God, Country, Politics...

God is!

Jason Ketteman — Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:02:30 GMT

I know of a situation I'm not involved in. Hear me! I'm NOT involved and I'm not getting involved. I have loved ones on both sides of the situation. It hits at a tender place in my heart and memory. It saddens me in many ways that I'm afraid those closer to the situation may be calloused to.

People are not perfect. Whether those people are pastors or congregants, old or young, long-tenured or newly arrived. But God is.

None of us is capable of seeing into the hearts of anyone else. We can never definitively know the motives or intentions, sorrow or regret, or remorse or repentance of anyone outside of ourselves. But God is.

None of us have been appointed "Defender of God's Holiness". We have all tarnished God's Holiness more than we've polished it. Even if we could defend God's "God-ness", He doesn't need us to defend Him. It's not our job nor place. We're incapable of doing it. But God is.

None of us has been appointed Judge over matters and motives of the heart. Because we cannot see into the hearts of people, it is not our place to determine their guilt, predict their eternal standing with God, or to serve as jury and executioner of whatever penance we determine proper. But God is.

None of us is anything forever. We change. We start out immature. Hopefully, we mature. Sometimes we don't or perhaps we regress in an area we think we have conquered. But God is.

None of us is anywhere forever. We're born and we die. We come and go. We move and are moved. We befriend and estrange. But God is.

There are many people saying things they either don't fully understand what they say or are ignorantly and arrogantly attempting to wield powers that they are not entitled to use. The "noise" needs to end. The few remaining Godly men from both parties (and they DO exist on both sides) need to gather around a table, bathe the meeting in prayer, and seek to put and end to the non-constructive, unhelpful, and in many examples plainly stupid things people are saying on both sides.

I sincerely pray that ALL will act in humility and muster a willingness to, if not reconcile, at least be amicable and mutually supportive of each other's work for the Kingdom of Christ. My heart hurts for this family that was once was loving and supportive of one another as they worked for God's glory. My limited vantage point can see some things on both sides that can only bring a tear to God's eye.

Later.

Happy blog-day to me!

Jason Ketteman — Wed, 27 Sep 2006 23:51:21 GMT

Today, September 27, 2006 is my 3 year anniversary of blogging. 3 years ago today, I started blogging, as opposed to just "being on the web".

To be clear, this site is not been my first. I've been on the web for a VERY long time. I've had many sites before I started blogging. But they were very circa-90's-decade-personal-site, ya know? Infrequently updated. Look was more important than content. This site is very light on flash, but I use this site to discuss things that are on my mind and heart.

3 years blogging isn't a overwhelmingly significant milestone like my 1000th post or anything (which is like 18 years away, at my current post rate), but it's an opportunity, nonetheless, to stop and see where I've been and what has happened through this site.

First, 3 years ago I worked for a different company in a different industry focus than I do now. I spent quite a bit of time training, leading, implementing and fixing Microsoft CRM 1.0 all over the country. In fact, many of my first posts were about that application, either directly or indirectly.

Second, personally, life was a little different 3 years ago. I was one child younger. I was sub-30. I hadn't yet started teaching my Sunday School (now, Connection Point) class. I wasn't pursuing going back to school. I was almost 30 pounds heavier.

Socio-politically, we weren't yet at war in Iraq. We were waging a war on terror and Osama bin Laden. No one worried about a tsunami destroying thousands of lives off the Indian Ocean.

This blog has brought folks to me that I never would have had opportunity to meet. I've heard from servicemen in Iraq that used some of my lesson notes for their Bible studies. I've heard from a private Christian school teacher who wanted to add one of my book studies (Romans, I think). I've heard from a priest from Korea that wanted more information on Daniel. None of these people were my initial targets, but God saw fit to not only draw them to my site (via Google, no doubt), but to bring them to contact me. What an encouragement!

What I'm happy about is that from the beginning God was central to my posts. By way of this blog, I can see and reflect on the journey God has brought me on in these three years. I'm also happy that I'm nearing 10 years of marriage - which is related to this site because I COMPLETELY believe it has saved my relationship with my wife by sparing her the discussions that she just doesn't want to have with me... :)

I hope to continue to use this blog to bring glory to God and Christians closer to Him through provocative discussions and challenging thought. I pray that God continues to bring me along the journey that He started - I plan to keep talking about it as often as I can.

Later.

Reflections: "Twelve Ordinary Men" by John MacArthur

Jason Ketteman — Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:34:55 GMT

After reading "Twelve Ordinary Men" by John MacArthur, I find it nearly impossible not to compare myself to these men.

MacArthur analyses the men in order of how they're usually referenced in Scripture. As such, he starts with Peter and ends with the traitor Judas Iscariot.

For me, I found myself identifying with each disciple in some way as I read their respective biographies. At times, it was surprise that I didn't know a certain feature about that person. Other times, it was shock at the extremes from where Christ called them from. In all of them, they made a journey.

Starting with Peter, it's easy and comforting to see the mature Peter as that human standard of who to look up to. Sure, he's rough around the edges as a younger man, but after Jesus gets done molding him, Peter is a model worthy to emulate. He's a leader's leader. He's confident. He's bold. He's respected. There's a lot to like in Peter the elder.

On the other end of the spectrum, James the Less wasn't in the spotlight. He was a faithful servant content to give his Lord the spotlight and his leader the front of the stage. Yet, he was diligent and trustworthy. He didn't grumble. In fact, he didn't say much of anything. He just did. He served. He obeyed.

Finally, Judas Iscariot is all too identifiable. Yes, he was the traitor that sold his Creator for little more than table scraps. Yes, he was the one that stole from the disciples' treasury. He's the icon of deceit and deception in the Bible, second only to Satan himself. He's a favorite target for hate in the Church. Yet, he's not that far removed from many of us. How many of us steal from Christ in how we tithe? How many of us deceive others about our relationship with God? How many of us sell our relationship to Christ for even less than Judas did? At times, I'm afraid we're all too like Judas.

...yet, we want to grow up to be a "Peter". We like seeing ourselves as the mature, refined Christian. We want to be thanked for our wonderful, glorious service to God. When we should be content to be "little James". We don't work for the accolades of men. We don't serve for honor on this earth. We should be content to quietly see that Christ is glorified and that we fade into the background.

Just my thoughts.

Later.

1 of 2996 - 5 years later: Remembering Swede Joseph Chevalier

Jason Ketteman — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 01:04:26 GMT

I have the honor of highlighting one victim of the September 11, 2001 attack on the United States. His, and the 2995 other DIRECT victims died 5 years ago. 5 years! The memory of this event is etched on my mind like it was yesterday. It's not cliche. What I thought was a joke turned out to be a horrific, spineless slaughter of innocent lives.

Now, 5 years later, the heroes of 9.11.01 are facing their own challenges with lingering health issues related to their service following the destruction. The total toll of lives lost to this calculated, premeditated act will probably never be known. But we can always remember...

...the pain caused.

...the families impacted.

...the relationships broken.

...the lives lost.

One of those lives was Swede Joseph Chevalier. He was born 31 years ago. It's not lost on me that he and I were approximately the same age. He never made it to 31. Swede was murdered when he was 26.

Swede was employed by Cantor Fitzgerald as an Equities Trader in one of the World Trade Center buildings. He also had a landscaping business on his family’s 15-acre estate. He shared a love of adventure with his father, Vernon Chevalier, who said the two went mountain biking down a single-track path from the top of Pikes Peak in Colorado several years ago. It was a narrow path with 300-foot drops. “It was dangerous, but he loved it,” his father said.

Swede lived in Locust, NJ after graduating from Cornell University's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences in 1998. He spent two years as president of his fraternity, Phi Delta Theta. In addition to his father Vernon and sisters, Tylia and Brittany, he is survived by his mother, Elaine, and his companion at the time, Melissa Markewich. He is also survived by his maternal grandparents, Joseph and Helen Polguy of Sayreville, and his fraternal grandfather, Vernon Chevalier Sr. of Sayreville

Swede was Catholic and was memorialized in such fashion upon his death. I pray that Swede was received into the arms of Jesus Christ upon his death.

Note, I'd encourage you to visit the 2996 website that has coordinated the effort to honor each and every victim from the 9.11.01 attacks. They'll have links to other sites that have additional memorials.

References:

His fraternity's memorial: Phi Delta Theta - This tribute page is very touching. They have stories about Swede growing up and more information about what he was like.

Swede Joseph Chevalier, 26, Locust, N.J

http://www.unitedinmemory.net/quilt.php?quilt=503 - This is a page of a quilt that was constructed in Swede's honor. It has some additional pictures of him with other folks.

The taste of the Lord's Supper

Jason Ketteman — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 08:01:06 GMT

I experienced a Lord's Supper a little differently recently and it made an impact on me compared to the normal grape-juice-and-crackers that I've usually had.

Many of you have participated in Lord's Suppers this way before, but I'd never taken the elements as a piece of bread dipped in the juice. I was shocked by what I felt...

First, it's yucky. There was a psychological aversion to eating grape juice-soaked bread.

Second, it's bitter. I'm not sure if it's the juice, the bread, or the combination of the two - maybe it was even the type of bread used, but beyond a simple "texture thing", it just had a poor bitter taste.

Those physical responses gave me cause to stop and think about how I was reacting to this Lord's Supper as I'd not reacted to any previous events. For that reason alone, I appreciated the difference.

But that wasn't all. Beyond the physical, I was drawn to how appropriate it was for the elements of the Lord's Supper to be unpalatable. It's entirely appropriate for us to be a little discomforted when we reflect on Christ's sacrifice and what He endured for us. Certainly, an unpleasant mouth-feel and something NOT sugary sweet is a strong contrast to our pampered lives we usually lead. Tasting the mushy, bitter taste representing Christ's substitutive death helps us understand that it was no stroll in the park for Christ that next day.

I pray for every Lord's Supper, while done with bland elements or not, is always an uncomfortable time for us. I pray that we never are able to swallow it easily. I pray that it always leaves us upset and a little disgusted as we thank God for our blessings and the sacrifice of His Perfect Son, Jesus Christ.

Later.

Before the Last Supper - Thoughts on leading worship

Jason Ketteman — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 22:31:06 GMT

Before Jesus Christ lead His disciples through the Last Supper, He didn't seek to elevate Himself. While some of the Twelve debated which of them would be "greatest", Christ lowered Himself to Servant and Slave.

While Christ was preparing to take the greatest stage in the history of the world He relegated Himself to a washbasin and dirty feet. This was His preparation before taking the platform where God Himself would watch His Son die for the redemption of sinful man.

In this (or any) environment Christ would have been totally justified to request or require to be elevated, honored, or even pampered at His last meal on Earth. Instead of talking about the spotlight He was about take, He went to the shadows to quietly do the most menial and least respected of tasks.

It's interesting to me that THIS was Christ's own response to what would become an ultimate act of obedience to God the Father and love for us - played out as humiliation, pain, and mocking on a cruel and ugly cross. In His immediate surroundings, there was a most ungrateful and unaccepting audience. But ultimately, He was offering His obedience and actions to the Ultimate Audience, God the Father.

How often do we prepare to lead - be it music, teaching, drama, whatever, and we pray that God grant us good voices, good memory, and the like? How often do we deeply desire to win the praise of those around us? Certainly, the praise of the audience is nice, but praise from our peers is not to be overlooked.

How often do we bicker to one another that "We deserve..." this or that? How often are we offended when things don't go the way we'd like? How frustrated do we get if we don't perform at what we believe to be our best? Forget a lyric or a bullet point? Oh...you've ruined everything!

Should we not seek to do as Christ did before He took His grand stage? Should we not seek to glorify God in our obedience and actions above how well we "perform"? Should we not strive for God's approval over that of men?

How can we, as a body of believers - some of us "lead worshippers" - do more to humble ourselves before others and God in preparation to worship Him? Instead of praying for ourselves, pray for others that will hear. Instead of praying for a positive reception from the crowd, pray for discomfort for all that are in the presence of the King. Instead of singing to "them", sing to Him!

Certainly, striving for excellence is proper. Christ Himself was perfect in His obedience to His Father. God deserves (so much more than) our best, to be sure. But we often lose focus that our best is far from adequate and short of the perfect glory that God deserves. In remembering that, I pray we can bow our heads, bend our knees, and break our hearts in the presence of our Creator. I pray that if need be, He shuts your mouth so you're just still and quiet in His presence - no matter who else is around.

Later.

Biblical church leadership...

Jason Ketteman — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 16:47:42 GMT

Question: How do most Southern Baptists (and others) believe the roles of church leadership in terms of Pastors, Deacons, adult teachers, etc are to be filled?

Answer: By men. [ding, ding, ding, ding] Correct!

Bonus question: What if the boys don't step up and lead?

Answer: [crickets chirp]

I make funny, but honestly, I think this is a problem. In fact, I know it is, simply because of how God made us.

(Before I really get rollin', let me say that I'm making broad generalities and there are certainly exceptions to every stereotype.)

For starters, many men (not all men all the time, of course) are content to allow someone else to lead when they're outside of their office. These bulldogs at work come home and allow their collective wives to run their homes, discipline (as opposed to bark and command) their children, and generally LEAD their home. The same thing goes for church. Men are less prone to responding to guilt when asked to serve or lead - so they usually don't.

Women, on the other hand, seem to rise to whatever occasion their given. Absentee father? Mom plays "Dad" too. Next door neighbor lost their job? "Oh, Jane would love to bring dinner." Your friends just had their second child, Sally offers to watch the oldest when needed.

What's this mean in the church? It means that when there's a void in leadership of the church, where men SHOULD (or at least COULD) step up, women more frequently do.

In the church, this can result in a potential for debate. While I won't get into the whole gender-role argument, there is a principle and relationship that should be understood well.

The bottom line is that when God talked about the submission of women to their husbands, it was in direct relationship to the men leading their families. Likewise, when Scripture talks about roles for women in church, roles for men are also laid out. Certainly, it is incumbent on men to "lead". But what when they don't? I believe many women are more than ready and willing to lead in the absence of a man doing so, but the Bible is clear that the role of leadership (generally speaking)

So, why do I think this is how God made us? Well, who better than He - the Creator who created us knows us can instruct us on our behavior? Because of that intimate knowledge, He as Jesus Christ admonished those around Him because He knew their tendencies. Christ knew that women have an internal desire to lead and command. It's the struggle against this desire to submit oneself that Jesus highlighted for women. Likewise, many men are usually content to be apathetic (or lazy), indecisive or noncommittal, and generally OK with someone else doing "their" work for them.

The question remains of what should be done when men won't step up to lead where there is a need? Beyond forcing a man to do it, there are two options: Let the need go unfulfilled or allow a woman to do it.

First, certainly the rules of engagement are different depending on the role in question. For the more easily agreed upon role of "Pastor", which most Baptists agree is reserved for men, if no man agreed to step in and lead, I think most (men or women) would not have a women take that position.

But what about a co-ed (i.e. married couples) Sunday School class? If your view is that women cannot lead over men, then should the role go unfilled? Certainly, if it's not OK for a woman to hold that role, committing a sin while teaching about God is not acceptable. However, that's not really my point.

My point is that too often men don't step up to take the roles that God presents before them. Too often, men will wait in the shadows and on the sidelines for someone else to take the position. But if that position was taken by a woman, they'll be the first to squeal that she shouldn't be leading. The man sins by not accepting and fulfilling God's role for him. The woman (perhaps) sins by taking a position outside of the role God has designed for her. Therefore, to avoid sin, the role goes unfulfilled.

What a travesty! The Word of God is not discussed, taught, or preached simply because there's no one willing or available to do it? We should be clamoring for opportunities to share our joy over what Christ has done for us. We should be yelling over one another to talk about the hope we have in Christ. We should be running from one hilltop to another to spread the Good News of the Gospel to whoever will hear.

What happened in my Sunday School class this past weekend...?

[crickets chirp]

Pharmacists say (and have) No Plan B

Jason Ketteman — Sun, 20 Aug 2006 08:54:35 GMT

Some of the readers of this site know that I have a background in pharmacy. I have a continued interest in the profession - mostly because of the disillusionment I dealt with - and when it crosses with a socially-relevant Christian worldview topic, I just can't resist.

Well, today I found an article that mixes the many facets of the "emergency contraception" (EC) drugs that face pharmacists that claim to be Christians in one tidy article (here). Certainly, there have been PLENTY of articles covering what are generally painted as "renegade" pharmacists in the popular media. But the one at Christianity Today gave me pause.

In general, I think there's a lot of well-intentioned, yet misguided folks on this topic. These new EC's are the IDENTICAL drugs (ingredients) contained in regular birth control drugs that these same pharmacists dispense MANY of every day. These aren't the nasty true (in scientific definition) abortifacients like RU486 that created so much hullabaloo years ago. This is literally "more of the same" that we do already. Boosted doses of drugs we have long been comfortable to dispense (unless you're Catholic, of course). So, while I don't see any value in stating MY view on these, I think it's safe to say that most folks don't really know what they're arguing about...even some pharmacists, unfortunately.

However, this situation has brought to light something I felt when I was in the profession - that pharmacists are not respected members of the medical community nor considered "experts" by society. Let's look at each of those points.

First, pharmacists have long been second class citizens when compared to doctors and nurses. They're somewhere above chiropractors and podiatrists, but below psychologists. Medical docs are, of course, the top of the heap. They've long been discounted as incapable of writing prescriptions - even though the medicines are EXACTLY what they focus on and know the most about. Yes, they have less training in diagnosis, but partnered with a doctor (in crisis situations, for example) and it would only serve the patient better. Pharmacists have had to shoe-horn their way on to the medical rounds team. Pharmacists have been supposedly replaced by automated solutions in many outlets (retail and hospital) and staffed down only to the minimum level required by law in some cases.

Likewise, there is a perception within society that the pharmacist is basically an "automated pill dispenser..." and shouldn't have the same option to exercise their medical training as their doctor does. I've literally been berated because we wouldn't dispense a drug that would interact with another they were taking. While the circumstances are different, the lack of respect for the training and education is the same. "Who cares if the pharmacist says it - my doctor told me to take it." Where are the days of people respecting their neighborhood pharmacist and seeing them as not only a "key" part of their healthcare team, but often, the first-line of support with something ails them.

Largely, this is why I became disillusioned with pharmacy. Working at your neighborhood pillbox isn't healthcare - it's RETAIL. So, does that mean you check your training at the door and just become a checkout jockey?

That said, I think these pharmacists that refuse to dispense ECs had best NOT be dispensing any birth control pills at all. Noesen, in the article has this as his standard, but has paid dearly for it.

On the other hand, if this was a story about a true life-killing drug - be it babies, the elderly, the terminal, whatever - the pharmacist should have the respect and legal grounds to use the training they've earned and their expert ('cause they are) opinions to "Do no harm." Have we heard that phrase before? Oh wait, pharmacists aren't doctors, right? So that doesn't apply, I guess.

Later.

Nonconformist Sunday School Attendees

Jason Ketteman — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 10:29:58 GMT

I lead a Sunday School class (referred to as a Connection Point for Adult (CPA) class in our church) that is officially categorized as an "Adult, 22-29" grouping. Unofficially and more widely known, is that my class is "the Newlywed Class". I HATE both of these methods of organization. Why? I'm glad you asked. :)

First, churches today need to understand that while "Promotion Sunday" where kids graduate from one classroom/age group to the next works and serves very valid purposes, adults don't bother to graduate classes as they age. I've never seen it happen widely (meaning that there are individual, rare cases of obedience) at any of the churches I've regularly attended. So, the whole age-based ministries really doesn't work insofar as what the goal of SS/CPA classes should be. (Hmm...that sounds like a future post, "The Goals of Formal Small Bible Study Groups")

Second, while I understand the principle of constructing a class of folks in similar life-stages, I whole-heartedly disagree that this is a solid principle for how to do organize SS/CPA classes. My problem is that this method of organization assumes that everyone going through the same life-stage can identify with each other. While that's true, we risk limiting our exposure and influence by those that are in different and potentially later life-stages and the experience those lives bring. Along with that principle, there's also the needlessly confusing and excluding about the term "Newlywed Class". Does that mean singles can't come? Does that mean that if you're married longer than a year, you have to leave? Does that mean if you have kids, you can't come or you have to leave when you do? I certainly hope not! (Although, my wife and I have been told that very thing.)

The bottom line is that any of these current, popular methods lead to confusion and leads to resistance for those that believe age isn't a legitimate reason to leave their friends, study- and worship-fellows to join a new group and have to reestablish both the friendships and perhaps the worship comfort that existed in the first class. (Your SS/CPA class is a "worship" time, right?)

My desire is to organize a Sunday School/Connection Pont structure based on a set of criteria that does two key things:

Cause the teacher/leader to consciously determine why their class exists and why someone would attend their class as opposed to another class. Is it teaching format? Is it emphasis on "social" elements? Is it life-stage? (which isn't entirely invalid, if "advertised" as such, i.e. Parents of Teenagers, etc.)
Provides the prospect/potential attendee with accurate information on what the class seeks to offer. Is it "life application"? Is it an "Inductive Bible Study" format? Are they focused on meeting the needs of abused women?

While this helps the attendee figure out where to go, it also forces the teacher to think beyond their "quarterly" or their "lesson" and determine why their class is different than the other similarly age-named classes the same or other hours. I hope no classes just leave the decision of regularly joining the class to whether or not an attendee "clicks" with the rest of the members. It's more than a popularity contest - "Do they like us?"

I strongly encourage folks to "shop around" when they're looking for a SS/CPA class. Some classes are great for some folks, but not others. That's OK! But there's usually a class that's right for you if you'll get engaged. Why not help folks know what to expect when they step into your area?

Later.

About who? - related thought

Jason Ketteman — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:12:35 GMT

Tim Challies , blogging from the WorshipGod06 conference, run by Bob Kauflin recently had this as part of report from a recent session ...

How many times have we gathered with the church to worship God and been unaware or only vaguely aware that God is present in His house? How many times have we sung songs of praise with our minds distracted in a thousand different places, completely unaware that God is present in His house? How many sermons have we listened to and been aware of the pastor's voice, but only vaguely aware of God's voice? How many times have we received communion and been aware of the bread and the cup, but been only vaguely aware of the Savior who is living in His people who are His house? It should be of great concern that Sunday after Sunday we could be in the presence of the living God and be unaware or only vaguely aware that He is there.

If we're in the presence of God, nothing else should matter. Not where you're standing. Not if the people can hear or see you. Not what someone else is doing.

God is too good, too big, too gracious, too jealous to accept this from us.

Thanks, Tim.

Later.