Stuff I’ve Written

ManuscriptI’ve final­ly put up a col­lec­tion of essays and Bible stud­ies that I’ve writ­ten. I’ve been com­pos­ing them off and on for years, usu­al­ly in response to ques­tions I receive from stu­dents.

I have more hid­den away in the recess­es of my hard dri­ve. I’ll add them to the list as I have time.

I hope you find them help­ful. Feel free to share them with oth­ers or use them for any non­com­mer­cial pur­pos­es.

An Unofficial Response to Westboro Baptist Church

The noto­ri­ous West­boro Bap­tist Church is hold­ing a protest at Stan­ford this Fri­day (see a good sum­ma­ry at Fiat Lux: why here, their iden­ti­ty, their beliefs, their legal his­to­ry). In response, the Stan­ford com­mu­ni­ty is plan­ning a counter-ral­ly at the same time and place as West­boro’s protest.

A group of Chris­t­ian min­istries signed a joint state­ment oppos­ing West­boro, but the Stan­ford Dai­ly has appar­ent­ly declined to pub­lish it (at least, I can’t find it in the online paper). Per­haps it will appear soon (UPDATE: it was pub­lished in the op-ed sec­tion the day after I put this post up). But in case it does not, I would like to give my own per­son­al response to them here. The offi­cial state­ment was designed to gar­ner sup­port from sev­er­al dif­fer­ent min­istries, but what fol­lows is lan­guage that no one else but me has signed off on. Con­se­quent­ly, it is con­sid­er­ably more direct.

I think West­boro Bap­tist Church is crazy. I also think it is unwise to hold a ral­ly oppos­ing a group which thrives on con­flict. Atten­tion is the drug they crave. They have become a recur­ring nation­al news sto­ry mere­ly because of their abil­i­ty to draw crowds and media.

I refuse to protest them, and I also refuse to ignore them. I am in no way ambiva­lent about their pres­ence on cam­pus: what they are doing is wrong. It heaps shame upon Christ and it caus­es peo­ple made in God’s image to expe­ri­ence an alien­at­ing anguish. I believe that prayer is the most effec­tive pos­si­ble response to this sit­u­a­tion. I, my min­istry, and sev­er­al oth­er Chris­t­ian groups at Stan­ford will hold a prayer meet­ing while the protest is going on at which we will ask God to con­vict West­boro mem­bers of their sin and lead them to repen­tance.

So yeah. That’s what one preach­er thinks about their pres­ence.

What Does The Bible Require of a Church?

Agios NikolaosAn alum­na of my min­istry recent­ly sent me an email ask­ing what the Bib­li­cal require­ments of a church were. I thought about it for a bit, and this is what I came up with. I’m sure the list of require­ments that I have below is incom­plete, and I wel­come sug­ges­tions for improve­ment.

But if you, like my for­mer stu­dent, are look­ing for a church home then med­i­tate on these points.

Here’s the email I sent her.


What does the Bible require of a church? Prob­a­bly not the things you expect. The Bible doesn’t require that a church meets on Sun­day morn­ing (although it does set that as the pat­tern: Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2), nor does it require that a ser­mon be the cen­ter­piece of the meet­ing (although that is cer­tain­ly one way of ful­fill­ing the cri­te­ria of Bib­li­cal teach­ing below).

The most impor­tant thing that God requires of a church is that it be built upon the con­fes­sion of Jesus as God’s Son and Christ (Matthew 16:16–18; 1 Cor 3:10–11). What this means prac­ti­cal­ly is that Christ is the cen­ter of the church and is the focus of its activ­i­ties.

The church should be engaged in per­suad­ing unbe­liev­ers to become dis­ci­ples of Jesus (Matthew 28:18–20; 2 Tim­o­thy 2:2; 2 Tim­o­thy 4:5), which the Great Com­mis­sion defines as bap­tiz­ing them and teach­ing them to obey Christ. Dis­ci­ple­mak­ing also includes tak­ing sin seri­ous­ly and dis­ci­plin­ing impen­i­tent believ­ers (Matthew 18:15–20; 1 Corinthi­ans 5:1–13; 1 Tim­o­thy 5:19–20; Titus 3:9–11).

The church should meet reg­u­lar­ly and the meet­ings should be encour­ag­ing (Hebrews 10:24–25). The encour­age­ment should not come just from the min­istry lead­ers – the com­mu­ni­ty as a whole should be one that strength­ens you. Here is a rep­re­sen­ta­tive list of pas­sages describ­ing how those in the church ought to treat one anoth­er.

  • Greet one anoth­er 2 Corinthi­ans 13:12
  • Show hos­pi­tal­i­ty to one anoth­er 1 Peter 4:9
  • Hon­or one anoth­er Romans 12:10
  • Live in har­mo­ny with one anoth­er Romans 12:16
  • Serve one anoth­er Gala­tians 5:13–14
  • Com­fort one anoth­er 2 Corinthi­ans 1:3–4
  • Encour­age one anoth­er Hebrews 3:12–13
  • Teach and admon­ish one anoth­er Colos­sians 3:16
  • Be for­bear­ing with one anoth­er Eph­esians 4:1–3
  • For­give one anoth­er Colos­sians 3:13
  • Con­fess sin to one anoth­er James 5:16
  • Bear one another’s bur­dens Gala­tians 6:2
  • Love one anoth­er 1st John 4:7–21
  • Search Biblegateway.com for the phrase “one anoth­er” to find more.

There should be singing moti­vat­ed by grat­i­tude to God (Colos­sians 3:16; Eph­esians 5:19–20). Grat­i­tude for who God is and what God has done (both on the cross and in our lives) is what I believe is in mind here. As part of its wor­ship, church­es should also cel­e­brate com­mu­nion on a reg­u­lar basis (1 Corinthi­ans 11:17–34).

The church should also be a com­mu­ni­ty devot­ed to prayer (1 Tim­o­thy 2:8; Eph­esians 6:18). We must remem­ber that when Jesus taught his dis­ci­ples to pray, he taught them to pray togeth­er (it is, after all, “our” Father not “my” father – Matthew 6:9). These sorts of prayers ought to be empha­sized:

  • The ele­ments of the Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6:9–13, Luke 11:1–4) should always be cen­tral: for God to be glo­ri­fied, for His will to be done, for pro­vi­sion, for for­give­ness, and for holi­ness.
  • For effec­tive evan­ge­lism (Colos­sians 4:2–4, Eph­esians 6:19–20). Note the empha­sis of the prayer: it is not for the lost to be saved so much as for us to be bold and wise wit­ness­es.
  • For gov­ern­ment lead­ers to not inter­fere with our faith, espe­cial­ly not our abil­i­ty to evan­ge­lize (1 Tim­o­thy 2:1–2).
  • For the needs of the church (Eph­esians 6:18). The prayers of the apos­tles serve as excel­lent exam­ples of the sorts of prayers one could offer on behalf of the church (Rom 15:5–6, 13; Eph 1:17–19; Eph 3:16–19; Phi 1:9–11; Col 1:9–12; 1st Thess 3:12–13; 1st Thess 5:23–24; 2nd Thess 1:11–12; 2nd Thess 3:1–5).
  • The elders of the church are specif­i­cal­ly instruct­ed to make them­selves avail­able to pray for the sick (James 5:14–16).

All the spir­i­tu­al gifts should be wel­comed (1 Corinthi­ans 14:26; 1st Corinthi­ans 14:39, 1 Thes­sa­lo­ni­ans 5:19–20), although they should be deployed in such a way as to attract and not repel unbe­liev­ers (1st Corinthi­ans 14:24–25). Their effect on the church should not be chaot­ic (1st Corinthi­ans 14:40).

A church should be led by Bib­li­cal­ly qual­i­fied lead­ers:

  • Who teach Bib­li­cal truth (2 Tim­o­thy 1:13–14; 2 Tim­o­thy 3:16–17; 2 Tim­o­thy 4:2; 1 Tim­o­thy 4:13; Titus 1:9)
  • Who exer­cise appro­pri­ate author­i­ty (Hebrews 13:17; 1 Tim 4:11–12; 2nd Tim­o­thy 2:22–25; Titus 2:15)
  • Who are above reproach in both char­ac­ter and rela­tion­ships (1 Tim 3:1–13; Titus 1:5–9)

The church ought to care for the poor, espe­cial­ly poor believ­ers. (2nd Corinthi­ans 8–9; James 1:27; 1st Tim­o­thy 5:16; Gal 2:9–10; Gal 6:10; Acts 6:1–4). And the poor should be wel­comed into the life of the com­mu­ni­ty (James 2:1–7).

The church ought to also pay min­is­ters – both those who teach and lead with­in the church itself (1st Tim­o­thy 5:17–18; 1st Corinthi­ans 9:3–14; Gala­tians 6:6) and those who are sent out as mis­sion­ar­ies (3 John 5–8; Romans 16:1–2; Philip­pi­ans 4:10–20)

In order to facil­i­tate these lat­ter two points the church should be receiv­ing offer­ings (Acts 4:32–37; 1st Corinthi­ans 16:1–2), although it does not appear that they must be received in any par­tic­u­lar way.

There are prob­a­bly oth­er things church­es should be doing as well, but these seem to me to be essen­tial. No church will be per­fect, of course. Give them the same grace that you give to fel­low believ­ers, but avoid church­es that are not at least attempt­ing to ful­fill these man­dates.

[Jan­u­ary 23, 2010 update: after some feed­back on my Face­book notes page, I decid­ed to add the para­graph about prayer. I also made a few small changes.]

Why Do Christians Evangelize Instead of Just Feeding the Hungry?

Soup KitchenI was recent­ly inter­viewed by a stu­dent writ­ing for the Stan­ford Dai­ly. A group of off-cam­pus Chris­tians had put on a con­tro­ver­sial out­reach activ­i­ty and he want­ed to know why Chris­tians share their faith. Appar­ent­ly my answer was­n’t pithy or inter­est­ing enough, because I did­n’t make it into the final arti­cle. 🙂

His ques­tions (which he asked sep­a­rate­ly but which I com­bined for my answer): “Why do Chris­tians try to spread their beliefs? With so many oth­er prob­lems in the world, why expend so much ener­gy on spread­ing the gospels instead of, for exam­ple, feed­ing the hun­gry?”

My emailed response:

Jesus said that he is the way, the truth, and the life — he even said that no one could come to God apart from him. So the same com­pas­sion that com­pels Chris­tians to build hos­pi­tals and orphan­ages and feed the hun­gry also com­pels us to share the news that every­one can be rec­on­ciled to God through Christ.

In addi­tion, we know that by spread­ing the gospel we also increase the num­ber of peo­ple who are feed­ing the hun­gry and oth­er­wise doing good deeds. We know from research that reli­gious peo­ple give more to char­i­ty than non­re­li­gious peo­ple do, and so we see that com­pas­sion and evan­ge­lism are not anti­thet­i­cal. If any­thing, they rein­force each oth­er.

In sum­ma­ry, we share the gospel with some­one because we believe that the gospel meets their deep­est needs and will also cat­alyze them to like­wise go meet the spir­i­tu­al and prac­ti­cal needs of oth­ers.

He asked me more ques­tions than that, but I did­n’t have time to answer them before his dead­line. And even this answer was kind of rushed. If I had my answer to give over again I prob­a­bly would have put a line about heav­en and hell in there, but as it is I feel pret­ty good about it.

So if you’re not a Chris­t­ian and won­der why we keep urg­ing you to trust in Jesus, I hope my answer helps you under­stand our motives. We love you and we love Jesus, so we want to arrange an intro­duc­tion.

My Philosophy of Rain

raincloudsIt is rain­ing right now in the San Fran­cis­co Bay Area. It has been rain­ing all day.

This is rare, and it under­stand­ably con­fus­es Stan­ford stu­dents. They came to Stan­ford because they thought all of Cal­i­for­nia was San Diego. That and because Stan­ford is awe­some. But the San Diego thing was def­i­nite­ly a tip­ping fac­tor. Rain is not fea­tured promi­nent­ly in the Stan­ford recruit­ing mate­ri­als.

In sit­u­a­tions like this some peo­ple con­tem­plate skip­ping Bible study (you know who you are).

I thought I should take this oppor­tu­ni­ty to clar­i­fy my posi­tion on rain: Bible stud­ies do not get can­celed on account of rain. That’s base­ball. And pic­nics. But not Bible stud­ies.

And you should not skip Bible stud­ies because it is rain­ing. Show up wet. That’s why we bap­tize you. So you’ll learn not to fear water. And if you haven’t been bap­tized, come to Bible study and kill two birds with one stone.

And as for our week­ly meet­ing… don’t even think about it. We’ll have that one even if Jesus tells me the Rap­ture is sched­uled for 7:35pm on a Wednes­day. I fig­ure those who are left behind will have some­thing to talk about in our absence.

So… yeah. That’s what I have to say about that.

beware the H1XA virus

ChanchocheI sent this email out to my stu­dents last night and received such pos­i­tive feed­back I thought I’d share it here for my fel­low cam­pus min­is­ters to adapt for use on their own cam­pus.

In case you just stum­bled upon this through some ran­dom inter­net search, I lead a min­istry called Chi Alpha Chris­t­ian Fel­low­ship which is abbre­vi­at­ed with the Greek let­ters XA. That should be all you need to know in order to laugh/groan/hurl toma­toes at the below email.

Mem­bers of the Stan­ford Com­mu­ni­ty,

In addi­tion to the H1N1 virus — the so-called “swine flu” — sweep­ing
our cam­pus, there is anoth­er and more insid­i­ous infec­tion to beware.

I speak, of course, of the H1XA virus — the so-called “divine flu”.

The H1XA virus is extreme­ly con­ta­gious. Symp­toms include joy,
friend­ship, and a pro­found sense of spir­i­tu­al cen­tered­ness. Car­ri­ers
can be iden­ti­fied by their cheer­ful coun­te­nance, their moral
lifestyle, and occa­sion­al­ly by their styl­ish t‑shirts. Should you meet
some­one already infect­ed, know that there is no cure (espe­cial­ly if
they already have a t‑shirt). Avoid them lest you your­self be seized
by divine pur­pose accom­pa­nied by rap­tur­ous joy and immer­sion in
mean­ing­ful com­mu­ni­ty.

There will be a pub­lic meet­ing tomor­row (Wednes­day) night at 7:30pm in
370–370 to dis­cuss this dis­ease in more detail. Please know that
epi­de­mo­nolo­gists are avail­able to help pre­vent this dis­ease from
spread­ing. Bring every­one you know who is not already infect­ed.

Do not despair. It will be tough, but we can pull through this togeth­er.

Should con­di­tions on cam­pus become unbear­able, we can all flee to the
woods Oct 17–18. Get your escape tick­et at http://xastanford.org/events

Sin­cere­ly,

Glen (a con­cerned mem­ber of the cam­pus com­mu­ni­ty)

Hope you find it use­ful. Or at least amus­ing. I’ll even set­tle for mem­o­rable. 😉

And if you’re a Stan­ford stu­dent who did­n’t receive this lit­tle charmer, sign up for our mail­ing list at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/chialpha-fellowship!

Chi Alpha Favorably Profiled In The Stanford Daily

Halls of Learning - Stanford QuadThe Stan­ford Dai­ly pub­lished an arti­cle titled Tes­ti­monies On Stan­ford Faith about peo­ple in our min­istry (Chi Alpha Chris­t­ian Fel­low­ship).

The web­site the arti­cle focus­es on is testimonies.stanford.edu.

Read­ing this arti­cle was very encour­ag­ing to me because I always fear that Chi Alpha will wind up in the Dai­ly because of some bone­head­ed thing I said in a ser­mon… this was a much bet­ter expe­ri­ence. 😉

Group Text Messaging

7001 New Messages?
For a few years, Face­book was one of the best ways to con­nect with col­lege stu­dents. Not any more. It’s still use­ful, but not near­ly as use­ful as it used to be. The nov­el­ty has worn off and so stu­dents aren’t as respon­sive on it.

So like Steve Lutz I’ve been think­ing about text mes­sag­ing late­ly. My younger stu­dents (frosh and sopho­mores) seem to be much more like­ly to have unlim­it­ed tex­ting plans than my upper­class­men and grad stu­dents.

In the past I’ve just texted peo­ple indi­vid­u­al­ly, but now I’m exper­i­ment­ing with group text mes­sag­ing ser­vices.

I con­sid­ered using Twit­ter and telling peo­ple to sub­scribe via text. A few prob­lems:
a) Col­lege stu­dents don’t use twit­ter.
b) It cen­tral­izes the com­mu­ni­ca­tion too much.
c) I don’t feel con­fi­dent in twit­ter’s reli­a­bil­i­ty.
d) The verb “tweet”.

So I’ve been look­ing into oth­er ser­vices. So far I’m drawn to txtBlaster. The thing I like best is that I can dep­u­tize as many of the sub­scribers as I want and allow them to text the entire group, so I can make this a stu­dent-dri­ven thing. It’s a free (ad-sup­port­ed) ser­vice. They claim to screen their ads care­ful­ly and to tar­get them based on the type of group you set up. So far so good on that front.

Do you have
a) any thoughts on using text mes­sag­ing effec­tive­ly as a min­istry tool?
b) anoth­er ser­vice to rec­om­mend (such as TextMarks or txtSig­nal or even the maligned Twit­ter)?

P.S. If you want to see txtBlaster in action, feel free to text xas­tan­ford to 25278. I’ll be play­ing around with it for the next few days.

Every Ph.D. Has A Little Crazy Inside

Straight Jacket GuyPh.D. stands for doc­tor of phi­los­o­phy. Doc­tor is from the Latin doc­tor which means ‘teacher’. Phi­los­o­phy is from the Greek (the verb phileo ‘I love’ plus the noun sophia ‘wis­dom’). From an ety­mo­log­i­cal stand­point, a doc­tor of phi­los­o­phy is one who teach­es oth­ers to love wis­dom.

But ety­mol­o­gy is often a mis­lead­ing guide to real­i­ty. Just ask a but­ter­fly or a pineap­ple.

There’s an old joke that Ph.D. stands for per­ma­nent head dam­age. Humor usu­al­ly has more truth buried inside it than ety­mol­o­gy. I am con­vinced that most Ph.D.s have a lit­tle crazy in them.

You see, to earn a Ph.D. one must con­vince not only one­self but also a com­mit­tee that you are one of the world’s lead­ing experts about one nar­row slice of real­i­ty. Ide­al­ly, you con­vince the com­mit­tee that you know more about this very nar­row prob­lem than any­one else who has ever lived.

And here’s where the crazy comes in: this idea that you are unique­ly qual­i­fied to hold a cer­tain opin­ion in a very eso­teric area becomes a habit which creeps into oth­er areas of your life. You con­vince your­self that you are right and the world is wrong about some­thing quite triv­ial. Every­one does this to a degree, but there is one impor­tant dif­fer­ence: the Ph.D. believes some­thing absolute­ly crazy.

At this point you are think­ing to your­self, “Glen, I know sev­er­al Ph.D. hold­ers. They’re nice, nor­mal peo­ple.”

Yes. They are. They are also insane about some­thing unex­pect­ed. They have learned through expe­ri­ence to keep their crazi­ness well-masked. You have to dig down deep.

Talk with your friend long enough and you will like­ly dis­cov­er that they raise ham­sters for food. Or that they have a plan for which stores to loot in which order after the next major nat­ur­al dis­as­ter, and actu­al­ly have a shop­ping list secret­ed about their per­son at all times for just such an even­tu­al­i­ty. Or that they believe in flood­ing preschools with mar­i­jua­na smoke to keep the kids calm. Or that they keep a bazooka in the trunk of their car.

And that’s just the way it is. Some things come with acces­sories — Bar­bie dolls are one and Ph.D.s are anoth­er. You just have to learn to live with it. This is why I have a much high­er tol­er­ance for eccen­tric beliefs in out­side speak­ers for my min­istry if they have a doc­tor­ate. I expect the crazy. I actu­al­ly wel­come the crazy — it keeps things inter­est­ing.

So if you are my friend and are in pur­suit of a Ph.D., know that I love you and that I won’t be dis­tressed when you turn crazy in a few years.

And if you already have your Ph.D., just remem­ber that I know. Some­where deep in the recess­es of your brain is an idea. I don’t know what it is. I don’t even know what it’s about. But I know it is so insane that your fam­i­ly has tried to slip phar­ma­ceu­ti­cals into your meals on more than one occa­sion, which is why you only eat foods that are translu­cent. Which is crazy.

The Deceptiveness of Sin — Deeper Than You Thought

Justice Preveils?Simon M. Lahama, Adam L. Alterb, and Geof­frey P. Good­winc report a sur­pris­ing result in “Easy on the mind, easy on the wrong­do­er: Dis­crepant­ly flu­ent vio­la­tions are deemed less moral­ly wrongCog­ni­tion, Vol­ume 112, Issue 3, Sep­tem­ber 2009, pages 462–466.

From the paper:

Par­tic­i­pants com­plet­ed a ques­tion­naire in which they read six vignettes describ­ing var­i­ous moral vio­la­tions: ‘Punch’ (one man punch­es anoth­er in a bar), ‘Flag’ (teacher burns Aus­tralian flag in class), ‘Dog’ (fam­i­ly eats its dead dog), ‘Deface’ (man defaces a memo­r­i­al), ‘Hitler’ (man taunts Jew­ish sports fans with Hitler imi­ta­tion), ‘Kiss’ (broth­er and sis­ter kiss pas­sion­ate­ly).

Each of the par­tic­i­pants read three of the sto­ries in an easy-to-read for­mat and the oth­er three in a hard­er-to-read for­mat.

In the words of the authors:

…dis­crepant per­cep­tu­al flu­en­cy decreased per­cep­tions of wrong­ness com­pared to dis­crepant dis­flu­en­cy. Fur­ther, and con­sis­tent with effects of dis­crepant flu­en­cy on truth judg­ments (Hansen et al., 2008), it seems that this dif­fer­ence is account­ed for by flu­ent pro­cess­ing decreas­ing, rather than dis­flu­ent pro­cess­ing increas­ing, per­cep­tions of wrong­ness.

In nor­mal Eng­lish: peo­ple thought that immoral choic­es were less seri­ous when they were easy to read about. In the­o­log­i­cal terms, they excused sin because of how good it looked (or more pre­cise­ly based upon how easy it was to under­stand). Appar­ent­ly clean­li­ness is next to god­li­ness (or at least leg­i­bil­i­ty is next to liv­ing right).

So the next time you have some­thing to con­fess, be sure to print it on nice paper and use a laser print­er. It just might give you the edge you need.

The heart is deceit­ful above all things and beyond cure. Who can under­stand it? (Jer 17:9)