Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Christmas Controversy

December 30, 2025 by bjcorbin

The topic of “Christmas” has become increasingly controversial within Christian circles.  This seems sadly ironic given Western Christianity’s passion for cultural relevance, while at the same time, many within the church willingly abstain from the one season in which the culture tepidly engages with its songs and stories.  The arguments against this celebration go something like this:

“Christmas has its roots in Pagan festivals!”

“Jesus wasn’t even born this time of year!”

“It probably wasn’t even cold in the season of Jesus’ birth!”

“The wise men didn’t arrive on the night of His birth!”

“Christmas is too commercial!”

And on and on….

Sadly, these types of arguments just make pious church folk seem even more joyless and effectively remove Christ from Christmas in the process. 

Does it really matter whether it was winter, or cold, or what the exact date was?  I would contend that there is a marked difference between celebrating the birth of Christ and celebrating Jesus’ birthday.  If we have no way of knowing the exact date, should we simply forfeit the celebration of His coming? 

The truth is that ancient people were very attuned to the seasons and the cycles of the sun and moon; especially as they related to growing and cultivating food.  As such, the winter solstice was a significant marker in every year, as the descent into darkness finally halted, and the days began to grow steadily longer. 

To be sure, the Pagans did center their celebrations around this annual event, but they were ultimately taking their cues from creation itself.  No doubt, early Christianity arranged their festivals/feasts to in some way counter these Pagan offerings, but the changing of the seasons was a far more significant point of reference. 

The scripture teaches us that the invisible qualities of God are “clearly seen and understood” in the things He created (Rom.1:20), and that because of this, men have no excuse for not finding Him.  Indeed, this is why so many lost people are prone to worship created things like the sun, or moon, or nature itself. 

As the Pagans looked for a source of hope, they found cause for celebration in the turning of the seasons, even if they did not recognize the One who set those patterns in motion.  Should we, who claim to know Him, forfeit our remembrances because they made their arrangements first.

It only seems fitting that we would celebrate the arrival of the “Light of the World” amidst the darkest days of the year.  Alas, our tradition is not rooted in paganism, it is derived from the creation which so clearly magnifies our Creator. 

There are those who would further argue that it was ultimately the death of Christ on the cross that matters, and that the birth of Christ wasn’t particularly consequential.

But before His sacrifice on the cross, Jesus sacrificed His deity; not only to become a man, but to become a man of sorrows, who was acquainted with grief. 

He sacrificed His perfect fellowship with the Father to come to this earth as our Savior.  He sacrificed the glory of heaven for a manger, the rejection of mankind and ultimately crucifixion.

He did all this to become Emanuel, “God with us.”

How much more clearly could God have expressed His love for us than this.

And when the angels shared the glorious news of His arrival, it was with shepherds.  Powerless, voiceless, working folks of no reputation.

He wasn’t born, nor did He live His life anywhere near the seats of human power.  There is no record that He ever went to Rome, and He rarely even visited Jerusalem.

Indeed, when the Son of Man chose to be born on a roadside, raised by a working-class family in Nazareth, and to spend His years of ministry pouring into 12 simple men of little influence, He was making a statement about how He would change the world.

He clearly demonstrated that His Kingdom was not of this world, and He steadily refused to become entangled in the affairs of men.

Make no mistake; the sacrifice Jesus made to become “God with us” was no less profound than the one He made on the cross.

It was the day that our redemption was set in motion, and it certainly warrants a season’s worth of rejoicing.

As the Ark of the Covenant was returned to the tent of David (1Chron.16), which signified the return of God’s tangible presence in the midst of His people, David praised,

Give praise to the Lord, proclaim His name

Make known among the nations what He has done

Sing to Him, sing praise to Him

Tell of His wonderful acts

Glory in His holy name

Let the hearts of those who seek the Lord Rejoice

Let the heavens rejoice, let the earth be glad

Let them say among the nations, “The Lord reigns!”

Let the sea resound, and all that is in it

Let the fields be jubilant, and everything in them!

Let the trees of the forest sing,

Let them sing for joy before the Lord!

And as our God humbled Himself to come and dwell amongst His people, why should our celebration be any less jubilant.

As for the commercial aspect of Christmas, this season is whatever we choose to make it in our hearts and in our homes.  If we decide to adhere to the cultures take on Christmas, then we have no one to blame but ourselves. 

Boycotting Christmas does not serve His purposes nor glorify His person.  There are no bonus points in heaven for historical datebook accuracy.  If we don’t like what Christmas has become then we need to change it for ourselves, and for our children, and for our grandchildren, and for our neighbors and for our community.

Posted in Christmas, Commentaries | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

10 Popular Christian Phrases that Can be Misleading

October 31, 2025 by bjcorbin

  1. Winning Souls for Jesus:  This phrase is derived from the concept that life is essentially a battle between the forces of good and evil, and that our mission is to win souls to team Jesus, so that team Satan doesn’t gain the upper hand.  But Christ has already defeated the power of evil (1Cor.15:55-57, Heb.2:14-15)), and He has not given us the ability to “win souls” (1Cor.3:6-9).  Our real mission is to be a manifestation of Christ’s presence on the earth (Rom.8:29, Col.1:27) and to allow the Lord to draw men unto Himself (John 6:44).  We make disciples of all nations (Matt.28:19) by being faithful disciples ourselves.
  1. Soldiers in the Lord’s Army: For many, the concept of being a soldier in the Lord’s army can conjure all sorts of glorious imaginings of epic battles, and grandiose victories, but the scripture doesn’t seem to support such a picture.  Like Peter, we imagine that grabbing a sword is the way the battle will be won (John 18:10), but Jesus explained that this wasn’t the case (John 18:36). Ephesians 6:10-20 makes it clear that we’re not battling against each other, and it speaks of protecting ourselves against the relentless attacks of the enemy.  While 2Tim.2:3-4 speaks of enduring hardship like a good soldier and of not becoming entangled in temporal affairs. 
  1. Making a decision for Christ:  There are several different phrases that float around the evangelical realm that seem to point to a moment of salvation.  Things like, “I invited Christ into my life,” or “I repented of my sins,” or “I made a decision for Christ.”  They all seem to point to a specific instance where my eternal status changes from unredeemable to redeemed, and my eternal trajectory shifts from hell to heaven.  And while I don’t deny that such a moment exists, I don’t believe we are well equipped to discern it (Matt.7:23).  Only the Lord can decide when a heart truly belongs to Him, and each of these expressions simply describes a step along our lifetime journey of pursuing Him.  Inviting the Lord into our lives is a great step, but He won’t be content to sit on the shelf with all of our other interests.  Repenting of our sins isn’t simply a matter of being sorry for our transgressions, it’s about going on and living a different life, which takes more than just a singular moment.  And making a decision for Christ isn’t necessarily the same as surrendering our life to Him.
  1. Defending the Faith: The nature of faith is that it cannot be defended, because to those who are perishing, the cross is foolishness (1Cor.1:18).  The scripture tells us to be prepared to give a reason (or a defense) for the “hope that we have” (1Peter 3:15). This of course presumes that we as Children of God would live in a way which might cause someone to make such an inquiry. Unless hope becomes visibly manifest in our lives, the source of that confidence will be of little consequence. I would suggest that the culture isn’t growing more hostile toward God’s message of hope and love; they are instead growing more resistant to a religious system that doesn’t seem to offer them either one of those things. God has called His people to live by faith (2Cor.5:7), not to simply be defenders of the ideology of faith.
  1. Building the Kingdom: There is a big difference between building a house and moving a house.  When we build a house, we choose a site, make our plans and build to suit our desires; but when the house already exists, we must go to where it is and study its design if it is to arrive intact at its new location.  The Kingdom of God already exists, and God Himself was the Architect and Builder (Heb. 11:10).  God is not interested in some earthly replica of His Kingdom; He means for His Kingdom to come on earth as it already exists in the heavenly realm.
  1. The cause of Christ:  The “Cause of Christ” can mean different things to different people.  Too often we attach the name of Jesus to causes we’ve become zealous about as though He shares our passion and position (Matt.7:21-23).  But He is not fickle (Heb.13:8).  The Son of Man came to seek and save that which was lost (Luke 19:10), so we are called to be compelled by His love and to regard “no one” from a worldly perspective, as we’ve inherited the ministry of reconciliation (2Cor.5:14-18).  This is the cause of Christ and it will not change.
  1. Saved, sanctified & going to heaven:  The decision to surrender our lives (i.e. take up our cross) and “follow” Jesus is not a one-time thing, it’s an everyday process (Luke 9:23), and a journey that lasts a lifetime (Phil.1:6), which is completely at odds with our cultural and religious paradigms.  We prefer to think of ourselves as, “saved, sanctified, and going heaven,” which implies that the work has already been completed, and we’re just waiting for the bus to take us to our heavenly mansion.
  1. The Anointing:  Our present use of the phrase “the anointing” is something of a misnomer.  Before Christ, access to the power and authority of the Holy Spirit was limited to a chosen few.  But because of Christ’s sacrifice, all believers have a direct connection to the indwelling Spirit.  All who belong to Him can rightfully be classified as “anointed” (2Cor.1:21, 1John 2:20). Holy Spirit empowered giftings are not expensive presents that God only bestows upon His favorite kids, they are tools provided to faithful followers.  An anointing was never intended to be something we could possess.  It is simply a garment, provided by the Lord, which allows us to serve His purposes.
  1. God is in control:  God is most certainly omnipotent, and sovereign over all things.  He is the Lord of heaven and of earth, but that does not equate to Him being in “control”.  He gave the earth to man and gave men the ability to choose who they would serve (Josh.24:15).  He does not send the molester into a child’s bedroom, and he does not place the drunk driver behind the wheel.  He sets before us life and death (Deut.30:19) and then lets us choose for ourselves.  Those choices have significant consequences, which affect both us, and the people around us.
  1. Fruitful ministry: Culturally, we tend to view an endeavor as being fruitful if it gets results (e.g. productive, profitable, prosperous, popular…), but the “fruit” that God seeks is Christ’s character (Gal.5:22-23) being revealed in the hearts of His children (Col.1:27).  And that fruit can only be produced by abiding in the vine (John 15:5).

Posted in Commentaries, Lists | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Way

September 25, 2025 by bjcorbin

The danger of living in the social media age is that we can gather a following of like-minded folks, spend our days shouting into the echo chamber, and cancel anyone who dares to disagree with us.  Devoid of any contrasting perspective, it’s easy to deceive ourselves into believing that our perceptions have become reality.  And with the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI), we can be sure that our electronic feed will remain full of voices that endorse and reinforce our illusion.

While this type of pattern is unhealthy on many levels, it is most dangerous from a spiritual standpoint.  Throughout the scripture we are warned against leaning on our own understanding (Prov.3:5-7), about the deceitfulness of our hearts (Jer.17:9), and of the great deceivers and deceptions that will be visited upon God’s people (Matt.24:24).  We are cautioned against focusing on what is seen, as it is perishing (2Cor.4:18).  And most importantly, we are told to fix our eyes on Jesus, who is the Author and Finisher of our faith (Heb.12:2).

I suspect that popular renderings of a singular “Anti-Christ” figure, from our depictions of the End Times, have clouded our understanding of the true spirit of anti-Christ, which manifests in many forms.  While we’ve been taught to make bold declarations against such things, I have found that these spirits are not nearly as intimidated by our use of Jesus’ name as we might think.  Like the sons of Sceva, the Chief Priest (Acts 19:13-16) or those people Jesus spoke of in Matthew 7:21-23, we can try to evoke His name while having no genuine connection to Him (John 15:5).  In such instances, this word carries no spiritual authority. 

Ultimately, attacking the authentic, life-giving connection to Christ is the aim of the anti-Christ spirit.  It tries to redefine the “work of God” as being something other than believing in the One that He sent (John 6:29).  It offers symbols and rituals and formulas and brokers as a substitute for a genuine one on one relationship with the person of God.  It offers earthly prosperity and temporal gains as a substitute for genuine spiritual authority. 

It encourages us to know ministers by their gifts instead of by their fruit (Matt.7:16).  It fills the atmosphere with voices and things to look at, so that we don’t discern the still small voice of God (1Kings 19:11-13) or fix our gaze on the Giver of Life (Heb.12:2).  It inspires religious leaders to build an earthly replica of the kingdom, so that the genuine Kingdom does not become manifest.

This spirit does not care that Jesus’ name is plastered all over our buildings, bumper stickers, t-shirts and letter heads, as long as we don’t look anything like Him (Rom.8:29).  It does not oppose our gatherings, as long as people aren’t genuinely connecting with the Savior (or each other). It does not resist our endless Bible study, as long as the scripture remains little more than a tool for the rationalization of our own carnal interests (John 5:39-40).  It is not against us viewing Jesus as a resource for strength, as long as cultivating an authentic relationship with Him never becomes the goal.  In such cases, the inclusion of Jesus’ name actually lends a sense of legitimacy to the whole deception.

Evidence of this spiritual influence would be a people who call themselves “Christians” yet aren’t identifiable by their love and grace for one another (John 13:35); who aren’t concerned about the fact that they nor their leaders look or sound anything like Christ (Rom.8:29), and who are more concerned with current events (i.e., the seen realm) than eternity (i.e., the unseen realm) (2Cor.4:18).  They would likely be a people who were known more for their divisions than their unity (Eph.4:4-6).

In the absence of Christ’s Lordship, such a people would be destined to idolize mere men, and likely to crown themselves an earthly king (1Sam.8).  And apart from the guidance of Christ’s Spirit, they would be highly susceptible to hollow and deceptive philosophies, which depend on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world (Col.2:8). 

It would be difficult to argue that this isn’t a fairly accurate portrait of Western Christianity.

There are so many scriptures that appear to be warnings for individuals who count themselves as believers, or followers, or even disciples.  Passages referencing a people who possess a form of godliness but also deny the power thereof (2Tim.3:5), who honor Jesus with their lips, but whose hearts remain far from Him (Matt.15:8), and/or who will exchange God’s thoughts for the rhetoric that fuels their true passion (2Tim.4:3-4).  Yet we can convince ourselves that these words don’t really apply to us because we are good and moral people, who hate what is evil and champion the proper value system.

Despite the fact that many Christians would say that we are fast approaching, or perhaps even living amid the “end times”, there seems to be little concern regarding the Lord’s admonishments to the churches in the book of Revelation.  If we really believe His return is imminent, we should probably be mindful of what it looks like to forsake our first love for some other passion (Rev.2:1-7) and perhaps be on the lookout for the false prophets who threaten to lead us astray (Rev.2:18-29).  We might also want to ponder what might cause Him to view us as “lukewarm” (Rev.3:14-22).

Jesus taught that He is the way, the truth and the life; and that there is no other path to the Father (John 14:6).  But the anti-Christ spirit works diligently to separate our concept of these things from the person of Jesus.  It invites us to fix our eyes on anything but Him.  Unless Christ becomes the embodiment of our truth, we will never walk in the way He’s ordained for us, nor experience the life He died to give us. 

Ultimately, God’s ways are much higher than our ways (Isa.55:8-9) and that pattern was so perfectly demonstrated by Christ that at the end of His life He was able to say that, if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the Father (John 14:9).  Through this perfect reflection of the Father’s heart, Jesus became “The Way” for us (John 14:6), and now the only thing that keeps us from walking in that way is “the way that seems right” to us (Prov.14:12) instead.

Posted in Commentaries | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Us and Them

September 18, 2025 by bjcorbin

I have found that we as people tend to listen to testimonies differently than we do sermons.  When we’re aware that someone is trying to influence our perspective there is a guardedness that rises up in order to protect our core values.  We naturally evaluate the source of this new information, to see if it seems trustworthy or whether it might pose some type of threat. 

We generally listen with a degree of skepticism until we establish some sense of connection to the provider of this alternate viewpoint.  If internal alarms begin to sound in our head, it becomes very difficult to receive anything, regardless of the content of the message.

On the other hand, when someone tells their story we tend to be less guarded and to look for points of connection with their experience.  When they speak of struggling as a child, we often recall our struggles as a child.  When they testify to moments of despair, we generally remember our moments of despair.  And when they share their moments of triumph, we are often reminded of our own redemption story.  Even if their journey is very different than ours, we can relate to points of it in a very personal way.

I would describe these two dynamics as the “Us and Them” paradigms.  New information is generally received through the “Them” portal (e.g. that’s your opinion, that’s your experience, that’s your interpretation, that’s fine for you, but…) until that data and its source are vetted through our internal filtering system.  Once credibility is established, we can shift to the “Us” portal, where these things can be viewed as trustworthy and pertinent to our own experience.

I would also suggest that we tend to interpret the scriptures through these same information biases.  We are naturally drawn to the passages about God’s faithfulness and the promises He’s made.  We receive them through the “Us” bias because we view them as pertaining to us, and our lives.   

But warnings about unfaithful Israel and the folly of the Pharisees are usually viewed through the “Them” lens, as we struggle to place ourselves in those contexts.   There is a natural inclination to push such incrimination away from us.  Within this pattern, God’s promises to His covenant people are banked in our account as part of our inheritance, yet somehow His warnings of straying hearts and a love of temporal things are seen as “Them” issues.

We’ve even developed theologies based on the idea that Israel’s unfaithfulness disqualified them from God’s promises, while God’s grace somehow justifies us in spite our own lack of fidelity.  Once again, their transgressions are viewed through the “Them” lens (i.e. as pertaining to a certain people at a specific time and place), while God’s enduring patience is received through the “Us” channel (i.e. transcendent to time and space).

This pattern becomes even more troubling when viewed through the context of Jesus’ return.  There are so many scriptures that appear to be warnings for individuals who count themselves as believers, or followers, or even disciples.  Passages referencing a people who possess a form of godliness but deny the power thereof (2Tim.3:5), or who honor Jesus with their lips, but whose hearts are far from Him (Matt.15:8), and/or those who do things in His name, but don’t really know Him (Matt.7:21-23).  Yet, if we process these words through the “Them” paradigm, refusing to entertain the possibility that He’s speaking to “Us”, we’re not likely to heed those cautions.

Similarly, the gospels prominently feature tales of Jesus’ adversarial relationship with the religious leaders of His day (i.e., Pharisees, Sadducees).  His strong rebuke of their hubris and haughty attitude is obviously a cautionary tale for anyone who might assume the mantle of leadership within the church. 

Yet the sad history of western religion is littered with corrupt, perverse, and even abusive leaders, who claim to represent Christ.  It is not as if this topic is subtly addressed or thinly veiled within the scripture, but clearly the warnings have not been heeded.  I have little doubt that this type of counsel is generally viewed through the “Them” lens.

Despite the fact that many Christians would say that we are fast approaching, or perhaps even living amid the “end times”, there seems to be little concern with regard to the Lord’s admonishments to the seven churches in the book of Revelation.  Who is He speaking to with these warnings?  What does it mean to forsake our first love (Rev.2:1-7), who are the false prophets that threaten to lead us astray (Rev.2:18-29), and what causes Him to view us as “lukewarm” (Rev.3:14-22)?  If we process these words through the “Them” paradigm, we run the risk of being spewed from His mouth.

Paul asserted that “all scripture” is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training (2Tim.3:16), while the Hebrew writer reminds us that every good father chastens their children (Heb.12:5-8).  If we want to claim the promises as our own, we must also be willing to receive the training and correction of the Lord.  We cannot afford to have “Us” scriptures and “Them” scriptures, as we need to hear what the Spirit of the Lord is saying to the church in this very hour (Rev.2-3).  If the only thing we can receive from Him is promises, blessings, or encouragement we diminish His role from that of a Father to that of a Sugar Daddy.

Posted in Commentaries | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Competitive Edge

September 11, 2025 by bjcorbin

I believe that God revealed His design for all of creation in the Garden.  Within this original blueprint there was no strife, or any need to push to the front of the line.  Every creature had their place, and He was their limitless provision.  Each creation derived its sense of worth and purpose from its unique relationship to the Creator. 

Had mankind chosen to remain under the umbrella of His Lordship, unspeakable joy and a peace that surpasses understanding, could have been our daily bread.  But the choice to go our own way, and to rely on our own sense of what is right came with significant costs.  Not the least of which was the change in how we view ourselves, and how we look at one another.

Unhinged from the Father’s perspective, we lost track of our identity, purpose, and sense of belonging.  Without Him as a singular reference point, we began to look at each other, and to measure ourselves by what we saw.  I believe it’s telling that after eating the forbidden fruit man and woman covered the parts of themselves that were different from each other.

As mankind was expelled from the garden, life became a struggle for provision and a battle to survive (Gen.3:17-19).  Estranged from our limitless Provider, and unseated from our place at His table, we floundered to find our place in the world, or to conjure a sense of self-worth.  Our comparisons (to each other) inevitably led to competition, and it didn’t take long for that dynamic to become lethal (Gen.4:8).

Because of man’s natural proclivity to compare, to covet and to compete we seem to have accepted that this is all part of God’s design, but I would suggest that it’s actually a byproduct of the fall.  If our identities were rooted in Christ, and if we trusted that He is our provision, there would be no need to compare, covet or compete.  As such, I think it’s fair to say that our compulsion to compete is generally rooted in both our insecurity and our instinct to survive.

Western culture has not only accepted competition as a normal part of the human condition, it has embraced it as a core value.  Our society loves to turn every facet of life into a contest (e.g. The Voice-singing, The Bachelor-relationships, The Biggest Loser-weight loss, Beat Bobby Flay-cooking, Rock the Block-home renovation…), and we indoctrinate our children into this pattern at an increasingly young age (e.g. Pee-Wee sports leagues starting at 3yrs old).  But the reality of competition is that it is most often poisonous in terms of cooperation, collaboration, community and any sort of meaningful relationship.

Perhaps worse than our cultural embrace of this destructive paradigm is its broad acceptance within the Body of Christ.  Whether it is wrestling for the lead vocal on the Worship team, or trying to woo congregants from other local ministries, or all the preening and posturing that goes on at church leadership conferences, our religious system is absolutely infested with a competitive spirit, featuring countless “ministries” solely dedicated to discrediting other ministers and ministries.

Though the followers of Jesus were meant to be identifiable based on their great love for one another (John 13:35), we “Christians” routinely struggle to gather together without all manner of envy and strife.  But if love is patient and does not envy.  If it is not self-seeking and keeps no record.  If it always protects, always trusts, always hopes, and always perseveres (1Cor.13:4-7), then there is no context in which it can be competitive.  And without love, we have nothing and are nothing (1Cor.13:2-3).

God commanded that we refrain from covetous (or coveting) and if we hope to be obedient to that standard we must also resist our natural urge to compare and to compete.  We need to take a hard look (i.e. through spiritual eyes) at our ideas about competition, and to examine them in light of what the scripture teaches.  If we continue to view competition through the lens of culture, the church will remain fractured in much the same way our society is.     

Posted in Commentaries | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Cost of Discipleship

August 20, 2025 by bjcorbin

Western culture’s infatuation with convenience has led to a steady progression of “advancements” meant to make life easier.  But like any significant shift, there have been some unintended consequences.   Though the practical demands of our day-to-day life have receded, so too has our capacity for delivering consistently high levels of energy for any given task.  Within this new reality, there is no need to sweat anywhere other than the gym.  Despite this erosion of endurance, our voracious appetites seem to have remained largely intact. 

As a result, the struggle with obesity has become rampant throughout our society, which has triggered a corresponding obsession with weight loss.  Things like gym memberships, progress picks and Ozempic shots have become prominent features of our cultural landscape.  And one of the most popular components of this phenomenon is anything that promises that we can lose weight without changing our diet or exercise pattern.

Inherently, we recognize that if we hope to lose weight, we ought to be disciplined in what we take into our bodies, and/or in how we take care of ourselves.  But the appeal of “weight loss without dieting or exercising” is that we can get the results we want, without having to sacrifice the things we crave, even when they are counterproductive to that goal (i.e., reap the benefits without paying the cost). 

Unfortunately, this kind of thinking is like yeast that spreads through the whole loaf and works its way into our spiritual life as well.  Western Christianity has largely grabbed a hold of the scriptures that celebrate the finished work of Christ, while ignoring those that speak of the cost of following Him.  Popular doctrines create the illusion that Jesus’ love created the proverbial blank check (i.e. He died once for all, and we are justified by faith alone) which covers however we chose to live our lives today, while ensuring our place in the next life as well.  Like a spiritual Ozempic shot, it promises eternal security, without sacrifice (i.e., dying to yourself) or suffering.

More often than not, faith is presented as both the vaccination and antidote to all suffering (e.g., if we just believe that God loves us and that He is all-powerful, we will somehow become immune to struggles of this life).  Yet, Jesus (a man of perfect faith) learned obedience from the things He suffered (Heb.5:8), and He endured the cross, despising its shame (Heb.12:2).  He warned His followers that no servant was greater than their master, and that they would be hated for His sake (John 15:18-21).  Further, He let them know that to those who have been given much, much more will be required (Luke 12:48).

Throughout the scripture, we see the lives of devoted followers testify to the cost of discipleship.  Paul declared that we ought to present our bodies as a living sacrifice (Rom.12:1), saying that in order to become an heir we must be willing to share in Christ’s sufferings (Rom.8:17).  Peter agreed, asserting that to partake of this burden was cause for rejoicing (1Peter 4:12-13).  David avowed that he would not offer to God that which cost him nothing (2 Sam.24:24), and James observed that the price of cultivating a friendship with the world (i.e., adopting its ways, and adhering to its value system) was to become an enemy of God (James 4:4).

Jesus spoke very plainly about all of this, teaching that whoever wants to be my disciple must be willing to deny themselves and take up their cross daily (Luke 9:23-25).  He clarified that the key to experiencing the life He’s ordained for us is found in laying our lives down for Him and His purposes (Matt.16:25).  This was the challenge He made to the “rich young ruler,” asking him to forfeit those things which might identify him as anything other than a child of the one true God (Luke 18:18-30).

He taught that unless a seed falls to the ground and dies, it has no potential to produce fruit (John 12:24), and He left no room for interpretation when He said that those who are unwilling to take up a cross and follow Him are not worthy of Him (Matt.10:38).  Jesus surrendered His will to accomplish the will of the Father (Luke 22:42), but if we refuse to participate in this of death of self-rule, how then can we lay claim to the resurrection that was gained by it?  Can there be a resurrection if there hasn’t been a death?

Posted in Commentaries | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Good Guys and Bad Guys

July 9, 2025 by bjcorbin

The question of whether man is basically good, or basically evil has long been a matter of philosophical debate.  The increasingly popular Humanist perspective includes a strong element of faith in the inherent virtue of the human spirit and even supposes that a culture left to its own devices (i.e., separated from ancient religious ideas and morality), will quite naturally evolve into a utopian society.  As John Lennon mused in his masterful ballad “Imagine,” they believe that we must rid ourselves of notions like heaven, hell and religion, so that we can all live together as one. 

On the other side of the coin would be the Reform Theology doctrine of “Total Depravity,” which purports that man’s sinful nature is bound to contaminate every part of his being, which ultimately dooms him to darkness, unless God Himself chooses to intervene.

I believe that a thorough overview of the scripture presents a more balanced picture.  Indeed, men are created in the image of God (Gen.1:27), thus they come with an inherent capacity to reflect Him.  Even folks who have not come to know the Lord in a personal way can be loving, charitable, compassionate, neighborly…  And while that may not be all that it needs to be from an eternal perspective (Matt.7:23), it hardly qualifies as totally depraved or evil.

On the other hand, the scripture does acknowledge that our sinful nature presents a constant battle (Gal.5:17-25) and warns that those who choose not to engage in that struggle will quite naturally wander into the darkness (Pro.14:12).  Thus, I believe it would be right to say that all men come with a capacity to do what is good, and to fall to what is evil (Deut.30:19).

Unfortunately, there is also very natural tendency to try to place people in either the “good” category, or the “bad” category.  Ultimately, either categorization proves to be problematic.

For the Humanist, who presumes that people are fundamentally good, the evidence that they may not be presents a conundrum.  Once an individual falls into the bad category, there is no way back (i.e., no forgiveness, no redemption, no rehabilitation).  They have to be treated as outliers, who need to be expunged from the record.  This is at the root of “Cancel Culture,” where we must erase any evidence of their existence (e.g., teardown the statue, revise the history, rename the park…).

For the Christian, who should have an awareness of man’s frailties (John 15:5), such a fall should not be shocking.  Throughout scripture we see heroes of the faith repeatedly fall to their human nature (e.g. Abraham, Moses, David, Samson, Jonah, Elijah, Peter, Paul…), which only serves to highlight the Lord’s ability and desire to redeem that which is broken.  In theory, this is a way in which the church should look very different from the world, but sadly, that is rarely the case.

When it comes to elevating a person’s status, the penchant to turn mere men (or women) into idols seems to be as prevalent within the church as it is in the culture.  In such cases our classification of them as “good” often grows to a point that we become blind to their potential for weakness and bestow presumptions of honor and virtue they may not possess.  The grander these suppositions become, the further they have to fall, and the greater the potential for substantial damage.

The litany of abuse at the hands of ministry leaders within the Liturgical, Evangelical, and Pentecostal movements clearly testifies to the dangers of presuming the basic goodness of an individual and treating them as though they are above reproach.  Often times these idols have become so sacred that followers refuse to believe that they are capable of such atrocities and choose to villainize their victims instead.

Recent ministry scandals demonstrate the degree to which the “church” has fallen into both the “good guy” and “bad guy” dynamics.  Allegations again Mike Bickle (International House of Prayer) and Dr. Michael Brown (Author, Speaker, Apologist) were met with great skepticism, as both were perceived to be “good guys.”  To their devoted followers it seemed incomprehensible that any of these stories might be true.  It was easier to disparage the credibility of their victims, and to claim that this was all just some sort of demonic attack on “God’s anointed ones”.

Yet, after a season of adamant denials, there seemed to be a tempered concession of impropriety by both men.  But even after these claims were largely substantiated, there were (and are) a significant number of devotees who refuse to acknowledge these failures or the damage caused by them.  For them, restoring these idols to their pedestal remains the primary focus.

On the other end of the spectrum is singer Michael Tait, a former member of notable Contemporary Christian Music bands, DC Talk and The Newsboys.  Unlike the previously mentioned ministers, Tait willingly stepped down from his platform and confessed to living a “double life”.  Though he hasn’t corroborated all the claims against him, he has admitted that many of them are true.  But his confession has been met with little grace.  Just as the world does, he has been thrown into the “bad guy” pile, from which there is no return.

Now the cancel culture machine is busy making sure that his former band (The Newsboys) isn’t allowed to make records anymore (i.e. cancelled recording contract), can’t play live music (i.e. cancelled tour dates) and that his music is never played on the radio again (i.e. DC Talk and Newsboys removed from Christian Radio).  If all goes as planned, they may soon erase any evidence that he was ever involved in the business.

Understand that I am not advocating for or against any of this response, I’m simply pointing out that this is another example of the church taking their cues from the culture instead of from the Spirit of God.  We need to ask ourselves, has God cancelled Michael Tait?  Has He thrown Him in the eternal dust bin?  Have we forgotten that the measure we use with him, is the measure that will be used for us (Matt.7:2)?

This touches on another aspect of this good guy / bad guy paradigm.  Once someone gets in the bad guy column, we have the tendency to go back and rewrite their history.  We cannot accept they may have been a sincere and devoted follower of Christ, who simply got off track.  We assume that they were always a snake, who simply deceived everyone along the way. 

Ultimately, I believe this is a hedge against admitting to ourselves that we might be susceptible to the same temptations (i.e. they fell because they are bad guys, and we won’t fall because we are good guys).  But once again, scripture does not support such a rationalization.

Saul’s failure as the king did not erase the fact that he was hand picked by God, and for many years walked in humility and submission to his calling.  David’s adultery and conspiracy to commit murder did not get Him thrown into the “bad guy” pile with all of the other failed kings of Israel.  Jonah’s disobedience didn’t earn him the silent treatment from God.  Neither Peter’s denial, nor Judas’ betrayal allowed gospel writers to record that there were only 10 actual disciples.  The Lord didn’t redact all the unsavory parts of their stories.  In fact, they became crucial parts of their testimonies.

If we admitted to ourselves that we’ve helped create the dynamic that allows certain ministers/ministries to act without accountability, we’d also have to own our part of the damage that has been caused by that. 

I am in no way trying to justify Michael Tait, or his actions.  Clearly, he got way off track and people got hurt.  There are certainly repercussions that come with all that, but such things are better left to the Lord.  We, as followers of Christ, have a calling to reflect His mind and His heart to a dying world, thus how we handle a brother who falls matters.  Simply mimicking the world’s process for dealing with these types of situations fails to rise to the standard of that high calling.  That failure also has repercussions.

I have to ask myself, did I resonant with the Newsboy’s worship songs because Michael Tait was the singer, or because the Spirit of God bore witness to them?  And if it’s the latter, does that somehow change because he was the vocalist?  Is it about the message or the minister?  How clean does a vessel have to be before we can receive from them?  And as ministers are we ready to have our lives examined to that degree?

I would submit that mankind’s stubborn belief in “good guys”, “bad guys” and in our ability to distinguish between the two, is a byproduct of the fruit that the first man chose in the garden.  God never intended for our faith to be invested in mere men, or in our ability to discern what it good, and what is evil.  He entrusted those things to His Spirit, which is why Jesus told His disciples that it was better that He go and allow the Spirit to come to them (John 16:7). 

God doesn’t look at men the way we look at each other (1 Sam.16:7), and He has no use for the categories we assign to each other.  He has given us the Ministry of Reconciliation (2 Cor.5:16-21), and we are His ambassadors.  If we are to be known by the way we love one another (John 13:35), these situations are opportunities for Him to be glorified (Col.1:27).  His sheep know His voice, they listen and they follow (John 10:27).

Posted in Commentaries | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Institution – Industry – Idolatry

June 23, 2025 by bjcorbin

It is not particularly difficult to walk through a sun filled garden with a casual acquaintance, but in times of calamity, we desperately search for a true brother.  Indeed, the strength of a relationship is best measured in the midst of adversity, which is also true within corporate entities (e.g., families, communities, organizations), such as the Body of Christ. 

Some of the most inspirational stories in scripture are portraits of God’s people manifesting genuine faith in the midst of extraordinary adversity (e.g., Job, Joseph, Daniel, Shadrach-Meshach-Abednego, John the Baptist, Stephen), while some of its most ardent warnings center around those whose character fails in the critical moment (e.g., Balaam, Saul, Solomon, the rich young ruler, Judas, Ananias-Sapphira). 

Adversity does not necessarily build character, but it almost always exposes it.  Sadly, the true character of what identifies as “the church” in America has been repeatedly exposed in recent decades.  This litany of failures speaks to both a weak connection to the Lord, and to each other.

Though religious leaders from various denominations had much to say when allegations of sexual abuse within the Catholic church first emerged, the chorus has diminished significantly in recent years, as eerily similar scandals have rocked the evangelical and charismatic movements.  To a lost and dying world, there is no discernable difference in these instances.

The word that is most often interpreted as “church” within the scripture refers to a people who have been called out by God.  It was never intended to rest upon a building or an institution.  Though there is a legitimate corporate expression of this group, scripture points to a living, breathing organism; not an inanimate, man-made object or system. 

But instead, we have created an industry called, “The Church”, and we’ve slapped Jesus’ name on our letterheads, and buildings, much like a corporate sponsor does on a stadium. Unfortunately, any system that men create is highly susceptible to corruption and abuse, and that has become the legacy of this guarded religious paradigm.

The Lord spoke to me some years ago about “Institutions,” and said, “institutions are created by man, and they are not sacred to Me”.  He showed me that it is the people who inhabit these institutions that are precious to Him.  But the men who create and promote such entities are more apt to protect the institution at the expense of people, which clearly opposes the Lord’s value system.  

When an institution becomes a conduit for manipulation, abuse and destruction, it has completely perverted God’s design and desire.  If a branch that does not produce fruit is cut off and thrown into the fire (John 15:6), what is the fate of branches that produce poisonous fruit.

Nothing seemed to stir Jesus’ ire like the religious leaders of His day, and the scripture is filled with stories of their ignorance and arrogance.  But sadly, almost no one seems to see themselves in those stories, as the religious leaders of today continue to blindly walk into many of the same traps.

A clear pattern of failure was demonstrated by Israel’s very first King.  Saul did not promote himself to the position of king, nor was he nominated by his peers, he was literally picked out of the crowd (1Sam.9:17) and chosen by God (1Sam.10:24).  At that time, he was humble (1Sam.9:21), anointed (1Sam.10:1), gifted (1Sam.10:13), and God had done a work in his heart (1Sam.10:9).  And for a substantial period, Saul walked in that calling and anointing (i.e. 1Sam.11), fulfilling God’s purposes in his life.  

But, sustained seasons of victory, and the praise of men eventually eroded Saul’s humility to the point that he felt empowered (or commissioned) to make decisions of his own (1Sam.15:9).  It wasn’t as if he stopped wanting to serve God, but his pride and greed caused him to overstep the bounds of his authority. 

God’s response was quick and definitive (1Sam.15:11 & 23), and it’s hard not to see the parallel between his story and the narratives surrounding so many “anointed” (i.e. called, gifted, empowered) ministry leaders who’ve fallen throughout church history, especially in the recent past.

At the point David refused to lay his hands on “God’s anointed one” (1Sam.24:10), it was clear to him and everyone else that Saul had been rejected as the king of Israel.  This passage is pointing towards David’s unwillingness to act without specific direction from the Lord, which is a foreshadowing of Jesus’ pledge that He couldn’t do anything without direct guidance from the Father.  It is meant as an advocation of David’s heart, not a defense of Saul’s immutable position or calling.  

Nothing in scripture supports the idea that calling, gifting, anointing… exempts a person from accountability.  Indeed, quite the opposite is true (1 Tim.5:20, James 3:1).  Within these stories, we see Samuel soundly rebuke Saul (1Sam.15:17-19), just as Nathan strongly rebukes David for his transgression with Bathsheba (2Sam.12:1-7).  Chastening a king was a dangerous activity, even for a recognized prophet, but it was exactly what God called them to do.

A related aspect revealed in David’s story occurs toward the end of his reign, when he wants to build the temple.  As he inquires of the prophet Nathan, he’s told that God is with him, and that he should do as he pleases (2Sam.7:3).  There is nothing recorded that indicates that Nathan inquired of the Lord for this answer, and it appears to have come from his experience of being alongside David as he wins battle after battle. 

It was a completely reasonable conclusion to draw, and on the surface, it seemed true, as God clearly was with David.  But when Nathan takes the time to inquire of the Lord (2Sam.7:4), the answer is much different than he or anyone else expected.

This phenomenon is frequently played out in the modern context, as truly gifted people, who have eyes to see, are blinded by someone’s position, title, resume, success, giftings, callings, anointing…  Like these prophets, they may have been called by God to confront issues, but they defer to what they see with their natural senses, or what they perceive to be a higher authority. 

Nathan’s rebuke allowed David to repent, and to step back into the fullness of his calling.  It’s hard not to believe that God hasn’t extended this same grace to so many other ministers who fell because no one was willing to confront them as they veered off course.  Unfortunately, we have created a culture that struggles to tolerate such a confrontation.

Even when abusive leaders are uncovered, there seems to be an inappropriate sense of urgency to “restore” them to ministry.  If we view these situations through the lens of a fallen brother (or sister), our concern should be about the restoration of their relationships with both the Lord and their loved ones.  But when viewed through the lens of the church industry, it’s bad for business to have your most valuable players on the sideline, so the focus tends to be on getting them back on the field.

When people see ministries that are particularly successful, they are prone to elevate the ministers and their organizations to a place that God has reserved for Himself (i.e. our source, our covering, our provision).  Regardless of the good work that has been, and/or is being done within a ministry, this still amounts to Idolatry.  And while unquestioned loyalty to a man or ministry may be good for business, it can ultimately stir the resistance of God.  In such cases, both the minister and the people bear some responsibility for establishing and preserving this relational dynamic.

The fact that people fall into sin is not surprising nor does it need to be traumatic to the whole body.  The catastrophic damage is done when we turn a blind eye to these failures, and/or endeavor to cover them up.  This further crushes the victims, violates the trust of the affected community, and empowers the abusers.  The rationalization is that we are somehow mitigating the damage done to the “Body,” but in truth, it’s about protecting the entity (i.e., the minister, the ministry, the organization…) and its interests.

It is not wrong that organizations aspire to build a track record of effectiveness, but when protecting the brand becomes more important than protecting the people who inhabit the group, significant damage is inevitable.  It begins subtly, as a disparity develops between the picture presented in front of the stakeholders, and the reality of what goes on behind the scenes.  The longer that gap is allowed to exist and grow, the greater the depths to which an entity is bound to fall. 

While we may rationalize that the prosperity of the brand benefits everyone, an institution’s legacy is ultimately rooted in how they treat their people.  God’s perspective always boils down to the treatment of “the least of these (Matt.25:40).”

Posted in Commentaries | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Fitting In

June 13, 2025 by bjcorbin

Throughout my lifetime I have heard countless people attest to the fact that they feel as though they “never really fit it,” which is a sentiment that is generally greeted with a hearty chorus of amens.  Even folks who seem to be popular and successful often profess to battling such feelings.  Indeed, in all my years I’ve never encountered even one person claim the converse of this condition (i.e., I feel like I always “fit in”).

I’ve heard Psychologists assert that most people wrestle with the subconscious fear that, “if you really knew me, you wouldn’t love me,” and I sense that is probably truer than any of us would like to admit.  There does seem to be a very human tendency to conceal and safeguard the inner most part of our being for fear of being rejected.  Though some experience traumatic levels of rejection at a very young age, this apprehension seems to be prevalent even in those who haven’t. 

Anxiety about other people truly knowing us tends to manifest itself as insecurity, which then becomes a breeding ground for covetous, competition, envy, manipulation, and strife.  Needless to say, all of those dynamics are highly destructive in terms of our relationship to others, which greatly impedes our ability to function as a family, a community or as a body of believers.  Given Jesus’ description of how people would be able to distinguish His followers (i.e., by their strong, loving relationships -John 13:35), this would seem to be a significant issue for those who are called by His name.

In praying about the root of this problem, I sense that it goes all the way back to the first man, and his decision in the garden.  When Adam and Eve were walking in undeterred fellowship with the Father, they were aware of their nakedness, but they were unashamed (Gen.2:25).  Yet immediately after eating the fruit, it says that their nakedness became a source of humiliation (Gen.3:7), and they felt the need to cover themselves.  

Though the scripture doesn’t really describe these coverings, I sensed the Spirit clarify that they didn’t feel the need to cover their face, or hands, or legs…  It was only the parts of them that looked different from each other that they felt compelled to conceal.

Prior to eating the” fruit of the knowledge of good and evil,” they viewed each other through the lens of the Father’s love, and were unashamed of their differences, but after the fall, they viewed each other through the context of their own senses, and were embarrassed by the things that made them unique.  

Thus, mankind became mired in an endless cycle of comparison, covetousness, and competition, which turns out to be the antithesis of unity.  This pattern became lethal within the first generation, as jealousy compelled Cain to murder his brother (Gen.4:8).

Considering that our Creator saw fit to make each one of His children a unique expression of Himself (Gen.1:27), and that Paul would later describe the Body of Christ as the coming together of all these distinctive aspects (1Cor.12:1-26), our apprehension at being vulnerable and genuine with one another is no doubt at the heart of our ineffectiveness in manifesting the body that the Lord described.

Our concept of “fitting in” seems to be predicated on the idea that we will be just like everyone else.  So we tend to dress like the proverbial “them”, speak like them, and act like them, in the vain hope that we will find acceptance.  But no two pieces of a puzzle are exactly alike, and if they were, a clear picture would not emerge at the end.  I would suggest that we were not created to “fit in,” we were designed to “fit together”. 

Yet, even if we come to recognize the power in diversity that potential can only be realized when each member of the group is willing to yield to the unique aspects of the others.  The whole cannot partake of its rich variety of parts, if a singular element or elite grouping is allowed to dominate at the expense of the others.   

Indeed, a clarinet was never meant to sound like a flute, and you actually need both to play the symphony as it was originally written.  But you’re not likely to hear either of them if the brass continues to play beyond their prescribed stanzas.

Church models that promote some to be soloists, while making the remainder accompanists (or even worse, simply an audience) virtually ensure that we will never truly function as the body described in scripture (1Cor.12:12-20).  Much of the new Apostolic movement has fallen into this trap, as they seek to elevate the position of a few, when the five-fold gifts were actually intended to cultivate the gifts of the many (Eph.4:12-13).  Effective “Five-fold” ministry is when every member’s gift finds its place at the table (and every instrument is given its rightful place within the concerto). 

Sadly, these mindsets (e.g., I never fit it, if you really knew me you wouldn’t love me…) have become strongholds within the body, and drive most people to willingly forfeit their seat within the orchestra. They will happily sit in the audience if it means that no one will ever truly see what is inside of them.  And they will freely gather around someone else’s gifts, while their gifts go dormant.

There is little doubt that the enemy of our souls loves to stir our sense of alienation, so that we will willingly isolate ourselves from the group.  It is a classic predator tactic.  These feelings of estrangement are often at the emotional core of those who pursue and assume a completely new identity in the hope of finding a suitable new tribe (i.e., the place where they fit in).  

Of course, the cost of pursuing a new identity is the identity that they were endowed with by their Creator, which tends to relentlessly haunt them in moments of quiet reflection.  They suppose that no one can accept them for who they really are, when it is actually their innermost being that is rejecting this contrived facade.

If this compulsion to “fit in” and be like everyone else is a byproduct of mankind’s fall, then the antidote surely lies in returning to God’s original plan, which is to view ourselves and each other through the lens of the Father’s love (Psalm 139:14, John 13:34).  Until we learn how to walk together in unity, by considering others before ourselves (Phil.2:3-4) and submitting to one another in love (Eph.5:21), we will not be able to experience the fullness the Lord authored for His Body (1Cor.12:12-20).  

If we continue to fall into the snare of the compare-covet-compete dynamic, we will remain a house divided (Mark 3:25) and never step into the fulness that has been authored for us.  For this, and so many other issues, the renewing of our minds (Rom.12:2) is at the heart of the “revival” we cry out for. 

Posted in Commentaries, Thought for the Day / Quotes | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Finding God’s Favor

May 26, 2025 by bjcorbin

Like most kids who grew up in the 1960’s and 70’s, my parents had home movies they’d occasionally pull out and show on a big projector screen.  One that particularly sticks out in my mind is of my brothers and I playing on the street in front of my grandmother’s house in Brooklyn.  It was a cold, dreary looking day, and we were all in our winter coats, but we were running around with the sort of abandon that only young children seem to possess. 

I believe that I was about 5 yrs old in the film, which would make my brothers 6 yrs and 7 yrs old.  In particular it was my brother Tom (the oldest sibling) who stood out.  His big eyes and childlike manner in these movies were such a sharp contrast to the serious and pragmatic fellow he would eventually become.  These old reels were some of the only evidence that he’d not really started out that way.

Life has a way of pushing back against innocence and cultivating cynicism.  And for little boys, wide eyed compassion and sensitivity aren’t generally a sustainable course.  Very quickly it becomes clear that having such emotions or at least allowing folks to know that you have them, is a precarious path to take.  Early on, it becomes a matter of survival to learn how to hide your vulnerabilities and to always come from a position of strength.  For many young men that manifests in a form of aggressiveness that is generally accepted for young males.  For my brother Tom, it manifested in the form of intellect.

My brother had a brilliant mind and was usually one of the smartest guys in the room.  He also had the ability to express himself, which made his intelligence harder to ignore.  Because my father was in the Air Force, we changed schools constantly, but wherever we’d go my brother would quickly be viewed as the smartest kid in the class.  As the sensitive nurturing elements of his personality receded into dormancy, the power of his mind emerged.  He wasn’t just smart, he was a born leader, and soon that was all you could see.  

As a younger brother, who had no desire to be led by someone I thought of as a peer, I just viewed him as overbearing and bossy.   By the time we got to high school, his identity as the smart kid was already set in stone, and he further solidified it by dating the smartest girl in school.  In those days, if you had asked anyone who knew my brother to describe him with three adjectives, his intelligence would have been referenced with the first word.

Forty-five years later, as I sat through the various memorial services celebrating my brother’s (too short) life, I suddenly recalled those scenes of us frolicking on the street as kids, and I realized that not one person had made a singular reference to his intelligence.  Indeed, there was barely any mention of the impressive work he had done at Ball Aerospace (e.g., the Hubble Telescope, the Mars Rover), or any of his other accomplishments.  

As the montage of pictures scrolled across the screen, they were mostly scenes of Tom with his grandchildren, or his god children, or dear friends, or with his beloved wife.  In many of them he was dressed funny and clearly goofing around with that same sort of abandon that we’d had as children. 

When people eulogized him, it was his warmth, compassion, faith, and wisdom they spoke of.  And I found myself wondering how this transformation had occurred.  What was it that allowed my brother’s true heart to re-emerge over all these years.

The short and simple answer is that the God who gave Him that heart, also worked throughout his life to preserve it.  But at the center of God’s plan was Tom’s beloved wife Fawn. 

By the time they’d met in high school, Tom had developed a pretty sharp edge to his personality, yet around her, he was like Jello.  He was crazy about her from day one, and she was not the type of person to use that as leverage against him.  If there were ever two people who seemed destined for each other, it was these two, and absolutely no one was surprised that they married and spent a lifetime together.

Looking back, I realize that because Fawn loved my brother for who he was, she made it safe for the nurturing, loving, playful part of his heart to re-emerge.  Because she routinely engaged that part of his being, it regained strength and eventually became the hallmark of his legacy.  Though it sounds cliche, she brought out the best in him.  And to his credit, I believe that he did that for her as well.

As I pondered all this, I couldn’t help but think that this is exactly what God had in mind for marriage.  That these unions were meant to amount to more than just the sum of the parts.  That both partners would help each other become the people they were created to be. 

If Tom had chosen to spend his life with someone who only related to him on an intellectual level, he may well have become a stoic recluse. Thankfully, he found a loving soul, who was full of spirit, and every bit his intellectual equal. She loved his heart and nurtured it throughout their years together.

In my brother’s final days, the room was filled with people who loved him and whose lives had been touched by his.  And right by his side was his beloved partner Fawn.  Though we could wish for more days, it would be hard to imagine a better way to finish the race.

He who finds a wife of worth, receives the favor of the Lord (Prov.18:22)

A wife of noble character is worth far more than rubies (Prov.31:10)

Posted in Commentaries, Tributes | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Older Posts »