Monday, February 22, 2010

Market Place Apartments Outreach


Every 1st, 3rd and 5th Sunday evening at 4 p.m., I meet with residents of the Market Place apartment complex for an hour-long Bible study. Usually, between 12 and 15 residents will attend this study. Four are members at Grace Pointe, while the rest just attend the Market Place studies.

This ministry at this complex is a blessing, not only for me, but I can see God working in the lives of the residents as well. The faithful support of our sister churches and the MBA of Texas allow me the time to perform ministries like this, and for that, I truly thank you.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Grace Pointe launches YouTube channel.


In the spirit of using all the available resources God has given us to spread the Gospel, I decided to start posting devotions and scriptural, Spiritual encouragement on YouTube. Be sure to tell me what you think, and if you are so inclined, please feel free to post a link on your blog. Also, all videos will be available for imbedding, so by the off chance I say something you like, you can post it on your blog as well.

The link to the Grace Pointe YouTube channel is here.

Mission: Brownwood Jan. 2010 Report


Mission: Brownwood returns to Market Place

In January, I was invited by the residents to hold a Bible study at the community room of the Market Place apartment complex. We had 15 in attendance the first week, 8 the second, and 12 the third week. We hold these studies every first, third and fifth Sunday at 4 p.m. Currently, we are studying the book of Ephesians.

Grace Pointe gets “on mission”

Beginning in January, we have begun canvassing northwest Brownwood. We are going door-to-door and handing out tracts in public places. These outreach efforts have brought us into contact with many who need prayer, and reminded us of the need to carry out the Gospel into Brownwood, Texas.

Furthermore, Grace Pointe is showing interest in becoming active in missions. We have Bro. Jason Clark (missionary to France) visiting with us Feb. 21, and Bro. Ben Woodward (missionary to Belize) visiting with us April 11.

Grace Pointe has also upped its mission giving from 10% to 12% of total offerings, dividing the mission budget evenly between TMD, state missions, ABA interstate and foreign missions, and Bro. Abel Dimatulac (missionary to the Philippines).

New PO Box for Grace Pointe

We have a new mailing address for Grace Pointe. Please address all correspondence to me personally, or to Grace Pointe MBC, PO Box 1828, Brownwood, TX 76804.

Upcoming Dates

Southwest Mission Rally (Quaker Ave in Lubbock) April 24
Vacation Bible School: June 7-11
Summer Revival: July 5-9
Southwest Mission Rally (Wyndrock MBC in Abilene) July 31
Southwest Mission Rally (Grace Pointe in Brownwood) Oct 30

By The Numbers:

Sunday Morning

1/3 - 11
1/10 - 14
1/17 - 21
1/24 - 14
1/31 - 15

Wednesday Evening

1/6 - 12
1/13 - 12
1/20 - 10
1/27 – 11

Finances

Offerings - $2,001.05 ($25 designated for Bro. Acker and $80 designated for Ladies Auxiliary)
Memorial MBC (Rusk, TX) $100
Memorial MBC (Rusk, TX) $50
Landmark MBC (Porter, TX) $88
Jim Slocumb (Jacksonville) $100
Northcrest MBC (Andrews,TX) $61.78
Northcrest MBC (Andrews, TX) $68.82
Donna Prasatik (Grapeland, TX) $300

Expenses:

Rent: $600
Brownwood Water: $84.51 (Dec)
Texas Mission Development: $86.39
MBA of Texas (State Missions): $86.39
Leland Acker: $100
Leland Acker: $25 (designated offering)
PO Box Rental: $58
VBS Sample Kit: $208
Ken & Barbara Sibley: $200 (toward Haiti trip)
Brownwood Water: $84.51 (Jan)
TXU Energy: $87.24
Transfer to Ladies Auxiliary: $80
Banking: $3

Mission: Brownwood Account

Deposits:
Missionary Bapt. Assn of TX $3,058
Denson Springs MBC (Grapeland, TX) $100
Heritage Baptist Church (Missouri City, TX) $200
White Rock MBC (Center, TX) $100
Memory Lane MBC (Palestine, TX) $50
East Side Baptist Church (Jacksonville, TX) $100
Rocky Springs MBC (Jacksonville, TX) $200
Bassett Road Baptist Church (Palestine, TX) $75
RidgeCrest MBC (Andrews, TX) $25
Wyndrock MBC (Abilene, TX) $40
Quaker Ave. BC (Lubbock, TX) $100
58th Ave MBC (Amarillo, TX) $110.25
Hickory Grove MBC (Newport, AR) $48.54
First Baptist Church (Arp, TX) $120

Expenses
Salary + Housing $3,822
Outreach $103.66
Benevolence $100
Lights and signage $63.23
Curtain Rods $9.45
New Checks $41
Home Depot (building supplies) $203.54

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

UnGodly Holiness Pt. 6 - Missionary 'Accountability'

The following is based on my observations of certain mission projects conducted throughout the U.S.A., and is in no way tied to my personal experience in Brownwood. Mission: Brownwood is well supported financially, prayerfully and emotionally. Rocky Springs has been a very good sponsoring church and I have no complaints.

The year is 1966. A naval aviator (fighter pilot) has found himself in a dogfight with a VC Mig 23. The Mig 23 is smaller, more agile and faster than the American's jet, and the American pilot soon finds himself under the relentless pursuit of a VC fighter who smells the pending victory over a Naval officer.

The American pilot, desperate to evade the VC fighter inadvertently sends his jet into a spin. He loses total control of the aircraft. The VC pilot, confident that he has secured the demise of the American pilot, flies right by. Then, a miracle happens. The American regains control of his aircraft, and the hunted suddenly becomes the hunter. He locks onto his target, fires his missile, but it misfires and twirls toward the sea below. The only course of action now is to return to the aircraft carrier.

The American pilot was at a severe disadvantage during this confrontation with a North Vietnamese Mig 23. His aircraft was bulkier and slower than the Mig 23. It was actually hard to land on an aircraft carrier, and required special procedures to launch, because it was not designed for carrier use. It was an air force jet... forced upon the Navy as part of the Department of Defense's consolidation program.

Not only did the size and belabored maneuverability of his aircraft put the American at a disadvantage, his jet also lacked machine guns. That's right, many American fighter jets in the Vietnam war lacked machine guns... a must-have for dog-fighting situations. Why? Good question.

It all goes back to the Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara. McNamara had a vision of streamlining the process of equipping the U.S. Military, shifting from a doctrine of massive retaliation to one of "limited warfare," and conducting national defense while reducing military expenditures.

Under this system, the emphasis would be shifted from small fighter jets to bombers. The goal would be to equip the military with bombers that would have limited dog-fighting capabilities. All branches of the armed forces would get the same aircraft. Why waste money buying specialized aircraft when all can buy the same aircraft in bulk. Plus, many of the expensive features, like machine guns, can be eliminated as the technology has surpassed aerial combat techniques of yesteryear. Hence, the fighter jet with no guns. McNamara believed the American pilot could fire the sidewinder missile from 70 miles away and pick a Mig 23 out of the sky before aerial combat maneuvers were necessary.

The problem was the sidewinder missile frequently misfired, and the VC figured out that if they could get their Migs so close to the Americans that they couldn't use missiles, the Americans would be sitting ducks. Hence the ratio of enemy planes to American planes being shot down fell to 3-1. While this grim statistic led to machine guns being placed on the planes, better aircraft being purchased, the Top Gun academy being founded at the Miramar base in San Diego, and a really exciting movie being made in 1986, the damage to American lives and troop morale had been done, all with the swipe of a pen by a bureaucrat who had never flown a combat mission. Sure, McNamara served in the Army Air Forces in World War II, but he served in a capacity that analyzed bomber effectiveness.

You see, McNamara, and most of those in the cabinets of Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, felt they were smart enough to wage war from Washington, with little or no regard given to the needs expressed by the generals on the ground in Vietnam.

Many pastors regard missions and missionaries the same way. There are some sponsoring pastors, and supporting pastors, who feel that they have a better understanding of the mission and its needs than the missionary on the field. These pastors require that all decisions made on the mission field must first cross the pastor's desk, and then be approved by the sponsoring church. Many times, critical needs are denied... all under the guise of "missionary accountability."

To some degree, missionaries need to be held accountable. If a missionary is receiving support from his sponsoring church and supporting churches, and possibly the association, those entities deserve to know that the money they send in is being used for the purposes for which it is sent. They need to know that the missionary is spending his time on the field doing mission work. They deserve reports, and they deserve respect from the missionary. Furthermore, any decision that is going to have a direct impact on the finances or security of the sponsoring church, or one that could possibly create responsibility or liability for the sponsoring church, must be put before the congregation of the sponsoring church.

However, many times the "accountability" term is applied to situations which actually fall under the heading of "lording over." Here are a few examples:

1. A foreign missionary uses an all-terrain vehicle to travel from village to village where he preaches the Gospel, baptizes, establishes churches, and then revisits the churches that have been established. One day, the vehicle breaks down. He has it taken into a nearby town, where repair costs are estimated at $2,500. The funds are available in the mission fund at his sponsoring church. He calls his sponsoring pastor, asking that the funds be sent to him so he can repair his vehicle. The sponsoring pastor replies, "We'll have to bring this before the church in its business meeting."

Here's the problem. The supporting churches have sent that money to the mission fund at the sponsoring church for the purpose of funding that missionary's ministry. Any attempt by the sponsoring church to withhold, delay, or regulate that fund is "lording over," not accountability. Suppose it takes two weeks to get the item before the church in the business meeting, and then it takes two to three days to get the check to the missionary (provided the treasurer was prompt in mailing the check out). The vehicle will then be in the shop possibly for a week, maybe longer, depending on which country he is in. The work has just suffered a one-month set back, and time is the most valuable commodity for many missionaries.

2. A missionary in New York City successfully evangelizes and baptizes a handful of Wall Street investors. These investors become faithful in their study of the Word, their support of the mission in NYC, their attendance, and they become active in the mission work. These mission members get some money together and desire to rent a loft space in Manhattan. The sponsoring pastor says "No. We must wait and take this before the sponsoring church."

The missionary has been faithful in teaching this mission about the "local, visible" church, and against the "universal" church, but now this congregation finds themselves at the will of another ecclesiastical body. Sound confusing? I'll never understand what makes one person or body of believers believe that they can tell another body of believers what to do with the money they've raised. If a mission can fund its own needs, let them, and hinder them not.

3. A sponsoring church votes to send out a missionary, but then forbids him from finding secular employment, while at the same time refusing to guarantee him support. They insist that he step out on faith, but they refuse to step out on faith by making sure his rent is paid and his kids are fed. I shouldn't even have to explain what's wrong with this picture.

4. A pastor stands up at an associational meeting and demands that every associational missionary give a total of the number of doors they've knocked on, the number of people they've witnessed to, the number of sermons they've preached, how much time they spend on visitation and in sermon preparation, the number of visitors and an explanation of why their missions haven't grown more. Actually, this can be a reasonable request, so long as that pastor would not be offended should his church ask the same thing of him the following Sunday.

You see, I'm all for giving an account of myself and my work. I believe that any missionary worth his salt should be willing to give an account of himself and his work. However, when you move from an attitude of reviewing the work to one of "I've got to get this missionary or mission under control," it ceases to be an accountability issue and more one of lordship.

Peter wrote, "Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being examples to the flock." Too many people want to be lords over God's heritage. If we would repent of that attitude, maybe more missions would get started and more missionaries would be successful.

Let's pray for our missionaries, let's help our missionaries, and let's support our missionaries financially... not as lords over their work, but as fellowlaborers. May God's work prosper in the years ahead.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

UnGodly Holiness Part 5, Silencing the Church

In Poland, under the Communist regime of the 1950s, churches were required to register with the government, pastors had to be licensed by the government, and pastors could not speak out on politics. Doing so could result in the shutdown of the church and the pastor's license could be revoked, making it illegal for him to follow God's call in the ministry. This was fairly common in Iron Curtain countries prior to 1980, as is my observation from reading "God's Smuggler" by Brother Andrew.

Governments have always despised religious intervention from the time King Henry VIII decided that he didn't like being told by the pope that he couldn't divorce his wife. While governments tolerated religion, some even officially adopting certain religions, the movement in the world has been to rid countries of religion. The Communist were very effective at this. Government wants the churches to stay out of the political arena.

Now Baptists believe in separation of church and state. What this means is that the state does not pick an official state religion, neither does the church usurp authority over the state. The United States put into the Constitution with the first amendment the prohibition of Congress making "any law regarding the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof." What this meant was that Congress would not adopt a state religion, neither would it regulate religion, neither would it limit the free exercise of religion. It did not say that churches could not petition Congress, support a candidate for Congress, or lobby for or against legislation.

However, IRS tax code does just that. Churches seeking the non-profit status are legally prevented from attempting to influence legislation or elections. This code is in direct violation of the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution because it regulates the free exercise of religion. It limits churches' abilities to stand up against pro-abortion legislation, and stand up in favor of pro-family legislation. Furthermore, churches are not even allowed to contribute money to political causes. (Read the IRS tax codes and state business codes).

The problem we face as churches today is that we not only have the government silencing our voices in the political arena, some of our own people are calling for us to shut up as well. They cite examples such as Jesus being apolitical, their belief in separation of church and state, and rail against Christian PACs that lobby for pro-family legislation, or legislation that expands Christian liberties. We should be all about saving souls and not worry about the politics, or so they say.

To fall into this line of thinking is to ignore thousands of years of precedent, not only in scripture, but in Baptist history as well. Did not the prophets try to influence the kings they were under? Did not Jesus try to explain His Kingdom to Pilate? Did not Paul try to convert and influence Festus, Felix and King Agrippa? Was Rhode Island not founded by Baptists seeking refuge from persecution? Did not Baptists, and John Leland in particular, lobby the U.S. Government for the freedom of religion clause in the first amendment? These are just a few examples.

The point is, when governments follow evil trends and pass evil laws, God's people must rise up and voice opposition to those laws. If they do not, then the evil consequences will come upon the nation with little or no warning.

Paul wrote that we should pray for our governments that we can live peaceably and worship freely, and James wrote that we should put our prayers into action. We have the ability to petition our government for the purpose of protecting our Christian liberties, and for the purpose of keeping our government in line with the things that God finds acceptable. Should we neglect this blessing, and turn a blind eye to the evils being perpetrated by our government, we have no one to blame but ourselves when the persecution comes.

Therefore, the church is right to oppose pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, and pro-immorality legislation. Don't let the opposition, either external or internal, silence you. You will be held accountable by God.