Each year the Nashville Scene runs a contest for readers to submit phrases which complete the sentence “You are so Nashville if…” Past winners have included.
…1993 Your church congregation is referred to as �the studio audience.�
…1997 You�ve checked your flower bed for Janet March.
You get the picture.
Anyways I was browsing the web and came across this picture and it reminded me of how you could complete the sentence…You are so Mt. Juliet if….

…Your church basketball team wins a tournament and you don’t recognize half of the players. In laymans terms they could be called ringers?
(Actually I didn’t even know we had a men’s basketball team)

Lately I’ve been intriged by a report from the BBC reporter Louis Theroux in regards to his time spent with the Phelps of Westboro Baptist Church – the same group which pickets American soldiers’ funerals among other things.
The report can be found on YouTube here (Warning: Strong Language and plenty of hate)
The Most Hated Family in America (Part 1)
(Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7)
Several things spring to mind while watching this video. The first is how these people have been feed so much hatred by “Gramps” that they themselves say things that you wouldn’t normally hear in today’s vernacular. The words “split hell wide open,” come to mind, both said by Pastor Phelps in regards to the pending death of Billy Graham and by one of the parishiners in regards to Princess Diana’s death.
These people are taught to hate, as evidenced when the reporter interviews the children of the church. How sad it was to see the grand-daughter almost realize how absurd it is to laugh at someone who they believe is going to hell. How sad it is again to hear of how, even from childhood onwards, that she was shunned by the outside world due to their extremist views that she feels she must take on to please her family and her God (see Part 7).
And yet it was surprising to find that this family, apart from the pickets, is relatively stable and polite to Louis the interviewer.

There is a pronounced rift between conservative churches of Christ and liberal churches of Christ. As one might expect, the liberals tend to try to be innovative, somewhat pushing the envelope. Conservatives seem unwilling to change, but at the same time grounded in the truth.
Nowhere is this rift seems so apparent is during winter in Gatlinburg. On one viewpoint there’s the liberal Winterfest, while at the otherside of the spectrum, there is the CYC – Challenge Youth Conference.
Originally Winterfest was the only youth rally sponsored by the Churches of Christ. I attended Winterfest during my college years… My role was halfway between a student and a chaperone…possibly a bit more of the former. I don’t remember much of it, except it was all a bit emotional. During one session we were told of a young man who lost his life before he was able to become a Christian. During that point I was emotional myself. Yet now I look back at it and it seems so trival because we have all heard that same story over and over before.
CYC arose from Winterfest’s liberalism. Conservative churches wanted a youth rally in Gatlinburg, but didn’t want the liberalism that Winterfest had become.
Since in recent years the church I attend had pushed CYC and did not mention Winterfest at all, I had assumed that Winterfest had all but died out. Not so. Today I got an email sent to the church’s email address from a representative from my alma mater sent to area churches inquiring about Winterfest and giving the opportunity to receive goodies…as in beanies for the kids. Winterfest is sponsored by the more liberal Lipscomb University…among other sponsors, while CYC is sponsored by the conservative Freed-Hardeman, Southern Christian and Faulkner Universities.
So now one must have to image what the storekeepers in Gatlinburg think when there are seemlingly two large youth rallies among the churches of Christ within (sometimes) consecutive weekends in Feburary.

“To Those Willing to Serve…” was the phrase used in church bulletins when listing men who publically lead the worship service in some capacity. Usually the listing came in a weekly listing of prayer leaders, song leaders, and Bible readers.
By my count my own church uses 12 people montly on the communion table (that’s 8 upfront, 4 “ushers” in the back). That’s 144 yearly. Then there’s 2 prayer leaders (opening and closing prayers respectively), and a scripture reader. That’s 156 men needed yearly to do this. Keep in mind we have 2 worship services on Sunday morning. This brings us to a grand total of 600 men per year needed to lead publically on Sunday mornings. That’s of course not including the preacher and song leader which is usually the same men over and over.
We have around 700 people who attend on Sunday morning. Of these I’m sure a good 400 or so are members and of these let’s say half are men. So that gives us a pool of 200 men to choose from. Why all the math? I wanted to point out a problem which seems to be effecting the church as a whole. The problem is you tend to see the same people leading prayers, reading scripture and serving on the communion table.
Of course not everyone is willing or capable of leading a prayer, reading scripture publically, or even passing a communion tray. However I do believe that most everyone could be capable of doing some of those things, given enough time and practice.
The problem is that due to apathy or fear members just don’t want to serve, but instead sit back in the pew and wait to be served.
“You must be proud of your son,” a member told a father of a son who had just got done leading a public prayer during worship service. As it turned out the father remarked that it was something he would never be able to do. Do we need an adult equivalent of “Young Soldiers” ? And I’m being told that there are some deacons who will not lead public prayers during worship services. Spiritual leaders indeed?

During my late teen years and early 20s I attended church camp with my home congregation. During those years I could just about place money on which camper would go forward during the invitation song and confess whatever sin they committed during the past school year. We would then pray and then have a huge hug/cry session to aleve the pain.
I think these people were hooked on emotionalism. When they are put in a highly emotional situation they react. However once the emotionalism fades, so does their faith.
“Lord, Sometimes I Just Don’t Feel Saved,” is the title of a book by Michael Moss. And sometimes we feel we need to have that special feeling somewhere in our own heart that lets us know that we’re saved. Once that fades some feel they have to go forward to renew their committment.
Time and time again I have seen the same people go forward over and over at church confessing real or imagined sin, while other people, people who NEED to go forward sit back on their pew and consequently engage in sinful activities on days other than Sunday.
Sadly, or maybe more appropriately realistically, the newness and geniuness of a Christian life has somewhat faded, mostly through negative life experiences with past jobs and church. My relationship with God hasn’t changed. However seemingly this whole hooked on emotionalism has been placed in the backseat and instead utilitarianism has taken its place. I’m not knocking emotionalism. I think for some people it has its place. But what I would like to see is more logic. Logical people examine themselves and ask “Is there anything I’ve done lately that would put me in an unsaved position?” If yes, then change your behavior.

It passed. Apparently the Wilson County school board thinks that it is perfectly acceptable to use taxpayer dollars to fund religious instruction in public schools.
Do you trust your government? Do you trust your government to teach religion in an unbiased manner? Would you accept a Utah school board funding religious instruction which included promoting the Mormon faith?
And why is this man smiling? Could it be that he has propelled the county back to the 1950’s? His brand of religion will be taught. I know nothing about him. And I ask you, if you knew nothing about someone, would you let them mold the minds of your child in religious instruction?
You want an elective in Bible? Go to your church’s Sunday school. It’s free and funded solely by private donations.

In between watching the latest Corker vs. Ford smear ad, I find solace in two places: while watching reruns of Seinfeld broadcast on TBS (a non-local channel, therfore not subject to the manditory airing of political grievances….Corker, Ford, Rochelle, Beavers, or whatever).
The 2nd place I find solace is while worshipping God with others collectively.
However lately it seems that many conservative Bible-belt churches are becoming a Bully-pulpit of sorts when it comes pushing a specialized political agenda.
Pastors, ministers, preachers, etc…run the risk of loosing their congregation’s tax exempt benefit if an endorsement of a candidate is mentioned. They also run the risk of alienating their parishiners if they do not vote for or believe in the endorsed candidate. Parishiners don’t want a political advertisement from the pulpit. We already get enough of those lately.
What we want is how to make one’s personal relationship with God and their fellow Christians better. What I need to know how to deal with the pain of suffering, overcoming temptations, and increasing our faith.

There’s a local debate starting in regards to teaching the Bible as a historic document in public schools. Terry Redman wants to offer a class as an elective in Wilson County schools, using the Bible as the primary text.
As a sidenote, it seems kinda funny that Redman is shown holding up the Bible open to Song of Solomon (note the goofy grin on his face). Perhaps Song of Solomon should be used as a text in sex ed…but that’s another debate altogether.
A few days ago students voiced their views on allowing the class.
We as Christians can’t even agree on whether or not Jesus was born of a virgin. What makes us think that we’ll agree with whatever Mr. Redman wants to teach? I know nothing about Redman’s religious background. He could teach our children something doctrinally wrong.
Lets look at this from a different angle. Dearborn, Michigan has one of the largest concentrations of Muslims (outside of NYC). Approximately 30,000 of the city’s 98,000 residents are Muslim. What if the residents of Dearborn wanted to use the Koran as a historical document in public schools? Would you support taxpayer funding of instruction of the Koran?
What if Mormon residents in Utah wanted to teach the Book of Mormon in public schools as a historic document? Would you support teaching that a remnant of Jewish settlers came to pre-Columbus America as fact in public schools?
And what if Branch Davidians wanted to teach in public schools that David Koresh was our Lord and Savior?
By opening up religious instruction in public schools, you open up a huge can of worms.
I’m tired of hearing about well meaning Christians thinking that putting prayer and religion back in public schools as being the cure-all for society’s ills. Proponents of prayer in public schools point to 1962 as the landmark point in American history when prayer was taken out (due to Engel v. Vitale) and subsequently society went to hell in a handbasket. As a reminder, the 1960s were a turbulent time in American history. The Vietnam war, coming of age of the babyboomers, death of an American president….all of these things and more brought and upheaval of society which caused a change in how we as Americans see things. It wasn’t just taking prayer out of schools which caused this change in demographics.
I’m also tired of people trying use public schools as a vehicle for teaching religious instruction. This should be the job of churches, synagogues, and mosques….and most importantly parents. Too many times parents just don’t want to be parents and want to allow third parties to teach morals. Parents simply do not want to take a stand. Hence the strict dress code in Wilson County because parents do not want to inspect their child’s wardrobe upon leaving for school. Instead we put the wardrobe selection in the hands of the school board. Do we really want to put Christian education in the hands of third parties?

Myspace has become one of the most visited websites on the Internet. Originally setup to showcase up and coming bands, the site is now used mostly by teenagers and 20somethings as a social networking site.
Most of the time it’s mostly somewhat of a car crash on the internet, allowing users to use any sort of background, font, or external pictures (no matter how hideous the design is).
Some churches embrace it. For example, the webpage of the West End Church of Christ in Nashville links directly to their youth group’s page on Myspace.
I am concerned about the content of church member’s Myspace profiles. I guess I wouldn’t be as concerned, but it just leaves me shaking my head in disbelief when I see “I go to church; I put God first in my life” and then allow vulgar language to be posted on their profile. In the same vein, they themselves post vulgar messages on other’s church members’ profile.
It’s almost as if we’re trying to live dual lives inside church and outside online. People are showing their true colors online. It leaves me in disbelief whenever they express their love of God publically at church.
I really do think that most parents are ignorant to what their kids are posting on their Myspace profiles. Adults and other authority figures seem either unwilling or unable to convince young Christian Myspace users to clean up their pages.

Let me tell you of a couple of true stories. I’m not going to use names and places to protect the innocent. I just really want to make a point.
I know of a minister and song leader in their 20s at two separate small country churches. Both were just getting started in their ministries. Seems that at some point these people were discouraged at what they were doing…
The discouragement comes from two separate incidents. One had to do with the minister being inappropriately dressed at a high school graduation. He was wearing shorts (collective gasp from you the readers). Now, I am not sure why a minister wearing shorts is such a big deal to some people, but it was at this point, even though I’m sure that there were church members there who had shorts on too.
The song leader himself was discouraged when he expressed his emotion at a baptism ceremony. He clapped. This caused much many people to think negatively of this song leader.
So at some point these people decided to leave their own churches and core beliefs behind. The song leader is now praise team cheerleader at an instrumental progressive church, one very much different than the church he grew up in. The minister himself has recently quit his preaching postion and moving away to a more progressive “accepting” congregation.
Now I’m not sure if these servants were progressive (read “liberal”) all along, or if they turned that way after being discouraged. I would tend to believe the latter.
Sometimes it takes just a few discouraging words to turn someone against their own core beliefs. These discouragements can come in different forms but sometimes unfortunately it comes from fellow Christians who seem to know what they think is right better than the Creator.