As Christians, we are to leave vengeance to God, but He made us inclined toward action. To say a prayer for justice can feel like inaction, but what if we were granted an audience with the most powerful leader in the community, state, or nation in the face of wrongdoing? ? We would go and make our appeal, and it would not feel as if we'd done nothing. When we pray for justice to our Creator God, we are making our case before the Highest Power in the universe.God calls us to enact justice when it is within our power (Micah 6:8), but the greater injustices are too often outside our human influence to redress. The people of God have suffered injustice throughout their existence. Many Christians around the world are treated unjustly even today because of the name of Jesus. We sometimes suffer daily injustices based on things about us we can't change or because we encounter others who are largely out for only themselves. ? People all around us suffer injustice, whether they follow Jesus or not, and as we witness their pain, we may feel helpless and small, but God has given us an avenue to appeal on their behalf.Now, it's true that justice can get confusing on this side of Glory. Our prayers can be muddled in a world with much deception and where people imagine themselves victims with sometimes very little evidence or cause. This is all the more reason to bring these cases before God, as He is perfect, knows all truth, and judges rightly.Psalm 89:14 says, “Righteousness and justice are the foundation of your throne; steadfast love and faithfulness go before you” (ESV).Deuteronomy 32:4 reads, “The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, just and upright is he” (ESV).So, how do we go about praying for justice? What can the Bible tell us about this process?Photo Credit:©GettyImages/olegbreslavtsev

We live in a time like the judges, when “everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25), because there is no recognized ultimate authority.

We live in a time like the judges, when “everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25), because there is no recognized ultimate authority.

What Does “Woke” Mean? And Why Does It Matter?Dr. Paul ChappellFri, 03/01/2024 - 16:49 Woke is an odd word—and not just because it is a past tense verb that is now commonly used as an adjective. It's odd because it has vague connotations without clear definitions. This ambiguity allows those who appreciate the word's implications to write off those who criticize its implications as “just not understanding its meaning.”? In conversations like this, clarity is always our friend. That's why I was thankful when someone from our Sheriff's Department recently asked me what I meant in using the word woke. This individual is not a believer, and I was happy to answer his question from a Christian perspective.? Below is a lightly-edited copy of the letter that I wrote him. I thought it may be helpful to readers of this blog who have similar conversations with law enforcement or others who are seeking clarity on our concerns over the radical changes in our society that are being furthered under the banner of wokism.? Thanks for asking about the definition of “woke.” I wasn't sure if the question was asked personally or on behalf of the Sheriff, but I am happy to share a few thoughts.? Many of us had never heard the term woke until a few years ago. Prior to that time, it was used simply to describe people who felt awakened to the injustices of racism. In recent years, however, it seems the word has been highjacked by political activists who are often far-left or socialistic in their views and have a larger agenda in mind than standing against racism.? Although I cannot in this short space define the whole woke philosophy as is commonly applied today, I can point out a few frequently used terms and highlight some of their implications.? Social Justice: This is a broad term that often defeats the principles of “equal justice under the law.” Social justice focuses on enforcing equal outcomes for everyone. In this way, it leans into socialism. And amazingly, “social justice” doesn't bring justice to the average citizen, as it focuses on groups rather than on individuals' misconduct or good accomplishments. The end result, as philosopher Friedrich Hayek observed, is that people must be treated unequally in order to create equal outcomes: “And that's what social justice amounts to. It's a demand that the state should treat people differently in order to place them in the same position. . . .To make people equal a goal of governmental policy would force government to treat people very unequally indeed.”? Critical Race Theory (CRT): Under the guise of exposing racism, CRT actually suggests a reverse racism by insisting that the color of one's skin determines whether or not he or she is racist. As one author explained, “Even if a white person has never had a genuinely racist thought…he is still a racist, white supremacist, because he is white and belongs to the majority” (Ronnie W. Rogers, “Understanding the Terms…” blog post). This kind of insistence on seeing everything through the lens of race brings division to communities.LGBTQ Promotion: For many years, the LGBTQ movement has sought to align with the woke activists to gain influence, and that strategy is working. Woke activists aggressively promote sexual behavior and lifestyles through celebrations and legislation with new laws and vocabulary introduced regularly (cisgender, transgender, cultural appropriation, intersectionality, conscious capitalism, etc.). They have enshrined these numerous terms which are now being forced upon the public. The woke agenda also belittles the nuclear, or biblical, family model. Yet strong families are a strength in any society. While claiming to be marginalized, the woke and LBGTQ lobbies in this state are well-represented in government positions and dominant in political circles. Most concerningly, they are now targeting children and prohibiting parents and teachers from speaking up. For instance, CA Bill AB 957 which was put before the California legislature and passed both houses before being vetoed by the governor, said a non-consenting parent of an under-aged child would lose custody if that parent refused a mastectomy or castration (sex re-assignment surgery) for his or her child. Only the “gender affirming” parent is deemed fit to parent a child who may actually be suffering from dysphoria. Additionally, teachers have been fired from their jobs for refusing to go along with these new ideals. (One local example is Jessica Tapias, a teacher in Riverside County, who was fired just this year for refusing to hide gender transitions from parents of young children.)Economic Equity: This aims to reduce the income gap between the poor and middle class—not by increasing economic opportunity for minority groups, but by taking from the middle class by way of taxes and/or not prosecuting theft. Wealth redistribution is a common theme in woke literature.Again, this is a very high-end summary, and more could be said. But the larger point is that, while every American should stand against racism, wokism actually focuses on emphasizing differences between race and seems to have an end agenda of the disruption of society.? In particular, it leads to concerning philosophies as it relates to law enforcement. The interpretation of social justice by woke activists has led to practices such as zero-bail policies, refusing to prosecute crime, and large-scale defunding of and/or disrespect for law enforcement.? These policies, which are supported by left-leaning financiers such as George Soros and others, have been adopted by the Los Angeles District Attorney. The training of these policies has been disseminated throughout Southern Californian governmental agencies. What has been the result?? Increase in crimeIgniting class and race warfareDiscouragement and apathy among law enforcement, including many LA County deputiesFor instance, another bill recently passed the California legislature (AB 852) that requires judges to base their sentencing on race, rather than on crime. The essence of the bill is that someone who is a minority should not be prosecuted to the same extent as someone who is Caucasian because of past injustices. This is the actual opposite of Martin Luther King Jr.'s aspiration that people “not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”The woke philosophy applied to law enforcement has essentially emboldened the criminal element of communities. No doubt, you have seen this with grab-and-go robberies of high-end stores and hit and run accidents. In places where the criminal element of a community is emboldened, the rank-and-file deputies as well as law enforcement in general have become discouraged. I know the citizens of the Antelope Valley as well as anyone, and I can tell you they are discouraged by the emboldened attitude of those who run red lights, commit robbery, and worse.? As a pastor of thirty-seven years here in Los Angeles County, I care about the safety of our citizens and the wellbeing of our law enforcement community. I am concerned to see crime on the rise and criminals emboldened. I'm saddened, too, to see these issues tied to race. I've preached here in our community for nearly four decades against racism, and I know that all people are made in the image of God.? Theologically and biblically, I believe that all humans fall short of God's perfection (Romans 3:23). None of us are better than others. We have all broken God's law, and we all need redemption through the finished work of Christ for us (Romans 6:23). Whoever calls to God, acknowledges his or her sin, and receives Christ as Savior may have forgiveness and peace with God. I realize this last point is another, although related, topic. But I am happy to discuss it with you at some point in time.? I realize there is political pressure because many woke activists are political donors. Yet, I believe the Sheriff's Department must not be guided by the woke agenda, but by the law. Without law and order, nothing else works in society. Certainly, our new Captain in Lancaster or anyone in the department should be advanced based on integrity, respect, leadership, and a history of good policing. They should not be affirmed because of adherence to a particular dogma such as “wokism.”Thank you for your service to our community. Please know that I am here to help you and our law enforcement community in any way that I can.? Your Friend,Paul Chappell? P. S. I'm happy to provide additional resources on wokism and woke interpretations of social justice if these would be a help to you. A few that may be a help are Fault Lines by Voddie Baucham Jr. and Woke, Inc. by Vivek Ramaswamy. I have written a minibook on this topic titled Which Justice? which I would be glad to send you. Category Christian Living

A pair of judges in the United Kingdom allege Muslim individuals have faked a conversion to Christianity and have duped Church of England clergy in order to claim asylum and remain in the country.

Disagreement without DisunityDr. Don SiskTue, 05/02/2023 - 10:14 I am nearing my ninetieth birthday. I made public my call to preach on Thanksgiving night of 1954. A few days after that I preached my first sermon in the prayer meeting service of the Black Oak Baptist Church in Gary, Indiana. Two years later, I began pastoring. I have been in full-time ministry since 1956—nearly seventy years.Because of the various ministries I have served in, I've preached in literally thousands of churches all over the world. Being in so many churches is a blessing because I get to meet men and women who are faithfully serving Christ all around the globe. But going to so many places does have a downfall: I sometimes see the sad disunity among God's people. Churches, Bible Colleges, mission organizations, preachers, and ordinary Christians find reasons to quarrel with one another.Of course, every church or organization has some differences with the next organization. But among the independent Baptist places where I am privileged to serve, most have so much more in common than different. Yet, for some reason, we emphasize our differences more than our common practices and beliefs. Would it not be wonderful if we would emphasize our commonality rather than our differences?Many years ago when I became the Far East Director of BIMI, my pastor, Dr. Lee Roberson, was generous in giving needful advice—principles by which to conduct my ministry. One night as we were driving together back to Chattanooga from a meeting, he said to me “Don, you go anywhere that you believe God is leading you to go and minister. Some of the places you go to some of the brethren will criticize you. Don't fight with them; just keep going where you know God wants you to go.” Of course, Dr. Roberson was speaking about doctrinally-solid Baptist churches. And that was good advice. He was right on both points—some brethren criticized me, and I learned not to spend valuable time defending myself.For the first eight years of my ministry. I was a Southern Baptist. When I began to see the liberalism and compromise taking place in the Southern Baptist Convention, I became an independent Baptist by conviction. I'm grateful for that decision, and I would do it all over again—even today. I soon learned, however, that independent Baptists sometimes aren't very independent in their relationships with one another. If I did things the way they wanted me to do and went where they wanted me to go and refused to go where they did not want me to go, I was accepted. But when I didn't meet those criteria, I was not always accepted.Over my nearly seventy years in the ministry, I have seen several leaders try to be a Baptist pope (although not, of course, with that title). None of them have succeeded. The reality is that we must each answer to God—not to each other. “Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. . . . But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ” (Romans 14:4, 10).When biblical doctrine or sin is involved, of course we must separate. And yes, we all have our preferences. We have a right to have them. However, pastors, in particular, have a responsibility to establish leadership guidelines for their church workers. But, pastors do not have the right to determine preferences for other churches.I realize we must not call the violation of biblical principles a preference. We are commanded to “contend for the faith” (Jude 3). But we need not be contentious about matters not pertaining to the faith.Throughout the New Testament, we have examples of the conflict that comes through pride and the good that comes when people who have differences give deference to one another.John the Baptist“And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him. John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:26–30).Some of the disciples of John the Baptist realized that when Jesus began His ministry, people were going to Him instead of to John. They told John, “all men come to him.” (By the way, all of the people were not going to Jesus. We often unwisely exaggerate when we want to make a point.)The answer that John the Baptist gave to his disciples was classic: “He must increase, but I must decrease.” John did not become jealous or competitive. In fact, he was not trying to make disciples for himself in the first place; he was pointing people to Christ. So rather than feeling insecure, he rejoiced in what Jesus was doing and how the people were following Christ.I fear—and I can speak from experience—that we have a tendency to criticize others not because of something bad they are doing, but because they are doing more and are seeing more results than we are. In short, we become jealous.None of us are in competition with other good Bible believing organizations or individuals. We are on the same team. Their success is our success, and it's all for the glory of God. But when team members become jealous of one another, we all lose.John the Apostle“And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us” (Luke 9:49–50).Basically, what John was saying was, “They didn't graduate from our college” or “They weren't with our mission organization” or “They are not in our camp” or “They aren't doing things like us.”And what did Jesus tell John? “Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.”To allow others to do things differently than we do without criticizing them is Christlike. And to attempt to be an enforcer of others is Johnlike—the immature, pre-resurrection version of John.Paul and BarnabasPaul and Barnabas were a wonderful team who were greatly used of God. In Acts 13, they were sent out as missionaries from the first organized church missions program. Throughout Acts 13 and 14, we read of the amazing ways that God used them. Then, when they returned to Antioch, they continued to work together, including speaking to the Jerusalem council in Acts 15.But when it came time for their second missionary journey, they had a falling out.“And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do. And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark. But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work. And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus; And Paul chose Silas, and departed, being recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God” (Acts 15:36–40).Because we know this story of Paul and Barnabas' disagreement, we aren't surprised when we read it. But if we had known Paul and Barnabas before this incident, we would never have suspected that they would have parted ways.Perhaps the most amazing thing about this separation, however, is not that it happened, but what did not happen—specifically that they did not spend time criticizing one another. In fact, you do not find one word in Scripture of Paul speaking poorly of Barnabas or Barnabas of Paul. They parted ways, but they did not spend the rest of their ministries criticizing one another. And they did not draw John Mark into tests of loyalty over their disagreement. In fact, just before Paul was martyred, he makes the statement, “Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry” (2 Timothy 4:11).There are things that happen that make it nearly impossible for particular people to work together. But even if two Christians can't work together, they can be kind to one another. If we have differences with a brother, we can determine, “Even though I cannot work with this person, I am not going to be critical of him.”Paul in Prison“Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice” (Philippians 1:15–18).Paul was in prison for no other reason than preaching the Word of God. He did not look at his prison time as a hindrance to the ministry, but as an opportunity to preach to the other prisoners, to the people in authority, and to all of the other leaders. No doubt, many of them were converted.Because of Paul's boldness, many other leaders became bold in preaching the gospel. Some of these were sincere. And evidently, some of these were just trying to irritate Paul. Yet, Paul's conclusion was that regardless of the preacher's motives, he would rejoice that Christ was being preached.Years ago, I determined that I, too, will rejoice when others are preaching the gospel. When God's Word is preached and people are getting saved, baptized, and added to the church, I am going to rejoice. Rather than being jealous or critical, I am going to rejoice.I think we independent Baptists need to take Jesus' words in John 13:35 more seriously than we do: “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.”If you are preaching the gospel, winning people to the Lord, discipling believers, and training leaders, you are my brother in Christ, and I love you, appreciate you, and will gladly pray for you. We can be brothers without being identical twins. Category Pastoral Leadership Tags Pastoral Leadership Christian Living

The governor of California has vetoed a bill that would have required judges to consider if a parent affirms their child's gender identity when the court makes custody decisions.

On Friday, the California State Assembly approved a bill that would order judges in custody cases to consider whether or not parents have affirmed their child's gender.

by Phil Johnsonhis guy, angry that Grace Community Church yielded to the 9th Circuit Court's ruling banning church meetings in California this weekend, Tweets at me: "An unjust law need not be followed."I'm appalled at how many people who profess to believe Scripture echo that sentiment. Nero was emperor when Paul wrote Romans 13:1-7: "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. . . ." First Peter 2:13 was written to people suffering unjustly. ("Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him...")Peter goes on to say: "Be subject . . . also to the unjust. For this is a gracious thing, when, mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly" (vv. 18-19). Indeed, "to this [unjust suffering] you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps." (v. 21). When someone in authority over us treats us unjustly, the example we are to follow was set for us by Christ, who simply "continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly" (v. 23).The only exception to this principle is when the one in authority instructs us to sin. Then "we must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29).So does a government-mandated quarantine ask us to violate Hebrews 10:25 ("not neglecting to meet together"), or is the quarantine in keeping with the principle of Leviticus 13-14, where quarantines are expressly mandated?The answer to that question may vary according to where we live. Quarantining people in the midst of a pandemic is a legitimate prerogative of government. How long the quarantine should last and who should be exempted are questions that don't have clear, fixed answers. The severity and duration of the pandemic determines what's reasonable or not. We may or may not agree with how the quarantine is being implemented (I certainly do not), but we have a clear duty to submit unless we are being asked to sin.How long until the government-ordered quarantine is undeniably excessive, or we conclude that it's targeted persecution against our worship and therefore an illegal attempt to make us disobey Hebrews 10:25? That time may come, and when it does, we may have to implement the principle of Acts 5:29. The question of whether we have already passed that point is another subjective issue, but it's clear that among believers—in the church itself—there is not yet consensus on whether the quarantine has gone too far.Nevertheless, if you hang out on Twitter or Facebook, you may have noticed that there are countless people in the evangelical community who refuse to regard any of the above questions as matters of conscience. They believe the answers are perfectly obvious. They are eager to tell you what you and your church ought to be doing. They are locked and loaded with vituperation for anyone who sees matters differently. Two camps of them have squared off against each other—hordes of angry Karens at opposite extremes, all of whom disagree with the position I've outlined above. Some of them are scolding us for thinking Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2 actually apply in today's circumstances. The others are berating us for wanting to resume public worship ASAP.Sorry, but in the words of Martin Luther, here I stand. I can do no other. I cannot and will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. God help us.

If you missed Bro. Mikes Sermon on Judges 13:11 you can download the audio here, or you can stream it from its archive.org page.