Rex M Rogers - Discerning What Is Best

Discerning What Is Best
with Dr. Rex M. Rogers

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 23 September 2011

We live in rapidly changing times. More scientists, more technology, more information, more capacity to communicate and travel, more of nearly everything exists today than once existed, and more is being added as I write. Nothing stands still.

Meanwhile, Christians are supposed to live “in the world” while being “not of the world” even as they go “into the world” (John 17). We’re here in 2011 for a purpose. We’re supposed to be God’s ambassadors of reconciliation.

But how do we do this if we don’t understand the principles and values God gave us in his Word, and how do we do this if we don’t understand the times in which we live?

In the Old Testament, we read the story of King David's effort to unite the kingdom of Israel. To help King David win the battles ahead of him, God sends to David a long list of "mighty men of valor." These men were seasoned soldiers who knew battle tactics and weaponry and who were men of great courage.

But right in the middle of this long list of mighty soldiers, God sends the men of Issachar, and the only thing on their resume is that they were men "who understood the times, to know what Israel ought to do." While they could fight, their main contribution was to give King David sound advice.

Their value to David was that they not only understood what was happening but why it was happening and whether or not it was a good thing.

Now, this is what we need today. We need Christian "men and women of Issachar" who understand their times. This means that Christians must understand the Bible, God's Word, as well as learn about the ideas that influence our nation.

If you're a Christian, you should be able to relate God's unchanging biblical principles to these rapidly changing times. You and I should be able to apply the principles and values of a biblical worldview in our lives, in our cultures, and in our times. We should be able to “give the reason for the hope that you have” with “gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15).

What does a Christian worldview have to offer the environmental movement? What really does a biblical understanding of life and Christian faith suggest we should do in the Middle East? What is a truly Christian view of stem cell research? Is Christianity relevant to public morality? Are Christian values regarding family, sexuality, and personal morality still valid and meaningful in 2011? When should, if ever, a Christian go to war? Is there really a Christian view on capital punishment? How can Christian values be fairly represented in education, entertainment, law, medicine, politics?

My point is this. The Christian life must be lived-out in the world. That's what James meant when he said, "Faith without works is dead." We should live our faith in a relevant way.

How many Christians do you know who have faith but don't do anything with it? And how many Christians do you know who know a little about the Bible but have never learned how to connect Bible truths to the everyday world?

Let's read, learn, and "study to show ourselves approved." Let's become a man or woman of Issachar who understands the times. Let's change the world.

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 22 September 2011

“Interracial marriage” has almost reached the status of little-used term in the cultural lexicon. This is not to say that racial distance no longer exists because of course it does. It is to say that fewer people become as agitated as was once common when an interracial couple walks through the public square.

When I was a young adult this term, and the cultural implications behind it, still loomed large, including amongst the Christian community. Interracial dating and marriage was something people with any sense of propriety simply didn’t do, or at least that was the dominant view among whites. But in the past forty years American attitudes toward race have changed.

According to one recent study, black-white marriages are increasing, though they still trail the rate of other mixed-race marriages. In 2008, 10.7% of blacks married whites compared to with 3% in 1980. This may not seem like much, but given the social history of this country this is a huge change.

When I was in high school, our school and community didn’t have many non-whites. But I remember discussions about interracial dating and the overwhelmingly negative response the topic elicited.

Coming of age at Cedarville College, 1970-1974, I remember not simply discussions but for the first time knowing personally both black and white individuals involved in what was then called “mixed dating.” In fact, mixed dating and the potential for interracial marriage became a major issue because two couples, each individual a popular student, became regular ‘items” on campus and, we eventually learned, some college supporters didn’t like it.

This was about the same time that Bob Jones University in South Carolina garnered national publicity for denying admission of blacks based on what the school claimed was a biblical mandate forbidding interracial dating and marriage. Because of this, the IRS revoked the school’s tax exemption in January 19, 1976, retroactive to December 1, 1970. The ensuing legal battled ended in the United States Supreme Court with a judgment against the school in Bob Jones vs the United States (1983). In 2000, Bob Jones University finally stated publicly that it was wrong about interracial dating and marriage and began admitting black students.

So, my alma mater faced a converging stream of race-related issues: a) for apparently the first time in the school’s history, two prominent interracial couples were dating on campus; b) certain off-campus supporters allegedly expressed dismay; and c) Bob Jones University was attracting national attention for taking a stand against interracial dating and marriage, thus arguing its refusal to admit blacks was protected by freedom of religion guaranteed in the First Amendment. Needless to say, as a social and political science student I was thoroughly immersed in this on campus discussion.

Eventually, then-President Dr. James T. Jeremiah spoke publicly to the issue. In brief and from my memory, he said: race is a creation and gift of God; there is nothing in Scripture suggesting, much less mandating, interracial dating or marriage be considered morally suspect or condemned; those who choose to date and especially those who choose to marry interracially should carefully evaluate social attitudes because, wrong or right, they cannot be controlled and the couple must know how it will respond; and Christians should relate to each human being, regardless of race or ethnicity, as people made in the image of God.

All these years later, and having served as a college president myself for nearly 17 years, I still value this memory of a Christian leader who stood for right, good, truth, righteousness, however you want to say it. Dr. Jeremiah spoke truth to culture that day, protected the school and the couples in the spotlight, and used his bully pulpit wisely and well.

Interracial marriage, because of social context, is still in 2011 fraught with challenges, which for some couples may prove insurmountable. But to paraphrase Dr. Jeremiah, there is nothing in the Bible that says interracial marriage is a sin. What matters is who each person in the relationship is spiritually before God and each other.

As I said, American culture’s attitude toward race has change a lot in the past forty years. I’d add that much of that change has been good.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 20 September 2011

I’ve long believed that the American airline industry’s record of customer service is the worst out there. I don’t mean nice airline personnel don’t exist. Of course they do. But the industry, the companies, inflicts a long list of irrational indignities upon its captive customers.

Some airlines demand inordinate change fees even when you arrive unexpectedly early and simply want to take another available earlier-than-booked flight. Makes no sense.

Baggage fees keep going up, as was announced in today’s news. And not only up but up a lot. This only results in passengers taking more “carry-on” luggage with them to the plane where the rest of us stand in lines waiting for their bags to be checked—why does it cost to check a bag at the registration desk, but it doesn’t cost to check the same bag at the plane?

Or passengers carry-on too-large and too-many bags, than attempt to jam them in overhead compartments. Doesn’t work. Meanwhile, the rest of us captives stand and wait.

I have a Delta Sky Miles account, a frequent-flier mileage program that's supposed to reward me for my loyalty to the airline. In some ways it does, like a free upgrade to first class from time to time.

But here’s the kicker: I pay money for my tickets and thus earn miles. I theoretically “own” these miles. They are mine to give away, for example, to nonprofit causes. But if I want to transfer these miles to a friend or family member—remember, these are miles I earned from tickets I purchased—I must pay an exorbitant “transfer fee.” Recently I checked into this and discovered that I’d be required to pay $280 to transfer enough miles for a “free ticket.” Ridiculous. Irritating.

Except for a drink and a peanut bag, airlines charge for meals unless you fly first class. Why? Why not simply add $5 or even $10 to a ticket and cover this cost? Airlines say it’s because not all passengers want the meal. Maybe, but my guess is that most would be willing to pay the bundled rate rather than be nickel and dimed to death by these kinds of avoidable traveling irritants.

Meanwhile, international airlines serve the meals, even wine, offer free newspapers, and treat their customers, captive though they may be, like the airline actually hoped the customer might return.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 19 September 2011

There’s something inherently problematic in the term “Christian politics.”

While God’s will is stated in Scripture, good people, including Christian people, disagree on scriptural interpretation. While God’s perspective on moral issues like lying, stealing, or murdering is abundantly clear, many other contemporary issues are not directly addressed. So which position on a non-addressed issue is the Christian view, and thus, who has a corner on Christian politics?

Of course politicians use Christianity, or at least some affirmation of their fidelity, to promote their agendas and their opportunities for electoral office. These are the “Political Christians,” politicians who glom onto the faith for perceived political advantage. Perhaps some do this out of genuine commitment to the faith, but surely many others do so disingenuously. Unfortunately, it’s not always easy to ascertain in which category a politician falls.

Whether or not politicians openly declare faith or how they do it varies with the political culture of the times. JFK downplayed his Catholic heritage. Jimmy Carter campaigned and won as a southern believer. Four years later, many Christians jilted Carter for Ronald Reagan, thinking he was a better man of faith because of his political views. Both George Bushes and Bill Clinton publicly affirmed their Christian faith. Barack Obama and his 2008 Republican opponent, John McCain, did so as well. For the record, I doubted the latter more than the former, but neither one makes much of a believable case.

All presidents, beginning with George Washington, publicly asked God to bless America, even LBJ and Richard Nixon, two of the most morally bankrupt men ever to hold the presidency.

Perhaps we’d generate more light if we talked about Christians in politics, rather than Christian politics. I believe my political views are consistent with my understanding of the Christian faith, but I must admit that on many issues I cannot prove this. I can only say what I believe. I am a Christian trying to live out my faith, but I cannot claim to live it perfectly. So it is with everyone else.

Seems to me Christians in politics is ideal, while Christian politics is an ideal.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 17 September 2011

Music is a fine art, and as a fine art it is forever changing, and changing rapidly. That is because music, like all artistic expression, captures as much emotion as reason. It seeks to express thoughts that are as yet inexpressible in more detailed and analytic form.

I do not mean that music is not rational. Indeed music is capable of incredible statements of deeply thought-out philosophy, both ordered and harmonic and dissonant and noisy. Music is truly a universal language in that it enables us to communicate across cultures and across time.

But music's special gift is that it is affective. It appeals to our innermost feelings. Consequently, people's taste in music is highly personal, preferential, and idiosyncratic. We know what we like and like what we know. We like what we like whether others like it or not.

In times of rapid cultural change, some music is always on the frontier of discussion and development. So if you like today's music you may not like tomorrow's because you may not share the values, feelings, and philosophies being expressed.

Music is preference because it is so personal. In any given family, spouses and other family members may have very different musical tastes. So judging what is "good" or "bad" in music is forever problematic. As always, the key to determining acceptability for the Christian is whether the music directly violates Scripture or whether the music falls within the infinite realm of choice that God has given us. If it does not undermine Scripture, than the music must not be labeled "bad," whether we like it or not.

Music is a fine art. Like it or not, music is synonymous with preference.

Music is a universal language. It enables us to communicate across time, across cultures, and across psychological and geographic space. Music may be a philosophic statement, deep and profound, or an emotional expression, shallow or deep, profound or simple.

As a philosophic and emotional expression, music is a language within our own language. As Christians, we should develop the ability to ascertain how a given musical expression relates to Scripture. Does the music fit into the infinite realm of Christian liberty God has given us for the purpose of expressing our worship of Him? Does a given musical piece actually violate biblical principles in some way? If the music doesn't violate the Scripture, are we able to appreciate the variety of humankind's God-given musical gifts?

We ought to be able to listen to different kinds of musical styles and lyrical content and determine what the person or persons is trying to say to the world. What is the Country artist saying? The Rapper? The Rocker? Is one musical artist consistently immoral? Is another artist gifted at conveying the beauty of love and commitment?

What is our teenagers' music saying to us? Is it all "bad," or is at least some of it telling us something we need to hear? Yes, it's true that their styles are sometimes musically immature. But whether or not you like what you hear teenagers' music is saying something that needs to be heard and answered.

Music is a medium. It's a language. It communicates. It has something to say. It can be Christian, non-Christian, or anti-Christian. Whatever it is, Christians who care about influencing their culture need to learn to speak the language.

Details: Written by: Rex M. Rogers; Published: 14 September 2011

A while back my SAT-7 colleagues in the UK developed a new website called Wazala.org. It features issues, news, views, developments, and challenges in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). In particular, Wazala keeps an eye on Christians, Christianity, and the Church in the region. Wazala is a derivative of the Arabic word "wasala," meaning to connect, to join, to reach out.

Who can deny that MENA is a strategic region? Virtually every night, in some way, the region is featured in stories on international news channels. If you know much about biblical prophecy you know the region plays a prominent if not predominant role in the End Times. Add to this oil and other economic considerations, the volatile position of the “island” of Israel, and the fact that three wars continue to plague the region—depending upon whether you believe Afghanistan is part of the ME, depending upon how you evaluate fighting in Iraq, and depending upon whether you believe the Libyan Revolution is a “war,” at least in terms of Western involvement. In any event, MENA is strategic by about any definition of the term.

Wazala.org references things political, but it is not given to political prescription. Rather, Wazala attempts to apply a Christian perspective to developments in MENA. In this the site provides the rest of us a service. The West, and especially America, needs to learn more about MENA. We need to learn how cultures function where there is essentially no separation of Church and State. We need to understand not simply news-network-theology but the deeper, theologically complex, layered nuances of the region’s dominant religion. The more we learn the more, hopefully, we understand. The more we understand the more we will be able to give an answer of the hope that lies within our Christian faith.

I highly and without reservation recommend to you www.wazala.org. It’s good to learn the Lord is at work in MENA. Indeed, “He is there and he is not silent.”

Subcategories