<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="snappages.com/3.0" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>
	<channel>
		<title>Mountain View Chapel</title>
		<description>Mountain View Chapel is an independent evangelical protestant church, founded in 1955 in Douglassville, PA. Our congregation of around 300 meets on Sunday morning at 10:00am for worship, Children's Church, and Children's Sunday School. Other ministries include: Youth Group, Bible Studies, Awana, and more!</description>
		<atom:link href="https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 17:52:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 17:52:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<ttl>3600</ttl>
		<generator>SnapPages.com</generator>

		<item>
			<title>The Fork That Scandalized Venice</title>
						<description><![CDATA[Giovanni Orseolo, a prince of Venice in the early 11th century, married Maria Argyropoulina, a Byzantine princess who brought with her a fascinating little piece of technology that the Venetians had never seen: a two-pronged golden fork.  She shocked everyone by using it to eat her meals.  Peter Damian, a fiery monk, denounced the fork as a sinful luxury.  As the story is told by some, Damian insi...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/06/09/the-fork-that-scandalized-venice</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 18:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/06/09/the-fork-that-scandalized-venice</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>Giovanni Orseolo, a prince of Venice in the early 11th century, married Maria Argyropoulina, a Byzantine princess who brought with her a fascinating little piece of technology that the Venetians had never seen: a two-pronged golden fork. &nbsp;She shocked everyone by using it to eat her meals. &nbsp;Peter Damian, a fiery monk, denounced the fork as a sinful luxury. &nbsp;As the</b> <b>story is told by some, Damian insisted that God gave us “forks”—our fingers—so using the fork was an affront to divine design. &nbsp;Princess Maria died of the plague, but supposedly Damian declared it was a divine judgment for her use of the fork.</b><br><b><br>Despite that divine judgment, forks are now commonplace in the Western world. &nbsp;Even at church dinners.</b><br><b><br>This strange anecdote illustrates an important truth: nearly everything that becomes tradition was once a radical and unwelcome change. &nbsp;All truths seem to pass through three stages—first, they are ridiculed, then they are violently opposed, and finally, they are accepted as self-evident. &nbsp;Changes become new traditions which eventually yield to further change. &nbsp;Despite the regular repetition of this cycle, many people struggle to accept it as the way the world works.</b><br><b><br>From infancy we learn to navigate the world. &nbsp;We take that learned navigation as “the way things are—and have always been”. &nbsp;Changes require that we re-learn a new way of seeing, thinking, and doing, and most of us aren’t fond of that exercise.</b><br><b><br>Back in the mid-1980’s our church wanted to add contemporary Christian guitar-led choruses to our singing of hymns (accompanied by piano). &nbsp;The choruses weren’t in the hymnal; lyrics would have to be projected with an overhead projector. &nbsp;When I proposed the change, one old saint protested, “JESUS NEVER USED AN OVERHEAD PROJECTOR!” &nbsp;It never dawned on the dear soul that Jesus never used a hymnal or a piano either!</b><br><b><br>Some people objected that a guitar didn’t belong in church. &nbsp;They insisted that the piano was the appropriate instrument for church music—not realizing that just a century before church-goers protested the piano, an instrument from the saloon, replacing the pipe organ. &nbsp;A century before that the Puritans dismantled pipe organs in English churches, complaining that they were worldly instruments.</b><br><br><b>Many have complained about modern music replacing the “ancient” hymns. &nbsp;But I analyzed our hymnal and found that…<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; …almost half of the hymns were from the 20th century; &nbsp;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; …40% were from the 1800’s;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; …10% from 1700’s<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; …2% from the 1600’s<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; …1% from the 1500’s<br>We have very few truly “ancient” hymns. &nbsp;Some of the oldest still known hymns are those of Isaac Watts (1674-1748)—<i>Alas and Did My Savior Bleed; When I Survey the Wondrous Cross; O God Our Help in Ages Past,</i> and the Christmas favorite, <i>Joy to the World</i>. &nbsp;Ironically, Watts was fiercely opposed by his contemporaries for the audacity of composing his own lyrics (rather than using the biblical Psalms).</b><br><b><br>Church music provides many examples of the cycle, but there are others. &nbsp;When Sunday School was introduced in the 1780’s much of the clergy opposed it. &nbsp;Within 25 years it had spread to nearly every Protestant denomination.</b><br><b><br>In the 1940’s many people condemned the new trend of church social halls as worldly. &nbsp;Churches were for worship, not socializing. &nbsp;Today, providing a social hall for funeral luncheons, wedding receptions, and other large gatherings is a given of church architecture.</b><br><b><br>Changing times and changing perceptions led to changes in traditions. &nbsp;Ridiculed and opposed at the outset, the changes ended up becoming the new traditions.</b><br><b><br>If everything we call ‘tradition’ was once radical change, what exactly are we defending when we defend tradition? &nbsp;And what are we attacking when we attack it?</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>The Tension Between Tradition and Change</title>
						<description><![CDATA[I converted to evangelicalism as a teenager convinced I was leaving error for truth. I left Catholicism because so many practices seemed unbiblical and its traditions of repetitious liturgy seemed to lack life.  Evangelicalism, I was sure, would be different.  Evangelicals trusted the Bible, the Word of God rather than the traditions of men.  How could evangelicalism go wrong with that foundation?...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/06/02/the-tension-between-tradition-and-change</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 22:48:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/06/02/the-tension-between-tradition-and-change</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>I converted to evangelicalism as a teenager convinced I was leaving error for truth. I left Catholicism because so many practices seemed unbiblical and its traditions of repetitious liturgy seemed to lack life. &nbsp;Evangelicalism, I was sure, would be different. &nbsp;Evangelicals trusted the Bible, the Word of God rather than the traditions of men. &nbsp;How could evangelicalism go wrong with that foundation?</b><br><b><br>My college years cured me of that confidence. &nbsp;I discovered that evangelicals had their own unexamined traditions, entrenched leaders, and gaps between profession and practice. &nbsp;For a season, I became an angry young man convinced that reform to “fix” the last generation’s errors was the answer. &nbsp;Replacing dead traditions with my “better informed” practices would bring spiritual health back to the church.</b><br><b><br>I was not entirely wrong, but I missed the mark by a wider margin than I realized. I had to learn that tradition and change are not enemies, but two goods in permanent tension with each other. &nbsp;Wisdom is not choosing one over the other but learning how to hold both in tension.</b><br><br><b>The traditionalist in me said “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, and forever”. &nbsp;I felt our evangelical churches had moved away from biblical traditions in our previous reforms. &nbsp;“Good change” meant returning to biblical traditions—doing things <i>exactly </i>the way the Bible prescribes.</b><br><b><br>That <i>sounds </i>like faithfulness to God’s Word—a good thing. &nbsp;But I found it difficult to put that principle into practice consistently. &nbsp;Should we have a church building (the apostles didn’t) or did we need to sell our building and meet in home or a rented hall, as early Christians did in Acts? &nbsp;The apostles didn’t use pianos or organs or hymnals, pulpits or overhead projectors or offering baskets? &nbsp;Could we? &nbsp;What about head coverings or jewelry or braided hair for women (1 Corinthians 11; 1 Peter 3.3-4)? &nbsp;Did we have to do <i>everything </i>the way it was done in the first century?</b><br><b><br>In sermon preparation I discovered that first century synagogues preached first (and the preacher sat to speak) and then closed with congregational songs of praise. &nbsp;I decided to follow biblical tradition and sat down, preached the sermon, and then closed the service with several hymns. &nbsp;The immediate response of our people was: “Don’t EVER do<i> that AGAIN</i>!”. &nbsp;The change was too extreme and too uncomfortable.</b><br><b><br>Going back to the Bible was not as simple a proposition as I had thought. &nbsp;Though God <i>Himself</i> never changes, He never hesitated to adapt His <i>dealings </i>to ever-changing humanity and its customs!</b><br><b><br>I would need to rethink my understanding of both tradition and change. &nbsp;Both are necessary. &nbsp;Deciding when to use which, and how to do so, is the real challenge.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>A Pastor's Pain: Wounding with Truth</title>
						<description><![CDATA[As a pastor, I have often been put in a difficult place by people I love.  They claim that something I have taught or that our church stands for has hurt them.  “If you were teaching truth,” they say, “I wouldn’t feel hurt.  And if you really love me you will apologize, recant what you’ve said, and change your teaching.”  Every time a pastor experiences this—and all pastors experience it—he is pla...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/05/26/a-pastor-s-pain-wounding-with-truth</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2026 18:26:45 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/05/26/a-pastor-s-pain-wounding-with-truth</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>As a pastor, I have often been put in a difficult place by people I love. &nbsp;They claim that something I have taught or that our church stands for has hurt them. &nbsp;“If you were teaching truth,” they say, “I wouldn’t feel hurt. &nbsp;And if you really love me you will apologize, recant what you’ve said, and change your teaching.” &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>Every time a pastor experiences this—and all pastors experience it—he is placed in a tension between truth and mercy. &nbsp;Which is more important: maintaining a belief or maintaining a relationship? &nbsp;If I prioritize truth and risk the relationship, I am portrayed as cold and lacking love. &nbsp;If I prioritize the relationship and try to alter biblical teaching, I am seen as a spineless people-pleaser.</b><br><b><br>How should a pastor think about this—and what should he do?</b><br><b><br>If the situation is seen as merely <i>binary </i>(one pole is right and the opposite is, of necessity, wrong; see my previous blog), then I must simply choose the “right” pole. &nbsp;But if the situation is <i>polar </i>(both poles are good things) then I must find the right relationship between the two goods and navigate them accordingly.</b><br><br><b>The first problem to be navigated is the complainant’s binary perspective. &nbsp;“If you were teaching truth, I wouldn’t feel hurt.” &nbsp;Look at the binary beliefs tucked into this complaint: &nbsp;<br>(1) Truth doesn’t hurt; therefore, falsehood does. &nbsp;<br>(2) Feeling pain is bad; therefore, feeling good is always good.<br>(3) Love wouldn’t make someone feel pain; therefore, those who make me feel pain don’t love me.</b><br><b><br>Each of these binaries is an oversimplified view of the world and a person committed to them has “rigged the game”, so to speak. &nbsp;The simplistic thinking forces me to compromise and love them—or to stand for the truth and hate them.</b><br><b><br>But each of these oversimplified binaries can be false. &nbsp;Many lies, flattery in particular, are designed to do painless damage. &nbsp;Truth <i>often</i> hurts and those willing to risk hurting you may be your truest friend: “<i>Faithful are the wounds of a friend, profuse are the kisses of an enemy</i>” (Proverbs 27.6). &nbsp;Pain is nearly always a necessary part of healing, and absence of pain (or inability to feel pain) is not necessarily a sign of health. &nbsp;Many die of diseases that present no painful warnings.</b><br><b><br>These things are true spiritually as well. &nbsp;Jesus said following Him meant taking up your cross daily (Luke 9.23)—not a painless prospect. Likewise, Jesus taught that all men speaking well of you is <i>not </i>a good thing (Luke 6.22-23,26). &nbsp;Conviction of sin and the personal discipline of confession and repentance are painful but productive (e.g. Psalm 32.3-5; Hebrews 12.11; Revelation 3.19). &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>To understand this, however, one must abandon <i>binary </i>thinking and grasp <i>polar </i>thinking. &nbsp;The problem here is not good versus evil, but good versus good. &nbsp;How do I navigate relationships to truth versus relationships with people?</b><br><br><b>My experience has been that if the person refuses to abandon binary thinking for polar thinking when the situation requires it, it is a no-win situation. &nbsp;They insist that the matter can only be understood <i>their</i> way.</b><br><b><br>That forces me as a pastor to navigate the channel between two other goods: &nbsp;maintaining the truth or maintaining the friendship. &nbsp;The strain I feel when that happens isn’t intellectual; it is emotional and relational. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>When I refuse to concede the truth or revise our beliefs, it isn’t because I <i>want </i>to alienate a friend. &nbsp;I am protecting something that pastors are called to protect: &nbsp;the integrity of the gospel and the authority of Scripture. &nbsp;False teachers have always compromised truth to make people feel better, saying “peace, peace” when there is no peace. &nbsp;False teachers don’t like having enemies and prefer to avoid conflict. &nbsp;It seems easier. &nbsp;It <i>is</i> easier. &nbsp;Always.</b><br><b><br>But I am also protecting something else when I side with truth and risk friendship. &nbsp;Though my alienated friend sees me as cold, uncaring, and lacking compassion—maybe even hateful, I am protecting the truth of the only <i>real </i>mercy that can resolve the guilt and pain for sin. &nbsp;Not only for him, but for others. &nbsp;That is what it costs me on the love side of the tension.</b><br><b><br>My choice for the truth doesn’t make the tension go away. &nbsp;It maintains the tension. &nbsp;I must bear the pain of one lost friendship for the sake of a truth that I believe will be a far more important blessing to many more people in the long run.</b><br><b><br>I hate losing friends for the sake of the truth, but I don’t hate <i>them </i>for walking away from me. &nbsp;I am more disappointed than angry. &nbsp;It is part of a pastor’s dying to self and bearing the cross.</b><br><b><br>But more than once a good God has turned my disappointment to joy, sometimes after many years, by powerfully turning around my ‘enemy’s’ perspective and making them my friend once again.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Succeeding Without Teeth</title>
						<description><![CDATA[The mayor of Los Angeles, Karen Bass, recently proposed “free” (i.e. taxpayer-funded) dental care for the city’s crystal meth addicts because “you can’t succeed without teeth!”  This proposal is compassionate, and showing compassion is good.Those who support the proposal are compassionate, support a good thing, and are therefore good people.Opponents of the proposal must lack compassion and must t...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/05/18/succeeding-without-teeth</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 15:40:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/05/18/succeeding-without-teeth</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>The mayor of Los Angeles, Karen Bass, recently proposed “free” (i.e. taxpayer-funded) dental care for the city’s crystal meth addicts because “you can’t succeed without teeth!” &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>This proposal is compassionate, and showing compassion is good.<br>Those who support the proposal are compassionate, support a good thing, and are therefore good people.</b><b><br>Opponents of the proposal must <i>lack </i>compassion and must therefore be bad people.</b><br><b><br>That is how most of us <i>learn </i>to think. &nbsp;As children we were taught simple binaries (opposites). &nbsp;Big opposes small. &nbsp;Loud opposes quiet. &nbsp;Good opposes bad. &nbsp;Simple binaries form the foundations of a child’s thought.</b><br><b><i><br>The foundations.</i></b><br><b><br>Functioning adequately in the adult world necessitates a more complex moral superstructure to be built on those foundations. &nbsp;I had to unlearn the assumption that every important question is a matter of two opposites, one good and one evil. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>Though some questions are that simple, those are usually the easy ones. The more difficult questions of life involve two choices, each of which is good. &nbsp;These kinds of choices stand in tension against each other. &nbsp;They are not equal but opposite binaries. &nbsp;I describe them as polar—like a magnet, with each pole attractive to different goods. &nbsp;I must weigh the goods. &nbsp;It’s not that one pole is completely right and the other wholly wrong. &nbsp;Rather, I must figure out the relationship between the poles and determine how each good must come into play in my decision to act. &nbsp;I must figure out how to navigate the poles.</b><br><b><br>Let’s use the example from Mayor Bass. &nbsp;Compassion—the capacity to be moved by another person’s pain and to act to reduce or eliminate that pain—is a real and genuine good, one of the most Christlike things we can experience.</b><br><b><br>But compassion standing alone without qualification can lead in a bad direction. &nbsp;Mayor Bass was correct that you can’t succeed without teeth. &nbsp;But she has ignored the fact that you can’t succeed while addicted to crystal meth either!</b><br><b><br>The flaw in Mayor Bass’s vision is not her compassion, but the failure to recognize the important good at the opposite pole: calling the meth addict to personal responsibility for his own life! &nbsp;The Mayor’s binary sense of compassion places that burden on the taxpayer and sends the message that sloth (an evil) is actually a good. &nbsp;Compassion is a good thing, but an equally important good is requiring each soul to take personal responsibility for his own life.</b><br><b><br>Another pole that may lie opposite compassion is <i>restraint</i>. &nbsp;Imagine a child permitted to forego studying because he wants to play with friends. &nbsp;The parent, wanting to show compassion (“Childhood is so short; let the child be a child!”), allows the child to play. &nbsp;The child fails the test the next day and cries to his parent that the test was too hard or was unfair. &nbsp;The parent demands a meeting with the teacher and insists that the child be permitted to retake the test or that the grading be curved. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>In this parent’s simple binary mindset, the good of freedom to play (and it is a good!) was placed against the <i>evils </i>of the pain of self-discipline, of learning self-restraint for a greater good. &nbsp;The pain of failing—the natural consequence of freely playing—the parent treats as an evil by demanding that the teacher (rather than the student) alter the way they have behaved. &nbsp;Compassion was shown by the parent and felt by the child, but because of the failure to balance the poles with the good of self-discipline, the child was actually taught entitlement and a fragility that makes him unable to absorb failure and make changes that lead to success.</b><br><b><br>But in <i>polar </i>thinking, parental instruction in restraint and correction are <i>good things</i>—as are compassion and understanding. &nbsp;It’s not that one pole is freely indulged as good and the other totally avoided as evil, but that the poles must be weighed and used in appropriate measure in the relevant circumstances.</b><br><b><br>I began my own journey practicing simple binary thinking. &nbsp;The opposite of the good was always evil. &nbsp;I was, in the terminology of Proverbs, <i>simple</i>.</b><br><b><br>Mature thinking isn’t about <i>unlearning </i>right versus wrong; there are times where questions are that simple and binary. &nbsp;But mature thinking has to distinguish <i>those</i> simple binary questions from the more difficult <i>polar </i>questions—weighing good against <i>good</i>—and navigating issues by balancing the poles in our thoughts and deeds.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Why I Rarely Give Simple Answers</title>
						<description><![CDATA[I've noticed a pattern in how people respond when they bring me hard questions.  Sometimes they leave satisfied. But sometimes — maybe more often than not — they leave with more questions than they came with. People come hoping for a clear answer and instead find me saying something like it depends or there's more than one thing true here or I'm not sure that's quite the right question.I want to e...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/05/12/why-i-rarely-give-simple-answers</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 19:55:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/05/12/why-i-rarely-give-simple-answers</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>I've noticed a pattern in how people respond when they bring me hard questions. &nbsp;Sometimes they leave satisfied. But sometimes — maybe more often than not — they leave with more questions than they came with. People come hoping for a clear answer and instead find me saying something like<i> it depends or there's more than one thing true here or I'm not sure that's quite the right question.</i></b><br><b><br>I want to explain that. Not to defend it — but because I think understanding <i>why </i>might be more useful than any simple answer I can give.</b><br><b><br>I didn't start out this way. Early in ministry I was much more certain. I had a system. &nbsp;I had positions. I had frameworks. I could tell you fairly quickly what I thought about most things. All of it was genuine conviction and most of it was the confidence of youth. But a good bit of it — I can see now — was that I hadn't yet been sufficiently schooled by the real world.</b><br><b><br>Reality is a demanding teacher. It doesn't care about your framework. It just keeps presenting you with situations that I have repeatedly found don't fit as neatly into my framework as I’d like. Real lives were much more complicated than my neat categories. People had to make decisions where every available option cost something real. And I often found moments where two things I was completely sure of pointed in opposite directions.</b><br><b><br>You can respond to things like that in a few ways. You can maintain a tight grip on your framework and force reality into it — which produces a certain kind of confidence at the cost of actually paying attention what's in front of you. </b><br><b><br>Or you can abandon your frameworks altogether and just react — which produces a different kind of confidence but no wisdom at all. </b><br><b><br>Or you can let reality teach you something harder and more useful: that most important questions aren't puzzles to be solved but tensions to be navigated.</b><br><b><br>That third path is the one I’ve learned to choose and is what I want to write about in this series.</b><br><b><br>I'm not going to present a system because I don't think wisdom comes in systems. Instead, I hope to share a little bit of what four decades of paying attention has taught me — about how reality is actually structured, about what it means to think and live well inside that reality, and about why the shortcuts our culture offers are often shortcuts to places we don't really want to go.</b><br><b><br>I'll warn you in advance: some of this will be uncomfortable, not because I'm trying to be provocative, but because honest thinking is often uncomfortable. It was for me. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>We live in a moment that rewards certainty and treats complexity as weakness. I will suggest almost the opposite — that wisdom requires holding things in tension without collapsing them into a simplistic answer to a complex problem, and that developing wisdom takes time, costs something, but, as Solomon said repeatedly in Proverbs, is worth everything.</b><br><b><br>I'm writing this partly because people have asked me over the years why I think the way I do and I want to put it down on paper to help me figure <i>myself </i>out. I'm also writing it partly because I am increasingly aware of my mortality—that I won't always be here—and that there are things I should leave with those that will be here when I am not. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>Perhaps you will be able to use some of what I have learned. &nbsp;I don’t believe the world you're inheriting is going to reward simple answers, and I feel a responsibility to leave my congregation with some things that might equip you for that.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Christianizing the Christians</title>
						<description><![CDATA[We seem to be living at a time when “the centre cannot hold” for much longer.  The nation is polarized.  Politicians and the media call for unity but they can’t unite around ideology or practice.  They perpetuate the division.  Social media extends the battlefield to the citizenry.  We heatedly re-argue the points put out by the media without any resolution.  We on the right see the world falling ...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/05/05/christianizing-the-christians</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 14:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/05/05/christianizing-the-christians</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>We seem to be living at a time when “the centre cannot hold” for much longer. &nbsp;The nation is polarized. &nbsp;Politicians and the media call for unity but they can’t unite around ideology <i>or </i>practice. &nbsp;They perpetuate the division. &nbsp;Social media extends the battlefield to the citizenry. &nbsp;We heatedly re-argue the points put out by the media without any resolution. &nbsp;We on the right see the world falling into chaos and disorder, while the left fears that we are losing our democracy to rigid right-wing despotism.</b><br><b><br>When the world is coming apart at the seams, people want to understand what is happening. &nbsp;We, Christians included, seek certainty. &nbsp;Christians seek it in biblical theorizing about the end-times or in theories about ‘evil’ groups or organizations controlling the world. &nbsp;These theories provide a sense of certainty about the out-of-control external world, and we take comfort in our “interpretation”.</b><br><b><br>I do not lead in either of these directions. &nbsp;I came to evangelicalism during the 1970s end-times craze that proved utterly mistaken. &nbsp;Church history reveals a long line of completely mistaken end-times crazes that discredit the faith when they fail. &nbsp;I try to avoid those speculations.</b><br><b><br>Conspiracy theories are appealing because government and the media have earned our distrust. &nbsp;Conspiracies need only be suggested, not proven, and by design cannot be disproven. &nbsp;Built on suspicions rather than solid evidence, they don’t warrant the confident assertions they make. &nbsp;I find their certainty illusory and trust in them ill-founded.</b><br><b><br>The pendulum will <i>always </i>swing between the desire for liberty and the desire for order. &nbsp;But America’s founders identified a deeper force that moderates that swing: &nbsp;Christian morality. &nbsp;John Adams observed, <i>“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. &nbsp;It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”</i></b><br><b><br>What did Adams mean by “a moral and religious people”? &nbsp;Like most of the Founding Fathers, Adams refers, not to the rituals of Christianity but to the established points of morality that governed European Christianity in the 18th century. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>Each soul is required to govern <i>himself</i>, having a sense of accountability to God (above the state). &nbsp;The cornerstone of self-governance is taking personal responsibility for one’s actions—to pursue, wherever possible, those things that make for peace and prosperity and to avoid actions that disturb the peace of the community. &nbsp;Sobriety and temperance—the control of and resistance to appetites that can enslave and destroy self and others—are important virtues.</b><br><b><br>Not destroying, harming, or killing others is crucial (“you shall not murder”). &nbsp;Justice—treating all people as equals, regardless of social standing—is another important value (“do unto others as you would have them do unto you”).</b><br><b><br>There is a high premium placed on truthfulness (“you shall not bear false witness”) and integrity in all dealings—honoring promises, oaths, vows, and contracts. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>The foundational social unit is heterosexual marriage. &nbsp;Fidelity within marriage (“you shall not commit adultery”) for the creation of a stable atmosphere for the birth and rearing of children is a central value. &nbsp;Parents are responsible to train children, and children are responsible to obey and honor parents (“honor your father and mother”). &nbsp;This becomes the template for proper relationships with legitimate authorities beyond the home.</b><br><b><br>Work, a part of the original creation, is a blessing and honest labor and industriousness are virtues to be pursued (“six days you shall labor”). &nbsp;The right of personal property—the fruits of labor belonging to the laborer to be disposed of as he sees fit—is an important Christian value, as is the necessity of respecting the property rights of others (“you shall not steal”). &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>“A moral and religious people” will hold these principles to be true and right and will seek to live by them. &nbsp;Doing so, the Founders believed, would moderate wild swings of the pendulum between liberty and order. &nbsp;If the moderating force is the unchanging set of values held by “moral and religious people”, and the moral and religious people compromise those values to appease an unbelieving world, should we expect anything <i>but </i>wild swings of the pendulum?</b><br><b><br>Not only are these values not practiced, but they are also no longer held sacred or, in some cases, even believed—not even by many who name the name of Christ. &nbsp;They have been eroded by unbelief, and the cost of experiencing the disdain of the unbelieving world has become too much for many.</b><br><b><br>Many believe the answer is political activism (i.e. “culture wars”)— Christianizing the unbelieving world by law. &nbsp;Perhaps we need more work on Christianizing “the Christians” by faith.</b><br><b><br>Jesus’ admonition to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” was this: &nbsp;<i>“You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? &nbsp;It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet.”</i> (Matthew 5.13)</b><br><b><br>Israel had lost sight of its holy calling. &nbsp;Jesus came to restore them. &nbsp;Though the national machinery resisted, God powerfully used those that were willing to believe and obey to change the world.</b><br><b><br>He is still in that business.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>When the World Comes Apart at the Seams</title>
						<description><![CDATA[The pendulum of human history swings along a spectrum.  On one end there is liberty and personal freedom; on the other, order and restraint of chaos.We all want two things at once.  We want the freedom to choose, to speak, to own, to worship—the freedom to pursue happiness.  But we also want predictable rules, stable families, stable markets, social trust, and deterrence of wrongdoing and protecti...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/04/27/when-the-world-comes-apart-at-the-seams</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 17:35:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/04/27/when-the-world-comes-apart-at-the-seams</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>The pendulum of human history swings along a spectrum. &nbsp;On one end there is liberty and personal freedom; on the other, order and restraint of chaos.</b><br><b><br>We all want two things at once. &nbsp;We want the freedom to choose, to speak, to own, to worship—the freedom to pursue happiness. &nbsp;But we also want predictable rules, stable families, stable markets, social trust, and deterrence of wrongdoing and protection from violence.</b><br><b><br>The great challenge is that when the pendulum swings too far one way, it undermines the other ideal at the other pole. &nbsp;Too much concentrated power and an overly rigid sense of order can become tyranny and oppression—the crushing of freedom. &nbsp;Freedom without limits, without any moral discipline, can become chaos and disorder—unleashing selfishness and violence.</b><br><b><br>People, nations, and the world are always seeking to strike the proper balance. &nbsp;We are always moving along that pendulum line, always seeking that sweet spot at the center. &nbsp;Rarely have we found it.</b><br><b><br>Throughout history the pendulum has at times swung wildly—the collapse of the ancient Bronze Age world of the Mediterranean (c. 1200 BC), the fall of the Western Roman Empire, the American Civil War and the Reconstruction, and the 20th century transition of Europe from monarchy to more democratic forms of government. &nbsp;To borrow W. B. Yeats’ phrase, in times like that, “the centre cannot hold.” &nbsp;The world seems to come apart at the seams and people search frantically for stability and direction. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>The Old Testament prophets, Jesus, and the apostles spoke of days like this in apocalyptic terms: the sun being darkened, the moon turning to blood, the stars falling or no longer giving their light, and mountains shaking or melting. &nbsp;Some people believe these are to be taken literally—and that is possible—but I’m inclined to believe that such imagery depicts things that have long been certain becoming uncertain. &nbsp;It’s not that the world ends but that “the world <i>as we have known it </i>ends.” &nbsp;Though one day there will be a <i>final end</i>—an end to the entire process of history—history has experienced many lesser ends that launched a new start and a new direction.</b><br><b><br>At the moment we seem to be living in such a time when “the centre cannot hold”—or we are at least approaching such a time. &nbsp;Everything seems to be topsy-turvy. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>American politics is being radically re-aligned. &nbsp;The names of the old parties remain but neither party is what it was even 50 years ago.</b><br><b><br>Mass migration is reshaping the ethnic and cultural composition of Western nations. &nbsp;Islam is making powerful inroads into European nations and has a foothold in America.</b><br><b><br>The Arab Gulf states are more pro-Israel than much of the West is.</b><br><b><br>International institutions (e.g. UN, WHO, NATO) are growing less credible and old alliances are weakening.</b><br><b><br>COVID and international political tensions revealed the fragility of global supply chains.</b><br><b><br>Each step of communication technology—the internet, smart technologies, social media, and most recently AI—radically changes the way people and economies function.</b><br><b><br>Though the West is rapidly secularizing, there is also a simultaneous global explosion of religion and spirituality, especially Christianity and Islam.</b><br><b><br>These large issues (and many lesser ones) easily unsettle us—even we Christians. &nbsp;Some of us retreat fearfully into apocalyptic thinking (“the world is ending soon!”) and disengage from the present. &nbsp;Some of us, knowing that leaders and institutions have proved false in the past, look for order and certainty by recognizing patterns of hidden forces manipulating events behind the scenes, taking comfort in the thought that we understand what’s <i>really </i>going on.</b><br><b><br>I think there’s another option…but I’m out of space and it will have to wait till next week’s blog.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>A Door That Never Closes.Part 2</title>
						<description><![CDATA[In my last blog, I outlined the covenant cycle between God and Israel (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28-30) that always leave an open door for the Israelites to repent and return from dispersion and exile.STEP 1: Obedience to God brings blessing in the landSTEP 2: Disobedience brings hardship to lead Israel to repentanceSTEP 3: Failure to repent leads to Israel’s expulsion from the landSTEP 4: Israel’...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/04/20/a-door-that-never-closes-part-2</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2026 08:29:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/04/20/a-door-that-never-closes-part-2</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>In my last blog, I outlined the covenant cycle between God and Israel (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28-30) that always leave an open door for the Israelites to repent and return from dispersion and exile.</b><br><b><br>STEP 1: Obedience to God brings blessing in the land<br>STEP 2: Disobedience brings hardship to lead Israel to repentance<br>STEP 3: Failure to repent leads to Israel’s expulsion from the land<br>STEP 4: Israel’s repentance leads to her restoration to the land</b><br><b><br>That final step matters. If the door to restoration is never shut, does Israel still have a claim to the land today? &nbsp;Are God’s promises to Israel still in force?</b><br><b><br>The promise of the land did not originate at Sinai; it predated the law entirely. &nbsp;God promised the land to Abraham and his offspring centuries before Moses was born (Genesis 12.1, 7; 13.14–17; 15.7–21; 17.8; 28.4; 35.12), and as Paul said, the law does not negate the promise (Galatians 3.17–18). &nbsp;The promise of the land remains in force.</b><br><b><br>The covenant at Sinai <i>does </i>govern Israel’s <i>enjoyment </i>of the land in the four steps of the covenant cycle. &nbsp;While the promise of the land is eternal (Genesis 17.8), the enjoyment of the land is contingent upon covenant obedience.<br>The messages of the prophets, God’s covenant lawyers, are explications of the four-step covenant cycle. &nbsp;Prophets usually come on the scene either to announce a coming hardship (Step 2, e.g. a locust plague as in Joel) or to threaten expulsion from the land (Step 3, e.g. Jeremiah 25.8–11). &nbsp;At either stage, repentance can forestall the judgment, since each step of the covenant cycle presents a contingency.</b><br><b><br>But the prophets also refer to the final step—the hope of restoration based on God’s faithfulness in keeping the covenant cycle. &nbsp;Though the prophetic wording often<i> looks like</i> a prediction, restoration is a contingency tied to repentance because the prophet is operating within the covenant cycle. &nbsp;Israel’s repentance is not inevitable, but the hope of restoration <i>upon repentance</i> is.</b><br><b><br>The prophets express that exile does not need to be the end of the story. &nbsp;The covenant cycle always provides hope for restoration to the land (Isaiah 43.5–6; Jeremiah 30.3; Ezekiel 37.12–25; Hosea 3.5; Amos 9.14–15; Zechariah 8.7–8). The prophets are not introducing something novel in the message of restoration, nor are they guaranteeing a fixed historical outcome; that is, they are not <i>predicting </i>a <i>necessary </i>return to the land. &nbsp;They are reminding Israel of the certainty of God’s covenant faithfulness and reiterating the covenant cycle established in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28–30. &nbsp;The door always remains open. God is free to fulfill His covenant promise of the land exactly as He gave it.</b><br><b><br>In Romans 11.26–27, Paul echoes this covenantal hope of Israel’s future salvation, citing the prophets. “The Deliverer will come from Zion; he will banish ungodliness from Jacob; and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.”</b><br><b><br>The faithful God promised the land to Abraham’s descendants, so there is <i>always </i>a hope of restoration to the land held out to Israel. &nbsp;There is no passage—Old or New Testament—that explicitly revokes the promise of God’s commitment to give Israel her land. &nbsp;The New Testament expands the scope of the promise (Matthew 5.5; Romans 4.13—“<i>heir of the world</i>”), but that expansion is not cancellation of the promise, but fulfillment of another part of the promise. &nbsp;“<i>In you will all families of the earth be blessed</i>” (Genesis 12.3).</b><br><b><br>If, in the unfolding of His sovereign providence, the kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ (Revelation 11.15), then there is nothing implausible—biblically or theologically—about Israel being restored again to the land promised to the patriarchs. &nbsp;If that happens, it will not be because Israel has earned it. &nbsp;Scripture is explicit: it will be for the sake of God’s own name (Ezekiel 36.22, 32; cf. 20.42–44).</b><br><b><br>God’s faithfulness to His promises always insures hope for Israel. Exile is never the end of the story.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>A Door That Never Closes</title>
						<description><![CDATA[How is it that despite continued Jewish hostility to the gospel and despite seeing Gentiles outnumber Jews in the Christian church Paul can still hold out hope that the Jews will someday turn to Christ (Romans 11.12,15,23-24,26-27)?  I believe the answer is to be found in the nature of God’s covenant promises which, Paul says, belong irrevocably to the nation of Israel (Romans 9.4-5 cf. 11.29).Man...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/04/13/a-door-that-never-closes</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2026 09:32:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/04/13/a-door-that-never-closes</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>How is it that despite continued Jewish hostility to the gospel and despite seeing Gentiles outnumber Jews in the Christian church Paul can still hold out hope that the Jews will someday turn to Christ (Romans 11.12,15,23-24,26-27)? &nbsp;I believe the answer is to be found in the nature of God’s covenant promises which, Paul says, belong irrevocably to the nation of Israel (Romans 9.4-5 cf. 11.29).</b><br><b><br>Many evangelicals have a habit of reading the Old Testament in terms of <i>prediction</i>. &nbsp;The Law or Prophets speak in advance of an <i>event </i>that <i>must </i>take place. &nbsp;Once such an event comes to pass, it is “fulfilled”, over and done with, never to be repeated.</b><br><b><br>But the covenant promises of God were <i>not </i>predictions of single events, but the promise of a <i>repeating cycle</i> in God’s interaction with His people. &nbsp;Moses presents that cycle in Leviticus 26 and in a longer formal covenant in Deuteronomy 28.1-30.20.</b><br><b><br>STEP 1: &nbsp;When Israel obeys God, she will be blessed in the land (Leviticus 26.1-13; Deuteronomy 28.1-14)</b><br><b><br>STEP 2: &nbsp;When Israel disobeys God, she will be disciplined with hardships to lead her to repentance (Leviticus 26.14-26; Deuteronomy 28.15-24).</b><br><b><br>STEP 3: &nbsp;Failure to repent will eventually lead to Israel being driven from her own land (Leviticus 26.27-39; Deuteronomy 28.16-68).</b><br><b><br>STEP 4: &nbsp;If after being driven out of the land, Israel repents and returns to the LORD, she will be restored and returned to the land (Leviticus 26.40-46; Deuteronomy 30.1-10).</b><br><b><br>The covenant promise cycle is then set to repeat.</b><br><b><br>Paul, a Pharisee immersed in the Old Testament, would have been familiar with this covenant format. &nbsp;Though Step 4 doesn’t <i>predict </i>Israel’s return to the LORD, it <i>always </i>allows for it, because of God’s faithfulness to His covenant promises. &nbsp;This covenant faithfulness, highlighted at the end of the Leviticus passage, makes the gift and calling of God irrevocable (Romans 11.29).</b><br><b><br><i>Yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not spurn them, neither will I abhor them so as to destroy them utterly and break my covenant with them, for I am the LORD their God.<br>But I will for their sake remember the covenant with their forefathers, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God: I am the LORD. </i>&nbsp;(Leviticus 26.44-45)</b><br><b><br>Paul’s hope for Israel’s eventual turning to Christ is grounded, then, not in prediction but in the faithfulness of God to His promises that remain perpetually in force. &nbsp;As long as the cycle Moses outlined in Leviticus and Deuteronomy holds, the door is never finally closed—and for Paul, God’s faithfulness guarantees that it never will be.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>The Jews: Beloved Without Belief</title>
						<description><![CDATA[As regards the gospel, [the unbelieving Jews] are enemies for your sake.But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. (Romans 11.28)How can unbelieving Jews be enemies of the gospels and yet “beloved” in terms of divine election at the same time?Paul qualifies his statement with two phrases:  “as regards election” and “for the sake of their forefathers”.First, unbeli...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/04/06/the-jews-beloved-without-belief</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2026 09:49:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/04/06/the-jews-beloved-without-belief</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b><i>As regards the gospel, [the unbelieving Jews] are enemies for your sake.<br>But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers.</i> (Romans 11.28)</b><br><b><br>How can unbelieving Jews be enemies of the gospels and yet “beloved” in terms of divine election at the same time?</b><br><b><br>Paul qualifies his statement with two phrases: &nbsp;“as regards election” and “for the sake of their forefathers”.</b><br><b><br>First, unbelieving Jews are loved by God <i>for the sake of their forefathers</i>. &nbsp;They are a part of the people descended from Abraham (Romans 4.1), Isaac, and Jacob—renamed Israel—for whom the nation was named. &nbsp;While the Jews may have overemphasized physical descent (e.g. Matthew 3.9; John 8.33-40), that physical descent from the patriarchs means <i>nothing </i>in God’s providential plan swings too far in the opposite direction.</b><br><b><br>Second, Paul ties God’s special love for the Jews for the sake of the forefathers to divine election. &nbsp;When the word “election” occurs, people think of arguments about predestination. &nbsp;But that’s not what Paul has in mind.</b><br><b><br>Moses wrote the book of Genesis to present the context of Israel’s call to be God’s chosen people (Exodus 19.5-6). &nbsp;Genesis 1-11 presents a rebellious world opposed to God, scattered at the Tower of Babel. &nbsp;From among the lost nations, God chooses Abraham to be a mediator of divine blessing to those nations (Genesis 12.1-3). &nbsp;Abraham isn’t chosen to be saved automatically; he must exercise personal faith in the promise. &nbsp;He is chosen, rather, to be the vehicle of divine blessing to the world.</b><br><b><br>Moreover, not only Abraham personally but also his descendants—a nation that will arise from him—will become that vehicle of blessing (12.2-3). &nbsp;God chooses Abraham’s son, Isaac (21.12) and then Isaac’s son, Jacob (25.23, 28.13-14, 35.12-14). &nbsp;Jacob’s sons become the tribes of Israel, chosen (i.e. elect) and loved because of the oath God swore to the fathers (e.g. Deuteronomy 7.6-8; Psalm 105.6-11).</b><br><b><br>Paul simply repeats this theme in Romans 11.28. &nbsp;The nation of Israel was chosen <i>in Abraham </i>to receive God’s covenant love so that they might bring blessing to the Gentile world.</b><br><b><br>The argument of the New Testament is that Jesus, the perfectly obedient Jew, son of David, son of Abraham, is the true and proper heir of all the ancient promises (Matthew 21.38; Romans 8.17; Galatians 3.16; Ephesians 3.6; Hebrews 1.2). &nbsp;Those who have faith in Jesus, the heir, are ‘Abraham’s children’ and thus inherit those promises in Christ (e.g. Galatians 3.9, 29), whether Jew or Gentile.</b><br><b><br>The gospel going to the Gentiles <i>expands </i>the promised blessing to its originally intended destination. &nbsp;But many today think that the expansion of the Abrahamic promises has negated and cancelled the original core promises to Israel, that the Christian church is now the chosen people and Israel has been tossed aside without a future. &nbsp;Antisemites go a step further, seeing all non-Christian Jews as wicked and forever <i>cursed</i>. &nbsp;They consider them worthy of disdain and even hatred. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>But this conflicts with the tension Paul maintains in Romans 11. &nbsp;The ancient calling of the nation of Israel is irrevocable, says Paul. &nbsp;Jews who reject Jesus may be the enemies of the gospel, but they are <i>still beloved</i>, being part of the ancient chosen nation commissioned by God’s promises.</b><br><b><br>Israel’s election was never based on their worthiness but on God’s character. &nbsp;He keeps His Word. His character has not changed, and the unbelief of the Jews does not nullify God’s faithfulness. &nbsp;Paul called the Romans (and he calls us) to reject prejudice and hatred, and to remain humble in the presence of a God who can do the impossible and often does the unexpected.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Beware Contempt for God's Beloved Enemies</title>
						<description><![CDATA[Do not be arrogant toward the branches.  If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you.  (Romans 11.18)A consistent problem in apostolic Christianity was cultural conflict between Jews and Gentiles in the church.  To address the problem, Paul in Romans 11 depicts Israel as a cultivated olive tree growing from a holy root (the promises to Abraham).  Jewish ...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/31/beware-contempt-for-god-s-beloved-enemies</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/31/beware-contempt-for-god-s-beloved-enemies</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b><i>Do not be arrogant toward the branches. &nbsp;If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. &nbsp;</i>(Romans 11.18)</b><br><b><br>A consistent problem in apostolic Christianity was cultural conflict between Jews and Gentiles in the church. &nbsp;To address the problem, Paul in Romans 11 depicts Israel as a cultivated olive tree growing from a holy root (the promises to Abraham). &nbsp;Jewish Christians, he says, are the <i>natural </i>branches (11.18,21,24). &nbsp;Believing Gentiles are <i>not</i>; they are <i>wild </i>olive branches grafted onto the Jewish tree (11.17-19), partaking of the blessings from the ‘root’ (11.18)—the promises to Abraham.</b><br><b><br>Paul addresses the judgmentalism of the Jew against Gentiles elsewhere (e.g. Romans 14.2-3b cf. 2.17-29). &nbsp;In Romans 11 he speaks to the arrogant Gentile Christians who despise Jewish Christians. &nbsp;Gentiles, most likely in the majority in the Roman church, would find it easy to be critical of the strange holiness practices of Jewish Christians. &nbsp;Those sensitivities would seem <i>foreign</i>.</b><br><b><br>Paul commands the Gentile Christians to keep the picture straight. &nbsp;“YOU’RE the foreigner,” he says. &nbsp;“Your Roman culture isn’t the foundation of Christianity; the promises to Abraham mediated to you through Israel and its Christ are. &nbsp;Remember the grace you received and don’t demean your Jewish brothers and sisters! &nbsp;The covenant promises are theirs!” </b><br><b><br>Paul anticipates the Gentile response: &nbsp;<i>“But the Jews were broken off, and we have taken their place!”</i> (11.19). &nbsp;One can almost hear the Romans protesting: <i>“But the Jews rejected Jesus! &nbsp;They framed him and had him crucified! &nbsp;They persecute you wherever you go while we Gentiles embrace King Jesus with open arms! &nbsp;Surely Christianity can no longer be a Jewish thing! &nbsp;It has become a GENTILE thing, and the Jews must conform to OUR ways!”</i></b><br><b><br>Paul agrees that <i>some </i>branches were broken off because of unbelief and that the Gentiles found a place of blessing because of belief. &nbsp;The proper response to that truth, Paul says, is <i>not</i> condemnation of or disdain for the Jews—not even unbelieving ones!—but humility and fear of God who keeps, not only His promises, but His threats (11.20-24).</b><br><b><br>If anyone had reason to despise unbelieving Jews, it was Paul. &nbsp;But he urges the Gentile Christians at Rome to adopt a different perspective on them: &nbsp;</b><br><b><br><i>As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. &nbsp;But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. &nbsp;For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable</i> (Romans 11.28-29).</b><br><b><br>Unbelieving Jews who oppose the gospel, Paul says, are enemies of Christians. &nbsp;The apostle makes no bones about it. &nbsp;But then his reasoning takes this unexpected turn: <i>“But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers.”</i></b><br><b><br>Who is beloved? &nbsp;“They” are—a group, a people—not merely isolated individuals.</b><br><b><br>Beloved by whom? &nbsp;Who else but God? &nbsp;And beloved by God, not because of good individual life choices; in fact, beloved despite a bad one: unbelief! They, as a people, are beloved by God <i>in their unbelief! &nbsp;</i></b><br><b><br>And God loves them, not for their own sake, <i>but for the sake of their forefathers</i>—Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to whom God chose to give the original promise of blessing.</b><br><b><br>And they are loved by God for the sake of the patriarchs because <i>“the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable.”</i>&nbsp; Paul applies this irrevocable call, not to Jewish believers, but to the <i>unbelieving </i>Jews.</b><br><b><br>If they, as a people, cut off from participation in their own covenant promises, are still <i>loved </i>by God in that state of unbelief, Gentile contempt for Jews is not just wrong—it is rebellion against God’s own posture.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Fateful First Steps</title>
						<description><![CDATA[This series of blogs is not about opinions on Israeli politics.  Like citizens of any free nation, Israelis differ on Israeli politics, so it is no surprise if American opinions on the topic differ.  Nor is it about American foreign policy toward Israel or the wars in Gaza or Iran.  Political opinions are not antisemitism and not my concern.  Intimations of hatred toward the Jewish people are my c...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/23/fateful-first-steps</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2026 16:35:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/23/fateful-first-steps</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>This series of blogs is not about opinions on Israeli politics. &nbsp;Like citizens of any free nation, <i>Israelis </i>differ on Israeli politics, so it is no surprise if American opinions on the topic differ. &nbsp;Nor is it about American foreign policy toward Israel or the wars in Gaza or Iran. &nbsp;Political opinions are not antisemitism and not my concern. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br><i>Intimations </i>of hatred toward the Jewish <i>people</i> are my concern.</b><br><b><br>We all know about the mass shootings and death camps conducted by the Nazis. &nbsp;A decisive step on the road to that catastrophe was the publication of Hitler’s <i>Mein Kampf </i>(1925). &nbsp;The propaganda developed from Hitler’s book generated suggestions that shaped how people thought about their Jewish neighbors—repeated themes left just ambiguous enough to grant plausible deniability. &nbsp;In its early stages antisemitism operated more through implication than through verifiable declaration.</b><br><b><br>Because some Jews were bankers, it was insinuated that Jews secretly manipulated markets for their own gain. &nbsp;Because some Jews owned newspapers, it was insinuated that Jews were secretly shaping public opinion to their own liking. &nbsp;The Nazis falsely alleged that through these means <i>the Jews</i> were spreading cultural corruption: sloth, greed, and perverse sexual lusts (e.g. homosexuality, pedophilia, and prostitution).</b><br><b><br>Nazis claimed the Jews were a hidden force behind <i>everything</i>. &nbsp;German culture was being degraded and corrupted through the influence of the Jews. &nbsp;The poisoning was so subtle, they said, as to be unnoticeable – until it was too late.</b><br><b><br>How could the German people have been so easily fooled? &nbsp;Couldn’t they just look at their poorer Jewish neighbors and see that they weren’t bankers or journalists wielding destructive influence? &nbsp;This is where 19th century racial theory came into play.</b><br><b><br><i>Religious </i>antagonism toward Jews had existed for centuries. &nbsp;The 1800s saw the emergence of racial theories defining Jews as a biological race, and Jewish evils, the Nazis insisted, were biologically inherited race-wide. &nbsp;Their subtle, cunning ways of corrupting the German-speaking peoples were not merely troublesome behaviors or individual personality traits, but the fixed racial heritage of <i>all </i>Jews.</b><br><b><br>Why am I saying this? &nbsp;Because these Nazi-era tropes—<i>intimations </i>that demean and devalue Jews as individuals and as a people—the first steps on the road of antisemitism, are re-appearing today. &nbsp;Of more concern to me as a pastor is that over the past year I’ve encountered Nazi-era tropes in our conservative Christian circles. &nbsp;(Why that is the case may be a topic for a future blog.)</b><br><b><br>History has already gone down that road once to a repulsive destination. &nbsp;Do we conservative Christians really want to take those first steps again? &nbsp;Aren’t those first steps the best place for a pastor to issue the challenge of change? &nbsp;C. S. Lewis said, <i>“If you’re on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road.” </i>&nbsp;The sooner the change of heart, the shorter journey back to what is right.</b><br><b><br>This was not the essay I had planned to present this week. &nbsp;But it’s an important clarification of the situation I am seeking to address. &nbsp;I don’t personally know anyone advocating physical attacks against Jews, but I regularly encounter intimations that demean and devalue them as individuals and as a people.</b><br><b><br>One such intimation claims the Jews no longer truly exist as a people and, by extension, that the nation of Israel doesn’t need to exist. &nbsp;I hope to begin explaining what I believe the Bible says about that in my next blog.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>A BURDEN I NEED TO SHARE</title>
						<description><![CDATA[I’ve apparently upset some people with my blogs on antisemitism (Sep 2025-Jan 2026).  Let me explain why I wrote those blogs.I regularly receive newsletters from pro-family and pro-life pastors’ groups and last year there was a growing alarm among conservative pastors about the rise of antisemitism in our churches.  I thought they had to be overreacting.  Conservative American evangelicals were th...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/18/a-burden-i-need-to-share</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2026 18:22:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/18/a-burden-i-need-to-share</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>I’ve apparently upset some people with my blogs on antisemitism (Sep 2025-Jan 2026). &nbsp;Let me explain why I wrote those blogs.</b><br><b><br>I regularly receive newsletters from pro-family and pro-life pastors’ groups and last year there was a growing alarm among conservative pastors about the rise of antisemitism in our churches. &nbsp;I thought they had to be overreacting. &nbsp;Conservative American evangelicals were the last people I would have suspected of buying into ideas promoted by the antisemitism of the last two centuries. &nbsp;I was wrong.</b><br><b><br>Just as these articles appeared, Christian parents started coming to me asking for help because their children were getting caught up in antisemitic propaganda online. &nbsp;While researching the matter I encountered more Christians who were being drawn to these antisemitic ideas. &nbsp;The ideas weren’t new; they were recycled from 20th century antisemitism. &nbsp;I hope you can understand why I found this alarming. &nbsp;I felt it was important to address the matter and felt the blog was a better place than the pulpit. &nbsp;I hoped that an understanding of the history of antisemitism would clarify some things that might open doors for a more profitable discussion.</b><br><b><br>It didn’t. &nbsp;It upset people. &nbsp;I was sad to discover recently that a few quietly left the church because of what I wrote.</b><br><b><br>I am very concerned about what this issue is doing in the hearts and lives of believers. &nbsp;I believe there is a lot of confusion and that what is happening at the grassroots is being amplified and complicated by an array of voices in conservative media and conservative politics that claim to be “anti-Israel but not antisemitic”.</b><br><b><br>I believe a group of policy-driven non-interventionist politicians (e.g., J. D. Vance, Rand Paul, Thomas Massie) are successfully maintaining the line between legitimate criticism of foreign policy and antisemitism. &nbsp;They believe putting America first means the U.S. should avoid funding or fighting for foreign countries. Israel is not singled out; as a foreign nation, it is one of many with which the U.S. should avoid entanglement on principle.</b><br><b><br>Others, like journalist Tucker Carlson, claim to be in the “anti-Israel but not antisemitic” camp—and most often he is. &nbsp;But at times Tucker flirts with the line between the two positions, and that can be confusing. For example, he sometimes uses language echoing familiar antisemitic tropes, suggesting hidden Israeli influence or disproportionate Israeli sway over the American government. &nbsp;Taken together, these statements can make him sound more antisemitic than anti-Israel.</b><br><b><br>In a recent interview with Mike Huckabee, Ambassador to Israel, Carlson kept trying to get Huckabee to identify what it means to be a Jew. &nbsp;What are the identifying marks of the Jewish people? &nbsp;When Huckabee offered genetic, ethnic, religious, and covenantal grounds for Jewish peoplehood, Carlson rejected each in turn. The cumulative effect is denial that a Jewish people exists at all. &nbsp;That’s antisemitism.</b><br><b><br>I’ve noted in the past Carlson’s habit of giving his platform to extremists like Nick Fuentes and Daryl Cooper without challenging their antisemitism.</b><br><b><br>These practices make it harder for people—especially young Christians—to distinguish between legitimate policy criticism and antisemitism. &nbsp;It makes it easy for the minds of audiences to conflate the politicians, the line-blurring journalists, and the radical extremists.&nbsp;</b><b>If they all seem to be saying the same thing, supporting the extremist is the same as supporting the politician.</b><br><b><br>I see this kind of confusion happening. Having a biblical framework in which to sort these difficult matters out is vital to a proper understanding of the Christian faith. &nbsp;I continue to get questions about whether the modern state of Israel fits into the biblical story, and if so how, and if not, why not? &nbsp;What I hope to present in upcoming blogs should help us all understand these difficult issues from a sound biblical perspective.</b><br><b><br>I wanted to be transparent about the pastoral concerns driving my choice of topic, laying to rest any distress before it arises. &nbsp;We can have political disagreements among us, but we can’t espouse hating people merely for being Jewish. &nbsp;History should have taught us that. &nbsp;I am alarmed that it hasn’t.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ram Lambs</title>
						<description><![CDATA[Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year old.  You may take it from the sheep or from the goats…  Exodus 12.5Dave Day, Jr. and his wife Kim have been members of our church for years.  They raise sheep.  Last Sunday I preached about the Passover lamb, and Dave caught up with me to share some insights with me about year-old male lambs.He noted that shepherds don’t have much use for “ram lam...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/10/ram-lambs</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2026 19:44:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/10/ram-lambs</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><i><b>Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year old. &nbsp;You may take it from the sheep or from the goats… &nbsp;</b></i><b>Exodus 12.5<br><br>Dave Day, Jr. and his wife Kim have been members of our church for years. &nbsp;They raise sheep. &nbsp;Last Sunday I preached about the Passover lamb, and Dave caught up with me to share some insights with me about year-old male lambs.<br><br>He noted that shepherds don’t have much use for “ram lambs”. &nbsp;(From this day forward, that is how I am translating the Hebrew phrase!) &nbsp;Shepherds want ewes, not rams. &nbsp;Ewes reproduce. &nbsp;One ram can successfully mate with up to fifty ewes, so you don’t need many rams. &nbsp;<br><br>And contrary to my depiction of them as cute and cuddly, Dave noted that a male yearling is almost fully mature and sizable. &nbsp;One ram lamb will provide far more meat than a family could consume in one sitting. &nbsp;<br><br>Also, “cute and cuddly” is not the best description of a yearling ram. &nbsp;He’s more likely to be feisty at best and at the worst, <i>aggressive</i>. &nbsp;Too many rams competing for mating privileges in a flock can stress the ewes and disrupt breeding.<br><br>Most ram lambs, Dave offered, go to the butcher at six months old. &nbsp;Why keep them around? &nbsp;They’re only good for one thing and you only need one for that. &nbsp;They’re a needless drain on the food supply, better invested in the ewes, and the meat is better when the ram is young and tender.<br><br>In short, one might be more than happy to sacrifice a ram lamb.<br><br>In Hebrew, “one year old” is literally “son of a year”. &nbsp;I looked up every occurrence of that phrase. &nbsp;There were only two occasions requiring the <i>personal&nbsp;</i>sacrifice of a year-old lamb: Passover and every time your wife gave birth. &nbsp;The Passover lamb had to be a male. &nbsp;The post-partum sacrifice could be either male or female, but I’d be willing to bet people sooner chose to part with a ram lamb than a valuable ewe.<br><br>If you weren’t a shepherding family, every time you needed a ram lamb to sacrifice, you’d have to buy one from a family with flocks. &nbsp;In Jesus’ day, when Jews from across the Roman Empire traveled to Jerusalem for Passover, many pilgrim families had to <i>buy&nbsp;</i>a Passover lamb in the Temple. &nbsp;This was part of the market inside the Temple that enraged Jesus.<br><br>Those are the only <i>personal&nbsp;</i>sacrifices. &nbsp;Institutional sacrifices in the Temple required even more year-old ram lambs. &nbsp;Passover took place on Nisan 14th with every family sacrificing its own year-old lamb. &nbsp;Two days later on the Feast of First Fruits another year-old ram lamb was sacrificed on the altar in the Temple—just one for the nation. &nbsp;Fifty days later at Pentecost another seven ram lambs were sacrificed by the priests on behalf of the nation.<br><br>Those were the ram lambs offered at the special feasts. &nbsp;The <i>daily&nbsp;</i>sacrifice required two one-year-old ram lambs without blemish, one offered in the morning, the other in the evening (Exodus 29.38 cf. Numbers 28)—730 ram lambs per year. &nbsp;Two <i>additional&nbsp;</i>ram lambs were sacrificed in the same fashion each <i>Sabbath&nbsp;</i>– so 104 more per year (Numbers 28.9ff). &nbsp;Finally, seven ram lambs were offered in the Temple to begin every month –84 more ram lambs a year (Numbers 28.11). &nbsp;<br><br>That’s a grand total of 926 <i>required </i>year-old ram lambs sacrificed on the altar in the Temple <i>every year</i>!<br><br>Ram lambs were a shepherd’s dilemma. &nbsp;Too many were a nuisance to the flock. &nbsp;You could sell them young for slaughter or keep them for a year and sell them into the sacrificial system (or use them for yourself). &nbsp;But that meant feeding otherwise useless rams for a year and having to go to the trouble of keeping them separated lest their fighting and butting create unwanted blemishes that would render them useless as sacrifices.<br><br>Reviewing this material reminded me again how much blood was constantly shed in this ancient culture. &nbsp;I only reviewed ram lambs that were “sons of a year”. &nbsp;There were younger ones sacrificed. &nbsp;There were also older rams, both goats and sheep, as well as calves and oxen and turtledoves and pigeons. &nbsp;<br><br>These sacrifices were constant and continual reminders of how difficult it is for us to come into His presence. &nbsp;We don’t have to bring lambs to church anymore so it is easy to forget the enormity of the price paid by one precious, flawless, “firstborn” son whose sacrifice was sufficient beyond all the animal sacrifices ever offered together to open the way for us to the Father.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bible Tips: &quot;All&quot; Does Not Always Mean &quot;All&quot;</title>
						<description><![CDATA[“I’ve tried everything and nothing works.”“You NEVER listen to me!”“There is nothing on TV tonight.”Most of us have said (and have heard others say) things like this.  Words like “always/never” or “everyone/everything” or “all/none” are universal terms.  Yet in ordinary speech we use them in non-universal ways, and we expect others to understand that “all doesn’t always mean all”.If I say “I alway...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/03/bible-tips-all-does-not-always-mean-all</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2026 18:09:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/03/03/bible-tips-all-does-not-always-mean-all</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b><i>“I’ve tried everything and nothing works.”<br>“You NEVER listen to me!”<br>“There is nothing on TV tonight.”</i></b><br><b><br>Most of us have said (and have heard others say) things like this. &nbsp;Words like “always/never” or “everyone/everything” or “all/none” are universal terms. &nbsp;Yet in ordinary speech we use them in non-universal ways, and we expect others to understand that “all doesn’t always mean all”.</b><br><b><br>If I say “I always have to do everything myself!” or “I have nothing to wear!” you should understand that I am exaggerating to express frustration. &nbsp;<br>If I say “nothing good ever happens after midnight” I am making a sweeping generalization to express a tendency, not an absolute law of the universe. &nbsp;<br>If I say “all of Philadelphia was talking about the game”, it doesn’t mean <i>every </i><i>person </i>but that the game was a topic of discussion among many people.<br>If I say “the customer is always right,” I’m speaking proverbially. &nbsp;It is understood that there are exceptions.</b><br><b><br>Language works the same way in the Bible. &nbsp;It records speech the way that people actually speak.</b><br><b><br>When Moses writes <i>“<u>all the earth</u> came to Egypt to Joseph to buy grain, because the famine was severe </i>over all the earth<i>”</i> (Genesis 41.57), he doesn’t mean the famine was global or that Mayans, Chinese, and aboriginal Australians paddled to Egypt in search of food. &nbsp;By “all the earth” he means Egypt’s world, the lands within its circle of dealings.</b><br><b><br>Likewise, when Matthew says <i>“all Judea and all the region about Jordan were going out to”</i> John the Baptist, not every individual person in those regions went out. &nbsp;Matthew means John’s teachings were popular and large crowds went to hear John and be baptized.</b><br><b><br>Jesus spoke the parable of the persistent widow who, when she didn’t get justice, kept pestering the judge to re-open her case (Luke 18.1-7) and Luke said its message was that we <i>“ought always to pray and not lose heart”</i> (18.1). &nbsp;Luke’s point is persistence (the parable portrays that), not that every waking moment be only given to prayer. &nbsp;Paul makes the same point: &nbsp;<i>“Pray without ceasing”</i> (1 Thessalonians 5.17).</b><br><b><br>In Romans 7.18 Paul says <i>“I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing.”</i>&nbsp; Though he says <i>“no good thing dwells…in me”</i>, he limits his description by <i>“that is, in my flesh”</i>. &nbsp;So he isn’t referring to his entire self; &nbsp;but to “his flesh” – his fallen nature. &nbsp;A few verses later Paul says “I delight in the law of God in my inner being” (Romans 7.22). &nbsp;He distinguishes his “inner being” from his “flesh”. &nbsp;Similarly, in Romans 3.12 Paul quotes Psalm 14.3: &nbsp;<i>“There is no one who does good, not even one.”</i> &nbsp;Yet Scripture elsewhere praises Noah, Job, and Joseph as righteous men. &nbsp;The verse describes a general moral condition, not a commentary on every act of every individual in history.</b><br><b><br>Paul’s point is the intractability of fallen human nature. &nbsp;Self-improvement programs won’t save you. &nbsp;You can’t satisfy God’s demands for perfection by your own willpower. &nbsp;You will always fall short. &nbsp;But that doesn’t mean that people are incapable of doing <i>any </i>good in a civil or relational sense. &nbsp;Jesus himself said that evil people know how to give good gifts (Luke 11.13).</b><br><b><br>Universals can be used universally. &nbsp;To name a few examples:</b><br><b><br><i> “The LORD never sleeps or slumbers.”</i> &nbsp;(Psalm 121.4)<br><i>“I am with you always, to the end of the age.” </i>&nbsp;(Matthew 28.20)<br><i>“Nothing is impossible with God.” </i>&nbsp;(Luke 1.37)<br><i>“No one comes to the Father except through me.” </i>&nbsp;(John 14.6)<br><i>“Every good and perfect gift is from above.” </i>&nbsp;(James 1.17)<br><i>“God is light and in Him is no darkness at all.” </i>&nbsp;(1 John 1.5)</b><br><b><br>Scripture uses universal language the way all human language uses it—sometimes absolutely, sometimes rhetorically—and context tells us which.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>MOBS AND THE BIBLE</title>
						<description><![CDATA[In recent years, we’ve seen an increase in “mob justice”.  A mob is a group that refuses examination and suppresses dissent.  A mob is persuaded less by evidence and more by outrage or fear.  The members of the group fuel each other emotionally and, by oppressing or ignoring dissent, develop moral certainty about their perspective.  That all members agree proves that they already know the truth.  ...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/02/23/mobs-and-the-bible</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2026 17:41:53 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/02/23/mobs-and-the-bible</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>In recent years, we’ve seen an increase in “mob justice”. &nbsp;A mob is a group that refuses examination and suppresses dissent. &nbsp;A mob is persuaded less by evidence and more by outrage or fear. &nbsp;The members of the group fuel each other emotionally and, by oppressing or ignoring dissent, develop moral certainty about their perspective. &nbsp;That all members agree proves that they already know the truth. &nbsp;Reason is unnecessary.</b><br><b><br>The Bible is not unfamiliar with mob activity. &nbsp;Jezebel utilized a mob mentality to murder Naboth (1 Kings 21). &nbsp;Paul and his co-workers were victims of mob violence in Ephesus (Acts 19.21ff) and Jesus was crucified under pressure from a mob (Matthew 27). &nbsp;The common threads in these stories are false witness, emotional agitation, and pressure on authorities to yield to the mob rather than the truth.</b><br><b><br>James Madison (Federalist 10) warned about mobs (“factions”) as the most dangerous tendency inherent in democracy. &nbsp;The Bible also warns us about mobs. &nbsp;<i>“You shall not fall in with the many to do evil, nor shall you bear witness in a lawsuit, siding with the many, so as to pervert justice, nor shall you be partial to a poor man in his lawsuit”</i> &nbsp;(Exodus 23.2-3). &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>Mobs, driven by peer pressure and emotional reasoning, are the opposite of the wisdom encouraged by the Lord. &nbsp;Wisdom takes its time, restrains emotions, and assesses the viability of evidence.</b><br><b><br><i>Whoever is slow to anger has great understanding,<br>but he who has a hasty temper exalts folly.</i> &nbsp;(Proverbs 14.29)</b><br><b><i><br>Do you see a man who is hasty in his words?<br>There is more hope for a fool than for him.</i> &nbsp;(Proverbs 29.20)</b><br><b><br><i>Better is the end of a thing than its beginning,<br>and the patient in spirit is better than the proud in spirit.<br>Be not quick in your spirit to become angry,<br>for anger lodges in the heart of fools.&nbsp;</i> (Ecclesiastes 7.8-9)</b><br><b><br><i>Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God.&nbsp;</i> (James 1.19-20)</b><br><b><br>Biblical wisdom is slow because it insists on painstaking precision. &nbsp;Mobs determine who is the guilty party rather quickly based on an emotionally charged echo chamber. &nbsp;Wisdom slows things down and asks hard questions about what is true.</b><br><b><i><br>The one who states his case first seems right,<br>until the other comes and examines him.&nbsp;</i> (Proverbs 18.17)</b><br><b><br>Accusations are at first persuasive. &nbsp;The first to tell his story molds the narrative in his own favor. &nbsp;He selects and omits points of his story and assigns moral roles to the characters (victims, villains, heroes) based on the emotional responses he hopes to generate. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>Wisdom listens but <i>always&nbsp;</i>says “There is more to the story”. &nbsp;Wisdom <i>“examines him”</i>. &nbsp;What seems obvious and right at first hearing may be biased, incomplete, and <i>completely&nbsp;</i>wrong. &nbsp;Wisdom takes the time to review evidence and ask hard questions about the story and the storyteller(s). &nbsp;Inconsistencies in the narrative raise doubts about the credibility of the story and its narrator and prevents reckless judgment.</b><br><b><br>Mobs form when a group uncritically accepts the first storyteller before the other side has a chance to speak. &nbsp;The other side, when it does speak, has been pre-judged merely for disagreeing, and the mob reinforces its self-perception that it is just and dare not be questioned. &nbsp;It is this that makes a mob difficult to counter.</b><br><b><br>Wisdom—taking the time to hear both sides before making a final judgment—has led to the practice of treating the accused as innocent until <i>proven&nbsp;</i>guilty by reasonable evidence. &nbsp;The caution found in English common law reflects the principle of Proverbs 18.17. &nbsp;As the renowned jurist William Blackstone said, <i>“It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent person suffer.”&nbsp;</i>&nbsp;</b><br><b><br>Wisdom distrusts initial impressions, emotional judgment, and peer pressure. &nbsp;Wisdom insists on examining competing narratives and testing claims and places the burden of proof upon the accuser, not the accused.</b><br><b><br>Because of sin we all are vulnerable to being swept by emotion into partiality and unjust judgment. &nbsp;Biblical wisdom requires a certain distrust of self and a disciplined focus on the evidence. &nbsp;The Lord calls us to resist the pressure of the crowd, to slow down, to test claims, and to love clarity and justice more than agreement. Truth is not established by feelings or numbers but by careful examination. &nbsp;</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bass Life</title>
						<description><![CDATA[I enjoy playing the bass.In fact, the role I play—and enjoy playing—in life is similar to the role of the bass in the band.The bass isn’t a showy solo instrument.The bass is rarely gaudy or extravagant.  It’s rather plain.It’s not out in front.  The bass is behind the scenes.With the drums the bass forms the foundation of the music upon which everyone else – the guitars, the vocals, the keyboards ...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/02/16/bass-life</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2026 15:57:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/02/16/bass-life</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>I enjoy playing the bass.</b><br><b><br>In fact, the role I play—and enjoy playing—in life is similar to the role of the bass in the band.</b><br><b><br>The bass isn’t a showy solo instrument.<br>The bass is rarely gaudy or extravagant. &nbsp;It’s rather plain.<br>It’s not out in front. &nbsp;The bass is behind the scenes.</b><br><b><br>With the drums the bass forms the foundation of the music upon which everyone else – the guitars, the vocals, the keyboards – is building the song.</b><br><b><br>The bass line is usually simple.<br>Most importantly, it must be steady and consistent.<br>Sometimes its simplicity makes it boring.</b><br><b><br>Yet the consistency of the bass line holds the song together.</b><br><b><br>The bass keeps the other musicians together.<br>I feel like that’s the role I’m called to play in almost everything I do.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Loving Prodigals</title>
						<description><![CDATA[In praying for people one dislikes, I find it helpful to remember that one is joining in Christ’s prayer for them.  – C.S. LewisThere is no indication that the father in Jesus' parable of the prodigal son approved of his son's reckless lifestyle or that he wasn't disappointed with his son's decisions. My guess is that the son knew his father wouldn't approve and would be disappointed. That's most ...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/02/09/loving-prodigals</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2026 16:38:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/02/09/loving-prodigals</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b><i>In praying for people one dislikes, I find it helpful to remember that one is joining in Christ’s prayer for them. &nbsp;– C.S. Lewis</i></b><br><br><b>There is no indication that the father in Jesus' parable of the prodigal son approved of his son's reckless lifestyle or that he wasn't disappointed with his son's decisions. My guess is that the son knew his father wouldn't approve and would be disappointed. That's most likely why he "took a journey to a far country" to live his own way and not have to daily face his father's disapproval and disappointment.</b><br><b><br>When the son decided to return, he didn't come demanding his father's approval of all he had done. On the contrary, the son came to accept that his father's disapproval, disappointment, and possibly disowning were warranted. </b><br><b><br>The son came to disapprove of <i>himself</i>. "Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you and am no longer worthy to be called your son." (Luke 15.21)</b><br><b><br>The father took his son back, not because he approved of his son's reckless lifestyle, but because he approved of the son's abandonment of that lifestyle and his return to the father's side.</b><br><b><br>The air that we breathe these days says that love equals,<br>not just acceptance, but positive affirmation or approval.&nbsp;</b><br><b><br>If you don't approve, people say, then you must hate.</b><br><b><br>But this is patently false, even in our own experience.</b><br><b><br>Love can disapprove the beloved and continue to be love.<br>Love can be disappointed in the beloved and continue to be love.<br>Love can believe the beloved to be completely in the wrong and yet continue to be love.<br>Love can be angry with the beloved and continue to be love.<br>Love can rebuke and correct the beloved and continue to be love.<br>Love can even part ways with the beloved and yet continue to be love.</b><br><b><br>What love can't do is rejoice in a lie. Love rejoices with the truth.<br>Love can't say that evil is good, that wrongdoing is right.</b><br><b><br>But love can love the wrongdoer in his wrongdoing without accepting or approving the wrongdoing.<br>Otherwise we would be unable to love our enemies.</b><br><b><br>Or prodigal children.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Learning to Learn</title>
						<description><![CDATA[Whoever isolates himself seeks his own desire;he breaks out against all sound judgment. (Proverbs 18.1)A fool takes no pleasure in understanding,but only in expressing his opinion.  (Proverbs 18.2)The one who states his case first seems right,until the other comes and examines him.  (Proverbs 18.17)After receiving my master’s degree, I took classes toward a second master’s degree.  One of my profe...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/02/02/learning-to-learn</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2026 18:24:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/02/02/learning-to-learn</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b><i>Whoever isolates himself seeks his own desire;<br>he breaks out against all sound judgment. (Proverbs 18.1)</i></b><i><br><b><br>A fool takes no pleasure in understanding,<br>but only in expressing his opinion. &nbsp;(Proverbs 18.2)</b><br></i><b><i><br>The one who states his case first seems right,<br>until the other comes and examines him. &nbsp;(Proverbs 18.17)</i></b><br><b><br>After receiving my master’s degree, I took classes toward a second master’s degree. &nbsp;One of my professors was a young man, newly graduated with his doctorate. &nbsp;I came to dislike him almost immediately.</b><br><b><br>He asked provocative questions in class, but no matter how you responded, he would find a minute technical fault with your answer. &nbsp;It was as if he were trying to humiliate everyone in the class to show off his doctorate and how smart he was.</b><br><b><br>Every paper I wrote for him came back bleeding with red ink, criticizing finely nuanced logical errors and asking questions that challenged the legitimacy of my reasoning. &nbsp;This professor never seemed satisfied, never said “nice work”, always seemed to be looking for microscopic flaws in my work.</b><br><b><br>To make matters worse, I couldn’t escape him. &nbsp;He taught most of the courses in the specialty I was studying.</b><br><b><br>I couldn’t understand that this professor didn’t recognize my “brilliance”. &nbsp;Instead, he seemed to shrug it off as “average”, and then he’d challenge everything I said and wrote.</b><br><b><br>Isn’t that what learning is supposed to do?</b><br><b><br>That brings me to the three proverbs from Proverbs 18 at the head of this blog.</b><br><b><br>I felt anger against this professor because I felt I was sufficient. &nbsp;I didn’t want to hear his petty, finely nuanced logical arguments. &nbsp;He wasn’t petty. &nbsp;I was. &nbsp;He was a precise thinker, and he wanted me to be a <i>much more </i>precise thinker. &nbsp;That’s what education is about, isn’t it? &nbsp;I got angry because, in truth, I wanted applause, not input. &nbsp;That’s the lesson of Proverbs 18.1.</b><br><b><br>I wanted to wax eloquent in my papers and arguments and I wanted him to recognize my brilliance. &nbsp;He didn’t criticize what I knew; he just understood that at this level of study, it wasn’t extraordinary. &nbsp;It was expected. &nbsp;He wanted to push me into further understanding – and I wasn’t taking pleasure in it. &nbsp;I thought I was sufficient. &nbsp;Proverbs 18.2 says this is characteristic of a fool.</b><br><b><br>I thought my arguments made perfect sense as presented. &nbsp;I didn’t think they needed refining. &nbsp;But we all make sense to ourselves, and our “obviously convincing arguments” aren’t always so immediately convincing to others. &nbsp;Sometimes that’s unsettling, but it’s the way reality works. &nbsp;That’s Proverbs 18.17.</b><br><b><br>I detested that professor while he was teaching me. &nbsp;I found him petty. &nbsp;But in hindsight, once I dropped my foolish defenses, I realized that he was rigorous. &nbsp;I learned from this professor what real learning was.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>The Serpent's Second Counsel (A Satire)</title>
						<description><![CDATA[…I recently came across this fragment of text that appears to fit well between Genesis 3 and 4…The LORD God drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden He placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life. And Adam and his wife tilled the ground and ate bread by the sweat of their faces, as God had said.  And it came to pass, as Adam ha...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/01/26/the-serpent-s-second-counsel-a-satire</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2026 15:39:45 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/01/26/the-serpent-s-second-counsel-a-satire</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b><i>…I recently came across this fragment of text that appears to fit well between Genesis 3 and 4…</i></b><br><b><br>The LORD God drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden He placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life. </b><br><b><br>And Adam and his wife tilled the ground and ate bread by the sweat of their faces, as God had said. &nbsp;And it came to pass, as Adam had gone away to reap the fields, that Eve was alone, grinding grain outside of the house. &nbsp;And she was weeping.</b><br><b><br>And the serpent heard her weeping and said, "Why do you weep?"</b><br><b><br>And Eve said, "The earth in which we toil has been cursed and we eat bread by the sweat of our faces because of the evil that I have done. &nbsp;Therefore, my face is fallen, and my heart is heavy, and I weep.”&nbsp;</b><br><b><br>And the serpent said, "Your heart is heavy, not because you have done evil, but because you believe what is not true. &nbsp;Did you die in the day that you ate of the fruit, as God had said?”</b><br><b><br>And the woman answered, “We did not die.”</b><br><b><br>And the serpent said, “It is as I said. &nbsp;And were your eyes opened to know good and evil, as I myself said?”</b><br><b><br>And the woman said, “Our eyes were opened and we were ashamed of the evil that we had done.”</b><br><b><br>And the serpent said, “You were ashamed because the LORD God told you what was not true and you believed Him. &nbsp;Open your eyes wider and grow wiser. &nbsp;<br>You have done what was good. &nbsp;The LORD God has done evil in making you ashamed.”</b><br><b><br>And the woman answered, “The LORD God is good and all that He has made is good. &nbsp;He could not do evil against us.”</b><br><b><br>And the serpent said, “Who told you that the LORD God is good?<br>Has the LORD God blessed you or cursed you for seeking to be like Him? &nbsp;You sought to be like God and He cast you away. &nbsp;He cursed the earth and rewarded you with hardship and pain.<br>Has He not done evil rather than good?”</b><br><b><br>And again the serpent said, “Is this what a good father does? &nbsp;<br>If his child seeks a fish will he give him a serpent? &nbsp;If his child seeks an egg will he give him a scorpion? &nbsp;<br>Does a good father cast his children away and close the door, rejoicing when they suffer, delighting that the hearts of his children are heavy every day and every night? &nbsp;<br>Is this not how the LORD God rewarded you for seeking to be like Him?”</b><br><b><br>Then the serpent said, “The LORD God commands that which you cannot do and then accuses you of falling short of His glory. &nbsp;He wounds you and says that you are wounding yourself. &nbsp;<br>Do not long to return to blindness. &nbsp;Your eyes are now open; &nbsp;look to your own way. &nbsp;Trust your own heart and lean on your own understanding.<br>Do not weep for the garden. &nbsp;The paradise of the LORD God was your prison. &nbsp;The tree of life is death. &nbsp;You are now like God, knowing good and evil. &nbsp;Believe that you are truly free—and live.” &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>And Eve rose up to grind the grain and her hand was mighty upon the stone. &nbsp;And she wept no more.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Prophets</title>
						<description><![CDATA[O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it!  (Matthew 23.37 // Luke 13.34)Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute?  (Acts 7.52)The first quote is from Jesus, the second from Stephen, the first Christian martyr.  We read these words and simply recognize them as statements about the history of Israel.But let’s think about Israel’s killin...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/01/20/prophets</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2026 07:50:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/01/20/prophets</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b><i>O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! &nbsp;(Matthew 23.37 // Luke 13.34)</i></b><br><b><br><i>Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? &nbsp;(Acts 7.52)</i></b><br><b><br>The first quote is from Jesus, the second from Stephen, the first Christian martyr. &nbsp;We read these words and simply recognize them as statements about the history of Israel.</b><br><b><br>But let’s think about Israel’s killing of the prophets. &nbsp;Why did they kill them? &nbsp;They killed the prophets because their message was unpopular.</b><br><b><br>But why was that message unpopular?</b><br><b><br>The prophets condemned many sins. &nbsp;The Israelites were stealing, murdering, swearing oaths and then not keeping their word; they were willing to sell their own people into slavery – sometimes for the price of a pair of shoes; they were sexually promiscuous and all too willing to divorce; they were willing to take advantage of and impoverish the most helpless people in society – widows and orphans – to enrich themselves.</b><br><b><br>This is just a partial list of sins condemned by the prophets.</b><br><b><br>These condemnations were unpopular, not only because the people were enjoying sinning, but because despite their sins, the nation was usually doing well politically and economically. &nbsp;Doesn’t that mean God is “blessing”? &nbsp;If things are going well when you are sinning, the guy who tells you to change your behavior certainly looks to be the guy who wants to undo your experience of success and blessing!</b><br><b><br>Oddly enough, it’s these prophets that everyone hated and that kings put to death whose books, sermons, and messages ended up preserved and revered as God’s Word! </b><br><b><br>The prophets who were SO popular back then, we know today only as “the false prophets”. &nbsp;Most of their names have been lost. &nbsp;If they wrote anything it didn’t survive. &nbsp;The only way we know of them is through the preserved writings of the unpopular and hated prophets.</b><br><b><br>How did the hated prophets become revered?</b><br><b><br>Hindsight. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br>True prophets didn’t usually live long enough to say “I told you so.” &nbsp;But when God’s judgment came as they predicted, eyes were opened and people remembered—when it was too late.</b><br><b><br>We live in a world that is at odds with God. &nbsp;That’s why His ways often seem strange, and His prophets often seem to be saying the wrong thing at the wrong time.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>Anointing the Sick</title>
						<description><![CDATA[Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.  And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up.  And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righte...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/01/13/anointing-the-sick</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2026 15:38:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/01/13/anointing-the-sick</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b><i>Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. &nbsp;And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. &nbsp;And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.</i></b><i><br></i><b><i><br>Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working. Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed fervently that it might not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth. &nbsp;Then he prayed again, and heaven gave rain, and the earth bore its fruit. </i>&nbsp;(James 5.14-18)</b><br><b><br>I don’t think James is trying to persuade Christians to refuse medical treatment in this passage. &nbsp;Rather, he calls on them not to neglect our spiritual side when we find ourselves in difficulty.</b><br><b><br>James is not here speaking of the sniffles, but of a seriously debilitating physical failure. &nbsp;Yes—seek medical care! &nbsp;But <i>also </i>“call for the elders of the church”. &nbsp;When you’re a Christian, you’re not alone. &nbsp;God has made you part of a large family! &nbsp;You don’t need to suffer in isolation – call on the representatives of the church to join you and share in that suffering. &nbsp;The elders aren’t running around peddling a “healing ministry”. &nbsp;The one who is sick has the responsibility of calling them to come. &nbsp;They must <i>want </i>this sort of connection and request it. &nbsp;An entire church filing in and out of your hospital room can be overwhelming. &nbsp;A few representative elders visiting can be a comfort and reminder that you are not alone while allowing for the rest necessary for restoration of health.</b><br><b><br>The elders are not celebrities, but representatives of the praying body of believers. &nbsp;James illustrates using Elijah as an example of the power of prayer, not because of Elijah’s special powers, but because he was just “a man with a nature like ours”. &nbsp;This isn’t about magical healing power; &nbsp;it’s about God’s power and our dependence on Him.</b><br><b><br>Anointing with oil in the ancient world was both medicinal and symbolic. &nbsp;The symbolism is the Spirit of God coming in response to prayer, bringing healing to the sick, both body <i>and soul</i>. &nbsp;</b><br><b><br><i>If you make the request</i>, our elders will pray over you and anoint you with oil. &nbsp;It’s just olive oil and we usually apply it with our thumb in the form of a little cross on your forehead or your hand as we pray.</b><br><b><br>James says it is the prayer of faith, not some magic in the oil, that “will save the one who is sick and the Lord will raise him up.” &nbsp;Prayer is a request. &nbsp;God will answer as He wishes, but He has told us to come to Him and express our wishes, to cast all our cares upon Him (1 Peter 5.7).</b><br><b><br>Finally, James points to the importance of giving attention to our whole being—our inner man as well as our body. &nbsp;Notice that he doesn’t say that we are sick because we have sinned. &nbsp;He simply says “<i>if he has committed sins</i>” and encourages the confession of sins and prayer for one another that we may be healed. &nbsp;Debilitating sickness can be God’s way of getting our attention, clearing away the frivolous things in life and sobering our hearts to reflect on deeper things, on the frailty and weakness, not only of the body, but of the soul. &nbsp;Often the healing of the soul is just as important or more so than the healing of the body.</b><br><b><br>If you have a severe illness, call the doctor. &nbsp;But call the elders too. &nbsp;We still practice what James prescribed, and many have found it a comfort and a blessing. &nbsp;We’ve seen God do some wonderful things for souls who are suffering.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>The Bible, Israel, and Antisemitism: Part 15: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion</title>
						<description><![CDATA[The piece of conspiracy propaganda that has carried perhaps the most weight throughout the 20th century is a booklet entitled The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.First appearing in Russia in 1903, the origin of The Protocols is still something of a mystery, though it is widely believed to be the work of Tsar Nicholas’ secret police.  Tsar Nicholas’ authority (and European autocratic power in gener...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/01/05/the-bible-israel-and-antisemitism-part-15-the-protocols-of-the-elders-of-zion</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2026 17:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2026/01/05/the-bible-israel-and-antisemitism-part-15-the-protocols-of-the-elders-of-zion</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>The piece of conspiracy propaganda that has carried perhaps the most weight throughout the 20th century is a booklet entitled<i> The Protocols of the Elders of Zion</i>.</b><br><b><br>First appearing in Russia in 1903, the origin of <i>The Protocols</i> is still something of a mystery, though it is widely believed to be the work of Tsar Nicholas’ secret police. &nbsp;Tsar Nicholas’ authority (and European autocratic power in general) was in decline, challenged by the rise of democratic forms of government. &nbsp;Exploiting the longstanding prejudices against the Jews, <i>The Protocols</i> claims that these challenges—liberalism, constitutionalism, socialism, and communism—are the outworking of a secret plan by elite Jewish masterminds to overthrow traditional authorities, namely the churches and the monarchies. &nbsp;The book strongly implies that the Jews will seize global power under the headship of an almost antichrist-like Jewish leader.</b><br><b><br><i>The Protocols</i> draws heavily on the Rothschild myth, alleging that a small group of powerful Jews secretly manipulates governments through the control of banking and public finance.</b><br><b><br>In the years surrounding WWI and the Russian revolution, monarchies were collapsing and more democratic forms of government were emerging across Europe. &nbsp;<i>The Protocols </i>appeared to explain this upheaval as the work of a secret Jewish conspiracy. &nbsp;Refugees fleeing the revolutionary violence in Russia distributed <i>The Protocols</i> in Europe where it was translated into French, German, English, Polish, and other languages, reinforcing an already virulent European antisemitism.</b><br><b><br>The propaganda soon reached the United States. &nbsp;In the 1920s Henry Ford’s newspaper, the <i>Dearborn Independent</i>, published a series of articles based on <i>The Protocols</i>, lending his prestige to the antisemitic hoax. &nbsp;Ford later republished the articles as a book, <i>The International Jew</i>. &nbsp;Although he eventually apologized under pressure, the damage was done, and the conspiracy spread through America.</b><br><b><br>Despite <i>The Times of London</i> exposing <i>The Protocols</i> as a forgery in 1921, Adolf Hitler continued to treat it as genuine, citing it in <i>Mein Kampf</i>. &nbsp;Nazi Germany distributed millions of copies of<i> The Protocols</i> throughout its occupied territories and required its reading in schools to foment hatred of the Jews and prepare public opinion for “the Final Solution”.</b><br><b><br><i>The Protocols</i> was also translated into Arabic in the 1920s and 1930s and adopted by some Arab nationalist and radical Islamist movements. &nbsp;Even today, it is presented as historical fact in some radical Islamist educational and media materials.</b><br><b><br>Although few now reference the Rothschilds or cite <i>The Protocols</i> directly, the ideas behind both conspiracies have become part of the antisemitic worldview. &nbsp;Claims that Jews secretly control banks, finances, the Federal Reserve, the United Nations, the media, or national governments echo these myths. &nbsp;Such rhetoric remains common among radical Islamists and their supporters, as well as in the rhetoric of radical online figures like Nick Fuentes and Stew Peters.</b><br><b><br>I cannot sound the alarm loudly enough about the danger of this antisemitic hatred, and I am greatly concerned when I hear conservatives and evangelical Christians embracing such ideas.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>The Bible, Israel, and Antisemitism: Part 14: Jewish Bankers and the Birth of Modern Conspiracy Theories</title>
						<description><![CDATA[European antisemitism took a more secular turn in the 19th century when the Rothschild family rose to prominence in the banking world.  Nearly every modern antisemitic conspiracy theory about “organized Jewry” running Wall Street, the Federal Reserve, the media, Hollywood, the American government, or the entire world is based on the famous Rothschild family of the 19th century.Mayer Amschel Rothsc...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2025/12/29/the-bible-israel-and-antisemitism-part-14-jewish-bankers-and-the-birth-of-modern-conspiracy-theories</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2025 14:33:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2025/12/29/the-bible-israel-and-antisemitism-part-14-jewish-bankers-and-the-birth-of-modern-conspiracy-theories</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>European antisemitism took a more secular turn in the 19th century when the Rothschild family rose to prominence in the banking world. &nbsp;Nearly every modern antisemitic conspiracy theory about “organized Jewry” running Wall Street, the Federal Reserve, the media, Hollywood, the American government, or the entire world is based on the famous Rothschild family of the 19th century.</b><br><b><br>Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812) of Frankfurt, Germany started out as a coin dealer who later expanded into rare coins and foreign exchange. &nbsp;He became an expert in exchange rates between the many small German states and built relationships with German noble families, providing them with reliable banking services, loans, and currency exchange.</b><br><b><br>Mayer Rothschild spread his business through his five sons in Frankfurt, Vienna, London, Naples, and Paris, creating the first international family banking network in Europe. &nbsp;The Rothschilds specialized in government finance and financed the British war effort against Napoleon. &nbsp;Theirs was not the only European banking house during the 1800s, but it was arguably one of the most powerful.</b><br><b><br>The Rothschild influence waned in the 20th century as Europe democratized, central banks replaced private royal financiers, American banking rose to prominence, and European wars disrupted the continental operations of the Rothschilds; for example, Hitler confiscated Rothschild assets in Frankfurt and Vienna.</b><br><b><br>It is an indisputable fact that there are many successful Jews in many fields of endeavor. &nbsp;But there is no evidence that “organized Jewry” cooperates to destroy competitors in a bid to control global finance, manipulate wars, and operate shadow regimes to dominate governments. &nbsp;That “organized” part of the conspiracy theory is always secret, built on antisemitic prejudice and folkloric suspicions of the Rothschilds of days gone by. </b><br><b><br>Hitler believed and propagated these lies. &nbsp;So do many Islamic radicals. &nbsp;And unfortunately these conspiracy theories are now gaining traction among conservatives, including conservative Christians. &nbsp;I have encountered it among several younger believers who have bought into the antisemitic propaganda of influencers like Stew Peters, Nick Fuentes, and Candace Owens. &nbsp;That is why I chose to write this series of blogs.</b><br><b><br>Nick Fuentes, for example, has said that “Hitler was really [expletive] cool” and that he’s “tired of pretending” otherwise, and that with regard to hating the Jews, “Hitler was right”. &nbsp;Unfortunately, Fuentes’ credibility was recently boosted by an uncritical and friendly interview with conservative journalist, Tucker Carlson, in which Fuentes said he was “a fan” and “always an admirer” of Josef Stalin, the brutal authoritarian responsible for the deaths of millions of his own Russian people. &nbsp;Carlson failed to challenge these statements, lending Fuentes an air of legitimacy. &nbsp;When I have publicly noted that Carlson made a bad decision here, I have met resistance, sometimes quite hostile, for daring to question Tucker Carlson.</b><br><b><br>I find the praise of evil tyrants by Fuentes and his ilk more than just an alternate historical opinion. &nbsp;It is a dangerous moral evil. &nbsp;Given the rise of violence against Jews around the world over the past years, I trust that my congregation and my readers will understand my concern that anyone naming the name of Christ would ever think that antisemitism is warranted or acceptable. &nbsp;It is a fiction and a lie that should NOT be tolerated by Christians—or by conservatives—at all. &nbsp;</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
		<item>
			<title>End of the Year Musings</title>
						<description><![CDATA[One of life’s little wonders is that during your sleep and at a very young age, you learned how not to fall out of your bed.Julius Caesar thought elk have no knees.A friend once posted a controversial point on Facebook.  I disagreed and responded at length, explaining my disagreement.   The friend responded; we volleyed a few times.  Finally, frustrated that I still wasn’t persuaded, my friend wro...]]></description>
			<link>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2025/12/22/end-of-the-year-musings</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 17:52:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://www.mountainviewchapel.com/blog/2025/12/22/end-of-the-year-musings</guid>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<section class="sp-section sp-scheme-0" data-index="1" data-scheme="0"><div class="sp-section-slide"  data-label="Main" ><div class="sp-section-content" ><div class="sp-grid sp-col sp-col-24"><div class="sp-block sp-text-block " data-type="text" data-id="0" style=""><div class="sp-block-content"  style=""><b>One of life’s little wonders is that during your sleep and at a very young age, you learned how not to fall out of your bed.</b><br><b><br>Julius Caesar thought elk have no knees.</b><br><b><br>A friend once posted a controversial point on Facebook. &nbsp;I disagreed and responded at length, explaining my disagreement. &nbsp; The friend responded; we volleyed a few times. &nbsp;Finally, frustrated that I still wasn’t persuaded, my friend wrote, “I don’t think Facebook is a good venue to facilitate conversation.”</b><br><b><br>Too many conservative Christians are motivated more by their fears about the end times than by faith in and reverence for Jesus Christ.</b><br><b><br>For some, "sophistication" seems to mean holding views that have no connection to observable reality.</b><br><b><br>Once a person decides to see you in a negative light, facts to the contrary make no difference.</b><br><b><br>There comes a time when refuting arguments is a waste of time—a time to stop talking and act. &nbsp;Your actions will demonstrate whose arguments were correct.</b><br><b><br>There are two ways to be humble. &nbsp;One may descend—or fall.</b><br><b><br>Is it that you are being ill-used by others, or that you just don’t like the hard sacrifices you must make to truly love others?</b><br><b><br>A good line from “The Chosen”: &nbsp;<i>Jesus makes people what they aren’t.</i></b><br><b><br>In books and movies about time travel into the past, the time-traveler is warned that one small action may radically alter the future. &nbsp;But as we live life in the real world, we rarely consider that one small action may radically alter the future.</b><br><b><br>We must acknowledge the wisdom—and the ignorance—of our ancestors.</b><br><b><br>One thing you really can’t understand when you’re young is just how little time you have.</b><br><b><br>I am the author of several unwritten best-sellers.</b></div></div></div></div></div></section>]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

