Samuel Adams, signer of the Declaration of Independence:

Principally and first of all, I recommend my soul to that Almighty Being who gave it and my body I commit to the dust, relying upon the merits of Jesus Christ for a pardon of all my sins.

John Dickinson, signer of the Consitituion:

Rendering thanks to my Creator for my existence and station among His works, for my birth in a country enlightened by the Gospel and enjoying freedom, and for all His other kindnesses, to Him I resign myself, humbly confiding in His goodness and in His mercy through Jesus Christ for the events of eternity.

Patrick Henry:

This is all the inheritance I can give to my dear family. The religion of Christ can give them one which will make them rich indeed.

George Mason, Father of the Bill of Rights:

My soul I resign into the hands of my Almighty Creator, whose tender mercies are all over His works, who hateth nothing that He hath made, and to the justice and wisdom of whose dispensations I willingly and cheerfully submit, humbly hoping from His unbounded mercy and benevolence, through the merits of my blessed Savior, a remission of my sins.

John Jay, Original Chief Justice U.S. Supreme Court:

Unto Him who is the author and giver of all good, I render sincere and humble thanks for His manifold and unmerited blessings, and especially for our redemption and salvation by His beloved Son… Blessed be His holy name.

Happy 4th of July! May God Bless America!!

Edwards then challenges Christians to impact culture from the perspective of a Christian worldview. Here are his closing remarks:

Learning to be discerning enables the Christian to avoid two undesirable extremes: what Brian Godawa describes as cultural anorexia and cultural gluttony. Anorexia is avoiding the culture altogether. On the other hand, cultural gluttony ignores how popular culture affects us, for good and evil, and takes it all in indiscriminately, consuming everything in front of us.

A third alternative for the Christian is to engage the culture: “interacting redemptively” with non-believers by understanding the good things in our popular culture and using those as a bridge to God’s truth.

Again, Paul models for us how to engage the culture when he spoke before the religious and civic leaders of Athens (recorded in Acts 17). Here we see Paul as a student of his culture; he did not try to isolate himself from it. He had studied the religious worldviews of his day, even looking “carefully” at their idols. In his speech before the Athenian leaders, he quoted from their own pagan poets and philosophers (apparently from memory). He discerned what was true in their pagan worldview and used that as a starting point to present what they had missing concerning God’s true nature, man’s true nature, and God’s redemptive plan through Jesus Christ.

Based on a biblical worldview, if our culture is tasteless and wicked it is because Christians are not doing their job! We cannot point fingers of blame at non-believers if our society is deteriorating. Non-Christians are simply living according to their view of life. Therefore, those of us who understand the truth must live it out on every level of society, from the boardroom to the classroom and the courtroom, and yes, even the sound stage. There is no area of society that is outside God’s concern. Cultural discernment and engagement are part of our Christian calling.

A conservative believes that our inalienable rights do not include housing, healthcare or Hummers.

A conservative believes that our inalienable rights DO include the pursuit of happiness. That means it is guaranteed to no one.

A conservative believes that those who pursue happiness and find it have a right to not be penalized for that success.

A conservative believes that there are no protections against the hardship and heartache of failure. We believe that the right to fail is just as important as the chance to succeed and that those who do fail learn essential lessons that will help them the next time around.

A conservative believes in personal responsibility and accepts the consequences for his or her words and actions.

A conservative believes that real compassion can’t be found in any government program.

A conservative believes that each of us has a duty to take care of our neighbors. It was private individuals, companies and congregations that sent water, blankets and supplies to New Orleans far before the government ever set foot there.

A conservative believes that family is the cornerstone of our society and that people have a right to manage their family any way they see fit, so long as it’s not criminal. We are far more attuned to our family’s needs than some faceless, soulless government program.

A conservative believes that people have a right to worship the God of their understanding. We also believe that people do not have the right to jam their version of God (or no God) down anybody else’s throat.

A conservative believes that people go to the movies to be entertained and to church to be preached to, not the other way around.

A conservative believes that debt creates unhealthy relationships. Everyone, from the government on down, should live within their means and strive for financial independence.

A conservative believes that a child’s education is the responsibility of the parents, not the government.

A conservative believes that every human being has a right to life, from conception to death.

A conservative believes in the smallest government you can get without anarchy. We know our history: The larger a government gets, the harder it will fall.

Our worldview impacts all areas of life including the arts. The arts also reflect philosophical and cultural trends in human societies. If philosophical and scientific concepts of intelligent design (ID) are valid, we believe they will both inspire, and be reflected in, our art, music, literature and film.

This is not a brand new observation, of course. Francis Schaeffer has written numerous books explaining the relationship between worldview and art and culture. ID Arts further explains its goals:

We’ve been talking with artists, musicians, authors, poets, and filmmakers about these ideas and we’ve discovered several who are already producing creative works that fit into the ID Arts category. This website features the work of some of these artists and we hope will inspire others. Our desire is that the ID Arts initiative will open up a whole new dialogue in our culture about whether we live in a world of chance or a world of design.

The homepage of the site contains a small reproduction of apainting by Salvador Dali called Galacidalacidesoxyribonucleicacid (See below). I’ve actually seen this large painting in person at the Salvador Dali Museum in St. Petersburg, Florida. It also links to this interesting commentary on the work by Jonathan Ashar. In it, Ashar concludes (you’ll have to read more of the commentary to see his support for his conclusion):

The Galacidalacidesoxyribonucleicacid is essentially a tribute to lives lost in the Barcelona flood. However, Dalí makes the painting into a synthesis of the ideas of science and religion. I see two possible interpretations of Galacidalacidesoxyribonucleicacid: either, God has the ultimate higher significance, or, religion and science are parallel and balancing. This is certainly not Dalí’s first painting without a single clear meaning.

I’ve only briefly looked at the site and hope to spend more time examining it later.

One reason for this behavior that I have noticed over the years is not all Christians understand God to be a real being. I do not mean a real idea or a real teaching, but a real being like your parents, spouse, children, or friend. It would be extremely difficult to go to church with your family and then go home and act as though your family does not exist. However, some Christians go to church and then go home and act as if God does not exist. Embarrassingly, some Christians even act as if God does not exist while they are at church. This is such odd behavior for the body of Christ who claim to have the most powerful, intelligent, and loving being dwelling inside of them…

Yet, I see so many defeated Christian lives. In fact, this behavior reminds me of the agnostic view about God; that perhaps there is a being that created everything, but we cannot really know that being. The agnostic view would explain a behavioral pattern of going to church and then going home quite unchanged and indifferent. Christians, on the other hand, do not believe in a nebulous creator that cannot be known. In fact, the New Testament writers affirm the certainty with which believers can know the reality of God…

These authors viewed God as a real being, and Jesus Christ as his real Son. They are essentially saying, “I was there and I saw these things with my own eyes.” No wonder they were able to suffer and die for God, because they had a reasonable understanding that God was real! So I am wondering if we would see a notable difference in the behaviors or attitudes of the body of Christ if all believers could articulate why they believe that God exists (apart from the answer of “the Bible says so”)? At the very least, would Christians be able to better prioritize what is petty from what is important in life if we could grasp hold of the reality of the God who indwells us?

What one believes does impact what one does. If one’s actions are not consistent with what one believes, perhaps one doesn’t really believe it.

The Aeneid is an epic poem composed by the Roman poet Virgil in the first century B.C. The work follows the adventures of Aeneas, a Trojan who was mentioned in Homer’s The Iliad. (By the way, it is in The Aeneid that we are told the story of the Trojan Horse.) Aeneas, among the few Trojans who escape from Troy, suffers numerous hardships before finally founding Rome.

Paterno states:

Virgil and his hero Aeneas, the founder of Rome, more than just entered my life; the adventures of Aeneas seeped into far corners of my mind, into my feelings about what is true and honorable and important. They helped shape everything I have since become. I don’t think anybody can get a handle on what makes me tick as a person, and certainly can’t get at the roots of how I coach football, without understanding what I learned from the deep relationship I formed with Virgil during those afternoons and later in my life.

After he continues to discuss the turmoil, struggle, and suffering of Aeneas as he continues on his journey, he makes this comparison between Aeneas and the heroes of Homer’s works:

To Homer—and, in fact, to most of the modern world—heroes are created through personal exploits and glorification, often through an ambitious drive for self-glorification. Heroes are superstars. The grandstands cheer them, and they throw their high fives up and slam the football down after a touchdown. Homer’s hero Achilles, in his pursuit of glory, ends up destroying his men and his cause and rotting at the end into a kind of monster.

Aeneas, as Virgil created him, was a totally new kind of epic hero. Like Homer’s heroes, he endures battles, storms, shipwrecks, and the rages of the gods. But the worst storm is the one that rages within himself. He yearns to be free of his tormenting duty, but he knows that his duty is to others, to his men. Through years of hardship and peril, Aeneas reluctantly but relentlessly heeds his fata until he founds Rome.

Aeneas is not a grandstanding superstar. He is, above all, a Trojan and a Roman. His first commitment is not to himself, for he is bugged constantly by the reminder, the fatum, “You must be a man for others.” He lives his life not for “me” and “I,” but for “us” and “we.” Aeneas is the ultimate team man. A hero of Aeneas’ kind does not wear his name on the back of his uniform. He doesn’t wear “Nittany Lions” on his helmet to claim star credit for touchdowns and tackles that were enabled by everybody doing his job. For Virgil’s kind of hero, the score belongs to the team.

I thank JoePa for his thoughts on The Aeneid and helping me to read this epic with more clarity and understanding.

I am probably as qualified as any to speak on the subject. First, I trusted Christ as a teenager in a Pentecostal church and served as a Pentecostal pastor for 14 years. Second, I live in Lakeland. Third, I have a number of friends and acquaintances from around the country who have come to Lakeland for the meetings. I’ve talked with them and some have stayed in my home. Finally, I’ve attended the meetings myself.

I’m actually quite troubled by the “Lakeland Revival,” as it has come to be known around the world. This “move of the Spirit” has been compared to past “revivals” such as the Toronto Blessing and the Brownsville Revival. First, I’ll state where I think some critics of the “revival” have erred.

1. Todd Bentley, of Fresh Fire Ministries, the leader of the revival is not your stereotypical preacher. He exhibits large amounts of tattoos and piercings, dresses like a biker and has a troubled background. None of that in itself discredits what is taking placed in Lakeland. These things might make one approach with a little more skepticism, but has no direct bearing on whether these meetings are of God or not.

2. I do not think that Bentley’s antics are demonically motivated. He is not under the power of Satan. Furthermore, the people that attend these meetings (at least the one’s I know) are sincere Christians who love God with all their heart and are truly hungry for God’s active presence in their lives and ministries. They are not subject to demonic influences, as some have suggested.

So, what’s wrong with the “Lakeland Revival?”

1. The Revival is extremely focused on the experiential and seems mostly unconcerned with the fundamentals of the Christian faith. There is not an emphasis on doctrinal correctness. The night I attended, the first thing I heard when I walked in the doors, was the worship leader mis(quoting) scripture: “The Scripture says that God dances in heaven over one sinner who repents!” While the main point of that statement is true (God is happy when one repents), the quote immediately made me question the commitment to doctrinal accuracy. Now, I’m not against enjoying the presence of God. I enjoyed the extended time of singing and praise. The problem is that “spirit” seems emphasized to the detriment of “truth.”

2. The tactics of Bentley are unscriptural and plain weird. For some examples of what goes on, see this youtube video. On that video he boasts of following God’s leading to kick people in the face, to punch them in the stomach (knocking their teeth out) and body slamming them in order to produce healing. The night I attended I watched him (under God’s direction) approach a gentleman and knee him in the stomach, knocking him to the ground. These antics do not in any way resemble anything I see in the ministry of Jesus or in the Acts of the Apostles. Does this mean all this is demonic? No. There is a third category - human lunacy and goofiness.

Perhaps, my greatest grievance with all of this is its impact on non-Christians. As one who is interested in the Christian apologetic enterprise, I am concerned that this complicates the task. The already signficant barriers to some accepting the faith have been multiplied by such foolishness. While Bentley prophesies of the coming worldwide move of God, “revivals” such as this in Lakeland, present a caricature of true Christianity easily dismissed by unbelievers. Much damage is ultimately done to the cause of the Gospel. The Gospel is offensive enough to many. We need not add additional offense unnecessarily.

The supposed large number of healings also concerns me. I’ve been in hundreds of services where the sick have been prayed for and in a number of dedicated “healing services.” Most of the healings are of the kind that are unconfirmable (except upon the testimony of the “healed”). I have yet to see a physically crippled individual with obvious physical deformities (or mental) healed despite the large number of healings which purportedly takes place. Let me clearly state: I am not a cessationist. I see no reason to believe that God has stopped working miracles in our day. On the other hand, I see nothing which makes me think such meetings as the Lakeland Revival are similar to that which took place in the New Testament. I must also state that it is possible, even probable, that some are healed in such meetings. That does not place God’s stamp of approval on the meetings themselves, however. It might be that God heals some folks in spite of, and not because of, the antics of those involved. I am quite concerned that non-Christians see through this facade of “healing” and are turned off to the Gospel of Christ. This becomes a hindrance to true revival and evangelism, rather than promoting it.

Additionally, the time and expenses that are invested (I won’t quite say “wasted”) by those who fly in from all over the world could be much better spent elsewhere. A great deal of time was spent prophesying about the coming revival all over the world (and how God told Bentley he was a big part in it) in the meeting I attended. As a former Pentecostal, I’ve heard these prophecies since my first week as a Christian. We need to spend less time looking for a new move of the Spirit and more time preaching, teaching, and doing what we already know from the Bible.

I have gone on longer than usual and there is much more I could say. I thought I should say something since I am close to action and have personally attended the meeting. Stand to Reason has recently posted several blog posts (here, here, and here) on their website regarding this “revival.” They are insightful and helpful, offering more legitimate criticism of the Lakeland Revival. Greg Koukl also spent time discussing this issue on his most recent radio show. Koukl also has an article adressing the Toronto Blessing called New Movement of the Spirit - So What?, which is applicable and offers wisdom when considering such meetings as the Lakeland Revival.