DEVOTIONAL ON PSALM 16:3

 

International Learning Center, Rockville, VA

"As for the saints who are on the earth,

They are the excellent ones, in whom is all my delight."

Psalm 16:3, NKJV

This Psalm starts off with David stating that his trust is in the Lord, and that his goodness is nothing compared to God. But now the focus is on "the saints who are on the earth." Saints - i.e. holy ones - can mean angels, but in the New Testament it refers to the believers, and I believe that's true with a lot of the OT references, including this one.

Being with the godly is my delight. This shows up in my love for fellow believers - that is, the local church. It also is reflected in my love and prayer for Christian musicians. Yes, I like music, but those who use their gifts for God's glory are at a higher notch than the music of the world.

Too often, I see Christians looking for reasons not to delight in other Christians, or even delighting in tearing others down because of "bad doctrine" (translated beliefs different than ones I hold on what I want to make issued). That grieves me. It's enough for the world to hate us. The last thing I want to do is assist the devil in tearing other believers down. True, Christianity is a remnant, but I have a strong hunch the remnant is bigger than we may think it is.

Lord, I want to thank you for other believers: for those I fellowship with regularly in the local church,  for those who minister to my spirit through preaching the Word and through setting it to music. Help me be an encouragement to my brothers and sisters. In Jesus name, Amen.

BOOK REVIEW - STONES THAT CRY: GOD'S PRECIOUS METAL BY GLENN REMSENl

 

Is heavy metal "the Devil's music? Is it possible for an omnipotent God to use Christian metal - or for that matter secular metal - for His glory?

"Stones That Cry: God's Precious Metal" by Glenn Remsen (with illustrations by Samuel Remsen) is a thought out book dealing with these issues. More importantly, it challenges making assumptions on face value.

Remsen suggests that God is responsible for all genres, and that it is giving the devil too much credit to say he, a created being, is able to create anything. Both God and the devil can use any genre for their purposes. 

The author is built up by "wholesome lyrics of honesty." Not all honesty is positive, after all. Remsen gives examples of metal music that has comforted him when dealing with traumatic situations, such as a brain tumor. He distinguishes between metal that is honest, that which is intentionally blasphemous.

The last chapter (not counting the conclusion chapter) focuses on Christian metal. He states that there is nothing wrong with Christian metal if it is honest. He has problems with Christian artists that try to sound like a popular secular artist. (He mentions the same things about authors who use their first and middle initials because A.W. Tozer and C.S. Lewis do so.)

Which secular and Christian metal bands should we listen to, and which should we avoid? Remsen refuses to answer those questions. He encourages Christians to listen to the music and then determine which is being used by the Spirit and which doesn't. 

Finally, the clearest message in this book is to not judge according to appearance, but to love those who are not like us, who don't fit in to our sanitized church environments. 

I highly recommend this book. I also recommend Lithoscry, a weekly podcast Remsen hosts.

A NEW ADVENT APPROACH? PART 3 OF 4: AN ADVENT OF TRUTH AND DISCERNMENT

 

Nativity Scene and sign for '23 Advent Christmas Sermon Series at Northside Baptist Church, Indianapolis. The title is taken from a song on Jonathan & Emily Martin's Advent album "Tell Me The Story."

I have proposed a new set of Advent focuses. Two weeks ago, I introduced an Advent of Gratitude and Encouragement; last week, I suggested an Advent of Mercy and Grace.

Would you agree with me that an appropriate theme of the 3rd week is an Advent of Truth and Discernment? You would agree with me there's a need for it, wouldn't you?

This society, in it's blindness, clinging to the moral absolute that there's no moral absolutes (obviously an irrational - maybe anti-rational - contradiction). We need to build our house on the solid rock of God's Truth, not on the sand of the latest ideas. 

Of course, the problem is sometimes it is hard to tell the truth from an error. The most effective errors consist 1% lie with 99% truth, but that 1% is enough to poison the beverage. That's where discernment comes in.

Many point out the most quoted verse of the Bible is not John 3:16 but rather Matthew 7:1, "Judge not lest you be judged." Of course, the reason for quoting that verse often is "Don't call my wickedness wickedness; better to call it something attractive rather than be honest about my sin." No, the Bible does not tell us not to call out sin.

But too many go the other, equally errant, extreme. They pretend Jesus' command to His disciples in Matthew 7:1 doesn't mean what it says (even the contextual emphasis of not condemning others), and make believe that the real command is "Judge with righteous Judgment" (John 7:24), ignoring that this was actually in context a rebuke to the Pharisees. 

Let me put it another, hopefully clearer way. Some people accuse those who are discerning as being judgmental/condemning, while others break Jesus' commandment not to judge and pat themselves on the back for being discerning.

Let's remember when we're speaking truth and discerning truth from error, we're to at the same time show grace and mercy, that is, God's love.

BOOK REVIEW - LIVE YOUR TRUTH AND OTHER LIES: EXPOSING POPULAR DECEPTIONS THAT MAKE US ANXIOUS, EXHAUSTED, AND SELF-OBSESSED BY ALISA CHILDERS

 

Have you tried "living your truth", putting yourself first, believing you're enough, rejecting any form of judgment and still find yourself empty, unfulfilled, and directionless? Is it because you aren't trying enough? Or is it that those concepts guarantee that emptiness and scatteredness?

Alisa Childers - former Zoe Girl, daughter of Jesus Music pioneer Chuck Girard, and author of the excellent book Another Gospel? looks at several cliches like the ones I've mentioned in her book Live Your Truth And Other Lies: Exposing Popular Deceptions That Make Us Anxious, Exhausted, and Self-Obsessed.

In reading this, there is a common thread between the cliches she deals with: they all focus on ourselves. But what we're designed to be more fulfilled when we focus on God and those around us rather than ourselves?

I enjoyed Childers accounting of the movie "Armageddon", and asked how the movie - and our reaction to it - would differ if instead of sacrificing himself to save the world, the character put himself first? It's interesting that we naturally respect those who put others first, but we want to hear that we should look out for number 1.

Two blessings in this book: One was where she mentioned her Zoe Girl bandmates confronted her on self-destructive behavior, and she states that she is thankful for their "judging her" and getting her on the right track. The other was when she mentioned a couple of dreams she gave up. I can relate, because I had dreams of becoming a musician (probably not a singer with my voice, but definitely as a song-writer), a novelist, and a Pastor. Thus far (I'm now 63), those dreams are all unfulfilled. But that doesn't mean I have any reason to be unfulfilled as a result.

As in Another Gospel?, Childers uses humor effectively to make reading a book on serious matters enjoyable. I highly recommend this book.

CHRISTIAN FAKE NEWS - CAN WE DO BETTER THAN THAT?

Pandemoneum, by John Martin

 I'll confess: I got dinged on Facebook for sharing a post that Fact Checkers found inaccurate. 

Yes, I know those fact checkers can be biased. I saw other stories that failed their tests, and the ones at the top of the list were stating a Conservative quote was false. But when I kept looking, I saw others pointing out the error of the liberal side.

In this case, I will raise my hand to acknowledge I'm guilty of the foul. I have no reason to appeal the ruling of the Fact Checkers.

The post I shared was stating a large number of Disney Plus Subscribers unsubscribing in a short time after the leak of the board meeting. The fact-checkers made this point - there was no way to access that information. Disney's numbers aren't due to be released for weeks, and they may not be.

The truth is we're involved in Spiritual warfare, and that reality overflows into culture wars. But are we using the world's weapons, and undermining our cause in the process?

I've remembered several waves, sometimes years apart, talking about atheist Madeline Murray O'Hair trying to get "In God we trust" removed and urging Christians to stand up against it. Each time, I remember other Christians pointing out that propaganda was not true.

In Blinded by Might: Can the Religious Right Save America, Cal Thomas pointed out that activists love having enemies, because that helps with fundraising. We need our white hats and they need black hats. 

Naturally, this doesn't at all resemble the command to love our enemies. The Greek word used is agapao, the same verb used in Christ's commandment for us to love one another (John 13:34-35) and for husbands to love their wives (Ephesians 5:25). It means to love in action without expecting anything in return.

It is ignoring Galatians 6:1-10 on numerous levels:

• It is not done in gentleness, and we aren't on guard to keep from being tempted (Galatians 6:1).
• It is heaping burdens on others (either their opponents or those who aren't joining their "holy" Crusade) instead of helping bear them (Galatians 6:2).
• It is thinking we're something, at least enough to judge and condemn others (Galatians 6:3) or in other words building our pride by tearing others down).
• It is sowing to the flesh (Galatians 6:7-8) instead of denying our self (Matthew 16:24) by judging others (Matthew 7:1-5; Romans 14:4; James 4:11-12).
• It is not done with a heart of doing good for all (Galatians 6:10; 1 Thessalonians 5:15).

Do you know what the worst part is? It is not showing Christ to others. It is portraying a God of vengeance towards our opponents, not a God who gave Himself, who died for our opponents while they were sinners (Romans 5:8).

I need to do better fact checking, but we also need to focus on winning others to Christ rather than fighting a holy war against the world by unholy means.

A NEW YEAR'S... MAKE THAT A NEW DAY'S RESOLUTION - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 8 OF 11

Saving Castaways by Franciszek Ksawery Lampi

 

How many of you have made New Year's Resolutions? How many have kept any of those Resolutions for the first 38 days of this year? Did I see any hands raised?

Romans 14:13, New King James Version, reads "Therefore, let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way." (Emphasis added).

I think Paul gives us a great resolution. But is this meant to be a New Year's Resolution, which doesn't last long? Or should we consider it a New Day's resolution, one we make every time it's a new day? It's achievable to attempt to keep this for 24 hours, isn't it?

I've seen a couple of lists of verses that encourage judging to counter the misuse of "Judge not, lest you be judge" (or is it to justify disobeying the command Jesus gave us in Matthew 7:1), and I see a lot of verses and concepts ripped out of context. The most common is "Judge with righteous judgment" (John 7:24), which in the context it belongs in was actually directed to Pharisees who were judging Jesus for healing on the Sabbath! Do those who make this claim want to be associated with the Pharisees? The most ridiculous is "There's a book in the Bible called Judges." Uh, those judges include rash Jephthah and lustful Samson; are those to be our models as well? But they ignore verses like Romans 14:4 and 14:13, as well as James 4:11-12 (again, is this willful?).

One interesting thing: the NKJV rendering above translates the same Greek word two different ways in the verse. Let me share that verse again, highlighting that word and its differing translations: "Therefore, let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way." 

Am I right in saying we too quick in judging others when they offend us and too slow judging ourselves that we don't offend others? 

As we continue reading in Romans 14:14-16, we see that we should willingly limit our liberties so as not to cause others to stumble. Let me give an example. Let's say an unsaved friend I'm witnessing to invites me to dinner and not knowing I don't drink pours me a glass of wine. I have the freedom to drink that wine (or more likely for me, sip it). However, if a mutual friend is also invited and I know that other friend has either a problem with Christians drinking or is overcoming a problem drinking, then I would refuse that wine, hopefully before the other one has to say anything, for their sake.

This reminds me of something I've heard from John MacArthur. If we have to choose between offending an unbeliever or a fellow believer, who should we offend? Some would, for the sake of the Gospel, avoid offending the unbeliever. MacArthur suggests the opposite, based on Scripture (primarily 1 Corinthians 8-10). One reason is preferring the unbeliever over the believer tells the unbeliever we're more concerned about the unsaved than the saved and diminishes the motivation to get saved.

Of course, when we think of avoiding placing a stumbling block before a weaker brother/sister, we tend to think of smoking or drinking or gambling or tatoos or to some listening to rock music. These apply, but allow me to give another activity that might offend your fellow believers: Heresy hunting.

Some will say "What? How can you say that we're not supposed to call out false teachers and expose errors? Are you saying we should tolerate error?" No, we shouldn't. However, some people aren't merely pointing out false teachers when they see wrong teaching; rather, they are looking for heresies to attack and actually delight in it.

Why do I say heresy hunting (you could call it doubtful discernment, as the Jubilee Bible 2000 translates Romans 14:1, as I mentioned at the beginning of this series) is a stumbling block? Let me ask a few questions.

1. Are they known more for what they're against than what they're for? In other words, are they quick to criticize and condemn and save their rare words of praise for those who share both their negativity and the targets for that negativity?
2. Are they showing a lack of love to those they oppose? For example, do they insult and poison the pot towards their opponents? Do they overlook anything positive or correct that those who disagree with them say or do? Do they (the heresy hunters) act like they're looking forward to their adversaries being judged by God?
3. Are they proud and exalting themselves as the one who knows God's mind? Do they assume that those who disagree with each other aren't studying Scripture or loving God with the same diligence they are? Do they believe they've got all the right answers to debates that have lasted centuries if not millenniums?
   

But am I doing any better right now? Sometimes I struggle determining if an offense to an action is genuine weakness or if the "offended brother" is what one of my Bible College teachers called "Professional weaker brethren." Am I ever guilty of reluctantly abstaining from something I enjoy with resentment toward the one I'm offending?

I have the painting "Saving Castaways" by Franciszek Ksawery Lampi at the top of the blog. Are we being quick to save those castaways? That's what God has called us to.

Are you following Paul's Spirit inspired advice in not judging one another? Is there anything we do that offends fellow believers that we need to abstain from?

WHO ARE WE ACCOUNTABLE TO? - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 7 OF 11

Rock Island State Park, Tennessee

Yesterday, I focused on Romans 14:4, and pointed out that other believers are accountable to God, not us, so we're not to act as their judge. Today, the focus is on Romans 14:7-12, and the fact that everybody is accountable to God. Verses 7-9 point out that we don't live for ourselves but to God, because we are God's. The next three verses remind us that we all will appear before God and give account of our lives (see also 1 Corinthians 3:9-17; 2 Corinthians 5:10; 1 Peter 1:17).

How often do we see ourselves as belonging to the Lord? We call Sundays the Lord's Day, but is the focus of the day the three hours in the morning when we assemble together to worship or on the three hours to six hours in the afternoon when the NFL takes over the TV? 

Even with church, do we REALLY see ourselves as the Lord's? Let's look at the music. Some people want a nice contemporary worship time, resembling the music they listen to at home. Others want a more traditional worship that they're more comfortable with. But are we more concerned with the accompaniment or with the words coming out of our mouth and especially if they reflect what's in our mind and heart?

Now, let's move to the sermon. Which of these two thoughts are more frequent while the Pastor is preaching:

1. I needed to hear that. God needs to work with me on that area so I'm pleasing Him more.
2. Is (fill in somebody else's name) here this morning? I hope so: he/she really needs to hear this message.

Too often we're focused on the shortcomings of others when we really need to instead turn our eyes inward and realize we are going to give account of ourselves before God. We're too worried about specks in others' eyes to see the planks in our own. 

Do you realize you are here solely for God's glory? Are you aware you will someday stand before Him?

WHO ARE YOU TO JUDGE ANOTHER MAN'S SERVANT? - A STUDY ON ROMANS 14 PART 6 OF 11

White Rhinoceros, Louisville Zoo.

David Bergland's Libertarianism in One Lesson is "You own yourself." Is he right?

My first response was to disagree with that unbiblical idea. Do believers own themselves? No, God owns us - we're bought with a price by God (1 Corinthians 6:20); we're His sheep (John 10;27). Are unbelievers free from being owned by God? No - "The earth is the LORD's, and all its fullness, The world and those who dwell therein" (Psalm 24:1); this includes all who are alive.

But then, Bergland's book is not about theology and God but public policy and man. His point is that we are not owned by anybody else but that we have individual liberty. Not limitless liberty: we're not free to harm or defraud others. But others lack the right to run our lives.

Do we own ourselves, or does God own us? Either way, we don't own others. And yes, I could say they don't own me, but that's not the point I want to make. We. Don't. Own. Other. People. Clear enough?

That is the point Paul's trying to make in Romans 14:4 - "But who are you to judge another man's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand." 

Yes, the most quoted and the most misquoted Bible verse in Matthew 7:1 about judging not; too many try to use this to bully believers into tolerating and even accepting sinful behavior. But another often misquoted Bible verse is John 7:24, and that's misquoted by believers. That verse says "Judge with righteous judgment." Those who use (or more accurately misuse it) forget (accidentally or not) that John 7:24 is not a command to Jesus' disciples as Matthew 7:1 is, but a rebuke to the Pharisees who were judging Jesus. 

Romans 14:4 (and also James 4:11-12) are ignored too often. We need to remember that fellow Christians are God's servants. Yes, we're to warn those plainly committing sin (Galatians 6:1; James 5:19-20; 1 John 5:16), but we're not to judge.

By the way, if you look at the previous verse, you'll notice two things.

1. Paul states those who exercise liberty fall into the trap of hating or showing contempt of those who are abstaining (Romans 14:1-2 calls those who don't eat meat "weak in the faith"), and those who don't practice liberty judge those who do. Put the two together, and those prone to judge appear to be those weak in the faith.
2. Paul closes Romans 14:3 by stating God accepts him. Who does God accept? Anyone who comes to Him. So when we're judging a fellow believer, we're judging someone God has accepted. Uh, should we be doing that? Really?
   

I'll once again ask a question that I asked yesterday: Does this extend to sin and doctrinal issues? Remember - both examples Paul gives are considered by some to be sin or bad doctrine. 

One guideline I heard - ask yourself if you want to judge/correct/warn a fellow believer. If you don't really want to, maybe God has called you to not be afraid and lovingly confront them. If you are ready to straighten out your brother or sister, though, it's probably best to let someone else do it who can do it with gentleness and humility and who knows that they're dealing with God's servant.

Are you aware that you're not your own, but that you're God's servant, that you belong to Him? Are you also aware that your brothers and sisters in Christ are also God's servant and they answer to Him, not us?

MATTHEW 7:1 - MOST QUOTED VERSE BY UNBELIEVERS, AND MOST DISOBEYED COMMAND BY CHRISTIANS?

John 3:16 may be the best known reference, but the most quoted verse is Matthew 7:1 - "Judge not lest ye be judged."

Note I compared "reference" with "quoted verse." Most of the time, the quotation is given without reference, and my hunch is a very large percentage of the time those using this verse have no idea where it's located at. 

But if they don't know where it's located, is there a chance that the verse is ripped out of context, with its real meaning twisted and distorted? Let me rephrase the question - is there a chance it ISN'T taken out of context or misused? To that rephrased question, I'd say "Probably not."

When it's quoted, I'd bet the vast majority of the time, those using it mean "Don't judge ME." It wouldn't surprise me that they also judge others, maybe without knowing it. 

Of course, there's nobody who wants to be judged. But should we judge actions? Those participating in actions God clearly condemns would give that a negative, or else they'd have to turn from the sins they enjoy. Likewise, they'll remind you of Jesus' words to the law-keeping crowd, "He who is without sin cast the first stone" but forget Jesus told the accused (and guilty) woman to "Go and sin no more."

Again, those making that claim don't know the Scripture they're appealing to. The next thing Jesus tells them is to not give what is holy to the dogs or cast pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6), which involves discernment, which some would call judging. Later in the same chapter, Jesus says we're to beware false prophets and are told we'll know them by their fruit (Matthew 7:15-20). Again, a call to discernment, or judging. Then, in Matthew 18:15-17, Jesus teaches His disciples that if someone sins, we should go and confront that person one on one, and if the person doesn't repent, then bring other witnesses and finally to the assembly (church). I've just given response through the book of the Bible we're dealing with - the same concepts are throughout Scripture.

But WHY did Jesus give that commandment? Isn't this part of "Unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:20)? Like other issues as not applying the commands to our thought-life (Matthew 5:21-48), doing our good works for man's applause (Matthew 6:1-18), trusting in money (Matthew 6:19-24), or worrying (Matthew 6:25-34), is judging something we are prone to do?

Here's the sad part. I've seen two different memes which both pointed out the misuse of "Judge not" and then taking the unfortunate route of giving out-of-context Scriptures to excuse not obeying the command. One of them steps into absurdity of pointing out there's a book in the Bible called "Judges." No, that isn't a command to judge! The other lists Scripture translating words as "judge" when I'm used to them translated differently.

One Scripture used to counter Matthew 7:1 is John 7:24, where Jesus commands to "Judge with righteous judgment." The argument is that we should focus on this quote in John and basically ignore the command in Matthew. Is this based on the presupposition their judgment is righteous?

But what if we looked at both verses in context? Let's start with Matthew 7. You may be aware that it is part of the Sermon on the Mount. It starts in Matthew 5:1-2 with Jesus sitting on the mountain and His disciples coming to Him, and Jesus teaching them.  I mentioned Matthew 5:20 three paragraphs earlier concerning the righteousness of the Pharisees, which is the key verse for this section of Scripture. Jesus starts with eight beatitudes (Matthew 5:3-10), and the teachings that follow are examples of living those beatitudes out. With Matthew 7:1-5, it fits the blessings on the poor in spirit, the meek, and the merciful. And to clarify the obvious, this is a commandment to Jesus' disciples.

Now, let's take the isolated brick of John 7:24 and put it back where it belongs. Is this section in John 7 Jesus teaching and commanding His disciples? No. In the context, our Savior is confronting the Pharisees who condemned Him from healing the impotent man on the Sabbath. "Judge with righteous judgment" is not a commandment to His followers but a rebuke to His enemy. In other words, if you want to live by John 7:24, you're placing yourselves not with Jesus' disciples but with the Pharisees. 

Returning to the context of "Judge not" (Matthew 7:1-5), we see the command followed in verse 2 by the fact that we will be judged according to how we judge. If you're one advocating judging, let's be serious: do you want to be judged by the measure of how you judge others? If not, should you be judging?

Then, Jesus gives an illustration of someone with a log in their eye seeing a speck in their brother's eye and offering to help them. The pro-judging crowd sees the key thought/command in this paragraph to be verse 5 ("Take the log out of your eye so you can see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye," forgetting this verse is addressed to a hypocrite). This approach is opposite of typical Jewish teaching which starts at the main point and the develops the main point, which in this passage would mean the main point is "Judge not." 

Also, how many of you have seen a speck in someone's eye? My hunch is that the answer is no unless a) somebody asks you if you see a speck in their eye or b) your occupation is an opthamologist. (How many specks do you see? One, or two? One? Or two?)

They have an impressive list of Bible verses, but I never see two important ones on the topic included. First, there's Romans 14:4 - "Who are you to judge another man's servant? To his own master he will be made to stand or fall, and he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him to stand." What is this verse saying? Simple - the person you're judging is not your servant but God's. Reading on in the same chapter, Paul asks why we do we judge our brother in a tone that makes it clear we shouldn't be. 

Wait, I see why this one is omitted, because it strengthens Matthew 7:1, not giving us a loophole to obey the disliked command. But there's one more to look at.

"Do not speak evil against another, brethren. He who speaks evil of his brother or judges his brother speaks evil of the Law and judges the Law. But he who judges the Law is not a doer of the Law but a judge. There is one Lawgiver who is able both to save and to destroy. Who are you to judge another?" James 4:11-12 Uh, after this verse, does anybody think we are qualified to judge others? 

So here's the question. As I pointed out above, we are commanded to discern and to turn others from their sins (also see Malachi 3:18, Galatians 6:1, Hebrews 5:14, James 5:19-20, and Jude 22-23). But when Jesus said "Judge not," I've got a sneaky impression He meant "Judge not." How, then, do we obey both thoughts?

The first is to distinguish between people and actions. We are commanded to condemn wrong actions, words, and ideas. But we aren't to judge others or motives. 

That sounds simple. Well, maybe it doesn't. And it isn't. I heard one guide, though, on whether we should confront, and that is to ask ourselves, "Do I want to confront? Do I want to judge?" If the answer is no, it may be that God is calling you, as poor in spirit as the one in error, to gently and mercifully plead with them to turn. If the answer is yes, then I suggest you find something else to do.

Pentecost and Other Holidays (or Holy Days or Hollow Days)

 

Pentecost by Emil Nolde

 

I got excited today. The pastor at our church mentioned today was Pentecost Sunday. If I remember correctly, the last time I heard Pentecost Sunday mentioned (other than my mentioning it) was 1959. Which, considering that was the year I was born, and Pentecost is in the spring while my birthday's not until fall...

In the Old Testament, God gave Israel seven holidays - or more accurately holy days - to observe (Lev. 23). An eighth one, Purim, is mentioned in Esther, though it is not commanded by God.

You can divide Christians in two groups. One group sees Christmas and Good Friday/Easter as the high points of the calendar, with some observing a time of preparation for those two days (Advent in the first case, Lent and Holy Week for the later). The other group points out neither holiday is commanded and delight in pointing out pagan connections to justify their non-observance. My mother-in-law referred to Christmas and Easter as hollow days.

Then, we can look at the issue through the extremes. Some can be ritualistic - I've heard of Christians judging those who are non-observant. Others take the cliche of celebrating the Resurrection and/or Pentecost every Sunday, though one can wonder if they are really celebrating either event any Sunday. 

Other questions arise in dealing with celebrating holidays is which ones should Christians observe. Should the Church recognize Passover and Day of Atonement and maybe even Pentecost as God commanded via Moses to Israel from Mount Sinai? As Christians, is it permissible to observe either church holidays like Lent, Advent, and All Saints Day or cultural holidays like Mothers' and Fathers' Day, Halloween, and Thanksgiving and patriotic celebrations like 4th of July and Veteran's Day? 

The answer needs to be Biblical, but allow me first to give a focus on two issues which I consider biblical: the autonomy of the local church and the Priesthood of the believer. What a local congregation does should be based on the decision of that congregation. Likewise, whether an individual chooses to observe (or not) a particular day is between him and God. 

I believe that conclusion is supported by Romans 14:5-6: "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day the same. Let each be firmly convinced in their mind. He who observes the day observes it to the Lord, and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not esteem it. He who eats eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks, and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks." In other words, both observance and non-observance are permissible when done to the Lord.

My favorite holiday is Thanksgiving, and I consider it a holy day. I would love to celebrate Reformation Day, All Saints Day - though I would define "saint" a little differently than a Catholic or Orthodox - and Pentecost regularly, when I think of them. Other holidays that often get overlooked (including by me) that can be observed to the glory of God include President's Day, Juneteenth, and Labor Day. And last but not least (or is it least but not last), there's Groundhog's Day.

Happy Pentecost, and let me close by asking: How do you observe your favorite holidays/Holy Days to the Lord?