“No Excuse Drill Sergeant!”

In January 1990, after graduating from high school a year late, I found myself going nowhere fast. I had no plan, no vision and no hope for my future. After sinking deeper into drugs, drinking and depression I decided that I needed to remove myself from my surroundings. I figured if my parents couldn’t straighten me up and if I couldn’t snap out of the funk I was in that maybe the Army could get me back on the right track. I thought that voluntarily joining the Army would be more beneficial than spending time in prison; this was ultimately the direction that I was heading.

I signed up that summer and toward the end of August 1990 I was shipped off to Fort Jackson, South Carolina for basic training. The truth is, the Army basic training program is much easier than the Marine boot camp however, I did not know this at the time. I remember being filled with anxiety because I had no experience being on my own for very long nor did I have even a vague idea of what I was about to encounter. I held on to the last words my dad told me as he walked with me to the recruiter’s car on the morning that I left. He said, “They can’t eat you, son. It’s all a mind game. Do what they tell you, don’t rock the boat, and you’ll be fine.” I made it through basic training without a problem. Dad was right; it was a mental game and a test of my resolve. I viewed my time there as a game. I followed the rules, had a great time and emerged a changed person. I had become more confident, disciplined and optimistic.

In basic training the fundamental military education is designed to incorporate important lessons in individual character development and team building. One of the more memorable character lessons was in the area of personal responsibility.

There’s something about taking responsibility for a mistake that makes some people shudder. They squirm when caught in an error. They get nervous, their heart begins to race and then they give an excuse, or they pass the blame or they lose their temper.

I remember, when I was a youth, being upset about doing some yard work before going out with my friends one Friday night. I began taking out my aggression on the garden fork, slamming it on the dirt as I dug. After a couple of times smashing it to the ground, I snapped the handle in two. I looked back to see if my mother was watching. Her back was to me so I grabbed both pieces in one hand and did my best to hold it as if it weren’t broken. I made some excuse that I preferred the other, older garden fork and walked over to the tool shed. I swapped out the broken garden fork for the older one, hiding the broken fork behind the fifty-five-gallon barrel that held all the yard tools. I returned to the place where I had been working and nervously resumed my digging. After a few minutes my mother asked me to bring her the garden fork that I had just put away. I acted like I didn’t hear her. I was trying to buy some time so I could make up a story; an excuse for breaking the garden fork. It’s amazing how quickly our minds turn to lying instead of telling the truth.

In basic training the drill sergeants wanted to break us from the habit of making excuse early on. They were very clear about their expectations. They told us, “We don’t want any excuses, ever. Your response will be ‘NO EXCUSE DRILL SERGEANT!’”

“Private, why are your boots not polished?”
“No excuse drill sergeant!”

“Private, why is your bunk not made?”
“No excuse drill sergeant!”

“Private, why is your wall locker a mess?”
“No excuse drill sergeant!”

“Private, why is your uniform all dirty?”
“No excuse drill sergeant!”

If we gave an excuse for the inexcusable, we were immediately punished by doing push-ups until we could not do any more. By saying “No excuse drill sergeant!” we were being forced to take personal responsibility for our actions, no matter how trivial they seemed. We were becoming conditioned, trained to admit to our mistakes. We were being broken from that bad habit.

I once had an employer who would not tolerate employees who did not take responsibility for their mistakes. It drove him crazy when he would find broken equipment that was not reported. To my employer, this behavior was indicative of an unethical individual and usually resulted in termination.

Why is it hard for some people to admit that they are wrong? Is it an issue of pride or selfishness? Is it a rebellion against submitting to authority? Is it a fear of facing the consequences of bad conduct? Whatever the reason, this habit holds people in bondage. It is an evasion or concealment of the truth.

Whoever conceals his transgressions will not prosper,
but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy.
Proverbs 28:13 (ESV)

When someone conceals a transgression by lying, that one lie turns into two lies, which turns into four lies, which becomes sixteen lies, and on and on. Becoming tangled in a web of lies is not a pleasant situation to be in. Once found out, trust is lost and usually hard to get back. Telling the truth by admitting to a fault can save someone a lot of time, trouble and heartache.

There is something about admitting to a mistake that is liberating. We’re human, we’re fallible, and we will make mistakes. When we admit to our mistakes we are released of the burden of being perfect in everyone else’s eyes. Messiah Yeshua said that when we abide in His word we will know the truth, then the truth will set us free from the bondage of sin (John 8:31-37).

Admitting to errors helps us to grow so we can then move on to greater things. When we conceal the truth it stunts our growth and prevents forward movement. The only place to go is back; and nobody wants to be a backslider.

---•---

~

Bernbach Rocks!

Upon graduation from the Art Institute of Dallas in 1995, I landed a job at a small design firm called McMann & Tate (Yes, they got their name from the advertising agency that Darren Stevens worked for on the TV show Bewitched.) Here I learned the art of production; that is, how to prepare artwork for the press and/or the Internet. I did very little design at M&T but I did learn the ins and outs of the printing process and how the Internet worked. After a year and a half of production training a co-worker informed me of a job opening in the new media department of a large advertising agency called DDB Needham. They had the Pepsi account and were going on their second year of managing the Pepsi website. We had a mutual friend at DDB on the Pepsi web team who was contacting all AID alumni to apply. I applied immediately and got the job.

Working at DDB was a major milestone in my career. The experience that I gained was invaluable and in many ways more influential than the education I received at AID. During my tenure at DDB I worked solely on the Pepsi website. I’ll write more about Pepsi at a later time.

After a few weeks as an employee I began to do research on the agency, DDB Needham. I was not familiar with any advertising agencies or with the advertising industry in general for that matter. I must admit, my attraction was with the client and not the employer. When I heard “Pepsi” I thought, “Yes!” When I heard “DDB Needham” I thought, “Who?”

The first thing that I learned was that DDB stood for Doyle, Dane, and Bernbach; the surnames of the three men that started the firm in 1949. I didn’t find any information on Doyle or Dane but it became obvious right away that the creative force behind the organization was Bill Bernbach (1911-1982). The ‘Needham’ part was added to the name in 1986 when Needham Harper Worldwide acquired DDB after Bernbach’s death.

During my in-house research I came across a book titled Bill Bernbach's Book: A History of the Advertising That Changed the History of Advertising. This large coffee table book is an overview of the creative and innovative work of Bill Bernbach and his team at DDB. To this day I continue to look to this book for inspiration. Another gem that I discovered was a small hardcover book of Bernbach quotes called Bill Bernbach Said.... This collection of thoughts and ideas is another inspiring resource that I return to on occasion. These two resources alone helped me to understand the significance of the DDB name and to appreciate the company that I had hired on to.

Besides the sporadic article here and there, these two books have been my only source of information about Bernbach and DDB. However, last year a book was written about Bernbach that is said to expose his shortcomings and bring to light the skeletons in his agency closet. It seems that the author is capitalizing on the now popular Mad Men; a cable show set in the early 1960’s about a fictitious advertising agency. The show frequently references Bernbach and DDB. I have yet to read this book or see an episode of Mad Men.

Regardless of what happened behind the scenes, the fact is that the creative work that came out of the DDB office was groundbreaking and it revolutionized the advertising industry. Today, Ad Age Magazine still lists Bernbach as the most influential person in advertising history.

Watch the embedded videos below to catch of glimpse of Bernbach’s creative philosophy. Warning: If you are not much into advertising (or the creative process), this interview might bore you :)

Bill Bernbach on Advertising 1/2



Bill Bernbach on Advertising 2/2




 Related Articles:
The Advertising Century: No 1 of 100 – William Bernbach (1911-1982)
The Advertising Genius of Bill Bernbach
Bernbach's Fatal Flaws: A book about the legendary adman lays bare his mistakes
Bill Bernbach Said... (PDF, 209 kb)

Jew or Not Jew: Bill Bernbach 

---•---

~

The "Donkey in a Ditch" Principle: A Quick Look

When we came into an understanding of the relevance of the Torah in our lives as Believers, the writings of the Apostles began to make sense more than ever. It became easier to identify and understand Hebraic idioms and references. In addition, the fact that Yeshua was Jewish and lived a Jewish life became apparent. After reading the ‘New Testament’ in light of the Torah, we were then confronted with the task of finding modern application of Yeshua’s instructions and teachings. At the congregation we attended we were introduced to some principles that were based on Messiah’s interpretation and application of the Torah. One of these is the “Donkey in a Ditch” principle. I don’t remember this principle ever clearly explained by the congregation’s leadership but the implicit understanding by the congregation was something like this:

If you find yourself in a situation that requires immediate attention it is permissible to miss the Sabbath Convocation and break the commandment to Rest (Lev 23:3) in order to address the situation. And, the individual determines the validity of the situation.

Members of the congregation used this principle to justify attending family gatherings, graduation ceremonies, weddings, and birthday parties. Some worked on their houses, their cars, or their yard. But is this really what the “Donkey in a Ditch” principle is about? Is the “Donkey in a Ditch” principle even Biblical?

After a quick search on Study Light I did not find the exact phrase ‘Donkey in a Ditch’ in the Gospels however, I am quite certain that this phrase originated from the following verse in the Gospel of Luke:

Then He answered them, saying, "Which of you, having a donkey or an ox that has fallen into a pit, will not immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?"
- Luke 14:5 (NKJ)

Here is the verse in context:

1 Now it happened, as He went into the house of one of the rulers of the Pharisees to eat bread on the Sabbath, that they watched Him closely.
2 And behold, there was a certain man before Him who had dropsy.
3 And Jesus, answering, spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?"
4 But they kept silent. And He took him and healed him, and let him go.
5 Then He answered them, saying, "Which of you, having a donkey or an ox that has fallen into a pit, will not immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?"
6 And they could not answer Him regarding these things.
- Luke 14:1-6 (NKJ)

Whether the Pharisees were trying to setup Yeshua or not by putting this guy with dropsy in front of Him, the point is that He healed the guy on Shabbat. He likened healing this guy to pulling a donkey or an ox out of a well. If the animal isn’t pulled out of the well, it will surely die. If saving the life of an animal is something worth ‘breaking a sweat over’ on Shabbat, how much more should we care for a person! We can surmise from this passage that healing someone from a condition that diminishes his or her quality of life is permissible on Shabbat; and if on Shabbat someone fell in a well, if it is a matter of life and death, there should be no uncertainty that they are to be rescued.

There is a passage in the Gospel of Matthew that is very similar to the passage we just looked at in Luke. It takes place on Shabbat but this time the setting is in a synagogue and there is a man with a withered hand. The people in the synagogue ask Yeshua if it is lawful to heal on Shabbat (Mat 12:10). He responds by saying:

“Which one of you who has a sheep, if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not take hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.” - Matthew 12:11,12 (ESV)

He then proceeds to heal the withered hand and the people conspire to kill Him so He leaves. (I guess for these people it was permissible on Shabbat to kill someone. Ha!) In this passage we see Yeshua compare rescuing a sheep out of a pit with healing a man’s withered hand. If the sheep was left in the pit it would die but if the man lived with a withered hand, he would not die; rather his quality of life would be diminished. The withered hand was not a life or death situation but, because the man is more precious in the eyes of God, healing him on Shabbat is good; it is lawful. It is lawful to save someone’s life on Shabbat as well as heal them when they are experiencing non-life threatening illnesses or physical conditions.

So based on this brief look at these two passages, what is the “Donkey in a Ditch” principle? I define the “Donkey in a Ditch” principle like this: on Shabbat is permissible to save someone’s life as well as heal them from illnesses, physical conditions and demonic oppression. It’s as simple as that. Going to a wedding ceremony is not a “Donkey in a Ditch” scenario. Taking a child to a soccer tournament is not a “Donkey in a Ditch.” If you are not remembering and observing Shabbat, call it what it is and don’t try to justify it with the ol’ “it’s a donkey in a ditch” excuse.

When I was a young believer, still learning all this Torah stuff, I claimed that digging out and repairing the water main to our home was a “Donkey in a Ditch.” In my mind it was a life or death situation—we can’t live with out water! I believed it diminished our quality of life—how would we shower? Besides, my neighbor who was a plumber was only available to help me on Saturday and he wasn’t going to charge me anything! However, I did have to go out and rent a jackhammer. The real problem was that I didn’t want to take off from work on Monday to take care of the busted pipe. We had vacation plans and using one of my vacation days would have interrupted our plans. Wahh!

We need to ask ourselves, is there a good reason to miss the Sabbath Convocation and break the commandment to Rest (Lev 23:3)? Life or death situations are a given. I’m talking about another justifiable reason to miss Shabbat. What about a funeral? Paying respects to someone that has passed away is a good reason to miss Shabbat, right? Think of someone who is really close to you. Would you miss Shabbat to go to his or her funeral? Consider this…

According to the account in the Gospel of Luke Yeshua died on Friday afternoon. This means that Shabbat was quickly approaching. What did His disciples do with His body? Did they consider this a “Donkey in a Ditch” that took priority over the commandment to rest? Did they stop everything in order to bury Him? Keep in mind this is Yeshua we’re talking about here. The Master! The Messiah! The Son of God! This is what His disciples did:

50 And a man named Joseph, who was a member of the Council, a good and righteous man
51 (he had not consented to their plan and action), a man from Arimathea, a city of the Jews, who was waiting for the kingdom of God;
52 this man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus.
53 And he took it down and wrapped it in a linen cloth, and laid Him in a tomb cut into the rock, where no one had ever lain.
54 It was the preparation day, and the Sabbath was about to begin.
55 Now the women who had come with Him out of Galilee followed, and saw the tomb and how His body was laid.
56 Then they returned and prepared spices and perfumes.

And on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment.

1 But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared.
 - Luke 23:50-24:1 (NAS)

Did you catch that? Just hours after Yeshua died "on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment." They kept the Sabbath. This passage gives us a glimpse of the significance of Shabbat in the lives of the disciples of Yeshua. They didn’t even miss it in order to arrange a proper burial for their Messiah.

Again, we need to ask ourselves, is there a good reason to miss the Sabbath Convocation and break the commandment to Rest (Lev 23:3)?

---•---

~

Wow. Great photos. An inspiring Blog for designers...

Design Fabulous is the Blog of 18 year old Korean Canadian product design student, Andrew Kim. In his blog Andrew posts photos of 'good design' in the world around him along with his own student projects. The photo below is taken from the post entry "Living with the iPad" where Andrew compares traditional media with the Apple iPad.

Check it out, won't ya...

http://designfabulous.blogspot.com/

 - mdg

---•---

~

Not trying to be a wet blanket, I'm just saying…

After reading an email from famed Messianic Music and Lyric Forensic Investigator, Ryan McCarthy, I wrote the following post...

What if I took a contemporary secular song with a catchy dance beat and swapped the lyrics with words that contained Scriptures and an overall positive message about God? Would you dance to it? Does it sound horribly blasphemous and wrong to even ask this question?

What if I told you that a popular 'Jewish' dance song that we all know, love and dance to is actually a cover of a popular Turkish song? And, the lyrics of this song contain Turkish proverbs and erotic innuendos that describe a man's frustration and infatuation with a seductress? Would you still dance to it?

The Turkish song is called Simarik, which means Spoiled. Here are the translated lyrics:

Arm in arm with another man
She's driving me crazy
Blowing bubbles with her gum
Bursting them boldly

Maybe that's why I'm hooked on you
Because I couldn't master you
Can a man take more, you spoiled thing?
Is the world changing?

She's lined her eyes with mascara
Lips bright red she shakes her [rear]
And shamelessly she faces me
Grinning sassily just to spite me

We weren't raised this way
Made fools in front of everyone
New customs come and old ways go
Boys we're done

You minx, you vamp
You sweet-talking tramp
My fate my big nuisance
If I catch you I'll… (kiss kiss)

I'm at your mercy sexy lady
I'm in a bad way sexy lady
I'm under your spell sexy lady
Oh my

Rather racy lyrics, wouldn't you say? In my opinion, these lyrics describe what can potentially happen to the young man who falls into the snare of the Proverbs 7 adulterous woman. This is not the kind of song that should be in our iPods.

Now, what if these risqué lyrics were removed from this song and then replaced with lyrics that said the following:

All those who bring joy to the groom and the bride merit the five voices.

It is a great mitzvah to be happy always!

Knowing what the original lyrics said, would you dance to this song if the lyrics were changed and made more 'godly'?

Are you wondering which popular 'Jewish' dance song I'm referring to?

Here is a link to a video of the 1997 song Simarik performed by Turkish pop singer, Tarkan. If you've been in the Messianic camp for more than a year, I'm sure this song will sound familiar to you… Click Here

By the way; the popular 'Jewish' dance song that I am referring to was released in 2000.
Listen to a sample: Click Here

Again, I'm not trying to be a wet blanket, I'm just saying…

Do the original lyrics of secular songs render the music off-limits to the Torah Observant Believer in Messiah Yeshua?

What do you think?

 - mdg

---•---

~

Referenced Material:
Simarik

Tarkan

Tarkan Translations

Related Links:
Matisyahu shatters conception of ‘Jewish’ music
Y-Love Speaks Out About Jewish Hip-hop (Video)
Perspectives on Jewish Music: Secular and Sacred

Michael Isaacson explores the Jewish in Jewish music

Jewish Music as Midrash: What Makes Music Jewish? (Audiobook)
Israel: Meet the Committee for Jewish Music
What is Jewish Music?

What makes music Christian?
Determing what makes music sacred or secular.
What Makes Music Sacred Or Secular?
Bible Guidelines for Christian Music

Who owns your Church?

For the past couple of weeks I have been listening to the teachings of various pastors (Messianic and Christian) over the Internet. Since I am currently a bi-vocational pastor I have to be creative with my time. Listening to mp3’s while I work is one way for me to get some Word in my day. Some of the teachings encourage me and some challenge me. Some I agree with and some I do not.

Last week I began listening to a series of teachings on Shared Congregational Leadership. This course is being taught in order to give an overview of the model of leadership in this particular community. The goal is to identify men that have the desire and fit the requirements to be leaders in this community. While listening to the second class in this series, the instructor made a very troubling comment. Most of the time when I hear aspects of teachings that I do not agree with, I let them roll off because they are usually common areas of disagreement. But this one comment in particular, really grieved my heart.

The teacher began to discuss the role and responsibilities of the elders and their relationship with the flock or the community. The teacher explained the importance of the elders relationship with Adonai. Before they can effectively lead and protect the flock, they must have a good relationship with Him. I agree with this statement. If the leaders of the community are not walking above reproach, they will not be able to function properly in their role and the community will suffer.

Then the discussion moved to the sheep, the members of the community. The comment was made that the sheep did not belong to the congregational leader but to Adonai. I agree with this statement too. I have not met a congregational leader that would disagree about the sheep, the flock, the Church (Ekklesia), belonging to Yeshua (Matt 16:18-19). We are the Body of Messiah.

Then the troubling comment was made. The teacher made an abrupt change of direction in the discussion. A distinction was made between the flock and the church, between the people and the corporation. One was said to belong to Adonai and other did not. Here is the comment:

Someone asked me, “You think that this Church is yours?”

And I answered him, “Yes, it is mine. It is not the sheep’s, it is mine. My wife and I worked hard for this church with our own blood, sweat and tears for many, many, many years. We assumed all risks and liabilities and we went without wages off and on for many years. Yes, this Church is ours and not the sheep’s.”

He was upset about my answer. But what he didn’t understand was this; the sheep belong to God but the corporation does not. Jesus’ name is not on it. Do you think the State is going to come after JESUS if something happens to THIS corporation? NO, they will come after ME! My name is on the corporation! I assume the responsibilities! I will go to jail, I will get fined, or whatever!

So of course the sheep belong to God. They are His, we are just under-shepherds; but if you create a club, called a 501(c)(3), and you have a board and you have officers; that [organization] that helps facilitate fellowship is a different matter.

The sheep belong to God, they are His. We are responsible to minister to them [and there are] a lot of different ways to do that, [and there are] a lot of different models for eldership.

I had to listen to this part of the recording over and over again because I thought that I had misheard what was being said. But no, I heard correctly. Then I thought that maybe the instructor was using a play-on-words or a metaphor in order to emphasis his point. No, this was not the case either. The teacher made it perfectly clear that the sheep, the community, did not own the corporation but he and his wife did. Nobody in the community could make the same claim. It was their hard work and their sacrifices that established this church; therefore, it belonged to them.

He did, however, make it clear that the sheep do belong to Adonai; but he also made it clear that the corporation does not, it belongs to him and his wife. It was this brazen statement that jarred me. Just because a church receives authorization through government organizations to operate as a non-profit does not mean that Adonai did not establish it. If Adonai can raise up nations, He can also raise up churches. He is the Sovereign Ruler of the universe. The teacher also stated the obvious: Yeshua's name was not on the 501(c)(3) documents but his name was. I'm sure this was a sarcastic statement designed to get a laugh from the class; but in reality, as believers in Messiah, our name on a document should reflect the name of Yeshua. We are His representatives in the world but not of the world. His statements made it obvious that this teacher has a great fear of the government and highly regards their approval as a non-profit organization. (side note: Why would someone be afraid of the State coming after them if they are not doing anything wrong?) After listening carefully several times to what was being taught, I considered the idea of private ownership of a church.

If a person owns a business, they usually run their own business. Likewise, if someone believes that they own a church, they will run the church as their own. In a business model it is highly unlikely that the business owner would give equal ownership and authority to their employees. Likewise, if someone owns and operates a church the leadership structures that they put in place will not jeopardize their ownership and authority; not to mention their income. This is especially true if this person, or couple, truly believes that it was their own hard work and sacrifice that built their church. They will do whatever they can to safeguard what they worked hard for; they will make certain that they will not lose their investment. This is what I hear communicated by this teacher in his comments.

In the Torah Resource article A Community or a Congregation? For What are We Striving?, author Tim Hegg explains the difference between the modern church ‘congregational’ model and the more biblically patterned Torah ‘community’ model:

At the risk of being overly simplistic, I would say that a "congregation" is essentially the product of our Western, Greek worldview, while a "community" is based in an Eastern, Hebraic worldview. For the "congregation," truth is what we know (cognitive); for a "community," truth is what we demonstrate by our lives (relational). For a "congregation," the core values (truth) are summed up in a doctrinal statement; for a "community," the core values (truth) are seen in the life of the community.

Based on this definition one can conclude that running a church according to the Torah is relational and running a church according to the 501(c)(3) Non-Profit Bylaws is cognitive. Running a community according to the Torah includes the people by getting them involved because they are co-owners. Running a congregation according to the Bylaws, like a business, does not allow co-ownership nor does it require involvement of the people.

Tim Hegg makes another important point in the Torah Resource Yeshiva Course, I Will Build My Ekklesia, An Introduction to Ecclesiology. This time he is speaking about the differences in the leadership structures of the 'congregation' and the 'community' models:

"Leadership in a Torah Community must be in plurality. It will not work any other way; not for a 'community'. It will for a 'congregation'; a single man can build his own kingdom if he is an executive type, but he will not build a community that has generational longevity and THAT is what we must be doing."

In a 'community' the ownership and authority are shared. In a 'congregation' the ownership and authority are under the control of one person, the senior pastor.

I find it interesting that someone teaching a class on shared leadership would emphasize the fact that they, him and his wife, are the ones who worked hard for and made personal sacrifices to build the church that they are leading. After making these comments, I find it hard to believe that they would allow anyone else to step in and become equal partners with equal authority. If they are careful in making it crystal clear who established this church, I doubt they will share the ownership of it. In the end, they will not install a true plurality of equal leaders to run the church; but instead, Bylaws in order to run their church like a business with the pastor/CEO at the helm. It sounds to me that the teacher of this online course, the owner of this church, is building his own kingdom. Unfortunately no matter how good his intentions are, like Tim Hegg said, this church will not have longevity. Once the pastor is gone, so is his vision and the driving force behind his organization.

Since this is only the second class in this series, one cannot help but wonder how this important detail regarding the ownership of this church will steer the remainder of the lessons and more importantly how it will affect their method and structure of church leadership. I am curious to listen to more of their teachings but at the same time, I do not want to waste my time if more of this is to be expected. The most frightening thing about this whole ordeal was that nobody in the class challenged the teacher on his comments. Either these future church leaders did not understand what was being taught or they were in agreement with it or it went over their heads. I hope for the latter.

So, who owns the Church, what is the Church, and who runs the Church? Here is a quick overview of how I see it:

1) Messiah owns the church. He paid for it with His blood (Acts 20:28).

2) We cannot separate the people from the church because the people ARE the church; they are the bride of Messiah (I Cor. 6:11, I Cor. 6:20, Eph.5:26-27, I Pet. 1:18-19).

3) The people through the designated elders (as they follow the Torah while being led by the Ruach) run the church (Acts 14:23, 1 Tim 3:1-13, Titus 1:5-9). Paul instructed Titus to establish elders, not 501(c)(3) corporations, in every city. A non-profit corporation is only the means for us, here in our modern society, to establish and run a church as a tax-exempt entity. 501(c)(3) status should not be our focus or our goal nor should we lord our Bylaws over the church body. Our approval comes from Hashem and from Him alone and not through our non-profit status. In my opinion, this 501(c)(3) non-profit stuff is nothing more than a distraction. Who cares about being tax-exempt anyway? Even our accountant who has worked with churches for many years does not see a benefit in the 501(c)(3) status and actually advises against it.

I pray that we never get to the point where we are claiming ownership of and taking credit for establishing The Front Range Messianic Community. We see the hand of Adonai in every aspect of our fledgling community. Are we working hard for this community? Yes. Are we making sacrifices for this community? Yes. But the work and the sacrifices are all for His glory not ours. We have done nothing for this community apart from Him. This community is His work with our hands.

I cannot help but remember in the Torah when the children of those who died in the wilderness were about to enter the land. Adonai warned them not to forget who was about to make them prosper. It would not be the work of their own hands that would bring them wealth. Their wealth and provision would come from Hashem, the very One who freed them from of the bondage of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. (Deut 8:11-20)

As we prosper,
May we remember Hashem, the one who provides for our needs.
May we remain His humble servants.
May He keep us from the snare of pride.

 - mdg

Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.

- Proverbs 16:18

---•---

~

Definitions:
Ekklesia (pronounced ek-klay-see'-ah) is The Greek word used in the Bible for church, which actually means “assembly” or literally “called out ones.” It is made up of the two Greek words, EK—“out of,” and KALEO—“shall be called.”

Referenced Material:
A Community or a Congregation? For What are We Striving?,
Tim Hegg (Torah Resource, 2007)

I Will Build My Ekklesia: An Introduction to Ecclesiology,
Tim Hegg (Torah Resource, 2009)

Related Links:
Elders or Board of Directors?
Whose Church Is It Anyway? 
Whose Church Is It, Anyway? (PDF, 127 KB)
Who Owns A Church?
Who Owns the Church?
Who owns your congregation?

-

The Blog Beginneth

I have taken some time away (1.5 years) from the world of blogging and have decided that it was time to jump back into it. My goal is to post on a variety of topics for the purpose of sharpening skills, namely in the area of written communication. I know most people nowadays know me as 'Pastor Michael' but I am also know by other titles and job descriptions. I am also a husband, a father, a middle child, a second son, an older and a younger brother. I am a friend, a neighbor, a coworker, and an employee. I have been known to host a restaurant, service ice cream, mow lawns, change light bulbs, and pull orders in a warehouse. I have been a student, a soldier, a designer, a pastor, and an office clerk. There are many more experiences and resources that I will be drawing from in order to write original and interesting entries for your enjoyment. There is also a strong possibility that I will incorporate visual and audio communications in this online journal. Please sign up and gimme your feed back.

Peace.

 - mdg