prisonchaplain

A common refrain in Evangelical circles is that we must get outside the church walls. The idea is that we spend too much time inside our church walls blessing ourselves and we do precious little out in our communities--presumably where God would having us being his salt and light. Some of us (mostly older folks, I'm afraid) are pushing back against this idea (complaint) because: 1. We do plenty that blesses 'the world' (prison ministry, homeless ministry, crisis response ministry, volunteering (mostly individual), etc.). 2. We only spend 2-3 hours per week in church, and already represent the faith the rest of the time. We probably need to spend more time inside the walls and our teachers need to be less afraid of delivering the meat of the word (v. always bringing lite, easy instruction). Do the same conversations take place among saints? Does the system of volunteer callings keep this balance from becoming an issue?

I'm probably closer to @Carborendum on this one. China can hurt us plenty. My financial advisor doesn't think it's likely, but the group says that if any country can create economic havoc it's China. Then there is Taiwan, N. Korea, and their funding of divisive elements in our society--including spiritual ones. My only point is that they aren't that smart about spirituality--perhaps more the "useful idiots" for the devil. Sometimes ignorance is more dangerous, though.

I doubt that China is that intentional about morally corrupting us. They probably fund divisive politics and media, but material mean to corrupt our morals--I doubt that the Communists are that spiritually savvy. On the other hand, the father of lies might have inspired some less intentional moves that are anti-gospel. Perhaps I am cynical, but I question all theories that ascribe spiritual astuteness to governments (including our own).

The LDS view of hades as being for only a few, and that it is a temporary state for many who end up there, may appeal to some broadly. The teaching that post-death a soul may progress might also appeal. However, I doubt that these teachings are an area of outreach or collaboration with Pentecostals. This part of the board is not so much for explaining Christian views, but most Pentecostals are very traditional on this doctrine--after death, it's heaven or hades.

So much could be said @Carborendum. Suffice to say you did great work "visiting those in prison." During the jail incident you kept your young adult feelings to yourself. You could not be Christlike because Jesus actually knew people's hearts. You had your intuition, but remained calm and did your best for that stage in life at listening to the Holy Spirit. The fact that you believed the person was rebelling against God and society was probably more right than sin--especially since you checked yourself and attempted to let God lead. Try not to hold on to unmerited guilt. The accuser of the brethren (Satan) is the guiltiest one of all.

On the flip side, a minister once walked into the program room while the lights were out. The officer (we don't call them guards anymore) tried to explain why she should not walk into a room when the lights were out because it was not safe, and she snapped, "I'm a minister. I can't think that way!!" The officer let me know and I counseled the volunteer to listen respectfully to officers. She did not have to think like one, but she needed to heed their counsel. 😉

Thank you for the testimony. I never try to be judge or jury. A common saying in prisons (federal and state) is, "They are here AS punishment not FOR punishment." Also, "Reentry begins the first day of incarceration." So, it's always hard to hear about how difficult some find prison--and how prison systems sometimes fall short. BTW, I believe the church usually sends volunteers (perhaps through the calling system), not missionaries. I may make mention of moderating a forum--but only if it comes up organically. The focus is empowering the incarcerated to explore faith. My role is to empower volunteers to bring their best.

I've reached the halfway point in my 3-week training and look forward to opening up the chapel for programs. One of the most active and well received volunteer groups is the LDS one. I'm eager to meet and work with the volunteers. The fellow that used to come to SeaTac proved very dedicated and pleasant. Has anyone here done prison ministry for the church? I'd love to hear/read some testimonies. -- PC

I just read an article on both Lazarus' from a Bible study site. It also argued that the account of the Rich Man and Lazarus was not a parable. Beyond mentioning specific names, Jesus neither interprets what happened nor adds a moral at the end. It is almost a certainty that this Lazarus was different from the one who was raised from the dead and became a target of the religious leaders.

I'm reacting more to the title than to the episodes of encounters with the spiritually loud. My grandmother (Lutheran) hated the term "born again." She did not appreciate that Billy Graham said one must be born again to enter the Kingdom of God. Now, I would fall under the born again category. However, my understanding of what the term actually means (vs. the stereotypes) leaves me assured that grandma was indeed born again, and entered the Kingdom of God. She might not have liked what she saw in people who claimed to be born again--she might have even rejected the label--but she's with God, and I'm convinced her prayers were/are a big part of me being with God today. Ironically, her spiritual work on my behalf a likely a large contributing factor to me being born again. 🙂

I've been taught that what Jesus shared with this episode was not a parable but an account. In parables Jesus supposedly never names his characters, but here He names Lazarus. If so, this actually happened to the rich man and Lazarus. My take away is to interpret this as mostly a historical lesson and as literally as possible. Thoughts?

The Buddhist monk that used to come into the federal jail I worked at was beyond wonderful. He told Christians who wanted to learn meditation to focus on Jesus as they did so. However, he, of course, focused on Buddha. The one practice he did not like was the secularization of religious practice. For example, yoga is Hindu. He had little patience for the gyms that offered yoga minus any spirituality. He would look at me and say, "It's supposed to be about God, chaplain!" Amen. That said, imho Buddhist meditation tends to encourage inward focus. Christians of all stripes probably do too much of that. We need to focus on the Savior first, and others second. I love the JOY acronym: Jesus Others You. We should not neglect ourselves, but most of us (especially me) are in little danger of that.

Today was New Hire Orientation. My trainer was 29. To give perspective, my oldest daughter is 23. It's okay though, because this old dog is not afraid to learn new tricks. Also, it's kind of cool being in a protected category (WA asked me if I was over 40, and prohibits hiring discrimination of the elderly).

Apologies for having been away for a few months. I am back--and back to my original calling. Many of you know that I retired from federal prison chaplaincy in December 2022. For the past two years I've taught secondary Bible and US History at a local Christian school. Beginning a few months ago I sensed God drawing me back to chaplaincy. I checked with the state DOC (WA), and there was a position at the women's facility. God opened the door, and I start full-time, beginning tomorrow. So prisonchaplain is a prison chaplain again! 🙂 I figured that this was also a good time for me to return to thirdhour.org, say hello to old friends, and perhaps even make a few new ones. -- PC

You could be right. If so, it's beyond ironic. BUT ... I'll take it. 😉

This is a doctrine we can agree on! My stumbling block comes when the enemy tries to convince me that the other 90% is mine to do with as I please. 😶

Well-behaved (yes, especially those who with abundant love for the difficult ones) can win converts to almost any faith tradition. It takes a compelling God to keep 'em though--especially when those less abundant in love make sideways comments. 😬

In my new career as a secondary school teacher I spent my first year teaching Civics to 12th graders. I tried to stay as neutral and objective as possible, empowering these emerging adults in the development of their own views. However, since I work in a private school I did not have to teach the jaundiced view that America was never great or that its Constitution is just some outdated document drafted by white men. We hit the themes of freedom of speech and religion pretty hard. I enjoyed it much and hope the students left wiser and more confident than they came in. This year I will have 7th graders for U.S. History. Perhaps the influence will be even greater.

Mea Culpa. I hadn't heard from/about him in awhile and assumed he'd retire. Now that I think about it...yeah...my wrong. Current Senator Romney...

I generally watch Fox News Sunday and the George Stephenopolis (sp?) show, so I have a general idea of what media is perceiving the news to be. Imagine my surprise when I stumble upon an interview of former Sen. Romney by Bret Baire (sp?). It was nicely and respectfully done. People may have varying views on Romney's policies and success, but he got the relationship of church and state right. Further, one aspect of LDS doctrine I find attractive and intriguing is the belief that the U.S. Constitution is inspired.

I don't believe this is true. It's a common joke--yeah, I'll just tell them I work law enforcement and they'll let me go! BUT, it's not actually a rule, to my knowledge.

Part of the issue here may be faith. We all believe in God--Heavenly Father--Creator of all that is. How we understand this God differs, however. Did God form preexisting intelligence into what we now know as humanity or did He make us out of nothing? Traditional Christianity believes the latter--and it's part of our understanding of who God is--Alone in His eternal existence--the one from whom all matter comes into being. There is a classic joke that we find hilarious. A scientist cries out and says, "God, if your there and you are real, prove yourself or leave us alone!" Suddenly, the scientist finds himself in an empty void. A voice speaks and says, "Hello. I'm God." The scientist says, "OK, so you exist. It really doesn't matter. We can now create life, so you can go away." God responds, "Really? That's great. Show this to me and I'll leave forever." The scientist then looks around frantically. Finally, he sees a pile of dirt and starts heading towards it. God speaks. "Where are you going?" The scientist says, "I'm heading over to that pile of dirt so that I can create human life from it." The last words the scientist ever hears are, "Get your own dirt."

You and I agree on this. However, I'm fairly certain that what you are calling predestination is what traditionalists consider foreknowledge. It's what I believe. Predestinationists contend that God, as Almighty Creator, has sovereign authority over His creation, and that He does indeed predestine souls to heaven or hell. They would argue that those who become believers were predestined--that for them grace was irresistible--the I in TULIP teaching.

To paraphrase @Traveler's inquiry, how can a God who created us out of nothing (a traditional Christian understanding) have no responsibility for the bad choices (sinful--evil) of His creation? If they started from nothing and God made them, then God would seem to bare total responsibility for the results, wouldn't He? There are traditional Christians who subscribe to Predestination--the belief that God does choose sinners and saints. I'm not one of those. Like many traditionalists, I perceive the Bible to declare God's foreknowledge, while at the same time permitting us the capacity to choose our way, for good or ill. What God created in us is the capacity for great good or evil. It is totally on us which direction we go and whether or not we repent if we start out wrong. The Apostle Paul says we have no excuse for our sin (Romans 1). He also decries his own weakness in sinning when he does not want to do so and avoiding good when he wants to do it (Romans 7). Still, he ends well, saying towards the end of his life that he had run a good race and fought a good fight. Never does he suggest that God bare any blame. I believe it is James that tells us not to blame God when we are tempted. God cannot be tempted, nor does He tempt. Rather, we are tempted by our own evil desires. Perhaps you can argue that God did not create the sinful acts that are in our hearts. He did instill in us the capacity, though. There's no blame because that good/evil capacity is what makes us free.

Those that wish to see @Traveler's arguments should refer to his OP--they are classic, and the issue has remained contentious for centuries. Those of us who believe that God created us out of nothing also believe that we were created capable of sin--not necessarily predetermined to do so. God knew we would, but he created us with choice. Once Adam & Eve sinned, the gravity in our decision-making did lean toward sin. Still, it was/is choice. Thus, Jesus said wide is the way that leads to destruction, narrow the way that leads to eternal life (paraphrase). Paul also told us (Romans 1) that we are without excuse--that we know right from wrong--that we could see God if we were willing to. And, of course, the Old Testament, New Testament, and Book of Mormon all contain promises that if God is sought He will be found. And so, how can I say God is good if he allows us to sin against ourselves, each other, and Him? One argument is that slavery is worse--having no choice. Another, that the safer we are made (whether by God or government) the less free we are. A third, that the Bible says God is good--especially as reflected in His original creation. The fourth, we have our testimonies--I KNOW that God is good because of the goodness He's extended to me. I readily confess that non of my reasons are fail proof. Thus, the discussion continues.