March 10, 2016

What Jesus Said and Did: Looking at the Gospel of John

john-logo-v2-1a

As Christians, we often look at the Gospel of John, and the rest of the New Testament, with an eye toward understanding who Jesus said He was, and what that means to our daily lives as His followers. Non-Christians do not read the Gospel through that same lens.

Many, actually probably most, of the Non-Christians we meet today have no concept of who Jesus was or what He did. And, if you’re like most Christians I know, you automatically thought I should have written “who Jesus is” not was. That clearly shows the difference between the Christian and the Non-Christian.

Here is radical concept for you. When you ask a Non-Christian to read and discuss the Gospel of John, you’re first step is to help the person understand who Jesus said He was and what the Gospel writer said Jesus did. And that’s a mighty big step!

Most Non-Christians are not going to assume that the Gospel of John is a completely historical document. They have heard from many other places that the stories have been fabricated, that the miracles never occurred, that archaeology proves the Bible wrong… How many other arguments have they heard?

Your objective in reading the Gospel of John with your friend is not to prove that the Bible is accurate, or that Jesus is who He said He was. It’s simply to expose him to what the Gospel says about Jesus – who He said He was and what He said.

Your objective is not to argue your friend into the Kingdom. Rather, you want to expose him to the claims for Christ. If he doesn’t agree, acknowledge that disagreement and move on. You could say, “Yes, there was I time when I didn’t agree with that either. Let’s keep reading and see what else it says.”

This is not a cop out. It’s exposing someone to the Word of God and letting the Word stew in his heart. You probably did not come to Christ after one or two conversations. Don’t expect your friend to do that either.

Just stay focused on what Jesus said and did. The conversation should revolve around what Jesus said and did, and what it might mean if it is true. Don’t argue that it is true; your friend probably isn’t there yet, and you could them less willing to read if you force them into the “right” interpretation.

This will be an opportunity for you to patiently guide your friend to decide that the stories about Jesus are possibly true. Once they reach that conclusion, then they need to consider the ramifications of following the truth.

On my next post, we’ll start in John 1 and give you some questions to help guide your conversation.

Posted by on March 10, 2016 in Witnessing.

Leave a comment

March 9, 2016

Looking at the Gospel of John: Through Non-Christian Eyes

Gospel-of-John1-e1382325623553

On Thursday evenings, a small group of us have been going through the Gospel of John in a different way than we may have done so previously. We are reading certain portions that we believe would be of most interest to our Non-Christian friends, and developing questions that we can ask them as they read through that same portion with us.

Because several people are doing this, and more are interested, I decided to post much more of the thinking behind this method along with the questions that we have developed for each section. That’s means this will be a multi-part post that will appear over several weeks in the next months.

Today, I wanted to go further into the concept of reading and talking through the Gospel of John with one or more Non-Christian friends, family members, neighbors, etc.

As Christians, we look at the Gospel of John and at Jesus Himself through a grid (or paradigm) that has developed by our belief that Jesus is the Son of God and that we should learn His teachings and follow His ways.

Here’s a news flash! Non-Christians do not have this same grid through which they view Jesus, faith, or Christianity. That requires us to think differently than we normally do, and ask questions that make sense to them rather than to us.

Because of this difference, there are certain passages that are more likely to engage a Non-Christian, and other passages that will not be helpful. While we may dig very deeply into the story of Jesus driving money changers out of the temple (John 2:12-22), this kind of story can simply cause confusion for a Non-Christian, since it would be necessary to explain Jewish ritual law to make sense of what was going on.

Instead, I strongly suggest that you choose passages that are already fairly clear to a Non-Christian without getting lost in religious details. For that reason, the passage discussed in future posts will be “cherry-picking” through the Gospel.

Remember, John’s Gospel was written primarily to people who were already believers, and already understood much of the content. There is also clear evidence in the way John writes that he assumed his readers (hearers) had already read or heard the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), since he refers to events that are only covered in those books and not his own.

Since this will be the first foray into the Bible for many of the Non-Christians that you may be meeting with, it makes sense to cut to the chase and deal with passages that Non-Christians can easily understand, rather than teach historical details and blur their understanding with more than they need to know to come to grips with who Jesus was/is and what he said and did.

Which brings me to my final point of this post. The objective of reading and discussing John’s Gospel with your Non-Christian friend is to help him or her understand what Jesus said and did. In most cases, they will not buy everything lock, stock and barrel. The objective is to simply expose them to Jesus directly from John’s Gospel, rather than from what they may get from a group discussion at work with other Non-Christians or the liberally based History of the Bible series on television.

On my next post, I will expound on the concept of helping someone understand what Jesus said and did.

Posted by on March 9, 2016 in Witnessing.

Leave a comment

April 22, 2015

Teacher or Lord?

HORN_SA_C_^_SATURDAY

Sometimes, my quiet time thoughts stay with me for several days, and occasionally they have an even greater impact on my total view of the Christian life. This post addresses one such quiet time passage.

In Matthew 26:20-25 (NASB), we read:

Now when evening came, Jesus was reclining at the table with the twelve disciples. As they were eating, He said, “Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me.” Being deeply grieved, they each one began to say to Him, “Surely not I, Lord?” And He answered, “He who dipped his hand with Me in the bowl is the one who will betray Me. The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of Him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.” And Judas, who was betraying Him, said, “Surely it is not I, Rabbi?” Jesus said to him, “You have said it yourself.”

Here’s my thoughts. When Jesus told His disciples that one of them would betray Him, each of them asked them if it was he that would do such a thing. They were all, according to the text, “deeply grieved.” That included the response of Judas, who was also sitting at the table, and would be pointed out as the one who would betray him.

I notice one significant difference between Judas’ response and that of the other disciples. Each disciple is recorded as using the title “Lord” when asking the question, except for Judas. He used the title “Rabbi.” Why did John the Evangelist include this difference in his Gospel?

There are many times in the Gospels that Jesus is called “Rabbi.” It was considered a term of respect for someone who was a significant teacher. Jesus acknowledged the weight of the term in Matthew 23:6-8 when he instructed the crowds in Jerusalem.

My thoughts turned toward the difference between “Rabbi” and “Lord.” When a person submits to a Rabbi, he submits to learning and following the Rabbi’s teaching. We may even learn everything we can from one Rabbi and move on to another to learn more. Often those who excel at a Rabbi’s teaching can even become a Rabbi themselves.

We can also submit to following a “Lord.” At what time do we follow a Lord so well that we become one ourselves? If someone is Lord, can we ever get to the place where should move on to another Lord?

Many people see Jesus as a significant teacher, perhaps one of the best in history. Yet they have little commitment to followng the hard sayings of a Rabbi when his teachings touches on our character or conflicts with our comfort. This accounts for why some “disciples” heard the word of Jesus and said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?” (John 6:60) and they stopped following Jesus and went on about their lives (John 6:66).

Judas seems to have made the mistake of viewing Jesus only as a teacher instead of the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matthew 16:16). Judas may have very well nodded his head in agreement when Peter proclaimed Jesus was the Son of God, but his words and actions later revealed what he really thought about Jesus. He was simply a teacher to follow long enough to get what he wanted out of life.

Who is Jesus to you? Lord or Rabbi?

Posted by on April 22, 2015 in Uncategorized.

Leave a comment

June 24, 2013

FAT versus FIT

ImageWhile the title of this blog may sound like it has to do with physical fitness, it doesn’t. BUT, the man in the picture is both FAT and FIT. What does that mean? Read on!

My buddy Ben came back from a trip to Tacoma and informed me that the Navs no longer use the acronym “FAT.” For almost 40 years of Christian life, I have heard Navigators use the term “FAT man” when they are talking about the kind of man they are looking to invest in. The man should have a minimum of three characteristics before we spend too much time with him. He should be Faithful, Available, and Teachable (FAT).

Now Ben informed me that the “new” acronym is “FIT” – Faithful, Intentional, and Teachable. Part of the thinking behind the “new” term is that it’s better to be fit then fat, which sounds catchy. But is it really? 

Of course, the Navs don’t really determine which acronym is in vogue and which isn’t. But we do still seek to disciple men and women and see them become laborers in the Kingdom of God. So is it better to find someone who is intentional or available, when you’re looking for someone to disciple?

The key to the answer is understanding where we begin in the process, not in where we end. The end is important; but to get to the end there has to be a beginning. Since the characteristics of being faithful and teachable seem to be standing the test of time, we need to look at how being available or intentional fit in with those two characteristics. 

If we are making disciples, we must be starting with someone who is NOT a disciple (otherwise, we don’t need to make one!). To begin a discipling relationship, the person absolutely needs to be faithful and teachable. He needs to do what we ask him to do, even if it’s just a small assignment, like reading a booklet or reading a chapter of his Bible (that’s faithful). And he needs to be open to hear and implement what we are trying to impart to him (that’s teachable).

So when we look for a man who is at least faithful and teachable, does he also need to be available, or is intentional more important? 

A definition of intentional is “done on purpose; deliberate.” The synonyms would include “deliberate – willful – purposeful – intended.”

A definition of available is “not otherwise occupied; free to do something.” The synonyms would include “disposable – accessible – serviceable – obtainable.” 

Here’s where things get murky. A young Christian who is not a disciple can be intentional—deliberately committed to some project; maybe music or refurbishing cars. But they can be so committed to music or cars that they don’t have time to meet with someone who wants to help them grow to be a disciple.

So in my mind, feeble as it may be, availability is a more critical characteristic than intentionality when we are looking for someone to disciple. Yet, once the person becomes a disciple, intentionality becomes more important. A disciple who isn’t intentional in reaching out to non-Christians or Christians who are less spiritually mature than himself, isn’t going to be very effective. 

So perhaps when we are looking for someone to disciple we need to continue to focus on a FAT man. But when we are looking for a disciple to equip to be a laborer, we need to focus on a FIT man (although he would still need to be available or we just can’t equip him).

That means for the vast majority of us who are living and discipling among the lost, we still need to focus on a FAT man. WE need to be intentional about discipling someone who is available to us.

Posted by on June 24, 2013 in Discipling.

1 Comment

February 15, 2013

Ministry and Money

     As I have spoken to people over the last two months about my financial support needs for full-time ministry, several of them said they really didn’t understand how my financial support actually worked. So instead, of trying to explain to each person the specific details, I thought I would put those details here, and that can allow me to insure that I give each person all the details while only giving an overview when we are together.

     Most people are pretty clear on how a pastor gets paid by a church. The person candidates at the church; a leadership group makes a recommendation to call the person to be the pastor; and the church gets behind the new pastor by giving their tithes and offerings to the church. The church then pays the pastor a salary with normal benefits on a monthly basis – the same amount every month (with potential increases over the years) as long as the pastor serves the church.

     This is NOT now most missionaries and other full-time Christian workers are supported.

     Most missionaries are completely dependent on the designated gifts of others (both individuals and churches) to meet their monthly needs. By designated gifts, I mean that the gift is given in the name of the missionary into an account for that missionary. When someone gives a financial gift to the “general fund” of a Christian organization, that gift does not go a missionary. (Occasionally, a missionary may receive a portion of this general fund money in an emergency situation, but it does not go to help the regular monthly needs of a missionary.)

     So, missionaries and full-time Christian workers usually must raise all the financial support they need to fulfill the mission God has given them. That means we need to raise a salary (what we need to live on – housing, utilities, food, transportation, all the things that you normally pay for as well), and our benefits (we need to pay 100% of the costs for life and health insurance, worker’s compensation, social security, etc. [many of these are at least partially paid for by employers but missionaries need to pay for these in full] ), and many Christian workers have another budget for ministry expenses (covering the costs of transportation, fees for meetings/conferences, meals on the road which are often covered by employers).

     The average monthly financial support gift varies with every ministry, but I’ve experienced the average to be about $60. Every gift is important, no matter the size, but monthly gifts are what missionaries count on to make it through every month. Annual or one-time gifts help us meet special needs, and can also fill in gaps.

     By “gaps” I mean times when people do not give, even when they have pledged monthly support. The average monthly supporter gives 10 out of 12 months. There can be a variety of reasons for this. Sometimes it’s as simple as a donor misplaced the contribution slip and envelope that they get from the mission headquarters. Most missionaries experience a drop in support every February and in the summer months. That’s because people often hold back a month’s support when they are trying to pay off Christmas bills or go on vacation. And that’s why some missionaries will ask you to consider giving through an automatic process (by credit card or an electronic fund transfer from a bank account) – it means our monthly support check is a little more stable.

     In addition to each missionary’s personal support needs, the funds that you donate have a portion that is deducted for the mission organization that the missionary works through. This administrative fee (or whatever terms the organization uses) covers the cost of work done at the headquarters in support of the missionary. An example would be the staff and equipment that is used to process support checks and electronic payments going to the missionary. These are usually not covered by the “general fund” so the missionary is “charged” for those services. The Navigators administrative fee is 11% (the average fee is around 15%). That means if the missionary needs $3,000 in monthly personal support, he needs to raise $3,375.

     I hope that helps you understand my support needs a little better. There may still be questions that you have, and I’ll try to answer them as best as I can.

     For a few years, I have had a ministry budget of $1,500 a month. This covers all the meals that I buy for the guys I meet with (or the spaghetti we eat on Sunday night fellowship times), the gas, oil and insurance for my car, materials that I use, travel costs when I am going to see ministry alumni or attending a conference, and more.

     You probably already know that I am actively raising full-time salary and benefits support. It will be in two phases: immediately, I need to raise $2,250 in monthly support, and by fall 2013 I will need to raise an additional $1,000 in monthly personal support. There will probably be times when I have a special need, and I will communicate that to everyone when it happens.

     If you would like to begin to support me, you can click this link to go directly to a secure web page for The Navigators: http://tinyurl.com/cnm22pt  (If you’re concerned about using the Tiny URL link, you can go to http://www.navigators.org and search for me by my last name).

     Send any comments or questions you may have to me at bruce.stopher{insert the at sign here}gmail.com (I don’t put my full email address here to prevent junk mailers from finding it!)

Posted by on February 15, 2013 in Uncategorized.

1 Comment

October 2, 2012

Can it be reproduced?

During my visit with Lucas this week, I asked about whether he and his wife, who is 8 months pregnant, would be starting a Bible study any time soon. They currently attend two Bible studies; one at church ad one at a home.

Lucas said, “No, no. I’m still not ready for that yet. Maybe in another year.

When I asked what would be different in a year, he replied, “I should have more knowledge by then.”

You see, the Bible studies that Lucas and his wife currently attend aren’t really “Bible studies.” But they are called Bible studies, so why would I say that?

The two Bible studies they currently attend are led by two men who spend a large amount of time each week studying a topic (in one case) and a Bible passage (in the other case). When the group gets together each week, each man then leads the group through what he has learned, including definitions of Greek words, cross references throughout the Bible, and examples that they have found that help illustrate the point of the topic or passage.

In each case, the people would attend the Bible study have not actually done Bible study themselves. Only the leaders have studied, and they then share their findings with a group of people who listen and diligently take notes.

One of the results I find from this type of Bible study is that there is little personal application for the group. That’s why I don’t call these a Bible study. It’s really another sermon offered on a different day.

That’s why Lucas felt like he needed at least another year of learning before he could begin a Bible study of his own. His model had become one of men who study throughout the week and then share at the appointed time.

So we talked about how we used to do Bible study together in a small group when Lucas lived closer to me. At some point during the week, each person would read a passage of Scripture. He would look for a key thought, and note anything that he should do or be. He would also jot down any questions or problems that he had with the passage.

When we got together for Bible study, what we were actually doing was sharing our findings with each other. Questions were brought to the group, since people often have similar questions, and we would bang out the answers together. We often asked the question at the end of the meeting, “So what difference should this make in our lives?”

A short time of sharing personal applications would end the meeting, and the next meeting would often begin with checking to see how each of us were doing with past application we wanted to make.

That’s not only real Bible study, with each person actively involved, but it’s also a method that is reproducible.

If something is reproducible, it is capable of being reproduced at a different time or place and by different people.

Most of us are probably not gifted at leading a group (either a small grouping the home or a large group in the church) by teaching what the Bible says about a topic or what a passage means. But all of us can facilitate a group of people who are all learning to feed themselves on the Word of God.

What would happen if every person who went to a Bible study was actually studying what the Bible says to them personally? That’s reproducible!

Posted by on October 2, 2012 in Uncategorized and tagged .

Leave a comment

July 16, 2012

One man, or many?

Yesterday at church, one of the pastor’s spoke on “Transforming Relationships.” During his message, he reiterated something that I have heard other pastors at the church talk about. They refer to the church and it’s ministries in a “home” analogy: the foyer, the living room and the kitchen.  They will explain the concept this way: the Sunday church services are like a foyer, where you get to know people; a sort of introduction to the family. The living family represents some of the larger ministries: the men’s group, MOPS (mothers of preschoolers), the old people (can’t remember what they’re called which probably means I should be part of the group), etc. In the living room, you get a little a little better acquainted. And finally the kitchen represents their small groups, where the most intimacy, and most of transformation, occurs.

 

I’ve heard this concept in several churches in several states (Minnesota, Nevada, South Carolina, and Washington come to mind right away. Perhaps the leadership of these churches have al read the same book (and perhaps I should do likewise). But I wonder if we really have to full picture.

 

During the message yesterday, the pastor used Proverbs 27:5-6, 17 as the support for his thesis. I like those verses, but I come to a somewhat different conclusion.

 

Verse 5 says, “Better is open rebuke than love that is concealed.” The pastor talked about the importance of open rebuke. One of the two examples he gave of open rebuke was a mother in a store with a child who she was publicly chiding. He said something like, “That kid won’t ever do that again, at least in public.” The inference was the public rebuke is not a good practice – which I generally tend to agree with.

 

His second example involved a friend named Mimi or Minnie (you know me – I can’t hear the differences in similar sounds and one of my hearing aide batteries had gone dead!). Minnie pulled him aside one day ad talked with him about some things in his life. He mentioned that the conversation was painful. But Minnie was right on, and he spoke of her appreciation for open rebuke, rather than concealing her love and not broaching the subject.

 

He went on to speak about verse 17, “As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another.” I have to admit that I became lost in my own thought at this point. A point that I want to make here.

 

Verse 17 talks about two men; one is sharpening another. It doesn’t say “As iron sharpens iron, so a small group sharpens another.” While small groups have their usefulness, and we should all strive to be part of one, the most intimate relationships occur one-on-one. The examples the pastor gave of open rebuke were both one-on-one situations (one public, one private).

 

This is where the analogy of a home fails. While there are several rooms where people can gather and get to know one another, love one another, encourage one another (I’m thinking of Hebrews 10:24,25), there are times when things are done best one-to-one.

 

For me, this one-on-one (life-on-life, man-to-man) time can be done in the privacy of my home, my buddies apartment, or at Whataburger or Panera Bread. The important thing is to see the value of this one-to-one time.

 

Using the pastor’s example, it’s not that we want to mother to rebuke her child in a small group (the kitchen) or the foyer (in front of an entire church). We prefer that she rebuke her child lovingly and in private, but still one-on-one.

 

By not mentioning one-to-one time, we leave out some of the richest time we can have with one another. Time when tears are shared, sins are confessed, thoughts are challenged. Sure, there are times when these times can be done in small groups, but they are most intimately done, with the best chance of transformation, in a one-to-one environment.

 

I long for the day for the church to see how important man-to-man and woman-to-woman times are and teach it, not only from the pulpit, but also by example.

Posted by on July 16, 2012 in Uncategorized.

Leave a comment

April 24, 2012

Long-term discipling

I was visiting Giancarlo in Little Rock and we were talking about his past experiences with the church and discipling. I mentioned that new believers are sometimes told “read your Bible and pray” as the only discipling help. This little “poem” came out of that conversation:

Here’s how to read your Bible,
Here’s how to pray,
Here’s how to witness to others,
Now go away.

Of course, no church is going to tell someone to go away. But it often feels like you’re being told to go away if you want more than the usual “read your Bible and pray” fare.

When Mike was visiting from Germany last month, he came with me when I was getting man-to-man time with Andrew. At one point he asked Andrew how long we had been meeting together. Andrew thought about it and said, “over six years.”

Later that day I reminded Mike of his question and commented that he seemed surprised by the answer. He had never considered that someone could be disciplined for more than a year or two. Part of that thought process is based on his being in a college discipling ministry – people just don’t stay that long, so there is a natural end to regular meetings.

He asked me, “What do you talk about for six years?” I responded, “Well, you sure don’t check his quiet times every week for that long!” I then told him the topics that Andrew and I had covered over the past year. And he saw the value in long-term discipling.

Discipling may sometimes come to an end because of the mobility we experience in America; people move on. It may also end because people feel like they’ve gotten what they wanted; they’ve been grounded in the basics of the faith and can feed themselves.

But it’s important to keep the door of a discipling relationship open. Recently, I had the opportunity to visit a guy I had discipled over fifteen years ago. A typical military guy, he had moved to another base, and then he got out and found a job in the southeast. He had settled down, raised his kids, joined a church, played in the praise band, and his walk with Christ was consistent. Yet, as we talked we both realized that something was missing. His Christian life had become “routine.”

As we talked, it was like I was able to throw some gasoline on his smoldering life and see a fire grow. And we set up a plan to do a better job of staying in touch and talking more about the “good stuff.” Of thriving in the Christian life, not just surviving.

Sometimes it may look like a guy has everything he needs for his Christian walk. That’s a deception. The natural law of entropy (things left to themselves will break down to their simplest form) seems to have a spiritual counterpart: men left on the back burner will cool and harden. We need to consider how to stir the pot from time to time.

As you disciple men around you, make sure that you see them as lifetime relationships, not just another notch on your gun.

Posted by on April 24, 2012 in Discipling.

Leave a comment

April 5, 2012

Thoughts on Spiritual Sons

There’s no question about it, I’m known for calling guys “son.” It gets a range of reactions, and often I chalk it up to having lived in Texas for a long time! But I do, in fact, think about a large number of men as my own sons; guys who serve with the Army in Germany and the Navy in Japan, and all points in between!

A few days ago, I was reading in Mark chapter 2 and had one of those “Ah-Uh!” moments. The chapter starts with the story of the paralyzed man being lowered through the roof by four other men so that he and Jesus could come face-to-face. There are all kinds of sermons and thoughts I’ve heard on this passage, but I’ve never heard anything about the first word out of Jesus’ mouth when He addressed the situation as recorded by Mark.

Verse 5 tells us, “And Jesus seeing their faith said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” Jesus looked at the man, and called him “son”! This wasn’t a boy or a child. Luke confirms that this was a man being carried by four men. Jesus might be, just might be a few years older than him. And yet he looks at him and calls him “son.”

The Greek word being used here is teknon. There are other Greek words for son, but this time (in Matthew and Mark) Jesus uses the word teknon. I searched for the word with some Bible tools and found that it appears 100 times from Matthew to Revelation. It’s the word that the Apostle Paul used for Timothy and Titus when he referred to them as his sons. The plural form is what Paul used in 1 Corinthians 4:14 when he writes to “my beloved children” and then talks about being their father through the gospel (vs 15).

Strong’s (5043) gives several definitions based on its use. Here are three:

  • the name transferred to that intimate and reciprocal relationship formed between men by the bonds of love, friendship, trust, just as between parents and children
  • in affectionate address, such as patrons, helpers, teachers and the like employ: my child
  • in the NT, pupils or disciples are called children of their teachers, because the latter by their instruction nourish the minds of their pupils and mold their characters

In my effort to put things into my own words, I take those three definitions and come up with this: A spiritual son is a man with whom I have an intimate and reciprocal relationship, based on the bonds of love, friendship and trust, as we work together to develop the spiritual walk of the son, while I also learn from him, over our lifetimes.

Being a spiritual father to a spiritual son is an awesome responsibility. It’s completely voluntary. We enter into the relationship willingly. We get into the weeds of life, and work toward being better men, better husbands, better fathers, and most importantly better followers of Jesus.

A few weeks ago, a friend was visiting and came with me on one of my weekly appointments with one of my spiritual sons. At one point he asked how long we had been meeting together, and was surprised when he heard it has been over six years. As we talked about that, we realized that some times people see discipling another man is simply sharing the “basics” of the Christian life. We help him get into the Word and develop a prayer life, pat him on the head and send him on his merry way.

Being a spiritual father to a spiritual son is different because it includes a lifetime commitment to each other – often without even verbalizing the commitment. It goes beyond the basics (which are absolutely important) and deals with the guts of life. It takes time and energy, and can drain resources from time to time.

The divine nature of Christ could rightly (theologically) call the paralytic man “son” since as the second Person of the Trinity we are His children. But as I put myself in the shoes (or pallet) of the paralytic, if I would have heard Jesus call me “son” I would know that He loves me and he’s with me for the long haul.

Who is your spiritual son?

Posted by on April 5, 2012 in Discipling, Spiritual Sons and tagged , .

Leave a comment