Month: February 2005

Baucham: ‘Remember who you were’

EULESS?Houston-area evangelist Voddie Baucham warned believers in the closing session of the Empower Evangelism Conference to remember their state before Christ redeemed them.

Baucham, raised by a Buddhist mother in Los Angeles and born again as a college student at Rice, said because of his roots he remains sensitive to people Christians sometimes spiritually snub.

He recalled being interrogated by a police officer and made to lie face down on the ground while walking with his uncle and cousin along the Pacific Coast highway in California because they were three black males in a neighborhood the policeman didn’t think they belonged in.

His uncle, he explained, lived only several blocks away. He also recalled preaching at a church that had never welcomed a black preacher into its pulpit. As Baucham took the podium, two deacons walked out in protest.

“So perhaps I do have another level of sensitivity toward those who are outsiders. But I urge you, when you look at people who don’t know Christ, who are not following Christ, before you say anything, remember who you used to be.”

Believers?some of whom were converted young?easily lose empathy toward pagans.

Preaching from Ephesians 2, which says believers were once dead in their trespasses, walking according to fleshly desires and children of wrath, Baucham pleaded: “How dare we pass judgment on other individuals because they struggle with things. I don’t know about you but I remember my life before I came to Christ. You and I were worthless before Christ got hold of us.

“So when you look at the homosexual, remember who you were. When you look at the drug addict, remember who you were. When you look at the garden-variety pagan, remember who you were.”

Baucham also urged his listeners to remember not only who they were but also how hard it was to do right without Christ.

Baucham said before we were saved we tried to do good things but failed often “because there was nothing in you or about you that would allow you to overcome your sin. Remember how hard it was?”

“Don’t be flippant ? How dare we expect non-believers to act like believers.”

Such attitudes make unbelievers think they need to clean up before coming to Christ, he said.

Third, remember what you did before salvation, Baucham reminded.

“You did things to deserve death and hell. We forget that sometimes. It amazes me sometimes that we shake our fists at God when life gets difficult as though difficulty coming into my life means God has slipped off his throne. And sometimes our attitude is, ‘God, I don’t know what you’re doing, but difficulty has come into my life right now, so you must have missed something. Because if you were paying attention and you were on your job, my life wouldn’t be this hard, these trials wouldn’t come my way. To which I respond, ‘Who do you think you are?’

“If he would crush and kill his only begotten Son, who was spotless and sinless, how dare you and I think that we ought to live a life of ease.

“The breath you just took is borrowed from God. You did not deserve it, nor do you deserve the next one that you will take. And if you walk out of here and fall on your face dead, God has still been too good to you.”

Finally, remember what God did, Baucham said.

Baucham said he and his wife would finalize adoption of a baby boy this month?a reminder to him that all believers, too, have been adopted. Several weeks into the pregnancy, the birthmother went to an abortion clinic but left after thinking someone would surely love the child and raise him. Baucham said he eagerly awaits the day he can tell Elijah, their new son, “Number one, God spared your life. Number two, we chose you. Number three, if you think adoption into this family is something ?”

Desperate Households

It was at least my third hearing of something hard to believe. On NBC, Katie Couric’s recent segment on students and sex suggested that the incredibly disturbing is commonplace in many of our schools. I’m starting to be convinced. The faces of the kids and parents interviewed were familiar and, well, casual in the way they discussed things rarely mentioned in my presence before I was in college.

A few years back, and on the same subject, journalist Tom Wolfe wrote an essay called “Hooking Up” in his book of the same title in which he described ways American mores had changed by the end of the second millennium. His tales of widespread, impersonal sexual encounters (the definition of “hooking up”) between our children, even during school hours, were dismissed by many of us as atypical, maybe hysterical.

The kids in Miss Couric’s report got my attention. She had a collection of middle and high school students and threw out terms like “oral sex” for them to discuss. At least in the televised edit, they were neither eager nor noticeably shy to discuss the subject. It was just something people did. It wasn’t sex and it was no big deal. When our hostess cheerfully asked why girls were willing, the answer startled me with its authenticity. “Self esteem,” “to be popular,” “because I want my boyfriend to be happy/like me,” the girls answered at once while the boys looked on blandly. I believed them. Mr. Wolfe had earlier written of the “continuing vogue of feminism” that made sexual activity a matter of little concern for young men. Now, they were the pursued as young women sought affirmation through them.

“Casual” was the relentless theme of the report. Either sexual behavior was worse or more surprising because it was thought meaningless. In another segment, the kids spoke of sex between mere friends as similar to “? going to the driving range. You improve your game and find out what shots work.” Again, they spoke of it with less passion or embarrassment than if they were actually talking about golf.

Then the kids went outside to the beach. We were treated to gratuitous shots of the newly-acquainted students slathering sunscreen on one another for the intro to the next bit with the parents.

The parents were worried about what they were hearing and what they suspected. One mom commented on losing touch with her daughter since she gained apparent independence at 16. Since her daughter had a car and a cell phone, mom didn’t know where she went and who she talked with. On the issue of sexual behavior, she worried that her daughter might do things that she was not “emotionally ready for,” or “not based on relationship.” A dad chimed in with the concern that his student’s sexual behavior might not be based on “romantic love.”

Then the kids came back to talk about the role their parents do or should play in their lives. No big surprises here. “I need my privacy.” “I don’t want her (mom’s) moral judgments.” One happy kid said that her mom knows “everything I’ve done” and “even if she doesn’t approve she still cares about me.”

Here’s why I believe them. What they’re saying sounds like the predictable fruit of what our society has been saying for years?if it feels right, it must be.

Listen to the priorities of the kids. For the boys it’s self-gratification and technique separated from responsibility. This is nothing new except for the seeming lack of embarrassment. For the girls, the core values are self esteem, popularity and a twisted perversion of unselfishness?all divorced from dignity and morals. They’ll apparently do nearly anything to get what they want. Both sexes want privacy, privilege, and absolute tolerance from the adults in their lives. Some parents seem willing to give it.

If you listen to the parents — at least the featured comments — they don’t have a problem with what they fear their kids are doing if it has a suitable emotional or romantic underpinning. Some kids are apparently getting the privacy, privilege, and acceptance they want. Actually I think these parents do have a problem with the behavior but can’t say why without sounding intolerant. The idea that parents are actually this careless in the face of the humiliation of their daughters and the brutishness of their sons is too dark for me to accept, yet.

As I write this, the radio in the background is playing an anti-drug abuse commercial about parents who ask questions and butt into the lives of their children. What a bizarre contrast in socially acceptable parental moralizing. I guess that’s because drug abuse is dangerous and sex is just sex.

But it’s not true. No one who’s survived to the geezerly age of 30 can doubt the spiritual aspect of sexual relationships. With aging eyes I can practically see the scars on young men and women as they strut and slouch through the mall or hamburger joint. You can almost pick out the users and used by the celebrities they ape in their costumes. You can surely see it in their eyes.

Parents are a big part of the answer and at least part of the problem. Our nation has created a very hostile environment for the nurture of healthy kids, though. Fashion and all kinds of entertainment underscore the idea that women are objects and victims.