Dr Paul Allen

Inside American evangelicalism is a paradox: many of the most respected leaders use their influence to steer denominations and institutions in a direction that is significantly more liberal than the people those leaders ostensibly represent. There is no shortage of examples of this. Congregations who would reject critical race theory have CRT spoon-fed to them by their leaders. While those in the pew eschew the LGBTQ+ movement, some of the most influential evangelical pastors in the country are exposing their congregations to “affirming” curricula.  The ERLC provides a great illustration of this paradox. While the government closed churches and banned singing during COVID, the “religious liberty commission” of the Southern Baptist Convention commended court rulings siding with the government, which directly opposed the ERLC’s supposed mission and the will of many Southern Baptists. The Daily Wire’s Megan Basham wants us to know that it is not a coincidence that church leaders use their

Jesus didn’t pull punches in his parable of the rich fool, condemning the man who built larger barns to store his ever-increasing wealth (Luke 12:13–21). If this is such a big issue, how ought church leaders to think about money in the bank? What’s the minimum a church should hold in reserve? When is a church flirting with the rich fool’s barns?   Such questions might make you uncomfortable. Christians sometimes talk about church finances as if they’re awkward cousins of real gospel ministry: “It’s a shame, but you’ve got to think about the church like it’s a business.” We assume preaching, evangelism, and discipleship are truly spiritual activities while finances are an unfortunate necessity—if not an outright distraction. We assume preaching, evangelism, and discipleship are truly spiritual activities while finances are an unfortunate necessity. The implication is that financial questions belong in the domain of the businessman, not the pastor.  The Bible, by contrast, calls money a

People assume (as I once did) that since Martin Luther (1483–1546) first protested the abuse of indulgences, in 1517, Rome must have been shamed into ending the practice. She was not. The sale of indulgences continues. In section 1471, the Catechism of the Catholic Church uses revealing language. The benefit of indulgences is available “under certain conditions through the action of the church.” It cites Paul VI’s Indulgentarium Doctrina (1967). Notably, the catechism criticizes past abuses but does not forbid their sale. This is because canon 28 of the Council of Constance (1414–18) set the conditions for the sale of indulgences: Can. 27. And whether he believes that by reason of this sort of grant those who visit the church and those contribute to them can gain indulgences of this kind. Can. 28 Likewise, whether he believes that, for a just and holy reason, the pope can grant indulgences for the remission of sins to all Christians who are truly contrite and have confessed, especially

Money, in the first century, was still a relatively new technology, so they were still working out its morality. We are now debating the ethics of mobiles: should we read a text message in church, or during a conversation? In the same way, people in Jesus’ day were wondering if money was good and when it was bad – something we still struggle with. If it weren’t for taxes (which had to be paid in coinage), most people could have gone through life without using any money. They could grow much of what they ate and could barter for other things. Coins were easier to carry than chickens, but using them could be expensive. Every time you made a transaction, you lost a percentage, so bartering was cheaper than money. Jesus’ teachings are surprisingly full of stories and advice concerning money, especially considering that most of his hearers didn’t have much. Perhaps he knew how important this technology would become. Jews were more positive about money than many people because of

We all live for something . Some purpose statement hides beneath all our desires and decisions, whether we know it or not. We do everything we do out of love — for something or someone. The question is whether that purpose (or person) is worth all the time, money, and energy we’re spending. Freedom and independence may be the purpose of choice among twentysomethings today. Clinical psychologist Meg Jay who focuses on young adults writes, “By the new millennium, only about half of twentysomethings were married by age thirty and even fewer had children, making the twenties a time of newfound freedom. . . . The twenties were now disposable years lubricated by disposable income” The Defining Decade ). The twenties have become this new kind of “paradise” in between childhood and real adulthood, when you can party hard, experiment with new things, and spend lots of money without feeling the consequences. We postpone becoming adults, or at least the responsibilities that come with being a

American buffalo proof vertical edit (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) “But godliness actually is a means of great gain, when accompanied by contentment. For we have brought nothing into the world, so we cannot take anything out of it either. And if we have food and covering, with these we shall be content.”  1 TIMOTHY 6:6–8 Believers should not have a self–centered preoccupation with money .  With all the attention modern society gives to money, what it can buy, and the dividends it can earn, Christians are continually challenged to view it properly. But Scripture provides us with much help and guidance in this area. It is replete with warnings and admonitions about how we are to act and think concerning money and wealth. There are at least eight basic, biblical guidelines that when believed and followed will give us a God –centered view of money. First, having money in itself is not wrong (1 Sam. 2:7). Second, we ought to recognize that money is a gift from God and comes to us throu