Ask the Pastor with J.D. Greear

This week, Pastor J.D. talks about whether or not Christians should listen to secular music. Show Notes: While I know it’ll frustrate the listeners, I’m going to have to give a “yes and no” answer. First of all, songs like the national anthem are secular songs — there’s really no way to avoid them. But let’s start with reasons why Christians might want to be very cautious or even want to mostly avoid secular music: The wrong kind of music leads to the wrong thought patterns. I heard someone a long time ago say that music affects us even more deeply than we realize, because it’s tied into our thought patterns. Proverbs (23:7) says that “As a man thinks in his heart, so is he.” John Mark Comer, in his book Live No Lies, writes: “If you sow a thought, you reap an action; if you reap an action, you reap another action; sow several actions, you reap a character; sow a character, you reap a destiny — either in slavery to the flesh or freedom of the spirit.” I listened to a fairly compelling YouTube video about this a few years ago, where this guy named Alan Parr was arguing that Christians generally should not listen to secular music. He said to ask yourself a few questions: Does the music I’m listening to promote an ungodly message? Am I being a light to others if I look just like them? Is this music hindering or helping my spiritual growth? But on the other hand, if you gave a “hard no” to this, you’d have to cut a lot of other things out as well: TV, movies, etc. Jesus tells us to be “in the world but not of the world.” Paul, in 1 Cor. 5, says that it’s impossible to totally separate yourself from all immorality in the world. That doesn’t mean you should participate in it, but that it’s impossible to separate yourself from all contact with it. That’s why I think it’s important to make a distinction between “non-Christian” music and “un-Christian” music. In other words, it’s one thing to say nobody should ever listen to a song that illicitly promotes sex, violence, etc. It’s another to say nobody should ever listen to Faithfully by Journey, or any Taylor Swift songs at all, etc. John Piper says: “There is such a thing as worldly music. One of the marks of worldly music is the exultation in a worldly view of life. A worldly view of life is a life that leaves Christ out and approves of what he disapproves. That is worldly. Worldly isn’t a sound; worldly is leaving Christ out. That is why it is called worldly and not Christly. And it approves of what he disapproves. It is called worldly because it treasures the world above the one who made the world. It revels in the very self-centeredness that gives rise to the miseries of the world.” I think about this similarly to how I think about the question: “Should you go to a party hosted by unbelievers?” It depends on what kind of party. At some parties, the whole point is to sin — I’d apply that to music and movies also. If the whole point is the glorification of sin, I don’t know if that’s the kind of thing our Savior delights in. After all, how could you love somebody and then delight in what led to their murder? What mood is the music you’re listening to putting you in? I don’t know about you, but the mood I need to dominate my heart is one that glorifies God and promotes goodness, truth, love and beauty, and that’s what I want to saturate myself with. Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

This week, Pastor J.D. answers a question about whether or not we should give out our own pronouns when asked. Show Notes: We have actually talked about this topic a couple of years ago from another angle, and this may be a good time to revisit that. The podcast from several years ago got a lot of attention and a lot of people asked questions about it. I think it’s good to bring that back up, both to continue the conversation and also to clarify some things I said. I’d actually like to start by discussing that previous question (“Should we use someone’s preferred pronouns when asked?”). The conversation in our culture has shifted even since then. Also, I’ll be candid: as I’ve wrestled with this, some of my own thinking on this has crystalized and, I’d even say, matured. There are several dynamics at play when we think about a question like this. One of those is is truth. Our job as witnesses is to stand uncompromisingly on the truth, to rebuke our society, to stand against untruth and darkness. Another dynamic are the relational aspects of knowing someone and maintaining a relationship with them. We’re not just called to defend truth but to win people. So, if someone has transitioned and wants to be called different pronouns, should you consent to that? Let me first use a phrase I first heard from Andrew T. Walker: “The answer to that question begins and ends with no.” The reason I say that is because I think, as believers, we have to be crystal clear on the truth. I did make this point on our previous episode, talking about the necessity of being crystal clear on truth, but I think I should have been more clear and I want to do that now: there can be no ambiguity in our testimony to the world. This is not ambiguous in Scripture, it’s not unclear, and part of our calling is to speak to culture when culture does not align with what God has said. I understand there’s a lot of brokenness, dysphoria, and complexity to this for a lot of people, but we have to be honest about what the Bible says. After that has been made clear, some of these other relational dynamics kick in. In that previous episode, I was hypothesizing about a situation where I’m sitting in my office with a dad and his transgender child, coming to me for clarity and so I make clear to them what the Bible says. But, if in the course of conversation I used the child’s self-referential pronoun as I talk with and about them, just to keep them in the conversation, I don’t think that would represent a capitulation or compromise of truth if someone chose to do that, assuming they’d been clear about the truth on the front end and the back end. That should never be done in a way that implies acceptance or affirmation, even for a second. The easiest thing, honestly, is to use their name, even if that forces you to word things awkwardly. Again, we’re trying to balance two things: clearly testify to the truth, and doing our best to keep our relationship with the other person in order to engage with them at the heart level. Let me add a third thing we’re balancing: to fight the battle at the right location. Being clear and truthful about gender is a battle we have to fight, no matter how unpopular. But that doesn’t mean that I fire shots or draw battle lines in every other sentence when I’m trying to get the conversation focused on what we need to get it focused on. Our goal is to engage the issue in a way that engages the heart, and to speak truthful about God’s design without apology. So that’s why I say the answer to the question begins and ends with no. Now, back to whether or not you list your own pronouns when asked (like on a name-tag at work, for example).  Different dynamics are at play here. On the one hand, saying that my pronouns are he/him is a true statement. I’m not telling or affirming a lie. But, what obviously is being done here is an attempt to normalize the idea that pronouns are a choice. And for me to clarify what my pronouns are, I’m normalizing the question and we believe that’s not even a valid question. So, when I point out my pronouns, in one way, I’m making a true statement but in another way I’m normalizing a question that should not be normalized. For that reason, I would resist giving my pronouns wherever I could because I don’t want to normalize the gender confusion or recognize this as legitimate question. If a job requires this, or the government requires it one day on our ID, should we refuse that even if it means losing our job or going to jail? I’m not sure I’d want to give one answer that would just be applicable at all times and all places. I think you’d have to discern what is best for witness and truth and your calling to be somewhere. Lastly, while we’re talking about things you said in the past, we’ve gotten a number of questions about a sermon you preached a few years ago. You used the word “whispers” in relation to how the Bible speaks about homosexuality. So, can you explain what was happening in that statement, and would you still say that today?  The short answer is no. In a message on Romans 1:24-32 called “How the Fall Affects Us All,” I said that in comparison to how Jesus talks about the sins of religious pride and greed, it’s as if God whispers about sexual sin while he screams about pride and greed. It was a comparison by analogy. I regret the word choice. It was a rather clumsy way of making the point. The point I was trying to make — that Jesus seemed to save his “loudest thunder” for religious hypocrites — that point is one that I stand by. But in the end, the language that I used to make that point probably obscured more than it illuminated, and I know that as a communicator, I bare the responsibility to speak clearly. Scripture says that teachers receive a stricter judgment, and I take that very seriously. In this case, my words confused some on a very vital topic which desperately needs clarity today. At no point was I trying to imply that sexual ethics are muted in Scripture or that Scripture is unclear about them, or that they’re less important than other sins and that we should not speak clearly and boldly about them or be embarrassed by them. I do seek to build bridges where I can, but I don’t believe we should ever undermine the Bible’s teaching to do so. I was speaking directly to the members of The Summit Church in that clip, highlighting a problem that I feel is pervasive in congregations like ours, which is that we treat gospel ministry as if it is primarily a culture war, speaking condescendingly about the sins of others while overlooking the sins at work in our own hearts. Failures in communication are almost always the fault of the communicator, and so, for any confusion that my wording may have caused, I do sincerely apologize. In that message and many others, I’ve been clear about the seriousness of sexual sin and I’ll continue to do that. I also want to be sure we link to that sermon, as it has helped a lot of people asking questions to hear the broader context. Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

This week, listen into one of Pastor J.D.’s recent sermons where he explained a question based on John 20:23: “Did Jesus give Peter the ability to forgive sins?” Show Notes: John 20:23 sounds startling at first: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld.” This can be a difficult verse because it almost makes it sound like Jesus is giving us the authority to forgive sins. But that can’t be true. I’ve said before that you always interpret hard verses in the Bible by easy ones? Well, multiple verses in the Bible say that only God can forgive sins. Think about it this way: If anybody in history would ever have had the authority to forgive sins, it would have been Peter (who Jesus said this to). He was standing in that original group that heard these words and he was recognized as one of the main leaders of the church. And some today do indeed claim that Peter and his successors have the authority to forgive sins. But not one time in the Bible do you ever find Peter taking upon himself the authority to grant forgiveness. Not once. In fact, in Acts 10, when Peter preaches the gospel to a group of Gentiles, he says to them–notice this– Acts 10:43, “To him (Jesus) all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” Peter didn’t say, “I forgive your sins,” he said, “The Bible says if you believe in Jesus you will receive forgiveness of sins and I’m just here to tell you about it.” So, if this phrase doesn’t mean that we have the authority to forgive sins, what does it mean? Well… this is a little nerdy, so hang with me for a minute: (v. 23) the expression “if you forgive someone’s sins, they are forgiven” is in the perfect-tense verbs in Greek, which means you could translate that phrase as: “they have already been forgiven.” You could really read that statement as, “If you forgive any one’s sins they have (already) been forgiven.” In other words, Jesus was saying that Peter and the Apostles were given the ability to recognize when God had saved someone, and the authority to validate their acceptance of it, assuring those new Gentile believers, when they believed, that they were indeed fully included in the family of God. The Apostles could recognize when someone’s sins were forgiven, and make it official. Even more importantly, it was through the apostles’ preaching that others heard the message and believed. God will forgive the sins of anyone who believes, but, it’s like Paul said, “How can they believe on him of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear unless we preach to them?” We hold in our hands the power to share the only message by which people can be forgiven. Jesus died to forgive the sins of everybody, but that death doesn’t do any good unless they hear about it. It’s like Martin Luther said, “It wouldn’t matter if Jesus died 1000x if nobody ever heard about it!” Or the theologian Carl F. H. Henry: “The gospel means ‘good news,’ but it is only good news for somebody if it gets to them in time.” Jesus purchase of their forgiveness doesn’t do them good if they never hear about it, and we are the only ones they can hear about it from. So, SENT people recognize God’s role and their role in the Great Commission.  Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

Recently, Pastor J.D. got to host a special “Live AMA” with college students from Hardin Baptist Church in Hardin, KY. Listen in as Pastor J.D. answers questions submitted by the audience, including, “Should Churches Sacrifice Doctrine to Appeal to More People?” Show Notes: Should Churches Sacrifice Doctrine to Appeal to More People? I don’t see any way other than to say, yes, you should be critical of these churches. Now, does that mean you should become a social media warrior? Probably not. That’s mostly unhelpful. But I will say, sometimes, not everything is as it seems with other churches. Sometimes, there are genuine reasons behind things other churches do that are admirable and laudable. However, you don’t ever do anyone any favors by backing down from the truth. Just like there’s a time to know when not to speak, there’s a time to be really clear. If I’m Called to Ministry — Now What? Let’s just acknowledge one thing: everyone is called in some way. Every Christian is called to leverage whatever God gave them for the Great Commission. The question is no longer if you are called, but where and how. We always challenge all of our college graduates to spend 2 years on church planting teams… a lot of times, they’re beginning their careers over there! Another phrase we use: To follow Jesus means to figure out what you’re good at, and then do it well to the glory of God, somewhere strategic for the mission of God. Our Summit College team encourages students to do this, but our North American Mission Board does this, also: go to Go2Years.net to get in on this. How Do You Counsel Someone Called Overseas? Well, just go. Check out either a short-term trip through your local church, or even something like the International Mission Board’s Journeyman program. Those are great ways to find out if this really is what God has for you. Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

Recently, Pastor J.D. got to be a part of a special “Live AMA” with college students from Hardin Baptist Church in Hardin, KY. Listen in as Pastor J.D. answers questions submitted by the audience, including, “How much should you dwell on your sin?” Show Notes: How much should you dwell on your sin? From a pastoral perspective, most of us don’t hate sins enough. One of the main things to do is to pray for God to give us a hatred for sin. Having said that, the Puritans used to say, “For every one look at yourself, you should take 10 looks at Jesus Christ.” In fact, where you learn to hate sin is by looking at the purity of Christ. The Bible says that the righteous man falls seven times and gets back up — can you imagine walking behind somebody who fell seven times? The point is, even the righteous man falls all the time. But he shows his righteousness not by never falling, but by looking to Christ when he falls. Growth in grace is not growing in how much you actually need grace, growth in grace is growing in your awareness of how much you actually need it. How do you go about addressing friends who are clearly in sin? Practically speaking, you have to say something. Some of us struggle with not wanting to confront anyone. Some of us struggle with wanting to say too much. Ultimately, you have to say that you can’t see the fruits of the gospel in their lives. And I’ve seen God use conversations like that in people’s lives before. But some of you will want to say that too many times. And the key is to find balance in speaking the truth into someone’s life while not trying to force them to change. You have to let the Holy Spirit do that. Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

Recently, Pastor J.D. got to be a part of a special “Live AMA” with college students from Hardin Baptist Church in Hardin, KY. Listen in as Pastor J.D. answers questions submitted by the audience, including, “How do you have faith in something that you can’t prove exists?” Show Notes: How do you have faith in something you can’t prove exists? The first thing I would say is that there are a lot of things that we perceive that are not necessarily perceived through our sight or even our five senses. And think, for example, about our perception of love. We all know love is real, even though it’s not something we can taste, touch, see, smell, or hear. We all have an innate sense of the divine — that there is something greater out there — whether we want to acknowledge that or not. It’s like C.S. Lewis said: “If we find ourselves with a desire that nothing in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that we were made for another world.” Beyond that, there are several things that the Bible points to that philosophers have called the “arguments for God,” or evidences and fingerprints for God’s existence. The cosmological argument: essentially, the idea that nothing + nobody cannot = everything. And that matter cannot create itself, which is a strong evidence that there is some a Creator. The moral argument: the idea that we all have a sense of right and wrong, and that if we truly are just evolutionary accidents, there’s no such thing as right and wrong. The teleological argument: the idea that we seem to be created for a purpose, with a longing for eternity. The ontological argument: the idea that because it is possible that God exists, then he must exist. And I often just think about the significance of all that has happened since Jesus’ life. None of it is likely, and especially since the original Christians did not gain much from the founding of the faith. How can we share the gospel with grace and truth? The story of Jesus is the greatest of all forms of evangelism. Over time, my evangelism approach has changed from trying to get through whatever method or tool I was using as quickly as I could, to focusing on an invite to study the Bible with that person together. Because I know when we study the story of Jesus together, there’s a beauty there that is more powerful than the logical arguments I might be able to overwhelm you with. Michael Green wrote a book called Evangelism in the First Century. He drew a distinction between missionaries and defenders of orthodoxy. Both are gifts to the body of Christ, both are important, but they are different roles. Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

Have you ever wondered if Christianity is too good to be true? In this episode, Pastor J.D. answers the question, “Is Christianity Just Wishful Thinking?” Show Notes: Well, I don’t think my answer will take anyone by surprise, considering my occupation: no! But let me try to unpack why. Is Christianity all just a fairy tale to make people feel better about the afterlife? I think you can answer pretty definitely that this is not what Christianity is about. Think about some of the earliest Christians, like Paul. Paul did not want Christianity to be true! Instead, he was confronted with it and knew he had to believe. Some say that the other apostles, especially those who were Jesus’ disciples, convinced themselves that the resurrection happened because of how that would have benefitted their lives. However, N.T. Wright’s book, The Resurrection of the Son of God, explains that the idea of a resurrected Messiah was not part of the Jewish hope. They thought about a Messiah that would come and reign, but not a Messiah who would rise from the dead and would not reign politically. And the disciples were a little bit slow to believe this — all of the gospels read this way. Sometimes, it’s easy to think of people over 2,000 years ago being more gullible and less scientific than us — perhaps more likely to fall for the myth of a resurrection. But that’s an arrogant way of thinking — they knew, of course, that people didn’t raise from the dead. Beyond this, the earliest Christian leaders did not gain any great wealth, following, or social status because of their newly-formed religion… just the opposite! They had to give up everything because of the gospel, and yet they did so willingly. This contrasts to others who have started false religions, because others who have done so have prospered greatly in some way because of their religious lies. Blaise Pascal famously said: “Always believe witnesses who are willing to have their throats cut, and have nothing to gain for it.” I think that’s what you see in the earliest Christians. I’d encourage you to press into N.T. Wright’s The Resurrection of the Son of God for more on this. Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

In this episode, we listen back to a recent sermon when Pastor J.D. answered the question, “When Should I Not Take Communion?” Show Notes: So, you ask, what exactly does it mean to eat “unworthily”? It can’t mean that we should only take communion when we feel worthy of Christ’s presence. Because that would be ‘never.’ None of us are worthy to take the bread and the cup. That’s why we take of the bread and the cup. None of us are worthy of Christ’s presence. Jesus said that at our best—on your best day, when you’re having the longest righteousness streak you’ve ever had, “18 days without a sin”— you are still unprofitable servants. Even though we’re forgiven, we have more corruption in our hearts than we can possibly comprehend. So it doesn’t mean “only eat when you feel worthy.” So what does it mean? Well, notice that “unworthily” is written as an adverb, which is how it is in Greek. You say, “What difference does that make? “Unworthy” as an adjective would describe you, and like we said, you are always “unworthy” to participate in Christ. But Paul’s focus is on something different: he’s talking about how you approach this table. You can approach this table unworthily. So what does that look like? A Spirit of Self-Righteousness: You don’t realize how dependent you are on Christ’s mercy. You don’t see how your only hope is the body and blood of Jesus. The irony is that you approach this table unworthily when you fail to see how unworthy you are to partake of this table. If you know you are unworthy, then you are approaching this table worthily. If you think you are worthy, you are approaching this table unworthily. Secondly, A Spirit of Defiance: If you partake of this table when you know that you are not submitted to Christ–that is, you are openly and intentionally living in a way that you know displeases him–you are engaging in the very lifestyle that put Jesus on the cross. Think about it: In taking the bread and the cup, you are saying, “Thank God for Jesus and his death, it is my life and my hope” but then with your life you are openly crucifying him.” God? With your mouth you are celebrating his cross while practicing the lifestyle that put him on the cross. You can’t shout “Worship him” and “crucify him” at the same time and not expect God’s anger. Friend, I say this with all humility: Do not touch the elements of this table if you are not surrendered to Christ. I don’t mean if you’re struggling with sin, or overwhelmed by your sin. Jesus came for people like that. His death is healing and help for those who know they are sick! What I mean is don’t touch this if YOU KNOW there’s some area you refuse to submit to him. Don’t add to your condemnation by hypocritically saying, “Thank you Jesus for your death” while stubbornly doing the very things that put him on the cross. Keep your rebellious, treasonous hands off of these elements. It’s dangerous for you. You eat unworthily when you come with self-righteousness, defiance, and lastly: A Spirit of Division This is, I believe, what was most in Paul’s mind when he said, “Don’t come to this table unworthily.” Because that’s the context of this passage, in vs. 33: Therefore, my brothers and sisters, when you come together to eat, welcome one another. Don’t come when in your heart you are separated from others by some kind of pride or classism or racism. Don’t come when you harbor resentment or unforgiveness in your heart. Don’t come claiming to cherish the forgiveness of God when you won’t forgive someone else. Don’t come when you are divided from your brothers and sisters over some secondary, non-essential matter–a political perspective or a cultural bias. Some of you should not take of this table because you are more Republican than you are Jesus. Or more Democrat than you are Jesus. And I say that because you can’t stand someone who approaches politics differently than you, even if they love Jesus like you and you agree on all the essentials–the authority of the Bible, what it teaches about morality or being pro-life or whatever. Even though you agree on all these things, because they bring a different perspective or a different set of priorities with them when they come into the polls, you resent them. Truth is, you hate them and you wish they’d just go to another church; and if they don’t, well, you are thinking you probably should. Don’t touch this table if you harbor divisions and resentments unbefitting of the body of Christ. That’s eating in an unworthy manner. Jesus put it this way in the Sermon on the Mount: If you are offering your gift at the altar, and you have division with your brother in Christ, leave your gift before the altar and go reconcile with him. FIRST be reconciled with your brother, and THEN come offer your gift. Paul is saying something similar: First, feel a real sense of unity with your brother and sisters, and let that be reflected in your attitude toward them, and how you behave toward them, and how you fellowship with them, and only then partake of these elements. And what happens if you don’t? What happens if you disregard the body? What happens if you disregard the lordship of Christ? What happens if you eat from this table “unworthily?” Paul says, vs 30 “this is why many are sick and ill among you, and many have fallen asleep.” You say, “What does that mean?” There’s no way to sugar coat this. Paul means that many people have gotten sick and died for not taking this moment seriously. Not everyone who participates in communion unworthily dies, but Paul says that sometimes that happens, and that at least shows you how God feels about those who don’t take this sacred moment seriously. The Theologian DA Carson tells the story of a pastor friend, who had a church of about 200 and sin was so rampant that he could not even discipline, for the leadership was involved in a lot of the sin and didn’t want to do anything about it. This pastor prayed for 3 months for God to change the church or move him out. The next year, he said, he had 34 funerals. 20% of the church died in the space of a year! The year after that he baptized 200. Does that always happen? No. Thank God. In his mercy, he doesn’t always do that. But Paul says the fact it sometimes happens should make you realize how seriously God takes this. We see a similar thing happening in Acts 5 when Ananias and Sapphira come into the church with an offering, and they lie about the offering they are bringing. (They told everyone that they were bringing the full price of the land they sold when in fact it was only half. The sin was not bringing half–they were free to do that. The sin was lying to the church, and to God, about what they were doing.) Now, thank God that he does not strike dead everyone in church who exaggerates their giving. What a moment that would be each Sunday, when the CP says, “Take out your phone and text ‘Give’ to 33933” and someone thinks, “I’ll just pull out my phone so people think I’m giving, even though I’m really just starting my Wordle game” and we start seeing the glow of lights and then hear people keeling over dead. God doesn’t strike dead everyone who exaggerates their offerings in church, but Acts 5 gives you a glimpse into how he feels about people who posture and lie and are phonies in church. Worship is a deadly serious thing. How does God feel about those who take this bread and cup, saying, “I’m thankful for this bread and cup, it’s my salvation,” all the while harboring in their heart the sin that put Jesus on the cross, or relishing in sinful resentments against their brothers and sisters that Jesus died to make into one family. This is supposed to be a moment of incredible gospel clarity–where the church puts on visible display the unity of the body Jesus died to create. Where we declare, our common hope in Jesus is more important to us than any secondary thing that divides us. Communion is supposed to be a time of togetherness, where we feel the warmth of family. Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

In this episode, Pastor J.D. is answering a listener question from Ashley: If you were baptized as a baby, should you be re-baptized as an adult? Show Notes: I want to answer this question in three ways: theologically, practically, and also try to expand the question for those who aren’t sure they were saved when they were baptized. Biblically speaking, baptism is a ceremony — a celebration — that goes along with conversion. In the New Testament, baptism and conversion are tied incredibly close together. Baptism is a confession of faith. So, if you were baptized as a baby, whose faith was that a confession of? It has to be your parents’ — which by the way, is nothing to be ashamed of. At our church, I usually tell people that when you’re re-baptized as an adult, you’re actually fulfilling your parents’ hopes for you when they had you baptized as a baby in the first place. The simple fact is, every baptism we see in the New Testament is in response to a confession of faith. Now, what about if you were baptized already and you’re not sure if you were saved at that time? If you know for certain that you weren’t saved at that time, then yes, you should be re-baptized. But, unless you know for sure, I think it’s better to look at it like that was the beginning of your faith journey (which is when your baptism should happen), and the proof that what was going on inside of you was real is the fact that you’re following Jesus now. Baptism isn’t something you achieve, it’s something you start from. Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

In this episode, Pastor J.D. is answering a listener question: Can a Christian support abortion? Show Notes: The way I hear the question is, can a Christian consciously support abortion and is this an area where Christians can disagree? My answer to that would be no. What I’m not hearing in this question is, is every person who has ever voted pro-choice or said they were pro-choice automatically not a Christian? That’s a different question. So, to answer your question, I want to talk about the heart of the abortion issue. That is, that all people are instilled with the imago Dei – the image of God. And all those made in God’s image are precious to God and their lives deserve protection. Attacking the unborn is tantamount to attacking God since all life is created in his image and that includes life in the womb. Now, there are always objections to this from the pro-life side.  People say, “Well, the baby is a part of a woman’s body, and we need to respect her right to privacy and sovereignty over her body.” And I agree that the right to privacy over our bodies is precious.  But here’s the thing: The baby is not part of her body. That baby is intimately attached to her body for a period of time, yes, but it’s not part of her body.  Scripture certainly presents the preborn child as its own person: The Psalmist of Psalm 139 says that in the womb God knew me by name, as a person; there I was fearfully and wonderfully made, knit together according to the plan of God with his purpose for me already in mind.  Someone says, “But it’s still IN my body.”  Yes, but we all know our rights over our bodies are not absolute as far as the law is concerned. Prostitution is illegal in most states, and I don’t know of anywhere in the US can you legally pour drugs into your body just because it’s your body. Your rights to your body stop precisely at that place where they begin to affect someone else’s. And that’s exactly what is happening to the pre-born. Others say,“Well, saying life begins at conception is a matter of opinion, and you shouldn’t force your opinion on others.” But we’re not in the realm of opinion, here; we’re in the realm of biology and Scripture.  I would argue that the more helpless a person is, the more vulnerable–the less viable–the more we as a society should do to protect them.  Even if you are unclear on this, and are not convinced that personhood begins at conception–shouldn’t you err on the side of life? “If you’re hunting in the woods and hear a rustling in the bushes and you’re uncertain as to whether it’s your friend or a deer, morality and common sense dictate that you don’t pull the trigger, given the potential risk of murder.” I’ve heard people say, “Abortion sometimes help poor women escape crushing financial burdens. Banning abortion would cause overpopulation and massive poverty.” This kind of statement confuses “finding a solution” with “eliminating a problem.” Think of it this way: If the neighbor’s dog keeps pooping in your yard… you go out and shoot the dog. You’ve eliminated a problem, but you haven’t come up with a solution. If poverty is a problem, let’s keep working to find a solution.  Again, the point is–the pre-born are people. You can’t justify killing a person because it eliminates a problem. I mean, if you use that reasoning there, where does it stop? Couldn’t you use that same line of reasoning to justify eliminating other financially burdensome groups?  Listen: That little human life, that little person, regardless of how they got there, when it’s no bigger than a speck, the size of a period at the end of the sentence, is made in the image of God. That speck has more value than all the planets and stars in the vast cosmos! It has a soul made in the image of God, that Jesus died, that has an eternal future. BONUS: Why does The Summit Church Plant Churches? We believe in the power of multiplying churches — planting churches that plant churches. It’s not about one church, but multiple churches being raised up. So, we measure our church’s success not by seating capacity but by sending capacity. God has really blessed us in this — we’ve planted 59 churches in the United States, and If you are someone who wants to be a part of a church plant or even plant a church, we’d love to have a conversation with you. The goal is to plant churches that plant churches. To facilitate that, we’re trying to raise $1 million. We’d love you to be a part of that, and I can’t think of a greater impact in the kingdom of God. For more information, email Matt Love at matt@summitcollaborative.org Want to ask J.D. a question? Head to our Ask Me Anything hub to submit your question. As always, don’t forget to rate and review this podcast! Find Pastor J.D. on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.