183 Sermon Illustrations on Influence

John Newton is the author of one of the most beloved songs of the Christian faith -- Amazing Grace. He was born in London July 24, 1725, to a pious Christian woman and the commander of a merchant ship which sailed the Mediterranean. In July of 1732, thirteen days before his seventh birthday, death took his saintly mother who had, since his third birthday, been his teacher and friend. He was left with only the memory of a godly mother and her Christian teaching.

When he was eleven, John went to sea and it was not long before he was wholly involved in the ungodly vices of seamen. As one author put it, "he became a dissipated sailor." He followed this ungodly path for many years, but finally, the memory of his mother brought him to himself. He remembered her Christian teaching and her godly life, and considered his ungodly lifestyle and his wretched life. The recollection of his mother prompted him to again seek Christ. He searched the slave ship for a Bible or some other book about Christ and found IMITATIONS OF CHRIST by Thomas à Kempis. This book sowed the seeds of his conversion. On May 10, 1748, when the ship nearly sunk in a violent storm he trusted Christ as his personal Savior. As a result of his mother’s influence a stream of boundless influence flowed forward throughout the world.

John Newton became a preacher of the Gospel. One of the people he lead to Christ was Claudius Birchman. Birchman went as a missionary to India. No doubt, no one has ever heard of Claudius Birchman. But, God mightily used a book this Englishman wrote, THE STAR IN THE EAST, to motive an American to become the pioneer of American foreign missions. The man this book motivated was Adoniram Judson, who became a missionary to Burma. Judson was the first American foreign missionary.

Newton also led Thomas Scott to Christ. Scott became a preacher and the author of the famous SCOTT’S COMMENTARY ON THE BIBLE. Rev. Scott pointed despondant attorney and harp player, William Cowper, to the Christ of the Bible and through reading Romans 3:25 Cowper was saved. He says, "I saw the sufficiency of the atonement He had made, my pardon sealed in His blood, and all the fullness and completeness of His justification." Not long after his conversion he penned one of the great songs of the Faith, THERE IS A FOUNTAIN FILLED WITH BLOOD.

William Cowper was used of the Lord to write many great Christian hymns but he also wrote other poetry, including THE NEGRO'S COMPLAINT, an anti-slavery work, which had a mighty impact on a short and sickly little Englishman named William Wilberforce. He became a powerful English statesman and through his efforts slavery was ultimately abolished England. Wilberforce was a dedicated Christian as well. He wrote, A PRACTICAL VIEW OF THE PREVAILING RELIGIOUS SYSTEM OF PROFESSED CHRISTIANS...CONTRASTED WITH REAL CHRISTIANITY. This book was instrumental in bringing Legh Richmond to Christ. Rev. Legh Richmond is the author of the once popular Christian children’s book, THE DAIRYMAN’S DAUGHTER. Between 1813 and 1820 there were 22 editions of this book printed in America. The book was used of the Lord to bring about the salvation of thousands. Undergirding this chain of events stands the influence of John Newton’s godly mother.

__________________

(Source Information: Golden Links in the Chain that Connects Mother Home and Heaven edited by Mrs. J. P. Newman, © 1890, p. 56-57; Moody Monthly, August 1931, pp. 594, 595; The Dairyman’s Daughter by Rev. Legh Richmond, M.A., published in 1800’s by American Tract Society, pp. 11-12)

*

Tipping Point author Malcolm Gladwell thinks churches can learn a lot from the flu bug.

What do the weird resurgence of Hush Puppies shoes, the sudden drop in New York City's crime rate, the steady rise in teen smoking, and the revolutionary success of SESAME STREET have to do with proclaiming the gospel? A lot, if you take to heart Malcolm Gladwell's thesis in his bestseller, THE TIPPING POINT: HOW LITTLE THINGS CAN MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE.

Gladwell, a staff writer for THE NEW YORKER, has taken principles of epidemiology (the study of how diseases spread) and translated them into strategies for understanding the life cycle of cultural trends. Just like disease epidemics, he says, ideas and messages have "tipping points"-dramatic moments when, all at once, they explode upon a society and "infect" it. Studying these phenomena could help us "start and control positive social epidemics of our own."

Christianity Today advisory editor Michael Cromartie spoke to Gladwell at his NEW YORKER office in Manhattan about social epidemics and their potential implications for the church.

HOW DOES THINKING IN TERMS OF EPIDEMICS HELP US UNDERSTAND OUR SOCIAL WORLDS?

It gives us a new appreciation for the extent to which ideas and behaviors can be contagious, and that we pick things up largely involuntarily. When your 6-year-old decides she wants a Cabbage Patch Doll, she's not sitting down and making a rational choice. She has caught the Cabbage Patch "virus." She caught it the same way kids catch a cold virus in first grade.

There are moments when all of us get swept up in causes, ideas, and behaviors. There's this notion that every time we do something, it's because we sit down and make a rational choice. But we fool ourselves when we think that individuals are autonomous creatures. We're not. We are exquisitely sensitive to the pressures and influences of the world around us.

WHAT ARE THE LAWS OF EPIDEMICS THAT CAN BE APPLIED TO THE SOCIAL SPHERE?

First, there is the Law of the Few; with epidemics, a core group does all the damage, all the work, all the spreading. This is true in social epidemics as well.

Certain personality types are responsible for playing that critical role. There are "Connectors"-a small number of people who know a lot more people than the rest of us do. "Mavens" specialize in knowledge accumulation, and we appeal to them for insight or expertise. "Salesmen," those with a gift for persuading others, are the third type.

These personality types have an extraordinary amount of social influence. But it's not the influence of power, money, or physical attractiveness; it's personality. The people who are ultimately influential in your life are not the ones with status or money but those who inspire trust, credibility, and love.

BUT JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS CONTAGIOUS DOESN'T MAKE IT AN EPIDEMIC.

Exactly, which moves us to the second law, the Stickiness Factor. The common cold is the most contagious virus we know, but we never talk about epidemics of a cold because the cold doesn't stay around. We do talk about flu epidemics, and the difference is that the flu is sticky. You're on your back, it stays with you for two weeks, and you remember it. It changes the way you live your life.

The same is true of ideas. For an idea to take off, it must be more than simply infectious. It also has to make a lasting impact on everybody it infects, which is that additional quality of stickiness.

SESAME STREET is a show that deliberately engineered stickiness; the producers figured out not just how to capture a kid's attention but also how to create something that would stick in their brains. We're often too concerned about the initial grabbing of the attention. But an idea takes off not just because it grabs your attention but because it stays with you. And the things that make something stay with you are often not obvious but quite small.

In a famous study at Yale University, researchers tried to influence students to get tetanus shots. They played with all kinds of variables: Should we make them take a two-week course, or a one-week course? Read a 10-page paper, or a 15-page paper? It turns out the only thing that made a difference was the little packet they gave students: it included a campus map to show them how to get to the place that administered the shots. That's what made it sticky. They didn't need to be warned about the dangers; they didn't need a two-week course on the medical history of tetanus. All they needed was a map.

YOU'RE SAYING IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH TO INFLUENCE PEOPLE, IF YOU KNOW WHAT THE KEYS ARE.

The Power of Context, the third principle I discuss in the book, says human beings are much more sensitive to their environment than we think they are. Years ago two psychologists at Princeton University gathered a group of seminarians and said, "We're giving you a topic to work with. Prepare something quickly, and deliver your message to a group of professors." On their way to give the talk, each student came across a man moaning and in dire need. The question was: Who's going to stop?

A few variables were built into the experiment. They asked everybody whether they were in the ministry to help people or for intellectual and spiritual fulfillment. Some students were given as their speech's text the story of the Good Samaritan. Others were asked to speak on the relevance of a religious vocation. And the third variable was that some students were told they were already late to the lecture and needed to hurry.

Most of us would think the people who were in ministry to help others would be the most likely to help the moaning man. Also, it's hard to believe that somebody who just read the story of the Good Samaritan wouldn't stop to help. As it turned out, the variable that made a difference was whether people were in a hurry or not. Those in a hurry didn't stop. Those who weren't in a hurry did stop.

What this tells us is that even someone who is committed to helping people in ministry, and has even just read the story of the Good Samaritan, can under certain circumstances act in a way-when presented with a certain situation-that does not allow them to express their fundamental humanity.

I don't doubt that all of these students were decent, honest, spiritual people. But at times, even good people have their goodness frustrated by circumstances. External circumstances are incredibly powerful; they can thwart even the most profound set of beliefs.

WHEN IT COMES TO MAKING CHANGES IN AN ORGANIZATION, LIKE THE CHURCH, WHAT IS A KEY FACTOR?

There seems to be a kind of tipping point in human organizations at around 150. When groups get larger than that, all the personal ties begin to break down. You can no longer know everyone's name.

Time and again, churches form with a charismatic, effective leadership and committed people. And because they are so successful, they grow, and at a certain point they grow so large that all the things that made the church wonderful in the beginning begin to fade. Unless you do certain things to promote the same level of intimacy, closeness, involvement, and humanity in a large group as you have had in a small group, something is lost. And when churches start to exceed that 150 level, they need to break up the group into smaller pieces. One of the things that made the early church so successful was that they created small cells, pockets of community where people had close ties.

THIS HAS ALSO BEEN A KEY TO THE SUCCESS OF MANY INFLUENTIAL CHURCH MOVEMENTS IN HISTORY. IN THE BOOK, YOU MENTION METHODISM.

The genius of early Methodism was in setting up structures, not just churches, with rules that held the group together until people were able to build up a much stronger set of personal bonds and greater attachment to their faith. John Wesley spent his life traveling on horseback, seeding all these groups, visiting one after another, giving them an injection of energy and inspiration. The interesting thing about him is not that he managed to create a religious movement in his lifetime; he was able to create a movement that has lasted hundreds of years after his life.

YOUR MESSAGE IS HOPEFUL: MAJOR SOCIAL CHANGE CAN BEGIN WITH JUST A SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE.

Absolutely. A message or idea doesn't have to have status, power, and money behind it, but it does have to have the right kind of personalities. These people - Connectors, Mavens, and Salesmen - aren't interested in furthering themselves; they're just doing it because that's who they are. It's as natural as breathing to them.

Nicholaus Ludwig Count Von Zinzendorf was born in Dresden, Germany into Austrian nobility. He was raised by his grandmother who was a strong supporter of the Pietist movement within the Lutheran Church. When he grew up he became the catalyst for the formation of the modern Moravian Church.

He purchased a large estate near the Bohemian border of Saxony. He invited persecuted believers from any country to come take refuge on his estate. A colony grew up there which was named Herrnhut. The members of this colony agreed to abide by the principles of the ancient Bohemian Brethren which held that Christianity must be an experience of faith and love toward the Savior.

Count Zinzendorf became an ordained Lutheran minister and led out in the worship services of the group at Herrnhut. Singing and reading of Scripture became an important part of each service. Zinzendorf himself wrote many hymns for their worship. He divided them into small groups for mutual prayer support and spiritual growth.

Count Zinzendorf traveled to many countries of Europe and to America to establish groups of Moravian believers. It was not his intent that these be a separate denomination, but that they work as leaven within existing churches for a more meaningful Christian experience. He was against formalism in worship, and felt that services should be lively with much prayer and singing and praising God. Many rejected the Moravians as having too much emotionalism in their religion.

A marvelous prayer vigil began at Herrnhut in 1727. Led by Count Zinzendorf, a group of twenty-four men and twenty-four women covenanted to spend one hour each day in scheduled prayer for a lost world. Soon others joined them in the hourly prayer.

Just as the sacred fire on the altar of the tabernacle in the wilderness was never permitted to go out, the prayers of that community continued around the clock without ceasing for one hundred years!

As a result, within six months, twenty-six of the group volunteered for world missions. By 1792, sixty-five years after the beginning of the prayer vigil, that small community had sent out three hundred missionaries.

It was Moravian missionaries from Herrnhut who witnessed to Charles and John Wesley. That led to the Great Awakening in England and America during the early part of the eighteenth century. The Seventh-day Adventist Church has its roots in this Great Revival stirred by the Moravians, George Whitefield, John Wesley and others.

________

FAITH TRIUMPHANT, INSPIRING STORIES OF GOD’S CHURCH, Dorothy Eaton Watts, February 19, 2007, p. 54.

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #5107]

If you took your teenage daughter to the movies this summer, what did you see? Laura Sessions Stepp, who frequently writes on trends among adolescent girls, saw something that bothered her. But it's not what you might think.

In a thought-provoking article in the WASHINGTON POST, Stepp writes, “If you're a young Hollywood heroine today, you lip-sync your way to rock stardom overnight ... win passage of a bill by giving [cosmetic] makeovers to members of Congress or solve murders by posing as a stripper cop. ... You entertain, but you don't inspire, at least the way movies used to.” For these young women, she says, “Power lies largely in how you look and what you buy. ... Perfection through consumption, that's the (young) American Way.”

Many of us are concerned — and rightly so — about teen culture's promotion of sexuality and violence. But I think Stepp has put her finger on a problem just as important: the encouragement of selfishness among our youth.

Movies like the CHARLIE'S ANGELS franchise, LEGALLY BLONDE 2, THE LIZZIE MCGUIRE MOVIE, and other popular summer fare may pretend to teach about independence and maturity. But the truth is that real “character development” is out; consumerism and feel-good messages are in. Or as Stepp puts it, “Life revolves around these young women.” For the most part, instead of stories about girls who grow up facing real challenges and learning how to help others, we get fictional girls whose main concern is ME, MYSELF, AND I. And that pervasive message is not doing real girls any good.

There's more than one factor at work here. For one thing, at a time when many adults act more irresponsible than teenagers, or want to stay juvenile, our definition of MATURITY has changed. For another, feminist leaders have long been putting pressure on both our educational system and our popular culture to try to make up for a supposed lack in girls' self-esteem (which is actually based on distorted data).

But the biggest factor may be that teenagers today have more spending money than ever before and have proven themselves vulnerable to marketing campaigns, which means that those campaigns grow more and more aggressive. And it's good marketing strategy to present the consumer with an image of herself the way she'd like to be: glamorous, independent of parental and moral restraints, easily able to overcome all obstacles. It's not good marketing strategy to suggest that she still has a lot to learn about the world, that there's life beyond adolescence, and that developing strong character is more important than instant gratification.

I'm not saying that every movie has to be serious; everybody needs a little comic relief now and then. I'm just saying that when frivolity and egotism become trendy among such an impressionable age group, we need to pay attention. Christian parents in particular have a duty to inoculate their children against these kinds of trends, for in our worldview, there is more to life than self-interest. We believe in the value of good character, humility, and self-sacrifice for the good of others. Let's make sure we're communicating what we believe to our kids and grandkids.

FOR FURTHER READING AND INFORMATION:

• Laura Sessions Stepp, “Hollywood's Material Girls,” Washington Post, 3 August 2003.

• David Sterritt, “Who's the adult in this picture?“ Christian Science Monitor, 22 August 2003.

• Stephen Hunter, “Girls Gone Wild,” Washington Post, 29 August 2003. (Archived commentary; costs $2.95 to retrieve.)

• David Edelstein, “Girls Gone Wild,” Slate, 20 August 2003.

• Two alternatives to the typical girl movies are Whale Rider and Rabbit-Proof Fence.

• Kay Hymowitz, “The Weaker Sex?“ City Journal, 27 February 2002.

• Christina Hoff Sommers, “Politics Dressed Up as Science,” Atlantic Monthly, May 2000.

• “The Merchants of Cool,” Frontline, PBS, 2001.

• Gina Dalfonzo, “Complicating the Issue: Women and Worldview in the Movies,” BreakPoint Online, 30 June 2003.

• Kim I. Robbins, “Lethally Blonde,” BreakPoint Online, 18 July 2003.

• Kim I. Robbins, “The 20th Century Art Form,” BreakPoint Online, 10 September 2003.

• Charles Colson, Answers to Your Kids' Questions (Tyndale, 2000).

• Brian Godawa, Hollywood Worldviews (InterVarsity, 2002).

• Colleen Carroll, The New Faithful (Loyola, 2002).

__________

Copyright (c) 2003 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

*

”Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable — if anything is excellent or praiseworthy — think about such things.” Philippians 4:8, NIV

As Christians, we’re used to thinking that the only cultural mandate is found way back in the book of Genesis (1:28), but there’s another one in the New Testament that may be even more directly applicable in our day and age.

In Philippians 4:8, Paul lays down a challenge to every believer. Notice he doesn’t distinguish between the “sacred” (Christian stuff) and the “secular” (non-Christian stuff). No, he simply says that we’re to look around our world, and support — in thought, and, by extension, word and deed — those things that are “excellent or praiseworthy.”

I think if Christians would do this, our world would be far more in the grip of Jesus and his love. Paul knows that if Christians spend their time supporting the best our culture has to offer, including the arts, then our witness to a watching world will be infinitely stronger than if our response to the world around us is largely antagonistic.

How freeing is Paul’s advice! It means if a book, movie, play, game, or whatever is “excellent or praiseworthy,” then we’re commanded (yes, commanded) to lend our support to it. Paul wants us to interact with the culture in a truly meaningful way, “salting” the best parts of it — not create an artificial version of culture where we feel safe from “the world.” God is Lord over culture, and Jesus is there in it. As Madeleine L’Engle has written, “To be truly Christian means to see Christ everywhere, to know him as all in all.”

Last year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court holding that UNDER GOD in the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court, absent Justice Scalia, who has recused himself, will hear arguments today as to whether to uphold the ruling or allow children and others to continue to recite those familiar words.

In yesterday's NEW YORK TIMES, columnist David Brooks made a great suggestion for the justices. He assigned as bedtime reading the book A STONE OF HOPE by David L. Chappell.

Chappell's thesis is that without America's religious beliefs, we never would have had a successful civil rights movement. Chappell argues that there were two groups involved in the civil rights movement. First, there were “mainstream liberals, often white and Northern,” who “tended to have an optimistic view of human nature” — these are the utopians who believe that, with government help, public awareness, and education, all the world's ills can be mended. The second group, “mostly black and Southern,” were religiously motivated. They included Martin Luther King, Jr., who saw that in a fallen world, justice can only be achieved by a commitment to religious beliefs.

One only has to read King's speeches to see his constant references from the Old Testament prophets. And in his LETTERS FROM A BIRMINGHAM JAIL he cited Augustine and Aquinas to show that an unjust law is no law at all and that God's law sets men free.

Brooks, writing as a Jew, says that whether you believe in the Bible or not you have to agree that it has a deeper and more accurate understanding of human nature than secular social scientists.

In addition to Chappell's book, I recommend that the justices also read FOR THE GLORY OF GOD by Rodney Stark, an eminent secular social scientist at the University of Washington. Stark shows how Christianity led to great advances in science, the reformation of human behavior, and the end of slavery.

You see, the real question raised by this case is one posed by Phillip Johnson, the Berkeley law professor and founder of the Intelligent Design movement. “If we are not to declare ourselves one nation under God,” Johnson asks, “what are we under? The universe? The UN? The goddess Gaia? Or the Supreme Self?” The editorial board of the NEW YORK TIMES, which, despite Brook's superb column, favors the elimination of the words UNDER GOD, presumably leaving us as one nation under nothing.

But that is the ultimate act of hubris. We declare ourselves free from any moral law or governor higher than the imperial self, and so we become gods. I cannot imagine a more frightening prospect.

Now the fate of the republic doesn't hang on two words, but still this is no small matter. We've seen the steady erosion of Christian influence in American life over the years and a growing hostility to those who hold that the one, true sovereign God called us into being and reigns over us. The Court's decision will be one more step toward the official establishment of secularism as American religion. And it will tell much about our values, humility, and our capacity to love and respect one another.

Brooks suggests that the most important thing at the moment is to try to understand what the phrase ONE NATION UNDER GOD might mean. “That's not proselytizing,” he concludes, “it's citizenship.” To that I say, Amen.

FOR FURTHER READING AND INFORMATION:

• David Brooks, “One Nation, Enriched by Biblical Wisdom,” New York Times, 23 March 2004. (Free registration required.)

• Linda Greenhouse, “One Crucial Issue in Pledge Case: What Does 'Under God' Mean?“ New York Times, 22 March 2004. (Free registration required.)

• “Dad's status could derail pledge case,” Charleston Post and Courier, 23 March 2004. (Free registration required.)

• Ginny Mooney, “Just 'One Nation'?“ BreakPoint Online, 1 July 2002.

• David L. Chappell, A Stone of Hope: Prophetic Religion and the Death of Jim Crow (University of North Carolina Press, 2004).

• Alan Sears, “'Under God' the Bedrock of America,” Crosswalk.com. Visit www.telladf.org for more information on the pledge case before the Supreme Court.

• Bill Murchison, “Under God — or somewhere else?“ Townhall.com, 23 March 2004.

• Martin Luther King Jr., Letter from a Birmingham Jail, April 16, 1963. (Free Adobe Acrobat Reader required.)

• Rodney Stark, For the Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts and the End of Slavery (Princeton University Press, 2003). Read an interview with Rodney Stark and an excerpt from the book.

• See BreakPoint commentaries “Hunting Witches,” “We've Been Lied To,” “The First and Only Abolitionists,” and “Wall of Separation.”

• Phillip E. Johnson, The Right Questions: Truth, Meaning, and Public Debate (InterVarsity, 2002).

• Michael Novak, On Two Wings: Humble Faith and Common Sense at the American Founding (Encounter, 2001).

__________

Copyright (c) 2004 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

*

Am I a Kingdom person?

I think we would agree that it is a penetrating and challenging question that will help to ensure that we are focusing on those things that are on the heart of our Father.

As I have been studying the concept of the Kingdom of God in Scripture, I have isolated three primary issues that are at the heart of Kingdom thinking. God is looking for a people who will embody His name, embrace His mission to the nations, and obey His Word.

Specifically focusing on what it means to embody His name, Jesus declared in His great high priestly prayer: “I manifested Thy name to the men Thou gavest me out of the world; Thine they were, and Thou gavest them to Me, and they have kept Thy word” (John 17:6).

Jesus had conducted Himself in such a manner that when people saw Him, they would recognize His family resemblance. When Philip asked Jesus to show them the Father, He responded: “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how do you say, 'Show us the Father?'“

When I left for college, I was prepared for the “father-sending-his-son-to- college-speech” that most of us have heard or given at one time or another. I was expecting words of warning with a list of “do's” and “don'ts.”

My dad, however, made only one request: “Son, you bear my name. Don't take it anywhere I wouldn't take it and don't associate it with anything I wouldn't associate it with.”

That single piece of advice radically impacted my life. Whenever faced with a challenging situation, all I had to ask myself was, “How would my father respond?”

You can actually restate the “Am I a Kingdom person?” question in a slightly different manner. “Do my actions, words, deeds and interpersonal relationships reflect my Heavenly Father's character?” Before you respond in anger to the person who takes advantage of you, ask yourself if it is worth your Father's reputation.

To embody the Father's name means that we make a commitment to allow the Holy Spirit to produce the character of the Father through us. It is a commitment to personal holiness. This is precisely the point Jesus was making when He declared that Kingdom citizens are salt and light.

Salt refers to a holy lifestyle, and it is this holiness that gives credibility to our witness. When we have a consistent and godly lifestyle, it gives us greater confidence to give our testimony and declare our faith in the marketplace.

When we think of salt, we immediately think of a condiment that enriches the flavor of food, but salt had many uses in Jesus' day. Thus, the reference to Kingdom persons as salt may have triggered several different thoughts in the minds of those first-century hearers.

Before the day of refrigerators, salt was used as a preservative. We know about curing country ham in salt. Jesus was challenging His disciples to be a preservative in the midst of a decaying world. If you want to know why we are witnessing so much moral decay in our society, we must conclude that we don't have enough salt where it is needed. If you are concerned about moral decline in your local government or school, apply salt -- get involved!

Salt also was used as an antiseptic to purify or disinfect a wound. Perhaps you have waded into an ocean with an open wound. When salt is used as an antiseptic, it may well cause pain or discomfort as it fights the germs of infection. Indeed, the world may plead that we be more tolerant or understanding, but we cannot disinfect a dying world if we compromise with sin.

Salt also was used as a catalyst for fire. An outdoor Palestinian oven was called “earth” and a common fuel was dried dung. To make the ovens burn better, the bottom was lined with salt plates and the fuel was sprinkled with salt. The followers of Jesus are to live in such a manner that they ignite and accelerate spiritual fires at school, work or play.

We are most familiar with salt as a seasoning. Christians are to be the spice of life. Our Kingdom lifestyle should exude such flavor that it creates a hunger and thirst for the Gospel. Salty living means that we must embrace a lifestyle that is consistent with the character of our Father. Savorless Christianity is as useless as flavorless salt. We must embrace a Kingdom lifestyle to enforce the credibility of our witness.

When we talk about personal holiness, it means that we must allow God to manifest His character in us. That is the ministry of the Holy Spirit who manifests His fruit in the followers of Jesus. Holiness is not simply an issue of avoiding sinful behavior patterns; it also means that we practice righteousness. We must develop sensitivity to the voice of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit convicts us of sin and of righteousness. As we learn to listen to the Holy Spirit, He will confirm those actions that reflect the Father's character. He also convicts us of sin, which, in turn, should prompt the sensitive Kingdom person to confess that sin and turn away from it. Our concern for our Father's name and the advance of His Kingdom mandates that we avoid sin and live in such a manner that people see our family connection.

Let's try a few exercises. You have a choice piece of gossip about a certain individual. Someone in your hearing starts talking about this same person. What do you do? Do you share your gossip to win the favor of those participating in the conversation or do you speak a positive word on behalf of the person who can't defend himself?

You are at work. No one is watching. You need some typing paper at home, and you are in the workroom where there is a large volume of paper. You know that no one would ever be aware if you took a ream of paper. You could actually rationalize your behavior on the basis that you're not paid what you are worth and therefore you deserve the paper. What do you do? Does the Father's reputation enter into your thinking process?

Colleagues from work whom you have been trying to get to know invite you to attend a movie with them. You know from the previews that it is a movie that is clearly inappropriate for viewing by a Christian. What decision would best reflect your Father's character and advance His Kingdom?

What positive actions can you take that will influence lives and so advance the Father's Kingdom? Think about issues such as how you treat your family, how you respond to your critics, how you use your free time, and your involvement in your community.

How long has it been since someone asked you about your salty lifestyle? Can you imagine what would happen in our Southern Baptist Convention if each one of us made a commitment to embody our Father's character?

Since the 2004 election, the American media are trying to understand religion's role in the lives of Americans. It's a difficult task for them because, as CNN's William Schneider once put it, “the press ... just doesn't get religion.”

A recent high-profile attempt to “get religion” is the new issue of TIME magazine. In it, TIME identifies what it calls the “25 most influential evangelicals in America.” These are people “whose influence,” in TIME'S estimation, “is on the rise or who have carved out a singular role.”

This kind of recognition is, if we are honest, gratifying — not only to the people named in the article, but also to every Christian. But Schneider is right: The press doesn't get religion, starting with how the press views what it means to be an “influential” Christian.

Judging by its profile of people like Rick Warren, Roberta and Howard Ahmanson, and Chuck Colson, for TIME, “influence” is simply synonymous with “power.” The chief criterion for Time for inclusion on the list seems to be whether politicians will take your phone call.

Even people like Rick Warren and Billy Graham aren't cited, as they should be, for their impact on people's lives. Instead, their ministries become means to a political end, as Time sees it. Thus, in Time's view, Warren makes the list because fifteen senators “from both parties sought his advice.” Likewise, while Graham's general reluctance in political matters was noted, TIME also pointed out that Graham has “had the ear of presidents for five decades.”

Anyone who has read the Gospels will know that TIME has it exactly backwards. Service and humility — dying to self — not power are what matters in the kingdom of God. A Christian's true influence is measured in the lives he touches, not in the legislation he gets passed. And, indeed, that's why the list of twenty-five is influential — not because of their political influence.

The person I know the best on TIME's “25 Most Influential” list is Chuck Colson. While it would be disingenuous to deny Chuck's status or influence within the Christian world, this so-called “power” is nothing compared to the kind of power he once exercised. Today, Chuck may be able to, as TIME put it, get a bandwagon moving, but not so long ago, he didn't need a bandwagon to get things done. He did it through the power of the Oval Office in the White House.

Yet, it wasn't until he lost that power, what most people would call real “power,” that Chuck began to make a real difference and exercise the only kind of influence that really matters. Prison Fellowship is possible only because its founder, Chuck Colson, was forced to personally identify with those people who hold a special place in God's heart: prisoners and their families.

The pursuit of political power prompted the old Chuck to demonize offenders; the desire to wield godly influence prompted the “reborn and rehabilitated” Chuck to make their fate his primary concern for the sake of the Gospel.

Christians need to keep this contrast between power and godly influence in mind. My concern with the TIME article isn't that the magazine presumes to tell Christians who our “leaders” are. It picked some great folks. My concern is that we may accept TIME's criteria for why they have influence and, thus, allow the larger culture to define us. Remember, the press doesn't “get religion.” It would be a shame if we didn't, either.

FOR FURTHER READING AND INFORMATION:

• BreakPoint Commentary No. 050202, “Political Payback: Does Bush 'Owe' Religious Conservatives?“

• See Time's feature on Charles Colson. Read about the other twenty-four “most influential evangelicals.”

• Karen Tumulty and Matthew Cooper, “Does Bush Owe the Religious Right?“ Time,7 February 2005. (Subscribers only.)

• Charles Colson with Anne Morse, How Now Shall We Live? Devotional (Tyndale, 2004).

• Charles Colson, Born Again (Chosen Books, 2004 edition).

• Hugh Hewitt, In, But Not Of (Nelson, 2003).

________

Copyright © 2005 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

*

Mother's Day sermon 2 Timothy 1:4-7

MOMS WHO MOLD

=============

I. What is a molding mom?

II. Influential mothers in Bible.

A. Influence comes in different varieties.

B. A better kind of influence.

C. Everybody is an influence.

III. Factors to focus on.

A. The beliefs you teach.

B. The values you pass on.

C. The example you set.

D. The faith you are committed to.

IV. The unseen hand.

*

Say unto wisdom, Thou art my sister. — Proverbs 7:4.

Wisdom is to be treated as a sister … on the ground of the beautiful influence which a true sister, a pure woman soul, exercises over a young man’s life. It is given to a sister again and again, by unfailing sympathy and by sweet comprehending ways, not teasing or lecturing, but always believing and hoping and loving, to weave a real spell of goodness and truth around a brother who is exposed to dangerous temptations … Such a lovely fraternal relation is to be maintained with Wisdom, constant as a tie of blood, firm as a companionship from earliest infancy, yet exalted and enthusiastic in its way, and promising a lifelong attraction and authority.

We ask not golden streams of wealth, along our path to flow;

We ask not undecaying health, nor length of years below:-

We ask for wisdom:-Lord! impart the knowledge how to live:

A wise and understanding heart, to all Thy servants give.

1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1

The Beauty of Ruth

Elimelech and his family in Moab

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. Last week we looked at chapter 1, verse 1 of the book of Ruth:

1. “And it came to pass in the days when the judges were ruling, there was a famine in the land; and a man went from Bethlehem of Judah in order to sojourn in the Plains of Moab; he, and his wife and both his sons.” (RGH)

2. Deuteronomy 2:9 tells us that the Plains (or Fields) of Moab, also known as the land of Ar, had been given to the descendants of Moab, Lot’s son, by God: “Then the LORD said to me, ‘Do not harass Moab, nor provoke them to war, for I will not give you any of their land as a possession, because I have given Ar to the sons of Lot as a possession.’” (2:9 NAS)

3. So, God’s command was that His people, Israel, were not to dwell there.

2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2

Review of last week

A. This happened in the time of the judges

B. During this time God used oppression and hardship to judge the people of Israel when they forgot Him

C. There was a famine and a man left Bethlehem in Judah to go and live in Moab with his wife and 2 sons

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. We found that this happened during the period of the judges, after the land had been divided among the twelve tribes and Joshua was dead. It was during the earlier part of that 320 years, probably in the first century, possibly in the period just before Gideon became judge; probably not in the period before Ehud because at that time Moab, under King Eglon, was the oppressor of Israel.

B. During the period of the judges there are 7 cycles in which

1. the people forget God

2. God brought hardship upon them in the form of foreign oppressors and, at least in the time of Gideon, food shortages

3. the people cried out to God

4. God raised up a judge to deliver

5. there was a period of peace.

C. This man apparently had the means (we will note the indications of this in the book) to pick up and leave to go to Moab where life was easier; but Israel was not to have concourse with Moab because of Moab’s actions when Israel came from Egypt (hiring Balaam – we will return to this in a few minutes), so

1. Although this was a natural action for a father in looking after his family, it was not an act of faith:

2. It was disobedient to God (Israel was not to have possession in land of Ar, was not to consort with the Moabites)

3. It was an act of independence rather than the response of repentance which God sought

3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3

The story of Elimelech unfolds

A. In Ruth 1:2-5, we are given more information

1. The name of the man and his wife

2. The name of their 2 sons

3. How long they lived there (roughly)

4. The death of the man

5. The marriage of the two sons

6. The death of the sons

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. Here is the next part of the story, Ruth 1:2-5 (RGH): 2 The name of the man was Elimelech, and the name of his wife, Naomi, and the names of his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion; Ephrathites, from Bethlehem of Judah; and they came to the Plains of Moab, and they stayed there. 3 And Elimelech, the husband of Naomi, died; and she was left bereft, she and her two sons. 4 And they took to themselves wives, Moabitesses, the name of the first, Orpah, and the name of the second, Ruth; and they dwelt there about ten years. 5 And both of them, Mahlon and Chilion, died also; so the woman was bereft of both her boys as well as of her husband.

4 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4

Considering Elimelech

A. Name means ‘My God is king’

B. Was Elimelech’s taking his family to Moab blatant rebellion against God?

C. How did Elimelech personally fare as result of his decision?

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. Name also translated, ‘His (i.e.., Elimelech’s) God is King’, ‘God is King’, and ‘God shall be King’

B. Elimelech’s action

1. Is not specifically criticized or condemned in the book of Ruth

2. Was a natural action for a father to care for his family

3. It seems even commendable given Paul’s words, “But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith, and is worse than an unbeliever.” (1 Timothy 5:8 NAS)

4. Differed in degree from the murmurers against Moses in the wilderness who were slain

5. But was disobedient to what God commanded to His people Israel

a. Not to take possessions in Moab

b. Not to consort with Moabites

6. So, Elimelech failed to live up to the name that he bore

C. There is no record of how much time passed, but the indication is that it was in a relatively short period that Elimelech died; so any benefit from his action was relatively short-lived.

5 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 5

Lessons from Elimelech

A. What lessons can we as Christians learn from this?

1. The commandments of God are not to be treated lightly (John 15:10, 1 Corinthians 11:1)

2. Our lives and actions affect the meaning of Christ and Christian to those around us (2 Thessalonians 1:11-12)

3. Despite means and endeavours, you cannot outrun death.

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. Lessons for the Christians

1. Christ told us, His disciples, this:

a. “If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father’s commandments, and abide in His love.” (John 15:10 NAS)

b. Showing that He is our example as Paul also confesses, “Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ.” (1 Corinthians 11:1 NAS)

2. We may reflect either poorly or well on the names of Christ and Christian

a. “Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed.” (1 Timothy 6:1 NLT)

b. “To this end also we pray for you always that our God may count you worthy of your calling, and fulfill every desire for goodness and the work of faith with power; in order that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Thessalonians 1:11-12 NAS)

3. Many live as though their lives would never end, that they would never be called into account: “We think all men mortal save ourselves”

6 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 6

Consider Mahlon and Chilion

A. What three things happened to the two sons

1. They came to a marriageable age

2. They took wives from among the people of Moab

3. They died without children

B. How did the two sons fare as a result of Elimelech’s decision?

1. Every indication is that they really did not prosper!

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. During this period, the two sons became of marriageable age

B. The names mean

1. Mahlon – ‘sick, sickly’ – husband of Ruth (4:10)

2. Chilion – ‘pining, languishing’ – hence, husband of Orpah

3. There is an unlikely Jewish supposition that their real names were Joash and Saraph, based upon the genealogy of the descendants of Judah given in 1 Chronicles 4:22.

4. Whether this be true or not, these names here may have been descriptive epithets given to them later as they sickened and died

5. In any event, this was not a prosperous result!

7 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7

The matter of their marriage

A. “Furthermore, you shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor shall you take their daughters for your sons.” (Deuteronomy 7:3 NAS)

B. “No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of the LORD; none of their descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall ever enter the assembly of the LORD,” (Deuteronomy 23:3 NAS)

C. Bible interprets itself: Nehemiah 13:1-2, 23, 25, 27

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. The first of these passages applied particularly to the Israelites marrying the people of the land of Canaan, the 7 nations that God would have them drive out

B. The second is was the separation that was to be maintained from Ammon and Moab on account of their hiring Balaam to curse Israel

C. These verses are particularly applied by both Ezra (9:2) and Nehemiah:

1. “On that day they read aloud from the book of Moses in the hearing of the people; and there was found written in it that no Ammonite or Moabite should ever enter the assembly of God, because they did not meet the sons of Israel with bread and water, but hired Balaam against them to curse them. However, our God turned the curse into a blessing.” (Nehemiah 13:1-2 NAS)

2. “In those days I also saw that the Jews had married women from Ashdod, Ammon, and Moab.” (Nehemiah 13:23 NAS)

3. “So I contended with them and cursed them and struck some of them and pulled out their hair, and made them swear by God, “You shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor take of their daughters for your sons or for yourselves.” (Nehemiah 13:25 NAS)

4. “Do we then hear about you that you have committed all this great evil by acting unfaithfully against our God by marrying foreign women?”” (Nehemiah 13:27 NAS)

D. Therefore, Jewish writers say that the early deaths of both the young men were divine judgments inflicted on them for those unlawful connections, that the consorting of Elimelech and his sons with Moab was an act of unfaithfulness to God.

8 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 8

Lessons from Mahlon and Chilion

A. What lessons can we learn as Christians from what happened to these two sons?

1. Wrong or poor decisions that we make will have bad effects upon others

2. Do not underestimate the power of being either a good or a poor example

3. For the Christian, the matter of relationships is important, too (2 Corinthians 6:14)

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. Resulting from Elimelech’s decision

1. We see his boys thrown into acquaintance with wrong people, wrong ideas, wrong actions; how we as parents pay for how we fail to protect our children in this respect!

2. Yet, we cannot put a wall around our children – we may try, but eventually the right way of living must come from the Holy Spirit’s work inside them – so our example should be a means of guidance; “Train up a child in the way he should go, Even when he is old he will not depart from it.” (Proverbs 22:6 NAS) … but between youth and maturity there may be side excursions.

3. “Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14 NAS)

9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 9

Consider Naomi

A. The meaning of the name Naomi is ‘fair’, ‘pleasant’ or ‘pleasantness’; How does her name compare with her situation?

B. How did Naomi fare as a result of Elimelech’s decision?

C. In practical terms, what has God done to Naomi?

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. Remember the meaning of this name, because Naomi later will ask people to call her by a new name. Also, as opposed to her situation, keep your eyes open for how Naomi’s name compared with her real character.

B. She is left bereft in a foreign land with 2 foreign daughters-in-law; apparently without means of support other than any accumulated savings; the prophecy of Isaiah against Judah is similar:

1. “But these two things shall come on you suddenly in one day: Loss of children and widowhood. They shall come on you in full measure In spite of your many sorceries, In spite of the great power of your spells.” (Isaiah 47:9 NAS)

2. “These two things have befallen you; Who will mourn for you? The devastation and destruction, famine and sword; How shall I comfort you?” (Isaiah 51:19 NAS)

C. God has removed …

1. … everything that would give her independence: in that society, a husband and / or sons were the providers and the mark of blessedness and success

2. … every tie that would hold her in the land of Moab where she did not belong

3. … apparently, every human helper (what can she expect from these young women, kind as they have been); in an agrarian, patristic society, without the benefit of Israel’s God-given social laws, the widow without means was in a terrible situation

10 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 10

Lessons from Naomi

A. What lessons can we as Christians learn from Naomi as she finds herself in this situation?

1. God is still on the throne, Psalm 47:8, regardless of where we may find ourselves through either our own wilfulness or the actions of others

2. God will work out His plans and purposes despite us (Isaiah 46:10-11, Ephesians 1:11)

3. What God does he does for our good (Romans 8:28)

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. When we find ourselves experiencing the same situation as Naomi, what are some truths that we need to call to our mind (we do not yet see these being true for Naomi but we will)?

1. “God reigns over the nations, God sits on His holy throne.” (Psalms 47:8 NAS)

2. God is working out His plans

a. “Declaring the end from the beginning And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, ‘My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure; Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man of My purpose from a far country. Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it, surely I will do it.’” Isaiah 46:10-11 NAS)

b. “also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will,” (Ephesians 1:11 NAS)

3. God works these plans out for our benefit, “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” (Romans 8:28 NAS)

11 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 11

Next week, Ruth 1:6-18

The characters of three women

– - – - – slide above, notes below – - – - -

A. We have a longer passage for next week

1. We will look at the relationship between Naomi and her two daughters-inlaw

2. And each of their characters

B. We may finish that passage or not, but, Lord willing, in any case we will look at the final few verses from another perspective in a subsequent lesson

Annie Dieselberg works with the NightLight mission that focuses on rescuing women from the sex industry in Bangkok, Thailand. What follows is a story of one of her experiences

________

“What the *** do you think this country is here for!”

The large buff man was leaning over the seat in the bar yelling at my mission teammate. I had seen him come into the bar with his buddies. They had immediately begun to fondle the women and treat them like sex dolls. I tried to ignore them even when they threw some comments my way. One of them sat next to my teammate and made a rude remark. She told him his behavior was disgusting and got up to move back away from him. He immediately went into a rage and began to cuss and yell. “How else do you think the buffalos get paid for. . .” We were trying to avoid confrontation but he was demanding it. He then bought a basket of ping-pong balls used to throw at the women on the bar and thew them back at us. Chaos had erupted and it felt like everything was out of control. All I could do was point and say, “In the name of Jesus. . .” repeatedly but I didn’t know what more to say after that. It was a desperate plea for intervention.

Two large ladyboys in suits headed toward us - management! Oh no, I thought, we are going to be kicked out of the bar. I was ready to leave but not like that. The larger of the two in a bright yellow jacket approached me and stunned me by introducing himself as the head manager of the bar and apologizing. I was speechless for a second and then I told him how the man had insulted Thailand. I asked him to protect the women of his bar and not allow them to go with these men as they were demeaning and possibly dangerous. He thanked me and said, “These men who treat women like these . . . all of them at least have a mother and that should cause them to treat women better.”

The man at this point, having made a huge scene in the bar and seeing that we were receiving the sympathy, began to feel some guilt. He tried to throw a large sum of money at the teammate. She kept throwing it back and he would yell, “It’s not dirty money!!” The manager said, “Don’t take his money! Everything is not about money. There are more important things in life than money.” Again, I was stunned . . . this was the head manager of this go-go bar.

I decided to take another risk and I reached into my bag and pulled out a Christian booklet and handed it to the manager. He immediately began to read it while standing at my table. I asked him, “Do you like to read?” He answered me, “I really like these. Christians have handed these out to me and whenever I feel depressed or weary I read these and I feel better.” He then asked me where I went to church and if he could come. “When I was a kid,” he told me, “I went to a Christian school. I don’t like this job. I know its not good and I want to change.” I asked him if I could pray with him.

Right there in a dark bar, with girls dancing on the stage, a foreign man trying to make penance for his bad behavior, and loud music blaring, I held the hands of this ladyboy, the top manager. I looked him in the eyes and I prayed for him and for the destiny that God has prepared for him. He was touched and he thanked me. I paid my bill and walked out hugging the women who were with the rude customers on my way out. When we got out the door I began to jump up and down. What had started out as chaotic and evil, God had turned around to reveal himself to the manager and for his glory.

Cammy Franzese is a woman who stood by her man to a degree that would make even Tammy Wynette flinch if she were still alive. But by greeting his shortcomings with – now keep an open mind, ladies – love and prayer, she managed to change him.

Cammy Franzese is the reason her husband Michael Franzese – a.k.a. “The Yuppie Don” – became the first high ranking member of the Mafia to publicly walk away from a life of crime and into a life of Little League coaching and churchgoing. And if she can do that, there’s still hope that you can help your man walk away from a life of crumbs on the counter.

Cammy grew up in Anaheim, California, one of seven children born to Irma Garcia, a devout churchgoer, and Seferino Garcia. She graduated from Anaheim High in 1981. While studying dance at Cal State Fullerton, she got a chance to go to Miami as a back-up dancer on the set of the movie “Knights of the City.”

It was there in 1984 that she met Michael Franzese, the producer of the movie. He was young and handsome – and 11 years older, to her dismay. But he was sweet. He told her he was Catholic and had once been an altar boy. He didn’t tell her that he had already escaped five white-collar crime indictments. Or that he was “heir apparent” in the Colombo family.

Cammy returned to Anaheim when the movie finished shooting, but their relationship continued. One day not long after, Mike’s friend Frankie called: Mike had been arrested, something about tax evasion. At this point she still thought her boyfriend was just your average businessman. While the New York papers were having a field day with the Mob charges, it wasn’t making headlines in California.

When Michael made bail he flew out to the West Coast and told Cammy he wanted to spend his life with her. The day after their engagement party, he was acquitted. They married that July in Beverly Hills and bought condos on Long Island and in Brentwood. Cammy gave birth to a baby girl.

But the good times didn’t last long. When their daughter was 7 months old, Michael was indicted for racketeering. This time he went to prison. That same year he was listed as the youngest capo on Fortune magazine’s 1986 chart of “The 50 Biggest Mafia Bosses,” according to a Life Magazine article. He was 33.

“It was a blessing that I was young and idealistic and naïve at the time,” Cammy says. She didn’t ask her husband questions, fearing she would hear something she didn’t want to. She didn’t read newspapers. Or watch the news. Instead, over the next four years, she visited him every weekend – and prayed for him.

Cammy’s mother counseled her to forgive him and shared her vision. “He’s going to speak to millions,” she told her. “And she was so right. My mother was just so loving and forgiving and she believed in second chances and transformation and miracles,” Cammy says.

Well, Michael finally came home four years later. Law enforcement wanted him to testify against his “associates.” He wouldn’t do it. They threatened to throw him back in prison for a parole violation. He wouldn’t budge. One morning, after 18 months of freedom, he was back in prison.

By now they had two children. Money was tight so Cammy gave up the house with the elevator and nine bathrooms in Brentwood for a condo in Westwood.

“I just thought ‘Oh, my gosh, I can’t do this again.’ I was angry. Michael was still living for Michael.”

But she still loved him. “I used to get on my knees and pray that God would protect him and change his heart ... and make him the husband and the father he needs to be.... And bring him home.”

Back behind bars, the Yuppie Don broke. “My heart hurt so much that night, it was the kinda pain I remember,” Michael says. “That night I had nothing but enemies.”

A prison guard walked up and pushed a Bible through the slot. It fell on the floor. Michael threw it against the wall. Then he reconsidered. “Ya know, I’ve got everyone in the world mad at me, I don’t need God mad at me.”

He opened the Bible. It fell on Proverbs 16:7. “When a man’s ways are pleasing to the Lord even his enemies are at peace with him.”

He had let down his wife once again. “My life was in direct contradiction to everything that she was about and believed in,” he says. He remembered back when they first met and he couldn’t take his eyes off of her, and how pretty she was, as she talked to him about God. “Honestly, that didn’t really appeal to me at the time,” he says. “She could have been talking about anything. I was being polite. I wasn’t listening.”

Now he was listening.

“I loved her madly,” he says. “I think the main thing is, she knew that I would do anything for her.”

So finally he did. Michael Franzese renounced his life of crime. Behind bars, he granted an interview to Life Magazine. When “Quitting the Mafia” hit newsstands in 1987 the Warden called him into his office. “Franzese, do you have a death wish?” he asked.

“There’s an old saying that the only way to leave the Mafia is in a coffin,” the Life article began.

Michael was willing to take his chances. During his four years in the hole this second time around he read the Bible inside out and upside down. When he got out, the FBI came knocking. “You claimed you turned your life around, prove it,” they told him. They asked him to be in a video to warn young athletes not to be sucked into organized crime’s web of game fixing.

His videos led to speaking engagements. Today he travels the country, visiting colleges and churches, sharing his story. “Had I not met Cammy, I am certain I wouldn’t have taken the path I took and I would probably be dead or in prison,” he tells them.

Complete strangers have heard more about his double-dealings than wife has. “To this day, I’ve never sat down and discussed my past life with her,” he said. And she has never asked for details.

Michael has written two books, “Quitting the Mob” in 1991 and “Blood Covenant” in 2003. She hasn’t read a single page. “There’s probably a lot of things in there I don’t want to know about. I see it when he’s sleeping and tossing and turning. I can imagine it. I don’t need to see it in black and white.”

She remembers in the days after her husband got out of prison. “Every now and again someone would ask, ‘Are you fearful for your life or your children’s life?’ And I’d think, ‘Oh my God. Why should I be fearful?’”

Occasionally Cammy will join her husband and speak publicly to married couples about how they held it together.

“It’s definitely easier to say I didn’t sign up for this and walk away,” she will tell them. “But whatever his old life was, it doesn’t matter, because that’s not the man he is today. I’m married to this man and I’m in love with this man.”

”The men were amazed and asked, ‘What kind of man is this?’” (Mark 8:27)

Have you ever wondered why Jesus is never referred to as Jesus the Great? We speak of Alexander the Great, Charles the Great, and Peter the Great but never Jesus the Great. And why? Because He dwells in a sphere where no real comparisons are possible. It simply doesn’t seem right to use the designation “the Great” of our Lord as we would of others. Our Lord has no peers, no rivals, and no successors. He is so different from every other leader, so unique, so superior, that He qualifies for a place on His own. The things He said about God are not the same as the sayings of any other religious teacher. The claims He made for Himself are unparalleled. His analysis of human society goes deeper and is more devastating than that pronounced by any other man. The challenges and demands He made on His followers are more searching than those put forward by anyone – past and present.

As James Francis said of Him: “He never wrote a book, never held an office, never had a family, never went to college, never did any of the things that usually accompany greatness. But … He is the centerpiece of the human race and the leader of its column of progress. I am within the mark when I say that all the armies that have ever marched, all the navies that were ever built, all the parliaments that have ever sat, all the kings that have ever reigned, put together, have not affected the life of people upon this earth as powerfully as has that one solitary life.”

PRAYER: Jesus, my Lord and my God, all the descriptions of You fall short of defining Your real glory and worth. Yet my soul recognizes, even though it cannot put it into words, the glory that belongs to You by sovereign right. I love You Lord Jesus. With all my heart. Amen.

FURTHER STUDY:

Isaiah 40:1-31; Psalms 89:6; John 1:34

1. What question did Isaiah pose?

2. What was John’s testimony?

Years ago in England there was a man named Hugh Price Hughes who was well known for ministering to the poor in the slums of London. A noted atheist named Charles Bradlaugh challenged Hughes to a debate on the validity of the claims of Christ.

Hughes immediately accepted the debate and in doing so added one challenge of his own. Hughes said: “I propose to you that we each bring some concrete evidences of the validity of our beliefs in the form of men and women who have been redeemed from the lives of sin and shame by the influence of our teaching. I will bring 100 such men and women and I challenge you to do the same.

“If you cannot bring 100, Mr. Bradlaugh, I will be satisfied if you will bring 50 such men and women who will stand and testify that they have been lifted up from lives of shame by the influence of your teachings.

If you can’t bring 50, then bring 20 people who will say that they have a great joy in a life of self-respect as a result of your atheistic teachings.

If you cannot bring 20, I will be satisfied if you bring 10.

“Nay, Mr. Bradlaugh, I challenge you to bring one, just one man or woman who will make such a testimony regarding the uplifting of your atheistic teachings.”

Bradlaugh withdrew his challenge. Because he couldn’t.

Jesus changes lives.

Jesus is unique in His ability to transform lives and remove the guilt of sin from people’s hearts.

In 1993, I received the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion at an award ceremony in Buckingham Palace. I represented the thousands upon thousands of Prison Fellowship volunteers and staff who are offering the hope of new life in Christ to prisoners around the world.

I was honored to stand next to Prince Philip when he gave me the medal. We were surrounded by dignitaries. Then the Prince asked me, “Mr. Colson, what can we do about juvenile crime here in England?” I told him: “Send more young British children to Sunday school.” He smiled, thinking I was joking. I think I shocked some of the dignitaries, who no doubt thought I was being a bit cheeky.

I was deadly serious. I told the Prince, “Professor Christie Davies at the University of Reading conducted a study that showed when Sunday school attendance was highest in England, crime was lowest. Conversely, when Sunday school attendance declined, the crime rate increased.” So I said to him, “Send young boys to Sunday school so they can be taught the basics of Christian morality.”

“Pretty good idea!” Prince Philip replied.

A pretty good idea, indeed. And it’s an idea that is being proved right again and again. In yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, the eminent social scientist James Q. Wilson reviewed Baylor professor Byron Johnson’s new book, More God, Less Crime.

In researching his book, Johnson looked for every study “that measured the possible effect of religion on crime” published between 1944 and 2010. In case you were wondering, there were 273 of them.

Wilson noted that according to 90 percent of those studies “more religiosity resulted in less crime.” While Wilson cautioned that a lack of statistical controls makes these numbers hard to evaluate, Wilson wrote that the sheer number of studies showing the positive effect on religion offsets their potential weaknesses in methodology.

Wilson, the preeminent man in the field, pointed to a landmark 1986 study conducted by Harvard economist Richard Freeman, who found that “going to church is associated with substantial differences in how young men behave. More churchgoing, less crime, less alcohol and fewer drugs.”

And, Wilson suggests, among studies of actual prisoners the “strongest results” come from Prison Fellowship, particularly Johnson’s own study of our InnerChange Freedom Initiative in Texas.

When you compared a group of similar Texas prisoners to the InnerChange Freedom Initiative graduates, you see that after two years the post-release re-incarceration rate is 8 percent for our graduates against 20.3 percent for the matched comparison group.

These results, and the mountain of evidence showing that religion makes a difference, are enough for great scholars like Wilson to take notice.

Unsurprisingly enough, it’s not enough for many of our secularist, academic elite. Johnson was dismissed some years ago from the University of Memphis because his research on crime and religion -- and his Christian views -- meant that he “simply didn’t fit in.”

But what Johnson’s book More God, Less Crime shows so clearly, is that we’ve been right all along: The Gospel changes lives, and it’s the best hope for keeping men and women out of prison.

The evidence is clear, and it’s a great testimony. We just need eyes to see it.

________

Copyright (c) 2011 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.