Daniel was a Rebel. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were rebels. Jesus was a rebel. Paul, Peter, and the other disciples were rebels.

It may seem strange to say, but a Christian is quite a rebellious person. No, not against God, but she is a rebel against the social norms and the collective behavior of the world around her. She rebels against the expectations that most everyone else mindlessly follows.

This is quite a difference from the meek, mild-mannered robots that some might think characterize the ideal Christian. No, such a creature is likely tied to religion. The ideal follower of Christ is a rebel with dissatisfaction for what the world offers, and how the world leads.

Permission to be a rebel is granted by God, and doing so allows us to shine among the world to advance the Kingdom of God. When and how to illustrate one's rebellious license is the subject of this message.

Whenever we experience pain, it seems like our first (and only) solution is to remove the pain. We medicate it, or insulate ourselves from it, or attack its source. After all, who likes pain?

But pain is not always just a negative thing. C.S. Lewis writes that "pain shatters the illusion that all is well." Pain tells us that something is wrong, and there is always the potential for pain to get us off of our sedentary recliners and actually change something in our lives.

The story of Joseph is an example of how pain is a catalyst to bring about changes that are beneficial. Joseph received insight into his pain, and he eventually understood how his pain was ordained by God to move him and his family toward God's well-hidden plans.

Samson had all the spiritual potential in the world. He began with a miracle birth and a commission from God. He was raised in an environment with parents who knew the Lord and were concerned to raise their child well. Yet, he turned out prideful and disobedient to God, addicted to one of the core sins God warns us about - pursuit of relationships with those not of God.

Samson's weakness was his downfall. Indeed, God still worked in him despite his failures and his motivations, but Samson's impact might have been so much more had he been obedient.

Is the story of Adam and Eve just about obedience and punishment? After all, this is often how the story is told to children.

It is much more. Rather than seeing this as a narrative of disobedience, and in particular a historical narrative of original sin, there is an opportunity here to discuss the very foundation of our relationship with God and life ... even the very vision of God for His people. You see, this story is about God (creator, provider, unlimited) and how people (limited, powerless, and dependent) aspire to become God.

This is form of self-deification, exerting an independence from God. Ummmm ... just like we do today.

Today, science is seen as an opponent of scripture, and it declares that many of the Old Testament stories are merely fables or allegory simply because they are inconsistent with science.

Scripture is not designed to argue "how", but rather it is designed to argue "who" and "why". On the other hand, science is not designed to argue "who" or "why", but rather "what" and "how". Thus, the approach of Scripture, and of spiritual things, is not intended to debate in the same arena as science. Sure, they may touch on the same subjects, but they are pursuing different agendas.

Yet, we continue to get drawn into the scientific debates such as of creationism vs. big bang ... or primordial ooze vs dust of the earth.

What might be helpful is to first relearn the creation story in the context of "who" and "why" rather than "how". The "how" that is taught to children may be helpful in an introductory way, but few of us continue to operate as an adult with a concept of teaching that is applicable to a 5-year old.

What credentials does one need to have in order to present the truth of God? A seminary degree? A cross around the neck and a fish sticker on the car? Vestments? A large audience in a large cathedral?

In the marketplace of Christian ideas, there are many competing messages being delivered. So (to at least better evaluate which is truth and which is not), it is a valid question to evaluate the person through whom the message comes. What, then, should be their resume? Or, put another way, what does one need to possess in order for their message of Christ to be respected over other conflicting messages?

Paul's "fool speech" in 2 Corinthians 10-12 is dealing with just this issue. As we understand his rhetoric, we understand that we should follow the one that the Lord commends. This message explores what it means to be commended by the Lord, and how better to evaluate the source of a message.