Thursday, November 30, 2006
Monday, November 27, 2006
I've just recently become aware of the Joseph Farah-Rick Warren situation as well as the Brian McLaren-Mark Driscoll online "debate," which is now very dated (you can get most of the text here). In any case, having read all of the article written by Farah and the short rebuttal by Warren, on the record I side with Farah. Being late to the McLaren-Driscoll situation, I don't know that I have all of the info but I've read the original post by McLaren, Driscoll's response, McLaren's response to that and then Driscoll's short, to the point question to McLaren. That's where I've stopped. If there is more, forgive me, I'm not aware.
Anyway, after reading this and doing a little more research on my man Driscoll (I've written here before how much I appreciated his book "Radical Reformission" and his thoughts on various topics), this info below from Wiki also hits right where I am at right now:
Brief association with Emerging Church movement:
Mark Driscoll describes his association with, and eventual distancing from the Emerging Church movement in his blog"In the mid-1990s I was part of what is now known as the Emerging Church and spent some time traveling the country to speak on the emerging church in the emerging culture on a team put together by Leadership Network called the Young Leader Network.But, I eventually had to distance myself from the Emergent stream of the network because friends like Brian McLaren and Doug Pagitt began pushing a theological agenda that greatly troubled me. Examples include referring to God as a chick, questioning God's sovereignty over and knowledge of the future, denial of the substitutionary atonement at the cross, a low view of Scripture, and denial of hell which is one hell of a mistake."
I like a lot of the questions the emerging network are asking and some of the paradigms they are changing, but their lack of foundational theology greatly troubles me for the exact reason Driscoll notes above.
Anyway, after reading this and doing a little more research on my man Driscoll (I've written here before how much I appreciated his book "Radical Reformission" and his thoughts on various topics), this info below from Wiki also hits right where I am at right now:
Brief association with Emerging Church movement:
Mark Driscoll describes his association with, and eventual distancing from the Emerging Church movement in his blog"In the mid-1990s I was part of what is now known as the Emerging Church and spent some time traveling the country to speak on the emerging church in the emerging culture on a team put together by Leadership Network called the Young Leader Network.But, I eventually had to distance myself from the Emergent stream of the network because friends like Brian McLaren and Doug Pagitt began pushing a theological agenda that greatly troubled me. Examples include referring to God as a chick, questioning God's sovereignty over and knowledge of the future, denial of the substitutionary atonement at the cross, a low view of Scripture, and denial of hell which is one hell of a mistake."
I like a lot of the questions the emerging network are asking and some of the paradigms they are changing, but their lack of foundational theology greatly troubles me for the exact reason Driscoll notes above.
Friday, November 24, 2006
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Finally, this makes me sick, because he is all too right!
Another Way In Which Dogs in America Live Better Than People in Parts of the Developing World:
One breakthrough in antibiotics is a class of chemicals called cephalexins, which kill both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, yet have minimal side effects. Discovered in 1948 by an Italian chemist, cephalexins – most common trade name Keflex – were not widely available until the 1970s. By the 1980s, word was out on this drug's combination of effectiveness and minimal risk. Parents began saying, "Doctor, please give my child Keflex." Why do I mention all this? First, this is Tuesday Morning Quarterback: I don't have to have a reason. Second, recently I took Geneva, the brainless Official Dog of TMQ, to the vet. And they gave her – Keflex. From miracle drug for people to pills for the dog! The problem is that in many parts of the developing world, parents still plead, "Doctor, please give my child Keflex." American parents might soon plead, "Doctor, please give my child Claforan or Cefcatacol,"
these being advanced cephalexins that work against the antibiotic-resistant germ strains found in hospitals. How long before American dogs get Cefcatacol while developing-world patients still plead for Keflex?
Another Way In Which Dogs in America Live Better Than People in Parts of the Developing World:
One breakthrough in antibiotics is a class of chemicals called cephalexins, which kill both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, yet have minimal side effects. Discovered in 1948 by an Italian chemist, cephalexins – most common trade name Keflex – were not widely available until the 1970s. By the 1980s, word was out on this drug's combination of effectiveness and minimal risk. Parents began saying, "Doctor, please give my child Keflex." Why do I mention all this? First, this is Tuesday Morning Quarterback: I don't have to have a reason. Second, recently I took Geneva, the brainless Official Dog of TMQ, to the vet. And they gave her – Keflex. From miracle drug for people to pills for the dog! The problem is that in many parts of the developing world, parents still plead, "Doctor, please give my child Keflex." American parents might soon plead, "Doctor, please give my child Claforan or Cefcatacol,"
these being advanced cephalexins that work against the antibiotic-resistant germ strains found in hospitals. How long before American dogs get Cefcatacol while developing-world patients still plead for Keflex?
Another great idea from Easterbrook, I totally agree! It makes me sick whatBug Selig did in Milwaukee with the Brewers, forcing a new stadium deal funded by taxpayers' dollars, then selling the team since the new stadium increased the value of the team.
In other sports news, don't overlook that on election day, Seattle voters overwhelmingly approved an ordinance forbidding the use of public funds for NFL, NBA and MLB stadia. The proximate result might be that the NBA's SuperSonics leave the Emerald City when their current lease to play at the KeyArena expires. But sports owners beware, this might be the bow wave of an approaching trend. As recently as the 1980s, a civic-minded person could argue that some public expense was justified for pro-sports stadium construction in order to create economic activity, especially in downtown areas. Now there's so much money pouring into pro sports, and many owners are so rich, that it has become obscene to expect taxpayers to fund facilities that generate private profit for the wealthy. It's troubling, too, that with the majority of today's pro sports facilities being partially or wholly publicly funded, the owners claim proprietary rights regarding images of what happens inside. If, say, Indiana taxpayers are going to pay for the Colts' new stadium – as they are – why shouldn't anyone film or broadcast what happens within this public venue, ending the NFL's exclusive network agreements? TMQ expects this view to gain legal traction in the coming years. Pro sports commissioners: Better start planning now to pay your own stadium costs on a free-market basis.
In other sports news, don't overlook that on election day, Seattle voters overwhelmingly approved an ordinance forbidding the use of public funds for NFL, NBA and MLB stadia. The proximate result might be that the NBA's SuperSonics leave the Emerald City when their current lease to play at the KeyArena expires. But sports owners beware, this might be the bow wave of an approaching trend. As recently as the 1980s, a civic-minded person could argue that some public expense was justified for pro-sports stadium construction in order to create economic activity, especially in downtown areas. Now there's so much money pouring into pro sports, and many owners are so rich, that it has become obscene to expect taxpayers to fund facilities that generate private profit for the wealthy. It's troubling, too, that with the majority of today's pro sports facilities being partially or wholly publicly funded, the owners claim proprietary rights regarding images of what happens inside. If, say, Indiana taxpayers are going to pay for the Colts' new stadium – as they are – why shouldn't anyone film or broadcast what happens within this public venue, ending the NFL's exclusive network agreements? TMQ expects this view to gain legal traction in the coming years. Pro sports commissioners: Better start planning now to pay your own stadium costs on a free-market basis.
Two articles in last week's Time caught my eye:
1) Can I be honest and say that I am concerned about the economical future of the US? Can I say I am scared? I try to balance this with the realization that I am a citizen of a different sovereign Kingdom and this world should bring no worries to Christians. Yet it does, and was reinforced last week in this Time article, I believe the end of the fat American pocketbook and balanced portfolio is about over. This whole baby-boomer retirement and drawing their assets out of the housing and stock markets worries me and could lead to a major recession. As the article states, ""New homes are selling at a slower pace, and prices have fallen. Buyers are walking away from signed deals (and their deposits) at twice last year's rate." Everyone knows
this housing boom couldn't last, how much further is can prod along is another question. Though admittedly very unknowledgeable in this area, my gut is telling me that foreclosures and prices are going to drop rapidly, with all housing take a major dip in value. We are fortunate not to have bought over our means or have concerns about being able to make the payments, but one thing I like to have is equity in a home and if prices fall that will be gone. My prayer is that I don't worry or focus too much on this, but it's a reality I believe will come and should be prepare for.
2) Who wouldn't want to read this book? It reminds me of my friend who corrected his sons when they said they wanted to be rich like Michael Jordan, he said that was fine, but he wanted to be the guy who could afford to pay Michael Jordan that kind of money. Though I don't know about his conclusion or solution, I guess I'll have to read the book to make a judgment.
FORTY MILLION DOLLAR SLAVES
WILLIAM C. RHODEN
Don't equate the fat contracts of today's African-American athletes with power, Rhoden argues in this provocative book. The white owners and agents are still calling most of the shots. Rhoden blames today's black athletes for failing to acquire real control and Michael Jordan for approaching black causes "with an apathy that borders on treason." The solution? Rhoden proposes an intersport, black-athlete trade association. That, he says, would really put the ball in the black players' hands.
1) Can I be honest and say that I am concerned about the economical future of the US? Can I say I am scared? I try to balance this with the realization that I am a citizen of a different sovereign Kingdom and this world should bring no worries to Christians. Yet it does, and was reinforced last week in this Time article, I believe the end of the fat American pocketbook and balanced portfolio is about over. This whole baby-boomer retirement and drawing their assets out of the housing and stock markets worries me and could lead to a major recession. As the article states, ""New homes are selling at a slower pace, and prices have fallen. Buyers are walking away from signed deals (and their deposits) at twice last year's rate." Everyone knows
this housing boom couldn't last, how much further is can prod along is another question. Though admittedly very unknowledgeable in this area, my gut is telling me that foreclosures and prices are going to drop rapidly, with all housing take a major dip in value. We are fortunate not to have bought over our means or have concerns about being able to make the payments, but one thing I like to have is equity in a home and if prices fall that will be gone. My prayer is that I don't worry or focus too much on this, but it's a reality I believe will come and should be prepare for.
2) Who wouldn't want to read this book? It reminds me of my friend who corrected his sons when they said they wanted to be rich like Michael Jordan, he said that was fine, but he wanted to be the guy who could afford to pay Michael Jordan that kind of money. Though I don't know about his conclusion or solution, I guess I'll have to read the book to make a judgment.
FORTY MILLION DOLLAR SLAVES
WILLIAM C. RHODEN
Don't equate the fat contracts of today's African-American athletes with power, Rhoden argues in this provocative book. The white owners and agents are still calling most of the shots. Rhoden blames today's black athletes for failing to acquire real control and Michael Jordan for approaching black causes "with an apathy that borders on treason." The solution? Rhoden proposes an intersport, black-athlete trade association. That, he says, would really put the ball in the black players' hands.
Monday, November 20, 2006
I like the balance Chuck Missler places in his latest KHouse news on the church and state:
We have a responsibility to oversee our representatives, to hold them accountable, and to make our voices heard. Individual Americas, whatever their religious beliefs, are not only free but should speak out to make sure that our local and federal public servants are doing their jobs well.
Churches, however, are in a different position. If a church has not filed for a 501(c)(3) tax exempt status, then the pastors and representatives of that church may politic from the pulpit as much as they like.
...Specifically, pastors or church representatives may not use their official capacity to endorse any one candidate, nor do too much to advocate for the adoption or rejection of specific legislation. Official church newsletters or other publications may not endorse specific candidates or legislation.
I can live with that.
We have a responsibility to oversee our representatives, to hold them accountable, and to make our voices heard. Individual Americas, whatever their religious beliefs, are not only free but should speak out to make sure that our local and federal public servants are doing their jobs well.
Churches, however, are in a different position. If a church has not filed for a 501(c)(3) tax exempt status, then the pastors and representatives of that church may politic from the pulpit as much as they like.
...Specifically, pastors or church representatives may not use their official capacity to endorse any one candidate, nor do too much to advocate for the adoption or rejection of specific legislation. Official church newsletters or other publications may not endorse specific candidates or legislation.
I can live with that.
Sunday, November 19, 2006
I just returned from the National Missionary Conference in Indy through the Church of Christ/Christian Church. Great times! Tumaini had a booth and we did a workshop (I say we, Dr. Mutunga was invited to lead one and he invited me to help, it was an honor and privilege to be a part of it). It was also a blessing to be there, see some old friends (former pastors, the dean of the college, etc.) and get reconnected to the missionary world.
I also had the opportunity to sit in on the session hosted by Dr. Alan Rabe on Humanitarian Aid. Dr. Rabe is the dean of the Ministry Dept. at Hope International and has a long track record of working with and for Feed the Children, World Vision, etc. He's worked in more countries than I know. But what I found most interesting in his session was how he picked up William Easterly's "The White Man's Burden" and noted how not only well-written it is but how honest and truthful it is when dealing with humanitarian aid. It turns out that Dr. Mutunga had recommended it to him and another friend in the audience, Dr. Robert Reese, had read it as well. What a great discussion we had afterward. Anyway, I've written my thoughts on this book before in this space, but I want to reinforce what I think is one of the best quotes of this book:
Financing consumption of a few poor people is not bad, but the Big Push (Millenium Goals, etc.) hoped for the society-wide transformation that would come from aid financing investment and growth.
In my mind (and this seemed to be agreed upon by the others) this is what separates Sachs and Bono and their paradigm from Easterly and his. Sachs is calling for major aid increases at the government level in hopes that the government will properly invest it in the countries infrastructure (roads, health care, education, etc). History has shown this doesn't happen, and I have a number of articles from Kenyan newspapers saying the same.
In making his point, Eastly presents a case study, the situation of a young girl in rural Ethiopia who every morning at sunrise gathers a load of firewood, carries it on her back for a half-day's walk to Addis Ababa, sells the firewood, then walks back to her village to present the money gained to her family for their survival (I could tell similar stories of countless children in Kenya). Does the girl want to do this the rest of her life, of course not! She wants to go to school, get an education, and better her life. There are millions like her around the world. Easterly's concern is that the Big Push can't or at least hasn't helped this girl get an education. For all of the foreign aid Kenya has received, millions still lack clean drinking water, something that the Big Push is supposed to address. The people in these countries could care less what foreign aid is going where and what governments are fighting over, they just want clean water, education, food, etc., something that in spite of all the promises they still have not received or been given access to. The answer then, in my mind and basically endorsed by Easterly, is grass roots Searchers (those who look for what the people need rather than coming in and telling the people what they need and then giving it to them, even though the people dont need it) going to the end of the earth to find out what people need, finding out how we can help them get that, then through microfinancing (or donations where necessary) assisting them to get what they need so they can move from survival up the economic ladder.
I don't believe the Sachs plan can accomplish this, but I am hopeful that the Easterly plan is exactly what the people need!
I also had the opportunity to sit in on the session hosted by Dr. Alan Rabe on Humanitarian Aid. Dr. Rabe is the dean of the Ministry Dept. at Hope International and has a long track record of working with and for Feed the Children, World Vision, etc. He's worked in more countries than I know. But what I found most interesting in his session was how he picked up William Easterly's "The White Man's Burden" and noted how not only well-written it is but how honest and truthful it is when dealing with humanitarian aid. It turns out that Dr. Mutunga had recommended it to him and another friend in the audience, Dr. Robert Reese, had read it as well. What a great discussion we had afterward. Anyway, I've written my thoughts on this book before in this space, but I want to reinforce what I think is one of the best quotes of this book:
Financing consumption of a few poor people is not bad, but the Big Push (Millenium Goals, etc.) hoped for the society-wide transformation that would come from aid financing investment and growth.
In my mind (and this seemed to be agreed upon by the others) this is what separates Sachs and Bono and their paradigm from Easterly and his. Sachs is calling for major aid increases at the government level in hopes that the government will properly invest it in the countries infrastructure (roads, health care, education, etc). History has shown this doesn't happen, and I have a number of articles from Kenyan newspapers saying the same.
In making his point, Eastly presents a case study, the situation of a young girl in rural Ethiopia who every morning at sunrise gathers a load of firewood, carries it on her back for a half-day's walk to Addis Ababa, sells the firewood, then walks back to her village to present the money gained to her family for their survival (I could tell similar stories of countless children in Kenya). Does the girl want to do this the rest of her life, of course not! She wants to go to school, get an education, and better her life. There are millions like her around the world. Easterly's concern is that the Big Push can't or at least hasn't helped this girl get an education. For all of the foreign aid Kenya has received, millions still lack clean drinking water, something that the Big Push is supposed to address. The people in these countries could care less what foreign aid is going where and what governments are fighting over, they just want clean water, education, food, etc., something that in spite of all the promises they still have not received or been given access to. The answer then, in my mind and basically endorsed by Easterly, is grass roots Searchers (those who look for what the people need rather than coming in and telling the people what they need and then giving it to them, even though the people dont need it) going to the end of the earth to find out what people need, finding out how we can help them get that, then through microfinancing (or donations where necessary) assisting them to get what they need so they can move from survival up the economic ladder.
I don't believe the Sachs plan can accomplish this, but I am hopeful that the Easterly plan is exactly what the people need!
The last couple of weeks I've really enjoyed Gregg Easterbrook's "Tuesday Morning Quarterback" on ESPN.com. I rarely get through it as it must get close to 100,000 words, but skimming for some quality insight and evaluation on both the NLF and world events is worthy of my time. This week I found two interesting pieces by him on world events, the first in this post and the second in the next one. First, on raising the minimum wage, he writes:
Social Justice Goes Six-for-Six:
In the hoopla over last week's historic elections, it is important this detail not be missed: Six states held referenda on raising their minimum wage, and in all six the measures passed by big margins. Success margins ranged up to 76 percent yes in Missouri. The six-for-six success of higher minimum wage proposals tells us four things. First, Americans are a fundamentally generous people. The majority of voters who said yes to raising the minimum wage are above that wage themselves, and know higher minimums will result in higher prices for their goods and services. Second, concern with social justice is a rising trend among Christian voters. The 76 percent yes in Missouri is especially revealing because evangelical turnout was high in that state, owing to a referendum about embryonic stem cell research on the same ballot. Jesus taught that the first concern of social policy should be the needy, and in recent years, evangelical Christianity has been waking up to that teaching. (On that topic I recommend to readers the new book "Tempting Faith" by former George W. Bush aide David Kuo, an evangelical; also it's important that Rick Warren, America's most prominent Christian pastor, has recently been talking more about obligations to the needy than any otherSocial Justice Goes Six-for-Six:
topic.) Third, the referenda results are another indicator of how far out of touch the House and Senate were, since in 2006 the Republican leadership in both chambers worked to sabotage a higher federal minimum wage. Finally and most importantly, the vote tells us the federal minimum wage must go up.
To stop here, I am glad that people are talking of our duty, as Christians, to the needy. But to cite Scripture on this, we must discuss it in the context as our personal duty, not the government's duty, to poverty. The government has wasted millions, billions, probably trillions of dollars fighting it domestically and trillions more internationally to no avail (See John Stossel for more intellectual and humor-filled commentary). The government can't do it, it is limited. I'm all for people calling for more intervention to help the poor, but let's all do our part and not run to Uncle Sam to bail us out, or we'll be in this exact position, possibly even a worse one, in fifty years. He continues:
Today the federal minimum is just $5.15 an hour. Some states have higher minimums -- that's what the votes were about -- but others do not, and in all states local actual wages tend to shadow the federal minimum, rising when the federal number rises. It is shocking, and an indictment of Washington, that today's federal minimum wage is barely worth half the minimum of the 1960s. Expressed in today's dollars, the minimum wage would need to be $10.20 an hour to have the same value as the federal minimum of 1968. Through the 1960s, full-time work at the federal minimum wage kept a family of three above the poverty trend; today a family of three headed by a full-time minimum wage worker is [ http://www.fiscalpolicy.org/MinimumWageGraphs.pdf ]24 percent below the poverty line. Yes, teenagers from affluent families working summer jobs don't need $10 an hour -- a teen-wage exception to the minimum seems fine. But our social contract should ensure that any adult who works full time receives basic financial security, and a $10-an-hour federal minimum wage would achieve that end. A $10 federal minimum wage would increase the cost of pizza delivery. It would also increase social justice: and all Americans ought to vote for that.
Another thing I have to disagree with Easterbrook on, and I'll note and fully admit his brilliance goes far beyond anything I'll come close to in my lifetime, but he and many others in the Christian realm today are calling out for this so-called social justice. We want everyone to be equal. It's a great idea but more utopic that realistic. I've read Ehrenreich's "Nickeled and Dimed" and found it preposterous. Sure, we can double the minimum wage, but we'd better prepare to see prices skyrocket and jobs go overseas. Don't people realize that? I thought Sowell's "The Quest for Cosmic Justice" was the perfect reaction to this paradigm. We desire a sort of cosmic justice for this world but our social realm cannot produce that. As I stated above, we should help the poor, yes, but again, to think the government can do it through domestic (raising minimum wage) or international programs (Millenium Goals) is a dream. Great ideas, great vision, but simply not a reality.
First of all, what is the attraction to Joel Osteen? In my opinion, he's not all that good of a speaker, his stories seem fake, and I can't stand to look at him for more than five minutes.
Second, is it just me or are we being tricked and he is really the world's first robot? Watch him for a minute and tell me he doesn't demonstrate those tendencies?
Second, is it just me or are we being tricked and he is really the world's first robot? Watch him for a minute and tell me he doesn't demonstrate those tendencies?
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Believe me, I have some posts ready to roll, just need to proof and post, hopefully by this weekend!
In the meantime, I came across an article on The Daily Nation, Kenya's national newspaper where the comment was made that "As shareholders in Kenya, we are being invited to invest in our own downfall as a nation." I found this very interesting and something I had never heard of, being shareholders in one's own country. Does anyone see themselves as a shareholder in America or is that more of a thing with developing countries?
In the meantime, I came across an article on The Daily Nation, Kenya's national newspaper where the comment was made that "As shareholders in Kenya, we are being invited to invest in our own downfall as a nation." I found this very interesting and something I had never heard of, being shareholders in one's own country. Does anyone see themselves as a shareholder in America or is that more of a thing with developing countries?
Monday, November 13, 2006
Dick Morris just made a great comment on Hannity and Colmes:
…Remember, the riches 1% of Americans pay 36% of our nation’s taxes while 50% of Americans pay 3.4%. If you are going to cut taxes, you have to cut it from those who pay the most...
I have to laugh at those who think the "rich" don't pay their fair share in taxes. We surely have a progressive tax system in the US, with the rich taking on plenty of the burden.
…Remember, the riches 1% of Americans pay 36% of our nation’s taxes while 50% of Americans pay 3.4%. If you are going to cut taxes, you have to cut it from those who pay the most...
I have to laugh at those who think the "rich" don't pay their fair share in taxes. We surely have a progressive tax system in the US, with the rich taking on plenty of the burden.
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Thursday, November 09, 2006
I think the key to the most recent post, the quote by Jan Markell, is the last sentence of the second paragraph. As I've reflected on the emerging and post-modern movements in Christian circles, this may be my biggest concern. To refresh, she writes:
...and not a word about the fact that only our Lord's return can solve these overwhelming problems...
I really applaud the desire of this movement to address some of the current issues, global hunger, AIDS, etc., but I believe we must not begin thinking that proper politics is the answer to the crises of the world. There is only one perfect political Kingdom and that is the one of our Lord Jesus Christ when He returns. It appears that these movements are trying to make the world perfect to prepare for the return of Christ, and the Bible seems to say that things are going to get worse and worse before the Lord intervenes and we usher in the millenial age (especially in my apocalyptic worldview and biblical interpretation).
Therefore, addressing these and other issues of the day is important, I would say necessary if the Spirit has given you a heart for a specific area, but we can't get mixed up into thinking that our work here will bring on the return of the Lord any quicker or delay it any longer if we do or don't address these man-made (I use this term here not to mean that an individual's sin necessarily causes them suffering but rather that the Sin of Man - Adam - is the cause of this world being out of whack - another issue for another time) issues. This is postmillenial thinking, correct?
...and not a word about the fact that only our Lord's return can solve these overwhelming problems...
I really applaud the desire of this movement to address some of the current issues, global hunger, AIDS, etc., but I believe we must not begin thinking that proper politics is the answer to the crises of the world. There is only one perfect political Kingdom and that is the one of our Lord Jesus Christ when He returns. It appears that these movements are trying to make the world perfect to prepare for the return of Christ, and the Bible seems to say that things are going to get worse and worse before the Lord intervenes and we usher in the millenial age (especially in my apocalyptic worldview and biblical interpretation).
Therefore, addressing these and other issues of the day is important, I would say necessary if the Spirit has given you a heart for a specific area, but we can't get mixed up into thinking that our work here will bring on the return of the Lord any quicker or delay it any longer if we do or don't address these man-made (I use this term here not to mean that an individual's sin necessarily causes them suffering but rather that the Sin of Man - Adam - is the cause of this world being out of whack - another issue for another time) issues. This is postmillenial thinking, correct?
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Very well-written and balanced commentary from Jan Markell, this provides a very appropriate intro to my forthcoming post on human pain and suffering:
Also, in “Voting God’s Politics” Wallis says the Israelis are oppressing the Palestinians, not the Palestinian leaders choosing to keep their people in poverty. Wallis adds we must strengthen the U.N. and end capital punishment because it is biased towards the poor. He urges all Christians to support amnesty for illegal aliens, fight AIDS, and fight for women's rights.
What's missing here? I see not a word about a regenerated heart that would assist in the above, not a word about man's sin nature that has caused all the problems, not a word about repentance, and not a word about the fact that only our Lord's return can solve these overwhelming problems. That doesn't mean some efforts shouldn't be employed to correct some of these issues.
Also, in “Voting God’s Politics” Wallis says the Israelis are oppressing the Palestinians, not the Palestinian leaders choosing to keep their people in poverty. Wallis adds we must strengthen the U.N. and end capital punishment because it is biased towards the poor. He urges all Christians to support amnesty for illegal aliens, fight AIDS, and fight for women's rights.
What's missing here? I see not a word about a regenerated heart that would assist in the above, not a word about man's sin nature that has caused all the problems, not a word about repentance, and not a word about the fact that only our Lord's return can solve these overwhelming problems. That doesn't mean some efforts shouldn't be employed to correct some of these issues.
In the words of Joe Boyd, what I write in the following is more for me that you. I need to get some thoughts down in writing. Feel free to comment, but know that this is a process I need to go through for myself.
This is the first of what I hope will be a two-part series. The second is on the issue of pain and suffering and a reaction to a few books that my students have been reading that have very pertinent cultural issues in that I feel the need to respond to.
In light of the election yesterday, I wanted to put in writing a few thoughts on the issues, especially in light of my getting blasted for not voting. It was my conviction not to vote this year as I didn't particularly like any of the candidates,I agreed and disagreed with all of them on their various issues, and in good conscience I didn't feel comfortable voting in any specific way. I don't feel the Reps have been true to their ideals and party platform (DUH!) and on the opposite end of the spectrum when it comes to the beliefs of the Democratic Pary. I could have been like some people I know and not had any clue on what I was voting for but just went and filled in a couple of bubbles to say they voted, I chose not to do that. Hate me if youwant, but it what the choice I made.
In addition to getting blasted for not voting, I was told that I had to vote straight Rep anyway because of the abortion issue. Really? In the past two years or six years of the Rep dominancy of the government, what has been done to curb this issue? Sure, two conservative Supreme Court Justices were appointed, but have we heard the A-word since then in a non-election related sense? I didn't think so.
For the record, I believe abortion is wrong, it is murder, a fetus is a living, breathing baby and in an ideal world, it would not exist. We do not live in an ideal world. Do I believe it should be outlawed, yes! Do I think that realistic, no! If wemake it illegal, it will still happen, and that will break my heart. I believe as Christians it is not our duty to work through the government to get our way, rather our duty is to bring people to a living relationship with Christ in which their hearts will be changed and under the influence of the Holy Spirit working on their lives the decisions theywill make will reflect their relationship with Christ. Will a law accomplish that? I don't believe so. I've said for many years that we can't expect non-Christians to follow the law of the Bible, how can they without the working of the Spirit on theirlives. Heck, I go to the Spirit often for guidance and direction and I still fall short, we all do.
The issue in my mind, then, with abortion as with same-sex marriage and a plethora of other issues is the justification of the issue. Yes, they are wrong in the eyes of the Lord, the Bible seems to state that pretty clearly, so the problem in my mind iswith those who justify these actions. If one has an abortion (whether now if legal or forty years ago when illegal) and is repentant later and goes to Jesus for forgiveness and has a change of heart as she follows Him, He will forgive her, grace will beextended. If one is militant and radical in this process and her heart is hardened, there will be consequences for that person, both now and at Judgment.
There is a delicate balance we must take on these issues, proclaiming the truth of God's Word while also being sensitive that in a fallen world we fall short just as the next person. The only difference that I see between me and the next guy is that I realize I fall short and go to Christ for forgiveness and with full trust in my eternal salvation while the next guy might stick out his tongue at the Lord and seek to do it on his own will to no avail. We all sin, we all fall short of a holy and righteous God, no one is righteous, not even one, the sooner both Christians and non-Christians realize that and realize the love and grace awaiting us when we realize our state and repent the better we all will be.
This is the first of what I hope will be a two-part series. The second is on the issue of pain and suffering and a reaction to a few books that my students have been reading that have very pertinent cultural issues in that I feel the need to respond to.
In light of the election yesterday, I wanted to put in writing a few thoughts on the issues, especially in light of my getting blasted for not voting. It was my conviction not to vote this year as I didn't particularly like any of the candidates,I agreed and disagreed with all of them on their various issues, and in good conscience I didn't feel comfortable voting in any specific way. I don't feel the Reps have been true to their ideals and party platform (DUH!) and on the opposite end of the spectrum when it comes to the beliefs of the Democratic Pary. I could have been like some people I know and not had any clue on what I was voting for but just went and filled in a couple of bubbles to say they voted, I chose not to do that. Hate me if youwant, but it what the choice I made.
In addition to getting blasted for not voting, I was told that I had to vote straight Rep anyway because of the abortion issue. Really? In the past two years or six years of the Rep dominancy of the government, what has been done to curb this issue? Sure, two conservative Supreme Court Justices were appointed, but have we heard the A-word since then in a non-election related sense? I didn't think so.
For the record, I believe abortion is wrong, it is murder, a fetus is a living, breathing baby and in an ideal world, it would not exist. We do not live in an ideal world. Do I believe it should be outlawed, yes! Do I think that realistic, no! If wemake it illegal, it will still happen, and that will break my heart. I believe as Christians it is not our duty to work through the government to get our way, rather our duty is to bring people to a living relationship with Christ in which their hearts will be changed and under the influence of the Holy Spirit working on their lives the decisions theywill make will reflect their relationship with Christ. Will a law accomplish that? I don't believe so. I've said for many years that we can't expect non-Christians to follow the law of the Bible, how can they without the working of the Spirit on theirlives. Heck, I go to the Spirit often for guidance and direction and I still fall short, we all do.
The issue in my mind, then, with abortion as with same-sex marriage and a plethora of other issues is the justification of the issue. Yes, they are wrong in the eyes of the Lord, the Bible seems to state that pretty clearly, so the problem in my mind iswith those who justify these actions. If one has an abortion (whether now if legal or forty years ago when illegal) and is repentant later and goes to Jesus for forgiveness and has a change of heart as she follows Him, He will forgive her, grace will beextended. If one is militant and radical in this process and her heart is hardened, there will be consequences for that person, both now and at Judgment.
There is a delicate balance we must take on these issues, proclaiming the truth of God's Word while also being sensitive that in a fallen world we fall short just as the next person. The only difference that I see between me and the next guy is that I realize I fall short and go to Christ for forgiveness and with full trust in my eternal salvation while the next guy might stick out his tongue at the Lord and seek to do it on his own will to no avail. We all sin, we all fall short of a holy and righteous God, no one is righteous, not even one, the sooner both Christians and non-Christians realize that and realize the love and grace awaiting us when we realize our state and repent the better we all will be.
Saturday, November 04, 2006
I know this is more than you need to know, but oftentimes on the weekends I like to fall asleep in the basement on the couch. Lisa can't understand it but it is kind of serene for me, watching a little tube before calling it a night. Anyway, a few weeks ago it was around 11pm when I was readying myself for a nice snooze when one last flip through the channels brought me to two Leonard DiCaprio movies, "Gangs of New York," an old favorite of mine, and one of his I had never seen and never intended to, "The Beach." Now, I had seen the case of "The Beach" in the movie store for years and took it to be some romantic story of DiCaprio and some girl on some beach somewhere living out some utopic fantasy. BORING!
And of course if you have seen it you know that there is some of that, but I really got hooked on the story and couldn't stop watching it, trying to sleep at times to no avail. First, a quote in the opening part really struck me:
The only downer is, everyone's got the same idea. We all travel thousands of miles just to watch TV and check in to somewhere with all the comforts of home, and you gotta ask yourself, what is the point of that?
How true is that? The past three summers I've gone to Kenya and done the same thing for my teams, tried to provide for them the same amenities we find here in the States rather than trying to provide for them the experience of the country. Not anymore, that is going to be in the first trip meeting this year, that very quote and maybe even the clip from the movie to let people know that they are going to Kenya for a reason and not to make it seem like America.
Second, the story with the people on the island really got me, especially Sal. You could tell right away that there was something wrong with her and it really manifest itself throughout the movie. For her it wasn't just about having a good time on some hidden island, this island had overcome her to the point where it almost possessed her (tangent - this morning I sat down with a friend who just became pastor of a dying church to bring it back to life and one of the church members said that they need to have a Christmas program because they have one every year even though there are only about five kids in the church and they need to play Silent Night as the last song, a few years ago the old pastor played Joy to the World, he didn't last long, do you see the similarities?) to the point where she was willing to kill Richard (DeCaprio) to stay on the island, but it all backfired on her. If you haven't seen the movie, I recommend it.
Again, what I think hooked me here was the connection to our culture. We can't just enjoy things as they are, we have to organize them, make them perfect, allow them to overcome us, rule us. Like Sal, she couldn't just enjoy the beach, the freedom, the alternate experience this allowed them, she had to organize it, rule it, oversee it to a fault. In the church, we can't just gather as believers, teach, fellowship, serve, everything has to be organized and perfect or else the masses go somewhere else. Who cares? Settle down! Chill out! We mess up our priorities and get all out of whack - over non-essentials. We need to reinforce and focus on the essentials more (deity of Christ, His death as atonement for our sins, Bible as Word of God, etc) and less on the non-essentials (whether we have a Christmas program and the last song is Joy to the World - you think I'm kidding here, I'm not) or else we are going to continue to slide into relativity. I'm sick of it!
And of course if you have seen it you know that there is some of that, but I really got hooked on the story and couldn't stop watching it, trying to sleep at times to no avail. First, a quote in the opening part really struck me:
The only downer is, everyone's got the same idea. We all travel thousands of miles just to watch TV and check in to somewhere with all the comforts of home, and you gotta ask yourself, what is the point of that?
How true is that? The past three summers I've gone to Kenya and done the same thing for my teams, tried to provide for them the same amenities we find here in the States rather than trying to provide for them the experience of the country. Not anymore, that is going to be in the first trip meeting this year, that very quote and maybe even the clip from the movie to let people know that they are going to Kenya for a reason and not to make it seem like America.
Second, the story with the people on the island really got me, especially Sal. You could tell right away that there was something wrong with her and it really manifest itself throughout the movie. For her it wasn't just about having a good time on some hidden island, this island had overcome her to the point where it almost possessed her (tangent - this morning I sat down with a friend who just became pastor of a dying church to bring it back to life and one of the church members said that they need to have a Christmas program because they have one every year even though there are only about five kids in the church and they need to play Silent Night as the last song, a few years ago the old pastor played Joy to the World, he didn't last long, do you see the similarities?) to the point where she was willing to kill Richard (DeCaprio) to stay on the island, but it all backfired on her. If you haven't seen the movie, I recommend it.
Again, what I think hooked me here was the connection to our culture. We can't just enjoy things as they are, we have to organize them, make them perfect, allow them to overcome us, rule us. Like Sal, she couldn't just enjoy the beach, the freedom, the alternate experience this allowed them, she had to organize it, rule it, oversee it to a fault. In the church, we can't just gather as believers, teach, fellowship, serve, everything has to be organized and perfect or else the masses go somewhere else. Who cares? Settle down! Chill out! We mess up our priorities and get all out of whack - over non-essentials. We need to reinforce and focus on the essentials more (deity of Christ, His death as atonement for our sins, Bible as Word of God, etc) and less on the non-essentials (whether we have a Christmas program and the last song is Joy to the World - you think I'm kidding here, I'm not) or else we are going to continue to slide into relativity. I'm sick of it!
Well, I see Ted Haggard has resigned from his pastorship at New Life Christian Church after in essence being forced to leave. I think it is the right move, both for him and the church as there is no way he could continue leading that congregation and the elders had to remove him considering the details and the fact that he confessed to a lot of the allegations. Here is my hope, that though it was the right move, that there is support for him as he deals with these problems. I hope they don't just throw him to the wolves. If he is truly repentant I hope he is able to find people who will help him and his family and get him back on the right track.
This is what makes me so frustrated at modern evangelicals though. Here is a man who is the leader of two large organizations who are very anti-homesexual and while I don't know, I can assume he preached fire and brimstone from the pulpit on this topic. And now this? These people seem to lack any humility and then often times get caught up in the same sin they rant against. Doesn't that ruin the message? Some would say no, I am not sure. Couldn't we instead state that homosexuality (or whatever) is wrong, we all sin, God offers forgiveness when we choose to turn to Him, repent, and seek His help in this life. We will fall, we will sin, but He is there with unending grace if we place our trust in Him.
I guess here is what I am getting at, a year or two ago, I sat down with a good friend of mine for coffee and we asked each other the question, do we sin any less today than we did the day before we chose to follow Christ? Both of us answered no. We sin differently, we sin less outwardly, less drunkenness, less lewd language, etc. But the sin is now inward, what concerned us is that was the sin Jesus seemed to be most concerned about (Matthew 5). Our (my) conclusion was that while we tend to link the Christian life with less sin, in reality we are as dirty as ever and thankful for the grace of Christ. Though we tend to put on the facade that all is well, that we have our act together, lust, gossip, anger and many other inward sins still dominate us at times. We repent, we seek God, yet they remain. The stain is on us, we are a fallen creature, there is no escape.
Therefore, my premise of late has been that spiritual maturity may not necessarily focus entirely on obedience to Christ, as that is really impossible for us. Instead, spiritual maturity is, while still seeking to obey the Lord, also understanding right from wrong. We may not always do the right thing, but we still understand that what we do is wrong (lie, steal, cheat, covet, etc.) and we seek God for forgiveness and guidance. In the past, before we chose to follow Christ, we would have justified the behavior, now we freely admit our situation and actions or thoughts and take them to God. A few Scriptures that have brought me to this conclusion to consider as I close this post:
Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. - Hebrews 5:13-14
If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives. - 1 John 1:8-10
This is what makes me so frustrated at modern evangelicals though. Here is a man who is the leader of two large organizations who are very anti-homesexual and while I don't know, I can assume he preached fire and brimstone from the pulpit on this topic. And now this? These people seem to lack any humility and then often times get caught up in the same sin they rant against. Doesn't that ruin the message? Some would say no, I am not sure. Couldn't we instead state that homosexuality (or whatever) is wrong, we all sin, God offers forgiveness when we choose to turn to Him, repent, and seek His help in this life. We will fall, we will sin, but He is there with unending grace if we place our trust in Him.
I guess here is what I am getting at, a year or two ago, I sat down with a good friend of mine for coffee and we asked each other the question, do we sin any less today than we did the day before we chose to follow Christ? Both of us answered no. We sin differently, we sin less outwardly, less drunkenness, less lewd language, etc. But the sin is now inward, what concerned us is that was the sin Jesus seemed to be most concerned about (Matthew 5). Our (my) conclusion was that while we tend to link the Christian life with less sin, in reality we are as dirty as ever and thankful for the grace of Christ. Though we tend to put on the facade that all is well, that we have our act together, lust, gossip, anger and many other inward sins still dominate us at times. We repent, we seek God, yet they remain. The stain is on us, we are a fallen creature, there is no escape.
Therefore, my premise of late has been that spiritual maturity may not necessarily focus entirely on obedience to Christ, as that is really impossible for us. Instead, spiritual maturity is, while still seeking to obey the Lord, also understanding right from wrong. We may not always do the right thing, but we still understand that what we do is wrong (lie, steal, cheat, covet, etc.) and we seek God for forgiveness and guidance. In the past, before we chose to follow Christ, we would have justified the behavior, now we freely admit our situation and actions or thoughts and take them to God. A few Scriptures that have brought me to this conclusion to consider as I close this post:
Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. - Hebrews 5:13-14
If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives. - 1 John 1:8-10
Two more things:
First, I've been in a weird place in life of late. I've been very frustrated and discontent in a lot of ways. I don't know why. I haven't been in as much fellowship or community as I would like and haven't been able to read as I wish, but otherwise things are good. I also seem to be paranoid about a lot of things as well, which is wrong, and that really frustrates me, makes me feel like my total trust is not in Christ, it's too much in this world. If I lost everything tomorrow, my focus should be that I still have Christ and this world will end, but it seems like the things of this world have been too much of a focus and trust for me of late.
On the other hand, this feeling has made me seek Christ more, to pray more, to try to understand Him more, to love people more. Though my mind may be on the things of this world, I catch myself in that mindset and repent, think about the things of Christ, and snap out of it for a little while anyway. Like I said, weird place.
Second, if I can rant for a second, a big pet peeve of mine is when people feel like they have a voice and can comment on things that they have no experience or knowledge in. I teach and coach with a guy like that, it's like he is an orthopedic surgeon who can diagnose any knee or ankle problem just by looking at it (exact quote: there's nothing wrong with that knee, I know it, I've been around basketball a long time and I know she's fine), an outdoor court specialist (that court isn't slippery, it's made for slippery weather) and an expert on the Central WI football conference (Stevens Point is terrible, they've never been good in football) even though the miniscus was torn and the ACL was partially torn, the court was like ice, and SP has a solid history of being very good in football. It's one thing to offer your opinion on something, another to act like it is your area of expertise.
Thanks for letting me do that.
First, I've been in a weird place in life of late. I've been very frustrated and discontent in a lot of ways. I don't know why. I haven't been in as much fellowship or community as I would like and haven't been able to read as I wish, but otherwise things are good. I also seem to be paranoid about a lot of things as well, which is wrong, and that really frustrates me, makes me feel like my total trust is not in Christ, it's too much in this world. If I lost everything tomorrow, my focus should be that I still have Christ and this world will end, but it seems like the things of this world have been too much of a focus and trust for me of late.
On the other hand, this feeling has made me seek Christ more, to pray more, to try to understand Him more, to love people more. Though my mind may be on the things of this world, I catch myself in that mindset and repent, think about the things of Christ, and snap out of it for a little while anyway. Like I said, weird place.
Second, if I can rant for a second, a big pet peeve of mine is when people feel like they have a voice and can comment on things that they have no experience or knowledge in. I teach and coach with a guy like that, it's like he is an orthopedic surgeon who can diagnose any knee or ankle problem just by looking at it (exact quote: there's nothing wrong with that knee, I know it, I've been around basketball a long time and I know she's fine), an outdoor court specialist (that court isn't slippery, it's made for slippery weather) and an expert on the Central WI football conference (Stevens Point is terrible, they've never been good in football) even though the miniscus was torn and the ACL was partially torn, the court was like ice, and SP has a solid history of being very good in football. It's one thing to offer your opinion on something, another to act like it is your area of expertise.
Thanks for letting me do that.
I knew it had been a long time, but four weeks...WOW!
In honor of election season, I thought I'd post a little humor I found in TIME:
James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, last week told listeners of his radio program, carried on 1000 stations in the US, "Yes, what Mark Foley did was wrong, but it is still important to go to the polls and let our voices be heard...Take about five people with you and vote. It would be a sin not to."
Really, a sin? Not to vote? Hmmmm, I don't remember reading that as part of the law, guess I'll have to look again.
How important is it? As important as it was when we elected Bush in 2000 and 2004?
As one of my guest lecturers in seminary said four years ago, organizations need to stick to what they do well. Focus on the Family and Dobson started to bring the family together and keep it intact, had they stuck to that they'd be in much better shape today in my mind. Instead they've lost all integrity in my mind, but who am I?
In honor of election season, I thought I'd post a little humor I found in TIME:
James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, last week told listeners of his radio program, carried on 1000 stations in the US, "Yes, what Mark Foley did was wrong, but it is still important to go to the polls and let our voices be heard...Take about five people with you and vote. It would be a sin not to."
Really, a sin? Not to vote? Hmmmm, I don't remember reading that as part of the law, guess I'll have to look again.
How important is it? As important as it was when we elected Bush in 2000 and 2004?
As one of my guest lecturers in seminary said four years ago, organizations need to stick to what they do well. Focus on the Family and Dobson started to bring the family together and keep it intact, had they stuck to that they'd be in much better shape today in my mind. Instead they've lost all integrity in my mind, but who am I?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
