DownshoreDrift

In Response to Public Pronouncements: What to Say When Disaster Strikes

It is becoming common place now. Every time we have a natural disaster or some tragedy happens, a celebrity preacher takes to Twitter or the airwaves and tells us that the disaster happened because of the gays or the evil in America or the evil in that area or because of God's sovereignty. A verse will be tweeted, an off handed comment will be made, judgment will be pronounced. Pat Robertson does this repeatedly. Others jump in as well. The problem with this approach is that the preacher or the Christian who hears him doesn't actually KNOW if what happened was indeed the judgment of God. He doesn't know how the events of a tornado hitting a school house and killing little kids fits into God's sovereign plan. He is speaking of things that he doesn't know about. Better to just keep quiet or point to God's rescuing love and consider his own fleeting life and repent. Himself. Right then.

 

Jesus, when told about the death of Galileans at the hand of Herod in Luke 13:1-5 said that those who died then or when the Tower of Siloam fell on them were not worse sinners than others. The message was the same to all - repent. When we hear about disaster striking anywhere and children being killed tragically, the message to all of us is the same. Repent. Turn to God. Life is short. Trust God. We don't pontificate about why that certain community got hit. We recognize that disaster could befall any of us at any time. Creation groans. Eventually, the groan will overtake all of us (see Romans 8:18-25).

 

August 29, 2005. Katrina hits my homeland of the Gulf Coast/New Orleans. Over 100 miles of complete devastation. Almost 2,000 people killed. I helped establish a Red Cross shelter in Ocean Springs, MS 4 days after the storm. Families came in with all they owned in a paper bag that they found. The elderly had only their pets left. We took in the sick with oxygen tanks and children at that Lutheran church. A girl had turned 14 that week. That night, I had a little Bible study/prayer time at the shelter and let people talk about what happened. The girl said it was her best birthday ever because she was alive.

 

With all the suffering, tears flowed easily. A woman in a Methodist church crying over the supplies we brought from Montgomery. Finding my father in horrible pain and suffering mentally/emotionally when I got to his severely damaged home from the trees that fell on it. Saying goodbye to my grandmother who I helped get to Arkansas after the storm. Seeing my childhood memories wiped away. Lots of suffering. But, there was no shortage of Christians who wanted to let the people suffering know that all of this happened because of gambling and the sins of the people down on the Gulf Coast. The many Christians who lived down there weren't saying that, mind you. They were suffering alongside their neighbors.

 

March, 2006. My 8 month old son Caelan develops cancer. We found the tumor outside of his chest wall. We were devastated, scared, and confused. We clung to God. A few people tried to work out their theology on me telling me it was all part of God's plan and that if He died that God would get the glory so it would be okay. God was sovereign and just accept what comes as His will. Others wondered what sins had been committed to cause sickness to visit my house. It was either my fault or for God's glory for some people. I had enough sense to tune these voices out. They were unhelpful despite their best intentions. The next 2 years were pretty horrible. I did not talk about it much to people, but I did write about it for relief. After I wrote, I didn't want to talk. My son lost half his chest, went through chemo and radiation, we saw a bunch of children in similar circumstances die, and we thought that he was going to die for about a month in 2008 when we thought the cancer had returned. God was gracious and healed my son. People kept referring me to John Piper telling people to not waste their cancer. I did not find that encouraging.

 

January 2010. Haiti gets rocked by a massive earthquake. Through God's sovereign hand, I ended up in Port-Au-Prince 2 weeks later in the middle of 600,000 refugees living under bed sheets that they had strung together in the downtown area. We did medical work and tried to help and feed and bind wounds and care for people the best we could. I met a man who lost 14 family members, including his wife and children when their school collapsed upon them. He helped us serve others.

 

One day, we were helping people in front of the broken down capitol building and we began to talk about Christ and share the gospel. The crowd got bigger and bigger. Over a hundred people crowded in around me as I shared through a translator. A man spoke up and asked me if the earthquake came because God was punishing Haiti for her many sins. I had a chance right there to tell the people that yes, because of voodoo and other things, God was sending His judgment. I did not do it. I didn't know why it happened. God had not told me. I referred to how Jesus answered the question in Luke 13:1-5. I told them that the message from the Haiti earthquake was definitely to repent - but it was the message to America too. And to the whole world. We all needed to take this as an opportunity to repent. I shared the gospel and said that I also needed to turn to Jesus and needed His mercy. And, that His mercy and love was available to them too if they would accept it and forsake their sins and turn to Christ. We saw around 300 people come to Christ that week on the streets of Port-Au-Prince amidst the blowing bedsheets and the rubble and the human suffering.

 

Yesterday, disaster struck again. After a massive EF-5 tornado tore through Moore, Oklahoma, John Piper tweeted Job 1:19. He took it down sometime later, but since John Piper is kind of a big deal and I am not though I am fairly well aquainted with suffering, I thought I'd speak to the verse he chose: "and behold, a great wind came from across the wilderness and struck the four corners of the house, and it fell on the young people and they died, and I alone have escaped to tell you." I do not know exactly what Piper meant by using this verse unless he was just trying to describe what happened. Another tweet perhaps cleared up what he meant when he said, "My hope and prayer for Oklahoma is that the raw realism of Job's losses will point us all to his God "compassionate and merciful." Jam.5:11. James 5:11 says, "We count those blessed who endured. You have heard of the endurance of Job and have seen the outcome of the Lord's dealings, that the Lord is full of compassion and is merciful."

Now, John Piper is much smarter than I am and he is older and far wiser and more accomplished and is a much bigger deal. I am glad that he made the move to God's compassion and mercy. That was needed. But, when invoking Job in a tragedy, it seems to me that the bigger message of Job is that God is God and we are not and we DON'T know why horrible things happen but we are to trust God anyway. Maybe that is what he was trying to say but it came across wrong with the first tweet and then the second left confusion as to what he really thought. When people have lost everything, it seems that the message that those who are standing outside of their suffering looking in need to bring is one of comfort, hope, and the God who is there. Appealing to God's sovereignty is true, but . . .

 

. . . I need to hear about how God didn't create us to die and how this is not the end and that there is hope and Jesus came to make all things new. Then, God speaks to the person's heart and tells them that even though they are standing in a pile of rubble where they used to sit at the dinner table with their family and laugh and cry and now it is all gone and maybe their loved one is gone to - God speaks to them and says that He is there with them right there in the splintered wood and the destruction and the pain. And, then they cry and grieve and remember and fall into God's arms and He holds them because it was never supposed to be this way and He is coming again to make it all right but for a little while the suffering will continue and He's got that too because He suffered for us so that our momentary trial would not last forever. And, then they cry some more and healing comes eventually but the scars remain forever and cause them to long for eternity. Admittedly, it is hard to tweet all of that. Perhaps Twitter doesn't work in every circumstance.

 

It seems to me (and I am no acclaimed theologian, but I do know about suffering), that those outside of the disaster should be a presence of healing and understanding and hope and that we should grieve with those who grieve. Perhaps we should slow down with the pronouncements of things that we don't really know about within the mind of God. I mean, who knows why something happened exactly? Or, telling someone who just held their dying child in their arms that God is sovereign and this is all for His glory is perhaps not your job right at that moment. God will reveal His glory through weeping with them over death and then bringing about resurrection in their heart as we point to and trust in the God who never leaves us nor forsakes us.

 

The message that we all need is that, despite our own groaning, God has never left us. That is what Moore, Oklahoma needs right now - the presence of God. John Piper moved in that direction with his second tweet. I am glad.

"The Office" and The Beauty of Ordinary Things

"There's a lot of beauty in ordinary things." - Pam Beasley Halpert

The series finale of The Office aired last night and fans of Jim & Pam, Dwight & Angela, Kevin, Toby, Phyllis, etc. said goodbye to a fairly significant show in the history of television. It was one of those shows that sneaks up on you because for a while, you think that you are just watching a comedy, but in the end, you find that you were watching a commentary on our lives and how love and hope and joy and everything that we live for is actually found in the beauty of ordinary things with ordinary people that you never thought you would ever grow to love.

Over the years, I have watched The Office because of the awkward moments and the dry humor, which fits me pretty well. But, after going through the series on Netflix, it dawned on me that the appeal of this show was that it was one story of what happens when a group of people live and work and share their lives together for 9 years (7 years in the case of Michael) and are fundamentally changed by what seems to be an ordinary experience. At the end of it all, they become something like a family and they find that the very people that used to drive them crazy are the ones that they will miss the most.

"I wish there was a way to know you're in the good old days before you've actually left them." Andy Bernard

Shows like The Office have an appeal because they capture something real about our daily lives and our hopes and frustrations and what we are all wanting: relationships. We, as a people want to be known and loved and we want to know others. The characters in The Office, much like the show that it reminds me of the most in its diverse ensemble cast, Cheers, do not have much in common other than the fact that they work for the Dunder-Mifflin Paper Company. They share cubicles and tasks and projects and meetings in the conference room and office parties, but other than that, they go home to their own lives. But, over the course of many years and trials and triumphs, diverse people with nothing in common become friends - and then they become family.

I will not make some kind of allusion to God here, even though my blog is usually theological in tone. God was not a character in The Office. There was no real redemptive quality. Marriages happened (Jim & Pam/Dwight & Angela) and marriages broke up (Stanley, Angela and The Senator). People came and went and there was success and failure. Michael Scott, the original main character, dreamed of a wife and children and he finally found it and then moved to Colorado. While it was not religious/spiritual in any sense, the coming together of people who were very different but found joy in their relationships with each other does remind me of what happens in the church - or, what is supposed to happen. We end up journeying through life together with people that we do not always have much in common with. We learn to love people who are difficult to love sometimes and find that we are also loved when we cannot even love ourselves. Day after day, week after week, we go through life and share birthdays and weddings and holidays and children's classes and potluck dinners and sickness and sorrow and prayer and Scripture and hope, and ultimately, salvation.

Eugene Peterson once said that we do not go to church to hang out with our friends - with the people that we would choose. We go to church to hang out with God's friends, with the people that he chooses. When I was watching The Office, I thought about that and thought about how the relationships that I saw on a TV show that were not real and that were full of both joy and anger, generosity and pettiness, were riveting because they reminded me so much of real life and the characters that you face in your own office, or neighborhood, or family - or in your church. I was reminded of how much we need people - people different from us who will walk through life with us and who will show us and help us see the beauty of ordinary things.

We spend so much time looking for the spectacular and hoping for something great to happen to lift us out of our boredom that we miss the beauty of ordinary things right in front of us. Stanley had his pretzel day once a year. Dwight got excited about being safety officer. Michael loved the office parties and the conference room meetings and for all his quirky oddness, he knew how to lead an office to success. Jim always wanted to leave and go on to greater things but, in the end he found what he always wanted and needed in that dingy office. Everyone had a role both in the company and in each other's lives. It was nice.

In writing about this, I am simply saying that a longing for community and friendship and relationship in the midst of our daily lives is at the core of who we are as people. The longing for it and the receiving of love from others is part of what makes us human. There was a lot of failure and brokenness evident in The Office and it was not all pretty, but the message conveyed is one that is fairly surprising in America in 2013. People matter, even the people you don't like and that you find odd and who are nothing like you at all - and, those people can become your family because there is something that unites us all down deep - a longing for love and relationships and community - that we all keep trying to get to beneath the clutter and noise and our own struggles.

Maybe God put it there.

 

We Are All Doing Theology All The Time

Preaching on the Ministry of the Spirit this Sunday for Pentecost and I picked up the massive and exhaustive God's Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul by Gordon D. Fee. He talks about a "Theology of the Spirit" and makes a great observation about how Paul did theology and how we are to similarly do theology each and every day in all circumstances. Sometimes, when we think about "theology" we think of learned academicians sitting in a dusty study pouring over obscure works and pontificating on things that do not really have relevance for daily life. But, true theological work simply deals with what we think about God and His interaction with the world He creating, including us and our place in His plan.

Fee says,

"Yet theology is what Paul is doing all the time. But it is seldom the reflective theology of the academy, dealing with how the various matters we believe about God and God's ways can be put into some kind of coherent whole. Rather, it is what has been called 'task theology,' the theologizing that takes place in the marketplace, where belief and the experience of God run head-on into the thought systems, religions, and everyday life of people in the Greco-Roman world at the beginning of the second half of the first century CE. Such 'task theology' is the more complex because it takes place in an extremely heterogenous environment. In part, therefore, the issues raised for Paul have to do with what the God of the Jews (the one and only God) was doing in history through Christ and the Spirit, for him within a particularly Gentile context.

"Into this kind of setting Paul came preaching, experiencing, rethinking, and re-articulating old and new truths, as he wrestled with what it meant for Jew and Gentile together to be the one people of God at the turning of the ages ushered in by Christ's resurrection and the gift of the Spirit. In the process he was continually 'doing theology,' grappling with how the gospel works - and works out - in this new context that was so radically different from that in which it first appeared in history."

Fee is saying essentially that the mind of Paul and the early Christians was fully consumed with what God wsa doing in the world and that all of their interactions with the Greco-Roman culture of their day was influenced by God's plan and their part in it. There participation in God's plan and their reconcilation to God through Christ was by the Spirit of God and it is the Holy Spirit that empowered and animated their experience together.

Fee continues along these lines:

"Here was how the early church came to appropriate the salvation that Christ has brought; and here was how believers came to understand their own existence as essentially eschatological, with the Spirit as both the evidence that God's great future for the people of God had already made its way into the present and the guarantee that God would conclude what he had begun in Christ. Thus the Spirit is absolutely presuppositional to their entire experience and understanding of their present life in Christ; and as often happens with such presuppositional matters, one rarely looks at them reflectively. They are simply part of the 'stuff' of ongoing life; and what one says about such matters is often off-handed, matter-of-fact, and without considered articulation."

Fee is saying that the work of the Spirit in the life of the Christian, the church, and the world was a given for Paul and thus, it should also be a given for us. God is always working. Our understanding of the world and our place in it should begin and be based in the work of God in bringing salvation and reconciliation to creation and in calling us to participate with Him in His great restoration of all things though Christ. In trying to understand who God is and what He is doing in the world by His Spirit, we are all doing theology all the time and are all, thus, theologians of one kind or another.

Worth thinking about today and we go through our daily ups and downs and routines. As Christians, what kind of theologians are we and what kind of theology are we doing?

 

Capitalism, Renewing Culture, and a New Kind of Man: Thom Wolf's Universal Disciple

On Wednesday nights for the past 6 weeks or so, I have been teaching through a concept that considers the role of culture in economic development. Based on the work of Lawrence Harrison in his book, Underdevelopment Is a State of Mind: the Latin American Case and in the collection of papers, Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress, I laid out a perspective that claims that the most important aspect of a culture/nation/economy moving from third world to first world status, or from being progress-resistant to progress-prone, so to speak, is its culture.

David Landes, professor emeritus of economics from Harvard University writes, "If we learn anything from the history of economic development, it is that culture makes almost all the difference." He builds on the work of German sociologist Max Weber in his landmark essay, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism and makes the claim that it is the culture that derived from the Protestant Reformation that most clearly created the type of man who was ready to progress well and who could develop and use capitalism in a positive direction. Landes says about Weber:

"His thesis: that Protestantism - more specifically its Calvinist branches - promoted the rise of modern capitalism; that is, the industrial capitalism he knew from his native Germany. Protestantism did this, he said, not by easing or abolishing those aspects of the Roman faith that had deterred or hindered free economic activity (the prohibition of usury, for example) nor by encouraging, let alone inventing, the pursuit of wealth, but by defining and sanctioning an ethic of everyday behavior that conduced to economic success . . . Weber's point is that Protestantism produced a new kind of businessman, one who aimed to live and work a certain way. It was the way that mattered, and riches were at best a by-product. It was only much later than the Protestant ethic degenerated into a set of maxims for material success and smug, smarmy sermons on the virtues of wealth."

Landes responds to the predictable criticism of this theory which states that the time for Weber's thesis has come and gone by saying:

"I do not agree. Not on the empirical level, where records show that Protestant merchants and manufacturers played a leading role in trade, banking, and industry. Nor on the theoretical. The heart of the matter lay indeed in the making of a new man - rational, ordered, diligent, productive. These virtues, while not new, were hardly commonplace. Protestantism generalized them among its adherents, who judged one another by conformity to these standards."

This "New Kind of Man" was one rooted in a Gospel Worldview, even if he did not always know it. Dr. Thom Wolf in his Universal Disciple pattern explains how that worldview can affect and impact a culture in significant ways. By exploring Paul's pattern of teaching that he taught everywhere he went (and that can most clearly be seen in Ephesians and Colossians), Dr. Wolf explains that the components that make up Christian discipleship are actually the very components that lead to a society working well and operating in Micah 6:8's description of what God wants from us: Justice, Mercy, Humility before God. Or, as Matthew 23:23 says, Justice, Mercy, Faithfulness. This same pattern finds its way into Paul's description flipped around for the Christian of Faith, Love, and Hope.

The facts are that when people live according to the ways that Scripture has laid out in how they view time, work, other people, profit, issues of justice, freedom, working with others, fairness, equality, concern for the "other," etc., societies begin to progress and prosper. When people live selfishly and use what they have only for their own benefit, then societies begin to calcify and grow inward and distrusting, which ultimately halts human growth and advancement. No amount of government intervention or control can get society working correctly when the corruption of the individual heart is the primary driver over and above a desire to live with justice, mercy, and humility before God and one's fellow man. Capitalism and our form of government can only work well with a people who live a certain way. Without that "way," we are all just living for ourselves and James 4:1-2 is the result, with fighting, quarreling, and internal desires raging within.

Dr. Wolf (who was one of my professors in seminary) tells us that pattern of Paul and the Apostles that created a new kind of man can become a template for the individual, the family, and also for the renewal of a nation. He demonstrated it in a diagram that looked like a house being built on the Rock, which was Christ, with a foundation of worship. Everyone, and ultimately every family and culture, worships something. It is either the living God or false gods. From our worship comes how we walk. In Scripture, we are told to put off the old, be made new in the attitude of our minds, and put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness (Eph. 4:22-24). From there, we are to represent Christ through teaching, singing, thanking, and submitting one to another. Our relationships consisting of wives/husbands, children/fathers, employees/employers, insiders to outsiders, and the Christian to the authorities, are also dramatically affected by the Word of God and ministry of the Spirit. We are to then put on the armor of God in all 7 categories and we are to pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and all kinds of requests and praying for all the saints. All of this kind of living comes together to form our witness to the world, which is the roof that goes on the house of Christian discipleship.

There are ways to renew society, but we have to go back to Christian renewal and rediscover what set us apart as a people to begin with. Most have rejected the gospel and the Church, but there are many who God is working in to bring to faith and to set on the path of living as citizens of the Kingdom of God instead of their own kingdoms.

For more on the Universal Disciple, you can read about it here:

http://www.buckner.org/downloads/universal-discipleship-pattern.pdf

 

To All the Moms Out There . . . A Tribute

Every year for Mother's Day, we take time to honor our mothers and to say thank you for loving us and for a job well done. This year, I really wanted to see things from a mother's point of view, so I went to the one place where I could get the inside scoop:  Pinterest.  Through the modern satirical communication tool of Someecards written by moms themselves, I present to you a little retrospective I like to call, "Yes, we love our kids, but can we get a break, please?"  As a father of four, I can relate to many of these myself. At least they gave me a laugh: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                 

And, finally, this one doesn't have anything to do with Mother's Day, but I ran across it looking for the others, thought it made a good point and it is something that we have actually talked about in our house (and it made me laugh), so I'll just leave this one right here . . .

The Real Reason that Violent Crime Is Up in Montgomery

 

Violent Crime continues to rise in Montgomery. City leaders have decided to bring in the FBI and U.S. Attorney's office to form a panel with local law enforcement to try and figure out what is going on. While this is an admirable approach and I hope that they find some answers that they have not thought of, the main reason that crime is up is not really related to law enforcement. The main problem has to do with a societal and personal disregard of the law and respect for other people and a grasping after things, money, respect, and shortcuts to get what the individual willing to commit the crime wants. At some point, a significant portion of the population of the city - enough to do damage - has come to believe that human life is to be sacrificed at the altar of their own anger or greed. Law enforcement really cannot do a whole lot to restrain human depravity, selfishness, greed, and anger. It can prevent some things, of course, but primarily, it serves to punish crime, not to prevent it.

We also cannot just have goals of preventing crime. A violent crime is something that can be prevented or avoided 99.99% of the time with 99.99% of the people, but when it happens that one time, it obliterates all of the prevention and avoidance up to that point. Everything previously good and positive gets wiped out. We cannot just keep going around trying to prevent crime and talking about how it should not happen. We have to help reform our communities so that people naturally and internally live peaceful and peacemaking lives in relationship with others because they see THAT kind of life as the greater good, both for themselves and for others. The problem now is that acting violently or just taking what does not belong to you seems to be the most logical and beneficial approach for enough people to affect life here.

We are always going to have crime and violence. It is a part of the human race and it is impossible to prevent in all cases. Tribal warfare, corruption, greed, violence, etc. are all part of our human experience since Cain killed his brother Abel. The FBI and Attorney General's office cannot constrain what is in the human heart that manifests violently at random times in relationships day and night. When family and cultural restraints have broken down and hopelessness sets in, then what is actually in the hearts of people can break out in some pretty horrific ways. Along with increased vigilance from the law enforcement community, we need spiritual, social, and economic renewal. We need a different perspective on our Vocation and our Location with a vision of Shalom in the city.

Vocation. Many in our community, especially among the young, do not know who they are, why they are here, where they come from, or where they are going in life. Rootlessness and alienation with little future vision beyond finding satisfaction in the moment has bred generations filled with contempt for others, society, and ultimately, themselves. Christian theology says that each person is made in the image of God and we are made for relationship with God and with others. Every person is valuable and has something to contribute. We all have gifts and talents and a purpose. Sin has marred the image of God within us and instead of using our lives for God's glory and the good of others, we use what we have to advance ourselves and our own interests, which just increases problems. This is why we need a Savior and is why Jesus came - to reconcile us back to God and back to one another. An understanding of the doctrine of Vocation in this context (Voca-calling) plants our lives in the soil of productivity and contribution.

We do not just work to get a paycheck so we can buy stuff - our lives do not consist of what we own and how much pleasure we can experience. Rather, we are on this planet to give glory to God in all things and to benefit other people - and we do that in a myriad of ways from parenting to working in many different occupations and fields. When we lose sight of our Vocation, then we begin to wander aimlessly through life. Small things that should be overcome become large frustrations that can take us out. With a renewed sense of purpose and vocation that projects us beyond ourselves, minor frustrations and shortcuts that might provide temporary financial gain lose their power over us because we recognize that we are aligning our lives for bigger purposes.

Location. Acts 17:24-28 says that God has appointed our exact times and places to live so that we would seek Him and find Him. It says that He has determined our appointed "boundaries of habitation." God puts us where He wants us and He gives us good works to do in a specific place and context so we can find Him there. Every community has its own identity and God puts people together in a community to give it weight and shape and beauty and diversity so that we can grope for Him in the midst of our relationship with others. When we do not understand how each of us contributes to the greater good, truth, and beauty of the city that we inhabit, then we do not think too long and hard about destroying it. When we have no real role in our community that we understand, or when that vision has been lost, we lose any sense of responsibility to it. We need a renewal of awareness of the location that we live in and how God has placed us all here together to learn from one another and to share life together (fellowship-koinonia). When this happens in the context of the local church, which is to be a colony of Heaven in a specific place and time, the we paint a picture for the world as to what God is like and what eternity can be. When we embrace where we live with the people that we live with in redemptive ways, we witness to our Creator. When we reject or forget this, then we are prone for violence against our community because everything loses value. We need to know that we belong.

Shalom. This is the Hebrew context of Peace, but it means more than a peaceful, easy feeling. It is the idea that things are right with the world, that we are right with God and with one another, and that prosperity, health, and right, creative, productive living abounds. Shalom is what it means to live under the blessing of God. As a people, Montgomery needs to reclaim its identity together. Much of what has driven Montgomery's development over the years (including recent downtown renovation) has been an economic impulse. The idea is that if downtown develops from an economic and entertainment perspective, then money will flow in and everyone will benefit. The problem is that much of what drives what is seen as development is motivated by how developers can make the most money. I understand the profit motive and how it is needed, but when money drives development, then culture is sacrificed and gains are always shallow, plastic, and ultimately short term. How can development happen along cultural and social lines because people are freely creating and expressing their God-given identity and vocations together in a location that has a history and story to tell for the future? How can peace and justice reign in this city so that people become excited about creating and developing in ways that are beautiful and life-giving instead of just in ways that enable them to gain more money?

The reason that violent crime is up in Montgomery is because people lose hope. They are not living for anything beyond the moment. They have lost their sense of purpose and place and their passions and frustrations overtake any sense of the future and the value/dignity of the other person and even their own worth. It is a lie that they have believed. Montgomery has a lot to offer if we would tap into who we actually are together and what role each of us plays in God's purpose for our own lives and our city.

Vocation. Location. Shalom. It is only when we all understand why we are here and what purpose we have that we can forgo the immediate option of violence and grab hold of more permanent, life-enhancing solutions for the good of others, the city, and for ourselves. I am not sure that the FBI and Attorney General's office will have that perspective.

 

Yeah, Abercrombie & Fitch Is Really Bad - And Sad

 

Abercrombie & Fitch Refuses to Make Clothes for Large Women

The owner of A&F, Mike Jeffries (68 years old) idealizes (idolizes) youth and being skinny and good looking and the superficiality of popular culture to the point that crosses firmly into the obscene - so, he has built a business around his values. His ads are notoriously raunchy and ridiculous and the philosophy behind his marketing is even worse. Instead of just using sex to sell a product to make money (which is bad enough), Jeffries steps it up a notch and proposes a philosophy that demonstrates human lostness, alienation, insecurity, fear, and impermanence. Jeffries in a 2006 interview with Salon.com said that his business was built around sex appeal,

“It’s almost everything. That’s why we hire good-looking people in our stores. Because good-looking people attract other good-looking people, and we want to market to cool, good-looking people. We don’t market to anyone other than that,” Jeffries said.

Jeffries also told Salon that he wasn't bothered by excluding some customers.

“In every school there are the cool and popular kids, and then there are the not-so-cool kids,” he told the site. “Candidly, we go after the cool kids. We go after the attractive all-American kid with a great attitude and a lot of friends. A lot of people don’t belong [in our clothes], and they can’t belong. Are we exclusionary? Absolutely."

A child of mine will never wear an A&F product. At this point, I consider it a treasonous act against the human race and an affront to the image of God upon each person (did I overstate it?). There are good reasons to be healthy and in good shape and to dress nice and to take care of yourself. These reasons fit with dignity and stewardship of the body that God gave you. But, Jeffries goes entirely the other way and misses the point dramatically and horrifically.

2 Corinthians 5:15-17 says, "And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again. So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!"

Christians are to be different from the world not just for the sake of being different but because our basic understanding of how life works and where value comes from is different. We have a story to tell that says that our worth is not based on how cool or good looking or popular we are or how many friends we have. We don't judge others from a worldly point of view but according to the New Creation. Our worth is based on the fact that we are all made in the image of God and that Jesus, God's Son, died for us to reconcile us back to God. Every person has worth and value and is capable of contributing to others and society in unique ways. Not only that, but we all need each other and there are ways that even those we might overlook - especially those we overlook - have something to offer us that we desperately need. It is only the Christian worldview that can provide true equality and justice for all people. The world's perspective degenerates into competitive madness based on sexuality and superficialities as Jeffries demonstrates. I do not overstate it to say that, philosophically, it is the same perspective that is demonstrated in racism - your value is based on your appearance.

We all grow older and that is a blessing and a good thing. It is something to be embraced and not avoided. Everyone looks different. Youth is fleeting. We cannot escape growing older and death is not eradicated through plastic surgery or wearing stylish clothes or having lots of money or being popular. What Jeffries desperately wants is immortality and transcendence and acceptance in his grasping for it according to the superficial values of the world, it is actually slipping through his fingers. What he needs is regeneration and the New Birth that only comes through Christ.

I am hard on Jeffries' philosophy because I believe it to be destructive. But, as for the man, I am praying for him and grieve that he is captive to a worldview that tells him that he is essentially worthless if he cannot maintain his appearance and youthfulness in ways that deny who he actually is in the moment - a 68 year old man. He needs prayer and the kind of love that accepts him as he is - the love of Christ. At the end of the day, I need the same kind of love, and if I stop and think about it hard enough (which I don't want to do), Jeffries offends me because he speaks out boldly the judgment and ranking of people based on appearances and superficial values that lies within my own sinful self and that jumps up in my mind way more than I would like. And, the redeemed part of me knows that it is all just wretched death.

Come, Lord Jesus. Come quickly. We all need a Savior.

Jesus Rules In the Midst of His Enemies

Psalm 110:1-2

The Lord says to my lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." The Lord will extend your mighty scepter from Zion, saying, "Rule in the midst of your enemies!"

Psalm 110 is a Messianic Psalm used to describe Jesus and his ministry. Peter refers to this passage in his Pentecost sermon as referring to Jesus (Acts 2:34). In Psalm 110:4 it says, "you are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek." The writer to the Hebrews (6:20; 7:17) used this description of Jesus to talk about how he was able to be a priest even though he was not of line of Aaron where all priests had come from. This passage is a Messianic as it gets.

 

Something interesting occurred to me today as I was studying in regard to this passage. Verse 2 says that the Messiah will rule in the midst of his enemies. When I think about the reign and rule of God manifested in the coming of Christ's Kingdom, I do not think about Jesus' enemies being around. I think about those who worship and submit to Jesus and obey Him. But, this says that Jesus will rule in the midst - middle of - surrounded by - in close proximity to - His enemies. Let's think about that.

 

We know and believe that the rule of Jesus is manifested in the church among the people of God. We promote that thought and we want people to come to Christ and be a part of a worshiping community that demonstrates to the world what life is like in submission to Christ. But, how can Christ rule in the middle of his enemies? I think that it happens in a few different ways.

 

1. The rule of Christ is not dependent upon us. He is over and above all things - in Him, all things hold together (Colossians 3:17). He is ruling over all and every knee will one day bow whether we see it right now or not. As our culture runs away from God as fast as it can, denying His existence and rule in every way possible, the truth is that Jesus still rules over all. His Lordship is not deterred by our denials.

2. When the Christian lives among the enemies of Christ and he actually lives out the truth of the gospel in tangible ways, the rule of Christ shines even more brightly. In this way, the encroaching darkness around us is actually an opportunity for the light of Christ to shine even brighter and for the contrast to show even greater. So, we are not discouraged when evil seems to be growing - rather, we recognize that this is our opportunity as the hands and feet of Jesus to extend His rule into places that we had not thought of yet.

The apparent growth of evil will actually be an occasion to prepare people to be ready to hear the Gospel and turn to Christ because their need will become more known and apparent to them. In the midst of the enemies of God, Christ will rescue sinners.

 

Dietrich Bonhoeffer once said, "The Christian cannot simply take for granted the privilege of living among other Christians. Jesus Christ lived in the midst of His enemies. In the end all His disciples abandoned Him. On the cross He was all alone, surrounded by criminals and the jeering crowds. He had come for the express purpose of bringing peace to the enemies of God. So Christians, too, belong not in the seclusion of a cloistered life but in the midst of enemies. There they find their mission, their work."

 

Bonhoeffer goes on to quote Martin Luther in his book, Life Together, “Jesus Christ lived in the midst of his enemies. At the end all his disciples deserted him. On the Cross he was utterly alone, surrounded by evildoers and mockers. For this cause he had come, to bring peace to the enemies of God. So the Christian, too, belongs not in the seclusion of a cloistered life but in the thick of foes. There is his commission, his work. 'The kingdom is to be in the midst of your enemies. And he who will not suffer this does not want to be of the Kingdom of Christ; he wants to be among friends, to sit among roses and lilies, not with the bad people but the devout people. O you blasphemers and betrayers of Christ! If Christ had done what you are doing who would ever have been spared' (Luther).”

 

I think that we have had it all wrong. We, as Christians, have been trying to proclaim and express cultural dominance so that we can be in control. Of course, we want to witness to the ethics of Christ and the behavior that comes from being under the reign and rule of Jesus. But, we are to do that as servants - as slaves - without claiming power and trying to make life nice for ourselves. We witness to who Christ is through living in the midst of his enemies and when we live in relationship with Jesus surrounded by those who hate Him and want to kill Him and remove His name and influence from everything, then Christ is reigning in ways we cannot see.

 

Christ reigns in North India along the banks of the River Ganges when Christians are there loving and demonstrating the Kingdom in the proximity of a Hindu temple.

 

Christ reigns on a hillside in Southern Haiti along the coast where children are cared for and taught and shown the love of Jesus - right across the lane from a voodoo temple.

 

Christ reigns everywhere that he is cursed and mocked when his people tell a different story and even suffer for doing so - especially when they suffer, because His kingdom is not of this world - it is nothing like this world.

 

Christ rules in the midst of His enemies. Are we willing to join Him there?

He had come for the express purpose of bringing peace to the enemies of God. 
So Christians, too, belong not in the seclusion of a cloistered life but in the midst of enemies. 
There they find their mission, their work.
 

 

The Christian Foundations of the Gay Rights Movement

Last week, I wrote a post declaring that there were, in fact, rational arguments against Gay Marriage and that the Christian/Biblical position on the subject was in fact, an expression of rationality and reason. I wrote in response to a Slate.com article by Erica Friedman stating that the only arguments against Gay Marriage were basically religious arguments and that those arguments were irrational and necessarily homophobic. I ended up in a really good discussion with a friend of mine on this on Facebook and it got me thinking deeper about the subject.  First off, I want to say that one can be FOR the Biblical definition of marriage (which is the position I want to maintain) without being against Homosexuals. My guess is that Gay Marriage is going to be legalized in America and I have accepted that. I am not really interested in bemoaning that or taking a position against Homosexuals. I am much more interested in finding a way to maintain a traditional Christian position in this changing environment that is both rational and respectful of others, but that also maintains Biblical faithfulness and the ability to cordially disagree with the majority position. The way forward for Christians is not to try and forcefully control politics or the government, but to provide a faithful witness as to how a life with Christ that is guided by the Scriptures would shape and form us in believing communities in a world that is rejecting Biblical morality.

I have said many times before that while I believe Homosexuality to be sin, there are lots of sins and we are all sinners and we all need a Savior - no one is any different in that regard. So, this is less about the particular stance of Homosexuality and it is more about how we have these conversations and maintain differing positions in society and still respect and get along with one another.  So, with all of those disclaimers, let me dive in.

The argument is that the only argument against Gay Marriage is a religious argument and that religous arguments are, by nature, irrational because they do not appeal to Reason but instead, they appeal to Faith. Faith is irrational because it cannot be proven. It must be accepted as an act of, well, faith. So, since it cannot be proven to be true, any argument from faith must be rejected from public discourse as irrelevant. Like I said, I addressed this fallacy in the previous post.

But, here is the problem with that line of thinking in regard to Gay Rights and the Gay Marriage debate. You might be able to use that argument with the physical sciences (might) because the physical or hard sciences are related to what is observable, testable, and provable.  That is what the Gay Rights advocates are doing in this situation. They are unthinkingly lifting an argument that atheistic scientists have used against religion and are applying it to the their argument. But, you cannot apply that line of thinking (that all arguments from faith are by nature invalid) to the social sciences. The social sciences (history, economics, psychology, sociology, political science/civics, anthropology, cultural studies, etc.) are directly influenced and shaped by religion and faith claims and how we structure society and culture is fully intertwined with religious arguments. As in the old game of Jenga, if you pull out the block of religion in trying to gain understanding, the whole tower can easily teeter and fall. That is what is being attempted here and it is a false argument.

The argument for Gay Marriage is an argument based on equality and freedom and human dignity, or so the argument goes. The idea is that since hetero couples can be married, how is it just and fair for gay couples to not enjoy the same rights and benefits. Christians, traditionalists, and religious people often argue from a perspective on what is moral and what God approves of and those arguments are declared invalid because they come from faith. But, here is the question:  Where do arguments of equality, freedom, and human dignity come from? Of course, those concepts are embedded in Western political and social thought and do not require God to be believed. Or, do they?

The Declaration of Independence written by Thomas Jefferson says, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."   Jefferson was a Deist, but he was reflecting Christian thought and heritage here. Truths that are self-evident. All men "created" equal. Endowed by their Creator. Unalienable Rights. That is religious talk that was co-opted by the Enlightenment. In other words, the very foundation upon which Gay Marriage advocates are making their stand is a religious/spiritual/Christian foundation. They could not make the arguments for human equality and freedom if they had not previously benefitted from centuries of Christian thought on the nature of human dignity, rights, and equality. None of this developed in a vacuum.

Rodney Stark, who was an agnostic when he wrote The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success (2005) wrote about the Western development of rationality/reason, freedom, and capitalism:

"Freedom was also essential for the development of capitalism. This raises another matter: why has freedom so seldom existed in most of the world, and how was it nurtured in some medieval European states? This too was a victory of reason. Before any medieval European state actually attempted rule by an elected council, Christian theologians had long been theorizing about the nature of equality and individual rights - indeed, the later work of such 'secular' eighteenth-century political theorists as John Locke explicitly rested on egalitarian axioms derived by church scholars."

The very thing that Gay Rights advocates appeal to (freedom, equality, individual rights) actually finds its origin in Christian thought and theology. Where else do we see perspectives on equality and human dignity arise?  I would posit that this view of Equality before the Creator was birthed into Western Culture on a Cross in Palestine 2000 years ago. The Greeks didn't give it to us, despite our misunderstandings of their democratic philosophies - they were largely elitists. The Romans didn't either. Neither did the Barbarians or Germanic Tribes or Hindus, Muslims, or Buddhists. Notions of human dignity and equality for all - including women, children, people of all races and tribes, slaves, the unborn, the poor, the sick, and those in prison, and yes, sinners of every kind - found their most powerful expression in the teachings of Jesus and His followers (see Gal. 3:26-29, Eph. 2:11-22, Col. 3:11, etc.) and these teachings radically affected Western Civilization. But, the same Bible that teaches that people are equal before God and that "God so loved the world" to send His Son to save it, also teaches that some activities and lifestyles are not how we are created and are not to be celebrated. They reflect our brokenness and not our original intent and Western Civilization has, up to this point, recognized this as well and has done so quite rationally.

Because I am a Christian, I will defend the equality of every person and will oppose oppression, injustice, and discrimination. If I see a gay person being abused or persecuted, it is my faith that tells me that I am to throw myself in harms way and protect the innocent, even at peril to myself. Secular Reason doesn't establish that. But, also as a Christian I recognize that some behaviors and lifestyles are right and some are wrong and that we are all sinners and need a Savior. It is interesting to me how notions of equality found originally in the person/teachings/work of Jesus have been accepted, while concepts of sin and salvation similarly found in the person/teachings/work of Jesus have been rejected. 

Truthfully, it is not that Gay Marriage advocates do not accept Christian arguments or ideas that come from the Bible about how we are to live. The problem is that they accept some Christian ideas and not others. They accept ideas about equality, human dignity, justice, freedom, and the rights of man. They reject ideas about certain behaviors that they approve of being sin. Both are Biblical perspectives. They advanced their perspective to this point by saying that all views and persepctives are valid and should be accepted and gain a hearing, but now that they are moving into ascendency, they are saying that the views that oppose them are irrational and should not be heard or accepted as valid, but should be seen as oppressive and harmful to society. The irony of ironies is that they can only make these claims by standing upon the arguments of Christians who derived their perspective from the Bible.

They can only say that the Bible cannot be used by using arguments from the Bible. Again, irony.

What a world we live in. I think that, just like the Enlightenment and the Civil War, we are actually in a theological battle and we haven't even really realized it.

 

Romans 3:22-24 Worked Out

"This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."

Sin and brokenness are everywhere. 

Death is at work. 

We have all sinned.

We all continue to fall short of God's glory.

We all deserve death because of our sin.

There is no one righteous, no not one.

We are without hope in the world.

Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners - to seek and save the lost - to come for the sinner and not the righteous.

Jesus Christ is full of grace and truth.

Where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more.

Mercy triumphs over judgement.

God demonstrates His love for us in this, while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

The grace of God teaches us to say no to ungodliness. 

Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

Eternal life is in knowing God and Jesus, who He sent.

We are new creations in Christ - the old is gone and the new is come.

Behold, He is making all things new.

The world is being reconciled back to God through Christ.

Creation groans, waiting in eager expectation for the Sons of God to be revealed.  

The people of God are aliens and strangers in this world. 

We can't love the world and love God at the same time.

In this world we will have trouble - but fear not, Jesus has overcome the world.

We will be hated because of Him.

In the same way that they persecuted Jesus, they will persecute us.

We need grace.

Mercy triumphs over judgement. 

Without faith it is impossible to believe God.

Blessed are we for believing without seeing. 

Maranatha! Come, Lord Jesus.

Montgomery, AL: One of the Most Diverse Cities in America?

I was reading recently about how segregated American cities are according to race. Liberal/Progressive cities like New York, Chicago, New Orleans, Washington, DC, and Boston are still incredibly segregated according to race. They might talk a good game about racial diversity, but when it comes to where people choose to live, they have largely separated themselves out. Their philosophy of diversity is not actually playing out wherever people have choices. It makes one wonder if the dream of full integration is even possible?



*Article with color coded maps showing persisting segregation in major American cities:

*Study: Persistence of Segregation in the Metropolis

Racial Diversity

Enter Montgomery, Alabama. The birthplace of the Civil War and the Civil Rights Movement is actually telling a different story right now. It may not seem that way to people who live in Montgomery, because there is still a great deal of racial avoidance. 30,000+ white people have left the city in the past decade with many moving north and east. We still have situations where when black people move into neighborhoods, many white people want to move out if they can. I know the attitudes and I experience it all the time - that is the reality on the ground here. But, does the sense of division that we experience in our city tell another story, a story that the rest of America is unable or unwilling to tell?



The racial demographics of Montgomery are 57% black, 37% white, and 6% other, but the Hispanic population has exploded over the past decade as has the Asian population. The part of the city where our church, Gateway, is located (Southeast quadrant east of the bypass and south of I-85), has large populations of black, white, Hispanic, and Asian. Having an English-speaking church that is multiracial as well as Korean and Hispanic churches sharing our campus with us both addresses and reflects the cultural diversity of our area as well as the spiritual realities of the Kingdom of God.



*Montgomery's racial diversity map and residential integration relative to other American cities (my church, Gateway, is in the SE part of the map):

Diversity of Political and Spiritual Thought

I heard Dr. Kevin Elko, a psychologist and performance consultant who works with sports teams (notably, Nick Saban and the Alabama Crimson Tide), on a local Montgomery radio show last week. He said something very interesting that I had not thought of. He said that after being in Montgomery and speaking at an event, he noticed something very striking. He said that a person could be themselves here, that they could have their views and opinions and share them forcefully without holding back for fear of retribution or of offending political correctness. I thought about that for a while and realized he was right. Montgomery is a city of diverse views politically, socially, and spiritually. It is the capitol city in a very conservative state, but it voted for Barack Obama for president by a 62-38% margin. It was recently declared the 2nd most religious city in America by a Gallup Poll, but it has a large number of people who do not attend religious services at all. The real truth is that both Liberals and Conservatives, religious and nonreligious, and people of varying views and lifestyles are able to freely express themselves in Montgomery. Everyone might not agree and you might be forced to defend your opinion, but one is able to express it and actually be who they are. I think that Dr. Elko was right about this.



We still live and work together here. Race does not keep us separated. We have differing political and religious views. Some are rich and some are poor and we have a lot who are in between. Educational levels vary significantly. But, we shop, work, and live in close proximity and we share the city. Relationships have grown even as some have been strained. We still have many people pursuing and going after their own way of life and climbing over others in the process, but it is like that everywhere. There is still division, of course, but the potential for unity amidst diversity exists. In years past, East Montgomery was the White side and West Montgomery was the Black side. That is no longer the case in the way it used to be. Yes, there are still areas that are more predominately Black and White than others, but in many parts of the city, people are living together in the same neighborhoods, shopping and eating in the same places . . . and going to the same churches.



A Local Church Expressing Unity Amidst Diversity

At Gateway, the church I pastor, we are seeing people of different races, ethnic backgrounds, educational levels, and socioeconomic backgrounds come together. We are not a niche church that appeals to one target group and because of that, we are not adhering to the conventional wisdom. A millionaire might be sharing life in a small group or Sunday School class with someone on public assistance. A Ph.D. might share a small group with someone who didn't graduate high school. An officer in the military from the Pacific Northwest might be praying with school teacher from Alabama. Black and White and Asian and Hispanic might all be together in different settings. We have lots of kids and young families and older adults and retirees all worshiping together. A man wearing a coat and tie might be worshiping next to someone in shorts and flip flops. There is no rhyme or reason to it. People from countries all over the world might be sharing views and opinions.. We have people from different denominations and with varying perspectives on theological issues that are not essential marks of division. And, we all learn from one another and seek to encourage one another. The key, for us, is that Christ is our unifying principle and sacrificial love is lived out. If we are in Christ together, then we are together, despite whatever worldly differences we might have. I am not saying that we are perfect in all of this or that we don't struggle to get it right. We do. I am also not saying that this isn't happening in other churches - I really don't know - but it is happening here and the Gospel seems to be at work. God seems to be working in unusual ways.



"For Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again. So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!" (2 Corinthians 5:14-17)



I wonder if the power of this passage that declares that in Christ we are new creations and we are to longer regard others from a worldly point of view - I wonder if this truth is not at work in Montgomery, maybe in ways that we haven't fully noticed? I wonder if God is already working and if Montgomery has the ability to speak to the rest of America about how we can actually get along in a diverse and pluralistic society? Perhaps God IS answering our prayers already, but we don't realize it because we stay focused on what is wrong and where our struggles are (and we have many, still) instead of what is right and where God is at work? I wonder who it would benefit to keep our eyes on where we lack instead of what God is doing? Hmmm.



Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who used to pastor in Montgomery, once said that 11am on a Sunday morning is the most segregated hour in America. In many cases, that is still true. But, it is changing, at least at Gateway. And, in Montgomery, Alabama.



Who would have thought?

 

Posted with Blogsy

Hey Slate! There ARE Rational Arguments Against Gay Marriage ... And FOR Something Else ...

Yesterday, I saw an article on Slate by Erica Friedman, who writes about lesbian themed Japanese animation and comics for Okazu. Erica was answering a question from a reader asking why people who were against gay marriage were considered homophobic and irrational. Here is Erica's response:

"Rationality is one of those things that is always relative. You can be anti-marriage equality and quite lovely otherwise, but unless you can come up with a non-religious, backed-up-by-facts reason why my wife and I should not be allowed to get the legal benefits assigned without question to drug addicts, child abusers, grifters, murderers, and politicians who happen to be in heterosexual relationships, you have no "rational" basis for your position. This is the crux of the matter. You are welcome to be against marriage equality, but chances are you have one of several reasons for your feelings and none of them are actually rational. The definition of marriage has changed many times over the years. It's not rational to believe it has not. In my lifetime it has changed, when interracial marriages were made legal federally. So there is no rationality in insisting that the definition has not changed for hundreds (much less thousands) of years. It's irrational to rely on the Bible as a guide, since men had multiple wives and slept with slaves in the pages of those books."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/quora/2013/04/25/can_you_have_a_rational_opinion_against_gay_marriage_and_not_be_homophobic.html

I appreciate answers like this because we can all get our ideas out on the table and discuss them freely. I appreciate that Erica says that a person can be against gay marriage and be "quite lovely otherwise." Many just call those against the proposal "hate-filled hypocrites." So, she establishes a good starting point of a semblance of mutual respect in the conversation. I am happy to extend the same to her.

Erica's error, I think, is in assuming that all arguments based in religion are ultimately irrational. I have been thinking about this for a while now and I don't see any basis for that assumption. I mean, sure, if you assume that God doesn't exist so anyone who claims that He does exist is de facto irrational, then yes, an argument based in religion is necessarily irrational. But, then you need to prove that God doesn't exist or your own presuppositions are admittedly NOT based in rationality, but in your opinion, which is largely a faith-claim of your own. One could just as easily say that all claims that God doesn't exist are irrational and that every belief that arises out of a disregard for the existence of God is a belief rooted in irrationality. But, then you would have to prove that God DOES exist to make that claim. Science can neither prove nor disprove God's existence, so how about if BOTH sides stop calling the other side irrational and listen to what our arguments actually are? We might learn something and get down to the core of what we are really discussing here. 

The argument FOR Gay Marriage is strongest when one takes a secular view of marriage as sanctioned by the state and defines it as a contract entered into by two people who express love and commitment to one another. By that definition, Gay Marriage is entirely legitimate and there is really no basis to oppose it. Allowing Gay people to marry does not actually change the definition of marriage because they meet the requirements of being
1. Two people
2. Who express love and commitment to one another
3. Who choose to enter into a contractual relationship

Under that definition of marriage that has been accepted for some time in America, there is no real reason other than irrational homophobia why Gay people should not marry. The definition has already been established and Gay people are finding their way into it. But, who decided that this definition that has been slipped into the discussion is ACTUALLY what marriage is? And, on what basis was it decided? This definition surely did not come from science, tradition, or human custom. It just kind of appeared because people started saying it. What was "rational" about defining marriage this way? Unfortunately, Christians didn't really notice and bought into this redefinition as well a long time ago. The Gay Marriage debate was decided long ago on this point. Everything since then has simply been a foregone conclusion. 

The definition of marriage that was previously accepted in the West prior to this WAS rooted in a Biblical worldview and understanding, however, in that it recognized that marriage was not just between any two people but was between a man and a woman because that is how God created the world and the social order. Feelings of love did not give marriage legitimacy - God's design for humanity and covenantal love between a man and a woman gave it legitimacy. The primary reason for marriage was not for procreation (people are legitimately married even if they never have children) but to bear and reflect the image of God and to reflect the relationship between God and His people - Christ and the Church. Marriage existed as a means of reflecting covenantal, sacrificial love and became the foundation for families to live and to experience care and security in a difficult world. Children were raised in this environment and property and wealth was accrued and passed on. Marriage and family reflected an understanding of the created cosmic and social order that was rooted in a view of God and His will and intentions and His design. This was true across religions to an extent, by the way, because people are made in God's image and bear His imprint, although the further you get from a Christian/Gospel perspective outlined in Ephesians 5:21-33 the more that marriage loses its cosmic meaning and becomes something else entirely - often something abusive.

Ultimately, the Christian is not arguing AGAINST Gay Marriage as much as we are arguing FOR a Biblical view of marriage rooted in God's created order and the Gospel. We believe that the word "marriage" actually has a definition rooted in a Theistic worldview and that it reflects how God designed things. Our social institutions, like marriage, reflect our understanding of how things "work." When we start with God and understand how He created the world, then Biblical marriage fits in that system in a very RATIONAL way. When we remove God or redefine him completely, we are then free to redefine marriage and everything else according to the new reality that we have created - and it all "seems" quite rational to us and the religious way seems irrational. But, we are talking about working from certain presuppositions here and one is not more "rational" than the other when you get down to it, at least in an objective sense. 

There are good, rational reasons to say that Gay Marriage is not how we were designed and is not part of how we are to live and function in society. But, these arguments are rooted in an understanding of God and His revelation and how He created the world and humanity. And, it is completely valid and rational to say so. You cannot just eliminate the religious argument from the discussion and make an independently valid and verifiable point just like it would be unfair for me to eliminate the secular, ultimately atheistic argument with a sweeping rhetorical move. 

In a free society like we are supposed to be living in, we are free to actually put forward different ideas and perspectives and discuss them and advocate for them. I actually have no problem with Erica Friedman and others advocating for their viewpoint. She is free to do so. But, just because some do not believe in God (I have no idea what Erica believes on that matter) or does not root their perspective in a Biblical framework does not mean that He does not exist just like the presence of belief does not mean that He does exist. In a representative Democracy, as America is, it is completely valid for people to vote and make decisions according to their beliefs and convictions - it is quite rational, actually. 

What isn't rational is to claim that one view is objective and therefore valid while the other view is not and therefore anyone who holds to a view that does not mesh with the Gay Marriage proposition is somehow irrational or homophobic. If people choose to live in an America that is not influenced at all by religious ethics or worldview, that is a choice that people can make. We have the governmental apparatus to make that choice. But, let's just be honest about what we are doing and choosing. It is not about "rationality" or "irrationality." What we are choosing is whether human beings can redefine reality however we best see fit in the moment based on the categories that we devise to suit our desires (essentially based on nothing more than emotional impulse), or whether there is a transcendent reality beyond us that is rooted in God and the created order. THAT is the discussion we are having and it has been going on for hundreds of years now. 

And, it is a very rational discussion, despite what Slate tells us.

Love Your Enemies

Jesus, Luke 6:24-36

"But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.


"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful."

Obama Administration Does the Right Thing Regarding Tsarnaev

"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~ Benjamin Franklin, 1759.

I have been advocating an approach to politics called "Prophetic vs. Political" for some time now. In this approach, I have said that we should praise what is right and good and condemn what is wrong in our government and society apart from political loyalties. In other words, if we see action that is right and virtuous and upholds the rule of law, we should affirm it. I am a conservative politically, but this means that if I see a Democrat do something that is praiseworthy, then I should say so and give credit where it is due. If I see a Republican do something worthy of rebuke, I should say so. As Christians, we need to stop picking teams and only praising our side and rebuking the other side. This approach by the Church actually diminishes a nation's capacity for righteous behavior and justice because it affirms political gamesmanship and cynical machinations.

Today, the Obama Administration did the right thing and decided to not charge Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon bombing suspect, as an enemy combatant but instead they charged him in a plot to kill Americans with a weapon of mass destruction as an American citizen, which means that he will be afforded due process under the law according the 5th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said,

"He will not be treated as an enemy combatant. We will prosecute this terrorist through our civilian system of justice. Under U.S. law, United States citizens can not be tried in military commissions. And it is important to remember that since 9/11 we have used the federal court system to convict and incarcerate hundreds of terrorists. The effective use of the criminal justice system has resulted in the interrogation, conviction and detention of both U.S. citizens and non-citizens for acts of terrorism committed inside the United States and around the world."

This is important because we must remain a nation under the rule of law. There was a push by some, including U.S. Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, to treat Tsarnaev as an enemy combatant. This would have been a mistake, in my opinion. While the concern over terrorism is real, it would be much worse for Americans to sacrifice our Constitutionally protected freedoms for expediency of prosecution. If it is shown (and my guess is that it will be) that Tsarnaev was acting in concert with foreign entities who are waging war against the United States, then try him for treason as well and prosecute him to the full extent of the law. But, as an American citizen, he should be afforded due process.

Due Process under the Law is something that is embedded in the foundation of the American Republic. It can be traced all the way back to the Magna Carta in Britain in 1215 which says, "[n]o free man shall be taken or imprisoned … or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor send upon him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land."  

To abandon this position would have created a precedent that could have then been applied to other American citizens who are arrested on American soil. Yes, safety and security is important and we should do all that we can to protect Americans from terrorism. But, this safety/security is not more important than our freedoms and I have real concerns about how much the power of the government is capable of growing as it seeks to keep us safe. I would rather side with the Constitution. 

What happened in Boston was terrible. Terrorism in the United States is a very real threat. But, of even greater danger is America ceasing to be a land of the free because we choose to sacrifice those freedoms to a government that we entrust ourselves to to keep us safe. Throughout the history of America, we have had a citizen-contract with our government to live as free men. The Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights, was written to ensure those freedoms upon which our nation was founded. I am glad that we did not give them up to punish someone like Tsarnaev. Those freedoms were given by God and established here with the blood of our ancestors and they are too precious to just give away to bring a terrorist to justice. Let's trust the American system of justice that we have established. 

The Obama Administration did the right thing today. They worked to execute the law of the land instead of trying to find some way around it. In the long run, this is better for all of us and it is a praiseworthy action. We can only have justice for all when we apply that same measure of justice to those who have acted in the most despicable fashion. Ultimately, this ethic is rooted in a Biblical worldview of God's unwavering justice and I am glad that we did not sacrifice it today.

Are We Still the Land of the Free? The Home of the Brave?

This time last week, I was writing profusely about the Kermit Gosnell case. This past week the news has been dominated by the Boston Marathon Bombings and at the moment of this writing, one suspect is at large after a raging gun battle through a Boston suburb last night that left the other suspect dead. So, these things are on my mind as I think about America this morning and wonder where we are headed. I join the rest of the nation in expressing shock and outrage at these senseless crimes and also pray for those so horribly affected by what has happened. In times like these, we see the best of America arise as acts of heroism and bravery and selflessness rise to the surface. We find out what kind of people we still are and recognize that there is much that is good, noble, and true left in our nation.

These virtues can be eroded or exchanged for lesser values, however, and must be maintained. Freedom is not free, as the old saying goes. It comes with a price. And, only a certain type of people can keep their freedom. Freedom comes from God and is first expressed within and cannot be secured by the power of government or through a security apparatus. Only a free people can live free. When we are enslaved to our own passions and lack self-control and live for our own desires and pleasures or when we give in to our fears, we have already exchanged our freedom for another form of bondage and the result is that we give over our liberties to a State that must then protect us - from ourselves. At times like this, we need to make sure that America is who we were created to be and that we do not give over our freedoms out of fear of what might happen in the future.

At the beginning of Os Guinness' A Free People's Suicide, he quotes several voices from the past as to how a free people must maintain their freedom. It is not guaranteed forever. Benjamin Franklin, after helping to develop the Constitution, was asked what kind of government we had formed. He replied, "We have given you a Republic, if you can keep it." Keeping what we have is the challenge. In the midst of all the bad news this week, I am seeing bravery and honor and concern for others and a fighting spirit rise up again in America telling us that it has been there all along. It is who we are. When I see individual Americans live out the values of the Republic like I have seen this past week in Boston, I am encouraged that we are still the land of the free and home of the brave, at least in our hearts. This character shows up in times of crisis and we should use these moments to make sure that we maintain and enhance the freedoms and virtues that we were bequeathed and not give in to fear and thus, give those freedoms away for some other form of comfort. 

Now for the quotes. I find these instructive.

Marcus Tullius Cicero (Roman philosopher, On the Republic, 54-51 BC) on how Rome lost the virtues that made her great: 
"But our age, having received the commonwealth as a finished picture of another century, but already beginning to fade through the lapse of years, has not only neglected to renew the colors of the original painting, but has not even cared to preserve its original form and prominent lineaments. For what now remains of those antique manners, of which the poet said that our commonwealth consisted? They have now become obsolete and forgotten, that they are not only cultivated, but they are not even known . . . For it is owning to our vices, rather than to any accident, that we have retained the name of republic when we have long lost the reality."

Augustine of Hippo - City of God, early 5th Century AD.
"Suppose we were to define what it means to be a people not in the usual way, but in a different fashion such as the following: a people is a multitudinous assemblage of rational beings united by concord regarding loved things held in common. Then, if we wished to discern the character of any given people, we would have to investigate what it loves . . . Surely it is a better or worse people as it is united in loving things that are better or worse." - Augustine speaks to our situation this week very well. Faced with crisis all over the nation, from Gosnell to Boston to West, Texas, people have come together to remember and fight for what is valuable, namely each other and a sense of justice. In this moment, as a nation, trivial things have been replaced by real things and we are remembering who we really are. In times when self and money and pleasure are most important, we cease to be good and we implode upon ourselves. So, our "goodness," or lack thereof, can be noted by our values and our affections. What do we love?

John Adams - Letter in 1826 on the outcome of 1776
"A memorable epoch in the annals of the human race destined in history to form the brightest or the blackest page, according to the use or abuse of those political institutions by which they shall in time come to be shaped by the human mind."

Adams also said in a letter to Massachusetts Militia in 1798 regarding who our Constitution that delineates and protects our liberties was made for:
". . . we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

James Madison - The Federalist, 1787-88
"Liberty may be endangered by the abuses of liberty as well as the abuses of power."

Abraham Lincoln - "Address Before the Young Men's Lyceum," Springfield, Illinois, 1838
"At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up among us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide."

Theodore Roosevelt - Speech, July 4, 1886, North Dakota
"We must keep steadily in mind that no people were ever yet benefitted by riches if their prosperity corrupted their virtue."

This week, we are seeing America come together because of tragedy and because of a threat. Bravery, courage, self-sacrifice, concern for others, empathy, grief, humility, prayer to God, resolve, and a desire to protect and serve others and see justice take place has marked this week in American society. Our of tragedy and violence and injustice has arisen a severe mercy because, for a moment, we remember what it is to be human again. And, we are acting as a free people together. 

How can we bring these values to bear upon our nation when we are out of this crisis? The Church has a role to play in living like this all the time as Jesus, our Savior, gave His life as a ransom for many. It is our job to be salt and light and demonstrate to a broken world what real life looks like and what it really means to be human. The distractions and cynicism will return - they are biting at our heels even now. But, can Grace overcome? 

Praying for America today.

Have We Been Doing It Wrong? Why Christians Should Engage Culture With Faith & Scripture

Over the past month or so, I have been studying apologetics and have been preaching a series on a defense of the Resurrection of Christ. I have studies and put forward arguments for the Resurrection that I think are compelling and that answer many of the objections of skeptics. But, I have been left wondering if we are not consistently doing this work on the playing field that skeptics have constructed themselves that is hardly neutral or unbiased. Is the very way that we engage in this kind of discussion fully influenced by the presuppositions of those who are inclined to disregard the very claims that are putting forward. Is the deck stacked against our arguments by the rules constructed by people who seek to dismiss the faith outright? 

Lately, I have been rethinking the conventional wisdom behind how Christians should engage culture. I am wondering if we have been doing it wrong. Over the past hundred years or so, Western society has labored under the assumption that Faith is a private affair and that any participation in the common culture should only be on a neutral basis. This is the Secular Myth that neutrality actually exists. As time has gone by, however, and as the neutral secular approach has been used to push religion out of the public square as much as possible, we have not come to the promised place of a grand tolerance for all views. Rather, what has replaced a Christian consensus in society is a blatantly anti-Christian perspective that considers faith claims to be absurd. Frederic Baue, working off the thesis of the ideational phases of cultural shifts put forward by sociologist Pitirim Sorokin, predicted perfectly what would happen in 2001 in his book, The Spiritual Society: What Lurks Beyond Postmodernism? 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Spiritual-Society-Beyond-Postmodernism/dp/1581342535/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366214845&sr=8-1&keywords=frederic+baue

Christians responded to this call for neutrality, however, by trying to make neutral arguments that we thought would appeal to everyone. We appealed to Natural Law, to tradition, and to whatever studies that we could find that seemed to prove our case. We made political arguments, scientific arguments, and tried to drum up moral majorities to agree with us through grass-roots mobilization efforts. We tried to defend marriage, promote conservative moral values, and protect unborn babies primarily on the basis of showing how our approach would benefit society at large and how it was just, whether people were Christian or not. We voted for political candidates on the basis of their affirmation of our values, despite what they personally believed. At the end of the day, we found our cause to be loaded with pragmatism and when it could no longer win elections because the larger culture came to disagree with us about what they thought was best for America, we were jettisoned as being not needed.

Largely, I think we made a mistake. I have come to believe that there are no neutral arguments. Every argument and proposition that we encounter is loaded with presuppositions - hardly any of which are provable or beyond dispute. The vast majority of arguments are emotional and biased and based on experience, or the lack thereof. This goes for arguments against God as well, something that Science has no ability to even speak to one way or the other. We have fully moved into the realm of persuasion and emotional appeals and beliefs based on almost nothing except for, as the postmodern theorists tell us, "language games and power plays." This does not mean that there is no truth or that truth is relative (because I believe in God, I believe in absolute truth), but rather it means that we have lost our ability to agree on what truth is or how one arrives at it. We are left with persuasion, which usually means that whoever yells the loudest, exerts the most power or influence, or can get people to believe them is the one that establishes what truth is. It is a dangerous place to be, but we have been here before. We have returned to the marketplace of ideas devoid of any epistemological agreement or grounding. In short, we are rushing headlong into Paganism. 

I am coming back to the place that I think that the argument from Scripture for a way of life embodied in an alternative community of people actually living out that way consistently is the best apologetic in this culture. No one else has a corner on truth apart from what seems best to them at the time. Science, studies, and agreements no longer have persuasive power because we doubt the agenda behind the assertion. Who is backing this? Where does the money trail lead us? Who does this assertion benefit? What bias underlies the truth claims? How does this empower one group while disempowering another? What makes a convincing argument now is what is demonstrated to be equitable and most likely "true" based on prior assumptions about what benefits the most people in the moment. The way that the society goes is influenced more by the establishment of prior assumptions not completely related to the current issue being debated than it is by the advance of a particular argument. And, where did those prior assumptions come from? Mostly from assertions made by minority communities who found a way to put forward their arguments to the larger culture in a compelling way. 

Rod Dreher writing today in The American Conservative illustrates this shift perfectly in relation to the Gay Marriage debate and the Sexual Revolution: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/sex-after-christianity/?fb_action_ids=10200650623404430&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%5B504782369580731%5D&action_type_map=%5B%22og.likes%22%5D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D

What makes our own era different from the past, says Rieff (sociologist Philip Rieff, 1966), is that we have ceased to believe in the Christian cultural framework, yet we have made it impossible to believe in any other that does what culture must do: restrain individual passions and channel them creatively toward communal purposes. Rather, in the modern era, we have inverted the role of culture. Instead of teaching us what we must deprive ourselves of to be civilized, we have a society that tells us we find meaning and purpose in releasing ourselves from the old prohibitions.
         
How this came to be is a complicated story involving the rise of humanism, the advent of the Enlightenment, and the coming of modernity. As philosopher Charles Taylor writes in his magisterial religious and cultural history A Secular Age, “The entire ethical stance of moderns supposes and follows on from the death of God (and of course, of the meaningful cosmos).” To be modern is to believe in one’s individual desires as the locus of authority and self-definition.
               
Gradually the West lost the sense that Christianity had much to do with civilizational order, Taylor writes. In the 20th century, casting off restrictive Christian ideals about sexuality became increasingly identified with health. By the 1960s, the conviction that sexual expression was healthy and good—the more of it, the better—and that sexual desire was intrinsic to one’s personal identity culminated in the sexual revolution, the animating spirit of which held that freedom and authenticity were to be found not in sexual withholding (the Christian view) but in sexual expression and assertion. That is how the modern American claims his freedom.
             
To Rieff, ours is a particular kind of “revolutionary epoch” because the revolution cannot by its nature be institutionalized. Because it denies the possibility of communal knowledge of binding truths transcending the individual, the revolution cannot establish a stable social order. As Rieff characterizes it, “The answer to all questions of ‘what for’ is ‘more’.” Our post-Christian culture, then, is an “anti-culture.” We are compelled by the logic of modernity and the myth of individual freedom to continue tearing away the last vestiges of the old order, convinced that true happiness and harmony will be ours once all limits have been nullified.
             
Gay marriage signifies the final triumph of the Sexual Revolution and the dethroning of Christianity because it denies the core concept of Christian anthropology. In classical Christian teaching, the divinely sanctioned union of male and female is an icon of the relationship of Christ to His church and ultimately of God to His creation. This is why gay marriage negates Christian cosmology, from which we derive our modern concept of human rights and other fundamental goods of modernity. Whether we can keep them in the post-Christian epoch remains to be seen.
               

The "battle over Gay Marriage" was not lost when President Obama declared his affirmation of it. It was not lost in the 2008 or 2012 election. It was lost when the assertion that "to be modern is to believe in one's individual desires as the locus of authority and self-definition" was accepted by the larger society. When this assertion began playing out sexually in the 1960's, it was only a matter of time until we got to this point. Who knows how far we will go? Until we are able to effectively address where authority come from - ourselves or God - we will continue down this road. This is where a Biblical form of discipleship comes in rooted in Scripture and guided by the Holy Spirit in the midst of Christian community comes in. 

Scripture tells us that the way forward is as a cruciform community living out the commands and implications of Scripture as we are formed by the Holy Spirit with Christ as our Head. How we live and how we love and witness to the Truth of Christ matters a great deal. We are to be Witnesses and as the church, are to attest to the reality of God's revelation in the Scriptures that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John 5:37-47; 14:6). We are to love one another thus demonstrating to the world that we are followers of Jesus (John 13:35-36). The Kingdom of God is still breaking in in Christ and it looks like the Cross and the Resurrection and we are to live that story out through our lives and our communities and our collective stance in our culture. That positioning makes our claims as valid as any other - more valid actually, because they will be attested to by the supernatural power of God who will demonstrate Himself as we point to Him through Word and Deed. Not everyone will believe, but we knew that to begin with. There is no magic bullet that will convince the world that Jesus is real or that He is the Son of God. Jesus Himself could not do it. But, this is where sacrificially loving God and people to the ends of the earth is both a confessional and missional position in a world gone mad. 

We are back to the point where what the Bible says really matters, not as a trump card to win arguments. The World does not accept it as an authority. But, as a way to position us as a faithful community who live out the implications of Scripture as a witness to the truth of Jesus and the in-breaking of the Kingdom of God.

50 Years since Martin Luther King's Letter From a Birmingham Jail

Today is the 50th Anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's Letter From a Birmingham Jail written to 8 white clergymen in Birmingham who were calling upon him to wait and settle down and not push for too much change too fast. King saw their comments in the Birmingham paper and sat down to write a defense of his actions to advocate for justice and to call upon all Christians everywhere, including self-styled white moderate Christians, to support the goals of the Civil Rights Movement and their work in Birmingham.

I have contended for some time that you cannot rightly assess the spiritual state of America today and the weakness of the Christian church in society here without going back to the 1950's and 60's and recognizing how much being wrong on the racial segregation issue affected our witness in the South and across the nation. Never was the Evangelical church more powerful than in Alabama and Mississippi in 1960-1965. Never did we have more ability to change the culture and influence people for good. And, never have we been more wrong in how we treated other people and in what we DID NOT speak against than during that time. Ignorance was not an excuse as we had people like Martin Luther King calling us to repentance. But, so often, we were unwilling to listen. I wonder what America would be like today if Evangelical Christians would have been laying their lives down to see justice come to African Americans, many of whom were also Christians. 

Dr. King prophesied dark days ahead for the church that would stand on the wrong side of history and of God's justice in his Letter to the 8 white clergy:

"There was a time when the church was very powerful--in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being "disturbers of the peace" and "outside agitators."' But the Christians pressed on, in the conviction that they were "a colony of heaven," called to obey God rather than man. Small in number, they were big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be "astronomically intimidated." By their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contests. Things are different now. So often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an archdefender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church's silent--and often even vocal--sanction of things as they are."But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If today's church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust." http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html
That loss and forfeiture is exactly what happened. We should not wonder why America has turned away from the influence of the church. In many cases, we have ourselves to blame. However, the truth also remains that many who claimed to be Christians then were not and they sullied the witness of the church as well. Those who were true Christians did not have the discernment that they needed to understand or rightly respond to the delusion that they were under as they took the wrong side on the biggest human rights issue of the 20th century. Our witness has not recovered from this and 50 years later, I must admit that Dr. King was right. How can we reclaim our witness? Simply by laying down our lives in service to God and others every day. When we see someone in need, help them. Be agents of reconciliation. Care more about the welfare of others than we do about ourselves. Put others ahead of ourselves. Find out where people are hurting and step in with healing. Love sacrificially. Let our deeds speak louder than our denunciations. Love loud and let our words and actions be gospel saturated together. As we lay down our rights and are willing to suffer, then our witness will be restored because we will look more like Jesus who did the same for the glory of God and love for people. Dr. King told us that our witness to Christ was off base. We should listen, even today.

What Can We Do About the Rising Murder Rate in Montgomery, AL?

Montgomery had its 20th murder of 2013 last Friday night. According to my calculations, at the current rate for the year, if this continues, Montgomery will have a murder rate of 33.3 per 100,000 citizens, which would rank it #6 in the nation according to 2012 numbers. For a comparison, New York City had a murder rate of around 4.75 per 100,000 citizens last year. Chicago, highlighted recently for the rise in gun violence, had a murder rate of around 18 per 100,000 citizens. New Orleans had a murder rate of 53 per 100,000 citizens.

http://www.waka.com/news/montgomery-news/Apartment-Parking-Lot-Shooting-Marks-20-Murders-in-Montgomery-202931901.html

If things continue in this direction, Montgomery not only rank in the top 10 of American cities in the murder rate, but it will also rank 45th in the world right between Belo Horizonte, Brazil and Panama City, Panama. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate

What makes this even worse, though, is that Montgomery was also just rated the #2 most religious metro area in America by recent a Gallup Poll behind only Provo, Utah with 64% of residents claiming to be "very religious." As for cities with a predominately Protestant Christian affiliation, Montgomery would be the most religious city in America, tied with Jackson, MS. 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/161543/provo-orem-utah-religious-metro-area.aspx

All of this data begs the question: How is one of the most Christian cities in America also one of the most violent cities in America? And, what can and should the Church in Montgomery do about it?

The violence in Montgomery is not necessarily gang violence. There is no great crime syndicate here that is intimidating the population. Neither is the violence random. For example, I do not feel unsafe going just about anywhere in Montgomery. Most of the violence is related to drugs or even more commonly, related to arguments between people who know each other. These arguments often begin over something relatively trivial and then escalate until people feel disrespected and then lash out violently in rage. They grab a gun and then kill whoever they were arguing with. For some reason, when a person feels disrespected, instead of walking away, they are killing whoever disrespected them. Of course, there is also drug violence and robberies, but a large number of the crimes are over disputes that get out of hand. Could it be that the biggest problem is a rise of anger and a lack of self-control or perspective on where that anger might lead? Could the spike in violence also be related to a basic disregard for the value of human life and if a person disrespects you, then the only way to get that respect back is to lash out at them violently and even take their life?

http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/article/20130314/NEWS01/303140019/Q-spike-homicides-Montgomery-City-leaders-tackling-crime-problem-head-surgical-approach-very-aggressive-?nclick_check=1

These "societal" issues need to be considered. The Bible talks about these things and tells us that the reason that we quarrel and fight are because of the desires within us:

"What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don't they come from your desires that battle within you? You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight. You do not have because you do not ask God. When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures. You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world means enmity against God? Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God. Or do you think Scripture says without reason that he jealously longs for the spirit he has caused to dwell in us? But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says: "God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble." Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you." (James 4:1-7 NIV)

Montgomery is a very religious area, but our problem is that we have not taught people how to get their identity from God and find their joy in Him. We have used religion to take care of our eternal needs so we can go to heaven when we die, but we have not adequately considered how our religion is supposed to change the way we live now. In the Black community, religion has failed to connect with the real problems that young people are facing and in the White community, religion has been so privatized that we use it as a way to escape problems and even as an excuse to run away from our community.

James 4 says that we are killing each other because there are desires within each of us that we try to get met our own way and when that doesn't happen, we lash out against others who refuse to satisfy our desires. So, other people become either aids or obstacles to our success and getting our needs/desires met. When people get in our way and we do not value other people the way we should as those made in the image of God, we have been taught by our culture that lashing out is acceptable. As a community, we claim to follow the Prince of Peace, but in reality, we engage in war constantly to get our way - whether this be in our homes, in business, in our neighborhoods, or even in our churches. A lifestyle of sacrificial love is often a foreign concept and we recast our religion to help us gain prosperity or to meet our goals or to escape from problems. In this, God becomes a means to an end. 

So, what are we to do:

1. Each local church becomes a community of shalom - which means that we actively pursue peace and creative living in our communities as we are shaped by the Cross and sacrificial love. We need to look for ways to promote peace in our homes, our neighborhoods, and every aspect of our community. As Jesus said, "Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they will be called children of God" (Matt. 5:9).
2. Run to the problems - our religion should not consist of us trying to gain safety and prosperity for ourselves. If it does not direct us toward the places of pain, violence, and suffering in our community, then it is not real Christianity. We are called to die daily. How can we use God as a way to gain the best life for ourselves while people all around us - including children - are suffering from violence, brokenness, corruption, and poverty? We cannot fix everything and many people will resist the Gospel. But, we can try to engage. God is faithful and He answers prayers. 
3. Proclaim and demonstrate the worth and dignity of every person made in the image of God - We must become people who bless instead of curse and who value every person because God made them and has a purpose for them. We must oppose racism and every other philosophy that diminishes the dignity of people. I think that one reason that we see so much violence in the South is because of our legacy of racism and racial injustice. Anger and a devalued sense of the worth of people has become our heritage. As the church, we must repent of our part in that and tell a better story. 
4. Demonstrate how to handle being disrespected and the conflict that ensues - As Christians, we are called to lay down our lives for God and others. We must show that being disrespected is not a sign of weakness, but we can find strength in Christ. It is the world's way to lash out when a person is disrespected - not God's way. We need to show that Christians handle insults, violence, and conflict differently. 
5. Pray - God hears the prayers of His people. Ultimately, this is a spiritual issue. We must pray and be willing to act as well every chance we can. 

There are over 100,000 religious people in Montgomery. There are churches everywhere. Yet, we are among the leaders in our nation and in the world (as of right now if things continue in this direction for the remainder of the year) in murders. The church can come together and tell a better story and change this - but we must see a change in the hearts of people and we must learn how to handle conflict differently. That only happens when we find our identity in God and not in what we have and in how much power we wield. And, only the Gospel can change that. 

We need Jesus.

Boston Bombings, Evil Unleashed, and Light Triumphing Over Darkness

What a horrible day in Boston. Evil broke in again and shocked us all, although at this point, I don't know why we should be surprised. The Aurora theatre shooting. Sandy Hook. Dr. Gosnell's House of Horrors. Now, the Boston Marathon Bombings. Today, we all grieved with those in Boston and could not help but think back to 9/11.

But, there was another story being told today in Boston. When the bombs went off, people ran TO the victims to help instead of running away to save themselves. Howard Fineman of The Huffington Post writes:

"Today, rescuers were running toward the wounded on Boylston Street in acts of true heroism -- running toward the sounds of the screams. In the end the terrorists will fail because Bostonians did not turn from their fellow man -- they turned toward them. And that is the real music of mankind."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-fineman/boston-marathon-patriots-day_b_3088070.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

There were other reports that the Marathon runners who were turned away from the finish line just a mile away kept running to local hospitals to give their own blood to help those in need. Think of it. Runners who had already run 25 miles, upon hearing the bombs and the carnage and knowing that people that they did not know were wounded and dying, ran further and gave their own blood to help save them.

http://twitchy.com/2013/04/15/amazing-boston-marathoners-reportedly-run-to-hospital-to-donate-blood/

Not turning away, but running toward the sounds of the screams to help those suffering. Giving their own blood to save the lives of others. This is what the Kingdom of God looks like. This is what Jesus did for us and what He calls us to do for others. 

In the midst of so much darkness and violence and pain, today, God showed up and the eternity written on the hearts of men (Eccl. 3:11) reflected a Story more true than all of the evil that can be unleashed on the world. Heroism and sacrifice and laying down one's life for another still exists in this world. Light still triumphs over darkness.  

The Church is to be that Light in the world as we also run into the smoke and the carnage and toward the screams of mankind suffering. We are not to run away to save ourselves. We are to shed our own blood if necessary to help those being run over by the evil in this world. That is what Jesus did for us. How can we not do it for others? 

Consider the rescue workers and average people who ran into the smoke to help those in need. Consider the Marathon runners who KEPT running to the hospital to give their own blood to those hurting. THAT is the kind of life we need to live all the time, everyday. 

Light still triumphs over darkness.

Shocking White House Response to the Gosnell Trial

President Obama is well known to weigh in on legal matters throughout the nation from the Trayvon Martin case to the Supreme Court considering gay marriage laws to the Court's deliberations over ObamaCare. Everyone knows that, right? Well, apparently Obama's press secretary, Jay Carney thinks that we do not know.  Politico reports:

White House press secretary Jay Carney declined to comment Monday on the murder trial of Kermit Gosnell, a doctor who performed abortions in Philadelphia.

"The president does not and cannot take a position on an ongoing trial, so I won't as well," Carney told reporters, responding to a question from Fox News Channel's Ed Henry.

President Obama is "aware" of the case and, without weighing in on it, Carney added: "Certainly, the things that you hear and read about this case are unsettling."

When pressed by Henry, Carney again declined to comment. "The president's position on choice is very clear. His position on the basic principle that, as President Clinton said, abortions ought to be 'safe, legal and rare' is very clear," the press secretary said.

Ok. Let's unpack this "non-statement."

1. The President has taken positions on ongoing investigations before and in court cases. When did this new standard arise?

2. The question should have involved President Obama's opposition to the Born Alive Infant Protection Act of 2003 as I wrote about this morning. The question should have been something like, "Does something like what happened in the Gosnell case affect President Obama's view on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act that he voted against four times while a State Senator in Illinois?"

3. I am glad that President Obama thinks that over 100 babies who had their spinal columns cut and their feet put in jars is "unsettling." I wonder how he would define "horrific"?

4. "The president's position on choice is very clear."  What does "Choice" have to do with Dr. Kermit Gosnell murdering babies?  Once a baby is born, it is no longer an abortion but infanticide, which is illegal everywhere. Why bring up Choice?  Shouldn't BOTH pro-choice and pro-life advocates be completely against and horrified by what happened?  Is Jay Carney conflating "Choice" with what Gosnell did?

5. "His position on the basic principle that, as President Clinton said, abortions ought to be 'safe, legal and rare' is very clear."  Um, no it isn't, Jay.  Remember the Democratic Convention last year? That position was changed and the word "rare" was noticably removed.  Interesting that he would appeal back to the previous platform's language. From the Democratic Platform of 2012:

"The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way."

What happened in Gosnell's clinic was neither "safe" nor "legal." Why not speak to that? President Obama could have brought the nation together by condemning the outrageous, illegal, murderous acts of Dr. Kermit Gosnell. Who would not condemn something like this? Who would not say, "If the accusations are true, this is horrible and disgusting and we need to make sure it never, ever happens again to anyone?" Carney said that it was "unsettling."  Also, he could not even speak to it without bringing up the language of "choice" to pacify abortion-on-demand advocates. A statement like this from a man who opposed 4 times enhancing protections for babies-born-alive from failed abortions in the face of the Gosnell crimes should cause our entire nation to recoil in horror.

Of course, President Obama and Vice President Biden and many others have had no problem speaking about gun violence recently. Are the lives of the babies killed in the Gosnell Clinic worth less than others killed in gun violence? If so, how is that determined?

I feel like I am living in an alternate universe or something.