Michael Bloomberg, Captive Audiences, and North Carolina Rubes

Tags

commencement, graduation, Michael Bloomberg, North Carolina Marriage Amendment, speeches, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Sunday was not only Mother’s Day but a day of anticipation, promise, and hope as approximately 4,000 graduates graced the stands of Kenan Stadium on the campus of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The sea of “Carolina Blue” was an impressive sight as the processional seemed to be never-ending.

The commencement was like most with it’s remarks, rewards, and honorary degrees. Of course, as with any event of this nature being held at a prestigious university such as Chapel Hill the “highlight” is the commencement address given by a “big name.” In this case the “name” was the Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg. As any of the regular readers of this blog can surmise this was not a speech that I was greatly anticipating–and to his credit, the Mayor did not disappoint any of my expectations.

As far as a speech was concerned it was very strong indeed. He had done his homework, actually I would imagine someone else had done his homework for him, in that he mentioned all the requisite references that brought a roar from the gathered masses including a derogatorily muted nod to the school down the road (for the uninitiated that would be the arch nemesis Duke). In other words, he warmed the audience up quite well.

Lest your political calendar has not turned the page yet, it would be good to remember that his speech was being given a mere 5 days following the North Carolina Marriage Amendment being overwhelmingly approved. So about halfway through the speech he began to speak to the need for equality in our society he used the vote earlier in the week as an indication of how much more work needed to be done. What happened next was quite telling. The student body erupted in enthusiastic and sustained applause. However, there was another reaction that was just as compelling. As a backdrop I should let you know that the entire field had been reserved for disabled seating–in other words, thousands of parents and grandparents of the cheering youth. The silence from that group was deafening. The rest of the gathered masses was a bit of a mixed bag.

The first, and understandable, reaction to this state of affairs might be to despair. I would suggest however that response might be premature and here is why. These students have spent the last 4 years in a setting of liberal indoctrination of which the steady drumbeat would prepare them for such a response. It will not take terribly long after leaving this rather artificial conclave for reality to set in. Many of them will marry and have children and raise families. They will get jobs and become productive members of society. They will enter into normal life–and when they do a semblance of normal thinking will overcome a bit of the indoctrination.

In other words, they will cease to march in lockstep. Don’t misunderstand–many will continue to think the way they did in college, but many will not. They will become Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Conservatives, Liberals, Libertarians, Christians, Atheists, non-religious, etc. This will continue to be an issue that we as Americans will continue to hammer out together.

My problem actually was with the underlying meaning communicated by the Mayor–that the electorate of North Carolina are mainly a bunch of uneducated rubes that we, the educated and erudite, need to enlighten and bring them to a place of understanding what true compassion and equality looks like.

There was another quite fascinating and even humorous element to the speech (at least I found it humorous). We had been listening to the speech for a number of minutes when it struck me how many times the Mayor had used the pronoun “I.” It became so noticeable that I turned to my wife and mentioned that it seemed he had taken some speech making advice from President Obama. However, no sooner had those words escaped my lips when I heard him counsel the gathered throngs that we need to quit saying “I and me” so often and learn to say “we and they.” I actually did “laugh out loud.” Another great moment in liberal speech-making history.

So today I have no conclusions to draw, just some reflections to speak of. So I share with just a few of my thoughts from what was otherwise an absolutely wonderful day.

Anthropomorphic judgment

Tags

Bible study, Hebrew, Job, protection of God, Spurgeon, suffering, worship

We know some of the details of the book and experience of Job. We know he suffered but we rarely consider how deeply. Remember that in a very short amount of time he lost all of his possessions (and he seemed to be quite rich), all of his family (except his wife), and his health. He is going through so much physical suffering that when his “friends” arrive they do not even recognize him and when they finally realize who he is they sit in stunned silence for a full seven days (Job 2: 11-13).

Following Job’s refusal to curse God and his commitment to the worship of God, chapter 3 is dedicated to his desire that he had never been born–as you read the chapter this thought is expressed in many different ways. But I would like to focus on one comment he makes which is informative for us. It is found in chapter 3, verse 23–“Why is light given to a man whose life is hidden, and whom God has hedged in? The Hebrew word used here is suwk A word translated hedge but has the implication of being imprisoned or trapped.

What makes this so interesting (at least to me) is the comparison to Job chapter 1, verse 10. In this scene Satan is attempting to make the case to God that the only reason Job worships Him is because God has protected him so completely–“Have you not made a hedge about him and his house and all that he has, on every side? The Hebrew word used here is suk. Once again it is a word translated hedge but has more of the understanding of a protective wall. By the way, this is a charge that God does not deny.

As I got thinking about this today I began to think about suffering and the difference that perspective makes. We know that God’s ways and thoughts are infinitely higher than ours and His purposes are beyond anything we can begin to fathom. However, He has allowed past that “hedge” only what He has determined in His wisdom should be allowed past it. Job’s perspective (just like ours) is completely and hopelessly finite–thereby, it is by nature pretty shortsighted. So what in reality is a wall of protection Job can only see as a wall of entrapment.

To Job’s credit, even though he is confused, despairing, and in the midst of profound suffering he will continue to steadfastly worship the Lord. His amazing testimony is, “Though He slay me still I will trust in Him” (Job 13: 15).

Anthropomorphism
–a word which means to attribute human characteristics to that which is not human. For instance, I might say something like, “my computer has a mind of it’s own.” We find this in Scripture quite often. Even though John 4 makes it very clear that God is Spirit we see usages of “the arm of the Lord,” “the hand of God,” “the eyes of the Lord,” etc., etc.

We anthropomorphise God quite often when we consider suffering. We work from the assumption that God is like us. If it cannot be explained from our limited understanding then it must be inexplicable on the part of God. If I cannot see or understand the reason, it is therefore unreasonable on the part of God. And if it is unloving based on my human experience, the it is immensely unloving on the part of God.

Job seemed to understand something that the great preacher Charles Haddon Spurgeon was able to phrase in a memorable way–“God is too good to be unkind. He is too wise to be confused. If I cannot trace His hand, I can always trust His heart.”

The Left-Handed Plumber’s Study Bible

Tags

Christian Bookstore, christianity, God, KJV, NASB, NIV, NLT, reading, specialty Bibles, Study Bibles, The Bible, translations, versions

I read the Bible. I study the Bible. I meditate on and memorize the Bible. I preach and teach the Bible. I love the Bible. I not only graduated from a Bible college (yes it was a 4 year degree from an institution that is accredited from numerous religious and secular accrediting bodies–no it did not meet in my neighbors basement) and seminary but have been in active “professional” ministry for 23 years. In fact I actually have been attending church very regularly from 9 months before I was born. I have said all of that because when I start to sound a little critical I want you to know that it comes from within the family.

When it comes to Bibles I have probably given away more than I own and I think in my study there are more than twenty not counting the ones at home and then with the rather high-powered Bible study software I have that number begins to soar. But here is what struck me the other day. I was leafing through a relatively small paper catalog from a familiar Christian bookseller when I noticed of the 64 pages 16 were taken up with nothing but Bibles. I thought that was bad until I read recently that the 2010 Zondervan Bible catalog was 223 pages long! Seriously?!

Ladies and Gentlemen–there are a mere handful of common translations of the Scripture–King James Version (KJV), The New King James Version (NKJV), New International Version (NIV), New American Standard Bible (NASB), English Standard Version (ESV), New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), New Living Translation (NLT), and The Message (MSG). There are a few other niche ones available but these are the main staples. I realize for the uninitiated the fact that there are eight different translations of the Scripture is a bit unnecessary, but I will address this question in a future blog (maybe even tomorrow). This however is not really my concern–at least not today.

I would like to invite you to go into your local Christian bookstore and take a look around at the shelves of Bibles and see the titles–you will see things like The Battlefield Bible, The Marine’s Bible, The Airmen’s Bible, The Soldier’s Bible, The Coast Guardsmen Bible, The Doctor’s Bible, The Fireman’s Bible, The Patriot’s Bible, The Golfer’s Bible, The Nurse’s Bible, The Policeman’s Bible, The African Heritage Bible, The Spirit-Filled Bible (I have always wondered what that makes all the other Bibles), The Life Recovery Bible, The Life Application Bible, The Leadership Bible, The Promise Keepers Bible, The Sportsmen Bible, The Teachers Bible, The Graduates Bible, and on and on and on. I have been tempted so many times to walk in and ask if they have a Left-Handed Plumbers Study Bible.

In an article entitled “How Many Versions of the Bible Do We Really Need?” author Daniel Burke said, “The assortment of translations and ‘niche Bibles’ (think, ‘The Holy Bible: Stock Car Racing Edition’) sow confusion and division among Christians, invite ridicule from relativists, and risk reducing God’s word into just another personal-shopping preference.”

Just a little information for the non-Bible consumer reading this. These are not different translations of the Scripture–they are still the same text of the NIV, KJV, NASB, etc. But interspersed throughout the Bible there will be themed stories, prayers, quotes, etc. dealing with that specific subject.

IMHO the problem is this–when we start purchasing the Word of God according to my needs, my interests, my vocations, etc. then I can either consciously or subconsciously begin to think the Scripture is all about what is important to me. In a sense I no longer am defined by the Scripture, I am defining the Scripture. Which simply leads to even more narcissism in the American church than is already there.

I am not railing against study Bibles in general. There are good ones which give good introductory and exegetical helps which can certainly help in our understanding of the biblical context–The NIV Study Bible and the ESV Study Bible are among the best. But make sure when we purchase a Bible, my time spent in the Scripture is about God–not about me.

On being educated

Tags

christianity, disciple, discipleship, education, Great Commission, Stuart Briscoe, thinking

I had to opportunity this weekend to sit under the teaching of Dr. Stuart Briscoe and it was a wonderful time. Among the many things which were presented he quoted the following statement. I need to say that even though it was not original with him, I am not sure who he was quoting so if someone can give the right source I will gladly credit that. He said, “an educated person is one who has learned how to learn and then keeps on learning.”

I have come across far too many people who see education as a destination and not a journey. They somehow think that when they have received a diploma from some institution of higher learning they have become “educated.” The truth of the matter is, as Dr. John Maxwell says, “many of us have been educated far beyond the level of our intelligence.” Which is even made clearer by the great and powerful Oz when he points out to the scarecrow, that many people come out of the University and think deep thoughts with no more brains than the scarecrow has. Indeed!

I can remember when I was doing youth ministry and a teenager was trying to justify his many hours of TV viewing by pointing out to me that one could “learn” a great deal from television (I am not convinced he was spending his time watching PBS). While I agreed with him, for the sake of argument, I pointed out that the one thing TV could not teach you is how to think. Which is the area many of us have become quite lazy and unskilled in.

While all of this is both important and true, Dr. Briscoe was addressing his comment specifically to the follower of Jesus. The Greek word translated “disciple” in the New Testament is the word “mathetes” which means a learner or a pupil. Therefore, a disciple of Jesus is someone who has learned how to learn and continues to learn from and about Jesus. In fact, as disciples we are not only called upon to be learners that continue to learn, but to teach others how to learn so that they will keep on learning. Matthew 28: 19-20, that passage that Christians refer to as the “Great Commission” instructs us to one thing–to make disciples–teaching them all the things that Jesus taught.

This goes back, once again, to being people of the book. It is in the serious study of the Scripture that we will know what Jesus taught and thereby be continual learners and then by default being continual “disciples” and “disciples.”

The apostle Paul said it this way to his son in the faith Timothy: “The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” (2 Timothy 2:2 NASB)

The Broken Wagon Wheel

Tags

books, christianity, Columbine, faith, God, Jesus, quotes, Rachel Scott, Rachel's Challenge, religion

It has been 12 years since the country was shaken by the events that transpired at Columbine High School on April 20th, 2011 when 12 students and 1 teacher were killed by two young high school students who then took their own lives. One of the victims was a young lady by the name of Rachel Scott. Great good has been accomplished (and continues to be) in her memory.

Last evening I had the opportunity to attend an event celebrating what has become known as “Rachel’s Challenge.” It is a program based around 5 promises that students are being asked to make to hopefully keep from ever happening again what took place in Littleton, Colorado so many years ago. The challenges are these:

1. Eliminate Prejudice by Looking for the Best in Others

2. Dare to Dream (Set Goals–Keep a Journal)

3. Choose Your Influences (Input Determines Output)

4. Kind Words (small acts of kindness = huge impact)

5. Start a Chain Reaction With Family and Friends

This program has gone all over the country for over a decade with tremendous results with millions of students being involved–it has been quite effective. The motivation for all of this has been what was written in Rachel’s school essays and personal journals that she kept meticulously. The main impetus has been these words which came from essay she wrote for school entitled “My Ethics, My Codes of Life:”

My codes may seem like a fantasy that can never be reached, but test them for yourself, and see what kind of effect they have in the lives of the people around you. You just may start a chain reaction.

While I don’t have the time to expound, let it be said that this was a young woman who “practiced what she preached.” As important, poignant, moving, and effective that this program has been, as I listened last night I felt a little sad. I don’t mean because of the tragedy of this young lady’s death–that was horrific indeed–there was another kind of sadness.

If you followed much of the coverage following the Columbine massacre or read the books Rachel’s Tears: The Spiritual Journey of Columbine Martyr Rachel Scott or The Journals of Rachel Scott: A Journey of Faith of Columbine High then you know that not only was Rachel Scott a firm believer in Christ, but there was strong evidence that she was targeted for that very reason.

I fear that what “Rachel’s Challenge” does is present the “what?” of Rachel’s life, but leaves out completely the “why?” It reminded me somewhat of a wagon wheel with the spokes (the 5 challenges) while missing the center hub (her faith in Christ) which holds it all together.

Now I realize that this was being held at a public school thus there are restrictions of what can be shared–but there just seemed to be only a partial picture of what made her life so important.

Submissive Michelle

Tags

Byron York, christianity, church, Fox News, God, government, Michelle Bachmann, politics, religion, republican debate, submissiveness, submit, The Bible

I will admit that I did not see the recent Republican debate so what I know about it is mainly through hearsay (or the news–but then I repeat myself) other than the “submission” question. After I heard all the hullabaloo I had to watch in on you tube which I did. If you did not take the time to watch the debate and have not seen the question and answer, here it is:

You will notice some things about the question. First, even the audience knew what a sexist and out of place question it was–the boos from the crowd are pretty obvious. While there may be some who think this is a fair question for any female candidate for President of the United States, that standard does not seem to cross party lines–because unless I have a very short memory I don’t remember Hillary Clinton being asked that same question. Of course she wasn’t–that is because this was not a question for any female candidate for the office of President, it was a question for a Bible believing, pro-life, pro-marriage, conservative, Christian, female candidate (should I mention Tea Party)–which, as far as I can tell, in the history of our country that description only applies to Michelle Bachmann.

While this “submission” issue certainly has biblical implications which have been lived out in many healthy Christian marriages and is in the context of Paul’s teaching on marriage in Ephesians 5, which, by the way, spends a lot more time on a husband’s responsibilities to selflessly  love his wife, than on a wife’s call to submission. Another item to remember is that prior to v. 23 in Ephesians (where the submission issue is addressed to wives) in v. 22 Paul says, “let us submit to one another our of reverence for Christ.” However, I will add that this has been one of the most misused, abused, and misunderstood teachings in the entire New Testament.

Let’s return to the debate and the point at hand. Why was the question asked in the first place? If I were to give the benefit of the doubt to Byron York (the man who asked the question and whose resume looks a veritable who’s who of conservatism) we might say that as a Christian woman who has been very open about her faith that it is fair to address this issue since it potentially has domestic policy and national security implications since if a President Bachmann were elected then there may be undue influence from a man whom the President might be duty bound, on the authority of Scripture, to obey. This possibility ignores a couple of prominent issues–#1–The strength that has been evident in the person of Michelle Bachmann not only in the campaign so far (as brief as it has been), but in her time as part of the Congress and the fights she has willingly taken on. #2–A rather comprehensive ignorance of the biblical teaching on this vital subject.

If you have read anything of the coverage regarding the debate, and specifically this question (which seems to have overshadowed some of the more significant issues), there seems to be very little willingness to give Mr. York “the benefit of the doubt.” The kind of terms that I have read to describe his question are things like “ignorant,” “inappropriate,” and “offensive.” It was just as interesting that most of the ones defending the question are the moderators at Fox and some of the liberal pundits. What this is evidence of is the gross hypocrisy of the media. Michelle Bachmann’s and Rick Perry’s (and Rick Santorum’s if he makes it that far) Christianity will be made much of. Mitt Romney’s Mormonism will be made much of. Yet, the radical teaching under which Barack Obama sat for twenty years was to be summarily dismissed. Buckle-up–it is going to be a wild ride!

Belated thoughts on Avatar

Tags

Avatar, christianity, environment, gospel, Incarnation, Jesus, movies, pantheism

I need to begin by explaining that I am not usually this far behind the cultural 8-ball. By my own choice I never saw “Avatar.” As many times as I had the opportunity to view it or was being coerced into it (mainly by my own daughter) I have been able to escape the inevitable. But alas, being in a rather benevolent frame of mind which I will blame on vacation, I finally watched the movie last night in it’s entirety.

Since I do not want to spend too much time on the standard conservative/evangelical Christian complaints, many of which I would agree with, let me get those out of the way first. I mean things like paganism, pantheism, environmentalism, militarism, cultural superiority–you get the idea (by the way, if you are interested in my views on the Christian and the environment see (http://pastorjeffcma.wordpress.com/2009/04/09/the-green-christian/). You may or may not be aware that the word avatar represents a theme which comes out of Hinduism. While it traditionally has to do with Vishnu it actually means “descended from” or “incarnation.” But since the “spiritual” elements have been addressed over and over I see no need to do so again. But I think there are some interesting biblical allusions that are worth considering.

The first has to do with an edenic paradise populated by a pure and unspoiled people (Adam and Eve) whose understanding of themselves and “God” center around two different trees (Tree of Life and Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil). “Evil” (the serpent) enters this world and the end result is a destroyed world ready to be rebuilt again (the flood). The second is directly connected to the first and is quite representational of the gospel.

Even though it is for nefarious purposes the representatives of the human race are after something that it seems they cannot get regardless of how hard they try–”unobtanium”–rather original don’t you think? But in their attempts they determine what they must do is incarnate somebody in Na’vi form. They know if someone who is like them lives among them they may relate to them and understand them (incarnation) and thus be able to communicate with them.

Much like Paul said of Jesus in Philippians chapter 2–”Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.”

It seems elements of the gospel show up in the most unlikely of places.

Caring for the poor

Tags

christianity, church, economy, government, Heritage Foundation, injustice, politics, poverty, quotes, religion, welfare

I need to begin with a pre-emptive disclaimer. I am not suggesting that Christians are the only ones that take care of the most disadvantaged and underprivileged in our society. I won’t even argue that they do it best or did it first. I will say they have the best reason for doing it but I will save that argument for a later time. But I do want to address the responsibility that a Christian has in this area. I am in the process of preaching through the book of James on Sunday mornings. James 1: 27 says, “Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.” This is a theme found throughout the Old and New Testaments–God’s displeasure when the poor are being oppressed and the need of His people to care for them. This injunction has not changed for the church even in our current situation. Here is the difference–for the first century Christian there was no such thing as welfare or any other “government program.” However, with the entitlement society in which we live that question of charity and the biblical mandate which accompanies it has become a little muddy for us in a couple of areas. First, where does the church fit in with the presence of food stamps, unemployment benefits, WIC, Medicaid, Food Banks, Shelters, etc., etc? While we realize some of those programs/organizations are faith-based, most are not.

But there is a second, and in my opinion more significant question. In 2011, what does it mean to be “poor?” That is obviously a relative term. First, there is poverty on a global level. I have been told recently that if someone makes $55,000.00 a year they are wealthier than 99% of the world’s population. We can see on television pictures of poverty that are heartbreaking. If you have been outside of the U.S. you may have seen with your own eyes levels of need that are almost unimaginable. That is not the kind of poverty that is the norm in the United States–that does not mean though that great want is not the experience of many in this land of opportunity. On the other hand, as a resident of the United States you may think of poverty represented by the person who has been the victim of the economic downturn of the last couple of years, or maybe one of the many homeless that populate the streets of many of our urban areas, or maybe that person standing at the one of the main intersections in your city with the sign asking for a donation to help alleviate the suffering they are going through. While these situations are very real and very hurtful, you might actually be surprised how poverty gets defined in the U.S. today.

On July 18, 2011 Heritage Foundation published a report on poverty in this country entitled “Air Conditioning, Cable TV, and an XBox: What is Poverty in the United States Today?”  (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/07/What-is-Poverty?utm_source=strategicmktg&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=culturewatch). This is a fascinating study which may explode some myths about what it means to be “poor.” It states that the government has claimed for some time that there are 30 million poor in the United States or 1 in 7 people. While this does prove advantageous for entitlement budgeting purposes it stretches the definition a little bit. The study summarizes in this way:

“In 2005, the typical household defined as poor by the government had a car and air conditioning. For entertainment, the household had two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR. If there were children, especially boys, in the home, the family had a game system, such as an Xbox or PlayStation. In the kitchen, the household had a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave. Other household conveniences included a clothes washer, a clothes dryer, ceiling fans, a cordless phone, and a coffee maker.”

What we realize is that inherent in a media-driven society is the tendency to cease paying very close attention to words–for instance, words like poor, needy, poverty, etc. And when these “buzzwords” can possibly be used to create more and more social programs to meet these “needs,” we find statistical manipulation does more purchasing of political favor than it does to administer true compassion.

Do the poor need to cared for and true human hurt relieved? Absolutely! And we will continue to do so. Of that I am certain.

Is Christianity Important?

Tags

C.S. Lewis, christianity, faith, God, God In the Dock, gospel, Jesus, Mere Christianity, morality, quotes, The Bible, Truth, truth claims

“Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important.” (God in the Dock, C.S. Lewis)

In the truest and most basic sense Christianity is about one thing–humanity being reconciled to God. Yes I am quite aware that is supremely simplistic and there is much to be “de-compressed” in those words. But it was Jesus in Luke 19: 10 that said of Himself, “The Son of Man came to seek and to save that which was lost.” That is the message of the gospel. Theology speaks to things like the nature of God, Jesus Christ, the Bible, Sin, Salvation, the Holy Spirit, etc., etc. But that does not change the central tenet of the Christian faith.

If the gospel is true and sin is our condition, salvation is our need, and Jesus Christ is our Savior, then there is no other message that is even remotely as important as that. There is nothing else that is even on the radar screen. Like Lewis, I would say it is of “infinite importance.” If the gospel is not true, we are not sinners, we have no need of salvation, thus no need of a Savior then Christianity matters not one iota. These are true and clear demarcations. Unfortunately, believers and non-believers alike can play philosophical tug-o-war somewhere around the middle–moderate the message.

For instance, all of the good things that have been done in the name of Christianity–hospitals, orphanages, art, music, science, education, architecture, abolition of slavery, sanctity of life, etc., etc. If you would be interested in reading a good book on this subject take a look at Under the Influence: How Christianity Transformed Civilization, Alvin J. Schmidt. It is not my intent to argue the merits of it’s influence, but to point out that if this is the only value of Christianity then it matters not at all. Why? Because transforming society does nothing in terms of my broken relationship with the Almighty.

How about the person of Jesus? Lewis addresses this in what may be his most familiar statement from Mere Christianity–or at least one of them. “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic -‑ on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg ‑- or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come up with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.” If Jesus was nothing more than a good moral teacher (which Lewis argues cannot be the case) who taught some nice moral precepts, and gave a good moral example then His life really doesn’t even matter. The life of Jesus only matters if He was who He said He was and did what He says He did.

As I have pointed out before this is my problem with Pascal’s wager–if, in my belief in the Word of God and the message of the gospel, I have been wrong but I should supposedly buffer my disappointment with the fact that I have lived a “good” life–the Apostle Paul would call it pitiful. It is true or it is false! It means everything or it means nothing!

Sinners in the hands of an angry ?

Tags

agnosticism, American Family Association, Atheism, christianity, church, faith, Freedom From Religion Foundation, God, government, Governor Rick Perry, politics, quotes, Reliant Stadium, religion, The Response, worship

We have all seen the cartoons representing the wild-eyed street preacher with the sign emblazoned with the words, “Repent! The end is near.” Or the screaming evangelist whose sweat-drenched hair sweeps across his head with each articulated warning. What about that “wretched fundamentalist” whose sole message is focused on fires of hell and the damnation associated with it. One can almost smell the brimstone. While celebrating this caricature has been a favorite past-time of the non-religious, I did not think I would live to see the appearance of the “fire and brimstone” atheist. I can hear it now–”Sinners in the hands of an angry God.”

Here is the situation. Texas Governor Rick Perry has called for a day of fasting and prayer on August 6 to “seek God’s wisdom and guidance” for America (and other such nefarious purposes ). As part of this effort there is a prayer event being supported and sponsored by the American Family Association being held at the 62,000 seat Reliant Stadium billed as The Response: A Call for Prayer for a Nation in Crisis. This whole scenario seems to have upset the atheist group Freedom from Religion Foundation who has initiated a lawsuit against Governor Perry. If you choose you can read the entire suit at http://ffrf.org/uploads/legal/A1229380.pdf. It is quite an enlightening read. As you do so keep in mind that the suit is against Governor Perry, not the American Family Association or Religion (Christianity specifically)–it will be hard to differentiate.

While this kind of effort is not new, what really caught my attention today in all of this was the passionate and provocative loquacity so reminiscent of “fire and brimstone” type communication. Descriptions like:

“…the American Family Association, an organization that advocates and promotes a rabid evangelical Christian agenda…”

“…the American Family Association, a virulent, discriminatory and evangelical Christian organization known for its intolerance…”

“…(AFA) has been outspokenly hostile and disdainful…”

One of the things that I was fascinated with was that along with provocative pejoratives like “rabid,” “virulent,” “discriminatory,” “intolerant,” “hostile,” and “disdainful,” was that fearful and spine-chilling term “evangelical.”  Talk about name-calling!

I normally get confused in all of this rhetoric. Here are some of the things I don’t get. First, I don’t think any American with even a molecule of comprehension will disagree with the fact that we are, indeed, a nation in crisis–serious crisis. Secondly, our history is replete with political figures (many of them Presidents) calling for national days of prayer and fasting and repentance. And as surprising as it may be many of those proclamations were issued in times of national crisis. Thirdly, atheists should be the last people that ought to be upset–they don’t believe in prayer, they don’t believe there is anyone to pray to, therefore they don’t believe that anything happens when you do pray. But that has nothing to do with it we will be instructed. Here is the real issue–“I don’t care if you want to pray, but the government should have nothing to do with it.” Which, of course, shows a monumental ignorance of our history. But that lesson is for another time.

So I encourage you on August 6, 2011 to join heart and voice with those gathered in Texas to pray for this country, it’s leaders and it’s future–we are in desperate need of it. Only, don’t wait till then–start now!