Really bored? Google the words "Boycott" and "Target" and you will quickly come to the conclusion that the only group NOT currently boycotting the Target department store is...well, I'm not sure I can find a group totally in support of Target.
The Lesbian/Gay/Bi/Transgendered group is boycotting them for a campaign contribution last year to a Minnesota Republican group. Flag-wavers are boycotting them for not donating to local veterans groups. And Christians are up-in-arms because Target does not allow the Salvation Army to stand outside their stores and ring bells. Environmental groups...animal rights groups...family advocate groups...heck, Pop singer and LGBT advocate Lady Gaga is boycotting Target by revoking an exclusive deluxe release of her second studio album Born This Way. My God, when Lady Gaga is offended by you, you must be scum.
And in the midst of all this controversy, Target Corporation continues to donate a tremendous amount of money to charitable causes every year, averaging roughly $3 million weekly. And, as in previous years, they continue to top Forbes magazine's list of "America's Most Philanthropic Companies." And yes, while the Salvation Army's Kettle Campaign does raise up to 70 percent of the Salvation Army's total annual income, Target also donates well over a million dollars to the Salvation Army annually.
People just like to boycott stuff, and it doesn't really matter that their reasoning is usually based on something they read on the internet. Just the other day I came across someone shouting that Target is foreign-owned (less than 2% of their shareholders are foreign), anti-American, anti-Christian, etc.. It is always wonderful to come across such enlightened individuals (and by "enlightened" I mean dumber than a sack of rocks).
Now I have to hear about it from my own back yard. A gentleman in Springfield, Oregon is being threatened by St. Vincent DePaul with eviction from his low-rent apartment (owned by St. Vincent DePaul) for violating an rental agreement he signed (with St. Vincent DePaul) that prohibits the hanging of any banners or flags on the outside of the apartment units. But wait...he's flying an American Flag....and (it gets worse)...he's a veteran.
So yesterday, in my email, I get (wait for it.....) an appeal to boycott St. Vincent DePaul stores. After all, these people who help thousands of needy people each year by recycling and reselling your used stuff to people who could not otherwise afford it, while providing jobs to hundreds of otherwise unemployed, and offering low-income housing to hundreds of people...many of whom are disabled or retired veterans. Damn these communist!
So you can imagine the words I might have used when I found out today that Saint Vincent DePaul has caved in and is allowing the gentleman to fly his flag...thereby opening the door for rebel flags, Nazi flags, political banners, and the LGBT rainbow flag (making Lady Gaga happy).
There are reasons why certain rules and policies exists that have nothing to do with the American flag, or Christian bell-ringers. Start a boycott to get what you want from a business, and all too often you end getting what you didn't want as well. And doing so without looking at the long-term consequences and the real heart of the business or corporation is just...well...stupid.
So this year I'm calling for a total boycott of stupid. And if you don't forward this to at least ten people...
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Jesus Doesn't Hide on Halloween
For most of my childhood and early teens I hated Halloween. I hated it, not because of some connection with ancient pagan celebrations, or a fear that the dead could somehow cross over to the land of the living on that one mystical night...no, I hated Halloween because in my house, that was the night to turn off the lights and hide.
Growing up in an extreme fundamentalist home (note, there is no "fun" in fundamental, but there is a LOT of "mental"), my parents avoided anything that had a pagan origin. Christmas, Easter, Valentine's Day, St. Patrick's Day (St. Patrick was Catholic, and therefore somehow pagan), birthdays, throwing rice at a wedding...you name it, if it was fun for a kid, it must be pagan. There are occasions where I wish someone would have told them circumcision was practiced by the pagans long before God told Abraham to take a sharp stone and...well, you know the story.
So once a year my father would lock the doors, turn off the lights, and we would sit quietly in the living room while children knocked on the door. "Don't make a sound...they might hear." As a small child I would sit and tremble...terrified of I knew not what...perhaps feeling like children did in the 16th and 17th century, when they believed that the knock at the door could actually be a long dead ancestor.
Now don't get me wrong. I completely respect Christians who opt-out of the celebrations, but please don’t think Jesus is hiding under his throne while Batman and the Little Mermaid knock at the front door. The reality of his Kingdom answers the deepest questions raised by this holiday. As his people, we must be ready to speak that truth instead of complaining about jack-o-lanterns. This is an awesome opportunity to share about God’s love. Just like Paul used pagan idols to teach about the Creator, we must use every opportunity to speak God’s truth into the confusion of our culture.
I don’t think Halloween is completely harmless, but most of what happens is playful. We’re not talking about devil worship, most families are just dressing up the kids like superheroes and getting some candy from grandma. What seems most dangerous is keeping silent when people need answers. And yet, in the midst of pagan-influenced culture, Halloween is the one night were many Christians rise up in judgmental wrath...often without seeing the incredible hypocrisy in their indignation.
Easter is celebrated during the same time as the spring solstice and selected for that reason because a pre-existent holiday. Many people see it as a time for eggs and chocolate bunnies. Christmas is celebrated when it is to coincide with winter solstice events because those celebrations were already in existence. Advent is almost identical down to the advent wreath and the candles to druidic festivals of light. The Christmas tree is a druidic tradition. Now many people see Christmas as a day for presents and fat men in red suits. Halloween is a night that many people associate with being scared and getting candy. Personally, I don’t see the problem with the third holiday as much as the first two. How can we put a Christian spin on Halloween when we can’t even keep the spin on our two most sacred holidays (speaking from a protestant Christian perspective)?
But what drives me even wonkier is the doctrine of substitution (theology geeks will laugh) that Christians apply to Halloween. Just change the name, and it's OK. Perhaps someone should tell them the early Church already did that. Halloween is a Christian name. Churches celebrate " Trunk or Treat Fall Festivals," " Hallelujah Night," and my personal favorite..."Harvest Party," where the only thing "harvested" are pumpkins, kids dress up in costumes, and are given lots of candy. Certainly no comparison to Halloween in that.
This is one invitation posted for a local church: "Our church is once again hosting its annual Hallelujah Night with games and singing and puppets and LOTS of candy. The kids are encouraged to dress as “something from the Bible”. They get very creative – burning bushes, pillar of fire by night, pillar of cloud by day, the Red Sea (big red “C” ), and of course a variety of Bible characters. It is a great time, the kids look forward to it all year long." I think we'll take my granddaughter and attend. I'll go as Pontius Pilot, my wife will dress as the Witch of Endor, and my granddaughter can come as Rahab the Harlot.
Before you respond, check out Hebrews 2:14-15 carefully: "Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he (Jesus) himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery."
Did you catch all that? Satan has death & fear as his tools to enslave people, but Jesus overcame them both. He has broken the powers of evil and now lives as our champion. Bottom line, Jesus is not afraid of Halloween.
Growing up in an extreme fundamentalist home (note, there is no "fun" in fundamental, but there is a LOT of "mental"), my parents avoided anything that had a pagan origin. Christmas, Easter, Valentine's Day, St. Patrick's Day (St. Patrick was Catholic, and therefore somehow pagan), birthdays, throwing rice at a wedding...you name it, if it was fun for a kid, it must be pagan. There are occasions where I wish someone would have told them circumcision was practiced by the pagans long before God told Abraham to take a sharp stone and...well, you know the story.
So once a year my father would lock the doors, turn off the lights, and we would sit quietly in the living room while children knocked on the door. "Don't make a sound...they might hear." As a small child I would sit and tremble...terrified of I knew not what...perhaps feeling like children did in the 16th and 17th century, when they believed that the knock at the door could actually be a long dead ancestor.
Now don't get me wrong. I completely respect Christians who opt-out of the celebrations, but please don’t think Jesus is hiding under his throne while Batman and the Little Mermaid knock at the front door. The reality of his Kingdom answers the deepest questions raised by this holiday. As his people, we must be ready to speak that truth instead of complaining about jack-o-lanterns. This is an awesome opportunity to share about God’s love. Just like Paul used pagan idols to teach about the Creator, we must use every opportunity to speak God’s truth into the confusion of our culture.
I don’t think Halloween is completely harmless, but most of what happens is playful. We’re not talking about devil worship, most families are just dressing up the kids like superheroes and getting some candy from grandma. What seems most dangerous is keeping silent when people need answers. And yet, in the midst of pagan-influenced culture, Halloween is the one night were many Christians rise up in judgmental wrath...often without seeing the incredible hypocrisy in their indignation.
Easter is celebrated during the same time as the spring solstice and selected for that reason because a pre-existent holiday. Many people see it as a time for eggs and chocolate bunnies. Christmas is celebrated when it is to coincide with winter solstice events because those celebrations were already in existence. Advent is almost identical down to the advent wreath and the candles to druidic festivals of light. The Christmas tree is a druidic tradition. Now many people see Christmas as a day for presents and fat men in red suits. Halloween is a night that many people associate with being scared and getting candy. Personally, I don’t see the problem with the third holiday as much as the first two. How can we put a Christian spin on Halloween when we can’t even keep the spin on our two most sacred holidays (speaking from a protestant Christian perspective)?
But what drives me even wonkier is the doctrine of substitution (theology geeks will laugh) that Christians apply to Halloween. Just change the name, and it's OK. Perhaps someone should tell them the early Church already did that. Halloween is a Christian name. Churches celebrate " Trunk or Treat Fall Festivals," " Hallelujah Night," and my personal favorite..."Harvest Party," where the only thing "harvested" are pumpkins, kids dress up in costumes, and are given lots of candy. Certainly no comparison to Halloween in that.
This is one invitation posted for a local church: "Our church is once again hosting its annual Hallelujah Night with games and singing and puppets and LOTS of candy. The kids are encouraged to dress as “something from the Bible”. They get very creative – burning bushes, pillar of fire by night, pillar of cloud by day, the Red Sea (big red “C” ), and of course a variety of Bible characters. It is a great time, the kids look forward to it all year long." I think we'll take my granddaughter and attend. I'll go as Pontius Pilot, my wife will dress as the Witch of Endor, and my granddaughter can come as Rahab the Harlot.
Before you respond, check out Hebrews 2:14-15 carefully: "Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he (Jesus) himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery."
Did you catch all that? Satan has death & fear as his tools to enslave people, but Jesus overcame them both. He has broken the powers of evil and now lives as our champion. Bottom line, Jesus is not afraid of Halloween.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Worshiping with Style
Pastors love to talk about their congregations. We usually lie through our teeth, but we still love it when you ask us a question that opens the door for us to tell you all about the wonderful things we are up to. But I seriously threw off a fellow pastor the other day when he asked me a very common question. "What style of worship does your church use?"
Now I know exactly what he was asking. The normal answers are "traditional," "contemporary" or "blended." And how one answers the question determines if their congregation is made up of old farts (traditional), emergent 20/30-somethings (contemporary) or a congregation of old farts trying desperately to attract emergent 20/30-somethings (blended).
I understood the question, but my answer was not what my fellow man-of-the-cloth was looking for. Without missing a beat, I answered "We have two styles of worship...we worship in both spirit AND in truth."
Now my new-found friend understood the reference. Jesus tells a Samaritan woman "But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (John 4:23-24). But what he really wanted to know was...do we use drums and guitar, or just piano and organ?
But the problem I have is that if one more person tells me that the only way to attract young worshipers is to mirror the contemporary styles of music, they will run the risk of me sending them to worship Jesus face to face. For while I totally agree that contemporary styles of music are the inevitable outcome of a worship lifestyle that is Spirit lead and truthful, it is almost NEVER the other way around.
Music and lyrics can go a long way as a teaching tool for believers...perhaps even a better tool than the sermon. And music that is familiar and enjoyable is far more likely to attract a new believer than a Gregorian Chant. But if the "church experience" isn't firmly rooted in the teaching of the inclusive, unconditional love of God, and the need to live that love out loud in community, then the music is nothing more than that...music.
And as for the notion that young adults will only worship if the music sounds like a U-2 concert (I wish), all one need do is look at the thousands of teens and young adults that are drawn to worship settings like Imago Dei, or Taize in France. Settings where the worship occurs in ancient hymns, chants and long periods of total silence. Young, emergent, post-modern worshipers who are attracted to the opportunity to become those worshipers Jesus told the Samaritan woman the Father seeks.
The truth be told (did I mention pastors often lie), the musical style used for worship in my congregations is mostly contemporary, with an occasional old hymn thrown in as a peace offering to the senior members of the community. Do we worship in Spirit and in Truth? Yes...no...sometimes...maybe...not often enough. As a pastor and a musician, am I happy with our weekly worship experience? See previous answer.
But I am confident that the worship wars are long over, and we are slowly coming to see that worship is not a musical style, but a lifestyle. And the more the Spirit leads us to the Truth that can only be found in relationship with Jesus (to a Christian, ANYTHING else would be a lie)...the less we will care about how awesome the music was, and the more we will care about how awesome God is. And as the words of an OLD hymn put it..."How can I keep from singing." Drums are optional.
Now I know exactly what he was asking. The normal answers are "traditional," "contemporary" or "blended." And how one answers the question determines if their congregation is made up of old farts (traditional), emergent 20/30-somethings (contemporary) or a congregation of old farts trying desperately to attract emergent 20/30-somethings (blended).
I understood the question, but my answer was not what my fellow man-of-the-cloth was looking for. Without missing a beat, I answered "We have two styles of worship...we worship in both spirit AND in truth."
Now my new-found friend understood the reference. Jesus tells a Samaritan woman "But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (John 4:23-24). But what he really wanted to know was...do we use drums and guitar, or just piano and organ?
But the problem I have is that if one more person tells me that the only way to attract young worshipers is to mirror the contemporary styles of music, they will run the risk of me sending them to worship Jesus face to face. For while I totally agree that contemporary styles of music are the inevitable outcome of a worship lifestyle that is Spirit lead and truthful, it is almost NEVER the other way around.
Music and lyrics can go a long way as a teaching tool for believers...perhaps even a better tool than the sermon. And music that is familiar and enjoyable is far more likely to attract a new believer than a Gregorian Chant. But if the "church experience" isn't firmly rooted in the teaching of the inclusive, unconditional love of God, and the need to live that love out loud in community, then the music is nothing more than that...music.
And as for the notion that young adults will only worship if the music sounds like a U-2 concert (I wish), all one need do is look at the thousands of teens and young adults that are drawn to worship settings like Imago Dei, or Taize in France. Settings where the worship occurs in ancient hymns, chants and long periods of total silence. Young, emergent, post-modern worshipers who are attracted to the opportunity to become those worshipers Jesus told the Samaritan woman the Father seeks.
The truth be told (did I mention pastors often lie), the musical style used for worship in my congregations is mostly contemporary, with an occasional old hymn thrown in as a peace offering to the senior members of the community. Do we worship in Spirit and in Truth? Yes...no...sometimes...maybe...not often enough. As a pastor and a musician, am I happy with our weekly worship experience? See previous answer.
But I am confident that the worship wars are long over, and we are slowly coming to see that worship is not a musical style, but a lifestyle. And the more the Spirit leads us to the Truth that can only be found in relationship with Jesus (to a Christian, ANYTHING else would be a lie)...the less we will care about how awesome the music was, and the more we will care about how awesome God is. And as the words of an OLD hymn put it..."How can I keep from singing." Drums are optional.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
R E S P E C T
MSNBC: President Barack Obama placed a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington National Cemetery
FOX News: Suspected Muslim places suspicious device on government property.
This comparison may be a bit extreme, but considering some of the recent emails I've received, or worse, some of the comments I've read on major news sites, there is a large segment of society that would relate to the fictitious FOX News heading. The over-the-top hatred for the current president is only slightly greater than the hatred and contempt for the previous president.
Now let's get a couple of things straight. First, I don't care who you voted for or what political party you belong to. Someone voted for the current president, and if it wasn't you...GET OVER IT. Nobody is telling you to agree with him. But I am reminding you that that no matter how many rants you forward on the internet, he is still going to be the president tomorrow.
Second, let's weed a couple of folk out of this discussion who aren't going to understand it anyway.
If you are still a birther...you are too stupid to vote or contribute to intelligent conversation. Go away!
If you still believe the current president is a Muslim...ditto.
There...with all that said (and hopefully the wackos have left the site in a huff), let's talk about the utter lack of respect that permeates the internet when the name of Barack Obama is mentioned. The level of juvenile, crass, and otherwise mindless comments that Christians post on blogs, emails and facebook, shocks and offends even a cranky old curmudgeon like myself. My father's words regarding the president still ring in my ears years after I made an inappropriate comment regarding a former president. "You don't have to like the man, but you damn well better respect the office!"
I believe that, as a Christian, I need to do more than just "respect" the highest office in the land. I have a responsibility to the man himself. The Apostle Paul sets the tone when he writes in Romans 13:1-2 "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves."
Paul later will write to Timothy (1 Timothy 2:1-3) "I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior..."
So, with Paul's words in mind, let me ask this question. If you are praying, making intercession for, and giving thanks for the president of the United States (as Paul commands)...how likely are you to forward me a picture of a monkey with Barrack Obama's face photoshopped in? Or the photo of him wearing devil horns? Or a Nazi uniform? Bottom line...how easy is it to hate someone you are routinely praying for?
And BTW, if you are NOT routinely praying and giving thanks for Barrack Obama, what part of "This is good, and pleases God our Savior..." did you not understand?
FOX News: Suspected Muslim places suspicious device on government property.
This comparison may be a bit extreme, but considering some of the recent emails I've received, or worse, some of the comments I've read on major news sites, there is a large segment of society that would relate to the fictitious FOX News heading. The over-the-top hatred for the current president is only slightly greater than the hatred and contempt for the previous president.
Now let's get a couple of things straight. First, I don't care who you voted for or what political party you belong to. Someone voted for the current president, and if it wasn't you...GET OVER IT. Nobody is telling you to agree with him. But I am reminding you that that no matter how many rants you forward on the internet, he is still going to be the president tomorrow.
Second, let's weed a couple of folk out of this discussion who aren't going to understand it anyway.
If you are still a birther...you are too stupid to vote or contribute to intelligent conversation. Go away!
If you still believe the current president is a Muslim...ditto.
There...with all that said (and hopefully the wackos have left the site in a huff), let's talk about the utter lack of respect that permeates the internet when the name of Barack Obama is mentioned. The level of juvenile, crass, and otherwise mindless comments that Christians post on blogs, emails and facebook, shocks and offends even a cranky old curmudgeon like myself. My father's words regarding the president still ring in my ears years after I made an inappropriate comment regarding a former president. "You don't have to like the man, but you damn well better respect the office!"
I believe that, as a Christian, I need to do more than just "respect" the highest office in the land. I have a responsibility to the man himself. The Apostle Paul sets the tone when he writes in Romans 13:1-2 "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves."
Paul later will write to Timothy (1 Timothy 2:1-3) "I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior..."
So, with Paul's words in mind, let me ask this question. If you are praying, making intercession for, and giving thanks for the president of the United States (as Paul commands)...how likely are you to forward me a picture of a monkey with Barrack Obama's face photoshopped in? Or the photo of him wearing devil horns? Or a Nazi uniform? Bottom line...how easy is it to hate someone you are routinely praying for?
And BTW, if you are NOT routinely praying and giving thanks for Barrack Obama, what part of "This is good, and pleases God our Savior..." did you not understand?
Friday, May 13, 2011
"Slut" is a Good Thing?
For years I had a cartoon on my wall depicting two naked women (tastefully drawn) walking down a city street, past a busy construction site. As the men whistled and cheered, the one woman says to the other "Men are such animals!"
Let's pause for a moment while all the men reading this think "Yea....and?"
In case you missed it, thousands of women in several countries have gathered over the past couple of weeks to participate in "Slut Walks." All in response to controversial comments made by a police constable earlier this year. In January, Toronto Police Const. Michael Sanguinetti told a personal security class at York University that "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized."
Another brief pause while all the men reading this think "Yea....and?"
Now, before anyone reading this blows a gasket, we all agree that NOTHING, including dressing like a slut, gives a man a right to victimize a woman. A women walking down a dark street half naked is not "inviting" sexual assault, any more that a well-dressed white guy walking the streets of Compton, CA is "inviting" a carload of gang members to repeatedly shoot him. One should never lead to the other.
Unfortunately, one DOES sometimes lead to the other.
If I were to suggest that a white male...exposing himself to the pent up rage of an impoverished ethnic community...was acting irresponsibly, few would be quick to disagree. But make the same suggestion that a woman should take some degree of responsibility for her actions, and a group of angry women in fishnets and leather pushup corsets are protesting on my front lawn. I wouldn't mind that much, but my wife might take exception and it would frustrate the dog.
Which brings us back to the notion that all men are animals. (Yea....and?) Whether we like it or not, men were designed to respond to visual stimuli. Don't blame me, blame God. In his infinite wisdom, God designed the male brain with such a strong visual turn on, that walking by two grapefruit in a bowl will cause a man to forget why he came into the room. Perhaps God thought women might one day need a little help dragging their husbands from in front of the TV during March Madness.
Whatever the reason, dressing like a slut (think hooker, tramp, bimbo, hootchi, etc.) is not going to solve the age-old problem of men acting in totally inappropriate ways. Men need to be taught, from childhood, that what a woman wears (or doesn't) NEVER gives him the right to touch. On the other hand, women need to be taught, from childhood, that even good, decent, Christian men are still men. One study says that adolescent males have some form of sexual thought every 29 seconds, to which most men reply "That long?"
At our church camp we ask the young ladies to give the guys a break. One-piece swimsuits don't solve all the problems, but at least it's a start. But when so much of the clothing available to young women these days is designed to sexualize them, it's often a losing battle. How do you explain to the thirteen-year-old that while you are grateful that she purchased a new swimsuit just for camp, it would have been nice if the swimsuit designer had not chosen to accent the color of the suit by placing a color burst radiating a few inches from the crotch. Watching boys and grown men walk into utility poles (either from looking, or trying to not look) is only amusing for a few moments. And don't get me started about sweatpants designers who insist on putting their name on the backside of young girls.
So if women in Canada and the U.S. want to wear their Victoria Secret purchases in public, who am I to stop them. I get the point...the little black dress is not an open invitation to grope. But I must admit that I'm half tempted to begin carrying one dollar bills in my wallet. Because if you are going to dress like a stripper, then the only polite thing for me to do is come up to you and tip.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a strange craving for grapefruit.
Let's pause for a moment while all the men reading this think "Yea....and?"
In case you missed it, thousands of women in several countries have gathered over the past couple of weeks to participate in "Slut Walks." All in response to controversial comments made by a police constable earlier this year. In January, Toronto Police Const. Michael Sanguinetti told a personal security class at York University that "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized."
Another brief pause while all the men reading this think "Yea....and?"
Now, before anyone reading this blows a gasket, we all agree that NOTHING, including dressing like a slut, gives a man a right to victimize a woman. A women walking down a dark street half naked is not "inviting" sexual assault, any more that a well-dressed white guy walking the streets of Compton, CA is "inviting" a carload of gang members to repeatedly shoot him. One should never lead to the other.
Unfortunately, one DOES sometimes lead to the other.
If I were to suggest that a white male...exposing himself to the pent up rage of an impoverished ethnic community...was acting irresponsibly, few would be quick to disagree. But make the same suggestion that a woman should take some degree of responsibility for her actions, and a group of angry women in fishnets and leather pushup corsets are protesting on my front lawn. I wouldn't mind that much, but my wife might take exception and it would frustrate the dog.
Which brings us back to the notion that all men are animals. (Yea....and?) Whether we like it or not, men were designed to respond to visual stimuli. Don't blame me, blame God. In his infinite wisdom, God designed the male brain with such a strong visual turn on, that walking by two grapefruit in a bowl will cause a man to forget why he came into the room. Perhaps God thought women might one day need a little help dragging their husbands from in front of the TV during March Madness.
Whatever the reason, dressing like a slut (think hooker, tramp, bimbo, hootchi, etc.) is not going to solve the age-old problem of men acting in totally inappropriate ways. Men need to be taught, from childhood, that what a woman wears (or doesn't) NEVER gives him the right to touch. On the other hand, women need to be taught, from childhood, that even good, decent, Christian men are still men. One study says that adolescent males have some form of sexual thought every 29 seconds, to which most men reply "That long?"
At our church camp we ask the young ladies to give the guys a break. One-piece swimsuits don't solve all the problems, but at least it's a start. But when so much of the clothing available to young women these days is designed to sexualize them, it's often a losing battle. How do you explain to the thirteen-year-old that while you are grateful that she purchased a new swimsuit just for camp, it would have been nice if the swimsuit designer had not chosen to accent the color of the suit by placing a color burst radiating a few inches from the crotch. Watching boys and grown men walk into utility poles (either from looking, or trying to not look) is only amusing for a few moments. And don't get me started about sweatpants designers who insist on putting their name on the backside of young girls.
So if women in Canada and the U.S. want to wear their Victoria Secret purchases in public, who am I to stop them. I get the point...the little black dress is not an open invitation to grope. But I must admit that I'm half tempted to begin carrying one dollar bills in my wallet. Because if you are going to dress like a stripper, then the only polite thing for me to do is come up to you and tip.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a strange craving for grapefruit.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Lord's Supper and Car Wash
There is a story in the Gospel account of John where Jesus does something so bizarre…so astounding…that it leaves some of his followers confused and speechless. Their Rabbi…their teacher…their Lord…gets down on his knees and washes their feet. Then he tells them they will be blessed if they do the same for each other.
Now there is not a single written account of any of the early followers of Jesus washing each other’s feet. The other Gospel writers don’t even bother to mention the event. And there is a good possibility that what Jesus was demonstrating was not proper foot hygiene, but rather, the need to serve each other.
Nevertheless, for most of my life, I participated in an annual “footwashing” ceremony, where I would find myself on my knees pouring water over the foot of some other member of my congregation—usually selected at random. Then (even worse) I would have to let them wash my feet. While I may have learned a degree of humility from this practice, the “creepy” factor usually won out.
This year I gave the leadership team of my church the opportunity to give a thumbs up or thumbs down on a footwashing ceremony during our annual Lord’s Supper celebration. The response was mixed, and there was some amount of debate. But in the middle of it all, one member made an awesome suggestion.
She pointed out the fact that what made Jesus’ act so relevant to his disciples was that their feet were their main form of transportation. Sure, they rode the occasional donkey. But their feet were what carried then through the dusty countryside of Palestine.
Her suggestion was a simple one. If we were to follow Jesus’ example…and make the event relevant to our time and culture…we should wash each other’s car, not their feet. Brilliant! An act of service that actually MEANS something. Few of us wear open sandals and walk on dirt (and other “stuff”). But we all drive cars, and they get dirty.
We couldn’t pull it off this year. Not enough time. But if I have anything to say about it next year, we are seriously going to look into planning our first annual Lord’s Supper and Car Wash. Bread, wine, the Good News story, and buckets of soapy water.
In the meantime, perhaps you might want to follow Jesus’ example yourself. Wash a car. Mow a lawn. Find some way to lay down your life in service to a brother or sister. By this shall they know that you are a follower of Christ…
And I’m sure the promise of blessing if you do this still applies.
Now there is not a single written account of any of the early followers of Jesus washing each other’s feet. The other Gospel writers don’t even bother to mention the event. And there is a good possibility that what Jesus was demonstrating was not proper foot hygiene, but rather, the need to serve each other.
Nevertheless, for most of my life, I participated in an annual “footwashing” ceremony, where I would find myself on my knees pouring water over the foot of some other member of my congregation—usually selected at random. Then (even worse) I would have to let them wash my feet. While I may have learned a degree of humility from this practice, the “creepy” factor usually won out.
This year I gave the leadership team of my church the opportunity to give a thumbs up or thumbs down on a footwashing ceremony during our annual Lord’s Supper celebration. The response was mixed, and there was some amount of debate. But in the middle of it all, one member made an awesome suggestion.
She pointed out the fact that what made Jesus’ act so relevant to his disciples was that their feet were their main form of transportation. Sure, they rode the occasional donkey. But their feet were what carried then through the dusty countryside of Palestine.
Her suggestion was a simple one. If we were to follow Jesus’ example…and make the event relevant to our time and culture…we should wash each other’s car, not their feet. Brilliant! An act of service that actually MEANS something. Few of us wear open sandals and walk on dirt (and other “stuff”). But we all drive cars, and they get dirty.
We couldn’t pull it off this year. Not enough time. But if I have anything to say about it next year, we are seriously going to look into planning our first annual Lord’s Supper and Car Wash. Bread, wine, the Good News story, and buckets of soapy water.
In the meantime, perhaps you might want to follow Jesus’ example yourself. Wash a car. Mow a lawn. Find some way to lay down your life in service to a brother or sister. By this shall they know that you are a follower of Christ…
And I’m sure the promise of blessing if you do this still applies.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Human Life as a Bottom Line Item
(The following is a requested reprint of a newletter article I wrote a couple of weeks ago. Their idea was that by including the article here, another eight or nine people could read it.)
Most of us believe that a personal budget is a good idea. Few of us actually have one. In spite of all the advice from financial gurus like Dave Ramsey, Larry Burkett and Ron Blue, the closest we come is "the money comes in...and we spend it." And our personal debt grows in the process.
So when I got sucked into a discussion the other day regarding our nations budget, and our need to reduce our national debt, I once again found myself standing in the middle of the road as an obstacle to the bandwagon on which everyone else in the conversation was happy to ride. The Republicans are cutting the deficit by millions. That's a good thing, right? Not if those "not in my backyard" cuts cost the lives of thousands in third world countries.
And the proposed cut of $363 million to the President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and the 40% cut to the Global Fund will do just that. If the Republican controlled congress signs off on these cuts, they will, without question, become the very death panel they were so worried about.
These two programs, created by a Republican President in 2002, have treated more than 3.2 million AIDS patients worldwide though local hospitals and nongovernmental organizations. The program has changed the course of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in seven short years, increasing the number of patients receiving antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) from 50,000 before the program began to more than 3.2 million since. Drugs to pregnant mothers have prevented the transmission of the virus to 140,000 babies.
PEPFAR officers estimate that 400,000 HIV/AIDS patients who were supposed to begin treatment will not be able to under the proposed cuts. And 100,000 fewer mothers will receive services to prevent transmission to their babies--which PEPFAR estimates means 20,000 more babies will be born with HIV.
Ambassador Eric Goosby, head of PEPFAR and the U.S. Global AIDS coordinator, laid out the stark result of the proposed cuts in an interview: "They're going to Kill a lot of people, flat out." The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Catholic Relief Services put it this way: "Cuts at the level being considered will result in the loss of innocent lives". And Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee wrote this: "The proposed cuts in the House spending package would have devastating implications for these policies and for our humanitarian agenda as a whole. Simply put, these cuts will cost lives."
The Bush administration designated the foreign aid budget, including PEPFAR, as nation security spending, which could protect it from the congressional axe. House Republicans, however, have found a way around this protection. Why? House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., explained it this way: "I just don't think global health, as important as that may be...belongs in this national security budget."
A balanced budget is a wonderful goal. And I understand the pressure Republicans are under from their constituents to do "something." But imagine this for a moment. What if Dave Ramsey tells you... in addition to cutting up your credit cards and avoiding all high interest loans... the best way to balance your family budget is to stop feeding one of your children.
Think of the savings! Your financial bottom line will look so much better. But at what cost?
Consider me old fashioned, but I can't help believing that the Christian response to our own national financial woes has to look beyond just making a group of angry, under-educated voters happy. Cut funding to NPR if you must. Cut funding to State's Educational and Cultural Exchange programs (a $350 million dollar savings just over the next several months). Make the hard cuts, if necessary.
But ANY yes vote on the currently proposed budget cuts is, in my opinion, an act of murder. The children who will certainly die may not live in Oregon, or Wisconsin. But as members of the greater global community, they are our children, non-the-less.
Most of us believe that a personal budget is a good idea. Few of us actually have one. In spite of all the advice from financial gurus like Dave Ramsey, Larry Burkett and Ron Blue, the closest we come is "the money comes in...and we spend it." And our personal debt grows in the process.
So when I got sucked into a discussion the other day regarding our nations budget, and our need to reduce our national debt, I once again found myself standing in the middle of the road as an obstacle to the bandwagon on which everyone else in the conversation was happy to ride. The Republicans are cutting the deficit by millions. That's a good thing, right? Not if those "not in my backyard" cuts cost the lives of thousands in third world countries.
And the proposed cut of $363 million to the President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and the 40% cut to the Global Fund will do just that. If the Republican controlled congress signs off on these cuts, they will, without question, become the very death panel they were so worried about.
These two programs, created by a Republican President in 2002, have treated more than 3.2 million AIDS patients worldwide though local hospitals and nongovernmental organizations. The program has changed the course of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in seven short years, increasing the number of patients receiving antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) from 50,000 before the program began to more than 3.2 million since. Drugs to pregnant mothers have prevented the transmission of the virus to 140,000 babies.
PEPFAR officers estimate that 400,000 HIV/AIDS patients who were supposed to begin treatment will not be able to under the proposed cuts. And 100,000 fewer mothers will receive services to prevent transmission to their babies--which PEPFAR estimates means 20,000 more babies will be born with HIV.
Ambassador Eric Goosby, head of PEPFAR and the U.S. Global AIDS coordinator, laid out the stark result of the proposed cuts in an interview: "They're going to Kill a lot of people, flat out." The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Catholic Relief Services put it this way: "Cuts at the level being considered will result in the loss of innocent lives". And Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee wrote this: "The proposed cuts in the House spending package would have devastating implications for these policies and for our humanitarian agenda as a whole. Simply put, these cuts will cost lives."
The Bush administration designated the foreign aid budget, including PEPFAR, as nation security spending, which could protect it from the congressional axe. House Republicans, however, have found a way around this protection. Why? House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., explained it this way: "I just don't think global health, as important as that may be...belongs in this national security budget."
A balanced budget is a wonderful goal. And I understand the pressure Republicans are under from their constituents to do "something." But imagine this for a moment. What if Dave Ramsey tells you... in addition to cutting up your credit cards and avoiding all high interest loans... the best way to balance your family budget is to stop feeding one of your children.
Think of the savings! Your financial bottom line will look so much better. But at what cost?
Consider me old fashioned, but I can't help believing that the Christian response to our own national financial woes has to look beyond just making a group of angry, under-educated voters happy. Cut funding to NPR if you must. Cut funding to State's Educational and Cultural Exchange programs (a $350 million dollar savings just over the next several months). Make the hard cuts, if necessary.
But ANY yes vote on the currently proposed budget cuts is, in my opinion, an act of murder. The children who will certainly die may not live in Oregon, or Wisconsin. But as members of the greater global community, they are our children, non-the-less.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Disney Princess Terrorists
I knew better. You fly enough, you should know the rules. When you go through the full-body scanner you must remove everything from your pockets. I forgot my wallet.
So here I am, watching a highly-trained TSA agent take my wallet apart (as if I might have a pound or two of ammonium nitrate explosive hidden between my family photo and my pastors' discount card for the Tree of Life bookstore) while another security "expert" is fondling my crotch and ass.
It's been a long trip. I'm not feeling all that well. My tolerance for morons in uniform is at a dangerous low. There is another flight out in a couple of hours if...for some reason...I should be "delayed." Everything is in perfect order for me to cause someone to regret their employment choice. All that is left is to decide on the appropriate volume for the coming tirade.
But before I can utter the brilliant (yet cutting) comment to the troll still amusing himself with my wallet, the calm of the security screening area is shattered by a loud male voice shouting "Are you f___ing KIDDING me?" A small child begins to wail, and the voice continues "This has got to be some kind of f___ing joke!"
Wow, I think. That is far better than the snarky comment I was going to make. As Charleston Hesston said in the Ten Commandments, when seeing the burning bush from a distance, "I must go and see this thing." So as I put on my shoes, belt, watch, cell phone, glasses (and what was left of my dignity), I moved to see what the commotion was about.
The short version of the story was this. Mom, Dad and (I'm guessing) four-year-old daughter are coming back from a trip to Disneyland. Daughter's souvenir from the trip was a Disney Princess snow globe. Disney princess snow globes are on the official TSA no-fly list, so a dutiful and ever-vigilant agent has taken the snow globe from the child's Little Mermaid backpack and has thrown it into the bin of other extremely dangerous confiscated liquids (mostly oversized bottles of mouthwash). Child is wailing, and Dad has crossed the line from annoyed to full-blown anger. Others in line are joining in verbal abuse of the TSA agent.
The scene resembled recent news reports from Egypt. Security agents were arriving from other screening stations. And I swear people in line were scanning the floor for rocks to throw. My participation was neither needed or called for, so I went on to catch my flight.
I shared the story will a fellow passenger. She looked at me smugly and declared "I feel for the little girl, but personally, I'm willing to do anything to make sure flying is safe."
Really? Anything? I can't wait to hear her response when someone inevitably smuggles an explosive device "inside" their body, where the scanners don't penetrate. Let's see if she feels safer after the rubber gloves are removed.
So we traumatize four-year-olds. We publicly embarrass a woman in the Portland airport, as a TSA agent makes her explain (in front of dozens of other passengers) that the bulk the agent is feeling during the pat-down is an adult Depends diaper. Or the elderly black man in Orlando that had to show the agent (and everyone else in line) his colostomy bag. Or the veteran forced at LAX to remove his prosthetic leg to go through the screening. Or the additional screening and the interview I had to endure because I made a last minute change to my flight schedule when I found out my Mom had passed away.
Do I feel safer now when I fly? I'll feel safer when we abandon the idiotic screening methods we use in this country (methods that have been proven over and over to not work). I'll feel safer when we adopt methods that do work. I'll feel safer when we stop groping little old ladies, and instead, take a hard look at every traveler who even appears to be of middle eastern decent. And if my darker skin and beard mean that I get groped more often, I'll live.
But I must admit...I would really like to see the Homeland Security briefing on Disney Princess terrorist. I'll bet anything that Princess Jasmine is the ringleader.
So here I am, watching a highly-trained TSA agent take my wallet apart (as if I might have a pound or two of ammonium nitrate explosive hidden between my family photo and my pastors' discount card for the Tree of Life bookstore) while another security "expert" is fondling my crotch and ass.
It's been a long trip. I'm not feeling all that well. My tolerance for morons in uniform is at a dangerous low. There is another flight out in a couple of hours if...for some reason...I should be "delayed." Everything is in perfect order for me to cause someone to regret their employment choice. All that is left is to decide on the appropriate volume for the coming tirade.
But before I can utter the brilliant (yet cutting) comment to the troll still amusing himself with my wallet, the calm of the security screening area is shattered by a loud male voice shouting "Are you f___ing KIDDING me?" A small child begins to wail, and the voice continues "This has got to be some kind of f___ing joke!"
Wow, I think. That is far better than the snarky comment I was going to make. As Charleston Hesston said in the Ten Commandments, when seeing the burning bush from a distance, "I must go and see this thing." So as I put on my shoes, belt, watch, cell phone, glasses (and what was left of my dignity), I moved to see what the commotion was about.
The short version of the story was this. Mom, Dad and (I'm guessing) four-year-old daughter are coming back from a trip to Disneyland. Daughter's souvenir from the trip was a Disney Princess snow globe. Disney princess snow globes are on the official TSA no-fly list, so a dutiful and ever-vigilant agent has taken the snow globe from the child's Little Mermaid backpack and has thrown it into the bin of other extremely dangerous confiscated liquids (mostly oversized bottles of mouthwash). Child is wailing, and Dad has crossed the line from annoyed to full-blown anger. Others in line are joining in verbal abuse of the TSA agent.
The scene resembled recent news reports from Egypt. Security agents were arriving from other screening stations. And I swear people in line were scanning the floor for rocks to throw. My participation was neither needed or called for, so I went on to catch my flight.
I shared the story will a fellow passenger. She looked at me smugly and declared "I feel for the little girl, but personally, I'm willing to do anything to make sure flying is safe."
Really? Anything? I can't wait to hear her response when someone inevitably smuggles an explosive device "inside" their body, where the scanners don't penetrate. Let's see if she feels safer after the rubber gloves are removed.
So we traumatize four-year-olds. We publicly embarrass a woman in the Portland airport, as a TSA agent makes her explain (in front of dozens of other passengers) that the bulk the agent is feeling during the pat-down is an adult Depends diaper. Or the elderly black man in Orlando that had to show the agent (and everyone else in line) his colostomy bag. Or the veteran forced at LAX to remove his prosthetic leg to go through the screening. Or the additional screening and the interview I had to endure because I made a last minute change to my flight schedule when I found out my Mom had passed away.
Do I feel safer now when I fly? I'll feel safer when we abandon the idiotic screening methods we use in this country (methods that have been proven over and over to not work). I'll feel safer when we adopt methods that do work. I'll feel safer when we stop groping little old ladies, and instead, take a hard look at every traveler who even appears to be of middle eastern decent. And if my darker skin and beard mean that I get groped more often, I'll live.
But I must admit...I would really like to see the Homeland Security briefing on Disney Princess terrorist. I'll bet anything that Princess Jasmine is the ringleader.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Kill All the Heretics
Rob Bell is at it again. The likes of John Piper and Mark Driscoll are sharpening the executioner's axe. And if the volume of references (over 20,000 at last Google count) to an article by Justin Taylor are any indication, the orthodox religious types are gathering in the village square to witness a good old fashion beheading.
So what did Bell do this time to justify such fervent cry of "Off with his head?" We don't really know, because the book that has neo-Calvinists like Piper and Driscoll up in arms hasn't actually been released yet. About all we have is a short promo video and the following description from the publisher.
“Fans flock to his Facebook page, his NOOMA videos have been viewed by millions, and his Sunday sermons are attended by 10,000 parishioners – with a downloadable podcast reaching 50,000 more. An electrifying, unconventional pastor whom Time magazine calls ‘a singular rock star in the church world’, Rob Bell is the most vibrant, central religious leader of the millennial generation. Now, in Love Wins: Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, Bell addresses one of the most controversial issues of faith – the afterlife – arguing that a loving God would never sentence human souls to eternal suffering. With searing insight, Bell puts hell on trial, and his message is decidedly optimistic – eternal life doesn’t start when we die; it starts right now. And ultimately, Love Wins.”
Based on this, Piper tweets to his loyal following "@JohnPiper “Farwell Rob Bell. http://dsr.gd/fZqmd8”. And the link at the end of the tweet is a link to an article by Justin Taylor, who states, “It is unspeakably sad when those called to be ministers of the Word distort the gospel and deceive the people of God with false doctrine.” Taylor goes on to quote 2 Corinthians 11:14–15 (14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. 15 So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.)
So there you have it. We have no other choice but to kill the heretics before they can do any damage to the movement. And I use the word "movement" intentionally, because killing anyone who might disagree with the early followers of Luther and Calvin seemed to be standard operating procedure. Consider the two following quotes.
“Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to death will knowingly and willingly incur their very guilt.”
And this one:
“Anyone who can be proved to be a seditious person is an outlaw before God and the emperor; and whoever is the first to put him to death does right and well. For if a man is in open rebellion, everyone is both his judge and the executioner; just as when a fire starts, the first man who can put it out is the best man to do the job.”
The first is from John Calvin (after the execution of Servetus for preaching a non-Trinitarian understanding of God). The second is from Martin Luther encouraging the slaughter of peasants (often Anabaptist Christians).” And while John Piper has yet to call for the slaughter of liberal theologians, his "death before debate" approach to the writings of those like Rob Bell and Brian McLaren shows that little has changed over the centuries.
Is Bell a Universalist, as Piper and Taylor claim? I don't think so, but unlike them, I'll need to wait to read the book before I pass judgment. And even then, I think calling Bell a servant of Satan is a little over the top. Even without reading Love Wins: Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived I'm fairly certain that Rob Bell's Hell has a lot fewer inhabitants than Piper's. But then, I don't need Bell to tell me that. All I have to do is actually read scripture. That approach would work for Piper and Driscoll if they could ever take their John Calvin glasses off for a moment.
So what did Bell do this time to justify such fervent cry of "Off with his head?" We don't really know, because the book that has neo-Calvinists like Piper and Driscoll up in arms hasn't actually been released yet. About all we have is a short promo video and the following description from the publisher.
“Fans flock to his Facebook page, his NOOMA videos have been viewed by millions, and his Sunday sermons are attended by 10,000 parishioners – with a downloadable podcast reaching 50,000 more. An electrifying, unconventional pastor whom Time magazine calls ‘a singular rock star in the church world’, Rob Bell is the most vibrant, central religious leader of the millennial generation. Now, in Love Wins: Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, Bell addresses one of the most controversial issues of faith – the afterlife – arguing that a loving God would never sentence human souls to eternal suffering. With searing insight, Bell puts hell on trial, and his message is decidedly optimistic – eternal life doesn’t start when we die; it starts right now. And ultimately, Love Wins.”
Based on this, Piper tweets to his loyal following "@JohnPiper “Farwell Rob Bell. http://dsr.gd/fZqmd8”. And the link at the end of the tweet is a link to an article by Justin Taylor, who states, “It is unspeakably sad when those called to be ministers of the Word distort the gospel and deceive the people of God with false doctrine.” Taylor goes on to quote 2 Corinthians 11:14–15 (14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. 15 So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.)
So there you have it. We have no other choice but to kill the heretics before they can do any damage to the movement. And I use the word "movement" intentionally, because killing anyone who might disagree with the early followers of Luther and Calvin seemed to be standard operating procedure. Consider the two following quotes.
“Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to death will knowingly and willingly incur their very guilt.”
And this one:
“Anyone who can be proved to be a seditious person is an outlaw before God and the emperor; and whoever is the first to put him to death does right and well. For if a man is in open rebellion, everyone is both his judge and the executioner; just as when a fire starts, the first man who can put it out is the best man to do the job.”
The first is from John Calvin (after the execution of Servetus for preaching a non-Trinitarian understanding of God). The second is from Martin Luther encouraging the slaughter of peasants (often Anabaptist Christians).” And while John Piper has yet to call for the slaughter of liberal theologians, his "death before debate" approach to the writings of those like Rob Bell and Brian McLaren shows that little has changed over the centuries.
Is Bell a Universalist, as Piper and Taylor claim? I don't think so, but unlike them, I'll need to wait to read the book before I pass judgment. And even then, I think calling Bell a servant of Satan is a little over the top. Even without reading Love Wins: Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived I'm fairly certain that Rob Bell's Hell has a lot fewer inhabitants than Piper's. But then, I don't need Bell to tell me that. All I have to do is actually read scripture. That approach would work for Piper and Driscoll if they could ever take their John Calvin glasses off for a moment.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
The End of the World As We Know It
Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I've tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.
Fire and Ice - Robert Frost
OK, everyone...mark your calendar. Jesus is returning on May 21st of this year. I know because I heard Harold Camping tell me so on Family Christian Radio last night. Of course Mr. Camping also predicted Christ's return in 1994, but every prophet is entitled to one missed prediction, right? (If anyone is interested, we are planning an "end of the world" party for May 20th. You're all invited)
Harold is certainly not the first to predict the date for the end of the world. Joachim of Fiore announced to Richard the Lionhearted in 1191 that the Antichrist had been born, and the end would shortly follow. The Taborites waited for Christ's return in February of 1420. Melchior Hofmann predicted the end of the world as we know it in 1533. If you want to irritate a Seventh Day Adventist, mention the Millerites ("I am fully convinced that somewhere between March 21st, 1843 and March 21st, 1844, according to the Jewish mode of computation, Christ will come"). When that didn't pan out, William Miller changed the date to October 22, 1844. And I know a number of groups that get a little hot if you point out that televangelist Herbert Armstrong blew a couple of end of the age predictions.
But it must be the end of the world, right? There is unrest in the Middle East (like that has never happened before). Birds are falling from the sky (forget the fact that there have been an average of 165 bird die-offs reported every year). The economy is in the toilet (it's almost as bad as it was in the 80's). And Justin Beiber has a new movie in the theaters (OK, now I'm worried a little).
So why? Why do I, at least once every couple of weeks, have to listen to someone telling me all the reasons the end is near?
There are a lot of reasons I can think of. Fear. Frustration. Ignorance. Glenn Beck (wait, I already listed him in a previous reason). But I really believe the driving force behind prediction addiction is a burning desire to be let off the hook. If Jesus is coming back tomorrow, then I don't have to do anything today.
I don't have to worry about the conditions in my community...Jesus will fix it all when He gets here.
There really isn't enough time to share the good news the Jesus desires a relationship with my neighbor...my neighbor will have to figure that out when the trumpet sounds, and by then I hope to be out of here.
Global warming and the environment...it's all going to be toast shortly.
There is a story of a young monk who confronted St. Francis as he worked in his garden. "Brother Francis, if you knew our Lord was returning tomorrow, what would you do today" he enquired. St. Francis simple replied "I would finish weeding my garden."
If Jesus returns in May...awesome! If He comes back before April 15th, even better. But until then (whenever "then" may be) I have some weeding to do.
Some say in ice.
From what I've tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.
Fire and Ice - Robert Frost
OK, everyone...mark your calendar. Jesus is returning on May 21st of this year. I know because I heard Harold Camping tell me so on Family Christian Radio last night. Of course Mr. Camping also predicted Christ's return in 1994, but every prophet is entitled to one missed prediction, right? (If anyone is interested, we are planning an "end of the world" party for May 20th. You're all invited)
Harold is certainly not the first to predict the date for the end of the world. Joachim of Fiore announced to Richard the Lionhearted in 1191 that the Antichrist had been born, and the end would shortly follow. The Taborites waited for Christ's return in February of 1420. Melchior Hofmann predicted the end of the world as we know it in 1533. If you want to irritate a Seventh Day Adventist, mention the Millerites ("I am fully convinced that somewhere between March 21st, 1843 and March 21st, 1844, according to the Jewish mode of computation, Christ will come"). When that didn't pan out, William Miller changed the date to October 22, 1844. And I know a number of groups that get a little hot if you point out that televangelist Herbert Armstrong blew a couple of end of the age predictions.
But it must be the end of the world, right? There is unrest in the Middle East (like that has never happened before). Birds are falling from the sky (forget the fact that there have been an average of 165 bird die-offs reported every year). The economy is in the toilet (it's almost as bad as it was in the 80's). And Justin Beiber has a new movie in the theaters (OK, now I'm worried a little).
So why? Why do I, at least once every couple of weeks, have to listen to someone telling me all the reasons the end is near?
There are a lot of reasons I can think of. Fear. Frustration. Ignorance. Glenn Beck (wait, I already listed him in a previous reason). But I really believe the driving force behind prediction addiction is a burning desire to be let off the hook. If Jesus is coming back tomorrow, then I don't have to do anything today.
I don't have to worry about the conditions in my community...Jesus will fix it all when He gets here.
There really isn't enough time to share the good news the Jesus desires a relationship with my neighbor...my neighbor will have to figure that out when the trumpet sounds, and by then I hope to be out of here.
Global warming and the environment...it's all going to be toast shortly.
There is a story of a young monk who confronted St. Francis as he worked in his garden. "Brother Francis, if you knew our Lord was returning tomorrow, what would you do today" he enquired. St. Francis simple replied "I would finish weeding my garden."
If Jesus returns in May...awesome! If He comes back before April 15th, even better. But until then (whenever "then" may be) I have some weeding to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)