Naked or Nekid?

I believe it was Jeff Foxworthy who taught us all the difference between the word "naked" and the redneck word "nekid." Naked means you have no clothes on. Nekid means you have no clothes on and you're up to something.

In a world where we are constantly bombarded by pictures of nekid women on the cover of magazines, the current issue of Elle Magazine features a picture of a naked (and very pregnant) Jessica Simpson. Now as a man, I know that ANYTHING I write on this subject will be biased and perverted. I have an X and a Y chromosome, and according to most women today, that is all I'm capable of rising to (don't go there) when discussing the subject of female nudity.

So instead of allowing my testosterone to get me in trouble, I instead direct you to the current post on the Christianity Today blog for women...Her-meneutics... titled The Best Naked Pregnant Woman on a Magazine Cover.

(http://blog.christianitytoday.com/women/2012/03/the_best_naked_pregnant_woman_1.html )

Whether you agree with the article or not, take the time to read the comments section. Flame after flame, written by good Christian women (hey, that would be a good name for a television show) who obviously disagree with Caryn Rivadeneira's praise of the cover. Women far more concerned about the marital status of Ms. Simpson. Where is her shame? How can Christianity Today justify the glorification of adultery and sin? The naked (not nekid) female form should never be put on display.

I'll let the article, and the comments, speak for themselves. But I would like to ask a fundamental question. Since God created man and woman naked...and looked upon His creation and declared it to be good...how would nudity be looked at if Eve hadn't succumbed to the lies of Satan in the form of a serpent?

Having traveled to countries where public nudity is a non-issue, and the pregnant female form is almost worshiped, I have to wonder if many of those commenting on the Her-meneutics blog are aware that they are regurgitating some of the same lies that Satan has been foisting off on mankind since the fall in the Garden? That the naked female form...and by extension (once again, don't go there)...the naked male form are things to be hidden. That we simply cannot control our urges and lust, so the only other option is a burka.

Don't you find it curious that in all the admonitions to sexual purity in the writings of the Apostle Paul, he never comments on the fact that public nudity was common and accepted throughout most of the Greco-Roman culture. Even among the more modest Jews, baptism took place in the nude. Jesus does not tell his followers to never look at a woman (a teaching of the Pharisees) but rather, to never look at a woman with lustful intent.

The tree that Adam and Eve ate from was the tree of the knowledge of good AND evil. Up to that point, they had only known good. It is interesting that it is only after they come to know evil that they become ashamed of their bodies. And if you continue reading, it is God himself who makes them clothing. God is the original fashion designer. But you have to wonder if God's heart wept as he watched man and woman cover up His creation.

Yes, we live in a fallen, broken world. And yes, the lust of man (and woman) have grown strong. But is that God's fault, or Satan's ? In parts of the world that have not been corrupted by the Victorian Ethic...which told us that ANYTHING related to the body or bodily functions is evil...the sight of a man or woman bathing in a stream or lying on the beach has little effect. In our culture, a man walking by a bowl with two grapefruit suddenly feels the need for a cold shower. Is that God's fault or Satan's.

We must always be reminded that it is BECAUSE we live in a world influenced by Satan that we must be careful in what we look at...or allow on the magazine covers in the supermarket. It is because we have totally sexualized the human body that we now have to be careful in how we allow our children to dress or act. It is expressly because Satan has influenced culture to define the perfect male and female form that we have to pay psychologist to help us with self-image and self-esteem issues.

Once upon a time the Creator of the universe looked upon the naked bodies of a man and a woman...and He said "It is good." I wonder if one day in the future, that same Creator will look upon the glorified bodies of those in His Kingdom and utter the same words. Some use bad exegesis to argue that there will not be male or female in the Kingdom. But I personally believe that a God who is the same yesterday, today and forever will stick with a good thing.

So when I finally see a copy of Elle magazine on a newsstand (the local market was pressured by complaints and have covered the display), I think I'll ignore the obvious airbrushing of stretch marks, and the lack of a wedding ring on Ms. Simpson's hand. Instead, I believe I'll offer up this simple prayer; "Way to go God...sorry we allowed Satan to screw it all up."

I Think I Might Be Wee-weed Up

I’m sitting in the Salt Lake City Airport, surrounded by Mormon assault troops in white shirts and ties, and I’m about to do something I never thought I would do (no, I’m not converting...one wife is enough). I’m about to agree with and quote Sarah Palin. From FOX News no less.

Her brilliant and insightful comments were in response to attacks on Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, after the Drudge Report published a message he gave in a church during the 2008 presidential campaign. Here is an excerpt from that message:

"This is a spiritual war. And the Father of Lies has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country - the United States of America. If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age?"


"Satan is attacking the great institutions of America, using those great vices of pride, vanity, and sensuality as the root to attack all of the strong plants that has so deeply rooted in the American tradition. He attacks all of us and he attacks all of our institutions."

Now if you are one of the Christians that make up roughly 82% of the U.S. population, you probably have little trouble with that statement. Even if you are just one of those folk who believe in Satan, even if you don’t believe in God (I know that doesn’t make much sense, but they are out there), then you probably have blamed Satan for the economy, terrorism and reality television.

But if you are in the mainstream media, Santorum’s statement…in a church, no less…make him a wild-eyed radical threat to all that make our nation great. And in the blogosphere, comments like the following abound:

From cqtestk4xs...Ooooh, do you believe in the great big bad Satan. He has his sights set on America. Does this sound a bit like some wild eyed fanatical religious jihadist Moslem to anyone besides me? The only thing is, it's some wild eyed religious Christian zealots who would like to be president. Scary, isn't it?

So why am I suddenly in agreement with Palin? No, this is not an endorsement for Santorum, Palin or FOX News. That said, I have to agree with Palin’s comments, even if I find her use of the English language a bit disturbing. So here we go...

"They will attack any conservatives who boldly proclaims their faith and talks about there is good in the world and there's evil in the world and that's what Rick Santorum was talking about," explained Palin. "And this was a speech that he gave back in 2008, where he named evil as Satan. And for these lame-stream media characters to get all wee-weed up about that, first you have to ask yourself, 'Have they ever attended a Sunday school class even? Have they never heard of this terminology before?" And that's why they got so, you know, just whacked out about the speech."

So there you have it...lame-stream media strikes again, and I’m wee-weed up. But I see a restroom sign just down the concourse, so I think I’m ok.

Then They Came For The Jews

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists,
and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.


Then they came for the Jews, and I did
not speak out — Because I was not a Jew.


Then they came for me — and there was
no one left to speak for me.


- German pastor Martin Niemoeller, reflecting on the Nazi terror


In a conversation the other day with a fellow pastor, the talk turned to the Obama Administration's refusal to grant religious organizations an exemption from purchasing health insurance that covers abortion-inducing drugs, surgical sterilization, and contraception. My companion's comment put this egregious and dangerous violation of religious liberty totally into perspective.

"Good for the Catholics! It's about time they get what they deserve for supporting such a liberal administration."

Since I've never discovered a polite way of telling someone they are dumber than a sack of turnips, I excused myself and went to the restroom. When I returned my friend was on his cell phone, and my urge to strangle him had passed.

Are we, who profess the evangelical Christian faith really so naive (the polite word for "dumber than a sack of turnips) as to believe that the president's recent decision only infringes on the Catholic Church's freedom of religion, and we are all somehow still safe? Is our Catholic bias so strong...and with it our apparent ignorance of our reformational origins...that it is somehow OK when discrimination happens to "them?"

At a time when New York City schools have given Christian churches until this weekend to find another place to meet, because while "religious services" are still permitted on school property, Christian "worship services" are now prohibited. (And yes, the Supreme Court has already refused to overturn this decision.)

At a time when the United States Air Force has removed the word "God" from their Rapid Capabilities logo. The previous moto read "Opus Dei Cum Pecunia Alienum Efficemus" (Doing God's Work with Other People's Money). It's now changed to "Miraculi Cum Pecunia Alienum Efficemus" (Doing Miracles with Other People's Money).

At a time when the Supreme Court has ruled that the will of the people of California regarding Proposition 8 (a ban against same-sex marriage) is unconstitutional...

At times like this, can we really ignore ANY shot fired at ANY portion of the Christian community? Why am I hearing talking heads on major Christian television networks making statements like "Well, we'll just have to see how the Catholic Church fares under these new rulings."

We evangelicals must follow the lead of men like Chuck Colson and stand unequivocally with our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters. Because when the government violates the religious liberty of one group, it threatens the religious liberty of all. We should be writing and calling our representatives and senators. Our voices should be heard along with those of Catholic bishops and university presidents.

Because if this bone-headed ruling is allowed to stand, what (or who) comes next? Tax exemptions? Clergy housing allowances? Requirements for ALL clergy to perform same-sex marriages or face fines (if you don't think that can happen, talk to some of our brothers and sisters in Canada).

Then they came for the Catholics, and I did
not speak out — Because I was not a Catholic.

R.E.S.P.E.C.T. or G.T.F.O.

When I was in the second grade my teacher, Mrs. Fauzy (Mrs Fuzzy behind her back) called my parents into a meeting to complain about how I was treating her. She told my father that I was to immediately cease from saying "Yes Ma'am" or "No Ma'am," as it made her feel "old." For what it's worth, she was old, but that is not the point. My father explained...very emphatically...to Mrs Fauzy that I had been taught to show respect by saying "Yes Ma'am" and "Yes Sir" and that I would continue to do so, regardless of what a teacher might expect. A letter to the school principal backed that statement up, and I really didn't care much for second grade after that.


I'm in my fifties now (I know...it's hard to believe), but that sense of respect still remains. I'm not so offended by the biting satire in some to the political posts that show up daily on Facebook. After all, find a candidate who DOESN'T have something to take a shot at. Our previous president made some of the most inane statements ever recorded in the White House. If I ever slaughter the English language that badly, my wife will have the comment printed on a T-shirt.

It's not the satire that bothers me. It's not even the mean-spirited attacks where an attack may be due. It's the total lack of respect for the office that is demonstrated by those who post, and those who respond. Not only is it destructive in this country, but it just adds fuel to the anti-American fire that burns around the world.

And let's face it...that fire doesn't really need any more fuel. We may be one of the greatest nations on the planet, but we still collectively do things that make us look dumber than the fans at a monster truck rally. We would love to be known for our humanitarian aid and constitutional freedom. Instead we are known for The Jersey Shore, TSA and soldiers urinating on dead Taliban fighters.

An old photo is circulating around Facebook of President Obama standing with his hands folded in the "fig leaf" position while everyone else on stage has their hand over their heart during the singing of the National Anthem. I'm not going to defend the President's actions. Granted, few people still do the hand-over-heart thing while singing (Google any sporting event and watch the crowd). And there are dozens of photos of the President WITH hand over heart. But President Obama is a politician, and as such, should know better. You always sample whatever the local cuisine throws at you...you always kiss the baby, no matter how ugly...and you always look patriotic, even if Rosanne Barr is singing. (I did watch the actual video, and to be honest, the way that singer was screeching out the words, I too would have been tempted to cover my crotch or my ears BEFORE covering my heart).

No, the President's actions deserve comment and criticism. But he is still the President of the United states, and those comments need to reflect that. Use the titles of President or Mr. Lose the cute slang pronunciations of the President's name. Stop showing your complete ignorance by using racial slurs. I get that you didn't vote for him, and you won't vote for him again. We all know that YOUR GUY would have already fixed the economy, saved the environment, created so many jobs we would have to import workers (thereby solving the immigration problems), and we would be drilling for oil in all the national parks. But until the next election, Barack Obama is still the President.

So if you post some political tirade to Facebook, fine. I'll look at it, and I may even hit the "like" button. But show the office the RESPECT deserved, regardless of the man. If not, don't be surprised to get a response from me tell in you to...as they would say in King James English...Get Thy Facebook in Order (What did you think the title of this blog meant?)

This Year Let's Boycott STUPID

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...

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.

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.