March 01, 2012
Fighting The System, Not The People
For anyone who may misunderstand, I'm not seeking to get people on my side of this idea. I'm not attacking Christians. I'm sharing my thoughts and my journey. I'm addressing the culture and system that encourages abuses like shaming and fear and control. I believe that many members of the Christian club are victims of this shame and fear and control. I believe I was victimized by the Christian culture and the people in it and so I walked away from it. I continue to be attacked by victims still within the system. They think they are trying to save me, and so their intentions are good and honest and loving, but they remain blind to their methods of shame and fear and guilt and control. I'm still figuring it all out, but you're welcome to join me as I hobble onward.
The Shame Game
I've been speaking about institutional Christianity, or the corporate church, or the establishment, or the Christian bubble...using different terms like this to try and describe the body of Christ followers that exists around the world. Maybe that was already clear, not sure. In the comments section of my post Everything Is Permissible I commented that "the institution will try to shame and control its members" to get them to comply with church doctrine and belief. One person who commented asked what church I was going to that acted this way. This post was originally just a reply back to that person, but ended up being so long and so good I decided to publish it here as a new post. What I mean by my comment that came into question is that it's not any particular church that I visit, but the corporate body of believers. The very structure and procedure and culture of Christian church today does what I described. How do they shame and control people? The very words and language and sentiments used are controlling, and when people speak up or speak out or rebuff it or try to assert a different philosophy or idea they are shamed for it.
Examples: Try telling people at some churches that having a beer is ok. They will quote verses and try to control the members by shaming them into compliance. I know it doesn't happen at all churches, but we all know it happens. People have been kicked out of churches for that and for even less than that. Try telling people at your church you believe in Universal Reconciliation, the idea that all will be saved and go to heaven one day. This one is tough because it's not heard that often, it's not yet a culturally acceptable difference of opinion. For most in the Christian community it's far-fetched and isn't taken seriously at all. Once they see you’re serious they start in with the same shame and control approach. So, I could go on and on with examples, but the point remains that the corporate body has fundamental problems.
They are supposed to be a body of people known for love, but they judge even their own members for straying in thought and deed. People aren't accepted as unique and creative individuals that are allowed to start to think differently than the Christian club they joined. If you start to think differently you are shamed for it and told to conform to the widely accepted doctrine of modern Christianity.
I get that every club has its beliefs and agenda. That's why clubs meet. And if you no longer believe in the purpose of the club or if you no longer share the same interests, then you should leave the club. It should be a mutual and loving departure though. Not a break in relationships, not a royal rumble. There doesn't have to be a falling out. But my wife and I have already seen it. We have already had tough conversations with people who have cautioned us, yelled at us, and warned us to not go down the path we're traveling. We don't believe in their version of the truth, we don't see the world through their spectacles anymore, we have a different perspective, and we can't ignore that. We have to follow our conscience if we're going to be honest with ourselves.
Can you imagine yourself doing anything that your church would have a problem with? If so, is the way the church treats people it has problems with acceptable to you? I don't believe people should be shamed, no matter their walk of life; sinner, saint, rich, poor, white, black, Christian, atheist, Muslim, gay, transgender, criminal, community volunteer, etc. Jesus summed up the law by saying love God and love your neighbor as yourself. I guess the reality is that people shame themselves and don't accept themselves, so in that regard they are loving their neighbor as they love themselves. They are filled with shame and handicapped from it. It's ok to be ashamed. By ashamed I mean feeling bad about your own actions that didn't measure up to your own high standards. But to be shamed by someone else is wrong. It's not anyone's place to shame me, whether I failed miserably or not. It's ok for people to feel hurt by my actions, to feel sad by my actions, to feel angry by my actions, but it's wrong for them to turn those feelings into a weapon and to shame me for it. And that's what virtually all people do. I can't think of a single person not handicapped by shame to some degree. It's become a part of our culture. It's so radical for me to speak against it and it's hard for people to grasp it at first. Can we imagine a world, a society without shame? It's tough, but I think it's possible. And it all starts with me leaving the Christian bubble. I don't agree with their cause anymore, with their agenda, with their approach of shame and control and conformity.
Is it any different outside the bubble? Yes and no. Yes, people do shame others outside the Christian bubble too. But I won't be part of a club that desires to make me conform. I'll be an individual, still seeking to love like Christ. We don't have to be in a club to love people. Yes, it's nice to have community, but I've found a more accepting community outside the Christian bubble than I ever found inside. For more of my thoughts on this stay tuned here at my blog and also see my comments at my friend Jason's blog, specifically his post The Porn Myth.
Share your thoughts!
Examples: Try telling people at some churches that having a beer is ok. They will quote verses and try to control the members by shaming them into compliance. I know it doesn't happen at all churches, but we all know it happens. People have been kicked out of churches for that and for even less than that. Try telling people at your church you believe in Universal Reconciliation, the idea that all will be saved and go to heaven one day. This one is tough because it's not heard that often, it's not yet a culturally acceptable difference of opinion. For most in the Christian community it's far-fetched and isn't taken seriously at all. Once they see you’re serious they start in with the same shame and control approach. So, I could go on and on with examples, but the point remains that the corporate body has fundamental problems.
They are supposed to be a body of people known for love, but they judge even their own members for straying in thought and deed. People aren't accepted as unique and creative individuals that are allowed to start to think differently than the Christian club they joined. If you start to think differently you are shamed for it and told to conform to the widely accepted doctrine of modern Christianity.
I get that every club has its beliefs and agenda. That's why clubs meet. And if you no longer believe in the purpose of the club or if you no longer share the same interests, then you should leave the club. It should be a mutual and loving departure though. Not a break in relationships, not a royal rumble. There doesn't have to be a falling out. But my wife and I have already seen it. We have already had tough conversations with people who have cautioned us, yelled at us, and warned us to not go down the path we're traveling. We don't believe in their version of the truth, we don't see the world through their spectacles anymore, we have a different perspective, and we can't ignore that. We have to follow our conscience if we're going to be honest with ourselves.
Can you imagine yourself doing anything that your church would have a problem with? If so, is the way the church treats people it has problems with acceptable to you? I don't believe people should be shamed, no matter their walk of life; sinner, saint, rich, poor, white, black, Christian, atheist, Muslim, gay, transgender, criminal, community volunteer, etc. Jesus summed up the law by saying love God and love your neighbor as yourself. I guess the reality is that people shame themselves and don't accept themselves, so in that regard they are loving their neighbor as they love themselves. They are filled with shame and handicapped from it. It's ok to be ashamed. By ashamed I mean feeling bad about your own actions that didn't measure up to your own high standards. But to be shamed by someone else is wrong. It's not anyone's place to shame me, whether I failed miserably or not. It's ok for people to feel hurt by my actions, to feel sad by my actions, to feel angry by my actions, but it's wrong for them to turn those feelings into a weapon and to shame me for it. And that's what virtually all people do. I can't think of a single person not handicapped by shame to some degree. It's become a part of our culture. It's so radical for me to speak against it and it's hard for people to grasp it at first. Can we imagine a world, a society without shame? It's tough, but I think it's possible. And it all starts with me leaving the Christian bubble. I don't agree with their cause anymore, with their agenda, with their approach of shame and control and conformity.
Is it any different outside the bubble? Yes and no. Yes, people do shame others outside the Christian bubble too. But I won't be part of a club that desires to make me conform. I'll be an individual, still seeking to love like Christ. We don't have to be in a club to love people. Yes, it's nice to have community, but I've found a more accepting community outside the Christian bubble than I ever found inside. For more of my thoughts on this stay tuned here at my blog and also see my comments at my friend Jason's blog, specifically his post The Porn Myth.
Share your thoughts!
February 26, 2012
Everything Is Permissible
Paul says everything is permissible. Jesus said the law is summed up as love God and love your neighbor as yourself. So, love is the higher law and seeking to love our fellow man with the same love we have for ourselves is the goal. With this in mind, plus what Paul said about everything being permissible, plus what we know about Jesus dying for the sins of the Whole World, what remains of the issue with homosexuality? Or abortion? Or drug use? Or premarital sex? Yes, I know. Paul did say that not everything is beneficial, but that doesn't dismiss my question. Everything is permissible. All sins are forgiven. God has enough love to forgive all people all the time. I'm not saying there won't be consequences. I think there will likely be consequences on earth and on judgment day. But...in light of the above, what problems remain with the forbidden topics in the Christian bubble? Can homosexuals have sincere and intimate relationships where they seek to love each other and take care of each other? Can mothers abort their babies? Can people use hardcore drugs? Can young people have premarital sex? It sounds like the devolving of society. I'm not in favor of that behavior running rampant through a society. I don't think it's healthy for the individuals or for society as a whole. But just because it's not spiritually or economically sound that doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed.
Governments, specifically democracies and republics, exist to provide safety for the people. Thats it. The welfare state we have now does not properly reflect that ideal. What people don't realize is that our society should be a lot more like the wild west, with self-sufficient people making ends meet, walking out on their front porch with a shotgun telling the sheriff to get off their property cause they got no business with them. I would still prefer air conditioning though. Should Christians seek to make their government into a theocracy? Or should they work within the framework and reality of what exists now? Not all people believe as they do. Should they have to conform to laws they don't agree with? Can they have an equal vote? What if more people vote for the legalizing of homosexual marriage? Is that really a problem? If so, how is it a problem?
Back to the what I was saying in the first paragraph...[Most] Christians would say that only Christians are forgiven, though many verses in the Bible would argue differently. And, even if we go with that for a moment, what we see in deed is different than what we see in word. Christians that struggle with drug use are given a chance or two. Christians that have abortions are ostracized and are considered to have never been Christians. Same with "Christian homosexuals" that fight (but sometimes fail in fighting) their sexual urges to remain righteous in the sexual area of their lives. What see see is that sin is not equal, not forgiven, and people are not loved.
Yes, I'm generalizing. Not all Christians are this way, not all churches are this way. But a great many are, and this is also the perception of those inside and outside the Christian bubble. And for that reason I ask, is homosexuality okay? Is drug use ok? Is it permissible?
When many Christians vote in national elections, they suddenly become single-issue voters. That is, they vote for the pro-life candidate, as if that's the only value that matters. Murder of innocent babies is bad (in my singular opinion). I don't like it. But who am I to judge the young mother that, at that stage in her life, thought abortion was best? How are abortion and homosexual relationships different from a Christian parent shaming their child? Different from lying, cheating, splurging, not obeying one's conscience, compromising morals?
For me the question becomes, is living perfectly even the point? Does God love certain people more or less than others? Are we all demanding and teaching behavior modification because that's how we view our relationship with God? We have to please him with good behavior or we go to hell? My experience from inside and outside the bubble says that most Christians live this way even though they would preach all day long about God's grace for those in the fold. If God isn't interested in behavior modification, if God wants to redeem all people because they're all messed up, then can't we accept people as they are now and let God do his good work on his time?
Governments, specifically democracies and republics, exist to provide safety for the people. Thats it. The welfare state we have now does not properly reflect that ideal. What people don't realize is that our society should be a lot more like the wild west, with self-sufficient people making ends meet, walking out on their front porch with a shotgun telling the sheriff to get off their property cause they got no business with them. I would still prefer air conditioning though. Should Christians seek to make their government into a theocracy? Or should they work within the framework and reality of what exists now? Not all people believe as they do. Should they have to conform to laws they don't agree with? Can they have an equal vote? What if more people vote for the legalizing of homosexual marriage? Is that really a problem? If so, how is it a problem?
Back to the what I was saying in the first paragraph...[Most] Christians would say that only Christians are forgiven, though many verses in the Bible would argue differently. And, even if we go with that for a moment, what we see in deed is different than what we see in word. Christians that struggle with drug use are given a chance or two. Christians that have abortions are ostracized and are considered to have never been Christians. Same with "Christian homosexuals" that fight (but sometimes fail in fighting) their sexual urges to remain righteous in the sexual area of their lives. What see see is that sin is not equal, not forgiven, and people are not loved.
Yes, I'm generalizing. Not all Christians are this way, not all churches are this way. But a great many are, and this is also the perception of those inside and outside the Christian bubble. And for that reason I ask, is homosexuality okay? Is drug use ok? Is it permissible?
When many Christians vote in national elections, they suddenly become single-issue voters. That is, they vote for the pro-life candidate, as if that's the only value that matters. Murder of innocent babies is bad (in my singular opinion). I don't like it. But who am I to judge the young mother that, at that stage in her life, thought abortion was best? How are abortion and homosexual relationships different from a Christian parent shaming their child? Different from lying, cheating, splurging, not obeying one's conscience, compromising morals?
For me the question becomes, is living perfectly even the point? Does God love certain people more or less than others? Are we all demanding and teaching behavior modification because that's how we view our relationship with God? We have to please him with good behavior or we go to hell? My experience from inside and outside the bubble says that most Christians live this way even though they would preach all day long about God's grace for those in the fold. If God isn't interested in behavior modification, if God wants to redeem all people because they're all messed up, then can't we accept people as they are now and let God do his good work on his time?
February 23, 2012
Throwing Away Religion
My last blog on religion and faith was Christianity is the Matrix, written Jan 30th, 2012. In that post I spoke about mainstream Christianity and those inside the Christian bubble. And since that time I've had a few more conversations and spent more time thinking about what exactly I believe, what makes sense to me, and what should I call it (although I've hated labels for years, they are somewhat necessary). Yesterday I looked up humanism. What jumped to mind before I gave it a look was the worship of man. And while that's one definition, it's not all that humanism is. Humanism, in general terms, is a philosophy that focuses on human values and concerns. It affirms the dignity and worth of all people and leaves spirituality unaddressed. Secular humanism, a buzz word in Christian circles, is different from general Humanism, and it specifically rejects the supernatural and religious dogma as a basis for morality. As I read through the Wikipedia article on Humanism, I found links that took me to Religious Humanism and Christian Humanism, which "is the position that universal human dignity and individual freedom are essential and principal components of, or are at least compatible with, Christian doctrine and practice. It is a philosophical union of Christian and humanist principles."
That sounds close. Humanism is a philosophy that gives focus to human values and concerns. Christian Humanism says that the Christian doctrine is compatible with Humanism. Since leaving the Christian bubble I've found more community and experienced more freedom. Non-Christian friends have stopped by, have called, have emailed. Oddly, my Christian friends and family are no where to be seen or heard. But it's not odd, is it? That's the Christian life. To be alone and to rely on God. The Christian faith as described in the book of Acts is shown as a vibrant community full of people relying on each other for their needs. It's an involved community where burdens are shared by the group. But where is that example lived out now? I don't see it. And that's fine. I'm not here to change the ways of the church. That's an impossible undertaking. The church has been and always will be tainted by corrupt men who don't want to lose their power and control. Institutional Christianity is a farm full of cattle being herded in circles. Once you leave the farm you don't want to go back.
Have I given up my faith? No. I still believe that God created man and that Jesus died on behalf of mankind. But I have given up on Institutional Christianity, on religious rituals and practice, on following the lead cow around the farm. I'm tired of the shame that the church and its people use to control the herd. I see it so clearly now. In the past on this blog I've talked about how Christians seem unChristian, how they put up walls between themselves and all others outside their bubble. Christians will tell you that they love the homosexual, but they won't embrace them, invite them over for lunch or dinner, hang out with them on the weekends, etc, all because they're afraid that anything more than lip service will get them accused of affirming sin. And in their minds that's one of the worst things a Christian can be accused of.
Christians are agenda-driven. There are no intimate friendships in Christianity unless it's between two or more people inside the Christian bubble. There are no intimate friendships between those inside the bubble and those outside the bubble. Christians are friendly to the point that they can get a few minutes of your time so they can complete their agenda, telling the lost how sinful they are and then telling them of their need for Jesus. And oh, by the way, here's a church they'd like to invite you to this Sunday. It's insincere. Smiles and politeness and maybe even the occaisional nice gesture is a means to an end, to get that person to church and get them saved. It seems insincere to those outside the Christian bubble. Those outside the bubble are tired of it. Tired of the agenda. They want friendship, trust, love, sincerity. They don't want to be saved. Can't a Christian just be a loving friend without trying to change someone? To be fair, I know that Christians mean well. They're just doing what they've been taught, after all. They don't want people to go to Hell. They want everyone to experience the joy of salvation. It's an honest endeavor that stems from good intentions. But here's the thing...it's just not necessary and it does more harm than good. By casting oneself as right and others as wrong, it again creates a wall between Christians and all others. It creates a wall where no wall should exist. It casts shame on others. Healthy people will say, "Quit shaming me, there's nothing wrong with me." Weak and unhealthy people say, "Oh, what's wrong with me? How can I fix it?" And, of course, the Christian is right there waiting with the prescription in hand, like a drug dealer convincing children the only way to be right is to smoke crack and then they happen to have some crack they can try. Now they're hooked. Now they belong to a group of people that are fixed and no longer damaged (sarcasm). Now they are included, they are no longer excluded from the special group of people who hold all the answers (sarcasm).
Shame was the issue in the Garden when Adam and Eve covered their nakedness and it continues to be THE problem today. They were naked before they ate the fruit and there was nothing wrong with their nakedness. After they ate the fruit there was nothing wrong with it either, but they ate from the tree of knowledge and so bought into the deception that there was something wrong with them. People buy into that deception still today. There's nothing wrong with you. People think they need religion to fix the relationship between them and God. He already fixed it. He reconciled us back to Him and no matter what we do He accepts us and loves us. There are no more offenses. Jesus took the punishment for them all, even the future ones. He took away the sins of the world, once and for all, the sin debt is canceled. If there is a wall between us and God then it's our wall, which makes sense since Christians are so fond of erecting walls between themselves and everything. But we are not stiff-armed by God for drinking too much or saying a real curse word like shit instead of a culturally-acceptable one like shoot that means the same thing in the same situation. Anyone remember the Prodigal Son? The heathen child was given a party and at no point did the father stop loving him. This isn't a story for Christians. It's a story for the people of the world. God loves all his children, not just the ones that behave. And I'm sick and tired of being told that I'm not loved, I'm not accepted, and I'm not wanted just because I'm trying to be me. A me that doesn't naturally fit the modern, culturally-acceptable idea of what a good Christian should look and behave like. We all have equal value. There isn't a single person that has more intrinsic value than anyone else. We're either all kings and queens, or we're all bums. There is no hierarchy.
Shame. The church uses it to control the herd. Parents use it to control their children, telling them they're bad when they have natural feelings and urges and questions. Jesus said that the Law is summed up as love God and love your neighbor as yourself. Love is not just a feeling, it's also a justice issue. To withhold love is unjust. God, who is Love, made people in his image and instructed them to go love others as they love themselves. To refuse to love people, or to not love them as they should be loved, with a full measure equal to that with which we give ourselves, that is unjust. To withhold that love because we don't agree with people, because they live a lifestyle different from ours, because they sin outwardly while we sin inwardly, is unjust. The church has no problem telling the herd that they're all sinners because of one man (Adam), but the same passage used to shame the herd (Rom 5) says that all were made righteous through one man (Jesus), though the church doesn't focus on that part. They put their focus on the areas that allow them to maintain control. Shaming the sinner, getting the sinner to come back to church repeatedly, getting them to tithe and invest in the effort, getting them integrated into a world view that traps them inside a bubble from which they will almost certainly never leave. When questions come up about the differences in interpretation, the differences in translation, the answers are usually sufficient to gloss over the issue while instilling fear and shame back on the curious person. The fear of hell keeps the pews warm and the coffers full.
If I were to call myself something, it wouldn't be a humanist or even a Christian Humanist, though I think as far as labels go Christian Humanist strikes closer than Christian. I think Cosmic Optimist fits best. When I think of the grand story, the grand design, the grand purpose, I don't see the script ending with millions of people in Hell. I don't see sin standing in the corner of the universe in opposition to God for all eternity. I don't see Christ as God taking a human form (which is truly profound for a deity to do) and then suffering and dying for his creation just to make a few Christians. That story line doesn't add up. God isn't in the business of writing tragedies. He's in the business of loving his creation and working to reconcile those lost relationships. I'm optimistic about the ending and truly believe the church has lost its way and is no longer capable of leading people to truth. It is my deep conviction that all people will be reconciled and all will come to a knowledge and revelation that God is about love and that love always was the main idea.
I'm not asking anyone to agree with me. These are my thoughts. I just encourage everyone who reads this to figure out what they believe apart from being told what to believe. How many children grow up in Christian homes and so by default they become Christians? They don't really examine themselves or their beliefs. It's a fact that if you grow up in India you will likely be a Hindu. If you grow up in China you will likely be a Buddhist. If you grow up in America you will likely be a Christian. Statistically speaking, we are products of our environment. We give ourselves over to what we're told. That's why during the Cold War propaganda was so important in Russia and in the USA. Each side was telling their children that their country and people were better than the other countries and other peoples. Take a minute and ask yourself if you really believe everything you've been told. I bet there are gaps and no solid explanations as to why. Don't be afraid to question the establishment, to walk away from your bubble. But if your convictions are examined and you find that they remain deep and true, then I'm happy for you. The most important thing you can do is live an authentic life making decisions based upon your own thoughts and convictions, not the thoughts and convictions placed on you by your family, friends, or environment. No more lies. Don't lie to yourself, don't lie to others. Live fully, love deeply.
Share your thoughts!
That sounds close. Humanism is a philosophy that gives focus to human values and concerns. Christian Humanism says that the Christian doctrine is compatible with Humanism. Since leaving the Christian bubble I've found more community and experienced more freedom. Non-Christian friends have stopped by, have called, have emailed. Oddly, my Christian friends and family are no where to be seen or heard. But it's not odd, is it? That's the Christian life. To be alone and to rely on God. The Christian faith as described in the book of Acts is shown as a vibrant community full of people relying on each other for their needs. It's an involved community where burdens are shared by the group. But where is that example lived out now? I don't see it. And that's fine. I'm not here to change the ways of the church. That's an impossible undertaking. The church has been and always will be tainted by corrupt men who don't want to lose their power and control. Institutional Christianity is a farm full of cattle being herded in circles. Once you leave the farm you don't want to go back.
Have I given up my faith? No. I still believe that God created man and that Jesus died on behalf of mankind. But I have given up on Institutional Christianity, on religious rituals and practice, on following the lead cow around the farm. I'm tired of the shame that the church and its people use to control the herd. I see it so clearly now. In the past on this blog I've talked about how Christians seem unChristian, how they put up walls between themselves and all others outside their bubble. Christians will tell you that they love the homosexual, but they won't embrace them, invite them over for lunch or dinner, hang out with them on the weekends, etc, all because they're afraid that anything more than lip service will get them accused of affirming sin. And in their minds that's one of the worst things a Christian can be accused of.
Christians are agenda-driven. There are no intimate friendships in Christianity unless it's between two or more people inside the Christian bubble. There are no intimate friendships between those inside the bubble and those outside the bubble. Christians are friendly to the point that they can get a few minutes of your time so they can complete their agenda, telling the lost how sinful they are and then telling them of their need for Jesus. And oh, by the way, here's a church they'd like to invite you to this Sunday. It's insincere. Smiles and politeness and maybe even the occaisional nice gesture is a means to an end, to get that person to church and get them saved. It seems insincere to those outside the Christian bubble. Those outside the bubble are tired of it. Tired of the agenda. They want friendship, trust, love, sincerity. They don't want to be saved. Can't a Christian just be a loving friend without trying to change someone? To be fair, I know that Christians mean well. They're just doing what they've been taught, after all. They don't want people to go to Hell. They want everyone to experience the joy of salvation. It's an honest endeavor that stems from good intentions. But here's the thing...it's just not necessary and it does more harm than good. By casting oneself as right and others as wrong, it again creates a wall between Christians and all others. It creates a wall where no wall should exist. It casts shame on others. Healthy people will say, "Quit shaming me, there's nothing wrong with me." Weak and unhealthy people say, "Oh, what's wrong with me? How can I fix it?" And, of course, the Christian is right there waiting with the prescription in hand, like a drug dealer convincing children the only way to be right is to smoke crack and then they happen to have some crack they can try. Now they're hooked. Now they belong to a group of people that are fixed and no longer damaged (sarcasm). Now they are included, they are no longer excluded from the special group of people who hold all the answers (sarcasm).
Shame was the issue in the Garden when Adam and Eve covered their nakedness and it continues to be THE problem today. They were naked before they ate the fruit and there was nothing wrong with their nakedness. After they ate the fruit there was nothing wrong with it either, but they ate from the tree of knowledge and so bought into the deception that there was something wrong with them. People buy into that deception still today. There's nothing wrong with you. People think they need religion to fix the relationship between them and God. He already fixed it. He reconciled us back to Him and no matter what we do He accepts us and loves us. There are no more offenses. Jesus took the punishment for them all, even the future ones. He took away the sins of the world, once and for all, the sin debt is canceled. If there is a wall between us and God then it's our wall, which makes sense since Christians are so fond of erecting walls between themselves and everything. But we are not stiff-armed by God for drinking too much or saying a real curse word like shit instead of a culturally-acceptable one like shoot that means the same thing in the same situation. Anyone remember the Prodigal Son? The heathen child was given a party and at no point did the father stop loving him. This isn't a story for Christians. It's a story for the people of the world. God loves all his children, not just the ones that behave. And I'm sick and tired of being told that I'm not loved, I'm not accepted, and I'm not wanted just because I'm trying to be me. A me that doesn't naturally fit the modern, culturally-acceptable idea of what a good Christian should look and behave like. We all have equal value. There isn't a single person that has more intrinsic value than anyone else. We're either all kings and queens, or we're all bums. There is no hierarchy.
Shame. The church uses it to control the herd. Parents use it to control their children, telling them they're bad when they have natural feelings and urges and questions. Jesus said that the Law is summed up as love God and love your neighbor as yourself. Love is not just a feeling, it's also a justice issue. To withhold love is unjust. God, who is Love, made people in his image and instructed them to go love others as they love themselves. To refuse to love people, or to not love them as they should be loved, with a full measure equal to that with which we give ourselves, that is unjust. To withhold that love because we don't agree with people, because they live a lifestyle different from ours, because they sin outwardly while we sin inwardly, is unjust. The church has no problem telling the herd that they're all sinners because of one man (Adam), but the same passage used to shame the herd (Rom 5) says that all were made righteous through one man (Jesus), though the church doesn't focus on that part. They put their focus on the areas that allow them to maintain control. Shaming the sinner, getting the sinner to come back to church repeatedly, getting them to tithe and invest in the effort, getting them integrated into a world view that traps them inside a bubble from which they will almost certainly never leave. When questions come up about the differences in interpretation, the differences in translation, the answers are usually sufficient to gloss over the issue while instilling fear and shame back on the curious person. The fear of hell keeps the pews warm and the coffers full.
If I were to call myself something, it wouldn't be a humanist or even a Christian Humanist, though I think as far as labels go Christian Humanist strikes closer than Christian. I think Cosmic Optimist fits best. When I think of the grand story, the grand design, the grand purpose, I don't see the script ending with millions of people in Hell. I don't see sin standing in the corner of the universe in opposition to God for all eternity. I don't see Christ as God taking a human form (which is truly profound for a deity to do) and then suffering and dying for his creation just to make a few Christians. That story line doesn't add up. God isn't in the business of writing tragedies. He's in the business of loving his creation and working to reconcile those lost relationships. I'm optimistic about the ending and truly believe the church has lost its way and is no longer capable of leading people to truth. It is my deep conviction that all people will be reconciled and all will come to a knowledge and revelation that God is about love and that love always was the main idea.
I'm not asking anyone to agree with me. These are my thoughts. I just encourage everyone who reads this to figure out what they believe apart from being told what to believe. How many children grow up in Christian homes and so by default they become Christians? They don't really examine themselves or their beliefs. It's a fact that if you grow up in India you will likely be a Hindu. If you grow up in China you will likely be a Buddhist. If you grow up in America you will likely be a Christian. Statistically speaking, we are products of our environment. We give ourselves over to what we're told. That's why during the Cold War propaganda was so important in Russia and in the USA. Each side was telling their children that their country and people were better than the other countries and other peoples. Take a minute and ask yourself if you really believe everything you've been told. I bet there are gaps and no solid explanations as to why. Don't be afraid to question the establishment, to walk away from your bubble. But if your convictions are examined and you find that they remain deep and true, then I'm happy for you. The most important thing you can do is live an authentic life making decisions based upon your own thoughts and convictions, not the thoughts and convictions placed on you by your family, friends, or environment. No more lies. Don't lie to yourself, don't lie to others. Live fully, love deeply.
Share your thoughts!
February 17, 2012
Leaving the United States of America
How many of us have fancied the idea of leaving the U.S. to live some place else? Many, I suspect. How many of us follow up that fanciful thought with some research? Few, I suspect. Well, today I'm covering the high points necessary for any major geographical relocation. Further, more detailed and country-specific research would be up to you after sifting through what I'm providing here.
Many U.S. citizens first think of Canada when thinking of a change of location. They don't know why it seems safe or right, but what comes to mind for many of us is that Canada is westernized, so their society will seem fairly familiar. They're also nearby, which makes it seem not so radical of a move, keeping friends and family somewhat within reach. They also happen to border the U.S., be on friendly terms with the U.S., and thereby enjoy many of the fruits that such a relationship offers. But is Canada really a good choice? How would one determine this? Here are some places to start...
Some have said that the strength of a nation used to be it's military might, but is now determined by it's strength in the world economy. This assertion should not be taken lightly. International trade and commerce, the World Bank, and various stock markets all mean that we are interconnected and in some ways interdependent. Resiliency in tough economic times means having a robust national economy.
From the Heritage Foundation, here are the Top 10 Countries in the 2012 Index of Economic Freedom:
World Rank Country Overall Score Change From Previous
1 Hong Kong 89.9 0.2
2 Singapore 87.5 0.3
3 Australia 83.1 0.6
4 New Zealand 82.1 -0.2
5 Switzerland 81.1 -0.8
6 Canada 79.9 -0.9
7 Chile 78.3 0.9
8 Mauritius 77.0 0.8
9 Ireland 76.9 -1.8
10 United States 76.3 -1.5
Not surprisingly, The U.S. is not number one. The top two did surprise me though. Note that I have bolded a few of the countries. Keep an eye on these throughout this post to follow the trend. Some may say, "well, they have a strong economy and offer economic freedom, but how violent or peaceful are they? Some of those places seem to be known for their trouble." Great point.
So, from the Vision of Humanity, here are the Top 10 Countries in the 2011 Global Peace Index:
World Rank Score
1 Iceland 1.148
2 New Zealand 1.279
3 Japan 1.287
4 Denmark 1.289
5 Czech Republic 1.320
6 Austria 1.337
7 Finland 1.352
8 Canada 1.355
9 Norway 1.356
10 Slovenia 1.358
Notice that the U.S. is missing from the top 10 list. The U.S. actually ranks 82 because of internal and external conflicts! But look again at the countries in bold and keep those in mind as we go. So, now we have established countries with economic strength and freedom and also those that exist with the most peace. But what about corruption? Do these countries achieve these results by manipulating the system?
From Transparency International, here are the Top 10 Countries in the 2010 Corruption Perception Index (these are the cleanest countries):
World Rank Score
1 Denmark 9.3
1 New Zealand 9.3
1 Singapore 9.3
4 Finland 9.2
4 Sweden 9.2
6 Canada 8.9
7 Netherlands 8.8
8 Australia 8.7
8 Switzerland 8.7
10 Norway 8.6
Again, notice that the U.S. is missing from the Top 10 list. The U.S. ranks tied for 22nd on this list of least corrupt countries. These three surveys listed above cover the basics when one considers a move to another country. But what's missing from this research is quality of life. What is it like to actually live in these countries? The travel magazine International Living puts together a list each years based on these criteria: "To produce this annual Index we consider nine categories: Cost of Living, Culture and Leisure, Economy, Environment, Freedom, Health, Infrastructure, Safety and Risk, and Climate. This involves a lot of number crunching from “official” sources, including government websites, the World Health Organization, and The Economist, to name but a few. We also take into account what our editors from all over the world have to say about our findings."
From International Living, here are the Top 10 Countries in the 2010 Quality of Life Index:
World Rank
1 France
2 Australia
3 Switzerland
4 Germany
5 New Zealand
6 Luxembourg
7 United States
8 Belgium
9 Canada
10 Italy
The U.S. finally made the list again. In the first survey above noting economic strength and freedom, the U.S. ranked 10th. In this last survey they ranked 7th. In none of the four surveys did the U.S. place in the top 5. For those that think the U.S. is a pretty good place to live, think about the surveys above and think about the countries listed in bold. What countries keep popping up? New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and Denmark. And out of these, New Zealand seems to be the clear winner. Of course, there are many other considerations that need to be taken into account, such as your financial viability to relocate, occupational outlook in your country of choice, all of the work visa issues involved, and many other personal considerations specific to you.
For those interested in moving to New Zealand, as I am, here is a website and business dedicated to helping you make that transition. Yield Qwest was founded by an American and military veteran.
Many U.S. citizens first think of Canada when thinking of a change of location. They don't know why it seems safe or right, but what comes to mind for many of us is that Canada is westernized, so their society will seem fairly familiar. They're also nearby, which makes it seem not so radical of a move, keeping friends and family somewhat within reach. They also happen to border the U.S., be on friendly terms with the U.S., and thereby enjoy many of the fruits that such a relationship offers. But is Canada really a good choice? How would one determine this? Here are some places to start...
Some have said that the strength of a nation used to be it's military might, but is now determined by it's strength in the world economy. This assertion should not be taken lightly. International trade and commerce, the World Bank, and various stock markets all mean that we are interconnected and in some ways interdependent. Resiliency in tough economic times means having a robust national economy.
From the Heritage Foundation, here are the Top 10 Countries in the 2012 Index of Economic Freedom:
World Rank Country Overall Score Change From Previous
1 Hong Kong 89.9 0.2
2 Singapore 87.5 0.3
3 Australia 83.1 0.6
4 New Zealand 82.1 -0.2
5 Switzerland 81.1 -0.8
6 Canada 79.9 -0.9
7 Chile 78.3 0.9
8 Mauritius 77.0 0.8
9 Ireland 76.9 -1.8
10 United States 76.3 -1.5
Not surprisingly, The U.S. is not number one. The top two did surprise me though. Note that I have bolded a few of the countries. Keep an eye on these throughout this post to follow the trend. Some may say, "well, they have a strong economy and offer economic freedom, but how violent or peaceful are they? Some of those places seem to be known for their trouble." Great point.
So, from the Vision of Humanity, here are the Top 10 Countries in the 2011 Global Peace Index:
World Rank Score
1 Iceland 1.148
2 New Zealand 1.279
3 Japan 1.287
4 Denmark 1.289
5 Czech Republic 1.320
6 Austria 1.337
7 Finland 1.352
8 Canada 1.355
9 Norway 1.356
10 Slovenia 1.358
Notice that the U.S. is missing from the top 10 list. The U.S. actually ranks 82 because of internal and external conflicts! But look again at the countries in bold and keep those in mind as we go. So, now we have established countries with economic strength and freedom and also those that exist with the most peace. But what about corruption? Do these countries achieve these results by manipulating the system?
From Transparency International, here are the Top 10 Countries in the 2010 Corruption Perception Index (these are the cleanest countries):
World Rank Score
1 Denmark 9.3
1 New Zealand 9.3
1 Singapore 9.3
4 Finland 9.2
4 Sweden 9.2
6 Canada 8.9
7 Netherlands 8.8
8 Australia 8.7
8 Switzerland 8.7
10 Norway 8.6
Again, notice that the U.S. is missing from the Top 10 list. The U.S. ranks tied for 22nd on this list of least corrupt countries. These three surveys listed above cover the basics when one considers a move to another country. But what's missing from this research is quality of life. What is it like to actually live in these countries? The travel magazine International Living puts together a list each years based on these criteria: "To produce this annual Index we consider nine categories: Cost of Living, Culture and Leisure, Economy, Environment, Freedom, Health, Infrastructure, Safety and Risk, and Climate. This involves a lot of number crunching from “official” sources, including government websites, the World Health Organization, and The Economist, to name but a few. We also take into account what our editors from all over the world have to say about our findings."
From International Living, here are the Top 10 Countries in the 2010 Quality of Life Index:
World Rank
1 France
2 Australia
3 Switzerland
4 Germany
5 New Zealand
6 Luxembourg
7 United States
8 Belgium
9 Canada
10 Italy
The U.S. finally made the list again. In the first survey above noting economic strength and freedom, the U.S. ranked 10th. In this last survey they ranked 7th. In none of the four surveys did the U.S. place in the top 5. For those that think the U.S. is a pretty good place to live, think about the surveys above and think about the countries listed in bold. What countries keep popping up? New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and Denmark. And out of these, New Zealand seems to be the clear winner. Of course, there are many other considerations that need to be taken into account, such as your financial viability to relocate, occupational outlook in your country of choice, all of the work visa issues involved, and many other personal considerations specific to you.
For those interested in moving to New Zealand, as I am, here is a website and business dedicated to helping you make that transition. Yield Qwest was founded by an American and military veteran.
February 07, 2012
Student Loans
I'm sitting in a classroom in Linthicum, MD waiting for class to begin. Using their convenient wi-fi I browsed a few news articles and came across this one on altnatives to college tuition increases. University of California students proposed having no student tuition due while students are in school, but once they graduate and get jobs they could pay a modest bill for 20 years. The article noted that the students weren't the first to generate this idea. Back in the 1950s the idea was proposed but failed to generate traction.
While reading the article the thought came to me...why can't parents pay to a state or federal fund for 5, 10, or 20 years? Then it hit me. Something like this is already offered. It's called a 529 Plan. A 529 plan is a tax-advantaged savings plan designed to encourage saving for future college costs. 529 plans, legally known as “qualified tuition plans,” are sponsored by states, state agencies, or educational institutions and are authorized by Section 529 of the Internal Revenue Code.
There are two types of 529 plans: pre-paid tuition plans and college savings plans. All fifty states and the District of Columbia sponsor at least one type of 529 plan. In addition, a group of private colleges and universities sponsor a pre-paid tuition plan.
I'm sure a great number of families participate in this tuition plan, but I don't know of any personally. My impression is that families in a certain income bracket take advantage of this and most families don't have the means to contribute. This line of reasoning could lead to a discussion on the merits of the Occupy Wallstreet demonstrations and the argument of the 1%, but I'm not going to follow that rabbit trail in this post.
What are the different arguments out there?
1. Parents need to save for and pay their child's college tuition.
2. Parents should pay part of their child's college tuition.
3. Children can get loans and scholarships and part-time jobs while in school and take care of it themselves.
4. Children can join the military or other organizations that will pay off student loans.
While I see the sentiment behind the first two points (parents should pay so children aren't burdened with loans as they start their life), I also see the merit of the last two points (children will gain more from working through this obstacle and overcoming it through hard work).
What other ideas/alternatives are there?
While reading the article the thought came to me...why can't parents pay to a state or federal fund for 5, 10, or 20 years? Then it hit me. Something like this is already offered. It's called a 529 Plan. A 529 plan is a tax-advantaged savings plan designed to encourage saving for future college costs. 529 plans, legally known as “qualified tuition plans,” are sponsored by states, state agencies, or educational institutions and are authorized by Section 529 of the Internal Revenue Code.
There are two types of 529 plans: pre-paid tuition plans and college savings plans. All fifty states and the District of Columbia sponsor at least one type of 529 plan. In addition, a group of private colleges and universities sponsor a pre-paid tuition plan.
I'm sure a great number of families participate in this tuition plan, but I don't know of any personally. My impression is that families in a certain income bracket take advantage of this and most families don't have the means to contribute. This line of reasoning could lead to a discussion on the merits of the Occupy Wallstreet demonstrations and the argument of the 1%, but I'm not going to follow that rabbit trail in this post.
What are the different arguments out there?
1. Parents need to save for and pay their child's college tuition.
2. Parents should pay part of their child's college tuition.
3. Children can get loans and scholarships and part-time jobs while in school and take care of it themselves.
4. Children can join the military or other organizations that will pay off student loans.
While I see the sentiment behind the first two points (parents should pay so children aren't burdened with loans as they start their life), I also see the merit of the last two points (children will gain more from working through this obstacle and overcoming it through hard work).
What other ideas/alternatives are there?
January 30, 2012
Christianity Is The Matrix
I don’t know if you can tell from my blogs lately, but I’m kind of going through something with regard to my faith. It just hit me, just now while typing, that part of my problem, part of the problem for most Christians is that our faith seems to be in Christianity and not in Christ. We are all too easily convinced that what our pastor says is right, how we were raised is right, what our parents say is right. We aren’t learners, we’re accepters. We accept what we’re told. We swallow gladly the dogma we’re handed. And if anyone dares step towards the periphery of these topics they’re immediately seen and labeled as outsiders because, from the perspective of those in the mainstream, they’re walking away from mainstream ideology/theology. I can’t ask, ponder, or propose questions that aren’t welcome by the establishment. But the more I do, the more I find I have more questions.
Most people have seen The Matrix. Here are a few quotes that seem to fit nicely with the control exercised the Christian establishment. Just replace "The Matrix" with "Christianity" and you will see what I mean.
The agents would be those in the Christian bubble that don't want you asking questions, those that give you overly-simple answers to questions that don't necessarily have an answer, those that point fingers at you for sinning just like the Pharisees that pointed fingers at Jesus and called him a drunkard and a sluggard.
Not in any particular order...
Morpheus: The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system (tithing), that they will fight to protect it.
[Neo's eyes suddenly wander towards a woman in a red dress]
Morpheus: Were you listening to me, Neo? Or were you looking at the woman in the red dress?
Neo: I was...
Morpheus: [gestures with one hand] Look again.
[the woman in the red dress is now Agent Smith, pointing a gun at Neo's head; Neo ducks]
Morpheus: Freeze it.
[Everybody and everything besides Neo and Morpheus freezes in time]
Neo: This... this isn't the Matrix?
Morpheus: No. It is another training program designed to teach you one thing: if you are not one of us, you are one of them.
Morpheus: You have to let it all go, Neo. Fear, doubt, and disbelief. Free your mind. (Walk out of the mainstream bubble)
Morpheus: I'm trying to free your mind, Neo. But I can only show you the door. You're the one that has to walk through it.
Morpheus: What is the Matrix? Control. The Matrix is acomputer-generated dream world built to keep us under control in order to change a human being into this.
[holds up a Duracell battery] (So they can use us)
Neo: No, I don't believe it. It's not possible.
Morpheus: I didn't say it would be easy, Neo. I just said it would be the truth.
Morpheus: I imagine that right now, you're feeling a bit like Alice. Hmm? Tumbling down the rabbit hole?
Neo: You could say that.
Morpheus: I see it in your eyes. You have the look of a man who accepts what he sees because he is expecting to wake up. Ironically, that's not far from the truth. Do you believe in fate, Neo?
Neo: No.
Morpheus: Why not?
Neo: Because I don't like the idea that I'm not in control of my life.
Morpheus: I know *exactly* what you mean. Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it (I feel it). You've felt it your entire life, that there's something wrong with the world (the world of the Matrix, the world the establishment created, the delusion). You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what I'm talking about?
Neo: The Matrix.
Morpheus: Do you want to know what it is?
Neo: Yes.
Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us (borrowed straight from Christianity). Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work... when you go to church... when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else you were born into bondage (borrowed straight from Christianity). Into a prison that you cannot taste or see or touch. A prison for your mind.
You know, this analogy also fits with a Max Lucado story I read my kids, titled "You Are Special." The Wemmicks were made by the Carpenter. All the Wemmicks would put stickers on the Wemmicks that weren't accepted. The Carpenter told one of them (Punchinello) that he didn't need to listen to the other Wemmicks because he was made special. As Punchinello began to believe the Carpenter, the stickers started falling off. This isn't a story about how Christians should feel when non-Christians are mean to them. It's equally valid for how Christians treat each other, and also for how all people treat each other, no matter their faith, belief system, race, life style (gay or not), class, etc. No one deserves to be judged.
Share your thoughts.
Most people have seen The Matrix. Here are a few quotes that seem to fit nicely with the control exercised the Christian establishment. Just replace "The Matrix" with "Christianity" and you will see what I mean.
The agents would be those in the Christian bubble that don't want you asking questions, those that give you overly-simple answers to questions that don't necessarily have an answer, those that point fingers at you for sinning just like the Pharisees that pointed fingers at Jesus and called him a drunkard and a sluggard.
Not in any particular order...
Morpheus: The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system (tithing), that they will fight to protect it.
[Neo's eyes suddenly wander towards a woman in a red dress]
Morpheus: Were you listening to me, Neo? Or were you looking at the woman in the red dress?
Neo: I was...
Morpheus: [gestures with one hand] Look again.
[the woman in the red dress is now Agent Smith, pointing a gun at Neo's head; Neo ducks]
Morpheus: Freeze it.
[Everybody and everything besides Neo and Morpheus freezes in time]
Neo: This... this isn't the Matrix?
Morpheus: No. It is another training program designed to teach you one thing: if you are not one of us, you are one of them.
Morpheus: You have to let it all go, Neo. Fear, doubt, and disbelief. Free your mind. (Walk out of the mainstream bubble)
Morpheus: I'm trying to free your mind, Neo. But I can only show you the door. You're the one that has to walk through it.
Morpheus: What is the Matrix? Control. The Matrix is a
[holds up a Duracell battery] (So they can use us)
Neo: No, I don't believe it. It's not possible.
Morpheus: I didn't say it would be easy, Neo. I just said it would be the truth.
Morpheus: I imagine that right now, you're feeling a bit like Alice. Hmm? Tumbling down the rabbit hole?
Neo: You could say that.
Morpheus: I see it in your eyes. You have the look of a man who accepts what he sees because he is expecting to wake up. Ironically, that's not far from the truth. Do you believe in fate, Neo?
Neo: No.
Morpheus: Why not?
Neo: Because I don't like the idea that I'm not in control of my life.
Morpheus: I know *exactly* what you mean. Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it (I feel it). You've felt it your entire life, that there's something wrong with the world (the world of the Matrix, the world the establishment created, the delusion). You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what I'm talking about?
Neo: The Matrix.
Morpheus: Do you want to know what it is?
Neo: Yes.
Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us (borrowed straight from Christianity). Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work... when you go to church... when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else you were born into bondage (borrowed straight from Christianity). Into a prison that you cannot taste or see or touch. A prison for your mind.
You know, this analogy also fits with a Max Lucado story I read my kids, titled "You Are Special." The Wemmicks were made by the Carpenter. All the Wemmicks would put stickers on the Wemmicks that weren't accepted. The Carpenter told one of them (Punchinello) that he didn't need to listen to the other Wemmicks because he was made special. As Punchinello began to believe the Carpenter, the stickers started falling off. This isn't a story about how Christians should feel when non-Christians are mean to them. It's equally valid for how Christians treat each other, and also for how all people treat each other, no matter their faith, belief system, race, life style (gay or not), class, etc. No one deserves to be judged.
Share your thoughts.
January 29, 2012
Tolerance For Same-Sex Marriage
Tolerance is an idea that many Christians don't support. They believe that tolerance equates to affirmation or approval of sin. But can Christians support same-sex marriage and stay true to their conscience?
From The Thirsty Theologian,
"Once, when I was visiting at a cousin’s house, I overheard a conversation between my cousin and his father (my uncle). My cousin owns a service station/convenience store, and he had just hired someone whom his father judged to be of dubious character. My cousin commented, with a touch of irony, to this effect: “That’s true, but sometimes we have to accept the fact that everyone is not as wonderful as we are.”
"A few years ago I was visiting with a good friend of mine when the subject of a mutual acquaintance came up. I made a somewhat snide comment about a particular character flaw in this individual, to which my friend replied, “Yeah, I know. That’s something I’ve had to ignore in order to remain friends with him.”
"I present these two anecdotes as a lesson that has affected my thinking more than it should have. I say “more than it should have,” not because it is wrong, but because it is not particularly profound, and because I should already have been thinking along those lines. Instead, both of those occasions were epiphanies."
The blogger continues on and describes the idea this way,
"I’m not talking about overlooking blatant sin, or lowering our “standards” (assuming those standards are Biblical); but we ought to be understanding and tolerant, knowing that we are not without our own faults. Ephesians 4 exhorts us to “walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love” (vv. 1-2), and to “be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you” (v. 32)."
In light of the current political climate (Presidential election), how does this work in government and society?
What if Christians acknowledged that they believe in the supremacy of God and not the supremacy of government? Even those who consider homosexual behavior to be sinful can believe in the equality of all people under the government, a government that supposedly promotes freedom and equality for all under the Constitution. Christians can admit that many sins are not covered by our criminal justice system, nor should they be, as they are more matters of individual conscience. In the end all will be judged fairly before God and no one will be speaking up in accusation or defense on Judgement Day. All will leave it to God to do the judging. In the meantime, we can work toward the most equitable society possible on earth. We can stop erecting walls between ourselves and those who hold different views. We can love others who believe differently than we do.
Share your thoughts.
From The Thirsty Theologian,
"Once, when I was visiting at a cousin’s house, I overheard a conversation between my cousin and his father (my uncle). My cousin owns a service station/convenience store, and he had just hired someone whom his father judged to be of dubious character. My cousin commented, with a touch of irony, to this effect: “That’s true, but sometimes we have to accept the fact that everyone is not as wonderful as we are.”
"A few years ago I was visiting with a good friend of mine when the subject of a mutual acquaintance came up. I made a somewhat snide comment about a particular character flaw in this individual, to which my friend replied, “Yeah, I know. That’s something I’ve had to ignore in order to remain friends with him.”
"I present these two anecdotes as a lesson that has affected my thinking more than it should have. I say “more than it should have,” not because it is wrong, but because it is not particularly profound, and because I should already have been thinking along those lines. Instead, both of those occasions were epiphanies."
The blogger continues on and describes the idea this way,
"I’m not talking about overlooking blatant sin, or lowering our “standards” (assuming those standards are Biblical); but we ought to be understanding and tolerant, knowing that we are not without our own faults. Ephesians 4 exhorts us to “walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love” (vv. 1-2), and to “be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you” (v. 32)."
In light of the current political climate (Presidential election), how does this work in government and society?
What if Christians acknowledged that they believe in the supremacy of God and not the supremacy of government? Even those who consider homosexual behavior to be sinful can believe in the equality of all people under the government, a government that supposedly promotes freedom and equality for all under the Constitution. Christians can admit that many sins are not covered by our criminal justice system, nor should they be, as they are more matters of individual conscience. In the end all will be judged fairly before God and no one will be speaking up in accusation or defense on Judgement Day. All will leave it to God to do the judging. In the meantime, we can work toward the most equitable society possible on earth. We can stop erecting walls between ourselves and those who hold different views. We can love others who believe differently than we do.
Share your thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)