Remember when blogs first came out and everybody, including (incredibly smart, handsome, caring, intimidating) engineers wrote cloying messages like they were 13-year-old girls visiting Paris?
Yeah, me too!
But I think you'll admit that my writing has improved as a result of this little endeavor. At the very least, it's sparked conversations with friends on just how exactly it is possible to live your life as if the Earth were flat.
So I know it's a little early for New Years Resolutions, but I'd like to codify what I'd like to talk about in the future:
1. The Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle to the Romans. Did you know my roommate thinks that St. Paul is dumb? It's true! But Paul's letter speaks to many important issues, ranging from social/cultural hot-button issues like homosexuality, to the role of religion in government. But that's just to get butts in the seats. The letter is also very clear when it explains how Christianity is supposed to work. As Luther wrote, "This letter is truly the most important piece in the New Testament. It is purest Gospel."
2. Twilight. I fear for our nation's youth!
3. Movies that are Not Twilight. I would review Rachel Getting Married if I had seen it. Unfortunately, I was stabbed in the back on that. Et tu, Brute?
4. Meta-critiques of my own hubris and arrogance. (Hint: this post counts!) Who uses the word 'hubris', anyway? Insufferable pricks, that's who. How come I have to prove to everyone how much smarter I am, how much righter I am, how much better I am? When will my parallel construction end?
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Friday, December 26, 2008
American Culture At a Glance
In the Youtube comments to Beyonce's "If I Were A Boy":
cuddels9x20x08 (4 minutes ago):
my ex could learn a thing or 2 from this song :(
cuddels9x20x08 (4 minutes ago):
my ex could learn a thing or 2 from this song :(
Saturday, December 20, 2008
John 21
It's a Saturday, I've grown tired of reading rather than writing, so I might as well finish off this gospel. I've very much enjoyed this little project, as it's helped me study the Gospel in depth, and even revise my position on some issues. I hope the (few) readers of this have been informed as well, even if they have simply been informed that their friend David is a religionist and science stopper.
If reading this Gospel has changed one view of mine, it is my treatment of the miraculous and the evidence we have for Christianity. When asked for 'proof' of the validity of my religion, I used to say that faith is all the proof we will ever have. Indeed, if God had given us stronger proof (say, a giant message scrawled in the sky) it would destroy the value of belief. It's easy to get a test right if you're told the answers.
But I'm beginning to reconsider this. We are told, ultimately, that faith is needed to believe in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and that this faith is created by the Holy Spirit. After all, when John runs to the tomb, we read simply that he saw and believed. But for those of us with weaker faith, we're given a lot of remedial help. Thomas puts his hand into Jesus' side and feels where the nails went through his hands. Jesus performs all sorts of miracles and John writes that 'these words are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.'
So it's not like God hasn't been helping us out. When asked for 'proof' of the validity of Christianity, why not say that Jesus was born of a virgin, turned water into wine, healed the lepers, gave sight to the blind, had a loud voice from heaven exclaim 'This is my Son- listen to him!', walked on water, raised the dead, fed the 5000, calmed the storm, and rose from the dead himself? You might not believe that evidence, but that belief comes as a consequence of faith.
Anyway, on to the final chapter of John's gospel, which has lots of applications for the big-c Church, as well as simple reconciliation for all men.
********************************
Jesus and the Miraculous Catch of Fish
1Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Tiberias.[a] It happened this way: 2Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together. 3"I'm going out to fish," Simon Peter told them, and they said, "We'll go with you." So they went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing.
4Early in the morning, Jesus stood on the shore, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus.
5He called out to them, "Friends, haven't you any fish?"
"No," they answered.
6He said, "Throw your net on the right side of the boat and you will find some." When they did, they were unable to haul the net in because of the large number of fish.
7Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, "It is the Lord!" As soon as Simon Peter heard him say, "It is the Lord," he wrapped his outer garment around him (for he had taken it off) and jumped into the water. 8The other disciples followed in the boat, towing the net full of fish, for they were not far from shore, about a hundred yards.[b] 9When they landed, they saw a fire of burning coals there with fish on it, and some bread.
10Jesus said to them, "Bring some of the fish you have just caught."
11Simon Peter climbed aboard and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn. 12Jesus said to them, "Come and have breakfast." None of the disciples dared ask him, "Who are you?" They knew it was the Lord. 13Jesus came, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish. 14This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead.
********************************
This isn't really about catching fish, obviously. The disciples are about to become 'fishers of men'. They are about to start the Church. This section emphasizes that they do so ONLY by the grace of God- without Jesus' help, they catch nothing. This doesn't mean that there should be no outreach ministries or missionaries (quite the opposite), but it does mean that it is not worship bands or powerpoint screens that make Christians- it's the Holy Spirit. The best way to employ those outreach talents is to make them obedient to Christ.
*****************************************************
Jesus Reinstates Peter
15When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?"
"Yes, Lord," he said, "you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Feed my lambs."
16Again Jesus said, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me?"
He answered, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
17 The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?"
Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Feed my sheep. 18 I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go." 19Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"
20Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, "Lord, who is going to betray you?") 21When Peter saw him, he asked, "Lord, what about him?"
22Jesus answered, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me." 23Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?"
24This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.
25Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.
************************************************************************
This is the part of reconciliation I was talking about. Peter just weeks before had denied ever knowing Jesus. The fact that Jesus asks him three times if he loves him evokes Peter's denying him three times in the courtyard as Jesus was on trial.
Isn't this sort of mean of Jesus? I'm sure the last thing Peter wants to be reminded of is that time that he boasted of dying while fighting for Christ and then turning his back on him when Jesus needed him the most. On top of that, Jesus goes on to explain that Peter will die a pretty gruesome death! This is not the kind of reconciliation we see in the movies. We do not see:
Peter: I was whack.
Jesus: Let's hug it out.
To understand this, I think you have to understand Peter. He is the leader of the disciples, a bold man on the surface. But this boldness isn't supported all the time. Even though Peter has the ambition to see Jesus walking on water and asks Jesus to let him do it too, he is frightened by the wind.
From Matthew 14:
********************************************
During the fourth watch of the night Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. "It's a ghost," they said, and cried out in fear.
27But Jesus immediately said to them: "Take courage! It is I. Don't be afraid."
28"Lord, if it's you," Peter replied, "tell me to come to you on the water."
29"Come," he said.
Then Peter got down out of the boat, walked on the water and came toward Jesus. 30But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, cried out, "Lord, save me!"
**************************************************
Later, in Matthew 16:
***********************************
21From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.
22Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!"
23Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."
24Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25For whoever wants to save his life[h] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it.
****************************************************
Finally, it's important to understand why Peter denied knowing Jesus in the courtyard. Not only was Peter very upset that Jesus wasn't going to be the kind of Messiah Peter wanted him to be, Peter was clearly scared for his own life. Peter is shocked and horrified when Jesus tells him in the garden that he has to die on the cross. I quote these passages trying to gain a little insight into the psychology of Peter. And I think it's not much of a stretch to say that Peter had a huge fear that many people share: the Fear of Dying.
This is why it's so important when Jesus says that Peter will die. He addresses the elephant in the room. But something has happened in the last few weeks that makes Peter able to lead the new church and suffer imprisonment and eventually death. That something, of course, is Christ's death and resurrection.
As Paul will later write, "Death has been swallowed up in victory. Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?"
As proper a note to end on as any. E'en so, Lord Jesus, quickly come.
If reading this Gospel has changed one view of mine, it is my treatment of the miraculous and the evidence we have for Christianity. When asked for 'proof' of the validity of my religion, I used to say that faith is all the proof we will ever have. Indeed, if God had given us stronger proof (say, a giant message scrawled in the sky) it would destroy the value of belief. It's easy to get a test right if you're told the answers.
But I'm beginning to reconsider this. We are told, ultimately, that faith is needed to believe in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and that this faith is created by the Holy Spirit. After all, when John runs to the tomb, we read simply that he saw and believed. But for those of us with weaker faith, we're given a lot of remedial help. Thomas puts his hand into Jesus' side and feels where the nails went through his hands. Jesus performs all sorts of miracles and John writes that 'these words are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.'
So it's not like God hasn't been helping us out. When asked for 'proof' of the validity of Christianity, why not say that Jesus was born of a virgin, turned water into wine, healed the lepers, gave sight to the blind, had a loud voice from heaven exclaim 'This is my Son- listen to him!', walked on water, raised the dead, fed the 5000, calmed the storm, and rose from the dead himself? You might not believe that evidence, but that belief comes as a consequence of faith.
Anyway, on to the final chapter of John's gospel, which has lots of applications for the big-c Church, as well as simple reconciliation for all men.
********************************
Jesus and the Miraculous Catch of Fish
1Afterward Jesus appeared again to his disciples, by the Sea of Tiberias.[a] It happened this way: 2Simon Peter, Thomas (called Didymus), Nathanael from Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples were together. 3"I'm going out to fish," Simon Peter told them, and they said, "We'll go with you." So they went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing.
4Early in the morning, Jesus stood on the shore, but the disciples did not realize that it was Jesus.
5He called out to them, "Friends, haven't you any fish?"
"No," they answered.
6He said, "Throw your net on the right side of the boat and you will find some." When they did, they were unable to haul the net in because of the large number of fish.
7Then the disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, "It is the Lord!" As soon as Simon Peter heard him say, "It is the Lord," he wrapped his outer garment around him (for he had taken it off) and jumped into the water. 8The other disciples followed in the boat, towing the net full of fish, for they were not far from shore, about a hundred yards.[b] 9When they landed, they saw a fire of burning coals there with fish on it, and some bread.
10Jesus said to them, "Bring some of the fish you have just caught."
11Simon Peter climbed aboard and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn. 12Jesus said to them, "Come and have breakfast." None of the disciples dared ask him, "Who are you?" They knew it was the Lord. 13Jesus came, took the bread and gave it to them, and did the same with the fish. 14This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead.
********************************
This isn't really about catching fish, obviously. The disciples are about to become 'fishers of men'. They are about to start the Church. This section emphasizes that they do so ONLY by the grace of God- without Jesus' help, they catch nothing. This doesn't mean that there should be no outreach ministries or missionaries (quite the opposite), but it does mean that it is not worship bands or powerpoint screens that make Christians- it's the Holy Spirit. The best way to employ those outreach talents is to make them obedient to Christ.
*****************************************************
Jesus Reinstates Peter
15When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?"
"Yes, Lord," he said, "you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Feed my lambs."
16Again Jesus said, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me?"
He answered, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
17 The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?"
Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."
Jesus said, "Feed my sheep. 18 I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go." 19Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"
20Peter turned and saw that the disciple whom Jesus loved was following them. (This was the one who had leaned back against Jesus at the supper and had said, "Lord, who is going to betray you?") 21When Peter saw him, he asked, "Lord, what about him?"
22Jesus answered, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me." 23Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die. But Jesus did not say that he would not die; he only said, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you?"
24This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.
25Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.
************************************************************************
This is the part of reconciliation I was talking about. Peter just weeks before had denied ever knowing Jesus. The fact that Jesus asks him three times if he loves him evokes Peter's denying him three times in the courtyard as Jesus was on trial.
Isn't this sort of mean of Jesus? I'm sure the last thing Peter wants to be reminded of is that time that he boasted of dying while fighting for Christ and then turning his back on him when Jesus needed him the most. On top of that, Jesus goes on to explain that Peter will die a pretty gruesome death! This is not the kind of reconciliation we see in the movies. We do not see:
Peter: I was whack.
Jesus: Let's hug it out.
To understand this, I think you have to understand Peter. He is the leader of the disciples, a bold man on the surface. But this boldness isn't supported all the time. Even though Peter has the ambition to see Jesus walking on water and asks Jesus to let him do it too, he is frightened by the wind.
From Matthew 14:
********************************************
During the fourth watch of the night Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. "It's a ghost," they said, and cried out in fear.
27But Jesus immediately said to them: "Take courage! It is I. Don't be afraid."
28"Lord, if it's you," Peter replied, "tell me to come to you on the water."
29"Come," he said.
Then Peter got down out of the boat, walked on the water and came toward Jesus. 30But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, cried out, "Lord, save me!"
**************************************************
Later, in Matthew 16:
***********************************
21From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.
22Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!"
23Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."
24Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25For whoever wants to save his life[h] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it.
****************************************************
Finally, it's important to understand why Peter denied knowing Jesus in the courtyard. Not only was Peter very upset that Jesus wasn't going to be the kind of Messiah Peter wanted him to be, Peter was clearly scared for his own life. Peter is shocked and horrified when Jesus tells him in the garden that he has to die on the cross. I quote these passages trying to gain a little insight into the psychology of Peter. And I think it's not much of a stretch to say that Peter had a huge fear that many people share: the Fear of Dying.
This is why it's so important when Jesus says that Peter will die. He addresses the elephant in the room. But something has happened in the last few weeks that makes Peter able to lead the new church and suffer imprisonment and eventually death. That something, of course, is Christ's death and resurrection.
As Paul will later write, "Death has been swallowed up in victory. Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?"
As proper a note to end on as any. E'en so, Lord Jesus, quickly come.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Obama Victorious
You know what it feels like? It feels like when you're a kid, and you look down for a moment, and you lose your parents at Target and you completely freak out. You go to where they just were. You scan all the aisles. You're terrified.
But then you go around a bend and see them, and you know everything is going to be ok. The grownups are in charge.
But then you go around a bend and see them, and you know everything is going to be ok. The grownups are in charge.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
To Caesar what is Caesar's
Dedicated to Miss Chrissy Harbin, whose views diverge with my own in so many ways but who continues to be a person with opinions I value and trust.
This morning, there was a Bible Study between services on Christian Public Policy: Does Such a Thing Exist? The startling answer: probably, but we can't agree on too many specifics.
The discussion first looked at defining the separation between church and state, namely that there should be one.
Relevant Passages (Since we're Lutheran, we consider God's Word a pretty good source on this):
****************************************
Matthew 22:15-22
Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. "Teacher," they said, "we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"
But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"
"Caesar's," they replied.
Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."
When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.
*******************************************
Romans 13:1-7
Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
**************************************
Paul's letter to the Romans and Jesus' words here say that there should be a distinction between church and state. St. Augustine called these two cities.
The church is its own organization with its own rules and regulations, established to serve its own purposes (e.g., preaching Christ and him crucified), and the government is its own organization with its own rules, regulations, and purposes (e.g., provide for public welfare, common defense, secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity).
Put another way: Christianity isn't all that concerned with the speed limit on I-94, or CAFTA, or Card Check. It's concerned with sin, prophesy, redemption, evangelism, atonement, sacrifice, sanctification, grace, love, miracles, and salvation. Similarly, Congress does a good job creating the EPA, but can't do anything to protect your soul.
So, different roles, then. But what if those roles intersect? What if the government wants you to do something that God does not?
Relevant Passages:
*******************************************************
Acts 5:17-29
Then the high priest and all his associates, who were members of the party of the Sadducees, were filled with jealousy. They arrested the apostles and put them in the public jail. But during the night an angel of the Lord opened the doors of the jail and brought them out. "Go, stand in the temple courts," he said, "and tell the people the full message of this new life."
At daybreak they entered the temple courts, as they had been told, and began to teach the people.
When the high priest and his associates arrived, they called together the Sanhedrin—the full assembly of the elders of Israel—and sent to the jail for the apostles. But on arriving at the jail, the officers did not find them there. So they went back and reported, "We found the jail securely locked, with the guards standing at the doors; but when we opened them, we found no one inside." On hearing this report, the captain of the temple guard and the chief priests were puzzled, wondering what would come of this.
Then someone came and said, "Look! The men you put in jail are standing in the temple courts teaching the people." At that, the captain went with his officers and brought the apostles. They did not use force, because they feared that the people would stone them.
Having brought the apostles, they made them appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. "We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name," he said. "Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood."
Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men!
**************************************************************
Daniel 2:48-49, 3:1,4-6,8-12,16-18
Then the king placed Daniel in a high position and lavished many gifts on him. He made him ruler over the entire province of Babylon and placed him in charge of all its wise men. Moreover, at Daniel's request the king appointed Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego administrators over the province of Babylon, while Daniel himself remained at the royal court...
King Nebuchadnezzar made an image of gold, ninety feet high and nine feet wide, and set it up on the plain of Dura in the province of Babylon...Then the herald loudly proclaimed, "This is what you are commanded to do, O peoples, nations and men of every language: As soon as you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipes and all kinds of music, you must fall down and worship the image of gold that King Nebuchadnezzar has set up. Whoever does not fall down and worship will immediately be thrown into a blazing furnace."....
At this time some astrologers came forward and denounced the Jews. They said to King Nebuchadnezzar, "O king, live forever! You have issued a decree, O king, that everyone who hears the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipes and all kinds of music must fall down and worship the image of gold, and that whoever does not fall down and worship will be thrown into a blazing furnace. But there are some Jews whom you have set over the affairs of the province of Babylon—Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego—who pay no attention to you, O king. They neither serve your gods nor worship the image of gold you have set up."...
...Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to the king, "O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand, O king. But even if he does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up."
***************************************************************
Daniel also gets in trouble and is thrown into the lion's den for not toeing the religious company line. But he is one of the most powerful men in the government, as are his friends. So the principle here is clear: if the civil law of a government forces you to sin, you still shouldn't do it.
In the passage from Acts, a similar message. Even if the government prohibits righteous action, you still should do it.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Veggie Tales Tangent
I watch a lot of Saturday morning cartoons. One of those was the ostensibly Christian-ish 'Veggie Tales', which (kind of) retells Bible stories using anthropomorphic vegetables. They even do a show about the Hebrews in the fiery furnace that I quoted above.
Except they change the story importantly enough that it loses all (Christian) meaning. Instead of forsaking the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, these talking tomatoes are required (against their will) to sing a song to a giant chocolate bunny about how eating candy is awesome. So, instead of being a story about incredible faith in God and His deliverance, it becomes a story about standing up to peer pressure. And eating less candy.
While technically a virtue, eating less candy is pretty far down on the ladder.
Does this watered-down-to-the-point-of-meaninglessness cartoon reflect an alarming trend among modern Christianity today to spout uncontentious platitudes that is poisoning our children?
Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
You may have noticed that we are still a long, long, long way away from anything resembling Christian Public Policy. So far we have just two boundaries: different roles, and obeying God rather than Jim Doyle.
Here's a third we discussed this morning: be adamant about following the civil portions of the ten commandments. Thou shalt not murder. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not give false testimony. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Of course, I felt this third boundary begged the question a bit. Would Moses have made the same distinction between civil and religious law that we do? Surely the question now becomes, "which of the ten commandments counts as civil law?". Until recently, it was illegal to do many things on Sundays. Adultery isn't a crime, either, though governments often use it as a grounds for granting divorces, so it is recognized.
Not only are these commandments important for us to follow, but we have some kind of duty and obligation to get other people to follow them, too.
Relevant Passage:
*********************************************************
Ezekiel 3:18-19
When I say to a wicked man, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his evil ways in order to save his life, that wicked man will die for his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. But if you do warn the wicked man and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil ways, he will die for his sin; but you will have saved yourself.
*************************************************************
Now, that's an exhortation to the prophet Ezekiel to tell people what God told him. He's in trouble either way, so he might as well have the people of Israel be mad at him rather than God. Its application to government and Christian public policy is a little more tenuous, though.
The passage (and others) suggests that if I see people around me sinning, I am required to do something about it. This isn't incredibly controversial: if one person sees a murder in progress, most people would think it would be bad to not testify in court.
But this still isn't all that helpful. Take abortion as an example. Christians are required to do something about abortion, but what that something is isn't exactly clear. Ezekiel isn't supposed to go around with a glock and demand that the Israelites of his day shape up- he's just supposed to announce how angry God is. And whatever you think about abortion, it's very clear that Christians have announced how angry God is about it. But do we codify that into the civil laws of the United States of America? We still haven't had a whole lot of direction there, yet.
So that was about as far as the discussion this morning got. The last part we talked about was investigating John 18. Just a reminder of the important parts:
*************************************************
Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, "Are you the king of the Jews?"
"Is that your own idea," Jesus asked, "or did others talk to you about me?"
"Am I a Jew?" Pilate replied. "It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?"
Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."
*********************************************************
The discussion said that Christians too often hide behind this passage to not get involved in politics. The passage establishes Jesus as a religious leader, not a political one (at least, not yet). It doesn't say that Christians shouldn't be politicians.
Overall, I felt that the discussion lacked a little rigor and clarity. Saying that Christians should speak out against murder doesn't logically entail that abortion is to be punishable by death. Jesus and St. Paul seem to have a dim view of government: compared to eternal salvation, it's small potatoes. But Christians are also supposed to "take captive every thought and make it obedient to Christ".
So don't pay too much attention to government. Except when you should. Codify the Ten Commandments. Except for some of them. Don't speak for God through government. But do follow Christian principles even when you're not at church. Color me confused.
Barack Obama tried to lay out his governing philosophy as to where to draw the line in his book, "The Audacity of Bill Ayres". I don't feel like quoting it, but the basic premise was that Christians should not use religious arguments to write civil laws. The definition of human rights should be based on argumentation like whether a fetus has consciousness, or whether it can feel pain, or whether it will have a non-suffering-filled life, or whether it has 'agency'. It cannot be about a soul.
The governmental principles surrounding environmentalism should not be about stewardship or creation. They should be about sustainability, balancing industry and nature, or that the natural world has intrinsic value (provided that that value isn't put there by God).
Frankly, I find this disingenuous and, ultimately, ineffective. If my purpose is to enact environmental legislation, and my motivation is that God says we should be good stewards of the Earth, why should I translate that motivation into something more palatable for the general populace? Isn't that just, you know, lying? I don't really think that the aesthetic beauty of a tree is worth 20 utils, while the paper from that tree only provides 15. It's just a cloak.
Further, I just don't think that non-religious justifications for human rights are strong enough. Andrew Hanson and David Hume may think otherwise, but even non-Christian Thomas Jefferson wrote of a Creator giving people inalienable rights. If you have to invent a crypto-religious proxy-belief to convince other people, don't be surprised when that proxy-belief isn't as robust or convincing as the real thing.
Kind of like how Intelligent Design people are fence-sitters.
Why not mean what you say and say what you mean? If people don't like your environmental laws, they don't have to vote for you. If the court thinks you've violated the First Amendment, so be it.
I wish I could pack these ideas into Sunday morning only, Chrissy, but God's grace has few boundaries. So either kick the religious wackos out of your party, or come over to the Democrats with me. Don't you want to vote for a winner?
This morning, there was a Bible Study between services on Christian Public Policy: Does Such a Thing Exist? The startling answer: probably, but we can't agree on too many specifics.
The discussion first looked at defining the separation between church and state, namely that there should be one.
Relevant Passages (Since we're Lutheran, we consider God's Word a pretty good source on this):
****************************************
Matthew 22:15-22
Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. "Teacher," they said, "we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"
But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"
"Caesar's," they replied.
Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."
When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.
*******************************************
Romans 13:1-7
Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
**************************************
Paul's letter to the Romans and Jesus' words here say that there should be a distinction between church and state. St. Augustine called these two cities.
The church is its own organization with its own rules and regulations, established to serve its own purposes (e.g., preaching Christ and him crucified), and the government is its own organization with its own rules, regulations, and purposes (e.g., provide for public welfare, common defense, secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity).
Put another way: Christianity isn't all that concerned with the speed limit on I-94, or CAFTA, or Card Check. It's concerned with sin, prophesy, redemption, evangelism, atonement, sacrifice, sanctification, grace, love, miracles, and salvation. Similarly, Congress does a good job creating the EPA, but can't do anything to protect your soul.
So, different roles, then. But what if those roles intersect? What if the government wants you to do something that God does not?
Relevant Passages:
*******************************************************
Acts 5:17-29
Then the high priest and all his associates, who were members of the party of the Sadducees, were filled with jealousy. They arrested the apostles and put them in the public jail. But during the night an angel of the Lord opened the doors of the jail and brought them out. "Go, stand in the temple courts," he said, "and tell the people the full message of this new life."
At daybreak they entered the temple courts, as they had been told, and began to teach the people.
When the high priest and his associates arrived, they called together the Sanhedrin—the full assembly of the elders of Israel—and sent to the jail for the apostles. But on arriving at the jail, the officers did not find them there. So they went back and reported, "We found the jail securely locked, with the guards standing at the doors; but when we opened them, we found no one inside." On hearing this report, the captain of the temple guard and the chief priests were puzzled, wondering what would come of this.
Then someone came and said, "Look! The men you put in jail are standing in the temple courts teaching the people." At that, the captain went with his officers and brought the apostles. They did not use force, because they feared that the people would stone them.
Having brought the apostles, they made them appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. "We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name," he said. "Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood."
Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men!
**************************************************************
Daniel 2:48-49, 3:1,4-6,8-12,16-18
Then the king placed Daniel in a high position and lavished many gifts on him. He made him ruler over the entire province of Babylon and placed him in charge of all its wise men. Moreover, at Daniel's request the king appointed Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego administrators over the province of Babylon, while Daniel himself remained at the royal court...
King Nebuchadnezzar made an image of gold, ninety feet high and nine feet wide, and set it up on the plain of Dura in the province of Babylon...Then the herald loudly proclaimed, "This is what you are commanded to do, O peoples, nations and men of every language: As soon as you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipes and all kinds of music, you must fall down and worship the image of gold that King Nebuchadnezzar has set up. Whoever does not fall down and worship will immediately be thrown into a blazing furnace."....
At this time some astrologers came forward and denounced the Jews. They said to King Nebuchadnezzar, "O king, live forever! You have issued a decree, O king, that everyone who hears the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipes and all kinds of music must fall down and worship the image of gold, and that whoever does not fall down and worship will be thrown into a blazing furnace. But there are some Jews whom you have set over the affairs of the province of Babylon—Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego—who pay no attention to you, O king. They neither serve your gods nor worship the image of gold you have set up."...
...Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to the king, "O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand, O king. But even if he does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up."
***************************************************************
Daniel also gets in trouble and is thrown into the lion's den for not toeing the religious company line. But he is one of the most powerful men in the government, as are his friends. So the principle here is clear: if the civil law of a government forces you to sin, you still shouldn't do it.
In the passage from Acts, a similar message. Even if the government prohibits righteous action, you still should do it.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Veggie Tales Tangent
I watch a lot of Saturday morning cartoons. One of those was the ostensibly Christian-ish 'Veggie Tales', which (kind of) retells Bible stories using anthropomorphic vegetables. They even do a show about the Hebrews in the fiery furnace that I quoted above.
Except they change the story importantly enough that it loses all (Christian) meaning. Instead of forsaking the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, these talking tomatoes are required (against their will) to sing a song to a giant chocolate bunny about how eating candy is awesome. So, instead of being a story about incredible faith in God and His deliverance, it becomes a story about standing up to peer pressure. And eating less candy.
While technically a virtue, eating less candy is pretty far down on the ladder.
Does this watered-down-to-the-point-of-meaninglessness cartoon reflect an alarming trend among modern Christianity today to spout uncontentious platitudes that is poisoning our children?
Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
You may have noticed that we are still a long, long, long way away from anything resembling Christian Public Policy. So far we have just two boundaries: different roles, and obeying God rather than Jim Doyle.
Here's a third we discussed this morning: be adamant about following the civil portions of the ten commandments. Thou shalt not murder. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not give false testimony. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Of course, I felt this third boundary begged the question a bit. Would Moses have made the same distinction between civil and religious law that we do? Surely the question now becomes, "which of the ten commandments counts as civil law?". Until recently, it was illegal to do many things on Sundays. Adultery isn't a crime, either, though governments often use it as a grounds for granting divorces, so it is recognized.
Not only are these commandments important for us to follow, but we have some kind of duty and obligation to get other people to follow them, too.
Relevant Passage:
*********************************************************
Ezekiel 3:18-19
When I say to a wicked man, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his evil ways in order to save his life, that wicked man will die for his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. But if you do warn the wicked man and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil ways, he will die for his sin; but you will have saved yourself.
*************************************************************
Now, that's an exhortation to the prophet Ezekiel to tell people what God told him. He's in trouble either way, so he might as well have the people of Israel be mad at him rather than God. Its application to government and Christian public policy is a little more tenuous, though.
The passage (and others) suggests that if I see people around me sinning, I am required to do something about it. This isn't incredibly controversial: if one person sees a murder in progress, most people would think it would be bad to not testify in court.
But this still isn't all that helpful. Take abortion as an example. Christians are required to do something about abortion, but what that something is isn't exactly clear. Ezekiel isn't supposed to go around with a glock and demand that the Israelites of his day shape up- he's just supposed to announce how angry God is. And whatever you think about abortion, it's very clear that Christians have announced how angry God is about it. But do we codify that into the civil laws of the United States of America? We still haven't had a whole lot of direction there, yet.
So that was about as far as the discussion this morning got. The last part we talked about was investigating John 18. Just a reminder of the important parts:
*************************************************
Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, "Are you the king of the Jews?"
"Is that your own idea," Jesus asked, "or did others talk to you about me?"
"Am I a Jew?" Pilate replied. "It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?"
Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."
*********************************************************
The discussion said that Christians too often hide behind this passage to not get involved in politics. The passage establishes Jesus as a religious leader, not a political one (at least, not yet). It doesn't say that Christians shouldn't be politicians.
Overall, I felt that the discussion lacked a little rigor and clarity. Saying that Christians should speak out against murder doesn't logically entail that abortion is to be punishable by death. Jesus and St. Paul seem to have a dim view of government: compared to eternal salvation, it's small potatoes. But Christians are also supposed to "take captive every thought and make it obedient to Christ".
So don't pay too much attention to government. Except when you should. Codify the Ten Commandments. Except for some of them. Don't speak for God through government. But do follow Christian principles even when you're not at church. Color me confused.
Barack Obama tried to lay out his governing philosophy as to where to draw the line in his book, "The Audacity of Bill Ayres". I don't feel like quoting it, but the basic premise was that Christians should not use religious arguments to write civil laws. The definition of human rights should be based on argumentation like whether a fetus has consciousness, or whether it can feel pain, or whether it will have a non-suffering-filled life, or whether it has 'agency'. It cannot be about a soul.
The governmental principles surrounding environmentalism should not be about stewardship or creation. They should be about sustainability, balancing industry and nature, or that the natural world has intrinsic value (provided that that value isn't put there by God).
Frankly, I find this disingenuous and, ultimately, ineffective. If my purpose is to enact environmental legislation, and my motivation is that God says we should be good stewards of the Earth, why should I translate that motivation into something more palatable for the general populace? Isn't that just, you know, lying? I don't really think that the aesthetic beauty of a tree is worth 20 utils, while the paper from that tree only provides 15. It's just a cloak.
Further, I just don't think that non-religious justifications for human rights are strong enough. Andrew Hanson and David Hume may think otherwise, but even non-Christian Thomas Jefferson wrote of a Creator giving people inalienable rights. If you have to invent a crypto-religious proxy-belief to convince other people, don't be surprised when that proxy-belief isn't as robust or convincing as the real thing.
Kind of like how Intelligent Design people are fence-sitters.
Why not mean what you say and say what you mean? If people don't like your environmental laws, they don't have to vote for you. If the court thinks you've violated the First Amendment, so be it.
I wish I could pack these ideas into Sunday morning only, Chrissy, but God's grace has few boundaries. So either kick the religious wackos out of your party, or come over to the Democrats with me. Don't you want to vote for a winner?
Friday, October 10, 2008
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)