Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Reactions #4 and #5

Very good points.

We spoke of this a bit already but, it reminds me when I was smoking pot. It felt cool because it was illegal. It was a risk and there were consequences. It feels too good to rebel especially when you disagree with those who decide what is right and wrong.
-C



this is great, really. you helped me put my finger on why it makes me uncomfortable when politicians advertise their religious affiliations so much. It's not that i don't want to elect christians, I just don't know why I should vote for someone who publicly declares that they are a Christian just because they said they are.
-J

Reaction #2

I would add that it is "in relationships" that we discern what the truth is to begin with. The fact that we have a Bible at all speaks to the community of Christians who came together and decided what was and was not Scripture. God did not drop a list of rules out of the sky, though sometimes I wish he would. He did not speak to us directly, telling us not to eat of this tree or that tree. No. He gave us the witness of fallible, broken people, some of whom received prophecy from him, some of whom just tried to follow his rules of worship that they might relate to him, some of whom walked and talked with his Son Jesus.

Some of these people got drunk with wine, and it was good (read the Proverbs); Jesus even made some wine for a wedding because he believed in celebrating. None of these people had any concept of an equal relationship between men and women. Girls were property, given by their fathers in exchange for a dowry. Extra-marital sex amounted to financial theft from the girl's family.

Here are but two examples where a community, in loving relationship, must discern God's will for what is the healthiest, most peaceful, most loving way to live. In my humble opinion, this process involves not merely communicating God's truths as though we already understand them, but struggling, in community, to understand and apply them in a very different context from when they were presented in Scripture.

Alcohol, sex, anger, poetry, silence, baseball -- all of God's gifts are wonderful as long as they are used carefully and not abused. Will this drink or this sex or these words I am writing help you and me, or harm us? If they draw people closer together, fostering peace, then they are God's gifts, not to be feared.

To address your bigger point: God forbid a politics based on fear. The politics of Jesus is a politics of grace and love, inviting everyone into God's bounty.

-from J

Reaction #3

I agree with so much of what I just read. I do, however, disagree with your conclusion. In my opinion, to take God out of the state is to condemn America. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorra for their lack of morality and Christian influence. Abraham pleaded with God that if there were only 10 righteous people left that he would save the city. God also saved the ship that Paul was riding on his way to Rome that became lost in the storm. The reason he saved the ship was because of Paul. I’m not going to say that I look up to McCain spiritually, but I would love to vote for a president that truly has a heart after the Lord. This is not the case because I’m trying to exclude gays or make abortion illegal, but because I think it would be for the best interest of America.

Did you know that there are Chinese people coming to America on mission trips? China is evangelizing us! We are in danger of God’s judgment, and perhaps the reason why his hand is being held back is because of the Christian influence that is still here. Are we willing to pay the price of losing our morals in order to have lower taxes?

And where do we draw the line? I completely agree that we are going to see change through relationship and not through law, but I don’t think that means we should do away with the law. Should we legalize drugs and prostitution just because it is going to happen anyway? I’m not going to change a drug user by making a law against it, but by loving on him…agreed. But allowing him to destroy his life by something we know is wrong is not very loving.

I don’t think we are doing American any favors by separating it from the moral laws described in God’s Word.
-from CM

Reaction to Separate but Equal #1

I think upon first reaction that I agree with you on all major points
you made. It seems that all too often the church DOES try to control
politics by forcing their beliefs and convictions on the masses
through political means and gains of power. When discussing this with
some people I almost feel guilty, like I should be more on the other
side. I would not personally promote abortion, gay marriage,
over-consumption of alcohol or marijuana. However, I don't think that
just because that is my personal conviction that it should be law. So
many Christians try to say that this nation was founded on Chritian
beliefs, therefore, the Christian church and position should still be
the foundation and the solution to governments problems. I can't
agree, at least not fully. The founding fathers came for religious
freedom. It was because of similar oppression in Britain that they
came here. Yes, they were Christians, but what if they were muslims
coming for religious freedom? I somehow doubt that they would have
agreed with oppression against another religion as long as it wasn't
theirs. For example, I don't believe that politics and government
should preach and force Christian ideals just as I don't think they
should force Muslim/Buddhist/atheist etc. ideals. Take gay marriage. I
disagree based on Christian conviction. However, does that mean that I
should say it should be outlawed for everyone, because I disagree
means everyone should be forced to see it my way through state mandated
laws? I don't know. I realize if I said to most any Christian that I
wouldn't be totally appauled if it became legal that they would be
shocked and appauled by me and likely throw dozens of scriptures down
my throat about why it's wrong. But, what if state law said it was
illegal for me to go to a Christian church? Or illegal for me to send
my child to a Christian school? Or illegal to celebrate Christian
holidays? I think that all too often Christians are close-minded to
the point of not even listening to another side or lifestyle. Not that
we should be condoneing of it, but also not so close-minded that we
arrogantly assume that everyone should, in a way, be forced to believe
and act as we do. Anyway, I think that you got at the heart of the
matter. We should focus more on individuals and relationships as a
means to change hearts and actions and not politics and forced laws.
-from A

Why not to just pick the abortion issue like a booger when voting


Separate and Equal
The gospel of Jesus Christ says simply that no natural man can fulfill the law. No one is good enough, no one can be perfect. So one who was perfect came from above, fully God and fully man. He fulfilled the Old Testament law by forming a path for relationships between God and man.
Rules without relationships create anger, bitterness, and the word often heard in the church: legalism. Imagine being told by a stern authority with whom you had no desire to talk to or to please—not to cross the street, not to put your hand on a hot stove, not to kiss a pretty girl, not to speed, not to pursue a life of creativeness. Some may not have to imagine this. Authority may be given by someone other than you, but only you decide to respect certain authorities. Respect comes through relationship or through fear. Maybe that stern authority would whip you with a belt if you did such things, but does that ever really rid those desires?
Now think of a loving father, one who takes you to the park when he gets the chance and ties your shoes so you don't trip and makes you peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. In love, he tells you not to cross the street ... and then gives you a reason why. He walks you through the process of looking both ways and reminds you of the consequences of not doing so. After a few times of holding your hand as you do so, he lets you do it on your own. If you forget, and he sees, he'll correct you, possibly even yell at you. But as you grow older, he trusts when you cross without him, you'll continue practicing what he's taught.
This is why I believe Church and State should be separate.
Let's take the example of abortion. That stern authority tells you not to get an abortion. Tells you you can't. Tells you you are stupid for having slept with someone you shouldn't have. Continually condemns the things you do. The child is only a reminder of that condemnation because of a misconstrued desire for your "good." Let me be clear: I do not condone abortions. Anyone I have a right to tell my opinion on abortions, I will do so. That right comes with relationship. Morally, I don't think abortions are right even in rape cases. If I were in that position, I am 95 percent sure I wouldn't have one. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's moral. Legally, it's OK to have an affair. You don't get thrown in jail for that. Legally, it's OK to get drunk. Morally, neither one of these things are right. If abortion becomes illegal, just like Prohibition times, the action will still happen, just under sticky and detestable conditions.
Separation of Church and State was an idea taken from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in 1802. He said:
"Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."
The forefathers were escaping religious persecution from Great Britain. This is why their mindset (although many of them Christians) was religious freedom to all. The oppression felt by the crushing hand of the crown was enough to make them sail the 3,325 miles across the Atlantic in hopes of a new life.
Christ said he came to bring us an abundant life. Christians might disagree on many things, but the concept of a relationship with Christ is clear throughout the New Testament. Politics exist within the church, for anywhere a body of humans are gathered, politics exists. But should the church exist in politics? No. Why? Because man's corrupted heart will turn religion into a stepping stone for increased power, persuading people their stance can be equated to God's stance.
It makes me nervous when I hear of a politician being invited to a church in hopes of gaining votes. If that politician comes to the pulpit and preaches the Word, OK. But if he comes stating if you vote for him, you vote for God's man in office, I won't have any of it.
Blaise Pascal said, "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction."
We are human, and therefore we are fallible. We sin. Our hearts are deceptive above all things and beyond cure. Power corrupts. My will can never perfectly be God's will. I live in a corrupted world, and that pollution is part of why I am here. Can I be a politician and a Christian, absolutely. Just as I can be a doctor and a Christian, a journalist and a Christian. But I should not use my religion as a platform to try to convince readers I'm a better writer than the heathen Joe Schmoe. I am fully a Christian and I am fully a writer. Therefore the two will overlap. (Hence why I wrote this.) But I will not go only to Christians for stories. The truth will set you free, Jesus said. The truth is not that the U.S. is made of only Christian views. When I write columns, my beliefs always come out. I must create respect by showing my serious attempts of unbiased journalism. Then the prostitutes, the gays, the God-haters, the religious right that I rarely fully agree with might actually read my column and be reminded that when I interviewed them, I did so with respect and actually listened to what they had to say. Christians are too loud. You can tell me to shut up, I need to more often than I do. James tells us to be quick to listen and slow to speak. Listening is one of the best relational tools.
In any arena of life, when those who don't have a relationship with me try to convince me to do something they like, whether it be door-to-door Jehovah's Witnesses or gay rights activists ... I might talk to them just to practice my arguing skills, but I'm not really listening to what they say.
The way to reduce the abortion rate or the gung-ho desire for legalization of gay marriages or even the desire for marijuana is not through the government, it's through relationship. When the government creates more laws, it needs more people to enforce them. (Which means more raised taxes.) I have talked to law enforcement officials who say that jails are crowded with pot smokers. Time is spent on the smaller issues, when we have serial killers and rapists living civilian lives. Making abortion illegal will only create more work for police departments who seem to be short-staffed all over the United States.
Church and State must be separate, but personal beliefs and convictions can never be separate. That is why we vote for a candidate (hopefully) based on the issues, we vote for the man or woman whose problem-solving technique is most like ours. Church and State in my head are equal. The presence of an active Church is just as important as an active political life. But neither one comes above my relationship with Christ.
Jesus cannot be our excuse for an insatiable desire for power, an insatiable desire to make everyone believe what we believe. It is by example we must lead, it is by relationships we will change the hearts of men — does that not imitate Christ more than anything else?

Monday, October 13, 2008

Husband and Wife



In a little over two months, I'm going to be a married woman. That's crazy!
The scariest thing about it is: am I ready? I'm not worried about being with only one man the rest of my life because I've looked forward to that my whole life, and waited around a lot for a good one. I'm not worried about only kissing one guy; and I'm not at all worried about that one guy being J. What I am worried about is if I am ready to be as selfless as it takes to make this work.

Juggling our own feelings for each other and for our careers and for our families is more than difficult.
Backswinging the bad attitudes sometimes feels like a game of raquetball. I'll smack this one, it will hit the wall and then he has to hit it away again. If it's not one thing, it's another.
Kicking away the past and pressing on to the future takes quite the effort sometimes.
Sharpening our minds to understand what it takes to be a responsible adult and put away childish things only makes me want to throw a temper-tantrum.
Organizing our lives and all the paperwork involved: doctors bills, appointments, checking accounts, rent checks, phone bills, car, health, renter's insurances. Good grief Charlie Brown.
Surviving: can we stay afloat in a sea of time spent on red tape, cooking, cleaning, phone conversations, shopping, mowing, moving, shaking (hopefully our booties a little bit).
Routine can be a great thing, but also stirs the desire for more within us.

Will we be in survival mode? What is the point of marriage? What are its goals? It seems as though marriage turns into a race ... "We've made it 5 years, can we make it 25?" I don't want to just survive. I don't want the goal of marriage to be quantified. I want it to be magnified, riplified, exemplified. Marriage should be a picture of Christ and the church, really that is its purpose according to the Bible. Therefore, it needs to be magnified because it needs to magnify the essence of love that Christ has given his church. Just like the ripples that one drop of liquid can make, marriage should have the ripple effect. The love J shows me, and the love I show him should not only riplify (take that Webster) between ourselves, but also toward others. As we leave a home of "love, mercy and truth" everyday, those qualities will follow us around like a shadow.

But is that too much to ask for? Maybe not. I hope the groove we start to find when the rings are exchanged is one that will include such things, one that reminds us to look to heaven first and then to each other. In our case, the wedding might happen more than once, (hah!) but the marriage doesn't. Sitting still, dealing with the issues, not running from the problems ... these things can make me cringe more than the word "keish" does. (My sister and I were scarred for life when we were forced to eat keish growing up.) But that is part of marriage's purpose: in such a relationship as this, it takes someone like J to look inside me, through me, around me, and tell me what he sees. I now have a better understanding of who I am and what I need to work on to be a better person. We both do. The refinement process is wonderful and oftentimes full of laughter, but it can wear me out sometimes.

I'm so thankful God gave me J, who makes me laugh at the worst times to go through this life-long refining process. I couldn't have even imagined a better or crazier kook to partner with ... I must remember that when God said "Eye has not seen nor ear heard, nor has entered into the heart of man what God has prepared for those who love him," he's talking about every step in life.

Friday, October 03, 2008

Church doesn't equal relationship




Separate and Equal
The gospel of Jesus Christ says simply that no natural man can fulfill the law. No one is good enough, no one can be perfect. So one who was perfect came from above, fully God and fully man. He fulfilled the Old Testament law by forming a path for relationships between God and man.
Rules without relationships create anger, bitterness, and the word often heard in the church: legalism. Imagine being told by a stern authority with whom you had no desire to talk to or to please—not to cross the street, not to put your hand on a hot stove, not to kiss a pretty girl, not to speed, not to pursue a life of creativeness. Some may not have to imagine this. Authority may be given by someone other than you, but only you decide to respect certain authorities. Respect comes through relationship or through fear. Maybe that stern authority would whip you with a belt if you did such things, but does that ever really rid those desires?
Now think of a loving father, one who takes you to the park when he gets the chance and ties your shoes so you don't trip and makes you peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. In love, he tells you not to cross the street ... and then gives you a reason why. He walks you through the process of looking both ways and reminds you of the consequences of not doing so. After a few times of holding your hand as you do so, he lets you do it on your own. If you forget, and he sees, he'll correct you, possibly even yell at you. But as you grow older, he trusts when you cross without him, you'll continue practicing what he's taught.
This is why I believe Church and State should be separate.
Let's take the example of abortion. That stern authority tells you not to get an abortion. Tells you you can't. Tells you you are stupid for having slept with someone you shouldn't have. Continually condemns the things you do. The child is only a reminder of that condemnation because of a misconstrued desire for your "good." Let me be clear: I do not condone abortions. Anyone I have a right to tell my opinion on abortions, I will do so. That right comes with relationship. Morally, I don't think abortions are right even in rape cases. If I were in that position, I am 95 percent sure I wouldn't have one. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's moral. Legally, it's OK to have an affair. You don't get thrown in jail for that. Legally, it's OK to get drunk. Morally, neither one of these things are right. If abortion becomes illegal, just like Prohibition times, the action will still happen, just under sticky and detestable conditions.
Separation of Church and State was an idea taken from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in 1802. He said:
"Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."
The forefathers were escaping religious persecution from Great Britain. This is why their mindset (although many of them Christians) was religious freedom to all. The oppression felt by the crushing hand of the crown was enough to make them sail the 3,325 miles across the Atlantic in hopes of a new life.
Christ said he came to bring us an abundant life. Christians might disagree on many things, but the concept of a relationship with Christ is clear throughout the New Testament. Politics exist within the church, for anywhere a body of humans are gathered, politics exists. But should the church exist in politics? No. Why? Because man's corrupted heart will turn religion into a stepping stone for increased power, persuading people their stance can be equated to God's stance.
It makes me nervous when I hear of a politician being invited to a church in hopes of gaining votes. If that politician comes to the pulpit and preaches the Word, OK. But if he comes stating if you vote for him, you vote for God's man in office, I won't have any of it.
Blaise Pascal said, "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction."
We are human, and therefore we are fallible. We sin. Our hearts are deceptive above all things and beyond cure. Power corrupts. My will can never perfectly be God's will. I live in a corrupted world, and that pollution is part of why I am here. Can I be a politician and a Christian, absolutely. Just as I can be a doctor and a Christian, a journalist and a Christian. But I should not use my religion as a platform to try to convince readers I'm a better writer than the heathen Joe Schmoe. I am fully a Christian and I am fully a writer. Therefore the two will overlap. (Hence why I wrote this.) But I will not go only to Christians for stories. The truth will set you free, Jesus said. The truth is not that the U.S. is made of only Christian views. When I write columns, my beliefs always come out. I must create respect by showing my serious attempts of unbiased journalism. Then the prostitutes, the gays, the God-haters, the religious right that I rarely fully agree with might actually read my column and be reminded that when I interviewed them, I did so with respect and actually listened to what they had to say. Christians are too loud. You can tell me to shut up, I need to more often than I do. James tells us to be quick to listen and slow to speak. Listening is one of the best relational tools.
In any arena of life, when those who don't have a relationship with me try to convince me to do something they like, whether it be door-to-door Jehovah's Witnesses or gay rights activists ... I might talk to them just to practice my arguing skills, but I'm not really listening to what they say.
The way to reduce the abortion rate or the gung-ho desire for legalization of gay marriages or even the desire for marijuana is not through the government, it's through relationship. When the government creates more laws, it needs more people to enforce them. (Which means more raised taxes.) I have talked to law enforcement officials who say that jails are crowded with pot smokers. Time is spent on the smaller issues, when we have serial killers and rapists living civilian lives. Making abortion illegal will only create more work for police departments who seem to be short-staffed all over the United States.
Church and State must be separate, but personal beliefs and convictions can never be separate. That is why we vote for a candidate (hopefully) based on the issues, we vote for the man or woman whose problem-solving technique is most like ours. Church and State in my head are equal. The presence of an active Church is just as important as an active political life. But neither one comes above my relationship with Christ.
Jesus cannot be our excuse for an insatiable desire for power, an insatiable desire to make everyone believe what we believe. It is by example we must lead, it is by relationships we will change the hearts of men — does that not imitate Christ more than anything else?