"I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day" by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

I heard the bells on Christmas day Their old familiar carols play, And wild and sweet the words repeat Of peace on earth, good will to men. I thought how, as the day had come, The belfries of all Christendom Had rolled along th'unbroken song Of peace on earth, good will to men. And in despair I bowed my head: 'There is no peace on earth, ' I said 'For hate is strong, and mocks the song Of peace on earth, good will to men.' Then pealed the bells more loud and deep: 'God is not dead, nor doth He sleep; The wrong shall fail, the right prevail, With peace on earth, good will to men.' Till, ringing, singing on its way, The world revolved from night to day A voice, a chime, a chant sublime, Of peace on earth, good will to men.

Meteorologists and Hijacked Language

     Language is an interesting thing. The ever-evolving definitions of old words and the introductions of new words in a language are fascinating. (Words like strategery and friending come to mind.) My recent encounter with a "Winter Storm Warning" has led me to a brief examination of the changing meanings of words in the English language, specifically American English.
     Meteorology is an area of study that many have yet to understand. It has often been said that the weatherman's job is perhaps the easiest owing to his ability to always be wrong, but remain employed in his area of "expertise." Nonetheless, I wonder how meteorology has contributed to the American English vocabulary ways.
    For example, I believe the word "warning" used to mean something more. I'm not blaming the National Weather Service for dumbing down the term. After all, the Department of Homeland Security might also be held in partial responsibility. In modern times, the word "warning" has evolved into a passing comment on something that might happen. For example, a tornado warning in southwest Missouri no longer means a tornado is on the ground. (In fact, a tornado warning may be issued for a small "hook echo" found on the radar image.) However, in the past the term carried more weight. A "warning" from a parent, for example, caused personal alarm and discomfort.
     I wonder, then, what other words will change in the near future. This age of helicopter parenting and extreme caution has taken away power from once potent words. Will new words have to be introduced into the American English vocabulary in order to accurately portray certain messages? Perhaps strong blizzards in the future will lead to the declaration of "Potential Wintery Disaster" by the National Weather Service. Anyways... It's something to ponder.

A Stranger with a Story & Cash without Explanation

     Tonight, I took a train into Chicago. My trips into the city are always enjoyable and each trip has its unique moments. This evening produced a unique moment involving a man begging for money outside Union Station. My encounter with the man prompted me to think more deeply about humanization and salvation. The brief encounter went as follows...
  
     I walk out of Union Station in search of my friend. Before I have the opportunity to reach into my pocket in order to retrieve my cell phone and call my friend, a man approaches me. The man appears to be close to my age and is smoking a cigarette. He begins to tell me how he is not from the Chicago area. Apparently his bus from Madison dropped him off in Chicago, but proceeded to transport his luggage to his house in Indiana. The individual then requests $11 for a bus ticket. (I was skeptical of his story from the beginning.) Nonetheless, I reach into my wallet and handed over a couple of dollar bills. He had told me in the brief conversation that he would pay me back if I gave him my mailing address. I tell him not to worry about it. The man then walks up to another guy and begins to retell his story. I carry on with life and proceed to call my friend to find her location.
  
     I almost immediately considered my failure to mention my faith in Jesus Christ. In addition, I began questioning whether I gave the man some cash with the pure intention of helping him. (Perhaps I gave the guy some money simply to get him away from me.) These thoughts led to deeper questions concerning the effectiveness of holistic ministries in proclaiming the message of the gospel.
     Many attribute the following statement to St. Francis of Assisi: "Preach the gospel always, if necessary, use words." I disagree. How is the recipient of Christian service to hear the gospel, if it is not presented with words? As a Christian, I handed a stranger some money. That stranger has no idea that I am a Christian. I failed to communicate in word the love of Jesus Christ that compelled me to show compassion.
     I'm still pondering the issues that arose in my mind tonight. However, I believe the experience was a good reminder of the necessity of communicating the gospel in word, not only good deeds.

Community: Fellowship of the Weak

     Community is a very significant gift. However, I often perceive it as the large box under the Christmas tree- You don't necessarily know what it is, but you know you want to open it. Everyone speaks of community as this excellent idea of true fellowship with fellow humans. In the Christian context, community is the ideal characteristic of the church. Nonetheless, many (including me) do not fully grasp the fullness of community.
     I have recently experienced community in various contexts. These include dinner with a small group of friends, making s'mores around a fire pit, and conversations with fellow graduate students. A common theme has arisen from these social events- weakness. Many of us often look at community as a strong group of strong people (perhaps with above average intellect) whose relationship with each other will lead to significant contributions to society as a whole. This ideal, however, misses both the reality of community on earth and the essential idea of community.
     I propose that community is designed for the weak. (Note: We are all weak in some form or another.) It is only through gathering with other weak individuals and sharing our inabilities and shortfalls that we may approach the ideal of community. I will offer an example... As a graduate student, I encounter many conversations about the future. My friends and I discuss possible career goals or dreams of changing the world through our future efforts. Eventually, we come to realize that we are not ultimately in control of the future. No matter how organized we may think our lives are, God is ultimately the history maker.
     Some would argue that this doesn't sound like community, but a group of depressed, cynical individuals. (I must admit that I am prone to cynicism.) However, this is not the case. My relationship with fellow followers of Christ produces hope, not dread. While we may discuss our failures or quickly come to realize that we don't really know what we're doing with our lives, we are reminded of the grace of God. We will inevitably fail at things, such as class assignments. However, God continues to love us. We, as a community, are united in our love for God and appreciation of salvation through Jesus Christ. In addition, we are united in our hope that God will ultimately work out things for His glory. In this we rejoice.
     Our weaknesses serve as a reflection of the strength of God. As a community of believers, we can come together, discuss issues, and ultimately find hope in the sovereignty of God and His work in/through history. It is clear that this does not always occur when I meet with my Christian brothers and sisters. (For we continue to experience the effects of sin.) Nonetheless, when this does occur, it is amazing!
     I am truly thankful for the gift of Christian community, and the opportunity to see a glimpse of true community as I fellowship with fellow believers. To God be the glory.

Yoga- Yes and No

     I recently read an article entitled, "Southern Baptist leader on yoga: Not Christianity." The article gives a brief summary of a discussion (or debate) that has been occurring among many Christians over the past several years: Is yoga okay if you're a Christian? Albert Mohler, as well as John MacArthur, have argued against the practice of yoga. Still, others have encouraged the practice in order to grow in one's Christian faith. The article basically only addresses these two sides of the issue. I would like to propose a third side.

     First, I understand why individuals such as MacArthur are opposed to any resemblance of the practice of yoga in the church. The ancient practice is an integral element of Hinduism, a system of belief that simply does not mesh with Christian teachings. I suppose individuals who oppose yoga are attempting to shield Christian believers from threats of syncretism and/or heresy. Nonetheless, I am not sure that the physical practice of yoga should be totally denied to the Christian believer.

     Second, I do not understand how Christians can justify the full practice of yoga in light of the spiritual components of the practice. I recall watching a video in which a female minister explained her practice of yoga as a form of worship in her weekly services. The minister did not deny the spiritual aspect of yoga, but chose to embrace it. Rather than eliminate the spiritual elements of the practice, the minister replaced the names of Hindu gods with "Jesus" or "the Holy Spirit." Perhaps it is the very existence of these Christian yoga congregations that justifies the response of the MacArthurs of the world. As previously stated, the Hindu spirituality within yoga is not biblical.

     Finally, I believe there is a third option concerning the issue of yoga and Christianity. The article in question notes that many individuals within the Christian community have written to Mohler explaining that they practice the physical elements of yoga while ignoring the spiritual elements. Mohler's response to such letters is that the individuals aren't actually practicing yoga. I would tend to disagree with this analysis. It is clear that yoga has a historical and cultural grounding in the regional birthplace of Hinduism. I'm not sure that simply referring to yoga as "intense stretching" in order to justify its practice is a proper technique for addressing the overall issue. The physical elements of yoga are culturally grounded and this must not be dismissed.

     Christians should not ignore the issue of yoga. The issue provides an opportunity to become more familiar with Hinduism and explore the foundational tenets of Christianity. Personally, I do not see anything inherently wrong with practicing the physical elements of yoga while avoiding the spirituality of the practice. I think it is wrong for the Christian to simply substitute Christian labels of deity for the names of Hindu gods. In addition, I think it is wrong to dismiss the issue by referring to yoga as something else if the spiritual elements are avoided. There must be a balance between Christian beliefs/practices and recognizing the cultural/religious moorings of yoga. Nonetheless, if the issue should remain two-sided, I must side with those who uphold Scripture (MacArthur and Mohler) rather than those who compromise it for the purpose of a good stretch and a good feeling (the minister of the Christian yoga congregation).

Embrace the Awkward

     I recently travelled to Chicago. One would think that this would be a common occurrence owing to my close proximity, but this was only my second time in the city. Nonetheless, I had a great time exploring different parts of the city with a friend of mine. We ate cevapi at a Bosnian restaurant followed by some coffee at a Bosnian cafe across the street. In addition, my friend and I visited the Pakistani/Indian area of Devon Avenue. Finally, we visited the Lake Shore area and returned to the predominantly Puerto Rican Humboldt Park. The afternoon was quite enjoyable.

     During my explorations I was reminded of a phrase (or should I say a life motto?) I came up with a while back- "Embrace the awkward." I will explain this concept in a moment. As we all know, each of us tends to be drawn to communities of people with similar ethnic backgrounds, economic statuses, or levels of education. This hard truth can be observed in the various ethnic communities scattered throughout the city of Chicago. This can even be observed in the cafeteria of a public high school. We feel comfortable among those who are similar to us.

     Nonetheless, there is great benefit with exploring other peoples and cultures. Much can be learned by spending time among people who are "different" from us. Whether the differences are economic, ethnic, or educational, one can easily gain better perspectives through diversity. My friend and I visited a Bosnian cafe and sat down for some amazingly strong coffee. It was evident that we did not "belong" there- two white Americans speaking English in an establishment where Bosnian is the common language. Nonetheless, this somewhat awkward occasion was quite enjoyable.

     The concept of "Embrace the awkward" tends to be a matter of attitude. Any one of us can find a community of people that is "different." However, the experience will only be fruitful with the correct mindset of the "outsider." One could enter a culture with a mindset of superiority, for example. This would not lead to a genuinely good experience. However, if one enters a situation with the mindset that "different" can mean good and awkwardness can lead to learning, then he or she will more than likely have a pleasant experience. The key is to not limit ourselves to one group of people or one culture. We need to get out and explore the world outside of our cultural box. Of course, in doing so we must have a positive attitude that is seeking to learn rather than dominate. My experiences (including my recent trip to the city) have taught me to not avoid awkward situations. Embrace them.

Embrace the awkward.

Communication... Hmm...

     Communication is an interesting phenomenon. How would we ever get along without it? For example, how would I even express my thoughts on communication apart from communication? This occurred to me when I was pondering the power of words. More specifically, the power to create with words. Whether it be the beginning of a process through verbal command or the distinct change in emotion that may arise at the sound of a kind word. Words are powerful. Even more so, communication is powerful. After all, feelings of anger and/or sadness through visual communications of war. Here are some thoughts regarding the power of communication...

     Communication is interesting owing to the requirement of two beings in order for it to succeed. The old saying concerning the sound of a falling tree in a forest without human presence comes to mind. Perhaps a more relevant illustration is needed. Let's say that there is a man in an abandoned town. He writes his thoughts on walls and even goes so far as to create a message with rocks on the outskirts of town in case an aircraft passes overhead. However, his efforts do not become communication without someone seeing and understanding what he has written. Again, communication goes beyond mere words.

     Communication is also interesting with regards to thoughts and creation. All of us think. However, our thoughts go nowhere without communication. Let's look at another hypothetical example. A U.N. representative visits a small region suffering from genocide at the hands of a dictator. She thinks about the situation. Her thoughts record the sightings of mass graves and she explores in her mind her moral obligation to end the evil acts. However, nothing will happen unless she communicates her thoughts to another. If she is the only witness and fails to communicate, the genocide continues. This may seem like an extreme example. Perhaps it is. Nonetheless, communication is powerful. Communication can create change in a specific situation.

     Communication is definitely something that deserves some pondering and discussion (or communication...). How can community arise apart from communication? How can thoughts become reality apart from communication? How can a message be given to another apart from communication? (I suppose communication is the giving of a message...) These questions in and of themselves show the significance of communication. I urge you to think. But, don't stop there... communicate.

Simplicity is So Complex

     I have noticed over the past few weeks the huge impact of nature on my life. I know what you may be thinking... Plants create the oxygen that you breathe. Of course nature has a huge impact on your life... Then again, perhaps you weren't thinking of that.
     So, I have interacted with natural phenomena multiple times since moving to Deerfield, IL. Campus is full of squirrels, chipmunks, and the occasional raccoon. In addition, there is plenty of grass, trees, and a pond I walk by almost everyday. It's wonderful to be surrounded by natural beauty in the forms of plants and animals!
     I tend to be the type of person who only uses the outdoors as a means of taking up space between my front door and my car. I suppose I'm not the only one out there who takes nature for granted. Nonetheless, multiple times I have experienced the joy of observing little outdoor creatures. A chipmunk scurries in front of me as I walk to class... A raccoon climbs up a tree and stares at me as I pass by... The wind causes the rustling sound of leaves to flood the air... These are quite simple events. Yet, they have impacted me greatly.
     Perhaps it is the fact that they are simple that I have become so enthralled. After all, I live in a society full of texting, internet browsing, eco-friendly cars, and other forms of complex technologies. Unfortunately, we have become so complex that the simple things are usually overlooked. Why pick up a pen and write a letter to a friend when one can type up a short note and send it over a vast network of towers and wires? It may be easier to shoot an email, but the process of its transmission is quite complicated.
     Perhaps I am making a big deal about nothing. Maybe I should view the practicality of complex systems and move on from the simplicity of past traditions and the beauty of nature. Nonetheless, I am grateful for the joy I have found in the simple things in life- a chattering chipmunk, short conversations with friends, the glare of a raccoon, or a simple greeting from a fellow student. I question whether such joy can be attained by playing a video game or sending a faceless email. It's something to ponder.

Book Burning is Never a Good Idea

     I recently heard about a church in Florida that has decided to label September 11, 2010 as International Burn a Koran Day. I have seen links to stories about the issue on the Drudge Report, but only recently read an article about the event. Here is a quick summary: Some pastor in Florida, along with the members of his congregation, has decided to burn copies of the Koran in an attempt to show independence from the oppression of Muslim terrorism. 

     I believe this event is wrong on multiple levels. First, let's look at the issue of burning books. I understand that some books are offensive to some people. I understand that some books are so horribly written that justification may easily be made for setting them ablaze. However, I question whether the destruction of literature is ever appropriate. As one who studies history, I find that it is important to preserve items from the past in order to prepare for the future. Nazi propaganda, for example, was horrid. Nonetheless, if we decide to burn up every pamphlet calling for the rise of a "superior" race, then we as a people will quickly forget about the horrors of the Holocaust. Perhaps, WWII propaganda is too extreme. So, let's look at the world of fables and fairy tales. What if someone decides that anything that is not blatantly scientific is worthy of being thrown in the incinerator? We will lose not only the joy of reading about fantastic worlds, but we will eventually lose our concept of art and beauty. So... Book burning serves no productive purpose (unless one is stranded in an abandoned cabin in the dead of winter).

     I would like to propose an alternative to book burning... Education. I will use Harry Potter as an example. My parents have never felt comfortable with the Harry Potter books. I recall being told that I should never read them owing to the wizardry and supposed links to satanic practices. However, I never recall hearing my parents call for a community book burning of the Harry Potter books (although I know of some people who may have supported such an idea). The key to dealing with controversial literature is education, and, beyond simple education, discernment. If you find a book to be disturbing, don't read it. If you would rather your children wait to read certain types of literature until they are older, give them some clear reasons why you have come to that decision.

     Of course, discernment does not limit itself to the categories of "read" and "don't read." Some books, however controversial, should be read. How are we to come to an understanding of Marxist Communism without reading the Communist Manifesto? How are we to come to an understanding of someone else's religion without reading the texts he or she considers to be sacred? We should not throw away books with which we do not agree. Instead, we should read books with a mind open to learning.

     I would now like to move on to another problem with the Koran burning event. Let's look at this from a biblical perspective. First, I have yet to find any verse in the New Testament that advocates the burning of literature. It is evident that the Christian response to a non-Christian religious text should not be the organization of a book burning. Instead, the Christian should respond with love and wisdom. While I do not believe the Koran to be a God-inspired text, I refuse to support its destruction owing my love for the Muslim people and common sense. 

     As a follower of Jesus Christ, I am called to love God, love others, and advance the Gospel of Jesus Christ. My love for God creates within me a love for others. The burning of another's sacred text fails to show love towards him or her. Also, I do not see how a Koran burning event will help with the advancement of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I fear that such an event will only create more barriers between Christians and Muslims, and, thus, hinder the spread of the Gospel. I do not believe that the motives of the pastor, or his church, in Florida are pure and focused on the Gospel.

     This brings up another significant problem. I noticed in the article that I read about the event that the pastor is sponsoring the event in order to resist the oppression of Muslim terrorism. His reasoning appears to be more focused on nationalism than the cause of Jesus Christ. (Newsflash: Christianity and America are not the same thing.) As a follower of Jesus Christ, my citizenship is in heaven. While I participate in the governmental functions of my country, my allegiance is to Jesus Christ. The pastor stated in the interview that he is not going to allow Muslims and terrorists to control him. I think he has his priorities in the wrong place. (Of course this brings up the problem of cultural Christianity in America, but I digress...)

     Finally, let's look at the potential results of this act of protest. The media has already reported negative backlash from Muslim countries. In addition, General Petraeus has warned that the event could be used by Muslim terrorists to justify acts of terrorism. I can't seem to find any positive outcome from this event.

     I am saddened by the ignorance of those who would rather burn religious books, than reach out in love to those of different faiths. As a follower of Jesus Christ, I believe the Gospel message is Truth. The only way to be forgiven of one's sins and be reconciled to God is through the blood of Jesus Christ. This is already a very offensive message to many. Nonetheless, the Truth is a necessary offense to those who do not accept it. The International Burn a Koran Day, on the other hand, is a very unnecessary, and unjustified, offense. The event is ridiculous. I hope that those who are not Christians will recognize that the event is not a genuine reflection of true biblical Christianity.

Glenn Beck's Rally: A Short Critique

     O how quickly we fall into the traps of man-made systems. The human attempt to have complete control over the humanly uncontrollable has led to the establishment of manmade kingdoms that forget the Creator. Man, unable to accept his current state, attempts to establish his own system of history, government, society, etc. However, the answer to man's problems is not man's solutions, but a reliance on his Creator.

     These brief thoughts arise from the "historic" rally that is taking place in Washington, D. C. under the leadership of Glenn Beck. Personally, I have never felt comfortable with Glenn Beck. Many of his thoughts and observations are interesting, but his conclusions and reactions to America's problems often leave something to be desired. I am not very familiar with the conservative rally currently going on in this nation's capital, but what little I know of it concerns me.

     First, I would like to point out my theological disagreement with Glenn Beck with regards to theology. Glenn Beck is a Mormon and I am a follower of Jesus Christ. Not too long ago, the Mormon faith was classified by many Christians as a cult. Nonetheless, the increased popularity of the Mormon religion and political influence amongst Mormons have led quite a few Christians in America to blindly accept Mormonism as simply another sect of Christianity. This is an unfortunate occurrence.

     Second, I would like to point out a broader problem that is illuminated by the rally in D. C.- politics. I have read a few articles concerning the rally. One of the main quotes used by writers of dramatically different political and religious backgrounds is, "America today begins to turn back to God." While I recognize the need for God in America (and every other country in the world), I am concerned by the deep connection Beck (and many conservatives in the United States) are making between America "turning back to God" and politics.

     Politics is not the answer. As I have previously mentioned in conversations with friends in the past, politics is a reflection of culture, not the vehicle for cultural change. The reasons for America's turn away from God go deeper than issues on the November ballot. A rally of thousands of FOX News viewers who dislike the current White House administration is not going to change the hearts of millions in the United States. Should the Republicans regain seats in November, the overall culture in America is not going to be reformed overnight (if it reforms at all).

     Glenn Beck's sensationalism appeals to many people. There is no doubt that he strongly believes in what he is doing. Nonetheless, these things do not justify his beliefs in a distorted version of Christianity or his attempts to change America through the ballot box. Beck is attempting to change hearts through a manmade initiative that focuses on the wrong priorities. I saw in one article that part of the speech noted the ability of each person in the crowd to change the world and make a difference through individual means. One moment Beck speaks about turning back to God while the next moment he advocates individualism. This seems odd to me. I continue to feel uneasy about Beck's influence on conservatives in America, especially those who profess Christianity.

     Nonetheless, Glenn Beck and the rally in Washington is nothing new. Man always attempts to find solutions to man's problems. Unfortunately, Beck (and apparently thousands of other Americans) believe the answer lies in the field of politics. (Although the movement is said to be more "American" than "political" in nature.) Man is flawed. Politics is clearly flawed. I shall reiterate: Politics is a reflection of the culture, not a means to changing culture.

TEDS: Academics and Community

     The last couple of days at Trinity have been incredibly amazing. I have already met some of the professors I will be learning from in the coming weeks and months. It has been a great privilege to shake hands with men of God who have not simply written influential books but lived lives devoted to service in the name of Jesus Christ. There have been a few moments during the past couple of days that I have sat in awe of this place and thanked God for bringing me to TEDS.
     Two things have arisen from orientation at TEDS- academics and community. These are two elements of life that have greatly intrigued me over the past couple of years. I have pretty much always been interested in academics, but only in recent years have I become enthralled with the concept of true community. I will take a moment to explore these two subjects briefly...
     I will begin with the academic element owing to my life experience with academics. It is clear that Trinity is an educational institution that seeks to equip men and women for service to God with an emphasis on increasing knowledge of the Bible, theology, and other disciplines. Nonetheless, I have come to realize that this institution hopes to accomplish something beyond head knowledge. It is clear that academics at Trinity is something, but not everything. I find this to be very encouraging.
     I will now turn to the subject of community. First of all, I would like to note that I am very introverted and socially awkward. Nonetheless, community is something that I long for- as does any human being. I have been able to meet a few people at Trinity. In addition, I have spent time in discussion with multiple individuals. It is clear from interactions with professors and other TEDS students that this institution seeks to foster a Christ-centered community. This element of TEDS is quickly becoming more important to me than the significant academic integrity of the Divinity School. Community that is focused on glorifying God is an amazing blessing!
     Needless to say, I have greatly enjoyed my first days at Trinity. I am thankful for new friendships, renewed friendships, and relationships that have yet to be cultivated. I thank God for bringing me to this place!

An Update

     A couple of months have passed since my last blog entry. Since that last post, many things have occurred in my life. I decided to provide a brief update concerning my life for those of you who may be wondering.
     For those of you who do not already know, I am no longer a student at Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary. Towards the end of April and the beginning of May I decided to transfer grad schools. There are multiple reasons for my decision, but this summer I have come to realize that the main reason may have arisen from a need to change environments and a desire to write a new chapter of my life.
     Owing to various friendships, I zeroed in on Trinity Evangelical Divinity School as my primary choice for continuing my education. In all honesty, I had looked at transferring to TEDS as early as the summer of 2009. TEDS has excellent academic programs and a structure of campus life that allows for students to be mentored by professors, in addition to fellow peers. Most importantly, TEDS focuses on spiritual development of the follower of Christ.
     So, I applied to TEDS during my final weeks at Liberty University. The process wasn't very complicated since I had begun the application the previous August. I received notification a few weeks later that I had been accepted in to the Intercultural Studies program. I arranged for housing, scheduled classes, ordered textbooks, and eventually packed my car to head to the Chicago area.
     I have been in Deerfield, IL for about three whole days. I've been spending my time putting together furniture and unpacking. [Note: IKEA is an amazing place!] I still have some more unpacking to do before fully beginning the process of "settling in." Nonetheless, I am very excited to begin classes and see what God has in store for the coming months.
     To those who have prayed for me- Thank you! To those who have continued to keep up with my blog posts- Thank you! Finally, to those of you who have come across my blog for the first time- I hope you'll return in the future.

Better PR or Radical Grace

     Many of you who read this blog on a regular basis (Thank you, by the way!) are familiar with a recent event that occurred in Virginia involving the dean of a seminary and his removal. I do not wish to be lumped with a certain group of bloggers, so I will leave specifics out of this post. However, for those who are not familiar with the situation, please see the link below.

Click here to see an article about the situation

     I must admit that my first reactions to the breaking news were feelings of happiness. I was pleased to see that the serious accusations were addressed and the investigative committee had arrived at some respectable conclusions. I was very skeptical of the investigative committee from the beginning and thought it may have been formed simply "to sweep things under the rug." However, it is now clear that the committee actually did something.
     Anyways...
     While I am pleased, for the most part, to see the committee take action I question whether the entire matter was handled in the best way. If you read the above posted link you will see the public statement made by the investigative committee. You may notice some logical inconsistencies. For example, the statement about multiple "factual statements" that were self-contradictory. Beyond such flaws, the statement fails to communicate anything really substantive. For example, few questioned the religious background of the individual.
     I believe the committee may have passed up an excellent opportunity to show grace in action to a watching world. While the committee admitted the individual's discrepancies and misstatements, at no point does the committee explicitly address the sin of lying. It seems as though the committee focused so much on downplaying the issue of deception that they neglected the significance of Christian grace.
     It is true that the committee showed grace to the extent of allowing the individual to continue to teach. However, such grace does not appear to many to be significant owing to the fact the committee did not come to any significant conclusions about the individual. I don't think many would say that a couple of instances of "misspeaking" warrants the entire removal of an individual from a seminary's faculty.
     I suppose I should stop rambling and get straight to the point. Evidence shows that the individual in question clearly lied. His contradicting statements were not simply examples of misspeaking, but were examples of outright lies. The committee should have published a statement that recognized the individual as a liar. Recognizing lies as simple "misstatements" is similar to recognizing an act of adultery by a minister as a simple "mis-meeting." He who lies is a liar. He who commits adultery is an adulterer. (Thank you, Way of the Master training videos.)
    
     Let's look at a (rough) hypothetical public statement from the committee:
"After a thorough and exhaustive review of the individual's public statements, a committee consisting of members of the Board of Trustees has concluded that the individual has lied. The contradicting statements made by the individual cannot be recognized as simple misstatements or discrepancies.
"The individual has cooperated with the committee and sought repentance. He will soon be issuing a public apology owing to the public nature of his sins.
"As Christians, we acknowledge the grace God has shown to each one of us. Scripture teaches that man has rejected God and sins as an act of rebellion against God. It is only through God's grace that man may approach his Creator. Scripture points to Jesus Christ as the ultimate example of God's grace.
"Owing to the grace we, as Christians, have come to know through a relationship with Jesus Christ we have decided to show grace to the individual in question.
"The individual's contract with this institution as Dean expires at the conclusion of June. However, we have decided to offer the individual a contract for a teaching position in the coming academic year. "

     I imagine that many would be surprised with such a statement. Such a statement recognizes the reality of the situation while also showing the public the grace shown towards the individual. The failure of the committee to recognize lies as lies prevents the significance of the institution's grace from being recognized. I believe some things remain swept under the rug following this investigation. It is disheartening to see that grace may have been sacrificed by the committee for the sake of better PR. I believe the committee missed an opportunity to turn a discussion about ignored sin into a public discourse on God's grace.

The Man Who Misspoke (A Short Story)

     There once was a man named Jonathan Ivan Kreznev. He was born in London in 1952 and moved to the United States in 1955. The Kreznev family, originally from Moscow, moved to England as the Soviets began to take power in Russia. Jonathan and his family enjoyed life in London, but decided better opportunities may be available across the Atlantic.
     Jonathan attended public school in a small town in eastern Pennsylvania. His father worked as a professor in Philadelphia while his mother stayed at home with Jonathan and his brother, Peter. As Jonathan grew older, he came to realize the negative sentiments among Americans towards the Soviet Union. The U-2 incident in 1960 was the first major event to catch the eye of little Jonathan.
Jonathan grew older and continued to hear of fragile U.S.-Soviet Union relations, in addition to stories of gulags and Russian spies. Jonathan and his family regularly attended services at a local baptist church and every once and a while the preacher would mention the cruelty of the Godless Soviets. Occasionally, the local bookstore put on display the latest book written by a Soviet dissenter.
     Jonathan enrolled in a history class during his high school years. He learned about the rise of communism in Russia and the Red scare and the Cuban missile crisis. Again, Jonathan realized the significance of communist Russians in the minds of many Americas. Jonathan studied Russian-American relations and began reading memoirs about gulag survivors who sought refuge in the safety of the United States.
     While in high school, Jonathan approached the altar at the local baptist church and accepted the grace of God. He had attended church services almost all his life, but had never made a decision to follow Jesus Christ. A couple of years later, Jonathan attended a small Christian college and then received a graduate degree from a seminary.
     As the years continued on, Jonathan Ivan Kreznev eventually received a doctorate degree. It was around this time that President Reagan opened up new talks with the Soviet Union. Many Americans were curious concerning U.S.-Soviet relations. A new generation had arisen that did not experience air-raid sirens or tense historic moments. Owing to his studies of Russian history, Jonathan began speaking to small groups of interested individuals concerning the rise of communism.
     Occasionally, Jonathan would mention his family's history in Russia. His grandparents refused to join the communist movement. This eventually led his family to move to London before the situation in Russia got out of hand. Many in Jonathan's audiences were enthralled by the experiences of the Kreznev family. Word slowly spread of Jonathan's lectures about Russia and his testimony of coming to Jesus Christ in high school. Eventually, Jonathan was speaking in large churches throughout the United States.
     And then it happened... The fall of the Berlin Wall.
     The whole world witnessed the fall of an empire. Horror stories began leaking out about atrocities committed by Soviet leaders, such as Stalin. Jonathan's speeches became more and more exciting to eager listeners. Instead of talking about his grandparents' struggles, Jonathan began talking about his family's close affiliation with the Soviets. As the months passed by, Jonathan's stories became embellished with tales of espionage and attempted assassinations. His father, once known as a professor, was actually a key figure involved in communist indoctrination of American students. Jonathan and Peter had not grown up in a local church, but only began attending as a result of pressure from fellow peers. According to Jonathan, his future was laid out for him. He was to fall in his father's footsteps and attempt to bring about a change in mindset among young Americans.
     Jonathan published a book about his experiences as a young communist that found faith in Jesus Christ. The book detailed accounts in the life of Ivan Kreznev. ("Jonathan" did not sound very Russian to the American public.) Ivan's new book increased his popularity among patriotic Christians in America. The stories of a young man escaping the grips of an evil, Godless empire opened even more doors for Ivan (a.k.a. Jonathan). These opportunities included multiple professorships at Christian colleges. In addition, Dr. Kreznev became the leader of a Christian organization devoted to theological education known as Freedom in Bible Discussion (FIBD).
     Years passed by and the mid-1990s arrived. The Soviet Union was no longer a current issue in American minds. In some circles of influence rumors began arising concerning Dr. Kreznev. A couple of editorials were written in the local newspapers of Philadelphia questioning the authenticity of Ivan's claims. One writer noted his relationship with the Kreznev family upon their arrival to the U.S. in the 1950s. Another individual pointed out her relationship with the family as a Sunday school teacher at a small baptist church in eastern Pennsylvania. In addition, a former student of Ivan's father sent a letter to his local newspaper detailing intense lectures in which Ivan's father condemned communism. Ivan heard of these rumors and chose to ignore them. When questioned about his family's history, Ivan would simply call discrepancies in his speeches as misspoken words.
     A small news agency began an investigation of the issue. Tapes of speeches presented by Dr. Kreznev were transcribed and analyzed. It became clear that tapes from the early 1980s sounded dramatically different from those of the late 1980s. Eventually, the mainstream media got ahold of the story. FIBD was forced to address the issue head-on.
     A small committee was formed by FIBD in order to investigate Kreznev's stories. Some expected the committee to quickly get rid of Kreznev owing to his outright lies. Others were more loyal to Kreznev and expected the committee to support Kreznev no matter what. After a few weeks of investigation, FIBD released a notice to the public explaining the conclusions of the investigation. While the explanation did not address specific discrepancies, the committee had come to the conclusion that Kreznev had made false claims about his past. The public statement from the investigative committee failed to consider Kreznev a liar and left many questions unanswered. Dr. Kreznev was immediately relieved of his position in the FIBD. However, he was allowed to continue as a member of the FIBD board. In addition, only two of the five Christian colleges that employed Kreznev decided to cut ties with him. According to the committee, Kreznev had simply "misspoken" many times...



Disclaimer: Names in this story are fictional. (ie. There is no actual person named Jonathan Ivan Kreznev.)

So Call Me a Hippie... Pacifism

    
     Another common theme associated with the hippie movement is pacifism. It only takes a few minutes of listening to popular songs from the 1960s to figure out that war was not accepted by the hippie movement. Members of the movement focused mainly on the Vietnam War and questioned whether the United States should be involved in conflicts that do not directly impact the U.S. Unfortunately, many took their anti-war stances to the extremes of mocking members of the military, making cruel accusations against soldiers, or, at the very least, ignoring the sacrifices made by those in the U.S. military in support of the United States.
    The anti-war campaign revealed another aspect of humanity- the desire for peace. I have personally struggled with the issue of pacifism for the last few years. Those who knew me prior to college (and even some who knew me my first year of college) viewed me as a patriotic Republican who supported all U.S. efforts at world dominance. However, since those years I have come to realize the dark side of war. The taking of life is a significant issue, whether the victim be young or old. While some become enthralled with war to the point of becoming blood-thirsty, the majority of people on this earth have a sense of longing for a time absent of conflict. The hippie movement, in part, reflected this desire for an end to all wars.
    The topic of pacifism may be viewed as a touchy subject in the United States, especially among Christians. While we long for peace, the long-term consequences of war (more land, resources, authority, etc.) can often overshadow the short-term consequences (loss of life, destroyed land, high costs, etc.) Many Christians in the United States decide to go with the agenda of the Republican party without question. However, one must question to what extent a follower of Jesus Christ can support warfare. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, for example, was a very peaceful man who spent many years studying theology. Nonetheless, he supported efforts to assassinate Hitler during the Second World War. Of course, few question whether WWII was a just war. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq... These wars are definitely more questionable in terms of just war theory.
    A couple of years ago I wrote down a small essay in my moleskin concerning my stance on pacifism. I recall hearing a Q&A with John Piper in which Piper explained his stance on handguns in the house. While not directly linked to war, Piper's words hit me quite hard. In the interview Piper questions whether a Christian man who confronts a burglar should have a gun to defend himself. Piper brought up the concept that it is better for the Christian to die than for the burglar (who is presumably not Christian) to be killed prior to hearing the gospel and possibly coming to faith in Jesus Christ. Of course, God's sovereignty comes into play regarding the salvation of any individual. Nonetheless, one wonders how war should be viewed in light of the gospel and missionary work. For example, should a Christian support a war in the Middle East when Muslims are predominantly being killed without ever hearing the gospel? As I noted earlier, this is a very touchy subject. One might argue, for example, that bringing freedom to a closed society will pave the way for Christians to eventually live freely in the society and spread the gospel.
    Pacifism is a fragile subject. To what extent should the Christian object to a war that is being fought by his home country? How can a Christian have a love for peace, yet support war efforts? At what point does the Christian actively pursue peace with regards to government actions? The questions go on and on. The hippie movement in the 1960s revealed the human longing for peace in a world torn up by war. However, few hippies understood that peace is impossible in a world filled with sinful humans. Nonetheless, perhaps we can learn something from the hippies- pacifism is something that should be considered.
    With regards to pacifism, I continue to ponder my stance. I hope you think about it, as well. Stay tuned for future posts...

So Call Me a Hippie... Community

   
     An event frequently linked to the hippie movement in the United States is Woodstock. The summer of 1969, referred to by some as the "Summer of Love" may be considered to be the peak moment in time for American hippies. The so-called Summer of Love focused heavily on the concept of "Make Love, Not War." The Summer of Love events that occurred in San Francisco during the summer of 1969 eventually led to the establishment of the first STD and drug rehab clinics in California. Whether it be at the music festival in New York or the summer activities in San Francisco, the summer of 1969 may be historically characterized by sex and drugs.
    Nonetheless, I would like to look at the root issues at play in the hippie events in the summer of 1969. Namely, the longing for community. Few can deny the deep desires of those involved in the hippie movement for a world of peace in which everyone may live freely. This is easily seen in the songs of peace and friendship that characterize the 1960s. In addition, the desire for a free environment is most notably identified with "free love" and excessive drug use. While the desires for peace and community are noble, the hippie movement obviously went too far with many of their ideas. After all, is an environment of addictive substances truly free? The government may not be controlling the individual, but clearly the addictive drugs take hold. Also, free love may seem like an excellent idea to those seeking love and acceptance, until STDs run rampant and hearts are broken.
    Community is an essential element of humanity. This is clearly seen in such movements as the Russian communists in the first part of the twentieth century, the Nazis in the 1930s, the hippie movement of the 1960s, and the modern day Tea Party movement. (Note: I am not placing all of these movements on the same level of morality.) People long to unite with one another under the banner of one cause. The communists united under the banner of economic equality. The hippies united under the causes of peace and love. The Tea Party movement unites under the banners of less government and lower taxes. Historically, one can see various movements of large groups of individuals uniting under a common purpose.
    While uniting in support of a certain cause may be viewed as respectable, many movements in history have united for the wrong reasons and led to more problems than solutions. An extreme example of this is seen in the Nazi movement. The problem is not the uniting of individuals, but the causes of that union. As previously mentioned, community is an element of being human.
    The hippie movement united in the name of love and peace, but led to excessive sex and drug abuse. In reality, the hippie movement focused on fulfilling sexual desires and creating a false utopia through psychedelic experiences. In essence- selfishness. While some may argue that hippies longed for a community that embraces everyone, most hippies joined the movement in order to fulfill carnal desires and feel good. The uniting of individuals for the purpose of promoting self-interests is not true community.
    The hippie movement revealed a desire for community. However, any man-made group who is united around man-made concepts cannot truly reveal community. A concept of love that leads to sex with everyone is not true love. The concept of freedom through peace that leads to drug abuse is not true freedom. True community focuses on union through selfless love. While the hippie movement identified the problems of a society that is focused more on conquering others than uniting as humanity, the movement failed to provide a solution- true community. I would contend that true community cannot arise apart from true love. Unfortunately, the hippie movement chose selfish love over love for others. Therefore, the attempt to become a large community by hippies in the 1960s must be identified as a perpetuation of man's problem of self-love rather than a solution to man's longing for a community of individuals who share selfless love.
     I believe in true community. I share the dream of every race and nation uniting in peace and love. So, on the surface level, the hippies got it right. However, on the level of practicality, the hippies totally got it wrong. As previously mentioned, true community must occur with true love. True love may only be realized through a relationship with the Creator, the very source of love. However, owing to man's rebellion against God, man is unable to have a relationship with the Creator through his own efforts. Therefore, man is unable to experience love in its purest, unselfish form. However, God came down to man's level in the person of Jesus Christ in order to provide a way to restore the relationship between man and God. This act of grace opens the door for man to experience true love and true community. The only way for true community to occur is through a union of individuals who have experienced true love offered by God and seek to reveal God's holiness to others. Therefore, community is not about seeking self-interest, but recognizing the love of God as revealed through Jesus Christ and seeking to show that love to others. Community in and of itself is not bad. The problem with community arises, as it did in the hippie movement, when we attempt to create an imitation of community in order to pursue our own interests, rather than pursuing love for the Creator and love for others.
     
     Stay tuned for more additions to the So Call Me a Hippie... series.

So Call Me a Hippie... New Blog Series Coming Soon

     I have come to realize over the past couple of years that many of the conclusions I have reached at this point in my life reflect the views of hippies in previous decades. Therefore, I have decided to begin a new series of blog posts entitled, "So Call Me a Hippie..." In these posts I will explore certain facets of my belief system typically associated with hippies, at least in terms of the broader subject. For purpose of clarification- many of my views differ from the hippie movement with regards to the specifics of certain subjects and/or how the subject is addressed publicly. For example, I am not one to join a crowd in the streets, seek a psychedelic experience through drug use, or dance around at a Woodstock-like event. Nonetheless, certain issues addressed by the hippie movement are issues that in part reflect my current views on various subject matters. I am sure the posts will not only be informative, but entertaining in nature.
   
     Please stay tuned for future "So Call Me a Hippie..." posts in the coming days and weeks.

Man Can't Climb the Mountain He Does Not Know

     I recently attended the Advance the Church conference in Raleigh-Durham, NC. Multiple speakers spoke for multiple hours over a course of two days. Many things were said regarding the problems faced by churches in the South. Often referred to as the "Bible Belt," the region has produced multiple generations of individuals who claim the social label of "Christian." Many churches have abandoned gospel centrality in order to grow in numbers and adapt to a region commonly known for its morality. Many "Christians" in the South live lives with emphases placed on moral standards, but without a true relationship with Jesus Christ. This problem has not arisen simply out of Southern culture, but a neglect on the part of local churches to confront morality in the name of Jesus Christ.
     The Gospel, contrary to the beliefs of many, is not centered on human efforts. It is impossible for the individual to attain salvation by his own efforts. This is made clear in Paul's writings regarding salvation "by grace, through faith." God does not lay out a step-by-step program for climbing the proverbial mountain to heaven. Many world religions lay out seemingly excellent programs for climbing the mountain and finding God. Islam gives the Five Pillars. Schools of Hinduism provide models for escaping suffering and reaching a perfect state. The difference with Christianity is the message of the Gospel. God does not lay out points of progression on a journey to the mountaintop. Instead, God comes down the mountain to the people. After all, it is impossible to actually reach the top of the mountain by human efforts alone. God, through His son Jesus Christ, climbs down the mountain, picks up the climber, and brings him into the presence of God.
     Aside from Christianity, the religions of the world teach that man may gain favor with God and reach the top of the mountain. Nonetheless, Christianity teaches that not only does man lack the physical strength and capabilities to ascend, man does not even want to climb the mountain. This sounds very strange- Of course man would want to climb the mountain and gain salvation. However, a quick examination of human motivations will reveal that man avoids the mountain and does not seek God on his own accord.
     There is no question that man is climbing proverbial mountains. The question is whether such mountains lead to salvation. The business man is climbing up the corporate ladder in an attempt to gain favor and prestige. The professor is clinging to the ropes of academia in order to spread his knowledge to others. These two scenarios reveal that man is climbing, but he is not climbing towards God but personal gain. So, if man in his sinful nature is seeking his own goals by climbing other mountains, how may salvation truly be attained?
     The answer lies in the Word of God. God must descend the mountain and bring the climbers to the top. This is a wonderful and beautiful concept! After all, the corporate mountain only reaches so high and the scholastic ropes are only so long. In addition, the mountains of business and education do not deal with the problem of sin and man's separation from God. Man is climbing the wrong mountains and doesn't even care.
     Many churches in the South have looked to the wrong mountains and provided climbing accessories that won't work. Morality does not lead to salvation. No matter how many good acts one commits, one cannot clean away the stains of sin. Man's righteousness can never reach the righteousness of God. This is why God provided Jesus Christ as a perfect sacrifice for the sins of mankind. Only a perfect sacrifice could erase imperfection. God, in His love and grace, sacrificed His son in order to provide a rescuer for mankind. Through Jesus Christ, man recognizes the mountain of salvation and is brought to the top through the efforts of Jesus Christ.
     Therefore, the Gospel is not man-centered, but God-centered. When man reaches the top of the proverbial mountain of salvation he cannot boast in his own efforts, but in the efforts of Jesus Christ. After all, man did not know about the mountain apart from God showing him the mountain. In addition, man did not climb the mountain with his own methods and efforts, but Jesus Christ carried him.
     The "mountain of salvation" is only an illustration. The illustration is not perfect, nor does it fully reveal the amazing power of God and His love. However, it is important to recognize that the Gospel points to glorifying God and the efforts of Jesus Christ, not man and his false morality.

"This university is named Liberty for a reason."

Liberty University recently became the first private organization to join the mass of lawsuits filed against the new legislation on health care. I encourage you to read the article posted by the News & Events section of Liberty University's website:
http://www.liberty.edu/news/index.cfm?PID=18495&MID=17125

The amount of attention given to politics at Liberty University has been overwhelming over the past several months. Some might find such an assessment to be strange coming from an individual who chose to attend Liberty owing to its Right-wing Fundamentalist leanings and conservative outspokenness. Nonetheless, I believe politics has taken over the LU mindset. An example may be found in the quote below from the article mentioned above.

“We here at Liberty believe that the healthcare bill that was signed into law this week is an attack on our freedoms and our liberties that our founders fought and died to secure,” said Falwell. “This university is named Liberty for a reason. We believe in defending the liberties that are guaranteed by our Constitution.”

I have spoken to many people concerning my opinions of Liberty's political momentum. Such conversations have included comments concerning the campaign at LU to register students to vote in the upcoming Lynchburg election for City Council members. Personally, I am against college students voting for local issues when the students are only temporarily invested in a community owing to the location of an educational institution. However, I digress...

As a student at Liberty University, I am not sure that joining a lawsuit against the government is the best idea out there. In speaking with some individuals, it appears that I am not alone on this matter. Some basic problems arise when Liberty jumps on the bandwagon of fighting health care reform in the courts. One such problem is the idea that Liberty has now painted a target on itself for future problems with the U.S. government. Another problem comes in the form of Liberty's purpose.

Jerry Falwell, Jr. asserts in the above quote that Liberty was named for the purpose of promoting freedom as outlined in the Constitution of the United States. While the cause of defending the U.S. Constitution is noble, one must question whether this was/is the purpose of Liberty University. After all, a main theme of LU is the concept of "Training Champions for Christ." Please note that the theme is not "Training Champions for the U.S. Constitution" or "Raising Up Voters for a Liberty-friendly City Council." Clearly political events can easily cloud over legitimate goals, and have done so in recent years. 

In addition, the University has often used 2 Corinthians 3:17 as a means of describing LU. The passage of scripture reads, "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom." Liberty publications have often changed "freedom" to "Liberty" in order identify the institution's commitment to Christianity. (Questionable exegesis, I know.)

As a follower of Christ it is important that I keep my focus on Jesus Christ. I am a follower of Christ before I am a student at Liberty University, a registered voter, or an American. Perhaps the focus of Liberty University has shifted as a result of political unrest and economic threats. However, such a shift in focus can be dangerous. I'd rather Liberty be known for spreading the Gospel and defending biblical principles than filing lawsuits and leading biased political campaigns. This is not to say that civil responsibilities should be abandoned, but may the actions of the University reflect its purpose to "Train Champions for Christ." May Liberty University not focus on politics to the extent that its original purpose of spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ is abandoned.

Evil Exists and Its Name is Poppy

I recently watched a National Geographic documentary on the problem of heroin. I found the video to be quite interesting and informative. Not only did I not know very much about the drug prior to watching the documentary, but I had not seen many examples of the effects of the drug on the user.

A portion of the documentary highlighted the fact that about 90% of the heroin distributed worldwide originates in the poppy fields of Afghanistan. This was not really new information to me owing to the increased media coverage in the region over the previous decade. Nonetheless, the documentary dove into a deeper problem. Perhaps the makers of the documentary did not mean to communicate it, but it occurred to me that the problem of heroin in Afghanistan is a microcosm of a larger problem... Evil.

The documentary explained that heroin distribution ceased under the rule of the Taliban. The cruel and evil practices of the Taliban led to the severe death and injury of many poppy farmers. The destruction of poppy farming at the hands of the Taliban was founded on the Islamic condemnation of growing, selling, and/or using hallucinogenic drugs.

As most of us know, the United States and its allies invaded Afghanistan and used it as one of the fronts for the "War on Terror." After months of fighting the Taliban, the regime's rule over the people of Afghanistan came to an end, for the most part. Since the beginning of the war Afghanistan has held multiple elections and dramatically changed its government. However, with the end of Taliban rule came the renewed growth and distribution of heroin. Thus, the previous evil (heroin) which was squashed by the other evil (the Taliban) arose to popularity yet again. Despite efforts of the United States, and others, to stop one type of evil, it has led to the reemergence of another.

This reveals the problem of evil that all of us face in this world. In an attempt to feel happiness, heroin users shoot up. In an attempt to gain power, the Taliban continues terrorist practices. In an attempt to stop evil, the United States opens the doors for another evil to thrive. Yet, one must come to realize that true happiness cannot be gained through a needle. Mankind deserves no power. And our efforts to do things on our own will ultimately lead to problems.

Evil exists. Ultimately, man can do nothing to stop its spread on his own. It is only through the grace of God as revealed in Jesus Christ that we have any hope of escaping from evil. Paul writes about creation yearning for redemption. This brings to mind the concept that God's original creation (not tainted by sin) was perfect- no thorns, no pain, no ill-effects. In the same way, man yearns for a return to original perfection without evil people and practices. As a follower of Christ I have hope that one day evil will cease. In addition, I know that a temporary high will not satisfy my craving for joy. It is only through faith in Jesus Christ that I will experience joy in this life, and future fulfilled joy in the presence of God for eternity. May the problem of heroin illuminate man's ultimate need for salvation and the grace of God in Jesus Christ.

Pro Life or Anti Abortion?

I recently joined the Virtual March for Life owing to my inability to join the March for Life in Washington, D.C. Owing to the large event occurring today, I thought I would post something concerning the pro life movement in America.

It is easy to identify one's self with a movement without fully understanding the moral consequences. This can be seen in the pro life movement and the pro choice movement. These two opposing movements reveal how a moral issue can become more about politics than morality. Owing to my association with the pro life movement, I will look at how many pro life supporters have become corrupted in their thinking.

Sometimes I wonder if the pro life movement should be renamed the anti abortion movement. I say this because I have noticed that many who label themselves as pro life are limited in their respect for the sanctity of life. In many cases, the individual who decries the pro choice movement is calling for indiscriminate bombing of areas of the Middle East. Many of those who argue against the pro choice movement owing to its categorizing of what lives are worth saving commit the same fallacy with respect to warfare.

I am not arguing against "Just war," but it seems as though there is a double standard for many who consider themselves defenders of life. For example, I find it disturbing to hear someone attempt to justify the bombing of areas of the Middle East with high concentrations of civilians. Politically speaking, it is too easy for an individual to be against abortion, but in favor of killing innocent populations in a "the ends justify the means" type of fashion.

Those who support the pro life movement must come to an understanding of what defending life truly means. Unfortunately, some who consider themselves pro life are more anti abortion than pro life. To them the movement is more about supporting a political movement than upholding an objective moral standard that places value on human life, no matter the age or religion.

On this day of marching in support of the unborn, may the marchers examine their standards of morality. After all, it is hard to convince those on the other side that we defend life when some are calling for an end to abortion in America and, at the same time, supporting a 400,000+ square kilometer parking lot in the Middle East.

Manmade Systems Cause Problems

This post was inspired by a discussion that broke out in one of my graduate courses. Below are some thoughts that came to mind when the professor began explaining the rise of modernism, Cartesian thinking, and the decline of biblical authority in western society. Perhaps in the near future I will more fully formulate my thoughts. Nonetheless, below are some points I am pondering...

Modernism v. Postmodernism
*The modernist view is not necessarily biblical.

• Here we have another example of a system created by man attempting to replace the system established by God
  
• Rather than living out the Christian lifestyle, many within the church conformed themselves to a flawed system. Hence, replacing God's system with a manmade system. (In essence, God is replaced by man.)

•  Therefore, when the system of modernism did not live up to its promises, many rejected the church. After all, those within the church had joined the modernist club. If the system fails, the followers of the system can't possibly be right.

• Many tend to begin by placing the world inside a system. However, one must view the established order and God's revelation in creating a lifestyle. Rather than making the world conform to a system, the system must be conformed to the established order of creation.
• Descartes' philosophy began with doubt. Generations that followed Descartes and published his writings began leaving out God. Then the philosophy became secularist.
• Another instance of placing a divide between secularist and sacred. Philosophy in and of itself is not not sacred. When it is blatantly considered secular, truth within philosophies is rejected owing to philosophy not being "sacred."
• Since Cartesian thinking led many to no longer view the Bible as an authority, many Christians have rejected it. This stems from Cartesian thinking beginning with doubt.
  
  
  • However, will Truth not prevail in the presence of doubt? Perhaps the ill effects of Cartesian thinking have led many to reject doubting. This leads to shallow, unchallenged thinking. Faith is a necessary element for Christian living. However, doubt itself is not secular. And stupidity is definitely not sacred.
  
  
  

• Many problems within the community of Christians stem from a fear of losing Truth and creating a divide between the secular and the sacred. Categorizing things as "sacred" and "secular" creates unnecessary societal divides. For example, those who have long hair may automatically be viewed by some to be not saved. Or the one who sips an ale is placed in the same category of the damned. 
  

*Thus, man-made systems cause problems. Should the reality of God's sovereignty and the sinful nature of man not lead us to strive to conform in lifestyle to God's system rather than conforming our concept of God to our own system?

I would like to reemphasize that these are just a few points to ponder. I will later post a more organized and formulated entry in the future.

Systems vs. Lifestyles

Owing to some recent conversations with friends and fellow RA's at Liberty University, I thought I would place some of my thoughts in writing concerning the significant differences between systems and lifestyles. I started contemplating the topic when I heard about a program for losing weight. Someone mentioned that the program was not really a diet but a way of living. Thus, a lifestyle and not a system.

Nonetheless, the subject goes deeper than weight loss programs and developing healthy habits. I shall explain...

It has become easy in the culture of America to take a set of rules and conform one's life to it. This may be easily observed in the context of "American Christianity." Christianity in the United States has developed in such a way that rules, and burdens, have been placed on the individual upon conversion. Although such rules are not strictly biblical in nature, they are associated with cultural Christianity in America. Examples of this include the prohibition of dancing and all forms of alcohol.

Cultural Christianity in America is an example of the system overtaking the lifestyle. Many are fooled into thinking they are going to heaven as long as they stay away from beer and vote Republican. The system has created a fog that covers the ground of biblical Christianity.

Christians are not called to check off a list of do's and don'ts. After all, salvation is not by works, but by faith in Jesus Christ. Unlike all other religions in the world, Christianity teaches that man cannot be saved by checking off a list, but only through the grace of God. The Christian's life, therefore, is to reflect his relationship with Jesus Christ. Good works are practiced as a result of salvation, rather than for the purpose of salvation. It is this distinction that separates the concepts of a lifestyle and a system.

I plan on writing more on this subject in the future. Some things to ponder...

Can true love be created by rules/regulations?
Can a structured system bring different people together in true community?