I just wanted to follow up on the last blog, and share the reasons why I started thinking about these things. Right after the phrase "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" is introduced in Genesis 2, the author writes, "Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh" (Gen. 2:24 ESV).
This shows that the situation described of the first couple is also prescribed to every married couple. This is what God commands of a marriage: two becoming become one.
The Practical Side:
Lately, I've been spending a lot of time working on Christmas presents with Julie. Usually if I'm working on stuff on my computer or wasting time on facebook, I am doing things that we don't partake in together. For the last six weeks though, the vast majority of our free time has been spent together as we have been creating stuff or coming up with ideas or buying things or wrapping gifts. It has been really great and got me thinking about how I like this time of year because it's so busy.
The reason I like being busy is because we are doing a lot together. I don't like the busyness itself, but I love that I am forced to do things with her, which I should usually be doing anyway.
I want to find ways where my things and hobbies and ministries can become ours, and where her things and hobbies and ministries can become ours.
Julie was pointing out a few months ago that we still have "my car" and "your truck," and we still even think of our computers or furniture as "yours" or "mine," when really we legally co-own all of it, and we want to work on thinking of our stuff and time that way.
Why does any of this matter anyway? - The Theological Side
This is all incredibly significant, not just practical.
The idea of two becoming one is meant to symbolize the Trinity. Just as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are individual persons but one God, in a marriage we are meant to see two souls with one flesh. It's incomprehensible, and it's priceless as a representation of the nature of God.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
"Bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" - thoughts on marriage from the Bible
Lately I've been thinking about the phrase "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh." By "lately" I mean since right before I got married a couple years ago. This phrase is found in Genesis 2:23, right after Eve is created. Adam says, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."
At first glance, you might think he is just saying that he finally has another human being with him, since he had been looking at the animals to find a "suitable helper," but couldn't find one until Eve was created.
However, it's pretty clear in Scripture that there is something more to it than that.
A few years ago I read the book Sex God by Rob Bell, which explores the connections between Christian Spirituality and Sexuality. I think Bell made some minor points into a bigger deal than they ought to be, but the book did have some good ideas in it. He said that "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" refers to the idea that where one spouse is weak, the other is strong, and vice versa.
While that is a great idea, I don't think that is the primary intent of the phrase "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."
I was listening to Genesis 29 today, and heard in verse 14 when Laban says to his nephew Jacob upon meeting him for the first time, "surely you are my bone and my flesh!"
Laban is saying "we are related!" when he says they are bone and flesh. So to say "You are bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" is to say "we are more intimately connected than any other human relationship--we are more connected than blood relatives are."
So I think the point of "bone of my bones & flesh of my flesh" is to say "we are so connected that we have everything in common. Sure, there are areas where one of us is strong and one is weak, and in those areas, we have each other's back. In the areas where we have a choice, though, we are devoted to one another completely."
Many couples do not choose to live in this type of marriage, which is the way marriage was meant to be in its perfect design. This shows up practically when couples choose to do things that separate rather than draw together. For example, I don't think a Christian couple can keep their finances separate if they really want to have a marriage that reflects God's best intent for them. Or, if your hobbies are taking up more of your time individually than together, it's time to get a new hobby you can do together. You can figure out a bunch of other ways this principle can apply.
If you're married or want to get married, think about it.
At first glance, you might think he is just saying that he finally has another human being with him, since he had been looking at the animals to find a "suitable helper," but couldn't find one until Eve was created.
However, it's pretty clear in Scripture that there is something more to it than that.
A few years ago I read the book Sex God by Rob Bell, which explores the connections between Christian Spirituality and Sexuality. I think Bell made some minor points into a bigger deal than they ought to be, but the book did have some good ideas in it. He said that "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" refers to the idea that where one spouse is weak, the other is strong, and vice versa.
While that is a great idea, I don't think that is the primary intent of the phrase "bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."
I was listening to Genesis 29 today, and heard in verse 14 when Laban says to his nephew Jacob upon meeting him for the first time, "surely you are my bone and my flesh!"
Laban is saying "we are related!" when he says they are bone and flesh. So to say "You are bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh" is to say "we are more intimately connected than any other human relationship--we are more connected than blood relatives are."
So I think the point of "bone of my bones & flesh of my flesh" is to say "we are so connected that we have everything in common. Sure, there are areas where one of us is strong and one is weak, and in those areas, we have each other's back. In the areas where we have a choice, though, we are devoted to one another completely."
Many couples do not choose to live in this type of marriage, which is the way marriage was meant to be in its perfect design. This shows up practically when couples choose to do things that separate rather than draw together. For example, I don't think a Christian couple can keep their finances separate if they really want to have a marriage that reflects God's best intent for them. Or, if your hobbies are taking up more of your time individually than together, it's time to get a new hobby you can do together. You can figure out a bunch of other ways this principle can apply.
If you're married or want to get married, think about it.
Jesusmas
A few weeks ago, one of my Facebook friends (and I can't even remember who) said something about "Jesusmas" instead of Christmas. The idea was to not take Jesus out of Christmas. On the one hand, it sounds a little funny or like it's taking the whole "keep Christ in Christmas" thing to its logical end, but on the other hand, I think it brings up a good point. Too often, we call Jesus by his title, and not by his name.
For the last few years, I've tried to not use the word Christ as much. I want to be sure that I think of Jesus as a person, not as a distant historical figure or abstract entity. Whenever I have the chance to refer to the Son of God, I choose his name. "Christ" is a title that describes him. For example, Julie usually calls me "Josh," not "husband."
However, lately I've been thinking that it's important to remember that he is the Christ - the Messiah.
I guess that's why it's called "Christmas." If Christmas was just a time that we celebrated Jesus' birthday, we would call it "Jesusmas."
But, Christmas isn't really about Jesus' birthday. It's about the incarnation.
So, when we celebrate Christmas, we aren't solely celebrating the birth of Jesus, we are celebrating the broader idea that God became a man and that man, Jesus, was set apart (anointed, as in "anointed one" or Messiah or Christ) to save us through His death and resurrection.
I still think it's a good idea to call him Jesus, because that's His name (in some languages), but from time to time, I need to stop and remember that He's not just Jesus, He's the Christ, the Messiah.
For the last few years, I've tried to not use the word Christ as much. I want to be sure that I think of Jesus as a person, not as a distant historical figure or abstract entity. Whenever I have the chance to refer to the Son of God, I choose his name. "Christ" is a title that describes him. For example, Julie usually calls me "Josh," not "husband."
However, lately I've been thinking that it's important to remember that he is the Christ - the Messiah.
I guess that's why it's called "Christmas." If Christmas was just a time that we celebrated Jesus' birthday, we would call it "Jesusmas."
But, Christmas isn't really about Jesus' birthday. It's about the incarnation.
So, when we celebrate Christmas, we aren't solely celebrating the birth of Jesus, we are celebrating the broader idea that God became a man and that man, Jesus, was set apart (anointed, as in "anointed one" or Messiah or Christ) to save us through His death and resurrection.
I still think it's a good idea to call him Jesus, because that's His name (in some languages), but from time to time, I need to stop and remember that He's not just Jesus, He's the Christ, the Messiah.
Sunday, August 01, 2010
The tree farm, a year later
About a year ago I first posted a blog about my backyard tree farm. I dug up a bunch of baby trees from my parents' house and church and one from my grandparents' house, then put them all in pots. If you want to see other blogs about this, then look for blogs tagged "backyard nursery." Well, here's an update (with pictures). If you click on any of the pictures you can enlarge them.Everything is growing really well. Julie's bike is in the foreground of this shot, so you can get an idea of how big everything is. There are 7 trees that are decent sized. All are over 2 feet tall, and the tallest Japanese Maple is around 4 1/2 feet now.
Here's a close up of the Avocado tree. It is unfortunately being ravaged by bugs, but it's surviving OK. Behind it, you can make out a few other trees, and we also have some herbs growing in other pots.
There are a bunch of trees in this image, so I have a painted version separating the leaves from each other. In the bottom left corner and bottom right corner are the 2 redwood trees. The other 3 trees (bottom middle, top middle, and top right) are all Japanese Maples. These are the 5 biggest trees. The Japanese Maple in the back and the Redwood on the Left are the two biggest trees so far. The redwoods grow much faster than the Japanese Maples, of course. These are all from 2009 Spring and Summer, along with the Avocado and the Red or Silver Maple.
Here are all the small trees. Those are avocado leaves along the left side of the picture. The yellow dot is in the pot for the big redwood (3 1/2 ish feet tall). The green dot is in the big Japanese Maple's pot (4 1/2 feet or so). The Cyan and Blue dots are in the smaller Japanese Maples, which are around 3 to 3 1/2 feet tall. The Magenta dot is in the smaller redwood's pot, and that tree is around 2 feet tall. The white dot is in the Silver or Red Maple's pot, and that tree is also about 2 feet tall. The Red circle is around a Western Black Oak that I found growing in a different pot back in February. These grow painfully slowly. The pot right below it has a baby redwood in it, which is only 1 or 2 inches right now. There are some really sickly looking rosemary and basil plants in this picture too.So that's the update. We'll see how well they make it through the winter this year, since they're probably too big to bring inside when it freezes. I may have to start selling or planting them in , 2011, because they're getting too big for my tiny backyard. We also have a grill, a patio table and chairs, and a bike. These are all crammed on a little concrete pad that's around 8'x20'.
Oh, the other cool thing is that the tomato plant I dug up from the compost pile has around 30 tomatoes on it. I found it in November and it survived over the winter. Last year we had a different plant that produced 2 tomatoes for us all year, and we were out of town when they got ripe. I think this year's are cherry tomatoes, but I'm not sure yet.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Glory, Steve Jobs, and Jesus
Three and a half years ago, I was sitting in a van driving from Cape Town to George, South Africa and listening to a talk by Louie Giglio on my iPod. Louie was talking about how the things that satisfy us most are the things we naturally glorify.
He related the story of how people got in line really early to buy a new XBOX 360 when they first came out. Or maybe it was Halo 2. I forget which. But his point was that because all these people got in line to get satisfied by a product, they gave free advertising to Microsoft when the newspapers predictably wrote articles about how long the lines were.
Ever since I heard Louie's talk, I always pay close attention to how people react when the next big product is released. Usually you see it when video games, movies, or Apple products come out. Also, season premieres and finales of big TV shows kind of do it, but not to the same extent, since you don't have to wait in line and spend money on those.
Today, the bulk of my friends who actually update their facebook accounts got iPhones. So I've been reading all about the wonders of the iPhone 4. Facebook gives us a much better picture of how glorifying really works than newspapers did. Each of our voices can glorify things. It's fine to go get an iPhone. But are you glorifying Steve Jobs or Jesus?
In the Bible, glory can really be explained by 2 concepts. In the Old Testament, the word that means "glory" also means "heavy," because when we worship God, we can feel his glory or presence. This is what Christians mean when we talk about the "manifest presence of God."
The second concept is making famous. Glorifying something is essentially advertising or promoting it. The Bible talks a lot about "renown," or God will say "for the sake of my name, I will..." That means he did things to boost his own reputation or glory. Since He is God, for Him to not do so would be lying about what the best thing in the universe is.
I preached on worship this past week, and during my preparation, God gave me a catchphrase that I'll always use to explain worship.
Appraising leads to Praising.
The English word "Worship" means "a statement of worth." Before you can say how much something is worth, you have to appraise it. In other words, before you can worship Jesus, you need to encounter His love for you. Here's an example from the iPhone 4:
All these friends of mine are updating their statuses on facebook and probably are having excited conversations with friends about how great the features are of this new product. They have appraised the worth of the phone, found it satisfying, and by talking about it are now glorifying Steve Jobs.
Have you appraised the worth of Christ? Have you found Him satisfying? Are you glorifying Him?
He related the story of how people got in line really early to buy a new XBOX 360 when they first came out. Or maybe it was Halo 2. I forget which. But his point was that because all these people got in line to get satisfied by a product, they gave free advertising to Microsoft when the newspapers predictably wrote articles about how long the lines were.
Ever since I heard Louie's talk, I always pay close attention to how people react when the next big product is released. Usually you see it when video games, movies, or Apple products come out. Also, season premieres and finales of big TV shows kind of do it, but not to the same extent, since you don't have to wait in line and spend money on those.
Today, the bulk of my friends who actually update their facebook accounts got iPhones. So I've been reading all about the wonders of the iPhone 4. Facebook gives us a much better picture of how glorifying really works than newspapers did. Each of our voices can glorify things. It's fine to go get an iPhone. But are you glorifying Steve Jobs or Jesus?
In the Bible, glory can really be explained by 2 concepts. In the Old Testament, the word that means "glory" also means "heavy," because when we worship God, we can feel his glory or presence. This is what Christians mean when we talk about the "manifest presence of God."
The second concept is making famous. Glorifying something is essentially advertising or promoting it. The Bible talks a lot about "renown," or God will say "for the sake of my name, I will..." That means he did things to boost his own reputation or glory. Since He is God, for Him to not do so would be lying about what the best thing in the universe is.
I preached on worship this past week, and during my preparation, God gave me a catchphrase that I'll always use to explain worship.
Appraising leads to Praising.
The English word "Worship" means "a statement of worth." Before you can say how much something is worth, you have to appraise it. In other words, before you can worship Jesus, you need to encounter His love for you. Here's an example from the iPhone 4:
All these friends of mine are updating their statuses on facebook and probably are having excited conversations with friends about how great the features are of this new product. They have appraised the worth of the phone, found it satisfying, and by talking about it are now glorifying Steve Jobs.
Have you appraised the worth of Christ? Have you found Him satisfying? Are you glorifying Him?
Friday, March 26, 2010
I wish I had more time
Lately, I've been wanting to spend some time just being creative for creativity's sake. I have hundreds of old pictures that need processing, I feel like recording some instrumental music, I want to get my wedding video edited.
But, I have other creative obligations. They don't feel as creative, because I committed to doing them. Things like websites, wedding videos from a year ago, marketing for an event that is supposed to go out to over 50,000 people. Sure, I get paid for some and the event is going to do a lot for our community and for AIDS in Africa, but I don't get to express myself as much as I need to.
On top of that, I've been trying to not be on the computer as much, and the computer is where most of those creative outlets take place. Last month I built a guitar pedal. I learned a lot about electronics and soldering. I learned about capacitors, resistors, diodes (including LEDs). I learned about painting metal, from sanding to spray painting to clear coating.
My big working-with-my-hands hobby is gardening. Lately I've gotten to do this a lot for work as we've been planting a lot of trees and doing landscaping work days, but I've had to spend a lot of my free time working out there too. I enjoy it a lot, but it does take up most of the free time I have.
I have too many hobbies, but I don't have one to drop. On top of that, sometimes you just want to veg and watch TV or a movie. I'd like to eliminate that, but I don't think it's going to happen.
And of course, somewhere you have to spend time with people. I'm the sort of person who is not going to naturally prioritize this one, but it's obviously important, especially if you're married and you made a promise to spend time with your wife when you said "I do."
I'm looking forward to getting some of my obligations completed so I have some time to do fun stuff. I just hope I'm still in the mood to be creative. I also hope that I enjoy doing the obligations as much as I should. I'm still doing things I enjoy, I just have other people's expectations to live up to.
But, I have other creative obligations. They don't feel as creative, because I committed to doing them. Things like websites, wedding videos from a year ago, marketing for an event that is supposed to go out to over 50,000 people. Sure, I get paid for some and the event is going to do a lot for our community and for AIDS in Africa, but I don't get to express myself as much as I need to.
On top of that, I've been trying to not be on the computer as much, and the computer is where most of those creative outlets take place. Last month I built a guitar pedal. I learned a lot about electronics and soldering. I learned about capacitors, resistors, diodes (including LEDs). I learned about painting metal, from sanding to spray painting to clear coating.
My big working-with-my-hands hobby is gardening. Lately I've gotten to do this a lot for work as we've been planting a lot of trees and doing landscaping work days, but I've had to spend a lot of my free time working out there too. I enjoy it a lot, but it does take up most of the free time I have.
I have too many hobbies, but I don't have one to drop. On top of that, sometimes you just want to veg and watch TV or a movie. I'd like to eliminate that, but I don't think it's going to happen.
And of course, somewhere you have to spend time with people. I'm the sort of person who is not going to naturally prioritize this one, but it's obviously important, especially if you're married and you made a promise to spend time with your wife when you said "I do."
I'm looking forward to getting some of my obligations completed so I have some time to do fun stuff. I just hope I'm still in the mood to be creative. I also hope that I enjoy doing the obligations as much as I should. I'm still doing things I enjoy, I just have other people's expectations to live up to.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Why I think Marijuana should be legalized in California...maybe
This blog is tentative. I'm not sure if I've reached a final conclusion on this issue.
Today it was officially announced that legalizing recreational marijuana use will be on the State ballot this fall. Here's an article about it.
First off let me say that I have never smoked or eaten pot, and I won't regardless of if it becomes legal or not.
I agree with the general premise that legalizing marijuana is not going to drastically increase the number of people smoking pot, but will increase the amount of money in the local economy. It also will mean that police officers don't commit resources to stopping underground marijuana sales, since it will be available through legal means.
Think about how prohibition didn't really do anything for alcoholism, but in fact created more crime as moonshiners and speakeasies came into existence.
However, my main concern is that the full slate of laws which apply to cigarettes and alcohol should also immediately go into effect with pot. I'm not sure if that's how the proposed law is set up.
One of my concerns is that there is a medical marijuana dispensary near my apartment, and it is less than a half mile from my elementary school. It is illegal to advertise for alcohol or tobacco within a certain distance of a school, but currently it is legal for "Medi-Cann" to have a big sign with a pot leaf in front of their building, when it would take a child less than 5 minutes to walk there from two different elementary schools.
That means kindergarteners are now more likely to become aware of the existence and popularity of marijuana.
I hope that the law includes some sort of stipulation that all tobacco and alcohol laws will just be copied over to marijuana by default.
If it does, I will vote for the law. Right now there is no way to regulate things like the sign, and since local governments have authorized medical marijuana dispensaries, it's already in our neighborhoods legally (sort of). I also think that the doctors who are currently writing prescriptions for marijuana for anyone who's willing to pay enough are abusing their medical license, and it will be well-deserved that they are out of work when people no longer need a prescription.
Currently the California medical marijuana system is set up to make people try to bend rules so they can make money or get high. I think the situation can be fixed in a way that gives the economy a boost, and won't increase marijuana usage. I'm just not 100% sure that the proposed law is the right way.
Today it was officially announced that legalizing recreational marijuana use will be on the State ballot this fall. Here's an article about it.
First off let me say that I have never smoked or eaten pot, and I won't regardless of if it becomes legal or not.
I agree with the general premise that legalizing marijuana is not going to drastically increase the number of people smoking pot, but will increase the amount of money in the local economy. It also will mean that police officers don't commit resources to stopping underground marijuana sales, since it will be available through legal means.
Think about how prohibition didn't really do anything for alcoholism, but in fact created more crime as moonshiners and speakeasies came into existence.
However, my main concern is that the full slate of laws which apply to cigarettes and alcohol should also immediately go into effect with pot. I'm not sure if that's how the proposed law is set up.
One of my concerns is that there is a medical marijuana dispensary near my apartment, and it is less than a half mile from my elementary school. It is illegal to advertise for alcohol or tobacco within a certain distance of a school, but currently it is legal for "Medi-Cann" to have a big sign with a pot leaf in front of their building, when it would take a child less than 5 minutes to walk there from two different elementary schools.
That means kindergarteners are now more likely to become aware of the existence and popularity of marijuana.
I hope that the law includes some sort of stipulation that all tobacco and alcohol laws will just be copied over to marijuana by default.
If it does, I will vote for the law. Right now there is no way to regulate things like the sign, and since local governments have authorized medical marijuana dispensaries, it's already in our neighborhoods legally (sort of). I also think that the doctors who are currently writing prescriptions for marijuana for anyone who's willing to pay enough are abusing their medical license, and it will be well-deserved that they are out of work when people no longer need a prescription.
Currently the California medical marijuana system is set up to make people try to bend rules so they can make money or get high. I think the situation can be fixed in a way that gives the economy a boost, and won't increase marijuana usage. I'm just not 100% sure that the proposed law is the right way.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Thoughts on Glenn Beck from a "Social Justice Christian"
A few weeks back Julie and I got a new TV and plugged it into our cable. We found out that suddenly we were getting 100 or 150 channels instead of the 18 or so we had before. Last week I was at home for a little while and for some reason thought I would watch the political talking heads. I don't like political TV, and for some time I've been pretty unsatisfied with both Republicans and Democrats (see point 3 in my list below).
Glenn Beck happened to be on, and I watched him for 10 minutes or so and came away with the idea that really what he has is a religious following. I know a lot (most) evangelical Christians are conservative, and I know of a few who were/are pretty ardent fans of Beck.
I thought, "This guy would make a really good cult leader or TV Preacher." I decided that it would be a good blog if I wrote about how so many people put their trust in politics rather than Jesus.
Oh the irony.
I later found out that the day before Beck had told people to leave their churches if the church taught anything about "social justice" or "economic justice." Here's some info on that. Here's why I call it ironic: most responses I've heard in defense of Beck have run somewhat along the lines of: yes, I as a Christian do believe in caring for the poor, but I believe it's the Church's job, not the government's.
So, what they're saying is "people should trust in Jesus, not the government." I agree with that. In fact, that's the most common argument against liberal politics if you're a Christian. In an ideal world, it's a solid argument, too. But we don't live in an ideal world, and I think this statement is a rationalization and weak excuse for most people who say it (see points 2-3 in my list below).
And what I'm saying is "people should trust in Jesus, not politics." That's why I dislike it when people are way into politics. If you spend more time watching Glenn Beck or Keith Olbermann (just naming one conservative and one liberal) than reading your Bible and talking about Jesus, then you're showing more emotional and intellectual attachment to a political opinion than to the message of Jesus.
_____________________________
So my responses to Glenn Beck's statements about leaving your church because it teaches social justice are this:
1. Jesus should be the center of every facet of life.
In Isaiah, we read that "the government will be upon his (the Messiah's) shoulders." If you believe Jesus is the Messiah, you believe that all government and politics are broken until they come under the definitive control of Jesus. For the meantime, humans are never going to get it right, and we are responsible to let our faith rule our politics, not the other way around.
2. Christians who help the poor understand the role that government plays.
When you start helping the poor, you become aware of the governmental/political systems that contributed and/or caused their poverty. You ALWAYS will ultimately be changed politically. Your stances will soften. You will begin to see that God works in mysterious ways, and His work cannot be described in legislation.
Most Christians who say "Helping the poor is the church's job, not the government's" aren't helping the poor. And if they are, they aren't really living justly, just with token compassion. Unless you are choosing to give away more than you're keeping for yourself, it's hard to consider you an expert on this topic. I'm sure not doing that, and I don't know of many people who are.
In the Old Testament God made it clear that nations have a responsibility to care for everyone and that justice is part of the government's responsibility.
3. Being a party-line Republican or a party-line Democrat is an unwise stance for a Christian.
I've written a blog about this before. It's a bit more detailed, but here's a short version:
Let's revisit the person who says, "Helping the poor is the church's job, not the government's."
On one hand, people who say this will say that the government should not legislate the helping of the poor. On the other hand, the same people will usually say that the government should legislate the illegalization of abortion and gay marriage.
Sorry, but if you're consistent, you have to be a person who believes that everything in the Bible should become law, or that people should have the right to do whatever they want and that the Gospel should spread first and then the Holy Spirit will change the way people live (I guess this is Libertarianism). The first option means that Christians should support codifying social justice and moral behavior into law. The second option means that Christians should not try to legislate justice or morality, but seek to engage individuals on a heart level instead of a legal level. Personally I'm pretty into number 2, since Jesus seemed to enjoy building relationships with those who were breaking the moral laws of his day.
4. Christian social justice is extraordinarily different from socialism
Karl Marx came up with the idea of mandatory redistribution of wealth, but the disciples of Jesus came up with the idea of voluntary redistribution of wealth (Acts 4:32). There is a vast chasm between the two concepts. One is forced by unjust tyrants, and one is empowered through the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 4:33).
But possibly more relevant to this topic, God created a system of economics in the Old Testament called Jubilee. It was neither socialism nor capitalism, and you can read about it in Leviticus 25.
5. If anyone loves Glenn Beck (or anyone else) more than they love their church, I hope they do leave their church.
That kind of person has their priorities in the wrong place, and is hurting the health of their church in indescribable ways. By leaving, maybe they'll get a better picture of how valuable the church is and return to it changed, with the right values. Or maybe they won't, but the church will be better equipped to reach people who are less opinionated on trivial matters and disgusted by those who are so opinionated.
It's fine to be a fan of some talking head, but not if you love their voice more than you love God's. That is idolatry. And it's as big an issue today as it was 4000 years ago.
6. Churches and Pastors (like me) should not endorse specific bills or politicians, but should share how they personally apply their faith to politics.
This is incredibly risky. A few years ago, I wrote a blog saying that I was going to vote for Obama. I don't want to talk about what I think about him now, since that's off topic. But the reason for writing the blog was to demonstrate how I personally used my worldview to determine who to vote for rather than just voting for the Republican candidate as I had always done before.
I enter blogs like that one and this one kind of nervous that someone will misread it or write me off because I am more liberal or conservative than they are. But the benefit of doing life together and sharing how we each come to decisions through our faith outweighs the risk for me.
I don't care who or what you vote for and against. I do care that you use your faith to make those decisions instead of just voting how you want to and then distorting your faith to support your decision.
Glenn Beck happened to be on, and I watched him for 10 minutes or so and came away with the idea that really what he has is a religious following. I know a lot (most) evangelical Christians are conservative, and I know of a few who were/are pretty ardent fans of Beck.
I thought, "This guy would make a really good cult leader or TV Preacher." I decided that it would be a good blog if I wrote about how so many people put their trust in politics rather than Jesus.
Oh the irony.
I later found out that the day before Beck had told people to leave their churches if the church taught anything about "social justice" or "economic justice." Here's some info on that. Here's why I call it ironic: most responses I've heard in defense of Beck have run somewhat along the lines of: yes, I as a Christian do believe in caring for the poor, but I believe it's the Church's job, not the government's.
So, what they're saying is "people should trust in Jesus, not the government." I agree with that. In fact, that's the most common argument against liberal politics if you're a Christian. In an ideal world, it's a solid argument, too. But we don't live in an ideal world, and I think this statement is a rationalization and weak excuse for most people who say it (see points 2-3 in my list below).
And what I'm saying is "people should trust in Jesus, not politics." That's why I dislike it when people are way into politics. If you spend more time watching Glenn Beck or Keith Olbermann (just naming one conservative and one liberal) than reading your Bible and talking about Jesus, then you're showing more emotional and intellectual attachment to a political opinion than to the message of Jesus.
_____________________________
So my responses to Glenn Beck's statements about leaving your church because it teaches social justice are this:
1. Jesus should be the center of every facet of life.
In Isaiah, we read that "the government will be upon his (the Messiah's) shoulders." If you believe Jesus is the Messiah, you believe that all government and politics are broken until they come under the definitive control of Jesus. For the meantime, humans are never going to get it right, and we are responsible to let our faith rule our politics, not the other way around.
2. Christians who help the poor understand the role that government plays.
When you start helping the poor, you become aware of the governmental/political systems that contributed and/or caused their poverty. You ALWAYS will ultimately be changed politically. Your stances will soften. You will begin to see that God works in mysterious ways, and His work cannot be described in legislation.
Most Christians who say "Helping the poor is the church's job, not the government's" aren't helping the poor. And if they are, they aren't really living justly, just with token compassion. Unless you are choosing to give away more than you're keeping for yourself, it's hard to consider you an expert on this topic. I'm sure not doing that, and I don't know of many people who are.
In the Old Testament God made it clear that nations have a responsibility to care for everyone and that justice is part of the government's responsibility.
3. Being a party-line Republican or a party-line Democrat is an unwise stance for a Christian.
I've written a blog about this before. It's a bit more detailed, but here's a short version:
Let's revisit the person who says, "Helping the poor is the church's job, not the government's."
On one hand, people who say this will say that the government should not legislate the helping of the poor. On the other hand, the same people will usually say that the government should legislate the illegalization of abortion and gay marriage.
Sorry, but if you're consistent, you have to be a person who believes that everything in the Bible should become law, or that people should have the right to do whatever they want and that the Gospel should spread first and then the Holy Spirit will change the way people live (I guess this is Libertarianism). The first option means that Christians should support codifying social justice and moral behavior into law. The second option means that Christians should not try to legislate justice or morality, but seek to engage individuals on a heart level instead of a legal level. Personally I'm pretty into number 2, since Jesus seemed to enjoy building relationships with those who were breaking the moral laws of his day.
4. Christian social justice is extraordinarily different from socialism
Karl Marx came up with the idea of mandatory redistribution of wealth, but the disciples of Jesus came up with the idea of voluntary redistribution of wealth (Acts 4:32). There is a vast chasm between the two concepts. One is forced by unjust tyrants, and one is empowered through the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 4:33).
But possibly more relevant to this topic, God created a system of economics in the Old Testament called Jubilee. It was neither socialism nor capitalism, and you can read about it in Leviticus 25.
5. If anyone loves Glenn Beck (or anyone else) more than they love their church, I hope they do leave their church.
That kind of person has their priorities in the wrong place, and is hurting the health of their church in indescribable ways. By leaving, maybe they'll get a better picture of how valuable the church is and return to it changed, with the right values. Or maybe they won't, but the church will be better equipped to reach people who are less opinionated on trivial matters and disgusted by those who are so opinionated.
It's fine to be a fan of some talking head, but not if you love their voice more than you love God's. That is idolatry. And it's as big an issue today as it was 4000 years ago.
6. Churches and Pastors (like me) should not endorse specific bills or politicians, but should share how they personally apply their faith to politics.
This is incredibly risky. A few years ago, I wrote a blog saying that I was going to vote for Obama. I don't want to talk about what I think about him now, since that's off topic. But the reason for writing the blog was to demonstrate how I personally used my worldview to determine who to vote for rather than just voting for the Republican candidate as I had always done before.
I enter blogs like that one and this one kind of nervous that someone will misread it or write me off because I am more liberal or conservative than they are. But the benefit of doing life together and sharing how we each come to decisions through our faith outweighs the risk for me.
I don't care who or what you vote for and against. I do care that you use your faith to make those decisions instead of just voting how you want to and then distorting your faith to support your decision.
Thursday, March 04, 2010
Best place to buy banners online
I haven't blogged in awhile, since I've been tweeting more, but I wanted to share a resource with anyone out there looking for one.
I have bought a few banners for church from esigns.com. The first one I bought came with an interesting story. I was wondering if there was a way to track my order, so I went on their website to see if I could get more info, and just as I logged in, our UPS driver delivered the banners. They showed up a few days earlier than I had expected.
Recently, they were running a promotion, and I got sick and couldn't finish the artwork before the promotion was over. I contacted their customer service department, and they were able to work with me to deliver a great price.
This company is way cheaper than anyone else I've found, and their products are really good. Full vibrant color, full-bleed, and durable banners that hold up well even in stormy weather.
I have bought a few banners for church from esigns.com. The first one I bought came with an interesting story. I was wondering if there was a way to track my order, so I went on their website to see if I could get more info, and just as I logged in, our UPS driver delivered the banners. They showed up a few days earlier than I had expected.
Recently, they were running a promotion, and I got sick and couldn't finish the artwork before the promotion was over. I contacted their customer service department, and they were able to work with me to deliver a great price.
This company is way cheaper than anyone else I've found, and their products are really good. Full vibrant color, full-bleed, and durable banners that hold up well even in stormy weather.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
