31 posts tagged “christianity”

It seems like the same people who are so vocal about this fear of Shari'a law being implemented in Western countries are the same fundamentalist Christians who vehemently support the death penalty. They claim the Levitical law of the Old Testament in the Torah, as well as the Noahic Covenant, supports putting to death those who kill others.

This is a fallacious argument to be sure considering there are myriad laws deserving of capital punishment within the Jewish Law, including rebellious teens, and adultery. However they are perfectly fine in dispensing grace in this area.

Tying into the Shari'a law, the Levitical law is very similar calling for similar punishments. Yet the fundamentalist Christian is appalled by the application of this law; severing hands for theft, killing for impropriety. They seem to be appalled when viewing an even more fundamentalist, more conservative version of themselves.

If we are to acquiesce to the Old law concerning application in contemporary courts, should we not then lay the full course of judicial action in the hands of Mosaic dispensation? Or perhaps we should consider today's secular law apart from God's law in both practice and application. The legislation and execution of such secular law should then accomplish the consensus of citizens within this jurisdiction, and should be for the peace and prosperity thereof. We should not appeal to an outside source for divine support of laws.

And this is the problem: fundamentalists say, "it is thus or naught." They do not leave room for compromise in this institution where they have previously compromised in all other parts of Levitical penalties. For the Christian is a citizen of a spiritual nation, a sojourner in this land. We must live according to our conviction and faith and let secular humanity, in its unregenerate state, to live as their depraved hearts will.

The Christian duty is to speak the Gospel into this darkened world that the Kingdom of God may increase against the gates of Hell.

Tertullian is an early church father (known as ante-Nicene) from the period circa 160-225 C.E. He was one of the first Christian apologists, and the first to write in Latin. This is what he says regarding the Christian's view of earthly affairs:

Unless I mistake the matter, the prevention of such associations [of illicit societies] is based on a prudential regard to public order, that the state may not be divided into parties, which would naturally lead to disturbance in the electoral assemblies, the councils, the curiae, the special conventions, even in the public shows by the hostile collisions of rival parties; especially when now, in pursuit of gain, men have begun to consider their violence an article to be bought and sold. But as those in whom all ardour in the pursuit of glory and honour is dead, we have no pressing inducement to take part in your public meetings; nor is there aught more entirely foreign to us than affairs of state. We acknowledge one all-embracing commonwealth--the world. ( Apology XXXVIII)

This essentially explains how when we are born unto Christ, we are born into an international community with no earthly boundaries. All of humanity is in service to the Lord, and all nations answer unto Him. The Kingdom of God goes out to all nations, and all tongues. When we have solidarity through Christ amongst the varied nations, how can we support one nation's triumph over another?

A little known American Christian activist from the 19th Century named Adin Ballou is a personal inspiration to me (I actually started and wrote most of the beginnings of the Wikipedia article on him). Ballou expounded on this idea, bringing it into the discussion of morality.

How many does it take to annul the commandments of God, and render that lawful, which HE has forbidden? How many does it take to metamorphose wickedness into righteousness?

One man must not kill. If he does it is murder. Two, ten, one hundred men, acting on their own responsibility, must not kill. If they do, it is still murder. But a state or nation may kill as many as they please, and it is no murder. It is just, necessary, commendable and right. Only get people enough to agree to it, and the butchery of myriads of human beings is perfectly innocent.

These are some serious thoughts in the face of the new American imperialism. To whom do we give allegiance. In whom do we trust? It is the Lord of Hosts and his son, the Prince of Peace.

This morning I found it sad that I can recite the Pledge of Allegiance but not the Apostles Creed (at least not all of it).

I was thinking a bit more about this. I think it's a difficult challenge for Children to distinguish between devotion to the nation and devotion to God. This is especially hard when Christians say it is a "good Christian duty" to vote or "protect" the country. When churches display the flag and sing patriotic songs. We teach our children to be devoted to the country and to God, and I don't know if they can separate the two - and our nation is a real thing we deal with every day in the physical as adults when we complain about the government, talk about the President, vote, etc. It seems devotion for country has overwhelmed devotion to God and the two are inseparable.

And then these kids grow up and they are Americans, not Christians. Christianity is just a part of the American identity, it is a secondary title, a lower allegiance.

I cannot kill for this country, and I won't die for it. As a Christian I am a citizen of the Heavenly Kingdom which is not of this world. It has no borders to protect, it has to economy of goods, no voting booths, no military. My first identity is found in Jesus, the Christ, Savior of the world. He said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight" (John 18:36). If I will not fight to defend this Kingdom of eternal importance - if I will not invade to expand the borders of this Kingdom of Peace - how can I fight for an empire that is worth nothing to God?

Isaiah 40:17
Before him all the nations are as nothing;
they are regarded by him as worthless
and less than nothing.

Now I'm a heretic, haha.

It seems like the US Church has done a good job of teaching people that being a bad Christian is actually being a good Christian. We've made an art of parsing Scripture to find loopholes (perceived loopholes anyway) to living a godly life. We have written books on how to live exactly like the world and still manage to live in the Kingdom of God.

When I hear of Christians or the world at large talk about "cults" it is usually talking about a group of people who have withdrawn from the world or have otherwise disengaged in "normal" activities. This weekend I found it amusing that we find this kind of activity so weird when we've been called to exactly that.

No, I'm not talking about specific ideas, not vindicating any or all "cults." What I'm talking about is Christ called us out of the world to be set apart. He called us to a new way of thinking, of living. When we live exactly like the world except we listen to different musicians, we go to Church and TiVo the football games instead, when we give a portion of our income (if we're real "good"), don't drink or smoke - and that's what a Christian life is ... really, that's the radical way of life Jesus called us to?

I heard criticism within the Church after the shootings in Colorado at the YWAM base and the mega-church. Some people said YWAM was a cult because the people who join it tend to not own much, they don't participate in most regular frivolous activities and they go on trips and arrange events. So our own Church looks down on Christian living as if its weird.

We've gotten really good at taking the teachings of Christ and of his Apostles and twisting them into our pagan way of life. When Christ said, "Turn the other cheek" we say it only applies to verbal abuse. "Love your enemy" means those you disagree with in the Church body.

One specific text I want to bring up and give a call to action is in 2 Corinthians 8:13-15. This relates to a previous topic I wrote about pertaining to community:

"Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality. At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. Then there will be equality, as it is written: 'He who gathered much did not have too much, and he who gathered little did not have too little.'"

What is this about? Equality with whom? In this case it is with our brothers and sisters in the Lord, the Body of Christ. This passage quotes from Exodus 16 where God supplies manna to the Israelites in the desert. Those who gathered much had just enough and those who gathered little also had enough. There was enough to go around.

Similarly, God has given us each enough to go around. Some have been given little, and some much. Some have so much they don't need it all, and some have not a lot at all. Paul implores the Corinthians to share with those in their time of need, and when they are in need they will receive in return.

This is clearly a well-ignored biblical teaching.

I don't believe in tithe. In Deut. 14 the tithe is clearly used as a communal service - a party if you will. The quote no pastor wants you to read, "exchange your tithe for silver, and take the silver with you and go to the place the LORD your God will choose. Use the silver to buy whatever you like: cattle, sheep, wine or other fermented drink, or anything you wish." This celebration of giving was to go to the Levites (who ran the temple), the alien, orphan and widow. But clearly Jesus called us to give 100% of ourselves to God. "Give to Caesar what is Caesar and to God what is God's." When the Apostles took the Gospel to the gentiles they removed all requirements of the law except for eating blood, meat sacrificed to idols, things strangled, and to stay away from fornication. Tithe was not in this. What was taught was this communal giving. One of the signs of the Pentecost was the believers having all things in common.

So I took a very long time to get to this point. I have things others don't that I want to make available to every believer. I want to give everything I have and everything I am to the Body of Christ. I'll start by saying that I have a washer/dryer I know not everyone has and you can come use it here at my house. Feel free to share your needs with myself and with others so that we can have our needs met by one another.

Why complain about not having community without intentionally living it? Will it just come about if we don't do it?

More theology here, but talk about the Eucharist here. The manifestation of the Body of Christ here on earth when believers are gathered in "two or three" in communion. Imagine Christ literally working through his transubstantiationed body here on earth to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, house the homeless. Perhaps we can be on the side of the Sheep when He comes in judgment through His grace and mercy on our lives.

I want to comment on this op-ed in the NY Times by Nicholas Kristof about liberals being hypocritical to mock Christians when they claim to be so open-minded and tolerant. Many of the comments he received only served to prove his point.

The secular-liberals who responded that said it's OK to mock, hate and discourage Evangelicals said it is justified because Evangelicals are intolerant, bigoted and authoritarian. That's still unfair. Should we say its OK to hate all Americans because they're fat, stupid and war-mongering? The majority are for sure.

What I'm trying to get at here is that you can't attack a group of people simply because a sizable portion of them are douche bags. It's not fair to those within that group that aren't. It's like saying all liberals are stupid because they think Clinton is a good choice for President. Obviously this is unfair because not all of them support Clinton, but about the same percentage of liberals support Clinton as Evangelicals support certain conservative issues.

But since we can now attack any group based on a minority within that group, lets say all Japanese are into perverted sex, all blacks hate latinos, all Africans spread AIDS, and all humans are Chinese. It's stupid.

If we're going to criticize anyone, it needs to be on an individual basis. We can oppose ideas that span through groups, but this whole attacking of people has got to stop. Bill Maher and Ann Coulter are the biggest examples on either side of the issue we should look to to see where things go when we start attacking people instead of issues (didn't they date for a while?). Lets not go there.

Another point I'd like to make is that some secular-liberalists in response to the op-ed said the Evangelicals are pushing their moral agenda on them and it needs to be stopped. Honestly that's silly. The secular-humanist moral agenda is also being pushed. You can't see this really? The claim is made on both sides that there is a meta-morality  in play and the other side is encroaching on the rules of that morality. The liberalists claim its justified for their morality because it says no other morality can encroach on another, but their own morality encroaches on plenty of other moralities. I don't have the time to go into details here right now, but you get the picture.

"You guys are all into that 'born again' thing, which is great. We do need to be born again, since Jesus said that to a guy named Nicodemus. But if you tell me I have to be born again to enter the kingdom of God, I can tell you that you have to sell everything you have and give it to the poor, because Jesus said that to one guy too. But I guess that's why God invented highlighters, so we can highlight the parts we like and ignore the rest." - Rich Mullins (quoted in Irresistible Revolution - Shane Claiborne, Zondervan)

Damnit Tim, why'd you give me this book? I just finished the first chapter and I'm already crying and hating my life.

Practically every church in Oklahoma is against the new immigration laws, but you still have ridiculous, racist xenophiles attacking the Church for their pro-Jesus stance.

They say it was OK to break laws to feed slaves but wrong to break laws to feed immigrants because immigrants are breaking the law to be here. Well, slaves were breaking the law to run north as well - same difference.

What's important is Christians acting like Christians and helping the hungry, oppressed, widow and orphan without first making sure they have a green card, aren't communists, et al. Imagine the Good Samaritan refusing to help the Jew because he was in Samaria illegally.

These organizations that claim it's offensive to not be wished a "Merry Christmas" but instead are given a friendly "Holiday Greeting" are themselves offensive to me. They go out of their way to manufacture some BS cause to stir up anger, arguments, strife and debate. Screw that!

Proverbs 17:14
Starting a quarrel is like breaching a dam; so drop the matter before a dispute breaks out.

Proverbs 17:19
He who loves a quarrel loves sin; he who builds a high gate invites destruction.

Proverbs 20:3
It is to a man's honor to avoid strife, but every fool is quick to quarrel.

2 Timothy 2:23-24
Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.