Reflections

The Most Embarrasing Thing My Wife's Ever Seen Me Do...

2011-06-29T19:12:00.000-07:00

As my Aunt Mary so perfectly put, God has a sense of humor.

As the older of two in my family, I have the supreme honor of being able to tell embarrassing stores about my younger brother without any fear of retribution. I often share, when the subject comes up, how terrified my little bro is of any kind of flying bug. Flies, bees, even mosquitoes. I stretch out and then demonstrate the "Andrew Flail." I'm sure you've seen me do it before, and if not, just ask.

After telling the story and doing the move for my Aunt & Uncle, I headed home after a long day. As is our routine, I let the dogs out the back door to relieve themselves. When I opened the door, several moths were startled and flew around our exterior floodlights. I didn't want to have to round them up later, so I reached for the screen door, and then it happened.

Have you ever seen a cicada killer? If the hairs on your neck aren't standing up right now, you definitely haven't. They look like this. Bugs are definitely biggest in the south. Well as I was closing the screen door, one buzzed past my head and into my house.

As it turns out, I am not scared of flying insects. Instead, I am mortally terrified of huge flying insects. That is the only explanation I can offer for the reactions that followed.

I started screaming. I might have swore a few times. Rachel, who was changing in the bedroom asked what happened. I screamed back at her to stay in the bedroom. She asked why. I yelled "A Cicada Killer just flew in our house!". So she came out to investigate. Did I ever mention my wife is fearless? She grew up in Indiana, so it figures...

I had lost sight of the monster and immediately found the biggest magazine I could and rolled it up to defend myself. This, as it turns out, was a terrible, terrible mistake.

So we moved slowly around the living room trying to find it before it found us. And then it took flight. It flew from the couch, up to the ceiling and over the fan. I backed up against the wall and immediately started to panic and scream. Rachel asked "Where is it" and I immediately shouted back "ARE YOU SERIOUS? IT'S ENORMOUS!!!"

Well it flew down between the blades of the ceiling fan, hovered about a foot off the ground, and then made a B-Line (no pun intended) for me. I swatted as hard as I could ... One ... Two ... Three times, never connecting once. And then it landed. On me. More specifically, on my ... zipper area.

I backed up into the wall and shouted at the top of my lungs, tried to brush it off, and then I swung again ... One ... Two ... Three times (breaking the standing lamp next to me in the process), never connecting with the insect once. I did, however, connect all three times ... with my zipper area. The pain caused me to drop the unfortunately heavy magazine on the ground. The wasp flew down to the carpet and landed. My fearless wife ran over, grabbed the magazine, and then pounded the critter into the carpet. She then dropped the magazine, picked up her sandal and continued to beat the bug until she was sure it was dead.

I hope that you, the reader, take the following lessons away from this tragic and painful story:

1) Be nice to your siblings.
2) Don't make fun of the fears of others.
3) Only grab the lightest periodical available when dispatching household insects.

Impeach Obama

2011-06-24T17:27:00.000-07:00

A warning in advance ... this blog post is going to be a political rant having to do with a statement that was made by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. If you're not in a place to hear it on a Friday, I totally understand. Stop reading, hit the backspace button and have an AWESOME day.

For those crazy enough to continue, let's just dig right in, shall we?

In summary, Sunday, June 19th marked the 90th day of US involvement in the war raging for control of Libya. Our involvement was not sanctioned, as permitted in the Constitution, by Congress. Instead, it was initiated by President Barack Obama. Were it not for the War Powers Act of 1973, outrage would have happened much sooner, but the act permits the President to declare war for 90 days without the consent of Congress.

Let's clear that up too ... this is only when the US is in immediate danger or has been attacked. But we haven't, so the War Powers Act should not even apply. It does not apply. But still, that's the present debate in the media, so let's just go there...

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attempted to perform an act of verbal prestidigitation earlier this week. This was followed by votes on two measures in Congress today: one to support our involvement in Libya, which failed, and the other to partially restrict funding for our involvement in Libya, which also failed. She said:

"The bottom line is, whose side are you on? Are you on Gadhafi's side, or are you on the side of the aspirations of the Libyan people and the international coalition that has been created to support them?"

No ma'am, that is not the bottom line. Leave it to a high ranking democrat to redefine this situation and attempt to smother the issue at bar in a political smoke screen. President Obama is doing the same thing, by the way, by saying that he hasn't violated the Constitution since the actions he's authorized don't qualify as "hostilities." Of course, the Pentagon and the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel disagree with him.

The bottom line is that the President broke the law by authorizing military action toward Libya (using NATO as some kind of fraternal scapegoat). He was then defended (erroneously) by the War Powers Act, and then broke that law. Regardless of what is happening in Libya; regardless of what the rest of the world is doing or what they think, President Obama neither had nor has authority under his Constitutional constraints to provide military resources, personnel or funding to the war in Libya.

The bottom line is that it is time for President Obama to be impeached, under Article II, section 4 of the United States Constitution, for abuse of power of the Office of the President.

What Disc Golf Taught Me About Christianity this Week...

2011-06-21T15:08:00.000-07:00

I play disc golf. Yes, it's a sport. No, you may not judge me.

There are some pretty amazing courses here in Charlotte, so I get to play without having to travel too far. This year, I decided I wanted to get more distance out of my drives, so I practiced a different grip. Yes, there are different grips. Shut up.

Ever since I started playing, I have used a control grip for everything ... drives, mid-range and putts. That resulted in more control, but less distance. So this year, I'm changing to a power grip. As the name implies, there is more power, but less control.

So I went out to Killborne Park here in Charlotte, and I made the decision to switch to the power grip. And something odd happened...

The third time I went to drive off the tee, mid throw, MY HAND switched from a power grip to the control grip. At first I was surprised, then confused, and then angry. How dare my own hand disobey ME! It's MY hand!

The problem is, that's what I trained it to do. Out of sheer muscle memory, my hand simply did what it has always done. Regardless what I wanted it to do, it was going to try to go on auto-pilot and throw the way I learned to throw. Unlearning is a frustrating process.

I'm convinced the soul has a "muscle memory" too. It's in this place that Christian disciplines like prayer, personal worship and devotional time become essential. If you teach your soul to live with them, eventually they will become auto-pilot. But if you teach your soul to live without them, don't be surprised when your soul argues with you to do something different. And the thing of it is, you can't even really get mad, because it's just doing what you trained it to do...

A Bit of Honesty

2011-06-21T08:31:00.000-07:00

I don't blog very often. It's for a variety of reasons, but it's something I want to change. I happen to like blogging. I've run into a few roadblocks, so this post is an attempt to clear the air and move right past them.

First of all, I spend too much time deliberating about how I should come across in each post. "What do I want these readers to think about me?" Well, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but despite how I try, I'm not a philosopher. I'm not a political analyst. I'm not a successful businessman.

What I am is a 30 year old pastor and husband who went through some very trying times (including a church split), lost all interest in the church as a whole, went through a period of depression, and then came out of it with the help of an amazing wife and a loving, gracious, and patient church. So when I write, that's what you're going to get. That's my filter. That's my history. And if I live as though it never happened, then the lessons I learned during that time would be wasted. So no more denial. I hope that's cool with you.

Moving on.

Also, because I'm a perfectionist, long blogs are exhausting. Revising. Linking. Fact-checking. I have 10 great blog ideas, but the thought of them is completely debilitating, because I feel like I have to get them perfect. Well I don't. So my blogs are going to be shorter and to the point.

So here's to short & to the point...

Love may Win, but "Love Wins" does not...

2011-05-18T06:12:00.000-07:00

I know it's been a while since I chimed in about Rob Bell's most recent book, "Love Wins." Well I've read it, and it's already been passed around to people who were also curious and wanted to see for themselves what it was all about.

I've also had plenty of time to talk to friends, family and mentors about it, and it's comforting to know that after reading the book, we're coming to a lot of the same conclusions.

I went into reading the book with a high degree of optimism, because I remember just how much controversy surrounded "Velvet Elvis" when it came out, and how disappointed I was with the fundamentalists' grasp of what Mr. Bell was actually saying with that book. It seemed to me that so much of what he said was taken out of context that I gained a level of respect for his musings.

Final Conclusion: I both recommend "Love Wins" and warn against it. I recommend the first 2 chapters, and I caution the reader to be careful with everything following. Here's why...

The first two chapters are like an inoculation for the Church to remember that we believe in a more Biblical understanding of the kingdom and the people of God as both present and future. We're not supposed to simply occupy our time with churchy things until we get to really let loose after death. We're supposed to be, as a church, a bastion of God's love here on the earth, reaching out to people, because that's what God cares about above everything else: reaching hurting people. The first two chapters inspire a refreshing amount of hope, regardless of the background of the reader.

Beyond those two wonderful chapters, proceed with caution. First of all, because the method of Mr Bell's writing is very ambiguous and asks a great many more questions than he dares to answer or even attempt to lead the reader to answers. Socrates was a master at this ... he asked questions that led his students to answers. Mr Bell's questions seem to only lead to an agnostic void ...

Yes, ask questions; Yes feverishly pursue answers as well.

My second and most important caution has been echoed by every single Bible scholar and pastor whose opinion I've solicited: Rob Bell's logic, reasoning and exegetical conclusions take ENORMOUS leaps from question "A" to his own conclusion "B" that simply can't be made without a great deal more support. This is manageable for someone who is mature, but for someone who is perhaps more impressionable, it's just downright dangerous.

Starting Over

2011-04-03T14:36:00.000-07:00

I absolutely hate putting together furniture. I'm pretty awful at it. Ask my wife, she's seen me in action. You know that place on instruction manuals that tell you the approximate assembly time? I've begun to simply add 50% extra time for myself to know how long it's actually going to take.

At our home, Rachel has a room that is dedicated as her photography studio/office. I also have a space of my own. Right now it's the catch-all room of the house, but before that, it was my study. I have a love of books, and coming from 3-too-many years of college, I have plenty of books to love. That also means that I have plenty of books to find shelves for. So in our second year of marriage, we invested in 3 identical bookshelves from Target.

When I set out to put together the first one, I was confronted with something I hadn't ever handled before ... cam bolts and locks, paired with wooden dowels. Now I'm sure you have some experience with these if you've ever put together office furniture. I have come to appreciate them and loathe their design all at the same time. I felt like I was making extremely good time (for me) and was ready to put the backing on the bookshelf, and then I saw it. The framing on the back of the bookshelf was backward, and because of that I couldn't complete it properly. The backing of the shelf was step #26. The framing was step #4. The cam bolts and locks had lied to me, and I didn't notice it until I was almost done.

Hence my hatred of office furniture.

As a perfectionist, I couldn't just Jerry-rig it to work as it was, so I was left with 2 options: Scrap it for firewood or work my way backward and start over. So I began the arduous process of taking it apart, lock by lock ... dowel by dowel. And no, I didn't whistle while I worked. I mostly grumbled incoherently, throwing in a profanity or two ... or twenty. In any case, I wasn't happy. Eventually I got it together properly, and then was careful not to repeat my error in the other bookshelves. They look marvelous.

On May 3rd, I will celebrate my 15th year of being a redeemed man, sold-out for Jesus and serving Him with everything I have. I'm a Life Pacific College Graduate, as well as a Life East alumnus. I've served several pastors in several churches in a variety of ways, but I find myself in an odd place at this major adult benchmark... You see, a little over a year ago, I discovered that in all of my effort and work at being a Christian man, somewhere along the way I skipped a step. I missed a detail. There was no way around it. I could not continue forward to embracing the destiny that the Lord had for me because something was off. Something in my framework was backward, and it couldn't be ignored. And for the last year, I've kicked and grumbled and swore under my breath (and at the top of my lungs), because I was working my backward rather than forward. I was undoing everything just to get back to step #4. It's been a painful process, but one I think was absolutely vital to my future as a man after God's heart.

Today at church, while listening to Pastor Dale speak, something settled in me that hadn't been settled until today: "If I am being undone so that I can be a healthy member of the body of Christ for the next 15 years, it's absolutely worth it." Being disassembled is infinitely better than being discarded and used for firewood. So tonight, after the blog post, dinner and some family time, I think I'm going to go upstairs to those bookshelves, grab two of my first Bibles (A blue pocket sized full Bible and a red leather bound New Spirit Filled Life Bible), and pick back up at step #4.

To Pastor Larry and Pastor Dave "Andre Agassi" Barndt, thank you for giving me those Bibles as a teenager and insisting that I mark them up as much as I wanted to. Without your love, starting over would be much more difficult. And to Pastor Dale Jenkins, thank you for fanning the flame and being like Jesus; "a smoldering wick He will not snuff out, and a bruised reed He will not break."

Here is the New There

2011-03-29T11:38:00.000-07:00

I love tuning forks.

I seriously do.

During my brief time at Radford University, I belonged to A Cappella groups that would perform in public places, most of which didn't warrant the use of a full size pianos to get our starting notes. So we brought tuning forks. If you don't know what they are, google it. Go ahead ... I'll wait.

In the movie Tin Cup, Kevin Costner's character says that a well-hit golf shot is like a tuning fork going off in your loins. And it's a funny way to think of golfing, but I know what he means. I've only had 1 or 2 golf shots where I felt the "That's what it's supposed to feel like" after the swing. I've felt it more playing disc golf, where when the driver releases out of your grip off the tee, holds that tight line down the fairway and makes the turn at the perfect moment. It's not a technical moment. It's something you just feel.

You know that feeling?

Reading Chapter 2 of "Love Wins" by Rob Bell, I had one of those moments, but it was the first time I can remember that was a spiritual tuning fork moment. To summarize, if you haven't read the book yet, Chapter 1 deals with the not-so-simple nature of salvation/faith. By the way, this was what I read last time that wouldn't allow me to continue reading. Chapter 1 asks a lot of questions. Chapter 2, on the other hand, begins answering them , starting with the nature of Heaven and how we relate to it.

Rather than paraphrasing, here is a trail of quotations that led to my moment...

"How we think about heaven, then, directly affects how we understand what we do with our days and energies now, in this age." ~p44

"Taking heaven seriously, then, means taking suffering seriously, now. Not because we've bought into the myth that we can create a utopia given enough time, technology, and good voting choices, but because we have great confidence that God has not abandoned human history and is actively at work within it, taking it somewhere." ~p45

"Jesus teaches us to pursue the life of heaven now and also then, anticipating the day when earth and heaven are one.

Honest business,
redemptive art,
honorable law,
sustainable living,
medicine,
education,
making a home,
tending a garden --
they're all sacred tasks to be done in partnership with God now, because they will all go on in the age to come. In heaven, on earth. Our eschatology shapes our ethics. Eschatology is about last things, ethics are about how you live." ~p46

"A proper view of heaven leads not to escape from the world, but to full engagement with it, all with the anticipation of a coming day when things are on earth as they currently are in heaven." ~p47

When I got to the words "They're all sacred tasks", I had to stop reading, because I started sobbing uncontrollably. It wasn't crying. It was deeper than that. It was like a tuning fork being struck in the deepest part of my spirit and resonating "I knew it. Thank God someone said it."

Rachel loves photography, not because of the prestige, but because of the deep belief that she is helping to shape this age (aion) and will change the world using that medium. For her, it is a sacred work with sacred purpose. Because of her perspective, she probably will change the world...

I love tending to people and anything that is alive. When I care for my wife, our dogs, the rose bushes and the lawn, there is a part of me that knows that I'm "about my Father's business." They're each a sacred work; which I sense that I'm partnering with Him every time I do them.

There is something intensely freeing about seeing seemingly secular, mundane, ordinary tasks as sacred tasks. It's a feeling and a heart understanding that I hope I never lose.

For those that can remember the movie Chariots of Fire, it's saying the same thing as what the character Eric Liddell is known for saying: "I believe God made me for a purpose, but He also made me fast. And when I run, I feel His pleasure..."

For all the skeptics, Rob Bell is not saying that Heaven doesn't exist. What he is saying is that Heaven is much more expansive than the current popular tradition of it, which is simply a place away from here that we'll eventually go if we're good enough.

"Love Wins" by Rob Bell, First Impression

2011-03-24T19:29:00.001-07:00

Yes, I know, it's been a while since I posted a blog. Please forgive me for springing this new post on you so suddenly.

If you follow me on twitter or are a friend on Facebook, you know that I've been trying to get my hands on a copy of "Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived" by Rob Bell. It took me a few days and a few trips, but Barnes & Noble came through today.

I sat down to start reading, and I stopped 20 minutes later. But it wasn't because I was offended or offput by anything that was said. I was so astounded at the preface to this very controversial book that I had to stop. I'll read it 2 or 3 more times before I make my way through the remaining 190 pages, because it's worthy of the attention.

Rather than quoting text or citing specific examples, I'll leave you with a brief first impression, in the form of a series of statements. Guess what that means... you're going to have to read it your darn self (that is, if you want to agree or argue with me).

I believe that Rob Bell has a greater grasp of the complexity of scripture than his most skeptical theologians and/or scholars.

I think that the reason this book has so enraged the Evangelical community is that the author asks questions that have been largely tossed aside by others. The preface is 80% questions and 20% research or statements. The danger with tossing aside questions about Jesus and the nature of salvation is that we can also toss aside the people sincerely asking them as well.

Most of the quotations that I've read in blogs, tweets and articles that are in opposition to the orthodoxy of this book are found in the first 10 pages. I wonder how many of those critics didn't actually make it throught the rest of the book...

"Tolerance" is Overrated; A Top-10 List

2010-09-30T17:54:00.000-07:00

You know what I don't want to tolerate? Tolerance being counter-intuitive. It seems that in the name of tolerance, we're scared to oppose anything, because being intolerant seems to be the easiest way to become an American pariah. Well, I guess that means I'm doomed to a life of unpopularity.

Bunny trail: I think the "Coexist" bumper sticker using religious symbols is just plain ignorant. Take a world religions class people. Read a book. Then form an opinion.

Back on track. Every belief is not equally valid. Either Jesus is the Savior of the World or He isn't. Either it is OK to kill infidels in Allah's name or it isn't. Not every belief system has equal merit, nor should they be given equal air-time. And in special circumstances, giving ground in the name of tolerance is actually offensive.

I'm sure you've all, by now, heard plenty about the Mosque being constructed at Ground Zero (the site of 9/11). Rather than ranting about it here, I figured the most constructive use of my words would be to make a list of things as/more insensitive and offensive than having a Mosque at Ground Zero. These all could be argued from the standpoint of understanding and tolerance.

10. The Handgun Appreciation Club (with indoor shooting range) at Columbine High School
9. The Andrew Jackson's Colonization Museum at any Native American reservation
8. Lebron James singing the national anthem at the 2010 Cav's home opener.
7. Changing all of the tour guides' uniforms at the Holocaust Museum to resemble Nazi Officers.
6. "Bloody Sunday's", an Irish pub in the heart of London, England.
5. A Michigan recruiter at a booth during Ohio State's Club Fair
4. A US munitions factory in Hiroshima or Nagasaki, Japan
3. A national law mandating that every "Martin Luther King Jr Blvd" in the country be intersected by "James Earl Ray Road".
2. "Hutu Gravedigger Services" in Rwanda, advertising "No one has more experience."
1. A Jewish Synagogue next to the Kaaba in Mecca, with a likeness of Mohammad wearing a Yarmulke

Tolerance should never take priority over respect; or better yet, love. And not all perspectives are worth listening to. Why allow something unloving and disrespectful in the name of tolerance? I think our response to those building Park51 should be "You are welcomed to build, as soon as Israel is allowed to build a Synagogue at Mecca." That should delay the project a while...

Christians are the Worst...

2010-07-26T07:55:00.000-07:00

It's been a while folks. Good to see you again. Yes, I'm loosing weight. Thank you for noticing and speaking up. Encouraging bunch of people...

Now for the matter at hand.

Imagine that you work at Chili's. (Ok, I'll give you a few seconds to think about those Fajitas ... soooo good) Sunday afternoon, you go in to work. You make between $3-$4 per hour plus tips. Now imagine 12:43 in the afternoon rolls around. A well dressed, seemingly happy group of 7 walk in, and are seated in your section. Everyone gets soft-drinks, except for the one guy who asks for water, 2 slices of lemons and splenda stirred in. They get appetizers, entrees, but no dessert, because let's face it ... nap time is coming. Throughout the meal, they talk about the church service they all just attended, the message, the worship, and maybe a little gossip about that one family. You know the one.

Then you hand them their single check an hour later. It totals up to $78.75 pre tax, and $84.45 after tax. While you wait on other tables, they greet you as they walk out the door. You make your way back to the table, and discover something interesting. They have left $.55 as a tip to round up to $85, and a gospel tract for you to read.

That hour of your service, combined, was worth $3.55.

Do you read the tract?

If you think this is a baseless hypothetical situation, I DARE YOU to ask anyone who is a server in a restaurant. You'll hear stories that miror this. Even better, ask them what day they dread working the most. They will almost unanimously tell you Sunday. Why? Because Christians are the worst people to serve. They're demanding, condescending and cheap.

We're demanding, condescending and cheap. Right after service, where hearts are uplifted, lives are changed and people encounter the Living God, we let ourselves get away with being demanding, condescending and cheap. For a people who serve the best God, why do we let ourselves get away with being the worst?

For the servers out there, please know this: When Christians treat you this way, it's shameful. It is not behavior endorsed by the Bible we read, the God we serve or the values we strive to uphold. God's love for you is greater than that Bible tract. Your time is worth more than we've made it. We appreciate your service, because believe it or not, YOU are an example to US of how to serve others. Sometimes we just forget that as a people, we represent the God who didn't come to be served, but to serve and to give His life for many. Forgive us for forgetting.

To the Christians out there: don't you think it's time we changed the tides? After all, we are a people who once were lost, but now are found! We serve the God who formed the heavens and the earth, and the Savior who bore the sins of all mankind. Do you realize that we're known by our actions, not our intentions? No one cares about our theological disposition; rather, they care about and are impacted by the practice of our religion. Isn't it time that we let Sunday be a day that others look forward to also? Imagine how great it would be if Sundays were the day that servers looked forward to working, because of how generous those Christians are.

We serve a generous God, let's allow ourselves to be generous to the world He's called US to serve. We are a people overwhelmed by God's mercy, so let's pass that on, even if they spill your drinks or get your order wrong. Twice. We are a people transformed by nothing less than an encounter with God Himself. Let's give people more than tracts to believe in. Let's be a transformed people, no matter where we go.

As a complete aside, the mathematician won't let me conclude this blog post without a tipping lesson. Do you know how to tip 15% on $84.45? Yes, I said 15%. Think of it as a minimum, because traditionally, it was. If you can't afford to tip, then you can't afford to go out to eat. Buy groceries, go home and have a great afternoon with your family & friends.

If you have a smartphone, just use that calculator and multiply $84.45 x 1.15. Pay that amount. If you prefer to do the mental math, then do, but get it right: Add 10% and 5%. 10% is easy to come by ... $8.45. Now round it up to $9 (you big spender you). Then cut that number in half to find the 5%, and add it on. $9 + $4.50 = $13.50

If your server is average, just tip 15%. If they're above average, go ahead and tip 20% ($18). If they're really amazing, tip 30% ($27) or more and let their manager know ... compliments go a long way.

We serve the best God. Let's be the best at serving the world around us, even while they're serving us lunch.

An Unemployed Man's Perspective on Daytime TV

2010-02-12T08:28:00.000-08:00

First of all, let me just publicly dispel a myth I held going into being unemployed. You would think that once you didn't have a job, you'd have all the time in the world to do the things you enjoy, since, after all, you finally had the time you were lacking when it wasn't consumed by commute and committed employment. That's bunk. The structure that school or employment provide are what drive motivation to do all those other things apparently. I haven't been this lethargic in ... well ... I can't even remember.

Being unemployed stinks. I'm not gonna lie. It just plain stinks.

What's worse, since I'm unemployed we can't afford normal people TV, so we're forced to use antenna TV. There isn't a whole lot on during the day. The only show I really even care about is Dr. Phil. The rest of the day is filled with what I like to call "drama TV" (the View, Tyra, Days of Our Lives, Maury, etc). So since it's all there is to watch, I started watching.

Did you know that Jerry Springer is STILL on TV?

WHY is Jerry Springer still on TV?

The guy who spearheaded the brawling drama TV movement is still doing his thing, provoking screaming fist fights between lesbian love triangles, spurned lovers, and midget rodeo transsexual Olympians. Girls flash the camera to get Jerry Beads. Seriously? We're still funding this crap? And what's worse, there are at least 3 other shows that specialize in the same stuff. And that's WITHOUT counting the judge and divorce court genre...

I could blame Jerry for ruining TV as we knew it, but the truth is he's still on the air because he keeps finding people to be on the air with him. People call in and want to be on the Springer show with their drama, and he obliges.

Truth be told, I think we're to blame for his presence. After all, they don't supply the drama, we do. As much as I hate it, I've become wholly convinced that our American culture no longer revolves around values, but around drama. We don't care about character nearly as much as we want to get to know characters.

Thinking back over my life, I don't know a venue, whether it be school, church, or family, where I can't pinpoint people who seemed as if they couldn't go a month, week, or sometimes even a day without some kind of drama. I'm sure you know people like that. Maybe it's you. Tune in next week to find out if it is...

No, seriously, think back. Why is it that we can't get through a day without some kind of a plot twist? Wouldn't it be AMAZINGLY REFRESHING if we could just do the mundane and boring for a week straight? Wake up, go to work (I wish), commute home, have a family dinner, enjoy some downtime, go to sleep and then do it all over again. Or how about this: Go to church, greet people, laugh, sing praise and worship, grow through studying the Word, go to lunch, go home, grab a nap, and do it all over again next week.

Why is there always gossip? Or fights? Or mistrust? Why do we let things like this keep our attention? Or why is it that we know characters on TV better than we do the members of our own families?

Honestly, I need YOUR perspective on this. Please answer the following questions in the comment section, especially if you're able to think back and remember life prior to sitcoms and reality TV (i.e. if you're older ... just sayin'): Why do you think drama has such a high place in our society? Is it a greater problem to be bored with the routines of life or exhausted from the emotional swings of living dramatically?

And on a completely separate note, I have to confess: I do watch the View. It's easy to tolerate after you've seen the Tyra show. At least The View has both sides represented. You don't know the "liberal bias" until you've seen it masquerading in designer dresses, dramatic eye makeup and heels.

Generational Knowledge of Tragedy

2010-01-23T20:26:00.000-08:00

Something dawned on me today when I heard that celebrity musicians will be covering "We Are The World" to benefit relief in Haiti. When the original song was performed, I was 4 years old, and I remember singing the song, but I had no idea what it was for. I didn't know that it was meant to raise funds for famine in Africa. I also only vaguely remember the Challenger disaster, because I was only 5. My parents, on the other hand, can tell you exactly where they were, and when they talk about it, still get tears in their eyes.

Where were you when JFK died?

Where were you when you heard that the Challenger exploded?

Where were you when the Towers Fell?

Where were you when you heard about the earthquake in Haiti?

When I talk about the JFK assasination, I only speak with facts. I only know basic information. I don't know what it's like for my president to be killed and not know who to blame.

On the other hand, I can tell you exactly what I felt at the moment when the Twin Towers were attacked, who I called, who I tried to console, and how many times I cried for no reason and too many reasons all at the same time.

Do you realize that the children being born today will have no emotional connection to or rememberance of the World Trade Center? In the world they live in, the Twin Towers never existed. To them, it's just history. This realization gives me a greater appreciation for the Hebrew culture found in the Bible. They didn't have CNN. They didn't have YouTube. They didn't have social media, Newspapers or any other way to preserve the past. They had scribes that would reproduce letters and books BY HAND. The main way they remembered was to tell stories. They told stories over and over and over again, with as much vivid language as they could muster to reproduce the sights, sounds, smells and emotions of their past in the hope that the future generations would remember, learn and pass it on.

When I have children, I hope that I have the courage not just to teach them how to live in the present, but also to teach them about the events that created the world they live in in the hopes that they can take that information and remember, learn and pass it on.

Why Pat Robertson Was Wrong...

2010-01-16T07:37:00.000-08:00

For those that haven't heard, Pat Robertson recently made a pair of statements regarding the destruction in Haiti resulting from the 7.0 earthquake and it's tremendous aftershocks. Rather than paraphrase, please click the link below to be redirected to the most unbiased YouTube clip I was able to find showing what was said...

Pat Robertson's Two Cents...

Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.

In voicing my repulsion of Mr. Robertson's words to friends, on two separate occasions I was told that he was right to say what he said. While I value the relationships I have with these friends, I have to stand in strong opposition to their conclusion, because I believe that it reflects poorly on the heart and mind of those who belong to Jesus' church.

Pat Robertson is one of the loudest voices on the globe maintaining a Christian paradigm, and the strength of my response is directly proportionate to his elevated status and the representation he is of all Christians. My goal is to make sure that people know that not everyone maintains his over-simplified view of this catastrophy.

I won't lie. I'm stirred up about this, and I believe rightfully so. And if I'm wrong, I'm wide open to divine guidance and correction. Until then, I'll rant away. Rather than spend more time crafting another response, I'm simply going to use one I already released to a dear friend:

I vehemently disagree with the belief that "We should defend the truth of his words." Historical facts are far from the fullness of the truth. It's not that his words were ill timed ... it's that they were deplorably inappropriate coming from a man redeemed by grace. To be wholly forceful, his words were unbiblical. I stand on Luke 13. Please take the time to read it.

Also, it is worthy to note that I stand behind the words of Charles Spurgeon, a voice certainly more prominent than my obscure opinion. Here's a link for his commentary on Luke 13. Also a worthy read.

Jesus was asked what He thought about Galileans who were murdered and whose blood was then mixed with sacrificial blood as a warning to the Jews by Pilate. The common belief of the day was that bad things happen to bad and deserving people, and that the worse the punishment, the worse the sinner. "Those dirty Galileans deserved it." Racism mixed with legalism. How despicable.

Jesus doesn't tolerate that belief for one moment. He cut through their cultural bigotry and did what He did best ... show God to a people desperate to hear from Him. He sited 2 different recent events to dismantle their belief...

"Do you suppose that these Galileans were greater sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered this fate? I tell you no..."

"Or do you suppose that those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, were worse culprits than all the men who live in Jerusalem? I tell you no..."

Do you suppose that those who were destroyed by Hurricane Katrina were greater sinners than anyone else? Do you suppose that the souls who were lost to the earthquake in Haiti were more vile offenders than anyone else who walks the planet? I tell you no.

It is appropriate, at times, to vocally oppose the voice of those prominent in the Church. Paul the Apostle did it without apology. Martin Luther did it at the cost of his own life. We have a responsibility to confront anti-biblical Christian ramblings, regardless of the mouth that those words proceed out of.

Did Haiti have a Vodou blessing pronounced upon their independence? I can't find it, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Regardless, it's a historical fact that wouldn't affect my theology for the following reasons:

In Haiti, 80% of it's people profess Roman Catholic Christianity as their religion, and another 16% profess a Protestant Christian denomination. 50% of the population is said to practice Vodou (voodoo). Using those numbers, and the current projected death-toll of as many as 200,000 souls, here's how the simple math of the "God's Judgment" statement plays out...

80,000 Roman Catholics with no affiliation to Vodou perished
80,000 Roman Catholics who practice Vodou also perished
16,000 Protestants with no affiliation to Vodou perished
16,000 Protestants who practice Vodou also perished
8,000 people who did not profess or practice any religion also perished.

Normally in my posts I come across as smug and sarcastic, but I'm crying as I write this, because the numbers are sobering to me that I am overwhelmed. You see, I believe in a God that was willing to spare a city from destruction because of 10 righteous people. And I believe He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

Me personally? I would rather do what the Apostle Paul did on Mars Hill concerning the nameless God, only in reference to Bondye the great but unknown and removed Vodou deity and try to instill hope in a place of desparation, eternal life in a place of so much death, and love to try to mend the grief they are facing. Have you seen any of the live broadcasts from Haiti? Have you heard the wailing in the background from those in mourning?

But what do I know, I'm just a man who once had a contract with Satan and who now stands forgiven as a child of God because of Jesus Christ.

Bad form Pat, bad form. Your "optimism" isn't welcome.

A Christian Perspective of Disney's "Up"

2010-01-10T10:20:00.000-08:00

I'm just warning you, this one is going to be long...

Ok folks, it's 2010. If you haven't yet come to the realization that cartoon movies are made to be a diatribe on cultural absurdities, you clearly haven't seen enough of them. For instance:

In Wall-E, the humans have become so fat and lazy that they forfeited their planet to waste, and have to get off their robotic recliners to do something about it.

In "Over the Hedge", RJ gives a tutorial about how much of human life is centered around food, from a Raccoon's point of view, and pokes a jab about how we're "slowly losing the ability to walk." Ask my wife; every time I see a kid in heelys, I remember and quote aloud that line.

Well today I saw a movie that follows in that great tradition; the tradition of exposing and ridiculing adult culture to our children in cartoon form so that maybe, just maybe, they won't repeat our foolish ways. That movie? Disney's "Up". If you haven't seen it, I'll try not to spoil the ending, but you may just want to go out, rent it, pop some popcorn, watch it and then come back to me. Don't worry ... the blog will still be here.

There are almost too many lessons to take away from the movie to catalog, but I'll do my best. The main purpose of the movie that jumps out to me is answering the question: "What's really important in life." I'll lay the lessons out by character...

Carl Fredrickson is an elderly widower that lived a full life with his wife Ellie, and who wants to fulfill their adventure by flying his house to the place they always dreamed of; Paradise Falls. His valued possessions are a lifetime's worth of pictures of he and his wife Ellie, and most importantly their Adventure book. And while he is the classic depiction of a bitter old man, the viewer is given a glimpse as to why: he is a quiet man who has lived life, including car troubles, house repairs, a miscarriage (or the inability to have chilren) and the death of his wife. The lesson? Don't judge people too quickly, because you don't know their back-story. Well he gets his house to Paradise Falls and then realizes that life isn't about getting your dreams done, it's "What I'm going to do" when I get there. Life isn't exclusively about fulfilling your dreams, it's about coming together to dream about new adventures for the next generation to embark on.

Charles Muntz turns out to be the villian of this movie. He is an adventurer of old that was the inspiration for both Carl and Ellie as children. He makes a discovery which is contested by the scientific community, so he sets out to Paradise Falls to find and capture the bird that will clear his name, and commits that he will not return until he captures that bird. Charles and Carl's paths cross in the wilds of South America, and while he initially seems to be an ingenious pioneer of a man, he quickly flips to show his true character: a man driven by the need to show the world that he's not crazy, who will do anything to see that happen, no matter what the cost or how many people he has to hurt. His valued posessions are the bones of his past exploits. He just wants to complete his set of skeletons. He teaches us that people driven by the need to be recognized have an unlimited capacity to be terrible, because irregardless of their talents and abilities, they are incapable of putting people above their accomplishments.

Russell is a wilderness scout trying to get his last badge so that he can become a Senior wilderness scout. He isn't even doing it to be a senior scout ... he just wants his dad to come to his ceremony and be active in his life again. You learn that his dad is in at least his second marriage (or is dating after his first marriage), and Russell calls his new mom by her first name, saying "She's not my mom." Russell's prized possession is his wilderness scout sash with all of his pins. He, in a protest, lays his sash down at Carl's feet to go off and do what is needed, what is right. He characterizes what is truly courageous: to lay down our lives and interests for the welfare of others.

Alpha and Doug are two dogs, both of which need to be mentioned. Alpha is a condescendingly formal attack Doberman Pincer that Charles Muntz trains to track the giant bird of his obsession. He is the first of a pack of wild dogs trained to do this. Even before I saw Charles Muntz, I thougt to myself, "I wonder what kind of a man trains a dog to be so brutally cruel." Alpha teaches us that you can easily determine the quality of a person by examining the people closest to them, especially those that follow them. Doug on the other hand is a very typical golden retriever; playful, loyal, trusting and even gullible, with a notable distraction by and hatred of squirrels. He is the only member of "the pack" maintained by Muntz who doesn't have a greek letter for a name. He doesn't fit the attack dog mold. My wife made the observation that, "He is the only dog that doesn't have any position with the pack." He gets sent out on "special missions" intended to keep him from getting in the way. The most important thing you'll notice about Doug is that he voluntarily changes masters, from Muntz to Carl, and ends up becoming the "Alpha" of the pack by outsmarting Alpha to help Carl and Russell. His loyalty is based on what we Christians call righteousness: Doing right which is rooted in the expressed heart of God. We do what is right because He did, does, and will continue to do what is right, because He is good.

As they used to say (and need to start saying again), the moral of the story is that people are all the same in that we all dream and have goals. But that isn't nearly as important as what we are willing to do with them. This movie was deeply challenging to me. It left me asking questions of myself, and I pose the same to you. Will we see our dreams fulfilled no matter what, even at the cost of the people around us? Are we willing to lay down our dreams to help those that need it most? Is the end result the most important thing to us, or is it the continued journey that we value above anything else? Is our loyalty based on position and authority or on just kindness (acts of kindness springing from a just heart). Will our lives be rated by our own achievements or by our sacrificial inspiration of others?

The greatest moment in the movie comes at the end, when Carl attends Russell's wilderness scout ceremony. Russell is the only child standing without his father present, and Carl stands to be with him, but then presents him with the pin that Ellie gave Carl as a child, bringing him in to the adventurer club. It's been said that we are a part of a fatherless generation. What Carl does is what is necessary for us to do, if we're willing. It's time to mentor the fatherless to be driven by a need for adventurous community, in place of the success society that abandoned them in the first place.

If you are a person professing the Christian faith, ask yourself this: If our Savior offered to us an abundant and full life, why aren't we taking advantage of it in the same way He did, by laying down our lives for others? Why would we expect fullness of life to look different for us than it did for Him?

Top Ten Rumors Worth Repeating...

2010-01-01T23:04:00.000-08:00

Over the course of the last few days, Rachel and I have talked extensively about rumors and gossip an everything that wasn't supposed to happen when we stepped down at World Hope. One of the best ideas we had was to create a list of 10 things that we'd prefer people to say if the issue of us leaving comes up in a speculative way. Two things: please feel free to use these when asked about our REAL reason for leaving, and please feel free to post a comment with your own fantastic rumor for us to use the next time we're asked. Ok, here they are, in no particular order...

1) We discovered that the entire staff at World Hope were KGB operatives, and Ryan has an intense irrational fear of Russians. (I really am afraid of Russians, but have no idea why)
2) Rachel is pregnant with octuplets, and we're gearing up to give Octomom a run for her money in the reality TV business.
3) We discovered that our dog Ginger can talk, but she only speaks Gaelic, so we're moving to Ireland.
4) We feel a call to take a family vow of poverty, silence and ... nudity, and that just doesn't fit in with the values of World Hope ... yet.
5) Rachel got hired by National Geographic to photograph pigmy wedding rituals in the Amazon Rainforest.
6) Pastor Mike cracked one too many fat jokes, and actually made Ryan cry.
7) We were simultaneously cast for reality TV shows ... Ryan for "So You Think You Can Dance" and Rachel for "Survivor". (And yes, I heard you think "Ryan for The Biggest Loser", Pr Mike, and I'm hurt all over again)
8) Feskos + Powerball winning ticket = Super Early Retirement
9) Ryan and Rachel are team Edward, while Pastor Dave and Katrina are team Jacob.

And this last one we actually heard from other people...

10) We didn't have any other way out of the Daniel Fast. "What do you mean you don't eat no meat?"

Feel free to comment and share your absurd rumor that we can use in the future.

Why we REALLY left World Hope...

2009-12-31T11:37:00.000-08:00

The number one question Rachel and I have been asked since announcing our resignation at World Hope has been, "Why are you guys REALLY leaving?" In going into the new year, we thought long and hard about this and decided to air out why we're really stepping down as Associate Pastors. After all, we want to go into 2010 with clean consciences, and wouldn't want the last thing we did in 2009 to be lying.

What we TOLD everyone was that ... well, let me just quote a portion of the letter we read to the congregation on the 27th...

"When we originally came to World Hope, it was with the belief and assumption that we would be serving long term, alongside Pastor Dave and Katrina and the rest of the pastoral staff. Over the last month, however, we have sensed that a transition was coming and that we needed to prepare for that. Through prayerful consideration, we have come to the understanding that the Lord brought us to World Hope for a very specific assignment, namely to aid with the season of transition that the church has gone through in the last few months, and to help bring a more stable environment for the body to launch from into the new year. Even though we know that Pastor Dave's vision for World Hope in the coming year is one given by the Holy Spirit, we've sensed that we weren't going to be a part of it ...Please be reassured: we aren't leaving with any ill feelings or discord toward the staff or anyone in the church. We are leaving to give place for growth in our lives and in the life of this church."

Rachel and I have tried to be transparent and ethical in leaving World Hope, because we've seen it done differently and have tried our best to be obedient to what we feel the Lord is leading us to do in a way that builds up the people around us that we care about. What makes me laugh is the tendency in certain people to need more than just what is said. Where's the drama? Where's the dirt? Where's the scandal? Why did we REALLY leave World Hope? Exactly what we've said from the beginning, to everyone we've talked to in the process. We believe, based on our life with the Holy Spirit, that our time at World Hope was meant to be temporary. Certain aspects of our lives (financial, among others) can't support us being engaged in the level of ministry that we know that World Hope is called to in 2010. So we're resigning. That's it. Sorry to disappoint. No scandal. No paparazzi. No breaking news. To quote my father-in-law, "This is the Kingdom of God, not reality TV."

I blame this cultural anomaly on the excessive saturation of sitcoms, reality TV shows and soaps on TV. You can say whatever you want about TV not making people do things; from all I've seen it can and does influence the way we think. Are we so inundated with drama on the screen that we can't separate that out from real life?

I watch TV too. I love Friends. This actually reminds me of a particular episode of friends. It's the one where Joey and Chandler's TV accidentally locks in to a porn channel, and they're too afraid that if they change the channel it'll go away forever. Don't go getting all moral on me just yet, the lesson is ahead... In that episode, Joey and Chandler watch so much porn that they start expecting that life will imitate what they've been watching, and are then disappointed and disillusioned when girls don't just throw themselves at the guys. It's ridiculous, but they wouldn't mock it if it didn't have merit in real life. It's only laughable on screen because it's plausible in reality.

I know that even after posting this, some people might still say, "Well they're just saying that because they don't want anyone else to know the truth," or "They're just trying to cover up what REALLY happened." My invitation to you, the reader, is this: If you run into or talk to one of the people who maintain that perspective, do them (and yourself) a favor and cut them off, slap them with a fly swatter, and then ask them to change the subject." And if you happen to be the poor soul who gets slapped with a fly swatter, please kindly send me a picture to remember you by.

Addendum: I know that this post may come across as sarcastic and impatient, and that isn't my intention. I am, however, deliberately exposing something that I believe happens too much in the body of Christ and needs to be brought back in line. My heart is to challenge believers not to waste time on gossip, rumors, or speculations, but to grow up in the way we us our words, because too many people's souls depend on the quality and potency of our faith to be worried about such trivial things. Let's get back to being people who are more interested in truth and love than we are in rumors and idle talk.

The Social Media Challenge, Part 1, "The Motive"

2009-11-12T08:12:00.000-08:00

So I just read an article. I'll give you my take on it, but first, here's the link. For the non internet savvy, click the blue word back there. It'll take you somewhere else...

Go ahead and take a minute to read it. You never know. I might just lie about what I think or what it's even about to throw you off. I'm sneaky like that...

Ok, for those that took time to read the article, here's my personal summary:

We've been told for the last 10-15 years that an ideal candidate for hire in just about any career path is the ability to multitask, and at increasingly higher levels. Juggle your responsibilities, all at the very same time, and you get more done that way, right? Wrong, according to this most recent in a slew of studies about the mental effects of multitasking.

Here is what multitasking doesn't actually do:

Doesn't help you focus
Doesn't help you ignore irrelevant info
Doesn't improve your memory
Doesn't help switch between tasks more quickly
Doesn't help switch between tasks more quickly
Doesn't help switch between tasks more quickly (the third time shows it was intentional)

Check this quote out from the article. This sums it up best for me:

"They couldn't help thinking about the task they weren't doing," Ophir said. "The high multitaskers are always drawing from all the information in front of them. They can't keep things separate in their minds."

The only thing that high levels of multitasking seems to accomplish is to prevent us from relating to the world around us (which requires focus, ignoring TONS of irrelevant info, memory, and switching to doing something else). This has me remembering a commercial I saw from a cable company... The only reason that commercial was even funny was that I live with a televisaphonernetter. If you don't understand that term, it's because you didn't click the blue link back there. Just sayin'...

So here's what I'm thinking. I'm thinking I'm going to be challenging myself and, well, the rest of the world, to a Social Media Challenge. Details to follow, but it's going to involve logging out of all social media platforms for 1 entire week. Now right away, I know that causes a panic for some people. My televisaphonernetter included. Right away, when I told her what I was thinking, she responded with, "Yeah, I won't be taking that challenge." Now understand, she's a self-employed professional wedding photographer in Charlotte (with a snazzy website if I do say so myself), and social media is her primary form of communication for business. That, I understand. But for the vast majority of us, social media plays a minuscule role in our work lives. So the question is, do you still have the remaining brain capacity to relate to the world around you without social media distraction?

We'll be in touch. Keep an eye out for Part 2, the "The Method"

Rob Bell Ruined My Evening...

2009-11-10T19:02:00.000-08:00

I find myself haunted tonight. But it's not by any of the unfortunate folks at peopleofwalmart.com (beware if you click, you may end up haunted too). And it's not because I went out and rented Saw 17: Jigsaw goes to Cancun. It's because I finished reading a book, and something the author wrote caught me off guard. Almost like a sucker-punch of the soul.

The book is Velvet Elvis. The author is Rob Bell, pastor of Mars Hill Church. Now this particular entry isn't going to be a book review. That may come later. This is about just one statement that is still rocking my world. Before I get to what he said, let me go back briefly to explain why this book even found itself on my shelf.

I serve as an assisting pastor in a church, and as such I have friends that are pastors also. One of them asked me, "What do you think about the Emerging Church Movement?" I had never heard the term. The tone of the question was negative and almost indignant, so I asked about it. They hooked me up with a few websites, and I was intrigued, because from the Evangelical mainstream voice, the Emerging Church was almost being labeled as a threat, and Rob Bell was one of their chief "heretics." I watched a few anti-videos on YouTube and was even more intrigued, so I did what anyone in my position ought to. I bought his books. Velvet Elvis was one of the books. After all, you can only learn so much from spliced text with musical backgrounds on YouTube. For a people as opinionated as the church seems to be, we should have to be the most well-read community on the face of the planet... I digress...

The statement is in the last chapter. I'll give it to you plain:

"Most of the messages we receive (as Christians) are about how to make life easier. The call of Jesus goes the other direction: it's about making our lives more difficult. It is going out of our way to be more generous and disciplined and loving and free. It is refusing to escape and become numb to and check out of this broken, fractured world." (emphasis added)

I can't get past that last statement, because it's right where I live. Even as a pastor, even having gone to Bible College, I find myself more interested in finding varied ways (TV, video games, heck even social media) to escape from the world around me because in a not-so-small way, I've lost the faith to believe that God can make a difference in that world using my life. That's hard to admit, but I knew at once I had to admit it. I have to own it. I have to throw up my hands and say, "You're right, God, that's me. I checked out." I can't tell you why. I can't even tell you what I'm going to do next. But at least I know where I am, and that's a start.

The position I'm in has the words of Debbye Graafsma , renowned worship song writer and Christian counselor, echoing in my heart. She has said that life isn't about success, it's about congruency. It's about being the same, inside and out. It's about letting what is at the core of who you were created to be set the pace for the person you appear to be, not the opposite way around.

I know where I am. But I know where I want to be, and I'm taking the first steps in that direction. I'm not writing this to try and tell anyone how to get there themselves. Rather, I'm writing to invite other people along who may find themselves on the same point of the map that I am: checked out, numb, and not even knowing how they got there, but wanting to go back.

If anyone has been down this road, I'd welcome your comments and contributions. I'm sure a lot of other people would too.

A Christian Perspective on S.909, The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act

2009-11-04T19:37:00.000-08:00

I know that I'm not a consistent blogger. I also don't consider myself to be a political person. Certain topics trigger my interest more than others, but for the most part I tend to lay low and just let the politicians play their games without a whole lot of spectating or commentary.

I simply can't be silent about this subject, however, because the rest of the Christian Church is voicing a seemingly noble but ultimately ignorant view on this bill and I simply can't let it be the only voice coming from our paradigm. Initially, I bought into the emails that circulated about how devastating the bill could be in the future. Then I read the bill itself. Wouldn't you know, the emails ended up being completely bogus and my perspective on the bill radically changed.

Let's start at the beginning, shall we? S.909, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act was signed into law by President Obama last week. The church is in uproar over the bill, using the following rationale, quoted from an email that circulated:

"A bill now before Congress would criminalize negative comments concerning homosexuality, such as calling the practice of homosexuality a sin from the pulpit, a "hate crime" punishable by a hefty fine and time in prison. This dangerous legislation would take away our freedom of speech and freedom of religion."

Let me first state that this blog is not intended to post any kind of position on homosexuality or personal or religious views of homosexuality. I am specifically targeting the above perspective on the Hate Crimes Prevention Act. I am not targeting any organizations or individuals specifically.

If you haven't read the bill yet, here's a link to the text version.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s909/text

Read it. Please. Seriously. I'll wait for you..........

Ok, now that you've read it, let's talk about the Christian Email claims about the bill, and match them up with what the bill actually says.

Makes speech from the pulpit concerning homosexuality as sin a hate crime...

But check out the language of the actual bill:

"Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of any person..." (emphasis added)

I see bodily injury, not speech as being the crime. Furthermore, to avoid confusion about speech vs bodily injury, the act has the following language (which you READ ALREADY, right?)

"(1) The term "bodily injury" has the meaning given such term in section 1365(h)(4) of this title, but does not include solely emotional or psychological harm to the victim;"

In other words, words aren't enough. Hurt feelings aren't a crime in and of themselves. Emotional or Psychological harm are not grounds for prosecution. Only bodily harm substantiates a valid use of Hate Crimes. Well, actually, that isn't completely true:

"The Constitution does not protect speech, conduct or activities consisting of planning for, conspiring to commit, or committing an act of violence."

Oh no, maybe this is the loophole on which fellow Christians base this other claim:

"This dangerous legislation would take away our freedom of speech and freedom of religion."

Maybe this is a good point to bring up an important exegetical strategy that we as Christians feel is important to employ when reading the Bible: let's examine the context surrounding the above language in the bill.

"Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit any constitutionally protected speech, expressive conduct or activities (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), including the exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment and peaceful picketing or demonstration. The Constitution does not protect speech, conduct or activities consisting of planning for, conspiring to commit, or committing an act of violence. (4) FREE EXPRESSION.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual's expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs or solely upon an individual's membership in a group advocating or espousing such beliefs."

Please, if you didn't catch it, read that last part again and ask yourself this question: According to the Act, are the freedoms of speech and religion restricted or reinforced?

So let's get to the skinny, Minnie. Here is a good running list of things that are prohibited through the newest rendition of the 1994 Hate Crimes Bill:

Punching a Norwegian in the nose because of his national origin
Throwing a stick of dynamite at a lesbian couple because of their sexual orientation
Ejecting a Christian from the passenger seat of your car off a bridge because they believe in Jesus as a religion
Shooting a Muslim with a Bee-Bee gun because he prays 5 times per day as part of his religion
Running a man over with an H2 because all men are dogs, and his gender is male
Lighting someone with down's syndrome on fire because of their unusually pleasant disposition, because of their disability

I know that the examples are less than polite, but in the world we live in, you're going to need to move past that. After all, worse things than the above listed actually happen. That's why legislation like this is needed. Sick people commit crimes against others that are motivated by hate based on national origin, gender, religion, disability, gender identity and sexual orientation. If we don't face the world we live in, we can never hope to influence it.

More importantly than the above list of atrocities, here's a list of what is explicitly protected based on the language of the bill that passed:

Speaking about the Biblical view of Homosexuality
Belonging to any religious organization that takes a stance against same sex marriage
Telling someone who maintains an alternative gender identification that you disagree with their view of human identity creation.
Calling the practice of homosexuality a sin from a church pulpit.

You probably noticed the last one seemed similar to the email claim from the beginning. Good eye. You should join a slow-pitch softball league.

One common thing I hear in response to my position is: "Why do we have to have separate legislation protecting homosexuals or muslims, since they're already protected from bodily injury as citizens of the US?" Here's the simple answer ... the gay and lesbian communities, along with many other groups, are more prone to be targeted for violent crimes as a result of the lifestyle they maintain. Separate legislation is needed to increase consequences because the motive of hatred is more heinous than others. Different motive = different crime = different consequence. It works that way for manslaughter vs first degree murder vs second degree murder, etc. Why wouldn't it work for acts of hate motivated violence? I would encourage all believers to read Exodus and Leviticus to see how this kind of rationale was used in the Law (Torah) that our Constitution was modeled after.

Here is my simple conclusion: the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act doesn't make preaching on the subject of homosexuality wrong, it makes acts of hate motivated violence (hate crimes) illegal, and extends the definition of hate crimes to include those motivated by sexual or gender differentiation and identification.

Also, to anyone that might respond by saying that "This is the first step in a slippery slope...", please acknowledge that your logic is only valid when you can succinctly identify all of the proceeding steps of the slippery slope and then follow that with historical evidence that those steps are both plausible and probable. If you can't do that, stop using that philosophical model.

Ignorance is ugly, no matter whose mouth it proceeds out of. I'm not taking up an issue with Christians or Right-Wing Conservative GOP supporters. I am taking up an issue with the recklessness with which we as the Church of Jesus Christ circulate nonsense emails or speak publicly in an attempt to promote our political agendas or scare trusting followers into getting involved in a protest that they don't even understand.

Read legislation, not just emails. Learn first, don't just react. Speak out of understanding, not misguided fervor. Take your call as an advocate of Jesus, The Truth, seriously.

Deep Water

2009-04-20T19:28:00.000-07:00

"A plan in the heart of a man is like deep water, but a man of understanding draws it out."
~Proverbs 20:5

Those who know me better know that I am a man who is always thinking. I'm always ruminating about possibilities, probabilities, dreams and ambitions. Always considering what to do next. I would dare to say that 90% of my waking hours are spent thinking forward toward what is to come. This blog's intended use, for now, is to take the process of thinking and postulating and bringing it into the realm of expression and action.

I began 4 days ago. 0 posts. Why? Because there was plenty of considering to do. How to format the page. What nifty little applications and links should I put in those framed boxes? What should my first subject be?

Tonight, I was reading in Proverbs about living wisely, and I came accross the verse above, and it struck me. I was doing what I always do: preparing. How funny is that? I started a blog, but I almost didn't post at all. And why? Because it had to be well considered. It had to be well prepared. It had to be researched, mulled over, drafted, and maybe then it'd be ready for the public forum.

It's time to draw out the deep waters. I hear that call, and while I'm freaked out that it might be too raw or unpolished, it's time for those waters to do more than sit at the bottom of a well. So welcome to this, my outlet.

See, and this is where I sit for a few minutes thinking about the closing line. Something corny like "So welcome to this, my outlet. Surfs up."

Wow. So rather than wasting time and virtual ink on something like that, I'll just say this: Read my blog, it'll be enjoyable. Unless you're heartless.