Archive for the ‘Religion’ category

Gay Marriage & Christian Faith

August 31st, 2010

In my last post on this topic, I made two observations regarding this debate.

  1. First, the issue of gay marriage and Christian Faith will not go away and it will continue to shape the public debate.
  2. Second, every church in America will at some point be forced to take a stand on this issue one way or the other.

I have spent a lot of time contemplating this post.  The issue is a lot more clear in my head, so what follows is my best attempt to put my Faith into writing.

First, My Faith is Not Political

This, to me, is the most fundamental point to the issue of gay marriage.  I have written a lot on about the politics of Faith over the past years, so I will leave it to you, the reader, to do some research so you can understand this point (a good starting point is the articles linked at the bottom of this post or use the Category “Politics” to refine your search).  Christianity, in its truest form, is quite dissimilar from the other major world religions when it comes to politics.  The little chart below shows the fundamental difference.

 

Faith Comparison of Major Religions

Most important to notice is that Christianity is the only major religion that is NOT political.  In contrast, Judaism IS a political religion, but NOT evangelistic and Islam is BOTH Political and Evangelistic.

Israel, for example, is the political expression of Judaic faith, but they make no attempt to convert the Muslim or Christian citizens of Israel to their faith.  Nor do they force their citizens to observe Jewish Torah.

Islam is BOTH Political and Evangelistic.  Pick any Muslim country in the world (Turkey being the most moderate example) and you will see a legitimate interpretation of Islamic faith in action.  Mohammad is the first and best example.  He established the first Islamic State, Medina, in the middle 7th Century.  Islam is both concerned with Political power and converting non-belivers to follow Allah.

Christianity, as defined by Jesus, the Apostle Paul, and the New Testament, is NOT Political, but only concerned with taking the Good News (Gospel) of Jesus to those who do not have it.  Jesus refused to establish himself as a political leader and his first Apostles followed his example.  Christianity is decidedly apolitical in its nature. Our goal is Evangelistic (which means to spread to the good news), but not to convert people to a political view.

I will pick up on this point in another time, but suffice to say, this is why I think Conservative Evangelicalism in America has bastardized what it means to be a Disciple of the Messiah Jesus. Conservative Evangelicalism in its current incarnation has conflated politics, and Democracy, with the true evangelistic mission of Christian Faith.

Second, My Faith is Not Legal

This is another area where so many Christians get confused because of poor teaching over the past decades.  Too many confuse the Old Testament, which tells the history of the Jews, with the politics of America.  Simply put, The Old Testament theocracy and Torah (Law) was meant to bring Israel to the realization that no Law can make the heart of Man righteous.  The Law of the Old Covenant between God and Israel illustrated that no legal system can make people good.  Each person needs to be remade in the Image of God, not subjected to a form of government.  Thus, all the Law pointed to Jesus as the Savior and hope of mankind.

Judaism, as it is lived out today, does not see a need for Jesus as Messiah and so they live out their faith through either the politics of Israel, or through obedience to a set of Laws they find consistent with the Torah.

Islam, because it is both Political and Evangelistic, lives out their law and enforces it on others.  That is why we find Homosexuals hanged or killed in Muslim countries for their “sin” of homosexuality.  It is why Islamic countries have laws that force women to wear head coverings and stone women to death for sex outside of marriage.

Faith in Jesus, in contrast, recognizes that no matter how good our laws our, they are not enough to change the heart of people.  It is the great irony of American Evangelicalism that so many people think that if they pass a law to prohibit gay marriage, they will somehow keep the country “pure.”  But even God with his perfect Law (Torah) could not purify Israel.  This is why so much of the Evangelical furvor against homsexual marriage makes no sense.  It is an attempt to live out a Legalistic faith instead of an Evangelistic one.

Finally, Where I Stand

So given this understanding of my Faith, here is where I stand.

1. Christianity is not political, yet we live in a democracy.  Out of respect to the political powers in authority over me, I do feel obligated to vote my conscience.  However, there are two caveats to this point.

First, I do not find any foundation in the teachings of Jesus or in the teachings of the New Testament that would allow me to persuade others to share my political conscience.  In other words, it does not fit with my personal faith to endorse or create any “Christian” Political Action Committees to oppose gay marriage.  I do not think it is of any value to donate money to candidates who share my faith.  I do no support any advertisement campaign to “raise public awareness,” engage the “culture war” or persuade people to vote against gay marriage.  These are the methods of politicians, not Christians.

Second, if push comes to shove, I would gladly give up my right to vote at all if it caused anyone to stumble and think my faith in Jesus was in any way political or legal.  Voting my conscience is NOT my primary obligation.  My first obligation is to be an Ambassador to Jesus, not an emissary of the political Right (or Left) of America.

2. Christianity is not legalistic, so while I trust the biblical teaching that homosexuality is a sin, passing a law against homosexuality or against homosexual marriage is not my mission.  My mission is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  My only obligation is to share the Good News of Jeuss and then I must allow the Holy Spirit to convict others of both their sin and the path of righteousness. This is hard for legalistic-Evangelicals, because they would rather be in control and force others to follow their rules even if they do not share their heart.  But the message of Christ, and Him Crucified, is that our Heavenly Father wants to restore our hearts and then lead us into right action—not the other way around.

In short, it does not matter if gay marriage is legal or illegal in America.  The legality of this State sanctioned contract does not change my mission; it only shows how big my mission is.

  • Share/Bookmark

No comments »

Posted in Culture, Discipleship, Emerging Church, Evangelism, Hamartology, Law, Missiology, Politics, Religion

The Rise of Freedom and the Demise of Grace

July 4th, 2010

On the 4th of July, churches all across the United States of America will celebrate Freedom!  Unfortunately, it is hard to differentiate the religious from the political rhetoric when it comes to this topic.  The typical Evangelical Sunday-fare goes something like this, “God made us to be free… America is freedom… America is God’s country… Oh, and Jesus wants us to be free from sin…”  That about covers it, except some churches skip the part about Jesus and opt for a congregational sing—along  of “America the Beautiful.”

The problem is that “freedom” has shifted the focus of our Faith celebration away from grace.

Francis Schaeffer traces the roots of this philosophical shift during the late 18th and 19th centuries… a critical time in the founding of our nation.

After the Renaissance-Reformation period the next crucial stage was reached at the time of Rousseau (1712-78) and of Kant (1724-1804), although there were of course many others in the intervening period who could well be studied.

By the time we come to Kant and Rousseau, the sense of the autonomous is fully developed. So we find now that the problem was formulated differently. This shift in the wording of the formulation shows, by itself, the development of the problem. Whereas previously men had spoken of nature and grace, by the eighteenth century there was no idea of grace — the word did not fit any longer. Rationalism was now well-developed and entrenched, and there was no concept of revelation in any area. Consequently the problem was now defined, not in terms of “nature and grace,” but of “nature and freedom”

This is a titanic change, expressing a secularized situation. Nature has totally devoured grace, and what is left in its place “upstairs” is the word “freedom.”…

In the above diagram, freedom and nature are both now autonomous. The individual’s freedom is seen not only as freedom without the need of redemption, but as absolute freedom.

The fight to retain freedom is carried on by Rousseau to an extreme. He and those who follow him express in their literature and art a casting aside of civilization as that which is restraining man’s freedom. This is the birth of the Bohemian ideal. These thinkers feel the pressure “downstairs” of man as a machine. Naturalistic science becomes a very heavy weight — an enemy. Freedom is beginning to be lost. So these men, who are not really modem men as yet — and so have not accepted the fact that they are only machines — begin to hate science. They long for freedom even if the freedom makes no sense, and thus autonomous freedom and the autonomous machine stand facing each other.

Francis A. Schaeffer, The Complete Works of Francis A. Schaeffer : A Christian Worldview. (Westchester, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1996).

This concept of absolute Freedom for the individual (and nation) shaped America’s Founders and sowed the seeds for the American Revolution. The desire for unbridled  Freedom undergirds our modern American culture and, in the Church at large, has replaced any meaningful belief in the superseding power of Divine-grace. Few churches offer ‘more than cake’ when it comes to teaching the fundamental difference between America’s version of Freedom and YHWH’s Grace.  We have allowed the culture to idealize Freedom and instead of offering God’s alternative of Grace, the Church has simply chosen to offer a spiritualized freedom (Freedom + jesus).

The masses long for Freedom, yet economic chaos and global war have proven politicians to be false prophets of a false hope.  The church is in decline because She has compromised grace and offers nothing more significant than Jesus eating apple pie and saluting the Red White and Blue.  The Church has unwittingly fostered the rise of freedom and demise of grace.

This 4th of July, my prayer is that we, the people of God, set aside our dalliance with Freedom and return to our love of Grace.

  • Share/Bookmark

2 comments »

Posted in Culture, Epistemology, Holidays, Politics, Religion

God’s Judgement, Love, and the Haiti Crisis

January 19th, 2010

Opening Thoughts

A powerful 7.0 earthquake hit haiti this past week and killed at least 72,000.  Countless people are starving and more will eventually die from diseases spawned from the unburied corpses filling the streets of Port-au-Prince. I feel a connection with the people of Haiti. My parents served there in the 1980′s doing both medical and building missions and they saw first hand the destructive rule of Bébé Doc Duvalier. Over the years, our family sponsored several needy kids from Haiti and I grew up reading letters from our sponsored children telling of their life in Haiti. In last week’s earthquake, my wife agonized in prayer for many days over the life of an APU friend who was missing, and eventually found alive, in the rubble of the Hotel Montana.  With my own history in mind, I want to address this earthquake and how I see God’s judgment and love at work.

God’s Judgement Today

The internet is abuzz with the infamous remarks made by Pat Robertson on on the 700 Club TV show.

Something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it. They were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III and whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, ‘We will serve you if you will get us free from the French.’ True story. And so, the devil said, ‘OK, it’s a deal. And they kicked the French out. You know, the Haitians revolted and got themselves free. But ever since, they have been cursed by one thing after the other. Desperately poor. That island of Hispaniola is one island. It’s cut down the middle. On the one side is Haiti; on the other side is the Dominican Republic. Dominican Republic is prosperous, healthy, full of resorts, et cetera. Haiti is in desperate poverty. Same island. They need to have — and we need to pray for them — a great turning to God. And out of this tragedy, I’m optimistic something good may come. But right now, we’re helping the suffering people, and the suffering is unimaginable.

Most disturbing is the historical falsity presented as “fact” from a guy who founded a University. Napoleon III did not come into power in France until 44 years after the Haitian revolt.  If Robertson can’t get his history correct on such a simple thing, I don’t trust him in more complex matters.  So on its face Robertson’s “true story” must be called into serious question.

The primary problem with this quote, however, is Robertson’s biblical hermeneutic and application which I have repeatedly called into question.   In this particular instance, I would like to distance myself from Robertson’s assertion that natural disasters are the judgment of God.  I disagree with Robertson’s view for one simple reason; we are not in an age of Natural Judgement but an age of judgment through grace.

YHWH has not changed–He is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. God has appointed differing ages of judgment in order to establish his unchanging plan of salvation.  In other words, God’s method of judgement upon the world is different today than it was in the Old Testament, and different from the Age to come, but his overall purpose is the same–redemption of the lost.

First, unlike some other Christian commentators, I do not have a moral or ethical problem with God judging nations by the sword or natural disaster.  Clearly God did this during the Old Testament period where He punished whole nations for the sins of their Kings and leaders (Isa 1:1-20; Jer 5:15-17; Lam 2:1-22).  I don’t claim to understand it, I even cringe at it, but I trust that God’s judgement upon these nations in the Old Testament were fair and designed to serve YHWH’s purpose.

Second, God will some future day judge the nations for their actions.  The Old Testament is clear in teaching that in the “Day of the Lord” (an End of Times judgement) God will hold to account all the nations of the world for their wicked deeds.

For the day of the LORD is near upon all the nations.
As you have done, it shall be done to you;
your deeds shall return on your own head (Obediah 15. ESV)

Third, the world today exists in the age of Christ’s Judgement of Grace.  God has, for a season, forestalled the judgement of sword and nature upon the nations so they might instead have an opportunity to respond to the judgement of Christ expressed in his unselfish act of love on the Cross.

“[Jesus says] Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. Father, glorify your name!”

Then a voice came from heaven, “I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.” The crowd that was there and heard it said it had thundered; others said an angel had spoken to him.

Jesus said, “This voice was for your benefit, not mine. Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out. But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.” He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die.

The crowd spoke up, “We have heard from the Law that the Christ will remain forever, so how can you say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this ‘Son of Man’?”

Then Jesus told them, “You are going to have the light just a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, before darkness overtakes you. The man who walks in the dark does not know where he is going. Put your trust in the light while you have it, so that you may become sons of light. (John 12:27-36)”

God’s judgement today is not with sword and quake–used to drive the sinful to their knees in fear–it is in the death of Christ lifted up on the Cross–used to drive the sinful to their knees in love. Through Jesus’ act of love for the world, God is judging the nations who refuse to accept Jesus as the light of life.

Finally, how then should we perceive natural disasters if they are not a judgment of God?

  1. Natural disasters are a manifestation of corruption brought upon God’s creation through the sin of Adam (Genesis 3:1-24).
  2. Natural disasters are the manifestation of Nature’s true longing to be freed from the shackles of sin’s corruption (Romans 8:18-25).

Application for Haiti

Haiti has suffered from a tremendous disaster, but the death and suffering are not a result of God’s judgment and I would argue that they are not even the result of the earthquake.  The death and destruction in haiti is the result of the sinful leaders of that nation who have kept those people in poverty and allowed the earthquake to bring destruction.

1. The death and suffering in Haiti is a direct result of greed.

Since 1992, the United States has given 3 Billion dollars in aid to Haiti, yet it remains the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere.  The money was stolen by Haiti’s leaders and the more money the US poured in, the worse things got for Haiti.  The poor have no escape from Haiti because the money given to them was stolen by evil men.

2. The death and suffering in Haiti is a direct result of their value system.

In 1989, a 7.0 earthquake hit San Francisco (not exactly the picture of moral virtue), yet in that quake only 57 people were killed.  Why?  Because the leaders in the US, although sinful, still value the life of its citizenry. Based on our values, we impose building codes and invest Billions in infrastructures designed to protect the poor and wealthy alike from earthquakes.  Haiti’s leaders do not value life, so instead of spending money on infrastructure, they continued their policies of poverty.

3. The death and suffering of Haiti is a direct result of their religious faith.

Haiti’s predominant faith is Voodoo–a belief that magic and the spirits will save them from disaster.  Tony Campolo remarks on this very thing in his recent response to the earthquake.

Haiti’s former dictator, Jean-Claude Duvalier, was a voodoo witchdoctor, and when he was driven from power it was widely rumored that he offered an infant boy as a blood sacrifice to Satan, and cursed the country with an evil spell to bring disasters and suffering upon the Haitian people. You may not believe in that sort of thing, but many Haitians do. Now we must show them that God’s love, expressed through sacrificial people, is greater than the forces of darkness.

The Haitian people are ruled by evil spirits.  They allow politicians to rule who share their same faith and fears–leaders who seek power through evil forces. The curse of Duvalier may not have “caused” the earthquake, but it does remind us that the faith of a nation can enslave a people to poverty resulting the due penalty of their sin.

Ultimately, the hope for Haiti is that they see the light of Christ’s judgment of grace on the cross and turn to Him for freedom.  Haiti will only find this freedom in the giving of love–not dollars.   Love is expressed not through the giving of Billions, but through the message of the Gospel and the sacrifice of the many Christians who have given up the Western lifestyle to become the hands and feet of of Jesus to the people.

  • Share/Bookmark

23 comments »

Posted in Culture, Eschatology, Hamartology, Religion

The Manhattan Declaration-A Call to Conscience or Compromise?

November 25th, 2009

Screen shot 2009-11-25 at 12.39.57 PMThe Manhattan Declaration is a formal “call to arms” to all Christians asking us to engage in the major issues that are shaping our modern society. Following is the summary of this declaration.

Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.

We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are (1) the sanctity of human life, (2) the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife, and (3) the rights of conscience and religious liberty. Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Human Life

The lives of the unborn, the disabled, and the elderly are ever more threatened. While public opinion has moved in a pro-life direction, powerful and determined forces are working to expand abortion, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide, and euthanasia. Although the protection of the weak and vulnerable is the first obligation of government, the power of government is today often enlisted in the cause of promoting what Pope John Paul II called “the culture of death.” We pledge to work unceasingly for the equal protection of every innocent human being at every stage of development and in every condition. We will refuse to permit ourselves or our institutions to be implicated in the taking of human life and we will support in every possible way those who, in conscience, take the same stand.

Marriage

The institution of marriage, already wounded by promiscuity, infidelity and divorce, is at risk of being redefined and thus subverted. Marriage is the original and most important institution for sustaining the health, education, and welfare of all. Where marriage erodes, social pathologies rise. The impulse to redefine marriage is a symptom, rather than the cause, of the erosion of the marriage culture. It reflects a loss of understanding of the meaning of marriage as embodied in our civil law as well as our religious traditions. Yet it is critical that the impulse be resisted, for yielding to it would mean abandoning the possibility of restoring a sound understanding of marriage and, with it, the hope of rebuilding a healthy marriage culture. It would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not, in any intrinsic way, about the unique character and value of acts and relationships whose meaning is shaped by their aptness for the generation, promotion and protection of life. Marriage is not a “social construction,” but is rather an objective reality—the covenantal union of husband and wife—that it is the duty of the law to recognize, honor, and protect.

Religious Liberty

Freedom of religion and the rights of conscience are gravely jeopardized. The threat to these fundamental principles of justice is evident in efforts to weaken or eliminate conscience protections for healthcare institutions and professionals, and in anti- discrimination statutes that are used as weapons to force religious institutions, charities, businesses, and service providers either to accept (and even facilitate) activities and relationships they judge to be immoral, or go out of business. Attacks on religious liberty are dire threats not only to individuals, but also to the institutions of civil society including families, charities, and religious communities. The health and well-being of such institutions provide an indispensable buffer against the overweening power of government and is essential to the flourishing of every other institution—including government itself—on which society depends.

Unjust Laws

As Christians, we believe in law and we respect the authority of earthly rulers. We count it as a special privilege to live in a democratic society where the moral claims of the law on us are even stronger in virtue of the rights of all citizens to participate in the political process. Yet even in a democratic regime, laws can be unjust. And from the beginning, our faith has taught that civil disobedience is required in the face of gravely unjust laws or laws that purport to require us to do what is unjust or otherwise immoral. Such laws lack the power to bind in conscience because they can claim no authority beyond that of sheer human will.

Therefore, let it be known that we will not comply with any edict that compels us or the institutions we lead to participate in or facilitate abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or any other act that violates the principle of the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every member of the human family.

Further, let it be known that we will not bend to any rule forcing us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality, marriage, and the family.

Further, let it be known that we will not be intimidated into silence or acquiescence or the violation of our consciences by any power on earth, be it cultural or political, regardless of the consequences to ourselves.

We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.

I have not yet read the entire declaration available for download from their website, but I hope to get to it soon.

Who Signed It

There are literally hundreds of thousands of signers to this Declaration, but below are a few names I recognized from the main list of supporters.

Randy Alcorn
 Founder and Director, Eternal Perspective Ministries (EPM) (Sandy, OR)
Kay Arthur
CEO and Co-founder, Precept Ministries International (Chattanooga, TN)
Gary Bauer
President, American Values; Chairman, Campaign for Working Families (Washington D.C.)
Ken Boa
President, Reflections Ministries (Atlanta, GA)
Timothy Clinton
President, American Association of Christian Counselors (Forest, VA)
Chuck Colson
Founder, the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview (Lansdowne, VA)
Rev. Daniel Delgado
Board of Directors, National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference & Pastor, Third Day Missions Church (Staten Island, NY)
Dr. James Dobson
Founder, Focus on the Family (Colorado Springs, CO)
Dinesh D’Souza
Writer & Speaker (Rancho Santa Fe, CA)
Dr. Wayne Grudem
Research Professor of Theological and Biblical Studies, Phoenix Seminary (Phoenix, AZ)
Rev. Ken Hutcherson
Pastor, Antioch Bible Church (Kirkland, WA)
Rev. Tim Keller
Senior Pastor, Redeemer Presbyterian Church (New York, NY)
Dr. Richard Land
President, The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC (Washington, DC)
Josh McDowell
Founder, Josh McDowell Ministries (Plano, TX)
Dr. Tom Oden
Theologian, United Methodist Minister and Professor, Drew University (Madison, NJ)
Marvin Olasky
Editor-in-Chief, World Magazine and provost, The Kings College (New York City, NY)
Dr. J.I. Packer
Board of GovernorsÕ Professor of Theology, Regent College (Canada)
Dr. Ron Sider
Director, Evangelicals for Social Action (Wynnewood, PA)
Joni Eareckson Tada
Founder and CEO, Joni and Friends International Disability Center (Agoura Hills, CA)
Paul Young
COO & Executive VP, Christian Research Institute (Charlotte, NC)
Ravi Zacharias
Founder and Chairman of the board, Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (Norcross, GA)

Here are my questions:

  • What do you think of this declaration?  Is it a genuine call to engage the Christian conscience or a compromise of our faith?
  • Will you sign the declaration? Why or why not?
  • If you sign it, would you really follow through with the call to civil disobedience and risk imprisonment?
  • Share/Bookmark

31 comments »

Posted in Culture, Discipleship, Epistemology, Law, Leadership, Politics, Religion, Social Justice