the downgrade of the western church

many people have compared the united states to the roman empire, and there are those who support as well as disagree with that theory.  however, one comparison that has been largely overlooked is the comparison of the organization of the church with that of the roman empire.  in the early days of the church, people met in homes in secrecy, for fear of the government and persecution.  then, upon the emperor constantine's conversion to CHRISTianity, the church got thrust from the shadows into the light and placed in a position of prominence.  while this was seen as a welcome change to many in the church of that day, it became a chink in the armor of the church as corruption infiltrated the church by those entering the clergy with a lust for power instead of a desire to follow the CHRIST of the church.  it became a social institution used for political gain, and the ethics and morals that were hallmarks of the church were replaced with greed and tyranny.

fast forward to the founding of the united states.  the founders of our country fled religious persecution to come to a country where they were free to worship CHRIST in the manner they felt was biblical.  the church experienced a revival, only to find herself subject to the ebb and flow of societal popularity, but for the most part remaining a personal aspect of the individual rather than the collective.  in post ww2, there was a heightened sense of national pride, and consumerism experienced a significant flux as the baby boomer generation burst onto the scene, and the economy shot through the roof.  it was then that a return to the church arose, and church got thrust out of the individual homes and into the public spotlight and a place of prominence.  church membership became synonymous with national pride and americana, and the consumer culture that pervade society made it's way into the church.  church became a commodity, a place to network, and a mark of a person's patriotism and societal standing.  while many baby boomers today look back to what they refer to as the "golden age" of the church and the "good ole days", the 1950s was a great boost to the church as an organization, but was one of the great detriments to the church as a biblical entity.

as the 1950s lingered on, the spiritual depth of the church became shallower and shallower, with CHRISTianity becoming replaced by a religion of morality.  This left the children of the 1950s generation disillusioned with the politics and the superficiality of their parents, resulting in the rebellion of the 1960s against everything having to do with the church and the religious moralism modeled by the previous generation.  there were slight returns to biblical CHRISTianity, but the consumer CHRISTianity that was germinated in the 1950s had taken root, and every return to biblical CHRISTianity was preyed upon by the consumer culture, like a leech sucking off of its host, but never killing it.  this cancer of consumer CHRISTianity has affected the church, and not in a good way.  the church has become a religious country club, where the command of "go" given by CHRIST has been replaced with post-modern tribalism, with church members hiding behind their million-dollar church walls and denominational signs, isolating themselves from a decadent society, but not out of a sense of fear and survival, but rather out of a need to not be bothered or taken out of their comfort zone.  this shallow version of CHRISTianity has led to a replacement of biblical principles with political correctness and a denial of the promise of CHRIST that His followers will suffer for His Name's sake.  we are told by pastors such as joel osteen that our life in CHRIST should be a dream life with God as our own personal genie, waiting to grant our every wish.  we are told by pastors like rob bell that we should ignore biblical definitions of sin in the name of love and acceptance.

in the midst of this bleak outlook, there is hope.  CHRIST founded the church, and promised that she would endure until the end.  however, the biblical church, which is made up of people, and not bricks and mortar, will carry on in a far different way than what we have seen of the church as an organization in the past half-century.  the church as an organization will carry on, but i believe it will fundamentally change to reflect the societal shifts and political pressures being placed upon it.  there is still big money to be made utilizing the CHRISTian name, and as long as there is money to be made, there will be a need for the organization to exist.  but i foresee the biblical church having to go back into the shadows in a future of increasing persecution.  the good news about this is that the biblical church has always thrived under intense persecution, and the church has always grown historically during those times.  but it is a qualitative growth vice a quantitative growth.  more time is spent actually making disciples and not converts, and the original model presented by CHRIST for the church prevails.  this happens all over the world on a daily basis, and the church thrives in those countries where persecution is heaviest.  the question CHRISTians in the united states must answer is what are we willing to endure for the sake of CHRIST?  because i have a feeling that in the not too far future we will see who is willing, and who is merely giving lip service.      

low in the grave he lay

i have seen a lot of recent posts on facebook stating something along the lines of "sunday's coming".  as CHRISTians, we focus on the passion week, starting with palm sunday, all the way to maundy thursday, and then good friday, with the culmination being resurrection sunday.  by the time we get to good friday, the focus then shifts to sunday.  while sunday is very important, we neglect saturday to our detriment.  we know very little about that saturday between Christ's death and His resurrection.  we can infer a few things, but the Bible is silent about the events between the death of Christ and the resurrection.  we know that joseph of arimathea provided a tomb for Him to be laid in and he and nicodemus prepared Him for burial by wrapping Him in clean linen and spices, with mary and mary magdalene present.  we also know that the jewish leaders petitioned pilate to place a roman guard in front of the tomb to prevent His disciples from "stealing the body" and saying He was resurrected.  but in terms of the disciples, we know nothing about that saturday between His death and resurrection.

maybe the Bible is silent on this day because it is not important.  we know that saturday is the sabbath, and the disciples were resting on the sabbath according to law, so maybe this is why the Bible is silent on this day.  but one very important thing we can assume from what the Bible does tell us, is that saturday was a very long one.  we know that the disciples went into hiding on that friday, and that they were still in hiding on sunday.  we know that they were sad and downcast from the conversation on the road to emmaus.  so even though the Bible is silent on the actual events of saturday in terms of the disciples, it communicates a lot.

as CHRISTians, we all have what i call "saturday mourning" experiences.  as a chaplain, one of my many duties is making casualty calls on the families of deceased marines and sailors.  as a hospital chaplain, i was also responsible for being there when families received the news that their family member passed away or when patients received a grim prognosis.  i not only was there for the initial notification, but for the aftermath as well.  there are times in all of our lives when we experience those times of solemnity.  we have received bad news, and there is an outpouring of support from friends and family members, but eventually those friends and family have to return to their lives and we are left on our own to process what has been told to us.  it is in those times that God can seem like He's light years away, and we can feel left all alone to deal with the crushing blow that has come our way.  sometimes, the dark times in our lives can cause us to forget the promises God has made to us.  even the disciples forgot that Jesus said that He would rise again on the third day.  the jewish leaders didn't forget it.  they even tried to prevent it.  but they didn't just lose the one person that they had put all their hopes and dreams on.  the disciples were sad, and they were afraid.  and they were hiding.  all because they had lost their faith that God was still there and was still going to keep His promise.

in our lives, it's easy to think that God has somehow forsaken us or forgot about us when things don't go the way we think they should.  we are never promised an easy life, and on the contrary, we are promised the exact opposite as CHRISTians.  so when we are in those "saturday mournings", we can rest assured that God's promises still hold true, and that just because things didn't work out the way we expected, it doesn't mean we didn't have enough faith, it means that we still need to have faith that God is still there and is still in control.  because until we get to heaven, "saturday mournings" will come, and are in fact, inevitable.  we may be tempted to go into hiding, as many CHRISTians do, both from God, and the people of God.  but we should not remain in hiding, or remain downtrodden, because during our times of sadness, we can be a more powerful witness of the One who is bringing "resurrection morning", to a world that is in perpetual "saturday mourning" without hope.

dead weight

the other night, i fell asleep on my arm, which cut off the circulation to it, making it a useless appendage that became quite dangerous when i rolled over and it flopped on top of my bride's head!  it took me a while to get the feeling back to my arm, and to make it a useful part of my body again.  it's no wonder God calls the church the "body of Christ".  there are those who are like my arm, not serving any real purpose, and really just getting in the way.  many are like a benign tumor, taking necessary nutrients away from the body, but not really causing any harm.  others are like cancer, causing harm to the body, and needing to be addressed.

with the rise of contemporary services, coupled with the maturation of the "me generation" into adulthood, we see an interesting dynamic starting to arise.  there is a paradigm shift in how people are viewing the church, and instead of adopting a biblical view of the church, they are adopting a psychological view of the church.  what i mean by this, is the church is no longer seen as the body of Christ, where each of us has a place and a function, but is rather seen as spiritual gym, where we can go and get our weekly spiritual workout in, and then go our merry way.  it is all about the experience, and "what can i get out of it?"  don't believe me?  ask a person why they are at a particular church, especially the larger, more contemporary churches.  you are likely to hear something along the lines of, "i really like the worship there," or "i really like the pastor's preaching".  you rarely hear, "i like the ministries that God has placed me in there," or "this is where God has called us".  i hear quite frequently, "i don't like that church because i don't get anything out of the worship there" and "i don't feel like i am worshipping there".  those excuses amuse me, especially when you break down the logic of what they are saying.  essentially, when a person says they are not getting anything out of worship, they are saying they are expecting to get something out of worship, and to carry that logic out to its end, it is like saying, "i bought you a gift, but i'm not really going to give it to you because i want it myself!"  because if we are only participating in worship for what we can get out of it, we are bringing God a gift that we are trying to keep for ourselves.  the other common excuse is, "i don't feel God".  this excuse is null because Scripture tells us that whenever two or more are gathered in God's name, He is there also.  so if a person doesn't "feel" God, then it's obvious that the problem is not with God, but with them.  

what's even funnier, is that many of the people that do that are the first to complain when the church doesn't live up to their standards, especially when they are in need.  they become like that tumor, owing its existence to the host, but not providing any real benefit to the host.  in science, we call that a parasite.  as members of the body of Christ, we should instead be asking what purpose we serve in the church.  instead of the "experiential" view of church, we should attend church to contribute our gifts and talents to that local body, so that the body may minister to others and be the hands and feet of Christ.  the benefit then becomes that God blesses us for being obedient, and the temporary highs that are associated with a good musical performance in a worship service are traded for life changing joy that carries over into every other aspect of our life.

this concept is nowhere stated more clearly than when Jesus says, "God is a spirit, and whoever worships Him must worship in spirit and in truth."  whenever you have worship in truth but not in spirit, you have dead orthodoxy; and whenever you worship in spirit but not in truth, the result is shallow emotionalism.  there must be a balance if we are to truly worship.  worship is not something that happens within the walls of the church  building.  worship should be the pattern of our lives, worshipping God in everything that we do.  this is what the Bible means when it says to do all things for the glory of God.  get that?  for the glory of God.  again, implying that it should be outwardly motivated towards God, and not inwardly motivated towards ourselves. remember, satan's sin was that of selfishness and pride.  that's why he was kicked out of heaven.  so we can logically infer as to what he would tempt us with to take the focus off of God:  self-glorification and satisfaction.  he tempted Jesus with the same thing in the wilderness.  he saw that Jesus was hungry and tempted Him to satisfy Himself and turn the stones into bread.  so the temptation for self-gratification must be a powerful one for satan to choose that to tempt the Saviour with.

so ask yourself, "why do i go to the church i attend?"  if the motivation is anything other than God's calling and serving Him through His church, then it just might be that you have been deceived.

wherever i may roam

as i sit here and begin the long, arduous process to prepare for my imminent departure, i think about the life that God has called my family and i to.  it is a life of constant change:  housing changes, friend changes, location changes, school changes, job changes, doctor changes, church changes, uniform changes, just to name a few.  and then there is the huge elephant in the room.  in the military, it's one that we tend to really ignore until we bump right into it, but we are always aware of its presence.  we know it's just a matter of time before we have to start eating that elephant, one bite at a time.  that elephant?  deployment.  there's a saying in the navy/marine corps, not if but when.  it's not if you deploy, it's when.  my date is coming up rapidly, and i have begun the preparations for it.  i am preparing physically, with packing, training, etc.  i am preparing mentally, with classes, schedules, and what not.  i am preparing spiritually, constantly seeking God's face as to what He would have me accomplish for the deployment. but i am not prepared emotionally.  some would call it denial, as if i can ignore it and won't have to deal with the emotions that go along with it.  but it is more than that.  men are not emotional beings, as a general rule.  you ask a man how he's feeling, and you're liable to get either a one word answer (fine, okay, good, ticked, etc.), or the inevitable "i don't know".  this is not men being difficult.  it is simply us being honest.  we never really think about feelings too much, so when we are forced to define them, it is like asking for us to describe some place we've only been to a scarce few times.  we might know some general details, but not specifics.  you ask a woman how she is feeling, and you are likely to get 15 answers.  women are an emotional roller coaster, so a woman can truly say she's happy one minute, and sad the next, or any of the countless variations (frustrated, upset, depressed, confused, the list goes on and on!).  but not men.  we know three basic emotions:  happiness, sadness, and anger.  that's the emotional trichotomy of a man.  recognizing this weakness innate within me, i will attempt to describe what is going through my soul as i approach departure.

the first emotion i would have to own up to is excitement.  i am excited because i am getting to do what God has called me to do.  i can do it here in the states, i know that, but i joined the military with the anticipation of deploying and going where the marines and sailors need me most, and now that is here, so i am excited.  i am excited because i am an experiential being.  i have a wandering bug in me.  i love to see new places, experience new things.  i am getting to go to places that i've never been before, meet people in cultures that i would otherwise never be exposed to.  through that, i am getting to be a light for CHRIST everywhere i go.  i may not be able to openly proselytize, but i am still allowed to wear my cross on my collar, which gives me an in whenever anyone sees it, to be a witness in my actions to those i meet.  so i am excited.

another emotion i am experiencing is apprehension.  i would not go so far as to call it fear, but i will say i am apprehensive.  some of the places we are going will inevitably place us in danger.  we have been vaccinated for every disease and illness they can vaccinate us against, but there are still those out there that have no vaccination, and we will likely be exposed to those.  so there's that element of danger.  also, whenever we leave the united states, we are exposing ourselves to danger.  we will visit war-torn areas, impoverished areas, and areas influenced by those who seek to do us harm.  you never realize what a blessing it is to live in the united states in relative safety until you leave her for foreign shores.  i trust in my God, and know that He is with me, but i do understand now what the psalmist said in the 23rd psalm.  i am also apprehensive as to my family.  i worry about their safety when i am gone.  i worry about who is going to change the flat tire on my wife's suv.  i worry about my middle son jumping out of his treehouse with his superman cape on and ending up in the hospital.  i worry about my youngest son not being able to remember and recognize me when i return.  so there is apprehension.

there is also sadness.  this one is a given.  in the past week, i have hardly been able to talk about it while looking at my bride or three beautiful boys without tearing up.  they are a part of me, and you might as well be ripping me in half and leaving one half here and shipping the other off.  it is excruciating to think about being away from them, and what i will miss while gone.  thankfully, i have not had to miss a birthday yet because of military travel, and this is one of those times when i won't.  however, i do know the time will come when i may have to do that, and that saddens me.  i think about going to sleep every night without my "baby love" cuddled up in my arms.  i realize that there will be no warm body in my bed for me to snuggle up to when i am freezing.  i will miss the comfortable silences we share, when being in the same room with each other is enough.  i will miss the playful banter we toss back and forth when we talk "smack" to each other in jesting.  and i will even miss having her there to infuriate me because she told me something that i really needed to hear, but didn't want to admit because of pride or stubbornness.  i will miss my boys.  gavin is like me.  i know it affects him, but he kind of keeps it to himself.  he is truly my "mini-me".  he looks like me, acts like me, and talks like me.  i will miss his random facts about snakes, sharks, the titanic, weather, or whatever subject he happens to be focusing on at that moment.  but mostly i will miss when he calls me to his room to give him a big hug and kiss before he goes to sleep.  he won't go to sleep without it.  nathan, now he's like lori.  he looks like her more than me, and he is like her in that he wears his heart on his sleeve.  there is never any doubt about what nathan is feeling at a particular moment, as he will readily let you know.  his flare for the dramatic keeps us either in hilarity, or in frustration.  i will miss his playful spirit, coming up and wanting to try and take me down.  but most of all, i will miss nathan climbing up into the chair with me for no other reason than to sit in my lap and lay his head on my chest and watch "phineas and ferb".  then there's logan.  he's my little buddy.  we had an amazing day playing at the beach yesterday.  he loves for me to flip him up in the air like we are part of a traveling circus act, while his mom gasps in apprehension.  i will miss his giggle whenever he and i play our cat and mouse game through the house.  but most of all, i will miss holding him to get him to sleep at night.  he normally gives lori a hard time going to sleep, but when i hold him, he settles down and goes right out, as i rock him back and forth and he and i look into each other's eyes as he drifts off into dream land.  so there is sadness, and it is the elephant in the room that takes up most of the space.

wow, all this emotional talk is draining!

but there is yet another emotion looming.  i couldn't put my finger on it until last night.  as i was packing some things, i was watching my bride over on the computer, who is a master at multi tasking, as she typed, watched "army wives", and watched me.  as i was selecting items and checking them off, the excitement was building in me, but the sadness was there as well, and then it hit me.  i was feeling guilt!  i was feeling guilt that i was excited about this trip.  how could i be excited about leaving my family?!?  i was feeling guilt that i was leaving my bride all alone for months to take care of the house and the kids by herself.  she is an amazing woman and i know she can handle it, but never the less, i was still leaving her.  i was feeling guilt that i was about to cause them terrible sadness by leaving for such a long period of time.  every time that nathan comes up to me and hugs me and says in a sad voice, "i will miss wu when wou're gone," it twists the knife in my soul.  God has called me to this ministry, and i know this is part of it.  i now realize what paul meant when he said that he wished all men were like him, unmarried, so they would be more willing to go anywhere God sent them without an emotional conflict.  don't get me wrong here, i love being married, and would not change it for the world, but i understand what paul was saying.  however, i also know that when i do get back, i will experience that other verse where God said, "it is not good for chris to be alone" (italics mine!), as i will have a bride waiting on me that will wrap me in her arms and three boys who will jump on me as soon as i get off that bus, and i'll take that over coming back home to an empty barracks room anyday!  so i will deal with the guilt.

i still have some time left before i leave.  it's not a long time by any means.  if you ask me, it would never be long enough.  so i have chosen to tuck these emotions away for now, and enjoy having my family beside me until the time comes that i must deal with these emotions.  all of these emotions will likely stay with me, and morph during the trip, with some outweighing others at different times.  however, the emotion that i will hold on to is anticipation.  anticipation of my reuniting with the family that God has blessed me with.  anticipation of my bride's embrace!  anticipation of playing with my sons!  anticipation of being back home, where i belong.

p.s. doesnt' this give you an idea of how it should be with us as CHRISTians?  excitement at the opportunities God places before us.  apprehension at the unknown places he will take us.  sadness at living in a fallen world, that is not our home, and at what we could be experiencing in heaven.  and guilt at having loved this present life more than the next.  but most importantly, anticipation of eternity with our Jesus!  

you say po-ta-to, i say po-tah-to

before i get started, let me first throw this out there:  webster's dictionary defines pornography as
the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement.

okay, now that we have that clear, i want to address something that is not a new concept, but one that has recently gained notoriety through a book and a movie:  mommy porn.

i have seen numerous blog postings by females on the subject, both for and against, by both CHRIST-followers and secularists alike.  these blog posts seem to either condemn or justify the reading of books or watching of movies by women, that are blatantly sexual in nature.  the purpose of this post is not to address these arguments, but rather to actually look at the materials and give them a proper classification, because once we can strip away all the hooplah and actually look at something for what it is, then we can make an informed decision on the morality of indulging in the materials.  again, it is not my motive to condemn anyone for any behaviour, but to simply speak the truth, and then allow persons who enjoy such materials to make their own decisions. 

the first item up for discussion is the latest craze among women entitled, say it with me, "fifty shades of grey".  now, i have not read the book personally, but i did see a rather disturbing youtube video of gilbert gottfried reading excerpts from it.  let me just say this, i was embarrassed at having seen the 20 seconds of the video i did, because i know the images that popped into my head, which with gilbert gottfried reading it, were rather horrifying!  now, there are those that would argue that they are reading the book for the story, which is always a perplexing argument to me.  if someone is reading it for the story, and the story is about sex, then what is the redeeming factor in that argument?  it goes along with the man who says, "i only read 'hustler' for the articles", when, if the pages the articles are in between are filled with sexual images, then likewise, where is the redeeming factor in that?  i postulate that the story is classified as pornography.  now, before anyone gets all bent out of shape, i ask you to refer to the above definition of pornography:  the depiction of erotic imagery (in pictures or in writing) intended to cause sexual excitement.  it is a well known psychological fact that women are not turned on by pictures to the extent that guys are, but more so by their imaginations based on emotions.  as a guy, i can honestly say that a romantic comedy does nothing to get me going, nor does reading erotic writing.  so it is clear that this book is targeted towards women (if it were for men, there would be pictures with the story underneath in captions!)  now, if it is targeted towards women, we have to ask what is the motivation of the author?  you can find articles that address the topics of s&m, as well as sexuality, that are designed to be informative, rather than gaining a sexual response from the reader.  the author clearly stated that the book was the author's own sexual fantasies written down in narrative format, to excite others.  so, the author admits that her work, by definition, is pornography.  next, is the responses by the readers.  one female critic is quoted as saying, "guys, buy this book for your wife, and you will not be disappointed", insinuating a sexual favor in return based on the wife's reaction to what she reads.  so women define it as pornography, by definition.  so, if it is pornography, as the evidence shows, then what makes it different from the erotic magazines, movies, and websites that men visit on a daily basis?  is there a double standard here? 

the next piece of entertainment (no pun intended) is a movie entitled "magic mike".  this movie is about, and this is no secret, male strippers.  the fact that it contains actors that are known for their looks further solidifies the appeal to women.  women who would never dream of darkening the door to an actual strip club are flocking in droves to see this movie.  again, based on the above definition, i postulate that this movie is also pornography.  it is designed to elicit a sexual response in women.  there was a movie along the same lines that came out a few years ago with elizabeth berkley, of "saved by the bell" fame, entitled "showgirls".  i always thought it ironic that berkley went from playing a girl who fought against the objectifying of women, to playing a role that objectified women, but i digress.  any male who went and saw that movie in the theaters, was classified by women as perverted.  i know, because in college i witnessed the treatment of guys who went to see it by girls that were their friends.  they were classified as perverts.  now, again i ask, is there a double standard here?  women are going to the movie, objectifying the men in a sexual way, and getting aroused by the images on the screen.  as one facebook picture posted by a female said, "i don't know what happened in that movie theater, but i think i'm having channing tatum's baby!" 

now, as said before, erotic fiction geared towards females has been nothing new, it has just been thrust into the limelight.  harlequin romance novels have been around for decades, and all are designed to elicit a sexual response based upon the imagination created by the emotions within the novels.  however, it has always been acceptable for women to read these, yet reprehensible for men to read "playboy" or any of the other erotica that is out there. 

based on the above items fitting the definition of pornography, should someone who calls themselves a follower of CHRIST partake in this sort of entertainment?  or does Jesus' admonition about a man "looking upon a woman with lust in her heart" only apply to males?  should a man lower his standards as the spiritual leader of his home and buy these materials for his wife in hopes of sexual repayment in return?  or, should our sexual desire be excited by, and only be for, our spouses?  when counseling a married couple, sometimes the excuse is, "the excitement is gone out of the marriage bed, so i (we) use erotic materials to excite us".  my response is, if the excitement is gone, then you must be doing something wrong!  and, if it takes another person to get you sexually aroused, then are you not lusting after that person when engaged in sexual relations with your spouse?  if so, how is that not adultery, based on Jesus' definition? 

like i said before, the purpose of this article is not to condemn anyone for watching or reading these forms of entertainment, but to strip them down (again, no pun intended) and pull the curtain back to see what they actually are, and then for people to make their own decisions.  one of satan's primary tools, as the father of lies, is deception.  if he can wrap up a hook in some harmless looking bait, then the undiscerning will take it.  there are millions of males whose lives and homes are wrecked each year because of the detrimental effects of pornography, and now it seems that satan has his sights set on the females.  "be vigilant and watchful, for your adversary, the devil, prowls about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour!"

pay no attention to that hateful person behind the curtain

i am angry.  as a CHRISTian, i am angry.  and ashamed.  and embarrassed.  "why?" you ask?  well, i'll tell you.  up until now i have kept mostly silent about the whole "homosexual marriage" debate.  i have reasons for that, but mostly it has to do with casting my pearls before swine.  and my purpose behind writing this is not to address that debate.  my purpose is to address the reprehensible behaviour by those who call themselves followers of CHRIST in recent days.

as the debate swirled around our nation like a philosophical hurricane, it has swept up everyone from the president, to state governments, to celebrities, and to various members of faith groups including CHRISTianity, judaism, islam, etc.  and like a hurricane, it has caused astronomical amounts of damage on all sides.  nobody has been left untouched.  however, the damage i am concerned about is the damage caused by those i call my brothers and sisters in CHRIST.

if you look throughout history, you can usually pinpoint a particular vice or perceived sin (whether biblical or not) that people have focused on and attacked.  in the 1920's it was alcohol.  in the 1950's it was rock 'n' roll.  in the 1960's it was race.  in the 70's it was drugs.  in the 80's it was divorce.  in the 90's it was abortion.  now, that sin is homosexuality.

now, before you start accusing me of saying that homosexuality is ok, i must reassure you that i do believe fully what the Bible says about homosexuality.  let me clarify even further:  i believe what the Bible actually says about homosexuality, not what people think it says, nor what people twist it to say.  the Bible is a powerful weapon, and refers to itself as a two-edged sword, yet some who call themselves CHRISTians choose to use it more like a machete, wielding it with no skill and hacking away at whatever vice lost people are engaged in that they think needs a good clearing.  the problem with this approach is, it is not what the Bible was given to us for!  Scripture says it is to be used for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and for training in righteousness.  it never says that we are to use it as a flagrum, beating the lost into submission.  Scripture was given so the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly equipped for all good works.  get that?  Scripture is given to the man of God!  lost people, while under the condemnation of sin, are spiritually ignorant of Scripture, and unless the Holy Spirit moves in their soul, they will never comprehend it.  i've always said to expect lost people to act like lost people, so why should we be shocked when they do not adhere to our Scripture-based values?  so the Bible is to be used by us, for us, not to judge the lost.

however, those who call themselves CHRISTians engage in this targeting and think that they are somehow crusaders out to vanquish evil and to eradicate the infidels if they don't bow to our God or adhere to our values!  the issue is these same people are guilty of sin, many of sexual sin which places them in the same category as those who engage in homosexuality, yet they have the audacity to decry others who are guilty of the same sort of sins.  the whole concept of grace and mercy is foreign to them, making me wonder if they have ever experienced the grace and mercy of the Saviour themselves.

why do they do this?  i suspect that it either has something to do with helping them to feel better about their own shortcomings if they can target someone and make them out to be worse, or they feel like they are doing God a favor and legislating all of the evil away, as if they are God's version of "judge dredd".  their fires are further fueled by organizations such as afa, or american family activists as i like to call them.  they buy into the whole "get out and vote the evil away" mantra, and next thing you know we have a religious lynch mob attacking anyone who engages in their targeted sin and trying to beat them into submission with rallies and signs and laws.  what does this actually accomplish?  absolutely nothing.  oh, sure.  it may make them feel comfortable for the time being knowing they helped to put those evil people in their place, and if they win, then they don't have to have their comfort zones upset by seeing two people holding hands that are of the same gender.  and there you have the real reason for it.  nobody wants to be uncomfortable.  everyone wants to sit on their blessed assurance, get all dressed up in their sunday best, and go to church on sunday and have nothing but CHRISTians at their workplaces, where they don't have to interact with those sinners.  why?  because then they actually might have to start sharing their faith with someone they don't think deserves it.  many in the church today have the mentality of "get right and then you can become a CHRISTian".

THAT'S NOT THE MESSAGE OF CHRIST!!!

the message of CHRIST is love your neighbor as yourself.  it is to go into all the world and preach the gospel to everyone, whether you feel they deserve it or not.  that is the message of CHRIST, that God loves us despite our sin, and we are to do the same to others!  not go into all the world and condemn everyone!  we do not have the authority nor the right to condemn anyone!  we like to quote john 3:16, but we leave out 3:17.  "for God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him."  that's right.  Jesus did not come to condemn.  one day, all will stand before Him, and the condemnation will not come from Him, but from those who reject Him!  they are in essence condemning themselves!  so, instead of looking at those who engage in homosexuality as "perverts", look at them as people in need of a Saviour!   we are all born with the penchant for sin.  and we readily engage in that sin so we are all guilty before God.  the difference is, those of us who have been saved from our sins know the true meaning of grace, mercy, and forgiveness.  so we should not be like the man who was forgiven a large debt and then was ruthless in collecting debts from those who owed him.  instead of looking down our nose at those who do not behave as we think they should, perhaps we should follow our Master's example and actually get to know them.  spend time understanding why they choose to engage in the behaviour that they do, and then show them, not tell them, the godly way.  show them the Saviour.  but if they do not see CHRIST's mercy and forgiveness in your actions, then they will simply see you as a bigot who looks down on them, which quite frankly, you possibly are.  stop bringing reproach on CHRIST's name, and reach out to those He came to save.  we are His hands and feet, and if we don't tell them, through our words as well as through our actions, then we are condemning them to an eternity in hell.

(oh, and just for the record, i am not against voting your conscience.  i believe we should use the vote God has blessed us with to glorify Him!  but don't stop there.  that does not solve the problem.  you can outlaw the action, but unless the heart is changed, the action will always find a way to continue!)

valentine's day: a pile of dung by any other name would still stink

for years, during my single days, i had my own moniker for valentine's day:  v.d. day.  for those of you wondering what v.d. is, go ask your mother.  there were many that said my attitude was only that way out of my disdain for my perpetual singleness.  however, with almost ten years experience as a married man, i can tell you, my view towards it has changed very little.  as a matter of fact, i would say that it has actually made me view it in a far more negative light.  i have actually become borderline "anti-valentine's day".  now, i know all the ladies out there are grabbing their spikes and hammers and are poised to crucify me, but before you go pick out a tree, please hear me out.

every year at this time, we are bombarded with commercials commanding us as men to go out and spend money on our wives/girlfriends/significant others.  comedian ron white had a story on truth in advertising, and he said that he had witnessed for the first time what he would classify as truth in advertising in a diamond commercial.  the slogan was, "diamonds, render her speechless".  white's comment was, "why don't they just come out and say it?  'diamonds, that'll shut her up!'"  i actually laughed quite a bit at that one, but this year, i have witnessed what i classify as the most blatant truth in advertising i believe i have ever witnessed.  in the commercial, and frankly i don't remember what product they were advertising, there was a very attractive female who said, and i quote, "guys, valentine's day is not that complicated:  give, and you shall receive."  lori and i laughed at it when we first saw it, but then as i have sat here and listened to marines' plans for valentine's day, and what they hoped to get out of it (yes, marines can be very blunt), it really solidified the point that i have said for years:  valentine's day is nothing more than prostitution.

yes, ladies, i know that is a pretty tree that you have now picked out to nail me to, but please, bear with me for a moment more.  let's remove the emotion and look at the logical inferment surrounding this.  prostitution, by definition, is defined as the act of trading sexual favors for material compensation.  how does the average prostitution encounter take place?  a guy goes up to a girl he suspects will entertain him, and offers her money, drugs, etc. in exchange for sexual favors.  how is this different from valentine's day?  a man buys his wife or girlfriend gifts (someone he knows will entertain him), with the secret desire that it will gain him favor and hopefully reap other benefits from it.   if anything, women should not be flattered by this, but insulted.

now, there are some that will say that for them, it's romantic.  let me go on the record and say, romance is good, and necessary.  also, valentine's day, in its original intent, is good.  however, retailers took it and did with it the same thing that they have done with every other holiday:  twisted it to fatten their pockets.  i hold no ill will toward them, any more than i do toward the wolf for killing for its food, for they are acting according to their nature.  however, in recent years, our society has become so selfish that everything we do is in anticipation of what we will get out of it.  thus valentine's day has become nothing more than a holiday with selfish motives, and subsequently has tried to corner the market on romance.  well, i, for one, refuse to let anyone dictate how, when, and why i choose to love my bride. 

let's think about this for a second.  if a man only chooses one day a year to show you that he loves you, then how much does he really love you, and how much does he really mean it?  if you love someone, then your entire life, your every day, is affected by that person.  but the problem is, we have such a skewed idea of what love is today, that most people wouldn't know it if the mythical cupid actually materialized and started firing tangible arrows at people.  in fact, most would turn and run.  we have a hollywood notion of love today that has doomed marriages and ended relationships on an epic scale.  i actually attended a wedding while in seminary, and instead of "till death do us part", the bride and groom said, "for as long as love shall last".  the problem today is that society as a whole sees love as a feeling you get in your stomach whenever a certain someone is around, and when that feeling goes away, then love is gone.  newsflash:  that feeling, is not love, it is infatuation.  to find a true definition of love, we must go to the Author of Love, and to the instruction manual He left us on how to love.  we can look at passages such as 1 corinthians 13, aka "the love chapter", or john 15:13, or ephesians 5:25. 

what is the one common thread in all of these passages?  sacrifice.  true love is sacrificial.  it is the giving of oneself to another without any expectation of repayment.  is this the message that we are getting at valentine's day?  i postulate the answer is "no".  the message that we get is twofold:  1) give, and you shall receive, and 2) this is your one day a year to make up for not showing love for the rest of the year.  if someone only told you that they loved you once a year, or only gave you a hug or kiss once a year, or only bought you flowers once a year, could you confidently say that they loved you?  moreover, if someone only did something for you out of obligation, would you consider it a true sacrifice?  if CHRIST only died for you out of some misguided self-righteous sense of duty to you, would it carry the same weight?  absolutely not!  the sad thing is, we apply the same principles we have in marriage to our CHRISTian lives.  we only show our love, devotion, and level of sacrifice to God one day a week by "sacrificing" and giving up an hour or so out of our week to go to church, out of some misguided, self-righteous sense of duty, and then claim to love CHRIST. 

here is the take-away:  love is a verb.  it is an action.  it is intentional.  it is unselfish.  and most importantly, it is not confined to one day a year.  am i against doing something nice for your wife on valentine's day?  no.  but check your motivation.  is it because of what you will get out of the deal?  if so, it is selfish.  is it so you won't look bad to all of your wive's friends?  if so, it is prideful.  is it because you think your wife expects it?  if so, it is forced.  is it because you haven't done the like during the rest of the year and you are making up for it?  if so, it is inconsiderate.  all of these are antithetical of love.

p.s. - i know that this was primarily geared towards the males, (because let's face it, valentine's day is marketed towards the males' pocketbooks) but it applies to females as well.  ladies, if you are rewarding valentine's gifts with pleasure, you are prostituting yourselves.  if you expect your husband to buy you something just because it is a certain day, you are forcing love, which is servitude, in effect making you a slave master.  and if you allow him to make up for the past by buying gifts, then you have cheapened love and romance and reduced it to a commodity that can be bought and sold. 

this year, ladies and gentlemen, look at this as a learning exercise and take the time to communicate the things that make you feel loved.  if you don't communicate that, then your partner may never know.  take time to find out what the Bible says about love, and once you learn how CHRIST loves us, then you can effectively love your spouse the way CHRIST loves us, and all year long, i might add!  i admit i'm far from perfect when it comes to loving my bride, and for that i continually ask hers and God's forgiveness.  but if i, or you, ever get complacent in striving, then we will miss out on the immense joy God meant for us when He designed marriage.  i hope you have put the hammer and nails down by now.  if not, oh well.  i hear body piercing is in these days!

happy saint valentine's day!
c.