Category: christianity

Loyalty to God and country

Over at The Jury Talks Back, Not Rhetorical asked an interesting question:

“I’m a Christian first and an American second.” If you heard someone say that, would you consider it divided loyalty? What if a soldier said it?

I responded that I would not be surprised at all, because if anyone claims to believe in God but doesn’t place him as the primary influence in his life then that person does not really believe in God. It doesn’t matter which god – the God of Israel, Allah, Zeus, you name it – if God exists, then your entire existence is shaped by that fact. Anything else you do must be in the context of what that all-powerful God wished you to do or to be. I think the US Armed Forces understand this, given that they’ve allowed soldiers whose faith prevents them from fighting to serve other roles so as not to force a showdown between God and country.

This quote, however, comes from Nidal Hasan, the Ft. Hood shooter. He apparently made it public knowledge that he considered himself a Muslim first and an American second – a fact which is being played up as another sign of his blind devotion and barbarism. This should surprise no one. No political entity can match the sheer clout of a deity. The fact that he considered his religion to be the primary motivator in his life is a perfectly rational response to his beliefs, and using this point as evidence of his insanity is at best intellectually dishonest and at worst outright anti-religious propaganda. Continue reading Loyalty to God and country

Podcasting for Jesus

This week, and actually for the last few weeks, I’ve been listening to a lot of Mars Hill’s podcasts of Mark Driscoll’s sermons. I’m currently going through the Trial series, where he goes through 1 & 2 Peter. It’s awesome. I’ve really really enjoyed listening to these and learning – or at least having reinforced – all these great Biblical teachings. I’ve had a real hunger for good teaching lately, and these podcasts have been a great meal.

The one I just completed is an amazing message for men, in regards to how to relate to their wives and be a godly man, husband, and father. This is Driscoll preaching to men – he is harsh, blunt, and brutal. His passion for this topic really shines through, and I think really gives evidence that a complementary stance on gender roles does not mean that you have any less love or respect or value for women, as so many claim. It’s all about being complementary. Equal, but serving different functions in harmony. And the burden of responsibility for the family is on the man – which means that men need to step up that much more when seeking to enter such a relationship.

Honestly, I find it terrifying.

Not in the crippling, “oh woe is me” sense but just that this is such a massive responsibility that we need to go into it with eyes wide open and lives that are ready to support that responsibility. Too many people do not take this or anything else seriously in life, and it’s a travesty. God expects nothing less than our all, and to give anything less is absurd.

Anyway, considering starting a new “series” on here this coming week. We’ll see how it goes. Have a great weekend, all!

Culture Wars, Episode IV: A New Hope

Over at Boar’s Head Tavern there’s been a discussion going on about cultural “wars” between Christians and, well, everyone else. How far should Christians go in confronting the culture at large? Should churches be involved formally in politics, social agendas, or lobbying? Should a pastor use his pulpit to preach only Jesus – or should he also preach what Jesus might do in today’s political climate? The question may seem simple, but the ramifications are not – and looking at history’s various churches and their failed attempts at striking the right balance only makes us wonder that much more. Where is the dividing line between too much and not enough? Where should the people be involved, where the organization should not?

The first question then is “what purpose does the church, as an institution, serve?” If we understand what churches actually supposed to do, we can understand better how to go about doing it. In the times of Acts, there was no clear distinction between the Church as a body of believers and the church as a formal organization. We do see that the Christians met together regularly, and from what I can tell in Scripture, the gatherings served four major purposes. I draw these primarily from the specific examples of the early church in Acts, and I think a good summation can be found in the post-Pentacost gathering described in Acts 2:42 – “And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.” Continue reading Culture Wars, Episode IV: A New Hope