October 23, 2007 by David.

Since I’m on a roll of finding hot-button topics, I might as well follow-up with one of the hottest. Gay Marriage.

Next to abortion, gay marriage is easily the dominant topic in the minds of politically minded Christians. This is evidenced by the amount of hub-bub that went around not too long ago about amending the US Constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Here’s the problem with this issue: it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter whether Adam and Eve becomes Adam and Steve. The biggest argument from Christians has been that gay marriage will shake the foundations of what marriage should mean. That’s interesting, coming from a group of people who are just as likely as the rest of the populace to get a divorce or have an affair.

Plain and simple - this is another issue where Christians can sit in their ivory towers and demonstrate their complete hypocrisy. Why do we care about gay people getting married when we can’t stay married ourselves? Why do we care about gay people getting married when many of the marriages that do avoid divorce are devoid of love and commitment? Have we looked at our brother’s eye to find a splinter while there is still a plank in our own?

If the church wants to “defend” marriage, why don’t we start with ourselves? It’s outrageous that Christians demand marriage be protected, when they are the very principals in undermining it in the first place. Indeed, when the church would appear to defend wife-beaters before it would gay men, all credibility is lost and we are nothing more than babbling fools.

Here’s another problem with the issue: the message it sends is one of exclusion and judgment. And before anyone puts words in my mouth, let me clarify what I am not saying. I am not saying churches should be forced to perform gay marriage ceremonies. I am not saying that churches should promote gay marriages. What I am saying, however, is that people who understand grace should be the first to grant it. The truth is, God doesn’t need us to do the work of judgment. He has called us to the work of loving one another, including our enemies. His call to us was clear and distinct. He never asked us to protect the vows of marriage. He never asked us to affect the political machine. He never asked us to single out people for their sin. And yet, these are the things we focus on.

People - gay marriage is a non-issue. If it happens, so what? How will it impact your own marriage? My marriage of 10 years will not suddenly be hurt because two men have taken a vow to love one another. My role as father and husband is not weakened because two women share the same bed. However, my mission in Christ is tremendously hampered when I take my eyes off the mission. And this issue has done just that to many Christians.

So, no matter what you think about gay marriage, put it aside.

If only Christians were as “fired up” about seeing to it that they fed the hungry and clothed the poor…

Posted in General | No Comments »

October 22, 2007 by David.

I’ve hammered on this issue in the past, and it may seem like it’s important to me. That’s because it is. I know several homosexuals and I can say emphatically that the stereotypes painted of this group are grossly inaccurate of these men. And that bothers me, because the church - for years now - has used these stereotypes as cause for shunning and persecuting this group of people. Let me quickly dispense these stereotypes and explain why I believe this is a critical area in need of reform in the modern church.

First off, the idea that all homosexuals have poor relationships with their fathers is a stereotype that may be grossly misrepresented. Of all the gay men I know, only 1 of them had a poor relationship with his father. Ironically, the rest had better relationships with their fathers than I do with my own. I don’t have statistics to back up this assertion, but I would be willing to bet that the poor father/son relationship correlation is loose at best. I imagine that just as many (percentage-wise) straight men have poor relationships with their fathers as do gay men. The main purpose of this stereotype is to insist that people are not born gay, but rather, a poor relationship with their fathers caused them to be gay. I can’t even begin to address this thought without first laughing at it. If this correlation were true - and it’s definitely more correlation than causality - then I would be gay. And I’m not. Never have been. Never will be.

Secondly, the idea that pedophiles are typically gay has been painted into the church psyche. No on likes pedophiles, and rightfully so. But, painting an entire group of people with that title is disingenuous and spiritually criminal. In truth, most studies on pedophilia show that the vast majority of pedophiles are actually straight men. But, why dwell on the truth of the matter when the made-up explanation gives you a reason to exclude and discriminate so that you can feel comfortable on Sundays?

Finally, the idea that homosexuals want to “force their lifestyle” upon Christians (or anyone) is an image unfortunately painted by the vocal minority. The men I know simply want to be able to live their lives free of persecution or discrimination. Is that too much to ask? When you consider for one moment what it must be like to be gay - even in today’s more accepting society - you’d have to wonder what kind of crazy you’d be to WANT to be gay? Admittedly, some people have a victim mentality that may lend them to become a victim in this way, but again, that’s a broad generalization. The men I know only want to love and to be loved.

You may notice that one thing I’m not addressing here is the issue of whether or not homosexuality is a sin.  There is a distinct reason why - I’m not sure. I know I may be painted a heretic in some circles for saying this, but I’m not sure the Bible lends a case for it being a sin. There are only a few references to it. The earliest references occur in Leviticus, but if we look to that book for clarity on sin, we also see that we need to stone adulteress women and cut off the hands of thieves. The only clear New Testament statement on the issue is in Romans (btw, Jesus never spoke on the subject directly). And from what I’m currently reading, the scripture  reference (1:24-28) needs to be examined in light of the original greek, the context of the writing, and with great consideration of whom the letter was written to and for what purpose.

The one thing I want to be sure of is that I don’t take a firm stand on an issue that may not have firm footing. I believe Christ gave us clear guidance on what issues deserve our firm stand, and homosexuality is not one of them. He clearly instructs us to love one another. To feed the poor. To sacrifice of ourselves and to be servants to one another. And if anything, the one sin Christ pointed out more than any other - the one that angered him repeatedly at the Pharisees - was pride. If you look through the various teachings of Christ, one can quickly see that almost every story drew a comparison between prideful men (who were always the antagonist of the story) and humble men (the sure protagonists). And yet, churches have no problems with putting a rich man’s name on the side of a pew or erecting new buildings with the money of wealthy, prideful men. Where is our sense of balance and justice?

I believe the new church will take a different stand on homosexuality. The new church no longer needs to worry about specific sins, and whether or not something is a sin. The new church will look for brokenness and a spirit humbled before God, and in a renewing faith, trust that He will provide clarity for change - not us. If God would see fit that a man would turn from his sexual lifestyle, then surely He will do that work in their hearts. Surely we can trust in the same God that fed the five thousand to finish the good work he has started in us?

Posted in General | No Comments »

October 18, 2007 by David.

I’ve seen ugliness and I’ve seen pain. I’ve seen rock bottom and I’ve seen people go further still. I’ve seen drugs ravage, alcohol destroy, adultery shatter and promiscuousness corrupt. I’ve seen complete condemnation and I’ve seen utter abjectness. None of this, however, compares to what disgusts me the most: “church people.”

No, I’m not talking about anyone who goes to church. I’m talking about people who consider the church “theirs.” I’m not talking about the person who simply wants to warm a pew. I’m talking about the person who proudly imprints his name on that pew. I’m not talking about the fallen leaders taken down by drugs, sex or corruption. I’m talking about the leaders who stand in judgment of them.

I’m sick and tired of people who believe that the church is about them and what they have to offer.  I’m disgusted by people who read I Corinthians 13 and believe it is the marriage passage and nothing else. I’m weary of those who stand pridefully at the altar, rather than collapsing to their knees in front of it.

I long for a family of believers - I refuse to say church because the name has been dirtied by dirty men - who love one another and love those not even in their ranks. I yearn for a family that humbles itself and believes the truest form of leadership comes in humble servant hood. I cry out for a body that cares less about ministries and more about ministering.

I believe that I am not alone. I KNOW this. I’ve heard it and seen it.

Are there hypocrites in the church? You better believe it, and I’m chief amongst them. God forgive us.

I don’t want one more second of my life to be spent on “church people.” Not one.

I’ve seen what true love is. It’s about feeding the hungry. Comforting the hurting. Lifting the fallen. Consoling the widowed.

True love is about giving of yourself so that others may prosper, not just enough so that you avoid pain. True love is about sacrifice. The truest love knows no race, no gender, no boundary and no judgment.

It’s time to reform so that we are no longer “church people.”

We need to be what we were called to be from the very beginning - God’s people.

Posted in General | No Comments »

October 17, 2007 by David.

When I say someone is a Christian, what political party do you immediately assume this person would be tied to? Well, if you said “the Republican Party,” you’re absolutely right. And this is a major, major problem.

Here’s the biggest problem with the church and politics: Politics, by their very nature, are intended to divide. The church, by it’s God-given purpose, is intended to unite. Can anyone else here see the problem?

Politics is an ugly game. It forces people to look past the human and to generalize based on a set of rules. If you’re a Republican, chances are you 1) support lower taxes 2) support most wars 3) support prayer in schools and on and on. If you’re a Democrat, chances are you 1) support higher taxes 2) support more Federal social programs and 3) want less “religion” in government and on and on. The problem with these assumptions? They’re hardly true of every person tied to that party, but they’re assumptions we make based on a label alone. It keeps us from engaging people individually and avoiding them altogether in some cases. Rather than getting to know a person and what makes them tick, we judge a person and choose whether or not to engage them or to shun them. Also, considering this country is nearly divided 50/50 between the two parties (or more likely, 30/30/40 independent), by affiliating ourselves with a political party, we immediately build walls between us and a substantial number of people. The church should be in the wall-busting business, not wall-building.

I know of quite a few liberals who don’t go to churches almost for the political reason alone. They feel alienated and disrespected or feel that their beliefs are not valued or to be heard.

So, how can this reform be done? Simple - Christians don’t need to politicize their values. It is great to value the unborn life, but don’t politicize it. It is great to want to pray, but don’t politicize it. It is great to follow the Ten Commandments, but don’t politicize it. Forcing your values on a person will always backfire, no matter what those values are. So, instead of throwing money to political action committees that seek to instill these values in government, we should put that money into ministries that will reach people and teach them the trueness of these values.  We should also embrace people who see politics differently from us. Believing abortion should be legal does not mean you want more abortions. Some people, myself included, believe the legality allows us better opportunities to address the issue at its source. Believing that prayer should not be forced in schools does not mean you don’t believe in prayer.

It’s time for the church to “…give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s…”

Posted in General | No Comments »

October 16, 2007 by David.

If there is one thing I’ve adopted as a personal creed, it is the need for reform in the modern church. In fact, this creed has now become a bit of a mission. I feel compelled to bring a message that is - in my opinion - more aligned with the original message of Christ than the one currently given in many congregations nationwide. Not that I am a scholar or know better than other men. Not that I am a prophet or gifted speaker. Rather, this mission is fueled only by simplicity.

What needs reforming? Well, let’s start with a hot-button topic: abortion.

Here’s a wake-up call for Christians in America: making abortion illegal will NOT stop abortions. Need evidence? Look to the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s. It was during that time that the black-market exploded and moonshine flooded the backwoods. Men were buying aftershave to drink for its alcoholic content. All prohibition did was take an outward issue and push it behind closed doors. No one was helped by prohibition. In fact, many people were hurt in the process. Luckily, the men of that time learned the lesson and issued the 21st amendment in 1933 to repeal the prohibition (it sadly took 14 years).

Why is it, then, that we can’t learn from history?  Instead, the church is throwing money into PACs whose sole focus is the over-turning of Roe v. Wade. The “Christian Right” is so determined to make abortion illegal, it has become the primary issue for many conservative Christians. I believe that some Christians would vote for Satan himself if he simply carried a Pro-Life bumper sticker with him and was a registered Republican. I know that’s a harsh statement, but I’ve met some people who I honestly believe would do so, and it makes me shudder.

Here’s a thought: take the money that is being shoved into these PACs and put it into ministries geared to helping people in poor communities. Studies show that the vast majority of abortions are happening to people who live below the poverty line. Put those millions of dollars being spent on lobbying into giving hope to these young women. Instead of criminalizing their actions - help them to never get to the point of wanting to get an abortion. Wanna choke the problem off at the source? Encourage young men who are running away from their families to be real men and raise their families. I guarantee that this reform will have a permanent impact on the number of abortions in this country.

The only thing you’re guaranteed with passing a law is that there is now another law to be broken. However, creating social change is ever-lasting. Don’t believe me? Just tell me what year it is and remember that time itself was split by the social change of a single man…

Posted in General | No Comments »

October 15, 2007 by David.

It hasn’t even been 24 hours and already I’m missing the guys of Walk 136, Table of Matthew. In particular, I felt a strong bond with David Anthony - who had a fatherly like quality to him - and to David Brown, who felt like a kindred spirit the whole weekend. Many things happened, and many things were revealed.

First and foremost - I received confirmation that I’m being called. However, I don’t think this calling is to the standard “Bible school, associate pastor, Pastor a church and develop programs” call that most men follow. I don’t know the details yet, but I do know the foundation. It’s the same foundation it has always been: Love every man, unconditionally - as Christ did - and let God do the rest. I do know that what I’m envisioning is a church more intent on feeding the poor, than developing internal ministries. Time will tell and God will lead. The rest is inconsequential.

Secondly, I was able to break out and do something I haven’t done in some time. My artistic side broke through, albeit begrudgingly, and I felt truly alive again. I’m not the best artist, or even a decent one, but it’s something that has always driven me. I had given it up over time because I couldn’t make a living doing it. I quickly learned, though, that making a living out of something shouldn’t be the sole criterion for whether or not you continue doing it.

Finally, I learned you should never tell people how God has you structured. I told several people that “I’m not very emotional.” Great, David, go ahead and test God why dontcha??? Sure enough, as the rest of the day progressed, my eyes began to leak like a hole in the Hoover Dam. Good thing too, given that everyone else was crying - I’d have looked the fool (not really, but kinda sorta).

All in all, it was a great weekend. I’ve got new friends - brothers, even - and I’m coming back with new fires and old fires rekindled.

Posted in General | No Comments »

October 10, 2007 by David.

You know, I can appreciate governmental desire to keep cities clean. It helps tax revenue by making the city more attractive to visitors. It helps keep costs low by reducing the work needed to straighten stuff up. But, at some point, the desire for a clean appearance and higher tax revenues tramples all over decent values and common sense. It’s the primary reason I consider myself a libertarian.

This article encapsulates the extreme idiocy our government is capable of. In short, the city of Orlando has a law on the books that makes it illegal to feed homeless people. Yup - you read that right. You can be arrested and thrown before the court if you hand a happy meal over to Homer, the crazy but likable Vietnam Vet living under the bridge.

So, in tried-and-true 1960’s protest fashion, a group of people decided to publicly mock the law by - GASP - feeding homeless people! Oh the horror! Sure enough, local government was not going to sit by while their constituents attempted to be more Christ-like. They arrested one of the chaps involved. And now he has to face a trial for his heinous actions against society.

Wait - what he did didn’t harm anybody. In fact, it helped some people. Oh, and what he did didn’t cost government anything. If anything, it saved government money. Oh yeah, what he did didn’t make the city any dirtier, but quite likely, made it cleaner (if not more satiated). Can someone out there explain to me what was inherently wrong with feeding the homeless?

The sad thing is, this law was very likely put forth and approved by a few Christians along the way. Statistically, the vast majority of policy makers in this country are “Christians”, so it stands to reason. I’m really trying to figure out how one resolves the conflict of making illegal one of Christ’s statements on what it means to love Him.  I’m wondering if the person who put this law together really believes that feeding the homeless is wrong and/or hurtful. On top of that, is this the kind of thing we want our underpaid police to be watching out for? Seriously - with everything else that goes on in the world, are we that concerned with a homeless person being given bread and soup?

These kind of laws scare me. They’re the ones that, as Christ followers, we need to break.

I’m left wondering what will be made illegal next…

Posted in General | No Comments »

October 2, 2007 by David.

When someone wrongs us, pains us or does something to offend us, they are inadvertently granting us power. Whether they intend to or not, what they are bestowing on that person is the choice of forgiveness.  The power - which may have once been in the hands of the offender - is now squarely and solely in the hands of the offended.

If you think about it, our own governing system is setup this way. If you wrong the government (presumably by committing a crime), the power has now been transferred from you to the government. You are now completely at their mercy. The government can now hand down a penalty as harsh as death, or offer a slap on the wrist. In some instances, the government can even go so far as to forgive you for your crime and let you off scott-free.

Naturally - all of this presumes that you “care” what the government (or whomever you may have offender) thinks of you. If you don’t, you can stop reading now.

Ultimately, though,  the act of forgiveness is one of power. It’s a decision that is made from a position of authority. However, once that decision is made, the power is lost. It’s a single-use card that can’t be exploited for further gain. The government can only try you once for a particular crime (considering federal and local different entities, of course). Likewise, once you make the choice to forgive a person and you GRANT that forgiveness, the power that they gave you is gone.

Which leads me to my ultimate point. It is this loss of power when forgiving that has often held me back from forgiving people. When you’ve been badly wronged, you have been given a power that the wronging person had typically had over you. Whether they know it or not, your choice to forgive them is a power they can not take back. It puts you in a position above them. It doesn’t make you better than them, but it does make you a debtor to them. This empowerment is both liberating and poisonous.

I’ve come to realize that the longer I hold onto this forgiveness - the longer I refuse to grant it - the more jaded I become. I even tell lies in the midst of this empowerment by saying that I have indeed forgiven the person when I know that I truly haven’t. Clinging to this power also makes me angry. I often get angry that those whom I hold power over don’t even acknowledge it. I want to hear them beg. I want them to WANT what I now have. In some ways, I want them to EARN it. As if I could ever earn forgiveness for myself…

I grasp onto this power with a grip so tight I could strangle myself to death. I refuse to let go because it makes me vulnerable to that person (or persons) yet again. The irony is that the longer I hold onto this power, the more I lose myself. I’m beginning to understand that power is not meant to be stored or kept - it is to be expended. Even a battery - a container of power - is not intended to hold that power indefinitely. It is designed to expend power. Should it never expend power, it loses its purpose and given time, it will collapse in on itself.

Likewise, humans are not meant to hold onto power - especially the kind that’s given over other people. It is designed to be used - positively, hopefully - and to be done with. Power can be regained, but again, it must eventually be expended. If it’s not, the purpose of that power is lost and the same is true for the carrier of it.

I fear that I’ve been a charged AA battery sitting on the shelf. It’s time for me to release that power…

Posted in General | No Comments »