The Cult at Westboro

Part of me hates to dignify the Westboro Cult with a blog post, but in light of the tragedy in Connecticut, the Mephistophelian fringe of Topeka has resurfaced, grinding on American consciousness. The inconsistencies between Westboro’s message and biblical Christianity are immediately evident, and much tedious effort could be given to their ill-informed use of scripture. But more fundamental errors are at work in Westboro.

The most observable trait of the group is its inflammatory speech, which by definition is designed to arouse anger and hostility. This seems to be completely antithetical to the rules of engagement exemplified by the Apostles. Paul wrote in Colossians 4:6, “Your speech should always be gracious, seasoned with salt.”

There’re generally two types of discourse on either side of controversy, seditious and conciliatory, both with different outcomes. One produces strife, the other curiosity. If Westboro had any God-ordained mission to win converts, they would heed Proverbs 16:21 which reminds us, “pleasant speech increases learning.”

But it’s not only the tenor of Westboro’s rhetoric that’s problematic, but also the content of their rant, or lack thereof. Not the faintest resemblance of the biblical gospel can be found in Westboro’s message, but rather they rail almost solely against homosexuality. They fail to communicate enough doctrine to even be accused of preaching a false gospel. As a result, there message only qualifies as the hateful raving of misguided souls, led by the Enemy himself. Truly a tragic masquerade.

Westboro is also unwilling to entertain offers of correction. Their website reportedly says, “Zero is the number of nanoseconds of sleep we lose over the opinions of others.” Being willfully unteachable is a dangerous state, even for true believers. Proverbs 19:27 says, “If you stop listening to instruction, my son, you will stray from the words of knowledge.”

So what needs to be said? Numbers 14:18 says, “The Lord is slow to anger and rich in faithful love, forgiving wrongdoing and rebellion. But He will not leave the guilty unpunished.”

Yes, God is good. He is so good, He will punish evil. If a man who breaks the law comes before a judge, and that judge fails to bring justice to bear upon the situation, he would be considered a poor judge. God is a perfect judge, and will bring perfect justice to bear upon the sin of mankind, which includes us all.

Yet, there is another dimension of God’s goodness which is displayed in His mercy. God offers the sinner forgiveness on the grounds that He himself provided a means for justice to be done. The message of Christmas is God becoming a man. This Jesus Christ lived the sinless life we should have lived, a life of perfect trust in the Father. Then He died on the cross, receiving in Himself all the Father’s wrath for our sins. Three days later, Jesus rose from the dead, displaying the sufficiency of His sacrifice to appease Divine justice, therefore validating His offer of mercy to the weary sinner.

“Therefore repent and turn back, that your sins may be wiped out so that seasons of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord,” Acts 3:19.

Image Credit

Where I Learned Courage

The Oklahoma town crawled with a population of eight-hundred. Some enjoyed small town living, others tolerated it, and yet others didn’t know any different. One woman, navigating life a couple of clicks south of garden-variety dysfunction, shared low-income housing on the north side with a man her boys simply referred to as “him.”

Three years into her two-year degree, nursing textbook in her lap, wrestling with concepts and terminology foreign to a woman twenty years out of high school. Her chair was part of a matching living room suite which brought comments from his relatives, “He must really love you.” And now he and his brother towered over her, demanding her financial-aid.

The worst kind of abuse lingered in her past, and few understood the scope of its defilement, tainting every choice of employment, friendship, and romantic interest. Enrolling in junior college already called for a paradigm shift in her thinking about the future, and dropping out would only cement her legacy as a victim.

These defining moments aren’t made by the converging of events upon a point in time, but rather they leap into existence on the heels of a choice. Choices are generally mundane, but those that defy precedent come with risks, and sometimes violence. They challenge the status quo, forging a new standard, leaving behind the inescapable and lunging for the impossible.

She averted her eyes back to her studies and answered softly, “I can’t do that.” Such a refusal normally meant ignorance. But she knew him. The length of the next moment allowed the danger to become a tangible force in the room, but this night something else was present as well. Courage.

Breaking from years of conditioning and complex senses of self-preservation is wrought with fear. She may have feared him, or she may have feared leaving familiarity, but I suspect she had a revived fear of the Lord. For the courage to turn from such night comes from the dawning of conviction.

Mom finished her nursing degree when I was in boot camp and soon moved out. She has continued to display great courage right up to this day.

Reflections on Grief and Revelation

When someone close to us dies, they rarely fade from our lives, allowing us to grieve in manageable increments. Instead, it’s often a violent tearing, for death knows nothing of gentleness, nothing of grace, and nothing of our desperate bargaining. And like Martha we say, “Lord, if only you had been here…”

If only the Healer had been there, her brother wouldn’t have died, and she and her sister wouldn’t feel as if they were dying as well. And into their anguish Jesus speaks, “Your brother will rise again.”

A grander narrative of scripture culminated in a resurrection of the dead. Martha knew this. It lingered in the consciousness of many Jews, but Jesus was speaking of something a bit more imminent and much more revealing, as He states, “I am the resurrection and the life.”

The point is inescapable. There are depths of understanding achieved only when pain and grief are brought to bear on the human heart, for the deepest truths of Christ’s identity are never more relevant than when death is present.

Jesus explains, “The one who believes in Me, even if he dies, will live.” The Lord applies his identity directly to Martha’s grief over the physical death of her brother, but then Jesus reveals truth deeper still. “Everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die—ever.”

Just as physical death is a shadow of the greater reality of spiritual separation from the living God, Jesus’ raising of Lazarus would foreshadow a greater resurrection to a life that would span eternity.

The concept of forever-ness brings profound considerations, for when the pebble of momentary experience is dropped into the ocean of eternity, one’s perspective gains alarming clarity. Yet, despite these philosophically daunting themes, the question posed by Jesus is simply, “Do you believe this?” The act of believing is relational. For the One offering life without death could only have love as a motivation, and Martha’s act of believing moves the relationship forward.

Martha was feeling the pain of loss, and Jesus’ offer was simply more of Himself, for she no longer knew Jesus as a mere healer, but as the Son of God. She learned this as she hurt, and I wonder if she whispered Job 42:5, “I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear, But now my eye sees You.”

Image Credit

When Evangelicals Were Pro-Abortion

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/30/my-take-when-evangelicals-were-pro-choice/comment-page-7/

In his blog Jonathon Dudley observes the hard stance of evangelicals against abortion. Of course he rehearses some of the asinine remarks of so-called evangelical politicians, but may be correct when he says these gaffs point to a false assumption that evangelicals have always been on the extreme end of the abortion debate. According to Dudley, such an interpretation of scripture is a relatively new phenomenon. He goes on to cite a special issue of Christianity Today from the late sixties where Bruce Waltke claimed the Bible clearly taught that life began at birth, and no earlier. He says that the Southern Baptist Convention even passed a resolution in the early 70's supporting the legalization of abortion.

Dudley continues providing a history lesson outlining the evolution of various Christian leader’s position on the beginning of life, hence the morality of abortion. Such a shift in biblical interpretation has had obvious effects on the political climate. Dudley’s point is to challenge the mindless followers of anti-abortion advocates to realize that religious opinion on the matter has not always been settled, and therefore perhaps it shouldn’t be a settled biblical issue today. Perhaps the issue is not solved by a timeless biblical principle.

Dudley is correct in asserting that one shouldn’t blindly follow one person’s interpretation of scripture. This would be the place for caution while praying for the Holy Spirit to lead one into truth and wisdom, holding fast to the gospel once and for all delivered to the saints.

Dudley is also correct that evangelicals have not always agreed on what the Bible has taught concerning the beginning of life. This could be said about many, if not all of the doctrines of scripture, for biblical interpretation has its complexities. Yet, Dudley is incorrect when he implies that inconsistency in the past automatically equals error in the present. Therefore, when it comes to forming one’s own convictions, the history of biblical interpretation can teach much, yet there are many more considerations and scholarship to take into account. And ultimately one must always come back to wrestle with the text itself.

I am unapologetically pro-life and anti-abortion, and I believe the scripture teaches that human personhood begins at conception. Yet one thing certainly to be gleaned from Dudley’s observations is the need for humility when approaching holy writ, and the need for graciousness when communicating biblical convictions in a hotly debated environment. Convictions can be drawn from scripture, held without flinching, while at the same time being an occasion to display humility and graciousness, while remaining teachable for those occasions when correction is made available to us.

Is President Obama the Antichrist?

Robert Jeffress of FBC Dallas assured his mega-congregation President Obama was not the Antichrist, but was his forerunner; the John the Baptist of the Antichrist, if you will. Inflammatory remarks such as these are not likely to endear the gospel to our secular counterparts, but rather will continue to reinforce Christian stereotypes.

The Apostle Paul set a much loftier example as he showed profound respect for those in authority. In Acts 26, the governor Festus told Paul that he was mad, and Paul addressed him respectfully as “most excellent Festus.” Other examples could be cited, but Paul explicitly told Timothy in 1Timothy 2:1-3,

“First of all, then, I urge that petitions, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for everyone, for kings and all those who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good, and it pleases God our Savior …”

Peter likewise writes in 1Peter 2:13-15,

“Submit to every human institution because of the Lord, whether to the Emperor as the supreme authority, or to governors as those sent out by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For it is God’s will that you, by doing good, silence the ignorance of foolish people. . . Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the Emperor.”

Christians don't agree with the President on key issues, but unlike those who see history as capricious and erratic, allowing themselves to digress into inflammatory speech and passing it off as Christian rhetoric, we see the universe in God's sovereign hands, allowing us to reflect His glory with measured words and honor for those in authority. As Dr. Russell Moore said, “Because we know as believers that we will eternally say ‘Jesus is Lord,’ we can as citizens temporally say, ‘Hail to the chief.’”

50 Shades

El James has become one of the best selling female authors of all time due the profound success of her Fifty Shades Trilogy. The repetitive pornographic sex scenes, “mommy porn” as its been called, are damaging enough to its readers, but these novels push the envelope of sexual debauchery to ever darkening scenarios.

The success of the London based author coincides with the British Home Office seeking to widen the definition of Domestic Abuse to include coercive control in addition to physical violence. It’s therefore a bit ironic that the so-called “hero” of James’ novels repeatedly exercises coercive control over the heroine.

The subtle power of these novels resides in their ability to condition female readers to view coercive control, arguably the most dangerous form of relationship abuse, as something desirable and pleasurable. The novels describe quite accurately the process by which serial abusers groom a vulnerable target. This predatory snake-charming can be extended to the target’s family as well, masking sinister motivations.

There are generally six stages of grooming (found on abuse survivor websites), and they all appear in these novels.

1) Selecting a target
Predators will zero in on potential victims, recognizing those who are distanced from family, exhibiting confidence issues and neediness. James’ main male character, Christian Grey, quickly identifies the insecurity and low self-esteem of the heroine, knowing there are very few people around her who will defend her. He immediately seeks to further isolate her from any other voices of reason, while quizzing her about personal information, learning she is from a broken home.

2) Win target’s trust
An abuser will learn about a targets needs so that they may be met with exploitive motivations. Meeting a target’s needs serves to win trust, while providing future leverage. In the Fifty Shades Trilogy, the abuser keeps a dossier on his female target full of such information. He eventually resorts to stalking her online and in person. Personal information is even used to win the trust of her father, putting the predator in position for the next phase of grooming.

3) Meeting needs
The abuser will exploit the knowledge of a target’s personal needs by showering them with attention, gifts, and praise. Christian Grey gives the female target a car, money, and expensive clothes, primarily serving the his dark agenda. Through the use of wealth and manipulation, Christian Grey’s target becomes financially dependent on him, which quickly evolves into her dependence upon him for her very self-esteem.

4) Isolation
A predator will use his relationship with the target to create situations where they are alone together. In Fifty Shades, the female’s youth and naivete makes her suseptable to plenty of special first class trips. This further builds trust, but it also separates the target from any support group she may possess.

5) Sexualizing the relationship
With child grooming, once trust has been firmly established, the abuser gradually sexualizes the relationship. The child is desensitized through dirty conversation, pornography, and situations where they are naked together. With adult grooming, this sexualizing can be harder to detect, because the dating relationship will become sexual and all consuming very quickly.

The target in Fifty Shades is desensitized by talking about the predator’s dark sexual desires. He orders her to negotiate a contract pertaining to her participation. Within weeks she’s manipulated and coerced into dehumanizing sexual acts of ever increasing depravity.

6) The final phase of grooming a target is staying in control. The target is told that her submission is for her own good. Her free will is seen as an obstacle to greater freedom and personal fulfillment. The target is kept off balance by the abuser’s volatile reactions.

When women are conditioned to believe that abuse is normative, it is not only they who are at risk, but also their children. If they cannot recognize when they themselves are being groomed and manipulated for abuse, they surely won’t recognize it when it happens to their children.

The dangers of El James’ novels are evident. When grooming and coercive control are normalized and even glorified as the romantic ideal, generations of women are put at risk.

P.S. My information came from reading reviews, not from reading the novel itself.

H - E - Double Hocky Sticks

A handful of topics bring heat to any friendly discussion. Hell is certainly one. The concept of eternal punishment is so daunting, one can scarcely see where the discussion should begin. To begin to understand Hell, one must try to understand the God who created it. This is true of any ultimate question concerning life, death, and purpose. Yet, our so-called understanding of God is our fatal flaw.

William and I were fishing at a pond in the woods south of town last week. A pack of dogs immerged from the tree line, and one came charging toward me, hair bristled and teeth gnashing. I stood up straight and shouted as loud as possible, “NO!” The dog stopped twenty feet from me, turned around and led the pack back into the woods.

To correctly understand that situation, I had to correctly understand the dog. I could have opened my arms wide to embrace the dog with a hug saying, “I believe all dogs are loving dogs.” I could have done nothing saying, “I don’t believe wild dogs are dangerous.” I could have turned and ran saying, “I believe what my heart is telling me, and it’s telling me I should run.”

Any one of these misunderstandings would have resulted in a catastrophe, and yet these are the same mental gymnastics we apply to our understanding of God. We believe God is tolerant and no real threat to us; therefore we can simply follow our heart. But if we’re wrong in our understanding of God, the consequences are infinitely worse than a dog attack.

The only viable option is to seek revealed truth, being an understanding of God provided by God himself. This revelation came as God inspired men to record His words. We know this divine record as the Bible.

Exodus 34:6-7 says, “Yahweh is a compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger and rich in faithful love and truth, . . . But He will not leave the guilty unpunished.”

This brief passage reveals God as not only good, but his goodness is at such a perfect level that sin in His universe will not go unpunished. Yet at the same time, his love is so vast that he came in the person of Christ to receive the punishment for us. Romans 5:8 says, “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”

According to God’s own revelation, the goodness of his character requires the existence of Hell as a just punishment for a sinful rebellious humanity. The bottom line is God is who He is, so rather than expect Him to be less than He is, lets embrace His truth and bow before His Christ.

Dating Advice for Girls

I thought dating stress was gone forever once I got married, but God was playing a joke on me. My dearest Emily, as well as her friends, are now playing with the “in a relationship” status on Facebook. Dating is one of the most exhilarating and most frustrating experiences in life, and this is especially true for the young Christian lady.

It’s bad enough that the pickings are so slim for Christian girls as few young men have been willing to truly turn from sin and commit to a life of following Christ. But many times even Christian boys lack the qualities essential for a healthy dating relationship.

So how can a young Christian girl gain crucial insight into a boy’s character before she even begins any kind of “relationship” with him? What does a girl often possess as an incredible tool to help determine a boy’s integrity? Surely God has not left young Christian girls to navigate these shark-infested waters alone.

Great news, girls. God has provided you with an incredibly powerful equalizer for the frontlines of dating. It is called “DAD.” That’s right, girls, there is no one on the face of this planet who cares more for your safety and well-being than that one man. Not only is he your personal polygraph machine and expert in teen-boy psychology, but he is willing to personally run his own background checks.

So how can you utilize this powerful tool in screening potential gentleman callers? This brings us to the ominous INTERVIEW. Oh my, gives me chills just thinking about it. Listen girls, don’t underestimate the power of this single event, because not only is your dad able to see through a boy’s false motives, but this is an essential step in determining a boys character. Because if he doesn’t have the brass to stand before your dad and ask for permission to get know you better, then he is not willing to shoulder the risk of being rejected. And that is an indication of weak character, poor leadership, and impure motives.

If a boy cannot pass this basic test of decency and integrity, then he is not yet ready to get to know you better, and may never be. And if your dad is not available to conduct this simple interview, I would be happy and honored to provide this service free of charge.

Anthropological Argument for God's Existence

Inside every person’s heart is a moral compass. This belief in right and wrong leads to the development of the moral argument of God’s existence. In other words, the existence of a moral compass in man’s heart is best explained by the biblical account of being created in God’s image. Man’s belief in objective right and wrong is a remnant of what was once a flawless humanity created for a good purpose.

Yet, what man finds troubling is his complete inability to return to his previously greater self. He is reduced to living a life wrought with frustration only to end in the icy fingers of an ominous death. And this introduces the anthropological argument for God's existence.

Blaise Pascal, in Pensees, described man as “deposed royalty,” seeing a wretchedness he cannot escape, and a death he cannot avoid. “Being unable to cure death, wretchedness and ignorance, men have decided, in order to be happy, not to think about such things.”

Man works hard to keep his mortality and sinfulness far from his thoughts. He gives his heart and mind to diversions, distracting himself from a plight too grim to stare in the face. According to Pascal, man’s obsession with hobbies, entertainment, and prestige are attempts to escape the truth of his own miserable condition.

When man looks honestly at his predicament, he sees a moral standard existing in his heart, yet nothing in this world can help him achieve that standard. Death looms on the horizon like the uncle no one mentions in polite company, yet nothing in the world provides an alternative. Man suspects he was made for greater purpose, but something went terribly wrong, and possessing the pleasures of this world offers no remedy.

This peculiar trait of humanity shackles him to a monumental dissatisfaction crying out for an explanation. C.S. Lewis, in his essay The Weight of Glory, offers one such explanation:

"Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists. A baby feels hunger; well there is such a thing as food. A duckling wants to swim; well, there is such a thing as water. . . If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world." (emphasis mine)

Philosophers have long recognized man as a very peculiar being, capable of great personal sacrifice and great selfish evil. He longs for purpose and meaning transcending his existence, yet finding only despair in the end.

If a worldview is to be of any value, it must at least explain man’s pitiful existence. Christianity not only provides an explanation, but spectacular hope.

My soul shall be satisfied as with marrow and fatness, And my mouth shall praise You with joyful lips. Psalms 63:5 (NKJV)

Morality Exists, Therefore God Exists

The moral argument for God’s existence basically says that if objective moral values exist (absolute right and wrong), these values must come from a personal Being transcending the various opinions and cultural nuances of mankind.

A few hold the extreme position stating there is neither such thing as right that is always right, nor wrong that is always wrong. They site examples illustrating the contrast of differing perspectives and cultural practices. For example, some may view the men who flew into the World Trade Center as terrorist, while others see them as freedom fighters. Another example points to some cultures striving to love their neighbors while others work to eat their neighbors.

Yet when one of these hardliners was asked how he felt about the cruel treatment of children by Nazi doctors, he responds by stating that he did not like what happened to those children, and he would not have enjoyed witnessing what happened to those children, but he could not say that the Nazi doctors were doing anything wrong. This man’s mind contradicted his heart. He didn’t intellectually believe in evil, but even he couldn’t escape an emotional belief in evil.

This continues to illustrate the presence of moral sensibilities within the human heart. What needs to be explained is where this moral compass originated. Is it merely an emergent quality of evolution, or does it reside there as a faint reminder that we were created in God’s image.

Noted atheist and ardent proponent of evolution, Richard Dawkins, has done much in an attempt to promote the theory of evolution as the only intellectually sustainable position, yet even he seems confused as to what he actually believes. In his book The God Delusion he argues that morality is based on evolution. Yet this seems to contradict his understanding in River Out of Eden where he observes evolution being unconcerned with right and wrong.

Dawkins’ inconsistencies aside, can evolution truly account for the formation of conscious morality in human beings? For the sake of argument lets consider evolution as a source for morality. If morality did indeed evolve through the blind mechanism of natural selection, then there is no more reason to trust such a morality than one we may receive from reading tea leaves. Both are impersonal and blind to meaning and purpose.

Henry Middleton in his article Can Morality Be Based In Our “Selfish: Evolutionary Past? says, “Moral standards deal with right and wrong, what should and should not be done. That implies a choice that requires personality and consciousness. A transcendent moral standard would therefore need to be grounded in a conscious, personal, and transcendent reality. Christians find this in God—the only place where such a standard can be found.”

Also, as noted by Jay Wesley Richards in his article Naturalism in Theological and Biblical Studies, evolution is driven by behavior, not beliefs. As long as an animal behaves in a self-preserving way, its beliefs are irrelevant. For instance, a deer can believe a mountain lion is his mother, while simultaneously believing the way to get his mother to love him is to run away. The natural selection of evolution doesn’t choose between beliefs, only behavior.

The bottom line is that evolution could only determine what is, not what should be, therefore it is a completely inadequate explanation for the human heart’s passionate reaction to good and evil.