culture war

It’s Not About Politics

Frank

Here is a rundown of denominations and major Christian organizations who have released statements in opposition to the Trump Administration’s policy of separating families while going through deportation/asylum hearings.  Note that some of these are traditionally right-leaning.  Check out this running list from Jack Jenkins on Twitter for a more complete list including statements representing other faiths.  I will try and keep this updated.

  • The Council of Bishops of the African Methodist Episcopal Church released a statement through the Religion News Service
  • The American Baptist Churches USA responded directly to AG Sessions
  • The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (statement from Cardinal Daniel DiNardo)
  • The Christian Reformed Church of North America issued a bilingual statement (nice touch)
  • The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America added a statement
  • The Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution (resolution #5) at their annual meeting last week
  • The Seventh Day Adventist Church also released a statement
  • The Council of Bishops of the United Methodist Church (Jeff Session’s denomination) also released a statement

#KeepFamiliesTogether is a joint statement from 20 religious leaders including:

  • General Minister and President of the United Church of Christ -UCC
  • Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church (United States)
  • Presiding Bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America -ELCA
  • Executive Director of the Mennonite Church USA
  • General Minister and President of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
  • Stated Clerk of the Presbyterian Church (USA)- PCUSA
  • Executive Director of the International Council of Community Churches

The Evangelical Immigration Table includes signatures from the:

  • President of the National Association of Evangelicals
  • President of World Relief
  • Ambassador, General Superintendent Emerita of the Wesleyan Church,
  • Board of General Superintendents of the Church of the Nazarene
  • President of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention,
  • President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference
  • President of World Vision

It’s the Culture, Stupid

Frank

This week my Facebook timeline blew up (no pun intended) with post after post regarding the 2nd Amendment. Part of it is the fact that many of my Facebook friends are from my hometown or college- a culture where hunting is a way of life and some children are practically born with a Remington in their hand. The other part of it is simply that some people really, really love their guns, some to the point of near-worship. In fact, roughly half of the employees in my building at work was in Las Vegas this week for the “Shot Show”.

Meanwhile, 9 people were killed by gun violence in Chicago last weekend. If this would have happened in a single place as an isolated incident it would’ve been front-page news. But it only added to the 500 homicides from 2012, making 9 a relatively small number.

We, as Christians, need to own up to the fact that we’ve lost the Culture War in America. We lost because we fought on the wrong front. We turned Christianity from a lifestyle to a political platform. We choose to fight immorality in our culture with legislation, putting our trust in politicians to enforce morality rather than allowing our lives to be Christ-like examples worth following.

We fought to limit abortions while neglecting the single mother. We fight against amnesty for immigrants while ignoring the Biblical examples of refuge. And now we fight for our right to own Assault Rifles, just because.

I don’t know what the answer is to gun violence. I know better than to blame video games. I want to blame fatherless homes, but that’s part of a larger problem. It wouldn’t be fair to blame gun manufacturers or gun enthusiasts. Really I need to blame you. I need to blame me. We need to take personal responsibility for pursuing the American Dream no matter the cost. We need to take the blame for leading self-centered lives that has turned neighbors into strangers and home into the place we go when we’re not at work. We need to point our fingers at the mirror and ask ourselves the hard question- do our lives look like Jesus, or do they look just like everyone elses’?

Running for the Glory

Frank

Sunday I watched Usain Bolt prove again that he is the “fastest man in the world” as he won the Gold medal in the 100 meter dash at the London Olympics. As a former sprinter myself, the 100 meter dash is my favorite Olympic event (with the 4x100m relay close behind). To the winner goes the lofty title above; it takes a special kind of ego to compete at that level.

My interest in the race goes back to Carl Lewis’ four-medal showing in the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics and it wasn’t too long after that I laced up my first pair of cleats with him as my inspiration. Since then records have been set, broken and set again, runners disqualified and medals stripped, unlikely heroes crowned, and of course the heartbreak of missing the medal podium by a literal hair (again, Tyson Gay came up short- just 0.01 second behind US teammate Justin Gatlin).

But the drama of this race did not begin in 1984. Of course we could obviously go back to Jesse Owens’ performance in the 1936 Olympics held in Berlin before the critical eyes of Adolf Hitler. But I want to go back a little further to the 1924 games in Paris.

Not long after Bolt crossed the finish line in Olympic-record time, I put in my DVD of Chariots of Fire. If you’re not familiar with the movie, it recounts the efforts of Great Brittan’s track and field team, specifically sprinters Eric Liddell and Harold Abrahams, as they prepared for and competed in the Paris Olympics. I’ve talked about Liddell’s story before, but watching the movie while the London Olympics unfolded before me took on added significance.

One of the key plot points in the movie, and in Liddell’s life, was his refusal to run in the 100m dash because the preliminary heats were held on a Sunday, the Christian Sabbath. While this is a true story, the movie adds and extra level of drama by portraying Liddell as surprised to learn this on the way to Paris, when in fact he knew months in advance. Also not portrayed in the movie was that he also refused to run 4x400m relay for the same reason.

Bolt won his Gold medal on Sunday. Imagine, for a moment, Bolt refusing to race because it conflicted with his religious convictions. He would have been widely criticized as fanatical and his absence would have created a worldwide scandal. Perhaps Liddell wasn’t a runner of the same notoriety, but he was considered the fastest man in England. Liddell did compete in the 400m dash as a back-up event, and though he held the English record for the 440 yard dash he was not expected to seriously compete at the Olympics. Surpassing everyone’s expectations, he won gold, setting a world record that would hold for 12 years. So competitively, Liddell was on par with Bolt.

We’ve heard the soundbites from athletes grateful for their performances thanking God and giving him credit and praise. But what if Gabby Douglas or Missy Franklin went a step further and refused to compete on a Sunday? It is nearly unthinkable. Yet some Jewish athletes choose not to compete on Saturdays and all will refuse to compete during Holy Days. Likewise Muslims will also not compete during their Holy Days. Imagine Christian basketball players sitting out every Friday during Lent (it is during March Madness after all) and when would the NFL play if most players took Sundays off?

A lot is made of the culture war in America on issues such as gay marriage and abortion, but if we look just at holiness- being separate from the world- it appears to me that we’ve already lost as competition and fame have won out over our convictions. (How many in your congregation miss church on Sundays during softball or soccer tournament season?)

Right before Liddell ran in the 400m finals, a note was handed to him quoting 1 Samuel 2:30, “Those who honor me I will honor.” As you watch the Olympics ask yourself, who are you honoring?

Either Or

Frank
You cannot be compassionate without accepting.
You cannot serve without enabling.
You cannot forgive without being tolerant.
You cannot challenge without judging.
You cannot preach the Gospel without condemning.
You cannot promote something without opposing something else.
Religion divides, politics unites under causes.
Politics divides, religion unites under causes.
You cannot follow Jesus without voting _________

Do any of these seem unreasonable to you? They all sound perfectly logical and have just enough truth to believe. But they are all lies that Satan has used to have us argue that either politics and religion are one in the same or that one cannot have anything to do with the other. And we buy into the lies and divide our churches and our society along lines drawn by politics.

I was browsing through a couple of websites last night, from each side of the political aisle, both claiming to be Christian. I could not believe the hate and divisiveness that permeated every topic, every discussion. Each side assumes that you cannot be for a Social Justice gospel without voting a certain way, nor can you be against immorality in our culture without voting a certain way. Is it possible to  be compassionate yet still hold a high standard of morality?

One side argues that Jesus hung out with sinners, never preached about politics, and had in his small group of apostles an insurrectionist and a swindler. Oh and of course, his first miracle involved alcohol.

The other side argues that Jesus preached morality and religious purity and called his followers to repentance.

Why can’t both be true? So long as politics gives us a choice of either/or between two candidates, we assume the same applies to our religion. Jesus didn’t preach about politics even though he lived under an empire that promoted infanticide and embraced homosexuality because he cared more about how we live than how we vote. Any one of the Gospel writers could have added commentary to fit their political views but they didn’t. God gave his Law to the Israelites not to make them morally superior, but to separate them from the world around them. So following Christ is about how we live, separate from the world’s values; not about how we vote or what social cause we embrace.

But this does not mean to throw away your politics, rather it is a call to not put your faith in it. Instead put your politics into action:

  • Are you pro-life? Then love the unwed mother, accept her when her family rejects her.
  • Are you for the sanctity of marriage? Then remember the commands to keep the marriage bed pure, the definition of love in 1 Corinthians 13, that marriage is as much about love as it is respect and that divorce is as much, if not more, a threat to the traditional family as gay marriage.
  • Do you preach against the immorality in our culture? Then preach against every sin, from gossip to gluttony, with the same amount of bile and venom you spew against the gay community.
  • Do you embrace and accept homosexuals? Then remember that although Jesus did not condemn the woman caught in adultery he commanded her to leave her life of sin.
  • Are you compassionate towards the downtrodden, doing what you can to heal? Recall Jesus’ words to the man healed by the pool to stop sinning or something worse may happen.
  • Do you believe that our nation is a Christian nation? Then remember that you are citizens of Christ’s Kingdom first and that the first command of the Kingdom of God that Jesus ushered in was to repent.
  • Remember that someone’s station in life may have come about because of sin, yet it is an opportunity for the work of God to be displayed.
  • And before you judge the speck in another’s eye, remember the plank in your own.

Unlike politics, following Jesus is not an either/or proposition; it is all or nothing.

Who You Are Is What You Wear

Frank

What identifies you? Are you labeled by the logo on your clothes? In sports, we become part of the nameless mob of thousands attending a game. But if you put on that jersey of your favorite player, you are now identified as either old-school- sporting throwbacks, naive- wearing a jersey of a player just traded to the hated rivals, loyal- wearing a jersey that doesn’t need a name on the back, band-wagoner- wearing the best-seller, or an out-of-towner- wearing the jersey of the opposing team. In a heated rivalry, that last one can get you in trouble. Bryan Stow was identified by his Giants jersey at a Los Angeles Dodgers game and was beaten nearly to death for it. He was not identified by his name, his career, his family, or even his race. He was judged merely by the shirt he was wearing.

Yet as heated as the Dodgers-Giants rivalry goes, it does not begin to compare with one of the oldest rivalries in soccer (er, football), the Old Firm in Glasgow, Scotland between the Celts and Rangers. In that rivalry, the kit you wear does not just identify you as a fan of either team, it labels you as Catholic or Protestant, Irish or British. The 100-plus year rivalry is marked by employment discrimination (the Rangers would not employ any Catholics until the 90’s), sectarian taunts, mob violence, and most recently mail bombs. Sure the competition is heated which contributes (Last year’s final match between the two was postponed until the Rangers clinched the Scotland Premier League title so that less would be at stake. The two teams have occupied the top two spots in their league every year but one since 1995.) but the hatred goes far beyond the final score.

Yet despite the rift between religions, the dispute isn’t about the Pope, views on homosexuality, or any real doctrinal issue. Here, religion identifies your background, your nationality, your culture. It doesn’t matter if you never even attend church, if you cheer for the Celts you are Catholic, Irish, and an immigrant. Funny how much you can learn about someone just by the team he roots for.

So Catholic/Protestant has been reduced to cultural identifiers more than religious. I fear the same is happening in this country. Call yourself a Christian in certain parts of this country and that instantly means you’re white, Republican, homophobic, and anti-science. If you challenge the assumption and say you vote Democrat, then you’re Social-Gospel and progressive. More broadly, just based on the numbers, if you even call yourself an American then it’s safe to assume you are also Christian. Of course our doctrines, politics, and behaviors are more nuanced yet “Christian” has become more a cultural definition than any statement towards one’s beliefs or activities. Just like wearing a jersey to a game, I can assume a lot about you by calling you a Christian.

But about that label; it’s not political, it’s not racial, it’s not even doctrinal. The name identifies you with Christ. Wearing a Giants jersey does not make you part of the team. Yet calling ourselves Christians does identify us with Christ. It is that identity that should matter most. I don’t only root for Christ, I’m on his team.

“You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:26-28)

Here’s the irony of the bomb threats in the Old Firm rivalry: the next time they play is Easter Sunday.

Flashback Friday: What was Old is New Again

Frank

***Originally posted December 17, 2009. Reposted because A Charlie Brown Christmas aired this week. I’m a sucker for Charlie Brown holiday specials, but especially this one. You think the “war on Christmas” is bad now? You should’ve been around when this special was first aired. And there’s a link buried at the end of this post that is worth clicking on as well. The outrage wasn’t limited to Charlie Brown, it also extended all the way to space with the Apollo Program.***

“What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.” (Ecclesiastes 1:9)

We’re at the heart of the Christmas season, which means we’re in the thick of the “War on Christmas” and are inundated by the overreaction to this “war”. For some reason we think our circumstances are unique. We look around and think our culture’s morals are worse than they have ever been. And we are hyper-sensitive to criticism or even just contrary opinions. And for some reason, the image we often portray is that of the 1950’s white picket fence America where ‘Christians were Christians, and non-Christians were too.” But not long after this utopia was the upheaval of the 1960’s. Darn hippies.

Tuesday night ABC aired A Charlie Brown Christmas, the second-longest running Christmas special on Network Television (beat out by only a year by Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer) which first aired in 1965. I’m not ashamed to admit we bought the box set of Charlie Brown holiday specials a year ago and we’ve already practically worn them out. My children are quick to run up and press play after any movie finishes, but sometime the menu screen isn’t the ‘top menu’ but is the menu for Special Features. These Charlie Brown DVDs are an example of this. So they come running in wanting me to fix it, because what 4 and 2 year old wants to watch a “making of…”?

The first time this happened I was surprised as they were talking about the negative backlash they received for having the nerve to quote scripture (Linus’ famous reading of Luke 2). Producer/director/and snoopy actor Bill Melendez tried to talk Peanuts creator Charles Schulz out of including the scripture. CBS executives were hesitant to air it. And the public response was as expected.

This was in 1965. It could be argued we have much greater freedom today when we televangelists can be found on multiple channels, political pundits on both sides of the aisle who aren’t afraid to reference their religion, and movies such as The Passion of the Christ being commercial successes. Yet we still feel this insecurity whenever anyone has a different opinion than what we consider “mainstream Christianity” which some of us believe should dominate our culture and every facet of society.

For those of you fighting in the latest go-around of the War on Christmas, hearken back to 1965 (or 1968) and remember than “nothing is new under the sun.”

Tricks (and Treats) are for Kids!

Frank

With one major Fall holiday down, there’s one to go before Christmas, which means stores should already be stocked with Christmas decorations, parents are beginning to stock up and hide away presents for their little ones, and the “Keep Christ in Christmas” crowd is ramping up to full speed.

‘Tis officially the holiday season. Holiday, derived from Holy Day. Can’t really tell anymore looking at our consumer cultural landscape. Prior to having children, I was much more cynical towards the holidays, seeing them as nothing more than an attempt by the greeting card, toy, costume, and decoration industries to end their year in the black. Case in point, it is estimated up to $5 Billion (yes, with a B) was spent on Halloween this year (down from last, believe it or not). But going out with my young Iron Man and Minnie Mouse Princess last night and watching the joy in their faces as they went door-to-door, I’ve softened up my stance. Christmas and Easter I approach the same way- the kids don’t care about the etymology of holiday or how the Church blended pagan influences with their own doctrine to be relatable and supersede existing holidays- they just want to have fun (and eat candy, lots and lots of candy).

Yet of the three major holidays (leaving out Thanksgiving which exists for me on a whole other level), Halloween has always been a personal favorite. I love the effort put into costumes, carving pumpkins, and decorating. Maybe it’s the engineer in me. But as a Christian, there seem to be two approaches towards this holiday. Either participate but forbid costumes and themes that hint of the occult, or not participate at all. I’m honestly not sure which is better. As my son grows older, if he’s anything like me, he will look for the scariest costume he can find and run with it. I’m not sure how to cross that bridge when I get there. For now though, I’ll settle with Iron Man and Minne Mouse. And just from observation last night, superheroes and princesses outnumbered ghouls and goblins 2-to-1.

My question(s) of the week:

Did you celebrate Halloween last night? If so, how (basic door-to-door, haunted houses, fall festival, etc)?

Did you (or your kids) dress up? As what?

Flashback Friday: Walking in Another’s Shoes

Frank

***Originally posted on August 24, 2009. Posted in the wake of the Court overturning California’s Proposition 8. It’s been a while since I kicked this hornet’s nest…***

One of my goals with this blog is to be even-handed in my analysis and commentary, though I do have obvious religious and political beliefs. That doesn’t mean I’m not open to taking a different point of view. Walking in another’s shoes, so to speak, and these two articles do just that. They both highlight how one’s worldview impacts their decisions. By reading these articles, I gained a great deal of respect for both men because they are consistent in applying their worldview, something I seldom see in the present culture-war.

The first is about Ted Olson, a conservative lawyer who is fighting to overturn Proposition 8 in California. His defense of gay-marriage is based on his conservative principles to keep the government out of our personal lives. You can’t argue that he’s not consistent with his conservative view of government, in contrast to a conservative view of social moors taken by many politicians and activists. Now, I’m not about to change my opinion on gay-marriage. However, given the background in this article I will concede the point of “fundamental right” though I still worry about the “slippery slope” and disapprove the means by which homosexuals are trying to gain this right. (Specifically, not responding to Prop 8 with a proposition of their own and instead throwing a legal hissy fit)

The second article is about the “abortion evangelist” (gotta love the sensationalist headlines) LeRoy Carhart. I don’t approve of his practice, but I understand his motivation for providing it. I also admire that he does stick to his guns. In one example, “Carhart asked her what she would do if she had to carry the baby to term. ‘She didn’t say she was going to kill herself,’ he says. ‘She said she would put it up [for adoption].’ He turned her away..” I do regret that he feels the way he does about his own safety. I hope he realizes that not everyone who is opposed to abortion wants him dead. But given the slant of the article, I don’t expect that perspective to be conveyed. What is also important to glean from this article is how tragic abortion really is and that criminalizing it only marginalizes those who “need” (I hesitate using that word, but I think it’s appropriate here) the service. The real war against abortion needs to be against this need (“abortion should be available, but rare”). Think simple supply-demand economics. Legal restrictions to abortion reduce the supply which only increases the cost (emotional and physical in addition to financial) to women. Instead, the demand needs to be brought down. And no, I believe showing pictures of fetuses to women entering a clinic is too late to have any measurable effect. Instead the preciousness of life (via Scripture) needs to be emphasized alongside the value of reserving sex for marriage. There is a moral case for family planning.

In both of these cases, it can be seen how their careers are guided by their respective worldviews. But neither worldview is Biblical. Get Religion points out that the profile of Ted Olson only mentions that Olson is “not a regular churchgoer”, and Newsweek fails to mention any religious affiliation of Carhart. Yet, while we may not agree with them, we should take the lesson that our lives should be guided by some particular worldview. As Christians, our worldview should be built on being Christ-like and “what would Jesus do?” I also think it is important to be open-minded and respectful of others’ worldviews. I linked these two articles above despite my being against both cases. It is always important to see the other side of an argument. That may sound wishy-washy, but I’m not saying “we can both be right” or “truth is relative”. Instead I’m saying that I disagree with, but respect your opinion, just as you are free to disagree with mine.

Converter

Frank

My wife and I have been fortunate in the last couple of weeks to baptize a couple of our friends into Christ. Leading up to the first baptism, I was telling someone I was with that I needed to leave for a Bible study. When asked what about, I stumbled for an answer and said, “conversion.” (wrongly thinking that the arbitrary titles given to our studies are meaningless unless you’re in them) Naturally, that answer raised an eyebrow. The word conversion has negative connotations bringing images of the Crusades, cliches like converting the heathens, and highlights one of the most common negative images of Christianity in our culture- that we’re right and everyone else is wrong.

The book unChristian uses several surveys, many by Barna Research, to identify preconceptions and misconceptions of “outsiders” and Christians, respectively. (I share the author’s hesitancy in using the term “outsiders” because it is a loaded term, but is most illustrative of the purpose behind the study) A chapter titled, Get Saved!, brings the attitudes towards conversion to light. A telling number, emblematic of the disconnect between Christianity and our culture, is that “only one-third of young outsiders believe that Christians genuinely care about them.” While, “64 percent of Christians… believe that outsiders would perceive their efforts as genuine.”

Love-bombing visitors then dropping them like bad habits once they become full-fledged members of the church is all too common and only adds to this stereotype. The attitude of “I’m right and you’re wrong, so therefore you’re going to Hell” that is portrayed when we try and share our faith doesn’t help this image any either. Add to that the infighting and competition for numbers within and between churches and you begin to see why outsiders would have a polar opposite opinion of our intentions.

While the word conversion may sound holier-than-thou, it shouldn’t. Think of the word. Conversion means change. You need a power converter when traveling overseas so that you can use your hair-dryer (120 V) in foreign wall sockets (220 V). You need to convert electricity from alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC) to use most electronics. In both of these cases, the electricity is changed into something useful. It is still electricity, but is put in a form that we can use.

Religious conversion is really the same thing. It’s not about “I’m right, you’re wrong.” It is about being changed into something useful to God. Jesus told Nicodemus, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.” (John 3:3) Being born again implies a new creation, i.e. change. Ironically, Barna defines a “born-again Christian” as one who has only “accepted Jesus Christ as their personal savior.” The term “Evangelical” narrows down this definition by adding the conditions of “1) saying their faith is very important in their life today; 2)believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; 3) believing that Satan exists; 4) believing their eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works; 5) believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; 6)asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches; 7) describing God as the all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today.” Neither of these definitions say anything about change, even though Jesus said, “unless…”

Paul instructs us to “be transformed” (Romans 12:2) and reminds us that “if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” (2 Corinthians 5:17). That is conversion. That’s why I so appreciate the ministry of Paul Washer (Heartcry Missionary Society- see link on the sidebar). His emphasis is that simply praying the Sinner’s Prayer doesn’t convert you. Without evidence of change brought about by the Holy Spirit, can you really argue that you’ve been converted? I always joke that praying Jesus into your heart works. It’s just that once Jesus is there, he’s hanging out asking “now what?”

So when I share my faith, of course I want to convert them. But that doesn’t mean I want them to conform to my way of thinking, or my personal theology/doctrine/denominationalism. It means I want to see the Holy Spirit come into their lives and change them. Maybe that is still judgemental, thinking that they even need change. But I see addiction, abuse, selfishness, and pride on a daily basis. Our media drowns us with greed and lust. I see no evidence in the world-at-large to make me believe that others don’t need change. I can’t do it. I can only offer it. I’m nothing special. But Jesus Christ is.

Converter

Frank

My wife and I have been fortunate in the last couple of weeks to baptize a couple of our friends into Christ. Leading up to the first baptism, I was telling someone I was with that I needed to leave for a Bible study. When asked what about, I stumbled for an answer and said, “conversion.” (wrongly thinking that the arbitrary titles given to our studies are meaningless unless you’re in them) Naturally, that answer raised an eyebrow. The word conversion has negative connotations bringing images of the Crusades, cliches like converting the heathens, and highlights one of the most common negative images of Christianity in our culture- that we’re right and everyone else is wrong.

The book unChristian uses several surveys, many by Barna Research, to identify preconceptions and misconceptions of “outsiders” and Christians, respectively. (I share the author’s hesitancy in using the term “outsiders” because it is a loaded term, but is most illustrative of the purpose behind the study) A chapter titled, Get Saved!, brings the attitudes towards conversion to light. A telling number, emblematic of the disconnect between Christianity and our culture, is that “only one-third of young outsiders believe that Christians genuinely care about them.” While, “64 percent of Christians… believe that outsiders would perceive their efforts as genuine.”

Love-bombing visitors then dropping them like bad habits once they become full-fledged members of the church is all too common and only adds to this stereotype. The attitude of “I’m right and you’re wrong, so therefore you’re going to Hell” that is portrayed when we try and share our faith doesn’t help this image any either. Add to that the infighting and competition for numbers within and between churches and you begin to see why outsiders would have a polar opposite opinion of our intentions.

While the word conversion may sound holier-than-thou, it shouldn’t. Think of the word. Conversion means change. You need a power converter when traveling overseas so that you can use your hair-dryer (120 V) in foreign wall sockets (220 V). You need to convert electricity from alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC) to use most electronics. In both of these cases, the electricity is changed into something useful. It is still electricity, but is put in a form that we can use.

Religious conversion is really the same thing. It’s not about “I’m right, you’re wrong.” It is about being changed into something useful to God. Jesus told Nicodemus, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.” (John 3:3) Being born again implies a new creation, i.e. change. Ironically, Barna defines a “born-again Christian” as one who has only “accepted Jesus Christ as their personal savior.” The term “Evangelical” narrows down this definition by adding the conditions of “1) saying their faith is very important in their life today; 2)believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; 3) believing that Satan exists; 4) believing their eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works; 5) believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; 6)asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches; 7) describing God as the all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today.” Neither of these definitions say anything about change, even though Jesus said, “unless…”

Paul instructs us to “be transformed” (Romans 12:2) and reminds us that “if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” (2 Corinthians 5:17). That is conversion. That’s why I so appreciate the ministry of Paul Washer (Heartcry Missionary Society- see link on the sidebar). His emphasis is that simply praying the Sinner’s Prayer doesn’t convert you. Without evidence of change brought about by the Holy Spirit, can you really argue that you’ve been converted? I always joke that praying Jesus into your heart works. It’s just that once Jesus is there, he’s hanging out asking “now what?”

So when I share my faith, of course I want to convert them. But that doesn’t mean I want them to conform to my way of thinking, or my personal theology/doctrine/denominationalism. It means I want to see the Holy Spirit come into their lives and change them. Maybe that is still judgemental, thinking that they even need change. But I see addiction, abuse, selfishness, and pride on a daily basis. Our media drowns us with greed and lust. I see no evidence in the world-at-large to make me believe that others don’t need change. I can’t do it. I can only offer it. I’m nothing special. But Jesus Christ is.