Flashback Friday: Converter

***This week’s flashback is inspired by this awesome post from The Church of No People. On the same subject, it is worth linking Jonathan Sigmon writing at Relevant Magazine and John Shore writing the opposite POV at Huffington Post.***

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.

Flashback Friday: Take me out to the ballgame

***Originally posted 8/02/08. Posted again in honor of the Midsummer Classic and the upcoming trading deadline (the hot stove is as much fun to follow as baseball itself, IMO)***

So we’re now officially in the playoff race with the passing of the trading deadline. Just a couple no-name players got moved. I mean, who’s this Manny Ramirez guy anyway? And Ken Griffey Jr? Who does he think he is, Ken Griffey Sr? Of course I’m kidding. But in the spirit of trying to get away from my obsession with politics, I want to instead focus on my greatest passion here on earth, baseball. And of course, I’ll make it relevant.

In college, I was given the opportunity to lead a small group Bible study. I was filling in for the brother who would usually lead and he left me with this valuable advice, “do whatever you want.” Of course, as a young Christian that was intimidating since all I knew was what we’ve done before. But I was tempted to think outside of the box. The Fellowship of Christian Athletes had Dave Dravecky as a speaker that same night. Besides the “pitch heard ’round the world,” he was a well known inspirational speaker and was very open about his faith. In 2004 he wrote the book Called Up, which I still need to get around to reading. But like I said, all I knew was what we’ve always done before. So I regret to this day not going, and instead offered a re-hashed discussion on one of Jesus’ parables which everyone had heard before.

There’s another book that’s recently been released that I want to get my hands on too, called Free Byrd by Paul Byrd and John Smoltz. Smoltzie you’ve probably heard of but if the name Paul Byrd doesn’t sound familiar, do a Google search of Paul Byrd and HGH. That’s right, you could lump him in with “roid heads” like Barry Bonds. But instead of being all surly to the public and press following getting busted, he’s instead been openly repentant and just as open about how his faith has seen him through.

But this isn’t just a book review either. Kathy Orton, over at her [now defunct] Praying Fields blog at the On Faith online community has several blog posts related to baseball including an interview with Luke Scott, pitcher for the Baltimore Orioles.

And if that doesn’t inspire you to follow the pennant races, let me finish with a couple of songs. No, not Take Me Out to the Ballgame, written by a couple of guys who hadn’t ever seen a game. But a couple more heartfelt and spiritual.

The First Ballgame
Lyrics by Johnny Mercer, 1947

My sermon today
Said the Reverend Jones
Is baseball and whence it came
If you take the Good Book And you take a good look
You will find the first baseball game

It says Eve stole first
And Adam second
Solomon umpired the game
Rebecca went to the well with the pitcher
And Ruth in the field made a name

Goliath was struck out by David
A base hit made on Abel by Cain
And the Prodigal Son made a great home run
Brother Noah gave checks out for rain

Now ole St Pete was checking errors
Also had charge of the gate
Salome sacrificed Big John the Baptist
Who wound up ahead on the plate

Delilah was pitching to Samson
When he brought down the house with a clout
And the Angels that day made a double play
That’s when Adam and Eve were thrown out

Now Jonah wailed and went down swinging
Later her popped up again
A line drive by old Nebuchadnezzar
Made Daniel warm up in the pen

Satan was pitching that apple
It looked as though he might fan them all
But then Joshua let go with a mighty
And he blasted one right at the wall
Shoutin come along and let’s play ball

Life is a Ballgame
Sister Wynona Carr © 1952

Life is a ballgame
Bein‘ played each day
Life is a ballgame
Everybody can play
Jesus is standin‘ at home plate
Waitin‘ for you there
Life is a ballgame, but
You’ve got to play it fair.

First base is temptation,
The second base is sin
Third base tribulation
If you pass you can make it in
Ol‘ man Solomon is the umpire
And Satan is pitchin the game
He’ll do his best to strike you out
Keep playin‘ just the same.

Daniel was the first to bat
You know he prayed three times a day
When Satan threw him a fast ball
You know he hit it anyway
Job came in the next inning
Satan struck him in every way,
But Job he hit a home run
And came on in that day.

Prayer will be your strong bat
To hit at Satan’s ball
And when you start to swing it
You’ve got to give it your all in all
Faith will be your catcher
On him you can depend
And Jesus is standing at Home Plate
Just waitin for you to come in.

Moses is standin‘ on the side lines
Just waitin to be called
And when he parted the Red Sea
He gave Christ is all-in-all
John came in the ninth inning
When the game was almost done
Then God gave John a vision
And he knew he’d all ready won.

Flashback Friday: Jesus is my Campaign Manager

***Originally posted 10/23/08. Posted today in light of a radio station pulling support for a Christian music festival for inviting Jim Wallis as a speaker in addition to my debate with Sojourners on Twitter and in my post on Monday.***

I made the mistake last night at church talking politics with one of my friends. Actually, she brought up how she can’t wait for it all to be over; she’s tired of hearing the same arguments over and over. Then she said something that totally boggled me. She commented on how Jesus never talked about abortion or homosexuality. Now I understand where she was coming from. The Religious Right is too narrowly focused on these issues above all else. But the case she makes doesn’t apply to her point. She commented on how the world was more “jacked up” in Jesus’ day, yet he didn’t bring up these issues. The Romans practiced infanticide, but Jesus didn’t say anything against it. Homosexuality was common in pagan worship and temple prostitution, but Jesus didn’t say anything against it. Well first of all, Jesus ministered to the Jews who lived in and around Jerusalem. He never went to Rome or Corinth or associated with Greek prostitutes. So why would he bring these subjects up? But here’s a twist on the argument. Slaves were present all around Jesus’ ministry. In fact, the Old Testament gives instructions regarding slavery. And Jesus never said a word about the practice. Should that mean that slavery is not a religious issue of concern to Christians? Someone should’ve told that to William Wilberforce.

I mentioned that and she side-stepped it by then saying that Jesus never preached politics anyway. Well yes, and no. His comment on “giv[ing] to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s” was both a theological and political statement since Caesar claimed divinity. At the same time, he didn’t take any side to the dismay of the religious leaders. The same was true when Jesus instructed his disciples how to pray by saying “Our Father, who is in heaven, hallowed be your name.” The first comment personalized the God of the tetragrammaton, YHWH, which would’ve upset the religious leaders, but followed that up by praising his name which usurped the divinity of Caesar. If anything, his politics were indirect. But because he wasn’t the political leader many thought the Messiah should’ve been, it was easy to entice Judas to betray him.

The extension of my friend’s argument, that she didn’t mention, was that Jesus preached about the poor more than anything else, so that should be a political priority. I don’t disagree, except for the political aspect of it. Jim Wallis, in his book God’s Politics, dedicates a section in his first chapter titled, “The Political Problem of Jesus” and then goes on to turn Jesus’ teaching into a political argument. This is where I disagree with him. I don’t believe that because Jesus said to “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” that that should apply to foreign policy. That is a personal command. Not a political one. And there’s a difference between being under attack and persecuted. But he argues that if a political leader claims to be a Christian, then they should apply that to their politics. I agree that faith should guide morality applied through politics. But to apply faith directly to politics turns this pluralistic country into a theocracy, which I believe Jesus would’ve opposed. A political leader needs to consider the big picture and the good of the country and balance that not against, but rather on, their faith. In other words, their faith should be the fulcrum of their lever, not one side of the balancing act.

Back to the personal aspect of Jesus’ teachings. His commentaries on the poor, lack of explicit political stances, and teachings on the Kingdom of Heaven are personal, not national. So we can’t apply “love your enemies” or “blessed are the peacemakers” to policy. That’s not to say I’m pro-war. But whether or not to go and participate in war is a personal decision that would have to be informed by a personal faith. Whereas the decision to engage in war on the national level must be policy driven. At the same time, I believe our Freedom of Speech also obligates us to speak out against war if our conscience leads us to.

This would then imply that a Christian politician cannot effectively hold an office and still keep Jesus first and God above all. And I think there’s truth to that. That’s why I’m suspicious of any politician who says I should vote for him or her because of their faith. And that’s also why I don’t expect our moral problems to be “fixed” via politics, but instead through individual Christians actively living out their convictions.

As for abortion and homosexuality, I told my friend that sin is still sin. That doesn’t mean that morality at that level should be legislated. But if my vote gives me a voice, I want to cast it to make a statement of my faith. And that is what I will continue to wrestle with up to, and beyond, November 4.

Flashback Friday: 4th of July

***Originally posted for the 4th of July, 2007. Enjoy your freedoms this weekend. I’ll be enjoying mine camping and worshiping the God of Creation.***

Last Sunday for communion I shared about freedom and what that means to us as Christians. I was inspired after talking with one of my friends who was concerned about the lack of “true worship” in our church and reminded me that God freed the Israelites from Egypt specifically so that they could worship him. So freedom and worship go hand in hand. The wheels in my head started turning and out came this:

Wednesday is the fourth of July. A day to celebrate the birth of our country and the freedoms we have. But how does that relate to us, this morning, as we’re gathered to worship our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? First of all, we’ve heard from this podium before, in fact I’m sure I’ve even said it myself from up here, that we should be grateful to God that we have the freedom to gather together to worship him without fear of death, injury, or persecution. We are guaranteed the freedom to worship publicly. But we’re also given the freedom to worship as we choose. And that’s a part that I think is often forgotten. If you look at the history of this country many of those who first settled here did so so that they could worship they way they wanted to: Quakers, Puritans, Catholics, and others all came to this land because they were required to worship a certain way where they came from and were persecuted for not doing so. So today we have the freedom to worship however we want to. This freedom enabled the different Great Awakening periods as well as the Restoration Movement that we owe our history to. So without this part of our freedom, we may have been able to worship publicly, but it’s unlikely we’d be worshiping in this church.

But this isn’t a patriotic rant or an historical lesson. I’m here worship our Lord through communion. Remembering the sacrifice of Jesus. And that’s where I want to turn our attention. God has consistently used the freedom of his people for worship. Mishach, Shadrach, and Abendigo were thrown in the fire for not worshiping how they were told. And then saved so that they could freely worship the one true God. The Jews in exile with both Ezra and Nehemiah were freed so that they could worship God in Jerusalem by rebuilding the temple and then rebuilding the wall. And probably most explicitly, God freed the Jews in Egypt so they could worship him freely. In Exodus 7:16, when Moses was confronting Pharaoh, God instructed Moses to say, “The LORD, the God of the Hebrews, has sent me to say to you: Let my people go, so that they may worship me in the desert.” And that reason did not change as Moses continued to confront him through all the plagues.

It is no different for us today following Jesus. Jesus died so that we would be freed from the slavery of our sin. But he also died to free us from the religious tradition that ruled his day. Just because our country allows us to worship however we like, doesn’t mean we should. Paul said not to use our freedom as an excuse to indulge in sin. In the same way, we can’t use our freedom to worship as an excuse to make up our own traditions, our own rules, or bind old traditions to others arbitrarily. Please turn to John 4. Starting in verse 19, we read…

“Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”

Jesus declared, “Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.”

The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”

Then Jesus declared, “I who speak to you am he.” (John 4:19:26)

To worship in spirit and in truth. That’s what Jesus died for and what we need to reflect upon when we celebrate our freedom. Are we worshiping in spirit and in truth? With the hundreds of denominations that exist today, I’d argue that we’re not. With the countless traditions, expectations, and doctrines that continue to divide, I am certain that we’re not. This morning I want to call us to a higher standard, to worship our Lord in Spirit and in Truth.

So I left it hanging. What does it mean to worship in Spirit and Truth? Does it mean ecumenism, seeker-friendly services, Power Point slides, instrumental music or a-capella, emerging churches, speaking in tongues, etc, etc? I’ll leave it to you the reader to search this out for yourself. Let me know what you find.

Flashback Friday: 4th of July

***Originally posted for the 4th of July, 2007. Enjoy your freedoms this weekend. I’ll be enjoying mine camping and worshiping the God of Creation.***

Last Sunday for communion I shared about freedom and what that means to us as Christians. I was inspired after talking with one of my friends who was concerned about the lack of “true worship” in our church and reminded me that God freed the Israelites from Egypt specifically so that they could worship him. So freedom and worship go hand in hand. The wheels in my head started turning and out came this:

Wednesday is the fourth of July. A day to celebrate the birth of our country and the freedoms we have. But how does that relate to us, this morning, as we’re gathered to worship our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? First of all, we’ve heard from this podium before, in fact I’m sure I’ve even said it myself from up here, that we should be grateful to God that we have the freedom to gather together to worship him without fear of death, injury, or persecution. We are guaranteed the freedom to worship publicly. But we’re also given the freedom to worship as we choose. And that’s a part that I think is often forgotten. If you look at the history of this country many of those who first settled here did so so that they could worship they way they wanted to: Quakers, Puritans, Catholics, and others all came to this land because they were required to worship a certain way where they came from and were persecuted for not doing so. So today we have the freedom to worship however we want to. This freedom enabled the different Great Awakening periods as well as the Restoration Movement that we owe our history to. So without this part of our freedom, we may have been able to worship publicly, but it’s unlikely we’d be worshiping in this church.

But this isn’t a patriotic rant or an historical lesson. I’m here worship our Lord through communion. Remembering the sacrifice of Jesus. And that’s where I want to turn our attention. God has consistently used the freedom of his people for worship. Mishach, Shadrach, and Abendigo were thrown in the fire for not worshiping how they were told. And then saved so that they could freely worship the one true God. The Jews in exile with both Ezra and Nehemiah were freed so that they could worship God in Jerusalem by rebuilding the temple and then rebuilding the wall. And probably most explicitly, God freed the Jews in Egypt so they could worship him freely. In Exodus 7:16, when Moses was confronting Pharaoh, God instructed Moses to say, “The LORD, the God of the Hebrews, has sent me to say to you: Let my people go, so that they may worship me in the desert.” And that reason did not change as Moses continued to confront him through all the plagues.

It is no different for us today following Jesus. Jesus died so that we would be freed from the slavery of our sin. But he also died to free us from the religious tradition that ruled his day. Just because our country allows us to worship however we like, doesn’t mean we should. Paul said not to use our freedom as an excuse to indulge in sin. In the same way, we can’t use our freedom to worship as an excuse to make up our own traditions, our own rules, or bind old traditions to others arbitrarily. Please turn to John 4. Starting in verse 19, we read…

“Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”

Jesus declared, “Believe me, woman, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.”

The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”

Then Jesus declared, “I who speak to you am he.” (John 4:19:26)

To worship in spirit and in truth. That’s what Jesus died for and what we need to reflect upon when we celebrate our freedom. Are we worshiping in spirit and in truth? With the hundreds of denominations that exist today, I’d argue that we’re not. With the countless traditions, expectations, and doctrines that continue to divide, I am certain that we’re not. This morning I want to call us to a higher standard, to worship our Lord in Spirit and in Truth.

So I left it hanging. What does it mean to worship in Spirit and Truth? Does it mean ecumenism, seeker-friendly services, Power Point slides, instrumental music or a-capella, emerging churches, speaking in tongues, etc, etc? I’ll leave it to you the reader to search this out for yourself. Let me know what you find.

Flashback Friday: Sanctuary

***Originally posted in September 2007. Updated because of the recent immigration law passed in Arizona which will likely be challenged by the Administration.***

Do you remember Elvira Arellano? She was an illegal immigrant who made headlines in fall of 2007 for claiming sanctuary in a Chicago church. This headline led me to study my Bible about the role of sanctuary cities and a word study on refuge. Then time flied and I never finished that study. At the time, the debate over illegal immigration died down, although as current (2010) headlines show the debate never went away. But that post then (2007) wasn’t going to be about her, but about what role should our churches play in this debate?

Also in the fall of 2007, the city of Simi Valley sent a bill of $40,000.00 to a local church for the police required to keep order during a protest outside their doors. The protest wasn’t organized by them, wasn’t planned by them, and really wasn’t even participated in by them. But the rationale was that since their actions, by allowing an illegal immigrant to seek refuge in their church, they incited the protest and that they should be the ones held responsible. Yeah, that made perfect sense.

If this would have held up, it would have set a dangerous precedent for the church. Would a church be held financially responsible if there’s a protest on their stance against homosexuality? Or what if a synagogue is vandalized with anti-Semitic tagging, would you hold them responsible? At the time, most agreed that this was an infringement on that church’s First Amendment right and a ploy to passive-aggressively stake their ground on the illegal immigration debate.

But that wasn’t really the point of this either. Is this something we, the church, Christ’s ambassadors, should be getting involved in? There’s no legal standard for a church being a sanctuary for fugitives. Rather it’s an unwritten rule, kind of like fighting on Holy Ground in Highlander. But what’s the history behind it? Obviously our country began as a refuge for many seeking religious freedom. The motivation behind the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment was to keep the government from dictating a state religion so any faith could be practiced freely. Churches were central as sanctuaries pre-abolition just as they were involved during the Civil Rights Movement. So there’s historical precedent. But is there Biblical precedent?

When settling in Israel, the refugees from Egypt were given instructions by God to set aside “sanctuary cities”. These were cities where one could flee if accused of murder so that their case could be heard by the elders before they were killed in revenge. The fine print though, was that they had to be innocent. Romans instructs us that we should obey the law of the land because every authority on Earth is there but for the grace of God. So is it right for a church to be a sanctuary for someone breaking the law, even if we don’t agree with that law?

Another refugee from authorities wrote many Psalms about God being his only refuge. David was being hunted down and though he lived in caves and some towns let him hide, he knew that his only refuge was God Almighty.

But we are also commanded not to “oppress an alien; you yourselves know how it feels to be aliens, because you were aliens in Egypt.” (Exodus 23:9) And let’s not forget about the Good Samaritan, a foreigner. We also read in James, “Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?” (James 2:15-16)

So what should we do? Where’s the line between giving to a “foreigner” in need and giving them employment? Where’s the line between being sympathetic to illegal immigrants and offering your church as a sanctuary? First, we need to heed to existing laws. Second, we need to reach out to meet the needs of those who are here illegally. They’re here for a reason, after all; Mexico is an absolute mess between its economy, political corruption, and rampant violence between rival drug lords. Finally third, we need to be careful not to skate on the thin ice of the hot political topic du jour. We need to let our lights shine, be the salt of the earth, and represent Christ in all we do. My question for all those “safe churches”, are you doing everything you can to help the immigrant you’re harboring to get on a path to citizenship? What are the circumstances of him or her facing deportation (immigration officers have their hands too full to want to deport someone ‘just because’)? Or are you just seeking headlines?

Yes, families are affected, and depending on where you live chances are there’s someone in your congregation who is here illegally. But the church as an institution exists to meet the needs of its parishioners. In this case, that means helping them gain citizenship, legally. Sanctuary in the Bible requires innocence, and unfortunately none of us on either side of this debate are wholly innocent.

Flashback Friday: Sanctuary

***Originally posted in September 2007. Updated because of the recent immigration law passed in Arizona which will likely be challenged by the Administration.***

Do you remember Elvira Arellano? She was an illegal immigrant who made headlines in fall of 2007 for claiming sanctuary in a Chicago church. This headline led me to study my Bible about the role of sanctuary cities and a word study on refuge. Then time flied and I never finished that study. At the time, the debate over illegal immigration died down, although as current (2010) headlines show the debate never went away. But that post then (2007) wasn’t going to be about her, but about what role should our churches play in this debate?

Also in the fall of 2007, the city of Simi Valley sent a bill of $40,000.00 to a local church for the police required to keep order during a protest outside their doors. The protest wasn’t organized by them, wasn’t planned by them, and really wasn’t even participated in by them. But the rationale was that since their actions, by allowing an illegal immigrant to seek refuge in their church, they incited the protest and that they should be the ones held responsible. Yeah, that made perfect sense.

If this would have held up, it would have set a dangerous precedent for the church. Would a church be held financially responsible if there’s a protest on their stance against homosexuality? Or what if a synagogue is vandalized with anti-Semitic tagging, would you hold them responsible? At the time, most agreed that this was an infringement on that church’s First Amendment right and a ploy to passive-aggressively stake their ground on the illegal immigration debate.

But that wasn’t really the point of this either. Is this something we, the church, Christ’s ambassadors, should be getting involved in? There’s no legal standard for a church being a sanctuary for fugitives. Rather it’s an unwritten rule, kind of like fighting on Holy Ground in Highlander. But what’s the history behind it? Obviously our country began as a refuge for many seeking religious freedom. The motivation behind the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment was to keep the government from dictating a state religion so any faith could be practiced freely. Churches were central as sanctuaries pre-abolition just as they were involved during the Civil Rights Movement. So there’s historical precedent. But is there Biblical precedent?

When settling in Israel, the refugees from Egypt were given instructions by God to set aside “sanctuary cities”. These were cities where one could flee if accused of murder so that their case could be heard by the elders before they were killed in revenge. The fine print though, was that they had to be innocent. Romans instructs us that we should obey the law of the land because every authority on Earth is there but for the grace of God. So is it right for a church to be a sanctuary for someone breaking the law, even if we don’t agree with that law?

Another refugee from authorities wrote many Psalms about God being his only refuge. David was being hunted down and though he lived in caves and some towns let him hide, he knew that his only refuge was God Almighty.

But we are also commanded not to “oppress an alien; you yourselves know how it feels to be aliens, because you were aliens in Egypt.” (Exodus 23:9) And let’s not forget about the Good Samaritan, a foreigner. We also read in James, “Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?” (James 2:15-16)

So what should we do? Where’s the line between giving to a “foreigner” in need and giving them employment? Where’s the line between being sympathetic to illegal immigrants and offering your church as a sanctuary? First, we need to heed to existing laws. Second, we need to reach out to meet the needs of those who are here illegally. They’re here for a reason, after all; Mexico is an absolute mess between its economy, political corruption, and rampant violence between rival drug lords. Finally third, we need to be careful not to skate on the thin ice of the hot political topic du jour. We need to let our lights shine, be the salt of the earth, and represent Christ in all we do. My question for all those “safe churches”, are you doing everything you can to help the immigrant you’re harboring to get on a path to citizenship? What are the circumstances of him or her facing deportation (immigration officers have their hands too full to want to deport someone ‘just because’)? Or are you just seeking headlines?

Yes, families are affected, and depending on where you live chances are there’s someone in your congregation who is here illegally. But the church as an institution exists to meet the needs of its parishioners. In this case, that means helping them gain citizenship, legally. Sanctuary in the Bible requires innocence, and unfortunately none of us on either side of this debate are wholly innocent.

Flashback Friday: Marketing the Gospel

***Originally posted May, 2008. Relevant here as Skye Jethani’s The Divine Commodity and Jon Acuff’s Stuff Christians Like have moved towards the top of my reading list. Though I still haven’t read the book in this blog, unfortunately.***

As you wage battle in the Culture War, how do you arm yourself? This is an interesting question in an age of mass publicity, open hostility to Christianity, and an ever-increasing slippage in the morality of our society.

I spend a lot of time posting about politics as if that is the only front in the Culture War. But that’s not the case. It just happens that we’re in the midst of the election cycle, and there’s an endless supply of news relative to a Christian Worldview. However, I think too many “Evangelical” Christians believe that the Culture War should be fought in the political arena—Constitutional Amendments barring same-sex marriage, candidates pandering to the religious to gain votes, and so on. But there’s another disturbing trend in Evangelical circles, and that is trying to make Christianity marketable.

There’s an interesting book review over on Slate on “Rapture Ready!” a book describing the awkward marriage between Christianity and pop-culture. Since that’s a topic of great interest to me, this book has moved towards the top of my reading list. The review is right to point out that much of what passes for Christian pop-culture are just watered down rip-offs of what’s already available to the mass consumer. But the growth of this industry is tied to our commercial materialistic culture. Much of what is offered in this genre is meant to market the Gospel. While that’s not necessarily bad, what message does it send when the Gospel is presented as an inferior product? And what happens when the worldly materialism that we so try to avoid is overcome by materialism driven by a niche industry? Remember, they need to make money too.

And then there’s the faith that some Christians put in their pop-culture rather than in God alone. This can be seen in the home-schooling movement, but also can be related to our role as consumers. A coworker recently stated that the guy who opened Chick-fil-A is “cool” because he’s a Christian. No other reason given. Maybe no other reason is necessary. But I recall classmates in college who would devoutly eat Domino’s Pizza over any other brand because some of the profits would go towards Pro Life causes. I also remember a friend growing up whose record collection was filled with Stryper, Amy Grant, and Michael W Smith. And sadly, these were the only evidences of their faith.

Don’t get me wrong, none of these things are necessarily wrong in and of themselves, but we need to be careful what we put our faith in. We should certainly protect ourselves from the sin so prevalent in our culture, but I don’t believe that means we should create our own culture separate from the rest of the world. After all, how can we be the salt of the earth, if we refuse to interact within the world? That’s a fine line, granted, but at the same time a line that’s drawn differently for each and every Christian. I look to what Paul wrote in Romans 14 as a great example of how we should live as Christians in a multi-cultural society. “Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.” (Rom 14:1) Paul, in fact, quoted contemporary works to relate to others in Acts 17:28, 1 Cor 15:33, and Tit 1:12.

I don’t know if I fit in the mold of who the Christian marketplace is gearing their product towards. I love Quentin Tarantino movies, but find myself uncomfortable with the language and glorified violence. I consider Animal House classic cinema, but I would only watch the version edited for cable. Others would avoid these movies all together and might even call me a heathen. I accept that and I’m not about to invite a group of brothers over to watch something if I’m not sure they won’t struggle because of it (I did that once, and don’t intend to ever repeat it).

On the flipside, I used to avoid Christian Rock because I couldn’t stand the inferior production, the cheesy lyrics, and the self-righteous pious image projected by that industry. I’d much rather listen to Metallica than Stryper. But then someone pointed out to me that people who watch pornography don’t watch it because of the production value, they watch it because of the content. And I began to listen with a more open mind. There’s still some artists and songs I can’t tolerate, but I often find myself listening to either the Christian pop/rock station on XM or Air1 and being encouraged by songs praising my Lord or singing words of encouragement in a difficult, sinful world. For me, it’s become about the content, not the production. It’s about edification, not marketability. Yet I don’t expect every Christian to share my tastes.

So am I a “Christian consumer”? I don’t have cable, but I’m not going to judge someone who does. I wrestle with placing my children in the public school system. I play poker, watch R-rated movies and listen to rock music. I don’t own anything that says “WWJD” or have a Jesus-fish on my car. I watch Veggie Tales with my kids, and am building up a pretty large playlist of Christian music on my portable XM player. I own about a half-dozen Bibles and read secular comic books. I don’t shop conscious of where profits might be going or go out of my way to give my patronage to Christian businesses. I have trouble relating to the Evangelical “culture” as described in the above book, yet I have deep and strong convictions about the Greatest Commandment and about repenting of the sin in my heart that shows itself not as much by my actions, but through my character.

And yet here I am, just another Christian posting in the blogosphere. Maybe I relate more than I thought? Maybe I am buying what they’re selling.

Flashback Friday: Marketing the Gospel

***Originally posted May, 2008. Relevant here as Skye Jethani’s The Divine Commodity and Jon Acuff’s Stuff Christians Like have moved towards the top of my reading list. Though I still haven’t read the book in this blog, unfortunately.***

As you wage battle in the Culture War, how do you arm yourself? This is an interesting question in an age of mass publicity, open hostility to Christianity, and an ever-increasing slippage in the morality of our society.

I spend a lot of time posting about politics as if that is the only front in the Culture War. But that’s not the case. It just happens that we’re in the midst of the election cycle, and there’s an endless supply of news relative to a Christian Worldview. However, I think too many “Evangelical” Christians believe that the Culture War should be fought in the political arena—Constitutional Amendments barring same-sex marriage, candidates pandering to the religious to gain votes, and so on. But there’s another disturbing trend in Evangelical circles, and that is trying to make Christianity marketable.

There’s an interesting book review over on Slate on “Rapture Ready!” a book describing the awkward marriage between Christianity and pop-culture. Since that’s a topic of great interest to me, this book has moved towards the top of my reading list. The review is right to point out that much of what passes for Christian pop-culture are just watered down rip-offs of what’s already available to the mass consumer. But the growth of this industry is tied to our commercial materialistic culture. Much of what is offered in this genre is meant to market the Gospel. While that’s not necessarily bad, what message does it send when the Gospel is presented as an inferior product? And what happens when the worldly materialism that we so try to avoid is overcome by materialism driven by a niche industry? Remember, they need to make money too.

And then there’s the faith that some Christians put in their pop-culture rather than in God alone. This can be seen in the home-schooling movement, but also can be related to our role as consumers. A coworker recently stated that the guy who opened Chick-fil-A is “cool” because he’s a Christian. No other reason given. Maybe no other reason is necessary. But I recall classmates in college who would devoutly eat Domino’s Pizza over any other brand because some of the profits would go towards Pro Life causes. I also remember a friend growing up whose record collection was filled with Stryper, Amy Grant, and Michael W Smith. And sadly, these were the only evidences of their faith.

Don’t get me wrong, none of these things are necessarily wrong in and of themselves, but we need to be careful what we put our faith in. We should certainly protect ourselves from the sin so prevalent in our culture, but I don’t believe that means we should create our own culture separate from the rest of the world. After all, how can we be the salt of the earth, if we refuse to interact within the world? That’s a fine line, granted, but at the same time a line that’s drawn differently for each and every Christian. I look to what Paul wrote in Romans 14 as a great example of how we should live as Christians in a multi-cultural society. “Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.” (Rom 14:1) Paul, in fact, quoted contemporary works to relate to others in Acts 17:28, 1 Cor 15:33, and Tit 1:12.

I don’t know if I fit in the mold of who the Christian marketplace is gearing their product towards. I love Quentin Tarantino movies, but find myself uncomfortable with the language and glorified violence. I consider Animal House classic cinema, but I would only watch the version edited for cable. Others would avoid these movies all together and might even call me a heathen. I accept that and I’m not about to invite a group of brothers over to watch something if I’m not sure they won’t struggle because of it (I did that once, and don’t intend to ever repeat it).

On the flipside, I used to avoid Christian Rock because I couldn’t stand the inferior production, the cheesy lyrics, and the self-righteous pious image projected by that industry. I’d much rather listen to Metallica than Stryper. But then someone pointed out to me that people who watch pornography don’t watch it because of the production value, they watch it because of the content. And I began to listen with a more open mind. There’s still some artists and songs I can’t tolerate, but I often find myself listening to either the Christian pop/rock station on XM or Air1 and being encouraged by songs praising my Lord or singing words of encouragement in a difficult, sinful world. For me, it’s become about the content, not the production. It’s about edification, not marketability. Yet I don’t expect every Christian to share my tastes.

So am I a “Christian consumer”? I don’t have cable, but I’m not going to judge someone who does. I wrestle with placing my children in the public school system. I play poker, watch R-rated movies and listen to rock music. I don’t own anything that says “WWJD” or have a Jesus-fish on my car. I watch Veggie Tales with my kids, and am building up a pretty large playlist of Christian music on my portable XM player. I own about a half-dozen Bibles and read secular comic books. I don’t shop conscious of where profits might be going or go out of my way to give my patronage to Christian businesses. I have trouble relating to the Evangelical “culture” as described in the above book, yet I have deep and strong convictions about the Greatest Commandment and about repenting of the sin in my heart that shows itself not as much by my actions, but through my character.

And yet here I am, just another Christian posting in the blogosphere. Maybe I relate more than I thought? Maybe I am buying what they’re selling.