Friday, June 25, 2010

Everything’s Alright

Earlier this month, news of the destruction of the King of Kings statue at Solid Rock Church in Monroe, Ohio hit the national airwaves.  This statue, over 62 feet tall made of flammable fiberglass and Styrofoam was struck by lightning on the night of June 14, 2010 and burned to ashes, leaving nothing but the steel girder framework.  The cost of the statue’s erection was $250,000 and the estimated monetary damages resulting from the recent fire are in the range of $700,000.  This statue, in addition to its official name of King of Kings was also known by several nicknames including “Big Butter Jesus” in reflection of its buttery appearance and “Touchdown Jesus” referring to a football referee’s upraised arms when a touchdown is scored.

When I learned of the destruction of this statue, something about its very existence was troubling to me.  Don’t get me wrong, I think that it is a very worthy goal to make a public declaration of Christ’s victory over death and the cross, but is this the best way to spread the Good News to a modern populace?  How many people did this statue bring to salvation?  This statue required an incredible expenditure of church resources, manpower, talent, and treasure.  Can one honestly declare that the construction of this large statue was the best way to spend God’s $250,000?  A quarter of a million dollars can go an awful long way to print copies of the Holy Bible for missions work, provide food and shelter for those in need, and to support local and international missions work.  Yet, despite this, a massive (and as it turns out, massively flammable) statue was erected by the church.

To make matters worse, an even greater expenditure of capital is about to take place in the reconstruction and replacement of this statue. The pastor of the congregation in question has dismissed arguments that the lightning strike which resulted in the destruction of the statue was a sign from God, but perhaps she has spoken far too soon.  Christ did not come to earth to be memorialized in statues for the world to see; rather, He came for the purpose of reconciling God and man that death and sin may be conquered.  Would Christ, if he was given $250,000 have made the same decision to build a statue of Himself?  Or, would He have used it in another fashion?

I want to make it very clear that I am not questioning the intentions of the Solid Rock Church.  Aside from this statue, I know absolutely nothing about the church, nor its congregation.  Additionally, I could be completely off in my analysis.  Perhaps that statue has done more to further the Kingdom of God than I think.  I am also reminded of the anointing of Jesus in John 12 and Judas’ complaints about whether the money for the perfume would be better spent elsewhere.  Yet, keeping all of this in mind, I still am forced to question the wisdom of such an expenditure of resources when there is such suffering and darkness in this world that might be better addressed in a different manner.

Bonus points for those who can decipher the meaning of the title.  Hint: it isn’t directly related to the statue, but something else mentioned in this post.

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

The Most Destructive Disease

Technorati Tags: ,,

The United States has a tremendous problem.  This problem has torn apart the American people for most of American history; dividing the nation North and South, Republican and Democrat, white and black.  That issue is race.  Nearly 50 years after the American Civil Rights movement achieved most of its objectives in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Martin Luther King Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech, race still remains a central topic in the American political process.  While race remains a hot topic in political discussion in 2010, the nature of the discussion has changed dramatically.  No longer does the discussion seem to be centered on issues of equality under the law, or even of opportunity and outcome.  In contemporary political discussion, the issue of race is only raised in order to accuse someone of the great sin of American political life: racism.

Unfortunately, before going further it is necessary to state that this is not a denial of the existence of racism.  Racism remains a horrible reality in the United States, often rearing its head in unexpected ways.  However, genuine examples of racism like those seen in the 1950s and 1960s are few and far between.  There are ever fewer Americans who were alive and politically active during the Civil Rights era on either side of the issue.  American political society is largely made up of the children and grandchildren of those who oppressed the blacks and those who marched in opposition.  Overt racism still exists, but it is far from prevalent.  As mentioned previously, racism is the great sin in American political discourse.  It is hidden and shameful.  Even those who are in fact racist do not openly broadcast that fact any longer.  It is political and social suicide.  In fact, a majority of the American voting public elected the first black President of the United States in 2008.

That being said, accusations of racism seem to be at an all-time high.  One cannot be party to political debate without having to confront the issue.  Everyday when one turns on the news, accusations of racism are leveled at anyone who dares oppose the liberal and Progressive agenda, no matter the validity of the argument presented in opposition.  Never mind that at least some of these people who oppose the Progressive project are some of the very same people who voted to elect President Obama and other black politicians to some of the highest political offices in the nation.  Why is this the case?  The answer is simple; the American public is so concerned with being labeled ‘racist’ that the mere accusation is often enough to silence debate.  Effectively, the word “racist” has become a weapon used to bludgeon opposition into silence.

The ramifications of this are quite serious.  Not only has it allowed the Progressives to advance their destructive agenda further than many ever dreamt possible in less than two years, but it has destroyed American political discourse.  Many in the American public are unwilling to voice opposition to the Progressive project, fearing to be labeled as a racist and taking a tremendous hit socially and politically.  This reduces discourse and prevents those who are least politically active from hearing both sides of an issue.  However, what is perhaps the most insidious effect of these accusations is that real instances and allegations of genuine racism lose credibility in the public’s eyes.

While political discussion is largely silenced by these accusations – politicians don’t like to be labeled as racists – the public is beginning to tire of the accusations.  The situation has become largely analogous to the “Boy Who Cried Wolf”.  He falsely sounded the alarm so many times that when the wolf really was in the pasture his warnings were no longer heeded.  The American people are increasingly unwilling to grant credibility to those who cry “racism!” and eventually they’ll cease to listen altogether.  The issue is compounded by the reports that surface every election cycle of racist vandalism of Democrat and liberal campaign headquarters.  Initially the Republicans are labeled as being the racists at fault, but invariably the perpetrator is a liberal campaign staffer.

An additional likely consequence is that by increasingly leveling charges of racism, the Left will only succeed in inflaming racial tensions.  There is no better way to cause resentment than to falsely accuse someone of wrongdoing.  If it happens enough, many whites may simply begin to resent blacks as they will see them as the source of these false accusations.  This will only serve to set back the American Civil Rights movement decades.  The simple reality is that the vast majority of white Americans don’t care what color someone’s skin is anymore.  In the American conscious, most people are effectively color blind.  But every time the issue of racism is brought up, the American people are once again forced to take notice of a person’s skin in order to prevent offense, or in the case of affirmative action, to ensure that they are given preferential treatment.  As long as the American public is forced to take notice of “race”, there will be racial tension and prejudice.

The political rhetoric of the time is increasingly setting up what may become a perfect storm.  Resentment on both sides of the racial divide is reaching a fever pitch due to the rhetorical machinations of the Progressives.  Whites resent the false accusations, and blacks often seem to be taken in by them (perhaps understandably so – it hasn’t been too long since state-sponsored racism was a real concern).  This fuels resentment on both sides.  Unfortunately, there are many who will use this in a cynical ploy for either power or wealth.  There are individuals who have intentionally put themselves in a position to benefit from racial tensions, and it is in their personal interests to foster them.  Individuals like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Nancy Pelosi have all cynically put themselves in a position to profit from racial rhetoric.  So long as these people are able to benefit from this resentment, they will work to divide rather than unite the American people.

Make no mistake, racism is a very real problem in the United States.  However, the problem seems to be less genuine racism, and more the accusations of racism anytime one voices opposition to the Progressive project.  The Left has successfully managed to paint a picture of the opposition where the opposition to the President’s schemes is not based on actual opposition to policies, but simply to the man because he’s black.  Nothing good can come from silencing political discourse, and so far, nothing good has.  Unless the American people begin to speak up despite the possibility of being labeled racist, the Left will be able to continue their unhindered work of destroying the foundations of the American Republic to replace it with American socialism.

Saturday, April 17, 2010

That Which is Caesar’s and That Which is God’s.

Technorati Tags: ,,

Recently, while surfing an online forum that I frequent, someone posed the question of whether churches should be tax free. This question inspired this particular blog post as it brings up several interesting issues. Ultimately, I do believe that churches should remain tax exempt, but this is not based on any theological argument, but rather I believe that taxation should be sparse. However, I’ve come to the conclusion that whether churches are to remain tax exempt they should be prepared to lose that status. They should be willing to sacrifice that status in the name of preaching the Word of God.

Presently, for a church to remain tax exempt it must shy away from entering into politics. Effectively, the tax laws of this nation prevent churches from preaching messages on the policies of politicians regardless of whether church doctrine is opposed. This hamstrings the church in its roll of shepherding God’s sheep. Christianity is a religion which is designed to permeate every aspect of the believer’s life. It is not simply limited to those moments on a Sunday morning when the believer is in church, or at home in prayer. The Christian religion is a worldview, and as such it has something to say on the political issues of the day.

Unfortunately, churches have often chosen to remain silent on political issues despite their moral consequences. Fear of losing tax-exempt status prevents churches from commenting on the stances taken by the politicians that members of the church vote to represent them in the government. It is important for believers to know not only where their representatives stand on the issues, but also where the church that they claim to belong to stands on those same issues. However, the tax structure in this nation, as it stands prevents churches from making such commentary available.

The church must take a stand on the moral issues of the day. It cannot remain silent on the issues of homosexuality, abortion, obscenity, promiscuity, etc. Unfortunately, the church has had to speak on the issues with extreme caution. One never knows when the ACLU will file suit against a church for entering into the political realm in a sermon after all. Yet, the church still has a duty to address these issues; in many ways, I feel that it has fallen down on the job. In essence, the church in its desire to not render unto Caesar it has also neglected to render unto God.

The church should not be so concerned with the issue of taxation that it tames its message so that parishioners can continue to claim deductions for putting money in the offering plate. The church must take a stand on these issues. It must be a strong stand. We know what is right and what is wrong according to God’s word and we must not be afraid to speak out about it. If that requires the church to lose its tax-exempt status, so be it. Money should not be standing in the way of preaching God’s Word.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

The Great Exchange - Thrice

I crewed on a fair golden ship that
went down at the dawn of the world
We mutinied had sentenced our captain to die
'fore our sails had barely unfurled

We sank shortly after our riot,
Wanton flames and our powder kegs met
While I swam for my life became voices aloft,
joyful, unearthly, and dread

Singing of a violent, tireless mystery
That one would give his life to save his enemies

Too bone tired to keep my arms moving
To swim or even grasp out for straws
Undertow drew me down into its cold
and infinite, indigo jaws

I was singing of a violent, tireless mystery
That one would give his life to save his enemies

Thought I must be dead or dreaming
When my captain still battered, betrayed
Pulled me up, laid me over the beam he clung to
Breathed his last and sank under the waves

Your body is a bridge across an endless sea