For the Love of Marriage?

Christians in these waning days prior to Jesus' soon return are faced with many dilemmas. Christ commissions each believer to go forth and spread the gospel to the ends of the earth. However, there appears to be a disconnect between: what are salvation issues and legislating one's beliefs upon others. It is for this reason I ask believers to re-evaluate the message they shout and shove to have heard.

In our news, as recently as yesterday, June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court has debated and ruled regarding the definition of marriage. While it is true, the Old Testament calls homosexual activity an abomination, detestable, to the Lord (LEV 18:22); Jesus specifically tells us to "Love our neighbor, as we love ourselves" (MATT 19:19). In fact, if we were to follow the life question of "What Would Jesus Do?" we'd recognize all of mankind as our neighbor and greet them with love. 

This doesn't mean that we have to condone sin, but we should tolerate it. A sermon I listened to a while ago demonstrated that Christ, in an effort to show sinners the path to salvation, met people where they were, showed them the love and led them among His flock. I believe this is how we should live our lives, showing others the love of Jesus as a path to salvation. 

Many shouts against the above mentioned rulings have come in the form of condemnation and judgement, and this is in direct opposition to the way Christ led so many to salvation. While it is true, he showed anger toward the money changers and threw them out of the temple (MATT 21:12); by and large he loved people and then led them to salvation and away from their sins. Therefore, I propose, it will be by love and kindness that we win over followers, not by condemnation.

Do we really need to legislate morality, no Christianity? I seems so much of the debate recently comes from issues regarding the faith of the people. I thought this was one of the great reasons for our founding fathers to dream up this great nation of ours: the weaknesses of church ruled states. Should our churches have unlimited influence upon the administration of our country? I think not. That would lead our democracy straight into the jaws of a theocracy, and we all know how that affected Medieval Europe.

The Inquisition is arguably one of the darkest periods in the annals of the church, originally intended to ensure orthodoxy, an adherence to accepted norms. It developed into a blood-thirsty machine that devoured anyone who represented the least variation on orthodoxy... case in point, definition of marriage.

Do we persecute our neighbor? Judge our neighbor? Or show them the love of Christ and maybe, just maybe, help them with a salvation issue, accepting Christ as their personal savior. Since there is only one way to Heaven, and that's through Christ Jesus (ACTS 4:8-12). Once they've accepted Christ, the Lord will lay the burden upon their heart to cast any sin, the follower prayerfully feels convicted of, aside. Leave the conviction of the heart to God, the definitive judge. 

I firmly believe that God would not have a single soul lost to the fires of Hell, but He gave us each the will to choose. This will to choose is what this whole life on earth is about. Do we follow Jesus' example and live a life glorifying God? Or do we follow our prideful, judgmental, angry selves to the abyss... Well, you know where that path leads. Therefore, shout the love of Jesus, and His promises for salvation from the mountaintops!

New Holy Wars, Holy Terror or Ulterior Motives?

I don’t know how many of you are following the story of Florida Pastor Terry Jones and his plan to burn copies of the Quran this weekend on the ninth anniversary of the World Trade Center bombings. He initially stated he has planned this event because the Muslim holy book is used to incite evil and terrorist attacks by militant radicals, however now it appears he initially created the event as a ruse to have the mosque near ground zero moved.

The story begins December 2009 with the announcement from Muslim leaders of plans to build the mosque. When city officials vote 29 – 1 in favor of the plans in May 2010, public outcry ensues. As the debate heats up, a plan is hatched by Jones to strike back by announcing plans July 30, 2010 to burn copies of the Muslims’ sacred text. To date, the church has accumulated about 200 copies to torch this Saturday.

Over the past couple of months, Jones has enjoyed much media attention and has attracted the attention of political, religious, military and celebrity activists leaders to name a few. In a statement on an ABC Nightline this week he stated he would only stop in the event of a “clear sign from God.” So now he has the attention of virtually every US citizen and the entire Muslim world, he has to figure out how to achieve his ultimate goal: to have the mosque plans changed and move it to another “more suitable” location.

Early Thursday evening, September 9, Jones told media reporters of the cancelation of his plans, only to reverse that statement when he found out Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf had not agreed to move the mosque. In an article in Friday’s N&O, Jones stated the agreement to move the mosque “is for us a sign from God.” Now that Rauf has stated there is no agreement to move the planned mosque, Jones is saying the book burning has only been suspended.

These are the facts as best as I can substantiate them. What follows is my interpretation of these facts. I believe Jones hatched this idea as a weapon of terror to convince Muslim leaders at the heart of the Ground Zero Mosque to either move to another site or cancel their plans all together.

Additionally, I have a couple points of contention with what has happened and is planned to happen in the next couple of days:

1. If Jones has so much support, why are volunteers at his church carrying weapons? You shouldn't have to hold a congregation at gunpoing to call them to worship.
2. Again, if he has so much support, why has he only been able to accumulate 200 copies of the Quran in close to six weeks of planning? In that length of time, he should be knee deep in the holy text.
3. You can’t go into a plan, that as he confesses he has prayed about, with preconceived ulterior motives. The timeline is way too convenient for my liking. If the Quran, as he says, incites violence, why hasn’t his book burning been an annual event since 9/11?
4. Any holy text can be used for evil, violence or terrorism. Look at history and you’ll find the Jewish Torah was used to have sinners punished and even stoned to death. Even early Christians aren’t immune to having its Holy Bible twisted and interpreted for evil. Early Christians were persecuted and martyred almost daily. It only takes a read of Foxe’s Book of Martyrs to substantiate this. Foxe reports that believers spanning Christian history have been persecuted, with some of the most severe occurring during the Inquisition of the middle ages. Now religious radicals from both Christian and Muslim faiths are squaring off again. When do we stop, read our texts and follow the teachings found in them?

To Jones, I question: Have you read any one of those 200 copies of the Quran? I have been shown where it teaches love for fellow man and kindness to others. Not as you imply, a guide book for creating terror and violence. This is merely a twisting of the text to comply with one’s own beliefs; just as the Bible has been twisted over the years, to say things seemingly making it a contradictory work. I’m saying that the Bible is an inspired work from God and He is not contradictory. Contradiction comes from inconsistent interpretation of the word.

Clearly Jones thought of moving the mosque and premeditated his actions. Either he was bound to incite violence by burning copies of the Quran, or his ulterior motive was to have the mosque moved from its current planned location. I tend to lean toward the latter, and I see him as no better than the religious fundamentalists he so vehemently condemns.

You know it's going to be a bad day when...

your doctor says "I'm sorry."

A little over a year ago when I returned to my surgeon after having had surgery, the first words out of his mouth were, "I'm sorry." What followed were numerous doctors visits, procedures and operations, and what I thought would be done and over in a matter of weeks turned into almost an eight month process. Through no fault of my surgeon, I had developed complications, and he was going to do his best to find the causes and fix the problems. In the end he has done just that.

Since the ordeal, I have recuperated and feel as good as ever, and I can say that it's been worth it to be able to enjoy the foods that were under dietary restrictions due to the condition originally causing the need for the operation.