Would it surprise you to know that George Washington refused to call anyone a patriot who worked to remove religion and morality from public and governmental life?
What would you say if I told you that the United States Congress tried to import 20,000 bibles from Europe, but then decided to endorse a version printed in America and recommended that version to every American?
Did you know that 27 of the 39 signers of the U.S. Constitution had seminary degrees?
Each of these statements are true, but they have been cleanly scrubbed from our history books and from our public memory.
If you become a student of pre-1900 U.S. History, you might be surprised at how influential Christianity has been in the foundation and maintenance of the federal government. Christianity was not only foundational to the United States, it was strongly promoted by many of the Founding Fathers, sometimes using government funds to advance the faith.
Thomas Jefferson, the author of the supposed "wall between church and state", authorized payment of funds by the United Sates to the Kaskasia Indians to help them build a church. He also approved seven years of financial support out of the government's coffers to pay for a priest! So how does this square with Jefferson being the creator of the concept of the separation of church and state?
By the way, the words "separation", "church" and "state" cannot be found in the First Amendment, the Constitution, or any other official founding document.
Why is it important to discover, recover and remember this information? Because the founders of this nation understood that a republic, like the United States, would never work, and would eventually fail if the People rejected morality and a Judeo-Christian understanding of God.
John Adams, the Second President of the United States and a crafter of the Declaration of Independence, stated, "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other [people]."
Unfortunately, there has been a consistent attack on the public demonstration and declaration of our faith for several years, sometimes by people who have sworn to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution." There are even some, in the highest offices in the land, who think that the constitution is fundamentally flawed and that we need to break free from its basic limitations.
However, the Constitution was written and designed to list a handful of things that the Federal Government had the power to do. Any authority, action, or power, other than those things specified in the Constitution, was to be determined by the States or the People. In short, it was intentionally designed to limit the power of the Federal Government. Modern political thought seeks to limit the People and give power to the Government.
The church has an opportunity to speak into this culture and remind it of the moral and religious foundation of the nation. No one else will do it. And when we do, we will not be wrapping the church in the American flag. Instead we will be wrapping America in the truths found in Scripture.
Truths like, "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery."
"For lack of guidance a nation falls, but many advisers make victory sure."
"Hate evil, love good; maintain justice in the courts."
"He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. "
"Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people."
"Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord."
Consider these parting words of George Washington: "Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness."
Questions or comments? Email me at curt@smdcog.org
You can find me on FACEBOOK at my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719).
Here's a link to my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/)
Thanks for reading!
Monday, March 15, 2010
Saturday, February 13, 2010
How Do You Love?
New Castle Courier-Times Article for Saturday, February 13, 2010
While New Castle slogs through the heaviest snows of the winter season, I am in Florida with my parents. My father has been diagnosed with Alzheimer's and my local congregation has graciously allowed me to travel to Florida and help them navigate the trailhead of this new and uncertain journey.
As I learn about Alzheimer's and what is required of their caregivers, I'm realizing that my mom will not be able to walk this road alone. She will need respite from providing care. She will need sleep and good health. She will need a shoulder to cry on and friends who will listen. In short, she will need a loving community of support.
But the passage I began this article with, from John's first letter to the churches, leaves me with a nagging question: are our churches, in truth, loving communities of support?
I know we say we love each other. We say we are praying for each other, and prayer is certainly not passive or useless, but I wonder if that is the extent of our concern.
Some friends of mine were in the final days of a pregnancy when the first of these two snow storms rolled through Central Indiana. I know people were praying for them, but what they really needed was a snow plow. Two individuals offered to provide a snow plow, but fortunately my friends didn't need the snow plow; baby Cohen came between storms.
A pastor friend and his family is walking through the dark valley of the shadow of death and I know there are thousands of people praying for them, but is anybody providing care for them? I know of some that are.
Other people in this community are grieving the loss of a loved one and prayers have been said and continue to be said for those who grieve, but is anybody expressing their love for those who grieve in deeds and not just words?
DC Talk was right several years ago when they released a song called "Luv Is A Verb". Love isn't something we say, it's something we do. Love isn't something we feel, but something we WILL. Remember the classic wedding vows? For better or worse; in sickness and in health?
In better and healthy times it is easy to FEEL love. But in sickness and worse times we often must WILL ourselves to love.
This passage from 1 John challenges me. Am I truly loving or do I just say that I am loving? John is really saying, "Let your actions speak for themselves. Shut up and show that you love each other."
How do we know that Mother Teresa loved the people she ministered to? It's not because of her sermons or speaking ability. We know she loved the people of Calcutta because she gave her life for the dying and destitute of Calcutta. She didn’t have to say anything.
A friend of mine plowed my driveway three times this year, without me asking him to do it or expecting me to pay for it. I know he loves me and my family. My church gave me several days to travel to Florida so that I could express my love for my parents. I know that my church loves me and my family.
The question that haunts me today is, "If people only looked at what I did, and ignored what I said, would they think that I love them?"
Tomorrow is Valentine's Day and it is Sunday, a day when we celebrate the Author of Love. As we gather in our churches, will we heed John the Apostle's words? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.
Any questions or comments? Write me at curt@smdcog.org
You can find me on FACEBOOK at my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719).
Here's a link to my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/)
Thanks for reading!
This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother. . . Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth. - 1 John 3:10, 18
While New Castle slogs through the heaviest snows of the winter season, I am in Florida with my parents. My father has been diagnosed with Alzheimer's and my local congregation has graciously allowed me to travel to Florida and help them navigate the trailhead of this new and uncertain journey.
As I learn about Alzheimer's and what is required of their caregivers, I'm realizing that my mom will not be able to walk this road alone. She will need respite from providing care. She will need sleep and good health. She will need a shoulder to cry on and friends who will listen. In short, she will need a loving community of support.
But the passage I began this article with, from John's first letter to the churches, leaves me with a nagging question: are our churches, in truth, loving communities of support?
I know we say we love each other. We say we are praying for each other, and prayer is certainly not passive or useless, but I wonder if that is the extent of our concern.
Some friends of mine were in the final days of a pregnancy when the first of these two snow storms rolled through Central Indiana. I know people were praying for them, but what they really needed was a snow plow. Two individuals offered to provide a snow plow, but fortunately my friends didn't need the snow plow; baby Cohen came between storms.
A pastor friend and his family is walking through the dark valley of the shadow of death and I know there are thousands of people praying for them, but is anybody providing care for them? I know of some that are.
Other people in this community are grieving the loss of a loved one and prayers have been said and continue to be said for those who grieve, but is anybody expressing their love for those who grieve in deeds and not just words?
DC Talk was right several years ago when they released a song called "Luv Is A Verb". Love isn't something we say, it's something we do. Love isn't something we feel, but something we WILL. Remember the classic wedding vows? For better or worse; in sickness and in health?
In better and healthy times it is easy to FEEL love. But in sickness and worse times we often must WILL ourselves to love.
This passage from 1 John challenges me. Am I truly loving or do I just say that I am loving? John is really saying, "Let your actions speak for themselves. Shut up and show that you love each other."
How do we know that Mother Teresa loved the people she ministered to? It's not because of her sermons or speaking ability. We know she loved the people of Calcutta because she gave her life for the dying and destitute of Calcutta. She didn’t have to say anything.
A friend of mine plowed my driveway three times this year, without me asking him to do it or expecting me to pay for it. I know he loves me and my family. My church gave me several days to travel to Florida so that I could express my love for my parents. I know that my church loves me and my family.
The question that haunts me today is, "If people only looked at what I did, and ignored what I said, would they think that I love them?"
Tomorrow is Valentine's Day and it is Sunday, a day when we celebrate the Author of Love. As we gather in our churches, will we heed John the Apostle's words? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.
Any questions or comments? Write me at curt@smdcog.org
You can find me on FACEBOOK at my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719).
Here's a link to my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/)
Thanks for reading!
Thursday, January 14, 2010
An American Journal In the 21st Century - Thursday, January 14, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010 - A new foundation Is being laid for at New America. Those who truly understand this new foundation have hidden it in the 2000-plus pages of the Health Care bill being re-written in Washington D.C. Here's something you need to know about that new foundation.
The President's first choice for Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle. After losing his re-election bid in 2004, Mr. Daschle wrote a book about his view of the condition of healthcare in America and his desire to see it improved. The book is titled "Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis".
In the book, Daschle argues for a single-payer (government controlled) healthcare system. Daschle concedes that pushing for a single-payer system in the United States would be politically problematic and that it would indeed result in socialized medicine. On March 3, 2008 Daschle said in a Huffington Post article, "I have proposed a Federal Health Board that would be a foundation from which we could address all" healthcare problems.
About a year ago, Tom Daschle had to remove his name from consideration for the HHS post because of reports of inappropriate financial dealings and tax issues. The President then selected Kathleen Sebelius to head the HHS, but the administration was still committed to the blueprint found in Tom Daschle's book - a single-payer system with a Federal Health Board that controls it all.
In the current House Bill H.R. 3962, Section 241 (a) it reads: "There is hereby established, as an independent agency in the executive branch of the Government, a Health Choices Administration". The newly created Health Choices Administration is responsible for "the establishment of qualified health benefits plan standards under this title, including the enforcement of such standards".
This is the "foundation" that Tom Daschle was talking about. In his book, Daschle states that this board should be modeled after other nations like Great Britain. "In Great Britain, for example, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), which is part of the National Health Service (NHS), is the single entity responsible for providing guidance on the use of new and existing drugs, treatments, and procedures." So how does it work in Great Britain?
Let's look at the explanation found on the website for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE):
With the rapid advances in modern medicine, most people accept that no publicly funded healthcare system, including the NHS, can possibly pay for every new medical treatment which becomes available. The enormous costs involved mean that choices have to be made.
It makes sense to focus on treatments that improve the quality and/or length of someone’s life and, at the same time, are an effective use of NHS resources . . .
To ensure our judgments are fair, we use a standard and internationally recognized method to compare different drugs and measure their clinical effectiveness: the quality-adjusted life years measurement (the ‘QALY’) . . .
A QALY gives an idea of how many extra months or years of life of a reasonable quality a person might gain as a result of treatment (particularly important when considering treatments for chronic conditions) . . .
Generally, however, if a treatment costs more than [$32,290 to $48,435] per QALY, then it would not be considered cost effective.
In other words, medical treatment under the proposed healthcare system will come down to a mathematical equation based on cost effectiveness and an arbitrary judgment on your anticipated quality of life and how many years you have left.
Why should you care?
Regardless of what the "talking-heads" say on television, the final decision on your health care choices will be made by the Health Choices Administration. That decision will be a cost-based decision (i.e. is it worth the cost for the United States Government to approve payment for this treatment?). The question for you is, is the proposed healthcare system worth giving up your freedom to make your own health care choices?
What can you do? Here are four ideas. If you have more ideas, please send them to me so that I can pass them along in future journal entries.
1. You can write or call the offices of your Senators and Congressmen and Congresswomen. Ask them to explain the Health Choices Administration and on what basis, this newly created government agency will be making decisions for you.
And don't stop with just one phone call and one letter or email. Contact your representatives weekly or twice a month. At the very least, your representative will know that you are watching.
2. You can pass this journal entry on. It is the first of many. Hopefully it will educate and stimulate a good and noble people to action; the very same people described in the constitution as "We the People . . ." You are free to make copies and distribute them by hand or 'snail-mail.' Please make sure that the last paragraph of this journal is included with your copies so that individuals can contact me with comments or questions.
If you forward this in e-mail form, please remove the "FW:" from the subject line. Many people delete Email Forwards without even opening them up. Also, take the time to e-mail it to one or two individuals at a time. You are encouraged to send this to everyone in your contact list, but many spam filters block emails that contain too many addresses in the "To:" box.
3. Organize a trip to your representative's office (local or in Washington D.C.). By carpooling you can share the expense while making a stronger impact by arriving in greater numbers. By the way, if you haven't done so already, you should make at least one trip to D.C. in your lifetime. Go to the memorials; read the inscriptions on the walls; examine the statues and paintings. You will discover a strong Godly heritage, clearly on display and quite possibly forgotten by your representative.
4. If you are a person of faith, pray. Pray fervently for your nation and for her leaders. Pray daily or hourly. Pray for a good and noble people to wake up and take action. Pray also for those who wish to reshape America in a Progressive image - pray for their safety and protection, but pray that their efforts will be thwarted.
My name is Curtis Ferrell, and this is An American Journal In The 21st Century. You can find additional journal entries at http://clfnotes.blogspot.com. You can contact me at American_Journal@sbcglobal.net. If you do not wish to receive these journal postings, please email me so that I can remove you from my contact list or click here: Remove
You can find me on FACEBOOK at my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719).
Here's a link to my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/)
Thanks for reading!
Friday, January 8, 2010
An American Journal In the 21st Century - Thursday, January 7, 2010
We are awakening to find ourselves in a topsy-turvy world. Each new day, starting before the election in the fall of 2008, we have seen actions by government officials which not only anger and frustrate us but are hard to comprehend. Their actions cause us to say things like, "What are they thinking?" or "How can they think that will possibly work?" and "It just doesn't make sense."
I am convinced that our officials are intelligent people; they are not stupid. I am also convinced that they believe that their actions will bring about a better America; they are not suicidal. So if they are not stupid and they are not suicidal, why are they convinced that their actions will "fundamentally transform America" into a better place, while many of us believe they are destroying the America that we know? Why are they convinced that their actions will solve our problems and we believe that their actions are irrational?
Worldview.
I am not a conspiracy theorist. I am not convinced that there is a secret group of individuals using well-known-faces as puppets to "take over the world." It is possible, but not very probable; there's always a snitch that squeals and the plot is revealed, or a deathbed confession, or memoirs that are published after someone's death.
What IS possible (and, in fact, irrefutably true) is that everyone has a worldview; a fundamental way that a person sees the world and how it works, or how it should work.
For years in America, the predominate worldview was biblically based. In fact, America was founded on a God-centered worldview: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
But there are competing worldviews in America, including Progressivism. A person with a Progressive worldview typically believes in economic and social justice. Economic justice, for Progressives, means that we should take from those who have too much and give it to those who have too little. (Who will decide what is too much and too little?) Social justice, for progressives, means promoting policies that say that a woman has a right to her own body (as well as to the life or death of the one in her womb). Social justice also asserts policies that say there are all kinds of families (meaning straight families and gay families) and that they need to be recognized and celebrated equally.
What we are awakening to is the reality that many of those who wield political and social power in this nation subscribe to a Progressive worldview. And, just like one who rubs the sleep out of his eyes in the morning to make his surroundings clearer, the picture that is becoming clear to us is that a Progressive worldview is contrary to a God-centered worldview and contrary to the worldview that founded this nation.
Again, I am not a conspiracy theorist; I don't believe there is a grand "master-planner" who seeks to dominate the world . . . at least, not one that is human. And I don't believe this is a Republican or Democrat plot. What IS happening, from my perspective, is that many individuals, regardless of party affiliation, all wielding considerable political and social power, and all with a similar Progressive worldview, are now in a position to make decisions and establish policies that "fundamentally change America" and make it the "way it should be." In fact, Progressives from both major parties, beginning with Republican President Teddy Roosevelt and continuing down through our current President, have been making decisions based on this worldview for more than 100 years.
I also believe that, if the recent decisions and policies of Progressives are allowed to take place and mature, we will witness the greatest crisis this nation has faced since the Civil War. If we do not change our course, we will wake up in a society that is not only frustrating and confusing, but unrecognizable as the nation that was founded nearly 234 years ago. In essence, we will suddenly become citizens of a very different nation - immigrants in our own country.
If we fail to act, we will witness what one Progressive hero called, "Act II of the American Revolution." This Progressive hero was the subject of our current Secretary of State's senior thesis when she was attending Wellesley College. Our President valued the thoughts and ideas of this Progressive hero so much that he taught a course promoting his hero's philosophy and worldview. And on December 23, 2009 an MSNBC's news anchor, while interviewing the only socialist Senator in the US, affirmed that Saul Alinsky, the Progressive that penned the quote above, was one of his heroes as well.
Why should you care?
Saul Alinsky's worldview is clearly articulated in his most popular book, Rules for Radicals. As I read it, I was shocked that this worldview was admired and emulated by some of the most powerful people in our nation's capitol. On the page following the dedication, Alinsky praised "the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom - Lucifer." On the final pages of this book, he calls for "Act II of the American Revolution" and likens it to the "revolution of the soul."
On the pages between these bookend quotes, Alinsky makes statements like these: "[A person] should ask of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; and of means, only whether they will work." "He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar conception of 'personal salvation'; he doesn't care enough for the people to be 'corrupted' for them." "The third rule of ethics of means and ends is that in war, the ends justifies almost any means." "Ethical standards must be elastic to stretch with the times." "Reviewing and selecting available means is done on a straight utilitarian basis - will it work?"
In short, many of our political and societal leaders revere a man who said, in essence, that when it comes to political power there are no morals. Many of the current influencers in our society are agnostic or simply religious in name only. They do not believe that there are unalienable Rights given to us by a Creator; they believe that rights are given and taken away by those who have the political power and the will to do so. If they proceed, unchecked, they will succeed in "fundamentally transforming America" by re-laying a foundation for our nation; one without a Creator, with a less restrictive Constitution, and a more powerful centralized federal government that does not have a moral compass.
What can you do? Here are four ideas. If you have more ideas, please send them to me so that I can pass them along in future journal entries.
1. You can pass this journal entry on. It is the first of many. Hopefully it will educate and stimulate a good and noble people to action; the very same people described in the constitution as "We the People . . ." You are free to make copies and distribute them by hand or 'snail-mail.' Please make sure that the last paragraph of this journal is included with your copies so that individuals can contact me with comments or questions.
If you forward this in e-mail form, please remove the "FW:" from the subject line. Many people delete Email Forwards without even opening them up. Also, take the time to e-mail it to one or two individuals at a time. You are encouraged to send this to everyone in your contact list, but many spam filters block emails that contain too many addresses in the "To:" box.
2. You can write or call the offices of your Senators and Congressmen and Congresswomen. How can you pay for the phone charges and postage? You could pay for the calls by dinning out one less time a month. How can you find the time to write? You could find the time by sacrificing one of the TV shows or movies or video games that consume a good portion of our lives.
And don't stop with just one phone call and one letter or email. Contact your representatives weekly or twice a month. At the very least, your representative will know that you are watching.
3. Organize a trip to your representative's office (local or in Washington D.C.). By carpooling you can share the expense while making a stronger impact by arriving in greater numbers. By the way, if you haven't done so already, you should make at least one trip to D.C. in your lifetime. Go to the memorials; read the inscriptions on the walls; examine the statues and paintings. You will discover a strong Godly heritage, clearly on display and quite possibly forgotten by your representative.
4. If you are a person of faith, pray. Pray fervently for your nation and for her leaders. Pray daily or hourly. Pray for a good and noble people to wake up and take action. Pray also for those who wish to reshape America in a Progressive image - pray for their safety and protection, but pray that their efforts will be thwarted.
You can find me on FACEBOOK at my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719).
Here's a link to my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/)
Thanks for reading!
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Choose Well, Choose Life
Article for The New Castle Courier-Times, Christian Perspectives, December 26, 2009
And in despair I bowed my head,
“There is no peace on earth,” I said.
For hate is strong and mocks the song
Of peace on earth, goodwill to men.
It’s the day after Christmas, and this article is sharing the newspaper with stories of current events that impact our community. Inside its pages you will likely find a section filled with names and photos of individuals who have died in the last 36 hours. You’ll see stories about the war in Afghanistan, a tragic fire or domestic assault. You likely read a story about political squabbling or mudslinging, and one of our superstars may be in the news again – for all the wrong reasons. Maybe today will be the day when the annual “Grinch” story will be written about this year’s hard-hearted person who stole all of the Christmas presents from under the tree.
It’s clear, even as you examine this paper, that Henry Wadsworth Longfellow was right. Hate is strong. In these “United” States, we are experiencing more animosity and division than we have in several years as politicians pit the Haves against the Have-Nots. The threat of a nuclear Iran is foreshadowing a handful of responses, all of which make Sodom and Gomorrah pale in comparison. The "good-old-days" of abortion on demand have mutated into today's headlines of a Virginia woman being able to kill her own live-born daughter without consequence because "the mother and baby were still connected by the umbilical cord."
This day is not unlike the days following the first Christmas. The part of the advent story we seldom read in our "sanitized" version of the Christmas story was very dark and tragic. Herod, the king, was so afraid of this new born King that he had every male child under the age of two slaughtered. Mothers and fathers across Judea wailed in anguish over the loss of their sons.
"There is no peace on earth," I said.
But, what is the source of this animosity, these dark-days, this war that is waged every day in our neighborhoods, and political parties, and churches, and families? Could it be that the source of this ill-will can be found in our freedom of choice?
Of all people, Americans should have the most intense understanding of the power we find in the freedom of choice. Our nation was founded on this freedom-of-all-freedoms. We are free to choose our own paths as we “pursue happiness.” We are free to choose how we will live. It is with this power, our freedom of choice, that we can transform the world both for good and bad.
Examine a passage of scripture common to Jews, Muslims, and Christians says, “I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life!” This may come as a shock to some right-wing individuals who have invested far too much energy in the wrong argument of the abortion debate, but God is pro-choice. Before us every day are countless decisions. In each one we can choose between blessings and life, or curses and death. God wants us to choose life. He commands us to choose life. But the choice is ultimately ours, and so are the consequences.
The angels on the hillside announced "Peace on earth, good-will toward men." But that is just God's side of the equation. What is our side of the equation? Are we choosing life over death? Are we choosing peace over conflict? Sadly, I think not.
All too often we choose the things that promise hope, only to be disappointed. Herod promised peace as long has he was in control. But when his power was threatened, even by an infant, pain and anguish replaced the stillness found in Bethlehem. God never asked us to choose hope; he asked us to choose life, even if choosing life meant a life of challenge.
Longfellow's final stanza reminds us what can happen if we choose life; if we choose right; if we reject wrong. He reminds us that we must fight for what is right and reject what is wrong. The choice is ours. Now is the time. Choose well.
Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:
God is not dead nor doth He sleep;
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail,
With peace on earth, goodwill to men.
You can find more my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719).
Or my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/)
Thanks for reading!
And in despair I bowed my head,
“There is no peace on earth,” I said.
For hate is strong and mocks the song
Of peace on earth, goodwill to men.
It’s the day after Christmas, and this article is sharing the newspaper with stories of current events that impact our community. Inside its pages you will likely find a section filled with names and photos of individuals who have died in the last 36 hours. You’ll see stories about the war in Afghanistan, a tragic fire or domestic assault. You likely read a story about political squabbling or mudslinging, and one of our superstars may be in the news again – for all the wrong reasons. Maybe today will be the day when the annual “Grinch” story will be written about this year’s hard-hearted person who stole all of the Christmas presents from under the tree.
It’s clear, even as you examine this paper, that Henry Wadsworth Longfellow was right. Hate is strong. In these “United” States, we are experiencing more animosity and division than we have in several years as politicians pit the Haves against the Have-Nots. The threat of a nuclear Iran is foreshadowing a handful of responses, all of which make Sodom and Gomorrah pale in comparison. The "good-old-days" of abortion on demand have mutated into today's headlines of a Virginia woman being able to kill her own live-born daughter without consequence because "the mother and baby were still connected by the umbilical cord."
This day is not unlike the days following the first Christmas. The part of the advent story we seldom read in our "sanitized" version of the Christmas story was very dark and tragic. Herod, the king, was so afraid of this new born King that he had every male child under the age of two slaughtered. Mothers and fathers across Judea wailed in anguish over the loss of their sons.
"There is no peace on earth," I said.
But, what is the source of this animosity, these dark-days, this war that is waged every day in our neighborhoods, and political parties, and churches, and families? Could it be that the source of this ill-will can be found in our freedom of choice?
Of all people, Americans should have the most intense understanding of the power we find in the freedom of choice. Our nation was founded on this freedom-of-all-freedoms. We are free to choose our own paths as we “pursue happiness.” We are free to choose how we will live. It is with this power, our freedom of choice, that we can transform the world both for good and bad.
Examine a passage of scripture common to Jews, Muslims, and Christians says, “I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life!” This may come as a shock to some right-wing individuals who have invested far too much energy in the wrong argument of the abortion debate, but God is pro-choice. Before us every day are countless decisions. In each one we can choose between blessings and life, or curses and death. God wants us to choose life. He commands us to choose life. But the choice is ultimately ours, and so are the consequences.
The angels on the hillside announced "Peace on earth, good-will toward men." But that is just God's side of the equation. What is our side of the equation? Are we choosing life over death? Are we choosing peace over conflict? Sadly, I think not.
All too often we choose the things that promise hope, only to be disappointed. Herod promised peace as long has he was in control. But when his power was threatened, even by an infant, pain and anguish replaced the stillness found in Bethlehem. God never asked us to choose hope; he asked us to choose life, even if choosing life meant a life of challenge.
Longfellow's final stanza reminds us what can happen if we choose life; if we choose right; if we reject wrong. He reminds us that we must fight for what is right and reject what is wrong. The choice is ours. Now is the time. Choose well.
Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:
God is not dead nor doth He sleep;
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail,
With peace on earth, goodwill to men.
You can find more my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719).
Or my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/)
Thanks for reading!
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
On Divisions In The Church
Courier-Times Christian Perspectives Article for 11/14/09
Three weeks ago a brother in Christ took issue with these words that I wrote the week previous: "The Bible speaks very clearly about the sanctity of life; about our responsibility to the poor, the orphaned and the widow; about God's view of homosexual behavior."
I try to follow the guidance of C.S. Lewis, who stated in Mere Christianity, "Our divisions should never be discussed except in the presence of those who have already come to believe that there is one God and that Jesus Christ is His only Son." But I would like to take this opportunity to discuss WHY there are divisions in the church, and divisions with peoples of other faith systems.
A friend of mine, and national speaker for women and youth events, Lori Salierno, says that there are three general areas of belief in the church: standards, convictions, and preferences. For example, divisions in the church about the style of worship are preference differences. Scripture does not speak directly to these issues.
Divisions among believers about the day for worship, the appropriate age for baptism, the manner of baptism (i.e. sprinkling or dunking), and women in ministry are based on conviction. In other words, we believe the Spirit of God has convicted us that "this" way is the way God wants "us" to behave. We don't deny that other Christians have a different understanding. We don't call them non-Christian, or believe that they are sinning. However, if we act in a way, different than the way that God has convicted us to follow, we would be committing an act of sin.
Finally, standards are truths that scripture declares are true for all people, for all times. If someone opposes a standard, the bible calls those actions "sin". The church doesn't label it a sin; individuals don't label it a sin; it is the bible that labels those actions as sins.
While there are some Christ-followers that will identify as standards, the things that I identify as preferences and convictions, most believers will acknowledge these three general areas of belief in the church.
In the late 1960's, intellectuals began toying with an idea called "deconstruction". This idea states that you cannot know what a writer "actually" meant, so you, the reader, must deconstruct what is written and decide for yourself what you think the author meant. In other words, you re-construct what is written in the way that you think it should be read. Actually, the first deconstrucionalist was the serpent in the garden, "That's not what God really meant; you won't surely die."
Armed with this new tool, people have been deconstructing documents for over 40 years and re-constructing them according to their own preference.
They deconstructed the First Amendment to the Constitution which reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. "Surely freedom of speech doesn't mean ALL forms for speech." As a result we have a new type of crime: Hate speech. Additionally, religious expression is being restrained by public law on several fronts.
They deconstructed the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. "Surely they didn't understand that we would need National Health Care." As a result, we are well on our way to a government-run health care system; a power that was not enumerated in the Constitution.
There are also those who deconstruct scripture. Where scripture is clear but uncomfortable, some say, "That's not what God REALLY meant." Sadly, this is where some divisions among believers occur in the area of standards. In past generations this re-construction of scripture was called heresy. Now we timidly say, "That's your understanding of truth; not mine."
As to areas of agreement, my brother is correct in saying that what brings us together is far more important than the things that separate us. But that is also true of my Jewish and Muslim friends. These faith systems, as well as Christianity, all count the Hebrew Scriptures in the Old Testament as holy scripture. There are many areas in which we can all agree. But the areas that divide us are significant.
For example, the Jewish faith does not accept every scripture we accept (i.e. The New Testament). In the other instance, the Muslim faith accepts, as scripture, documents we cannot accept (i.e. The Koran). Interestingly, they are both battling attacks by those who wish to deconstruct their holy scriptures.
This week we celebrated the veterans that have served this country by fighting for and defending freedom in all of its forms. Many of them died for the truths that we find in the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They didn't worry about what the Founders of this nation "really" thought. They clearly understood what was at stake and what the cost could be. They fought for freedom. All gave some; some gave all.
Deconstruction has done damage to the fabric of America and has resulted in the loss of some of the freedoms they fought and died for. Deconstruction has resulted in the creation of an expanded hate crimes law. Someday, we will be reading the report of an individual being charged under this new law for simply speaking his or her mind and defending biblical truth. It could be your pastor. It could be me. It could be you. We were warned and failed to do enough to defend the right to freedom of speech. Someday, someone will have to fight to win it back.
Deconstruction is doing damage to the unity of the church; the unity of all believers who claim to follow Christ. If we begin throwing out the passages of scripture that make us uncomfortable, soon we will have little left that we can call scripture; little left that unites us. Fortunately, scripture defends itself very well, if we have faith to believe what it says.
There is another truth that is clearly spelled out in Scripture. Faith in Christ means more that simply acknowledging that He exists; it means being obedient to His Word. Those who wish to debate this truth will have their opportunity one day, face-to-face with the Author of Truth. Personally, my debate with scripture is done; the Word won.
Questions or comments? Write curt@smdcog.org
You can find more at my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719).
Also at my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/)
Thanks for reading!
Three weeks ago a brother in Christ took issue with these words that I wrote the week previous: "The Bible speaks very clearly about the sanctity of life; about our responsibility to the poor, the orphaned and the widow; about God's view of homosexual behavior."
I try to follow the guidance of C.S. Lewis, who stated in Mere Christianity, "Our divisions should never be discussed except in the presence of those who have already come to believe that there is one God and that Jesus Christ is His only Son." But I would like to take this opportunity to discuss WHY there are divisions in the church, and divisions with peoples of other faith systems.
A friend of mine, and national speaker for women and youth events, Lori Salierno, says that there are three general areas of belief in the church: standards, convictions, and preferences. For example, divisions in the church about the style of worship are preference differences. Scripture does not speak directly to these issues.
Divisions among believers about the day for worship, the appropriate age for baptism, the manner of baptism (i.e. sprinkling or dunking), and women in ministry are based on conviction. In other words, we believe the Spirit of God has convicted us that "this" way is the way God wants "us" to behave. We don't deny that other Christians have a different understanding. We don't call them non-Christian, or believe that they are sinning. However, if we act in a way, different than the way that God has convicted us to follow, we would be committing an act of sin.
Finally, standards are truths that scripture declares are true for all people, for all times. If someone opposes a standard, the bible calls those actions "sin". The church doesn't label it a sin; individuals don't label it a sin; it is the bible that labels those actions as sins.
While there are some Christ-followers that will identify as standards, the things that I identify as preferences and convictions, most believers will acknowledge these three general areas of belief in the church.
In the late 1960's, intellectuals began toying with an idea called "deconstruction". This idea states that you cannot know what a writer "actually" meant, so you, the reader, must deconstruct what is written and decide for yourself what you think the author meant. In other words, you re-construct what is written in the way that you think it should be read. Actually, the first deconstrucionalist was the serpent in the garden, "That's not what God really meant; you won't surely die."
Armed with this new tool, people have been deconstructing documents for over 40 years and re-constructing them according to their own preference.
They deconstructed the First Amendment to the Constitution which reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. "Surely freedom of speech doesn't mean ALL forms for speech." As a result we have a new type of crime: Hate speech. Additionally, religious expression is being restrained by public law on several fronts.
They deconstructed the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. "Surely they didn't understand that we would need National Health Care." As a result, we are well on our way to a government-run health care system; a power that was not enumerated in the Constitution.
There are also those who deconstruct scripture. Where scripture is clear but uncomfortable, some say, "That's not what God REALLY meant." Sadly, this is where some divisions among believers occur in the area of standards. In past generations this re-construction of scripture was called heresy. Now we timidly say, "That's your understanding of truth; not mine."
As to areas of agreement, my brother is correct in saying that what brings us together is far more important than the things that separate us. But that is also true of my Jewish and Muslim friends. These faith systems, as well as Christianity, all count the Hebrew Scriptures in the Old Testament as holy scripture. There are many areas in which we can all agree. But the areas that divide us are significant.
For example, the Jewish faith does not accept every scripture we accept (i.e. The New Testament). In the other instance, the Muslim faith accepts, as scripture, documents we cannot accept (i.e. The Koran). Interestingly, they are both battling attacks by those who wish to deconstruct their holy scriptures.
This week we celebrated the veterans that have served this country by fighting for and defending freedom in all of its forms. Many of them died for the truths that we find in the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They didn't worry about what the Founders of this nation "really" thought. They clearly understood what was at stake and what the cost could be. They fought for freedom. All gave some; some gave all.
Deconstruction has done damage to the fabric of America and has resulted in the loss of some of the freedoms they fought and died for. Deconstruction has resulted in the creation of an expanded hate crimes law. Someday, we will be reading the report of an individual being charged under this new law for simply speaking his or her mind and defending biblical truth. It could be your pastor. It could be me. It could be you. We were warned and failed to do enough to defend the right to freedom of speech. Someday, someone will have to fight to win it back.
Deconstruction is doing damage to the unity of the church; the unity of all believers who claim to follow Christ. If we begin throwing out the passages of scripture that make us uncomfortable, soon we will have little left that we can call scripture; little left that unites us. Fortunately, scripture defends itself very well, if we have faith to believe what it says.
There is another truth that is clearly spelled out in Scripture. Faith in Christ means more that simply acknowledging that He exists; it means being obedient to His Word. Those who wish to debate this truth will have their opportunity one day, face-to-face with the Author of Truth. Personally, my debate with scripture is done; the Word won.
Questions or comments? Write curt@smdcog.org
You can find more at my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719).
Also at my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/)
Thanks for reading!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
