Why are you so annoyed at having to "Press One for English"

I don't get it!  Why are so many Christians upset because there are people living in America who don't speak English as their first language.  I can understand secular Americans having some phobia about foreigners, but why should Christians really care.  When the church was born on Pentecost, there were people from all over the world speaking various languages in Jerusalem and God's response was the empower people with the Holy Spirit to speak in such a ways as to touch the hearts of all these diverse peoples.

Xenophobia should not be something that afflicts Christians.  In Christ our national origin becomes irrelevant.  The language we speak is irrelevant.  Christ is the only thing that is relevant.  He is the center of our focus, not the national origin or language spoken by those around us.  Don't let the devil distract you from the most important thing.  Following Christ and loving others as Christ has loved you.

How does whining and I stress the word WHINING about whether a person speaks English or not, glorify God?  It doesn't!  Instead it just shows your pettiness and your lack of understanding of Christ and what He has done for us all.  When you complain that someone doesn't speak your language, its like saying, "Go to Hell you foreign devil, you cannot be saved unless you speak my language!"  The arrogance, the hubris of such a statement/attitude affronts and infuriates me.  Do you really think that God cares whether America is the greatest nation or not?  If you do, you have been conned by the devil.  God seeks to unite his children it's the devil who finds all kinds of ways to divide us.  The devil wants to make us think that everyone who is not like us is somehow unworthy of God.  He wants us to hate our neighbors and complain about them and withdraw from getting to know them.  The devil even wants to pit Christian against Christian so that we will not be about doing God's work.  Whining and complaining is not of God, it's of the devil, no matter how right you think you are.

Even in Solomon's time, people tried to set themselves above others.   Often they did so by thinking they were better than others because of their wealth.  But God spoke through His Word and told us that whether we are rich or poor, we are still made in the image of God.  This runs true for national origin, race and language.  The apostle Paul told us in his letter to the church in Galatia, that national origin was irrelevant in Christ and even gender was irrelevant in Christ.  Not that their are not differences, but rather the most important thing is to be united in Christ.  Christ died once for all.  He didn't die just for English speakers or for Hebrew speakers or Russian speakers.  He died so that we would no longer have to rail against our brother and sisters in Christ.  He paid for the sins of every person born and yet to be born.  He died so that we would become subjects of the Kingdom of God, wherever we might live and whatever language we might speak.

Speaking English or living in America doesn't make you any more deserving of God's grace and mercy than anyone else in the world.  Christ didn't die for the American flag.  He didn't die for English language.  He died so that every person in every land and of every language could be set free of the burden of sin and made free to live for Him regardless of where they call home.  He died, was resurrected and sent us the Holy Spirit so that we would be free from hatred and distrust and so that we would be free to love others as Christ loves us.

If you want to be a whiner and an complainer, then why should you call yourself a follower of Christ?  At best you are a secular Christian (lukewarm and not much good for anything) at worst you are totally self-deceived and don't even know Christ.

Just some thoughts

• When we dismiss or degrade other people we dismiss and degrade God; they are made in His image.
• When we complain about the diversity of people we complain about God who created that diversity.
• Which do you put first in your life, the Cross of Christ or your national flag?
• Is it a sin to speak a language other than English in America?
• If the greatest law is loving God and loving our neighbors how is resenting others because they don't speak English loving them?
• America use to be a place where we welcomed the poor and the downtrodden, now we complain about them.
• The Christian inspirational teacher Zig Ziglar suggests that we shouldn't let negative people rent space in our minds, I am thinking why should I let complainers, rent space on my Facebook page?
• Is it wrong for people to seek gainful employment in another country so that they can better things for their children?  Is it morally wrong for them to illegally enter the United States so that they could secure a better future for their children?  Is it morally wrong for them to be willing to work more for less?
• If you want to go Old Testament on me, did you ever consider that God's Word says that we are not to treat foreigners differently than our own people
• Bemoaning things that upset you is not being Light.
• When we worry about how others will affect us then, according to Christian author and psychologist Larry Crabb, we are guilty of "The Sin of Self-protection"

If I have offended you, tough!  The offense is all yours.  Nowhere in the Bible does is say to take offence against a brother or sister.  I am just telling you the truth in love.  If you don't like it you can go right to my Father and He will explain it to you.

Christ said that we would be know by our love.  Judging others or complaining about them because they speak another language that you don't understand is not demonstrating love, it is only demonstrating how little love you have in you.  For my part I have learned to speak another language so that I can reach people for Christ.  I am now qualified to teach people English as an ESL instructor.  What are you going to do to show "foreigners" (a.k.a. your neighbors) the love of Christ?

Happiness, fun and homosexuality

Once again I am provoked by a FB post to blog on another topic.  Does that make me a reactionary? :D

Okay so what about wanting to be happy and wanting to have fun.  In one sense this doesn't sound to bad, it almost sounds plausible.  But I do not think that these statements cannot stand as axioms for life.  Am I apposed to people being happy or to having fun?  Of course not!, But I do think there needs to be some sort of  caveat to go with it; something that says fun or happiness has some sort of conditions or limits on it.

So what is happiness.  I think in its basic form happiness is "I get to do what I like doing."  I am happy when I am watching a good movie, I am happy when my wife is kind and supportive (which nowadays, by the way, is most of the time).  I am happy when I have money to purchase the things I want to have.  I am happy when the sun shines, the temperature is mild and the pollen count is low.  Happiness is conditional.

In the constitution we are guaranteed the right to pursue happiness.  Which is the say that we all have the right to work to pursue some form of happiness (likely in its day it had a different meaning than it holds today).  However the Constitution does not guarantee that I will be happy or that it's the government's job to ensure I am happy.  My happiness is my business.  Other people are not responsible to insure that I will be made happy.  Sometimes others will in fact be unhappy when the right thing or the moral thing is required.  I doubt that many people nowadays are happy about paying taxes, yet it is necessary for a government to govern.  Jesus recognized that when he told the Pharisees that one should render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and render unto God what is God's.  In a way he was saying, "As much as you would like to keep all that you earn for yourself, it isn't possible.  You need to pay the government their taxes (even if they are an oppressive one - which is what the Jews thought of Rome) and you must pay tithe or temple tax so that the church may continue serve the spiritual and physical needs of the people of God.

If children had their way, they would never have to do chores or homework, they would never have to eat anything that is "good for them" and they would be able to play as many games and watch as much TV as they cared to.  But parents know that children most learn some sense of responsibility.  Although there are some who are parents who have not learned this lesson for themselves.  When a parent puts a child on time out or when parent withholds privileges that child is not happy.  Is that wrong? Of course not!  Children do not know what they need (what they must learn to do and not do); initially all they know is what they want or don't want.  I cannot think of anytime I was happy to do the dishes when I was a child but now as an adult, I am happy to see all the dishes cleaned and put away when I come into the kitchen in the morning..  But we should know that parent(s) and the child are not always both able to be happy at the same time.  When a parent says no to a child, it is often because they know that the thing the child thinks they would be happy with, the parent realizes would be harmful to the child's character or physical well being.  We cannot always have what we want.

So then what is fun?  I think fun relates more to our sense of pleasure.  When we do something it gives us some sort of pleasurable feed back.  I think both fun and happiness are related and that the line between them is a fuzzy one.  But back to fun. Sometimes I have heard the response of a person to being warned off doing something to be, "But it's fun"  I must say that being fun cannot be an axiom or criteria for the primary reason to do something.  This NOT me saying that we cannot have fun.  I am just saying that something being fun cannot be the most important criteria for the reason for doing something nor does it legitimise the activity.  Some things are inherently fun and are designed to be fun.  That's okay.  Some things that are meant to be fun can be made un-pleasurable by the circumstances surrounding the activity in question but being "fun" in and of itself does not make something right or needed to be carried out.

So how do we judge an activity or a state of being if not by fun or happiness?  Well I don't really think that is what I am saying.  I think a visit to Disney Land/World should be fun.  I don't think that we should have fun at someone else's expense.  Bullies have fun bullying but they make the lives of those that they bully miserable.  Luckily I escaped being bullied and as far as I know and I never played the part of a bully.  Obviously when we cause someone harm so as to have fun, that is wrong.  But there are times that when we do the right thing that not everyone will be happy with us.

But what happens when world views collide?  What do I do when someone else demands that I change the rules for how I understand the world works because they say that my way is preventing someone else from being happy.  I think there will always be the "No way José" response for some and for others, not wanting to offend, they will quickly surrender their point of view.  I'm in the group that says, "Wow, wait a second is this really something that needs to be changed?"

200 years ago, many people saw nothing wrong with enslaving people based upon skin color or national origin. They saw profit in the subjugation of other races and even found reason from a biblical position (wrongly I would add) for doing so.  So when abolitionist came along and said "Hey slavery was wrong, it must be stopped!"(and by the way abolitionist were devout Christians) there were some deeply entrenched in owning and selling slaves who thought this was crazy.  "How dare you try to turn our world view upside down?"  This happened again for women in their bid to gain equal rights (which they are still struggling for) and yet again with the civil rights movement; led by a prominent Christian Preacher - Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.  His argument that people of all colors should have equal rights touched many people's hearts and his use of nonviolence further validated his cause.

So here we are in the 21st century and we have homosexuals saying they have the same rights as anyone to marry whom they want.  They say that we are denying them happiness and their rights by not legalizing same-sex marriage.  I admit that on one side the argument seems to have some validity.  But I think it is based upon a false premise.  The premise is that they are born that way, much as a black person or a Hispanic is born with darker skin, homosexuals claim as do some scientist and psychologist that they are born that way.  Therefore they see any laws preventing them from doing what straight people are allowed to do, is completely wrong;  much as racial prejudice is wrong. Or so goes the argument.

So do homosexuals need to be married as straight couples are to be happy?  Obviously they think they do, but yet there are so many legal options that are available to them.  They can enter into a legal union as recognized by the state.  They can put their possessions and estates into non-transferable trusts.  So there are (as far as I understand) legal actions they can take to validate and protect their estates to ensure that marriage would offer.  So do we really need to change the definition of marriage from a man and a woman to any two humans.  I have to say no but this doesn't give me the right to be hateful and even angry about homosexuals wanting some recognition as people.

I don't believe that homosexuals are born that way, yet still I don't believe that it is merely a choice (although recent changes in the law of some states make this more likely to be the case).  Homosexual's claims that they have always felt that way says their is something deep in their psyche at work.  I think if I was suffering such strange urges it would be very unsettling.  I would look at nature and the function of sexual organs, and I would know something is a miss. But where does one turn for help?  Unfortunately with the current trends in psychology, homosexuality is seen as normal and psychologists try to help people come to terms with it rather finding a way out of it.  It seems like a kind thing to do, but would you do that for a child-molester, for a drug addict or a sociopath?  These people also have urges that stem from deep seated problems or even failures to mature as a human.  We want to help these folks, but for homosexuals, some want to validate them.  The truth is that psychology has failed in some respects to effectively deal with these issues.  They can identify, but not cure and to add to it, homosexuals don't want to be cured they want acceptance.

I am left with "Love never fails."  I think that what we need to do is to love homosexuals as people created in the image of our God.  We need to introduce them to Jesus and trust that He will change them through his Holy Spirit and the Word of God.  We cannot help people by merely arguing with them and we cannot help them by demanding they conform to God's or our standards.  We need engage them, talk to them, help them wrestle with the deep things of life and faith.  We don't need to condemn them.  Unfortunately very few people I know in the faith are equipped, ready,and prepared for giving such loving help.

Christ's ways are the ways of love.  Love seeks the better of the other.  Love does not react out of fear or hatred.  Loving someone doesn't mean you have to agree with them or accept their lifestyle choices, but it does mean that you try to see who God has made them to be and introduce them to the One who can redeem even the most reprobate sinner.

So is sticking with the current model of man-woman marriage denying homosexuals happiness? I don't think so.  Is it denying them a validation of their life style? Yes.  Do we as a society need to validate same sex marriage?  No, there are other avenues available.  We won't lower age of consent for sex to appease or decriminalize pedophiles even though many societies recognize the threshold of adulthood to be 12 years of age so why try to appease this group who wants to redefine marriage.  I apologize if I have offended you by making this comparison, but there are currently advocates for child sex who are even writing books to encourage other pedophiles.  Its seems here we are on the edge of a very slippery slope.  Some are pushing others are trying to hold this back.

I know this article has moved to a very emotional and political point, but it all comes back to this.  Do we have to give in to other's wishes just because they say something is fun or that it would make them happy?  I think we have to weigh such requests carefully and neither dismiss them out of hand nor just cave in to someone else's desires.

Being a Christian can be fun and as Christians we can be happy in participating in the faith life of the community of Christ.  But we need to realize that neither happiness nor fun are in and of themselves true criteria for determining what is right.  And condemning something because it is seen as "fun" is just as pointless.  Weigh all things in the light of God's Word and God's Holy Spirit.  Trust that God will help you enjoy this life that He has given you.  Trust that even in the things that are not fun or that do not make you happy, that there is room for God to move and bring about what is right and true.

The Law of the Jungle vs. The Law of Love

Today I was very struck by a short video I watched on FaceBook posted by a friend of mine.  The video addressed the differences between how we think wealth should be, how we think it is and how it actually is distributed in America.  I was not shocked as some of you may be.  I know that the top 1 % of the wealthy hold a huge part of the pie.  But for your edification I provide this clip to look at before I continue with my post.
Wealth Inequality in America

I guess what I wanted to say was that those in the "Liberal" part of the house that are atheist and who support the idea of evolution, this is the right and normal outcome.  With no God there is no right and wrong outside of "The Law of the Jungle"  Which is he (or she) with the most toys is the best evolutionary adapted and is deserving of that wealth.  There is no real fair and right and just outside of the "Judeu-Christian" world view.  Without there being One True God to rule over us and to hold us accountable, He or she who is strongest, fastest or meanest is bound to win.  Outside of Christianity in a world ordered by evolution and our selfish mitochondria there is really no such thing as fairness or right and wrong.

In the eye of evolution the bully is just a well adapted person who is rightly exerting their dominance over another weaker individual.  Without Judeo-Christian fairness and justice, there is no such thing as rape or abuse being wrong.  There is only the strong exerting their power over the weak, which in evolution's eye is apt.  The rule of Law (both The Bible and governmental) is only right and effective in a society where all the men and women recognize a higher power who punishes the criminal and blesses the law keeper; where we recognize there are absolutes in right and wrong.

Evolution doesn't teach love your neighbor, it approves of your taking advantage of your neighbor.  He or she is just someone to be dominated or feared.  Your neighbor is either a threat or a potential source of material to increase your own wealth.  Evolution doesn't encourage an ordered society apart from the strong ruling over the weak.  Evolution doesn't distinguish between popularity, intellectual power and brutality; whatever works is the rule of thumb in evolution.

Consider the problem of inner-city gang violence; it is just a symptom of a society which has put greed, acquisition of wealth and popularity as the ear marks of a successful life.  And really the video linked above is just proof of the law of the jungle at work.  Maybe those who hold the majority of the wealth are more stylish in the acquisition of material wealth than the inner city gang leader, but the result is the same - gaining wealth and power at someone else's expense.  Evolution says this is normal, Judeu-Christian values say this is unjust.

So how do we get out of this mess?  Well, first we who are Christians can begin to live as Christ did, and stop judging our success based upon wealth, comfort and fame - in other words actually living like The Golden Rule really is a true measure of our faith. Second we can work to share the Good News in every avenue of our life.  If we really do believe and we really are going to let Christ reign as our Lord and Savior, then his values must become our values.  He died on the cross so that every man, women and child, could have opportunity to come to the saving knowledge of God.  We Christians must learn to live the kind of life based upon God's love that will demonstrate the reality of The Law of Love; therefore we must reject standards of behavior and success which are not in line with Christ's love and life.

Then we will have to police ourselves to ensure that God's love is the dominant theme at work in our lives.  That love puts relationship above wealth, notoriety and personal power. We should live such lives that demonstrate the reality of God's love at work in our hearts.  We cannot do this in and of ourselves, because like all those around us, there is a broken, selfish, greedy person living inside each of us.  We have to choose which part of us we are going to feed.  Whichever we feed, it is that part of us that will dominate our lives.

Until Christ returns there will always be those who reject him and chase after all these things that are bringing ruin on our world, but the more of us that are pursuing God and rejecting these values then the better things will be.  We can't just hunker down and wait for "The Rapture" hoping to make it till He comes back.  We are called to be salt and light in the world.  We can and must make a difference in the world.  It doesn't mean we will fix everything, but if we learn to love our neighbors as ourselves, I cannot but think that life will be much better.

Blessings,
Preacher Al