Something incredibly rare happened in New York City on Monday, November 24. Not one single person reported a shooting, stabbing or some other violent crime. New York Police Department chief spokesman, Paul Browne, told Reuters that it was the "first time in memory" the city's police force had experienced such a peaceful day.
With a population of almost eight million people, New York City knows violent crime. From 2,245 murders in 1990; this year, the city's murder rate is on target to hit its lowest point since 1960. The Police Department is hoping for less than 400 murders in 2012. Now, that is good news.
Good News is always good, especially when one is surrounded with bad news. That was true for the shepherds in Bethlehem when they were told by an angel “I bring you good news of great joy…” At that period in history, shepherds stood on the bottom rung of the Palestinian social ladder. They shared the same status as tax collectors and dung sweepers.
In reporting the story of the birth of Jesus, Luke says that the shepherds were “living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night” (Luke 2:8). As second class and untrustworthy Jews, no one expected them to host angelic messengers.
Near Eastern Studies scholar, the late Dr. Joachim Jeremias, contended that shepherds were despised in everyday life. They were deprived of all civil rights. They could not fulfill judicial offices or be admitted in court as witnesses. According to Jeremias, “to buy wool, milk or a kid from a shepherd was forbidden on the assumption that it would be stolen property.”
One wonders, why would angels choose shepherds to announce the birth of Jesus? They could have opted for the religious or political elite of the day. It is obvious, even with the announcement of His birth, it would seem that the name of Jesus was never to be associated with snobbery and class prejudice - the good news was for everyone, not merely the elite.
The New Testament was clear in reporting the words of the angel – “I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people” (Luke 2:10). We are reading this information more than 2,000 years later, and can confirm that the good news of Jesus’ birth continues to have a global audience and impact.
Interestingly, the term “good news,” is a single compound word in Greek. It is the same word from which we get the English word gospel. Hence, the gospel is good news. For New Testament writers, this was more than a play on words. They actually believed, witnessed and passionately taught that the coming of Jesus was good news to the world.
Many of those New Testament eyewitnesses gave their lives in the process of sharing the message of good news to the world. Thankfully, millions have followed them in paying the ultimate price to share with others the message and mission of Jesus. The impact of that sharing is evident, not only in the size of Christian churches, but more so in the influence of Christian values in society. These values are consistent with the message of transformation, integral to the coming of Jesus.
Even a cursory study of the history of hospitals and health care will recognize the contribution of the Christian message. The same can be said of major universities and education on a whole, especially in the western world.
Despite attempts to deconstruct history by deleting the role of Christianity in many institutions, it is more than apparent that Christianity influenced the abolition of slavery and infanticide. In addition, it is because of the Christian ethic that the outrage against euthanasia and abortion persists.
Sometimes one wonders, where would civilization be today without Christian notions of compassion and forgiveness? In attempting to answer, simply peruse the history of institutions like the Boy Scout movement, YMCA, Credit Union, Salvation Army, Habitat for Humanity and so many others. Serious students of history in civil liberties, medicine, the arts, economics, science and the humanities, often express a sense of awe, because of the influence of Christianity in the birthing of these disciplines.
However, the good news of the birth of Jesus was not only intended to influence horizontal relationships. The birth was primarily intended to bring about vertical relationships with the God of heaven. Jesus Himself said, “I have come that you might have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10). That fullness of life Jesus promised is both for now and eternity – that is good news.
However, the good news of Christmas is more than a once a year celebration. It is best reflected in a lifestyle, displayed throughout the year. Agreed, the Christmas season provides additional opportunities to care and share, but it does not stop there. It is a spirit that should influence us throughout the year.
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Monday, December 3, 2012
EXACTLY WHEN Was Jesus Born?
History provides no precise information about the birth of Jesus. It would seem, Jews had very little interest in celebrating births and non-Jewish historians wrote with little precision. Our interest in details like month, day and even time of day, were not characteristic of ancient historians.
In reporting the story of Jesus’ birth, both Matthew and Luke clearly demonstrated that His birth was a fact of history. Whereas Matthew aligned the birth with Herod the Great, Luke focused on Roman Emperor Caesar Augustus. Historians would concur with Matthew and Luke that Herod ruled in Judea while Augustus was emperor from Rome, the capital of the Roman Empire.
In order to satisfy today’s desire for precise information, one would need to reconstruct the information currently available. For instance, Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus seemed quite certain that Herod died on or before April 4, 04 BCE. From Matthew we learn that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod died (Matthew 2:13-16).
Deductions from Luke 3:23 and John 2:20 would also place the birth of Jesus sometime around 06-04 BC/BCE. This conclusion would require some knowledge of Herod’s rebuilding of the Temple in 20 BCE.
In his presentation of the birth, Luke also adds, that the events took place “while Quirinius was governor of Syria.” Historians are now confirming that the Quirinius to whom Luke referred, served as governor on two occasions. One census took place during his first term in office and another in 06 CE, during his second term. These procedures took place every 14 years.
Jesus could not have been born during this second term – Herod was already dead. However, based on the 14 year cycle, Jesus should have been born in 08 BCE. However, because of political conflicts with Herod and Rome, it is believed that the census was delayed by about two years. Here again, that would place the birth of Jesus sometime between 06-04 BCE.
Whereas much of this information may seem to have little value to Christians, it is critical for dialog with skeptics who question the historical Jesus. Some of this questioning is based on the choice of December 25th as the birthday of Jesus.
For more than 200 years, no one seemed to care about celebrating the birth of Jesus. The church even announced that it was sinful to contemplate observing Christ’s birthday “as though He were a King Pharaoh.”
The idea to celebrate the birth of Jesus on December 25 was first suggested sometime in the year 300. Other dates like January 6, March 25 and May 20 were suggested. May 20 became a favored date since Luke stated in his report – the shepherds who received the announcement of Christ’s birth “were watching their flock by night” (Luke 2:8).
Scholars argue that shepherds guarded their flocks day and night only at lambing time, in the spring.
The early church fathers debated their options and chose December 25 because this date was a popular pagan festival to honor the birthday of Mithras, the “Invincible Sun God.” So, it was not until December 25, 337 AD/CE, Christians officially celebrated the first Christmas.
Some historians contend that in the early 300’s, the cult of Mithraism was a serious threat to Christianity. For a period of time Mithraism was even proclaimed to be the official state religion by Emperor Aurelian (274). It was not until the reign of Emperor Constantine, Christianity began to receive favor from the state.
In 337, Constantine gave December 25 his blessing to observe the birth of Jesus. With time the observance of Christmas eclipsed the pagan festival of honoring the birthday of Mithras. Initially, the celebration of Christ’s birth was a sacred event. In Christ’s honor, there was Christ’s mass – from which we get the term Christmas.
Through the centuries Christmas has become an amalgam of traditions. The sacredness has been lost and today, many see it as anything but a sacred event. As Christians, we would be doing ourselves and the Lord Jesus a disservice, if we were to celebrate this season as anything but a season of sacred reflection. The date should only provide an opportunity to celebrate His historic birth and to recall His purpose for coming into this world.
For additional study, I would strongly recommend James Veitch’s article on Scythian monk, Dionysius Exiguus.
In reporting the story of Jesus’ birth, both Matthew and Luke clearly demonstrated that His birth was a fact of history. Whereas Matthew aligned the birth with Herod the Great, Luke focused on Roman Emperor Caesar Augustus. Historians would concur with Matthew and Luke that Herod ruled in Judea while Augustus was emperor from Rome, the capital of the Roman Empire.
In order to satisfy today’s desire for precise information, one would need to reconstruct the information currently available. For instance, Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus seemed quite certain that Herod died on or before April 4, 04 BCE. From Matthew we learn that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod died (Matthew 2:13-16).
Deductions from Luke 3:23 and John 2:20 would also place the birth of Jesus sometime around 06-04 BC/BCE. This conclusion would require some knowledge of Herod’s rebuilding of the Temple in 20 BCE.
In his presentation of the birth, Luke also adds, that the events took place “while Quirinius was governor of Syria.” Historians are now confirming that the Quirinius to whom Luke referred, served as governor on two occasions. One census took place during his first term in office and another in 06 CE, during his second term. These procedures took place every 14 years.
Jesus could not have been born during this second term – Herod was already dead. However, based on the 14 year cycle, Jesus should have been born in 08 BCE. However, because of political conflicts with Herod and Rome, it is believed that the census was delayed by about two years. Here again, that would place the birth of Jesus sometime between 06-04 BCE.
Whereas much of this information may seem to have little value to Christians, it is critical for dialog with skeptics who question the historical Jesus. Some of this questioning is based on the choice of December 25th as the birthday of Jesus.
For more than 200 years, no one seemed to care about celebrating the birth of Jesus. The church even announced that it was sinful to contemplate observing Christ’s birthday “as though He were a King Pharaoh.”
The idea to celebrate the birth of Jesus on December 25 was first suggested sometime in the year 300. Other dates like January 6, March 25 and May 20 were suggested. May 20 became a favored date since Luke stated in his report – the shepherds who received the announcement of Christ’s birth “were watching their flock by night” (Luke 2:8).
Scholars argue that shepherds guarded their flocks day and night only at lambing time, in the spring.
The early church fathers debated their options and chose December 25 because this date was a popular pagan festival to honor the birthday of Mithras, the “Invincible Sun God.” So, it was not until December 25, 337 AD/CE, Christians officially celebrated the first Christmas.
Some historians contend that in the early 300’s, the cult of Mithraism was a serious threat to Christianity. For a period of time Mithraism was even proclaimed to be the official state religion by Emperor Aurelian (274). It was not until the reign of Emperor Constantine, Christianity began to receive favor from the state.
In 337, Constantine gave December 25 his blessing to observe the birth of Jesus. With time the observance of Christmas eclipsed the pagan festival of honoring the birthday of Mithras. Initially, the celebration of Christ’s birth was a sacred event. In Christ’s honor, there was Christ’s mass – from which we get the term Christmas.
Through the centuries Christmas has become an amalgam of traditions. The sacredness has been lost and today, many see it as anything but a sacred event. As Christians, we would be doing ourselves and the Lord Jesus a disservice, if we were to celebrate this season as anything but a season of sacred reflection. The date should only provide an opportunity to celebrate His historic birth and to recall His purpose for coming into this world.
For additional study, I would strongly recommend James Veitch’s article on Scythian monk, Dionysius Exiguus.
Monday, November 26, 2012
Why Jerusalem?
“No city is more important to the peace of the world than Jerusalem” – I believe New York Times bestseller Dore Gold is correct. Since Jerusalem was declared the capital of Israel in 1,000 BCE by King David, more countries have fought over it than any other city in the world. During its long history, Jerusalem has been destroyed at least twice, besieged 23 times, attacked 52 times, and captured and recaptured 44 times.
Today, Jerusalem is less than 50 square miles. However, much of the trouble is about an area, just half a square mile in size. It is often referred to as the Old City and is divided into Jewish, Muslim, Christian and Armenian quarters. In this area one would find some of the holiest sites of the world’s three major religions.
Within this half a square mile area is a hilltop platform complex, the 35-acre Temple Mount. Formerly known as Mount Moriah, this is the area Solomon used to build the Temple in 950 BCE (2 Chronicles 3:1). It is the same area where the destroyed Temple was rebuilt, following the Jewish exile in Babylon (516 BCE). As a favor to the Jews, Herod the Great demolished and built a new Temple on that same site in 20 BCE.
It was Herod’s Temple with which Jesus was familiar. That Temple was destroyed by the Romans (70 CE), just as Jesus predicted. In 135, under Emperor Hadrian, the Romans further crushed the Jews. Dio Cassius estimated that more than half a million Jews died during the rebellion. The Jews were kicked out of Jerusalem and the city was renamed. Judea was also renamed Palestine, in order to eradicate permanently the memory of Jewish independence.
For centuries the Romans banned the Jews from Jerusalem. Annually, they were allowed to observe the destruction of the Temple by mourning at the Western Wall, which became known as the Wailing Wall. The Wall was the only symbol left to remind the Jews of the Temple.
Because of their love for Jerusalem, Jews in other countries built synagogues facing Jerusalem. A similar passion for Jerusalem and what it represented can be seen in Psalm 137, as the writer described life in Babylon, after the first Temple was destroyed.
Following the destruction of the Temple and the banishment of the Jews from Jerusalem in 135, the memories of the city were preserved in Jewish culture and prayers. These practices placed Jerusalem at the core of Jewish belief and consciousness. Because the Jews were driven from their homeland by force, they always looked forward to returning home. Their bond with the land had never been severed.
When the Muslims invaded Jerusalem in 637, they headed straight for Jerusalem. Muslims believe the prophet Muhammad had his night vision from Jerusalem - and not just Jerusalem, but from the hilltop complex 35-acre Temple Mount. Muslims believe that in that vision Muhammad was taken to heaven by the Angel Gabriel and saw Abraham, Moses and Jesus, before being ushered into the very presence of God.
As a memorial, Muslims decided to erect the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount in 688. In 705, the al-Aqsa mosque was also built on the Temple Mount. Both structures are still at this location, thus making it impossible for the Jews to rebuild the Temple on the same spot where the former temples were built.
The presence of the Muslims in the region launched a reign of terror that lasted for hundreds of years, partially culminating in the Crusades. In 1099 Jerusalem was seized from the Muslims. In 1187, the Muslims recaptured the city. However, the fight for Jerusalem continued for centuries.
When the British defeated the Muslims during World War I, signs of a Jewish homeland appeared more likely. The Holocaust of 1933-45 and the murder of some six million Jews by Germany made it very clear that the Jews needed their own homeland to be able to protect themselves.
With the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948 and the resurrection of Jerusalem as the capital of the nation, the Arab-Israeli War began in 1948. Subsequent wars and skirmishes, including the recent Gaza battle, all have religious undertones for control of Jerusalem.
In essence, the historical quest for Jerusalem is religious. The Psalmist was correct in asking that we “pray for the peace of Jerusalem” (Psalm 122:6). In addition, when Jesus was asked by His disciples about His return, He said in Luke 21 – watch for developments in Jerusalem, just like you would watch the fig tree sprouting its leaves.
Interestingly, Judaism, Christianity and Islam all believe that it is only the Prince of Peace who would bring peace to Jerusalem. The big question though, who is this Prince of Peace? In upcoming commentaries we will talk about Him as we approach the Christmas season.
Today, Jerusalem is less than 50 square miles. However, much of the trouble is about an area, just half a square mile in size. It is often referred to as the Old City and is divided into Jewish, Muslim, Christian and Armenian quarters. In this area one would find some of the holiest sites of the world’s three major religions.
Within this half a square mile area is a hilltop platform complex, the 35-acre Temple Mount. Formerly known as Mount Moriah, this is the area Solomon used to build the Temple in 950 BCE (2 Chronicles 3:1). It is the same area where the destroyed Temple was rebuilt, following the Jewish exile in Babylon (516 BCE). As a favor to the Jews, Herod the Great demolished and built a new Temple on that same site in 20 BCE.
It was Herod’s Temple with which Jesus was familiar. That Temple was destroyed by the Romans (70 CE), just as Jesus predicted. In 135, under Emperor Hadrian, the Romans further crushed the Jews. Dio Cassius estimated that more than half a million Jews died during the rebellion. The Jews were kicked out of Jerusalem and the city was renamed. Judea was also renamed Palestine, in order to eradicate permanently the memory of Jewish independence.
For centuries the Romans banned the Jews from Jerusalem. Annually, they were allowed to observe the destruction of the Temple by mourning at the Western Wall, which became known as the Wailing Wall. The Wall was the only symbol left to remind the Jews of the Temple.
Because of their love for Jerusalem, Jews in other countries built synagogues facing Jerusalem. A similar passion for Jerusalem and what it represented can be seen in Psalm 137, as the writer described life in Babylon, after the first Temple was destroyed.
Following the destruction of the Temple and the banishment of the Jews from Jerusalem in 135, the memories of the city were preserved in Jewish culture and prayers. These practices placed Jerusalem at the core of Jewish belief and consciousness. Because the Jews were driven from their homeland by force, they always looked forward to returning home. Their bond with the land had never been severed.
When the Muslims invaded Jerusalem in 637, they headed straight for Jerusalem. Muslims believe the prophet Muhammad had his night vision from Jerusalem - and not just Jerusalem, but from the hilltop complex 35-acre Temple Mount. Muslims believe that in that vision Muhammad was taken to heaven by the Angel Gabriel and saw Abraham, Moses and Jesus, before being ushered into the very presence of God.
As a memorial, Muslims decided to erect the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount in 688. In 705, the al-Aqsa mosque was also built on the Temple Mount. Both structures are still at this location, thus making it impossible for the Jews to rebuild the Temple on the same spot where the former temples were built.
The presence of the Muslims in the region launched a reign of terror that lasted for hundreds of years, partially culminating in the Crusades. In 1099 Jerusalem was seized from the Muslims. In 1187, the Muslims recaptured the city. However, the fight for Jerusalem continued for centuries.
When the British defeated the Muslims during World War I, signs of a Jewish homeland appeared more likely. The Holocaust of 1933-45 and the murder of some six million Jews by Germany made it very clear that the Jews needed their own homeland to be able to protect themselves.
With the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948 and the resurrection of Jerusalem as the capital of the nation, the Arab-Israeli War began in 1948. Subsequent wars and skirmishes, including the recent Gaza battle, all have religious undertones for control of Jerusalem.
In essence, the historical quest for Jerusalem is religious. The Psalmist was correct in asking that we “pray for the peace of Jerusalem” (Psalm 122:6). In addition, when Jesus was asked by His disciples about His return, He said in Luke 21 – watch for developments in Jerusalem, just like you would watch the fig tree sprouting its leaves.
Interestingly, Judaism, Christianity and Islam all believe that it is only the Prince of Peace who would bring peace to Jerusalem. The big question though, who is this Prince of Peace? In upcoming commentaries we will talk about Him as we approach the Christmas season.
Monday, November 19, 2012
Say Thank You AND LIVE LONGER
In his 1998 American Psychological Association presidential address, Martin P. Seligman, an eminent psychology professor, announced that he was founding a new science of "positive psychology." According to Seligman, “psychology had too long focused on the negative side of human nature and it was time to rigorously study the positive.” Seligman was calling for a rigorous, empirical approach. He was able to jump start the field with a $100,000 prize from the John Templeton Foundation for the best research project in this new area.
Further to Seligman’s initiative, major universities are now offering courses in The Science of Happiness, Forgiveness and Gratitude. With the 2012 Thanksgiving Day just a few days away, it would seem appropriate to look at gratitude through the eyes of behavioral scientists.
What is Gratitude?
Gratitude is a basic human emotion. It is expressed in some way by all ancient and modern cultures. According to Dr. Robert Emmons, a leading gratitude researcher and author of the book, Thanks! How Practicing Gratitude Can Make You Happier, the idea of receiving a gift is central to the concept of gratitude.
While merely appreciating something for its positive qualities does have a positive impact on our lives and emotions, gratitude takes the next step beyond. Gratitude happens when we go beyond just appreciating something to acknowledging that we have received something that we did nothing to earn or deserve. On some level, the warm emotional rush we feel when we really feel gratitude is very much like the glow we feel from realizing we are unconditionally loved.
The Power of Gratitude
New research shows that practicing gratitude may be the fastest single pathway to happiness, health, long life, and prosperity. In a remarkable study performed by Dr. Emmons, people who kept a gratitude journal for just three weeks measured 25% higher on a life satisfaction scale. They exercised more, drank alcohol less, and their families and friends noticed that they were nicer to be around. And the effects lasted for several months beyond the initial three week study.
Other studies on gratitude are confirming these results. People who take the time to notice and appreciate the good things that come their way through grace, or luck, or the goodness of others are happier and more peaceful. They do better on cognitive tests and tests of problem solving skills. They practice healthier habits, have better relationships, are more optimistic and live longer. Gratitude is one powerful emotion.
New Testament Gratitude
The power of gratitude is illustrated in the story of the ten lepers, recorded in Luke’s gospel. Of the ten lepers that were healed, one returned to say thanks. There are at least three lessons we can learn from that thankful leper:
1. Giving thanks is an intentional act of looking back. Giving thanks requires reflection. Furthermore, it assumes appreciation for the thing received. As an intentional act, giving thanks demands that we rearrange our priorities and make space for this expression of appreciation.
2. Giving thanks is an expression of thoughtfulness. Giving thanks provides opportunities to affirm others. It esteems and validates others. The person giving thanks chooses to shine the floodlight on the giver and the gift received.
3. Giving thanks is a display of humility. In giving thanks, one is acknowledging that a desire has been met. In expressing thanks, one is becoming vulnerable, in that one is affirming that there was a need and that need was met. Actually, giving thanks undermines pride and focuses on others. In essence, giving thanks tenderizes one’s attitudes.
Behavioral scientists are now confirming that people with a greater level of gratitude tend to have stronger relationships in that they appreciate their loved ones more. Studies confirm that thankful people are happier, display improved mental alertness, sleep better and tend to be healthier. Thankful people are also better equipped to offer emotional support to others.
Research is also confirming that thankful people take better care of themselves and engage in more protective health behaviors. They tend to be more optimistic, a characteristic that researchers say boosts the immune system. Did you know that optimistic patients are better prepared to undergo surgery and experience better health outcomes?
In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul contended that thankfulness is a product of the control of the Holy Spirit in Christians (Ephesians 5:18-21). Paul argues that when a Christian is “filled/controlled with the Spirit”, the Christian acquires an appreciative disposition. I pray that that disposition would be very visible in you and me during this Thanksgiving season. Happy Thanksgiving!
Further to Seligman’s initiative, major universities are now offering courses in The Science of Happiness, Forgiveness and Gratitude. With the 2012 Thanksgiving Day just a few days away, it would seem appropriate to look at gratitude through the eyes of behavioral scientists.
What is Gratitude?
Gratitude is a basic human emotion. It is expressed in some way by all ancient and modern cultures. According to Dr. Robert Emmons, a leading gratitude researcher and author of the book, Thanks! How Practicing Gratitude Can Make You Happier, the idea of receiving a gift is central to the concept of gratitude.
While merely appreciating something for its positive qualities does have a positive impact on our lives and emotions, gratitude takes the next step beyond. Gratitude happens when we go beyond just appreciating something to acknowledging that we have received something that we did nothing to earn or deserve. On some level, the warm emotional rush we feel when we really feel gratitude is very much like the glow we feel from realizing we are unconditionally loved.
The Power of Gratitude
New research shows that practicing gratitude may be the fastest single pathway to happiness, health, long life, and prosperity. In a remarkable study performed by Dr. Emmons, people who kept a gratitude journal for just three weeks measured 25% higher on a life satisfaction scale. They exercised more, drank alcohol less, and their families and friends noticed that they were nicer to be around. And the effects lasted for several months beyond the initial three week study.
Other studies on gratitude are confirming these results. People who take the time to notice and appreciate the good things that come their way through grace, or luck, or the goodness of others are happier and more peaceful. They do better on cognitive tests and tests of problem solving skills. They practice healthier habits, have better relationships, are more optimistic and live longer. Gratitude is one powerful emotion.
New Testament Gratitude
The power of gratitude is illustrated in the story of the ten lepers, recorded in Luke’s gospel. Of the ten lepers that were healed, one returned to say thanks. There are at least three lessons we can learn from that thankful leper:
1. Giving thanks is an intentional act of looking back. Giving thanks requires reflection. Furthermore, it assumes appreciation for the thing received. As an intentional act, giving thanks demands that we rearrange our priorities and make space for this expression of appreciation.
2. Giving thanks is an expression of thoughtfulness. Giving thanks provides opportunities to affirm others. It esteems and validates others. The person giving thanks chooses to shine the floodlight on the giver and the gift received.
3. Giving thanks is a display of humility. In giving thanks, one is acknowledging that a desire has been met. In expressing thanks, one is becoming vulnerable, in that one is affirming that there was a need and that need was met. Actually, giving thanks undermines pride and focuses on others. In essence, giving thanks tenderizes one’s attitudes.
Behavioral scientists are now confirming that people with a greater level of gratitude tend to have stronger relationships in that they appreciate their loved ones more. Studies confirm that thankful people are happier, display improved mental alertness, sleep better and tend to be healthier. Thankful people are also better equipped to offer emotional support to others.
Research is also confirming that thankful people take better care of themselves and engage in more protective health behaviors. They tend to be more optimistic, a characteristic that researchers say boosts the immune system. Did you know that optimistic patients are better prepared to undergo surgery and experience better health outcomes?
In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul contended that thankfulness is a product of the control of the Holy Spirit in Christians (Ephesians 5:18-21). Paul argues that when a Christian is “filled/controlled with the Spirit”, the Christian acquires an appreciative disposition. I pray that that disposition would be very visible in you and me during this Thanksgiving season. Happy Thanksgiving!
Monday, November 12, 2012
2012 ELECTIONS LOSSES Bigger Than White House
The results of the recent elections were very disappointing for evangelicals. According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, some 80% of evangelicals voted for Republican candidate, Mitt Romney. According to pre-election polls, Romney received a larger slice of the evangelical vote than any previous Republican presidential candidate. However, Romney and the Republicans lost.
At the state level, evangelicals also lost on a number of social issues. Voters in more than one state passed referenda supporting gay marriage. This marks the first time for any state to legalize same-sex marriage by the expressed will of the people, rather than through court rulings or legislation. Other social issues included abortion funding and legalization of marijuana.
In light of these losses, Ed Stetzer, President of Life Way Research believes “we should begin thinking about what it looks like to be the church in a ‘post-culture war’ era.” Simply put, evangelicals seemed to have lost a worldview battle, often referred to as “the culture war”.
According to Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, “evangelical Christians must see the 2012 election as a catastrophe for crucial moral concerns.” Mohler believes “we face a worldview challenge that is far greater than any political challenge.” The question facing us is clear – how can we winsomely convince Americans to share our moral convictions about marriage, sex, the sanctity of life and a range of other moral issues?
It was with that question in mind I shared in a recent post-election sermon – when it seems okay to ridicule a priest because his prayer to God was unacceptable, you know we are in trouble. Or, when it seems okay for a political party to remove the need for God and the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel from its platform, you know we are in trouble. Actually, before our eyes we are witnessing the reshaping of a culture that is against the idea of Christian values in the marketplace.
The results of the November elections made it clear that politics is not the answer we need to confront the moral decline in America. In the words of Richard Stearns, president of World Vision, “we need to go back to the basics of living as disciples of Christ, living missionally for Christ and demonstrating the Gospel in tangible ways within our schools, workplaces and communities.” In other words, Christians need to get back to what we know best – serving others with the support of our faith communities, rather than to the beat of political drums.
The admonition of the Apostle Paul is appropriate at this time. In Romans 12:2, he urges the Christians in Rome to discontinue the practice of allowing the world to squeeze them into a mold. This is how The Message describes the verse: “Don’t become so well-adjusted to your culture that you fit into it without even thinking.” Or, “don’t copy the behavior and customs of this world” (NLT).
The New Testament writers are saying to us that we should not allow non-Christian ways of thinking to influence our thoughts or actions. For instance, the political practice of demonizing your opponent in order to dissuade others from voting for the challenger is a non-Christian practice. It must be opposed vehemently, regardless of the party responsible for the demonizing. Our commitment to civil discourse must not be defined in political terms. Whenever we allow such practices to guide our thinking, we are allowing a non-Christian worldview to squeeze us into its mold.
Rather than give-in to conformity, we should be “transformed by the renewing of [our] minds” (Romans 12:2). In essence, we ought to arrange our thinking to reason ‘Christianly’. Our values should not be defined by politicians. Our values must be in line with our primary allegiance – and that is not to ‘Ceasar’, but to God.
We must call on our politicians to pursue the common good – to care for the most vulnerable among us, including the unborn, the poor and the immigrant. We must continue to stand in defense of life, marriage and religious freedom. Like Cardinal Timothy Dolan, we must pray for the President and everyone in leadership – “that they help restore a sense of civility to the public order, so our public conversations may be imbued with respect and charity toward everyone.”
The cultural war is not an imaginary battle. It is real and must be fought in the spirit of Philippians 4:8 – “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable – if anything is excellent or praiseworthy – think about such things” (allow such things to shape your thinking).
At the state level, evangelicals also lost on a number of social issues. Voters in more than one state passed referenda supporting gay marriage. This marks the first time for any state to legalize same-sex marriage by the expressed will of the people, rather than through court rulings or legislation. Other social issues included abortion funding and legalization of marijuana.
In light of these losses, Ed Stetzer, President of Life Way Research believes “we should begin thinking about what it looks like to be the church in a ‘post-culture war’ era.” Simply put, evangelicals seemed to have lost a worldview battle, often referred to as “the culture war”.
According to Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, “evangelical Christians must see the 2012 election as a catastrophe for crucial moral concerns.” Mohler believes “we face a worldview challenge that is far greater than any political challenge.” The question facing us is clear – how can we winsomely convince Americans to share our moral convictions about marriage, sex, the sanctity of life and a range of other moral issues?
It was with that question in mind I shared in a recent post-election sermon – when it seems okay to ridicule a priest because his prayer to God was unacceptable, you know we are in trouble. Or, when it seems okay for a political party to remove the need for God and the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel from its platform, you know we are in trouble. Actually, before our eyes we are witnessing the reshaping of a culture that is against the idea of Christian values in the marketplace.
The results of the November elections made it clear that politics is not the answer we need to confront the moral decline in America. In the words of Richard Stearns, president of World Vision, “we need to go back to the basics of living as disciples of Christ, living missionally for Christ and demonstrating the Gospel in tangible ways within our schools, workplaces and communities.” In other words, Christians need to get back to what we know best – serving others with the support of our faith communities, rather than to the beat of political drums.
The admonition of the Apostle Paul is appropriate at this time. In Romans 12:2, he urges the Christians in Rome to discontinue the practice of allowing the world to squeeze them into a mold. This is how The Message describes the verse: “Don’t become so well-adjusted to your culture that you fit into it without even thinking.” Or, “don’t copy the behavior and customs of this world” (NLT).
The New Testament writers are saying to us that we should not allow non-Christian ways of thinking to influence our thoughts or actions. For instance, the political practice of demonizing your opponent in order to dissuade others from voting for the challenger is a non-Christian practice. It must be opposed vehemently, regardless of the party responsible for the demonizing. Our commitment to civil discourse must not be defined in political terms. Whenever we allow such practices to guide our thinking, we are allowing a non-Christian worldview to squeeze us into its mold.
Rather than give-in to conformity, we should be “transformed by the renewing of [our] minds” (Romans 12:2). In essence, we ought to arrange our thinking to reason ‘Christianly’. Our values should not be defined by politicians. Our values must be in line with our primary allegiance – and that is not to ‘Ceasar’, but to God.
We must call on our politicians to pursue the common good – to care for the most vulnerable among us, including the unborn, the poor and the immigrant. We must continue to stand in defense of life, marriage and religious freedom. Like Cardinal Timothy Dolan, we must pray for the President and everyone in leadership – “that they help restore a sense of civility to the public order, so our public conversations may be imbued with respect and charity toward everyone.”
The cultural war is not an imaginary battle. It is real and must be fought in the spirit of Philippians 4:8 – “Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable – if anything is excellent or praiseworthy – think about such things” (allow such things to shape your thinking).
Monday, November 5, 2012
Nature or Acts of God?
Superstorm Sandy is gone. As one of the fifth worst hurricanes in US history, she left behind more than 100 deaths and billions of dollars worth of damage. The blame game has begun – some believe the hurricane was a result of global warming. Others believe it was “an act of God” – a statement that could suggest God was responsible or it was merely an act of nature.
Scientists tell us that the winds in a hurricane are caused by air near the ocean rushing inward to replace air that's rising in the storm. The earth's rotation gives the incoming air a counterclockwise spin. A hurricane grows weaker when it moves over cool water or over land, which cuts off the supply of warm, humid air, which is the storm's energy source.
Just like wind, rain and even earthquakes, hurricanes are necessary acts of nature. If nature is not allowed to do its thing, various ecological imbalances would occur. So, just as we protect ourselves from rainfall, we must protect ourselves from other acts of nature. Thankfully, science has advanced to the point where we know when to expect some acts of nature.
At times, science is unable to accurately predict natural disasters. For instance, in Italy, two scientists resigned their posts with the government's disaster preparedness agency last week after a court in L'Aquila sentenced six scientists and a government official to six years in prison. The court ruled that the scientists failed to accurately communicate the risk of the 2009 quake, which killed more than 300 people.
Thankfully, we got adequate warnings about Hurricane Sandy. Some American economists were even predicting the financial cost of the damage before the storm hit. Because we cannot influence the course of nature, the very best we can do is to prepare ourselves adequately to cope with nature.
However, if we build our houses near the mouth of a volcano, we should not complain when it erupts. The same thing is true when we drain wetlands or redirect the course of rivers in order to build our palatial homes.
When God placed human beings on earth He commanded us to take care of the earth – to dress it and keep it (Genesis 2:15). In this way we can be at peace with our environment. However, because of greed and selfishness we often ignore God’s warning and suffer the consequences.
Because of advances in science we are not only able to predict the course of nature, we are able to cooperate with the course of nature. In order to avoid flooding, we implement adequate drainage and erect lakes to compensate for intruding into natural habitat. On the other hand we see the consequences of reckless deforestation. This is what results in uncontrolled flooding and soil erosion.
The truth is – the practice of blaming God for the reckless choices we make is unfair. It is not logical to expect God to interfere with things that would violate the purposes of His creation. It is also illogical to expect God to thwart the consequences of our actions. The Bible clearly states, “we reap what we sow” (Galatians 6:2).
Thankfully, God is merciful and He often allows greater good to arise from our disasters. Apart from the opportunities for nature to replenish itself, God provides opportunities for us to care for victims of nature. For instance, within twenty-four hours of the hurricane, there was an overwhelming display of generosity across America.
Stories of compassion are flooding the media, despite the dominance of political rhetoric. The presidential candidates recognized the value of showing care and severely curtailed their campaigns. When Americans go to the polls tomorrow, they will be looking for compassionate leaders. The candidates know this and used the crisis to demonstrate care.
Just the size and force of Hurricane Sandy serve to remind us all that there are some things in life that are bigger than we are. Every wise person within the path of the hurricane took heed. Affluence, influence or status did not matter, we all submitted to something bigger than ourselves. Activities and priorities were rearranged.
In his book, An Act of God?, Dr. Erwin Lutzer reminds us that “historically, the church has always responded to tragedies with sacrifice and courage.” During the third century, Tertullian recorded that when pagans deserted their nearest relatives in the plague, it was Christians who stayed and ministered to the sick.
As nature rejuvenates itself we need to ensure that we prepare ourselves to avoid human tragedies. However, when tragedies occur, others need to rise to the occasion as philanthropic Americans do.
Scientists tell us that the winds in a hurricane are caused by air near the ocean rushing inward to replace air that's rising in the storm. The earth's rotation gives the incoming air a counterclockwise spin. A hurricane grows weaker when it moves over cool water or over land, which cuts off the supply of warm, humid air, which is the storm's energy source.
Just like wind, rain and even earthquakes, hurricanes are necessary acts of nature. If nature is not allowed to do its thing, various ecological imbalances would occur. So, just as we protect ourselves from rainfall, we must protect ourselves from other acts of nature. Thankfully, science has advanced to the point where we know when to expect some acts of nature.
At times, science is unable to accurately predict natural disasters. For instance, in Italy, two scientists resigned their posts with the government's disaster preparedness agency last week after a court in L'Aquila sentenced six scientists and a government official to six years in prison. The court ruled that the scientists failed to accurately communicate the risk of the 2009 quake, which killed more than 300 people.
Thankfully, we got adequate warnings about Hurricane Sandy. Some American economists were even predicting the financial cost of the damage before the storm hit. Because we cannot influence the course of nature, the very best we can do is to prepare ourselves adequately to cope with nature.
However, if we build our houses near the mouth of a volcano, we should not complain when it erupts. The same thing is true when we drain wetlands or redirect the course of rivers in order to build our palatial homes.
When God placed human beings on earth He commanded us to take care of the earth – to dress it and keep it (Genesis 2:15). In this way we can be at peace with our environment. However, because of greed and selfishness we often ignore God’s warning and suffer the consequences.
Because of advances in science we are not only able to predict the course of nature, we are able to cooperate with the course of nature. In order to avoid flooding, we implement adequate drainage and erect lakes to compensate for intruding into natural habitat. On the other hand we see the consequences of reckless deforestation. This is what results in uncontrolled flooding and soil erosion.
The truth is – the practice of blaming God for the reckless choices we make is unfair. It is not logical to expect God to interfere with things that would violate the purposes of His creation. It is also illogical to expect God to thwart the consequences of our actions. The Bible clearly states, “we reap what we sow” (Galatians 6:2).
Thankfully, God is merciful and He often allows greater good to arise from our disasters. Apart from the opportunities for nature to replenish itself, God provides opportunities for us to care for victims of nature. For instance, within twenty-four hours of the hurricane, there was an overwhelming display of generosity across America.
Stories of compassion are flooding the media, despite the dominance of political rhetoric. The presidential candidates recognized the value of showing care and severely curtailed their campaigns. When Americans go to the polls tomorrow, they will be looking for compassionate leaders. The candidates know this and used the crisis to demonstrate care.
Just the size and force of Hurricane Sandy serve to remind us all that there are some things in life that are bigger than we are. Every wise person within the path of the hurricane took heed. Affluence, influence or status did not matter, we all submitted to something bigger than ourselves. Activities and priorities were rearranged.
In his book, An Act of God?, Dr. Erwin Lutzer reminds us that “historically, the church has always responded to tragedies with sacrifice and courage.” During the third century, Tertullian recorded that when pagans deserted their nearest relatives in the plague, it was Christians who stayed and ministered to the sick.
As nature rejuvenates itself we need to ensure that we prepare ourselves to avoid human tragedies. However, when tragedies occur, others need to rise to the occasion as philanthropic Americans do.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Every Vote Counts
On January 18, 1961, in Zanzibar (now part of Tanzania), the Afro-Shirazi Party won the general elections by a single vote/seat. The seat of Chake-Chake on Pemba Island had been gained by a single vote. According to the Guinness World Book of Records, this is the closest general elections ever occurred in the world.
Here in the United States, on August 7, 1979 in Mississippi, Robert E. Joiner was declared the winner over W.H. Pyron with 133,587 votes to 133,582. That's the narrowest recorded percentage win in an election. The loser got more than 49.999% of the votes for the office of Southern District Highway Commissioner.
The above are mere samples of the value of every single vote. The 2000 Presidential elections is another example of the value of every vote. Then, President George W. Bush won the election by a margin of just half of a percentage point of the 110 million votes cast.
With this kind of information, one can understand why I was outraged when I heard the report of a group of black pastors who were encouraging their congregations not to vote. Thankfully, the report from the New York Times was proven to be inaccurate. The truth is that some pastors will be voting on the other matters on their respective ballots. However, they will not be voting for the Office of President.
Some pastors believe to vote for President Obama in the upcoming elections will advance the same-sex marriage agenda and also affirm the Democratic Party Platform which endorses that lifestyle. To vote for Governor Mitt Romney would be to release him from the racist teachings in the Mormon Bible that “black-skinned” people are “cursed…loathsome..unattractive...despised and filthy.”
It is in light of the above positions; some pastors believe that any vote would be to endorse an evil. In other words, our only choice would be to choose the lesser of the evils. And, to endorse any form of evil would be to undermine the cause of righteousness, to which we are first committed.
If we were to apply this line of reasoning to all the decisions we make in life, we would be suggesting that every decision we make promotes the cause of righteousness. However, because there is no clear biblical prescription on how to vote, issues of this nature are treated as issues of ethical thought.
Ethical views are usually divided into two broad types – ethics of ought (deontological) and ethics of consequence (teleological). Deontological ethics are derived from a previously-determined view of reality or of the nature of God – sometimes referred to as natural law.
The crucial thing with teleological ethics is not whether the act comes out of divine command or natural law, but whether it produces good results. There are times when Christians are confronted with issues for which there is not biblical clarity. At such times, as guided by the Holy Spirit and by consensus within the wider Christian community, it becomes necessary to apply teleological ethics.
Some argue that because God is sovereign, He already knows the outcome of the elections and therefore a single vote would not make a difference. Agreed, God is sovereign, but throughout the Scriptures He is seen inviting people to be in partnership with Him to accomplish His purposes. In other words, God’s sovereignty does not absolve me of my responsibility.
Many traditionalists contend that because we are pilgrims in this world, we must not become engrossed in “the things of this world”. Jeremiah the prophet responds to this attitude of non-involvement.
Jeremiah was fully aware that the Jews were going to be in exile in Babylon for a specified period of time. However, rather than suggest a program of non-involvement in a foreign land, among hostile captors, he encouraged full participation and involvement. Here is an excerpt of his letter to those who were already in Babylon:
“…seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper” (Jeremiah 29:7).
In a democracy, voting is one of the most cherished rights of citizens. That right enables citizens to elect representatives who are obligated to comply with laws and the wishes of their constituents. Opportunities to vote provide opportunities for constituents to contribute to the welfare of their country. In addition, voting opportunities enable constituents to appraise the work of their representatives.
This system has contributed significantly to America’s position of greatness in the world. Isn't it interesting, while many are anxious to migrate to America, others in America are not as anxious to migrate to other countries?
Here in the United States, on August 7, 1979 in Mississippi, Robert E. Joiner was declared the winner over W.H. Pyron with 133,587 votes to 133,582. That's the narrowest recorded percentage win in an election. The loser got more than 49.999% of the votes for the office of Southern District Highway Commissioner.
The above are mere samples of the value of every single vote. The 2000 Presidential elections is another example of the value of every vote. Then, President George W. Bush won the election by a margin of just half of a percentage point of the 110 million votes cast.
With this kind of information, one can understand why I was outraged when I heard the report of a group of black pastors who were encouraging their congregations not to vote. Thankfully, the report from the New York Times was proven to be inaccurate. The truth is that some pastors will be voting on the other matters on their respective ballots. However, they will not be voting for the Office of President.
Some pastors believe to vote for President Obama in the upcoming elections will advance the same-sex marriage agenda and also affirm the Democratic Party Platform which endorses that lifestyle. To vote for Governor Mitt Romney would be to release him from the racist teachings in the Mormon Bible that “black-skinned” people are “cursed…loathsome..unattractive...despised and filthy.”
It is in light of the above positions; some pastors believe that any vote would be to endorse an evil. In other words, our only choice would be to choose the lesser of the evils. And, to endorse any form of evil would be to undermine the cause of righteousness, to which we are first committed.
If we were to apply this line of reasoning to all the decisions we make in life, we would be suggesting that every decision we make promotes the cause of righteousness. However, because there is no clear biblical prescription on how to vote, issues of this nature are treated as issues of ethical thought.
Ethical views are usually divided into two broad types – ethics of ought (deontological) and ethics of consequence (teleological). Deontological ethics are derived from a previously-determined view of reality or of the nature of God – sometimes referred to as natural law.
The crucial thing with teleological ethics is not whether the act comes out of divine command or natural law, but whether it produces good results. There are times when Christians are confronted with issues for which there is not biblical clarity. At such times, as guided by the Holy Spirit and by consensus within the wider Christian community, it becomes necessary to apply teleological ethics.
Some argue that because God is sovereign, He already knows the outcome of the elections and therefore a single vote would not make a difference. Agreed, God is sovereign, but throughout the Scriptures He is seen inviting people to be in partnership with Him to accomplish His purposes. In other words, God’s sovereignty does not absolve me of my responsibility.
Many traditionalists contend that because we are pilgrims in this world, we must not become engrossed in “the things of this world”. Jeremiah the prophet responds to this attitude of non-involvement.
Jeremiah was fully aware that the Jews were going to be in exile in Babylon for a specified period of time. However, rather than suggest a program of non-involvement in a foreign land, among hostile captors, he encouraged full participation and involvement. Here is an excerpt of his letter to those who were already in Babylon:
“…seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper” (Jeremiah 29:7).
In a democracy, voting is one of the most cherished rights of citizens. That right enables citizens to elect representatives who are obligated to comply with laws and the wishes of their constituents. Opportunities to vote provide opportunities for constituents to contribute to the welfare of their country. In addition, voting opportunities enable constituents to appraise the work of their representatives.
This system has contributed significantly to America’s position of greatness in the world. Isn't it interesting, while many are anxious to migrate to America, others in America are not as anxious to migrate to other countries?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)