Archive for the ‘Culture’ Category

May
10
2013

Loving Someone With Whom You Disagree

Today in my Friday Five interview for Leadership Journal, I had the privilege of interviewing Dr. Russell Moore, the newly elected head of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. I’ve long admired Dr. Moore for his clear, biblical teaching and his winsome perspective on the Scripture and politics. One of the questions I asked him was about his relationship with the President. You might not expect a friendship between a liberal Democrat and a conservative evangelical, but this is what Dr. Moore said. I think his response gives Christians a good model for how to disagree agreeably:

I have disagreements with President Obama on some crucially important things, such as matters of life, marriage, and religious liberty. I have respect for him as a leader and as our president, and I like him as a person. When you pray for someone every day, it is hard not to love that person, even when he disappoints you in some area or another.

He and his Administration have always treated me with kindness and respect, and I have friends I love in the Administration. We don’t have to agree on everything to work together sometimes, and to seek to understand one another when we don’t agree.

I hope to honor and to pray for the President, as the Bible commands us to do, even when we disagree, and to work with his Administration when we have points of mutual concern for the common good.

I have learned a lot by watching the example of Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) in his friendship with the President. In a profile of Sen. Coburn in TIME Magazine, written by President Obama himself, of all people, the senator is quoted as saying, “What better way to influence someone than to love them?” I recognize the Spirit of Christ in that statement, and I hope to live up to it.

Read the entire interview here:

May
08
2013

Raising Little Pharisees

Prior to moving to our existing neighborhood, we lived in a small townhouse about 20 miles west. We lived there for 8 years and had great relationships with our neighbors. There was something about the physical closeness of our homes that fostered a closeness among the neighbors. I had thought that neighborliness was a dead art until I moved here. We enjoyed some rich, deep, wonderful relationships with a very diverse group of neighbors. We raised our kids together, borrowed each other’s baking goods, and experienced tragedy together. So when we moved it was bittersweet. We had to leave people we had genuinely come to love.

Despite this sense of community, few of our neighbors were what you’d consider committed evangelical Christians. And so as our children grew, we had to navigate the tension of being “in this world” but not “of this world.” There were contexts we avoided–particularly some parties that we felt would not be good for us or for our children. And yet we always struggled with articulating this, because we didn’t want to come off as judgmental. I think we did okay, but we always wondered.

I’m telling this story because it was this context (and our current context as a family in a new neighborhood) that constantly provokes Angela and me to wrestle with raising our children with values (on the one hand) and teaching them to love people and make a difference in the world (on the other hand). I think there is a real danger, especially among conservative evangelicals, to fall off the horse on one side or the other. Most of us are aware of the danger of too much immersion in the culture that can negatively influence our kids away from God. That’s a substantial fear (real and imagined) that has motivated much of what we do in the church. It’s a concern worth having. As parents, we’re the curators of what influences the young minds God has entrusted us.

But it’s the other danger, a more subtle danger, that worries me most as a parent. I’m afraid that if I’m not careful, I may raise up little Pharisees, who so imbibe the values I teach that they use them as a cudgel with which to judge others. We have to be careful about doing this.

I think there are three areas where this is a real danger. I want to discuss them and how keeping the gospel narrative front and center can help keep us balanced:

1) In the area of entertainment choices and parenting styles. Every family has their own set of entertainment guidelines. It could be as loose as “whatever you want to watch/download/listen to” (I hope not!) to as strict as total separation from anything cultural (I also hope not!). Most families fall somewhere in the vast gray in between. This can be a challenge for us. There are certain television shows we don’t allow our kids to watch for a variety of reasons. It could be sexual content, it could be language, it could be the level of violence (meaning we don’t want to deal with 3 am nightmares), it could be disrespect, etc. But what happens when the family down the street allows their children to watch this? And what happens if that family is Christian, too? Or vice versa. Maybe we’re the more permissive family.

Growing up in church, I know this can be a cause of contention between families. Kids don’t always understand nuance and shades of gray. So, for instance, if we’ve told my daughter Grace that a certain show is not good and then she finds out her friends watch it, she’s liable to look at them differently and even point out their “sin.” If we’re not careful, we’ll raise her to be a little Pharisee and the self-appointed guardians of other families’ choices. So here is what we have done in our family. We not only enforce our values, but we also make sure we teach our kids the importance of demonstrating forbearance and mercy. So, for instance, when Grace comes home with an attitude of “So and so watches that show. They are bad. Are they even Christians?” (this conversation has really happened quite a few times), we jump in and say, “No, Grace, this family feels it’s okay to watch it. We respect their choices. They are good people, etc. It’s sinful to judge people this way.” We also try to have conversations about first being concerned about sin in our own hearts before we look for it in others. We also talk about certain choices that are not as clear in Scripture about which every family has to make choices. It’s a difficult tension, because we want her to have the courage to resist peer pressure and make wise choices and yet we don’t want to raise her as a do-gooder Pharisee willing to rat out those who don’t follow her legalistic list. We also have to be careful to distinguish between the gospel that saves and the wisdom of wise choices. We never want our kids to think that not watching Spongebob, for instance, equals the gospel. (If you think Spongebob is wholesome, I won’t judge you, I promise!)

2) In the area of engaging with unbelievers

One of the most difficult tensions is raising our children to love sinners on the one hand and yet live their lives in Spirit-directed holiness on the other hand. There have been times when my kids have heard of or even seen conversations about unbelievers and some of their lifestyle choices and have made some pretty harsh statements. Probably because they heard them from us. Probably because that’s how Christians often talk and think about those who have not yet find the grace, mercy, and love of Christ. It’s amazing how having children really filters your conversations and makes you think about the culture you are creating in your home and church and other environments.

To remedy this, we constantly have conversations about what our mission is on this earth. Why are we here? To look good or to love others into the Kingdom? We constantly have to remind our children of their own desperate need for the gospel, that we need it as much as “that person” who seems so far from God.

I’m really deeply burdened by this responsibility. I think Satan can make great use of children raised in good Christian homes who avoid all the vices and yet who have no ability to mingle with sinners and have no love in their heart for the people God has called them to reach. We can easily raise little, green-housed, bubble-wrapped Jonahs who actually don’t want God to save those terrible “Ninevites.” It’s important for us to raise our children with gospel-informed values that will keep them from the heartache of sinful choices and yet if I’m not careful, I’ll raise my children in such a way that they have no impact in the world. Jesus loved sinners. He ate with them. Spent time with them. Engaged in long conversations with them. He did say to sinners (like you and me, by the way), “Go and sin no more.” But Jesus’ heart was brimming with love for the world. I want that to exist in my heart so much that it spills into my home and is caught like a virus by my children (John 8:11). Let’s raise children broken by their own need for the gospel and humble enough to know that, by the grace of God, there they would go.

3) In the area of politics. I’m probably launching a hand grenade into the conversation here, but I’m going to do it anyways. I wonder if we are training our young kids, raised in Christian homes, to have proper respect for authority. I’m not simply talking about pastoral authority or the police and fireman. But people we may disagree with, such as our the President or members of Congress. If we’re constantly calling them crude names and joking and slandering public officials, if our Facebook timelines are full of that kind of thing, what are we modeling for our children? It’s humbling to think that what I do in moderation my kids may do in excess. Are we telling our kids it’s okay to disobey Scripture and sin by disrespecting those in authority (1 Peter 2:17; Romans 13: 1 Timothy 2:2).

My daughter Grace is 8, so she is not that fluent in some of the ongoing political discussions. But we have had discussions about certain policies and about the President and other public officials. In some of her homeschooling discussions, we’ve read about his path to the White House and the history of being the first African American President. I know some conservative Christians who would think this is a “sellout” or “compromise.” But I disagree. I think it’s important to first teach my kids to respect the office and the person holding the office. Now, there have been moments where we’ve had some discussions on the issues, particularly during the last campaign. I outlined a bit what both candidates believed and why I was voting for whom. But I worked hard to try to do it in a respectful way. Saying something like, “Daddy disagrees on some issues with this man, but I respect him and pray for his family.”

I think it’s important to teach our kids civility and grace at a young age. I’m not sure that we do this well all the time. We are still learning and growing as parents.

Apr
03
2013

Christians and Online Engagement: Some Great Links

How should Christians engage online? What should inform the words we use the debates we engage?

I’ve been studying this question for a particular project (more on that whenever there is more on that). In my study, I’ve come across some terrific articles. I thought I’d pass them along:

“An Open Letter to My Politically Outspoken Facebook Friend”  - Jeremy Writebol at Gospel Centered Discipleship

“Consider Yourself” – Burk Parsons at Ligonier

“Honoring Christ Online” an interview with Tim Challies

“Why Christians are Jerks Online” – Jon Acuff at CNN.com

“Defined by Who We Aren’t” – Barnabas Piper at World Magazine

“A Word to Christians – Be Nice” – John S. Dickerson

Feb
22
2013

Friday Five: Andrew Walker

fridayfive-smaller

I’m thrilled today to chat with my friend, Andrew Walker. Andrew researches and writes about marriage, family and the moral principles that support civil society. As a policy analyst in The Heritage Foundation’s DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society, he also focuses on how ethics inform public policy decisions and investigates the role that religion plays in American political culture.

Before joining Heritage in November 2012, Walker was a policy analyst and lobbyist with the Family Foundation, a public policy organization in Kentucky. He worked on issues related to education policy, opposition to casino gambling, and the defense of marriage, life and religious liberty.

Walker has been published in outlets such as The Louisville Courier-Journal, The City, The Weekly Standard, Christianity Today, Touchstone, The Gospel Coalition, MereOrthodoxy.com and — as a freelance writer — by the Institute on Religion and Democracy. His broadcast experience includes appearances on Louisville’s Fox and NBC affiliates.

A native of Jacksonville, Ill., Walker graduated summa cum laude from Southwest Baptist University with a bachelor’s degree in religion. He received the highest departmental honors as a theology student. In 2010, he earned a master of divinity degree in theology from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is pursuing a master of theology degree in ethics there, focusing his studies on political ethics and church-state relations under theologian and ethicist Russell Moore. He is active on Twitter at: @Walker_Andrew

I asked Andrew a few questions about his work and the Heritage Foundation:

1) For people who may not be familiar with the Heritage Foundation, explain the mission and purpose: 

The Heritage Foundation began in 1973 under the direction of Dr. Ed Feulner. In many ways, it has become the standard bearer for conservative policy and the conservative movement in America. Heritage came to prominence under Ronald Reagan, whose administration adopted and implemented many of the policies crafted by Heritage scholars. Since then, Heritage has amassed a large grassroots coalition of over 600,000 members who partner with Heritage to see conservative principles advanced across American culture and public policy. Our mission bears repeating, which is to formulate and promote conservative policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. Heritage’s main audience is Congress, so we’re located right in the heart of Washington D.C. on Capitol Hill.

2) 2012 was not a good year for evangelicals at the voting booth. Are you disheartened about Christianity’s so-called waning influence?

I’m not convinced there’s been a drastic plunge in Christianity’s numbers as much as a precipitous decline in the cultural capital that Christianity once wielded. Christianity is no longer a label of cultural validation that it once was. In some places, the label ‘evangelical’ is a term of derision. While we should regret “Christophobia,” increased hostility towards Christians does provide a new context for faithfulness. We shouldn’t resign ourselves to despair, fatalism, or defeatism. Hope should be our sign because, frankly, we don’t determine outcomes by the present. Moreover, if you’re in Christ, eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we inherit the cosmos.

But let’s tackle the political aspect. The 2012 election showed, again, a hardening of political divides, with the evangelical voting bloc especially. Precise statistics aside, if you self-identify as a white evangelical, you’re overwhelmingly likely (75%-80%) to vote for one party over another. Why is that? Some critics will accuse Christians of voting in ways to recover the loss of Christian America. Some will accuse Christians of cozying too closely with political powers in order to ingratiate themselves with power. For me, the answer is found in the Christian ethical witness. One party in America demonstrates open hostility to core beliefs of Christian doctrine and ethics. You probably wouldn’t expect Christians to be voting in droves for this party. If there comes a time when both parties are hospitable towards a culture of life, then I think you’ll see political divides begin to weaken. I want Christians to debate the merits of minimum wage laws (and they can), not whether we should allow marriage to be redefined. So, depending on how you measure success, Christians might have been on the losing side of the issues, but they were more united on key aspects related to Christian ethics. If our beliefs should form a consensus, 2012 reveals that, like in 2004 and 2008, evangelicals have a strong united vision for certain public issues of our day. I should issue a word of caution, however, and say that Christians ought to be fiercely independent and not beholden to any party. If there comes a day when both parties demonstrate hostility to marriage and life (and that could be on the horizon), I think you’ll see a mass exit of Christians voting for the GOP. I’m with Peter Leithart who recently remarked that “If the Republican party can’t bring itself to endorse a traditional understanding of marriage, let it split. If the Republican party can’t be bothered about the slaughter of the unborn, let it shatter into a million little pieces.” To that I reply with, “Amen and amen.”
3) Evangelicals today seem to be reexamining their engagement in the public square. What are your thoughts on Christian political activism in the 21st century?

What a question! As many have observed, there are growing pains within evangelicalism and its relationship to politics. I think this is overall very healthy. On the face of it though, rethinking how we’ve engaged in politics isn’t a confession that we ought to abandon politics, which some tragically advocate for.

Evangelicalism’s past engagement with politics has gone in cycles. When Carl Henry awakened evangelicals to the necessity of public engagement, he wasn’t focused exclusively on politics. He did, however, help lay the firmament for what has been known as the Religious Right and its direct engagement on the political process. Today’s evangelicalism is moving in a direction (a good one, I think) that sees politics following downstream from culture. Moving forward, I think you’ll see evangelicals marked for concern with the institutions of culture perhaps more so than direct political advocacy. My friend Thomas Kidd at Baylor very recently remarked that he can’t control the voting patterns of Ohio, but that he can control the culture of his dinner table. That seems about right to me. At the same time, we shouldn’t think of everything in black and white categories. I’m in Washington that has Congress as its audience. Dan Darling has his church as his audience. Congress and families are but two components of culture. The message is that Christians should use whatever platform or venue they’ve been placed in to love their neighbor and to seek the welfare of their city.

We’re also seeing evangelicals adopt the “Common Good” into their political lexicon and as a motive of their engagement. Christians shouldn’t be motivated by social prestige or social privilege; we should be motivated by the Common Good, which means loving our neighbor and advocating for the institutions that facilitate access to human flourishing. One example is marriage. Today’s marriage debates assume that Christians advocate for marriage for exclusively theological reasons. That isn’t accurate. While marriage is an ultimate Christian ‘good,’ is isn’t exclusively a Christian ‘good.’ Marriage is a creational ordinance that fosters well being for all—atheist, Muslim, Jew, or Christian. I want a strong marriage culture because I want kids in my neighborhood to experience life at its fullest—and a Mom and a Dad is a feature of that. Lastly, I also see an evangelical openness to Natural Law—a concept that allows for a common ethical and moral grammar with our non-Christian neighbors. For all the talk of evangelicals lacking a coherent political theology, the Common Good and Natural Law approaches are quite promising.

My present concern is that in overreacting against the Religious Right, some evangelicals are advocating for a very hollow program of post-partisanship—this idea that Christians can largely escape political controversy and the so-called “Culture Wars” by resigning themselves to  silence or as above the fray. Any whiff of political talk and certain evangelicals will pounce, decrying the fusion of religion and politics. Frankly, this is profoundly naïve and glosses over the complex layers that motivate Christians to enter the public square. Are Christians motivated by amassing power? I don’t think so. I think it’s more accurate to say that Christians are motivated by ethical witness and forming what Robert George calls humane “moral ecologies.”

When political and cultural forces unite on issues that Christians find disturbing, Christians have the opportunity and I’d argue, obligation, to confront Caesar. Let’s use Hobby Lobby as an example. Are the owners of Hobby Lobby trying to carve out exceptions in the law in order to arbitrarily flout government authorities? By no means. The owners of Hobby Lobby are defying an unjust policy imposed by the federal government because their Christian faith imposes certain ethical (not political!) standards related to human sexuality and human dignity. Moving forward, I’d ask evangelicals and their critics to think about how ethics is the bridge between religion and politics. This changes things, I think.

To me, it seems that some evangelicals are really anxious to be martyrs; that they find sordid delight in Christianity’s lost influence. Fine. Swell. If the time for martyrdom comes, let us be faithful. But remember: Martyrdom comes only when Christianity has been ruled out-of-bounds. I don’t want Christian faith marginalized in America just because we think being on the margins will make us better Christians. Being on the margins or promoting life on the margins doesn’t necessarily make one a more faithful Christian any more so than the profoundly immoral Anabaptist who doesn’t want his or her taxes supporting “empire.” I want a culture responsive to Christian mission, and we don’t have to disentangle ourselves from issues of political importance in order to succeed. The pro-life advocates who counsel a post-abortive woman to Christ are demonstrating both a political and evangelistic witness. That’s not theocracy; that’s evangelism. We just need to be responsible in our politics, which means both boldness and humility, or as someone once said, “Grace” and “Truth.”

4) You studied at Southern Seminary under men like Albert Mohler and Russell Moore. Explain how their scholarship has informed the work you do now.

It was a real blessing to study at a seminary led by two evangelical and intellectual giants. Dr. Mohler’s influence has been instructive for me in seeing how the dynamics of culture work—for good or bad—with the Christian narrative. Dr. Moore combines a perceptiveness about human nature that is uncanny, to be frank. The Christian political task must have an accurate biblical anthropology and both Mohler and Moore understand the nature of man and his proclivities in a way that makes political realities discernible and unsurprising. When you understand the fallenness of man, redemption in Christ, and the unveiling of His Kingdom, you’re rescued from despair but also freed from pursuing some type of Christian utopia. The Christian political program should be one where our view of the Ultimate informs and shapes life in the Penultimate. Both Mohler and Moore are models for that perspective.

5) If you were to recommend a particular book to someone wrestling with the intersection of faith and culture, what would that be?

It’s a little complex and academic, but Robert P. George’s The Clash of Orthodoxies: Law, Religion, and Morality in Crisis is a clear presentation of how divergent understandings of ethics and morality often lead to cultural conflict.
Bonus Question:  I know you’re a huge fan of West Wing. So what’s your favorite character?
The quick response is Ainsley Hayes, because she put the Bartlett administration’s unchecked liberalism on its heels from time to time. As for a main character, Josh Lyman really grew on me as the show progressed. He was tactical, shrewd, unapologetic for his views, and fiercely loyal.

Feb
19
2013

You May Have Something that Michael Jordan Doesn’t

'Michael Jordan, Slamdunk Contest, Chicago, IL - 1988' photo (c) 2010, Cliff - license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
Over the weekend, I stopped what I was doing to read this brilliant ESPN piece on Michael Jordan by Wright Thompson. The article, a transparent window into the soul of this great athlete, left me a bit sad for Michael.

You have to understand that I grew up in Chicago during the apex of Jordan’s athletic career. To this young boy, Michael defined sports and life in many ways. I had the privilege of playing on the basketball team at our little Christian school. I am not athletic, but for several years basketball was the air I breathed. In our world, there was no other sport.

You have to understand that in Chicago, this sport was not always popular. My grandfather told me of getting seats at the old Chicago stadium close to the floor. Before Jordan, these were seats you couldn’t give away. The stadium during Bulls cames was empty and cavernous. Chicago is largely a Cubs town and a Bears town. (Sorry Sox fans, but this is truth.)

Jordan transcended sports. His exploits seemed superhuman. He could take off from the free throw line and dunk. He had a 48 inch vertical. He stayed up in the air longer than the other guys. He could score at will. And you didn’t want to get him mad because he’d get even with you by torching you for 50 pts (ask New York Knick fans).

Our whole family were rapid Bull’s fans. I remember fondly spending game nights at my grandparent’s condo. The ladies would sit in the living room and the guys would spend the night in the den, not only watching the Bulls, but breaking down every play. Sometimes the post-game chatter was more fun than the actual game. Even my mom was into it. I remember the time we wanted to see the Bull’s play, but couldn’t get tickets at the United Center. So we travelled up to Milwaukee’s Bradley Center and scalped tickets from a guy on the street. My mom was the one who negotiated the price, telling the guy, “C’mon, I’ve got three kids in the car, they are crying. Can you help us out here?”

And I still have, in my parent’s house, video tapes of the first Finals series against the Lakers. In Chicago, we followed Jordan’s every move. We knew his life story. We cried when his father, James, was found murdered at a North Carolina truck stop. We forgave him when he left basketball to fulfill a childhood fantasy to play baseball for the White Sox. And when he faxed the media a two word statement: “I’m back,” all of Chicago stopped and pumped their fists.

That’s why it’s kind of unsettling for us to see Michael at 50 years old. That competitive spirit that fueled his passion for excellence at the game seems to have no outlet. I don’t know if there is a pinnacle higher than the one Michael Jordan has reached. Blessed with the rare combination of gifts and drive, rewarded with billions of dollars, served by a coterie of capable staff, Jordan is, for all intents and purposes, on the top of the world.

And yet, having conquered all, Jordan seems restless. A wanderer. The same gnawing drive that compelled him to punish his body and will himself to the top now haunts him. There are no more rungs to climb. No more battles to fight. No more victories to achieve.

I want to tread lightly here, because I don’t know the state of Michael Jordan’s soul. But viewing Michael from afar, it seems to me that the one thing the world’s greatest athlete doesn’t have, but desperately wants is something even the poorest follower of Jesus has: peace with God. I don’t want to be crass here. I’m not saying that all Christians are always happy all the time. The same afflictions that torment the world torment God’s people: depression, anxiety, temptation, idolatry.

And yet it strikes me that you can gain the whole world as Michael has done and yet not find peace for your own soul. All my life people have wanted to be Michael Jordan. Who wouldn’t trade places with him? The talent, the endorsements, the money, the fame. And yet . . . if you know Jesus Christ, you might have something Michael Jordan has searched his whole life for. You have, through Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection, something that often eludes the famous and rich. You have peace with God, which gives you the peace of God.

This is not to say ambition is inherently, always empty. Sometimes Christians act as if striving for excellence in your profession is somehow sinful. It is not. The pursuit of success can be a testament to the Creator. But success as a single-minded pursuit, as an object of worship, becomes a tormentor, a soul-eating monster when severed from its proper intent: to glorify the Creator who gives these good gifts. Success is a lousy idol. It promises peace, but ultimately fails to satiate the soul. It leaves you spiritually hungry, wanting, and raw.

Again, I don’t know the state of Michael Jordan’s soul. I don’t know if he is a Christian who has been alienated from his Savior or if he’s a lost man desperately searching for his way home. If Jordan is a Christian, I pray he embraces repentance and faith and again places Jesus at the center of his affections. If he is not a believer, I pray he finds Christ and thus, the only deity worth his worship.

For Michael fans like me, his life is a cautionary tale. It reminds us that those things for which we so desperately grasp cannot ever, ultimately, satisfy the deepest longings in our soul. It reminds us that if we have Jesus and Jesus has us, then we really have all we’ll ever need.

 

 

Feb
05
2013

If There is No Sin, There is No Grace

Be of sin, the double cure, save from wrath and make me pure - Augustus Toplady

There is a hesitance, actually more like a firm resistance, to calling any behavior, “sin.” When the issue of sexual lifestyles are discussed, even evangelicals are wary of labeling any one behavior as sin. It’s the word we want to run far, far way from. Nobody sins anymore. They make mistakes. They were born that way. They are misunderstood.

The Bible, however, has clear categories. And some things are sin. Sexual license is sin. Murder is sin. Libel is sin. Gossip is sin. Furthermore, the Bible doesn’t just say that humans commit sin, but that humans are actually, by nature, sinners. That is they aren’t naturally good people who sometimes fall off the wagon and sin. We are sinners by nature.

But what about grace? Isn’t the church supposed to be about spreading the good news that God has accepted sinners by grace? Isn’t the message of the church that God’s grace covers even the vilest of sins? Yes, it is. And this is a message we should shout from the rooftops. It should be the core of what we evangelicals do and say.

Here’s the rub. If you stop acknowledging that some choices are sinful, you stop needing that wonderful thing called grace. In other words, if everything is okay, is just a different lifestyle, but not actually a gross violation of the righteousness of God, then why would you need grace? You wouldn’t, because nobody is doing anything wrong.

This is why the Church must talk about sin and about grace. At times, followers of Jesus have talked more about sin, as if God was violently angry at sinners and they have no hope. As if we were gleeful, like the Pharisees, to catch someone abusing God’s standard. This is the wrong message and denies the gospel.

And yet, we seem to be in a moment in the church when we want to talk about grace in a way that acts like sin is no big deal. Let’s not talk about sin, after all we’re suppose to be the people of grace. Wait a minute, though. If there is no sin, there is no need for grace.

The point I’m making here is this: Unless I realize I’m a sinner deserving of God’s just wrath against sin, I cannot experience the richness and fullness of His grace. If I deny my sin, I shut the door on grace. This was Jesus’ message to the woman at the well. Yes, you are a woman who is living in sin. Yes, you are just the kind of person I came to save. 

We have to acknowledge both realities. This is why talk of the word, “sin” should not frighten us who believe in the gospel. Because it was not mistakes or missteps or misunderstandings that Christ came to conquer and defeat. He came to defeat sin and sin’s awful child: death.

I’m not proud of my sin, but I’m glad to recognize that I’m a sinner. Because sinners are the only people eligible for Jesus’ unlimited grace.

Jan
09
2013

The Kingdom of Disney and the Kingdom of God

As I write this, our family is wrapping up a long vacation in Orlando, Florida. We took our kids to a long-awaited, much-anticipated trip to Disney World. Specifically we spent our time at the Magic Kingdom, the epicenter of Disney world. Even though it was a herculean effort to lead four children through the teaming masses of people at the park (a clerk told us it was the busiest day of the year, go figure), we had a thoroughly enjoyable time. It was way more fun than I envisioned and our kids had a grand time.

I was struck by the idea of Disney World. Christians have long had their beefs with this iconic entertainment company. There was the famous ill-fated boycott in the 90′s. There is the company’s profiteering off of violent media. And some feel that Disney introduces secular themes through the cute back door of seemingly innocent characters. There is substance to all of those complaints. It’s not too hard to see in the Disney ethos a sort of pantheism, that there is no transcendant God, but that the real hope for the world lies within your heart and my heart. Good parents subtly correct this with biblical theology.

Still, the idea of the Magic Kingdom is one worth celebrating, I think, in so much as it speaks to the longing in each of us for a place, a time, an environment where all of our hopes and dreams are met. Where evil is destroyed, life is fun and creative, and beautiful. I don’t think this idea originated with Disney. I think his idea originated with God, who once created such a perfect place called Eden. Eden, of course, was not Disney and Disney is not Eden. But Eden was the place where God dwelled and where life was as it should be, as it was created to be. The Bible tells us that Eden was violated by a destructive enemy and a force called sin. And if you look closely at almost every fairy tale that originates from Disney and others, you will find a glimpse of this story.

The Bible also tells us that a Kingdom is coming one day that will spell the end of violence and war, of evil and death. That our hopes and dreams will finally be consummated and life will be as it should be. As we all know it was intended to be. Unlike the Magic Kingdom, the hope for this new city is not within us, but in the King who defeated the enemy and will usher in the Kingdom. Pantheism tells us that we can, by mere belief, usher in the Kingdom. But we all know that is not true. Human history tells us that man cannot create utopia. He can try. He can create pretty cool things, like Disney World which have echoes and glimpses of a perfect Kingdom. But ultimately someone outside of us must do this work. Someone transcendant and powerful and sovereign.

So, yes, Disney gets much of the theology wrong. It’s Walt Disney’s attempt to create Heaven on earth without the ruler of Heaven. And yet we shouldn’t dismiss Disney World as mere fantasy in that we shouldn’t imagine Heaven will be any less wonderful than Disney World. We should know that Heaven will be much greater than Disney world.

Sometimes Christian teaching makes Heaven seem, well, boring. Like going to Disney World in Orlando is way better than going to Heaven. As if Heaven will be a bunch of Christians in suits singing four verses of every hymn without smiling. As if Heaven will be uncreative and unattractive. But if you read the Bible, you will know that Heaven will be anything but. The Kingdom of God will not be any less than Disney world and will be so much more. God, the first Artist, the original Creative, the source of all joy and love and goodness will design a place that will make Disney look like a fold-up carnival in a Kmart parking lot. Because at the center will not be the misplaced hope in the human heart, but the glory of God and the light of His Son, Jesus Christ.

So until that Kingdom is fully here, let’s celebrate glimpses of it when we see them, however flawed, however obscured by the dark glass of a fallen world. When it comes to Disney, let’s dismiss the faulty theology, but celebrate it’s creativity and beauty.

Dec
24
2012

What Advent is and Why We Should Celebrate

There is something really wonderful about the word, advent. When you Google the word, one of the definitions you get is: the arrival of a notable person, thing or event. We know this word from other contexts besides religions. We say things like, “Since the advent of the automobile . . . .” Or “Since the advent of the modern era . . . ”

Advent means something new is coming. The dawn of a new and better era. This is really what Christmas is about, isn’t it? It’s the celebration of the advent of a new era. God broke into time and space and entered our world. He is Immanuel, God with us. He broke in the midst of the sin and clamor and the fallenness. He came as a vulnerable baby in a poverty-stricken town to ordinary people, in a time of great political unrest. Advent–Christ’s Advent–means that God sees us in our distress, in our sin-ravaged condition, in all of our helplessness.

We’d like to think that we can save ourselves from ourselves. We’d like to think that with a few tweaks here and there, we can create the Heaven we long for. We’d like to think that with a bit more progress and education we can overcome evil. But alas, we know we cannot. If the tragic events in Sandy Hook tell us anything they remind us that evil invades even the safest, most beautiful environments on this earth. But the hope of Christmas tells us that Christ invades even the most evil, sin ravaged places on this earth.

The 1st Advent is worth celebrating with great joy because it tells us that a new day is here. Christmas is the dawn of something to come. It fills us with hope that the endless cycle of sin and violence and hopelessness of human history will someday be reversed. The curse that was put on mankind, on the universe is not forever. God broke in as man and God and by his life, death, and resurrection defeated sin and death. As hymnwriter Isaac Watts wrote:

No more let sins and sorrows grow,
Nor thorns infest the ground;
He comes to make His blessings flow
Far as the curse is found,
Far as the curse is found,
Far as, far as, the curse is found.

We should celebrate Christmas joyfully with presents, with food, with singing, with festive decorations because Jesus has come. God is with us. And because the First Advent signals a second advent, a coming of a King whose Kingdom will end all other kingdoms and whose rule will create the world we all long for but can’t create. His glory will spread through the earth and sin and sickness and death will be no more. The enemy will be forever silenced.

So, celebrate Christmas, not as a scrooge, not as a scold, but with overflowing joy. Because the Lord has come.