The shortcircuits that seem to be affecting our cultural conversation in this country need urgent attention. A case in point concern biblical quotations in the media that are often taken as insulting by members from other faiths or even more so by secularists.
It is important for the sake of our unity as a nation that we learn to overcome this roadblock. And it all has to do with the constitutional "freedom of speech" that we all claim to support and to believe in.
Yes, often biblical quotations upset people and I dont see how it cant possibly be otherwise. Its in the very nature of the message of Jesus, we only need to remember how He ended up.But now, people have every right to express their opinions, cite verses from all their favorite spiritual books be it the New Testament, the Koran or the Torah. It is, I believe, high time that we acknowledge this and stop hurling insults and derogatory or demeaning remarks to those with whom we disagree no matter how. strong our feelings .Remember, friends, the beauty of America precisely resides on this magnificent "marketplace of ideas" In a true democracy, ideas are fought with ideas-anything else has a name, persecution.
So, if biblical quotations quotations upset you, thats part of what reading it is expected to accomplish. We, Christians, call it the power of conviction of the Holy Spirit. And yes, it upsets, as it did me before I accepted Him.
Frankly, if we cannot rise to the level of civility, we, as Ameicans, have become a very sorrow bunch.
domingo, 16 de septiembre de 2007
jueves, 13 de septiembre de 2007
09-13-07
Regardless of whether you believe that Moses was talking literally or handling symbols the Genesis account clearly established the following:
a) God created Man
b) God made Man inherently free (his freedom illustrated on the fact that he was given the option to disobey)
c)Man disobeyed God, evil entered into the world.
d)As a result, man lost grace, and he will know pain and death.
Here, the crucial point is whether you are going to believe the account or not since you are totally free to choose. As it is well known, the authencity of its contents is undisputable, the authorship of Moses strongly supported...
Now, from the beginning of Genesis itself,"he will strike your head", and throughout the Old Testament, the figure of a Redeemer, the Messiah, is often referred to. Different people have held different views about Who or What this Messiah can be
Jesus claimed to be this Messiah, "the one who takes away the sin (the condition of evil) of the world". This he did more than one time as illustrated in the New Testament whose authenticity of contents is beyond any especulation. Therefore, on deciding here, we are left with only three possible options: 1)He was a liar, 2)He was insane or 3)He was telling the truth
Jesus comes as one who is not, at any point ,compelling people to believe in Him. He INVITES
(remember the inherent freedom of man is solid biblical truth)people.
And what does this Jesus propose? That you receive Him into your heart. To me, it is amazing that an agnostic writer, Albert Camus, put it so well : "He only wanted to be loved and nothing else".
What is the result of receiving Him? You begin the walk towards the state of grace that was lost. It is a process, it is never completely finished. How is this possible? Because Jesus is a Spirit, the Spirit of God, Who coming to live in you transforms human nature into divine nature. But, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, you can't possibly understand this experience unless you live it.
Just like love.
Again, like Adam, you are completely free to choose.
a) God created Man
b) God made Man inherently free (his freedom illustrated on the fact that he was given the option to disobey)
c)Man disobeyed God, evil entered into the world.
d)As a result, man lost grace, and he will know pain and death.
Here, the crucial point is whether you are going to believe the account or not since you are totally free to choose. As it is well known, the authencity of its contents is undisputable, the authorship of Moses strongly supported...
Now, from the beginning of Genesis itself,"he will strike your head", and throughout the Old Testament, the figure of a Redeemer, the Messiah, is often referred to. Different people have held different views about Who or What this Messiah can be
Jesus claimed to be this Messiah, "the one who takes away the sin (the condition of evil) of the world". This he did more than one time as illustrated in the New Testament whose authenticity of contents is beyond any especulation. Therefore, on deciding here, we are left with only three possible options: 1)He was a liar, 2)He was insane or 3)He was telling the truth
Jesus comes as one who is not, at any point ,compelling people to believe in Him. He INVITES
(remember the inherent freedom of man is solid biblical truth)people.
And what does this Jesus propose? That you receive Him into your heart. To me, it is amazing that an agnostic writer, Albert Camus, put it so well : "He only wanted to be loved and nothing else".
What is the result of receiving Him? You begin the walk towards the state of grace that was lost. It is a process, it is never completely finished. How is this possible? Because Jesus is a Spirit, the Spirit of God, Who coming to live in you transforms human nature into divine nature. But, THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, you can't possibly understand this experience unless you live it.
Just like love.
Again, like Adam, you are completely free to choose.
viernes, 7 de septiembre de 2007
Faith, culture and the 2008 elections
If one is listening well, religious beliefs are going to be a factor in 2008. It is interesting to hear questions concerning evolution or abortion included in the debates. It is even more interesting to watch Democratic Party candidates revealing their religious selves as was the case at the “Forum on faith, values and poverty”, widely seen on cable television. And it is crystal clear that long standing religious questions are back again in the public arena.
In truth, Clinton, Obama and Edwards may have found politically inevitable to talk about faith. For, have we heard right that regular church attendants massively voted for the other party in the last election? No doubt, the least a democratic candidate can do these days is to try to rescue a little bit of that vote. After all, it can’t possibly hurt to admit some degree of faith. The sad part of this is how little, they and, for that matter, the cultural establishment seem to understand this issue.
To begin with, it is time to declare once and for all, that contrary to the perception of American newsrooms, there is no such a thing as Christian Right or Christian Left. One can concede that the culture may have found this classification expedient- something like the White NonHispanic category in the census. We all know that this race doesn’t exist. It is another linguistic accommodation, the type of which is increasingly growing in a society where fictional, not real talk, is becoming the norm.
Gentlemen, “the law of the Lord is perfect”. For a Christian with an almost passing acquaintance with Scripture this means that the Message is complete and therefore, never in need of additions or subtractions or let alone, emphasis. To be sure, he found that the beauty of the gospel is precisely that, its complete harmony between its whole and its parts.
Now, what some groups, graciously defined by the media as social gospel Christians, do is to exalt the part at the expense of the whole which violates the law we just expressed it. In the Christian spirit the effect of an individual or group exalting a particular i.e the social gospel, is always the same, it disrupts the whole gospel. It merely suffices to remind the excesses this has led to, i.e “the theology of liberation” with priests joining the armed struggle against capitalism or the protestant National Council of Churches providing financial backing to Marxist guerrillas in Africa, among the most formidable abominations in recent church history.
Scriptures are literally full of exhortations to help the orphan, and the poor and the widow and to do justice. My readers friends, this IS the social message, there’s no need to start any particular movement. For the gospel is one, to be transmitted and practiced integrally, as a whole, not in segments. Indeed, one may properly say, that in the Spirit of Christ, loving and caring for the poor “comes with the territory”.
In truth, Clinton, Obama and Edwards may have found politically inevitable to talk about faith. For, have we heard right that regular church attendants massively voted for the other party in the last election? No doubt, the least a democratic candidate can do these days is to try to rescue a little bit of that vote. After all, it can’t possibly hurt to admit some degree of faith. The sad part of this is how little, they and, for that matter, the cultural establishment seem to understand this issue.
To begin with, it is time to declare once and for all, that contrary to the perception of American newsrooms, there is no such a thing as Christian Right or Christian Left. One can concede that the culture may have found this classification expedient- something like the White NonHispanic category in the census. We all know that this race doesn’t exist. It is another linguistic accommodation, the type of which is increasingly growing in a society where fictional, not real talk, is becoming the norm.
Gentlemen, “the law of the Lord is perfect”. For a Christian with an almost passing acquaintance with Scripture this means that the Message is complete and therefore, never in need of additions or subtractions or let alone, emphasis. To be sure, he found that the beauty of the gospel is precisely that, its complete harmony between its whole and its parts.
Now, what some groups, graciously defined by the media as social gospel Christians, do is to exalt the part at the expense of the whole which violates the law we just expressed it. In the Christian spirit the effect of an individual or group exalting a particular i.e the social gospel, is always the same, it disrupts the whole gospel. It merely suffices to remind the excesses this has led to, i.e “the theology of liberation” with priests joining the armed struggle against capitalism or the protestant National Council of Churches providing financial backing to Marxist guerrillas in Africa, among the most formidable abominations in recent church history.
Scriptures are literally full of exhortations to help the orphan, and the poor and the widow and to do justice. My readers friends, this IS the social message, there’s no need to start any particular movement. For the gospel is one, to be transmitted and practiced integrally, as a whole, not in segments. Indeed, one may properly say, that in the Spirit of Christ, loving and caring for the poor “comes with the territory”.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)