This is the same for claiming to be a Christian, the best we could ever assume about ourselves is that we wish to be Christian. Lacan says we are fragmented in our very essence [this is our original selves] and the attempt to fill in the spaces is a form of idealism [i.e., looking for the whole]. Without getting too complicated, what this means is that we are always looking for something to make use ‘feel’/seem whole, which denies our very essence of fragmentation. What does this have with being a Christian?

Well, visualize your individual self as a series of parts [i.e., legs, arms, a head, feet, shoulders, eyes, ears and etc.] , the attempts at filling/hiding these gaps is what I call ‘sinew’, you know the tissue uniting the skin to the bone. The sinew is an attempt to deny our essence by projecting we are whole. God is here to remind us we are fragmented, that is what the cross is about, dying to the parts that hide our fragments. But the struggle lies not only in our theology but also in our society. Even down to our late night cartoons. Family Guy follows the life of one American family and their relationships however dysfunctional they might be.

The vulgarity of the cartoon is not explicitly in the content [although some might think so] it is something more sinister [yet hidden in the comic aftermath] – it is that the dog (named: Brian Griffin] is more human than animal. The irony is that the cartoon is written by humans who interpret a dog as a human. Just by following the simple pattern of anthropomorphism one can already see the problem, which is predominantly one of interpretation. Is this also not the same issue hidden within the altruistic notion of what most have historically called ‘Missions’?

Which is the attempt to over-interpret the ‘other’ to the point that anything that distinguishes ‘us’ from the ‘other’ is dissolved into nothingness. Which seems extremely counter-intuitive to another controversial theological element most know as ‘The Trinity’. The three-in-one. Three distinct [separate/distinguished] persons in ‘one’ God. The consumption of the other as the other leaves no space for difference. There is also this one point when the disciples come running to Jesus and complain about some ‘other’ people who are doing things in ‘his name’; Jesus’ response is basically to leave them alone and let them do what they do, if they are for him then they are not against him.

I wonder if we need Missions anymore? I wonder if what we now deem as Missions solely emerged out of a bloody history for dominance [for example: a la Constantine] and what we now have is an over-spiritualized simplified version of domination of that which is other? If the Trinity demonstrates anything to us it is that we can co-exist with people who are doing things in Christ’s name but might not ‘look’ like ‘us’.

If we consume the other, then there is no difference, there is no distinction. There is an ancient midrash [Jewish commentary] that tells the story of two guys who were walking across this mucky ground and they were complaining of how muddy the foundation was below them all the while being blind to the miracle of a parted Red Sea. Maybe we need to rekindle a love for the other, which is the miracle to ourselves rather than attempt to change them/it.

Rather than anthropomorphize them into our world which makes them more digestible. This all stems from our need to cover our fragmented selves and the attempt to consume that which other [i.e., war, missions, apologetic's and etc.] Missions is another form of the sinew I spoke of above that hides us from ourselves. At one point Jesus tells a woman [a Samaritan, or that which is other to the Jew] that we should worship in spirit and truth, the Message interprets that to mean that we should worship God as ourselves. This means we might have to give up both Missions along with seeing others as our sinew.
_______________________

George Elerick is a cultural theorist, author, & human rights advocate. He lives in England with his beautiful wife and amazing 4-month old little boy. Catch up with him at his blog, follow him on Twitter, and purchase his new book, Jesus Bootlegged.

The quote remained unfinished upon the walls of the art installation. This was Burning Man, and the search for people who hear voices ought not to be considered a strange thing in this radical desert festival event of self-sufficiency and self-expression. But of course, even the mad create their own boxes of sanity.

Over the course of the week hundreds – no, I am sure thousands of people visited the site. They stood at the flame altar, they cast the things they felt compelled to surrender, they meditated upon the ten to twelve foot tall pillars, and they shared words which they “heard” by writing in holy graffiti upon the walls.

Some people might tell us that divine inspiration does not come in words. Others might view deity as something distant, unconcerned or perhaps even impersonal.

Caveat writes about his experience with the Pillars in an extremely fictionalized manner. (We know this, because we remember Caveat visiting with his mask.) He defines divinity as having the capacity of a capricious 2 year old, “It doesn’t care about prayers and poetry.  The only words it knows are “yes” and “no.”” Somehow Caveat sees this impersonal “it” divinity only using events like, “dreams and comets, in calls to action and faces suddenly appearing out of the darkness,” but words are not part of the domain of the divine.

We thought otherwise, and provided a place for the Divine – God – The Spirit, to speak in words we can communicate with one another. It was a place for people to sit and listen – to sit and learn, to discover the simple things of life – the things we all need to be reminded of, and occasionally even the divine might explode upon us.

I suppose our view of God was larger – more personal, and allowed for dreams, and comets, and masks in the darkness to communicate as well as poetry and prayers. And so the walls were filled with words of a gracious expression – certainly more powerful than limited legalese of “yes” or “no.”

We were looking to create an anthropological experiment by asking people who hear voices to do so in an un-moderated manner. Yet, we also believed that the Creator of the universe has the capacity to break into our little lives and speak in ways we can understand, and ways we can communicate to one another. Did this happen? We have hundreds of photos of the all the phrases written upon the walls, and we think it might have occurred. Naturally, that is how a group of five silly Jesus followers might think.

Of course, some of the words are personal expressions of catharsis. Some of the words are ideas people carry every day, but some of the words were too deep for words, and some were transformative and new thoughts to the hearers, and that’s why we went to Burning Man with this concept. That’s why we will go back next year as well.

But of course, Burning Man is a place where the search for a voice in the wilderness ought not be considered a strange thing. Well, at least not for most, but I say that with a caveat in mind. (wink)
______________

Phil Wyman is pastor at The Gathering in Salem, Massachusetts. Certified as a “heretic,” he and his church were asked to leave their denomination for befriending the Witches of Salem, MA. He can be found blogging at squarenomore.blogspot.com. This was his second year at Burning Man, and you can bet he will be returning to build art installations over the next couple years.

For that we can go as far back as Genesis 9. In verses 5-6 God speaks to Noah and says, “And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being. Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind.” This passage clearly indicates that capital punishment, at least in principle, is justifiable. Why? Because people are made in the image of God, they are unique, and are wildly valuable to the Creator. These verses from Genesis 9 aren’t demeaning the value of a life. On the contrary, they’re meant to uphold and defend the dignity of all human life. John Piper puts it this way: “The point isn’t to make the taking of a life, through capital punishment, an evidence of the small value of a life. It’s exactly the opposite.”

So, because we’re made in the image of God, the penalty for taking a human life is steep. But let’s pause for a moment, because there are a lot of questions surrounding the phrase “image of God.” Genesis 1:26 tells us that people have been made in the image of God, but what does that even mean? What are the implications? Klaus Issler says that three facts are clear concerning the phrase “image of God.” He says, “The focal point is on God as the prototype. Secondly, human nature was designed so that God the Son could take on humanity. Furthermore, since Jesus was the only person ever to live fully within his humanity and also follow God’s will, we must study more about Jesus to learn about our own humanity.”

With that in mind, an appropriate question might be what does Christ’s life teach us about capital punishment? And the answer, I think, is a lot. Christ was a death row inmate, so to speak, and He was executed. But as we know, Jesus was innocent of any charges that would remotely justify capital punishment. Even still, as He was being crucified, as soldiers were casting lots for his clothing, Jesus prayed for every hand involved in His death. “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.”

At this point it’s important to make a distinction between forgiveness and justice, at least in the case of Christ on the cross. We might say, when someone has wronged us, “I forgive you, but I still want to see you pay for what you’ve done,” but that isn’t the type of forgiveness we see from Christ. And thank God for that. While Jesus is being arrested in Gethsemane, Peter tries fighting off some of the crowd and ends up cutting off the ear of a slave. Jesus heals the slave and says to Peter, “Put your sword back into its place… Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels.” Twelve legions of angels would amount to anywhere between 36,000 and 72,000 angels. In 2 Kings 29:35 we find a story in which one angel enters an Assyrian camp and kills 185,000 soldiers in a single night. I think Jesus’ point is clear. He didn’t have to go to the cross. And even once He was crucified He could have come down. But in this case it’s clear that it wasn’t enough for Christ to say, “I forgive you, but I still want you to pay for what you’ve done.” It would seem that Christ placed His love for the world and His faithfulness to the Father above His rights as an innocent man and His liberties as an omnipotent God.

A friend recently confided in me that he feels like a bad American. I asked him why and he went on to tell me about his upbringing, and how he was often taught about the wonder and beauty and greatness of our country. “Which it is,” he told me. “It’s great.” But my friend was wrestling with what he considered to be conflicting doctrines, our Country’s and our faith’s. “American Christians want their rights, their privileges, but Jesus told us to give up our lives, to carry our crosses.”

You might be wondering, what’s the distinction? Can’t we have our rights, seek out justice for ourselves, and also give up our lives and carry our crosses? To which I would ask, did Jesus? As Philippians 2 tells us, “being in very nature God, [Jesus] did not consider equality with God something to be used to His own advantage; rather, He made Himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!” This isn’t to say that we should throw out other passages that urge us to seek justice and correct oppressions, but perhaps we should be less concerned about our rights as Americans and more occupied by our duties as Christians.

When referencing Christ and His crucifixion, someone might say that Jesus was a special case, which He was. He’s God, after all. But does that mean we shouldn’t emulate Him? On the contrary, we ought to emulate Him because He was a special case, because He is God. “Love one another,” He said. “As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are My disciples, if you love one another.” The first recorded martyr of the Christian faith, Stephen, certainly took Christ’s example literally. Stephen, like Christ, found himself on the receiving end of an execution, and as he was being stoned he prayed, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them!”

Remember the story of Abraham pleading for Sodom? Abraham asks God, “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? The Lord replied, “If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.” Abraham then asks God if He will spare the city for forty-five righteous people, then forty, then thirty, then twenty, and finally ten. God answers, “For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.”

It’s impossible to know for certain how many innocent people have been executed over the years, but according to Deathpenalty.org, 138 death row inmates have had their convictions overturned since 1976. And according to a study conducted by Dr. Stephen Greenspan, a Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Colorado, there have been at least 106 posthumous pardons in the history of our country, twelve of the 106 having been executed. All of this tells us one thing: sometimes the innocent are wrongly convicted and executed.

Abraham prayed that the innocent would not be swept away with the wicked, even if there were only ten righteous people in the entire city; in the history of our country, capital punishment has already taken the lives of at least twelve innocent people. Jesus Christ and Stephen demonstrated a love for others that trumped any liberty or right to see the guilty party pay. We’ve seen from Genesis 9 that capital punishment is justifiable in principle, but what about in practice? What do the prayers of Abraham, Christ, and Stephen teach us? What does the Gospel, the life and death of Christ, compel us to do concerning matters of justice? As we continue wrestling with these questions, let us not forget to pray for the two families at the heart of this discussion.

______________________

Sean Bess is a freelance writer living in Birmingham. He blogs at http://wastebaskets.tumblr.com.

We are now living in a culture in western society in which entertainment has gone from a celebratory event to an escapist pacification. Our food, movies, music, shopping, sports, etc. have ceased being entertaining and have become the drug of choice for those looking to escape the reality of life.

While entertainment in and of itself is no wrong thing, I submit that we, In America have become addicted to it and even possess a sense of entiltement. We shell out the highest dollar to achieve the goal of getting what we “need”, when we “need” it and most often display a shift of temperament when we don’t get it.

Yes, we are addicts itching for any distraction from the pains of daily life and the realization that we are near powerless to change the course of our nation. While we are about to implode upon ourselves, we are desperately trying to not look the situation dead in the eye and fight it. It is easier to get our fix than to fix our problems as a collective nation. We do not stop to realize the foolishness and futility of pouring our resources into an industry that manufactures and peddles our visual heroin.

So, why “Footloose”? Well, it’s this simple. That movie has already been made. This re-make is going to bring in millions by the next generation. While one might argue that the movie does have an inspirational message, I repeat, It has already been made. We have to stop the madness and set an example. We must tell Hollywood, “No more remakes. Either make new art that inspires, or stop altogether until your vision can be cleared.” Let’s take our $10 and search for a new high rather than continuing to grease the palms of producers of unoriginal, trite subject matter, a patronizing of our artful senses and intelligence. In doing so, we are saying, “No,” to an industry that keeps growing in wealth while our nations keeps growing in class division.

Youth must be challenged to forge a new path for our nation… one that asks our entertainment to inspire rather than peddling cheap imitations. On the day that movie hits the local theaters, why not take your $10 to a local food bank, anonymously donate it to a family in need, buy your friend in poverty a gift card to help get school supplies. It’s time to initiate a collaborative effort to change our nation from the ground up by becoming addicted to the entertainment of generosity.

The bottom line is, we must investigate our “need” for entertaiment and the motivation for our escape. Finding new inspiration and joy from what Christ has placed in our own hearts to give is the new high. It’s time to get “footloose and fancy free” as part of a Kingdom of people who are addicted to receiving and giving God’s love. That will not come from today’s entertainment industry and certainly not with re-hashed “art”.
__________________

Tammy Fuller is a youth leader in church and community. Inspired by the radical likes of Claiborne and Campolo, she is an advocate for peace, fair labor practices, and looking for ways to reach the marginalized in the marketplace of daily life. A wife and a mother, Tammy’s first loyalty is there. Find her on Facebook.

A boy owned a dog that was uncommonly shaggy. Many people remarked upon its considerable shagginess. When the boy learned that there are contests for shaggy dogs, he entered his dog. The dog won first prize for shagginess in both the local and the regional competitions. The boy entered the dog in ever-larger contests, until finally he entered it in the world championship for shaggy dogs. When the judges had inspected all of the competing dogs, they remarked about the boy’s dog: “He’s not so shaggy.” Notice what happens here the narrator sets up the story as if a punchline is meant to conclude with some remarkable punchline, but it doesn’t, if anything it leaves the listener either frustrated or confused or both! (Wikipedia)

Christianity is an interesting place as of right now. There is a lot of talk about the end of the institutional Church along with the end of evangelicalism. To some Christian’s both were seen as a shaggy dog, things that never led Christianity anywhere. Other’s see them as the punchline we’ve all been waiting for. So who’s right and what’s wrong? I mean these seem to be the questions that have been driving the direction of Christianity for the last thousand years or so, but I wonder if these questions are a distraction, nothing more than something to keep us from discovering a punchline amidst the confusion of it all? Maybe the answer is in South Park! Rather than simply allowing Christianity to end up being the butt of its own joke, maybe it needs to take itself seriously, but not as some ethical community driven by a deified Jesus. Don’t get me wrong, those things about Jesus are important, but what if they have become the punchline that has led us nowhere? What if the loving your neighbor to the point of self-sacrifice (isn’t that how most understand the meaning behind the ‘agape’ love we so often speak of in our church services?) was literally more important than the virginity of Mary? Or what if attacking injustice with peace was central to our theology rather than what Augustine said about God? I wonder if like the rambunctious children from the fictional town in Colorado, as iconoclastic as they may be might have something to teach us?

In the Aristocratic joke the purpose isn’t merely to lead nowhere, although that is what it seems. It challenges socialized conceptions, rules, taboos, and anything in between that we have become too accustomed to. Isn’t that what Jesus did? He says to a bunch of the religious leaders a few times, “You have heard it was said, but I say!” He was proclaiming a new way to see things, at times, even through sarcasm or even name-calling to wake the religious elite out of their conditioned slumber. Is that us? Has the Church been sleeping? If so, we need to wake up. No longer can we sit idly by and allow Origen, Athansius and the other Church Fathers to tell us what we should and should not believe, is this not why Christ at one point tells an outsider that God desires us all to worship in Spirit and Truth.

Spirit is something we can’t touch or even define, it just is what it is. But to get back to Spirit we have to sacrifice a few things to get their, but let’s not be naive, the gods’ we all have are personal. The pantheon’s we praise tend to be inside rather than outside and they don’t call it spring-cleaning for nothing. If we are to have a future, no longer under the guise of Christendom, but as the organic movement of Christ-followers, maybe its time to be a part of the crew from Colorado and become iconoclastic toward those aspects of theology that blind us from the real sin that exists in the world, things like: poverty, injustice, war, racism, gender inequality, the gay question, famine and whatever else atrocious things we think of. The world needs to changed for the better, not more theology, it seems to me this was the challenge of the prophets. But much like Kenny, most of them ended up dead before the episode even finished…

________________________

George Elerick is a cultural theorist, author, & human rights advocate. He lives in England with his beautiful wife and amazing 4-month old little boy. Catch up with him at his blog, follow him on Twitter, and purchase his new book, Jesus Bootlegged.

Back in Sunday school, I learned that “my neighbor” actually meant everyone we share this planet with, including the starving child or the refugee from a third world county. While I don’t come anywhere close to loving them as much as I do myself, on a good day, I can muster a respectable amount of empathy toward struggling strangers half-way around the world. Truth be told, it is my actual “neighbors” I have a problem with.

I live in one of the most conservative counties in a blood red state, so I am surrounded by raw-meat Republicans. They make up most of my Bible Study class, some are my clients, and they are my literal neighbors, including the guy down the street who flew his flag upside down the day after Barrack Obama was elected President. (Apparently, a distress signal). They argue and shout; they are often wrong, but never in doubt.

So, how can I be expected to love someone I disagree with so strongly? Love your neighbor as yourself looks good on paper, but doesn’t work in real life. And yet, as the arguments get louder and dissension grows wider, the greatest commandment seems more important than ever. In fact, our society is experiencing the very next verse in Galatians 5 (15), “If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.”

The protests over public employees’ right to organize and the debate over the debt limit are just two recent examples of the division taking place on a state and national level. The fault line that is splitting our country is so deep it runs underneath the church, too. Granted, there are two very different theologies on either side of the political divide. Never-the-less, we are all supposed to share the same Savior who commanded us to love our neighbors and do unto others…

From my perspective, I feel like I am obeying those commands by supporting legislation that benefits the majority of society, without forgetting about the “the least of these.” While government can be intrusive and wasteful, it is also capable of doing so much more than all the well-intentioned individuals and churches could ever hope to do. Despite my desire to promote altruistic policies, I also know I can’t be effective in the discourse if I am not honoring the greatest commandment.

So how can I learn to love my neighbor? The following are a few suggestions and guidelines I try to keep in mind:

1. Accept that I do not love my neighbors the way I should, especially the ones that I disagree with politically. I also need to recognize the need to change my attitude toward others, including that guy down the street who still has the “McCain/Palin” sign in his yard.

2. Stop worrying about winning an argument, or for the candidates I support to win an election at any cost. This can only lead to me saying things I wish I could take back and bad decisions that come back to haunt me. If I can take my own agenda out of the equation, it’s easier to trust God with the outcome.

3. There are certain radio and TV shows that fill me with a righteous indignation that is neither holy nor productive. While these ‘air attacks’ usually come from the opposing camp, they can also be ‘friendly fire’ that is designed to whip me up and vilify the opponents. When in doubt, tune it out.

4. Accept that God loves every one of us, Republicans, Democrats, Tea-Partiers and Socialists. Only God knows the series of events that led (or misled) a person to come to certain conclusions. Their beliefs don’t necessarily make them a bad person. Sometimes, however, you do encounter such hostility and malevolence, the best response is to simply turn away and not engage.

5. Pray for divine help because, ultimately, that’s the only way I can learn to fully love my neighbors. Jesus tells us to “…love your enemies, and pray for those that persecute you.” (Matthew 5: 44) As well as releasing supernatural aid, the exercise of praying can also release anger that wells up when we’re threatened or offended. It might also help to keep in perspective that we are not physically persecuted for our beliefs the way the early Christians were.

*(This list is obviously not a complete set of answers, and I would welcome and benefit from your comments below).

Disagreements among Christians are as old as the church itself. In Galatians 2: 11, Paul informs us “When Peter came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong.” Not only is it okay to disagree, we are called to correct without condemning and admonish without judging. This means getting the log out of our own eyes first. It also means being willing to call out those in our party or church who cross the line.

Christians have the opportunity to break the vicious cycle of hate that is so pervasive in our society. Based on God’s greatest commandment, we are actually obligated to bring the debate down to a more caring, conversational level. As always, Christ himself provides the ultimate example by boldly standing up to the Pharisees and to the Roman ruler, while forgiving them even as they crucify him. If He can do that, I can be a little kinder to my political opponents, even that guy down the street.
___________________

Jeff Fulmer lives in Brentwood, TN and is the author of the book, “Hometown Prophet.” More information about his book and blog can be found at www.hometownprophetbook.com.

Alisa Harris’ memoir, Raised Right: How I Untangled My Faith from Politics, reflects on the apparent cultural, spiritual and economic desert time in which we find ourselves. We have witnessed the carnage of a financial system that was intended to perpetually buoy a nation, but whose “invisible hand” has instead crushed the dreams of millions. We’ve watched as the two-headed political serpent attacks itself until it is impotent. We’ve seen religious figures scandalized their institutions emptied as a generation walks away, in search of something more relevant to their daily struggle.

One of the few common threads among us is our shared embrace of iconoclasm. While labeled as rebelliousness for the sake of itself by some, it’s more a symptom of a culture whose intense self-awareness has yielded either jingoistic narcissism or resigned nihilism. And both sides are convinced the other is both void of heart and intent on their destruction.

Why do we shrug off labels? Each seems weighed down by its own repugnant sense of self-righteousness. Why do we step away from our parents’ religious and political convictions? Because both have failed us, intent on self-sustenance before serving any greater purpose to better the human condition. Instead we pick and choose from our daily experience as we find identities and causes that fit, not satisfied to permanently ally ourselves with any particular group, lest we get fooled once again into placing our trust in something that doesn’t merit it.

Two quotes from Harris’ book stood out to me as definitive of the postmodern Christian American. Both suggest a custom-tailored identity that older generations label as opportunistic, but which younger ones understand as our only option for survival. She describes her college friend as “…cool in the ‘Evangelical ex-homeschooler who quotes the Aneid in Latin while drinking whiskey and smoking a pipe’ type of way.” Such a combination of attributes betrays both a longing for grounding, while also seeking liberation from old expectations.

A second description of a friend from New York City points at why so many today struggle to find any group or label they consider palatable. Harris calls her friend, “…a fiscal Republican, a social Democrat, a pro-lifer who didn’t believe in banning abortion, and a Christian who didn’t think Jesus cared so much whether people were gay.”

It’s reasonable to see why those within the established systems claim we stand for nothing. On the contrary, the friction lies in the disconnect between what we do stand for and what the systems that have so long taken power for granted say we should believe.

It’s no surprise we’ve walked away from traditional institutions in droves; we feel we owe them precisely what they’ve given us.

The redemption of such cultural ambiguity is that assumptions and stereotypes fall short more often than they apply, causing us to have to take people more at face value, discerning what they believe through face-to-face discourse. We crave more intimate, direct connection with one another because, in doing so, we hope to find out more about who we are as well.

It is here, as Harris points out, that real change takes place: where two or more are gathered. The talking points and ready-made labels fall short, giving way to a deeper concern for the humanity at the center of each life. The effect on her was that she, “determined not to let dogma swallow up my personality and poison my sense of charity. I promised myself that I would remember that people are more important than clinging to beliefs…”

Call it cynical, iconoclastic or even destructive to the fabric of society, but placing humanity above ideals seems the only hope we have for living out Christ’s call to love one another as ourselves. In so much as politics and religion both have failed to yield the result they had promised, it’s now up to us to plant new seeds, together, one at a time.
_______________

Christian Piatt is an author, editor, speaker, musician and spoken word artist. He co-founded Milagro Christian Church in Pueblo, Colorado with his wife, Rev. Amy Piatt, in 2004. Christian is the creator and editor of the Banned Questions book series, which include Banned Questions About the Bible and Banned Questions About Jesus. He co-created and co-edits the “WTF: Where’s the Faith?” young adult series with Chalice Press, and he has a memoir on faith, family and parenting being published in early 2012 called Pregmancy: A Dad, a Little Dude and a Due Date. For more information about Christian, visit www.christianpiatt.com, or find him on Twitter or Facebook.

Food is in short supply around our globe, and we have a responsibility to make sure all have some rather than some having all. I often wonder what it appears as… to be in a third world nation and to, perhaps, catch a glimpse of the food/travel channels, preparing rich/slimming, delicious/bizarre, small-portioned/gut-busting meals. To see a man, at one sitting, eat food that would feed a small village, often leaves me, excuse the pun, empty, on behalf of America and our vast freedom to choose to eat anything, anytime, anywhere. Then I remind myself that hunger is alive and rampant in our own nation, and I don’t have to imagine someone in a third world nation catching these shows… there are some in my own city that would grimmace at the gluttony paraded as entertainment and “good.”

This is a letter I sent to both the Food Network and the Travel Channel:
(Yes, I am just crazy enough (a fool for Christ) to think that I might’ve been heard at least a teeny bit.)

“It has recently begun to stir in me an increased awareness of food as entertainment, both on your network and the Travel Channel. I would like to submit a show idea of which I would love to support and see. Why not produce a show highlighting the need of the hungry around the world and the organizations feeding the poor and hungry?? At the end of the segment, you could feature contact information for people to participate in giving or volunteering. It would even be great to have regular show hosts be the ones highlighting the various organizations and traveling to the locales. Why not have a full day of programming dedicated to the cause?? You could call it ‘Food Network Cares’. You profit so highly off of your shows, products, and celebrity endorsements, why not use some air time to be proactive for the communities around the world?? Thank you for your time, Tammy Fuller”

So, to us. Let’s also do our parts to remember the hungry in our towns and around the world. While I enjoy cooking and entertaining, I cannot view food as entertainment nor sport. It is sustenance and not often an option for some around the world. Matthew 5:7, “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.”
__________________

Tammy Fuller is a youth leader in church and community. Inspired by the radical likes of Claiborne and Campolo, she is an advocate for peace, fair labor practices, and looking for ways to reach the marginalized in the marketplace of daily life. A wife and a mother, Tammy’s first loyalty is there. Find her on Facebook.

Rationale #1:
Being gay is a sin. The Bible says it’s wrong. Therefore, a gay person cannot be a Christian.

Replace gay with:
unkind, judgmental, selfish, greedy, hateful, jealous, lustful
drug-addicted or alcoholic
elitist, over-ambitious, self-absorbed, egotistical
human!

Replace gay with any other word and the rationale doesn’t hold up. Can you think of any other word where this argument makes sense? If you say that sinners cannot be Christians, then there are no Christians.

Rationale #2:
Being gay is a choice. Therefore, a gay person cannot be a Christian.

Again, replace gay or “a gay person” with:
Republican, Democrat
Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, monk, hermit
pro-choice, pro-life
homeless, jobless, hungry
in debt, debt-free
an engineer, a doctor, a masseuse, a travel agent
a prostitute, a loan shark, a bank robber, an axe-murderer

The only words that make any sense in this sentence would be “non-Christian” or something similar that implies the person is not a Christian (e.g., Muslim, atheist, etc.). A person that chooses not to be a Christian, is NOT a Christian. That’s it!

You can define “being a Christian” in various ways (having faith in Jesus and the Bible, being accepted by God, liking Christian traditions, whatever) and there’s no other choice you could make that would disqualify you from being a Christian. We believe that a person makes a choice for faith, and that its a free gift from God, right? Certainly an “axe-murderer” would most likely not agree with Christian ideals but we could have a long, heated theological debate about whether the axe-murderer could be accepted by God in the end if he tried to be an axe-murdering Christian. Probably the axe-murderer would get a better deal from Christians than the gay person in most circles! Not sure about the pro-choice person — I suppose that could be a close tie with being gay.

Rationale #3:
Gay people are just born that way. Therefore, a gay person cannot be a Christian.

Replace gay with:
blond-haired, brown-haired, brown-eyed, blue-eyed
short, tall, fat, skinny
white, black, Hispanic,
physically handicapped, mentally handicapped, mentally ill, child with a birth defect or disease
introverted, extroverted,
smart, dumb,
upper-class, lower-class,
male, female, human !
The argument about whether gay people are born gay or choose a life-style of homosexuality is irrelevant to faith or being a Christian. If only certain classes of people can be Christians, then being Christian is not a choice at all!

How about this one:

Rationale #4:
I don’t like gay people. Therefore, a gay person cannot be a Christian.

You get the point. Doesn’t work with that word or any other word either. But it’s probably the most honest statement of all.

I have heard these arguments all my life, and blindly accepted them. But do we ever stop to question whether the argument itself makes any sense? What’s the sense in arguing something when the logic is flawed to begin with. In that type of argument, we will always lose!

It’s like when my 8-year old boy argues with me as to why he should be able to eat candy for breakfast. He’s convinced, but his logic is laughable! I would be embarrassed to support an irrational point that everyone else can see as laughable. It makes Christians look ignorant! Can’t we hear our own words and tell when they don’t make sense?

In the end it just doesn’t matter if we like it, or agree with it, or think its a sin or a life-style — the rationale of rejection just doesn’t work. It’s better to just call it hate.

So, once again, I challenge anyone to find a rationale for rejecting LGBT people. Can you think of anything that doesn’t fall apart if you replace “gay” with any other word?

If you can’t think of one, then maybe an apology would be a better choice. We have hated gay people long enough, and they don’t deserve it. What’s worse: being hateful, or being gay? If they can’t be Christians, then maybe we’re not Christians, either.
_______________________

Dr. Bradley Duncan is an aerospace engineer living in Boston. He blogs athttp://GraceEmerges.blogspot.com and started the “Open Church Initiative” Facebook page.

It sounded cool to escape the day-to-day grind and start over with this elite group. Then I began to wonder why I would be picked to join this league of luminaries… I wasn’t a captain of industry, or a genius artist, or a brilliant inventor. That put me squarely in the dark along with the rest of the unwashed masses. Ayn Rand’s followers might want to ask themselves the same question – on what grounds would they qualify for the John Galt Society?

What is even more difficult to comprehend is the number of Christians who promote Atlas Shrugged as a manifesto of their personal beliefs. Although she partnered with social conservatives to further her own agenda, Ayn Rand was a devout atheist. One of Ms. Rand’s core beliefs was that the individual “should exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others, nor sacrificing others to himself.” This is in stark opposition to the teachings of a carpenter/healer who lived and died for the salvation of others.

Digging a little deeper into the Ayn Rand books is a disturbing disdain for the less fortunate. The poor are poor basically because they are lazy dullards who deserve their lot in life. Actually, they deserve worse, if only the government would get out of the way and stop propping them up. Ayn Rand condemned ethical altruism, eschewing it for the “virtue of selfishness.” She knew and accepted this was antithetical to Christ’s teachings (“what you do to the least of these, you do to me”), and she would be the first to admit her true religion was capitalism.

As a Russian girl, Ayn’s (or Alisa Rosenbaum at the time) upper middle-class family lost their business during the Bolshevik Revolution. This understandably had a major impact on shaping her world-view. Sympathies for her stop there. As her writing gained popularity, she reputedly fostered a cultish atmosphere among her followers and called herself “the most creative thinker alive.” A two pack a day smoker, Ms. Rand scoffed at government warnings about cigarettes, until she developed lung cancer. It’s also worth noting that she took social security and Medicare when it was in her interest.

Perhaps Ayn Rand’s brilliance was to convince average Americans they are the John Galts and Dagny Taggarts (the female protagonist in Atlas Shrugged). If only the government would lift its heavy hand, these individuals would finally be free to build skyscrapers, invent jet-packs, and cure cancer. Blaming our dashed dreams on a big, bad bully is always popular theme – and the government makes a good fall guy, especially when a Democrat is in office. It is the perpetuation of this myth that actually gets the “little guy” to vote for policies that benefit the rich and against his own self-interests.

Ms. Rand’s argument that taxes and regulations will reduce the incentive for the best and brightest is a long way from the world we actually live in. Reduced tax rates on the upper end of the economic scale have created an even wider dictionary ‘wealth chasm’ and corporations are doing better than ever. Even when tax rates were significantly higher, I don’t remember anyone dropping out of society because they were too oppressed. The rich may winter in the Caribbean, but they will never stop participating in the economy because they need the rest of us to buy their goods and services.

Capitalism works best when government provides restraint and balance. We got a tiny taste of laissez faire capitalism when an under-regulated financial industry sold trillions of dollars of credit mortgage default swaps and nearly took down the whole economy. We caught a glimpse of what the world could look like without government intervention when FEMA was slow to respond in the wake of Katrina. I don’t know about you, but that is not the kind of world I want to live in – and it’s certainly not “Christian.” If you think you can do better, John Galt has a nice spot in Colorado for you.
__________________

Jeff Fulmer lives in Brentwood, Tennessee and is the author of the book Hometown Prophet.