Churchy Stuff

This is Why I H@te Some Christian Music.

0

Enjoy! If you can through it all…

Pastor in Sweden in Hot Water

2

Here is interesting article. In a country like Sweden there is a national church (the Church of Sweden). That means that the ministers of this church actually get paid and pensioned by the state. Here in America, we believe in the separation of church and state. But many other countries don’t.

What’s strange, is that Sweden is progressive in so many ways. This is really a hold-over from the past, when religion was literally part of the governing process and structure. Be it a monarchy or theocracy, government was intertwined with religion. 
As much as many people in the USA complain and protest things like a prayer at a High School graduation ceremony, or crosses on grave sites at national cemeteries, this isn’t actually a breach of separation of church and state. The Constitution provides for the freedom of religion, not the freedom from religion. So these examples should really be the choice and reflection of the local community.
Now back to the story…
In Sweden, a pastor of the national Church of Sweden performed a funeral for a person who was not a member of the church. A Church of Sweden pastor is, according to existing regulations,
permitted to perform the funeral service of a non-member, but
permission needs to granted by the local parish and the estate of the
deceased must cover the expenses. Now the situation is being investigated. 
It is strange from the outside. It begs the question, why does this church exist if it puts such ridiculous restrictions of the whole “love your neighbor” principle Jesus emphasized and modeled? 
Just wanted to bring this to your attention.

Catholics Told to Pray Before Sex

2

Couples praying in the bedroom

Here is something kind of funny. A book published by a prominent Roman Catholic Church group has issued a prayer for married couples to recite before getting it on. Is it:

*A prayer for women who are sick of their man’s sex-drive so he’ll stay away, complete with venial white-lie sins that God is okay with like, “Not tonight, honey. I have a headache.”?

*A prayer for men for more sex from their woman? Or more adventurous sex?

*A prayer for more seasoned people (old) asking that everything works tonight?
Nope.
It is aimed at ‘purifying their intentions’ so that the act is not about selfishness or hedonism.
Here are some of the things it says. It asks God:
*To place within us love that truly gives, tenderness that truly
unites, self-offering that tells the truth and does not deceive,
forgiveness that truly receives, loving physical union that welcomes’.

 

Easter Play Crucifixion Mistake

0

I know this shouldn’t be funny, but it is.

 

Weirdest Video of the Week

0

I don’t know what the heck this is. I’m not sure if it’s real or not. I think it is, which REALLY scares me. Um…enjoy?

How Dare the President! [Part 2 of 2]

3

CLICK HERE TO READ PART 1


Yes, I think healthcare reform needs to happen. But it better do two things: 


1) Actually improve and expand healthcare 

2) Not break the back of the economy 


This is the true moral imperative. 


Upon a cursory read of certain portions of proposed legislation (HR 3200), I have made some simple observations. By the way, you can read the legislation here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.R.3200:. If you do, you will have one up on your Representatives. For some reason, they don’t think they have to read the Bills they vote on, even though they sign an affidavit stating they have. Here’s what I’ve noticed:

  1. Our Representatives will be exempt from this legislation. In other words, they won’t be subject to what they want to subject us to. How can this nation stand if our Representatives vote for things that they don’t have to abide by? (And by the way, they do it all the time.) This is like old-style monarchy, and we are the peasants.
  2. A public option will drive out the private market. Why? Because by law the government can pay up to 30% less than its private competitors. In fact, this is one of the reason healthcare is so expensive now. Because doctors and hospitals have to make up the cost for the low reimbursement rates of current Medicare and Medicaid patients. No one can compete with that. In any other context, these practices would be considered illegal or monopolistic. But because it is gov’t, it’s A-OKAY. This will actually decrease the standard of health care in the long run as competition unavoidably lessens. This will lead to the socialization of healthcare. Now there are rumors of the public option being removed from the legislation. I don’t believe. Provisions for it will be tucked away in there somehow hidden with fancy and confusing legal jargon. Besides, there are about five versions of this Bill floating around. And the final versions on Bills are never read anymore. So how would anyone really know?
  3. Federal funds will go to cover abortions. You may say it won’t, that abortion isn’t even in the Bill. But laws and legislation are based on precedent and the precedent has already been set. Since abortion is legal, it will be considered a simple medical procedure in the context of this Bill and will be covered.
  4. In the end, bureaucrats in Washington (not you, me, or our doctors) will oversee and decide on health care costs, coverage, and procedures. 
  5. This will be the biggest social program in history because of the size of the US. We are given promises that this will be revenue neutral, but there is actually no plan in place to back that statement up. We are told that funding will be figured out after the fact. This is obviously a gross misstatement. It will break the bank. In fact, the health system will eventually become the biggest employer in the world by some projections. Nothing that size that doesn’t answer to anyone (accountability), have to perform well (competition), or be sustainable (pay for itself) can be effective or efficient. Is there anything you can think of that the government has taken over that has become cheaper or better?
  6. The government will have access to all your tax records to assess what your cost for care should be. And if you don’t like it, they will have access to your bank account so they can deduct it directly. Yes, that is in the legislation too. Want to do rock-climbing on the weekends? Well, you’ll pay a little more for your healthcare. Are you a roofer by trade? That will cost you more. Drink Coke and eat chips? Pay up. Drive an SUV o
    r have a house that is too big? That will cost you since you’re ‘hurting the planet.’ It can happen.
  7. This will NOT be FREE. That may be the biggest distortion of all.

I don’t believe this legislation will or can accomplish the goals it purports too. It is a logistical impossibility. That’s what makes me so suspicious. It’s more like radicalization of the healthcare. If you think about it, under the auspices of health reform the gov’t will have access and control of every aspect of your life (in one fell swoop). This is politics as usual and I think citizens are waking up to it. The President’s approval numbers consistently trending down might be evidence of this. 


The argument is often made that no one should die because they don’t have coverage. Not sure I get that one. Anyone is able to get care in the ER by law already. The argument is also made that no one should go broke because of medical expenses. Some simple changes in the system could be made to alleviate that (more on that in a moment). But let’s be clear, HR 3200 will not increase coverage or access. And it sure won’t cover experimental procedures.


As a result of the debate here in America, some recent information has come to light about healthcare in other countries with gov’t run programs. There’s a ton more information that could be uncovered too, if the media wasn’t so biased.


Did you know?

  1. 4,000 babies were born in toilets, elevators, and halls in the UK because there weren’t enough beds.
  2. Also in the UK, a recent investigation has revealed more than 1,000,000 cases of cruel and regretful care. Keep in mind the population is 60 million.
  3. In addition, the UK is telling doctors to help their suspected terminally ill patients to die sooner to save costs.
  4. In France health care is being rationed because the price is crippling.

But enough with the problems. Let’s talk about some ideas that would bring true reform. These ideas would bring down healthcare costs, increase the quality of it, and not strain the economy beyond the point of no return:

  1. Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits.
  2. Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs).
  3. Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines.
  4. Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover.
  5. Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.
  6. Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost.
  7. Revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren’t covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

You can read these ideas in more detail here. They aren’t mine, but I believe they would work immediately. Of course, they’ll probably never happen because these ideas put the power in the hands of the individual citizens, rather than the large vacuous unaccountable government.


Everything, in regard to my political leanings, stems from my belief in limited government. It’s strange to me. We as Americans know that the early settlers battled circumstances and hardships to come to this land to flee the heavy hand of large and oppressive government. They wanted to live free and pursue opportunity—to create their own destiny, you might say. 


For some reason, today we are willing to vote in (and for) leaders with philosophies (both Democrats and Republicans) that openly and proudly tout large and authoritarian views of government, all the while professing a sense of morality and principle. Unfortunately, these two ideas are mutually exclusive historically. People are never truly free while living under big government. The current world community also proves this. Big, strong, centralized government is hardly ever principled or moral because it is unaccountable and greedy by nature. 


Big government ideas are always framed in the context of being ‘helpful’. This is dangerous. Historically, people always let liberty die, all the while applauding and cheering the very things that bring its demise. Too many times citizens have been willful, or at least ignorant, accomplices to liberty fading. 


I mean, think of going to the DMV, Post Office, or to the city to pull a permit. Not a pleasant experience. Now imagine this in respect to your medical needs. No thanks!


Do I believe in unity and building bridges with people who aren’t like me or believe what I believe?


Of course! 


I really want to see healthcare reform in this country, but not at the expense of quality, reasonable costs, and the economy. Everyone will suffer in this context. Take it from the son of a Swede, socializing healthcare will fundamentally change this country. And it won’t be for the better.


That’s my moral imperative.


*UPDATE: The President is scheduled to give a speech on healthcare this Wednesday to clarify his plan. Still, I suspect it will mostly be anecdotal, if not entirely. Either way, I look forward to hearing it.

How Dare the President! [Part 1 of 2]

0

Although most of my conversations here are usually regarding faith, current events come up from time to time (but just so you know, I don’t go into them in my book). I am frequently fixated on the idea of whether my worldview is affecting my faith or if my faith is affecting my worldview.

This all comes together as I consider the world that my children live in and will inherit.

I am a person that gets tired of pretense and hidden agendas. As I read the news, there is a cautioning in my heart. It seems to detect things below the surface of what’s being reported. Sometimes it’s just plain obvious, though. I don’t need to detect anything.

That’s what happened about a week ago and it’s been chewing at me ever since. I couldn’t just keep quiet.

Recently, President Obama spoke with more than 1,000 religious leaders in two conference calls regarding his healthcare agenda. He was hoping to promote said agenda to their congregations, by default. In the conversation the President called his agenda a “moral imperative.”

Furthermore, he also said expanding healthcare fulfills a “core moral and ethical obligation that we look out for one another …that I am my brother’s keeper, my sister’s keeper,” and “We are partners with God in matters of life and death.” Al Gore and former President Bill Clinton (who didn’t want to endorse my book for some reason) just came out with similar sentiments. This is what I like to call invoking “the popular Jesus”:

“We all know the popular Jesus—the one who said so many generous, patient, tolerant, and graceful things. Everyone loves the popular Jesus. Everyone likes to quote him in speeches to support personal causes. At Easter and Christmas, the popular Jesus helps sell merchandise and fill churches. Many forward-thinking people quote the popular Jesus to resolve problems. World leaders tackle current events relying on the words of the popular Jesus.” (see chapter 8 of my book)

What the President said really made me angry for three reasons.

First, the tactic implies that if I don’t wholeheartedly subscribe to the President’s agenda, I am, by default, immoral—or at least not moral enough in my thinking on this issue.

That’s what I like to call a cheap shot. To vilify the opposition is what people do when they are on the ropes and/or can’t deal with the content of opposing ideas presented in the overall discussion. Strong-arm tactics also make me suspicious, like there is some type of hidden agenda they are trying to distract people from. Plus, it also smacks of pretense. As if I shouldn’t question him or his ideas because of who he is, how smart he is, or how moral he presents himself to be.

Is this the type of open and civil debate this self-proclaimed unifier promised during the campaign? Where is the openness? Where are the C-SPAN discussions for us to voice our concerns? Where are the informational websites to post our comments and questions? Or is this just guilt, fear, and manipulation repackaged as reform as politicians are so fond of doing? Wasn’t this supposed to be the most transparent administration in history?

Secondly, why is it that Democrats can interject God into their political conversations and no one says word one? The TV news, papers, and bloggers are all silent. Do you know what happens when anyone else does this? Say, a more conservative candidate that is not a Democrat and is white? They get pounced on for weeks in the news cycles for trying to shatter the “wall between church and state” or trying to create a theocracy.

So where are my media peeps on this?

Thirdly, and most importantly, what about abortion!

I am unapologetically pro-life. That’s right. I said it. It doesn’t mean I hate people who aren’t. But don’t lecture me about morality or that I am my brother’s keeper, Mr. President (or Clinton or Gore, to a lesser degree), when you’ve voted on several occasions to protect late-term abortions, partial-birth abortions, and, even worse, not protecting born-alive failed abortions (when the abortion goes wrong and the baby actually survives, the doctor can kill the baby). I am physically sick even writing that last one.

Plus, what about the Hippocratic Oath? Is it, “Sorry fetus. You’re not legally a ‘person’ yet, so we’ll be just fine disposing of you. You are a ‘being.’ But that’s not good enough. And even though most physicians, biologists, and scientist agree that life begins at conception, apparently that’s not good enough either. You are a mistake.”

If it’s not a baby, then you’re not pregnant, right? Sounds absurd, doesn’t it?

A baby is truly helpless and innocent. This is shameful. It is also a violation of the Constitution (The principles laid out in the Declaration of Independence, specifically. You know, the whole life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness we are all endowed with?), if you ask me.

At the core of my being is that life is sacred. In fact, I believe that every society, nation, and culture is defined by how they view and treat life at its early stages and the twilight years.

Out of curiosity, how has this administration treated the elderly so far?

Last week they also revealed Social Security recipients will not receive the automatic cost of living increases for the next two years.

Really? We can’t cut the bike paths or sidewalk projects from the ‘Stimulus Plan’ tucked away in there to make up the $8 billion? Besides, bike paths and sidewalks don’t stimulate anything (except heart-rates). I think we can make the sacrifice and redirect some pork in the Stimulus Plan toward the elderly, can’t we? Especially considering only 10% of it has been spent so far.

As a follower of Jesus, I am all for healthcare reform. So tomorrow I will talk more about that. But for today, how dare the President talk moral imperatives when he won’t protect the truly innocent.

With all due respect, I am outraged. And it makes me very suspicious of this legislation.

CLICK HERE TO READ PART 2

Jesus Is Your Friend

4

Have you seen this. It is goofy for sure. But there is a nice little ska beat to it, if I’m honest. I can’t decide if it’s serious or a hoax. What do you think?

Lead a Prayer, Go Straight to Jail

0

Here is an interesting case. Two school officials are being brought up on criminal charges in Florida.

For changing grades for money? No.

For selling drugs? No.

For fooling around with students? No.

So why are they facing six months in jail?

For praying.

The article linked states that the criminal charges, which carry up to a $5,000 fine and a six-month
jail term, originated with a Jan. 28 incident in which Mr. Lay, a
deacon at a local Baptist church, asked Mr. Freeman to offer mealtime
prayers at a lunch for school employees and booster-club members who
had helped with a school field-house project. (note: the article is mysteriously unclear whether or not this meal was held on school property or not)

THE HORROR!

As a result, the wonderful ACLU has brought up charges against these officials citing a violation of the First Amendment which states:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Furthermore, the district also agreed to forbid senior class President Mary Allen
from speaking at the school’s May 30 graduation ceremony on the chance
that the young woman, a known Christian, might say something religious. To me, this is shocking. This student was punished for something she hadn’t even done. It’s amazing that this blatant violation of the student’s rights is seen as okay. I haven’t heard any outrage. Have you? It’s like I’m watching Minority Report.

In addition, also named in the charges is a school clerical assistant who was attending a school district event in February with other school
employees at a local naval base. There, she asked her husband to offer
a blessing for a meal, says the ACLU, adding that students were present
and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

AAHHHH! HELP!

Back to the original charges…

So is praying in these settings that may be school sponsored functions a violation of the First Amendment or is this simply a witch hunt indicative of the religious bigotry that seems to be building in our country?  

It’s interesting that the First Amendment says, “…respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof
.”

Is this respecting or prohibiting? Is praying ‘establishing’ religion? Or is banning prayer prohibiting the ‘free exercise’ of it?

Which one is this?

VIDEO: Is Moby A Christian?

4

Here’s a little video interview of Moby by Dan Harris from ABC News (they guy who interviewed me/my 2nd interview airs in September BTW).  Anyway, in it the artist Moby discusses his faith in Jesus (or not). It’s pretty interesting.

What do you think?

CLICK HERE TO WATCH

Question for Christians: The Rich or the Poor?

0

http://newzar.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/rich_poor.jpg

I was doing a radio interview last week and we started riffing on current events and social/political trends. It’s not something I talk about in my book, since it is about the foundational aspects of my faith (nuts and bolts stuff), but it is something that is part of my life.

I am constantly challenged with balancing whether my faith is influencing my world-view or if my world-view is influencing my faith.

Now to my point.

Something that is part of culture, especially politics and government, is the whole class warfare and tactics of envy.

I hate it.

To me, it appeals to the lowest common denominator in order to manipulate. Still, my personal challenge is to figure out what place this issue has in my life as a follower of Jesus.
 
So in the interview this is the question(s) I posed to listeners to call in about and answer:

As Christians, who should we care more about: the rich or the poor? Who should get our attention and favor? And furthermore, who does God care more about?

So how do you answer that?

I say neither. But my initial leaning is to say the poor. It’s funny (or not so funny), I have a neighbor who lives on 7 acres of land (I know because I looked on the tax records in one of my fits of envy), a huge new house, a Mercedes, a Harley that he rides on the weekend, a pool, and much more…

And you know what?

I hate him for no reason other than he has more than me.

I’m under the impression that God loves all people equally and they deserve his love and spiritual healing just the same.

To give in to the tactics of envy and class warfare is destructive. Everyone deserves our respect and affections equally, regardless of what they have (or don’t have). Not to mention, it never stops. Why perpetuate the cycle? There will always be someone who has more than you and someone who has less than you. Just like there will always be someone who is better than you at something or worse than you at it. Or there will always be someone who is smarter or dumber than you.

Eventually you will be on the receiving end of the whole “eat the rich” mindset. The finger will rest on you, and what you have will come under fire, no matter how modest you view your lifestyle. So I say we all mind our own business and concentrate on being responsible for who we are, what we have, and what we do.

Finally, for those that claim to follow Jesus, prejudice is a very ugly trait. Don’t follow the cultural trend, no matter how fashionable it seems to be. It just doesn’t work. It is not productive. It is not healthy.

Be better. Be more. Treat and respect everyone equally. The poor….and the rich.

What say you?


Got to Church, Get Free Beer & Bacon

5

http://justinsomnia.org/images/rogue-brewery-nueske-bacon.jpg

There is concern by the Church of England over the lack of men attending church, which has lead to a new strategy. In order to attract men, they decided to give free beer, bacon, and chocolate bars for any men that attended. This article says that:

“Men at St Stephen’s church in Barbourne, Worcester, will be handed bottles of
beer by children during the service. A prayer will be said for the
fathers before the gifts are distributed.

Obviously, this has upset some people, like those struggling with substance abuse. But church leaders say it is supposed to represent “the generosity of God.”

There was a time when this would have really made me mad. Would I do it? No way. Am I really offended? Not really. Is it a bad idea. Probably. But I also think it is hilarious and I admire their courage. I know plenty of guys who would probably go to church for a free beer.

But let’s be honest, if they really wanted to get men into church and wanted to truly push the envelope, then they should have added ladies mud wrestling!

Baby Preacher

5

I stumbled upon this video of a baby preacher. I don’t know about you, but I smiled for the first 10 seconds. And then it became less cute and more strange. As it continues on I just think it gets uncomfortable and a little disturbing. I know, I know…it’s just a baby intimitating his daddy preaching. But there’s something about it I don’t like. In fact, I can’t even get through the whole thing. You decide for yourself:

National Day of Prayer?

4

Today is the National Day of Prayer. Normally it’s not something I would even talk about. Not because I don’t think marking the concept isn’t important or universally beneficial. But because it’s something I do everyday naturally and don’t even give a second thought to. I have had this day pass me by many times without even realizing it.

This National Day of Prayer is different.

This year President Obama has chosen not to outwardly honor the National Day of Prayer with an interfaith public ceremony.

Why?

Admittedly, I don’t know the inner workings of such a decision and the statements from the White House have been evasive. So I can only speculate. I am left to conclude the pivotal sentiment being that having a public ceremony is somehow an endorsement of a specific religion. That’s what Ron Millar, acting director for the Secular Coalition of America, says.

Millar said, “It’s a nice first step,” he said. “Generally, we don’t want the federal government to endorse prayer because it’s endorsing a specific religion. We’d rather them not be in that business. It would be difficult to be all-inclusive on this.”  

Call me stupid, but I still can’t connect how an interfaith ceremony endorses a specific religion?

This reminds me of the modern trend to remove things like the Crucifix and Star of David from federal and public cemeteries or things like the Ten Commandments from our federal and state buildings (courtrooms, for example). In my view, this is a dangerous trend. This is not actually the appropriate application of separation of church and state.

Let me make it clear like I always do when talking on these things: I DO NOT want to create a theocracy. (To say nothing of the fact that what most people consider a theocracy when throwing this word around to bludgeon their opposition, is actually a wrong definition of theocracy.)

It seems that, although we are a diverse people, we cannot memorialize or honor the religious side of that diversity, whether historically relevant or not. This goes beyond separation of church and state. It’s as if we are trying to create a society of free people who are not free to be religious in the public square in any form or acknowledge the historical importance religious diversity has played in the foundation of our nation. I believe this is a simmering trend towards religious bigotry.

For me, it all comes down to one premise: Do our unalienable rights (the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) as citizens come from God or do they come from government, the state, or other people?

The Declaration of Independence says that they come from God. But is that no longer the case? Do we need to ‘evolve’ beyond that primitive ideal? I emphatically say NO!

That is a step toward devolution and tyranny, not enlightenment.

Read this and remember it well: if your rights come from other people (i.e. government or the state), then those people can take them away as they see fit or beneficial for the ‘common good’ (because that’s how it’s always framed). That’s what Communism has done. That’s what Hitler did. And I believe it all starts with a subtle assault on belief and faith. If you can get people to accept the premise that they are not created by God with purpose, value, and unalienable rights, then you can easily control them. They will give their liberties away under the guise of the common good as not to bring attention to themselves as individuals, when in reality they are simply playing into the hands of their controllers establishing empire and perpetual power.

Many will say I sound like a nut-job here, but I think the civil rights issue of the next generation could be for those of faith⎯those who actually believe in God, those who actually believe in an intelligent design, those who actually believe that a God created it all, those who actually believe in miracles, those who actually believe Jesus rose from the dead. The argument will be, since these ideas are allegedly not scientific, objective, or rational, should people be able to believe them and perpetuate them? Is it actually damaging if they do? That is secularism at it’s best.

I know this may sound strange and antithetical, but the only way to make a truly free and neutral society, is to base the rights of the people in certain minimal and universal faith-based absolutes. That’s what the Founders knew and did. And it worked better than anything ever has.

That is why I don’t think having an interfaith ceremony based on the idea of prayer undermines the principle of separation of church and state.

What’s next? No Christmas at the White House since it’s about Jesus? I don’t think Malia and Sasha will be too happy about that.

Catching Hell From Christians

13

*MY (SORT OF) OFFICIAL STATEMENT TO MY CRITICS*

That’s right ladies and gentlemen; I used the word hell. I am not a cussing man, unless, of course, I smash my thumb while working on a home improvement project. Or if my vintage truck (that thought was so cool when I bought it) breaks down yet again⎯leaving me regretting that I ever purchased it. But the expression fits these days.

I would like to take a moment to respond to some of my critics. And by critics, I mean people who are emailing me all kinds of nasty things about my book but have never read it. Normally, I would not do this. It is standard public image strategy to never respond to your critics, since a response is a type of validation. But in all fairness, I can’t write a book called 10 Things I Hate About Christianity: Working Through the Frustrations of Faith and not expect to have any critical reactions that need to be dealt with.

Let me begin where I might end, in anticipation of some not finishing this long statement. I just want to make sure everyone is left with my most important points:

Believe it or not, my book is overwhelmingly positive (you can read the reviews to verify this).
You can’t believe everything you see. Interviews that are prerecorded (like on TV) often do not communicate every detail of the story being covered. Therefore, the full context of said subject is never revealed. They are more like interest-generating highlights.
Christians should be thanking me for writing the book. Sorry, but you’ll have to keep reading for my explanation on that one.
 
So let me move on to some comments I have been receiving. What’s interesting about these comments is that the harshest ones have been from Christians and these individuals have NOT read my book. This does not surprise me. This probably does not surprise you. In fact, I write about this in my book (Chapter 10 on what I hate about Christians).

The proverbial “don’t judge a book by its cover” comes to mind here. They truly personify the expression. You’d think Christians, who are mad about someone judging them and their faith, might not want to be so judgmental. The irony is that I believe my book is exactly what they need to read. If this is how they treat me (a fellow flawed follower), I can’t imagine how they treat people in their daily lives: cousins, co-workers, neighbors, schoolmates etc.

I want to share the sentiments I’ve been sent because I think it is a learning moment. Shockingly, these emails have not been anonymous. I suppose I should give them credit for that, at least. In respect to the senders (because I am actually not the savage that some claim), I will simply paraphrase the thoughts and not give you their names.

I have been called a sick-o, loser, idiot, the dumbest person in the world, offensive, that I need to get a life, that I’m promoting ignorant trash, and that it breaks the heart of God that I would ever release a book like this. Surprisingly, I have not yet been told I am going to Hell. But I’m sure it’s coming (especially since I just mentioned it). Let me say it again, all these comments are from Christians who have not read the book. It’s not like I can’t take it. I invite critical thinking…so long as it is informed.

The other interesting thing is that some of the kindest emails  (in response to my first ABC News interview) have come from self-proclaimed humanists, pagans, atheists, and agnostics who read the book. In fact, I was surfing around the web and found an atheist discussion-thread on some forum in which an atheist was actually defending me:

First Atheist:

“So…get over yourself (Jason) and move on with your life. If you’re pathetic enough to need a religion to give your life some sort of self meaning then shut up and stick to your faith.”

Response from another Atheist:

“Why should he do that…I’m pretty sure he didn’t write the book for atheists to tell them to stop whining, he wrote it for other Christians to read it and stop being d*#ches to the rest of the world…no one forced you to watch the video…so maybe you’re the one who needs to get over yourself and move on.”

In closing, I was sincerely hoping Christians would be less judgmental. I know that was naïve, but I wanted the Christians to prove me wrong. It saddens me that they would make parts of my book so true. They send me a hateful email because they’re mad that I would say anything negative about Christianity? How does that make sense? It’s life imitating art (Or is it art imitating life since my book is about life? Not really sure how that expression works in this context). Does it discourage me? Yes. But it also fires me up even more. I will simply think of them as that strange family member that everyone tolerates because they have to. And maybe they can think of me in the same light and still let me come to the family picnic. But let this be a lesson to us all.

The funny thing is, Christians should be thanking me for writing this book. That’s right. Read it again: thanking me. Why? For two reasons:

1) It would only have been a matter of time before someone else would have written a book under the same title. And it would not have been so constructive, healthy, positive, and motivational. Frankly, I’m surprised that someone didn’t beat me to the punch.  As a matter of fact, somebody approached me to buy www.10thingsihateaboutchristianity.com, but I told him I already wrote the book. I haven’t heard back.  

2) I have been able to give them a tool that will help them bring dialogue about Jesus in front of diverse audiences that would otherwise ignore the subject. And isn’t that really the point of it all, Christians? We call it the Great Commission in my neck of the woods. The more people that talk about Jesus the better, I say.

I operate my life under the assumption that God is okay with questions, doubts, honesty, and passion. If not, then he is no God worth following. That is the premise of my book and why I have any measure of sanity and peace at all. So let us not judge a book by its cover, unless you are merely commenting on the artistic design. Besides Christians, if we were all to judge the Bible by its cover alone, we would be forced to admit that it looks like the most boring book in the world. Instead, it continues to be the best-selling book in history year after year, because it is by opening the pages we discover that only certain parts are boring. The rest reads like:
 
“General Hospital meets Indiana Jones meets Lord of the Rings meets Monty Python. It’s filled with stories of action, adventure, fighting, sex, love, and humor. There are even fire-breathing dragons and a talking donkey. But no ogre. (Sorry, Shrek.)”
–taken from 10 Things I Hate About Christianity: Working Through the Frustrations of Faith in Chapter 3 on The Bible.

[UPDATE: I just got compared to Hitler and my book got compared to Mein Kampf. Once again, it was from a ‘Christian’ who has not read my book.]

Featured in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC)

4

I contributed to today’s issue of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (my regional paper/aka the AJC) alongside my pastor, Andy Stanley. Very cool! There is only one error. It says I became a Christian at 20, but actually I was 15. No biggie. Here is the text and I posted the link at the end if you want to go there:

Keeping the faith, in their way

Many worshippers enjoy innovation of less-rigid services.

By Christopher Quinn*The Atlanta Journal-Constitution*Saturday, May 02, 2009

When
John Hutchins took his wife and two children to visit Buckhead Church
about 18 months ago, his 7-year-old daughter, eyeing the rock band
onstage, theater lighting and big-screen monitors, said, “Daddy, I
thought you said we were going to church.”

Hutchins, who is the son of a Methodist minister, said, “It’s not like my father’s church at all.”

This church does not belong to a denomination, has no liturgy or
stained glass and offers communion only occasionally. It has a flashy
Web site and high-energy classes from Bible study to family finance.

Some of the fastest-growing congregations in the United States are
those that leave behind denominations, stultifying services and
internecine theological fights and offer contemporary styles of music
and communication. They are growing because Americans seem to love
their innovation and family-centeredness and because their leaders have
learned to apply entrepreneurial principles to faith.

Metro Atlanta has its share, large and small. Buckhead Church, with
sister churches North Point Community Church in Alpharetta and Browns
Bridge Church in Cumming, together attract about 20,000 on Sundays.
Newcomer Courageous Church started in downtown office space in January,
and attracts about 100.

Andy Stanley, the son of one of America’s best-known Southern
Baptist ministers, the Rev. Charles Stanley, helped start and pastors
North Point and its affiliates. The initial idea was to start a new
Southern Baptist congregation, “but it occurred to us that would be a
hindrance rather than a help,” he said.

Andy Stanley and other leaders winced at Baptist cultural baggage,
such as the denomination’s call to boycott Disney for allowing gay day
at theme parks. They dreaded the lethargy of bureaucracy. Stanley
remembered enjoying the lack of church trappings when he led members of
his dad’s congregation as the church moved into a former industrial
building.

Starting anew, he wanted freedom to use flexible business models and
packaging that people who did not grow up in church would understand —-
from informal dress to a stage rather than a dais, and music that
sounds like what people listen to on the radio, Stanley said.

It is a growing movement. The American Religious Identification
Survey shows that in 1990, 194,000 Americans identified themselves as
nondenominational. In 2008, it was 8 million.

About one-third of nondenominational churches are megachurches, having more than 2,000 members, and nearly all are evangelical.

Meanwhile, attendance at mainline churches and at the Southern Baptist Convention is declining.

A handful of the new churches are pastored by sons of famous
ministers, such as North Point and Grapevine Church outside Dallas, led
by another son of a former Southern Baptist president.

Scott Thumma, a professor of sociology of religion at the Hartford
Institute for Religion Research, said going independent gives them the
chance to move out from under their fathers’ and denominations’
expectations and fuse entrepreneurship with faith.

Dave Travis, an Atlantan and director of Leadership Network, a
church training organization, was at a conference recently of 4,000
pastors interested in starting new congregations. “And not one wants to
be in a denomination,” he said.

Americans are at ease with crossing church borders —- about half
have switched denominations or faiths in their lifetime, according to
the Pew Center. Disenchantment with denominations’ public image of
feuding, particular teachings such as being against drinking, and their
lack of contemporary feel help push people toward cutting those ties,
Travis said.

Jason T. Berggren, 36, represents that group. He is a North Point
member and wrote a book, “10 Things I Hate About Christianity: Working
Through the Frustrations of Faith” (X Media, $14.99).

Berggren wrestles with religious trappings, such as the benefits of
sleeping in over going to church, and why Christians seem obsessed with
rules.

He grew up not going to church and became a Christian at 20. His
wife grew up Catholic. They both wanted their faith to be accessible
and relevant to everyday life, as opposed to hidden in ritual. He
wanted to walk out of church feeling inspired, challenged to be better.
And he wanted to be comfortable in the same way he would be in going to
a baseball game, as opposed to a museum, he said. “I think that is why
people gravitate toward nondenominational churches,” he said.

Hutchins said when his children are older, perhaps he will return to
a more liturgical church. He misses saying the Lord’s Prayer and
Apostles’ Creed as a congregation.

“There’s a sense of community in that,” he said.

But North Point and its active children’s programs meet his family’s needs, for now.

Stanley knows his style church isn’t for everyone.

“I don’t feel like we are the right way. I feel like we are another way,” he said.

Here’s the link:

http://www.ajc.com/services/content/printedition/2009/05/02/sons0502.html

Merry Easter!

1

I wanted to wish everyone many Easter blessings this weekend. Even though we “do not consider ourselves a Christian nation” most people in America will be celebrating this holiday is some form or fashion. Not to mention most Americans celebrate Christmas and are happy to take the time off and get paid for it. And most Americans will also do the same with Thanksgiving–a celebration originally started to give thanks to God. But we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation, which I am fine with. I am not into theocracies. Can we at least agree that we are predominantly a nation of Christians, for the time being?

Anyway. Sorry for that rant. Back to Easter…

Easter celebrates the resurrection of Jesus. It is said that he died on the cross and raised 3 days later, thereby conquering death. This solidified his claims to be one with God (and also divine, like God). The event was witnessed by the disciples and at least 500 other people. The Roman historian Josephus also records this event.

Happy Easter!

Why Would the President Say That?

15

This week president Obama has been overseas for the G-20 summit. I’ve been trying to find details on what’s actually happening or what’s he’s saying. There hasn’t been much analysis in the media about this. Reports have been general at best. Finally, I heard a report about something he said that really bothered me.

While giving a press conference in Turkey he said in regard to America:

“We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation.”

Why would he say this–especially during Easter week? Something about this really rubbed me wrong and it’s not because I am a Christian, or that the Declaration of Independence (what our whole Constitution is based on) has blatant references to God based on the Judaeo-Christian values of the Founders, or that I don’t understand what he was trying to say with the intent of his words. In light of the context of many other things that he has said while on this trip, I find it a little unnerving.

It’s as if he’s been living the lyrics if Nirvana’s All Apologies song:

I’ll take all the blame
I’ll proceed from shame
Sunburn with freezer burn
Choking on the ashes of her enemy

That seems to be the sentiment of his words on this world tour. I just don’t think it’s stately or smart in the context of a trip like this to be communicating the idea like America is evil, weak, and guilty, especially coming from its preeminent leader. Is that the message we want to send? It does not engender trust, respect, or honor for the future going forward.

I’m all for diplomacy. I’m all for building bridges. But not at the expense of our security or future. Instead of emphasizing the negative, how about a focus on the positive? Instead of saying what we are not, how about saying what we are? Something like this:

“We are a nation of diverse people: Jews, Muslims, Christians, and more. Those with faith, and those without. But we are all committed to building bridges and creating solutions…”

Maybe this is a better sentiment to come from. I think that would accomplish his intentions even better. It’s nice, neutral, and inclusive.

Let me say, I don’t believe America was, is, or should be a theocracy. Although we may not officially be a Christian nation, we are still proportionately a nation of Christians (regardless of what Newsweek’s recent article The End of Christian America hopes for). I think this was just a poor choice of words from our President. Although I believe it was meant to be inclusionary, it was in fact exclusionary. After watching the press conference, I just don’t think it worked.

Am I being picky? Maybe. But he is the President, after all.

With my approach, I think everyone can be happy.

[you can watch the clip for yourself below]

April 1, But This is No Joke!

0

Check out the Heavy Metal Monk:

Is Satan Real?

3

Last week I watched this video from Nightline Face-off and it was really good.

In this third installment,
philosopher Deepak Chopra and Bishop Carlton Pearson will face-off
against Pastor Mark Driscoll of the Mars Hill Church and Annie Lobert,
founder of the Christian ministry “Hookers for Jesus” about the
existence of the Devil.

Both sides are interesting. Whether or not you believe, I found Deepak’s main point a little empty. His basic premise is that God is infinite, so we humans cannot understand Him. Furthermore, because God is infinite, we humans do him a disservice by trying to define him like religions do. Deepak’s approach is to seek enlightenment. And if you limit God by trying to understand Him in human terms, you are not working toward enlightenment. You are a primitive. You need only know that he can’t be known–and that he is love. Whatever love means in this ambiguous context.

So let me get this straight, the purpose of enlightenment is to discover that nothing can be known? Seeking truth only reveals there is no truth? Searching for knowledge only reveals nothing can be known? Yea, that makes sense…

If there is a God, and he is worth worshipping, than he better define his expectations a little. He better tell us what he likes and what he dislikes. Otherwise God is like an abusive father. The kind where the kids never know what to say or how to act. They just walk around the dad in fear afraid that the slightest thing will set him off, but they never really know what that is. What kind of relationship is that?

I think truth can be know. I guess I’m a primitive…

I highly recommend watching it. It’s a great debate.

So watch it when you get a chance: Does Satan Exist?

*Update: I just finally got to watch the last segment. Did anyone notice in the last frame (when all the panelists were saying goodbye to each other) that Deepak refused to shake Mark’s hand when he extended it? Wow! Not very enlightened…

Go to Top