What Haiti Reveals

I can't count the times that I've heard complaints from the secular left about how much harm religion does to societies. There is no question that you can find a number of examples of the harm done by the abuse of religion for political purposes.

What is overlooked is all the good that organized religion does, and particularly, Christianity.

As I watch the stories around the tragedy in Haiti unfold, one thing strikes me: the number of missionaries involved in the stories. These missionaries have not come in to Haiti following the earthquake to take advantage of an opportunity. No, rather, these missionaries were already there. They were ministering to the poorest of the poor, to the oppressed, to the illiterate and the homeless, long before Obama and Clinton jumped in this week to address the problems of the nation.

I know personally people in my own church who have been to Haiti and to Fuji and to Brazil and to Mexico and to other countries and other continents to dig wells, build houses, teach people farming techniques, to educate children and do many other things to improve the quality of life in these places ... all in the name of Jesus.

Where is the secular left? Where is the ACLU? Where are the American atheist organizations?

They are nowhere to be found. They don't see it as their job to help people in distress. They don't see the need to address tragedies. Instead they sit back and say "How can a God allow these kinds of things to happen. How can God allow people to starve? How can God allow people to be homeless?"

I suspect God may be asking the same questions of them, as they sit at home on their hindsides and complain about having prayer in public places and seeing Christmas trees. God might say to them, "As soon as you create your own universe, you can create your own rules about what is just and what is right."

Before Obama and Clinton and Bush met this week to address the problems in Haiti and to begin an organization effort to bring in relief, our church was on the phone telling us how we could help. You see, my church is already there. They've been there for years. In fact, they've been there for decades. And they don't need to start some new kind of organized effort to help out. They've already got an organization in place specifically designed to minister to the needs of the Haitian people.

Let's keep that in mind the next time we are tempted to knock organized religion for the"harm" they do to society.

Christmas Is Americana

The Christmas season is upon us.

Christmas trees and lights are everywhere. Department stores are running their "holiday shopping" ads. Atheists are up in arms and calling the ACLU. Don't you just love the season?

I was thinking about the secularization and commercialization of Christmas today. It's getting to the point that nobody seems to like Christmas, at all. At least that's what they say. The atheists complain about the religious aspects of the season, while man Christians decry the secularization of the season.

I wonder why we can't just enjoy Christmas.

Seriously. Can't we just enjoy the season for what it is? Even the commercials and the Christmas lights, and Santa Claus and reindeer. I love it all.

Yes, Christmas Day is a day that my family recognizes the birth of Christ. We read the Christmas story. We go to Christmas Eve communion at our Church. We honor the Gift given to us from heaven.

But I also like the TV Christmas specials. I like the Christmas lights. I like almost all of the "secular" aspects of the season. It's not anti-Christian. It's a part of American culture.

Yes, most of the traditions are borrowed from other cultures. Santa Claus and the gift giving and so on didn't start here in America. But much of the "trappings" of the season are unique to our culture. We've borrowed a little of this and added a little of that and created our own Christmas culture. Some aspects of that culture point to the Christ. Others are simply a part of the "fun". And I like it all.

So, why don't others enjoy it? Frankly, you could go through the entire season, watching the Holiday shopping advertisements, and the Christmas specials and look at the trees and the lights and the tinsel and never be confronted with or reminded of the Christian religion. If that's your choice.

But atheists and leftists and other secular humanists can't let it go at that. They aren't REALLY offended by Christmas trees and Christmas lights. They aren't even offended by the manger scenes and the Bethlehem stars they see at Christmas. They are offended that Christians are enjoying themselves. They can't stand it that people of faith have a time of year in which they publicly celebrate. And they REALLY can't stand it that many non-religious people celebrate with them. And they can't stand America, Americana and American traditions.

That's why they come out from under the rocks every year in December.

O'Reilly and Religion Don't Mix

I cringe every time Bill O'Reilly says he's going to have a guest on his show to discuss anything of a religious nature. Bill just gets lost when it comes to religion.

O'Reilly is Catholic. I have no problem with that. His guest last night didn't say what her beliefs were, but she was obviously not evangelical, nor did she approach religion with a conservative viewpoint. She is a "Religion Editor" for the Washington Post and recently wrote a column "attacking" Sarah Palin's faith.

Attacking may not be the right word. Mocking or ridiculing might be more accurate.

They discussed Sarah Palin's own expression of her faith and her trying to find and follow God's plan for her. This guest implied that if Palin were intellectually honest, she'd either have to say that running for office in '08 was not God's plan or that losing was God's plan. O'Reilly was clueless in searching for a response.

I won't presume to know what Sarah Palin's specific beliefs are with regard to God's plan in our lives or how much "control" He exercises over events. I can only express what my beliefs are.

In a broader sense, God does, indeed, have a plan for all of us. It is the same plan for everyone. He calls us all to repent from our sins and to accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. He calls us all to live a life directed by Him and the teachings in the Bible.

Does that mean that everyone follows this plan? Of course not. My belief is that each of us is free to choose and to do as we please. We can seek him and accept his gift of salvation for us. Or we can go our own way.

I also believe that God give a specific calling to some people with regard to their vocation or profession. I don't believe that He does this for everyone. Did God call Sarah Palin to be Vice President? I doubt it. I think he calls Sarah Palin to be faithful and to use the position that she has to do as much good in our nation as she can. But God doesn't push the buttons in the polling booths. So even if God wanted Sarah Palin to be V.P. (or the next President), that doesn't mean it's going to happen. We can still chose.

The guest last night also implied that if Sarah Palin were consistent in her beliefs, then she would say that it was in God's plan for her daughter to become pregnant out of wedlock, since that's what happened.

Again, that's complete B.S.

I don't think any Christian believes that everything that happens is a part of God's plan. We live in an imperfect and fallen world. Most of what happens in this world happens contrary to what God wants.

This is why I don't like the phrase some Christians use that "God is in Control." Strictly speaking, he isn't. We are. And the natural laws of the universe play a role. I do think that God intervenes in our lives at times. I also think he lets us live the consequences of our choices at times. We also sometimes have to deal with the consequences of the choices of others.

To say that God reigns is different than to say he's in control. I believe that God does, indeed, reign. He oversees all. And, in seeing all, his heart breaks at what's going on this world.

One day things will be different. Until that day comes, each of us must seek and try to follow God's plan.

And I think God's plan for Bill O'Reilly is to keep people off his show who want to talk about religion.

Judge Rules Against Christian Convert

A 17-year-old girl who fled from her home, fearing her Muslim parents would kill her for converting to Christianity, must go back to Ohio, a Florida judge ruled Tuesday.

Judge Daniel Dawson ruled Ohio has jurisdiction over the case involving the teen, Rifqa Bary.

The teen is expected to be placed in foster care when she returns and will also be provided with psychiatric evaluations. Her parents will also receive psychiatric evaluations.

Rifqa can be back in Ohio as early as this week.

In an emotional interview with WFTV in Florida, Rifqa said she expects to be killed if she is forced to return to Ohio. "If I had stayed in Ohio, I wouldn't be alive," she said. "In 150 generations in my family, no one has known Jesus. I am the first. Imagine the honor in killing me."

A Florida investigation found no credible threats to Bary, and her farther, Mohamed Bary, said he has no intentions of harming his daughter.

This case is a tough one. The girl, who is nearly 18, is certainly old enough to decide her own fate. It's not like she was a 10-year-old child. Even though no "credible evidence" exists that she would be harmed, if her father or other relatives intended to kill her, I doubt any credible evidence of their plans would exist. What are they going to do, make a video saying "I'm going to kill Rifqa the next time I see her"? Of course not.

On the other hand, I know that people, especially teens can exaggerate.

Still, I don't think I would have sided with the parents on this one. She's old enough to make her own decision in this case.

Buying Into Chrislam

Chrislam, as the name suggests, is a growing movement wherein some Christians are seeking to find common ground with Muslims. Indeed, it actually seeks to combine Christianity with Islam. It is a syncretistic movement that speaks about "spirituality without boundaries."

Whenever you hear that sort of talk, you should start heading for the hills.

That is exactly what we find in some leftist Christian circles, today. Tony Campolo, for example, has argued that "interfaith prayers and even mystical unions are critical for all true peacemakers." And given that a leftist version of "social justice" seems to be the most important agenda item for Campolo, it is not surprising that he can praise Islam in these terms: "When it comes to what is ultimately important, the Muslim community's sense of commitment to the poor is exactly in tune with where Jesus is in the 25th chapter of Matthew."

More recently, emerging church movement leader Brian McLaren has written a five part blog entry on why Christians should join with Muslims in celebrating Ramadan. In it he said, "We as Christians humbly seek to join Muslims in this observance of Ramadan as a God-honouring expression of peace, fellowship and neighbourliness."

Once again, the emphasis is on getting along; harmony and unity. The problem is that both of these faiths are ultimately evangelistic, exclusive and mutually incompatible. The heart of the Christian truth claim is that Jesus is God's Son, sent to save us from our sins by his crucifixion, death and resurrection. Islam claims that it is blasphemous to say that God has a Son, and they believe that Jesus' death was faked and that the resurrection was a lie.

How can two faiths get along when they are at heart directly opposed to each other?

Ultimately, they can't. Not unless one is watered down to the point of being meaningless. Which is exactly what the leftist Christian leaders are doing.

Christians engaged in the "interfaith" movement tend to engage in at least three harmful activities. (Harmful to the purposes of Christianity). One, they downplay and minimize the truth claims of Biblical Christianity. Two, they downplay and minimize the horrendous Muslim persecution of Christians all around the world, while there is no equivalent Christian persecution of Muslims. And Three, they fail in the most important calling of Christians: to evangelize and disciple all nations.

For all the talk of harmony, unity and friendship, the Chrislam movement is a move in the wrong direction. I, for one, will have nothing to do with it, and I hope all serious followers of Christianity will avoid it like the plague.

Nationalized Health Care ... WWJD?

A recent comment left on my blog by someone who appears to support NaziCare attempted to make the case that Jesus would support a Universal, Single Payor, Nationalized health care system. "Consider whether the “Public Option”, whether “Single Payer”, whether “Universal” Health Insurance, isn’t something more like WWJD than the alternative."

I gave a somewhat flippant retort, saying that when Jesus healed all the folks around him 2000 years ago, he didn't attempt to bankrupt the nation in the process. Perhaps the challenge of WWJD deserves a longer response.

I guess it would be cool if Jesus Himself would just appear out of heaven and say "I like the Obama health care plan!" and then go back and leave us all alone.

Then again, Jesus isn't a puppet on a liberal string. I don't think Jesus would say something like that without also mentioning things like the death panels, about government funded abortions, about confiscatory taxation, about the rationing of care, about people dying while waiting for operations, about people getting a pain pill instead of surgery, and about all the lying that is coming from congress and the President. I suspect he may care about those things, too.

I don't think Jesus would come back to support national health care and ignore all of our sin, all the babies we have slaughtered through abortions and all the babies we want to continue to slaughter through government funded abortions. If Jesus would only ignore all of our lies, our theft, our blasphemy, rampant homosexuality and all of the porn we have published and made available to our children, he could just tell all the Christian leaders to support government paid health care and then go away and let us live our lives like we want ... wouldn't that be great?

Of course, the accusation that not supporting Universal Health Care is somehow an UnChristian position ignores the fact that Jesus advocated personal responsibility and personal charity. He never advocated an increase government bureaucracy to force charity from people. The accusation also ignores all of the Catholic and Baptist hospitals (not to mention others). It ignores the fact that Christians, conservatives and republicans give more to charities that help the poor than atheists, liberals and democrats. The accusation also ignores the fact that the left wants any mention of God, Jesus and Christian principles left out of our political debates, except when they can twist the Christian faith around to suit their purposes.

In the liberal mind, there is an unproven assumption that their goal of nationalizing health care is more christian than other solutions. However, the more I read what Jesus taught, the more I see the importance of a moral law imposed by seeking God, because a man with the Holy Spirit guiding him will do the right thing, while a society governed by civil law enforced by the ungodly remains and becomes even more ungodly.

The national health plan involves seizing assets from the populace; power over life and death; and forced redistribution of wealth (which was big in Roman times); none of which Jesus advocated. His directives on wealth were always toward individual conscience under divine direction.

Under our current system, people who need health care usually get it. It is not uncommon at all for doctors to provide free care, including surgical care, pharmacies to provide free medications to the uninsured and underinsured, and hospitals and other health care providers to write off bills for those who cannot pay their bills. While there are exceptions, and while people do "slip through the cracks," so to speak, there is a great deal of "Christian Charity" in the current system. To imply that a universal single payer system is somehow more "Christian" is to close your eyes to the inherent charity in the current system.

I doubt this is the last word on the subject, but I think it is a tough proposition to claim that a universal single payor system is the answer to the question WWJD.

But as long as we are on the subject, did you know that Jesus advocated a "flat tax?" Not a flat percentage, such as 17%, but a flat dollar amount tax, such as $1000 for every citizen. (You have to dig, but it's there.) Would the liberals who want to "force" Christians into accepting universal health care with the WWJD argument be willing to apply Biblical principles and the WWJD argument to the flat tax issue? When it comes to that, you could call me a "doubting Thomas."

Hope and Change and Faith

Obama still hasn't picked a new Church to go to. I guess there must be a shortage of churches in Washington.

Watching Bill O'Reilly tonight, O'Reilly defended Obama saying that Reagan wasn't a religious man and didn't attend church regularly while president. True. The difference is that Reagan didn't make a big deal about his Muslim ... er ... Christian faith during the campaign.

Here is where O'Reilly is wrong:

We don't necessarily need a president who attends church on a regular basis. (Although, I would certainly prefer that) We do, however, need a president whose rhetoric matches up with his actions. In more areas than faith, Obama's rhetoric is completely opposite of his actions. Clearly Obama used Christianity and faith as a tool to get elected. That sort of hypocrisy is what the left is always accusing Republicans of. There has never been a more blatant example of a Christian hypocrite.

... And Gov. Mark Sanford

For those of you new to my blog, I talked about so called "Christian Hypocrisy" in this post entitled "Carrie Prejean, Bristol Palin and Christian Hypocrisy." I've yet to decide whether more needs to be said about the Mark Sanford affair. I suspect not, but in case you haven't read that post, I think it's one of my better ones. Simply add Sanford's name to the list, and I don't think the main point of the post changes.

Obama Goes To Cairo

I'm sure the Obama Mid East trip will generate may articles over the next few days. I won't try to cover all of what Obama said earlier today. I will make a couple of comments...

The first thing to catch my attention was when Obama said "...I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against the negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear."

Really? Since when, exactly? What other religions does Obama feel responsible to defend?

Let's take a look at one of the larger groups within our own country. A little religion you may have heard of somewhere along the way ... Christianity.

Has Obama been defending mainstream Christian groups who have been lumped in with the guy who shot George Tiller? Maybe I missed that.

I will give Obama credit, though. While many muslims, particularly in Egypt (from what I understand, anyway) have denied that al Qaeda was responsible for 9/11, Obama said this:

"I'm aware that there's still some who would question or even justify the offense of 9/11. But let us be clear. Al Qaeda killed nearly 3000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women, and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people... and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale.... These are not opinions to be debated. These are facts to be dealt with."

At least on this point, he gets it right. I wonder if his audience heard him.