Read the Dang Book!

A few weeks ago, I found myself standing on the steps of the Municipal Courthouse here in Nashville Tennessee. Inside the Nashville Davidson metro council meeting was about to begin. As it happened I was standing next to one of the council members, (who shall remain nameless) and he was approached by a gentleman who introduced himself as the pastor of a church belonging to a Christian denomination in Davidson County.

One of the issues on the agenda was a vote on a bill that would prevent the metro government from firing anyone based on their sexual orientation. First, let us be clear about the bill. The bill is a protection of the right to work for all, including those who are in same sex relationships or who prefer, for whatever reason, same sex relationships. The pastor wanted the council member to join in opposition to, and vote against passage of that bill. To his credit, the council member calmly and firmly let the pastor know that he would indeed vote in favor of the bill. Seeing that the council member was not going to waiver in his support of the bill, the pastor finally asked the council member if he would agree that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for homosexuality. I do not know if the council member is a theologian, a serious Bible student, or just someone with a keen sense of justice but he did not fall for the old Sunday school cliché. Out of respect for the fact that I was not an invited part of the conversation, I held my peace.

Nothing is more egregious to me than when someone uses the Bible as the basis for a position that is exactly the opposite of what the book is about! It pains me when people try to use God's Word, as I believe the Bible is, to justify oppression, bigotry, intolerance, and discrimination. Today, in pulpits throughout Metro-Davidson County, this kind of message is being preached and taught. It was not long ago that some of these same pulpits preached that Blacks "bore the mark of Cain", and not long before that, "slaves obey your masters". The problem is that all too many just do not read the dang Book!

So what does the book say? The Book says, "The LORD said, "Abraham, I have heard that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah are doing all kinds of evil things." (Gen. 18:20) Note the book says ALL kinds of evil things, not specific evil things but ALL kinds. What this means is that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was not because of any one specific thing, but all kinds of evil things. Now I know that Jude writes, "We should also be warned by what happened to the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and the nearby towns. Their people became immoral and did all sorts of sexual sins." However, Jude's words do not single out homosexuality. Rape is a sexual sin. The only indication of homosexuality in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is in the account of the men who visited Lot. If we say that this account is what proved they were homosexuals and thus were destroyed by God, then what if they had accepted Lot's offer of his daughters? If they had gone ahead and raped Lot's daughters, would that have been ok? Would God have not destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah still?

When you read the Book you understand that what really pissed God off was a cowardly pack of people trying to use intimidation and fear to take advantage of someone they perceived to be powerless. That is why later on in the Book God says to his own people in Jeremiah, "And you prophets in Jerusalem are even worse. You're unfaithful in marriage and never tell the truth. You even lead others to sin instead of helping them turn back to me. You and the people of Jerusalem are evil like Sodom and Gomorrah."(Jer. 23:14) Again in Ezekiel " As surely as I am the living LORD God, the people of Sodom and its nearby villages were never as sinful as you. They were arrogant and spoiled; they had everything they needed and still refused to help the poor and needy." (Ezek. 16:48, 49)

What I really wish, however, is that my so-called Christian brothers and sisters, especially those who lead congregations, would just take a moment or two just to think through what they are saying. Take the time to read the Book with a heart of compassion, and not eyes of condemnation. Stand for the truth of the Book. Stand for integrity, honor. Build people up not tear them down. Have the courage to stand for right, and righteousness alone if necessary. Don't settle for being a part of the Sodomite mob.

Make A Difference . . . . . For Life.

History, Who’s Story, Our Story

Facts are not history. History is the events that occur with relation to the facts. This is why we can speak of different "versions" of history. Facts are highly subjective. What becomes, or is established as, fact is based solely on what can be agreed upon. History then is subject to the facts, which is in turn subject to agreement, which is in turn subject to a whole host of variables, not the least of which is, who is doing the agreeing.

In a jury trial, the facts may lead a jury to conclude that someone committed a crime and thus convict that person. Once convicted that person is said to have a criminal history. The facts of the case became "facts" because, for whatever reason, the jury agreed with the prosecution. If the jury finds the person not guilty it is because they did not agree with what was presented as "fact" by the prosecution, or they agreed with a different set of facts presented by the defense. In either case, so much of history is personal.

In 1960 in Nashville, and across the nation, Jim Crow in one form or another was the status quo. Students from what are now American Baptist College and Fisk University, under the training Rev. James Lawson and Rev. Kelly Miller Smith, lead the struggle to change the status quo. The facts can be agreed upon because they are provable. The history, however, can be entirely different depending on who is telling the story. Conservative, oppressive, supporters of the status quo of the time would tell a story of rabble-rousers, impatient negroes who insisted on change now rather than being patient and allowing change to come in its own time. Some, who would profess a knowledge of, and a relationship with the Christ of Christendom would tell a version of history that portrays a group of theology students who, though perhaps well intended, had lost their way spiritually and become overcome by the "cares of this world". "It was not the place of religion to get involved in political affairs," they would say. Progressive, supporters of justice and equality would tell a story of courageous young men and women who joined together and offered their very bodies for the cause of progress and justice.

Today there is almost unanimous agreement in this country that the current healthcare system does not work (fact). Nearly 50 years after these young students, future religious, community, business, and political leaders decided that is was not only their time, but their responsibility to act; people of faith still struggle with the question of whether or not to get involved. Too many of our religious leaders are content to emphasize the vertical relationship between God and man. They want to make sure that we know that "I" am blessed and highly favored; God's got my back; if my breakthrough hasn't come yet . . . it is coming! Enlarge my territory, bless me indeed! This malady afflicts not only popular, well-known prosperity preachers. All too many of our local churches, and aspiring young ministers are afflicted by the "not my place, not my fight" theology that attempts to separate the sacred from the secular.

Those of us who profess faith in the God of the Judeo-Christian tradition must ask the question, "Do I believe in the creation story?" If we believe in the creation story, then we have to believe that the secular cannot be separated from the sacred because from the very start, the secular is created by the sacred! If we believe in the God of the Judeo-Christian tradition then we believe that everything (including the government) exists by His power and permission. Thus, not only can the secular not be separated from the sacred, but also it is in fact subject to the sacred. If then we truly believe we are who we say we are; if we really believe we are each the imago dei; if we truly believe that we are corporately the Corpus Christi; then it is not only right for us to act, it is our responsibility to act. This is our place. This is our struggle. "
We live in this world, but we don't act like its people ⁴or fight our battles with the weapons of this world. Instead, we use God's power that can destroy fortresses. We destroy arguments ⁵and every bit of pride that keeps anyone from knowing God. . ." (2 Cor. 10:3-5, CEV)

That is the history of those students in 1960 Nashville. The question of our day is, "what history will we make?" Will we stand by and do nothing, say this is not our concern, not our struggle? On the other hand, will we act; will we get involved and make our voices heard? We make history everyday. The question is what history will we choose to make today? To not decide is to decide.

 

Make Difference . . . For Life!!

Know Your Role!

I spent last week in Maine organizing in support of healthcare reform. If you have been following this blog you know that healthcare is an issue I am particularly interested in. This week I want to talk a bit about something else. I want to talk about something that happened to two of my friends. I had a great time in Maine and met some wonderful people, all of whom I am not ashamed to call friends, and I hope they feel the same way.

One night at dinner one of my new found friends told us that she had a problem with the church because they had rejected her because she had gotten a divorce. I was reminded of a friend of my parents who was a great teacher in a "Christian" school. She too was rejected and was fired when she got a divorce. What pains me about these instances is the fact that both of these women are really wonderful, caring, individuals, who love the people of God just the way Jesus loves them; and yet someone chose to use "religiosity" to reject and exclude.

Those of us who put on the mantle of "Christian" must be very careful not to use the Bible as a tool to hurt and abuse. Far too often we take on responsibilities that have clearly not been given to us, and for good reason. Jesus says clearly that it is not for us to decide sheep or goat status, wheat or tares. We are not adequate judges. The people of Jesus' time illustrate for us why we are not fit to judge who is approved or who is not. Time and time again Jesus had to point out that the religious leaders of the day were so focused on the letter of the law that they missed entirely, the spirit of the law. That is why Jesus could say to the woman whom the self-righteous religionists tried to shame and embarrass, "go your way".

Jesus uses the Sermon on the Mount to highlight the contrast between just superficially keeping the letter of the law, and actually living in the spirit of the law. Jesus is more concerned that we build real lasting loving relationships, especially in our marriages. Legalists (keepers of the letter of the law) somehow think that because you get a divorce you are a bad person; but if you stay married to your spouse and abuse or neglect them physically, verbally, or emotionally that's ok. You can stay as long as you are not "divorced".

When we use the scriptures to accuse, and exclude it is anti-Christ. Christ breaks down the whole law and the prophets for us in a nutshell; LOVE! Does our treatment of others, especially those inside the church, reflect love? Jesus says that following the Law can be broken down into to simple commands, 1) Love God with all you've got, and 2) Love your neighbor (that's everybody else) as you do yourself. Everything else rests on these. Love, then, is the law's fulfillment.

Knowing these two women as I do, I can say that in this they are more "Christian" than the so-called "Christians" who tried to reject and exclude them. I have seen first hand how these women love God and put into action their love for neighbor as self. These are the true Christians regardless of what "the church" might say. One who could have stayed at her desk job, she did not have to leave the comfort of her surroundings to go walk miles knocking on doors, running errands, making signs, all to help others get healthcare that she already has. She didn't have to but the love of God and for neighbor would not let her NOT do it. The other a well qualified teacher, who could easily have landed a teaching position anywhere, and at better pay, made a conscious choice and sacrifice to teach in a "Christian" school. Her primary interest was not in self but in helping others. These are the marks of true Christianity.

We love God when we keep his commandments, his commandments are summed up in, and rest on love. Let us love not in word only, but in deed and truth.

Make A Difference . . . . . . For Life ! ! ! ! !

What Is The Point?

Recently I read an article (Bishop Jakes counsels patience in economic 'sorrows') that concluded with one of my favorite passages of scripture; John 10:10, the one quoted in the title of this site. The article was an interview with “Bishop” T.D. Jakes. There were several issues discussed in this interview on which I would like to weigh in. In the interest of time and space, I will limit my comments to only one area: wealth.

I would like to take this opportunity to consider the following exchange from the article:

Q. So there's no contradiction in being a rich Christian?

A. "You're going to have Christians who are successful and Christians who are not. Just like you have Muslims who are successful and Muslims who are not. We're not a monolith. There are so many factors besides whether someone is Christian. Are you educated? Are you entrepreneurial?"

It is unfortunate, almost to the point of being tragic, that the “Bishop”, with over 30,000 members, does not take the opportunity to emphasize that success for a Christian is totally different than success as the “world” (our society) sees it. This would be an opportunity for the Bishop to let it be known that the point and purpose of the gospel story so not about personal, property, prestige, or power; that being a Christian who is successful is not about your education, or being “entrepreneurial”.

Personal prosperity is not God’s primary concern. I know that might be uncomfortable for some, and it might sound like I am saying that God does not care. I am not saying that God does not care. What I am saying is that the God that informs my worldview is the same God that the “Bishop” quotes (loosely) when he says in the interview, “Christ came into the world that we might have life and that we might have it more abundantly.” That God is the God of whom I speak. The abundant life that He speaks of is not one of personal prosperity. God is not concerned with increasing the size of our wallets, our bank accounts, or the number of our material possessions. The abundant life is not about getting closer to the 1% of the population that controls 80% of the wealth. God is not interested in making you a successful part of a greedy and selfish society that seeks profit for profit’s sake.

Bishop T.D. Jakes is basically saying that this thing about God is personal. People have their own personal issues in their lives and the church’s role is to deal with those personal issues. The church should be a place where I can come and get hope and healing for my personal situation, where I can find relationship with God and he will fix me. I will be blessed and highly favored of the Lord.

When we approach our relationship with god in this way we miss what god is doing in the world. God has always been active in the history of the world. He has put himself on record as taking a stand against injustice, oppression, greed, and dishonesty among other things. When we come to God as the healer of our troubles and the fixer of our problems, we simply come asking what God can do for us. In so doing we miss the other side of the coin, what we can do for God.

To be sure, God does heal, and save; he brings us out of situations, and changes our lives. However, the real transformation is an inside job. The change is an internal one. Thus, Jesus can say, “You must be born again” something different, someone different, must be created in you. Hence, the apostle writes, “If anyone be in Christ he [she] is a new creature”. This internal change brings with it a challenge, the challenge of the announcement of Jesus, the law in a nutshell.

Now I know you are asking, "What the . . . .?"

Consider this: “So he tried to test Jesus by asking, ’Teacher, what is the most important commandment in the Law?’ Jesus answered: “’Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind. This is the first and most important commandment. The second most important commandment is like this one. And it is, ‘Love others as much as you love yourself.’ All the Law of Moses and the Books of the Prophets [c] are based on these two commandments.” (Matt. 22:35-40)

This is the Law in a nutshell. Love God with all you’ve got, AND love your neighbor as yourself. This is the Law that Jesus came “not to destroy, but to fulfill”. It is in living out this law to the best of our ability that we prove ourselves disciples of Christ. This is the law of the kingdom, that kingdom that we pray for "on earth, as in heaven". When we become a part of this new family we are challenged; not to just take our blessings and squirrel them away, we are challenged to act, to move, to care, and to share.

Bishop Jakes may say that people “come to church to be uplifted, not enlisted.” I say that Jesus draws us to himself to be uplifted AND enlisted. He calls us to step up, reach out, join Him and . . . .

MAKE A DIFFERENCE . . . . . FOR LIFE!!

I Plead the Pledge

I attended a rally for healthcare last Thursday (Health-care rally hits Nashville rush hour). This was not the first of such rallies I have attended. What was different about this one for me was the presence of a small, but vocal, opposition. As both groups where side-by-side on the same side of the street it was easy for me to be standing right next to some from the opposition. For about 90 minutes, we held up signs, chanted slogans, and encouraged passing vehicles to honk their support for our opposing positions. What was most interesting, and encouraging to me was the fact that during that time those of us who where the closest to the opposite group engaged in conversation.

I was engaged in a dialogue with a young man named Eric, from Alabama. In the course of conversation, Eric came to agree that the status quo is not acceptable, and that government regulation is needed. I was excited and pleased that we could carry on civil engagement. One theme however, that continually ran through the conversation was the idea of personal responsibility to the community. Repeatedly this young man kept saying to me, "I don't want to have to pay for someone else's healthcare."

Let us put aside, for a moment, the fact that we are already paying for other people's healthcare, in the form of higher insurance premiums and insurance fraud on the part of doctors and hospitals. Put aside the argument, and a good one, that we pay for other peoples police protection, fire protection, we pay for the healthcare of police officers, firefighters, all government employees, as well as the military, all elected officials, and all the people currently in prison. Forget the fact that we currently pay for the healthcare of the elderly and those with incomes below the federal poverty level. All these are great arguments for a healthcare policy that ensures that every citizen has access to affordable quality care. Nevertheless, I don't want to go there!

I want to go with my flag waving, patriotic, freedom loving, "give me liberty or give me death", tea bagging, anti-healthcare reform, fellow citizens to the Pledge of Allegiance. "I pledge allegiance to the flag . . . and to the republic . . . one nation under God. I will argue that if this country claims to be a godly nation, indeed "one nation under God", then it has an obligation to affirm the humanity and worth of every one of its citizens.

These words, "one nation", are about community. They are about the "E Pluribus Unum", (from many, one). Living out the true meaning of these words is the strength of our community, and our nation. One nation, not individual fiefdoms, one nation; not separate groups of Republicans and Democrats, one nation; not white, black, red, brown, and yellow, one nation; not liberal and conservative, gay and straight, one nation. "One nation under God", if we really live it, not just say it, we will find our strength. We will find community. We will find the willingness to care, and to share.

When we actually live these words, "one nation under God", we will begin to operate in God's economy and not in "Trickle Down" economics. When we live these words, "one nation under God" we operate in an economy and indeed a value system that places people ahead of property. "One nation under God" means I AM my brother's keeper, I am the Good Samaritan. One nation under God means when you hurt, I hurt. One nation under God means "I" can't but "we" can. One nation under God means your health matters to me. It means we are in this together.

In the debate over healthcare reform in this country . . . I plead the pledge.

Make A difference . . . . For Life!!!

At Least He Told The Truth

I read a report online at Tennessean.com about a meeting at a church in Madison, TN last week. The report (entitled Alter Call Confronts Worries of Christian Conservatives) described the meeting as an "old-fashioned God and country revival". The report goes on to note that there was an alter call at this meeting. "But", the article says, "the 600 or so Christian conservatives gathered for "A Call to Arms," organized by talk show host Ralph Bristol, weren't asked to give their heart to Jesus. Instead, they were asked to sign up for conservative causes like the Tea Party Nation and the Eagle Forum, and to donate to charities like the Nashville Rescue Mission. The report quote's one attendee as saying, ""Tonight we are doing a different kind of altar call," he said. "Tonight's altar call is not for God. It's for country."

Now, before we begin to wag our heads and recall the words of the old school hip-hop song, "things that make you say hmmm", I would like to recognize that at least this man told the truth. For once someone from the fear mongering, exclusionary, radically reactionary, anti-Christ, right wing told the truth. It is not about God, it's about country. The agenda of the organizers of this meeting where not at all concerned with the principles of justice, equality, and true peace. Their interests are in maintaining the status quo, and in today's political climate that means continuing the regression toward a society as divided as it was before the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the Nashville sit-ins, and the march on Washington. Their agenda was not for the dismantling of unjust laws and sentencing guidelines that inequitably target poor and minority populations. No, that would be God saying, "Make sure that the poor receive equal justice in court" (Ex. 23:6, CEV). Their agenda is one of fear and antagonism towards non-citizens of this country using half truths and innuendo. God's agenda on the other hand is, "Do not mistreat or abuse foreigners who live among you. Remember, you were foreigners . . .." (Ex. 22:21, CEV). So when this person said it's, "not for God. It's for country." If nothing else, the first part was true.

Unfortunately in all too many pulpits in the Bible Belt including here in Nashville not enough is being said to combat this erroneous teaching. Too many Christians are being fooled into believing that because someone throws out a word about "family values", or ties someone or group with another religion that that person is on the side of right and righteousness. Just as "freedom is not free", so too truly serving Jesus, and being yoked up with him is not simple. It is a challenge. If we are to be truly on the side of right and righteousness, then we cannot simply turn our backs on individuals or groups. Jesus challenges us to be proactive, "Treat others as you want them to treat you." (Mt. 7:12, CEV) This present tense proactive, this is not a statement of reaction, but of action! The challenge for those who would be on the side of right and righteousness is to apply this 'Golden Rule' as it was given; without qualification.

The command to "treat others the way you want them to treat you" is not limited. It is not limited to just the people you like, or just the people who like you. It is not limited to the people who go to your church, or those in your denomination. Notice that Jesus just left it open like that. He gave us this very simple rule to live by yet we find it so hard to do. Before we throw our energy into any "cause", or support any political position, maybe we should take a moment to hold it up to that measure, 'does this reflect treating others the way I want to be treated?'

Honest answers to this question will enable us to move in a more Christ-centered direction and

Make A Difference . . . . . . . For Life

Yes Mr. Cooper, “It is a moral imperative.”

Tennessee Congressman Jim Cooper wrote an editorial in the Tennessean newspaper the other day explaining why he feels compelled to vote a "Reluctant No" to the healthcare reform bill, H.R. 3200. While the overwhelming response to the congressman's editorial are opposed to his position, and I agree with most of them, I would like to use this space to talk a bit about the five words in the editorial that I most agree with. "It is a moral imperative"

How immoral is it to say to 46 million people without any healthcare coverage at all, and another 50 million who are under covered (which means they have some type of health insurance but cannot afford to actually need to use it) " I know you need help . . . just wait". How immoral is it that this government, is willing to go into debt and move immediately to provide assistance to failing financial institutions, and automotive manufacturers, yet when it comes to helping almost 100 million citizens it wants to say, "we cannot afford it."

The founding document of this nation, The Declaration of Independence, states that this government is founded on the principle "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The document goes on to say that, "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men . . ." So there we have it! The very founding document of the United States says that the reason for the existence of the this government, the reason Jim Cooper's job as U.S. Congressman was created is to secure men and women's God given rights. The question then becomes, "is access to quality healthcare a right or not?" If it is not a right, then the ability to go to a doctor and receive the best available care when you are sick or injured is a privilege. If it is a privilege then it is reserved for the privileged. If it is reserved for the privileged then our current system of providing healthcare needs no reform. If, on the other hand, quality healthcare is a right then there is much to be done and government has a responsibility to do it.

I would argue that healthcare is a right. It is included in the Declaration when it talks about having a God given, unalienable right to life. Here is where I would expect to have the cooperation of the Moral Majority, the Christian Coalition, and even the newly formed, Faith and Freedom Network. If good health is a God given right then the purpose of government is not to debate its economic impact, but simply to "secure" it. When Thomas Jefferson wrote these words he intentionally used the word 'secure' and not 'procure'. Jefferson was talking about God given rights; unalienable rights; rights that each person has at birth, by the very fact of their birth, rights that are unalienable; they cannot be denied or limited. In other words the right to life in its fullest is already given, each person already possess it. That right does not need to be procured. The responsibility of government is to "secure" it, to keep it safe.

Our current healthcare system is little more than Jim Crow. The difference is that people are denied services not based on color or race, but because of economic station and political privilege. Those who oppose healthcare reform now are not unlike those who opposed the dismantling of Jim Crow. The words are almost exactly the same. "We know the way it is isn't right. We agree with you and really want change too. Just not right now." To this we say like, Congressman John Lewis said over 40 years ago to those in Nashville who wanted to change Jim Crow "but just not now". "If not now, when?" If history has taught us anything, it has taught us that,

"Somewhere we must come to see that human progress never rolls in on the wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and the persistent work of dedicated individuals who are willing to be coworkers with God . . . it is our experience that the nation doesn't move around questions of genuine equality for the poor . . . until it is confronted massively, dramatically in terms of direct action." – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

The reality of course is that the difference between what can and cannot be done is most often a matter of will more than any other single factor. When Congress (including Congressman Cooper) has the will to act morally, change will come. History has taught us that this will not happen until we, the people of the United States of America, make it happen. History has further taught us that it is those of us who have been touched by the teachings of Jesus, rather than just the teachings 'about' Jesus, who must take the lead, consider it, confer, and speak up!

When we do this, we fulfill our responsibility not just to be unspotted by the world but to leave our mark on it and . . .

Make A Difference . . . For Life!!

Write your Congressman here