Thoughts and Ruminations

In the spirit of Julie Clawson’s book “Everyday Justice”…

And living with Margaret Mead’s wise words “Never underestimate the power of a small group of committed people to change the world. In fact, it is the only  thing that ever has”….

In a world where so often we feel disempowered because we don’t have money or influence or aren’t considered “important”…

I will, from time to time, be posting pictures and thoughts of the small efforts in my life toward God’s justice.

Today, I have pictures of my most recent effort.  I work at Cracker Barrel, and when I first began there, the General Manager of the store gave me the OK to use our spent coffee grounds for composting at home. After he left, I was told this could no longer happen.  I attempted to recycle aluminum cans at work where everything is thrown into the trash.  Again, I was told this could no longer happen.  Why?  Because the company’s Loss Prevention Program doesn’t allow it.  We also happen to throw away all the paper used over the course of each day.

In the face of this opposition, I have decided to do my own mildly subversive activity.  Whenever I run out my food or the food of a fellow server, I pocket the paper used and bring it home at the end of the night to our home, where I place the paper in recycling.  This results in about 100 small pieces of paper an evening being recycled.

Some persons would tell me this is just a drop in the ocean.  Essentially meaningless.
But I have been shaped by the Bible to believe that nothing escapes the sight of our observant God.
Therefore no act of faithfulness is too small.
This knowledge transforms my disempowerment into thoughtful action.

PSALM 96

O sing to the LORD a new song;
sing to the LORD, all the earth.
Sing to the LORD, bless his name;
tell of his salvation from day to day.
Declare his glory among the nations,
his marvelous works among all the peoples.

For great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised;
he is to be revered above all gods.
For all the gods of the peoples are idols,
but the LORD made the heavens.

Honor and majesty are before him;
strength and beauty are in his sanctuary.
Ascribe to the LORD, O families of nations,
ascribe to the LORD glory and strength.
Ascribe to the LORD the glory due his name;
bring an offering, and come into his courts.

Worship the LORD in holy splendor;
tremble before him, all the earth.

Say among the nations, “The LORD is king!
The world is firmly established; it shall never be moved.
He will judge the peoples with equity.”

Let the heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice;
let the sea roar, and all that fills it;
let the field exult, and everything in it.
Then shall all the trees of the forest sing for joy
before the LORD; for he is coming,
for he is coming to judge the earth.

He will judge the world with righteousness,
and the peoples with his truth.

Nathan, you are not the center of the universe and the epicenter of meaning in the world. You were created by a Being much greater then you, who therefore has a claim on your life that cannot be surpassed.  Do not put this Being in a box, do not create a grab-bag of thoughts that sound nice for describing this being while ignoring uncomfortable ones.

No, humble yourself.
Pledge allegiance and fidelity to this God above all other allegiances.
Pledge to see the world the way He does, and alter your lifestyle and worldview accordingly.
Tremble before God and trust His commands more than you trust your own feelings about what is right and good and worthy to pursue.

Reorient,
and find in that reorientation
that you become more fully you than you ever could have known.

We read the following passage in our House prayers this morning, and I was struck by something.

“Now many signs and wonders were done among the people through the apostles.  And they were all together in Solomon’s Portico.  None of the rest dared to join them, but the people held them in high esteem.  Yet more than ever believers were added to the Lord, great numbers of both men and women, so that they even carried out the sick into the streets, and laid them on cots and mats, in order that Peter’s shadow might fall on some of them as he came by.”

Acts 5:12-15

I can honestly say I’ve never really “gotten” this Biblical passage, primarily because I’ve been mystified by how it progresses.  “Is the author confused?” I would ask, “How can you say no one dared to join them, yet in the next breath say great number of men and women became believers?  Weird.” And I often left it at that, mainly because I didn’t have the follow-up effort to sit and reflect on it.

Which is stupid because while authors can have huge oversights in writing when certain sections are far apart from one another, this one would have had to be an idiot to place them back to back with one another.

I think I understand it now, and it holds great potential for reflection on leadership.  All I had to do was consider the wider context.  I needed to ask the simple fundamental interpretive question; “What is the social context of this statement by the author?”

These apostles are the followers of Jesus of Nazareth.  Jesus was a revolutionary figure who, because of his willingness to simultaneously challenge the raw power of both the oppressive Roman occupiers and the Jewish authorities, was conspired against by those Jewish authorities and eventually executed “for the good of the people.”  The Jewish authorities may not have taken this step if Jesus hadn’t emphasized loving one’s enemies and giving one’s life for the folks on the margins so much.

After all, the role of the Messiah was to kill their enemies (the Roman occupiers), to unify the nation under one righteous standard (to either bring the sinners within the nation to heel or eliminate them), and to bring Israel  back to the prominence of the days of David.  Because Jesus was teaching and embodying a message radically different than this, they “knew” that he couldn’t be the Messiah, and had to be eliminated.

And the Romans, well, anytime the rabble they occupied got a little worked up, they would just crucify someone and let their bleeding, pain-wracked body sit out for all the public to see.  Effective. So they were more than willing to comply with the Jewish power elites.  The powerful believed this would bring an end to the Messianic expectations of the followers of Jesus, just like all the other false Messiahs.

Jesus, by every major standard (which we still apply today) was a failed revolutionary.

Yet an unexpected thing happened.  This Jesus arose from the dead (that really can happen?  It’s not just a metaphor, a concept, a theory, a belief that good things can emerge from tough situations?  So John Dominic Crossan is full of s$%t?), the God of the universe vindicating his message, and providing this clear example that the Way of Jesus, that loving-one’s-enemies supposed silliness, is backed by a Creator whose power is stronger than death (and certainly stronger than the piddly-by-comparison Romans).

So these formerly crushed disciples now are empowered to follow the teachings and example of Jesus no matter what.  And surprise surprise, they face the same threats Jesus faced early in his ministry, when his words started to seem a threat to the status quo.  This same Simon from before has now become Peter (the rock), who stands before powerful persons and the same crowd that went along with the execution of Jesus and instead of shrinking back, saying things like “On the other hand,” or “I see your perspective,” says things like “Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out.”

The sin of killing their enemy for the sake of the people.  The sin of allowing the wealthy to oppress the poor.  The sin of a religious system bent toward increasing the power of the religious elite at the expense of the common person.  The sin of following the will of the mob even when you know what they’re doing is wrong (as mob common wisdom goes, isn’t survival more important than faithfulness, isn’t ‘getting by’ more important than the truth?) The sin of ignoring the deep wisdom of the Scriptures and creating a folk religion that shapes God in their image rather than being shaped into the image of God.

As could be expected, Peter is commanded to cease this talk, with the ominous implication that something could happen to him and those he cares about.

Yet Peter and the other apostles ignore the threats from the authorities (and certainly the well-meaning warning from their grandmas).

They begin to practice God’s Jubilee economic practices together, modeling a way that exposes the sin of the current understanding.  They create an alternative economy based on meeting one another’s needs rather than holding each other at arm’s length.  They do not allow the wealthy to think this is some sort of voluntary charity opportunity; but instead command them to give up their grip on possessions. God backs this up by striking down a husband and wife who think they can control what they give to the common pot.

These are dangerous activities, starting alternative economies that care for the marginalized rather than stomping on them.  This is how dangerous social movements happen.  This is dangerous talk, offending the civil authorities of a system that everyone accepts to be “the only one.”  And God striking down Ananias and Sapphira threw a whole new dynamic in the mix.  What is happening here?  Why won’t the apostles shut up?  Who wants to associate with folks quickly becoming “public enemies,” according to the authorities?  Yet who can stay away, when people are being healed, and needs are being met?

All of this is the political and social and religious context of the Acts passage we read today, and all of that transforms the hard-to-understand two sentences from before into a perceptive glimpse into subversive fervor and its impact on the common person.

“No one else dared join them, even though they were highly regarded by the people.”

The apostles and the community they led had integrity.  They were speaking the truth and pursuing the truth.  People could sense this, could see it in their way of life.  Yet such a challenge is not comfortable.  For one, the leader of the apostles had just been brutally beaten and executed.  Couldn’t they see the path they were on led to the same end?  ”They may be speaking the truth,” some may have thought, “but I’m not going to get my quality of life affected by associating with them.  What about my job?  my reputation? my life? my family?”

So this fledgling church community was highly respected, yet isolated.  Persons were urging them on in their spirits, yet unwilling to take the social risk to associate with them.  The apostles understood that true leadership sometimes requires becoming isolated for the sake of greater unity somewhere down the road.  They understood the tension, the rejection, the struggle of following an alternative pathway.  They understood that they would need to walk this path without many true brothers and sisters, for the sake of witness.  Witnessing to another world with radically different priorities and choices.  They were compelled by God to be a witness, even if it cost them their very lives.

Witness, and faithfulness, are higher priorities in the kingdom of God than survival, it seems.

It seems so often we hide in cowardice behind comments like “Isn’t it more faithful to die of old age and challenge the system in smaller ways, tweaking things here and there?  Isn’t it unfaithful to be so brash and put one’s family’s economic position at risk?”

So the apostles are walking a Way of danger on behalf of those who respect them but are unwilling to join them.  This explains the comment “more and more men and women believed in the Lord and were added to their number.”  The apostles’ leadership has a secondary effect of shifting the priorities of others (even if just on the subconscious level).  And it seems that God does acknowledge that shift in persons, that awakening to what we were created for, even if it’s still buried under layers of cowardice and “common sense” perceptions about what is possible and what is not.  This reminds me of the saying, “God is easily pleased, but never satisfied.”

Is God pleased that these persons are “believing,” even when their belief isn’t yet embodied?  It seems so.  Yet will God allow them to remain there on the sidelines, living vicariously through the brashness and innovation of the apostles?  Certainly not. The way of the apostles, the Way of Jesus, is an echo from Eden of what we all we created to be and do.  God will not rest until this Way comes to pass in its fullness.

So while we can affirm that many “believed” in this passage in Acts, we cannot rip it out of context to extol it as the fullness of faithfulness. The completion of belief is action. And we are to create a community as disciples of Jesus that is so committed to one another that if a father or mother is picked off by powerful people, their family is picked up and carried by the community, and their children are told stories and asked,  ”Remember the courage of your father?”  The wives are held in high regard, and told “Remember the faithfulness of your husband?”

Because in a community of resurrection, death is scoffed at, and fullness of life is embraced.  The actions of the apostles teach us this. God’s Jubilee is at hand, and we will not shy away because of a fear of what we may lose.  We will choose this way as a witness. And we will know we may not have many companions on this tough, steep, perilously dangerous way; but how many are standing on the sidelines, watching, wishing they could overcome their fears, their cowardice, their self-protection, their way of life, their “obligations”?

May we be courageous people, in our own unique ways.  And complete our belief by embodying the Way.

A call to action from the good people at http://www.ilovemountains.org/ .  Please at least read to understand their perspective, let it affect you, and if you feel comfortable, take action through calling or emailing your elected representative.  I share this information not as a disinterested individual, but as a Christian obeying the command to care for God’s creation.  The situation is dire.  As Will Samson writes in his book Enough:  Contentment in an Age of Excess,

“Men and women are stuck with a coal economy that is devastating their job base and leaving little hope for their future.  Children are leaving Appalachia in record numbers, crushing families, some of whom have lived in that area for more than two hundred years.  Throughout the coal-mining areas of Appalachia, in almost biblical proportions, neighbor is pitted against neighbor, friend against friend (Isaiah 19:2).  One family fights to preserve ancestral lands from being take and blown up to get at the coal seams below, while another enjoys ATVs and a new widescreen TV.”  (36)

Massey Energy has begun blasting on Coal River Mountain in southern West Virginia. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection has stated that the mining operation on the mountain is “actively moving coal.” Workers have been seen moving heavy equipment up to the mining zones, and blasting and plumes of smoke were seen and heard near the Brushy Fork coal slurry impoundment.

he Brushy Fork impoundment is an enormous retention pond holding 8.2 billion gallons of toxic coal slurry waste. If the impoundment were to fail due to the blasting, hundreds of lives will be lost and thousands more will be in jeopardy from an enormous slurry flood.

A 2006 study confirmed that Coal River Mountain—the highest peaks ever slated for mining in the state—is an ideal location for developing utility-scale wind power. Local residents have rallied around this proposal as a symbol of hope, a promise of a new and cleaner energy future, but that hope may be destroyed unless quick and decisive action is taken right now.

Please take action today to communicate with Secretary Salazar, Secretary Jackson, and the Office of Public Affairs your concern.

6,000 Acres To Be Destroyed

Massey’s plans for the mountaintop removal operation would destroy over 6,000 acres of Coal River Mountain and create 18 different valley fills, devastating the Clear Fork watershed. Over 10 square miles of the most bio-diverse ecosystem in the United States will be destroyed forever, affecting the lives of the local residents by destroying their homeland and polluting their air and water.

Wind on Coal River

A wind assessment study conducted by Coal River Mountain Watch and Downstream Stategies revealed that Coal River Mountain has enough wind potential to provide electricity for over 150,000 homes and create stable, well-paying jobs—forever.

The proposed wind farm would help diversify the local economy in an area historically dependent upon sparse, temporary coal mining jobs, pumping $20 million per year in direct local spending during construction and $2 million per year thereafter. Destroying the mountain will also be destroying one of the best wind power sites in West Virginia.

This opportunity, however, depends upon the mountain being left intact. If blasting continues on Coal River Mountain, the wind potential—and the jobs—will be lost forever.

And thank you for helping to preserve Coal River Mountain for generations to come.

Contact your district Representative.   Contact your Senator.

And if your Senator is Mitch McConnell, tell him to stop whoring himself out to Big Coal. It’s unsightly to see supposed leaders be such a puppet and lapdog of big business  (Nathan’s words here, not the folks at ilovemountains).

I was driving up to Eastern Mennonite Seminary yesterday morning to participate in chapel when I heard on National Public Radio that April 7 is a national day of remembrance in Rwanda. For those not familiar with world events, in the year 1994 ethnic and tribal tensions in the central African country of Rwanda spilled over into a horrendous systematic genocide perpetrated by the majority tribe (the Hutus) mainly against another tribe (Tutsi), though other minority tribes (like the Twa) and Hutu moderates were killed as well. Over the span of approximately 100 days, about 1,000,000 (yes, six zeroes) people were killed, largely by the Hutu militias hacking them apart with machetes.

This was a sad, horrendous time in Rwanda, but it was also a sad, horrendous time in the world. The U.S. called Rwanda a “local conflict” and refused to use the word “genocide” because it may invoke moral responsibility on their part. President Bill Clinton later publicly expressed contrition for standing idly by during this time. In addition to U.S. non-action, significant charges have been made that the French government supported the Hutu perpetrators by both encouraging the Hutu death squads and turning a “blind eye” to the systematic killings when their troops were the only foreign forces in the country in June 1994. A damning report was released in August 2008 by a Rwandan commission of inquiry. According to journalist Linda Malvern,

The report – the fruit of two years’ work that includes the testimony of 638 witnesses, including survivors and perpetrators of genocide – is damning. It says that certain French politicians, diplomats and military leaders – including President FranÁois Mitterrand – were complicit in genocide. The French authorities knowingly aided and abetted what happened by training Hutu militia and devising strategy for Rwanda’s armed forces. Training and funding was also given to Rwandan intelligence services on how to establish a database later used to draw up a ìkill listî of Tutsi.

The most shocking allegations come from survivors who allege that French soldiers participated in the massacres of Tutsi. These soldiers were a part of Operation Turquoise, a French military intervention in June 1994, an ostensibly humanitarian mission that had the backing of the UN Security Council.

So from a world that uttered the phrase “never again” following the Holocaust in the 1940′s, passive ignoring and active assisting were the policy in the Rwandan “Holocaust.” This is one horrendous perspective of reflection on Genocide Remembrance Day. But I’d like to offer another that the typical journalist wouldn’t offer.

We Christians like to talk about “missions” a whole lot, and we like to talk about Matthew 28, Jesus’ “Great Commission,” where he said to “Make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” Many Christians have left the comforts and relationships of home to go to foreign lands, spurred on by this call to proclaim the name and mission of Jesus to the world. And when they have done so, they’ve met mixed results. In Africa, specifically, Christians often lament the big obstacles that meet them there; extreme poverty, tribal religions that maintain holds on the people, and other religions (especially Islam).

But with all of the struggles of Western mission in Africa, Rwanda was considered one shining example of success. Of all the nations in Africa, Rwanda had the highest conversion rate, and eventually the country could claim about 80-90% of its citizens as confessing Christians. Yet in 1994, in the most “Christian” country of Africa, one tribe of Rwandans slaughtered one million of their own people. For persons who care about the gospel (which should be all Christians), that leads to a big question,

“What in the world happened here? How can such a success story become such a tragic story of hatred and murder?“

And what investigators have suggested is that the gospel that was preached to Rwandans by Western missions groups was one that focused salvation on life after death, essentially, “Jesus died for your sins so you could be forgiven and go to heaven and not go to hell when you die.” This gospel, because of its focus on the afterlife, didn’t address its hearers’ (and eventual converters) everyday existence. Specifically, it had very little to say about social class, tribal, ethnic, racial, and familial relationships other than sexual behavior and marital boundaries. As a result, when a powerful racial hatred story came along (Hutu power), there was no counter-story in the “Christian” people of Rwanda to nullify the Hutu power story. To make this message come a little closer to home, this Rwandan gospel is the gospel most American Christians proclaim, which makes this more than a Rwandan problem; it makes it a global-church-wide problem.

To state this situation differently, it raises another important question. Is what the Rwandans received “the gospel”? And if it is, does this gospel have anything substantial to say about distinctions between people that lead to bloodshed? And specifically for the readers of this post, Does what you believe is the gospel only focus on the death of Jesus and its forgiveness of sins for eternal life, which means only heaven and hell after natural death?

If that is your gospel (and I wouldn’t be surprised if it is, because most of the Western world believes it is), I contend, Biblically, you’re missing the point of the gospel proclaimed by Jesus. And when you proclaim such a gospel in the world, it has disastrous results on the people hearing such a message.

I’m literally saying here that the Western church bears significant responsibility for the genocide in Rwanda. I’m not saying this to say the church is completely twisted and never has done anything good. I’m simply saying that when we miss the point of the gospel, and preach our missing-the-point as “the gospel,” it has consequences. Sometimes disastrous ones.

I saw the most recent example of the “gospel” we believe in when watching a video of a panel ostensibly put on to make Tony Jones look like a heretic (judging from the other panelmates) that ended up with statements from Tony, his “more orthodox” friend Scot McKnight, and his “definitely orthodox” (by American evangelical standards) panel-member Kevin DeYoung making statements about the gospel. I quote their three statements in full. In light of Rwanda, tell me which “gospel” wouldn’t significantly challenge the way of life of the Rwandan people and which ones would present to them a transformative message.

Jones: “The gospel is that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself. That none of us should be lost. He’s given us the ministry of reconciliation, therefore we are ambassadors for Christ. That’s the gospel. God is the protagonist. God does the work. We put our faith in God through Jesus Christ and that our job then is to take the message of reconciliation out to the world.”

DeYoung: “The most important thing is…to be absolutely solid on what the gospel is. The gospel is not first of all what we need to do for God, to go out and change the world or bring about shalom. The gospel is first of all about what God has done for us…The beginning point, the ending point, the thing that holds it all together is that Jesus Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures and rose again on the third day and without that we are lost in our sins and we are facing eternal punishment.”

McKnight: “Here’s how I define the gospel… I think it’s the work of the Triune God (Father, Son, Spirit) through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit to restore cracked eikons (which is what I call human beings) to union with God, union with others, for the good of others and the world. And the same apostle Paul called the gospel “the gospel of peace.” Shalom is the word he would have used there.”

What do you think?  Regardless of the way you may respond to each statement, which one do you think most Western Christians would say is the gospel?  And how might the story of Rwanda change the way you think about the gospel?

When our “gospel” is primarily focused on life after death, something powerful will occupy that vacuum of how to find meaning in this life.  I saw another example of how that something powerful co-opts and changes Christian symbols on the back of a Ford Explorer today too.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, the gospel that we preach must be Biblically-rooted, must never take away from God’s dream for the world, and must lead to transformed patterns of living in this world that extend out through eternity. the world must see a visibly distinct group of people in the world to have something either to hate or model their lives after.  A people pursuing God’s justice and God’s shalom.  Anything less than that and we are setting our sights far too low.  

Rwanda reminds us that lives hang in the balance.

Check out these thoughts on this important day called “Thanksgiving Day Mythology” by Robert Two Bulls.

I call this day important not because of our cultural story of Thanksgiving.  That’s what Robert is addressing.  I call this day important because it has the potential, I emphasize has the potential to lead disciples of Jesus to think about what we’re really thankful for.  And it’s not how many possessions I have as opposed to my brother or whatever.  It’s a deep thankfulness for the God who made us, a thankfulness for life itself, a desire to honor and value that life through cherishing our relationship with all that God has made, and celebrating that Jesus continues to lead us out of darkness and into the light of truth.

May Christians look beyond our culture and courageously lead the way to a deeper, more meaningful thankfulness in our world.

Sooooooo…..since blogs are supposed to be places where people express their own authentic views on any number of subjects ranging from very personal struggles to big-scale stuff like the cost of tea in China, I guess I should comment on a massive life change in my life (and, because my wife made one of those “lifetime covenants” with me, her life too).

I resigned as pastor of Middle River Church last month, effective May 1st, 2009.  The following is an attempt to put into words the reasons why.

I’m 28, young enough to be incredibly naive, but old enough to know life isn’t a bowl of cherries.  I’m young enough to have dreams for the world, and old enough to know that most older people have given up on dreams as foolishness.  I have chosen to dream, and while I’m sure this dream will run head-on into the harsh reality of the present, that doesn’t negate the power of the dream.

Bethany and I have decided to move intentionally to Cincinnati to live in community with our friends Dustin and Tiffany and Josh.  We will be making a covenant together that involves significant financial sharing, commitment to daily communal worship, commitment to the simple aspects of life together (common meals, working together), and a commitment to being neighborhood-minded in the pursuit of our shared dream.  

People around here try to talk to me about this, and I’ve run into a strong number of blank faces and quizzical faces.  

The blank ones don’t seem to have room in their heads for something like this; I would chalk this up to their being so intimately shaped and molded by our social message of individualism, privatism, and seeking of comfort that the strong desire for community is all but extinguished in them.  Sure, it might express itself from time to time, but is quickly quelched by the person’s fear of the unknown and society’s powerful message of selfishness.  

The quizzical faces also don’t seem to have room in their heads for something like this, but for different reasons. “Community” sounds too much like “communism” to them; it’s not a coincidence that these folks are often my parents generation with Joe McCarthy’s rants and anti-Soviet propaganda ringing in their ears. So that’s a barrier.  Plus, living together with others who aren’t your “natural” family sounds too much like David Koresh to them (remember Waco, TX in 1993 and Janet Reno?).  Some have had the courage to warn me about this, which is a wise caution, I’d say, of how community is easily corrupted by power and personality.

There’s maybe two other big reasons that people are confused by our decision.  There’s a strong current of American conservatism running through the Shenandoah Valley, where churches feed the desire for traditional values; work hard, save, take care of your family, “go to” church (and those aren’t necessarily negative values). But with those values has always been a latent racism, stereotyping of those who are poor, and an elevating of the values of family, tradition, and a middle-class state of mind to a place of idolatry. It is the only way of life folks know, and they cling to it even as they make decisions that shred that sense of shared values over time.  Those decisions (the embracing of spending ourselves into debt, buying bigger and more expensive transportation and houses, escaping life through movies, television, and entertainment rather than working consistently and hard towards real-life goals) come in the name of “change” and “progressive” thinking. That’s the second strong current in our area, a “progressivism” that is, from an eternal perspective, really “regressivism.”  As Os Guinness says,

“We insist on choice, we expect change, we prize relevance, we are unthinking believers in the-newer-the-truer, the latest-is-greatest, and what’s in and what’s out…the result of our casual nihilism is a careless demolition of tradition and the creation of a spiritual, moral, and aesthetic wasteland in its place.”

The Shenandoah Valley is quickly becoming a toxic wasteland of confused conservative/progressives who espouse family values yet get out of marriages because they don’t serve their selfish ends, who claim a Christian faith yet reject the life of discipleship because it gets in the way of watching American Idol or their dream of their child becoming a professional athlete (so they put them on travel teams that pull them away from investing in relationship with others around them).  We don’t know who we are, but we know that the television feeds our short-term wants; to feel significance through reality shows with “normal” people “making it,” to make us think we’re helping make our world a better place through watching (and crying through) Extreme Make-over Home Edition, and to feel athletic by altering our schedules to fit our commitment to watching various sports events.  You could add any number of examples onto those.

It’s a rat race.  Slowly but surely, as I’ve tried to carve out some time to listen to God in the midst of the competing messages and voices (by turning off the radio, but choosing not to have cable or satellite television in our house, by seeking to value relationship over entertainment), I’ve heard God beginning to whisper to me.  The more I’ve paid attention to that whisper, the louder it has grown and the more it has gripped me. At times the voice thunders in my head, stopping me dead in my tracks and making me quake in fear (the healthy kind, mostly).  The voice says something like this, “There is more to life than this.  Listen to me, obey me, and you can be a part of something greater.”  God has been shaping me, and this shaping has sped up the more I’ve worked to listen and act accordingly.  I’m choosing to dream more these days, and to follow the pathways of the dreams to figure out where they might lead.  T.E. Lawrence wrote something that has gripped me, saying,

“All men dream: but not equally.  Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find it was vanity:  but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible.  This I did.”

Bethany and I have chosen to be “dreamers of the day” with friends; working to line up our dreams with God’s dream.  We know that changing the world begins with us, is always focused on the daily life of neighborhoods and communities surrounding us, and includes my brothers and sisters across the globe.  There are already church families in Cincinnati who have been doing this for a while like Vineyard Central in the Norwood neighborhood.  There are already disciples of Jesus who have moved intentionally to economically depressed areas for years like Dorothy Day (and Catholic Worker folks), Tom Sine (and Mustard Seed House folks) and Shane Claiborne (and Potter Street Community folks) Mark Scandrette (and ReImagine folks) and John Perkins (and CCDA folks).  I know these persons would be frustrated with me singling them out, because they’re good, humble people who are a part of communities, not celebrities or Christians unto themselves.  But for the sake of examples, I isolated them.  We will be submitting to them and listening as a community to how their wisdom tempers our idealism; how their struggles temper our vision. We are naive, yet we want more.  This will be hard, but our common commitment will share the burden.  We are not alone in this.

Malcolm Muggeridge wrote his own (joking) epitaph while in college to a friend,

“Here lieth one whose soul sometimes burned with great longings.  To whom sometimes the curtain of the Infinite was opened just a little, but who lacked the guts to make any use of it.” 

Hearing that warning (Muggeridge was a famous killjoy of grand dreams for a long time in his life), I have a couple commitments;

I want to walk the uncomfortable balance of great longings and the ordinariness of daily living.  

I want to have the guts to risk for God while rejecting some twisted sort of heroic quest.

I want to be perpetually restless for redemption without allowing that restlessness to cause me to wander constantly in search of something that is only found in choosing to stay and work somewhere, somewhere to invest in, that has people to love.  

I want to walk in God’s pathways, and I’m grateful to join others in conspiring to lead our world back to Genesis 1 and God saying, “This is VERY good.”  

I love paying attention to these things and knowing that God is smiling, fighting for me and urging me to keep walking and keep striving.  

I get to join God’s story of redemption in our world, to play a role in this drama unfolding for millennia, and to work joyfully in God’s kingdom whether we see “results” or not.  God is making a “new heavens and a new earth,” and my faithfulness to the global scope and the common, daily path of it helps to bring that world to pass.

I was reading my mom’s Charisma magazine last week as we watched the Republican National Convention, and I flat out lost my temper. You wouldn’t have known it on the outside, because I seemed to be OK. If you knew me well (like my wife, who shot me a look of concern), you would’ve known I was upset, but it wasn’t hugely obvious.

I’m just gonna say this. I am so very tired of hearing Pentecostal/evangelical/conservative/fundamentalist/apocalyptic Christians talk about “supporting Israel.” If you’d like a definition of what they mean when they call us to “support Israel,” maybe the following will suffice. From the Christians United for Israel (CUFI) main page: “The Bible commands us to pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6), to speak out for Zion’s sake (Isaiah 62:1), to be watchmen on the walls of Jerusalem (Isaiah 62:6) and to bless the Jewish people (Genesis 12:3). These and so many other verses of the Bible that have one overriding message– as Christians we have a Biblical obligation to defend Israel and the Jewish people.”

For months now, I have inwardly seethed and said nothing as I saw blatant misrepresentations and misinterpretations of Scriptures to support such a position, and I can no longer stand idly by.

For right now, I’m going to offer a simple outline for the reading of the Scriptures that will guide us to a more wise, discerning position on this issue of “supporting Israel.” First, there is the foundational Scripture passage for Christian Zionists that comes from Genesis 12:1-3, and it reads;

The LORD had said to Abram,
“Leave your country,
your people and your father’s household
and go to the land I will show you.

2 “I will make you into a great nation
and I will bless you;
I will make your name great,
and you will be a blessing.

3 I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you.”

Essentially, the LORD tells Abe two things. First, he will be made into a great nation, and second, those who interact with Abe’s descendents will face consequences for how they treat them; positive ones for blessing them, and negative ones for cursing them.

Now, clearly, the historical result of God’s promise to Abe was the creation of the people of Israel. One could assume (as the above-mentioned “leaders” do) that this includes all of the Jewish people up until the present day. That assumption would be unwise and ultimately false. “Why?” you may ask. I’ll give good clear Scriptural reasons why. In the gospel of Matthew, chapter 3, verse 7 and following, John the Baptist (a Jew), said this to some fellow Jews who came out to the desert to hear the message he was proclaiming;

“But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.”

What John tells his Jewish hearers is essentially this; the claim to be a descendent of Abraham is not based on biological heritage, but instead on whether one obeys God. This is very different from the way we typically think about heritages today, so it might be a bit weird for us to grasp what John is saying, but he uses the metaphor of trees to illustrate his point. The trees are “Abraham’s children,” and those who do not “produce good fruit” (faithful living, obedience) will be “thrown into the fire” (cut off from God’s “great nation”).

During Jesus’ ministry that directly followed John the Baptist’s, Jesus said something that expounded on John’s statement. Again, it’s a bit mystical, but not terribly hard to figure out. It comes from the gospel of John, chapter 8, verse 31 and following. This passage comes right in the middle of Jesus speaking both with those his disciples (those obeying him) and the Pharisees (those not all sold on his message, and therefore disobeying him);

“To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?”

Jesus replied, “I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. I know you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are ready to kill me, because you have no room for my word. I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you do what you have heard from your father.”

“Abraham is our father,” they answered.

“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do the things Abraham did. As it is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. You are doing the things your own father does.”

“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”

Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here.

In this passage, Jesus is also questioning the people’s belief that they are Abraham’s descendents based on biological parentage. He makes an important distinction between being Abraham’s “descendents” and being Abraham’s children. Jesus says, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the things Abraham did.” His implication is obvious; those who disobey him are no longer Abraham’s children. Their disobedience places them outside of the covenant people of God.

To reinforce in a powerful way what John the Baptist and Jesus have already made clear, we turn to the apostle Paul’s letter to the Romans. In chapters 9-11, Paul gives an extended argument on how a vast majority of the people of Israel now are no longer considered children of Abraham. Beginning his argument, Paul writes in chapter 9 (you can almost hear him wailing this through tears);

“I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit— I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.

It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” In other words, it is not the natural children who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

“Who are the children of the promise?” we might ask in response to this section of the Scriptures. As Jesus stated very clearly, it is those who “hold to my teaching.” And since a huge majority of Jews in Paul’s day denied Jesus was the Messiah (all the way up to today), Paul uses harsh imagery in the following passage to illustrate that they are no longer Abraham’s children. If you remember John using a tree as a metaphor, Paul uses a metaphor of tree branches. And this section in Romans 11 is addressed to Gentiles (non-Jews);

“If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you.

You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.”

Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!”

In Paul’s metaphor of the branches of an olive tree, the root of the tree is God, and the branches are those who make up God’s “nation.” The Gentiles are “wild olive shoots” that have been grafted in among the other, we could say, more natural branches. The other branches aren’t more natural in that they’re more human, or somehow more gifted. They’re simply more natural in that they should know what the truth is since God called them to seek and represent the truth to the world before the others. And Paul makes clear here that being part of the tree is rooted in “faith,” which is essentially trusting God and obeying him.

You can really see Paul’s struggle as he, a biological descendent of Abraham, laments that most of the other biological descendents of Abraham are no longer part of the faithful people of Israel, but he makes no bones about it. Those who were formerly outside Abraham’s blessing (Gentiles) are now inheritors of the blessing, while those with biological connections to Abraham are now cut off from the blessing. Gentiles are now part of the people of Israel, along with the Jews who trusted and obeyed Jesus as Messiah. The message can’t be much clearer than that, and flat-out obvious for readers to see.

I’m tired of seeing evangelical leaders like John Hagee and Stephen Strang and the late Jerry Falwell use threats and fear to urge Christians to “support Israel,” suggesting that Christians who don’t blindly support what Israel does will be cursed. This is a disgusting, unholy, unfaithful practice, and it grieves the heart of God. Not to mention when you haul out threats to substantiate your message, that generally shows your motives are childish and petty

So Christians, when you hear supposed Christian “leaders” justify the modern Israeli state’s illegal settlements, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and genocide against Palestinians or other Middle Eastern Arabs by saying things like,

“God said to Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you and whoever curses you I will curse” (Gen. 12:3). This is God’s foreign policy statement concerning the Jewish people.” (Stephen Strang October 27, 2006)”

and

“I firmly believe God has blessed America because America has blessed the Jew. If this nation wants her fields to remain white with grain, her scientific achievements to remain notable, and her freedom to remain intact, America must continue to stand with Israel.” (Jerry Falwell in book Listen America! 1980),

ignore their fearmongering and simply say, “No, Jerry and Stephen. I am a part of Israel today, and I will not stand for your baseless positions that support hatred, murder, and fear. I’m sorry, but you’ll have to find someone more naive and Biblically illiterate than me to sit under your authority.“

I am SO sick and tired of Christian leaders spouting this drivel that leads Christians to justify some of the disgusting things the modern Israeli state is carrying out. May we reject fear and seek the truth in God’s word. May we tremble and maintain a healthy fear of God’s word, not those of misguided leaders.

Humbly, yet forcefully seeking the truth,
Nathan Myers

On August 29th, 2008, Barack Obama said in his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention:

“America, we cannot turn back. We cannot walk alone. At this moment, in this election, we must pledge once more to march into the future. Let us keep that promise – that American promise – and in the words of Scripture hold firmly, without wavering, to the hope that we confess. Thank you, God Bless you, and God Bless the United States of America.”

I heard that speech in its entirety.  It was, by and large, a pretty decent one.  But to the section I’ve quoted above, I have to say, “No, Barack.  I’m sorry, but no.”

Your speech was full of good, solid thinking on the problems of America and some solutions we can strive for together.  But I was deeply saddened at your last few sentences.  I’m not knocking the American promise; we can work together as people for the good of this country.  But Barack, the American promise is not the hope that we confess.  You claim to be a Christian, a claim that should not be made lightly, and Christians are held accountable to the Scripture that roots us as a people.  Last I checked, in that Scripture you quoted a little bit of, Jesus is the hope that we confess, and his global kingdom is the goal we progress towards as people, not America.

Barack, you have shown a balanced, principled approach to leadership in this country.  But in pursuit of being “balanced,” you have either allowed your discipleship to be co-opted by your political interests or you have presented yourself as someone without any serious, totalizing commitment to Christ that might make you look foolish in the eyes of others.  Whether this is a method or the real thing, Barack, Jesus expects more out of you, and it saddens and angers God when we place other things or commitments in the place only he can occupy.

And Barack, one more thing.  I know you have to say “God bless America” or you’ll be written off as a unpatriotic heretic.  Another one of those hurdles you have to jump through to be elected in this country. But please, in your politics and in your speech, will you represent the larger blessing we pursue, the one that reads “God bless the world”?  Clearly, America is not God’s kingdom, but there is a Biblical commitment among those who are blessed (in this case with material things); they are blessed to be a blessing.  Blessed to have a genuine concern for all the world’s citizens and all the rest of God’s creation; the kind of concern that leads us beyond America an into the major global moral issues of our day.  Please talk about/exemplify that, Barack.

On September 3rd, 2008 at the Republican National Convention, Mitt Romney said:

“Just like you, there has never been a day when I was not proud to be an American. We inherited the greatest nation in the history of the earth. It is our burden and privilege to preserve it, to renew its spirit so that its noble past is prologue to its glorious future. To this we are all dedicated and I firmly believe, by the providence of the Almighty, that we will succeed. President McCain and Vice President Palin will keep America as it has always been – the hope of the Earth. Thank you, and God bless America.“

I also listened to his whole speech.  I can’t say much good about his larger message, but especially in the above quotation, I was horrified and now must say, “No Mitt.  I’m sorry, but no.”

America is not and has not ever been the hope of the Earth.  As a disciple of Jesus, I firmly reject your statement.  In the incredible, beautiful letter to the Romans, the apostle Paul makes a powerful statement.  It is  may not come with the weight of an entire army behind it, nor will it come with economic might, but it is the truth nonetheless.  Here is Paul’s confession;

“For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God’s truth, to confirm the promises made to the patriarchs so that the Gentiles may glorify God for his mercy, as it is written:

“Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles;
I will sing hymns to your name.” Again, it says,
“Rejoice, O Gentiles, with his people.” And again,
“Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles,
and sing praises to him, all you peoples.” And again, Isaiah says,
“The Root of Jesse will spring up,
one who will arise to rule over the nations;
the Gentiles will hope in him.”

Mitt, you’re a Gentile like me, so this passage is addressed to us.  It seems that the prophet Isaiah proclaimed that Jesus rules over the nations, and that the Gentiles (joining with the Jewish people) will hope in him.  So no, Mitt, America is not the hope of the earth.

And Mitt, isn’t it a little myopic of you to make the claim that America always has been the hope of the earth?  Are you aware that America has only existed for 232 years?  And if you’re looking beyond the relatively short existence of America to make a larger claim, are you trying to say that all of history has anticipated the rise of the American nation so that it may, finally, have hope?  Mitt, forgive me for being direct, but that’s, frankly, deluded, not to mention deeply vain.

I would encourage you, Mitt, to read a story of someone else that got a little too big for his own britches, trusted a little too much in his own power, believed that every other nation had anticipated his people’s rise. His name (a little confusing to pronounce) was Nebuchadnezzar.  For all intents and purposes, his kingdom was the most powerful around.  People quaked in their boots when they heard ol’ King Neb was coming.  King Neb had a dream, though, a disturbing one. You can read about it in the prophetic book of Daniel, chapter 4.  The dream was about a great and beautiful tree. In King Neb’s words,

“Its height was enormous. The tree grew large and strong and its top touched the sky; it was visible to the ends of the earth. Its leaves were beautiful, its fruit abundant, and on it was food for all. Under it the beasts of the field found shelter, and the birds of the air lived in its branches; from it every creature was fed.”

Pretty amazing tree, right?  But in the King’s dream, the tree was cut down by a certain “holy messenger.”  It disturbed the King, so he asked one of his royal advisors, Daniel (or Belteshazzar), what it meant.  Daniel had some bad news.  Forgive me for quoting his whole answer, Mitt, but I doubt you’ll go to read the chapter, being that you’re more interested in attacking liberals than in seeking the Scriptural truth.  Here’s Daniel’s words.

“My lord, if only the dream applied to your enemies and its meaning to your adversaries! The tree you saw, which grew large and strong, with its top touching the sky, visible to the whole earth, with beautiful leaves and abundant fruit, providing food for all, giving shelter to the beasts of the field, and having nesting places in its branches for the birds of the air- you, O king, are that tree! You have become great and strong; your greatness has grown until it reaches the sky, and your dominion extends to distant parts of the earth.”

Does that sound a little like America, Mitt?  I’m going to bold the parts you might like to reflect on for a bit. Daniel continues;

“You, O king, saw a messenger, a holy one, coming down from heaven and saying, ‘Cut down the tree and destroy it, but leave the stump, bound with iron and bronze, in the grass of the field, while its roots remain in the ground. Let him be drenched with the dew of heaven; let him live like the wild animals, until seven times pass by for him.’

“This is the interpretation, O king, and this is the decree the Most High has issued against my lord the king: You will be driven away from people and will live with the wild animals; you will eat grass like cattle and be drenched with the dew of heaven. Seven times will pass by for you until you acknowledge that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes. The command to leave the stump of the tree with its roots means that your kingdom will be restored to you when you acknowledge that Heaven rules. Therefore, O king, be pleased to accept my advice: Renounce your sins by doing what is right, and your wickedness by being kind to the oppressed. It may be that then your prosperity will continue.”

Mitt, I’m not sure if you caught that.  Not only did King Neb get the reminder that he wasn’t the Grand Kahuna (or “the hope of the earth,” in your words), but Daniel reminded him of a social reality; good governance that God blesses is that which is “kind to the oppressed.”  In addition to recognizing who’s the real hope of the Earth, if you’re able to look past your political buzzwords that flush the faces of partisan hacks, America’s material prosperity is intended to flow from us outwards in a conscious commitment to the oppressed.  

Here’s a couple good questions, Mitt.

Who are the oppressed in our world?  

Who or what is oppressing them?

And how are these people reacting in order to gain a voice in the world?  

These are compelling questions that may lead you to dis-ease with your confident pronouncements.

I’m sorry about ranting a bit here, Barack and Mitt (well, not really).  

You see, I’m tired of politicians invoking the name of God while essentially spitting in his face as they do whatever they want.  I know that’s not just the politicians’ problem; heck, it’s a general global one.  But I’m about to the end of my rope with you guys, and profoundly dissatisfied with how American politics has descended into a conversation I could imagine with first-graders in my local elementary school.  

“You’re stupid.”  
“No, you’re stupid.”
“You have a fat nose and you’re poor.”  
(The other kids’ varied responses  ”Ooooo” “Oh no you didn’t!”  Some laughing, others appalled).  

Barack, you’ve shown a commitment to attempting to rise above this stuff, and so far you’ve done an OK job.  I hope you keep to that.

In closing, I will say that I hope that both of you understand why I don’t expect a whole lot out of you, with the present state of things being what it is.

Family, fellow disciples of Jesus, and friends;

I received an email forward today that raises an important issue regarding our daily life, and I had some thoughts in response to it.  We were encouraged to write a message in support of the thought behind the email, but I wanted to go deeper to write some thoughts that would challenge us to go beyond what most people rant and rave about in our society.  Here is the basic message I received;

“Dear Friends,

I hope that each of you will do what I’m doing now–send your concerns, written simply and sincerely, to the Christians on your email list.  With God’s help, and He is still in control of this nation and all else, we can show this man and the world in November that we are,indeed, still a Christian nation!  Please pray for our nation!” 

That italicized section was the message I received, and I appreciate the thought behind this email, and the desire in whoever wrote it that the United States be a people who follow Jesus.  I also had some thoughts in response that I’d like to share, as well as a simple question that might help us walk through this issue seeking wisdom rather than easy answers.

We need to talk about issues like this in ways that value the voice that each of us has; and we must, WE MUST do it without turning our backs on one another when we disagree.

My first thought is this: Has America always, for all time, 100% of its citizens, been “Christian”?

I can’t quote long sections of the founding fathers of America, but I do remember one of the fundamental things they remembered that led to them wanting to separate from British rule.  That thing was the memory of how western Europe and Britain were completely shredded by wars that had started for religious reasons; some were between “Protestants” and “Catholics”, some were between “Christians” and Muslims, and some were between “Christians” and pagan barbarians.

In England’s case, when different rulers came to the throne, they would claim to be either “Anglican” (Protestant) or Catholic, and then a bloodbath would follow to silence or kill anyone who disagreed with their commitment.  As I recall, King Henry started the Church of England because the Pope wouldn’t let him divorce his wife and marry someone else like he wanted, and Queen Mary, a later ruler and Catholic, was called “Bloody Mary” because of how ruthlessly she killed Protestants.

So this is what America’s founding fathers saw; religious disagreements leading to bloodbaths.  And that was a major reason why they, in the First Amendment to the Constitution,  stated, “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

What that meant was that the government would not stick its neck in religious conflicts and intervene with force behind one group or another; that the government was officially neutral unless it was a matter of law.  So Catholicism and Protestantism or any other “ism” wouldn’t be the official “religion” of America.

And while disciples of Jesus may agree that the Christian faith impacts everything (or should impact everything) we think about, and creates a way of life that everyone on earth would benefit from, I think we also can agree that it’s a good thing that the government has created a protection against someone killing us because of our religious practice (or lack thereof).

What I’m saying, specifically, is that Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Christians, or whatever other faith have the protected right to practice the “free exercise” of their faith, as long as it doesn’t break the law of the land.

Do you see the difference in thinking there?  Of course Christians want the entire world to be disciples of Jesus, but we can’t force them at the point of a gun or sword to do that, and when we try to, we end up staining the name of Christ, angering God, and living a lie rather than the truth.

So we win Buddhists, Muslims, Jews (and people who think they’re Christians but aren’t) over with our integrity, our courage, our love, and a deep commitment to our communities of faith (churches).

The protection of religious expression is part of what I thought was very wise in the thinking of the founding fathers of America.  Can we agree that it’s a good thing not to kill off Muslims, Buddhists, Jews, and our falsely Christian neighbors for not agreeing with us?

I think the answer to my first question is this, “No, America has not always, for all time, with 100% of its citizens, been Christian.” What that means is that there are Christians living in America, and that the laws of the land reflect some Christian commitments, but America is a nation of a bunch of different persons who think different, live different, and practice different faiths, and always has been.

I believe part of the reason the founders of America fought and died for America was that there could be a place in the world where religious disagreements wouldn’t turn into a bloodbath.  I also believe part of the reason the founders of America fought and died for America was the fundamental belief that we can live alongside persons of all different beliefs and be in relationship with them without being shredded by our disagreements.

And I also believe that when Christians are willing to kill others because they disagree with us, we have left the side of our Lord who calls us to “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” The kingdom of God is much more than the people of this world often settle for.

Respectfully,
Nathan Myers