Watching Cars Go By

I haven't blogged in a while. Okay, a long while. Basically, life has been very busy, stressful, eventful, mind-blowingly full, etc. All the superficial excuses that have a hint of truth without letting you all in on too many details.

I just saw a post on Facebook from a friend who just unloaded about the stresses in her life. I can relate to almost everything she said. We all get to a point where the pressures and speed-bumps in life take their toll on our emotional well-being. It's overwhelming sometimes.

That started me thinking. I've always been a people-watcher. I'm the guy driving down the freeway next to you who watches you bee-bopping to your loud radio or arguing with your significant other or straining your back to swing at the kids in the backseat. I'm the guy who counts how many drivers are on the phone or texting during my commute to and from work.  I'm the guy who sits on a park bench, watching people walk by, wondering about their lives, trying to guess what they do for a living, etc.

We each live in our own sort of sphere. It's like our own little world where no one really knows what's happening but us. We control access to our little world. We allow others to see only what we want them to see. Sort of like Facebook. I have a two-year-old daughter. She's the most angelic, beautiful, loving child in the world... er... most of the time. But you will only see the good things about her on Facebook. I choose what to show you, and I know you aren't interested in the periodic tantrums, accidents, discipline, and such. You only want to see the cute stuff. The funny quotes, or the picture of her in her new dress.

We all do that to an extent. We put our best foot forward and show others an idealized version of ourselves. It's good to a point. Everybody doesn't need to know all of our woes and worries. But most of us go overboard in portraying a Norman Rockwell version of our lives, when in reality we might be facing extreme difficulties or anxieties.

It just struck me when I read that Facebook post I mentioned, that every one of us has a story. Every person you see is a complete story.  Think about this for a moment: You are driving to work and you see a perfectly fit young lady jogging down the sidewalk, wearing the latest athletic gear, white iPhone earbuds stuck in her ears, with a perfect stride. Or you see that person in the sixty thousand dollar Mercedes and the perfect hairstyle sitting next to you at a stoplight. You go to lunch at a fast-food restaurant and the frazzled girl behind the counter doesn't do something the way you'd like it done. You go to dinner and the server entertains you and makes your dining experience a very pleasant one. All of those people have their own struggles. Maybe that perfectly fit jogger in the fancy athletic gear just lost a parent to cancer. Maybe she's jogging to clear her mind because she's not sure how to cope with the deep sense of sadness and loss. Or the guy in the Mercedes with the cutting-edge hairstyle has come to a place where his life seems hollow and meaningless. He's realized that he's spent so much time focused on building his business that he's lost touch with anyone who might bring love and fulfillment into his life. Or the girl at the fast-food restaurant whose old beater of a car wouldn't start this morning, and she's not sure how she's going to get home after work because she can't afford to get it fixed. Or the server at the restaurant with the infectious laugh and pleasant demeanor who might have four children, two of whom are sick with a fever, but she can't take time off to be with them because she can't afford to lose any income.

We all get so wrapped up in our own issues and struggles that we cease to be aware that everyone's problems are every bit as real and every bit as important and every bit as all-consuming as ours.

Perhaps if we took a step back and just quietly watched the world around us... just watched the eyes of the people who silently pass through our view... just listened to the deep, almost silent sighs of the people with whom we interact... Maybe, just maybe, we'd be more understanding, forgiving, and gracious.

It's a lofty goal, but it can be done. Take a fresh look in the windows of the cars that pass. Look your server in the eye. Listen to the silence as much as you listen to the words... and be patient with one another. Be kind to one another.

RACIST! HOMOPHOBE! INTOLERANT! JUDGMENTAL!

We live in a society that has lost its grip on reality.  No longer are discussions based on facts, but on hyperbole.  People have given up their ability to debate philosophies and logic in favor of quick insults and sarcasm.

We live in a society where it's considered a more serious crime to murder someone who is of a different ethnic background, faith, or sexual preference than it would be to murder someone randomly.  We call it a "hate crime."

Now, I've faced hate in my life.  I've been on both ends of the hate spectrum.  I can sincerely say that I have never hated someone because of their ethnicity, economic status, or sexual preference.  When I've hated, it was in response to specific acts perpetrated against me or those for whom I hold great affection.  Thankfully, though, I've experienced the grace and mercy of God in my life and I no longer hate.

In today's society, though, mere disagreement is considered equivalent to hate.  Let's use a recent example from the realm of current events:

“I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say ‘we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage’ and I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about.” – Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick-Fil-A

Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick-Fil-A voiced his personal religious belief.  It is a belief that coincides with traditional Christian beliefs.  In his quote, does he ever say that he hates homosexuals?  Does he ever say that they are less valuable as human beings?  Does he ever say he desires their destruction?

No.

He said that his business was founded on biblical principles, and that the traditional family dynamic is a part of that foundation.  He clearly shows his traditional Christian leanings in his statements.  But he never speaks hate.  He speaks his religious convictions, but he never speaks with hatred of someone who disagrees with him.

Yet, he's been called a bigot, a fascist (obviously by people who don't know the meaning of the word), a hate-monger, and many other things not suitable for a Christian to repeat.  Simply because he disagrees.

He disagrees with those who are constantly reminding us to be tolerant of opposing viewpoints.

And they've tried to destroy him. (Actually, it's very possible that the stress of this very public kerfuffle led directly to the sudden heart attack of Chick-Fil-A's Vice President of Public Relations, Don Perry.) 

Tolerant of them, isn't it?

I think back with a chuckle to the time I posted an image of Ronald Reagan online.  I was quickly referred to as a racist, even though I had made no comments, whatsoever, about anyone's ethnicity.  I had simply expressed my admiration for Ronald Reagan.  

If I quote a scripture that seems to convict someone of activities in which they choose to participate, I'm called judgmental.  

I find it fascinating that, in the absence of facts or a strong logical argument, many people resort to name-calling and insults.  We've become conditioned to fear certain labels more than anything else.  We fear being labeled a racist, a homophobe, intolerant, or judgmental.  It's really an interesting phenomenon.  

I googled "racism."  Now, if you use Wikipedia as your source for anything of substance, you need your head examined.  However, I found their opening paragraph interesting:

Racism is generally defined as actions, practices, or beliefs that reflect the racial worldview: the ideology that humans are divided into separate and exclusive biological entities called "races". This ideology entails the belief that members of a race share a set of characteristic traits, abilities, or qualities, that traits of personality, intellect, morality, and other cultural behavioral characteristics are inherited, and that this inheritance means that races can be ranked as innately superior or inferior to others.

 Dictionary.com similarly defines racism as:

1.  a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races  determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2.  a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3.  hatred or intolerance of another race  or other races. 

Let me take a moment to evaluate myself.  Do I believe that people of any ethnic background are innately superior or have a right to rule others?  No.  Do I believe that people of varying ethnic backgrounds are innately more or less intelligent, moral, or carry specific personality traits based solely on their ethnicity?  No.  Do I refuse to tolerate someone of a different ethnic background?  No.

I just posted a picture of a man I admired.  Guess I'm OK.

Do you realize that a phobia is defined as a persistent, irrational fear of a specific object, activity, or situation that leads to a compelling desire to avoid it? Notice that it doesn't say "a disagreement with a specific object, activity, or situation."  It says an "irrational fear."

I submit to you today that simply because I disagree with homosexuality does not make me homophobic.  I don't fear homosexuality.  I see it as the sin that the Bible says it is.  I have no fear of homosexual activity.  I disagree with it.  Therefore, the term "homophobe" is inaccurate and demonstrates the user's ignorance of the subject.

Is it hateful to disagree with someone?  No.  I don't hate homosexuals.  Their sinful choices are called an abomination in the sight of God, yet He extends His grace and mercy toward them.  God doesn't hate homosexuals, and neither do I.  I have acquaintances and relatives who live a homosexual lifestyle.  They know my stand on the issue, yet they will each--if they're honest--tell you that I have always treated them with respect and compassion.  Telling someone they are violating the tenets of scripture is not hateful, it's helpful.  We are called to "speak the Truth in love."  Telling someone that homosexual activity is sinful and destructive is no different than telling someone that using heroin is sinful and destructive.

Yet, in our morally relativistic society, disagreement equals hate.  

There is a segment of society that revels in using these terms as ammunition.  It's a form of emotional extortion, really.  They silence their opposition by threatening to brand them with a scarlet letter.  You disagree with President Obama?  You must be a racist!  You oppose homosexual marriage?  You're a homophobe!  You disagree with different lifestyles and philosophies?  You're an intolerant bigot!  You take the Bible literally and call Christians to live by that standard?  You're judgmental!

Probably the most quoted--wrongly--scripture by non-believers and followers of aberrant doctrines while calling themselves Christians is from Matthew 7:

1 “Judge not, that you be not judged. ² For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. ³ And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? ⁴ Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye? ⁵ Hypocrite!  

The quoters of  this scripture use this to justify their claims that the "Bible thumper" is judgmental and intolerant.  They wag their finger in your face and warn you that you're treading dangerous ground when you point to scripture and say "this is what the Word says.  Here's how your behavior doesn't line up with that Word."  It's the spiritual version of "racist, bigot, homophobe, etc."

What these people nearly always do is omit the next part of verse five.

First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

You see, Jesus did not tell His followers to ignore the sin in the lives of those around them.  He did not tell us it is wrong to hold up the light of scripture and cast that light upon the actions of those who call themselves Christ Followers.  He said, "First, remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

This insistence on throwing the "judge not" clause at people is simply a wicked heart's way of avoiding the light of Truth.  Can a person be judgmental?  Yes.  It's wrong.  Just as racism is wrong.  However, to hold up the Word of Truth to someone and point out how their behavior violates that Word is a service, not a judgment.

If it was wrong to call Christians to account for their behavior, then all of Paul's letters have no place in scripture.  Then Jesus was wrong for calling the religious leaders hypocrites.  Then it was pointless for the Bible to be written at all, since it is a book of instructions for our lives.  Throughout scripture we are instructed to judge our own behavior and, yes, that of others.  (Read 1 Timothy 3, where we are instructed on how to choose leaders in the church.  We are called to judge them according to their actions.)  How can it be wrong to do exactly what God has called us to do?  Is God schizophrenic? No.

To judge someone unjustly is wrong.  To write them off as a soul unworthy of being reached and unworthy of salvage is wrong.  To take someone who claims to follow Christ but lives in contradiction to His Word, show them that Word and call them to accountability for their actions is called discipleship.

We live in an "anything goes" society, and the church has adopted this same philosophy.  You can teach anything you want in most churches and be accepted.  Look at false teachers like Joyce Meyer, Benny Hinn,   Joel Osteen and other charlatans.  They have huge followings because they make their listeners feel good about themselves, but never call them to a true biblical holiness.  They're frauds, and will be held to some very high standards by God, Himself.  We have the IHOP movement and the Emergent Church movement that reduces God to a touchy-feely "big papa in the sky" rather than a Holy and Just God who expects His children to be Holy and Just.  These are dangerous movements and dangerous people who are destroying lives.  Their followers are deceived by their flashy shows and the emotional outpouring at their concerts and gatherings.

Well, "anything" does not go.  We simply need more followers of Christ to be more interested in what the Bible says than what they feel.  We need to stop looking at worship as an "experience" and look at it as service to our Creator.  We need to present ourselves a "living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God."  That means setting aside our selfish desires, styles, and practices and doing what He commands.

So, you can call me a racist because I don't approve of our current President.  You can call me a homophobe because I disagree with the sinful lifestyle of homosexuality.  You can call me intolerant because I believe in right and wrong.  You can even call me judgmental because I point to scripture and display ways in which a so-called Christian wanders from it.  Simple fact is, you'd be wrong on all counts.  These are merely inflammatory terms designed to silence your opposition, usually because your opposition is making a solid point and you have no ground upon which to stand.

The Truth will always prevail.  The Truth will always shine gloriously upon the ruins of the world's lies.   You cannot silence it.  You cannot intimidate it.  You should embrace it.  It will make you free.

Two Roads

I have been asked to minister at a funeral.  The fortunate part of that statement is that the person is still alive.  Being able to consider the sermon one would share at a person's funeral with lots of time to spare is not a luxury often afforded to a minister.  Normally one hears that a person has passed, is contacted by the family, and must prepare quickly for the service.

Having the luxury of time, my prayers and overactive mind have given rise to some thoughts I'd like to share with my readers.

Recently, a talented major celebrity passed away.  As with many celebrities, this one's life was pockmarked with drug abuse, erratic behavior and tumultuous relationships.  The lives of many celebrities vividly demonstrate the old adage that money (or fame) can't buy happiness.

One of the things my father taught me from his many years of experience in ministry, is that people tend to try to focus upon the positives in a person's life, usually to the complete exclusion of the negatives.  He described situations in which he'd preached the funerals of violent gang members who were buried with switch-blade knives and bottles of alcohol, and people spoke of what wonderful, caring individuals they'd been. 

I suppose it's a normal emotional reaction.  We, as loved ones, long to hold onto positive memories to help us with our grief.  Deep is the agony experienced by one who has lost a loved-one whose choices and actions have led them to an eternity of damnation.

The problem is, denial doesn't change facts.

We can attempt to canonize a person, turning that person into a saint in our own minds, when in fact, the person's life has been the complete opposite of an example of dedication to Christ.

Now, before I go any farther, let me acknowledge those of my readers, faithful as they are, whose sole mission in life seems to be attempting to remind me of my unworthiness to judge others.  We will not take this opportunity to resurrect our recent discussion on that topic.  The following statement will suffice:  Throughout scripture we are given the outward signs of a life of dedication to God.  Had God not wanted us to pay attention to those signs, He would not have included them in the Holy Record.  The fact is, some people follow Christ and some do not.  Those who follow Christ live lives that are different in obvious and evidentiary ways.  If your life does not show those outer differences, that's your fault, not those around you with eyes and ears.  Is the life in question accurately described by the biblical explanation of the fruit of the Spirit?  That's what we should all be asking ourselves.

Back to the funeral I've been asked to officiate:  the person's life has not been one of a believer.  It has been one marred with self-destructive decisions, sinful activities, and ultimately, the earthly consequences of those choices and actions.  This makes it tough for a minister.  One must be honest but comforting.  One must tell the truth while still offering hope.  Granted, the person is still alive, and therefore there is a possibility of salvation.  I pray fervently for that to occur.  However, this blog is an intellectual exercise based upon the suppositions outlined above. 

When I was a youth pastor, I ran into an interesting situation.  Another leader whispered in my ear that a friend of one of our young people had just died and the kid in our youth group had asked if he could say a prayer before our group.  Well, of course!  So the boy came up and began praying for the soul of the boy who had just died in a car wreck on his way home from a drug party.

Needless to say, this was a difficult situation.  Obviously this boy's heart was broken at the loss of his friend.  Obviously, he had not been taught what the Bible says about life, choices and judgment.  ...And...this was one of those unrehearsed moments wherein a leader must rely solely upon the prompting of the Holy Spirit and gently correct some misconceptions.

When he was finished with his prayer--imploring God to give his friend one last chance, to somehow offer his dead friend one last little bit of mercy and save his soul--I returned to the front of the room and gently explained that, according to scripture, there comes a time when there are no more chances.  I opened Hebrews 9 and described to them how we all have a date with death, and after that: judgment.  I shared with them how, sadly, many do not make the right choice and go on to an eternity without God.  But by the same token, we who are alive have the opportunity to choose to dedicate our lives to Christ, thereby sealing our destiny to be with Him throughout eternity.

We all have that choice.  Some choose eternal life, some eternal damnation.  This is not a popular subject, but it's a topic of which Jesus spoke.  In Matthew 7, Jesus spoke the following truth:  "Enter the narrow gate, for the gate is wide and the road is spacious which leads to destruction, and many are those who are going in it. How narrow is the gate and strict the way that leads to life, and few are those who find it!"

Sadly, most of the world has chosen the broad path.  This superhighway, unlike the one in the image to the left, is a one-way road.  It's broad and easy to travel.  There is a smooth surface, graceful curves, and luxurious accommodations along the way.  It's the scenic route.  It is surrounded by beautiful enticements that grab the attention of all who travel there, like billboards pointing to the next attraction.  Every kind of human enjoyment can be found on this road.  Companionship, excess, fulfillment, it's all there.  While on this road, your self-image is protected by those who will reinforce it.  Of course, they reinforce it only because they are traveling in exactly the same direction, headed to the same unknown destination.

Many who call themselves Christians are on this same road.  Life seems great!  They have great friends, a promising career, big goals and plans... Life seems to be flowing so smoothly for them.  They go to church and walk away feeling better about themselves than when they went in.  The music they listen to assures them that they are on the right path.  They've discovered that they can still walk alongside their unchurched friends and do so many of the same things they did before they began to call themselves Christians.

There's a reason things are going so well for them.  One rarely finds opposition when one is traveling en masse with multitudes of others.  They are coasting on the same flowing river as their comrades.  They are going the same direction as their worldly friends, their boss, and sadly, many of their church friends.  Their life isn't a threat to the world because they, too, are worldly.  They're traveling the wide road.  It is the path of least resistance.  They don't need to take a stand, because their beliefs are secondary to their desire to succeed in their own eyes and the eyes of their peers.

I believe that many entire churches are traveling together along this road.  They are rejoicing, singing, dancing and partying as they pass the billboards that declare upcoming attractions.  They pat each other on the back, rejoicing in their freedom as they live however they want to live, believing that the blood of Christ gives them that liberty.  They focus on a stress-free Christianity in which standards are all but nonexistent and anyone who stands by the doctrines that have been held for centuries is considered outdated and dogmatic.  They cast aside anyone who doesn't enthusiastically race down this broad avenue of reckless abandon, or who doesn't passionately pursue the enjoyment they claim while waving the banner of their type of Christianity.

This road, though easy, scenic, and apt to gain the affection of those around you, leads to destruction.  It is not a matter of if, but when, Easy Street finds its travelers plunging headlong into the abyss.

You may say I'm judgmental.  That's alright.  I've been accused of that by many on this road of which I speak.  Their accusations of judgmentalism do not dissuade me.  You see, I hold up the light of the Word of God and allow you to gauge your own compliance with it.  For, in that light, we are forced to come face to face with our own frailties.  It is not out of malice that I bring you to this light, but out of love.  For, if I didn't love you, I would let you blindly follow the broad path upon which you now travel.  I would stand idly by and smile at your enjoyment, rejoicing that you had found some temporal peace--even though that so-called peace and enjoyment will one day be your undoing.  I love you enough to warn you.  I love you enough to shout against the roar of the traffic and say stop! You're heading in the wrong direction!  This road will destroy you!

Recently, when I commented that it took more than sprinkling the name of Jesus on a life lived in debauchery, one well-meaning friend exhorted me that if I was going to err, I should always err on the side of grace.  What he seemingly meant was that my stance on that issue was too strong.  We were indirectly discussing the death of a celebrity whose drug habit and hard living had brought her life to an unfortunate end.  My stating that true Christians would be known by their fruits apparently, in this person's eyes, did not demonstrate grace.  This is a common approach to Christianity, although it is a failed one.  It is used often to chastise those who proclaim that there are still standards by which Christians must live.  It has become the churchy version of the philosophy "live and let live."


The problem is, when we follow that philosophy, we fail in the calling Christ has placed upon our lives.  We fail to tell the truth of the Gospel.  We fail to see changed lives because we aren't showing people how to change.

That's why I've chosen to walk the other path.  Its far more treacherous.  It's a difficult hike.  But it leads in the right direction.

How narrow is the gate and strict the way that leads to life, and few are those who find it!

This is often a solitary journey.  People turn away at the thought of such a long and laborious walk.  But it leads to Life!  Though the journey is long, though the gate is narrow, though the cliffs and obstacles seem limitless, Life awaits!  Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life!"  When you discover that He is the way, you realize that the journey isn't treacherous at all, for He is the journey!  Then you can stand up for the Truth, for He is the Truth!  And then you'll realize that in Him we live and move and have our very being!  The narrow way leads to Life, for He is the Life!

So it's alright when people reject us as we walk in the opposite direction as they, for they rejected Him as well.  It's alright when they attempt to throw obstacles in our path, for they rose up against Him, too.  It's alright when they call us old fashioned, for He never changes.  His Truth never changes.  His standards never change.

We all have a choice... a choice of two roads.  You can be like water, following the path of least resistance.  The problem with that is, though it's easy, it always leads downhill.  Or you can take the solitary road.  You can walk apart from the group, as you've been called to.

Friends will betray you.  They will try to make you question your stand.  They will--the very ones who have publicly professed their love of you--publicly chastise you and even call into question your Christianity.  It is the only way they can make themselves feel superior, for the life of the unregenerated is all about feeling superior to others.  It started with Lucifer before the dawn of time, and will continue until judgment day.  Don't be dismayed.  Don't give in.  Don't give up.  Follow the Way.  Walk in the Truth.  Jesus came that you might have Life, and that life more abundantly.  Don't lose sleep when they mock you.  Observe the haughtiness in their attacks and the false-humility they put on display.  Observe how their attacks come both publicly and in back-handed ways.  This is the deception in their hearts that is speaking.  Pray for them, weep for them, and keep walking.  When they see their destruction coming, they'll be calling out to you.  Keep your eyes on the Way.  Continue to speak the Truth.  Let them see the Life of Christ in you.

So dust off your hiking shoes.  We've got a hill to climb.  Are you with me?


So, I guess now I know what I'll be preaching at the funeral.

GSA Party Controversy... An Unusual View

My Name is Michael Land, and I have an opinion.  It is an opinion that is rarely popular with those of you with a liberal bent.  That's OK.  I don't expect my opinions to be popular.  I do, however, hope to make you think beyond what you've been spoon-fed by the media, unions, and the politicians who purchase your loyalty with handouts taken by force from others' bank accounts.

That being said, I sometimes tick off my more conservative friends, as well.  There are those on both sides who sit idly by like baby birds with their maws open to the sky, waiting for whatever regurgitated goodies their media stars and politicians will drop in.

The latest dust-up has been over an employee party near Vegas that cost the US taxpayers more than $800,000.  Apparently, the US General Services Administration held a "regional meeting" for around 300 employees.  Some of the costs break down as follows [according to The Atlantic Wire]:

Thanks to an investigation and report from GSA Inspector General Brian D. Miller, The Washington Post, and the Associated Press, we now know how Johnson and her team spent all that money. Here's how it breaks down (keep in mind that in 2010, according to Inspector Miller's report,  the meal and incidental expenses allowance was $71 per day):

• $31,000 on a "networking reception" that featured $19-per-person "American artisanal cheese display" and $7,000 in sushi
• $3,200 on a session with a mind reader
• $5,600 for in-room parties 
• $100,405.37 in employee travel costs to scout the event--meaning, these people returned to the Las Vegas area multiple times to visit hotels before settling on the fancy M Resort and Casino.
• $3,700 for T-shirts
•  $2,800 in water bottles
•  $1,500 for "Boursin scalloped potato with Barolo wine-braised short ribs" and a $525 bartender fee for a cash bar.
• Three officials spent almost $400 for rented tuxedos
• $1,840 for vests for the 19 “regional ambassadors” and other employees
• $146,527.05  was spent on catered food during the entire conference
• $6,325 was spent on commemorative coins in velvet boxes to reward all participants for their work on stimulus projects (because a certificate and the $800,000 party they're at wouldn't do)
• $75,000 for a “team-building” exercise — the goal was to build bicycles (which would later be donated to a Boys & Girls Clubs)

More details can be found here, here, and here. 


Conservatives and liberals alike have railed against the excessive and ridiculous spending of this organization.  People have been fired.  People have resigned.  And rightfully so.  It goes strongly against conservative principles to take money from taxpayers to spend on frivolous things like mind readers, tuxedos and "location scouting" pre-parties.  

Likewise, it looks really bad for liberals, especially after President Obama's speech in the early days of his term of office in which he called corporations to task for  their lavish parties and bonuses, specifically mentioning trips to Las Vegas in the mix.

It's a bad situation all the way around.  And, as usual, the taxpayer is the chief loser.

Now, here's my take on the situation.  It will probably ruffle feathers on both sides.  


1.  It's not Obama's fault.  Let's face it.  The federal government is HUGE!  By some counts, there are more than 2.65 million federal employees in over 1300 distinct agencies.  There is no way one president can possibly even know what all of those agencies are, let alone personally manage the activities of each one.  These types of debacles occur under presidents of both parties.


2.  I don't begrudge the employees of the GSA a party.  Look, my company had a staff Christmas party.  We enjoyed it very much.  It was a good time of recognition of accomplishments and growth.  We had some games, some good food, and a speech from my boss (a very long speech from my boss).  


That probably made my conservative friends angry.  At the same time, my liberal friends are probably sitting back with a bit of a smug look on their face.


Here's the thing:  While it isn't President Obama's fault this happened, he is in the position of ultimate responsibility.  He is the Chief Executive of the US Government.  Therefore, it is his responsibility to solve it.


Not only that, it is the very policies he embraces that cause these atrocities!  The liberal approach to governing is to create more programs, more agencies, and more bureaucracy.  Each time they create another agency they reduce their ability to effectively oversee them.  It isn't just Obama.  Under the leadership of the past several presidents, the federal government has literally exploded in size.  

Article One, Section Eight of the US Constitution spells out the basic purposes of the Congress.  

• To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
• To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
• To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
• To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
• To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
• To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
• To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
• To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
• To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
• To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
• To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
• To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
• To provide and maintain a Navy;
• To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
• To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
• To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
• To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
• To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

If a president and congress were to return the federal government to its original purpose, the number of non-military federal employees would be a fraction of its current size... and so would the budget and debt.


President Obama should stand up and disband the multitudinous agencies that do little more than suck up taxpayers' dollars.  Multiple, redundant, non-productive, and expensive agencies are not only unnecessary, but unconstitutional.  If the federal government were reduced to the proper scope of its constitutional function, I dare say, one president could easily be aware of what each department was doing and lead each agency more directly.  


As to my second point.  I do not begrudge the employees of the GSA a party.  Nearly every organization for which I've worked has held holiday parties, recognition ceremonies and other "regional meeting" style events.  However, there is a huge caveat. There is a difference between private companies and government agencies.  If my boss, who owns a wireless retail company, chose to hold a party that cost him $2,700 per attendee, that's alright.  It's lavish and over the top, but it's alright.  Why?  Because nobody is forcing the population, by threat of imprisonment, to purchase wireless phones!  My boss could throw as large and extravagant a party as he wished (and I wholeheartedly encourage him to do so) because he would be spending money that his company legitimately earned.  


A government agency, on the other hand, has a greater burden of accountability.  Those who pay the bills don't do it out of choice, but by coercion.  Failing to contribute financially to the federal government carries the risk of severe punishment.  Therefore, for a government agency to squander money on extravagance is not only bad form, it is misappropriation of funds.  It's fraudulent use of taxpayer's money.  It is criminal behavior.


The sad thing is, in a society where everyone thinks everyone else owes them something, getting this point through peoples' thick skulls is like trying to push a marshmallow through a rock.

Seriously??!!

As of the day before yesterday, I decided I was going to take a "leave of absence" from Facebook.  Feeling a bit overwhelmed with the constant stream of data that flows into my brain while I'm at work and at home.  While I'm at work, I'm working on accounts online, reading updates, adjusting pricing plans, updating the company Facebook page and working with customers.  When I'm at home I am always connected with my smartphone and my tablet computer.  It seems like I am constantly referring back to Facebook to check in on the status updates of people from all over the country and to attempt to post the wittiest updates on my own page.  Add to that my photography page, my family reunion page and monitoring the goings-on with my upcoming high school reunion, I just needed a few days to regroup.

One of the reasons I've become so frustrated while on Facebook is my Christian friends.  Seriously.  My non-Christian friends don't bother me all that much.  Probably because they are living up to the stand they've taken in life.  They know what I stand for, and that I will always represent Christ to the best of my ability with the help of the Holy Spirit.  I am not shy about my stand.  I share my faith.  They're good with it, and I respect their position as well.  Though my heart aches for them to place Christ as the central figure in their lives, I respect the fact that God has given us all free will.  I only hope that my ongoing prayers, example, and encouragement will be a catalyst for their conversion.

Many of my Christian friends, however, are enough to drive me to distraction.  If I base my understanding of God solely upon the status updates and comments of those who claim a relationship with Christ, I find three prevalent themes:

1. Theology is BAD
2. Religion is BAD
3. If you point out how any type of behavior diverges from scripture, that's being judgmental... and, as we all can guess, Judgmentalism is BAD.

Seriously??!! These are people who should know better!  (Oops!  There I go being judgmental again!)  Let's look at these three items in a bit more detail, shall we?  

• Theology

Let's look at the meaning of the word theology.  Theo comes from the Greek word theos, meaning God.  -logy also comes from the Greek, and is a suffix in the English language that means the study or knowledge of... Therefore, the word theology really means the knowledge of God.

As Christians, we believe in the Word of God... or at least we claim to.  If we believe the Word of God, the Bible, we must acknowledge that God has described His attributes, personality and commands in His Word.  As a Christian, there is no way around that acknowledgment.  It either is, or it isn't true.  If it isn't, than the Jesus you're following is a liar, and you're a fool to follow Him.  So, with all this in mind, can someone please explain to my poor underdeveloped mind how theology is bad?  Can the knowledge or study of God be bad?  It was God who said "I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently will find me." [Pr. 8:17]  He also said, "you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart." [Jer. 29:13]

Throughout scripture, we are instructed to seek the Lord, to know the Lord, to emulate His attributes.  To say that theology is a bad thing is to put aside this mandate.  These are not man-made ideals or man/centered rules.  These are directives handed down through the Holy Spirit to the men who penned the Word of God.   

I submit to you the idea that those who claim theology is bad or unnecessary 1. don't know what the word means, 2. haven't gotten to know the God they claim to serve, and/or 3. have hearts that are filled with rebellion and simply refuse to submit themselves to the lordship of God.

• Religion

James 1:27 says this:  "Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world."  This is a short summary of Christ's ministry on earth.  He cared for those in need, and he kept himself unsullied by the filth of the sinful world.  All the while, He spoke the truth of scripture and taught adherence to biblical law.

Many say that Jesus came to abolish religion.  This is false, and is a dangerous false doctrine.  Jesus said, "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." [Mt. 5:19]  His sentence just prior to that was, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill."  Did Jesus come to abolish religion?  No.  Did Jesus abide by the religious traditions of the Jews.  Yes, inasmuch as those traditions were scripturally mandated.  Jesus fulfilled the law and cast aside those man-made perversions that had become popular at the time.

Have there been man-made rules that have been passed down from generation to generation?  Yes.  People will always try to insert their own philosophies into scripture.  The point is to know the Word of God, and not to be fooled by extra-biblical teachings.  False religion is the hijacking of scriptural truths to serve human interests.  As I recently told a friend, to shun tradition merely because it is tradition is rebellion.  To question the origin of traditions and weigh them against the Word of God is wisdom.

Many claim that religion has caused violence in the world.  True.  However, not pure and undefiled religion.  False and man-centered perversions of religion have caused violence.  In short, sin has caused violence and death, just as scripture promised.  Think about it.  The "crusades" were caused by power hungry men who used their positions to try to spread their influence, all the while pretending they were doing it in the name of God.  These crusades were largely in response to an earlier power grab by Islamic zealots who used their false religion to capture, torture and kill people by the thousands.  I believe this is one main reason scripture draws a line of distinction between false religion and "pure and undefiled religion."  Religion isn't bad, folks.  Man-centered perversions of religion are bad.  If we don't hold true to the meanings of our terms, then nothing we say has any meaning.

•  Judgmentalism

This is, by far, the most commonly used tool of those whose actions are called into question in light of scripture.  Judgmentalism is misunderstood and misused in many cases.  Hopefully I can help to clarify the topic a bit.

"You're a Christian!  You're not supposed to judge!"  How many times have you heard this?  How many times have you said this?  In Matthew 7:1 and 2, Jesus says "Judge not, that you be not judged.  For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you."  Seems pretty cut and dried, right?

Elsewhere in scripture, though, we are instructed to measure the qualifications of spiritual leaders by comparing their lifestyles to scriptural edicts [1 Ti. 3:1-13, Tit. 1:5-9]  We are also told that if someone calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral, covetous, an idolator, slanderer, drunkard or swindler, we are not to associate with him at all. [1 Cor. 5:11] Given these two commands, are we not asked to judge?  Yet, when one holds up scripture and shows how another's actions deviate from it, he is chastised for being judgmental.

You see, it's all about context.  Jesus did say not to judge.  He connected that to judgment placed against ourselves.  As my father used to say: "Whenever you point your finger at someone else, you have three pointed back at you."  How true this is!  That's exactly what Jesus was saying!  Jesus said that we would be measured by the same standards to which we hold others.  He was telling us not to be hypocrites.  He was telling us that if we judge, the very standards by which we judge will be used against us.

I am not qualified to judge the inner workings of your heart and soul.  I cannot place myself in the position of the Judge Who determines your eternal future.  For me to try is foolishness.  However, scripture tells us that we will be known (judged) by our works.  Scripture tells us to judge whether a man is qualified to serve in leadership in the church by weighing the evidence of his life against scripture.  I can--and should--point to scripture and call upon my brethren to question their own actions and motives.

Let me make something perfectly clear.  Those who ride the "don't be judgmental" pony are soon bucked off!  They are people who, again, 1. don't know the meaning of what they're saying, 2. haven't spent enough time in scripture to understand the biblical standards of holiness to which we are all held, and/or 3. have a heart full of rebellion and misuse the words of Christ to justify their own sinful behavior.  There are certain standards the scriptures set for those who call themselves followers of Christ.  Those standards must be followed, or you prove the failure of your own testimony.  That isn't someone else bringing judgment on you, that's your own choices bringing judgment.  Those whose lives are solidly rooted in the Word of God see things through spiritual eyes.  Don't be so arrogant as to believe that you can live in contravention to God's Word and have that life be unnoticeable to God's people!  God's standards do not change with time or popular opinion.  If something was wrong two thousand years ago, it's still wrong now.  And throwing the hollow accusation of judgmentalism upon whoever sees your sin and calls your attention to it does not nullify God's Word.  If you are listening to someone who allows you to think you can do whatever you want to do without spiritual consequence, I refer you back to the book of Matthew, chapter 5: verse 19, where Jesus said, "Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

I know this blog isn't going to win me any new friends.  I'm OK with that.  It may even cost me a few.  That's OK, too.  What I'm not OK with is my friends thinking they are just fine because they get together with other like-minded folks, have a good time, feel good about themselves because they feel justified in their worldly behavior, and then die and find out how self-deceived they are.  I love my friends too much for that. 

When someone calls someone else judgmental, they say it in a way that indicates that the person is uncaring, unloving, and hateful.  You can call me judgmental if you want.  Just line your life up with scripture, or you'll find yourself surprised one day when God says "Depart from me, you worker of iniquity.  I never knew you."