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.

"We Need To Teach Our Daughters..."

We've always heard that we live in a "male-dominated" society.  I suppose if you have an innate victim mentality that was, at one time, true.  Men held the highest paid jobs, and a hugely disparate percentage of the jobs in total.  Men had the purchasing power.  Men filled the governmental positions.

That was back in the early days of this country.  Largely, this started changing with World War I and World War II.  During those years, women were needed to fill the production positions left vacant by men who'd gone off to fight for their country.

Since then, women have slowly and steadily filled more and more positions in the workplace and in government.  In fact, some of the most powerful roles in our government are filled by women.  This is a day in which a woman who wants to achieve great things has all the opportunity she needs to do so.  We have a female Secretary of State, a female Surgeon General, Homeland Security Secretay, ninety Congressional posts, and the numbers are growing all the time.  Disparities in wages are often caused by faulty statistical schemes.  For example:  most surveys that claim a disparity in male/female incomes do not take into consideration maternity leave, the increased number of days off that women take as opposed to men, and so on.  

The fact is, we are all different.  We must be careful when we speak in generalities.  

One thing is obvious to the observant person:  over the past few decades, there has been a concerted effort in the media and in society to undermine masculinity in American society.  In almost every family portrayed in television or movies, the man is portrayed as clueless or tyrannical, or both.  The woman is always portrayed as the one with the common sense and intelligence.  Men are either the comical characters whose oafish blunders make us laugh uproariously at their expense, or as the morally depraved deviants whose inner corruption is rarely far from surfacing and destroying the poor female victim.

Don't take my word for it.  Look at what you watch and read with open eyes.  Pay attention to what you're putting into your mind.

It has seeped into every part of our lives.  Read your Facebook news feed.  Watch how many women post things like "We Need To Teach Our Daughters..." or "A Real Man..."

How often do you read "A Real Woman..." ?  

When I moved to Missouri, the church my mother attended had an adult Sunday School class for people my age.  They were running a series of videos by a famed Christian author whose specialty seems to be in relationship counseling.  Throughout that series, I observed something that had disturbed me for several years prior to that.  Whenever the speaker addressed the men, he instructed them to change their approach to make room for the more emotional way many women interpret the world.  When he addressed the women, he instructed them to "understand that men just don't get it."

We now live in a time in which it's almost considered a bad thing to be masculine.  The church is one of the biggest offenders, too.  The church today is raising a generation of males who don't know what true masculinity is.  We see more and more who are so detached from their own gender that they even physically manifest signs of effeminacy.  It's an interesting and disturbing phenomenon.  They are not self-sufficient, strong, or effective leaders.  They cower to the politically correct rather than standing with a rigid spine in the face of popular opposition.  In my mind, it's vivid evidence of the emasculation of the Christian man.  (Read Wild at Heart, by John Eldredge for a much more skillful exposition on this subject.)

We also live in a time in which it's politically correct, and even applauded, when women make blanket statements about the cluelessness, ineptitude, lack of moral character, and spinelessness of men.  Yet, if a man were to say anything negative about a woman, he is branded a sexist.  The pendulum has swung so far that it's considered socially acceptable to hold up a man to public ridicule based upon his gender.  And it's become a part of the fabric of daily communication, to the point that it's unnoticeable unless one listens with new ears.

I'm writing to try to give you new ears.

Posts like the very popular "We Need To Teach Our Daughters..." make negative assumptions about men in general.  Posts like "A Real Man..." does or doesn't do certain things are a backhanded insult against men in general because they only address half of the equation.  We rarely see posts instructing women to be ladies.  We rarely hear teachers or preachers applauding true femininity instead of feminism.  We regularly hear messages instructing men to adjust to women, but rarely the opposite.  These messages criticize men for their less emotional approach to life, their lack of verbal communication and their tendency to spend too much time and effort on their careers.  We rarely hear sermons on how women can follow a truly scriptural approach to femininity.  We rarely hear a sermon that tells a woman to "suck it up and think logically" or to "stop talking so much."  

One problem is that these flawed sermons are often preached by men.  These men seem so afraid of being labeled as a sexist that they feel the need to apologize for their gender rather than educate women on how to adequately interact with men.  Just a clue, pastors, men are not the only ones who need to adjust their approach to the opposite sex.  

This morning, in the wake of the Aurora, Colorado shooting, I read an article that sparked a thought I wanted to share.  The article spoke of three young men who sacrificed their lives by shielding their girlfriends from the gunfire.  These men selflessly placed themselves between the attacker and their loved-ones.  Each one of them saved a woman.  Each one of them died in the process.  These are heroes.  These are valiant men.  These men deserve to be remembered.  These men demonstrated manhood.

What if we shifted our approach a bit?  What if, instead of focusing on the negatives that some men display, we focused on things like heroism, faithfulness, honor and integrity?  What if, instead of saying we need to teach our daughters to act like spoiled princesses in a world in which men exist only to meet her needs and make her happy, we taught our daughters to prove themselves worthy of a man such as these three men?  What if we teach  men how to be men and women how to be women?  What if we taught men to be gentlemen and women to be ladies?  You know, those archaic terms that have all but lost all meaning?

How about teaching your daughters how to be the best they can be?  Teach them the biblical definition of womanhood.  Teach your sons the biblical description of manhood.  You know, man and woman were created to complement one another, not compete against each other.  We were created as parts of a puzzle that becomes complete when we marry.  Stop teaching your little girl to dress like an eight year old prostitute who is so desperate for male attention that she'll lower herself to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Stop teaching your daughter that she's the most important person on the planet and that she deserves a man who will bow to her and give her everything that she wants.  Teach her that true love is self-sacrificing.

Teach your children, male and female, how to love sacrificially.

Teach your boys how to treat a lady.

Teach your daughter how to be worthy of that treatment.

Peanuts on the airplane...

Life is about the destination, not the journey!

I know, that goes against the tide of contemporary teaching.  We are constantly told to stop and smell the roses, enjoy life, focus on today, etc.

All of that advice has some merit.  We should not just numbly stumble through life, oblivious to the blessings that come our way.  We should seek adventure and chances for personal growth.  We should touch as many lives as we can with the love and grace of God.

All of these things are true!

However, as I was driving to work today I heard a brief snippet from a speaker who mentioned that nobody enjoys a trip so much that they choose to stay on the plane rather than go to their destination.  Even when traveling "first class,"  the plane ride is a means of getting us somewhere.

So much of the teaching today has adopted the humanist approach to life.  According to their philosophies, we should not be concerned with our eternal future, but should be focused on the beauties of the day-to-day human experience.  We focus on the blessings that come our way during this life.  We zero in on what we can get out of life--business success, popularity, companionship, financial benefits.  One pastor with whom I associated used boast about "the favor of God."

I am not demeaning the blessings of God. He grants us what we need to have in order to live the lives He's called us to live.  I am grateful for the many blessings He's chosen to give to me.  I have a beautiful family, a comfortable home, a few close friends, a car, a job, etc.  Those things are in my life because of the unmerited favor of God and I am grateful.

But those things are the peanuts on the airplane!  They are given to us to make this journey easier and more comfortable.  They are given to us to help us accomplish the tasks before us.  Those blessings are not to be our goals! 

We often cling to those blessings as though they were the goal.  Like the Children of Israel hoarding the manna that God had provided, we expend so much energy and time seeking our definition of the blessings of God.  And, like the Israelites experienced, those hoarded gifts spoil and decay.  God's love and mercy are new every morning!  He provides us with what we need for life.  He expects us to work hard and trust Him for what we need.  But, much like the mentality of the four-year-old in my living room, we confuse what we want with what we need.  We are so eager to obtain the little pleasures of life that we lose sight of the destination He has set before us.

Our goal is to be with God.  Our goal is to seek Him.  Our goal is to spend eternity in a love relationship with the One who lovingly created us.  We are the Bride of Christ!  We are traveling toward the Marriage Feast!  Why do we get so wrapped up in the peanuts on the plane?

Sarcasm

sarcasm [sahr-kaz-uhm] noun

1.  harsh or bitter derision or irony.

2.  a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms.

Origin: 

1570–80;  < Late Latin sarcasmus  < Greek sarkasmós,  derivative of sarkázein,  to rend (flesh), sneer; see sarco-


Sarcasm.  A cutting remark.  A sneering attitude. 

Comes from a term that meant to rend, or tear apart violently, as with flesh.  Like a wolf tearing the meat out of a carcass.  Sarcasm.  An emotionally violent act.

And yet, we live in an extremely sarcastic society.  Sarcasm is the first tool to which many of us turn when attempting humor, or argument.  Sarcasm is what we use to demonstrate our disdain for an idea or a person.  It is also a demonstration of our sense of self-superiority.  It's a prideful gesture.

Sarcasm is often used in place of a sound argument.  It is typically a sign of weak reasoning, or a lack of solid facts from which to argue.  Sarcasm is the first resort of a weak mind.

Yet, we all use sarcasm.  It makes us feel powerful.  It makes us feel good.  It makes others feel stupid and inferior...unless they are sure of their facts.  Then it makes us look like fools.  Attempting to take cheap shots at the intellect of another when he holds a firm grip on truth and reality, and when his belief in that truth is unwavering, is a fool's errand.  It is the mark of a fool.

We profess love for one another, yet commit verbal violence.  It's a sad contradiction.  If sarcasm is derived from the term to rend as flesh, why do we do that to those we claim to love?  Is it to feel superior to them?  If so, then we do not truly love.  Is it to dominate a disagreement?  Then we do not love.  Our sarcasm renders our claims of love fraudulent.

Can we not speak the truth in love?  Can we not simply state facts?  Can we not show our love for one another even in our disagreements?

Your sarcasm does not cause intelligent men to think you intelligent.  Just the opposite, really.  For your sarcasm is a failure of reasoning.  It is mental weakness on display.

It is not included in Jesus' description of the fruit of the spirit.

Just something God's been working on in my spirit.  Thought I'd share.

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.

The Dog Went To The Park. (Or, How To Give Your Kid The Best You Have)

A simple sentence.  The dog went to the park.  Simplicity at its finest.  The hesitant hand that penned this sentence is that of my four-year-old stepson, Tiegen.

Tiegen is homeschooled by my wife, Krystal.  Along with Tiegen, Krystal "babysits" two other young children.  I placed the word babysits in quotation marks because I take issue with it.  Each morning, a local mother drops off her three-year-old and seven-month-old daughters at our home under the care of my wife.  So, on the basis of that alone, yes, she babysits.

Krystal, however, would never be satisfied with simply sitting home and making sure the kids don't get into the laundry detergent, or making sure they don't crack each other on the heads with plastic hammers.  That's not enough for her.  You see, my wife is a teacher.  It's not just what she does, it's who she is.  If you place her in a room with children for more than a second or two, those children are going to learn from her.  And she teaches in unique and fun ways--ways that resonate with the children.

When Krystal and I were first dating, I paid a visit to the preschool/daycare center in which she worked.  It wasn't the first time I'd been inside a center, as my mother ran several of them when I was younger.  However, being a bit older and... shall we say... less patient, I realized what a special type of personality it takes to operate in that type of environment.  I've often said if I were a daycare teacher, parents might arrive at the end of the day to find a neat little row of Hefty bags with name tags.  Obviously, I'm not cut out for that kind of work!

Krystal is.

Kids adore Krystal.  She is firm, but fun.  She challenges their imaginations and their sense of ingenuity.  She teaches them problem-solving skills.  She comes up with outstanding lesson plans and craft projects for them to do.

When we got married, we decided that Krystal should stay home with Tiegen and teach him.  We crunched the numbers and realized that if we brought Tiegen home from daycare and she took in two to three other children, she would actually be financially better off than she was while working as an underpaid and under-appreciated daycare teacher.  Add to that the benefits of being able to teach Tiegen with much more personal attention than he would receive in a daycare, and we decided it was the best way to go.

Tiegen's always been a sharp kid.  He shocks us with his memory.  For example, one day we were driving down the road and he said to me, "Daddy, do you remember when we went to the zoo, and I played in the water?"  I scoured my brain, searching my memory banks.  He continued, "Remember how there were these little holes and water would shoot out in my face?  Remember how I laughed and laughed?"  I was stunned.  That event occurred on his first birthday!  He was remembering something that had happened three years earlier, while he was still toddling around in a diaper!

However, Tiegen is learning at extremely accelerated rates.  I believe that is, in large part, because of the approach Krystal takes to his education.  In the former daycare setting, he was one of many kids whose activities were loosely monitored by bored and underpaid ladies who seemed like they would've preferred to be elsewhere.  He came home repeating words and phrases he'd learned from other kids and teachers that we found to be inappropriate.  He learned to push and shove, and that when reason fails, volume is the best way to get what he wanted.

Since he's been at home with Krystal, any adults who deal with him remark about how unbelievably polite and intelligent he is.  He is learning the values we hold dear in our family.

Not only that, there's a story behind the sentence you see in the photo at the top of this post.  One evening while waiting for me to arrive home from work, Krystal was in the kitchen cooking.  Tiegen said from the dining room, "Mommy, how do you spell went?"  Krystal responded as we always do, "Sound it out, buddy.  How do you think you'd spell went?"  A moment later, Tiegen excitedly bounded into the kitchen to show his mommy the sentence he had just written.  This four-year-old boy, whom Krystal assumed was playing with his toys in the living room, had sat down with his beloved dry-erase board and--unprompted and uncoached--had written a perfect sentence.  All at an age when many kids are speaking in baby-talk and struggling to learn letter sounds.  I attribute this wonderful success to Tiegen's intelligence and to Krystal's skills and passion as a teacher/mother.

I am writing this today because it's on my mind.  There is a vast and growing debate in our country about homeschooling.  Some say that homeschooled children suffer socially.  One man, while singing the praises of the public school system, told Krystal that children need to be pushed down by other kids in order to learn their place in the world.  He said sometimes advanced kids need to simply "dumb down" and be normal.  

Really?  Is that the kind of innovation that made this country great?  Is that the way to give our kids the tools necessary for success?  "Look, kid... I know you already know this stuff and it's really easy, but your classmates aren't at your level.  Therefore, you'll just have to sit through it until the rest of the kids catch up to you."  Sorry, Jack.  It doesn't work.  I've been there.  The high school from which I graduated had that same outlook.  It was torturous, and it certainly did not help me excel.  

Others say homeschooling isn't for everyone.  On this point I agree.  For example, the man of whom I just spoke wrote with the use of only one type of punctuation: the comma.  He seemed diametrically opposed to capitalization and grammatical rules.  This man has apparently settled for a life of semi-literate bliss.  He should not be teaching, as he is unqualified.  Krystal, on the other hand, is exceptionally articulate, reads the dictionary for entertainment, and is a thinker.  She makes an excellent teacher.

Homeschooling isn't for everyone.  However, standardized test scores among homeschooled children are quite impressive, routinely surpassing that of public school students by as much as 30 to 40 points.  Plugged-in parents can easily put their kids in social environments.  Tiegen is involved in Rainbows at church, has his daily playmates, and gets lots of playtime at the park...where he has shown a knack for being exceptionally caring and compassionate to the kids around him.

I find it fascinating that, as a nation, we spend more than $10,000 a year per student in public schools while the average homeschool family spends between $600 and $1000.  Yet, homeschoolers tend to score 30 to 40 points higher than public school students on the same tests.  Perhaps the socialized approach to education doesn't work, after all.  

I actually didn't write this entry to push the idea of homeschooling.  I wrote it to say how proud I am of my wife for the hard work she puts into raising a smart, happy, well-adjusted boy.  I recognize a special gift in her, and in him.  We have made this decision for our household.  It is not without its difficulties, but it is well worth the investment.

Thank you, Krystal, for being a great mom, a skilled teacher, and a wonderful wife.  I love you.

Oh, and by the way, here is a list of people you might recognize.  Each one of these people was homeschooled.  Enjoy.

·  President John Adams

·  President John Quincy Adams

·  President Grover Cleveland

·  President James Garfield

·  President William Henry Harrison

·  President Andrew Jackson

·  President Thomas Jefferson

·  President Abraham Lincoln

·  President James Madison

·  President Franklin Delano Roosevelt

·  President Theodore Roosevelt

·  President John Tyler

·  President  George Washington

·  President Woodrow Wilson 

·  Pierre du Pont

·  Benjamin Franklin

·  Alexander Hamilton

·  Patrick Henry

·  William Penn

·  Daniel Webster

·  Alexander the Great  - Greek Ruler

·  John Barry - Senior Navy Officer

·  Stonewall Jackson - Civil War General

·  John Paul Jones - Father of the American Navy

·  Robert E. Lee - Civil War General

·  Douglas MacArthur - U.S. General

·  George Patton - U.S. General

·  Matthew Perry - naval officer who opened up trade with Japan

·  John Pershing - U.S. General

·  David Dixon Porter - Civil War Admiral

·  Albert Einstein

·  Michael Faraday - electrochemist

·  Oliver Heaviside - physicist and electromagnetism researcher

·  T.H. Huxley

·  Blaise Pascal

·  Booker T. Washington

·  Erik Demaine - Popular Science Mag: One of the Most Brilliant Scientists in America 

·  Alexander Graham Bell - invented the telephone

·  John Moses Browning - firearms inventor and designer

·  Peter Cooper - invented skyscraper, built first U.S. commercial locomotive

·  Thomas Edison - invented the stock ticker, mimeograph, phonograph, and perfected the electric light bulb

·  Benjamin Franklin - invented the lightning rod

·  Elias Howe - invented sewing machine

·  William Lear - airplane creator

·  Cyrus McCormick - invented grain reaper

·  Guglielmo Marconi - developed radio

·  Eli Whitney - invented the cotton gin

·  Sir Frank Whittle - invented turbo jet engine

·  Orville and Wilbur Wright - built the first successful airplane

·  Hans Christian Anderson

·  Margaret Atwood

·  Pearl S. Buck

·  William F. Buckley, Jr.

·  Willa Cather

·  Agatha Christie

·  Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain)

·  Charles Dickens

·  Robert Frost - Pulitzer Prize-winning poet

·  Charlotte Perkins Gilman

·  Alex Haley

·  Brett Harte

·  C.S. Lewis

·  Amy Lowell

·  Gabriela Mistral

·  Sean O'Casey

·  Christopher Paolini - author of #1 NY Times bestseller, Eragon

·  Isabel Paterson

·  Beatrix Potter - author of the beloved Peter Rabbit Tales

·  Carl Sandburg

·  George Bernard Shaw

·  Mattie J. T. Stepanek - 11-year-old author of Heartsongs

·  Mercy Warren

·  Phillis Wheatley

·  Walt Whitman

·  Laura Ingalls Wilder