Politics as Usual

I'm just baffled. What is the point of this message? I'm so confused, I can't even write a clear paragraph. Yes, Barack Obama is a celebrity. And so is John McCain. But what's with the messianic language and use of footage from the 10 Commandments? If the McCain folks are trying to make Obama out to be some sort of failed messiah, why did they choose to use clips from a mid-century epic of the life of Moses? Since when is Moses a messianic figure? Doesn't comparing Obama to Moses hurt McCain's case? According to Hebrew scriptures, Moses was only the one chosen by God to set God's people free from decades of slavery and oppression at the hands of the Egyptians. I'm not sure that's the kind of person to whom I would compare my opponent.

I'm sick of hearing about how McCain needs to do a better job of courting evangelicals when he puts out ads like this. Is it just me, or does this border on blasphemy? Yes, I understand that this ad is tongue in cheek and that the McCain folks think Obama is taking his role in history a bit too far. But people, this IS huge. I don't care which side of the political aisle you choose, we have an African-American about to claim his party's nomination to run for president of the United States. Sure, it's not on the same spectrum as Moses freeing the Hebrew people from bondage and allowing God's covenant with Abraham to continue. But this IS a big deal. And I think the McCain folks just made it even bigger. As one youtube commenter said, this may be the best ad in Obama's favor yet.

Perhaps, as most politicians do, Obama thinks a little too highly of himself. And yes, his supporters probably paint him in bigger terms than they should. But that's because they're excited. So far, McCain hasn't given me anything to be excited about. Perhaps I'm just another impressionable feller in his mid-20's getting swept up in Obamania. Regardless, it feels good to be excited about the prospects of a political candidate for once. Did somebody say change?

To switch or not to switch...

I think google may be taking over my life. My blog on wordpress seems to do everything I ask of it, but the fact that I can keep my online life so easily connected thanks to google (the thought of a disconnected online life seems somewhat paradoxical) has inspired me to give blogger a try. So here goes...who shall emerge victorious? Stay tuned...

Romans 8:1-11 (NRSV)

1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. 3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and to deal with sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6 To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For this reason the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God's law—indeed it cannot, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 But you are not in the flesh; you are in the Spirit, since the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

10 But if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit that dwells in you.

I was a part of a Bible study thing called the FIRE Institute at one time in high school. It was a very intense multi-month study full of learning spiritual disciplines, fasting, scripture study, video watching, for which I quit freshman football (wasn’t too tough of a decision; I don’t think I was cut out for high school football…much more comfortable on stage) and made various other sacrifices. It was an overall good experience that helped gird up my fundamentalist attitudes of the time but that I am quite sure genuinely helped me grow.

One of the most challenging (but fulfilling) aspects of the experience was that we had to memorize Romans chapter eight, one of my favorite passages since that study. In fact, ten years later (it’s been 10 years since I was a freshman?), I can still get through the first half of the chapter without stuttering. But this is good stuff friends…

I’m always intrigued by what exactly Paul had in mind when talking about the law of sin and death. Is this some kind of original sin idea? Or is it just the result of humanity’s sinful nature, like a natural law? My lovely New Oxford Annotated Bible says that Paul, when speaking of the law of the Spirit of life and the law of sin and death is reffering not to “two different laws, but of God’s law experienced under two opposing dominions, of sin and of righteousness.” In that case, I suppose that Christ ushers in the death or collapse of the dominion of sin and death by bringing about the dominion of the Spirit of life. That makes sense in light of verse four, when Paul talks about those who “walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”

But would that imply that God set up a dominion of unrighteousness? Or was God’s righteousness simply corrupted by flesh, as in verse three? I need to read some gnostic interpretations of this…I could easily see how this could be fodder for the idea that the God of the Jews is actually an evil diety, Lord of the law of sin and death, while the God of Jesus is actually the God of the good stuff, of the Spirit of life.

Personally, when I think of a law weakened by the flesh, I think of my inability to live up to God’s righteousness on my own apart from Christ, who came “in the likeness of sinful flesh, and to deal with sin, he condemned sin in flesh, so that the just requirements of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” I supposed the idea of separate dominions still works with this interpretation though; it’s a matter of which dominion we choose to walk under.

Having one’s mind set on the desires of the flesh ultimately leads to destruction according to Paul and creates a mind that is hostile to God and unable to submit to God’s law; BUT, the mind focused on the Spirit brings life and peace. I like life and peace a lot more than destruction. I need to spend more time in prayer and meditation, focusing my mind on the Spirit, finding peace.

I like to think of verse eleven as applying to living bodies, to the idea that God, through Christ, wants to give life to our mortal bodies, our bodies that are still alive. When people look at me, I want them to see someone who is truly alive. I struggled with that last week on mission trip; being tired and sick at the end didn’t help, but I was not a good demonstration of the vibrant life that Christ wants to give for my kids. I’m going to work on that, to find a way to still be me and be true to my personality, yet show that joyus life of Christ within.

Good stuff indeed.

Thematicaly Speaking

One of my biggest struggles in youth ministry is coming up with a theme for the fall and I’m not really sure why. I find it dificult to definitively decide what the entire purpose of Campbell’s youth ministry is going to be based on for a year. I inevitably stray or altogether forget about the theme by October anyway, but I understand the usefulness of a theme. It gives us all something to focus on, something to tie around. So here we go…hopefully I’ll be enlightened with something good…

Branson

We’re reading a book by Aaron Ketchell called Holy Hills of the Ozarks which is about religion and tourism in Branson. I’m not sure why, but I never thought about Silver Dollar City as an inherently religious place growing up. Sure, I knew they had gospel music shows and the huge Christmas festival (one of my favorite parts of the season), but I never thought of it as a specifically religious (read: Christian) place. Of course, I wouldn’t expect to go to Six Flags and see a gospel quartet, but somehow it never seemed “strange” at SDC. Why is that? Was I more focused on the rides and therefore less likely to notice? Or does it have more to do with growing up in the Ozarks.

Charles Reagan Wilson, the all-star of Southern history and culture, gave a talk on campus tonight and he mentioned how thoroughly the Ozarks is permeated with all things religious. If that’s true, then it makes sense that SDC wouldn’t seem “weird” to me; I (and many other natives) are simply used to the permeation, like it or not. But I think there is something else to it. When I go to Silver Dollar City, or to Branson in general, I expect to see elements of Christianity at every turn, regardless of whether or not said elements are tasteful. I know what I’m getting into when I go to Branson. Whether it be amusement theme parks, variety shows, or restaurants, the entire town is marketing nostalgia couched in Christianity.

But apparently, some people find Branson offensive, which I can understand. What I can’t understand is that some people seem to be surprised by Branson’s in-your-face embrace of Christianity. Believe it or not, there is a group of people in America that want to see Kirby van Burch make a helicopter appear and then talk about Jesus. They also want to see public displays of the 10 Commandments draped in American flags and hear about how awesome George W. Bush is. Branson, if a city could do so, is fulfilling many of those desires and more. Is that wrong? Is that something to be offended by?

Just as many fundamentalists will never go to Vegas, many non-evangelicals will probably never feel much affinity for Branson. That’s ok. Let’s just not be any more surprised to see Christianity in Branson then we would be to see Judaism in Miami. Rather than throwing up our defenses when encountering something different and uncomfortable, let’s try to reach a point of understanding; it’s a lot friendlier than being immediately offended.

Discipline

I’ve felt an overwhelming desire to write recently, but (clearly) haven’t made time for it. I was the “speaker” at our recent college retreat (don’t let the title fool you…I basically led discussion) and we spent the weekend talking about self and spiritual discipline, two categories in which I find myself lacking of late.

I’ve developed an affinity for my snooze button. I go to bed excited about getting my day started with a flourish, but seem to lack the same enthusiasm when the appointed wake-up time rolls around. I tried the “move the alarm” trick so that I would physically have to get out of bed to turn it off, but to no avail. Recently, I have gone back to using my cell phone as an alarm because it does not have a snooze button. Unfortunately, I’ve used the snooze button for so long that I’m afraid it’s been ingrained into my biological clock. In other words, I’ll wake up when my phone goes off, but have no problem snoozing until the last possible minute; my body still knows that it’s time to get up.

So the point here is to put this all in writing, hoping that by expressing my intentions might make them more real. Tomorrow is a new day, and I shall once again go to bed with every intention of getting up, eating a good breakfast, doing some reading, and starting the day at a relaxed pace. Time is, after all, precious, and I need to treat it as such. There you go, cyberspace; hold me accountable.

Romans 4:1-5 (TNIV)

1 What then shall we say that Abraham, the forefather of us Jews, discovered in this matter? 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” 4 Now to anyone who works, their wages are not credited to them as a gift, but as an obligation. 5 However, to anyone who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

Ah, the good ol’ works verses faith debate. And Paul characteristically takes us back to the ancestors, and rightly so. Just as Paul wrote (and it makes sense after working through the Genesis reading from earlier this week), if ANYBODY has the right to be justified by works, it was Abraham. Obviously the main hang up for Paul is that righteousness isn’t really something that’s “credited” or “payed”, but rather freely given. I really like the way that the TNIV puts verse 5: to anyone who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly. After justification, do we become godly?

But even if works don’t get us a payment of righteousness, isn’t that they way Paul makes faith sound? Faith is still an action and it’s because of faith that righteousness is given. Is faith a work? Regardless, I think it’s important to note that action is still necessary, on both God’s part and on our part. I just wish that Paul hadn’t so clearly ruled out the role of works when it comes to faith, or written about the importance of the interplay between faith and works…but maybe he didn’t feel that way. Or was his reaction so strong because of what he was writing against? If Paul and the author of James got together today to discuss faith and works, what would they say?

Back to Abraham to close. What really goes on with Abraham’s works and faith? Are his works contingent on his faith? Or is it the other way around? Or is it both? I agree that Abraham’s faith was the key, but his actions were only living out that faith, right? We too often fail to think of the word faith as a verb requiring action. Perhaps that is our greatest lesson from Abraham: faith as a belief is great, but faith put into action is the point.