Should Rick Warren’s inaugural prayer include Jesus Christ?

Posted on December 30, 2008 by Tim Farley

It seems that the Rick Warren debate is not solely about his stance on same-sex marriage.  Now there are many nervous and distraught over whether or not Warren will pray a decidedly Christian prayer during the Presidential inauguration.  By praying “in Jesus’ name”, many feel that Warren will be crossing the line of Separation of Church and State.  It seems like this is a common theme from those who do not like Christianity.  You can read a full article on this debate at the link below.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081231/ap_on_go_pr_wh/rel_inauguration_prayer

To me, it seems odd to ask a known Christian pastor to pray in a non-Christian manner.  It seems like the U.S. has a similar political atmosphere as 1st and 2nd century Rome.  Rome was open to religion and gods.  They made sure to build shrines and temples to as many as possible so they could be sure to have the gods on their side.  However, when the early Christians started making claims that there was only one true God and it was theirs, it was not well received.  It led to persecution and martyrdom for many.

It seems like many in the U.S. are now happy to accept any religion except Christianity.  What do you think?  How  do you think Warren should pray?  Do you think that Christianity’s claim of being the one true religion and way to God is the reason so many are opposed to Christianity?

Posted in Culture, Worldview | Tagged , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

The God of Gay-Rights Activists

Posted on December 26, 2008 by Tim Farley

I have posted several articles on the gay marriage debate that is currently raging in California and American politics.  Through the discussions, I have learned several things and want to ask a few questions and make a few observations:

  1. Why is Christianity seemingly the only religion that is under attack?  I realize that Christianity is probably the largest religious voting group in the U.S., but gay marriage is not accepted by the majority within any major religion in the U.S.  Have other religious groups received the same response?
  2. There are Christians who support gay marriage, so to lump all Christians into the same basket is stereotyping.  Many Christians support gay marriage based upon their religious convictions.  Why is it OK to support gay marriage based upon religious conviction, but wrong to oppose it based upon the same type of conviction?
  3. There are a large number of non-religious people who are opposed to same-sex marriage.  This is not just a “religious” thing.
  4. Why is it OK for gay-rights activists to appeal to their “Creator” (i.e. God) as their source of authority, but wrong for Christians to appeal to their God?  Not sure what I mean by this?  Gay rights activists say that Proposition 8, which bans gay marriage, is a violation of their basic, inalienable rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights of the United States.  The Bill of Rights states that people have inalienable rights bestowed on them by their Creator (i.e. God).  It is not necessary to define who “God” is in this statement, but to recognize it as an appeal to a higher Authority (i.e. God) as the source of our basic human rights.  This means that these rights cannot be taken away by any source, whether it be the President, king, government, or the will of the people.  When gay-rights activists appeal to their inalienable rights, they appeal to the authority of their “Creator” (again, they can choose who their god is).  To deny that there is a Creator is to deny that there are basic, inalienable rights and invalidates any argument based upon inalienable rights.  Why is the authority of the god of gay-rights activists allowed to enter the discussion, while it is inappropriate to allow Christians to appeal to their God as their source of authority?  This seems like a double standard to me.
  5. Is marriage primarily a religious institution or a civil one?  Marriage seems to have originated within religion and then was “recognized” by the State.  If it is primarily a religious institution, does the State have any right to redefine it?  Is this not a violation of Separation of Church and State?  It would make more sense to argue for civil unions recognized by the State that are equal (in a legal sense) to marriage rather than trying to impose a new meaning onto the religious institution of marriage, which the Christian Church and other religions can never accept based upon their convictions.

These are some of my observations.  I look forward to hearing what you think.

Posted in Gay Marriage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Christmas in a consumer world

Posted on December 26, 2008 by Tim Farley
Christmas gifts

Christmas gifts

So, my wife and I celebrated Christmas yesterday.  Our day was probably similar to most everyone’s in the U.S.  We woke early and spent the morning exchanging gifts with each other and opening packages sent from family.  After the gift-giving the celebration really seemed to be over.  It was just another day with not much to do.  We relaxed and spent time looking over and using some of our new “toys”.

Reflecting now on this Christmas and the Christmases of years past, I see how the day really does revolve around the gifts.  We spend so much time, effort, and money in the days and weeks leading up to Christmas making sure we get the right things for those we love, then the day seems over once the last gift has been opened.  Is this really what Christmas is all about?

As Christians, we know the real reason for Christmas is the celebration of the birth of our Savior, but do we celebrate the day in a way that is any different than the rest of the world?  Has Christmas become “all about the gifts” even for Christians?  Have we bought into the consumeristic version of Christmas that the rest of the world celebrates?  How much money do we spend on Christmas every year?  How many gifts do each of us need to have a good Christmas?

As I prepare to raise a child, I am wondering what I can do to make sure that our family celebrates Christmas in a way that teaches the true meaning of the holiday.  I know I can teach my child the biblical accounts of Jesus’ birth, but how can I also show him/her by example that Christmas is not “all about the gifts?”  Any thoughts?

Posted in Christmas, Consumerism | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Dear Road Rage Christian…

Posted on December 24, 2008 by Tim Farley

Dear Road Rage Christian,

 Hello.  You probably do not remember me, but we crossed paths a little earlier today.  Do you remember?  We were both sitting in our cars outside of Office Depot waiting to turn onto the street.  I was in the car in front of you waiting to turn left.  You must have been in a hurry because you honked your horn at me as if you were saying, “Hurry up!”  You obviously did not see the car I was waiting for before I made my left turn out of the parking entrance and onto the street.  Or, perhaps you thought I could have “made it” by quickly dashing in front of the oncoming car.  Either way, you seemed to be in a hurry and you were trying to let me know that.

Still do not remember?  Well after I had allowed the oncoming car to pass, I made my left turn and made my way down the street.  You, in an obvious hurry, quickly accelerated past me in a no-passing zone and came within inches of actually brushing my car with yours.  Do you remember that?  Maybe you would remember my face if you saw it because as you drove by you stared me down and had an expression of extreme concentration on your face as if you did not want to ever forget who I was.  I am sure you would remember my face.

I noticed the “Jesus Fish” license plate frame on your car as you drove by.  I also noticed the sticker in your back window of Calvin kneeling before the cross of Christ.  I wanted to catch up to you at the next stop light and ask what those symbols meant to you because they mean a great deal to me.  However, it was not to be.  The light remained green and you continued driving straight while I had to make another left turn and continue home.

Those symbols surely mean something to you though, I am positive.  Otherwise, why have them on your car?  I am guessing that they are meant to declare your allegiance to Christ and your dedication to following His teachings.  I am also sure that they are meant to express your desire to show the world the love and forgiveness that are available to all of the world through Jesus Christ.

I wish you had not been in such a hurry today.  Perhaps you would have been able to show me a little of that love and forgiveness as well for my inferior driving skills.  For that, allow me to say, “I am sorry.”  I realize that today is Christmas Eve and you were probably in a rush to finish your last-minute Christmas shopping and get to the Christmas Eve service at your church where you could worship your Lord.  You had every reason to be angry with me.  I understand. 

Sincerely,

Tim

Posted in Christmas, Worldview | Tagged , , , , , , | 5 Comments

The Bible says we should execute Sabbath breakers. Should we?

Posted on December 24, 2008 by Tim Farley

How does the Old Testament (Mosaic) law apply today?  How should Christians understand and apply it?

This post is in response to a statement that was made by a commenter on a previous discussion on this site.  The commenter stated in that discussion, “The Bible also says that those who work on the Sabbath should be put to death.”  This command can be found in Exodus 31:13-14.  Of course, what was implied is that since Christians do not seek the death penalty for those who break the Sabbath, they also should not seek to enforce / obey other laws that they seem to get so worked up over (i.e. homosexuality, same-sex marriage, etc.).  It was also stated that Christians seem to pick and choose whatever they want from the Old Testament law as long as it supports their prejudices.

So, what should a Christian make of the Mosaic law?  Should we keep the whole thing?  Should we just ignore it and forget the Old Testament even exists?  We could shorten our Bibles to the 27 books of the New Testament and make things a whole lot simpler.  I know it would make my life easier!

Contrary to what some may believe, there are reasons that Christians hold to some of the Mosaic law while seemingly disregarding other parts of the same law.  I will outline some of the reasons below.  I hope it is helpful without being too technical.

  1. There are 613 distinct laws that make up the Mosaic Covenant.  This covenant was a suzerainty-vassal treaty that was made by God with a specific geo-political nation: Israel.  The Old Testament tells us that the covenant was not kept by the Israelites (Jeremiah 11:10; 22:9; 31:32).  As a result of the constant violations of the Israelites, the New Testament tells us that God established a new covenant with a new people: the Church, which is not a geo-political nation, but a group of individuals scattered all over the world (1 Corinthians 11:25; 2 Corinthians 3:6; Hebrews 8:6–13; 9:15–18).  In fact, the reason our Bibles are divided into Old Testament and New Testament are to reflect the old covenant and the new covenant.
  2. In a legal sense, the terms of the original covenant are not binding on Christians.  The terms of the new covenant are binding.
  3. Even though the Mosaic law is not binding on Christians, it still has much to teach us about the character of God and His desires.  So, in an instructional sense, the Mosaic law is still binding, as is all of Scripture.  Christians do not approach the law the same way as those who lived under the old covenant did, but instead look at the laws and ask, “What does this teach me about the character of God?  What was God teaching Israel by this law?  How does this law apply to me and us now?”  Since God’s character does not change, the Old Testament law has much to teach us about Him.
  4. Specifically, we can say that Christians are not required to keep laws related to Israel’s government or Temple regulations.  Also, Christians are not bound to the particular punishments outlined in the Old Testament law.  However, what we learn from the Old Testament concerning God’s character and expectations in relation to morality do not change.  It is always wrong to kill another person, it is always wrong to practice incest, etc.
  5. Sabbath laws fall under “Temple regulations” and are not binding for Christians unless they are explicitly repeated in the new covenant, which they are not.  We do learn that “resting” in the Lord is advantageous to the believer’s spiritual well-being, growth, and relationship with God.  This is gleaned from understanding the intent of the Mosaic Sabbath laws.
  6. Same-sex unions, murder, incest, and others are issues of “morality” and are always contrary to God’s character and law.  These issues are also explicitly repeated in the new covenant, so we have no doubts about our attitude towards them as Christians.  However, the Old Testament penalties for these matters are not binding to Christians.

Christians do not “pick and choose” what laws to follow and which ones to ignore.  This is determined by the nature of the covenants that are described in Scripture.  Christians are bound by the new covenant, but also gain invaluable insight into the character of God by examining the old covenant laws.  As we understand what is in harmony with God’s character and what is contrary to His character, it guides our lives and tells us what is and is not morally acceptable to God.

So, yes, Christians are still under the Mosaic law in a sense, but not in the same legal manner that Israel was.

The key to reading any work of literature is understanding context.  It is impossible to have an accurate understanding of specific passages, verses, and laws in the Bible without first understanding the broader context that they are written in.  Those who attack the Bible usually fail to examine the historical-grammatical-contextual settings of the particular passages they attack.

Posted in Absolute Truth, Gay Marriage, Old Testament Law | Tagged , , , , , , | 22 Comments

Should Prop 8 be overturned? By what authority?

Posted on December 23, 2008 by Tim Farley

Jerry Brown, the attorney general in California, has asked the state supreme court to overturn the state’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.  Brown, who was once against same-sex marriage, now says the ban is unconstitutional.

You can read an article discussing the issue here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnews/20081223/ts_usnews/brownaskscourttooverturnprop8

The above article describes the state’s “constitutional crisis.”  It states that every branch of government in California, including the courts, support gay marriage.  However, the majority of the people (52%) are against it.  Who decides?

In a secular society such as ours, the people decide what laws govern the land.  We collectively decide through the democratic process what things are right or wrong, and what is acceptable or not.  A secular society has at its foundation the assumption that there is no such thing as absolute truth.  There is no such thing as absolute right and wrong.  These things are all decided collectively by society.

If one was to argue that society were wrong, she would have to argue from a position of a higher authority than society.  What could this authority possibly be?  For the Christian, the source of authority is found in the Bible.  We look to the written word of God as our guide in every area of life.  Truth is based upon what God has said is right and wrong, not what we collectively decide.  Other religions have their own ideas of absolute truth.

Even our nation’s Constitution is based on the idea that there is a higher authority than society.  The Bill of Rights begins by stating that people have certain inalienable rights that were endowed upon them by their Creator (i.e. God).  This means that regardless of what society or government may say, people have certain fundamental rights that cannot be taken away.  It also means that the Creator is the source of the rights.  If you eliminate the Creator, you eliminate the authority for rights and potentially the rights themselves (if society decides to take them away).

My questions at the end are these:

  1. If we live in a secular society, and we do, how do we have any basis for arguing that our basic, God-given rights have been violated?  If we say there is no God, we cannot say we have God-given rights.
  2. If we acknowledge God, how can we attempt to overstep His authority?  If He has stated that same-sex relationships are wrong, there is nothing else to be argued.  His authority is absolute and final.
  3. If we have absolute authority (which is needed to have “inalienable rights”) without God, what is the source of this authority?
Posted in Absolute Truth, Gay Marriage | Tagged , , , , , , , | 17 Comments

Christmas Trivia: How well do you know the real story?

Posted on December 22, 2008 by Tim Farley

So you think you know the true Christmas story?  Take this Christmas quiz and see how well you do.  The answers are given at the bottom of this post, so do not read them before you answer the questions!  You can post your results in the comments area below if you would like. 

 1. For the journey to Bethlehem, Mary and Joseph…

  • a. Walked
  • b. Joseph walked while Mary rode on a donkey
  • c. Rode a bus
  • d. The Bible does not say

2. Who directed Mary and Joseph to go to Bethlehem?

  • a. Herod
  • b. An Angel
  • c. Caesar
  • d. The IRS

3. How many angels spoke to the shepherd?

  • a. A multitude
  • b. Two: Gabriel and Michael
  • c. One
  • d. Who knows?

4. The baby Jesus was born in a…

  • a. Cave
  • b. Manger
  • c. Barn
  • d. Who knows?

5. What animals were present at Jesus’ birth?

  • a. Cows, sheep and camels
  • b. Cows, sheep and donkeys
  • c. Lions, tigers and bears
  • d. None of the above

6. What is a manger anyway?

  • a. A Barn
  • b. A place for hay
  • c. A feeding trough
  • d. A Greek word for a nursery

7. Who saw the star over Bethlehem?

  • a. Mary and Joseph
  • b. Shepherds
  • c. The three kings
  • d. Both B and C
  • e. None of the above

8. What sign were the shepherds to look for?

  • a. A star over the stable
  • b. A barn outlined with Christmas lights
  • c. A baby in a manger
  • d. Both A and C

9. How many wise men came to see Jesus?

  • a. One
  • b. Three
  • c. Twelve
  • d. The Bible does not say

10. What in the world are “Magi” anyway?

  • a. Eastern kings
  • b. Magicians
  • c. Astrologers
  • d. None of the above

11. Where did the wise men find Jesus when they brought their gifts to him?

  • a. In a manger
  • b. In a house
  • c. In a church
  • d. None of the above

12. What does the name “Jesus” mean?

  • a. God with us
  • b. Chosen by Yahweh
  • c. Lamb of God
  • d. Salvation of Yahweh

 

 

Answers:

  • 1. D
  • 2. C (Luke 2:1)
  • 3. C (Luke 2:10)
  • 4. D (Luke 2:7 – not told where he was born, only that he was laid in a manger afterwards)
  • 5. D (The Bible does not mention animals being present)
  • 6. C
  • 7. E (Matthew 2:1-2 – Wise men, or “Magi”, saw the star. Three kings are only mentioned in songs.)
  • 8. C (Luke 2:12)
  • 9. D (Matthew 2:12 – the Bible only says that they brought gold, frankincense, and myrrh)
  • 10. C
  • 11. B (Matthew 2:11)
  • 12. D
Posted in Christmas | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

If we’re all so good, why would 70% of us willingly torture someone?

Posted on December 20, 2008 by Tim Farley

We all want to believe we are good people.  When we see or hear of others doing horrendous things, we always want to think that we are above such actions.  We say to ourselves, “That person must be crazy.  No sane person would ever do that.”

Well, it turns out that many of us must be “crazy.”  In fact, 70% of us would willingly torture another person if we were instructed to do so.  You don’t believe me?  Read the following article, which discusses an experiment that shows this to be true.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081219/od_nm/us_torture_odd

I know what you are thinking.  You are thinking, “I am not in the group of 70%.  I would never do such a thing.”  Are you sure?  Or, are you just hoping that is true?

If we understand human nature correctly, we have to admit that we are all capable of doing the horrendous.  In fact, the Bible describes human nature this way:

None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God.  All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.  Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive.  The venom of asps is under their lips.  Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.  Their feet are swift to shed blood; and in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known.  There is no fear of God before their eyes.” (Romans 3:10-18, ESV)

According to this passage, we are all, by nature, incapable of doing good, liars, venomous in our speech, full of cursing and bitterness, murderous, destructive, and those who do not know peace.  Why is this the case?  Because we do not fear God.  We take away the final Authority and replace Him with ourselves.  When we only answer to ourselves, what is there to fear?

What is the solution?  We must realize that we are in rebellion against God and turn to Him as our authority.  In return, God promises to create a new nature in us that is able to love Him and others.  This new nature makes us capable of doing and being “good.”

Posted in Worldview | Tagged , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Are all faiths equal?

Posted on December 19, 2008 by Tim Farley

Do many faiths lead to eternal life?  It may surprise you to know that 52% of professing Christians believe that at least one other non-Christian faith can lead to eternal life.  Is this true?

It is often argued that God is love, so how could He condemn anyone to eternal punishment?  Isn’t it better to believe that, in the end, God will forgive everyone and grant us all with eternal life?

It is true that God is love, but this understanding fails to remember that part of love is allowing the one loved to choose.  God loves us so much that He will let us walk away from Him if that is what we desire.  He has provided a way to be united to Him, but we must accept the offer.  God is also holy and just.  This means that sin cannot enter His presence without payment being made.  If the only payment that is worthy (Christ’s death) is refused, it leaves the sinful person to pay for his/her own sin for eternity.  This view also ignores that God is truth and that He would never lie to us.  God’s word contains many statements that warn of eternal punishment for the lost.  We would be well-served to believe them.

What about those who are seeking God in other religions?  What about Jews and Muslims?  Don’t they follow the same God as Christians?  After all, they follow the God of the Old Testament, right?

Well, John 14:6-7 reads, “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me.  If you had known me, you would have known my Father also.  From now on you do know Him and have seen Him.'”  Also, 1 John 2:23 states, “No one who denies the Son has the Father.  Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also.”

The Bible tells us that as time moved on, God revealed more of Himself to humanity.  As God revealed more and more, people were responsible to accept God’s revelation and live according to God’s revealed will.  In the New Testament, God reveals Himself in the person of the Son, Jesus Christ.  Unfortunately, many did not accept Jesus as the Son of God.  They refused to accept this new revelation.  Instead they denied that Jesus was God and continued to worship a god of their own making.  Muslims and Jews fit into this category.  By denying Christ, they deny the Father.

The Bible and Christianity teach that there is only one way to God.  It is through the Son, Jesus Christ.  Those who are on any other path are lost.

Posted in Gospel | Tagged , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Barack Obama, Rick Warren, and Gay Rights Activists: A Strange Combo

Posted on December 18, 2008 by Tim Farley

So, Barack Obama has invited Rick Warren, the Purpose Driven Life author and pastor of mega-church Saddleback Church in southern California, to deliver the invocation at his inaugural address.  “What is so strange about that?” you ask.  Well, Obama was not exactly the most popular choice among evangelical Christians in the last Presidential election.  Rick Warren is perhaps the most well-known of the younger evangelical movement.  Many consider him the face of modern evangelicalism.

Obama is and has been an avid supporter of same-sex marriage.  Rick Warren was an outspoken and strong supporter of Proposition 8, which blocked same-sex marriage in California this past election.  Gay rights activists, who were overwhelmingly supportive of Barack Obama’s candidacy for President, are outraged over Obama’s choice of Warren to deliver his invocation.  Rick Warren and Evangelical Christianity are the enemy in the minds of those who support same-sex marriage.  How could Barack Obama make such a choice?  Is he trying to win over the hearts and minds of Christians?

Of course, Christians are wondering the same thing about Rick Warren.  How could he ever accept such an invitation from someone who seems to oppose many of the values so dear to Christianity?  Is Rick Warren a liberal?

In the end, it is all very interesting to me since it does not seem to please anyone.  I am curious what some of you think about this.  Do you like Obama’s choice?  Should Rick Warren, as the face of Evangelical Christianity, participate?

Posted in Gay Marriage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments