Get Ready for the Season

No. 1 Ranked Georgia wins their season opener!!!

Georgia 45 to Georgia Southern 21.

Go Dawgs!!!

Obamanomics?

A friend of mine sent the following link to a NY Times article entitled, ” How Obama Reconciles Dueling Views on Economy.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/magazine/24Obamanomics-t.html?_r=1&ei=5070&oref=slogin&emc=eta1&pagewanted=all

In sum the author attempts to make the case that Obama has some how reconciled command and control socialism with free-market capitalism. The following is the response I sent back to my friend.

I appreciate the New York Times guy making some semblance of an attempt getting both sides … though in the end he never demonstrated that Obama has done any reconciling of these so called “dueling” economic theories. Obama’s attempt to milk the market for government support is best summed up in the Warren Buffet quote that amounts to leaving the market alone and taxing the fool out of the people in the end. Such a view in the end vampirizes the market, leaving us lowly folk walking about as the living dead. Then what will the government do? Where will they get their revenue from?
 
As I pointed out before … by paraphrasing Thomas Sowell … the government receives more revenue from the populous with lower tax rates on the higher income brackets. With high tax rates these people … unlike us … can afford to put their money in tax shelters both in this country and abroad … away from the IRS. Secondly, those paying these increased tax rates … don’t in the end actually pay them … they pass those costs on to you and I via lay offs, shipping jobs overseas, and price increases.
 
In the end Obama hasn’t produced any kind of economic hybrid. I am very glad of his influence from the “Chicago School of Economics.” I wish more of it had influenced him.
 
I do appreciate the author bringing out Obama’s unwillingness or reticence of laying total blame for any present economic woes on President Bush … saying that in sum it’s way too complicated. When folks on the left attempt to make the claim that people are not seeing any increases in benefits from the economy … and simultaneously want to condemn free-market capitalism as the culprit … they need to follow the lead of Obama and admit … it’s complicated. The article mentioned the rising debt crisis. This is a symptom of a larger mindset that actually flows into another point I’ll make in a bit. The average consumer debt (i.e. credit cards) is huge. Some estimates put it at $10k. Some estimates put it at $20k. Thus with more and more money going to pay off more and more debt from more and more people … why should these people feel much “benefit” at all from economic slavery? Yet, this is not the fault of free market capitalism. Rather it is the fault of impulse buying, keeping up social status (that by the way is a multi-class problem), etc. While this may indeed be the first generation to not feel more benefit from the economy than their parents or from technology than their parents … this is also the first generation to accrue as much consumer debt with no financial plans or training. This is not the fault of the economy. This is … at least to a large part … a character-heart issue of spending-more-than-I-make.
 
Thus, any criticism of a free market public policy must take this into account to actually be taken serious. In other words you cannot with any seriousness criticize any Republican economic policy as demonstrating the efficacy of Leftist Democratic philosophy … when we all know full well that the Republicans (though cutting taxes) still spent like Democrats.
 
We can all debate the morality of the war on another day, but remember that much of Bush’s spending has gone to fianance the War. Again we can all debate the morality of the war on another day. To finance Obama’s social initiatives are going to require spending that makes Bush’s War spending look like a 10 year old’s allowance. Add to this the supposed middle class tax breaks (which we will never in reality see due to costs being passed along to us) and the higher income brackets putting their money into tax shelters … let’s just say that current deficit (not to mention the actual debt) will also look like a 10 year old’s allowance compared to the end result of an Obama tenure.
 
Here is the point I said I was hoping to arrive at earlier in my email. The primary difference between the two mode of economic thought is the role of government vs. the role of the citizenry themselves to solve their own problems. As a borderline Libertarian (I’m still a Republican but with strong Libertarian leanings) my view of government is not as Daddy-war-bucks. The Consitution set the government’s responsibilty as primarily protection from enemies foreign and domestic. In the paraphrased words of Mike Huckabee, the government should play the role of referee in internal affairs. Thus, I am quite unimpressed by pleas such as, “The crumbs haven’t fallen from the master’s table” or “what has this administration done for us” or “millions have not felt the benefits of trickle down economics.” (Anyone working has felt the indirect benefits of trickle down economics … though perhaps not directly.) The government as referee should perhaps ensure measures of equal access to opportunity, equal status before the legal bar, etc. However, equal opportunity these days … to paraphrase Thomas Sowell … has morphed into demands for equal results. The government makes a fairly poor judge of all the infinite facets that are justly required to make assessments of what constitutes “just” for one citizen as opposed to another. The Soviet demise came when they … again in the paraphrased words of Thomas Sowell … had to set 26 million prices against 26 million prices. No human being on the face of the earth has the mind required to do such things … and be just. Such a notion of justice is what Sowell calls “Cosmic Justice” and can only be meted out by the Almighty.
 
As a side note when we begin to say that the government owes me something past basic protection, are we not then breeding a sense of entitlement into the populous … which is perhaps what contributes to the ravaging consumer debt? Lastly, there is in every area of life what is known as diminishing returns. Simply put, “diminishing returns” is the notion that despite the amount of productivity I’m employing, at some point that productivity will yield fewer results. In the realm of the very subjective measure of polling people’s feelings on the benefits they feel they receive from the economy … Consumerism … I’m afraid … has brought our consumer-debt-ridden society to the point of diminishing returns. How many i-phones can I own before my the pleasure center of my brain is disconnected from reality?

Power and Intricacy in Sin and Salvation

The following is a poem I’ve been working on since last Christmas. I believe it captures in a unique way the beauty of Salvation in the Wesleyan tradition. While going to heaven is certainly an important part of Salvation, Scripture promises that we can experience the life Jesus offers in the here and now. I hope to help communicate this message of victory over Sin in the here and now and the promise of real experiential relationship with God-Father, Son, & Spirit … as well as real healing in our relationships in the here and now … healing that comes from being remade into the image of God-Father, Son, Spirit and experiencing victory over Sin. My goal is more of these communicating the beauty of Salvation in the Wesleyan tradition with an eye towards seeing them published in one volume. I’d love your feedback.

Power and Intricacy

A single snowflake,
Falling ever so gracefully to its metallic death.
Heat in its warmth’s wake,
Melts the familiar cold in isolation with stealth.

Holy God, eternal Community,
Father, Son, Spirit perfect in love and power.
In his image made humanity,
Sacred Bond, you breathed into fleshy flower.

Exalted flesh grasped for God’s wise glory.
Lowly he became when, greatness, did he find,
In Sin’s expansive power in gory,
Violence birthed from man’s heart, soul, and mind.

Eternal Word of the Father, our Creator,
Birthed from the Woman’s seed,
As grass for God’s own incinerator,
The Father’s glory, his creed.

The Holy became Sin, and from his Father was rent.
Broken Holy Community.
For our redemption, holy, his life was violently spent.
Wholeness wrought in entir’ty.

Warmth deceptive need no longer the snowflake melt,
Alienation no more,
To Sin and his power a violent blow has been dealt.
Love will reign forever more.

There is perhaps some imagery that will be foreign to some of you. If some of the meaning is elusive, please feel free to ask questions. One interpretive key can be found by reading Isaiah 40:6-8; James 1; and I Peter 1. Another interpretive key can be found by reading II Corinthians 5.

I hope to see this and many more published in one volume. What I envision in this volume is a section that contains the poems, themselves, then in another section I’d like to reprint them with commentary. Thank you for your support.

My Treasure

 

They’re growing way too fast, but such is life.

Evangelical Socio-Political-Engagement Savy at “Saddleback Showdown”

Perhaps you saw the “Saddleback Showdown” tonight on Fox News. Presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain were both given roughly one hour of roughly the same questions from Pastor Rick Warren. Both candidates in my opinion did very well and most likely scored points with “the evangelical vote.”

To be honest … like many other conservative evangelicals … I was very skeptical of listening to Obama … and McCain for that matter. Yet, tonight, Obama did strike my heart strings on several issues. Obama’s strongest point of connection came … oddly enough … during his answer on an important change in views. He now values work as an invaluable component of welfare “reform.” Work brings dignity, to paraphrase him, and it helps reconnect the person to the community in a productive way. Obama nuanced evil in ways that we do indeed need to be discussing … such as Darfour and poverty at home. For far too long we conservative evangelicals have abdicated our responsibility to influence thought and action in this area … and as a result … the left has dominated this discussion. Obama did define marriage as between one man and one woman.

Though I thought Obama did very well in answering Warren’s question on abortion and life … from the standpoint of being proudly pro-choice … the content of his answer only served to emphasize the need to defeat him in November. While the point at which a person develops into or becomes a soul might be “above (his) pay grade” to answer, he was very clear and out front with his stance on the war in Iraq. What elevates these two issues to two different philosophical “pay grades?” Though Obama defines marriage between one man and one woman, he is for civil unions. He did very well in emphasizing the communal aspect of personal responsibility … until these two issues … abortion and the definition of marriage. While, yes, Obama did emphasize the need to reduce the number of abortions and the number of “unwanted” pregnancies … this only serves to obscure the very real holocaust taking place. Why did he not address bringing emphasis to personal responsibility with regard to one’s sexual appetite? No sex outside marriage equals no pregnancy … wanted or unwanted.

McCain did very well. He was quick and sharp with the “right” answers to the questions. To be honest I was a bit uncomfortable with McCain’s answer to the question: does evil exist and what do we do with it. It felt to me like he was close to defining evil as anyone who opposes America. Now he did not say that. Older Americans will no doubt hear him in the light in which he intended to communicate. To his credit he did emphasize that America does have faults and we need to to talk about them. And to his very good credit he did grieve our response after 911 as to encourage Americans “to go shopping” instead of volunteering to causes greater than themselves. This helps to anchor his rhetoric. Though I am very sympathetic to federalism, there are perhaps some issues which do need to be addressed nationally. Same-sex “marriage” is one of those issues. McCain, though believing in “traditional marriage,” said he would leave this issue up to the states to decide … until it forcibly crossed state lines. I am afraid that at that point it would be too late, which is why something needs to be done now.

I felt McCain was strongest on the need for school choice, national defense, life beginning at conception, and on the tax issue. McCain did a great job of communicating that wealth as a designation is rather arbitrary and that taxing someone on the basis of supposed wealth is akin to theft by the government at worst … and harmful to society as a whole at best.

Despite whether anyone agrees with this format or not, it certainly shows that Evangelical socio-political sophistication is a bit more than a sweaty fat man thumping his Bible on the street corner. Surely no one can argue with Warren’s closing encouragement for dialogue and debate and his plea for civility in the process … and expect to be taken serious. This format tonight demonstrated that while abortion and homosexuality are indeed important issues for the “evangelical vote,” they are by far not the only issues many of us care about.

Why Sola Scriptura Can’t Mean Scripture Only

Marin Luther, in advocating against the abuses of spiritual authority of the Roman Catholic Church, laid down the classic Evangelical & Protestant litmus test for truth … sola scriptura. Sola Scriptura is Latin for Scripture alone … and refers to Scripture as the final authority for believers. For many well-meaning believers Scripture has become their only authority … which at first seems noble.

Yet, how many of us can completely divorce ourselves from our personal biases … from our own preconcevied notions, our own relational baggage, our own family dysfunctions, our own religious and secular fields of training? While it is certainly possible and even expected that we approach a topic on its own terms, it is quite unlikely that we approach anything … the Bible included … without the shadows of our own experiences and training haunting us as we read. None of us is perfect … with perfect minds.

In principle on paper, sola scriptura makes sense, as a safe guard against the abuse of authority. Most of us good evangelicals live the spirit of sola scriptura, while recognizing other tried and true authorities to help guide us along the way to Jesus. The Anglican tradition has long recognized reason and tradition as the handmaidens to Scripture in the court of Christian faith and life. In addition to Scripture, reason, and tradition, John Wesley included experience. In this arrangement of Scripture, reason, tradition, and experience, Scripture always takes the throne … while conversing heavily with her loyal handmaidens.

Yet, we have kidnapped Scriptures’ handmaidens, raped them and dumped their bodies into the River Individualism. What we don’t realize is that their ghosts often haunt us, as we can never read Scripture without using our brains (reason), nor thinking of what we have been taught or thinking of what new precedents to set (tradition), nor without considering how the message of Jesus gels with our experience.

I have two examples … both from people who seem to attempt to follow Scripture only.

Number One

I was speaking with a man, who passionately loved Jesus and his church. Yet my love for much of Contemporary Christian music and worship set him rather nauseous. His distaste for the Contemporary scene rocked on the principle that you don’t use the ways of the world to reach people in the world for Jesus. So not only lyrics had become taboo, but also the various beats themselves.

I asked him if he liked Southern Gospel music. He LOVED Southern Gospel. I asked him if he had ever been to a Country music councert. He had and experienced a rather knee-slapping time. Slowly, he began to get my point. County & Western music and Southern Gospel are very close kissing cousins.

Was it Scripture alone and only that led him to choose the worldly sound of largely white southerners by which to worship? Was it Scripture alone that led him to reject the wide variety of worldly sounds which make up the Contemporary scene? I’ll let you use your reason to evaluate his experience.

Number Two

My second example comes from a pastor and a church who are no doubt Bible-loving and Bible-believing Christians. The pastor submitted an article for the Faith section of a local newspaper, entitled “Cain is not in Adam’s bloodline” (sic). http://www.hartsvillenewsjournal.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=2821&SectionID=4&SubSectionID=4&S=1

According to the article, contrary to what you have been taught, it was not Adam that impregnated Eve, resulting in the birth of Cain. It was Satan himself. Contrary to what you have been taught, it was not only Noah’s people that made it through the flood. Somehow these devilish descendants of Cain also made it through. Contrary to what you have been taught, it was not a group of Jews, who Jesus chided as opposing God, but … you guessed it … Cain’s devil children … attempting to pose as Jewish people. After all Jesus told them they were listening to their father, the devil (John 8). We are advised to beware of these very real people/devils that certainly exist today and to avoid them at all costs … at least until Jesus comes to destroy them in battle.

Is this no doubt, sincere, well-meaning pastor attempting to follow the principle of sola scriptura? His group’s mission statement underscores that they are a “non-profit church that is not affiliated with any denomination, and this allows the freedom to seek the truth of God’s Word. God’s Word is the common sense that provides the foundation for truth. Understanding the Bible to be a personal letter from God, we will strive to teach you to read His letter with clarity and understanding.” http://www.lakeshorebible.com/missionstatement.htm 

Again, I have no doubt that these people are truly loving and great people. I have no doubt that this pastor is a true man of God, who earnestly desires God’s truth. Unfortunately his very public display of interprative dehydration only serves to emphasize the mirage of Scripture only. He makes at least three boo boos in his interpretation:

1. He failed to demonstrate that Scripture actually teaches that it was Satan instead of Adam who fathered Cain. This blunder alone sinks his whole argument.
2. The Scriptural witness is that the life in Noah’s ark … and that life only … made it through the flood to populate the earth (sea creatures notwithstanding). Similarly the witness is that only Noah’s people were on his cruise ship.
3. He claims the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares demonstrates his point, as it says that the tares represent the people who were sown by the seed of Satan. I don’t know if he’s ready for the necessary corollary or not. If the tares are the love-children of Satan’s sperm, then what are we to make of “He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man?”

Yes, let’s read Scripture, let’s devour Scripture, let’s follow Scripture. Yet, let’s not attempt to read Scripture only … as our only authority … and certainly not by ourselves … alone. We need the Holy Spirit, living in his temple, the Church.

Maintaining Boundaries and Self Respect As Love for Others

Typically when we think of loving others in mature ways, selflessness comes to mind. Is it possible, though, that some acts of “love” that appear self-sacrificing may actually be damaging to our loved ones … and may actually be self-gratifying?

You may need a minute to re-read the above statement.

Now that you’ve re-read the above statement think of all you do for others. Surely self-sacrifice for the betterment of others is at the heart of Christian, cross-centered love. But what if our supposed self-sacrifice is really propping up damaging behavior in the objects of our love? I’m thinking of continuing to put up with addictions in our loved ones. Continuing to nurture, protect, and provide for them seems the only natural thing to do out of love for them. Other behaviors, besides addictions, come to mind, such as allowing physical and emotional abuse.

Yet, continuing to allow these behaviors unchecked is not self-sacrificing for them. It is propping up bad behavior. Often times this is done not out of good will, but out of a sense of emotional neediness and a weak heart.

Paul writes in his letter to the Romans, “If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” (12:18; ESV). In the case of misguided love and emotional-neediness, these unfortunate souls have gone far past the boundaries of “so far as it depends on you.” They are attempting to carry the responsibilities of others. While this might seem loving, it is a well worn experiment in atrophy. If you don’t use it, you lose it. In this case if people don’t grow in responsibility, they increasingly lose not only the desire but also the ability to be personally responsible.

Drawing personal boundaries and practicing self-respect is actually fertilizer for strong love for others. For an excellent discussion in this all-important area, please consult James Dobson’s classic, Love Must Be Tough.

A New Kind of Christian?

Brian McLaren, author of A New Kind of Christian (http://www.amazon.com/New-Kind-Christian-Friends-Spiritual/dp/078795599X) and sort-of-theological-father to the postmodern, Emergent movement, has declared his support for Barack Obama. (http://www.matthew25.org/mclaren.htm)

I discovered this thanks to Matt Dabbs’s blog, Kingdom Living. (http://mattdabbs.wordpress.com/2008/08/05/brian-mclaren-endorses-barak-obama/)

McLaren declared his support for Obama on the site, Matthew 25 Network. The Matthew 25 Network mission statement is below:

“The Matthew 25 Network is a community of Christians – Catholic, Protestant, Pentecostal, and Evangelical – inspired by the Gospel mandate to put our faith into action to care for our neighbor, especially the most vulnerable.

“The election of our public officials, and the politics they stand for, are a reflection of our core values. We believe that those elected to public office carry an important trust, as their decisions have a profound impact on our nation and our world.

“We believe that people of faith should actively participate in the political process as an important avenue for social change. We are called by our faith to engage in the world as it is, while we seek after and hope for God’s Kingdom.

“Therefore, while no elected official will be without flaw, we come together as individuals to support candidates for public office who share the values of the Matthew 25 Network: promoting life with dignity, caring for the least of these, strengthening and supporting families, stewardship of God’s Creation, working for peace and justice at home and abroad, and promoting the common good.”

http://www.matthew25.org/about.htm

This is a completely wonderful mission statement that I could whole-heartedly support. However, I am puzzled. Obama would allow his daughters to murder “the most vulnerable” of the “least of these,” simply because he doesn’t want them “punished” with a baby. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNbaig-D5pk.

Sure, they … and McLaren, admit that no candidate is perfect. Yet, I am puzzled by McLaren, who crusades passionately against passionate orthodox belief … while passionately crusading for many types of social activism like Matthew 25:31-46 as to be unquestioned whatsoever … while supporting a candidate who would encourage his daughter to commit the most egregious offense against this Matthew passage.

Yet, should I be that surprised by any products of proud postmodern “thought?”

Another Side of the Coin

If you have a few minutes you might want to read the following two articles. Though written about two different topics, there is a common thread running through them … they give you another perspective besides that of the secular-progressive media.

In this first article Charles Krauthammer questions the consistency of the environmental ideal of the Democratic Party elite.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/31/AR2008073102824.html

In this second article Chris Leppek give voice to some among the Jewish community who find the ruling concerning Colorado Christian University encouraging to religious liberty. The American Jewish Congress and the Anti Defamation League, among others on the Left, find the ruling appalling to religious liberty. What do you think?

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0808/colorado_ruling.php3

A Couple of Wastes

Apparently, as you know doubt have heard by now, Kathy Hilton is not exactly happy with her presidential pick, John McCain (http://www.tmz.com/2008/08/03/hilton-to-mccain-take-my-money-and-shove-it/. Featuring shots of Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears, McCain questions Obama’s resume for presidential leadership (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHXYsw_ZDXg). Notably, she calls this a waste of the campaign donors’ dollars. Ironically, she made similar comments, following that mean judge’s decision regarding her starlet’s court trial: “What do you think? This is pathetic and disgusting, a waste of taxpayer money with all this nonsense. This is a joke” (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18472845/).

Let’s not waste this valuable opportunity for a fun game of “Connect the Dots.” Is it just coincidence that when Paris’s cards are called to account … Mama Bear comes running? I can just hear her at future tryouts for the Joker in Batman, “Why so serious?”

It seems to me there are indeed some wastes regarding all this treatment of Paris Hilton. My daughters (2 & 5 months) will one day be looking for female role models in American public life. The legacy bequeathed to them via our starlet is an Oscar winning performace for Hardees and perverts everywhere (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P82hABWq1To) and the expectation that fame gets you out of jail time for drinking and driving. The missed opportunities along the way to teach our starlet the value of personal responsibility is perhaps an even greater waste … and that, dear Kathy, is no joke.