Jesus Hats

JesusHats,com is a site which sells Christian baseball hats and T-shirts.  The idea is that the hats and shirts will cause someone to ask about Jesus.  This can be seen as a subtle form of evangelism; "a witness you can wear."

Whenever I visit a Christian website I always gravitate toward the statement of beliefs to see who the people behind the site are.  Dalen (Dale) Garris, of Waxahachie, Texas is the patriarch of this family-owned business.  I found that I can agree with some of Brother Dalen's beliefs and strongly disagree with some others.  This does not stop me from thinking that Jesus hats are a very good idea.

A NASCAR Prayer That Got Everyone Talking

You will have to decide for yourself what you think about this.  I, myself, love NASCAR.


NASCAR (The National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing) is a multi-billion dollar business owned and operated by the France family of North Carolina.  The business is stock-car racing.  Something that anyone who watches the races notices immediately is that every NASCAR racing event is begun with a public Christian prayer, usually by a pastor who lives in the community near the racetrack.

This year, in Nashville, Tennessee, a Baptist pastor caused quite a sir with his prayer .  He took quite literally the instructions of 1Thessalonians 5:18, "In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you."  The phrase, "Boogity, boogity, boogity!" was popularized by retired NASCAR racer, Darrell Waltrip , an outspoken Christian.

Here is the full prayer.

More about Darrell Waltrip:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darrell_Waltrip

More about NASCAR:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nascar

Chick Publications

Jack Thomas Chick (b. 1924, California, USA) is the most published comic book artist/author in history, with over 750,000,000 of his Christian evangelistic tracts, comic books, videos, and posters having been produced and distributed worldwide.  The works have been translated into over one hundred languages and are included in exhibits at the Smithsonian Institution.

Jack Chick's works are quite controversial.  He is hailed by some as a soul-winner, a genius at evangelistic outreach, and denounced by others as a homophobe, Islamophobe,  and a religious bigot because of his fundamentalist Christian beliefs.  Check out the website of Chick Publications and make up your own mind.

Book Comment: If the Church Were Christian, Chapter 2, Part 2

If you are joining this book review series mid-stream , you can read the comment from the beginning by going to the LABELS section following the last post on this page and clicking on PHILIP GULLEY.

Gulley, Philip, If the Church were Christian.  Rediscovering the Values of Jesus (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2010)

CHAPTER 2: Affirming Our Potential Would be More Important Than Condemning Our Brokenness

Pastor Gulley denies the doctrine of Original Sin.    He says that a God who would condemn billions of people to Hell because the first couple tasted a fruit is despotic.  A very strong charge.  To respond fully would take weeks.

Every question can be followed by one hundred new questions and this is no different.  Talking about Original Sin opens up a door to numerous doctrinal questions; original sin, the age of accountability, adult versus infant baptism, what baptism actually means, where the soul comes from and when and how it is connected to the body.  I will discuss each of these in separate posts later.

Pastor Philip Gulley says that the churches he is criticizing see humans as sinful, flawed, and broken.  Look at your history books, check the court dockets, watch Judge Judy.  The world is sinful, flawed, and broken.

In this second chapter of his book, Gulley is responding to a real attitude in some churches, a strict rules based understanding of the Christian life.  This is especially prevalent in Fundamentalist churches.  I think it misses a vital point (who we are) and robs many sincere committed Christians of the true fullness of their Christian life.  We really are different from those outside the Church

In his book, After You Believe, Anglican Bishop N, T. Wright points out that, in the Kingdom, believers are to be Kings and Priests (Isaiah 61:6, Revelation 1:6, 5:10, Exodus 19:6, 1 Peter 2:5) and that Jesus clearly said that the Kingdom is here now (Luke 17:20-21) as well as in the future.

Our purpose is to learn to live now as Kings and Priests, members of the royal household (Ephesians 2:19, 1 Peter 2:9).   That means becoming like Jesus and assuming the Mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:14-16, http://www.pbc.org/files/messages/4807/3577.html ), instead of living by a bunch of rules and trying to be perfect. 

This is part of a continuing chapter-by- chapter response to this book.  More to come. 

Book Comment: If the Church Were Christian

Gully, Philip, If the Church were Christian.  Rediscovering the Values of Jesus (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2010)

Philip Gulley is a Quaker minister, writer, and television host.  He was born and raised as a Roman Catholic and won Emmy Awards in 2007 and 2009 for his work on Across Indiana for WFYI Public Television.

He contends that “we should never delude ourselves into thinking that today’s church sprang directly from the mind and witness of Jesus.”  In fact, he believes that the modern church doesn’t seem to share the same values as Jesus.

Gulley states that, “We can’t know what Jesus intended the church to be …” and that we can’t assume that the four gospels’ recounting of the Jesus story are historically accurate.  He points out that the over 39,000 Christian denominations all think that they most  faithfully follow Jesus.

Pastor Gulley represents the views of a significant and growing portion of those who describe themselves as Christian.  These people believe that large portions of traditional orthodox Christianity are outdated and irrelevant to modern life.  Of course, they think that they have the correct modern and relevant Christianity all figured out.

The name of this movement is Emergent Christianity and it is in line with the political movement known as Progressivism.  It is a continuation and extension of the Social Gospel movement begun in the mid-Nineteenth Century.  It is what the secular media now refer to as “mainline Christianity” or “mainline Protestantism” and is the religious understanding of many modern theologians.

The inclination of Evangelical conservative Christians (including those who don’t align themselves with “fundamentalism”) is to reject this version of Christianity as not Christian.  I, myself, do not believe that it is Christian.

Even so, they do have some valid criticisms of Christianity as it has existed over the centuries and as it exists today.

In a series of posts on this book, I will be giving a chapter-by-chapter response to Gulley’s book.  This is not a personal attack on Pastor Philip Gulley.  I’m sure he’s a nice guy.  Nice is great, but this isn’t about nice.  This is about considering challenges to traditional understandings of Christianity; acknowledging and responding to those which have merit  and rejecting those which are based on something other than Scripture and the leading of the Holy Spirit.

Your job is to read the posts, and hopefully the book, and then to make up your own mind.

To just avoid the controversy is to add weight to the argument that traditional Christianity is anti-intellectual, and, besides, Pastor Gulley makes it abundantly clear in his book that he won’t lose any sleep if you disagree with him.

This is part of a continuing chapter-by- chapter response to this book.  More to come. 

Christians

At some time during their lives, the following people have publicly identified themselves as Christian.   Inclusion in this list does not indicate approval or disapproval of the person, of their orthodoxy or lack of it, or of their actions.  Readers are encouraged to suggest persons who should be included on this list.  This is a recurring segment in this blog.

Sadhu Sundar Singh: (b. 1889, India – d. 1929?)  Indian Christian missionary. Raised as a Sikh, educated at a Christian school, Singh wore the turban and ochre robes of a Hindu sadhu (ascetic).  The small Christian communities which he served in India and Tibet as an itinerant missionary called him “the apostle with the bleeding feet.”  He rejected western clothing and Anglican formality.  He said there were at least 24,000 secret Christians across India.  He was last seen in 1929 heading into Tibet for another missionary visit.

Artemas: This First Century Christian man is mentioned in Titus 3:12.  He was with Paul at Nicopolis (in modern Greece) and possibly later became the Bishop of Lystra (in what is now modern Turkey).

Heinrich Emil Brunner (b. 1889, Swizerland – d. 1966) Protestant Reformed neo-orthodox theologian, lecturer, university professor. He rejected liberal theology and insisted that Jesus was God incarnate and essential to salvation.

Harold John Ockenga: (b. 1905, Illinois, USA – d.1985)  Neo-Evangelical theologian, Congregational minister, seminary president, writer, helped form the National Association of Evangelicals.

Nympha: A Gentile woman, mentioned in Colossians 4:15, who had a house church at Laodicea (in modern Turkey). 

Fundies Say the Darndest Things!

Fundies Say the Darndest Things! (a title stolen from Art Linkletters' television program, Kids Say the Darnedest Things!) is another one of the Christian-hater websites which seem to be all over the internet. The word, "fundies: is a derisive shortening of the the label, fundamentalist. The website claims to have the world's largest collection of what it calls "hilarious, bizarre, ignorant, bigoted, and terrifying" quotations from Christian blogs, forums, etc. The problem with this website is that the quotations are exactly what fstdt says that they are. People!!!!!  Don't give them any ammunition!  They already think that you are idiots. Christians should be in the intellectual forefront of discussions on every topic, not running around saying stupid things.


There is a saying that it is better to remain silent, and be thought stupid, than to open your mouth and prove it. This has been attributed to numerous people: George Eliot, Confucius, Abraham Lincoln, Mark Twain, Samuel Johnson, Benjamin Franklin, Socrates, etc. Actually, the saying probably originated from a mangled mis-quotation of Proverbs 17:28. " Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: [and] he that shutteth his lips [is esteemed] a man of understanding."

exchristian.net

     Exchristian.net is a website dedicated to "encouraging de-converting and former Christians."  To the practicing observant Christian this will seem to be a collection of hateful and intellectually arrogant individuals spewing venom at something which they obviously do not understand.

     In a post by Brendon Rexford, God is referred to as a "fictitious sky phantom."  He says, "I found fundamental extremist Christianity the most hateful, narrow minded, controlling, and contradictory thing I have ever laid eyes upon."  As a Christian, I apologize to Mr. Rexford for what an extremist church may have done to him.  Every thinking well-meaning Christian knows that there are hateful churches like that, arrogant in their ignorance of the true meaning of Christianity and dismissive of anyone not sharing their narrow views.

     In the reader comments following the article a debate arose between several atheists and at least one traditional Christian (possibly more; everyone is using pseudonyms).  The atheists come across as increasingly dismissive, insulting, and abusive, resorting to "aha!" and "gotcha!" statements in response to what they see as unsupported or contradictory arguments.  Everyone, both atheists and Christians, seems to be repeating the same arguments over and over.

     The argument is pointless.  Do not argue with atheists, it merely drives them further into their intellectual do-loops, spinning around repeating their humanistic prideful self-congratulations.  It is not the duty of the christian to convince atheists that they are in error.

The duty of the Christian is to be able to provide a capable and rational explanation for their faith.

"...be ready always to give an answer of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear."  1 Peter 3:1

     We really are different from them and they really don't understand.

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned ... but we have the mind of Christ." 1 Corinthians 2:14, 16.

     The Christian should calmly present the truth and then step back.  There is no need to "win." Victory for the Christian is found in obedience to the Lord.  Let the Word of God do the work.

"... no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." 1 Corinthians  12: 3b.

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17.

 

The abortion debate is not only based on religious beliefs

     A friend and I were talking  and somehow got onto the subject of abortion.  When I expressed my opposition to the practice he told me he was surprised at me.    He said, "You're so well read and seem to be intelligent.  How can you be anti-choice?"

     I pointed out to him that I am not anti-choice, I'm pro-life.  He started rolling out all the pro-abortion arguments.  And, he made the charge that only fundamentalist Christians and Roman Catholics oppose abortion; so, declaring that it was not necessary to invoke religion at all in the debate, I asked him a question.

     "If you take tissue from an aborted fetus and from the biological mother and submit the samples separately for DNA analysis and comparison, what will be the result?  ... The DNA analysis will demonstrate that the tissues came from two separate and totally distinct individuals.  Genetic science states that the fetus, from the moment of conception, is a separate life, not merely a patch of tissue in the mother's body."

     My friend admitted that this was true but the implications of that admission flew right over his head.  He resorted to the hypothetical game, "If your unmarried young daughter were ... "

     Many people of both liberal and conservative orientations stake a claim on a particular issue on ideology and become almost automatons, chanting the established mantra over and over.  They challenge any deviation from their particular orthodoxy.  Real argument, in the classical sense, is drowned out; they merely become louder with their chanting.  If you don't agree with them you must be an uneducated boob, hopelessly confused, or, worst of all, a bigot.

     It would be a positive step if we could all learn to argue with respect.  At the end of our argument my friend and I looked at one another and laughed, both of us sure that the other was wrong.  We're still friends.