By Tom Prichard
The collapse of the I-35 bridge captured the attention of the nation. But what might God be trying to say through the tragedy?
While on vacation I heard the news of the collapse of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis. The Fox News Network covered the story seemingly non-stop and the other networks made it the top news story nationally for many evenings. While time was spent discussing it's causes and who to blame, I didn't hear any mention of what spiritual lessons we might be able to learn through it.
I realize one has to be very careful when attempting to interpret what God might be saying through such tragedies, but if the Bible is true then nothing happens without His knowledge and permission.
In the Gospel of Luke there is the interesting story of Jesus being confronted with another tragedy -- the story of the tower of Siloam falling and killing 18 people. The thinking at the time was that these 18 people suffered the fate of death because they were worse sinners than everybody else. Jesus' response was no, the people who died were no worse than anybody else. But He added, His listeners' fate would be no different if they failed to repent and turn to God.
I think tragedies like the I-35W bridge collapse serves to remind us of our human frailty and that we are not God. Life is short and there is an ultimate judgement. Too often we forget God. We think we're ultimately in charge. Then along comes a tragedy like the collapse of the a tower in Jerusalem or a collapse of a bridge in Minneapolis. It's a wake up call, reminding us of mortality and accountability to God.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Lutherans Say 'Committed' Relationships OK for Gay Clergy
From Citizen Link
'This decision will be an excuse for bishops to disobey policy.'
The 4.8 million-member Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) continues to loosen its standards on homosexuality and clergy celibacy.
During its weeklong assembly that ended Saturday, members voted to encourage church leaders to "refrain from or demonstrate restraint" in disciplining gay clergy who are in committed relationships. The thousand church members, meeting at Chicago's Navy Pier, voted down a measure that would have ended the church's celibacy requirement for gay clergy.
"To refrain from discipline in the home is bad parenting, but we're about to do so in Christ's Church," said Jaynan Clark Egland, president of WordAlone Network.
WordAlone is a Lutheran grassroots network concerned that the ELCA is losing its Christ-centered focus.
The Rev. Mark Chavez is director of WordAlone and Lutheran CORE, a coalition that includes WordAlone. "This decision will be an excuse for bishops to disobey ELCA policy," he said. "This decision does not reflect the will of the people, but of bishops and clergy who disregard God's word.
Chavez encourages Lutherans to get involved in the decision-making process of their denomination. "Take responsibility for the future of the denomination," he said. "We do not hope for further division. We are hoping for just the opposite."
'This decision will be an excuse for bishops to disobey policy.'
The 4.8 million-member Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) continues to loosen its standards on homosexuality and clergy celibacy.
During its weeklong assembly that ended Saturday, members voted to encourage church leaders to "refrain from or demonstrate restraint" in disciplining gay clergy who are in committed relationships. The thousand church members, meeting at Chicago's Navy Pier, voted down a measure that would have ended the church's celibacy requirement for gay clergy.
"To refrain from discipline in the home is bad parenting, but we're about to do so in Christ's Church," said Jaynan Clark Egland, president of WordAlone Network.
WordAlone is a Lutheran grassroots network concerned that the ELCA is losing its Christ-centered focus.
The Rev. Mark Chavez is director of WordAlone and Lutheran CORE, a coalition that includes WordAlone. "This decision will be an excuse for bishops to disobey ELCA policy," he said. "This decision does not reflect the will of the people, but of bishops and clergy who disregard God's word.
Chavez encourages Lutherans to get involved in the decision-making process of their denomination. "Take responsibility for the future of the denomination," he said. "We do not hope for further division. We are hoping for just the opposite."
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Bridge Collapse Resources
The 35W bridge collapse has caused many to volunteer and locate a resource to stay informed. Click Here to be linked with KTIS Bridge Collapse Resources.
Our prayers go out to the individuals and families affected by this tragedy.
Friday, July 27, 2007
Now that liberals have learned god-talk can we start applying biblical principles to the common good?
By Chuck Darrell
At the height of last years gay marriage debate, religious leaders rallied at the capitol to voice their support for and against the marriage amendment. I recall being interviewed by several capitol reporters regarding my thoughts on this so-called contradiction.
From the bottom of my heart I answered that I welcomed the debate. The addition of "progressive" religious voices legitimized the need for a faith-based dynamic in the public square. It also gave hope for the acceptence of religious voices within the Democratic Party. I could think of nothing better than a biblical worldview affecting our leaders across the entire political spectrum.
You could hear a pin drop.
Predictably, my remarks never aired. The reporters wanted controversy, not inclusion. Their bias against faith in the public square caused them to spike the story.
That’s all going to change because the left is getting religion. A recent Time magazine article, "How the Democrats Got Religion," chronicles the revival of god-talk on the left. Although this phenomenon seems a bit disingenuous I welcome the inclusion of biblical principles to the liberal lexicon. Especially when local voices (like MOAPPP) are asking the press to ignore traditional positions on marriage, sex education and abortion.
Ironically, Hillary, Barack and John are making it acceptable to mix faith with politics. Hopefully, this signals the end of mean-spirited secularism that defines separation of church and state as the cleansing of all faith from the public square. Conversely, the more liberals talk about God the more acceptable it is to discuss political issues within our places of worship.
Have we seen the end of the self-righteous secularist frothing about violation of the establishment clause? I doubt it, but it will be fun to watch the gnawing of teeth after quoting "St. Hillary" on abortion or global warming.
It was only a matter of time before the left found religion. Frankly, a biblical worldview can’t be limited to a single party or a single issue. It affects everything. The renewal of a faith-based dialogue creates unity and minimizes divisiveness. A shared set of values fosters consensus and knows no racial boundaries.
Religion is a sticky commodity that cuts both ways. It holds politicians to a higher standard because people don't forget their faith like they do political promises. Faith based voters are less likely to tolerate politicians who don’t walk the talk - and sit out an election. Hopefully the secularists disconnect between the private and public life will loose credibility as well.
The soul of our democracy depends upon the iron sharpens iron relationship between church and state. Now that we all have religion we can begin the real work of applying biblical principles to the common good.
Learning to speak the same language is not a threat - it’s a victory.
It was never about politics anyway.
At the height of last years gay marriage debate, religious leaders rallied at the capitol to voice their support for and against the marriage amendment. I recall being interviewed by several capitol reporters regarding my thoughts on this so-called contradiction.
From the bottom of my heart I answered that I welcomed the debate. The addition of "progressive" religious voices legitimized the need for a faith-based dynamic in the public square. It also gave hope for the acceptence of religious voices within the Democratic Party. I could think of nothing better than a biblical worldview affecting our leaders across the entire political spectrum.
You could hear a pin drop.
Predictably, my remarks never aired. The reporters wanted controversy, not inclusion. Their bias against faith in the public square caused them to spike the story.
That’s all going to change because the left is getting religion. A recent Time magazine article, "How the Democrats Got Religion," chronicles the revival of god-talk on the left. Although this phenomenon seems a bit disingenuous I welcome the inclusion of biblical principles to the liberal lexicon. Especially when local voices (like MOAPPP) are asking the press to ignore traditional positions on marriage, sex education and abortion.
Ironically, Hillary, Barack and John are making it acceptable to mix faith with politics. Hopefully, this signals the end of mean-spirited secularism that defines separation of church and state as the cleansing of all faith from the public square. Conversely, the more liberals talk about God the more acceptable it is to discuss political issues within our places of worship.
Have we seen the end of the self-righteous secularist frothing about violation of the establishment clause? I doubt it, but it will be fun to watch the gnawing of teeth after quoting "St. Hillary" on abortion or global warming.
It was only a matter of time before the left found religion. Frankly, a biblical worldview can’t be limited to a single party or a single issue. It affects everything. The renewal of a faith-based dialogue creates unity and minimizes divisiveness. A shared set of values fosters consensus and knows no racial boundaries.
Religion is a sticky commodity that cuts both ways. It holds politicians to a higher standard because people don't forget their faith like they do political promises. Faith based voters are less likely to tolerate politicians who don’t walk the talk - and sit out an election. Hopefully the secularists disconnect between the private and public life will loose credibility as well.
The soul of our democracy depends upon the iron sharpens iron relationship between church and state. Now that we all have religion we can begin the real work of applying biblical principles to the common good.
Learning to speak the same language is not a threat - it’s a victory.
It was never about politics anyway.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
"Would Jesus Discriminate?
By Tom Prichard
Maybe you've seen billboards and yard signs saying, "Would Jesus Discriminate?" When I first saw a yard sign a few months ago, I thought it must be a religious based effort to promote acceptance of homosexuality. It turns out I was right. (Nobody talks about discrimination more than homosexual activists.) Then a few weeks ago I received in the mail a personal invitation to attend a Town Hall meeting sponsored All God’s Children Church, the local church associated with national homosexual network of churches, Metropolitan Community Church. So I took them up on their offer and attended last Saturday night. The event was advertised as an "open dialogue around homosexuaity and Christianity". I treated respectfully and politely by the, I would guess, 150 to 250 people in attendance.
It was clear that we have opposite views regarding the biblical teaching on homosexuality. I think they've rationalized away some some very clear biblical texts on homosexual behavior by saying the passages aren't applicable today or they don't mean with they say.
When question during the forum on whether Jesus does discriminate, when he says things like, "I am the Way the Truth and the Life and nobody goes to the Father but by me" they had a hard time saying no He doesn’t discriminate. And frankly, they weren't willing to say they would forego discriminating when somebody asked them whether they would invite an evangelical pastor who believes homosexual behavior is sin to speak from their pulpit. Nice inclusive idea, but no, they weren’t too keen on that.
So, while their campaign slogan "Would Jesus Discriminate?" is intended to suggest He wouldn't. A closer examination of the issue shows it just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Maybe you've seen billboards and yard signs saying, "Would Jesus Discriminate?" When I first saw a yard sign a few months ago, I thought it must be a religious based effort to promote acceptance of homosexuality. It turns out I was right. (Nobody talks about discrimination more than homosexual activists.) Then a few weeks ago I received in the mail a personal invitation to attend a Town Hall meeting sponsored All God’s Children Church, the local church associated with national homosexual network of churches, Metropolitan Community Church. So I took them up on their offer and attended last Saturday night. The event was advertised as an "open dialogue around homosexuaity and Christianity". I treated respectfully and politely by the, I would guess, 150 to 250 people in attendance.
It was clear that we have opposite views regarding the biblical teaching on homosexuality. I think they've rationalized away some some very clear biblical texts on homosexual behavior by saying the passages aren't applicable today or they don't mean with they say.
When question during the forum on whether Jesus does discriminate, when he says things like, "I am the Way the Truth and the Life and nobody goes to the Father but by me" they had a hard time saying no He doesn’t discriminate. And frankly, they weren't willing to say they would forego discriminating when somebody asked them whether they would invite an evangelical pastor who believes homosexual behavior is sin to speak from their pulpit. Nice inclusive idea, but no, they weren’t too keen on that.
So, while their campaign slogan "Would Jesus Discriminate?" is intended to suggest He wouldn't. A closer examination of the issue shows it just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)