How To Spot Fake News (7 Simple Tips)

There's been a lot of talk about Facebook taking steps to weed out "fake news." When we think of the subject, we often think of political news. Though this blog describes fake news made for political agendas, there is a lot of fake news out there that isn't political - "Milk is Bad For Humans But the Big Dairy Corporations Don't Want You To Know It Because the Moon Landing Was Fake!" - but can still be scrutinized with the following tips. So, here are some characteristics that can help you spot a fake news story, or an opinion piece that calls itself news. Little things we often don't consider:

1. The article's headline is in all-caps.
2. The "news site"'s Facebook page has a profile picture of Ronald Reagan, often displayed in front of an American flag.
(This is sometimes also true with a picture of Bernie Sanders in front of an American flag, but it's far more common with President Reagan's mug...I can't fathom why that is.)
3. The article's headline is a run-on sentence. Ex: "Obama Bans the Word Christmas From Military Christmas Ceremonies to Destroy the First Amendment and Sacrifice America to Muslim Agenda Hey Mickey You're So Fine You're So Fine You Blow My Mind Hey Mickey"
4. The article's headline has more than one exclamation point. Or in many cases, a single exclamation point.
5. Multiple spelling errors.
6. A news article's headline should sum up the event it describes in the most succinct way possible, not give vague clues and hints as to what the reader will read: "You'll Never Believe What Kind of Scandal Ted Cruz is Involved In," or "Lindsey Graham Just Scored a Victory For Lower Taxes in the Most Epic Way Possible." These kinds of headlines are also strongly suspect.
7. The article's story has not been corroborated by a source not displaying the above symptoms. This is very important. In fact, it should be your only tip.

The First Amendment is a great blessing we enjoy in our country, but it does not protect against slander. And, as I learned from watching Judge Mathis, in order for something to be slanderous, it must 1.) be proven to be untrue, and 2.) cause damage to the reputation of the person it addresses. I urge us all to think of that the next time we're about to share a "news" article without at least a Snopes check.
The inevitable reply to that might be, "I think the fact-checkers should be fact-checked." Yes, I too find facts to be terribly inconvenient when they rain on some little part of my agenda. Like when I didn't believe in peanut butter. I was confronted with undeniable evidence that peanut butter exists, and I checked the fact-checkers, desperately trying to prove them wrong, even if it took unscrupulous articles to pacify my denial. But, "facts are stubborn things."
Peanut butter is real.

"I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak." -Matthew 12:36

A Thing is a Thing, Not What You Think About That Thing

There's a copy-n-paste post going around the ol' Facebook that, to paraphrase, asks people the question, "If my faith in Christ does no harm to you, why are you so against it?" I tend to avoid copy-n-paste things, but one comment on such a post caught my eye:

"lol this is so dumb. Your faith is the biggest argument against equal rights for the LGBT community, the reason why planned parent hood is being defunded , religion is the reason for all of the war in the world. Dumb, gullible, ignorant and oppressive. That's the harm it brings"

What the person who wrote this comment failed to realize is that the Christian faith in itself is not to blame, but people who misunderstand and misuse it.
One doesn't need faith to harm people - Hitler had no faith in any deity, yet he persecuted gays, much like Che Guevara, also an atheist. Not to mention the Marxist atheism that led the likes of Stalin to kill and imprison countless religious Russians. Rather, it is the misuse of a faith (or lack thereof) that causes harm. If a Christian tries to legislate morality by instilling their belief into law, that is misuse of that faith. I cannot support the decision to outlaw gay marriage due to my religious belief, which does not condone it. Concerning any similar situation, how can I hold non-believers to a standard that even I, a believer, can't live up to? That's why I need Jesus, after all.
There are exceptions of course: if a faith teaches against things that are universally agreed upon (well, sort of) by everyone of all faiths and lacks of faith: like murder, robbery, rape, etc. On the flip side, if a faith, condones and encourages something dangerous, like blowing up things in order to bring people into submission to their deity, then that faith must then be considered harmful.

But even the Bible does not teach that faith is something to be imposed on people, but must be a choice. The Crusades, the Inquisitions, were all wrong. So, again, it's not the faith that brings harm - it's those who misuse it. If I claimed Christopher Hitchens was risen from the grave and wanted me to oppress gays, when that's clearly not true, it would be no reflection on Mr. Hitchens - it would be only the result of my own deluded, erroneous use of his name. Likewise with Christianity.

A simple way to put it: a thing is a thing, and not what people say or think about that thing.

God is Everywhere

I'm glad God is everywhere at once. Not only because He comforts earthquake-stricken New Zealand while at the same time numbering the tears of victims of Boko Haram and aiding the hungry in Amarillo, but also because He occupies every piece of a broken heart.
I'm glad God sees everything. Not just because He sees the cash given to a single mother by an anonymous Samaritan while at the same time seeing the corrupt handshakes and intentions of a politician, but also because He sees each time we fall to our knees, alone in our apartments, with no human audience to weep for us.
I'm glad God weeps with us.

"If God sees all and is everywhere, why doesn't He make these things stop?"

God not only sees the evil that we choose to do, but He also sees the good we choose not to do. He sees the hungry in Amarillo. And, He sees us throw the "junk mail" from the High Plains Food Bank and the Salvation Army into the trash can. And, He sees the votes we willingly cast for the corrupt, turning a blind eye to their crimes in the name of our golden calves - the red elephant or the blue donkey.
"Was your mother sent away because I divorced her? Did I sell you as slaves to my creditors? No, you were sold because of your sins. And your mother, too, was taken because of your sins. Why was no one there when I came? Why didn’t anyone answer when I called?" -Isaiah 50:1-2 (NLT)

I thank God that He allows us the choice to do good. What kind of story would the story of humankind be if we only did what is right as autonomous creatures? What a glorious and gritty story it is, that we have the grueling task of choosing good, that we have laughter in relief when good prevails, that we have tears in sorrow when we're afflicted.

And what better eye to form the characters, to write the story, to watch it unfold, as the God who took part in its ugliest, most painful point on the cross?

"I can never escape from Your Spirit!
    I can never get away from Your presence!
If I go up to heaven, You are there;
    if I go down to the grave, You are there.
If I ride the wings of the morning,
    if I dwell by the farthest oceans,
even there Your hand will guide me,
    and Your strength will support me."
-Psalm 139: 7-10 (NLT)

Voting - It's Not For Everyone

Don't get me wrong - I'm all for voting. Well, I'm all for informed voting. I find the "register to vote" campaign to be a bit reckless in its approach. I don't want just anybody to vote. I don't want ignorant people to vote. And, being that there's no way to prevent them from doing so, I'm very uncomfortable with encouraging people to "get out and vote" just because they can.
Plus, I am admittedly not mature enough to accept the results of an election if those results are egregious to me. If we tell people to get out and vote, we must be mature enough to accept the results of that election. We cannot encourage people to vote, then scorn and vilify them for the choice they made.
A more honest slogan would be, "get out and vote - as long as you vote for who I'm voting for."

If I had my own country - Sturganistan - voters would be required to take an exam testing their knowledge of the candidates, issues, government, etc. The exam would be held the same day as the election. Maybe just a quick Scantron (remember those?). If a person fails the exam, they don't get to vote in that election. This weeds out uninformed voters. "But," some might protest, "that would prevent like sixty percent of people from voting!"
I know! Wouldn't that be great?!

I don't have a problem with giving voting rights to convicted felons. I do have a problem giving voting rights to people who only read infowars.com and have never heard of Snopes. But, in all honesty, taking away someone's right to vote because he or she is a bumbling idiot would undermine democracy.
But I also have a problem with the way we - meaning average citizens, not big bad government boogeymen - use guilt trips and/or fear mongering to pressure others into voting. We cite the sacrifice of soldiers who have died for the cause of freedom, implying that by not exercising your right to vote, you're somehow desecrating the tomb of the unknown soldier. I also have the right not to vote. Am I devaluing my rights because I don't think like you?
We also call to mind tyrants of the past and present, and say that not voting will put in power the next Hitler. But, we've been willfully electing corrupt, crooked men and women to office for years, even with a gleeful appreciation for our right to vote. If Hitler - or maybe someone who just shared a lot of Hitler's views - were running for President on the Republican ticket, many Republicans would still vote for him.

Why?

Because so many of us don't vote for candidates or even issues. We vote for a party. An ideal. Even if the party to which we belong doesn't actually have that ideal's best interest. If we're Republicans, we'll vote for a chainsaw wielding rodeo clown, as long as he's got an R next to his name. If we're Democrats, we'll vote for a sociopath who shoots puppies on live television, as long as he mentions the ninety-nine percent. People are more dogmatic about their politics than about their religion. People will turn away from God because they don't like the Bible's account of Creation, or they disagree with its view of marriage. But they'd rather die than turn their backs on liberalism or conservatism, even if their candidate's platform is more full of holes than Bonnie and Clyde's V8 (too soon?).

As a Christian, I hear some brothers and sisters in Christ tell me it's among a Christian's duties to vote. It's not. The apostles of the early Church had no voting rights, and if they spoke out against the regime of Rome, their skulls were turned into ashtrays. In fact, most of the Twelve Apostles were indeed martyred for proclaiming Christ, and they did so with faith and bravery that required no Congressman Combover (R-West Virginia) to promise he'd put the Ten Commandments back on the schoolhouse walls. They did so by the power of the Holy Spirit.
I'm very thankful for my freedom of religion, and those who have fought for it and defended it, but the purpose of Christianity is not to influence government and power. That would be Islam, whose own doctrine states its purpose is to bring the world into submission to Allah. Rather, the purpose of Christianity is to tell others the good news of the redeeming life, death, and resurrection of the Savior Jesus Christ, and that He's invited each of us to have a personal relationship with Him, and to live in His glorious kingdom now and for eternity. This is the Gospel, and it's not a nationalistic gospel - not an American gospel, not even an Israeli gospel.
Remember, there are countless Christians around the world who live in countries where they have no voting rights. But they carry out their mission in Christ without it.
Many Christians tend to vote Republican because many Republicans cater to the "evangelical" crowd (that word means nothing anymore, by the way - it just means white folks who consider themselves religious and vote Republican; an "evangelical" and a Christian are two different things sometimes). But many of the most hardcore "conservative" values are at odds with Jesus' values. See the most strident conservative stances on immigration and helping the poor via government programs.

"Vote third party!" some might interject.
Well, the third party candidate we have this election year doesn't know what Aleppo is, and claims the solution to global warming is to inhabit other planets. So, no. A third option doesn't hold merit simply by being an alternative.

Voting is a precious right, one for which I'm very thankful. I look at the phony elections held by Saddam Hussein and shudder at his corruption. Look, nobody wants to badmouth Saddam Hussein. But my point is, voting is important and a privilege we should hold dear. But if we hold it so dear, we must use it with discernment. We must vote informed, prepared, and persistent: we must be informed of the facts, prepared to accept responsibility for our decisions and not blame "the system," and persistent in voting. If we become complacent, they (whoever "they" are) know that they can prevent true progress in this country.
Furthermore, we mustn't scrutinize those who make an informed decision not to vote. This undermines the idea of freedom of choice, and democracy. So, if you choose not to vote, if you believe the thrill of pushing buttons is less important than a burden-free conscience, don't worry - you're not a flag burning commie.

P.S. In Sturganistan, the voting age is thirty.

(Edit, post-2016 election: I'd like to point out that Donald Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million, yet he is still the President - your vote doesn't matter. There are only a few hundred votes in Presidential elections that count, and yours isn't one.)

Why I Was Wrong To Vote For Hillary Clinton (No, That's Not Why)

In February of this year, I voted for Hillary Clinton in the Texas presidential primary.

"But wait!" some of my more worldly-minded brothers and sisters in Christ might say, "you're a Christian! Why didn't you vote for the white Republican? Or the black Republican?"

My answer was thus: my political beliefs are based on Wilsonianism (a brief description of which can be found via a "trusty" Wikipedia article). I felt Mrs. Clinton best fit that mold. But just as importantly, I felt (and still feel) she's the most qualified out of the candidates to be our next President. However, she and I don't see eye to eye on everything - for example, Mrs. Clinton supports abortion, a practice I despise to no end. But, I reasoned, despite the evil of abortion, I know it will never be abolished in this fallen world. And that's what I'm voting in - a fallen world. I'm not voting for the next president of the Southern Baptist Convention - I'm voting for which fallen human being, fallen men and women like me, can best run a fallen country in a fallen world.

So, with my answers and talking points memorized, I proceeded with confidence. But, my friend Jalee, never one to hide her light under a bushel, asked me why I'd voted for Hillary Clinton. She didn't ask out of some idolatrous allegiance to any party, nor to compare it to some view she held wherein her mind was already made up. She was genuinely curious, and sought the views of others to broaden or examine her own - if those views she heard weren't butt-over-tea-kettle wrong. I explained my reasons to Jalee, in the form of a long-winded, high-minded blog I'd written about this very subject earlier this year.

My talking point was, again: I'm not voting for a new pastor, I'm voting for which ambitious person with a killer instinct can best run a country in a fallen world.
But weeks later, during casual conversation on politics, Jalee completely PWNED me with words that I, in my vain attempt at intellectual political philosophy, had forgotten - as Christians, we are not of this world. The Bible calls us to be in the world, but not of the world; God calls us to be holy, which does not necessarily mean perfect and sinless, but rather "set apart," "distinct."
The Scripture asks through the apostle Paul, "For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?"
Jalee's reminder was used by the Holy Spirit as a gentle rebuke that hit me like a bullet between the eyes - in a good way.

"I'm voting for which fallen human being can best run a country in a fallen world."
But the book of Hebrews makes it clear that this fallen world is not our Home. Our Home is a city not made by human hands, but prepared for those who believe by a holy - and perfect - God. Our road to it was made possible by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross. And His sacrifice was witnessed in an empire built not on a two-party democracy, but on the policy "opposition to Cesar and his orgies, rampant assassinations, incestuous relationships, and pedophilia will be met with torture and death." (President Obama, the man so many Christians hate with un-Christlike frothing at the mouth, doesn't sound so bad now, does he?)

Many Christians preach that voting in civic elections is among every believer's duties. It's not. Our duty is to glorify Christ and spread His gospel as evangelists - not to be confused with "evangelicals," a now-useless term meaning "white people who consider themselves religious and vote Republican." The apostles and believers of the Early Church had no right to vote, but their mission was not civic - it was celestial.
If they declared Jesus as God over Caesar, their skulls were turned into ash trays. In fact, most of the apostles, and countless other Christians under the grip of Rome, and today in many countries around the world, were indeed martyred, murdered for proclaiming Christ - and they didn't have Senator Combover (R-North Carolina) to call upon for legislation restricting the Romans' persecutions.
(I hope you don't still think of Kim Davis as a "martyr" after absorbing those facts.)

None of this is to say voting as a Christian is wrong. If God leads you to vote, by all means, heed His voice. After all, Scripture also makes it clear that anyone in governing power is put there by His will, and in a democracy's case, He uses voters as the instrument through which to do just that (unless you're Gerald Ford). But don't be misled into thinking you're failing at a Christian's duty by choosing not to take part in a practice where you vote for evil ("lesser" or otherwise), as part of an evil world.
We mustn't turn America into an idol, nor must we hold the Constitution in higher regard than, or on equal footing with, the Word of God. We must leave Old Glory at the cross. We must pray for our country, for other countries, we must desire what is best for our country - but as the apostle John exhorted, "little children, keep yourselves from idols." 
And, don't be misled into thinking you're unpatriotic, spitting on the Iwo Jima monument, by not exercising the right to vote.

May God bless America - no sardonic cynicism is meant in that statement. May we never forget to praise Him for the abundant freedom and privileges we enjoy in the States.
God bless America indeed.

Talkin' Lowdown Amarillo, Texas Street Preacher Blues

There's a fella here in Amarillo, Texas whose days are filled with street preaching via megaphone, spewing the basic "everyone but me is going to hell" doctrine of those like Westboro Baptist Church and others cut from their blasphemous cloth. The man's basic message is that, even if you think you're a Christian, and think you're saved, you're actually not a Christian and are going to hell if you've sinned after accepting Christ.
People with this false doctrine build their argument, like any false doctrine, on Scripture misunderstood, twisted, or taken out of context; passages like 1 John 3:6-9, which says, "Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him. Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God." What the man with the megaphone doesn't realize is that this sin refers to the unrepentant, habitual sin of those with an empty proclamation of Jesus, who attempt to trample on grace, rather than live under it. This doesn't refer to true Christians - and what is a true Christian? A true Christian is not someone who suddenly becomes perfect, but someone who acknowledges that their sin is great, but abides in the truth that the love and grace of Jesus Christ is greater.
Also, Amarillo's megaphone preacher forgets the Holy Spirit's words through John just one chapter earlier: "My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1 John 2:1).

Paul writes to us in the epistle to the Romans that sinning because you're saved, shrugging it off and saying "God will forgive me" is not right: "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?" (Romans 6:1-2)
So, what is the truth of the matter? Are we literally unable to stumble once saved, our DNA changed as well as our hearts? Does God put us in a moral straight-jacket that makes it impossible to err? Or, has the precious blood of our Savior Jesus also covered the sins and mistakes we make as Christians? To suggest that the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross is good for some of a believer's sins, but somehow becomes ineffective, powerless against those after his or her conversion, is to suggest something as powerful as the blood of our Lord is fickle and limited by a believer's time and circumstance.

In arguing against the belief that true Christians do not sin, I would point to two incidents in the life and ministry of Paul. In the second chapter of Galatians, we read of a dispute between Paul and fellow apostle Peter. Paul describes confronting Peter, and even Barnabas, on a matter of "hypocrisy." This event obviously took place after the resurrection of Jesus, and during the apostles' ministry. So, then, did Peter's stumbling render him unsaved? Not a true Christian? And if so, why would God, sovereign over His word to us, allow two of his epistles to be part of this book we came to call the Bible?

The other example from Paul comes from the second epistle to the Corinthians, where we read of Paul's instructions to the church at Corinth - a church that was often plagued with sin and erroneous ideas about Jesus - concerning a brother who had done wrong and strayed (2 Corinthians 2:5-11). Paul instructs the church there not to shun or ostracize the brother, but to comfort, love, and forgive him. This is just what the Holy Spirit does to each of us when we, like the straying brother at Corinth, wander from God's direction.

Like many people who shout things on the street, I suppose it might be ineffective to confront megaphone man with these truths; for his mind seems made up, and a wall built over his heart. And with such people, the Proverbs give us sound advice: "Go from the presence of a foolish man, when you do not perceive in him the lips of knowledge," and "Though you grind a fool in a mortar with a pestle along with crushed grain, Yet his foolishness will not depart from him."
If you argue with a brick wall, who looks foolish? You, or the brick wall? The Proverbs also tell us, "He who corrects a scoffer gets shame for himself, and he who rebukes a wicked man only harms himself. Do not correct a scoffer, lest he hate you; rebuke a wise man, and he will love you."

But - Jesus tells us "the things which are impossible with men are possible with God." And it is Jesus who took upon Himself the shame and hate of sin - and sinners - on the cross. Before we knew Him, we scoffed at Him, hated Him, scorned Him to shame. But His mercy and grace are unfathomable, as they should be, for they belong to a God who is often so impossible to comprehend, to grasp, to understand. This is why He came to us in the form of that lowly Servant, our ladder to heaven like the one dreamed by Jacob at Bethel.

I won't say this megaphone man gives preachers a bad name - that's impossible, for a true preacher of the word is under the name of Christ. We must pray he receives love from even those at whom he spews the venom of ignorance, and gentle rebuke, done only out love and a desire for him to see how mighty the works of Christ truly are.

My Disastrous Date With Anna Kendrick

Why I was asked on a date by Anna Kendrick was at first a baffling mystery to me, but one I dared not question. And though the truth was revealed that she had mistaken me for Bradley Cooper, a common occurrence, I swallowed my hurt and tried my best to enjoy our fancy, way-beyond-my-budget dinner at Olive Garden.
Despite our date being purely based on mistaken identity, I thought it was going well. Ms. Kendrick even seemed to enjoy hearing my opinions on the failure of Grover Cleveland's second term as President. But, here's where I f*dged up: as I do with any pretty lady I meet, I instantly fell in love, and began to spout overly-flowery praise of her beauty. My gaucherie was at its worst ("gaucherie" is today's word of the day at dictionary.com).
I declared how much I admired her blue bob hairstyle, chubby cheeks, and how lovely she looked in her red bell sleeve dress. The problem with my words, aside from the forwardness, was that Anna Kendrick of course does not sport a bob haircut, her face is proportionate to her thin frame, and she was actually wearing a Radiohead t-shirt and slacks.

The lovely Anna Kendrick.

As stupid as my gaffe was, we do this very same thing with God. We describe Him as something He is not - nay, we insist He is something He is not - we give Him characteristics we want Him to have, all to fit our preferred version of Him. Jesus' followers did this even when He walked the earth as flesh - they wanted Him to be some militaristic leader who would deliver Israel, by force of battle, from the grip of the Roman empire. But He was not. And when they realized this, many turned away from Him. Just like we do when we realize Jesus doesn't fit into the mold of a poster child for our personal agendas and biases.

We describe Him as a hippie, just a nice man with nice teachings, another Buddha, anything we want Him to be. Anything but what He truly is - the only true God, the Savior of mankind who died for our sins and rose again, the God who calls to us to follow Him and leave behind our fleshly treasures and prejudices.
We try to ham-fist our cultural expectations into the meanings of the words of Jesus and those through whom He worked wonders. For example, we see the strength of Elizabeth and Mary as a symbol of feminism; we misconstrue Jesus' words to the rich young ruler as an endorsement of socialism; we see His words "the worker is worthy of his wages" as an endorsement of capitalism; we see Jesus' message that marriage is sacred and children are precious as a banner for conservatism; we make "do not judge" a mantra for liberalism.
We try to force-feed our idolatrous, worldly isms into our perception of God, what we want Him to be.

We do no differently than I did by imposing chubby cheeks and a blue bob on Anna Kendrick.

The Day God Froze the Weather For Me

The day God froze Amarillo, Texas just for me was Black Friday, 2015.

I'd studied myself into a rather dark corner of mind. A mass shooting at Umpqua Community College in Oregon had caused the heated debate on gun control to wake from its troubled nap. Wanting to address the subject via YouTube video, I did research on several spree killers and mass shootings. I recorded the video and uploaded it to YouTube on October 15, 2015. But reading about all of these men who had slaughtered other people in public rampages caused my mind much grief and worry. 
But I didn't have the nerve to be surprised.

I began analyzing every place I went, wondering if the next mass shooting would occur there, and how I could shield people with my own body. I eyed anyone who looked shifty or disturbed – though most of the gunmen were described as calm during their killing sprees, as if their rage, illness, and isolation was being weaned by the sound of death.
With Black Friday approaching the day after Thanksgiving, and knowing it to be the biggest and most chaotic shopping day of the year, traditionally, it instantly clicked in my mind to go to the Westgate Mall, where a mass shooting would take place. My mind had decided that someone was going to unleash horror with a semi-automatic rifle at the mall that day – it was an indisputable fact already, as if the event had already been recorded. All that was missing was my being there to try to disarm the shooter, or protect someone else from death by giving my own life. Then, in the trending news, with the callous irony the media loves, one story would read, “Amarillo Victim Posted YouTube Video About Gun Laws One Month Before Shooting.”

"Vanity, says the preacher."

November 27th would be the day I died. But as Thanksgiving wound to a close, a merciless slew of winter-like weather moved into the area. The next day, the city was frozen. Very few vehicles traveled over the ice-covered streets. No one was going shopping in this Goliath.
Slowly, less quickly as my mind had predicted the shooting and my death, it occurred to me that God had assigned this frigid weather for this city for this day, for me. He had frozen an entire city, rendered it to look like the barrenness of death, to show me what a mind that dwelt on death would look life if it were a place – activity and life everywhere, but all of it locked up for fear of the danger and the cold.
I don't know if a shooting would have occurred at the Westgate Mall on Black Friday. It certainly hasn't happened heretofore. I'm convinced that God predestined that day's weather for me, a troubled and unprofitable servant.
Why couldn't He? Why wouldn't He?

A couple of weeks later, a brother and sister in Christ gave me some money so that I could pay some bills and do some Christmas shopping. I walked that mall in peace as the city basked in the bright near-winter sunshine, made so much brighter by its reflection from the pure white snow of God.

I Would Support Abortion, If...

I suppose my admittedly strident and dogmatic opposition to abortion wouldn't be encased with such stubborn sorrow and anger if just one thing about the practice were changed. That one change would be giving the fetus awaiting termination access to legal counsel - or at the very least, a prison law library.

This way, the fetus would be given the knowledge that he or she has the right to a trial by a jury of his or her peers before being executed. The unborn, condemned criminal would even be wise to the notion of claiming that he or she was framed, or even that he or she was legally insane at the time of his or her crime.

The condemned could also learn about a motion to lessen the category of his or her crime, so that maybe it could be reclassified as "involuntary," as the fetus awaiting extermination committed his or her deed by no premeditation or malice of his or her own. The fetus could also learn about pre-trial motions, and that a change of venue would be in his or her favor. The womb can be a very a biased place.

See also: My Objection to Capital Punishment

The Golden Idol of Apathy

I asked God to divert my anger and sorrow away from things that don't matter - Kanye West's rantings, Green Day being inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame before Deep Purple and Cheap Trick, the fury of Bernie vs. Hillary - to things that do matter.
So, this month, He allowed me to somehow injure my back, my prescription drug plan to change so that my medications would cost more than I can afford every month, that my most important medication would not be covered at all, so that I'd lose it completely, and that my glasses would break, and I'd not be able to afford new ones.

In the book of Daniel, three men of God, about to be cast into a furnace for refusing to worship Babylonian idols, said, "our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and He will deliver us from your hand, O king. But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we do not serve your gods, nor will we worship the gold image which you have set up."

In my case, the false gods and gold images with which I'm tempted are in the form of bitterness and disbelief in God, for allowing me to suffer - which is something He never promised we would be exempt from. I've never understood the thought that "bad things happen, so there must be no God." For this to hold merit or logic, God would have to have first promised that He would protect us from the smallest to the most bone-chilling of horrors - which He has not promised. "If x is y, then x cannot be z" does not work here. He has not sworn to wrap us in bubble wrap to protect us from life's everyday trials and tragedies, nor has He bound us in a moral straight jacket that prevents us from committing wrongs that hurt others - slightly or severely. And I'm glad He hasn't - would love be love with the grueling effort, to choose it?
Instead, God promises us reconciliation to Him through His Son Christ Jesus, who suffered unimaginably on the cross so that we could each be offered the gift of eternal life and a personal relationship with Him - but not without suffering and sorrow on Earth. He has promised to comfort us in the midst of terrors, to give us strength when it seems the world is pitch black in darkness, to give us wisdom and discernment when we seek Him in hope, in desperation, in fear, or in confidence.

God has broken no contract in which He promised protection from each hardship and horror. He has not wronged me in the 29 years I've been alive, and I will not turn away from Him to serve the comfort of apathy, cynicism, and anger. Lord, make these words not boastful, but keep Your hand and on my heart; let me never stray from You to serve what is hopeless and bitter, but to minister to those in sorrow and pain - as You've commanded each of us who believe.

Good gosh I'm interesting.

"Though the fig tree may not blossom,
Nor fruit be on the vines;
Though the labor of the olive may fail,
And the fields yield no food;
Though the flock may be cut off from the fold,
And there be no herd in the stalls—
Yet I will rejoice in the LORD,
I will joy in the God of my salvation.
The LORD God is my strength;
He will make my feet like deer’s feet,
And He will make me walk on my high hills."
-Habakkuk 3:17-19

God Killed Him

There it was, in plain black and white, in unadorned speech: "Er, the firstborn of Judah, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; so He killed him."
This statement appears amidst the scores of names and genealogies in the first book of the Chronicles. There are many little jewels that stand out in those first few chapters, so yawn-inducing. "The prayer of Jabez" is the most powerful example, and little things that stick out in the lists of names so alien to us..."And they were helped against them, and the Hagrites were delivered into their hand, and all who were with them, for they cried out to God in the battle. He heeded their prayer, because they put their trust in Him....because the war was God's"...and a daughter of Ephraim, Sheerah, a strong woman who built three cities, in a Book so ignorantly called a chain to women.

But of all the things that softened my heart, there it was: "Er, the firstborn of Judah, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; so He killed him."

Some Christians were given a mind for apologetics as a theological practice and skill. And some were given minds for other gifts. In my bumbling attempts at apologetics, I'd tried to make the more scrutinized and accused pieces of Scripture become acceptable to a world that will never accept it, no matter how lucidly it is explained. Deeper in my motives, I was trying to make the world accept me as some great thinker of Christianity, perhaps the American C.S. Lewis, so that maybe they'd accept the Gospel.

How ridiculous. How idolatrous! I thought the world would accept the Gospel if it accepted me.

But there, the words "He killed him" in a Book where God striking down the wicked is not uncommon, freed me from apologetics, something I had no business handling. I could not make it look acceptable, gentle, and okay in the sight of the world that a God I insist is so kind and gracious struck down a man with death. And I would not try. I was free. I was free from explaining to the world with long-winded evasions the epistle's instructions that a wife should adhere to her husband; I was free from explaining to the world why the Flood makes sense; I was free from explaining to the world that pagan Nineveh really did accept Yahweh, if only for a brief time, at the preaching of Jonah, who had just been spat onto shore by a giant fish, in which he'd spent three days and nights, though no historical record of this conversion exists.

God killed Er, the firstborn of Judah, because he was a wicked dirtbag who contaminated the land and the people in it. And that's the way it was. No God as powerful and as awesome as mine needs an idiot like me to explain Him, to make Him look good to the world that made up its mind long ago that it hates Him and the light He brought by dying on the cross for them.

My God, who killed Er the firstborn of Judah, is an awesome God.

OHMS,
Cpt. Bud Sturguess

"And some of the Pharisees called to Him from the crowd, "Teacher, rebuke Your disciples." But He answered and said to them, “I tell you that if these should keep silent, the stones would immediately cry out."" -Luke 19:39-40