Quality Of Mercy

So the surviving suspect in the Boston bombing has been caught - saving Boston from a potential second nightmare...the suspect who was killed was wearing an explosive vest, and it might have been assumed that he who was captured had one as well.

He was evidently badly hurt in the shootout, and as I write this, is in serious condition...at the same hospital to which the victims were taken.

There are a lot of people who don't like that. Neither do I.

But the fact remains that, first, he was wounded, and had to go to a place where the injuries could be treated. This begs the question, why not take him somewhere else? Why take him where it's almost an insult to the families of the victims?

It's a good question, and here are some answers. First - Mass General is one of the best trauma care facilities on the planet.

Another question, begged - why does he deserve the best treatment? Why not say, well, this is the best you're going to get. Too bad.

We don't do that because he's still a suspect. He may have killed one police officer and wounded another, and he may have robbed a convenience store and hijacked a car, but he might not be the bomber. Stupid as it may seem, some criminals confess to crimes they didn't commit. Why, I don't know. But it happens.

And even if he did the shooting, and did the bombing, and is without a doubt the cold-hearted killer we think he is, there's an overriding reason why he has to be treated as Mass General.

Because this country is still a good place to live, with values that say, you don't assign care based on preference, or out of revenge. He may get the death penalty - but until he's tried and convicted, we operate under 'innocent until proven guilty'. And that means that both justice, and care, have to be blind.

That fundamental decency is something we've been nourishing for over 200 years. It's why Allied medics in Afghanistan treat wounded Taliban, and send them to hospital by helicopter.

We can't afford to be anything less. We can't afford to do something that makes us say, "We're better than that."

The quality of our mercy has to be defined by how we treat those we hate, when they are in our hands.

Spreading the Good News Successfully

I recently saw a statistic from a missionary outreach done in the wake of the tornadoes in Tuscaloosa, Alabama a couple of years ago.

The team witnessed to over a thousand people, and 37 chose Christ.

It's wonderful for those people, but the numbers are a bit dismal. Coming in the wake of a disaster, perhaps they're not surprising, since people had a lot on their plate.

But maybe they should be surprising, because suddenly losing the security of one's life can cause people to turn to the Almighty, as the only real refuge. I don't know - I;m not a psychologist.

Bit I still don't like the numbers.

I think that one area where Christians tend to lose their audience is in 'consistency', both in terms of staying true to Christ's message, and in maintaining a consistent theme in what one's saying.

To stay true to what Christ said, you have to know what He said. That has to be the basis for everything you say - it's not the Church of Isaiah, nor the Church of Paul, nor the Church of John the Revelator..

As an example - if you tell someone that if they don't accept Christ, they'll go to hell, you're making a crucial mistake.

You're judging, putting yourself into God's shoes. He's the final arbiter - not you. And He said, "Don't judge."

You may be thinking, well, that's what's both said and implied. Indeed it is, but Jesus also said that no one can get to Heaven on their own, but with God everything's possible. He judges, He decides. Not you, not me.

The Bible's not particularly user-friendly in this instance, and it's best to err on the side of caution. Instead of, "if you don';t do this you'll go to hell", why not say, "If you do this, you'll go to Heaven"? It's accurate, it's positive, and you won't have to answer questions like, "Does that mean the Dalai Lama is going to hell?"

The answer is that we simply don't know who's going where - except for ourselves. And we are meant to keep our eyes on our own salvation.

Staying consistent in one's own evangelism is helped by using language that's easy to understand, yet many people persist in couching their talk in the language of the King James Bible. Nothing wrong with the KGV, but it's simply not how people talk. Saying that you have to repent of your sin is accurate, but the choice of words is archaic, and it sends the message that religion is something that's apart from daily life. Likewise, "seek ye the kingdom". Maybe Billy Graham sounds like that at home, but he's about the only one.

You've also got to be consistent in what you say about the Bible as a whole. If you believe it's the literal and inerrant word of God, fine - but that immediately precludes treating something difficult, like Revelation, as symbolism. Once you open the door to interpretation, you've lost the 'literal' foundation - and it'll be better that you never even used it.

And, finally, "do what I say, not what I do" is a major no-no. If you're preaching the Christian life but you don't bother to live it, you lose every shred of credibility that you had. There are no excuses possible. If you can't back up the words with action in your own life, either try a different approach - or forget the whole thing, and give your service doing something other than evangelism.

Walk On By

Innocents died today. Men, women, and children were killed by governments, by corporations, and by criminals.

Some were killed by neglect. No one cared, and they died alone.

Creatures precious to God were slaughtered. Some to test cosmetics, some so that people might have a new taste experience. Some, simply because they were in the way.

And many from neglect, because no one cared.

On Facebook this evening I saw a post - "We should aspire to see the world as Jesus sees it."

Be careful what you wish for, because it will break your heart.

And with all of this, in this vale of tears we inhabit - there are people who think, and preach, prosperity.

They think that God wants to 'prosper' His own. That you really deserve that six-bedroom colonial. After all, look what He did for Solomon! God wants you to be rich.

Yes, prosperity can be used in good ways, to ameliorate - in some small way - the agony all around us. I hope God helps with that.

But let there be no mistake - He sent His Son into a world where the poor begged, and were often passed by, by the religious leaders who claimed to do the work of the Almighty.

Lepers were treated with scorn, and blamed for their affliction.

He sent His Son into that world, and He sent Him there to be tortured to death, in the casual offhand way that so many had died before him, and so many would soon follow.

Do you really think that God cares about your Hawaiian vacation, or the big-screen TV you've sent up for prayer?

Or do you think that He's sitting on His throne, head down, elbows on His knees - hoping against hope that you'll hear what he's really saying, and care?

He's not Donald Trump, looking to adopt you and set you up for life.

He's just God. And He needs your help.

Simple Christianity

I wanted to call this 'Mere Christianity', but it seems that title's already taken. Hmmm....

Walk into any bookstore, and you'll see hundreds of books on Christianity. Written for audiences ranging from laymen to professors of theology, they cover the gamut of Christian thinking, apologetics, and bible study.

They're all very worthy efforts, and I'm sure that they've helped a lot of people. They are, however, icing on the cake.

Christianity can be completely described, but theologically and as practice, in one short paragraph.

Do you believe Christ was killed on the cross, and came to life again in three days? Do you believe He did this to pay off your debt of sin, accumulated from the day you were born? Will you do your best to do what He said to do, namely, love God, and love your neighbors as much as you love yourself? If you don, congratulations. You're going to Heaven when you die.

That's it. Jesus did not go through everything He did so that people could climb a 'Christianity Ladder', from being baby Christians to being mature in the faith.

He never talked about any such thing. You're either in, or not. On /off. Binary solution set.

And now, get to work. The world is waiting, and it needs Him.

And He needs you.

(No disrespect is meant to Paul's writings, or to those who take great pleasure in 'unpacking' Scripture.Paul left a great deal of wisdom on how a church should be organized, and run, and how Christians should try to live in a community. Taking the Bible to bits to find deeper meaning helps a lot of folks, hence its popularity. My sole point is that these are extras, and you can live a perfectly good - in fact, a perfect Christian life if you believe in Jesus and do your best to do what He said.)

The Other Cheek

Terrorism has touched our country again. And we want payback. I sure do.

But before we unleash the fury of an enraged republic on the perpetrators - assuming we can identify them - what would Jesus do?

The first answer we get , the most prominent, is turn the other cheek. Absorb the blow, while praying for our enemies.

The second answer is found in Peter's defence of Jesus at His arrest - put your sword away, Peter, because if you live by it, you'll die by it.

Is this the sum of His teaching? To take the shock - certainly, while using everything we can to identify and prevent future occurrences - but not to retaliate with violence?

Or does the theological concept of a just war apply, allowing us to remove the threat using minimum force - but using force nonetheless?

This is probably the hardest question we can face. Far more pressing than prayer in schools, or same-sex marriages.The answer we give launches our souls onto a trajectory that can take them to Heaven - o Hell.

Jesus did not leave many instructions on using violence in defense, besides the two examples above. But He did leave a few.

First, He wasn't gently accepting of the merchants in the temple. He made a DIY whip, and used it to drive them out. It's hardly likely that He only hit their tables, and their retail goods.

Second, He said that it would be better to be drowned rather than to lead a child astray. "Millstone tied to the neck" was, I believe, how he put it.

And one of the victims in Boston was an eight-year-old.

Third, he healed the servant of a centurion, and complimented this Roman soldier on having more faith than most. He did not suggest a change in profession.

In the first instance, He did not stand by, praying. He saw a wrong, and He moved to correct it. He used minimum force, but He used force nonetheless. The offense was directed against the Father, and so against Him, and He did not step aside, taking it in.

In the second case, what's implied - and this is admittedly a stretch - is a directive to protect the innocent.

In the case of the centurion, Jesus was very forthright in identifying the man's faith as being what He was looking for. If He had wanted to make an anti-war statement, that would have been a logical place. But He didn't.

Taken together,  these suggest a doctrine of minimum force in a just (i.e., defensive) war for society at large, and a doctrine of nonviolence for His direct representatives - the clergy. (This is precisely the way military chaplains behave - they can encourage fighting me - "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!" - but they cannot take material part in battle.)

But that's a theory, and while it draws a lot of support, it may be self-serving. What I fall back on is the 'child and the millstone'. To be blunt, killing a child who's accepted Christ (and one who's beneath the age of reason) places that child into Jesus' care. Instantly.

But hurting? Putting the child into the nether region, on the cusp between life and death...scaring the child? That's abuse, and it's almost impossible for me to imagine Jesus wringing His hands, and praying, while the abuse goes on.

I think, and I hope, that He would stop it.

Holier Than Thou

There is a very sincere TV preacher who says, every so often, "I live a life that's holier than 99% of Christians."

Wow.

He goes on to explain that he doesn't drink, smoke, or swear, and that he devotes much of his time and thought to God.

His self-assurance is quite impressive, but he's completely missing the point. Holiness has nothing to do with what you do, or don't do. Let me repeat that. NOTHING.

Holiness is simply being a lens that focuses God's love and compassion into the world. It's being the hands and feet of the Lord, and not hiding the light of your faith under a basket.

Holiness is the absence of self, and the total presence of God. It's not that your personality is destroyed, mind you, and the God somehow takes over your body, like a creepy alien in a bad sci-fi flick.

It's the ultimate fulfillment of your personality. I mean, think about it - God created you, right? He created your personality? Then why would he want to trash it when you become what he intended?

Holiness is also surrender, but it's an intelligent surrender. A popular song has the title, "Jesus, Take The Wheel". That's not right. You don't just throw up your hands, and sit back and do nothing. God made you smart. He didn't make you a weak, whining little loser who can't be perfect so he gives up.

Surrendering to holiness is saying, "OK, God. I'll follow your lead. Whenever I don't know what to do, I'll hit the knees, open the Book, and ask, and when you give me an answer, I'll do it. Even if i don't understand it."

It's great not to smoke, it's great not to drink. They're bad for your health.

It's great not to swear, because it's crude and boring. (The normal curses you're thinking of that 'use God's name in vain' actually don't...they just fall into the crude and unimaginative category. Truly using God's name in vain attaches it, seriously, to something antithetical to His purpose - it's intentional and intentionally evil, and has nothing to do with the shock and anger of a hammer applied to a thumb.)

But if you think this is taking you one step closer to holiness, you're wrong.

You don't walk up to holiness.

It's more like jumping off a cliff.

2nd Lieutenant God

One of the first lessons taught at OCS is that the Marines under an officer's command are assets to be used to accomplish a mission.

Used, and sometimes expended. An officer has to be able to face, with serenity, the fact that some of the commands he will give will get some of his men killed.

He has to be willing to send them into danger, without leading them there himself, and being the first to fall.

Falling at the head of his men is not an officer's primary job, though that may become necessary. His primary job is the mission, and the commission he accepts, signed by the president, carries a weight of responsibility that is heavier than most people think.

It's the responsibility to make life and death decisions, and pay for them with lives other than his own.

This is a good lesson to remember when we wonder just what God is doing, by allowing dreadful things to happen in our lives. Doesn't He love us? Doesn't He care?

Of course He does. More than any Marine officer cares for his men.

But the mission is paramount.

Often, an enlisted Marine won't know all the details of a the mission, and will rarely have full knowledge of the tactical, much less the strategic plan. He only knows, in the end, that he's under orders.

As are we.