Where We Should Begin

A sermon preached on July 1, 2018

I have heard a lot of heated words over the past few weeks. Many of these words appear to be based in fear, or frustration, and whenever things happen in the world, that's to be expected. But today I'd like to try and take us back a bit. I'd like us to reintroduce ourselves to the story that we're all a part of. I'd like us to reclaim the story of which we're all a part.

The story begins in the desert. There's a guy taking care of some sheep. He's on the lam because he killed a guy and doesn't want to be prosecuted for it.
He's taking care of sheep, and a nearby bush catches on fire, and the voice of God speaks from the bush (like you see everyday). And the voice of God says to the man, "I've seen my people being oppressed in Egypt and I've heard their cry for release from their slave-masters, because I know their pain. I've come down to rescue them from the Egyptians." And the voice of God says that he's going to use this man, Moses, to bring these people out of slavery. He's heard their cry, and he plans to save them.

So he pulls them out of slavery. It's a miracle. And then...well...where do they go? They're in the desert. Nothing's really nearby, and they're a bunch of former slaves. They don't have a homeland. So they begin life as a free tribe, wandering together in the desert, with God as their leader. This kind of life was actually pretty normal. In the world at the time, each nation or group or tribe had their people, their identity, their security, their ideas, their ideals, their understandings, their leaders, their worldviews, and in many cases, their god or gods. Your nation or group or tribe was your entire life. They were your identity. You understood the world through your nation, your tribe, your group.

God uses this shepherd to bring the people out of slavery and makes them into their own nation/tribe/group, and now they have to learn how to live together as a free people. They haven't done that before. Sure, they were free before slavery, but that was generations ago. None of these people have never known each other as free people. So how do they live together? Well, God gives them a bunch of laws. People need laws, rules, and guidelines to know how to live with one another. And most of these laws involve how people within the group interact with one another. They're interpersonal laws. These laws appear barbaric, and yeah, they are barbaric. But they were how the early Israelites understood how they were to live with each other in their own world, at that time, as a part of the larger group. The laws helped the people know that their society was just and fair. The laws also helped the people understand that their society was safe.

Safety laws were important, not only between people in the group, but because other groups often wanted to defeat and kill your group. If you got into battle with another group, one of your groups would win and the other would lose, and the losers would usually be annihilated. Why? Because you had to annihilate them if you wanted to make sure that they wouldn't come back and get revenge. So people weren't only concerned with safety from those in their own group; they were concerned that other groups wouldn't come in and destroy their entire civilization. Outsiders were threats. If they came in to your group, it could be because they're spying, or because they want to do some damage to your way of life. So every nation, every tribe, every group, needed to have a plan about those outside of their group.

Most nations would do one of two things when dealing with foreigners: either 1. steal from/enslave them in order to gain something from them, or 2. kill them so they are no longer a threat. This is why it's so shocking when Leviticus 19 says "Don't take vengeance on or bear a grudge against any of your people; rather, love your neighbor as yourself; I am the LORD" (Lev. 19:17-18), but shortly after this says "If a foreigner stays with you in your land, do not do him wrong. Rather, treat the foreigner staying with you like the native-born among you--you are to love him as yourself, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt; I am the LORD your God" (Lev 19:33-34). The command to 'love your neighbor' is expanded to include the foreigner and alien among the people. This is a radical law from God, since foreigners were seen by most as dangerous.

"But David, who exactly is a foreigner? Don't words in the Bible sometimes have different meanings than the ones we use today?"  Why yes they do. Thank you, fictitious question-asker. The closest analogue in our world to this word "foreigner" or "alien" is a refugee. Someone who had to flee their land because of famine or war.

Repeatedly, God tells the people to assist the poor and foreigners among them, saying "When you harvest the ripe crops produced in your land, don't harvest  all the way to the corners of your field, and don't gather the ears of grain left by the harvesters. Likewise, don't gather the grapes left on the vine or fallen on the ground after harvest; leave them for the poor and the foreigner; I am the LORD your God" (Lev. 19:9-10, also Lev. 23:22, Deut. 24:19-22). Foreigners were to be included in celebratory feasts as well. In most situations, they were given equal or even better treatment than the Israelites. This is radical stuff. And God isn't messing around when he says it. Early on while giving these laws, God says "You must neither wrong nor oppress a foreigner living among you, for you yourselves were foreigners in the land of Egypt. You are not to abuse any widow or orphan. If you do abuse them in any way and they cry to me, I will certainly hear their cry" (Ex. 22:21). When God's people called out while in slavery, he heard their cry and saved them, destroying the Egyptians in the process. Now he's saying if a foreigner, widow, or orphan is mistreated and they cry to him, he will hear their cry. You can assume the threat behind this statement. "Remember when I saved you from the bullies in Egypt? Don't become those bullies to other people, or I'm going to save them from you."

So why is God making all of these special concessions for people outside of his chosen group? It says in the book of Deuteronomy that God "secures justice for the orphan and the widow; he loves the foreigner, giving him food and clothing" (Deut 10:18). There's the answer. God loves them. Just like he loved you while you were in Egypt, he loves those in other groups and tribes and nations as well. And God is making clear that he expects the people to have the same heart as he does. "Therefore, you are to love the foreigner, since you were foreigners in the land of Egypt" (10:19). When God's people truly turn their hearts to God's desires and thoughts and purposes, they will care for the foreigner as well.
Because God cares for the foreigner. He loves them.

And when we care for the poor, the orphan, the oppressed, and the foreigner, we are following God's leading and living out the image of God that we were made to be.
Because caring for the poor, the orphan, the oppressed, and the foreigner is what God does.

God is setting up a new standard here; a radical standard. For God's people, for this new group/tribe/nation, when someone comes in fear or trial, you will welcome them as a neighbor. You will not see them as a threat, like you're accustomed to doing, but you'll welcome them as neighbors. You will not kill or rob or enslave them, but you'll provide food for them, and welcome them in to your community.

So here's where I think that many of us Christians today have missed the story. When we begin talking about those who flee death or war or gang violence or rape or violence or famine in other countries, many Christians begin the conversation with talk of safety and security. Are safety and security important? Sure. That's why I have a lock on my house. That's why my car locks. That's why I don't walk around Pier Park at 2 AM. Safety is an important concern. But it should not be the beginning point for God's people when talking about immigration or refugees.

God commanded his people to love their neighbor, then expanded that love to include the foreigner. And this wasn't in a world that was predominantly safe. For the Israelites, it was a considerably more dangerous world than the one in which we find ourselves. They were on the move, and their "Homeland Security" was just a bunch of people in the front of the group hoping they could protect the rest of the group.
It. Was. Dangerous.
And God, in that dangerous world, called his people to welcome the refugee, to welcome the stranger, to welcome the foreigner, and not to oppress them, going so far as to say that he'd hear their cry if they did oppress those who were weak.

God's command for love of neighbor and love of foreigner should cause us to grieve when we see families being divided at the border. We should grieve when we see refugees fleeing war-torn areas with nowhere to go (and even if they do find a country that takes them in, they have a language barrier, no money, and no history in the country that will enable them to find jobs and housing).

If our immediate, first response to these stories is "Hey, we need to keep our people safe," then we've missed the story.
We need to reclaim the story.

The story begins with a God who found his people in slavery in a foreign land, and saved them because he loved them. The story continues with a God who loves people of other lands so much that he commands his people to care for them. The story culminates with a God who loved his people so much that he died for them, in spite of their propensity for evil.

"But...the people...they could be evil."
Yep. Jesus died for them. Because he loves them.
That's the Gospel.
Our job is following God. God loves the foreigner, and calls his people to do so as well.
Our job, then, is actionable love for the people that God loves.

This is where we should begin. We don't begin with fear, and we don't begin with political posturing. We begin with the understanding that God loved those who were in need and saved them. And God calls his people to do the same. If we want to live lives that follow God's leading, we need to pursue loving those who are in need, who are orphans, who are widows, who are foreigners, because God's love reaches to those people.

Remembering how God includes the foreigner in the command to love our neighbor, let's look at 1 John: Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. This is how God showed his love among us: he sent his one and only son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

God's love is in us and made complete when we love one another. We must begin with love. We cannot begin with fear. As John says later:

This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: in this world we are like Jesus. There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. We love because he first loved us.
(1 John 4:7-12, 17-19)

It's fine to have a conversation about safety. Again, safety is important. But if fear for our own safety overrides our desire to love our neighbor as ourselves, we've missed the story.
Let us reclaim the story.
Let us love our neighbors.
Let us love those outside of our borders.
Let us love refugees.
Let us love immigrants.

Is there danger in love? Sure. True love is always dangerous.

But there is no fear in love, because perfect love drives out fear.



More Bible stuff for you Bible nerds: Ezekiel 16:49, Malachi 3:5, 1 Kings 8:41-44, Job 31:32, Matthew 25:31-36, Luke 10:25-37, Galatians 5:14

Guns, Bombs, Children, Life

There are few collections of words that cause greater emotions than the phrase "pro-life." As the pastor of a church, I can assure you that many people considered abortion to be the single greatest influence on their voting in the 2016 election. This was true for many Christians in the 2012 and 2008 elections as well. Many people, especially Christians, consider the pro-life/pro-choice debate to be the foremost (or close to it) social issue on their minds.

But what does it really mean for someone to be pro-life? 

Genesis 1:26-27 reads,

Then God said, "let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."

So God created humankind in his image

in the image of God he created them;

Male and female he created them.

The creation account in Genesis 1 shows God creating light and dark, water from water, land and seas, vegetation, sun and moon, and animals. All of these creations were 'good,' according to this account. however, scripture tells us explicitly that humanity was created 'in the image of God.' If people are created in the image of God, and are children of God who are valued by God, then Christians should by nature see the image of God in all other people.

To be pro-life is to value and affirm the image of God in all people.

Often, when people talk about being pro-life, they mean that they are anti-abortion. However, there are many other questions about 'life' that Christians need to consider in the early 21^st century. Are some lives more important than others? Can Christians demand the closing of abortion clinics and simultaneously support the bombing of another country that will certainly kill hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of innocent civilians? Should concession for abortion be made for women who became pregnant as a result of assault? Can Christians support the death penalty, even as an absolute last resort, and still consider themselves “pro-life?”

Even when talking about abortion, there are numerous concerns that Christians should consider besides simply "Should abortion be legal or not?" Making abortion illegal is not a "quick fix" that will be entirely effective. In spite of legal abortion in America, abortion rates in 2016 were in decline, and had been for some time. Access to contraception seems to be an effective way to reduce abortion rates, whereas poverty appears to be a major factor in the decision one makes to have an abortion. Perhaps if a person considers him or herself to be pro-life, he or she should focus efforts on contraception, poverty, and economic issues. A person on the poverty line without the ability to buy extra food, diapers, and clothes is going to have a harder time deciding to raise a child than a person who does not have these concerns. A person who cannot afford a large enough apartment to raise a child is going to have a harder time deciding to raise a child than a person who has a large apartment or a house.

Abortion is a pro-life issue. Poverty is also a pro-life issue. Christians should be concerned with both.

Pro-life, however, does not simply mean "anti-abortion." Bombing is also a pro-life issue.

A prominent pastor and a member of President Trump’s Evangelical advisory team said in August of 2017 that God has given Trump authority to “take out Kim Jong Un.”  This came on the heels of President Trump saying that if North Korea threatened the US, they should expect “fire and fury, the likes of which the world has never seen” (a terrifying statement to make in a world that has seen two nuclear weapons used in major metropolitan areas). It seems strange for a president who claims to be pro-life, and for Christian supporters of his who are staunchly pro-life, to support the annihilation of a country with 25 million civilians. If a person is pro-life, shouldn’t the lives of North Korean civilians matter, even if their leader says and does reprehensible things? For many Christians, the answer to that question lies in Romans, chapter 13.

Romans 13 appears to many to argue that Christians should submit to all ruling authorities. On its surface, that seems correct, as verses 1-2 say

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

Case closed, right? All political leaders were put there by God, and must be obeyed. This kind of thinking has long been held by many Christians. A group of Protestants in the 30's and 40's in Germany believed that they were to submit themselves and show loyalty to Adolf Hitler. The problem with this kind of thinking, of course, is that often governing authorities act in ways that are objectively evil. I don't know of a single person who considers the choice to kill six million Jews during the Holocaust to be an act ordained by God. Often leaders act in ways that are antithetical to the ways of God.

In Romans 13, Paul argues that God institutes and gives authority to governments. In other words, God institutes the idea of government. However, there will be (and have been) leaders who use their authority to do evil. In these cases, Christians are to give their loyalty to God above human leaders. In Mark 12, Jesus is asked whether it's right for religious folks to pay taxes to Caesar. Jesus responds, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." He effectively says that yes, followers of God should recognize the authority of governments. However, he points to God's authority as well.

What is God authority over? Everything.

Therefore, Jesus says that we can recognize the government's authority, but we must also recognize that God has greater authority than even government.

Taking Jesus' words into account, we should recognize that God's authority is greater than human authority. Romans 13, then, should not be used as a blanket statement that “all people in a nation should simply bow to the leader(s) of that nation because God put them there and wanted them there for a reason.” When an earthly authority acts against the authority of God, that authority is to be resisted.

If the president talks about nuking a country with 25 million civilians, it is acceptable for Christians to look to God's authority over the authority of humans. It is a pro-life issue to care for the 25 million civilian lives in North Korea.

After all, God created humanity in his image, and values humanity.  

To be pro-life is to value and affirm the image of God in all people.

This includes civilians, the unborn, leaders, and people who have committed atrocities.

North Korean civilians possess the image of God. The unborn possess the image of God. If we are to consider ourselves pro-life, then we must be consistent. We cannot oppose abortion with one side of our mouths, and cheer on the deaths of millions with the other side. We must do what we can to value life in all of its forms. This includes recognizing the personhood of the unborn, while simultaneously opposing threats of nuclear annihilation. 

I am writing these words on Ash Wednesday; a day which introduces the season of Lent. This is a time in which Christians repent of the ways in which we have sinned, and turn our lives back toward God. This particular Ash Wednesday is also the day in which nearly 20 students and teachers were killed in a school shooting in Parkland, Florida. This Lent season, we need to repent for our failures to help end this kind of violence. Like a conversation about abortion, any conversation about gun control is bound to cause high emotions and heated debate. However, as we have seen, being pro-life means seeing the image of God in all people. We need to talk about this. We need to care about this.

I have many friends who love their guns and are deeply opposed to any kind of gun reform. But it is important for Christians to remember that no “thing” that we treasure can possibly compare with a person whose life bears the image of God.

Seventeen of these lives were taken earlier today.

If we want to call ourselves pro-life, we should do anything that we possibly can to cherish and protect the lives of all people who bear the image of God.

A ban on assault rifles and improved gun regulation could be a start. 

After the Pulse nightclub shooting in Florida in 2016, our church started what has become an unfortunate tradition. On the Sunday following a mass shooting, we will have pictures and biographies of the victims on a table in the back of the sanctuary. We have unlit candles to the side of the pictures, and invite people to light a candle in memory of one of the victims, and as a prayer for his or her family and loved ones. When we talk about a number of victims ("seventeen killed in Parkland"), it is easy to have a somewhat abstract conversation. When we think about a specific person, with a family and a future and hopes and dreams that were all taken away in an instant, we are reminded that these numbers represent people--people created in the image of God.

To be pro-life is to value and affirm the image of God in all people.

As a pastor and a Christian, I am called to see the image of God in those around me. Seventeen people created in the image of God were killed earlier today. Twenty-five million people created in the image of God have had their lives threatened. Thousands of unborn children created in the image of God have their lives taken from them. May we see the image of God in all of these people, and do what we can to protect and care for them.

Christians, We Need to Talk About This

Written Nov. 5, 2017

A month ago, I pulled out my phone recorder app, and gave some from-the-heart rambling thoughts about the previous days' shooting in Las Vegas. I put it on the website where St. Johns Christian Church's sermons are found. It's still there. That's noteworthy because the hosting site can only hold around a month and a half worth of sermons at a time. I have to cycle out the oldest sermons each week in order to upload the newest ones.

My thoughts on the Vegas shooting are still on the site.

It was just a month ago.

Today, there was another mass shooting.

One month, two major mass shootings.

Probably the hardest thing that I have to do as a pastor is to address tragedies in the world. They seem to happen more and more frequently lately, with devastating hurricanes, fires, and shootings all in the last couple of months. Each week that something terrible happens in the world, before preaching on whatever scripture and topic are planned for that Sunday, I lead the church in prayer for the victims, families, and (since Jesus taught us to love and pray for our enemies) the perpetrators of shootings.

But it gets harder and harder each time it needs to be done.

It seems like it would get easier. With basically anything else, you get better with repetition. I never used to enjoy praying in public, but doing it over and over made it easier. I used to hate calling people up and asking to come over and visit them (it really feels like an imposition), but I have no problem with doing it now.

Leading prayers in the wake of tragedies is different.

I always try to find some words of encouragement. Sometimes I plan them out ahead of time, sometimes I don't. Sometimes I'm working through my own feelings on stage, with everybody staring back at me. The Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando happened early on a Sunday morning. It had to be addressed, but there was no time or space to reflect. I was working through my grief alongside everybody else.

In these moments, I'm always looking for the right word to bring to the congregation. Often, there doesn't seem to be a 'right' word. Shortly after the Paris shooting in 2015, I remember stepping up on the stage, shaking, thinking about my planned remarks, and instead hearing myself in a defeated tone say the words, "Another one."

Mass killings are much harder for me to address than natural disasters for a couple of reasons.
First, with mass killings, you're dealing directly with the evils of humanity.
And second, I pastor a church with a lot of veterans, hunters, and people who carry. This is by no means the bulk of the church, but it's a significant group of people. I always want to be honest in the things that I say, but in the wake of mass murder, the question of "Does this need to be said, does it need to be said now, and am I the right person to say it" is constantly on my mind.

I'm about to say some things, knowing full well that it might cause defenses to go up. I understand that the rest of this post could make some enemies. However, we lit 58 candles at church one month ago in memory of and in prayer for the Vegas victims. Today, at least 26 people had their lives taken from them in Texas.

More candles to be lit. Each representing a life taken.

These lives deserve a conversation.

Here's where I'm coming from when I offer my thoughts: I'm not a gun owner. I've never been a gun owner. My parents weren't gun owners. I have many good friends--people whose outlook and opinions I trust dearly--who do own guns and like the current system of gun purchasing and ownership. I have other very good friends--again, people whose outlook and opinions I trust dearly--who would like stronger regulations on gun ownership.

I'm coming at this completely as an outsider. I have some common sense, and I have some understanding of scripture and of what I believe God's doing in the world, but I am not a gun owner, and I haven't been a part of the gun conversation before.

Mass shootings were always horrifying to watch and read about before I became a pastor. But now, I'm leading prayers again and again, and I'm having trouble finding any words of comfort for the people, because I know another shooting is probably a couple of months away.

If there's anything that could slow the likelihood of another two minute rampage that takes children from parents, spouses from one another, and brothers from sisters, then I want to be attentive to that. If some form of action could stop or lessen these killing sprees, then I want to consider it.

A couple of rebuttals come up whenever someone mentions gun control. People often point out that guns are tools. They will also mention that other things kill people too, for instance, the truck that was used to kill eight people earlier this week in NYC. To both of those points I would say this: yes, guns are tools. However, their purpose is to kill. A gun is made to kill. That's what they're for. The truck that was used to kill eight people has another purpose. Trucks are used to get from point A to point B. Trucks are used to haul heavy items.

But a gun, especially an assault rifle, is made to kill. It's a tool to kill. That's its purpose; that's what it's for.

Guns are killing machines. And we've become really good at making killing machines. We make them better and stronger and faster and more accurate. But their purpose is to kill.

Especially when we're talking about assault rifles, I'd counter this argument with a question: When does a person, an ordinary person, need an AR-15? When does a person need an AK-47? I'm actually asking. I don't understand why an ordinary person needs this kind of a gun. It doesn't make sense to me. You don't hunt deer with an AR-15. You don't hunt a prize buck with an AK-47.
The military uses them. I get that. But that's a different conversation. When it comes to assault rifles, I really don't see why an ordinary person needs one.

This thought leads me to another argument that I see on social media whenever there is a mass killing with something other than a gun, like the truck attack from last week: "This was done with something other than a gun. Guns aren't the problem. People will kill with whatever they can get their hands on."

I get the argument that's being made, but rifles seem to be able to kill a lot more people than trucks or knives, and mass shootings seem to happen way more often than knife attacks or truck attacks. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if an assault rifle can kill 50+ people in a manner of minutes at a concert without anyone being able to stop it, then maybe the assault rifle is better at killing than a knife or a truck (It's so hard to write that sentence and to talk so theoretically about the deaths of many people). If something so good at killing is so easy to come by, that seems to me to be a problem.

Also, I again ask, "What's the purpose of a regular civilian having an assault rifle?" When I was in high school, there was a nationwide scare because somebody was sending letters through the mail that were laced with anthrax. It seemed crazy to me, and I think to many Americans, that someone would be in possession of anthrax spores. I would have, and still would, support regulation on people obtaining anthrax spores. I would not support a "truck ban" simply because somebody ran down eight people with a truck. That was absolutely horrifying, but again, there is a positive use for a truck. However, I would support a ban on regular people having anthrax spores, because (correct me if I'm wrong...) no ordinary person needs to have access to anthrax spores.

Another thing people will often say is that guns don't kill people; people kill people. I get that argument. I also understand the "It's not a gun problem, it's a heart/sin problem" argument.  However, I wonder if the ease of buying an AR-15 is a good thing in a society that has such a heart/sin problem, or a mental health problem. Again, I've never been part of this conversation before, but common sense tells me that maybe it should be more difficult than it currently is to obtain one of these killing machines. If there is a rampant heart/sin/mental health problem in our society, then I really don't think easy access to an assault rifle is a positive thing.

I have a wife who I love. I have a son and a daughter who I love. I have roughly 50-60 people at my church who I love. It is destroying me to think about the horrors that occurred at a church service earlier this morning, and imagining the people I love in that unbearable situation.

My imagining is many people's reality today.

So here's where I currently am in regards to mass shootings, guns, and how to move forward:

Some gun legislation seems to me to be a good idea. There was talk about regulating bump stocks immediately after Vegas, but there hasn't been much more talk since then. Some kind of change seems appropriate. The "A killer is going to get a gun regardless of how hard it is to get it" argument doesn't really gel with me. That to me just sounds like giving up. When I hear that argument, I hear "There's nothing we can do. Just let the killers get their guns and kill." If there's even a possibility that advancing gun regulations on assault rifles could stop even one mass murder, it seems extremely appropriate to move in that direction.

That leads me back to my previous point: I don't understand why an ordinary person needs an assault rifle. Does anybody have a reason why someone needs an assault rifle? I'm all ears.

For this non-gun-carrying pastor of a church that has a number of proud gun-owners, I say this all in humility and with the understanding that I may not entirely know what I'm talking about. But what I say in confidence is that God values life. Let's get beyond the divisive talking points for a moment and recognize this truth: God loves his people. God loves his people so much that he taught his people to love other people. Jesus taught us to love our neighbors and even our enemies. We see God's Spirit moving in Acts to reach out to the whole world. God loves his people. God values the lives of his people.

If gun legislation--even just some legislation--would help in moving us away from the regularity of these horrors, then as a follower of a God who loves and values people, I think we should do it.

This isn't the end of this conversation. It's the beginning.

It's a conversation we need to have.

People are dying. Lives are being taken.

If you are a Christian who considers yourself "pro-life" (as many of my gun-owning friends do), then this should matter deeply to you.

I remember attending a Christian concert years ago, and a speaker came out midway through the show. This speaker began his talk by asking the crowd, "Who here considers themselves to be pro-life?" I remember thinking, "Here we go..." (I assumed he was there to give a pandering stump speech about abortion to get a bunch of Christian pro-lifers to buy his book in the lobby Am I cynical? Yes. Yes I am. Super cynical). He was actually there to convince people to support impoverished kids in other countries.
His point was well taken. Considering yourself to be pro-life should mean that you are concerned about life in all forms. This includes poor children who have needs (food, clothing, money) and have no ability to see these needs met.
It also includes the people who lost their lives in America's many recent mass shootings.

I'm concerned because we are one month out from 58 people having their lives taken away from them, and this morning, 26 more lost their lives.

Lives are sacred, and when someone takes a life, it is a tragedy. When someone is able to take many lives, it is unbearable. And when someone takes many lives just one month after someone else took many lives, well, we need to step up and do something about it. As followers of Christ, this should matter to us. God created them. God loves them. They're important. They're important to God, and they should be important to us.

They should be more important to us than our desire to have the right to own any kind of weapon that we want to own.

People's lives are more important than our right to own a weapon.

Here's where I ultimately land: if doing something like banning or regulating assault weapons will at least raise the likelihood that less people will lose their lives in a madman's rampage, then I think we should do it. God cares about people more than assault rifles, and we should care more about people's lives than about our right to have an assault rifle.

Paul reminds us in 1 Corinthians that love is patient and kind. Let's work through this conversation with patience and kindness. But let's actually talk about changes that could be made. People matter. If we can keep some people from losing their lives, and keep individuals from committing atrocities, then we really should do it.

Identities

Someone yelled at me today.

It was totally my fault. I was leaving the Costco parking lot, and a lady walked in front of my car. I didn't see her right away. I stopped in plenty of time, but it was pretty close. Nobody was hurt, and everything ended up fine, but she screamed at me. Again, it was my fault, so after apologizing, I took the litany of f-bombs and questions like "Who taught you to drive, you stupid kid?" as best I could.

Ten years ago, I was walking out of Albertsons with a cart full of groceries. As I was headed toward my car, a guy stepped out of his truck (which was parked in a parking spot) and started screaming at me. "Do you know how close you were to my truck???" I hadn't moved the cart since he got out of the truck, so I looked over at his truck. It was about ten feet away from the two of us. I was not even close to hitting it.
"You could have hit my truck!"
"Sorry. I didn't hit it." (There was probably a better way to respond.)
"You could have."
"Okay. Sorry I was so close."
"You'd better watch where you -----in' walk, 'cause if you hit my ----in' truck, I'm gonna ----in' take all your money."
"Okay."
"Okay? That's all? You almost hit my ----in' truck."
"I didn't hit it. I'm not even close to it. We're like ten feet away from it."
(Good job, David. Antagonize the guy. This should go well. Seriously, with the way I respond to angry people, it's amazing I've only been punched once.)

After about two minutes of this back-and-forth, he got back in his truck and I continued walking to my car.
That was ten years ago. I'm still mad about it.

In the heat of the moment, we tend to lash out at people with whom we're angry or frustrated. We may do this especially with those we don't know. This was the case with the two folks mentioned above. Both the woman who thought I was going to hit her and the guy who wanted his truck to remain dent-free considered me to be a stupid kid who doesn't know how to drive/walk.
I was no better. I stewed over the situation with Angry Trucker, and viewed him as irrational and a bit crazy.
In both of these situations, people were dehumanized. There are a thousand different things that could have led Angry Trucker to lash out at me. He could have had problems at home, or money troubles, or issues with someone at work. These situations could have added so much stress to his life that he was likely to snap at just about anybody. However, my reaction was to feel insulted and to silently stew about it for years. I chose to think about him simply as Angry Trucker. I've pulled away much of his humanity and left only his rage.
I used to work a drive-thru window for a fast food chain. I was simultaneously working as a youth pastor at the time. One day, a lady was annoyed with how slow her food was coming, and took it entirely out on me. She said that if I didn't spend so much time smoking pot and would go to college (I didn't smoke pot and I did go to college), I could make something of my life. She pointedly asked me what I do when I'm not at work. "I'm a youth pastor," I told her. At that moment, her entire demeanor changed. All of a sudden, we were all doing a great job, the food wasn't late, and I was not a layabout and a pothead.

Side note: fast food employees get this kind of abuse from customers a lot. If you do this, please stop.

When we're angry, we often give people labels or names like "idiot" or "moron" or worse. We may not say these things out loud, but we think them pretty hard.

We label people that we don't know, and sometimes we label people that we do know. I have had conversations with people I know and love that have ended poorly, and in the days and weeks following, I continue to think about each and every detail of the conversation. Over time, I will mentally put together a story about how the other party was at fault in the straining or breaking of the relationship. It's not exactly lying to myself; it's more like 'selective memory.' I want to justify to myself that I acted rightly, and the other person acted wrongly.  I recently heard a story about a group of people doing this very thing. It's common for people to see themselves as faultless in a spat. "I can't believe he said that!" "She just walked away. Can you believe it?" "I'm not talking to him until he apologizes." We're quick to blame others, and slow to accept responsibility.
What happens, then, when two parties who are at odds get together? Defenses are up. Shields are raised. Instead of working things out, we accuse; we name-call; we provoke.

We choose to view people in a certain way. But how does God view them?

Paul says in 2 Corinthians that "God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people's sins against them...God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Cor. 5:19, 21). Titus 3 talks about the hate and general jerkiness of people, but then says that "when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy" (Titus 3:4-5). God's salvation came to the sinful, the hateful, the angry, the envious, the greedy, the destructive. He didn't come to save because people were righteous, but because he is merciful to those he loves.
In the book of Luke, Jesus calls Levi as a disciple and goes to a banquet at Levi's house. The Pharisees and teachers of the law criticize Jesus for attending a banquet with "sinners," and Jesus responds, "it is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick" (Lk. 5:31). Jesus, in the face of criticism from the Pharisees, shares a table with Levi and his friends. Sinners.
A couple of years ago, I started rewriting the story of the Prodigal Son as a choose-your-own-adventure book (Why? I have no idea. One day, I decided that the world needed the story of the Prodigal Son as a choose-your-own-adventure book. Does it? No. Not at all. Or does it? Probably not. But maybe?). This is a story in which a kid asks his father for his inheritance--basically saying to his dad, "I don't care about you; I don't care about our relationship; I don't care about our history; I would rather have you dead than alive, because your money is more important to me than you are." The father gives the kid his money and the kid blows it all on wild living. He returns home with nothing, planning to ask his father if he can live as a servant on his father's property. His father sees him and immediately runs down the street to him and embraces him. His twice repeated pronouncement that his son "was dead and is alive again, he was lost and is found" shows the heart of the father toward his son whose last conversation with him was far beyond offensive. The older son is angry because he's never had a party thrown in his honor, even though he's faithfully served for his entire life with nary a peep (Nary a peep? Did I really just write that? Ugh). His father responds with "All I have is yours." Both children are deeply loved by the father.

God's love for his children is extravagant.

Our posture toward other people can often be combative. We may desire nothing but bad things for another person. At the very least, we may look at others with contempt; whether it is a person who cut us off in traffic, a friend with whom we've had a falling-out, or someone from a different class of people that we dislike. We minimalize them. Rather than seeing them as people with backgrounds and joys and fears and hopes and disappointments and families and loneliness and a history and a future, we place upon them an identity: "idiot."

Our conversations with people can easily go poorly if we enter these conversations with the point of view that the opposite party is a jerk, or a moron, or a whiner, or uptight.

What if we saw people differently?

What if, instead of the negative identities that we give to others (jerk, idiot, moron, whiner), we gave them a new identity?

What if, before every conversation, we reminded ourselves that the person with whom we're speaking is a child of God?

What if we reminded ourselves how much God loves that person?

Would the conversation change? Would I be less likely to scream at someone in traffic if I recognized that person's identity as a beloved child of God? What if, when I sat down with a person with whom I had a disagreement, I recognized his or her identity as a child of God? Would my shields stay up? Would I speak to them defensively? Would I work harder to repair our relationship if I remembered how deeply God cares for them, and how he has called them child?

I have returned to 1 Corinthians 13 repeatedly throughout the last year. It seems that anytime anything happens in the world, it quickly becomes a left/right, liberal/conservative thing. Every discussion seems to quickly become a fight in 2017. The love by which Paul calls Christians to live is not like that.  If we live with this kind of love, we should not be so quick to divide.

Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not envy. It does not boast. It is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Love never fails.

When I think on these words, I recognize how often I miss the mark when it comes to my relationships with others; those I know well, and those I don't know at all. When someone irks me, I don't have a lot of patience and kindness for them. I tend to boast about my own "rightness," and the other person's "wrongness." I dishonor others by seeing them as the enemy and myself as the hero or victim. I keep record of wrongs, and use those records to justify the other person's "wrongness" and my "rightness."

The world needs more patience and kindness. There is plenty of anger and recording of wrongs in the world already. What if, as a spiritual practice, we reminded ourselves before every interaction, that the person with whom we're talking is a child of God? What if we reminded ourselves how much God loves that person? Would we be more patient? Would we be more kind? Would we act more humbly? Would we be less likely to harbor anger and to keep a record of wrongs?

I think so.

I hear so often people saying that "our nation is divided." And they are right. But the ones with whom we're divided are other children of God--people who are loved by God, and saved by God.

May we be reminded of that fact as we continue to live as followers of Jesus.

When that Proverb Doesn't Come True

One of my biggest fears is that my kids will become "pastor's kids."

Let me explain...

When I was a youth pastor, most of us had stories of "pastor's kids" (PK's) who attended youth group, but were usually troublemakers, and whose faith was very clearly tenuous at best. Often by college, many of these students would leave their faith behind altogether.

Almost universally, the parents of these children had a strong faith in Jesus, and did their absolute most to pass that faith on to their child. For one reason or another, it didn't take.

I think about how many similar PK's that left their faith, and I fear a similar decision by one or both of my children.

At SJCC, there are so many amazing, stellar, incredible parents that I know whose children have stepped away from their faith. It happens often to Christian parents, and it rarely (if ever) has to do with bad parenting. Rather, some children simply decide that their parent's faith is not for them, and they leave it behind when they leave the house, or even before that.

There was a great episode of the Phil Vischer podcast recently about discipling (discipling, not disciplining--similar spelling, MUCH different meaning) children. In the episode, family ministry expert Rob Rienow says that 80% of Christian families have one or more kids who have left their faith behind.

80%.

This story is incredibly common.

And yet, probably due to embarrassment, we don't like to talk about it.

But we should, because it's common to many parents.

One of the most stay-strong verses for parents whose kids have left their faith is Proverbs 22:6: "Train children in the right way, and when old, they will not stray."  My pastor from years ago said that this was the verse that he held tightly to when thinking about his children. He said that he's seen some of his kids return to their faith, and he trusts that the others will as well, because of the truth of this verse.

You might be thinking, "Oh no. David's going to dump on this verse and tell me why it's wrong. I need this verse. It's what keeps me going."

Relax. I won't.

It's important to remember, however, that proverbs are not promises. Proverbs are general truths. They are principles. They are true sayings, but don't come true 100% of the time. We use proverbs all the time in life. "Cheaters never prosper." They sometimes do, but more often than not, those who cheat in life are caught. "An apple a day keeps the doctor away." Not necessarily. But in general, healthy eating leads to a healthier body.

Proverbs are truths that are noticed throughout life. The writer of Proverbs clearly noticed many truths in life and wrote them down. One of these general truths in life is that children learn from their parents. Who we become has a lot to do with how we are taught and led as a child. What our parents teach us and model for us has a bearing on who we become when we are older.

So the proverb that says "Train children in the right way, and when old they will not stray" is a true principle. Children are influenced by their parents and often follow their parent's guiding. But it's not necessarily going to happen 100% of the time.

Obviously.

If 80% of Christian families have at least one child who has left the faith, then it can't be true 100% of the time.

What this proverb is saying is that the teaching and training that a parent gives their child will have bearing on what they do and think and say for the rest of their lives.
A parent is their child's primary model and teacher while they are growing up.
What's more, they continue to be a model and teacher for their children after their children have grown and left the home.

So if your kids held on to their faith into adulthood, great! Appreciate what God has done in the hearts of your children, but do it humbly.

If one or more of your kids have left the faith, don't let this proverb guilt you into thinking that you did a subpar job as a parent. Remain faithful to God, and continue to teach and model Christ's love to your children. Your children are still learning from you.

If you know someone who is feeling the weight of disappointment, guilt, shame, pain, and anguish over their children because they have left their faith, support them. Build them up (Eph. 4, 1 Thess. 5).

I'm 33. I've been out of the house and on my own for 15 years. I am still learning from my parents. They continue to teach me about life, the world, and faith.

Your children are learning from you as well. Continue to "train your children in the right way." Continue to disciple them. Many children do come back to their faith later in life. You are still affecting them. You are still teaching them. Keep going. Keep at it.

And lean on the rest of us in the church for support.

We love you. We love your kids.

We're here to support you as you continue to teach and model your faith to your kids.

Some Thoughts and a Prayer for #Charlottesville

Racism: on display today in Charlottesville.

Nineteen people were injured and one was killed this afternoon when a car slammed into a crowd of people protesting a white supremacy rally.

A white supremacy rally.

It is unbelievable that I'm actually typing those words.

Evidently the rally came together as a protest over the removal of a Robert E. Lee statue.

More than a typical protest, however, this was a gathering of KKK members and white nationalists who chanted "You will not replace us," "Blood and soil" (a Nazi slogan), and "White lives matter." They carried torches as they marched last night a la KKK gatherings.

Let's be clear: Christians should condemn this. All Christians should condemn this. It is abhorrent, and goes against God's desires for humanity. God told Abraham in Genesis 12 that through Abraham's descendants, all people of the earth would be blessed. Jesus calls his disciples to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28). Paul says that in Christ there is no longer Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female, because all are one in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3). God loved all people, including foreigners in early Old Testament times, and called his people to do the same (Lev. 19, Num. 9, Deut. 10, many others).

All forms of racism and white supremacy are not of God. Neo-Nazism, KKK association, white nationalism, none of these are of God.

My heart grieves today for the dead and injured and their families. I am saddened by what I see on the news today. I am shocked that these white supremacists have become bold enough to walk the streets without hoods.

I thought I would have more words today.

I don't.

All I have is a prayer.  A prayer that the God who overcomes evil will continue to overcome the evil of racism that we see alive and well in our world.  A prayer that the gospel will win over the evils of prejudice, xenophobia, and discrimination.  A prayer that whenever racism is encountered, God's people (including myself) will speak out against it as the evil that it is.

Kyrie Eleison
Lord, have mercy.