THE MEANING OF LIFE
by TJ Kastning

I was disaffected, disenfranchised, and disgusted
So few people I trusted, totally maladjusted

My religion failed me, a listing boat on a dead sea
To a blatant degree I did not foresee

I blamed all but myself and put Christ on the shelf
Foolishly enticed to misprice a diced Christ

Self-reliance and pseudoscience described my noncompliance
I yelled “defiance” in a war of grand alliance

I thought my logic and intellect would save the day
Though selfish illogic and human introspect led me astray

I thought I rebelled against a wrong church
It was a self-confident search from a hypocritical perch

Casting blame on the Christian name
Failing to claim the shell game of my shame

I was a pinball without aim
A guessing game all the same

I felt banned to no man’s land
I could not understand

Then there was a miracle
While I waned satirical, God’s mercy waxed empirical

In a predestined play God declared armistice day
I felt brokenly compelled to pray, mayday mayday

Even still, my heart was still hard and scarred and on-guard
I did not fully regard this love greeting card

He still poured down grace out of place
But I held my poker face, just in case

Undeserving of love I was
Reserving my soul He, because that is what he does

I cannot and will not resist anymore
It is a chore to ignore my role in this vital war

I am his fervent bond servant
Observant to be conversant with truth

On the stage floor of world war
I ask what is the score as you grope and implore after more

Every man feels eternity’s weight
Ecclesiastes 3:11 preaches this trait

No man finds God alone
Our bones groan to this fatal tone

Christ must save you, on this you MUST rely
No deed of petty moralism does salvation imply

For all have sinned and come short of glory
Embrace his forgiveness not just the good story

It is ironic to us that while we are all weak
God’s strength is sufficient, it is God we must seek

The limitless store of mercy will stay your trap door
The key to restore to prewar is to abandon your quest for yours

No one is good
You misunderstood

God’s precious gift is that we inherit eternal merit
Through the blood of Christ, twenty four karat

Do not be allured by the shiny deceit all around
No long-lasting crowns are found in shallow town

While some eat, drink, and be merry unwary
The Bride waits patiently, knowing He tarries

The point I am desperately making
There is more to life than waking, making, and taking

Seek for eternity!
It is not in fraternity

This world is passing away
You are merely clay in decay

We live in an arena
A coliseum, not a concertina

We can live in comfort and die infernal
Or fight for God’s glory and live eternal

Reflect Christ, instead of flesh
Make me like wheat for when you perfectly thresh

You say give thanks, but my flesh chases after wealth
Your great love cares little for comfort or bills of health

You say diligently walk in light to fight the blight
Not as religious rite, keep a Godly line of sight

The deeds of darkness are shamefully disguised
As pleasurable expressions of selfishness immortalized

The lust of the flesh and the pride of life
Is dangled by the one who swings the scythe

Walkers in light will see with spiritual eyes
Appraisers by grace, careful of the lies

Sin holds no lure, no bondage, no attraction
His sheep hear His voice and cling to prayerful action

The battle seems long and resistance comes dear
The price sometimes steep, but what have we to fear

Keep your eyes on Jesus, no matter the cost
Persevere through trial, nothing will be lost

Perfect He will present us, atonement fully made
Names in the Book of Life, penalty staid

Gleaming we will be, not of merit our own
No price we paid for our sin sadly sown

The victory is certain, it has been proclaimed
I will not be ashamed to be defamed, maimed, or unnamed

The Kingdom is forthcoming
The World is succumbing

Choose this day whom you will serve
Make no mistake, there is no grading on a curve

Though this young man may have had good intentions, he did not square what he wrote and performed with Scripture. He did not consider the definition of religion and lumped true religion in with false religions. Worse yet, he took the criticisms of the world against the church and validated them ad hoc.

He makes no allowances for mans’ fallen condition and makes no allowance that even true believers will wrestle with sin. Denying his own hypocrisy, he exposes it and gives the impression he believes himself to be wiser than those who have gone to church before him. There is little to commend in the lyrics and part of it is evil – good intentions cannot overcome bad doctrine.

What this young man did is catchy and this caters to those who “feel” about their faith – rather than abide in Christ. Rather than defend the truth – and encouraging others to do the same – he has missed it severely. To follow Jesus Christ with all our heart, soul and mind is religion – pure and simple.

Lines are unmarked. They are by the author, unchanged and uncorrected. Comments are in brackets [ ]:

What if I told you, Jesus came to abolish religion?

[Jesus did not come to abolish religion. He said not one dot of the "i" or cross of the "t" will be done away with (Mat 5:18). The Bible tells us Christ came to save sinners; to seek and save the lost; to do the Father's will and speak the words of the Father. Never once do the Scriptures even imply, let alone state, Christ came to abolish religion. So, if you told me Jesus came to abolish religion, you would be lying.]

What if I told you getting you to vote republican, really wasn’t his mission?

[Why would you tell me this? Which Christian ever claimed this? And why is political affiliation the first subject about religion, in this context? It is interesting he targets Republican, which appears to be his purpose. The majority of the Democratic Party also claim to be Christian and the Christian left forcefully urges the government to be the savior of the oppressed. By discrediting the right, did the writer imply the left was accomplishing Christ's mission? - that the state is the fulfillment of Christ's mission?]

Because republican doesn’t automatically mean Christian,
And just because you call some people blind, doesn’t automatically give you vision.

[First line: True, but again, who even makes the claim? As for the second line, is the writer claiming those who stand for Biblical principles and call for a return to God in the political arena are calling others blind, or being judgmental? Granted, some people come across judgmental but do we lump all who hold to this message as being in error, or hypocritical, for the sake of the few with poor attitudes? And, on the other hand, is the intolerant right more hypocritical than the intolerant left? And why does this have anything to do with religion, in this context? Implicitly, this young man is calling those who stand for truth to be blind and he tells them, as the lyrics progress, he has the vision. He is what he has judged.]

If religion is so great, why has it started so many wars?

[Total inaccurate view of history: the implication is majority and the charge is initiation. That many wars were joined by those who viewed their mission as an obligation toward God - whether misguided or not, the fact is, these wars were not a majority and often they were begun by opposing nations. Furthermore, there is good Biblical basis that all wars come from God. And as long as there is evil in the world, there will be wars. So, are we now justified to discredit God for originating and directing all these wars? If the religious are guilty, is God more guilty?]

Why does it build huge churches, but fails to feed the poor?

[So what does it matter if a church is large or elaborate? Who are you to judge whether these buildings are erected for the glory of God or not? This is God's business. Did Christ condemn Herod's Temple? Doesn't the Bible praise Solomon's Temple? Nonetheless, most these same churches that have beautiful buildings are also feeding the poor. To make his point, the young man judges and defames those who are doing good works for the sake of the few that don't.]

Tells single moms God doesn’t love them if they’ve ever been divorced

[That some who are religious are legalistic is no cause to discredit all who are religious and especially not those who are truly religious. Furthermore, finding those guilty of this line are fewer in our day than in days gone by. This is more of a straw man than a popular practice.]

Yet God in the Old Testament actually calls the religious people whores

[False. That some of the people accused may be religious does not imply God accused all who were religious. The accusation of whores was not due to being religious but was due to the accused's efforts to please man rather than God, or glorify themselves rather than God. You could say this is the same sin this young man is guilty of because little in these lyrics lines up with Scripture and, thus, cannot please or glorify God. It can only glorify himself and increase his own fame.]

Religion preaches grace, but another thing they practice,

[What religion preaches grace besides the Christian religion? Thus the writer lumps Christianity into the religion pool. And once again, that some are legalistic, he discredits all. That most of the religious are not Christian is ignored because it does not help him make his case.]

Tend to ridicule Gods people, they did it to John the Baptist,

[False religions will ridicule God's people but so does this young man in the lines of this poem, or rap.]

Cant fix their problems, so they try to mask it,
Not realizing that’s just like sprayin perfume on a casket

[This is true for all human nature - not just the religious are guilty of this. However, those who practice true religion are free from this because they understand though they wrestle with their human nature, as Paul describes in Romans chapter seven, there is no condemnation because of the work of Christ Jesus, as described in Romans chapter eight.]

Because the problem with religion is that it never gets to the core,
It’s just behavior modification, like a long list of chores.
Let’s dress up the outside, make things look nice and neat,
Its funny that’s what they do to mummies, while the corpse rots underneath,

[This is true for false religions. True religion abides in the core - Jesus Christ.]

Now I ain’t judging I’m just saying be careful of putting on a fake look,
Because there’s a problem if people only know that you’re a Christian by that little section on your facebook

[This is a good admonition for true believers. Jesus said if you are ashamed of Him, He will be ashamed of you. But this is a mute issue to anyone else, regardless of religion. And, once again, he lumps Christians in with the religious. So, I am wondering, when later in the lyrics he claims to love Jesus, is he NOT a Christian? Has this young man risen above Christianity?]

In every other aspect of life you know that logics unworthy
Its like saying you play for the lakers just because you bought a jersey

[The first line does not make sense. To say using logic is like mixing apples and oranges (Lakers and jerseys) does not make sense. However, this young man has mixed apples and oranges in confusing all religion with true religion and lumping Christianity in with bad religion.]

But see I played this game too; no one seemed to be on to me,
I was acting like church kid, while addicted to pornography.
I’d go to church on Sunday, but on saturday getting faded,
Acting as if I was simply created to have sex and get wasted.
Spend my whole life putting on this façade of neatness,
But now that I know Jesus, I boast in my weakness.

[Good confession and it is true that many, even those who practice true religion wrestle with sin. Paul describes this in Romans chapter seven and in the next chapter he tells us how we overcome it.]

If grace is water, then the church should be an ocean,

[Bad mantra. The church is not the source of grace. God is and Paul describes this in Romans chapter eight, among other Scriptures.]

Cuz its not a museum for good people, it’s a hospital for the broken

[This is another popular mantra and it helps promote victimhood mentality as opposed to accountability to abide in Christ. The Bible never describes the church this way. The church is described as a fellowship of believers who worship God and encourage each other. And in the bigger picture, the church is the bride of Christ. does Christ come to the hospital to marry His bride?]

I no longer have to hide my failures I don’t have to hide my sin,
Because my salvation doesn’t depend on me, it depends on him.

[The second line is true, however the first line is vague. Many profess to be Christian and live openly in sin. This line seems to allow this but Jesus said, "Go and sin no more."]

because when I was Gods enemy and certainly not a fan,
God looked down on me and said, “I want that man!”

[This is true. Jesus said no man comes to Him unless the Father draws Him. He also said, "You did not chose Me but I chose you" (Joh 6:44; 15:16).]

Which is so different from religious people, and why Jesus called em fools

[This is confusing. Is he saying religious people were not enemies of God, and if so, why would Jesus call them 'fools'? Or, is he saying God did not look down on the religious and draw them to Him? If the second is true, and we are using this young man's definition of religious here, what about the Apostle Paul and other Jewish leaders who truly received Jesus Christ? This young man does not understand what the Bible tells us about religion, nor does he understand the plain definition of the word - and the mess gets worse as the song rolls on.]

Don’t you see hes so much better than just following some rules?

[This is true according to his definition of religion. Nonetheless, the Bible is clear, you cannot follow Christ without adhering to a basic set of rules: believe He was sent by the Father to die for your sins and give eternal life; abide in Christ and sin no more; love God with all your heart, soul and mind; love your neighbor as yourself; love one another and do not forsake the assembly; take up your cross and follow Me, etc. Remember, Jesus said, "My yoke is easy" but it is a yoke, nonetheless.]

Now let me clarify, I love the church, I love the bible, and I believe in sin

[He has spent many lines denigrating what he claims to love, namely, the church. He has demonstrated his willingness to ignore the Bible to make his case against religion. Thus, it is not far-fetched he believes in sin.]

But my question, is if Jesus were here today, would your church let Him in?

[Good question. Given that most professing Christians are not and thus most, or at least many, churches are in the control of worldly men. It is no wonder the popularity of churches and church leaders who denigrate the Word. There is an easy way to determine which churches would listen to Christ and which would not: Those who receive the Word of God in toto will; those who deny the authority and power of the Scriptures will not.]

Remember He was called a drunkard and a glutton by “religious men”

[He was called a drunkard and glutton by Jewish leaders, who were religious. But their religion was practiced to please man, not God. This young man has set up the straw man whereby he can condemn all religious men even though not all religious men agreed with the assessment of the Jewish leaders.]

The Son of God not supported self-righteousness, not now, not then.

[True. Christ condemned self-righteousness and pride.]

Now back to the topic, one thing I think is vital to mention,
How Jesus and religion are on opposite spectrums,

[Over and over, Christ admonishes us to abide in Him (John 15, et al). This is true religion - God, as revealed in Scripture, is our object of worship and we live to please Him and glorify Him with all our heart and soul and mind. When Christ pointed the way to true religion, how can He be on the opposite side of it?]

One is the work of God one is a man made invention,
One is the cure and one is the infection.

[It is true false religions were created by man and sometimes by demons. However, true religion is the work of God. God has declared He is a jealous God and we are to worship no one else but Him (Exo 20:5, et al). To claim this is an invention of man is blasphemous.]

Because Religion says do, Jesus says done.

[Most false religions are built upon mans' work and requirements for his salvation. When Jesus said, "It is finished," He was talking about the payment for our sin. While we are saved by grace, Jesus still commands us to do: abide in Me, follow My commands and while the New Testament makes clear the true believer is Christ's slave, Jesus assures him His yoke is easy and burden is light. James tells us to be doers of the Word. Certainly, we know we are not saved by anything we do (Eph 2:8-9) but the Bible makes clear we must still do (Eph 2:10) - this is our religion: abiding in Christ and glorifying God in every area of our lives.]

Religion says slave, Jesus says son,
Religion puts you in shackles but Jesus sets you free.

[Jesus said all who sin are a slave to sin (Joh 8:34). Paul affirms this in Romans chapter seven, et all, and tells us we are slaves to sin or we are slaves to God's law. - yes, the Bible still affirms our obligation to God's law. The New Testament has many references to our status as slaves of Christ and, as mentioned above, Christ tells us His yoke is easy and burden is light (Mat 11:30). If we truly believe, Christ sets us free from the law of sin and death (Rom 8:2; Heb 9:15) and for us He fulfilled the requirements of the law (Gal 5:1). Now we are free to live a life of obedience in reverent worship of our Lord and Savior (Rom 12:1-2).]

Religion makes you blind, but Jesus lets you see.

[If our religion is in Christ, then we will see (Joh 9:35-39). Without true religion, we cannot see.]

This is what makes religion and Jesus two different clans,
Religion is man searching for God, but Christianity is God searching for man.

[First, we already established the Bible teaches true religion. Christ cannot be opposite of this. Second, the Bible tells us no one seeks after God (Isa 64:6; Rom 3:11). Therefore, false religion is man rejecting God - not seeking Him - by substituting His worship. It is true, as mentioned above, God draws man and not the other way around,]

Which is why salvation is freely mine, forgiveness is my own,
Not based on my efforts, but Christ’s obedience alone.
Because he took the crown of thorns, and blood that dripped down his face
He took what we all deserved, that’s why we call it grace.
While being murdered he yelled “father forgive them, they know not what they do”,
Because when he was dangling on that cross, he was thinking of you
He paid for all your sin, and then buried it in the tomb,
Which is why im kneeling at the cross now saying come on there’s room

[Aside from a few journalistic liberties, these lines are true and mostly sound.]

So know I hate religion, in fact I literally resent it,

[Religion is the object of our worship (Act 17:22). Our religion is manifest in whom or what we honor and obey - who we glorify with our lives. If we abide in Christ, we are practicing true religion - anything else is false.]

Because when Jesus cried It is finished, I believe He meant it.

[When Christ cried, "It is finished," Hw was stating the payment for sin was complete. Our obligation to live in obedience to Him had just begun.]

FINAL COMMENTS:

So this young man hates religion – he has spent the entire poem on it. He has lumped in true religion, condemning it and has even denigrated Christianity. The second line from the end, he reveals his resentment. This is probably the key to this video going viral: there is a generation of bitter young Christians who resent the hypocrisy they watched growing up.

This generation does not realize hypocrisy is a human condition. And, like the legalists whom they condemn, they have no grace to see their brother through the eyes of Christ. The problem stems from the way we have raised a generation of Christians to assess the world around them by how they feel – not by critical comparison to the Word of God.

They do not understand we are in a war – much like the generation before them, they want their life to be comfortable. Because their faith is based upon feeling, they validate the deceptive complaints of the enemy. And, while claiming to love the General, they gun down all His soldiers.

This is the fruit of teaching a generation of Christians to love Jesus but failing to teach them how to abide in Him.

I hope this has been helpful.

Jesus did not come to abolish religion, as this young man claims. In fact, Jesus Christ said the dot will not be removed from the “i” nor the cross from the “t.” The Bible tells us to put our religion into practice; warns us not to allow our religion to be in vain; and explains what is the religion God accepts. This young man in the video judges those he perceives to be judgmental; he acknowledges what Christ has done for us and that is the end, or reason, of his abandonment of religion.

Jesus Christ commands us to abide in Him – not just to accept His work (as a substitute for religion). We must abide – this is 24/7 – this is religion. This young man falls short of the truth. Jesus said if we abide in Him and His words abide in us – this means we spend time in prayer and Bible study and that our minds are continually rehashing what we have studied and we are in constant communion with God – to glorify Him in all things and to glorify ourselves in nothing – THEN we will know the truth and the truth will set us free.

What this young man did is catchy but he has severely missed the truth. To follow Jesus Christ with all our heart, soul and mind is religion – pure and simple.

64 pages and on sale at Lulu.com. You will find the book challenging – because it presents Scripture as the foundation for the author’s observations – you won’t find any feel good, watered down Gospel here.

I’ve just returned from a ceremony . . . the swearing in of a Washington State Supreme Court Justice, in this case, my friend and fellow Bainbridge Islander Charlie Wiggins. . . At least one thing is certain – Charlie is a humble and approachable man of the highest integrity. The theme of his career is expressed in the book of Amos: “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream.”

This justice he speaks of, according to my previous conversation with Charlie Wiggins, a professing Christian and elder at his Presbyterian Church, is nothing short of social justice. Typical of a left leaning liberal talking about justice, Mr. Hays goes on to describe his feelings – not the solid foundation of law:

This was a gratifying experience because what I heard were the voices of real people with real lives, real families and genuine passions . . . I came away feeling that our courts are to a very high degree in good hands, that they’re vital to the protection of our liberty and our cherished unalienable rights as Americans and members of the human race.

Going into the elections of 2010, Charlie Wiggins sent me an email hoping to point out errors in my comparisons of him and his opponent, Justice Richard Sanders. He wrote, “I’d like to give you an opportunity to consider the truth.  I hope you’ll reconsider and endorse me, but whatever you decide, I know you will want to make your decision based on truths, not on untruths. . .” So, what are the truths Charlie Wiggins presented?

First, he attacked my position on VotingForJudges.org, defending it as a non-partisan website, when the truth of the matter is, although they do not directly endorse candidates, they largely publish endorsements by liberal organizations, thus affirming the endorsements for liberal candidates. In this example, in his arguments in the email, he relies upon changing the intent of words and meanings to give himself, and the organization he helped found, the appearance of neutrality, when, in fact, they are promoting liberal candidates.

Second, he said he was not proud of his endorsements from QLaw (the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender bar association) and only published the rating “because it was the lowest rating they could give me. . .” When in fact, the Cominus review of this candidate pointed out on his website and on QLaw’s website he did, in fact, have a High Rating. In this example, he outright lied – no hedge, just lies.

Third, in the Cominus review, we pointed out he had written a decision against the voluntary services of chaplains in municipal police and fire departments. Charlie Wiggins stated in his email rebuttal, “There’s a big difference between saying that I ruled against allowing voluntary chaplains and saying that such programs may be constitutional but further facts must be presented before we can tell.  That isn’t a holding against the chaplaincy program.”  And, in another email he wrote, “As for Malyon, I took an oath to follow the constitution and it would have been wrong for me not to make sure that the constitution wasn’t being violated by the chaplaincy program.  I did as much as I could in interpreting the constitution to allow the program to continue.” He may couch the decision in indecision, and give pretense to the Constitution and so justify himself to Christian friends, on the one hand, and liberal supporters, on the other. But the fact of the matter is that his decision struck a death blow to the volunteer services of the chaplains. Fortunately, he was reversed at the Supreme Court level and it was Justice Sanders who wrote the decision. As I pointed out to Charlie, “According to your argument defending Maylon, you prefer the Lawrence Tribe version of the Constitution over the plain wording. One reason I find Sanders fascinating is he thinks the Constitution has meaning of its own without the assistance of revision by those who would neuter it.” ["Appropriate constitutional analysis begins with the text and, for most purposes should end there as well." - Sanders' actual quote in the Maylon decision.]

Fourth, when bringing up his history of decisions based upon social justice rather than upon a foundation in law, Charlie replied, “My vision of social justice is shaped by Jesus’ example of healing the sick, and feeding the hungry. . .” And, in another email, “Brothers in Christ have disagreed since the disciples came to Jesus and complained about someone casting out devils in Jesus’ name.  As I recall, Jesus’ response was not to condemn them, but to respond that those who are not against us are for us.” Don’t ask me how this fits, unless by a faint possibility he means to infer that Christians working toward justice in law and Christians working toward equalization of results are both working for the kingdom of God. Charlie, there is no truth in having it both ways – either what God said about justice in Scripture is wrong, or the equal distribution of results is wrong.

No one can claim to seek justice while denying the clear wording of the law given in the word of God. No one can claim to seek constitutional intent while neutering the very words of the documents. Charlie Wiggins claims to be a Christian and he claims to seek truth. But in reality, he has worked hard to please man while tipping his hat to God.

If it is true, as his friend John Hays wrote in his letter to the editor, the theme of his career is expressed Amos 5:24, ‘Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream,’ maybe we should look at the verse in context. The chapter is a warning from God. He is going to destroy the nation of Judah because they have trampled on His justice and have denied truth and righteousness in the courts. The metaphors of justice rolling like waters, and such are the prophecy of God’s hand destroying the nation that would not listen. Charlie, you may think you have some fuzzy, feel-good life verse that seems to apply to your career; but you have chosen a Scripture which proclaims if we refuse to uphold God’s justice and righteousness in the courts, His hand will roll down upon us in destruction.

So, for Charlie Wiggins and other professing Christians who would twist the law to their own selfish ends, consider verses 14 and 15, “Seek good [righteousness - not outcomes], not evil, that you may live. Then the LORD God Almighty will be with you, just as you say He is. Hate evil, love good; maintain justice in the courts.” Charlie Wiggins, this is your opportunity to make a difference.

At the large church I used to attend, several times the pastor spoke against the people he saw on television protesting abortion doing corny things as an embarrassment to God. He lumped all protestors to the same standard and never attended an abortion clinic protest to see for himself – that would cost him a sacred ball game. And, though he claimed to be pro-life, he spent more time beating up those willing to stand for truth than those promoting “choice.”

Youth ministers are the largest group I have contended with in this argument of what embarrasses God. You would think the men whose primary job is to help young Christians rise up for God against peer pressure would be strong promoters of truth. But it seems they have the hardest time, themselves – personally – with peer pressure. They rely upon it heavily among their group and preach a conformity that is more in line with the world’s thought than it is with God’s. They promote their favorite teams and have their pictures taken with famous people, but they are quick to put down those who stand unashamed for God’s truth as arrogant and an embarrassment to God.

About a year ago, I was arguing with several youth pastors on Facebook who were promoting the film, “Jesus Save Us From Your Followers.” This is a movie promoting acceptance of homosexuality and other deviant lifestyles. The premise is Christians owe the homosexual community an apology for years of bigotry and hate. Where are the youth pastors who will raise up a generation of Christians to stand against sin? Does love trump truth? No, true love promotes truth – and warns against the evils of sin.

When Jesus was on earth, did He once apologize for the actions of John the Baptist? or any of the prophets? John the Baptist hung out in the desert clothed in animal skin, eating bugs and honey. He stood up against all the evils of the day – and he called people names! Isaiah preached naked for three years (Isa 20). While Ezekiel lay on his left side for 390 days, then lay on his right side for 40 days (Eze 4) – forcing others to feed him and clean up his urine and excrement! Yet, Christ praised these men – and quoted them – but never condemned their actions or apologized for them. Will somebody read the Scriptures, please, and point me to one verse where God complained of His people embarrassing Him.

Going back to John the Baptist: When Christ was confronted about John, He asked the people what they expected to find in the desert – “A reed swayed by the wind?” Or, in other words, a wimp, or an embarrassment. Then Christ set the record straight by commending John for his violence. Yes, his violence – standing up for the truth of God is violence among the principalities. Then Christ admonishes us all to become violent – not physically violent but violent against the thoughts and culture of the day (Mat 11:12).

The God of the Bible is a very big God. Not only is He the ONLY true God, He is bigger than our feeble, fallen minds can comprehend. Paul tells us in Romans chapter ten we cannot bring Christ down, nor can we raise Him up – that is, we cannot compare Him at our level, or bring Him to it. Our confession is to be “Jesus Christ is Lord.” Isaiah tells us God’s thoughts are not our thoughts (Isa 55) and in Job 38 to 41 God gives an account of His greatness and rebukes those who would bring Him down to man’s level. There are many other Scriptures declaring God’s greatness – He does not need the counsel of man. If He needs no counsel, it follows He needs no approval of man. If He needs no approval, how can He be embarrassed?

It seems the majority of youth pastors are more concerned with being cool and favorite teams, these days. There are few who teach Christian youth to stand strong in the Lord. And this whole conversation about embarrassing God is to dumb us down and promote conformity with the rest of us – who are already conformed to the world’s standard of what a Christian should be. What does the Scripture say?

Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers. But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on His law he meditates day and night. [Psa 1:1-2 NIV]

When we promote conformity with the world, when we speak of God to bring Him to our level, we sit in the seat of mockers. Bringing God down to our level will not bring one soul to Christ. Those who will reject God will reject Him on every level. If we teach our children not to be an embarrassment to God, they will be afraid to preach the truth to a fallen world.

It is true, Christians sometimes do embarrassing things; sometimes the purpose is malicious, sometimes just pure stupidity – we are fallen beings. But thank God, we are saved by grace and not by what we do. On the other hand, there are those who claim to be Christian but they exhibit few attributes of one who is saved by grace. Do any of these people embarrass God? How can God be embarrassed when Scriptures tell us He is glorified in ALL things? – the good, the evil and the embarrassing.

Rise up and get away from the seat of mockers. The young need to be educated to get into the Word of God and stand firm for the truth. Look up to God – don’t try to bring Him down.

For years, the GOP had been the minority party – and it appeared the upper end of the party were satisfied to remain that way, as long as they kept their seat at the table. The one message the ousted chairman preached was if the Republicans ever became the majority party, they would not be in a position to lead.

In 1994, that theory was tested, as the Democratic Party was run out of DC on a rail. With the Contract For America, and the rising tide of conservative speech, it appeared that lowly chairman had been a misguided voice of doom. But it took less than a year to prove him right. The conservatives were soon beat down by the liberal media. Instead of remaining faithful champions of their cause – the reason the people elected them in the first place, they slowly migrated into the party of conservative big government.

While I do not believe George W Bush was as bad a president as the public mantra would attest, I fault him for this: his refusal to confront Congress allowed the reigning party to further evolve into supporters of bigger government and the party of big spenders – in the name of conservatism. Had he held the members of his party in check, we would have never seen the crazy-talk election of 2008 and the victory of a no-name to the head office of the free world.

It appears we are at a similar crossroads again as we faced in 1992. We have a minority party, harassed by the media that, with few exceptions, is unwilling to stand up and proclaim its core principles. The goal is still the same: to win elections. To this end, the Republican Party is now reaching out to all political, immoral and religious tides that appear to have momentum at the cost of principle – long held, grassroots principles.

Please explain to me how winning elections will promote the cause of freedom.

This lowly has-been maintains, as he has always maintained, the important thing is to stand true to principle – and declare it to the masses. Once the principles are understood, elections will take care of themselves. Our responsibility is to protect our God-given rights and our heritage of Biblical law. It is God’s responsibility to “win” the elections.

Now comes Dino Rossi into the race for the senate seat occupied by Patti Murray. He is a conservative – at least he claims to be. In his earlier years, he appeared more conservative than he does now. However, while serving as a Washington State Senator, Dino Rossi supported and voted for SB6537, which forces health care workers to prescribe or dispense an abortifacient to victims of rape and incest. In fact, Dino Rossi publicly supports abortion for victims of rape and incest – as if killing an unborn child resolves the crime. Who instructed this man on justice?

With every election cycle, Dino has evolved to the left – though, to his credit, he is still in the middle. This election cycle, he has avoided right-wing appearances, such as Tea Party rallies and has distanced himself from his conservative base while reaching out to the Rational, Reasonable Republicans – that is, the RINOs.

When his primary opponent dropped the gauntlet that Rossi support the principles of the Republican Party Platform, Rossi refused to pick it up. Of course, the media and talking heads accuse Didier of creating division. We need to remember, just as Christ said He did not come to bring peace but a sword, so standing for principle will appear to divide – but the division is created by those who refuse principle to promote themselves.

The GOP, for that matter, the conservative cause – the cause of freedom – is at the same crossroads as pre-1994. The nation is in turmoil and confused by the multitude of talking heads. This is the time for statesmen to rise up and champion the cause of freedom. We need statesmen who are willing to sacrifice their own election to get their message out. If we become sold on the strategy of winning elections and majorities, we will sacrifice the cause of freedom.

What if we get a majority GOP elected to Congress – what could possibly be bad about that? Remember Bill Clinton was such a left-wing, radical president that the people turned the Democratic Congress back over to the Republicans two years into his term. This Congress did not lead on principle though they did contend with him politically. Yet, Clinton was so artful in his handling of them that he appeared to be a compassionate liberal-conservative and easily won reelection. If we repeat this process, Obama will handily win reelection in 2012.

So, I posit the theory, this election is not the cycle to work for majorities. This is the time to work for principle – elect those who will stand up for freedom, majority or not. If there is no conservative contender, let the rest stay in place. This will set the tone for freedom’s cause in 2012.

If we elect those who, like Dino Rossi, are only interested in their careers, we will be promoting more big government at the expense of our cause and these members will be entrenched and immune from true conservative contenders in future elections. Therefore, it is better to allow Patti Murray another six years – let the people see the difference between her and the conservative message, rather than allow a weak, big government conservative to create confusion and turn the people against the cause of freedom.

As it stands right now, there is not a lot of public difference between what Patti Murray and Dino Rossi appear to be – they both frame themselves as centrist. Put your efforts into electing conservative statesmen that will not be ashamed to display their differences. This will eliminate all confusion for the election cycle of 2012 – which is the campaign we must win.

A quick definition of hate: standing up for the truth of God’s word is “hate.”

I argued with these pastors and leaders from the Scripture. They, in turned, argued back that I was narrow-minded and old-school and that I could never understand their ways. To them, it did not matter the multiple Scriptures condemning the practice and the participants; it did not matter to them Jesus’ example of praising the prophets for their hateful ways (modern definition) rather than condemning them as narrow-minded; nor did it matter to them these homosexuals were on the road to hell and their method would do nothing to turn them back. And, in the end, I refused to “agree to disagree.”

It is hard for the church – and especially youth pastors – to stand up for the truth because they are more interested in what the church looks like than what the message of the Gospel is. This is ironic, because these are the same people who are supposed to address the problem of peer pressure to our youth, yet they cannot handle the problem themselves.

Molotov Mitchell has a short video out that addresses this issue: What should be the Christian response to the homosexual? [scroll down to "My Gay Friends" - depending on when you read this, it might be a ways down the list.]

[movie deleted because of script conflict]

Instead, I want to talk to Christians who are inclined to vote to give marriage benefits to same-sex partners despite moral concerns about homosexuality. You know who you are.

You believe in grace, redemption, forgiveness and the need to love your neighbor as yourself. You believe that homosexuality is sin, but you have a hard time opposing homosexual rights measures because you feel it would be forcing people to abide by your personal moral code. You do not dislike gay people. In fact, you like your gay friends more than some Christians you know.

You are inclined to vote in favor of benefits for homosexuals simply to avoid association attitudes you have seen from fellow Christians. After all, you believe fervently in the command to love your neighbor.

However, you may fail to recognize the distinction between loving your neighbor and being liked. Many people make this mistake. In fact many believe the test of whether or not you love your neighbor is whether or not they like you. Therefore, in an effort to prove their love by being liked, they purge their lives of all controversy.

When a choice is to be made, they spend far more time pondering what other people are going to think than they do wondering whether or not it is right. Individuals will bite their tongue. Churches will avoid certain passages of scripture for decades at a time-all in the name of love.

The idea that Christians should try to be well liked is somewhat ironic when you consider the fact that Jesus was murdered. Moreover, He promised his disciples that they would be hated for obedience to him. (John 15:18; Matt 10:21-23). So where did we get the idea that being like Jesus means everybody is going to like us?

Christian charity is frequently looked upon favorably. Christian holiness, however, is not. Still, the goal for the Christian is not to be like or hated, political or apolitical, popular or unpopular. The goal is to be biblical.

Referendum 71 presents a dilemma for many Christians. They understand that God does not believe homosexual relationships are the equivalent of heterosexual marriages. They certainly don’t want their children being taught in school that they are morally the same. But is it kind if it will make someone angry?

It presents an even bigger dilemma for pastors. They have a tremendous opportunity for influence. But should they risk the potential fallout of addressing the biblical perspective on this issue?

While I have opinions, I cannot answer these questions for you. I will simply say that whatever decision is made, I hope it comes more from a desire to be faithful and less from a need to be liked.

Joseph Backholm
http://fpiw.org/mondayminute