A Quirk with Actual Theological Significance?

Here’s a strange quirk of mine: I mute all TV commercials.The first person I saw do it was my grandfather. Then I noticed my father did it as well from time to time. As I got older I started to mute TV commercials as well.

There are some practical reasons for this. First off, TV commercials are very loud to me. I can be listening to dialogue in a show and be blasted by a car salesman commercial within seconds. The audiophile in me can’t stand it. But that’s a personal reason – coming for a guy who finds the hum of fluorescent lighting irritating or too much 3-5 kHz or 300 Hz in a song maddening. Secondly, at 3 1/2 minutes a break, I can talk to my wife about something or read a page or two of a book. Also, if I mute the commercials I am more likely to get up and clean up the dishes during the commercial breaks. So, improved communication, information gathering, and household chores – all with the click of a button!

More importantly, for me, there is an emotional and spiritual reason. As a minister, I firmly believe that our Christianity can be culturally influenced by many things, including commercials. With each commercial, we get a sermon regarding what we should value as a nation. This translates to what we should spend money on – something an advertiser tells us to value. Commercials stoke the fire of materialism in a person’s life.  The church is not immune to this at all. I was at a large conference recently where one of the popular topics was the evils of consumerism. Of course, I had a ten piece praise band, lights, videos, a comedian, a magician, free books and DVDs, and 400 kiosks to help me understand just how bad consumerism had become in America. Commercials are the foundation of that. Advertisers believe your convictions and values can be swayed in a mere thirty seconds time. Why do they believe that? Because we’ve proven it to be true in the past.

Christians should certainly believe in the power of Satan to tempt and destroy our lives. However, Satan (unlike God) has limited resources with which to do this. Though I am not saying our culture is authored by Satan, I do think he makes good use of what we’ve given him. Why spiritually attack a believer when you can lull him to sleep? To me, that’s Satan’s main objective – not to visit someone with direct demonic attack (though that happens) but to create a level of dysfunction in the Christian’s life by distracting him from “the one thing necessary.” Though commercials can certainly be entertaining, they are also “preaching” to you. The question is: are we buying what they’re selling?

Life Lessons Learned From TV

My wife loves “So You Think You Can Dance.”

I (by contrast) hate it.

Yet, while feeding the baby or folding laundry, I am subjected to an unconscionable amount of this show. I really don’t mind that much – sometimes I get into it. But the most interesting thing about the show is the critiquing of the judges. I know, I know. You were thinking it was the dancing that fascinates the nerd within. Sorry to disappoint… 

We were watching last week and the judges said some things that really interested me as someone who deals with people’s perception of right and wrong on a regular basis. Channing Cooke with Phillip Attmore had just finished a jive routine that seemed to be done well. It’s early in the program so the judging tends to be a little softer at this point. I perked up at Mary Murphy’s comments. She was impressed but pointed out that the couple’s leg movements were not up to par. Now, this is the part that caught my attention: she attributed their lack of sharpness to laziness. There’s something significant about that. Mary attributed their deficiencies to a personal lack of internal moral motivation. Nigel Lythgoe went next. He commented on the same lack of sharpness, but attributed it to the couple not quite being in shape for the dance style. In essence, he said their tiredness resulted in the lack of sharpness - a much softer critique attributed to external factors, not their personal integrity.

As a minister, I began to reflect on how such a simple change in perspective can make criticism harsh or constructive. The church walks a fine line in this regard. We deal with issues of the heart but have to be careful not to make a difficult situation look hopeless. If I was physically incapable of performing a task and was told that my failures were intrinsic/moral, I would feel crushed under that assumption. And that’s all it is – an assumption. We don’t have access to the motivations of others. We merely have the outward manifestation of those intentions. Often times, bad intentions are easy to spot based on the actions that follow. But there’s plenty of gray area where intentions are hidden. Some people automatically chalk up the suspect behavior of others to time-honored doctrinal catch phrases like “Original Sin” or assume that failure is always preventable. When tarred with the moral brush, that will always be assumed. But sometimes people are just weak and scatter-brained and frail. Grace gives the benefit of the doubt in those situations. “Bad” does not always equal “weak.” After all, Jesus gave rest for the “heavy laden,” not the morally corrupt.

That’s why I liked Nigel’s critique better. When you’re a world-class dancer (or anything else for that matter) it’s easy to moralize/spiritualize the amount of work required to be the best in a given field. It helps us tolerate the extreme conditions in which that expertise is developed to the detriment of other areas of our well-being. Mary, at least at this moment, seemed to be trapped inside that paradigm. Nigel transcended above it. He gave grace by attributing that weakness to joints, ligaments, and muscles – something to be strengthened – rather than to inherent laziness – something to be ashamed of. Preachers know that both of these can motivate. But which one preserves the dignity of others? As Christians continue to confront sin, we need to spend less time making sure we call “a spade a spade” and more time concerned with making sure we never call something a spade when it’s really just a heart or a club. Guilt can motivate – there’s no doubt about that. But grace preserves and strengthens. I’ll go with Nigel’s approach anytime.

When “Going Green” Goes Bad…

That title sounds like one of those reality shows about car chases or wild animals – “When Animals Attack!, Part 17″ or something…

I’m an eco-friendly guy to a degree. I don’t recycle everything possible or buy those cool looking light bulbs for every light in the house. But I try to recycle when the opportunity affords and practice energy and water conservation. We don’t make a huge deal of it at our house. We have recycling bins at our church office and I use those. But something happened the other day that really angered me. Claire Grace came home after preschool and began to lecture me about the plastic bottle in the trash can. She then proceeded to tell me about the inevitable destruction of all rain forests and how we needed to do something about that as a family right now! Let me remind you that CG is still 4 years of age (at least for a few more days). Four! That’s a little early to be looking for numbers on the bottom of plastics, isn’t it? So, I told her not to worry about the rain forests and recycling so much. Right now, her main job in life is to “have fun with reckless abandon.” Before you taunt me with accusations of morose parenting, let me explain my logic. You may find it commendable in the end.

Claire Grace got her urgent messages about the environment from two places: public television and preschool. Part of my response to her was to relay the often missed fact that people take various stances on the issue of the environment. Last time I checked, people have a choice to be eco-friendly. Yet, that’s not the message she was receiving. She was being indoctrinated. Come on, Sam – that’s a little harsh isn’t it? Well, look at it this way. Along with the basics of what it takes to care for the environment (something certainly worth knowing), CG was also getting a healthy dose of valuation without really asking for it. Morality was attached to the message of environmental conservation. So, she assumed that my decision to throw a plastic bottle in a standard trash can was an immoral or unethical decision. The inherently right decision would’ve been to find a recycling bin. We use this lingo all the time with secular/social/philosophical themes. After all, we need to “save” the earth, right? Yet, no one likes to point this out…mostly because we get enough righteous indignation from folks without asking for it.

Sadly, those who attach moral significance to the “right to choose ” in one agenda will completely disregard it in other scenrios. The same “choice” of individuality that was denied me by my daughter where going “green” was concerned is forced down my throat when it comes to abortion, for example. Women have a choice. And when the issue of gay marriage comes up, I’m denied that same right to choice used to support abortion when I disagree with same-sex unions. Funny, huh? I’ve never really met the “freedom of choice” police, but evidently that freedom only applies in pre-approved situations. I’m waiting for my manual to arrive in the mail so I can be up to date on which decisions have already been made for me.

I’m a minister. I believe in Jesus Christ. I also believe Christians have a responsibility to the environment.  Though I would like for you to believe in Jesus, I cannot make you. It’s your choice. It may surprise you to know that I am totally okay with that. I am constantly amazed at those who malign religion and those who want to “legislate” morality. Yet they have no qualms about applying a similar level of religious “fervor” to their own fashionable cause. All I’m asking for is the same professional courtesy I give you. Please don’t indoctrinate my daughter. She can make the choice to be “green” for herself one day.

I guess it just goes to show that we are all religious about something…

Why Oprah Just Might Be the Antichrist…

I taught a small group on end times beliefs about four years ago. During our examination of Revelation, we inevitably stumbled upon the passages believed to describe the Antichrist. Immediately questions arose: who is he? When will he come? Will he start the tribulation? Will Christians be raptured before then? Boy, could I feel a headache coming on! I’ve said in this post how much I hate popular forms of eschatology for this exact reason. So, this time around, I decided to have a little fun:

“Oh, the Antichrist is already here.”

“What!! Who is it?”

“It’s Oprah Winfrey.” 

“WHAT!!”

Then I took them to the only  place in the Bible where the term “antichrist” is mentioned: the epistles of John, specifically 1 John 2:18-19. What I love about these two verses is the fact that John says there were many antichrists who had come – most of them were part of the church at that time before they left it. So, if John is using the term correctly, we must assume that “antichrist” does not mean “Antichrist” in the popular sense of one rival messiah sent to deceive the world. So what does it mean?

Well, “Christ” means “Messiah” – that’s obvious enough. It’s the “anti-” part that we get wrong. We assume that “anti-” means “in opposition to” or “antagonistic” – like anti-abortion. But it doesn’t. In means “in place of,” “instead of,”or “substitutionary.” So, “antichrist” means “in place of Christ.” 1 John 2:22 goes even further by saying that anyone who denies not only the Son, but also the Father, is acting as an antichrist.

So, why Oprah? Well, it actually doesn’t have anything to do with Eckhart Tolle. It has to do with Oprah’s power and cultural influence. Like most media figures, Oprah often establishes her influence outside of Christianity and many people look to her for answers about life’s deeper issues. She’s one of the most popular and well-recognized individuals in our nation and often serves as a cultural substitute where spiritual issues are concerned.

In that sense anything can be antichrist – government officials, sports figures, musicians, teachers, world leaders, philosophers, and even preachers. Any person that others may substitute for Christ is, in some sense, antichrist. That list includes Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan. That doesn’t necessarily mean they are wrong or unworthy of admiration. But I think it’s safe to say that they aren’t God. And to subsitute them for God inapproriate.

In most cases, the problem is not with the “Oprahs” of the world but with those who substitute their wisdom for a deep relationship with God. Notice that John didn’t write to the “antichrists” of his time, but rather to the people who gave them undue authority and influence. And that’s the key. Anyone can warn about the “Antichrist” of the Left Behind Series, but what are we doing about those who give to others the influence that only Christ should have? People succumb to “antichristism” when Jesus is their savior in doctrine but in matters of life, Oprah (or anyone else) is their lord. The only time people look for substitutes is when what they have isn’t satisfying their deeper needs. Don’t blame Oprah, people. We Christians alone share the burden for “wandering” spiritual seekers. It just so happens that Oprah has a some spiritual advice for people now. But, for her followers, her cultural influence eclipsed the practical aspects of Christianity long ago. Eckhart Tolle just made Christians stand up and take notice.

I Hate “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition”

When I tell people this, they looked shocked, “How could you hate a show that builds homes for deserving families and individuals?!” Well, there’s a method to my madness and, of course, it has to do with some theological hangup about the show.

See, God’s grace is given to all without reservation for the taking. He doesn’t qualify his grace based on performance. But, like the show, neither does he qualify it on basis of need. What I can’t stand about “Extreme Makeover” is that fact that those who are given homes are those that the producers believe deserve those homes. Not only does kindness or sacrifice merit a home in that show, hardship and tragedy also becomes some kind of sick qualifier for benevolence. So, part of the show is dedicated to explaining the producers’ reasons for choosing a particular group on which to bestow grace…in this case, a new home. They play God.

I’ve had people tell me, “I just ‘see Jesus’ in that show” or “Isn’t that just how God is?” Luckily for me (and you), God is not like that. He extends grace to everyone regardless of economic status, race, gender, cultural relevance, or any other ridiculous qualifying criteria. He even extends grace to those who don’t think he exists or that his grace is in any way helpful to them. But that doesn’t matter – God extends it unconditionally. Without condition or reservation.

So what would “Extreme Makeover: God Edition” look like? Well, it would include a host of respectable and sordid characters. Philanthropists next to misers, Christians next to atheists, American soldiers next to radical jihadists, downtrodden tenants next to slum lords, and every other group of people you can think of. Yet, when the bus rolls back…they all receive houses beyond their wildest dreams. What’s more, they are all given the same blood red key. Each one, regardless of whether anyone else believes their lifestyle merits the gift. And you see the them all walking towards their houses, some cursing God and others thanking him, deciding whether or not to stick the key in the door. Repulsive idea, huh? Not to God.

Truthfully, “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition” is not about the people receiving the homes. It’s not even about the viewing audience or how much tugging on heartstrings translates into ratings. That show is solely for the benefit of those who create it. Ultimately, those who determine who deserves a home and who doesn’t aren’t concerned about anyone but validating their own criteria of worth. They are more concerned about feeling good about themselves and how such qualified giving seems charitable. But it’s really self-love. A “wrap-around” form of self love, but self-love nonetheless. Most charity in our world is for the giver rather than the receiver.

God works the other way around. He gives to overflowing first, then out of that overabundance, we are to give to others. If we give out of our own limited love, we will always run dry or expect something in return. But if we let God love others through us, we will never exhaust his love for others, even those we think they don’t deserve it. But more importantly, we’ll share unqualified love with those we do think deserve it. And that place everyone in the same category: unconditionally loved by God.

Songs You’ll Never Hear on American Idol Auditions

For the record, I can’t stand American Idol. For the first four seasons or so, I completely ignored it. However, at the beginning of the last few seasons, I have always watched the open auditions in various cities.

What interests me about the auditions is the song choices. I am surprised at what songs are repeatedly chosen and even more surprised at what songs auditioners pass over each year. So I have a running list of songs that I believe I will never hear at an Idol audition, including the one that I personally would sing (alas, though I am too old) at an audition. I would sing “The Last Goodbye” by Jeff Buckley. You can hear the song from the album “Grace” through the media player link. Sultry lows and shreiking highs – all in one song. In the original key, thank you very much! I am convinced I will never hear this song by an American Idol contestant…ever. They’re too busy singing Fergie and Justin Timberlake.

Since I haven’t posted on music – one of my passions, I plan to tell what CDs never leave my car in the next post or so.

So, for all you American Idol fans out there, what song(s) do you  think you will never hear during American Idol auditions?

Why I Mute Television Commercials…

Here’s a strange quirk of mine: I mute all TV commercials. There are several reasons for this. The first person I saw do it was my grandfather. Then I noticed my father did it as well from time to time. As I got older I started to mute TV commercials as well.

There are some practical reasons for this. First off, TV commercials are very loud to me. I can be listening to dialogue in a show and be blasted by a car salesman commercial within seconds. The audiophile in me can’t stand it. But that’s a personal reason – coming for a guy who finds the hum of fluorescent lighting irritating or too much 3-5 kHz or 300 Hz in a song maddening. Secondly, at 3.5 minutes a break, I can talk to my wife about something or read a page or two of a book. Also, if I mute the commercials I am more likely to get up and clean up the dishes during the commercial breaks. So, improved communication, information gathering, and household chores – all with click of a button!

More importantly, for me, there is an emotional and spiritual reason. As a pastor, I firmly believe that our Christianity can be culturally influenced by a lot of things, including commercials. With each commercial, we get “preached to” at a very loud volume about what we should value as a nation. This translates to what we should spend money upon – something an advertiser tells us to value. Commercials stoke the fire of materialism in a person’s life.  The church is not immune to this at all. I was at a large conference about 5 months ago where one of the popular topics was the evils of consumerism. Of course, I had a ten piece praise band, lights, videos, a comedian, a magician, free books and DVDs, and 400 kiosks surrounding the building to help me understand just how bad consumerism had become in America. Commercials are the foundation of that. Advertisers believe your convictions and values can be swayed in a mere thirty seconds time. Why do they believe that? Because we’ve proved them true in the past.

Christians should certainly believe in the power of Satan to tempt and destroy our lives. However, Satan (unlike God) has limited resources with which to do this. Though I am not saying our culture is authored by Satan, I do think he makes good use of what we’ve given him. Why spiritually attack a believer when you can lull him to sleep? To me, that’s Satan main objective – not to visit someone with direct demonic attack (though that happens) but to create a level of dysfunction in the Christian’s life by distracting him from “the one thing necessary.” Though commercials can certainly be entertaining, they are also “preaching” to you. The question is: are buying what they’re selling?