Super Bowl Salvation

Photo by Scott Nellis

Street preachers....oh, how I loathe thee. As I walked through downtown Indianapolis, I saw a spattering of these pharisaical evangelists with their megaphones and brimstone signs. Indy's Super Bowl Village was the prime spot for these opportunistic preachers to do their thing.

Disgrace. And un-grace, too.

It's hard to fathom that people still believe that condemnation and judgment trump sincere love. I suppose these gentlemen feel that their duty as Christians is to take the Saul-of-Tarsus approach and convict people of their sinfulness, lest they end up in hell. But street signs and megaphones? Really? I've read my gospels, and I don't remember Jesus ever using those tactics. I wanted to tell them that I'm about to enter seminary and I've committed most of the sins on their sign. Then I wanted to ask them where that left me. Doomed to hell? I know this: there was no mention of forgiveness, grace, or love. They surely have missed the point.

It's kind of pointless to write and rant about such things. These guys have always been around, and always will be around. But still... They don't honestly think that soapboxing in Super Bowl Village is going to win any souls? Apparently they do.

Post With Caution

I was reading a blog recently by a pastor named Jonathan Martin, http://pastorjonathanmartin.com/. He wrote some very interesting thoughts about social media in relation to ministry (though his thoughts apply to any area of vocation). Here's the excerpt:

Last year, I contributed a chapter to a book for Dr. Raymond F. Culpepper called The Great Commission Connection.  I was asked to write about the connection between the great commission and media, with a special emphasis on social media.  In it I wrote at length about not only the promise, but the peril of social media, especially with the ability to so quickly speak destructive words within the Body of Christ without safeguards of Biblical accountability.  I tried to address this constructively in the broader construct of a theology of online life.  To quote myself:
When we have such powerful tools at our disposal, making it possible for us to broadcast our every thought and whim to the world with such ease, the key to using media in our mission may lie as much in our restraint as in our creativity.  Within a matter of seconds, I have the capability to share my opinions about any conceivable topic or issue with the world in a matter of seconds.  But just because I can, doesn’t mean that I should…
I try to heed my own counsel and be cautious about what issues I do in fact choose to address in this kind of format.

Jonathan's words resonate deeply with me. I, too, have found myself with an aversion to Facebook posts and tweets that hastily communicate things that wouldn't be said face-to-face. I agree with him that it's just too easy to hit "post" and send your thoughts out to the world. In my work, people have left our church over issues that could have been resolved in a face-to-face meeting, but instead a train of emails set off a firestorm of hurt and misinterpreted motives. In fact, I hope to share this topic in future conversations, as blogs can cause the same problems as Facebook posts, emails, and tweets. And I, too, have found myself explaining why I said something in an email and what I meant by it. It's just not worth the confusion and trouble.

To reiterate, Jonathan said, "When we have such powerful tools at our disposal, making it possible for us to broadcast our every thought and whim to the world with such ease, the key to using media in our mission may lie as much in our restraint as in our creativity." In other words, watch what you say. This is truer now than ever. If the subject of an email is of significant importance, then that topic probably deserves a phone call. If you find yourself posting and tweeting about controversial matters, whether it be politics, religion, or even the antics of someone in the news, then pause. Stop for a moment and consider how your post will be received by those on your list of "friends." Will you alienate people? Will you offend people? Is this the type of comment that you would share at dinner with your friends?

I read posts on Facebook all the time that I find very...well, let's say 'enlightening.' Most of these posts are random, spur-of-the-moment thoughts. If these thoughts are simply that you're watching CSI tonight, then you're fine. But—and this is a very big but—if you find yourself posting your thoughts on a hot-button topic, then beware. These are the exact thoughts that will get you in the most trouble. If you're truly impassioned about a cause, then write your senator; don't post it on Facebook or Twitter. You will only ostracize yourself and cause others to question your motives.

The Evolution Of Reading In A Digital World

So I've been doing a lot of online reading lately, along with my standard two to three books at my bedside. I'm starting to notice the stark differences between the former and latter, and I'm finding myself a little torn. Every time I think of buying a Kindle or Nook and saving myself a lot of bookshelf space, I run across a dilemma that makes me want to regress to the pre-digital days.

My Digital Dilemma
I'll try to explain my dilemma by example. Every time I start to read a great online article or blog, I find my attention seized by another linked article within the text. Does this happen to you? The best recent example I can find is by a blogger and pastor named JR Forasteros. He has a great review of the new, controversial book Real Marriage by Mark and Grace Driscoll. I loved his review and thought it was very insightful. Still, reading the first paragraph of the review was like having my attention thrown in a washing machine. His review exemplifies what I've been doing here, which is what every blogger and news site seems to be doing...embedding links to anything and everything within their article. It's hard enough to carve out time to read in our advertising and media-saturated world. Now it's becoming harder still. I, like many young men, have the attention span of a 5-year-old. This is especially true when it comes to watching TV, walking through the movie section at Target, or looking something up on the Internet. Here's another example: Click over to AOL and try to search for something. Their Web page is filled with so much distracting, albeit amusing, fodder that you'll forget what you ever wanted to search for in the first place. I say all of this because I find it ironic, and a bit frightening, that I can't read an entire article without clicking on at least one or two links within that article before I'm finished. I get back to the first article and think, "What was this about again?"

This is the new norm. This is how Web sites track what your interests are and sell you stuff. This is how Facebook displays ads that interest you and Netflix knows just what movies and shows to recommend to you. Kind of feels like 1984, doesn't it? I'm not necessarily criticizing what bloggers and news sites are doing by embedding links to related topics. I'm just finding myself slowing down to analyze whether this is a good and helpful trend, rather than simply accepting it. As a society, we should continually slow down and analyze whether or not a new trend is useful, helpful, and, most importantly, good for us.

Let's face it...the digital revolution is altering us. It's changing the way we communicate (or the lack thereof), and it's changing the way we absorb information. So enjoy the technology, for sure. Just be sure to stop every now and then and think about what the technology is doing to you.

For My Own Curiosity  
Did you make it to the end of this blog without clicking any of the links above? Was it hard to come back to this blog after reading those others?

Christopher Hitchens's Death And The Evangelical Fail

This past week renowned author and atheist Christopher Hitchens passed away of esophageal cancer. Hitchens is author of the bestselling book, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. Christians around the world have used his death as an opportunity to throw a final posthumous punch. Maybe you won't interpret it this way, but let's look at some quotes to be sure. Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, CA, tweeted, "My friend Christopher Hitchens has died. I loved & prayed for him constantly & grieve his loss. He knows the Truth now." Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, also went to Twitter to drive his point home. He said Hitchens's death "is an excruciating reminder of the consequences of unbelief. We can only pray others will believe."

Let's be honest. These are not evangelical Christians showing a deep, sincere love for the loss of one of the world's great minds. No, this is simply the abuse of an opportunity. This opportunity allowed them to make an arrogant show of themselves on the world's leading asinine-soapbox, Twitter. This is not love. I'll say it again...this is not love. We're called to love one another, regardless of beliefs. And our love is also to be sincere. So it really frustrates me that so many prominent evangelical leaders used Hitchens's death as an opportunity to score a point for the God team.

If you still don't think that these little tweets are unfair and unloving, consider again Warren's statement: "My friend Christopher Hitchens has died. I loved & prayed for him constantly & grieve his loss. He knows the Truth now." Don't you think he could have left off the "He knows the Truth now" part? Wouldn't that have sounded so much more gracious? When I read these online postings, what I see is this: "You didn't believe in God, you got cancer, and now you're dead. Well, that's what you get for not believing in God." So to all the arrogant evangelicals out there, remember this: The same grace that saves you, regardless of anything you've done (and all the stupid tweets you've posted), is the same grace that comes to Christopher Hitchens. Don't act like you know God's ways...and remember the humble prayer of the tax collector in Luke 18.

In God Is Not Great, Christopher Hitchens says that organized religion is "hostile to free inquiry." These evangelical 'tweeters' are doing an excellent job to affirm Hitchens's statement. We should embrace differing views, rather than argue against them. I think it's easy to read certain passages of the Bible and conclude that we need to oppose those who oppose God. This is one of the main irritants that fuels my love/hate relationship with the Bible. Still, the Bible should never be cherry-picked. Love for those with differing views is the main, undergirding theme of the book. We too often forget that.

Keeping My Mouth Shut On The Internet

Blame it on a Christian news Web site.

Every morning I open my Firefox browser to its homepage, The Christian Post, where I get a speckling of world and religious news. And every morning, I find myself disappointed in how divisive religion is. There's always a depressing mix of articles, from the typical stories about homosexuality in America, to Harold Camping's doomsday predictions, to billboard battles between atheists and Christians. It's just too much to start my day with. I guess I should just switch to CNN.com as my homepage, but, as a Christian, I really do want to know what religious issues are happening in the world. It's just sad that most of them reflect petty things such as Harold Camping end-of-the-world predictions—and just how many evangelicals actually disapprove of him—rather than highlighting major injustices like poverty and human trafficking.

For me, the issue shifts to, 'Should Christians just stay off the Internet altogether?' Should Christians really use the Internet as their online soapbox?

And to answer your presumed question, yes—I do realize the hypocrisy of using a blog to consider this subject.

On a serious note, I do question my own partiality to writing Web logs. I question my online musings mainly because of the crap I see on The Christian Post. It makes Christianity look like a damn high-school gossip show. "He said this...She believes in that..." I realize that when a person with 'authority' claims a certain idea or doctrine as the gospel truth, it can raise eyebrows and blood pressure. I get that. But that's exactly why I think more Christians should withhold their opinions from the Internet. Just stay off of it. And quit posting religious thoughts on Facebook, too. It's just going to make people write angry comments on your wall. If we're really witnesses to what we believe, then I would hope we'd realize how terrible we look. We will always have our opinions and beliefs, but online articles and status updates are really not the best places to share those thoughts. If you want to see things in this world get better, then write a letter to your senator. Go volunteer. Send some money to organizations that work to prevent whatever it is that's ticking you off. Philip Yancey once stated, "No one converted to Christianity because they lost the argument." A digital conversation will never be as gracious as one that's face-to-face. There may be a place for productive religious discourse on the Internet, but it's hard to find. And I find that I respect those who keep their divisive comments and opinions to a minimum, while I find it hard to respect those who are consistently posting negativity. It seems to me that, while Jesus had strong opinions at times, he mostly kept his mouth closed and showed compassion. There's an idea.