So, the "already, but not yet" of the Christian faith is an expression of the tension we experience as followers of Christ living between his first coming (in humility, service, and suffering) and his second coming (in power and glory, to rule with true justice over all the earth). I believe that understanding this tension can help us understand the ebbs and flows of our relationship with God. It can teach us about our seasons of life, others' seasons of life, self-esteem, and suffering.
Allow me to use my personal journey as an example. I first started taking my faith in Christ seriously as a college freshman. Each week I participated in a Bible study, went to church, and went to a large-group campus ministry meeting. I was reading my Bible and praying privately almost every day. I went to a fall conference and a winter conference with the campus ministry group, and I volunteered for random stuff here and there. My faith was growing like gangbusters - the Bible was speaking into my life in ways I didn't know it could, I was connecting with God as never before, and my thoughts and actions were being reshaped by my growing convictions. I spent that first summer doing what was called a "summer project" with the campus ministry group, and I came back my sophomore year on a huge high - continuing to grow individually, and also growing as a new leader of others in ministry. God was bearing fruit in me and in others' lives through me. It was an exciting time!
In retrospect, I see that I was experiencing the "already" of life in Christ. Everything was new, and the horizon of life was expanding before my eyes. My appetite for learning new things and experiencing new things regarding life in Christ was insatiable. It was wondrous and wonderful... and I couldn't understand how some other Christians were living anything but an abundant, victorious life.
Fast-forward a few years. I had been exposed to all of the "big truths" of the Christian faith on at least some level. I became resigned to the fact that I would very rarely learn anything truly new from a preacher (or even from the Bible!) ever again. I had experienced a wide variety of ministry opportunities, and I had learned that ministry wasn't as simple as I once thought it was. I was seeing the world through increasingly pessimistic lenses, recognizing that many people aren't just passively naïve of spiritual truth - they can be intentionally ignorant, avoidant, and unresponsive. I had learned that the church had more problems than I thought it did & way more than I thought it should. I had been through a rough patch in life, facing issues that did not have simple answers. I began to long for God's deeper redemption.
I was living in the "not yet" of our life in Christ. At the same time, this felt wrong. I had one category for what life in Christ should feel like, and that was the "already" category. In this place of "disequilibrium," where the old ways of thinking were no longer working, I could have become disenfranchised with the whole enterprise - church, trusting God, Bible, prayer, ministry... whatever. Disenfranchisement could have taken the face of enduring pessimism in these areas or outright rejection of all of them.
Fortunately, I took a better road: I allowed new categories to take shape in me. These weren't entirely new categories for the Christian life, but they were new to my life. I found that life in Christ is big enough for both "already" and "not yet." In fact, I found that this is the essence of what it means to live for Jesus in this age on earth - we need both.
Those of us who find ourselves in a season where the "already" dominates must not look down on those currently soaking in the "not yet" (as I had in my early walk of faith). Those of us abiding in the "not yet" should not look on "already" folks with snorts of sarcasm and a "just wait and see, buddy" attitude. We need each other - "already" folks need to be reminded that life with God isn't always roses, and "not yet" people need to recognize that God really does bless his people and transform their lives in many ways in this life.
Marinating at one end of the spectrum while ignoring the other is unhealthy and unwise. A "not yet" life with no theology of the "already" wrongly resigns itself to the thought that spiritual growth and freedom from patterns of sin can't happen; the "not yet" self-esteem is too low. An "already" life with no theology of the "not yet" wrongly labels everything that isn't going right in another person's life as the result of that person's sin; the "already" self-esteem is too proud. A mature spiritual life is a blend of the "already, but not yet," allowing for certain seasons of life to ebb and flow between being deeply satisfying and truly painful. The "already, but not yet" self-esteem is on the high side, because we know that we have been created in God's image and even re-created to become like Christ, but we are not unrealistic about personal limitations and ongoing struggles with sin.
God is there in the midst of all seasons. The risen Christ celebrates with us when his reign is evident in our lives. The crucified Christ suffers with us when life sucks. We praise God for his blessings on this side of Christ's first coming, and we praise God for the coming end to our frustrations when Christ will come again.
Next post: life after the afterlife.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Accessible Eschatology: already, but not yet
The central thrust of New Testament eschatology can be summed up in one phrase: already, but not yet.
At the end of my last post, I said this idea has the power to serve as a holistic framework for the way a Christian looks at life. That sounds a little over the top, doesn't it? Do I really mean that? Well, yes. When I first heard a professor focus on the already-but-not-yet character of our life in Christ, it gave me a row of hooks to hang all my hats on. It fits the biblical evidence so well, I would be so bold as to say it's the second-most important Christian idea that is only indirectly taught in the Bible, right behind the doctrine of the Trinity.
The "already" is about the fact that the kingdom of God has already come to earth. Jesus came as God in the flesh, the promised Messiah of the Old Testament. He lived a perfect life, empowered by the Holy Spirit, saying and doing exactly what God the Father wanted him to say and do. He healed the sick, embraced the outcast, challenged corrupt authorities, and taught broken people about eternal life. He died for all people, making it possible for us to be reconciled with a holy God, corrupt though we are. As a result, those who embrace Christ are current participants in the kingdom of God. The Holy Spirit, who was only given to special individuals under special circumstances in the Old Testament, is now available to the entire community of people who follow Christ, just as the prophet Joel had promised.
The "not yet" is about the fact that the kingdom of God has not yet reached its ultimate fulfillment on earth. Jesus did not bring final judgment on the wickedness of this earth, so the good stuff remains mingled with the bad stuff. Everything is in shades of gray, the worthless so frustratingly intertwined with the worthwhile. The Old Testament expectation of the Messiah had included complete restoration and redemption - socially, politically, economically, spiritually, physically, vocationally... you name it. It had included Judgment Day, because that had to be part of the equation; if God were to usher in a golden age, he would have had to cleanse Israel from all evil. Christians continue to embrace this Old Testament hope for the consummation of the kingdom of God on earth, which we expect to occur when Jesus returns to earth (cf. Acts 1:1-11).
One way to put this is that we are currently living in an era that is an overlap of the old era (earth before the Messiah) and the new era (earth under the Messiah's rule). A visual representation of this is helpful (this is from our professor/boss/friend Craig Blomberg's Jesus and the Gospels, p. 385 - click the image for a larger view):
Thus our life in Christ is replete with the tension between the already and the not-yet. We experience it in our struggle with sin: we have the power of the Spirit living within us to make us conquerors over sin, yet we still struggle almost constantly with our enduring sinful tendencies (see Romans 7-8). We experience it in our worship and knowledge of God: "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known." (1 Corinthians 13:12) We experience it in our churches: the church is sometimes the most beautiful example of community the world has ever seen, yet it has known all the interpersonal ugliness one can find anywhere else in the world. We experience it in our mission in the world: the gospel continues to spread in Africa, Asia, and Latin America; William Wilberforce successfully argued for the end of the slave trade in England; the nonviolent Civil Rights Movement here in the U.S. brought an end to institutionalized racism, and we now have a biracial president... YET, the gospel has eroded in lands once populated with Christians through forces such as Islam in the 7th century and the Enlightenment in the 18th; though no longer sanctioned by our governments, there is more slavery on our globe today than at any point in human history; much of the Western world has decided it's okay to kill the most vulnerable persons in our societies for the sake of convenience. We experience it in our work: we often find satisfaction in our efforts and toils, particularly when we get to do something we enjoy or when the fruits of our labors are evident, yet we all too often find work to be a frustrating, futile endeavor, or our job brings us very little joy, or demand drops and we lose our income.
There's plenty more to say on this topic, but there's already plenty of food for thought in this post, so we'll draw the line here and save some for the next post, where we'll talk about the "already, but not yet" in spiritual formation.
At the end of my last post, I said this idea has the power to serve as a holistic framework for the way a Christian looks at life. That sounds a little over the top, doesn't it? Do I really mean that? Well, yes. When I first heard a professor focus on the already-but-not-yet character of our life in Christ, it gave me a row of hooks to hang all my hats on. It fits the biblical evidence so well, I would be so bold as to say it's the second-most important Christian idea that is only indirectly taught in the Bible, right behind the doctrine of the Trinity.
The "already" is about the fact that the kingdom of God has already come to earth. Jesus came as God in the flesh, the promised Messiah of the Old Testament. He lived a perfect life, empowered by the Holy Spirit, saying and doing exactly what God the Father wanted him to say and do. He healed the sick, embraced the outcast, challenged corrupt authorities, and taught broken people about eternal life. He died for all people, making it possible for us to be reconciled with a holy God, corrupt though we are. As a result, those who embrace Christ are current participants in the kingdom of God. The Holy Spirit, who was only given to special individuals under special circumstances in the Old Testament, is now available to the entire community of people who follow Christ, just as the prophet Joel had promised.
The "not yet" is about the fact that the kingdom of God has not yet reached its ultimate fulfillment on earth. Jesus did not bring final judgment on the wickedness of this earth, so the good stuff remains mingled with the bad stuff. Everything is in shades of gray, the worthless so frustratingly intertwined with the worthwhile. The Old Testament expectation of the Messiah had included complete restoration and redemption - socially, politically, economically, spiritually, physically, vocationally... you name it. It had included Judgment Day, because that had to be part of the equation; if God were to usher in a golden age, he would have had to cleanse Israel from all evil. Christians continue to embrace this Old Testament hope for the consummation of the kingdom of God on earth, which we expect to occur when Jesus returns to earth (cf. Acts 1:1-11).
One way to put this is that we are currently living in an era that is an overlap of the old era (earth before the Messiah) and the new era (earth under the Messiah's rule). A visual representation of this is helpful (this is from our professor/boss/friend Craig Blomberg's Jesus and the Gospels, p. 385 - click the image for a larger view):
Thus our life in Christ is replete with the tension between the already and the not-yet. We experience it in our struggle with sin: we have the power of the Spirit living within us to make us conquerors over sin, yet we still struggle almost constantly with our enduring sinful tendencies (see Romans 7-8). We experience it in our worship and knowledge of God: "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known." (1 Corinthians 13:12) We experience it in our churches: the church is sometimes the most beautiful example of community the world has ever seen, yet it has known all the interpersonal ugliness one can find anywhere else in the world. We experience it in our mission in the world: the gospel continues to spread in Africa, Asia, and Latin America; William Wilberforce successfully argued for the end of the slave trade in England; the nonviolent Civil Rights Movement here in the U.S. brought an end to institutionalized racism, and we now have a biracial president... YET, the gospel has eroded in lands once populated with Christians through forces such as Islam in the 7th century and the Enlightenment in the 18th; though no longer sanctioned by our governments, there is more slavery on our globe today than at any point in human history; much of the Western world has decided it's okay to kill the most vulnerable persons in our societies for the sake of convenience. We experience it in our work: we often find satisfaction in our efforts and toils, particularly when we get to do something we enjoy or when the fruits of our labors are evident, yet we all too often find work to be a frustrating, futile endeavor, or our job brings us very little joy, or demand drops and we lose our income.
There's plenty more to say on this topic, but there's already plenty of food for thought in this post, so we'll draw the line here and save some for the next post, where we'll talk about the "already, but not yet" in spiritual formation.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Accessible Eschatology: what is eschatology?
In order to embark on a series of posts about eschatology, it will be helpful for us to define the term. Short answer: Eschatology refers to biblical teaching about the future. It is concerned with two big questions - "What happens when a person dies?" and "Where is world history going?"
Of course, if that were all I had to say, there wouldn't be much point in putting together a whole blog post, now would there? So let's unpack that a bit. Eschatology comes from the Greek words eschatos (last things) and logos (word/study/doctrine). Thus, Bible-believing theologians use the term eschatology to refer to biblical teaching about last things. (Profound. This is why you pay me the big bucks, to tell you that 2+2=4.) Of course, we haven't really gotten anywhere yet - what are "last things"? We don't use that kind of language in everyday conversation. So, let's build a definition that makes sense.
Starting from the bottom up, we can say that "last things" equals the future. But it's not quite that simple, because "last things" includes elements that are present and even past. Why? Well, some of the things the biblical authors spoke about as future are now present or past for us, many centuries down the road, while others still have not yet come to pass. So, let's tweak our definition - "last things" equals things that were future to the biblical authors writing about them. One natural consequence of this is that Old Testament eschatology is different than New Testament eschatology. This is because certain things that were future for Old Testament authors came to be fulfilled in the life of Christ and the birth of the Church. So, another tweaking is in order - "last things" equals things that were future relative to the OT authors and things that were both present and future relative to the New Testament authors. If we put ourselves in the equation, we find that "last things" equals things that were future relative to the OT authors; that were both present and future relative to the NT authors; and that are past, present, and future relative to us today. I trust you can remember the second and third parts of that by hearing the first and thinking back to this conversation, so we will pare it down for brevity's sake: Eschatology refers to biblical teaching about things that were future relative to the OT authors.
Eschatology is commonly broken into two related fields of study - personal eschatology and general eschatology. These two correspond to the two big questions mentioned above - personal eschatology is related to what happens when a person dies, and general eschatology is related to the direction of world history. Personal eschatology is considered a subset of eschatology because, hey, anytime you're on this earth writing a book about death, it's a future subject for you.
In the next post, we will talk about the central thrust of New Testament eschatology, an idea that has the power to serve as a holistic framework for the way a Christian looks at life: already, but not yet.
Of course, if that were all I had to say, there wouldn't be much point in putting together a whole blog post, now would there? So let's unpack that a bit. Eschatology comes from the Greek words eschatos (last things) and logos (word/study/doctrine). Thus, Bible-believing theologians use the term eschatology to refer to biblical teaching about last things. (Profound. This is why you pay me the big bucks, to tell you that 2+2=4.) Of course, we haven't really gotten anywhere yet - what are "last things"? We don't use that kind of language in everyday conversation. So, let's build a definition that makes sense.
Starting from the bottom up, we can say that "last things" equals the future. But it's not quite that simple, because "last things" includes elements that are present and even past. Why? Well, some of the things the biblical authors spoke about as future are now present or past for us, many centuries down the road, while others still have not yet come to pass. So, let's tweak our definition - "last things" equals things that were future to the biblical authors writing about them. One natural consequence of this is that Old Testament eschatology is different than New Testament eschatology. This is because certain things that were future for Old Testament authors came to be fulfilled in the life of Christ and the birth of the Church. So, another tweaking is in order - "last things" equals things that were future relative to the OT authors and things that were both present and future relative to the New Testament authors. If we put ourselves in the equation, we find that "last things" equals things that were future relative to the OT authors; that were both present and future relative to the NT authors; and that are past, present, and future relative to us today. I trust you can remember the second and third parts of that by hearing the first and thinking back to this conversation, so we will pare it down for brevity's sake: Eschatology refers to biblical teaching about things that were future relative to the OT authors.
Eschatology is commonly broken into two related fields of study - personal eschatology and general eschatology. These two correspond to the two big questions mentioned above - personal eschatology is related to what happens when a person dies, and general eschatology is related to the direction of world history. Personal eschatology is considered a subset of eschatology because, hey, anytime you're on this earth writing a book about death, it's a future subject for you.
In the next post, we will talk about the central thrust of New Testament eschatology, an idea that has the power to serve as a holistic framework for the way a Christian looks at life: already, but not yet.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Accessible Eschatology: making sense of the present and the future in light of the past
What comes to your mind when you think of "eschatology" (the study of "last things")? Maybe your mind is a blank slate - you've never heard the word before, and the idea seems strange. Maybe you think of the Left Behind series of novels, or so-called "prophecy conferences" that many churches and ministries promote, teaching how current events in the newspaper correspond with events predicted in the Bible. That association could lead you to become fixated with these predictions: "Did you hear what happened between Russia and Iran? Read Ezekiel 38-39 - the end is near! I'd be surprised if the rapture didn't occur by 2012, at the latest." Or you might have a different reaction: "Why do people bother talking about this stuff? It's impractical and obsessive, and I don't buy it. I don't even try to read Revelation - it's hard enough understanding other parts of the Bible. Besides, what does the future have to do with my life now?"
I've sketched what are probably the three most common approaches to eschatology among Christians today: unintentional ignorance, intentional ignorance, and sensationalistic newspaper-Bible analysis. I hope many of you reading this will recognize that none of these three is particularly admirable (though one usually can't be held responsible for unintentional ignorance). So, it's my intention that this post will be the kick-off to a blog mini-series on eschatology. I'm calling it accessible eschatology, because my heart is that the average Christian reader could read these posts and be able to understand eschatology and understand its importance. This doesn't mean I will avoid all technical theological vocabulary, but I wholeheartedly intend to explain that vocabulary so its meaning is clear. If I ever offer too little explanation of a certain term, please leave a comment asking me to explain it better - you're probably not the only one wondering what the heck I'm talking about! (I'm also expecting that these posts might start a conversation here and there on a more technical level among my seminary-trained friends; don't let that scare you off - I promise, we don't bite, and it's perfectly normal to engage this subject at various levels.)
So, for my first trick, I have to try to convince you to keep reading the next few posts as they come. "Why should I care?" "What's wrong with where I'm at?" To the sensationalist, I pose a few questions: Does your current engagement of eschatology make you more like Jesus? Does it intersect with your day-to-day life? My guess is, the answer's no. Plus, I want to save you from looking and feeling stupid, like Edgar Whisenant and many others of the same ilk. To those who just don't know anything about eschatology, hear me from the top of my lungs: ESCHATOLOGY MATTERS! The Christian study of eschatology is intimately linked with a variety of topics that intersect with your daily life and relationship with God:
--hope
--the significance of your vocation
--the meaning of suffering
--your self-image
--international politics
--optimism, pessimism, and realism
--the tension between "life is good" and "life is hard"
... and more. Are you interested now? I hope so!
Next post: what is eschatology?
I've sketched what are probably the three most common approaches to eschatology among Christians today: unintentional ignorance, intentional ignorance, and sensationalistic newspaper-Bible analysis. I hope many of you reading this will recognize that none of these three is particularly admirable (though one usually can't be held responsible for unintentional ignorance). So, it's my intention that this post will be the kick-off to a blog mini-series on eschatology. I'm calling it accessible eschatology, because my heart is that the average Christian reader could read these posts and be able to understand eschatology and understand its importance. This doesn't mean I will avoid all technical theological vocabulary, but I wholeheartedly intend to explain that vocabulary so its meaning is clear. If I ever offer too little explanation of a certain term, please leave a comment asking me to explain it better - you're probably not the only one wondering what the heck I'm talking about! (I'm also expecting that these posts might start a conversation here and there on a more technical level among my seminary-trained friends; don't let that scare you off - I promise, we don't bite, and it's perfectly normal to engage this subject at various levels.)
So, for my first trick, I have to try to convince you to keep reading the next few posts as they come. "Why should I care?" "What's wrong with where I'm at?" To the sensationalist, I pose a few questions: Does your current engagement of eschatology make you more like Jesus? Does it intersect with your day-to-day life? My guess is, the answer's no. Plus, I want to save you from looking and feeling stupid, like Edgar Whisenant and many others of the same ilk. To those who just don't know anything about eschatology, hear me from the top of my lungs: ESCHATOLOGY MATTERS! The Christian study of eschatology is intimately linked with a variety of topics that intersect with your daily life and relationship with God:
--hope
--the significance of your vocation
--the meaning of suffering
--your self-image
--international politics
--optimism, pessimism, and realism
--the tension between "life is good" and "life is hard"
... and more. Are you interested now? I hope so!
Next post: what is eschatology?
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Kudos to Rick Warren
I was skeptical of Warren's acceptance of Obama's invitation to pray at his inauguration. An inaugural invocation can easily be perceived as an endorsement. However, after watching the prayer, I think he did many things well...
--He quoted the Shema and the Lord's Prayer, both appropriate ecumenical picks, and invoked a wide swath of biblical imagery about the nature of God.
--His prayer was decidedly Christian, not statist (in either a conservative or a liberal direction).
--He acknowledged differences of opinion.
--He called for biblical character qualities like humility, servanthood, integrity, compassion, generosity, responsibility, and civility.
--He asked for forgiveness of sins, including for "when we fail to treat our fellow human beings ... with the respect that they deserve," which sounded to me like an appropriately veiled reference to abortion.
--He acknowledged that "one day, all nations and all people will stand accountable before you."
--He called on "the name of the one who changed my life -- Yeshua, Isa, Jesús, Jesus." Missiologically awesome! For those who don't know, that's Jesus in Hebrew, Arabic, Spanish, and English.
--By saying nothing about "traditional values," he effectively turned the other cheek to gay rights activists who had been passionately calling for his removal from the ceremony.
In short, he was ecumenical yet evangelical, biblical, missiological, deferent, appropriate, and even mildly prophetic. May God answer this prayer and use it for his glory in the lives of its hearers.
(The full text of the prayer is available here.)
--He quoted the Shema and the Lord's Prayer, both appropriate ecumenical picks, and invoked a wide swath of biblical imagery about the nature of God.
--His prayer was decidedly Christian, not statist (in either a conservative or a liberal direction).
--He acknowledged differences of opinion.
--He called for biblical character qualities like humility, servanthood, integrity, compassion, generosity, responsibility, and civility.
--He asked for forgiveness of sins, including for "when we fail to treat our fellow human beings ... with the respect that they deserve," which sounded to me like an appropriately veiled reference to abortion.
--He acknowledged that "one day, all nations and all people will stand accountable before you."
--He called on "the name of the one who changed my life -- Yeshua, Isa, Jesús, Jesus." Missiologically awesome! For those who don't know, that's Jesus in Hebrew, Arabic, Spanish, and English.
--By saying nothing about "traditional values," he effectively turned the other cheek to gay rights activists who had been passionately calling for his removal from the ceremony.
In short, he was ecumenical yet evangelical, biblical, missiological, deferent, appropriate, and even mildly prophetic. May God answer this prayer and use it for his glory in the lives of its hearers.
(The full text of the prayer is available here.)
Friday, December 5, 2008
Cultural analysis - Spain
Tonight I wrote a paper for one of my classes, the topic of which I bet you can guess from the title of this post. I wanted to share it, but it would have been disgustingly long for a blog post, so I gave it its own Google site. Curious parties can find it here.
(Wow, three posts in a day after a month off. What gives, Knox?)
(Wow, three posts in a day after a month off. What gives, Knox?)
Thursday, December 4, 2008
God story
About a dozen recent University of Wisconsin grads are serving for a year in East Asia, reaching out to college students (and anyone they meet) with the love of Jesus. If you're in need of a good story about what God is doing in this world, one relationship at a time, read this recent blog post from Chris. This is particularly touching for me, because Meggan and I were there on the fall retreat he mentions, we were there with Chris in East Asia when he spent a summer there, and I can remember the blue sweatshirt. Plus, I'm close friends with his roommate who recently had his appendix removed... in a foreign country... Anyhow, enjoy, and pray for Chris, Tom (the newly de-appendicized guy), their team, and God's continued movement in the lives of people in that city.
Study Break!
Meggan found this gem a couple days ago. Enjoy! (Eight days to the end of the semester!!!)
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Post-election stream-of-consciousness
WARNING: This post may wander. I'm processing things, so one primary purpose for what I'm about to write is personal therapy. In addition, I hope this will be interesting to you, but also that it will serve as a model for a number of values: introspection, vulnerability, honesty, thoughtfulness, civility.
My heart goes out to Kent Koebke of Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin, who fought hard and with integrity for a chance at a seat in the state house. Kent, thanks for working your tail off for what you believe in, and God bless you.
Meggan and I went to an election night party last night. The majority of us there were McCain supporters, but we still had a good time. We did a "pick the states" pool - our entry had Obama winning, but we gave McCain way too many swing states, so we didn't take the prize. Thanks to Dan and Erin Breed for a fun time!
I was impressed both by McCain's concession speech and Obama's Grant Park acceptance. I didn't necessarily appreciate Obama's "Yes We Can" refrain, since it strikes me as misplaced hope, but I thought he came out with an unexpectedly muted expression. He was not celebratory; he was (exhausted and) rather sober. He did not look like a man who would quickly let the power go to his head. These are two men of character. God bless 'em both. God, we pray that you would keep president-elect Obama and his family safe from crazy people.
I think sobriety is the appropriate response for all of us at the moment. Let McCain supporters acknowledge our feelings of disappointment, submit our feelings to God, and recognize that He is still the Most High King. Let us recognize that Obama is a good man who will accomplish some good, and let us remember that McCain would have made some mistakes in the Oval Office, too. As for my brothers and sisters who voted for Obama, I won't be your killjoy; feel free to celebrate. But, please, do not mistake Obama for the Savior. Neither the real Savior nor our president-elect would want you to do so. A McCain victory would not have been the end of the world, and I hope you will critically examine the man you elected rather than becoming his unquestioned apologist.
The election of an African-American to the U.S. presidency is an historic occurrence. I wish I could celebrate it with enthusiasm. At the same time, we still have racial issues in our country, and the election actually highlights some of those. Black conservatives were ostracized in their communities for voicing their convictions, and they were dragged around in the dog-and-pony show by white conservatives. Millions of white Americans voted their conscience for Obama (or McCain), but, no doubt, there were many who voted for Obama out of "a sense of history" or latent white guilt (in addition to white supremacists who voted for McCain). I look forward to the increase of Dr. King's dream, that, in growing measure, people "will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." Still, it is amazing that we've reached a day where we fall short of this dream in ways so very different than the ways we once fell short of it. Praise God for this progress.
Random wondering - which of the following factors contributed most strongly to the defeat of a moderate Republican by a liberal Democrat:
--disapproval of Bush?
--the economic crisis?
--thinly veiled network media biases? (Before you read too much into that comment, see my Oct. 17 post about NPR.)
--image factors (as SNL put it, "Joe Cool vs. Yosemite Sam")?
I have deeply mixed feelings about international reaction to the election. On the one hand, it will be nice to live as a U.S. citizen in Europe during a time when Europe likes my president. On the other hand, I don't think European opinion should matter all that much in my choice of a candidate. I care a heck of a lot more about the opinion of people in countries that could be much more deeply and directly affected by who's in the White House: Iraqis, Afghans, Israelis, and Palestinians; for our foreign aid, Africans; also, our neighbors, especially Mexicans. Life would go on just fine for the vast majority of Europeans whether Obama, McCain, or Ron Paul were living at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. In the reverse direction, I have decided never to pass judgment on an Iranian for voting for Ahmadinejad or a Venezuelan for voting for Hugo Chávez unless I actually understand more issues than just how that vote affects their country's relationship with my country.
On a different note, I am saddened for the pro-life cause. How many justices will be appointed by pro-choice presidents and confirmed by a majority pro-choice Senate in the years to come? Beyond that, Amendment 48 (defining life as beginning at conception) got trounced here in Colorado, and a pro-life ballot initiative lost for the second time in South Dakota, 55%-45%. It seems that over a million babies a year will continue to be killed with government approval in our country. This is deeply unjust - not only to the people killed, but also to the people duped by our culture into thinking that murder for personal convenience is an expression of their freedom of choice. Three cheers for crisis pregnancy centers and adoption ministries, but it seems as though we pro-lifers need to reevaluate our political strategies. Do we turn to the 95/10 Initiative proposed by pro-life Democrats? Do we work harder to let the pro-life voice be heard in the marketplace of ideas (for an online example, see here)? Is creative nonviolent protest the answer? Should we put our efforts for the appointment of constructionist justices and the passing of pro-life ballot initiatives on the back burner or not?
For the trifecta, all three items on the ballot that I had strong opinions on (see my Oct. 10 posting) went the other way. :-)
And now, to end on a lighter note... God bless Minnesota! First, they elect an independent governor who happens to be a former pro-wrestler. Now, they come within 500 votes (out of nearly 3 million cast) of electing a comedian to the Senate, in a race where a liberal independent candidate garnered 15%. The recount is on, and Minnesota officially wins pop culture "cool" points (whether that's a good thing or not is up for interpretation).
My heart goes out to Kent Koebke of Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin, who fought hard and with integrity for a chance at a seat in the state house. Kent, thanks for working your tail off for what you believe in, and God bless you.
Meggan and I went to an election night party last night. The majority of us there were McCain supporters, but we still had a good time. We did a "pick the states" pool - our entry had Obama winning, but we gave McCain way too many swing states, so we didn't take the prize. Thanks to Dan and Erin Breed for a fun time!
I was impressed both by McCain's concession speech and Obama's Grant Park acceptance. I didn't necessarily appreciate Obama's "Yes We Can" refrain, since it strikes me as misplaced hope, but I thought he came out with an unexpectedly muted expression. He was not celebratory; he was (exhausted and) rather sober. He did not look like a man who would quickly let the power go to his head. These are two men of character. God bless 'em both. God, we pray that you would keep president-elect Obama and his family safe from crazy people.
I think sobriety is the appropriate response for all of us at the moment. Let McCain supporters acknowledge our feelings of disappointment, submit our feelings to God, and recognize that He is still the Most High King. Let us recognize that Obama is a good man who will accomplish some good, and let us remember that McCain would have made some mistakes in the Oval Office, too. As for my brothers and sisters who voted for Obama, I won't be your killjoy; feel free to celebrate. But, please, do not mistake Obama for the Savior. Neither the real Savior nor our president-elect would want you to do so. A McCain victory would not have been the end of the world, and I hope you will critically examine the man you elected rather than becoming his unquestioned apologist.
The election of an African-American to the U.S. presidency is an historic occurrence. I wish I could celebrate it with enthusiasm. At the same time, we still have racial issues in our country, and the election actually highlights some of those. Black conservatives were ostracized in their communities for voicing their convictions, and they were dragged around in the dog-and-pony show by white conservatives. Millions of white Americans voted their conscience for Obama (or McCain), but, no doubt, there were many who voted for Obama out of "a sense of history" or latent white guilt (in addition to white supremacists who voted for McCain). I look forward to the increase of Dr. King's dream, that, in growing measure, people "will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." Still, it is amazing that we've reached a day where we fall short of this dream in ways so very different than the ways we once fell short of it. Praise God for this progress.
Random wondering - which of the following factors contributed most strongly to the defeat of a moderate Republican by a liberal Democrat:
--disapproval of Bush?
--the economic crisis?
--thinly veiled network media biases? (Before you read too much into that comment, see my Oct. 17 post about NPR.)
--image factors (as SNL put it, "Joe Cool vs. Yosemite Sam")?
I have deeply mixed feelings about international reaction to the election. On the one hand, it will be nice to live as a U.S. citizen in Europe during a time when Europe likes my president. On the other hand, I don't think European opinion should matter all that much in my choice of a candidate. I care a heck of a lot more about the opinion of people in countries that could be much more deeply and directly affected by who's in the White House: Iraqis, Afghans, Israelis, and Palestinians; for our foreign aid, Africans; also, our neighbors, especially Mexicans. Life would go on just fine for the vast majority of Europeans whether Obama, McCain, or Ron Paul were living at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. In the reverse direction, I have decided never to pass judgment on an Iranian for voting for Ahmadinejad or a Venezuelan for voting for Hugo Chávez unless I actually understand more issues than just how that vote affects their country's relationship with my country.
On a different note, I am saddened for the pro-life cause. How many justices will be appointed by pro-choice presidents and confirmed by a majority pro-choice Senate in the years to come? Beyond that, Amendment 48 (defining life as beginning at conception) got trounced here in Colorado, and a pro-life ballot initiative lost for the second time in South Dakota, 55%-45%. It seems that over a million babies a year will continue to be killed with government approval in our country. This is deeply unjust - not only to the people killed, but also to the people duped by our culture into thinking that murder for personal convenience is an expression of their freedom of choice. Three cheers for crisis pregnancy centers and adoption ministries, but it seems as though we pro-lifers need to reevaluate our political strategies. Do we turn to the 95/10 Initiative proposed by pro-life Democrats? Do we work harder to let the pro-life voice be heard in the marketplace of ideas (for an online example, see here)? Is creative nonviolent protest the answer? Should we put our efforts for the appointment of constructionist justices and the passing of pro-life ballot initiatives on the back burner or not?
For the trifecta, all three items on the ballot that I had strong opinions on (see my Oct. 10 posting) went the other way. :-)
And now, to end on a lighter note... God bless Minnesota! First, they elect an independent governor who happens to be a former pro-wrestler. Now, they come within 500 votes (out of nearly 3 million cast) of electing a comedian to the Senate, in a race where a liberal independent candidate garnered 15%. The recount is on, and Minnesota officially wins pop culture "cool" points (whether that's a good thing or not is up for interpretation).
Thursday, October 30, 2008
McCain and Obama - global poverty commitments
Here.
As a Christian, I am encouraged that both candidates are committed to addressing issues of global poverty. As a Christian supporter of McCain, I submit that a vote for McCain is more than just a vote against abortion. The GOP is not the party of heartless greed and closed-minded nationalism. (That's not to say there are zero negative influences in the Republican Party; politics is dirty, and you'll find the dirt in both parties.)
As a Christian, I am encouraged that both candidates are committed to addressing issues of global poverty. As a Christian supporter of McCain, I submit that a vote for McCain is more than just a vote against abortion. The GOP is not the party of heartless greed and closed-minded nationalism. (That's not to say there are zero negative influences in the Republican Party; politics is dirty, and you'll find the dirt in both parties.)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)