Laura Curtis

My life is in such upheaval right now – this song just seems really appropriate at the moment.

And after viewing it, I saw this video posted on Facebook – the author of Reason For God, Tim Keller, talks about the main emphasis of the Bible. A paradigm shift for many, and a helpful reminder for all.

The Black Informant has an interesting post about supporting Black businesses.   I haven’t got anything to add to what Duane wrote, but it did get me thinking about how we tend to support our own “tribes” – whatever group we align ourselves with – and the ramifications of that.  No, I don’t shop racially.  I shop as seldom as possible, and my first choice is online because I hate shopping.  Shipping fees are an easy price to pay in exchange for avoiding parking lots, unhelpful sales clerks, and obnoxious fellow shoppers.  But I do support Christian-owned businesses when I can, for the express reason that I’m supporting “one of my own.”  I especially support the businesses owned by fellow church members whenever I can.  For Christians, the perceived benefits of patronizing a Christian-owned business usually include the fact that the money gets tithed on again, and the perception of being dealt with even more honestly and fairly than at a secular business.  The downside – if things go wrong, you can’t sue.

That is to say, if events occur under which you’d normally sue, but you and the business owner are both Christians, the bible says you must not sue, but rather, resolve the situation through a mediator or resign yourself to taking the loss.

When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life! So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church? I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers, but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers? To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded?
(1 Corinthians 6:1-7 ESV)

The Christian Legal Fellowship has some thoughtful guidelines to consider.   Other religions actually have their own courts – Muslims have sharia courts in England and are pushing to have them here.  (Jews have Beth Din courts – though unlike the sharia courts, they lack legal standing in England.)  There is no Christian equivalent to either.  At most, you could ask the pastor to talk to the other person and mediate between you.  So Christians conducting business within our own “tribe” require an additional level of trust that I’m not sure is required of secular consumers.   Even so, I think it’s worth it.

Like the Episcopalian church, the Lutheran church is splitting over the decision to permit noncelibate gay clergy.

A lesbian pastor says, “At my church there is a sense of great celebration, of people being very happy that our work to make the ELCA a more inclusive place has come to fruition.”

A biblically orthodox pastor says, “The issue is departure from the word of God.”

It’s one thing to treat people with civility, mercy and grace.  It’s quite another to simply vote something out of the “sin” category.  The bible does not give us that authority.  Although this split is going to be very painful, I really do view it as a positive development – weeding the biblically unorthodox out of the ranks of nominal believers.  People are going to have to compare their personal views with what the bible says, and where there is a difference, acknowledge that and choose one or the other.

Joseph Farah has his panties in a knot because Ann Coulter is going to talk to teh gheys.  In public.  For money, even.  At which point, she’ll get teh ghey cooties, and earn Farah’s everlasting disapproval.  Ace had some rather biting commentary on this phenomenon, and it really does sum up what I’ve been attempting to say for years, but am evidently not a good enough writer to get across.  (RTWT, etc.)

3. I can’t help but notice that homosexuality is elevated to rather higher position on the food-pyramid of sins than seems necessary. I note that in my every day life, I wrestle with all sorts of sins: Sloth, probably at the top, then Lust, then Envy, then Wrath…. actually, all four of those are separated only by the slightest titches; it’s nearly a four-way tie. Pride and Gluttony aren’t far behind, either.

And other sins too. Premarital sex? Sex only for lustful purposes and not procreation? Yeah, I’m all about that.

I presume Joseph Farah is as well — on that last point. I am not prepared to believe that he only engages in sex for purposes of creating children. I do not believe that is true of nearly anyone.

I’ll tell you one sin I never have to wrestle with: the sin of homosexual fornication. Why? Because I’m straight. It never even occurs to me that gee, maybe if I’m not scoring with the ladies lately I should change up my game and try for a dude.

Never. Not once has it even crossed my mind.

And I submit that this is true for 99.9% of straight men, which in turn means it’s true of 97.7% of men, period.

So Farah is essentially elevating to the position of Worst Sin the one sin he has absolutely zero chance of committing, zero chance of even being tempted by.

I find this breathtakingly convenient. According to Farah’s priorities, hell, I’m a pretty moral guy — never had gay sex, never wanted to have gay sex, never even thought about gay sex. So I’m pretty pure, right?

Of course I’m not. I’m just not guilty of that sin, but I’m not free of that sin due to devotion to God or exercise of willpower or the strengthening power of faith: I’m free of that sin for the same reason I’m free of the sin (were it a sin) of eating tarantulas. Because I don’t want to.

It strikes me as very convenient, self-serving position to take that the most important sin out there, the most destructive sin, the one, as Farah says, actually destroys whole societies, is the sin that those who are most concerned with it aren’t ever tempted to commit in their entire lives.

And that, on the other side of the coin, the 3% of the population that is gay is soaked in sin and offense to God.

I find it a little curious that Farah flames on about gays but doesn’t seem terribly bothered by non-procreative heterosexual sex, non-procreative heterosexual sodomy (which includes the old blow-jay), non-procreative lustful use of pornography.

Now some will probably say he does mention those. Yes, I would guess he does; but as far as I know he wouldn’t forbid Ann Coulter from appearing at a party I was hosting, and I’m an admitted (and unashamed) pornography user and non-procreative heterosexual sex fan.

Why the special elevation here? Again, I just find it damnably convenient for a proponent of morality to pound and pound on the one sin that he is almost incapable of engaging in, due to deep-seated revulsion to the act.

Spot on. And, oddly, it ties in with something someone said at my bible study last week, regarding how we see sin, compared to how God sees sin. I don’t remember exactly how she phrased it, but these charts I made express the concept pretty well:

I’m sure we’ve all wondered this: Will there be sci-fi super nerds in Heaven? And will we all get together and build the Enterprise?

There will, in fact, be sci-fi super nerds in heaven, because I’m one and I’m going. As for the second question, you’ll have to click through for that answer. And which Enterprise, anyway? If I get a vote, I want NCC 1701-D.

Added: As long as we’re talking Trek, how cool is Wil Wheaton?  This cool.