The Point of Grace

Grace is the revolutionary idea introduced by the death and resurrection of Jesus and handed down to us from those who saw him risen.  So what’s the point?  I recently went on a retreat where we visited a number of other religions, and it suddenly occurred to me that each one of these religions were (for the main part) self-centered.  In Islam, one prays, gives alms, makes the Haj, etc., to ensure one’s own salvation.  Some fundamentalists refuse to bathe often, for fear that their own nakedness will lead to impure thoughts.  Everything one does, it seems, is done for fear of punishment.  In Hinduism, one prays to specific gods to “get” specific things; your task in this life is to do your duty so that your soul can move higher in the next reincarnation.  In most faiths, I think, the “good deed” isn’t done for the benefit of the other, but for one’s own salvation.

Grace frees us from that cycle.  How?  Because grace says, “try, and when you fail know that your sins are already forgiven.”  That doesn’t mean (the early church was accused of this), “Go out and sin and don’t worry about it.”  It means “try to do well, but your salvation is not dependent on your own perfection.”

Now we are free to do good for others because they need it, and not for our own benefit or from fear.  Now, we give what we give because we want to help others, not because it is a command upon which our future hangs.  Now, the other is the point of our actions and our intentions, and not ourselves.  That’s the point of grace.

Oddly enough, the piece of scripture that I thought might directly contradict what I was thinking actually supports it perfectly.  “Continue to work out your salvation in fear and trembling,” was the piece I had in mind.  That, Phillipians 2:12.  But let’s add context.

"If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose.  Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.  Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.
 
Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:  Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.  And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death —   even death on a cross!   Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed — not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence — continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.   Do everything without complaining or arguing, so that you may become blameless and pure, children of God without fault in a crooked and depraved generation, in which you shine like stars in the universe as you hold out the word of life — in order that I may boast on the day of Christ that I did not run or labor for nothing.  But even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service coming from your faith, I am glad and rejoice with all of you. So you too should be glad and rejoice with me."

Phillipians 2:1-18

Okay, notice that “working out your salvation in fear and trembling” is half the sentence.  What’s the other half?  “Because God is going to smite you if you screw up?”  No, because the God of the Universe is working in and through you to achieve His purposes.  In other words, “guys, God has left this in your hands.  It's really, really important. Try not to screw up.”  AND, notice the text at the beginning:  “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.  Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.”  

That’s what I just said about what Grace frees us to do.  

As always, every time I think I’ve thought of some whoop-de-doo new spiritual insight, it turns out that it’s already there.  Anyway, go be free.

Persecution of Christians

Why don't we read anything about this? Check out the site (the title of this post is clickable).

Wisconsin Democrats Vote to Impeach Bush

Dairyville, WI, -- AP Democratic officials in this midwestern state voted overwhlemingly along party lines this weekend to IMPEACH BUSH! Among the high crimes and misdemeanors alleged against CHIMPY MCBUSHITLER! are

"1) lying to the American people; 2) Not telling the American people the truth about anything, ever; 3) Lying about the war in Iraq; 4) withholding the truth about the war in Iraq; 5) quite arguably and most likely complying with national law and presidential precedent in conducting wiretaps of foreign telephone calls without subpoenas; 6) Oh no, wait. Ummmmmmm Lying about subpeona-less wiretaps; 7) looking like a CHIMP, and a stupid one at that, and; 8) Lying all the time about everything even though he's too stupid to make anything up so it's real ROVEHITLER who's lying about everything because he's obviously putting every word into CHIMPY MCLYINGBUSHWIMP'S mouth."

The Act, entitled the "BRING THAT LYING CHIMP TO JUSTICE! Act" has no national effect, of course, but the law did immediately make it retroactively illegal for Wisconsin politicians to lie to their constituents. Twenty-seven Democratic state senators and 38 Democratic state congressmen were immediately arrested under the new law. Republican legislators quickly vacated the state, laughing.

New Joke

Okay, so a priest, a rabbi and a muslim walk into a 9th century Shiite mosque.




KaBOOOM!!!

Hirsi Ali

Bravest woman alive. Google her. Here's another photo. Thank God she dropped the burkha. And Allah wants to put this under wraps. Clearly a fool.

Let me see if I have this straight

Okay, this is my first crack at analyzing Sharia law, so forgive me if I seem a little confused. Ahem ... No cartoons of medieval tribal warlords. Check. No pooping on the Koran. Check. Blowing up centuries-old golden domed mosques, just fine. Check.

Jeez, that golden domed mosque thing is really a tragedy and a crime. No sarcasm here. It was a beautiful building. I'll try to find a before and after picture. I hear the US government has pledged to help rebuild it. I think that's the right thing to do.

Here's a composite picture of the mosque. The top is before, the bottom after.

















Here is a picture from Michael J. Totten's blog of the center of the universe. It's in Kurdistan in northern Iraq.



You can find his article about this, which you should read, at
Michael Totten

Well, well, well. An 'A' for Honesty, at least. Read the whole thing.

"It is wrong to say that Islam teaches us to respect the religious beliefs of non-Muslims. To respect the beliefs of others means to respect kufr and shirk. This is totally unacceptable."

Ask the Imam

"While the conditions under which non-Muslims are granted citizenship of Daarul Islam are many, at this juncture we refer to only those that are relative to our discussion.

Some of these conditions are:

They may practice their religion within the privacy of their homes

They may not build any new churches, synagogues etc.

Should any church, synagogue etc. be destroyed or require repair, they may repair or rebuild such buildings.

They may not celebrate any religious festivals in public

They may not display in public any item having particular religious purport, e.g. bible, Cross, statue, etc.

Such items should also be removed from the exterior of their places of worship i.e. No idol, Cross etc may be displayed on the outside of their places of worship.

They may not ring the church bell, nor read their religious books so loud that it is audible in public.

They may not invite towards their religion.

The reason for these conditions is that the purpose of Daarul Islam is to entrench Islam on the earth. Thus the salient features in religion must only be that of Islam. No features of other religions may be observable in public."

A new Photoshop contest at Fark

The above link takes you to Fark where they're photoshopping TV sitcom ideas using Mohammed. Muy funnyamos.

Dick Cheney sued by PETA

Houston TX -- Vice President Dick Cheney was sued in a class action this morning brought in a Texas federal court by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals PETA Homepage for infliction of emotional distress on all Texan quails. The three count complaint alleges that Cheney negligently, intentionally or with actual malice forced certain quail to witness the shooting of an insignificant human, including causing the shock of the shotgun blast to fray their nerves.  Said nerve fraying called for a class action, PETA spokeshuman Greta Blagmeyer, because the affected quail then flew off in all directions, no doubt spreading their nervousness and disorientation throughout a significant portion of the Texas quail population.

“Irresponsibly firing off shotguns in the vicinity of any animal, even if aimed directly at a human, should be a crime,” Blagmeyer intoned.  “But it’s not, so we’re going for the class action.”

Asked about the lawsuit, Cheney spokesman Scott Kappmeyer said the vice-president takes seriously all complaints from weenie-misanthropic-fringe-lunatic groups.

“The Vice President has communicated directly with Texas PETA’s offices,” Kappmeyer said, “and has suggested that the group’s lawyers join him for a friendly goose hunt to see if they can’t straighten this all out.  Of course, in deference to their beliefs, we won’t bring any geese.”

-30-

"a demand for submission." (Okay so lied)

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an apostate Muslim woman who was elected to the Dutch parliament. She teamed with Theo Van Gogh to make a movie,

Submission

which Van Gogh was murdered for making. She has been under protective custody since then. Here is her insightful take on the Cartoon Wars.

The Right to Offend

She's also just flat good looking, too. Erm, sans burhka.

Last Post Ever on This (Unless something really goofy happens)

Okay, Okay

I wasn't going to do this but these two articles convinced me otherwise

Curse of the Moderates

Cartoon Rage

Bush or Chimp?

This is funny.

Irony and Prophecy

In yesterday's Chicago Tribune Don Wyclife, the public editor, wrote a column about why the Trib hasn't published the Mohammed cartoons. But that's not the good part. He also wrote that the paper should not have included the use by a woman in another story of Jesus' name as an ephithet (swear word). Then he wrote (paraphrasing) "Just as we won't publish cartoon of the prophet" (which left me wondering which one, Isaiah?, Amos? Malachi?, oh well) "neither should we print the words 'Jesus Christ!' as an ephithet."

Um. You just did, Don.

But that isn't even the best part. This is: WHY DO AMERICAN NEWSPAPERS EVEN USE THE WORDS "PROPHET MOHAMMED?" Do you ever see the words "Jesus Christ, the Son of God" in a newspaper? Hell no! Not an f---ing chance, right? But Mohammed's status as a so-called prophet is an article of muslim faith -- NOT A FACT, just as Jesus' status as the Christ and Son of God is an article of faith.

I would never suggest that newspapers adopt "Jesus Christ, Son of God" whenever writing about Jesus. That's just silly. It's an article of faith, not fact, and newspapers shouldn't be adopting such things.

What I would suggest is that newspaper style books from now on refer to Mo as "the 7th century tribal warlord Mohammed" and leave it at that. Or "Mohammed, the founder of Islam" or something. Calling him a "prophet" borders on offensive.

Erm, or it would if I cared.

It's time to get serious

Can't say it any better than this.

A bad day at the Council on American Islamic Relations

Boston -- February 10, 2006

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today withdrew a press release issued yesterday and fired its public relations coordinator, Habibi Wahabi, after it was revealed that the press release was incorrect due to a computer programming error.

Yesterday's release, "CAIR Expresses Outrage At Bombing Of Jews in Tel Aviv Nightclub," should have read "CAIR Expresses Outrage at Publication of Cartoons."

Ibrahim Hooper, head of CAIR, said the error was caused by a faulty "cut and paste" job by a junior writer. "Mr. Wahabi should have easily known that the press release was erroneous, and he is being sacked for his negligence," Hooper said.

"I mean, the bombing hasn't even happened yet. Sheesh," Hooper explained.

Major Disconnect, General Confusion, Private Anguish, Corporal Punishment, Lieutenant Numbwithoutrage

This is what I don't get. At Arab News, they are "numbed with outrage" at the use of freedom of expression to support "the attempted destruction of a people's faith."

Arab News article

Your faith can be destroyed by a cartoon? What a frail and whispy thing your faith must be.

Then, apparently trying to teach us something, the same article says "... that the notion of freedom of expression cannot be translated into unlimited freedom to abuse another's faith is basic common sense."

It is? It's a "common sense" that is beyond me. Free expression -- which is not just a "notion" -- is not even supposed to be polite.

Here, I think, are the major disconnects causing all of this anguish, confusion and everything else:

1) Muslims -- I hear -- are forbidden to portray Mohammed (although, apparently that's not even true and images are sold in open markets in Iran all the time:

Website of Iranian woman selling Mohammed images online

Non-muslims are not forbidden to do so. Why? That's not our law, Achmed. That's your law.

2) Muslims are really, really offended by pictures of Mohammed (except, apparently, the ones who buy them from the lady in Tehran). There's some reason for this that I don't know or care to know. Anyway, they are. Non-muslims are not offended by pictures of Mohammed. Why? Why would we be? Mohammed is not a prophet to us. (He was -- in our view -- an ambitious, blood-thirsty, cruel, yet oddly charismatic tribal warlord. He tried to mimic what he (mis)understood of Judaism, was rejected by the Jews, and hence, after succeeding in a few battles and gaining some power, turned on the Jews and brutally executed hundreds of them, even taking the wife of one of the executed foes into his harem. So ..., ya know, not really a prophet by our standards.)

3) Even the idea of censoring blasphemy has utterly disappeared from the West (thank God)(was that a pun?). On the other hand, they still execute people for it (as well as for being homosexual, practicing Christianity, and other stuff) in several muslim countries including Saudi Arabia.

The result?

Muslims are offended when we do what we're perfectly entitled to do because they believe something we don't, and so they wish to impose their laws on us and force us to conform, in effect, to Islamic law.

I believe we should resist that effort with everything we have.

This was said even better at

New York Sun Editorial

This may be hopeful

Muslim Apology for Angry Response to Stupid Cartoons

Seems like a rational piece, urging a democratic, calm response instead of CARTOON RAGE!!! except for this:

"However, at the same time there is a need to realize that freedom of expression is a responsibility that should not be used to gratuitously insult people’s beliefs."

Why? Why can't I gratuitously insult someone's beliefs? It might not be nice, but should there be legal restrictions against it? I don't think so. There's all kinds of stuff out there gratuitously insulting Christians. Do I blow things up? Nope. Do I want those people not to be allowed to say those things? Absolutely not. Fire away; God can take it.

Nice Religion

People beheaded in the name of "Allah," embassies burned because Islam is "insulted," women and children massacred in Allah's name, mosques and churches bombed by Muslims, genocide in Darfur, and nary a peep from these people. But let someone draw a cartoon, and:



Nice religion, people.

See (Part Duh plus one)?

Islam is a ridiculous religion, and the so-called 'prophet' smoked dope and had sex with coconuts.

Okay, I don't believe any of that, but I should be free to say it. Why? Because by knocking down my false statements, truth is made stronger. That is the premise behind freedom of speech. "Say anything you want, and if what you say is false, we will prove it, and in the process make ourselves stronger for undertaking the proof." I'm sure John Mill said something along these lines only way more eloquent.

So, how to respond to the statement above? Well, the Western way would be to ask for evidence of prophetic dope smoking and coconut sex. There, of course, is none. Mark one in your column. Next, you'd ask "Ridiculous by what standard? Because it is not science? Science is the weaker of the two sisters, theology and natural science. That's no measure. 'Ridiculous' because it is different from your Christianity? Well, of course it is, otherwise it would be Christianity." Anyway, blah blah blah. So, that's the Western appraoch to such issues, fueled as it is of course by 2000 years of Church insistence on the primacy of reason.

Uh oh, however. That is not the only possible response. Here's another:



This, my friends, is why Islam and the West cannot be reconciled. And this, my friends, is also why the West is superior to Islam. And this, my friends, is why there is soon going to be a very long and very bitter and bloody global war. Let's pray we prevail.

My Favorite Mohammed

I wasn't going to post an image of Mohammed. Frankly, who wants to look at his mug anyway? But this one was just too good:

What? US condemns Cartoons

US Surrenders

Edited 2/6

Oh, this was just the Stadhimmitude Department

See (Part Duh)?

See? "Van Gogh's Murderer Says 'Prophet' Justifies It"

Here's the other side. There is no reconciling Islam and the West. Lock and load, friends.

There is no reconciling these two civilizations

That's my take anyway, especially after viewing this,

Fun with Mohammed

, a Dutch Photoshop contest featuring all kinds of images making fun of Mohammed. About half of them are funny, whicch for a Photoshop contest, if you've ever seen one, is actually pretty good.

This is ridiculous

And what I mean by that is, it's worthy of ridicule. The hoo-ha over drawings of Mohammed. Honestly. Grow up. The BBC ran pictures of the pictures on TV. The Muslim Council of Britian said, well, we might be insulted, but "it depends."

'The Muslim Council of Britain said its reaction to the BBC's decision to broadcast would "depend on the context".

A spokesman said: "It depends on whether they're broadcast to illustrate the story about the row developing, or, in the same way as the European newspapers have published, to gloat about freedom.'

BBC Joins Cartoon Controversy

I mean honestly, no gloating over freedom, people. What you enjoy it? Ha! Well we will bomb you then.

Mohammed Image Bomb

I've heard some people say, gee, shouldn't we as Christians respect their religious laws and be nice and all Christiany-feel-good? Isn't hurting people's feeling non-Christian? Um, guy, their religious laws include chopping the hands off of thieves and beheading raped women for "adultery." Their laws include allowing the murder of someone who leaves the religion. And there's lots of others like that. So, no, I don't think it is our Christian duty to respect that. Nor is there anywhere I see in the New Testament where Jesus was more concerned about not hurting people's feelings than He was about telling them the truth.

And another thing, if you ever catch me writing a sentence with the word "prophet" within four or more words of the word "Mohammed," please let me know so I can chop off the offending digits. :) I believe -- but I'm not looking it up -- that the Bible says something along the lines of "test a prophet. If what he says is false, he is not a prophet." Anyway, even if it doesn't say that, I think it's a pretty good litmus test.

Now, what does that have to do with my aversion to putting the word anywhere near Mohammed's name? Simple. Mohammed's little book denies the divinity of Jesus. Hence, it's false. Thusly and wheretofor, Mohammed ain't no prophet. (There's an exception to the "four word" rule when a negative appears between the two words.)

Support Denmark... and Germany, Italy and Spain

A Joke

Okay, so a priest, a rabbi and a muslim walk into a bar.





KABOOM!

hahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa