"Hey, man, it's a free country..."

I think it's amusing when people talk about "freedom of speech" on sites like YouTube. Last time I checked, YouTube is a privately owned company, not a public forum, thus, no one is guaranteed this freedom under the Constitution, as so many are fond of stating. The website lets users post content for free, but does that give anyone the right to "free speech" on the site? Not so much. Actually, there are a lot of misunderstandings concerning free speech in general. I'm sure many people who post content on the internet could be found guilty of libel and slander, were one to pursue the issue. Many people seem to take the perceived anonymity(or lack thereof) to be a license to say things that would be most unacceptable in, say, a public speech. Some people don't seem to realise that even simple trespasses against the law, even on the internet, can have dire real-life consequences, i.e., getting sued. Just something to consider.

To Die to Self

Note: I really didn't intend to write this much, but I got started with something I saw on TV, and I just kind of went with it.

I am currently watching a televangelist on TV, one Pastor Davis. He is trying to give away this stuff called "no evil oil," a substance which supposedly rids the user of "witchcraft spirits" and the "poverty devil" under the power of the blood of Jesus. Apparently, he and his "prayer family" prayed over this oil for 17 days, somehow consecrating it and changing it into this miraculous substance. Rebellious children, unfaithful spouses, and financial troubles can all be attributed to the witchcraft spirits, according to this man. He just promised a police officer at one of his meetings that he would receive two promotions and get a larger salary, all in the name of God.

I am sorry. This is inexcusable. I don't care what brand of Christianity you subscribe to, this is inexcusable. Even supposedly "mainstream" Christian leaders like Pat Robertson participate in this sort of thing, giving unfounded proclamations of healing and favour with no deference whatsoever to God's will. (Of course, Mr. Robertson is not a trinket peddler like this Pastor Davis person, but nevertheless, I do not appreciate some of the things he does.) Another thing this Davis fellow keeps saying is that he "sees" things. He said that to the policeman, he says to viewers who write him that he "sees" them anointing various people/things with his oil and being blessed. He sees them? What does that mean? He is seriously prophesying to these people. He simply says something and states that God will do it. This is akin to a combination of a BAM! commercial and an ad for a phone-in psychic. You can clean your bathtub and get rid of evil spirits at the same time!

How can we expect anyone to take Christianity seriously when our faith is allowed to be hijacked by people like this? Evangelical Christianity seems to be a harbour for distributors of a cheapened version of the faith. Christianity is portrayed as a quick fix for life's little problems. Self-help is the name of the game, and God is the guru who will set you right. Or that's what we're told. Joel Osteen is one such preacher, a man who preaches a theology of prosperity. He tells us that faith and righteousness will bring us favour from God, and in turn, this will manifest itself materially. Our health will improve, we'll be more productive at work, our stress levels will go down, we'll have happier lives, because these are apparently the signs of God's blessing. This is an incredibly reduced gospel. In fact, there's really not much gospel involved, to be perfectly honest. This is merely Christianized self-help, the American dream, with a Jesus-Fish stuck on the bumper. Like so many other things in our culture, we've taken something, stamped it with God's seal of approval, and supposedly claimed it for Christ, in all of it's postmodern, secular glory, ignoring the fact that it remains virtually unchanged. Is this "taking every thought captive?" Is this "renewing your mind?" No, it's just sugarcoating. Extremely popular sugarcoating.

We are challenged by Peter in his first epistle to pursue spiritual growth. So many people are still content to stay within the bounds of "Jesus loves me, this I know," never maturing past that point. (The aforementioned principle is indeed a wonderful one, but our faith has so much more to offer...) The "prosperity gospel" seems to be nothing more than "Jesus loves me and wants me to have an expensive car, perfect health, obedient children, and a carefree life," as if these are the benefits of the Jesus Club. I am always reminded that Christ himself specifically told us that we would be persecuted, reviled, and cursed for his sake. "To die to self and so to live" is the phrase that I think of, one that implies that the life of the Christian is not exactly "7 Keys Towards Improving Your Life." I am a slave to Christ, not a country club member. But my master is Yahweh, the creator of the universe. He has given me something much greater than the "American Dream," and has promised me an inheritance of incalculable worth.

True cultural transformation is more than possible through the gospel, but only if the entire gospel is put into practice. The gospel that is being displayed to the American public is a shoddy reflection of the true power of Christ. The American church is divided, disorganized, and inconsistent in its efforts. How can we expect nonbelievers to take our message seriously if we ourselves do not take it seriously? The incredible beauty of the gospel is being lost on an entire nation.

Things I Overhear at Work #1

As a busboy, I overhear many things that drift into my ears from nearby tables. I thought I'd begin a series of posts relating some of these bits of conversation.

"You know what I hate about Protestants?"

I didn't stick around to hear the rest of that thought, but I wish I could have. It would've been amusing...

Culture: Politics Internalized?

Do government and politics define a culture, or do the values of a society become the primary factor? This question found its way into my brain as the result of a comment on one of my YouTube videos. This individual said that American culture was vastly different from British culture, and cited politics as one of the reasons for this. Obviously, Britain's policies are more liberal and European than American policies. But is that really a valid cause of cultural difference?

I tend to base my judgements on the fact that (WCS kids, say it with me, I know you've been programmed to do so) culture is religion, externalized. How do politics and government fit into the equation, though? It's a bit of a "chicken or the egg" situation. If a culture's values are primarily determined by the actions of government, then what? Or, to pose a further question, are the actions of government really just outworkings of a culture's values? Is it top-down, bottom-up, or simply every which-way? Personally, I don't think that politics is a prime determinant in a culture, but then again, these matters are always quite messy and can never be said to go one way or another. I don't presume to surface with an actual answer, but I thought it was an interesting matter.

Final summation: how can government ultimately affect the nature of a culture?

Thoughts, anyone? Go.

American Faith: 3000 wide, 3 deep.

Ok, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm just not much for topics lately. BUT, here is a worthwhile blog post by Dr. George Grant. Read it here. Consider me your portal to interesting information around the internet.

These men are allergic to razors.

Perhaps someday soon I'll write a post that does not consist of the following pattern: "Here's a link to a website, isn't it grand?" /end post.

At any rate, here's the World Beard and Moustache Championships.

I think it's pretty cool, though slightly strange.