26 February 2013

Equality & Discrimination

I have had more thoughts since writing about discrimination recently.  I think I have reached the conclusion that some anti-discrimination ideals are a farce.

Please don't misunderstand me.  I think that treating people as inferior or deliberately putting people down is bad behaviour.  Especially if it is on the grounds that the other people are of a different gender or a different race.  By this definition of discrimination, I would think that discrimination is wrong.

The other people are as human as we are.  They are sinners, just like us.  In this sense, we are no better than the others and should not act as if we are.

However, as I thought about it, I also thought that the opposite extreme is also not true.  To regard everybody as the same is not being true to reality.  We are of different genders.  We are made up of many races.  We can discriminate to the extent of realising these differences, even if we do not put others down.  We can acknowledge who the bride and who the groom is, for example; or choose to use the right toilet.

To think that everybody gets the same marks in exams, to think that everybody is as athletically capable as each other - these are examples of just not being real.  To think that an untrained guy is as capable of performing surgery as a trained surgeon ... I would not do this, would you?

I think we are swallowing a lie if we take this meaning of discrimination too far.  We could end up saying that there should be no headship in the home, or even in the country.  We could say that worshipping God, idols or the Devil is exactly the same thing.

I think that we should not regard ourselves more highly than what we ought to, we should not put other people down.  But to think that children have the same right to correct their parents, to think that everybody is exactly the same in every way ... that is not right either.

What do you think?  Are all created equal, but some are more equal than others the way "Animal Farm" says?  Are we all alike in every way?  Are we believing a lie if we champion the anti-discrimination concept to its extreme?

21 February 2013

Kids leave church

"The American church is declining" would be my synopsis of https://marc5solas.wordpress.com/2013/02/08/top-10-reasons-our-kids-leave-church/.  This blog asserted that 70% of kids leave church when they leave high-school.  Half of them return a decade later.

If these statistics are true and the trend were to continue, then the church would be losing 35% of its population with every generation.  (I do not know how reliable the source of these statistics; nor do I know if the trend will continue.)

The point that the blogger seems to be making is that we are packaging church wrongly.  Church is a culture that they do not feel the need for.  It feels superficial.  It does not answer all their questions or all their needs.  Theology is "dumbed down" such that when the kids are treated as intelligent enough to ask the hard questions, the church does not have the answers.

Do you find church to be like this?

The blogger seems to think that our children and youth need to be confronted with the weight of the law and the freedom of the Gospel in order to appreciate church.  What do you think?

I think that people need to meet the real Jesus.  Church does not have to be a culture of its own.  Church does not need to be light Bible studies all the time.  Church does not need to be separated from community as though Christians are weird.

I think Church is really ordinary people who have met Jesus sharing together.  It does not need to be a separate culture, apart from trying to live God's way instead of any other way.  What do you think?

13 February 2013

Is it wrong to discriminate?

"Why do your "10 Commandments" have nothing to say about rape, child abuse or discrimination?" asked a friend on Twitter.

I was able to answer her about the "rape" and "child abuse" parts more easily ... but the "discrimination" part set me thinking.  Perhaps our moral code today is not exactly what the Ten Commandments say.  If that is so, then is the Ten Commandments obsolete?  Or is our moral code immoral?  Or wrong?  What do you think?

About "discrimination", though - I don't think it is necessarily wrong to discriminate.  After all, to "discriminate" means to treat people differently because of their age, gender, skin colour, etc.  I think we need to do that, and let children be children, men be men, women be women, etc.  I think of discrimination as negative only when it puts the discriminated person or party down; as in not having employment opportunity or access to the voting system, or something like that.  What do you think?

Then, as I thought about it further, I came to also realise that there are rules that we follow that are not exactly dealt with in the Ten Commandments also.  Eg. cheating in exams, littering, keeping to speed limits while driving, etc.  The Ten Commandments may hint at these issues, but it does not specifically address them.

Then, there are also laws that many people do not keep.  Like keeping the Sabbath, not having carved images to worship, honouring God's name.

Does that man the Ten Commandments is wrong?  Or are people wrong instead?  Besides the religious Jews, who sees the Ten Commandments as relevant today?

What if we keep only one of the Ten Commandments and ignore the other nine?

What do you think our moral code should be?  Where is God in your answer?

08 February 2013

Meekness, weakness and wrath

What does the word "meekness" mean to you?

I have learnt that the word means "quiet, gentle and not willing to argue or state your opinions in a forceful way" according to the Cambridge Dictionary.  .It is associated with tamed horses - horses are meek when they control their strength and cooperate with their riders.  A horse that does not use its strength to get out of control.

The Greeks regarded meekness as a virtue.  Do you?  Or do you see it as a weakness?

In cultures where people are taught to be assertive and to fight for ones rights, one might associate the concept of "meekness" with "weakness".  However, the opposite of meekness can be to fly off in a rage whenever upset, and society does not really like that.  We also value the idea of having restraint and self control.

Was Jesus meek?  Did He practice self control?  Did He have all the power in the world, but chose not to use it?

Or was He a man of wrath?  Calling down judgement and condemnation whenever angered?

If we are to follow after Jesus' example, then how are we to behave?
WILLIAM BARCLAY TRANSLATES THE GREEK WORD PROATES TO HAVE THREE BASIC MEANINGS:
1. One who has the right kind of temper
2. A person in control of ones life, responsive to God
3. Knows ones limits and accepts them.
Are we meek like this?

02 February 2013

Grace or Justice

Which is stronger for you?  Which should be stronger?  Grace or Justice?

Justice says we must punish sin.  Wrongs must be corrected.  One needs to face the consequences.  Always.

Grace says we can love and forgive.  Punishments may be withheld.  Consequences may be met by somebody else.

It seems that we like justice when we have been victimised.  We wish revenge on our oppresssors.  We wish that they be punished for their misdeeds, and that everything would be right.  We wish that everybody would behave kindly, and not take advantage of us.  Those who do, should be brought to justice.  Molesters, thieves, cheats and swindlers deserve justice and punishment.

However, there are times when we have wronged somebody and have then been found out.  We may have spoken a lie.  We may have broken a neighbour's window.  We may have been caught speeding.  We may have burnt our dinner.  In these situations, we wish for forgiveness and grace instead of punishment.

But, if the world were to run on a system of perfect fairness and equality, then we don't deserve any more grace than the people who we think should be brought to justice.  Don't you think so?  Why should we be pardoned for the offences that we have caused when other people are not?

If everybody were excused from doing what is right, then would people behave worse?  Would everybody be "a law to themselves" in a carefree, godless manner of wrongdoing?  Or, if everybody were to be brought to justice then who may be spared?  For all of us would have done something wrong or caused offences to other people at some stages.

The movie Les Miserables carry some concepts of this tension within it.  So does the book of Romans.  But what do you think?  If God were to hold the world fairly and harmoniously, then how should he dish out justice and grace to everyone?