Thursday, April 26, 2007
"Hate Crimes" Bill Poses Threat to Christians
Dear Readers,
As publisher of Ministry Today, I want to bring to your attention a serious threat to religious freedom in this country. H.R. 1592, the so-called "Hate Crimes Bill," would expand the federal definition of hate crimes to include "sexual orientation." If this bill passes, all anti-homosexual language could potentially be considered "inflammatory speech" and would be a crime. The implications for the pastors of this country are obvious.
The bill passed the Judiciary Committee Wednesday night, with all 17 Republicans voting against it and all 23 Democrats voting for it. It will hit the House floor for consideration next week. The Traditional Values Coalition is in Washington right now following the bill's progress and fighting its passage. Read their report to understand more about the urgent threat H.R. 1592 poses to the United States.
As a Christian and a believer in free speech, I urge you to call your representative and do all you can to prevent this bill from becoming a law.
In Christ,
Steve Strang
Founder and Publisher
INTERACT: What do you think of H.R. 1592? Is the threat in this bill real or is it being exaggerated? What, if anything, should we do about it? Weigh in with your comments below.
More Perspectives: If you'd like to see a few more perspectives on this controversial issue, check out these links:
As publisher of Ministry Today, I want to bring to your attention a serious threat to religious freedom in this country. H.R. 1592, the so-called "Hate Crimes Bill," would expand the federal definition of hate crimes to include "sexual orientation." If this bill passes, all anti-homosexual language could potentially be considered "inflammatory speech" and would be a crime. The implications for the pastors of this country are obvious.
The bill passed the Judiciary Committee Wednesday night, with all 17 Republicans voting against it and all 23 Democrats voting for it. It will hit the House floor for consideration next week. The Traditional Values Coalition is in Washington right now following the bill's progress and fighting its passage. Read their report to understand more about the urgent threat H.R. 1592 poses to the United States.
As a Christian and a believer in free speech, I urge you to call your representative and do all you can to prevent this bill from becoming a law.
In Christ,
Steve Strang
Founder and Publisher
INTERACT: What do you think of H.R. 1592? Is the threat in this bill real or is it being exaggerated? What, if anything, should we do about it? Weigh in with your comments below.
More Perspectives: If you'd like to see a few more perspectives on this controversial issue, check out these links:
- H.R. 1592 - The actual document
- Report from the Judiciary Committee hearing - From the Traditional Values Coalition, this goes into detail about the problems the Republicans had with the bill and the debates the bill went through
- Overall Picture - This news story provides a good view of both the supporters' and detractors' positions
- Monday Morning Insight's Post - The view from Todd Rhoades' excellent Christian leadership blog
- The View From the Other Side - An argument for the bill from a gay rights group
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Agnostic Advice
For about a year now, two enterprising agnostics have been writing a blog that provides church leaders with a unique and potentially useful perspective on Sunday morning church. In the blog, called Church Hopping, both writers (a young man and woman) visit a church service almost every Sunday and then grade their experience and explain what they liked and didn't like about the church.
It's an interesting read because neither is a Christian, so you don't get the usual complaints from first-time attendees about not having their favorite songs or an issue with a theological point in the sermon. What you get is a fresh look at the way non-Christians view church.
Regardless of how "seeker-friendly" your church is trying to be, some of the views and advice in here should be considered by every church leader. Sometimes we get used to our church and we just take for granted things like explaining the procedure for communion (a constant issue on Church Hopping) or how important it is to make connections with people we haven't seen before. Even simple stuff like putting your Web site on your marquee might get past us.
But while the authors' agnosticism provides a unique viewpoint, it also makes you take their advice with a grain of salt. Both writers do a pretty good job of separating their viewpoints from their analysis, but you can't get away from the fact that non-Christians tend to have a fairly "consumer" outlook on church. And occasionally you get a sentence like this: "The message just seemed to personal and way too involved. I like a sermon to ask a question in my mind, not tell me what I'm doing is wrong." I'm sure there are many pastors wouldn't be too upset with that criticism.
Here's a few of the better reviews showing a variety of viewpoints:
INTERACT: What do you think of Church Hopping? How much should we pay attention to their opinions? How would you feel if your church was reviewed? Let us know by commenting below.
It's an interesting read because neither is a Christian, so you don't get the usual complaints from first-time attendees about not having their favorite songs or an issue with a theological point in the sermon. What you get is a fresh look at the way non-Christians view church.
Regardless of how "seeker-friendly" your church is trying to be, some of the views and advice in here should be considered by every church leader. Sometimes we get used to our church and we just take for granted things like explaining the procedure for communion (a constant issue on Church Hopping) or how important it is to make connections with people we haven't seen before. Even simple stuff like putting your Web site on your marquee might get past us.
But while the authors' agnosticism provides a unique viewpoint, it also makes you take their advice with a grain of salt. Both writers do a pretty good job of separating their viewpoints from their analysis, but you can't get away from the fact that non-Christians tend to have a fairly "consumer" outlook on church. And occasionally you get a sentence like this: "The message just seemed to personal and way too involved. I like a sermon to ask a question in my mind, not tell me what I'm doing is wrong." I'm sure there are many pastors wouldn't be too upset with that criticism.
Here's a few of the better reviews showing a variety of viewpoints:
- 4/15 - Catholic church (Rating: 9)
- 2/25 - Catholic church (4)
- 1/8 - Vineyard church (6)
- 10/15 - Baptist church (1)
- 8/27 - Church of Christ (8.5)
- 6/23 - Methodist church (mixed)
- 6/2 - Non-denom church (9.9)
INTERACT: What do you think of Church Hopping? How much should we pay attention to their opinions? How would you feel if your church was reviewed? Let us know by commenting below.
Status of the Ministry Report
Ministry Report readers,
As many of you may have noticed, there has been an obvious lack of updates for the last month or so. The reason is simple: our beloved editor, Matt Green, has left us to pursue a calling with a missionary organization. In the scramble to fill the hole he left, the Ministry Report has been neglected. That changes today.
Starting this week, humble assistant editor Chris Glazier (me) will be updating the blog with the same news and commentary you've come to expect from us. We'll also have contributing pieces from others and an occasional update from the big man, Steve Strang, on topics close to his heart (check out tomorrow's story).
We're also re-launching the weekly Ministry Report e-mail at the end of this week.
So don't worry, Ministry readers. We're still here.
As many of you may have noticed, there has been an obvious lack of updates for the last month or so. The reason is simple: our beloved editor, Matt Green, has left us to pursue a calling with a missionary organization. In the scramble to fill the hole he left, the Ministry Report has been neglected. That changes today.
Starting this week, humble assistant editor Chris Glazier (me) will be updating the blog with the same news and commentary you've come to expect from us. We'll also have contributing pieces from others and an occasional update from the big man, Steve Strang, on topics close to his heart (check out tomorrow's story).
We're also re-launching the weekly Ministry Report e-mail at the end of this week.
So don't worry, Ministry readers. We're still here.
Friday, April 13, 2007
The Bible in Public Schools
The April 2nd cover story for Time magazine, “Why We Should Teach the Bible in Public Schools” may sound like a victory for Christians. But before we welcome the suggestion with open arms, let’s examine what it really means.
The article’s author, David Van Biema, reasons that Biblical literacy is essential for understanding Shakespeare–who quotes the Bible some 1,300 times–and the language of the founding fathers, which drips with scriptural allusions. He also argues that a grasp of the Good Book is crucial for operating in a public square, where religion plays an ever more contentious role.
No doubt Van Biema is correct–teaching the Bible at school will produce smarter students and better citizens. And those are good things. But they are not the primary purposes for studying Scripture. And, as Shakespeare would say, “there’s the rub.”
In Van Biema’s proposal the Bible’s stated purposes for its study, such as inspiring belief (John 20:31) and convicting of sin (Hebrews 4:12) are strictly off limits. He favors introducing Bible courses to high school curricula, “as long as we teach it but don’t preach it.”
The issue is complicated. On one hand, familiarizing youth with the stories of Scripture may make them more amenable to Christianity. God does promise that His word “will not return empty” (Is. 55:11).
Conversely, non-Christian, public school teachers may teach the Bible with a strong, secular bias, objectifying the text and dismissing its miraculous accounts as mere myth. There’s a danger that students could absorb that bias, and as a result, be inoculated from the life-changing power of the gospel. After all, nothing’s more insufferable than a smug atheist, confirmed in his disbelief by a Bible-as-Lit. course.
So, should the Bible be taught in public schools? Tell us what do you think!
The article’s author, David Van Biema, reasons that Biblical literacy is essential for understanding Shakespeare–who quotes the Bible some 1,300 times–and the language of the founding fathers, which drips with scriptural allusions. He also argues that a grasp of the Good Book is crucial for operating in a public square, where religion plays an ever more contentious role.
No doubt Van Biema is correct–teaching the Bible at school will produce smarter students and better citizens. And those are good things. But they are not the primary purposes for studying Scripture. And, as Shakespeare would say, “there’s the rub.”
In Van Biema’s proposal the Bible’s stated purposes for its study, such as inspiring belief (John 20:31) and convicting of sin (Hebrews 4:12) are strictly off limits. He favors introducing Bible courses to high school curricula, “as long as we teach it but don’t preach it.”
The issue is complicated. On one hand, familiarizing youth with the stories of Scripture may make them more amenable to Christianity. God does promise that His word “will not return empty” (Is. 55:11).
Conversely, non-Christian, public school teachers may teach the Bible with a strong, secular bias, objectifying the text and dismissing its miraculous accounts as mere myth. There’s a danger that students could absorb that bias, and as a result, be inoculated from the life-changing power of the gospel. After all, nothing’s more insufferable than a smug atheist, confirmed in his disbelief by a Bible-as-Lit. course.
So, should the Bible be taught in public schools? Tell us what do you think!
