At what point does it become tacky?

Driving through my town this week I noticed something a little disturbing. A gas station that’s been closed for quite some time was being reopened as a coffee shop. That wasn’t the disturbing part. In fact, that’s quite good. I’m a sucker for a good cup of coffee. It turns out that the coffee shop is a Christian themed coffee shop. I’ll admit, I don’t know what makes a coffee shop sufficiently “Christian.” Are some coffees more appropriate for Christians than others? Does that even matter? Can you just play some Amy Grant or Third Day CDs? Is that enough to qualify? We may never know.

However, none of those concerns explain my unease with this new Christian watering hole. It’s the name. Brace yourself. It’s pretty bad. Here it is: Jehovah’s Java, The Great I AM Coffee Shop and Café. Take a look at the attached picture. As Dave Barry is famous for saying, “I am not making this up!”

Let’s remember, Jehovah is one of the names of God in the Old Testament. He also tells us that his name is sacred. There are orthodox Jews that don’t write or speak the name of God. They consider it to be that Holy.

Does this bother you? What if someone opened a car dealership called: Jesus Christ Ford Lincoln Mercury? Would we (Christians) be okay with that? Does Jesus endorse Fords? Is He cool with using his name to sell cars? Can I play enough Christian pop music in the showroom to make Him cool with it? How many “Precious Moments” ceramic figurines do I need to strategically place near the brochure rack to meet the reverence quota? 4? 20? Is my hypothetical car dealership situation really any different from Jehovah’s Java? I don’t think so.

I don’t know the owners of Jehovah’s Java. I hope they are operating from a pure motive. However, it seems symptomatic of modern evangelism. In our attempts to appear relevant and cool we’ve surrendered something that wasn’t ours to surrender. God’s Holy name is being used to sell coffee.

I’m a Protestant. As such, we (Protestants) don’t focus as much of our attention on Mary as our Roman Catholic friends. However, would it be okay for me to open up a business across from a Roman Catholic Church? Sure. Can I open it in hopes of bringing in some neighborhood Catholics? I don’t see why not. But, what if my business is called: Virgin Mary’s Holy Mother of God Check Cashing and Pawn Shop? I’m cringing as I type this. That would be bad right? Right? Offensive? Of course! We’d never think of it. I’m sure my Catholic friends would be put off by such a name. That’s assuming that I’d have any Catholic friends after naming my pawn-shop after the woman who gave birth to the Christ-child. Tacky doesn’t begin to describe it.

Then why aren’t we outraged when we see Jehovah’s Java? Why do people think it’s cute? Sometimes we (Protestants) criticize Roman Catholics for their elevation of Mary. However, it seems that the real sin is that we modern evangelicals have lowered God. Our Catholic friends hold the name of Mary in higher esteem than we hold the name of God.

Science and the Bible

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about creationism. I affirm the infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible. As such, I believe the world was created in a literal six twenty-four hour days. I realize that those beliefs fly squarely in the face of what modern science tells us. In fact, that makes me, and the millions who hold the same view, look naïve and foolish. How do we reconcile the Biblical account of creation with the claims of modern science?

I confess that I often find myself trying to keep score in the battle between secular science and Biblical creationists. Biblical creationists in recent years have grown more and more aggressive and creative in their tactics for combating Darwinian Evolution. There are the state-by-state and district-by-district battles for inclusion of “Intelligent Design” curriculum alongside other explanations of the earth’s origin. One Christian creationist is opening creation a museum replete with explanations of dinosaurs and where they place those creatures on the timeline. Churches bring in creation scientists to hear detailed explanations of the Genesis account. Dozens of ministries have been birthed for the single purpose of fighting evolution and equipping Christians with talking points to use for sparring with their evolution minded friends.

Then there’s Noah’s ark. Christian scientists have built elaborate theories around exactly how Noah fit all those animals on the ark. They explain that the ark didn’t have to go anywhere. It just had to float. Many of the animals must have been babies. That explains one of the ways that Noah fit so many of them in such a small space. Oh, and don’t forget hibernation. Hibernation cuts down on the animal waste problem. All of these space saving measures are purely speculative. The text doesn’t answer all the questions for us. So, if we want to know the details, we have to theorize and speculate.

How do we explain a global flood? Some Christian scientists claim they can explain that. They put forth the “canopy theory.” The earth had complete cloud cover. This changed the sun’s impact on the earth. Thus we had different vegetation and the sun had different impact on man. That, some say, explains people being able to live for hundreds of years.

So what we have is modern science gradually coming up with evidence that seems to disprove the Bible. Then, Christian scientists explain why they are wrong. Sometimes the Christian explanation sounds reasonable. Sometimes, it sounds speculative. In fact, it sounds every bit as speculative as they accuse Darwinians of being.

Here’s the slippery problem with seeking scientific explanations to legitimize Bible stories. We eventually reach an impasse. We have to use the “M” word. Miracle. The explanations for creation and Noah’s Ark are one thing. What do we do when we get to the parting of the Red Sea? I believe that Moses literally parted the Red Sea and led the Israelites across it. However, I’m not going to look for a meteorological explanation. The infallible Word of God tells me that it happened.

How about the virgin birth? How about Jesus turning water into wine? Raising Lazarus from the dead? Walking on water? Even Peter walked on water for a little bit we know. How did these happen? We have to just say… miracle. That’s it. Science says they couldn’t have happened. We (Christians) have to just have faith that they did. We don’t require scientific proof of these events.

I appreciate the spirit with which these Christian scientists labor. No one wants to have science brand a big “Disproved” stamp across our entire Bible. However, this is a battle I believe that science will appear to win. Jesus ultimately won the war with His death on the cross.

I believe the Bible to be the inerrant infallible Word of God. I don’t need any further proof. Just as God opened Lydia’s heart to understand what Paul was saying, I believe that God’s Holy Spirit has opened my heart to believe the Bible’s claims. As we seek “proof” we’d be wise to remember Jesus’ words to Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

The Doctrine of Biological Infallibility

I discussed yesterday how Oprah encourages us to “live our own truth.” This is the Oprah mantra. “Don’t hide your secrets,” she exhorts us. “Live your own truth!”

Cue the applause.

Soccer moms begin their nodding.

The ratings rise.

This is one facet of the gospel of self.

On Tuesday’s show Oprah was interviewing married women that discovered after their wedding vows that they were actually gay. So, as I discussed yesterday, the thrust of the program was the bravery of these women and the difficulty of their struggle. Oprah and the audience had a lot of congratulatory applause for these brave women.

For Oprah, biology is destiny. These women found themselves attracted to people of the same gender. So, that must be their natural inclination. And, if that’s what their loins crave, it must be right. They must be born that way. After all, that’s “their truth.” They need to live it with courage and boldness. Supporters of same sex lifestyles always point out that no one would choose to be gay. It’s too tough a road to choose on your own. It’s a road fraught with persecution and social stigma. Therefore, it must be our natural inclination.

However, what do we do with other biological desires? The man who burns in his loins for children or for animals? What if he feels equally strong about his desires? Can he act on them? Should he? After all, talk about a tough road to choose. Who would choose to be a pedophile? I would guess that that’s a road fraught with stigmatization. Would anyone choose it?

Does Oprah encourage him to live his truth? If not. Why not?

Suddenly her doctrine of the infallibility of biological desires breaks down. She’s not prepared to say that he should act on that desire. And, she’s right. He shouldn’t. The problem is Oprah has to come up with an explanation for why he feels that way. Remember, her default answer is “live your own truth.” So, she’s got to come up with a way to explain why this guy has a “bad truth.” After all, aren’t our loins the guide? What if he feels like he’s listening to his heart?

Herein lies the problem with the Oprah worldview: She (and we) can’t hold it consistently. She’s got to come up with a way to approve of what she likes and explain away what she doesn’t. How does she do it?

Here’s how she explains the pedophile’s reprehensible behavior. He was wounded that way. Someone or something busted his internal compass. That’s what knocked his compass askew. In the world of Oprahvity people are born with pure desires and if they go bad it’s because some external force pushed them off course.

The Christian worldview is that we’re all born depraved. Like a car that is out of alignment, our tendency is to desire things that are wrong. A desire that comes from within is not always right. Because our internal compass is busted, we must navigate from something other than our “heart.”

Look at what the bible says in Jeremiah 17:9. “The heart is deceitfully wicked, who can know it.”

Living our own truth is actually a very dangerous thing.

Endless Navel Gazing

I'm flipping channels today and I landed on Oprah. That was my first mistake. I shouldn’t watch Oprah. I’m pretty sure that if I had an anger management counselor, he'd probably tell me that I should quit watching Oprah.

Anyway, on today’s episode the Right Reverend Oprah was treating her live studio audience and everyone at home in TV Land to a shocking new trend. Today’s episode was about wives in heterosexual marriages that realize that they are gay. These women sit on the Oprah couch and share their “brave struggle.”

Oprah furrows her brow.

The audience nods in agreement.

Oprah asks probing questions.

The guests and sometimes their ex-husbands talk about their journey as they navigated through this tough struggle toward living a life of truthfulness.

More brow furrowing.

More nodding.

Sometimes there is some clapping from the audience. Not too much, this is a sensitive subject.

The audience grows more and more enamored with this woman’s “courage.” She’s so brave.

Oprah reads sad email from an unnamed woman who’s afraid to be as brave as the show’s other guests. She’s loves her husband. But, she’s not “in love” with him. So, she’ll probably die lonely and afraid to come out of the closet.

Oprah can’t take it anymore. It’s time for the closing homily. She exhorts the audience to “Live your own truth.”

You don’t have to watch Oprah very long to realize that “living your own truth” is her battle cry.

There’s a lot of talk these days about “getting in touch with your feelings”. Or learning how I’m “wired-together.” At the end of the day aren’t we all just trying to “get in touch” with who we are?

Self-discovery, self awareness, introspection, soul searching, self actualization. Those are just a few of the terms we hear used.

When did we start talking like this? Did your grandparents talk like that? I don’t think my grandfather ever encouraged me to get in touch with myself.

In the classic musical “The King and I” Rodgers and Hammerstein have a song with which most of us are familiar. It’s called “Getting to Know You.”

However, if the Oprah Winfrey Show was a musical that song’s lyrics might go like this:

Getting to know me,
Getting to know all about me.
Getting to like me,
Getting to hope I like me.

Getting to know me,
Putting it my way,
But nicely,
I am precisely,
My cup of tea.

In Christianity we’ve also crafted a term for “getting in touch with our true selves.” In fact, we say that you can’t come to a saving faith in Christ unless you’ve gotten in touch with who you really are deep down. We call it the Doctrine of Total Depravity. We’re sinners. Our body, mind and spirit are totally corrupt. That doesn’t mean that we are as bad as we could be. As R.C. Sproul points out: Even Hitler refrained from killing his own mother.

The Doctrine of Total Depravity states that every aspect of our nature has been compromised to one degree or another by our own sinful selfishness. We are depraved!

Welcome to my first blog. I thought at the onset, that I should teach you some terms that I’ll be using. Depravity is a term that I’m sure I’ll refer back to often. If you didn’t know what depravity meant you could look it up. However, some of the terms that I’ll use will be totally made up words. Today I’m introducing a term that is the opposite of Total Depravity. That term is Total Oprahvity.

Oprahvity is all about “living your own truth.”