[freedom/bondage]

i want to touch on something that just happened yesterday, that regards freedom, especially as we honor the freedom of our country.

what follows is what i wrote down in response to what someone who claims Christianity said about the case and the jury.

to those upset by the verdict of the casey anthony trial.

rather than point fingers at the jury, i want you to have to sit locked away in a hotel room, without any family, friends, or outside communication. you have no e-mail, no facebook, no cellphone. do that for 10+ months while listening to psychologically devastating descriptions of this trial. if you don't go so insane that you wind up in a mental hospital, then try and decide what to do. have a little slack on the jury. and plus, you didn't sit through every bit of evidence, do you really think you know any better what happened? And for those "Christians" who are lambasting the jury with names i would never want to be associated with, uh, go read romans 12:19. If this was a mistake, then do you really think God would let her get away with it? i mean, if the jury did make a mistake, forgive them, unless you want to be judged the same way.

what does it mean to be free? regardless of whether casey anthony was guilty of murder or not(and i'm not here to tell you my opinions), the case was tried and the verdicts read.

......for those of you who think she was guilty and the jury messed up.......

do you [really] think that God is not in control?

......for those of you who think she not guilty and justice was done.......

do you [really] think that she is "free"?

the bondage that casey anthony will now live with the rest of her life, is arguably worse than the bondage of prison that she would have faced.

casey anthony will now be marked by society with a scarlet letter, as the "baby killer who got away"

...and you know what? to all you "Christians" who are saying these terrible things about both the jury and about casey anthony?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

"let the one who is without sin cast the first stone".

those are the words of Jesus, for a woman who was [convicted] of a capital crime; adultery.

there was no shadow of a doubt.

some even say that it was a set-up; a "sting-operation" if you will.

• before you blame the jury for a bad verdict...
• before you condemn a woman with a past...

if.you.call.yourself.a.christian... (which means, by definition, you are a CHRIST-follower)

then walk as your teacher did.

"and if she really is guilty?" you ask...?

then trust that the God in heaven will deal with her.

today, casey anthony still sits in bondage. she has a jail term to serve for her lies to the police. but she also has the bondage of a judgmental society.

christians...you don't have to like her. but you DO have to love her.

In His Grip,

jonathan

[church/religion]

when i don't know how to start a blog, we might as well start with dictionary definitions of the terms that i want to talk about, right?

so...

church

1. a building for pubic Christian worship

2. public worship of God or religious service in such a building

and

religion

1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe

2. a fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by persons

okay, all good and well(so to speak), two terms that for many people evoke passionate(violent?) emotions. these terms form the basis of many a discussion, argument, debate, writing, etc. these are terms that so many people get caught up with, without ever really knowing what they are even talking about. in their hurry to get out opinions [or even to just hear their own voices], people flippantly use these terms in ways that they often dont understand.

now bear with me.

i know i did a posting on the difference between being [religious] and [spiritual]. this is different. what i want to look at is the (apparent lackof) contrast between the church: building, and religion: beliefs.

to start off with, [church].

dictionary.com offers up a fine definition of what church is, and for most people, this is a definition that would suffice. church is a place we go to, it is what happens on sunday morning, and is full of opinionated people, on the topic of religion.

Yay, perfect segway into [religion].

dictionary.com offers up (yet again) a fine definition of religion, as a set of beliefs that many people hold in common.

where is the contrast you ask? just drive into west michigan, specifically ottawa county on a given sunday, and walk to a street corner. chances are, three of the four street corners will have a church on them (seriously, not an exaggeration), but each of the churches will have a different denomination.

• CRC (christian reformed church)
• RCA (reformed church in america)
• URC (united reformed church)
• PRC (protestant reformed church)
• AoG (assembly of God)

(alphabet soup anyone? this'll make your head spin... http://www.abbreviations.com/acronyms/RELIGION)

now. for those of you not familiar with the scrabble scramble that occurs on sundays in a town with more than one church denomination, basically it goes something like this.

1. pick a denomination (which basically is just a grouping of churches that share similar beliefs on non-salvation [or not] issues)
2. make your family go to that denomination
3. hate every other denomination and tell people why your denomination is better
4. indoctrinate your children to do the same.
5. repeat
6. (optional) cause a church schism if the church does something you don't like. make sure to yell really loud.

now do you see the problem? church provides the [means] and religion provides the [opportunity] to cause some of the largest and nastiest fights in history.

think

• the crusades?
• the kkk?
• abortion clinic bombings?
• westboro baptist church?

now don't get me wrong, not all churches start blowing up buildings. personally, i think denominations are a great way for churches with similar styles to come together to poll resources and work together. not all church styles fit all types of people, and thats okay. God made us unique and different (tower of babel anyone?). the problem is, we get so caught up in trying to be [better] and have the flashiest worship "celebrations" or the most orthodox liturgy, or the most active spiritual workings, that we fail to acknowledge the God behind those things...AND what that God commands of us to do in worship.

however...

an oft quoted passage by progressive christians who try and argue for destruction of denominations and of religion and of big church meetings often cite James 1:27

"religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world"

the fundamental problem with throwing out religion and church in favor of the teachings of the apostle james is that this was not the point of james at all. if we were to throw out anything that is [difficult], we shouldnt be in the service of christianity at all.

instead of abandoning the church and religious culture, we need to fix it. brothers and sisters, rather than running away and (God forbid) start a new post-modern church denomination of "pure and faultless religion", apply II Timothy 3:16 and use the scripture you have. fix the broken. after all, christianity is all about fixing broken lives through Jesus, right?

As famed religious critic sir elton john has said 'religion has the tendency to turn normal, rational human beings into hateful lemmings [editor's note: must be a british term]'. and he is right, if we keep bickering over where to place the pulpet, instead of helping the 50 babies that have died in the last five minutes that it has taken you to read this blog posting...

In His Grip,

-J

[religious/spiritual]

apologies to those waiting on a new post. i recently moved and don't have internet hooked up, so i have to write when i make it into a coffee shop.

recently in america, we hear more and more of individuals who are not "religious" but are "spiritual". now i grew up in a closed off religious community, so this notion of a difference between these two ideas was hard to grasp. in fact, i didn't believe there was such a thing...choosing instead to believe that people with this notion that there was a difference were just stupid.

whoops.

basically, there is quite a difference, as i was told. getting the two mixed up would be like calling a korean person japanese(for the record, don't. we like being asked our ethnicity, rather than being told it).

religious refers to being extremely devoted to a belief system or idea.

spiritual refers to things relating to the spiritual aspect of life.

quite different. thanks dictionary.com

now, i have heard both "christians" and "non-christians" alike fall into this notion of being "spiritual" and not "religious". specifically, the argument falls along the lines of 'not wanting to be tied down to a church bureaucracy'. these "spiritual" individuals want to be free, and not tied down.

and you know what? it works.

.

.

.

for a time.

go with me on this. a "christian" defines oneself as spiritual, not religious. reasons for being so are being disillusioned with the orthodoxy and stifling traditions that are not culturally relevant. this individual wants to worship God and be connected on a spiritual level, ergo is "spiritual".

now picture this. a "christian" defines oneself as religious, not spiritual. reasons for being so are following the traditions and orthodoxies of the past, learning from the wisdom of those who have gone before. this individual wants to worship God and be connected on a level more than just that of "how the spirit leads", but wants to be deeply rooted in Word, ergo is "religious".

who's "right"?

i'll give you a hint. they both are....

sorta.

• is it the "spiritual" person who dislikes wordy traditions and orthodoxy and instead wants to go as the Spirit moves (like Jesus, not the pharisees)?
• is it the "religious" person who dislikes how people will just "go with the Spirit" even when there is clear historical and Biblical precedent that such behavior is wrong?

again i ask...

who's right?

clearly, its two halves of the same whole.

there is evidence where religious teachings and laws are broken, because God commanded it (Hosea, taking an adulterous wife?).

there is evidence where "moving with the Spirit" was clearly unbiblical (jim jones?)

to get caught up in being religious or spiritual is silly. if you love God, you are both.

-j