Ask yourself, should the infamy of a moment be forever?

Consider the following cases:

You’d think she was the second incarnation of Hitler, judging from the infamy she’s gained on the Internet. Popularly known as “Cat Bin Lady,” Mary Bale’s life is a living hell. Her crime: stuffing a cat in a garbage bin. Cruel? Yes. Stupid? Yes. Criminal? Perhaps (what? a misdemeanor?) Whatever one thinks of “Cat Bin Lady,” her punishment in the court of public opinion is disproportionate, for she is now derided — world-wide — for her “prank.”

An even worse case of animal cruelty emerges from Bosnia; you can watch the video to learn more, or simply read the rest of this blog (caution: video contains graphic content).

Here, a young, unthinking, callous teen tosses live puppies into a river. In the U.S., she’d be charged with a felony, and possibly face jail time — and deservedly so. On the Internet, she’ll be hated; perhaps, even, her life will be in jeopardy.

The point of this blog post is not to excuse animal abusers, but to question the role of the Internet in shaping public opinion. Twenty years ago, access to these startling (and in the latter case, horrific) images would be limited to the six o’clock news, and then archived. Once punished, the offenders could then slink back into society and anonymity. Not so today.

There is an old adage: you made your bed, now you must sleep in it. Certainly this valid in these cases, but is there ever a new day? After all, we must make our bed every day. How fair is it to be judged by Monday’s bed? What about Tuesday’s? Can a person atone for their crimes? Or is atonement impossible? In the court of public opinion, swayed by every blowing wind, perhaps the day of forgiveness is never.

I’m only musing. I’m not saying that the video of the “Cat Bin Lady” is unfair to Mary Bale. She did stuff a cat in a bin. Perhaps, she’ll be able to move past it. Perhaps, she’ll always be hated, the subject of derision wherever she goes. Perhaps, she’ll capitalize on the affair, become a semi-successful Internet star.

Whatever the case, just ask how you’d like to be remembered.

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

Just read Dove World Outreach Center’s “5 More reasons to burn the Koran.” It’s author, Dave Ingram, offers five justifications:

1. “Shock the world into focus” — Burning the Koran is surely shocking, but I don’t see “shock,” for example, in the book of Acts. Now, if Ingram wants to join the ranks of “shock” jocks, perhaps he should start his own radio show. If he wants to usher Muslims into Christian faith, I suggest other means.

2. “Get people to start asking hard questions” — I suggest Ingram become a missionary to an Islamic country. I know many who are, and they are definitely asking hard questions. Burning the Koran from the comfort of your Florida home hardly seems noble.

3. “Remind the world that we still have freedom of speech” — Congratulations, you’re a jerk. Thanks for demonstrating that we Americans have this right.

(While I’m at it, freedom of speech also includes my right to dissent — you’re still a jerk.)

4. “Expose the truth” — Again, if Ingram is so passionate about “shocking” people in order to “expose the truth,” why not become a missionary? Or is that too difficult? Too costly?

5. “Force the world into action” — And while we’re at it, why don’t we just force people to convert?

You can read Ingram’s piece here: 5 More Reasons to Burn the Koran.

Now, if Ingram could give just one biblical reason…

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

First, as this report states(see here), the proposed burning of the Koran is already stirring unrest in Afghanistan — Jones’ action could cost U.S. soldiers their lives as well as the lives of Afghanis (and possibly underground Christian missionaries). To incite people to violence simply to make a point is immoral.

Second, it’s hateful.

Consider Paul at Mars Hill (Acts 17:16-34). There he was, standing amongst idols. What was his tactic? Did he go out destroy idols in the city square? No, he reasoned with them: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious.” Ultimately, his teaching on the resurrection was rejected by the Greeks, but the point is that Paul did not go with the purpose of offending. The only offense he afforded himself was the “offence” of the Cross. The result? “Some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.”

Jesus did not send his disciples into the world to offend, but to preach truth.

Lastly, it is painfully obvious that Jones is only seeking attention — his 15 minutes of infamy. Let’s “do the math” –

• Sept. 11
• Muslims
• The Koran
• Book burning

What purpose will this demonstration serve, except to inflame passions? If he wants to engage Muslims in a dialog, will burning the Koran serve this purpose?

I am certainly ready to engage Muslims in a religious conversation, even to debate. If speaking of the deity of Christ offends Muslims, I will offer that offense. If speaking of the Cross is upsetting, again, I am willing to offer that offense. But to offend simply to make oneself offensive is, well, offensive.

What concerns me is that there are missionaries doing real work among Muslims. Jones’ action places them at risk. Missionaries in Islamic nations are showing Christ’s love tangibly, though their presence there places them at risk. That a pastor should so carelessly desecrate this work is abominable.

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

Why are Christ’s teachings so meaningful? Because there is power in his words: power to change the world, power to change and transform lives. Lately, I’ve preached two sermons on the “Sermon on the Plain” –

Part 2, Aug. 15, 2010 — http://mountainbible.com/?page_id=162&sermon_id=109

Part 1, July 4, 2010 — http://mountainbible.com/?page_id=162&sermon_id=106

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

It is evident that the only appropriate conduct of men before God is the doing of His will. … The error of the Pharisees, therefore, did not lie in their extremely strict insistence on the necessity for action, but rather in their failure to act. ‘They say, and do not do it.’ — Ethics, p. 43

One of the fundamental problems in the study of faith and works is the inseparableness of the two. One cannot speak of faith without at the same time contemplating works, for faith in Christ does not draw one to inaction. Another of the problems is the idea that faith and works are antithetical, or at least incompatible. Dietrich Bonhoeffer puts forth this perspective in his seminal work, Ethics: “The irreconcilable opposite of action is judgement. ‘He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.’ (Jas. 4.11). There are two possible attitudes to the law: judgement and action” (p. 43-44). Bonhoeffer proposes in Ethics that the pursuit of knowledge — the knowledge of good and evil — is antithetical to the knowledge of God, or, more succinctly, knowing God. He writes that Adam and Eve exchanged knowing God for not-knowing, choosing instead to become judges. The Christian man or woman has turned away from not-knowing, to knowing only God. As such, the Christian cannot again become a judge, but rather becomes a doer by the grace and virtue of the Cross.

I highly recommend Bonhoeffer’s Ethics to everyone, but particularly the section entitled “Doing,” pp. 43-48.

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

Originally posted 2009-03-15 22:43:53.

Once I saw a Russian lady officer on the street. I approached her and apologized, “I know that it is impolite to accost an unknown lady on the street, but I am a pastor and my intentions are earnest. I wish to speak to you about Christ.”

She asked me, “Do you love Christ?” I said, “Yes! From all my heart.” She fell into my arms and kissed me again and again. It was a very embarrassing situation for a pastor, so I kissed her back, hoping people would think we were relatives. She exclaimed to me, “I love Christ, too!” I took her to our home. I discovered to my amazement that she nothing about Christ – absolutely nothing – except the name. And yet she loved Him. She did not know that He is the Saviour, nor what salvation means. She did not know where and how He lived and died. She did not know His teachings, His life or ministry. She was for me a psychological curiosity. How can you love somebody if you know only his name?

When I inquired, she explained, “As a child, I was taught to read by pictures. For an ‘a’ there was an apple, for a ‘b’ there was a bell, for a ‘c’ a cat and so on. When I went to high school, I was taught my holy duty to defend the communist fatherland. I was taught about communist morals. But I did not know what a ‘holy duty’ or a ‘moral’ looked like. I needed a picture for these. Now I knew that our forefathers had a picture for everything beautiful, praiseworthy and truthful in my life. My grandmother always bowed before this picture, saying that it was the picture of one called ‘Cristos’ (Christ). And I loved this name by itself. This name became so real to me! Just to say this name gave one such joy!”

Listening to her, I remembered what is written in Phillippians that at His name every knee should bow. Perhaps, the anti-Christ will be able for a time to erase from the world the knowledge of God. But there is power in the simple Name of Christ and this will lead to the light.

She joyously found Christ in my home and now the One whose name she loved lived in her heart in person (pp. 25-26).

Throughout Wurmbrand’s chronicle of the persecuted church in communist Romania, there are accounts of people whose first knowledge of Jesus is shrouded in mystery. They had no way to learn about Jesus, for the communists had all but quashed Christianity in Eastern Europe. Yet the Spirit of Christ permeated the land, and people believed.

The days of the Iron Curtain seem distant, yet only a short while ago Christians were suffering for merely believing in God. Churches were shut. Bibles destroyed. Pastors imprisoned. Yet Christ was known.

The story of the Russian officer, noted above, illustrates the power of the Holy Spirt and the testimony of Jesus. “For the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.” It is a power that gives God’s people hope.

Wurmbrand’s Tortured for Christ remarkably does not discourage, despite repeated accounts of suffering. No one can read Tortured for Christ without being moved by the beauty of the stories. How pastors rejoiced in their beatings, for beatings could be endured. How pastors embraced suffering in order that Christ might be made known, for silence was unbearable. How Christians scrounged for communist texts, not for the sayings of Marx or Stalin, but for the sayings of Jesus, which were published alongside criticisms, which could be ignored.

Rather than discourage, Wurmbrand’s story inspires.

(Note: A free copy can be obtained at Persecution.com.)

But the suffering is not to be diminished by admiration. “Tortures were sometimes horrible,” writes Wurmbrand. “I prefer not to speak too much about those through which I have passed. When I do, I cannot sleep at night. It is too painful” (p. 35). Suffering is to be lamented, for it is the product of human hatred, hatred of God.

Not all of the stories are “heroic.” In one section, Wurmbrand recounts how a priest succumbs to torture and consecrates human feces for communion. When asked about it, the priest replied to his companions that he should not be judged, for he has suffered more than Christ — that is not overstatement (read the book). Wurmbrand delivers such stories compassionately, without judgment.

(I sometimes wonder how I would bear such things. Would I endure?)

The suffering of the persecuted church is not to be admired as one admires other things, a sports competition or a literary accomplishment; rather, the suffering of the church is to be admired soberly.

Recall the zeal of the ancient church father Tertullian, who in his youth hastily sought martyrdom. His family hid his clothes so that he would not stumble into the street and to an early death. Dying merely for the sake of dying is meaningless; it testifies not to the glory of God, but to man.

As he matured, Tertullian learned he had much to do for Christ, teaching the gospel and living for God. He had much to endure.

So, the suffering of the church is real; it is not a badge we wear. In the comfort of our homes in the Land of the Free, we might all too often lose sight of this great suffering, imagining it to be something it is not.

Throughout Tortured for Christ, Wurmbrand speaks of the world’s need to overcome communism so that Christ might be freely preached, that Christians might live free. The suffering of persecuted church is beautiful, not because they suffer, but because they suffer and believe. We cannot speak of their suffering without speaking of their believing – that is the beauty of their story: they believe in and love Jesus despite their tortures.

“Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal which comes upon you to prove you, as thought something strange were happening to you. But rejoice in so far as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed” (1 Peter 4:12-13).

As a body, as Christians, we face two challenges: a life of purity and persecution, and these are intertwined. The life we lead and the sufferings we endure are the sum total of our faith. We bear his name. Our existence is his witness, and our word his testimony. In every place and in every situation, Jesus is known through us, through our faith, and he upholds his people. Glory to God.

Postscript: The International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church is Nov. 9. Let us remember our brothers and sisters in prayer.

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

Originally posted 2008-10-29 23:13:39.

Imagine being told you can’t build a church on property you own. Had you wanted to build a business, or a school, or a community center, OK. But a church? No.

That a group of Muslims wants to build a mosque — on private property — near the former World Trade Center should matter little to the citizens of the Empire State. Another group’s religious beliefs should not affect ones opinion of the proposed mosque. Unfortunately, opponents of this project have turned the matter into a dangerous political game, one that threatens religious freedom everywhere.

This group of Muslims did not attack the World Trade Center. They do not support terrorism. According to published reports, the cleric heading the project has actually worked to improve relations between Islam and the West.

This group is not to blame for 9-11.

So, Obama’s stand is noble: “Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country… That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.”

Unshakable.

Town planners in Utah should not be allowed to prevent a Baptist church from going up in Salt Lake City, regardless of its proximity to the Mormon temple. Nor should city planners in Santa Cruz, Calif., be allowed to prohibit the construction of churches in neighborhoods graced, already, with businesses and community centers. To proctect a Muslim group’s right to build a mosque is to protect everyone.

Let us not forget that.

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

In my youth I recognized the rainbow as a symbol of learning (my preschool’s logo included a brilliant rainbow, surrounded by many happy children). I also became acquainted with the story of Noah. “When the bow is in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth” (Gen. 9:16, ESV). The rainbow is certainly a “universal” symbol, employed by activist groups, civil rights organizations, and political movements, but when I see the rainbow, I want to remember what God remembers: his lasting covenant with humanity.

I now offer the “Genesis 9:16″ bumpersticker at Gen916.com. I make no political statement, but a statement of faith. The rainbow is a sign of God’s promise to humanity, a symbol of grace. That is all.

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

Let’s bring them home.

One mornin’ at breakfast I said to my wife
We’ve been everywhere once and some places twice
As I had another helpin’ of country ham
she said “We haven’t never been to Vietnam
there’s a bunch of our boys over there”
So we went

Well we got a big welcome when we drove in
Through the gates of a placed named Long Ben
We checked in and everything got kinda quite
But a soldier boy said “Just wait til’ tonight
Things get noisy things start happening’
Big bad firecrackers”

Well that night we did about four shows for the boys
And they were livin’ it up with a whole lot of noise
We did our last song for the night
Then we crawled into bed for some peace and quite
But things weren’t peaceful things weren’t quite
Things were scary

Well for a few minutes June hadn’t spoken a word
Then I thought at first she hadn’t heard
Then a shell exploded not two miles away
She sat up in bed and I heard her say
“What was that” I said “That was a shell or a bomb”
She said “John I’m scared” I said “Me too”

Well all night long that noise kept on
And the noise would chill you right to the bone
The bullets and the shells and the atomic bombs
shook our bed and finally fell and it never let up
It was gonna get worse before it got any better

Well, the sun came up the noise died down
We got a few minutes sleep and we were sleepin’ sound
Then a soldier knocked on the door and said
“Last night we brought in seven dead and fourteen wounded!”
We were goin’ down to the base hospital
To see the boys Yeah

So we to the hospital day by day
And of the night we were singin’ away
Then the shells and the bombs again til’ dawn
And the helicopter brought in a wounded man
night after night day after day
comin’ and a goin’

So we sadly sang for them our last song
And reluctantly we said so long
We did our best to let them know that we cared
for every last one of them over there
Whether we belonged over there or not Ê
somebody loves them and needs them

Well now that’s about all there is to tell
about our little trip and the livin’ hell
and if I ever go back over there again
I hope there’s none of our boys to sing for
I hope this ol’ war’s over with and they’re all back home
To stay in peace

Cash’s Viet Nam reference: “I wear the black in mournin’ for the lives that could have been, Each week we lose a hundred fine young men.”

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

I was a teen when this song was released. It was followed by the legendary concert Live Aid, in support of Africa.

© 2010, Mark Adams. All rights reserved. For inquiries press here.

Originally posted 2008-12-10 03:47:08.