Christspeak, Rx

Narcissistic.
That's what my wife thinks of my blogging. Actually, that's her opinion of all blogging. Perhaps she's right, I think its obvious all of us (bloggers) like to read our own writing. And if that survey most of us (in Greensboro) took is any indication, none of our spouses, family and friends appreciate our blogging. Narcissistic? I'm not sure. But I wonder how productive blogging really is if no one I am close with understands it or appreciates it.

Intolerant.
Joel and I were discussing a debate I had with another Greensboro blogger. I was talking about my being asked if I agreed with stoning someone for breaking an Old Testament law. Joel made the statement, "The (Greensboro) blogging community is very adept at stoning anyone who disagrees with them." I think he is right. In our blogging community most anyone who disagrees with the prevailing liberal arguments is roundly insulted. There is little respect and less tolerance for even the most pellucid and logical debates that contradict the liberal mindsets that prevail here.

Off Message.
My wife made the point that my debating contraversial issues sends a false impression about who I really am. When she said this I happened to be reading an article about another blogger who, when I read her blog, comes across entirely opposite from the way the article described her. And that is when it struck me that few of us do a good job representing our true selves in our blogs.

So I am signing off, at least for a while. I want to learn how to write in my own voice, so that when most people read me, they'll react to my writing as well as they do to me in person . Until then...

... for movies? 1939! Imagine a year where you could see a blockbuster per month!

That's what the following great films have in common...
Gone with the Wind (1939) - David O. Selznick
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) - Frank Capra
Wizard of Oz, The (1939) - Mervyn LeRoy
Stagecoach (1939) - Walter Wanger
Dark Victory (1939) - David Lewis (I)
Destry Rides Again (1939)
Goodbye, Mr. Chips (1939) - Victor Saville
Gunga Din (1939)
The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1939)
Only Angels Have Wings (1939)
Love Affair (1939) - Leo McCarey
Ninotchka (1939) - Sidney Franklin (I)
Of Mice and Men (1939) - Lewis Milestone
Wuthering Heights (1939) - Samuel Goldwyn


Not to mention a host of others, including Beau Geste (1939) Drums Along the Mohawk (1939)
Young Mr. Lincoln (1939) Flying Deuces, The (1939) Little Princess, The (1939)

Who won Best Actor? Robert Donat, Mr. Chips

Have you ever read one of those lists by the critics? Well, I'm sure they know better than most of us, but I think I can give them a run.

My criteria is entertainment, a great story, remarkable characters, script and soundtrack. With all do respect to more serious works and/or truly important films such as Schindler's List or Annie Hall, Citizen Kane, The Graduate...their value is more academic. The films on my list are the one's that blew me away, the one's I can't wait to turn my sheltered friends, kids and grandkids on to, and the movies that I appreciate the more I watch them.

In no particular order...

1. Rear Window Mr. Deeds Goes to Town Office Space
2. Tombstone Destry Rides Again Saving Private Ryan
3. His Girl Friday The Philadelphia Story Scent of a Woman
4. Moonstruck -Phsyco The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
5. Mr. Smith Goes To Washington- North By Northwest- Die Hard
6. Die Hard With a Vengeance L.A. Confidential (1997) Raiders ofthe Lost Ark
7. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance -It's a Wonderful World-High Noon
8. Notorious The Philadelphia Story -The Untouchables
9. Pirates of the Carribean, Finding Nemo, ConAir
10. Big Lebowski -As Good as It Gets (1997)-Jerry Maguire (1996)
11. Open Range-Tin Cup-The Rock
12. Break: What do the following great films have in common? Dark Victory, Goodbye Mr. Chips,Love Affair, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, Ninotchka, Of Mice and Men, Stagecoach, The Wizard of Oz, Wuthering Heights
13. The Sting -Blaze -Witness for the Prosecution (1957)
14. Patton-Toy Story-Nothing But Trouble- French Kiss
15. Warlock -Jaws The Gunfighter
16. The Lady Vanishes- The Firm -Top Gun
17. EDTV- The Matrix-The Green Mile
18. Ronin-The Shawshank Redemption (1994)-The Fugitive (1993)
19. Home Alone (1990)-Pretty Woman (1990)-Glory (1989)
20. Planes, Trains & Automobiles, Tootsie, Brave Heart
21. Back to the Future (1985), Rocky, The Goonies (1985)
22. Break: Best TV Series/Movies (in order): Band of Brothers, Lonesome Dove, Sopranos, Entorage
23. Star Wars, Midnight Run, Heat of the Night
24. Casablanca, Peter Pan, Stalag 17 (1953)
25. Dial M for Murder (1954), Manchurian Canidate, Lawrence of Arabia (1962)
26. Hopscotch, Cool Hand Luke (1967), Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969)
27. Godfather II, Kelly's Heroes (1970), We Were Soldiers
28. Gladiator (2000), The James Bond franchise, Toy Story 2 (1999)
29. Key Largo (1948), Miracle on 34th Street (1947), Notorious
30. Harry Potter Series, Meet John Doe (1941), My Man Godfrey (1936)
31. The Count of Monte Cristo, Inside Man (2006), Spiderman
32. The Rock, Animal House, Gone in Sixty Seconds
33. Get Shorty, Ferris Beuller's Day Off, Titanic
34. Wizard of Oz, ET, A League of Their Own
35. Sleepless in Seattle

Sin. Why is this the word of the day? It occurs to me that sin, as a Biblical term, is grossly misunderstood.

It is used, or rather misused, in song, poetry, jokes, politics, debates practically every day. I suppose it has become one of those words whose meaning has morphed its way into all types of subcultures. For that very reason, it is important to understand the meaning of sin, in order to prevent misunderstandings.

I am going to explain what it means in my own words. Remember, I am speaking about its Biblical and theological meaning. I'll start by telling you what it is not.

Sin is not about how God relates to man. Sin is never soley based on a person's relationship with other people, it always refers to man's relationship with God. Sin is not limited to behavior. All sins are not equal. Sin is not determined by man. Sin is not limited to just believers in God.

One of the two most common misuses of the term is to use it in order to alienate a person from others and to misinterpret its true meaning. For example, a close friend might, using 'sin' correctly, point out, "I fear what you are doing is sinful." To which his friend incorrectly responds, "So now you hate me because you think I am sinning? Alot of people would disagree with you."

Sin is how man relates to God. Sin is rebellion against God.

Many misuses and misunderstandings come from our lack of understanding that sin is how man relates to God. Going back to the example above, the person who's action was challenged as sinful, if he understood the meaning of sin, could reply, "You really think God cares about what I'm doing?" Or, "I disagree that it is a sin to..."

What is sinful? It is not open to interpretation, as some would have you believe. Sin is revealed by the law of God. What is open to interpretation is our understanding of the law. In a very real since, our understanding of God's law involves a spiritual, or supernatural relationship between us and God. It involves our conscience.

Regarding the degree of sins, CS Lewis warns us that "the sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins." He believed the worst sins are spiritual, "the pleasure of putting other people wrong, of bossing and patronising and spoiling sport, and backbiting; the pleasures of power and hatred. That is why the cold, self righteous prig who goes to church regularly may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute." Mere Christianity, chapter 5

Rush Limbaugh just made Orson Scott Card even more popular on his show today. Rush just told his listeners to read a piece Card wrote and linked it to Rush's webpage.

Tomorrow morning we all get to vote. I am grateful for the opportunity, but exhausted with the rhetoric. There are important issues at stake, but I am more concerned with things I believe are far more relevant.

Like loving my wife better... Learning more about God... praying for my children... honoring my parents... being a better neighbor... becoming a better employee.

Recently I highlighted an article about Sue Polinsky. What struck me about that piece was a reference to Sue's character- her second nature that compels her to help her neighbor. My Mom is like that. Actually, I am honored to know alot of people like that. But here's the point, these remarkable people who make life better where they can, are far more relevant to my life than any politician.

Tomorrow I'll vote for people I hope will represent our country well. It is a priviledge I don't take for granted. But I am truly thankful there are people in my community who don't have to be elected to make a difference. Their contribution far exceeds what a politician can do and that is how I remember to keep politicians in their place.

Note: This is an argument, a debate. I felt it was neccessary because so many people have a problem distinguishing between the term sin and how it relates to words like love and hate. My argument is not against homosexuals. And if my behavior were judged according to Biblical standards, I would fail far worse than anyone I know. I am confident about one thing, it is a grevious sin against God and man for a Christian to mistreat another because that person's behavior appears sinful.

So I hope everthing I write on this subject is passed through the prism of respect and love. I stand in judgement of no one.

The fact that homosexual sex exists is not an adequate defense for its acceptance in our society and certainly not the Church. The fact that there are Christians who agree with the biblical view that says homosexuality is deviant and sinful, yet are tempted to engage in homosexual behavior- and may even stumble- is no defense for legitimizing homosexuals within our society or the Church. You may know a lot of good people who are homosexuals, so do I, but they are not adequate evidence that homosexuality is any less deviant or sinful.

Many people believe homosexuality is more than a behavior because homosexuals do not choose- or cannot help who they are attracted to- and, therefore, it is physically unnatural for a homosexual person not to have an active, homosexual sex life. They reason that the biblical Jesus, who is said to be a loving God, would never condemn a homosexual for simply acting out how he or she was created. And if that is true, it follows that most Christian churches and any members that believe their church's teachings about homosexuality as sin, are tragically mistaken.

Some of those people take it a step further by saying that traditional Christian teachings regarding homosexuality are not only a mistake, they are evil. They use terms like "hate speech'' or bigotry to label any biblical teachings that condemn homosexuality as sinful.

If all those people really believe that logic is true, then they must also believe that the bible teachings on most all sexual behavior and marraige is, at best, irrelevant. Biblical law condemns alot of heterosexual sex outside of marraige, and since heterosexuals are bound by the same natural laws as homosexuals, any teachings linking sex with sin must also be wrong. And for that matter, many of the actions the Bible labels sinful must also be mistakes... if Jesus is truly a loving God.

Those folks who believe that much Biblical law is a sad mistake, must logically believe that Jesus came to redeem the really bad people... the liars, murderers, thieves- the people who commit the big, "universal" sins. For those of us who don't make a practice of doing the really "bad things," Jesus simply came to show us a better way to live. "I haven't murdered, stolen, cheated or lied, so He need not have died for my sake."


Actually, the Bible teaches us that it is the law, God's written word, that makes us aware of what is sin in the first place. This is important, because people who have so many problems with the law condemning actions and behavior as sinful, that they themselves see no harm in, or they find is contradictory to their idea of laws that would come from a loving Jesus Christ, are rendering the sacrifice of Jesus Christ's death on the cross irrelevant. The law cannot redeem us. Romans 3:12:"Therefore no one will be declared righteous in His sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin." The Bible teaches that Jesus died for our sins, so that we will not suffer the eternal consequences of our sins.


Therefore, a Christian who believes and teaches that homosexuality is deviant and sinful is simply repeating the Bible and, in most cases, repeating this truth in love... perhaps more so if he or she is a believer in Christ who longs for homosexual sex. However, the person who claims to speak for Christ by condemning any part of the law cannot, in any manner, be doing so truthfully.

I have no problem with folks who don't believe in Jesus as God regarding the Biblical laws as some big mistake. I take exception to people who, in the name of Christ, constantly attempts to belittle or change Biblical law. They are the ones claiming Jesus as something He is not . To wit, consider what Jesus actually said in Matthew 5, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

From the Business Journal: Sue Polinsky: 'Tech mama' makes things happen in the Triad