What About Osama?

As most of you, I watched the reports unfold about the killing of Osama bin Laden. At first, my reactions were of jubilation and great celebration. I was entirely comfortable with the parade of people celebrating in New York’s, Manhattan. At the same time, however, as a follower of Christ, I was sobered by the reality of what had just happened. How should we as Christians respond?
In order to dissect this question, I believe it’s important to define the situation in which we find ourselves. Were we simply targeting a religious icon in an attempt to squelch an uprising? Were we seeking revenge? Or, were we simply pursuing an enemy combatant? I contend that we were pursuing an enemy combatant of the United States.
If that be the case, then the resulting question is whether or not using force is necessary to remove the threat of this enemy of the United States.

When you study the life of Jesus, you notice that he never called a soldier who came to him in faith out of his military duties. Never once did Jesus say to a Roman Centurion, “Leave the Army!” And in His own life, He was known to use force, such as when clearing the temple.
As a result, the idea of a just act of war has been with Christian thinking from the beginning. But it has been very carefully spelled out. According to James Emery White, the conditions for a conflict to be just are as follows:

*There must be an urgent and imminent threat;
*It must be an act of defense against aggression – never simply for conquest or as an act of aggression – only a defensive war is defensible;
*It must be ordered by one who is in authority to do so;
*It must be for a just cause;
*It must have the right intention – it should not be based on revenge, but as an act of neighbor love and protection, with peace as its goal;
*It should be the last resort; peace and resolution should have been attempted;
*The force used must be proportionate to the desired ends – meaning that the evils caused by the war are less than the evils to be righted;
*It must seek to minimize non-combatant (civilian) casualties;
*It must have a reasonable chance of success.

I agree with James on all of these points...

So, what do you think? Did these things meet the threshold of a “just action of war”? Do you think Osama bin Laden had a direct connection to the attacks on 9/11? Did he pose an imminent threat or, by influence, cause extreme prejudice against the United States of America?

Listen, I do not celebrate the death of any person, but I can celebrate the death of evil. So from my vantage point, this was a justifiable action. May God have mercy on the soul of Osama bin Laden. And may God show much grace to the souls that have died at Osama's hands.

Read More

What Do We Have To Offer

I read two very interesting blogs today. One was about “Alignment” by Seth Godin and the other was a very similar topic by James Emery White. I thought I would share the latter with you since it touched a nerve with me.


Why do people go to Walmart? Do they go for the products? For the food? For the friendly greeters at the doors? No. They go because Walmart offers “inexpensive”. That’s exactly what they want.

And because Walmart is in alignment with what people want – meaning, they know it’s what people want and so they give it to them – they are successful.

Play this out with other successful relationships.

People want Apple to offer “cool.” So does Apple. So everyone is happy – despite the prices.

People want Google to provide the location of things on the internet. It does. So we keep googling.

Starbucks? We want legally addictive stimulants, but with cache. Starbucks is happy to comply, which is why Starbucks is now the world’s third largest restaurant chain.

But what happens when things don’t line up? What happens when people want cheap, but the company wants profit?

Or people want to find what they’re looking for online, but the search engine wants to direct me to ads and sites that I don’t care about but have paid for the traffic?

Or people want to walk into a store and find exactly what they want, but the salesperson wants to push certain items and up their commission?

Or people want to watch the movie, and the provider wants to show me commercials?

There is a radical disconnect, and the relationship suffers, or just ends.

Let’s apply this to the church.

What is it that people entering a church want?

I would suggest that they want the church to offer spirituality. Community is a plus, but that’s not what they are primarily expecting when they walk through the doors.

I know that the church isn’t a company; we don’t want to be consumer-driven where the “customer” dictates the product; and that mere “spirituality” is a far cry from the dynamics of life in Christ.

But let the point play out.

People do come for spirituality. They don’t know to come for much more in our day. So that’s what they are looking for. It’s the one thing they think the church has to offer their lives that they don’t already have, and that they may not be able to find anywhere else.

Churches that provide spiritual experience and an introduction to a spiritual life create an alignment with the person that continues the relationship.

Churches that don’t, experience disconnect.

In many ways, this is a significant shift in thinking for those who seek to connect with the unchurched population. In the eighties and nineties, churches were seen as being out-of-touch and out-of-date. As a result, many responded by contemporizing the church. They updated the music, implemented drama and media, and addressed contemporary topics with biblical wisdom. All of which, I might add, I am all for and have written about many times.

Some, however, went too far. They seemed to feel that the goal was to reflect culture as opposed to building a bridge into culture. In the end, alignment was lost. People came wanting spirituality only to find the world they were already in. They wanted God, and they got the Doobie Brothers.

Today the mistake is similar, except now it’s the perceived need to match the world in terms of technology and, perhaps even more, the “hip.”

And again, all fine - to a point. The point where it ceases to be fine is critical, and again comes back to alignment. People are coming for spirituality; how sad it would be if all they got were designer t-shirts and the latest display from Apple.

If you want alignment, you won’t just try and give them “Disney” with your children’s program; you’ll give the parent what they most want, which is religious education and character formation for their child.

If you want alignment, you won’t just give them creative tie-ins using music from Coldplay or Radiohead, but a sense of encounter with the living God.

If you want alignment, you won’t just highlight your Mac’s and sound and light, but a direct and compelling message that brings Christ to bear in such a way it intersects the deepest needs of their life and calls them to radical followership.

You will often hear church leaders say that they are not competing against other churches, but against every other available use of time on a Sunday morning. Or lately, that they are competing against the entertainment industry or technology of the world.

But do we really think that we’ll win people to the church with Starbucks, contemporary music, and high-tech presentations? I think not. If they want Starbucks, they’ll just go to…well, Starbucks. And to Netflix. And to iTunes. And to Apple. It’s not that we shouldn’t make ample use of technology, only that it’s not the greatest felt need of the people who enter our doors.

In truth, we are competing against the spiritual emptiness of the world. When we align ourselves with that need, we actually have something to offer the world that it doesn’t already have.

Read More