Why Bother?

No real comments from me about the whole "we-found-Jesus'-body" controversy. So nice of James Cameron to reveal this world-transforming discovery to the world; it's even more amazing considering that this was discovered in 1980. Do you think that if there was significant weight behind this find that it would have taken 27 years to hear about it? Cameron took advantage of The DaVinci Code phenomenon on looking to get his name back on people's lips. The reality is that this show will most likely be his personal Titanic. Nevertheless, I will DVR the Discovery Channel show and might then post about it.

If you're really worried about it, check out Asbury professor Ben Witherington's deconstructions of the issue. He does a great job examining the controversy.

Unpacking The Secret [Part Three]

This is the third part of an examination of The Secret. The first two parts are available here and here. Now that we've explored what The Secret looks like, what are we to do with it? Some of you who are Christian might think it's no big deal; it appears to be another passing fad. But I think many Christians will find The Secret attractive and attempt to implement aspects of it into their faith system.

I mentioned in a previous post that I watched an episode of Oprah where she rehashed The Secret. A woman who claimed to be a Christian expressed some reservations about these principles; the woman felt The Secret contradicted parts of her Christian beliefs. Oprah tried to assure the woman that you do both: adhere to The Secret and be a Christian. Ms Winfrey claimed it worked for her, and it could work for all Christians.

So are The Secret and Christianity compatible? After closely examining this belief system, I'm convinced that they are not.

The Secret comes across as positive and uplifting. It encourages people to make the most of their lives, to accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative. On the surface, this would seem to be a good thing- an opportunity for people to clean up their lives and develop a sense of accomplishment. Unfortunately, the suggested path and goals of The Secret are rather anti-Biblical; it's the antithesis of the Christian faith.

There are numerous reasons as to why The Secret is harmful for followers of Christ and a hollow spiritual path. Allow me to offer up three for now.

1) The Secret elevates materialism as the goal for living. Supporters might want to refute this, but it seems to be the main selling point. Throughout the film the were references as to how The Secret could transform your life by providing you with whatever you want. To illustrate the point in the movie, they even do a short segment about a boy who imagines getting a bike. Eventually, his grandfather brings by a bike.

You can find numerous texts within Scriptures that speak against materialism [Matthew 19:16-30 is a good starting point]. But despite it's anti-Biblical tendency, does it make the world a better place? If the focus on your faith system is your personal well being and fortune, it doesn't leave much hope for the rest of the world. Which brings us to . . .

2) The Secret suggests that we set ourselves up as gods. According to its principles, you become the most important being in your universe. Teachers may claim that you need to use the universe which is the greater power but, in reality, you're the one calling all the shots. You choose what you want. Secret teacher James Arthur Ray claims, "Put any label on [the Universe]; you choose the one that works best for you," i.e., you're in charge. Esther Hicks puts it even more bluntly as she teaches teaches, "You are eternal beings, you are God force, you are that which you call God."

This is the difference between egocentric theology and theocentric theology. When you're focus is on yourself, you're an idolater and you aren't worshipping God; you're not bringing Him glory.

3) The Secret promotes a hedonistic worldview. The Secret encourages people to live however they see fit. In the movie, we are told that there are two types of thoughts: good and bad. We're supposed to dwell on good thoughts and avoid bad thoughts. Interestingly enough, one of the negative thoughts listed was guilt. So The Secret teaches guilt is a negative thought to be avoided. While most of us are uncomfortable with guilt, it is usually rightly deserved; it's your conscience kicking in as a reaction to sin. So while Christianity teaches that will need to react positively to guilt, The Secret teaches that it's to be ignored as negativity.

Esther Hicks adds, "the better you feel, the more in line you are." Rhonda Byrne, author of The Secret urges viewers to "give thought to what you want . . . and only focus upon that." Again, when we're only focused on fulfilling our own desires, we're not in line with the will of God.

An additional warning here for Christians examining their spiritual walks. This past week I happened to tune into a television evangelist who was smooth and encouraging. As he spoke words that he claimed were the words of God, it was actually more reminiscent of things I've heard while watching The Secret film. There is no difference between The Secret and the flawed Name it/Claim It theology. If this is how you view God, like some huge blessings pinata that you beat to get what you want, then you ought to reexamine your faith.

There will always be issues and fads that force us to think critically about our faith. We may feel challenged and uncomfortable, but it's an important step in our personal growth.

Unpacking The Secret [Part Two]

This is part two of my three part examination of The Secret. I'd suggest reading part one before digging in here. The Secret wasn't marketed using conventional methods but took advantage of viral advertising means. It is available in both book and movie form. Reinforcing my selective book purchasing policy, I decided to watch the movie [isn't that the American way, anyway?]. So I carved out an hour-and-a-half of time to check it out. The film is a mixture of interviews with proponents of The Secret interspersed with dramatic reenactments.

From an artistic perspective, it isn't the worst thing I've ever seen, but it's pretty close. It was a mixture of cheap CGI effects and green screen interviews. The acting in the reenactments was reminiscent of a Lifetime movie. And there was a hint of The Da Vinci Code as they showed the mythological myth being passed down dramatically from generation to generation [note: I say mythological because its defenders offer up even less evidence than Dan Brown pretended to]. Rhonda Byrne, writer of The Secret, first offers up an excerpt of her journey towards discovering The Secret. She explains that she searched the world over for teachers who knew The Secret [apparent the search was limited to English speaking countries]. Byrne then allows the teachers to explain The Secret to the masses.

The movie begins with the teachers explaining the Law of Attraction and how it affects the world we live in. Esther Hicks*, author of The Law of Attraction: The Basic Teachings of Abraham, instructs listeners of the two basic feelings that we have: good and bad. It's instant karma- the kind of thoughts you're putting out there is the kind of return the world will give you. So as people look to expand their share of the universe, they need to follow the three step creative process behind The Secret: 1) Ask for what you want 2) Wait for the universe to Answer and 3) Receive what the universe offers you. Hicks assures, "You are the creator of your own reality."

Included in the film were testimonies of business men who claim to have used the Secret for significant financial gain. Also profiled was Morris Goodman, a man who survived a horrible plane crash and beat the odds to walk again. The inspirational stories are retold to lend credibility to the power of positive thought.

Dr Joe Vitale, a motivational speaker, is the pragmatic Secret teacher who instructs viewers on how to approach the universe. He advises viewers that when you live your life by the Secret, "The universe becomes your catalogue and you choose what you want."

The movie spends 90 minutes rehashing self-help/power of positive thinking principles cliches in digestible sound-bytes; it's basically a "You can do whatever you imagine" love-fest. I can only imagine that the book is similar in nature.

Now that we've looked at what The Secret media blitz, what does it mean to the Christian? I'll attempt to deconstruct it in the next post.

*Apparently Esther Hicks didn't appreciate the aggressive marketing surrounding The Secret and his since parted ways with the movement.

Unpacking The Secret [Part One]

One of the struggles of ministering in a small[er] church is keeping up-to-date on religious fads. It's critical that pastors be knowledgeable of the latest thing coming down the turnpike. When I was at the ole' megachurch, it was easier because I always had people knocking on my door asking about the new trends. Now, I'm forced to be more deliberate, seeking out info on the internet. Twice last week, someone asked for my thoughts about The Secret. Having no idea what they were referring to, I had to do some independent research on the topic. The Friday before last Oprah devoted an entire show to The Secret. She did a follow-up show last Friday which I DVR'd and watched this week. Oprah claims that The Secret has been the driving force behind her worldview for the past twenty years. She believes that she knew The Secret but never heard to it systematized like it has been recently.

If for no other reason, then, we Christians should familiarize ourselves with The Secret. For better or worse, Oprah is the spiritual voice of our country. And she's quite the evangelist. People you know will start buying in to this, if they haven't already. So we all should do some background work on this. I'll do my best to break down what I've learned here on my blog over the next few posts. I don't claim to be an expert, I'll do my best to give a fair treatment of the subject.

So just what is The Secret? The Secret is actually the New Age principle of the Law of Attraction. This law states that "you get what you think about; your thoughts determine your destiny." Perhaps you've heard of the power of visualization- athletes that visualize themselves winning supposedly perform better during the actual competition. That's basically the Law of Attraction, but you're supposed to harness the powers of the universe in order to get what you want. So the thoughts that you send out into the universe is what you'll yield, ergo, just think good thoughts and good stuff will happen to you [and to the rest of the world].

An Australian named Rhonda Byrne developed the concept of The Secret, citing several modern day New Age teachers as possessing it. Byrne also claimed that many people over the course of history had knowledge of it even, in instances, unbeknownst to them. She claims that Winston Churchill, Plato, Isaac Newton, Martin Luther King Jr, and Henry Ford are just few people from throughout history that knew The Secret.

Byrne released both a book and a movie in 2006 entitled The Secret and the movement has been well received. In addition to Oprah, Larry King and Ellen DeGeneres featured it on their shows.

I'm thinking that this will be a big year for the Secret. With that in mind I'm going to try to post two more parts on this topic. In my next post, I'll point out some of the things mentioned in the movie that I found interesting. In the third part, I'll offer an overall critique.

Do yourself a favor and get familiar with The Secret.

The Secret homepage USA Today article The Oprah Show

When News Isn't News

Regardless of how you feel about the death penalty, does it shock you that letters to Ohio's governor are running 5-to-1 in favor of ending capital punishment? It shouldn't. On a whole, people aren't death-mongers. How many people do you know that would write a letter to the governor like this:

"Dear Mr Governor,

Please keep using the electric chair. Lethal injection is cool, too.

Your friend, Steve"

It just doesn't happen.

But people will crawl over land and sea in order to voice their objections to the death penalty. I'm not quite sure why people are so passionate about defending the lives of murderers when there are innocents all around the world dying preventable deaths that could also use advocates.

Personally [and I know you're dying to know], I am for the death penalty; it's a necessary punishment for those who take another life. Despite those who wish to use a few isolated comments of Jesus to condemn capital punishment, you can easily derive a Scriptural ethic exists that would support it. It's a post-Noadic flood [second creation] mandate that "whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man." This commandment precedes Mosaic law, making it very difficult to refute.

We should not rejoice in the taking of life, but there are times when it is necessary.

Yikes! [ecclesiastically speaking]

Nothing says, "Jesus is Lord" like going one-on-one with Hulk Hogan. Reminds me of the first-century church.

HT: Unashamed Workman

By The Book

Congress is now in session. I'm so relieved. A conservative columnist raised a fuss because Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, decided he was going to take the oath of office while placing his hand on a Koran. Many echoed the columnist's objections saying that this was a Christian nation and the oath was a slap to the face of our country's history. Actually, representatives don't place their hands on anything during the oath; they do it en mass, so it's much ado . . .

Ellision planned on taking the oath today while holding in his hand a copy of the Koran . . . a copy straight from Thomas Jefferson's library. Oh, snap. BUT if you're familiar with Islam you know that an English copy of the Koran is not authorized and is considered as "holy" as a Porky Pig comic book. That's why the irony is thrilling.

TJefferson, founding father who penned the Declaration of Independence [oh, and was President and is on the nickle], was a deist who played salad bar with the gospels to form his own kind of moral code. Yet two hundred years later we want to believe that these guys who led the rebellion against England were choir boys. And then we use that revisionist history to spout out ridiculous ideas like we're a theocracy.

Sidenote: I also find it interesting that we do the same thing with Scripture: we think the point of the Bible is to elevate and emulate the characters to hero status when there's really only one hero found in the pages [extra credit if you can figure out who].

Not sure what you want to do with all this, but if you're not ready for the new role of religion in American politics, get ready. The next two years will most likely redefine the past twenty-five years of faith's influence on our democracy.

Enjoy Your Day

I've been rather silent since the passing of my grandfather. I was incredibly busy and stressed, but we all made it through. I'm sure I'll write up a few thoughts about it later this week. As a Christian, Christmas doesn't mean all that much to me. Of course it's great to celebrate an event in the life of Jesus, but why don't we bring the same kind of passion to Easter [pun intended]? Regardless, it's a still a unique, fun time of the year. Good food, good carols, and the opportunity to see practically everyone in your family. We had a great time in Lexington and will head over to my parents this afternoon.

I guess this year was supposed to be different now that we have the little girl, but it seems pretty normal. She's still way too young to comprehend the difference and she's suffering through a cold [which hasn't damped her chipper attitude]. And even though Kaelyn doesn't fully appreciate it, all the family have loved seeing her struggle to open up her gifts. I'm sure she'll be much more into it next year.

So I hope you're enjoying your holiday. Blessings.

Pop-Pop

My grandfather passed away tonight. He was 90 years old. We'll miss him, but he's with Jesus now.

Doctor Who?

Story time, kiddies. When I was in college I tried to get a scholarship for preaching students being awarded by a old school church planting organization from southeastern Ohio. I heard about this group because they were popular in the Maysville, Kentucky area where my grandparents resided. In order to interview for this $1000 scholarship I had to drive to Portsmouth, Ohio to interview for it. It was a five hour round trip, coupled with an hour interview about my theology and career aspirations. Low and behold, I didn't get the scholarship. It's a Saturday from my life that I'm still bitter about losing.

The head of this group had an interesting name: Hoyt Allen Jr. I only met him that one time, but I had difficulty forgetting that name, perhaps because I forever linked him to that scholarship snub. While online today, reading a news blurb about my grandparent's church, I saw that they invited good ole' Hoyt to come speak to their gathering. I normally would've passed on this article but noticed that it referred to him as DOCTOR Hoyt. I don't mean to be judgmental, but I couldn't buy that this guy had earned a doctorate; I'm certain that the closest he got to legitimately claiming this title was by downing a Dr Pepper [sorry, I felt that lame joke was necessary].

The article said that Hoyt earned his Master of Divinity and Doctorate at a Lake Charles Bible College in Louisiana. Having never heard of Lake Charles I looked up their website where I perused their intensive academic offering. You can check it all out here, but I would like to cite their rigorous requirements for attaining a doctorate at their prestigious institution.

DOCTOR OF MINISTRIES This course consists of four sections, all comprehensive and discussion questions. You will use your own library for research. The total course cost is $500, payable in four equal installments.

This, my friends, in case you were wondering, is not a fully accredited academic institution. I have to include this advertising gem from their MDiv description:

MASTER OF DIVINITY Our Master Of Divinity is a comprehensive program that requires one textbook, The textbook consists of four sections, all discussion questions. In other words, there are no completely wrong answers.

How refreshing! For somebody. I have no idea how someone could drop $1000 for these two pieces of paper and then, with a straight face, have someone address them as Doctor.

Unfortunately, the background of our movement of churches is extremely anti-intellectual. This sentiment developed as a stand against the highly-intellectual liberalism that rampaged Protestant churches in the early twentieth century. As a result, we've not been able to overcome this past and embrace the idea that we can be both intelligent and Biblically conservative. Hence, you get a degree mill like the Lake Charles Bible College where there are no wrong answers.

We still need some work if we're going to become the movement we need to be.

Honestly, I'd like to get a PhD someday . . . especially if I could get someone else to pay for it. Not that I want people to call me Doctor, but that I could specialize in a subject and become an authority. But if it never happens, I'll be OK. I'd rather it not happen than me to get a cereal-box-top degree not worth the paper it's written on.

Effing Zune

Been immersed in a few projects this week, so the blog has taken a backseat. Thought this would be a great time to link to an article I've been sitting on for a few weeks. Since Microsoft is finally ready to compete with the Apple iPod for mp3 player supremacy, you think the would've done extensive research in anticipation of a market blitz. You could say that they thought of everything . . . oh, except for the fact that the product's name sounds like a Hebrew curse word. Yep, the name "Zune" is amazingly similar to the modern Hebrew f-bomb.

I will refrain from any additional jokes.

Merry ******mas?

Over at the House of Carr homepage, I added a tab for our eventual Christmas stuff. To save space, I merely labeled it "Xmas." A good friend wondered if this was akin to selling out,"taking the "Christ" out of "Christmas." Good question. Let me explain it here.

First, in order for me to ruin everyone's holiday, we need to understand that it was very unlikely that Jesus was actually born on or near December 25th. The date was picked a few centuries after Jesus lived, in order to replace the popularly celebrated winter solstice, a pagan holiday. The most common deity worshiped on this date was Mithra; in Israel, we were able to observe a Mithra shrine in the sea port of Caesarea [for more on Mithra & Christmas, see here].

The word "Christmas" is literally a contraction of "Christ's Mass." The Greek word for Christ is "Χριστός" [Christos]. Notice the first letter is an X, the Greek letter Chi [pronounced "Key"]. For over 1,000 years the word "Christ" has been abbreviated with an "X" or "Xp" throughout various Anglo-Saxon and Eastern Orthodox writings. So using "Xmas" still emphasizes the presence of Christ in the holiday.*

Somehow, as retailers began to use Xmas as an abbreviation for the holiday [which has been done for almost 100 years now in America], some believers felt it was an attack on Jesus, not recognizing him being the center of the holiday. I'm not quite sure where this rumor started. I suspect that it comes down to advertisers trying to save a buck. Whenever you can shorten an ad to conserve space/ink, you usually do it.

Regardless of how you spell it, it's impossible to deny that the the holiday that we celebrate as Christmas today has its origins in the Christian faith.

*I should admit that I really don't take issue with calling this "the holiday season" because the word "holiday" is derived from "Holy Day," again showing the religious nature of the celebration.

Eat More Nativity Animals

Just got back in from our Thanksgiving journey, from Cincy to Lexington to participate in consecutive days of gorging. Much fun was had by all and Kaelyn loved the extra attention from the relatives. While reading today's Lexington Herald Leader, my father-in-law came across an article about their church, the church in which Kelly and I were wed. Southern Acres Christian Church was called out by PETA [People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals] for their abuse of animals in a live nativity scene; I guess leaving animals outdoors and feeding them is cruel to the critters. Only one small problem: Southern Acres hasn't had a live nativity scene in years. So why were they contacted about this issue?

All day I was puzzled by this until I came across mention of a similar case in Alaska [HT: Scott Aughtmon]. This church in Anchorage had an identical complaint from PETA, yet they had never used live animals before. Now it's all perfectly clear.

The PETA people contacted all their local chapters to seek out a church to pick on during the holiday season. So they drop an email/press release about the local church and get some free pub. Perhaps the national headquarters should have instructed members to first investigate whether or not the targeted church actually had a live nativity. So instead of being relevant, PETA ends up looking ridiculously out of touch.

Perhaps, as one of my kin-folk wondered, the organization is should really be referred to as the acronym PITA, for Pain In The A**.

God Told . . . Him

Before I dive into IF I BLOGGED THEN week, allow me to direct you towards this Wall Street Journal article on plagiarism in the pulpit. Found it interesting because of the local connections mentioned in the article. Steve Sjogren, founding pastor of the Vineyard in Tri-County stated that pastors he looks to for encouragement get 70% of their sermon content from someone else. They also noted the case of Liberty Heights Church in West Chester; the church was close to CCM and I knew a couple of guys on their staff. Apparently they fired the pastor who had grown their church over charges of plagiarism.

How do I feel about it? It's only a big deal because pastors don't do it right. There's nothing wrong with using someone else's work AS LONG AS you cite your source. Remember back in school that you could always use other people's research as long as you include it in your bibliography? It's the same thing in preaching. I don't use a lot of stuff from other people but if I do, I will make reference to it.

Both Sjogren and Rick Warren think it's unnecessary to attribute materials to other preachers and [listen closely] they're wrong. We're living in an age of authenticity, and it means even if you're a member of clergy; your integrity is everything. If I were to tell a story in first person that never happened to me, I'd be called out as a liar. Why should it be any different if people think I ripped the majority of my sermon from a guy in Texas and claim it as my own?

The real problem here is that ministers are forsaking their number one duty: the teaching of the Word of God. I know there's a lot of networking and pastoring that needs to happen in a given week but Sunday's message is the most important task I have each week. If I haven't fully invested myself in it, then I've failed. Coming up with 45 minutes of material each week ain't always easy, but that's my job. Try getting sympathy from someone who works 60 hours each week doing manual labor for your struggles in finding a text to preach on. If you don't like it, then perhaps you're in the wrong profession. I'm not complaining.

In Paul's challenge to Timothy, he tells him not only to preach the Word but to "be prepared in season and out of season." We pastors must always be in preparation for our next message.

Rant complete.

HT: Challies

Sorry!

I know I have regular reader Dawn in Texas who might not get as big a laugh about this, so I do apologize to her in advance. But if I have some free time on a Friday night, you wouldn't find me playing the home game version of Your Best Life Now.

Sad

I took the night to think about the news that broke yesterday about Ted Haggard. He's a megachurch pastor in Colorado and President of the National Association of Evangelicals. Haggard has been accused of carrying on a three year relationship with a male escort. I thought about throwing out some thoughts here last night, but wanted to be patient to see if today brought forth any additional information. You had to figure something happened since he stepped down from both these positions; even if you're innocent, immediately resigning never looks good. Apparently there is more.

Whereas last night Haggard denied ever being unfaithful, this morning we read that he's admitted to "some indiscretion." I'm sure that, by the weekend, there will be a much clearer picture of all went on. This will allow for this story to blow up by next week, right before the election. This becomes an issue as Haggard was involved in Colorado's fight to ban gay marriage, so expect to see much more about it.

Much will be written about this incident on the web in days to come, but allow me to make a few observations:

1) I wasn't surprised. It's not like I go around betting which guys will cheat on their spouse, however, it's become a fact of life: ministers are human and still sin. If allegations prove to be true, this could be the highest profile fall in American evangelicalism in twenty years. I guess we should be surprised it lasted this long without an incident.

2) Mega-problems. Even though the majority of evangelicals seem to prefer the megachurch, it becomes a beast. They're usually born out of the personality of one individual who is followed as an ultimate spiritual guide. But when all eyes are focused on one man, the pressure can become suffocating. I'm not excusing what Haggard did, but does the same thing happen if he's pastoring a church of 150 instead of 15,000? Perhaps, but I think the odds become much less if his face isn't constantly in Time Magazine. I'll be curious to see what happens at New Life, the church Haggard pastors. How will they move on after all this?

There's nothing wrong with us having megachurches but I don't think we take seriously enough the awesome responsibility surrounding pastors of such large flocks. It puts a lot on one guy. Again, it makes you really appreciate the life of Billy Graham, how he was able to reach so many people and avoid all the controversy. That in of itself might be the most amazing thing about his ministry.

3) Check myself. I'm madly in love with my wife, but I can't ever get too cocky to think it could never happen to me. As a minister, you deal with some of the most private, intimate moments in people's lives. You're supposed to empathize and reach out to vulnerable people. That creates awkward situations that can quickly morph into improper relationships.

I do my best to guard myself of even having such situations present themselves. At all cost, I will avoid being in the same room/automobile alone with someone of the opposite sex. I love my wife and my ministry and would like to keep both.

4) Disappointed in Dobson. Despite all the pieces of this scandal, I find it most embarrassing that James Dobson felt the need to immediately come out and defend Haggard. It's not that he supported him, but went as far to say it was all made up. Dobson said,

"It is unconscionable that the legitimate news media would report a rumor like this based on nothing but one man's accusation . . . it appears someone is trying to damage his reputation as a way of influencing the outcome of Tuesday's election."

How does Dobson know this is a conspiracy? What if the accusations are entirely true? He's willing to bet Focus on The Family on it? And is it truly all about the election? I think Dobson will regret his quick response to this one. And I believe this will be a catalyst towards . . .

5) The Transformation of American Evangelicalism. I could be wrong on this one, but I've really sense it coming. The past twenty years of Evangelicalism have been dominated by the Christian Right. Believers were sure that if we could control the American political landscape that God would bless our nation. Within the past ten years, that wish was granted as all three branches of our government became conservative. And yet we discover that we're really not better off than we were before the movement began.

The emerging generations of Christians aren't as interested in transforming US politics as they are changing their world. They're more interested in AIDS in Africa than they are Red State vs. Blue State. I'm not saying it will be perfect, but new leaders will rise to set the course as voices like Dobson and Falwell are totally ignored. For the shift to begin to take place, the foundation of present American Evangelicalism needs to be rocked. This could be that event.

All in all, it's incredibly sad incident. Thankfully, our allegiance is to a perfect God rather than to imperfect men.

---------------

Ben Witherington made some excellent observations about the Haggard situation, most of which I agree with. Definitely worth checking into.

One Reason The City Is Better Than Mason

Jennifer Miller, a Mason school board member is demanding that a couple Muslim students observing a Ramadan fast not be allowed to stay in a separate room during the lunch hour. Ironically, the two Muslim boys never used the separate room, choosing to go to the library instead. So the non-issue becomes an issue. Miller's quoted as saying, "We are a Christian nation, not a Muslim nation. Our Christian values have declined and yet we allow other faiths besides Christianity to have precedence in our schools."

Yes, friends, this is the biggest problem in Mason, Ohio. This lady is totally delusional. Just a few reasons why:

1) In my three years living there I heard of tens, if not hundreds, of incidents where Mason schools played favorites for students and particular issues. But Miller wants to single out some Muslim kids [who I'm sure aren't singled out because of their faith anyway] because that's obviously what Jesus would want. I'm sure they'll be way more open to the Christian faith now that you've warmed them up to it.

2) We aren't a Christian nation. This topic is an entire post in of itself. And even though some of you would deny this, it's the truth. Judeo-Christian values were centric to the development of our country's laws but that doesn't make us Christian. Slavery was part of our history for almost 100 years. That's the kind of thing a Christian nation would do, huh? The minute we realize this, the better we're able to live out our faith in America.

3) It isn't as if Muslims are the only faith group given preferential treatment in our schools. Living on the westside, attending a public school, I hated the cafeteria on Fridays; all they served was fish. This wasn't a coincidence, as they were helping Catholics adhere to their regulations of their faith. And what public high school that you know has classes on Good Friday or Christmas?

4) Miller may be correct when she asserts, "our Christian values have declined." 'Tis true. When believers roll around in Hummers, vacationing in tropical locations, maintaining million dollar homes, worshipping their children, all while ignoring the issues of the poor and needy- perhaps our values are in need of reevaluation. Oh yeah, I went there.

Don't get me wrong: I loved our years up in Mason; I have many wonderful friends living up there who are doing all they can to live for Christ as best as they can. But there are a lot of people like Miller in Mason who are less concerned about living a life of true Biblical discipleship than they are about dwelling in a Christian nation. Maybe that's why our values are lagging behind.

No, I'm good right here, thank you.