Wednesday, January 27, 2016

ReadyyYYY...AAAIM...You're Fired?

Some may wonder why the Donald would say a thing like this. Is it because his opinion of himself is so high or is it that his estimation of his devotees is so low? (I’m guessing the two options aren’t mutually exclusive. After all, big “I’s” live in a world of little “u’s,” right?)   

Still, the Donald’s comments would be more comical if they were less true. Granted, he is speaking hyperbolically. I mean…he couldn’t literally shoot somebody and not lose any voters.

Could he?

Suppose the person he busts a cap in was going to vote for him. Surely he’d lose that person’s vote? Well, if the person died—probably. (I say probably because I’m from Illinois where dead people vote.)

But let’s suppose ‘ol dead-eye Donald only intended to wing the woman (like when Liam Neeson grazed the nice lady’s arm because his daughter had been “Taken”). Could this hypothetically wounded woman give Trump her ballot despite his bullet?

She certainly could.

But here’s the thing about blind loyalty: Trump supporters don’t have a monopoly on it. Blind loyalty runs amuck across the political spectrum.

And ironically, what we loathe in others we often overlook in ourselves.

For instance, take the folks who lampooned Trump’s remark on Saturday Night Live. The writers who mocked “Trumpeters” for being blindly loyal to Trump, are the same folks who could watch Barack Obama strangle puppies and then blame George W. Bush.

(Naturally, depending upon the make and model of the dead puppies, the “Black Labs Matter” crowd may be particularly offended at George Bush.)

Blind loyalties abound in all political tribes it seems: Camp “I Never Heard of Ben Ghazi—Who’s He?” or, the comrades chillin’ at “Feel the Bern.” Maybe you prefer the order of service at the First Church of Cruz Missiles located in the "Glassy Sands" area. 

The point is, dear reader, blind loyalty to a political party or person is dangerous. Actually, blind loyalty to any person or thing is dangerous.

So why is it so common?

It’s hard to say, I suppose. Thomas Sowell observes,
Those of us who like to believe that human beings are rational can sometimes have a hard time trying to explain what is going on in politics.

This is certainly nothing new. I think a lot of it is ideologically driven. Facts and reason matter little to ideologues. 

I simply want to encourage you to blindly follow no one. Rather, with your eyes and heart wide open and your mind fully engaged and alert: Follow Jesus. Not even God desires blind loyalty.

Thursday, January 7, 2016

2015 In The Books

My own eyes are not enough for me, I will see through those of others. . . . In reading great literature I become a thousand men and yet remain myself. Like a night sky in the Greek poem, I see with a myriad of eyes, but it is still I who see.
~C.S. Lewis

I’ve seen some folks catalogue the most influential books they’ve ever read. Less ambitiously, I’d like to share a list of influential books I read in 2015—one for each month and in no particular order.

Obviously, this list in no way serves as an affirmation of all the things contained in the works; but it does enumerate books which shaped, enlivened, informed, challenged, or reinforced my thinking in the past year.

1. “The Divine Conspiracy,” Dallas Willard

2. “Where The Conflict Really Lies,” Alvin Platinga

3. “Basic Christianity,” John Stott

4. “The New Chosen People,” William W. Klein

5. “The Lost World of Adam and Eve,” John H. Walton

6. “The Pursuit of God,” A.W. Tozer

7. “A Hobbit, A Wardrobe, and A Great War,” Joseph Loconte

8. “Simply Christian,” N.T. Wright

9. “Christ Among The Dragons,” James Emery White

10. “Kingdom Triangle,” JP Moreland

11. “Two Views of Hell,” Eward William Fudge & Robert A. Peterson

12. “Did Adam & Eve Really Exist?” C. John Collins 

The above books, and all books, should be read in conjunction with and through the lens of God’s holy word, The Bible. As I like to advise: Eat the meat and spit out the bones. 

Read carefully, my friends.