Denying Human Rights: A How-To Guide

I wrote a paper for my English class that I wanted to share.
The paper is seven or eight pages long, but that is too much for your average blog post.
So, I decided to cut it into smaller pieces and post it over the next few days. Consequently, as you read any of the posts on any given day, there may be a contextual flow of thought that is not readily perceived.
I encourage you, however, to keep reading (and sometimes re-reading) the subsequent posts (and prior posts) as it will become clearer as you go.

Please enjoy.

Denying Human Rights: A How-To Guide

It is not true that all human beings have fundamental human rights.
Have you been to Darfur lately? In Darfur, government sanctioned ethnic cleansing occurs daily. Remember a place called Rwanda? Same story there. How about Kosovo? If these place names don’t jog your memory, maybe 1940’s Germany and Adolf Hitler or Russia and Joseph Stalin will be more familiar examples.

But, one might object that there is a difference between “is” and “ought.”
In other words, just because a situation “is” a certain way, doesn’t mean it “ought” to be that way. Someone who holds this point of view would say that while certain basic and fundamental human rights really do exist and “ought” to be honored among human beings, it, unfortunately, “is” the case that they are not granted to all human beings at all times.
This is not a problem with rights but a problem with humans. And it is not whether these rights are or aren’t granted that determines when and which human beings get them. Human beings should have these fundamental rights simply because we are human beings.
This person would also certainly agree to the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic rights, meaning that human beings have intrinsic rights by virtue of being human and that these rights are not somehow added to us from some outside source (extrinsically).

Abortion: What Is It?

Imagine the following conversation between two lady friends as they bump into each other in the grocery store:

“Hi Anita, how are you? I haven’t seen you in months!”

“Oh, I’m getting by. You know me, Lisa, a little morning sickness can’t keep me down for long.”

“I can see that! You’re looking great. When are you due?”

“Only three weeks to go. We’re almost done turning the spare room into a nursery.”

“Wow, that’s great, Anita. Do you know what it’s going to be?”

“Well, initially John and I wanted it to be a surprise but the suspense was just too much. We went in and found out what it was just last week. It’s a girl!”

“Uh huh….and…”

Lisa’s facial expression surprised Anita. It seemed as if she didn’t hear her.

“It’s going to be a girl, Lisa, just what John and I wanted!”

“Ok, ok, if you don’t want to tell me that’s alright. I’ll be surprised.”

“What do you mean Lisa? I just told you twice that it’s a girl.”

“Yeah, but that only tells me the sex. I want to know what it is. You know…..”

“Gosh, Lisa, I guess I don’t know. What do you want me to tell you?”

“Well, for crying out loud, Anita, is it a human being?!?!”

“What else would it be, Lisa, a frog?”

Obviously this conversation is absurd but it shows us something important.
No one really questions whether the unborn is human or not; this is common sense. It also supports a well known biological law that states that life only comes from preceding life, and reproduction occurs in kind (hence, the word, reproduction).
In other words, pregnant elephants give birth to elephants, not mice, pregnant dogs give birth to dogs, not cats, and pregnant humans give birth to humans, not frogs. Or, put another way, what else would it be?

Justifiable Homicide

What is "Justifiable Homicide"?

Here is the definition that I found at the following address:
http://www.criminal-law-lawyer-source.com/terms/justifiable.html:

"Justifiable homicide is the killing of one person by another that is committed without malice or criminal intent. When a person commits a justifiable homicide they are not guilty of a criminal offense. Homicide can be considered justifiable homicide if it is committed in self defense, the defense of others, while trying to prevent of serious crime, and in the line of duty. Capital punishment is also considered justifiable homicide. Preventing a prisoner from fleeing by means of deadly force may also be considered justifiable homicide." So, apparently, there are times when killing someone is not a crime. It also appears that there is a pretty narrow range of circumstances where killing someone is permissible; defense of self or others, preventing serious crime, and capital punishment are identified here.

So, what are some examples of times when it is not ok to kill someone?

For example:

Is it ok for me to kill someone who is interfering with my education or career?
May I kill someone who generally makes my life more difficult?
What if I am simply not ready to deal with someone; may I kill that person?

Seven states report information regarding the reasons women give when asked why they are having an abortion. Other relevant information can be obtained from the Center For Disease Control's abortion surveillance and the Allan Guttmacher Institute.

Following are some tabulated results from the Allan Guttmacher Institute:

Nationwide, the percentage of abortions performed as a result of rape or incest is 0.3%. That’s three tenths of one percent. Abortions performed in response to risk of maternal health or life is 1%. In the case of abortions performed in cases of fetal abnormality, the figure is 0.5%.
About 98% of abortions performed in the United States are elective and performed for primarily social reasons, economic reasons, and birth control.
For example, in a 2004 AGI survey, 25% of the women said the most important reason for having their abortion was being unready. Coming in second place as the most important reason was “can’t afford a baby” at 23% of women. The third most popular answer for the reason for their abortion was that she has all the children she wants or her children are grown at 19% of women. When tallying up all data regarding this question, since the women were able to select primary (most important) and secondary reasons for their abortions, the answers were similar. Among all responses to the question about why the woman was having the abortion, the number one answer at 74% was concern over how a baby would change the woman’s life. 73% chose can’t afford a baby, 42% stated they were unmarried as a reason for abortion and 48% said they were having relationship problems or wanted to avoid being a single parent. 38% said the child would interfere with their education or career plans.

Justifiable?

Hardly!

Atonement

What’s a scapegoat?

Leviticus describes two goats that play a role in the “Day of Atonement.” In this book, Aaron, the High Priest would lay both hands on one of the animals, placing the sins of all Israel on its head. Then the animal would be led out of the camp and into the wilderness. In this way, the goat symbolically bears the sins of the people in their place and is separated from them.

The other goat is slaughtered and its blood is taken behind the curtain of the Most Holy Place and sprinkled on the atonement cover of the ark of the covenant.

So, what does this have to do with atonement?
Glad you asked.

The reason for what happens to the goats is to provide atonement. The word, atone means to make amends (when something is mended it is made whole or one) for a wrong; this action makes the situation whole again or at one. In our case, we are under judgment from God for our wrongdoing and are not at one with Him. If atonement (at one ment) is successful, the relationship is restored, made whole, at one.

Because all people sin and are themselves sinners, God’s justice demands a penalty be paid. Luckily, a scapegoat has been provided to take our blame. That scapegoat is represented in Jesus. The death of Jesus satisfies both God’s justice and His love in that sin gets punished and the people He loves get forgiven.

There have been many people over history (Ghandi, Buddha, Martin Luther King Jr., Mother Theresa, etc.) who have spoken of and taught ways to live better lives, ways to treat others properly in society, and even ways to achieve fulfillment and happiness in this life. The one thing these people can't do is pay the debt that you owe (make atonement) for your own sin. You need a scapegoat that can bear your blame and suffer in your place. Only Jesus can do that. Only Jesus has done that. If you don’t accept the forgiveness that Jesus offers, you don’t get forgiven. It’s that simple.

Definition of Scapegoat: One that bears the blame for others; a person or group made to bear the blame for others or to suffer in their place.

Definition of Atonement: Compensation for a wrong; something done to make amends for wrongdoing, Amends or reparation made for an injury or wrong; expiation.

Have your sins been placed on the head of Jesus?

Existence of God

World's Shortest Philosophical Argument For The Existence Of God

P1. Existence
C. Therefore, God

Anselm would be impressed!

Forgiveness

Forgiveness is often misunderstood.

What, precisely, is forgiveness?

Forgiveness isn’t:

1) Forgiving isn’t forgetting. You may remember the wrong done to you for the rest of your life.

2) Forgiving isn’t saying it’s ok. When someone apologizes to us we usually respond by saying “that’s ok.” but that isn’t really what we mean. When we respond with that phrase, we are not really saying it is ok. What we mean to say is “I forgive you.” Or “I accept your apology.”

3) Forgiving isn’t saying it didn’t hurt. The damage done and the pain caused are completely irrelevant to the concept of forgiveness.

4) Forgiving isn’t saying it doesn’t matter. If we hurt someone, it matters.

Forgiveness is:

When we are wronged, we generally want the person punished in some way. We usually feel that the other person owes us something; an apology perhaps, our dignity, respect, or some object. Maybe we feel that person owes us contriteness or humility. Whatever the case, when you forgive someone, you no longer hold against him/her that expectation.

Forgiveness is the release of a debt. It is a release of the expectation or requirement of restitution.

Forgiveness is undeserved. If someone deserves forgiveness, then the act of granting him/her forgiveness isn’t forgiveness. It’s justice.

Justice is when a person gets the exact punishment that is deserved. No more and no less. It is just.

Mercy is when a person gets less punishment than deserved.

Forgiveness is when a person deserves punishment and gets none.

Elective Abortion

When a woman has an abortion, something is removed from within her. What is that something? Would we call it something other than a human being? If so, what? What type of being would it be, if not human?
This image comes from WebMD and depicts what a human being looks like at 8 weeks of development. Notice that the arms and legs are formed and eyelids and ears are forming. Statistics indicate that the majority of abortions happen within the first trimester (first 12 weeks) of pregnancy. It generally takes 2-6 weeks for a woman to suspect that she is pregnant.

The Mayo Clinic describes the development this way:

Week 8: Movement begins

Eight weeks into your pregnancy, your baby's arms and legs are growing longer, and fingers have begun to form. The shell-shaped parts of your baby's ears also are forming, and your baby's eyes and nipples are visible. The upper lip and nose have formed. The trunk of your baby's body is beginning to straighten.

Your baby may begin to move this week, but you won't be able to feel it yet.

By the end of this week, your baby may be about 1/2 inch (11 to 14 millimeters) long.

Selfless vs. Unselfish

I had a two-page paper on the difference between unselfishness and selflessness but I decided to spare you my rantings.
Here is my thought in a nutshell, though:

The difference between unselfish and selfless is the difference between cost and gain. They are opposites. A person acts unselfishly when he/she does something for someone that will benefit the other while the gain is negligible.

On the other hand, a person acts selflessly when he/she does something for someone that will benefit the other while "doer" experiences a cost factor.

The more selfless the act, the higher the cost.
The more unselfish the act, the lower the gain.

The ultimate act of selflessness?
Doing something for someone that will give great benefit while costing you everything.

The ultimate level is when the deed is done for those who hate you.

Romans 5:8
But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

Selfless vs Unselfish

What is the opposite of selfish?

Which word makes a better answer; Unselfish or Selfless?

A friend of mine asked me recently about some perfume he was buying for his wife. The question sounded innocent enough but I know my friend better than that. He wanted to know what I thought about what defines selfishness and unselfishness when it comes to gift giving. “Is it selfish of me to give my wife a perfume that I really like? It’s pretty expensive.”

That question got me thinking about the definitions (and nuances of definition) of a few words; selfish, unselfish and selfless.

Is unselfish and selfless the same thing?

Can a person be selfish and selfless?

Can a person be generous and selfish?

Can a selfless act have selfish motives?

Can an unselfish act have selfish motives?

I have some thoughts on the matter and some ways to think it through but I am curious about what you think. Click below and leave your comments. I will post some of the best ones along with my on thoughts in a subsequent posting in the next few days.

James 3:16

It's good to have ambition, right?

How do you tell (as a pastor or leader) when your ambition is sin?
Here are a few questions to get you started:

1. Do I use ministries to get people done or do I use people to get ministry done?
2. Do I look at other church websites, blogs, etc. in a desire to be more like that church, pastor, ministry etc.
3. Do I expect congratulations for things I do well? Do I feel down when not recognized for something I did well?
4. As an organization, do we hold on to our best people or are our best people departing?
   
5. Am I trying to be like someone else? Am I trying to make my church look like some other church?
   
6. How much time do I spend thinking about the giving levels at my church?
7. Do I really want to grow the church for Christ's sake or is that just what I tell others while I really want to increase the number of potential servers and givers?
8. Do I think more about what Christ is doing in the lives of the members or about what I (we, the "church") could do if we had just a little more (money, attenders, volunteers).
9. Do I really think what members financially give to my church is a good measurement of their commitment (or lack thereof) to Christ or do I just realize the pragmatic reality of our need for cash?
10. Does personally making more money ever come to mind when I think of what my church needs or improvements I would like to see?
11. Do I feel like I don't have enough control over what happens in my church and would I like to have more?
12. Am I a perfectionist?
13. Will I make a course correction if it means personal loss (money, prestige, ideas, control, etc)?
14. Do I use the words, "I, me, my" a lot from the pulpit?
    

Here is a quote from a book by Dan Allender to think about:

If you don't have the capacity to confess; acknowledging in real time how much you mess up, the result will be a workplace that becomes more cowardly and staff members that grow more self-committed, more closed to you and to one another and more manipulative. They will look out for themselves; not for you or the organization or their colleagues.

That's the strange paradox of leading. To the degree that you attempt to hide or dissemble your weakness, the more you will need to control those you lead; the more insecure you will become, the more rigidly you will impose; prompting the ultimate departure of your best people.

Be Afraid

I listen to an absurd number of podcasts.

Recently, a pastor from Acts 29 Network named Darrin Patrick said some things worth thinking about.

He was addressing pastors and leaders at a church-planting conference. His talk was on the topic of being centered on the gospel of Jesus Christ and not centered on buildings, programs, numerical growth and other secondary things that many pastors spend so much time on. He was pressing the importance of confession of sins, faults, frailties and weaknesses and our being able to recognize when we are trying to hide them.

Here are the quotes:

"I am afraid that my gospel proclamation is better than my gospel application"
"I am afraid that my skill growth is outpacing my character growth"
"I am concerned for myself that my pastoral passion is yielding to professionalism"
"I am concerned for you that you will settle for a church instead of a movement"

What are you afraid of?

Where's Waldo?

You've heard of "Where's Waldo?" right? Well, this image is called "Where's The Church?"

Can you see it? If you squint your eyes just right and rotate the image it's easier. Can you see the steeple? How 'bout that small cross on the side wall? The open doors with the pews inside?
Still can't see it?

Well, that's because it isn't there. Furthermore, that's not a church. It may be a building where a local church gathers for some purpose or other, but it is not a church. A church may do some type of ministry in a building like that but it is not a church. Repentance, salvation, the person and work of Christ may be preached in a building like that but it is not a church.

The reason it is not a church is because they are the church. Church is not an it, it's a who. That's right. It turns out that the best place to hide is in plain sight.... Where's the church?

You're looking at it.