(south)WESTERN CIVILIZATION» Justin D. Howe

Butter Battle Blunder

admin — Fri, 02 May 2008 04:03:00 +0000

Perception varies as much as individuals differ. Nations, groups, kings, leaders, philosophers, and peoples have existed and acted according to a set of beliefs and ideals throughout history. The Butter Battle Book by Dr. Seuss[1] is a perfect illustration of how wrong perceptions can impact a group of people. The same problems developed in the Dr. Seuss story have repeated themselves since the beginning of time. Is it possible for people to overcome their differing perceptions to live in harmony with one another?
The primary difference that separated the characters of the Butter Battle Book from one another was the issue over how to butter their bread. One group buttered their bread from the bottom while the other side buttered their bread on the top side. Dr. Seuss was a master at portraying important truths or values through simple children’s stories. This story is no different. Think about any conflict between people in history, and break the event down into its simplest form. Most likely, the source of the conflict will be nearly as silly as whether to butter their bread butter side up or down.
Anti-Semitism existed in Germany and central Europe for centuries before World War II and the Holocaust. Germans readily accepted Hitler’s hate of the Jews by accepting his propaganda. What separated the Jews from Germans? Were the Germans really a superior race? Not at all; they simply believed the simple untruths that seeped into their belief system. It caused support for a war against the Jews which was not grounded in a real threat, just a supposed one. A more recent example is of the Mormon church towards African-Americans. Their doctrine taught that to be black was a result of the curse of sin, thus, no blacks would enter the kingdom of God. Of course, this belief is based on a false premise, but the idea remains the same: separation because of simple misunderstanding.
The issue relating to the time period during and following the decline of the Roman Empire was an issue between Christians and Muslims. Several Crusades and countless battle ensued because of simple differences between the two sides. This is not written to say that everyone should think the same way, but that everyone should be free to believe as they wish. How many lives could have been spared had the Christians and Muslims been willing to allow each other freedom to believe and worship as they wish without imposing their respective beliefs on one another by force. Many serious divisions between people would not occur if more thought were given to what it is that actually separates them. Most of which are truly absurd and ridiculous.
Fair and honest communication between differing groups is also necessary. Religious freedom should not mean that we do not discuss our beliefs with one another, but that we do not allow differences to drive us to hate one another. Perhaps both sides could be benefited by truths that the other holds.
The major problem that results from these insignificant differences is the division that it creates. In the story, the two opposing groups built a wall to keep the other out of their land. When a “line in the sand” is drawn like the wall that separated the Yukes and Zooks, protection of those of like beliefs through the educational system is necessary. Pledges are devised to retain the loyalty of its progeny. The wall must also be defended. The enemy must be made hideous, atrocious, and unlike one’s own people. The emphasis focuses on the differences rather than the similarities. Just as the story portrays, the similarities between the Yukes and Zooks were much greater than the differences. Both sides were similar in many ways; in fact, the only difference noted was how they butter their bread.
Defense of belief began with a simple defense of the wall. When differences are emphasized and separation occurs, the human response forces a defense of “correctness.” It seems to be a natural response to defend what one believes to be true. This response, if God-given, is a good response that compels individuals to be prepared to have a reason for believing what they believe. The problem, however, is the issue with perception. What someone perceives to be true is that person’s reality. In other words, the things that an individual or people group believes, those things become that person’s reality or truth. It may not be truth or reality, but it is that person’s reality. To be able to defend what one believes is good. To be willing to listen to another’s arguments for the sake of seeking truth is better. The greatest caution is to make sure that what one believes is reality or truth.
The danger in defense of one’s beliefs is the escalation factor. First, remember that individuals should have a solid foundation in truth before they should be willing to take a stand on anything. Second, ask if one is defending their beliefs, how far they are willing to go to impose those beliefs on someone else? In the story, it started with a simple switch which seemed to work for some time, but soon a defense was made that rendered the switch useless. The situation escalated on both sides of the wall until finally a weapon was constructed which, allegedly, would annihilate everything on the other side of the wall. Is the annihilation of all opponents the ultimate goal for Christians? God forbid! The primary message of the gospel of Jesus Christ is about how God wants all mankind to live with him in heaven for eternity. If all that is accomplished is the destruction of adversaries, then Christians have failed to understand the intent of God’s message to them. Unfortunately, Christians have done this to each other as well, not just to their opponents.
Will mankind ever live in harmony, communicating to each other peacefully? Not until the world is in submission to Jesus Christ will the people of the world live in harmony. Does that mean that no one should try to be at peace with each other? No, all attempts should be made to understand each other better. Beliefs should be thoroughly examined and defended peacefully. If a building were on fire, and someone went in to warn the inhabitants of the imminent danger would such an individual be able to do so peacefully? Yes, but to the occupants the rescuer may be perceived as loud and threatening especially if they are not aware of the danger. The same problem can occur for Christians trying to share the truth of God’s Word, warning of the imminent danger of hell’s fires. The Christian can be perceived as loud, obnoxious, or even threatening. It is the responsibility of the Christian to be aware of the possibility of being misunderstood, and he must be willing to be patient. To give up would be a heartbreaking failure. Just as a simple children’s story taught the reader great truth, let this reader accept the truth of God’s Word for what it is: truth.

[1]Dr. Seuss, The Butter Battle Book adapted for video, http://www.youtube.com/

Resource Recommendation: City of God

admin — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 00:57:00 +0000

City of God, by Saint Augustine (abridged for modern readers, with a Foreword by Vernon J. Bourke)

Published in 1958 by Doubleday in New York City, modern readers do well to explore the thoughts of this theologian who recorded many profound concepts and solid theological principles in this book. City of God was written over the course of several years in response to Christians and critics of Christianity alike following the sacking of Rome by the Visigoths in 410 A.D. The problems Augustine addressed in his work were not only incredibly necessary to his time, but also to our time. The truths he presented are literally timeless. This resource is an excellent place to start if one is looking to understand the mindset and actions of the common people at the time of the decay of the Roman Empire. It strongly rejects the notion that it was the fault of the Christians that Rome fell. In fact, it notes that the lives of many who were not Christians were spared because they sought sanctuary in the churches when Rome was being laid waste by the Visigoths. Everyone interested in history should read this book.

Pirate or Commander

admin — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 00:51:00 +0000

“The answer which a captured pirate gave to the celebrated Alexander the Great was perfectly accurate and correct. When that king asked the man what he meant by infesting the sea, he boldly replied: ‘what you mean by warring on the whole world. I do my fighting on a tiny ship, and they call me a pirate; you do yours with a large fleet, and they call you Commander.’” (Augustine’s City of God, pg 89)

How fascinating it is that from ancient history mankind has continued to define what is acceptable by one’s might! Did either leader in the instance above provide better leadership than the other? Did either man inflict fewer atrocities on humanity than the other? To answer would be difficult. What gave one man the “authority” to impose his will over another? It is nothing more than the “stick” with which he backs up his position. Remember the common saying, “he who has the biggest stick wins.” Just as in the case of the early government of the expanding United States versus the Native American Indians who had been living in the land for years, the US was “allowed” to relocate them. They were not relocated because the US had certain God-given rights to the land, but because the US government had the bigger “stick.” Interestingly, perception plays a greater role in what is right than reality does.

Book Report on Christian Jihad

admin — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 03:31:00 +0000

The introduction to the book reads like a popular novel. The descriptive tale was an extremely effective manner of introducing the subject that these authors undertook. To grab the attention of the reader by such an appalling concept established a solid point. What many of us would consider outright atrocities, the authors described as acts of worship and piety toward the one true God. Their point was that this type of thing has actually occurred and can still occur. To kill in the name of God is a dangerous thing.
The Caners begin to chronicle the Christian response to war from the beginning of Christianity. In the early stages, several of the church fathers were pacifists for all practical purposes. They taught that to be a Christian meant that one would not serve in the armies of pagan kings because to do so would often mean the Christian soldiers would have to accomplish ungodly tasks. Tasks the early church fathers believed a Christian simply could not do such as taking up arms against other Christians, fighting on the Sabbath, swearing an oath to another master, or guarding pagan temples to name a few (Caner). As chapter one implies in its title, they also believed that the only blood a Christian should be responsible for shedding was his own blood (not in suicide, but in martyrdom).
In chapter two, the Caners discuss some of the early steps towards Christians being involved in warfare. Little by little, more Christians began to join the ranks of the military forces. After Constantine, especially, the Christians became the preferred and protected ones in the military. Steps were made which allowed the Christian to perform certain military duties without question of conscience (e.g. no bloodshed). Policing roles were common to these early Christian soldiers. Sure enough, the groundwork was being laid for further participation in the Roman army.
Chapter three described the proceedings that brought about what the authors described to be an unholy marriage. Thomas Aquinas wrote about justification for war. He outlined some specific reasons for having war. Even these rules can become easily twisted to suit someone’s agenda. Coinciding with the growing inclusion of Christians in the army was a power struggle between church and state. The authors stated in a thought provoking way that “the question of whether the Church should be invested in temporal authority was never raised. Sadly, the Church had become addicted to its power, politics, and intrigue.” (Caner 79) Whenever any religious organization becomes more focused on its ability to exercise its might over other people rather than its ability to make a positive difference in the world then it has lost sight of what is needed.
Truly from the time of Constantine, the groundwork was being laid for what Pope Urban II called a holy war. Chapter four records the beginning of the first Crusade. Claiming the war to be the will of God, he swayed the hearts of the people to follow him. More devastating, he announced that anyone who would follow would receive the reward of heaven. In other words, one could obtain salvation fighting this holy war to take back Jerusalem. Much emphasis was placed on the cross as well. Its image was placed on some part of every soldier’s uniform or armor. Interestingly, the First Crusade was “successful.” The Christian soldiers did in fact take back Jerusalem, but at what cost?
There were several motivations by which Urban justified or was driven to accomplish this holy war. One was protection for the Western Roman Empire from the Muslims. If the Christians could keep them busy in the Middle East, then they would not be attacking western parts of the empire. Many of the poor, down-and-outers, and illiterate were deceived into following this pope believing that they would receive eternal life from their faithfulness to this mission. Perhaps this was the most significant loss of the First Crusade despite the alleged victory.
Chapter six discusses the concept of the Pyrrhic victory in which a win becomes a loss. Much more harm came from the “victory” of the First Crusade than good. The Christian community could no longer be sought or trusted as a source for seeking peace and the Church became more ‘inebriated’ with power (Caner 121). Such power too easily corrupts what used to be good intentions. The Church was more interested in making more money and having more influence than actually being a church that worships the one true God. It is important to note that the Muslims were not the only victims of the holy wars called by these Christian popes. Jews were often the target of such “holy vendettas.”
Chapter seven reveals that as time progressed, the holy wars evolved into holy inquisitions that attempted to eradicate heresies from the Church. Certain lines of monks became instruments for tracking such heretical individuals. After finding the heretics, the various religious leaders became the judge, jury, and executioner. The major problem lies in the fact that there is no religious freedom in this type of system. Jesus never forced anyone to love or obey him, yet He had devoted followers. The Church, drunken with power, felt the need to destroy anyone who might threaten its authority. The Caners revealed that even dead bodies were exhumed and re-burnt as an expression that no one can get away with defying the Church. Recently, the Church accepted a position of allowing others a right to religious freedom.
Chapter eight describes some of the early sects considered heretical by the Church. Among those were the roots of the Anabaptist movement who believed that both institutions (church and state) corrupted each other. They believed that both were ordained by God and have their role within life. As the authors state, “worship must be voluntary if it is to be true worship.” (Caner 169) Thus, if worship is controlled by either the state or the church, then it cannot be true worship. One does not have to forsake the teaching that Jesus is the only way to the Father. One must accept the fact that all individuals have a right to accept or reject that fact (Caner 171).
Ultimately, when the powers of the church are used to attain political gain, a dangerous combination is being employed. The teachings of Christ and the Bible are the foundation for Christian thinking. If one seeks forgiveness for self at the injury of another, then that forgiveness is self-seeking and not centered around God. Christians must be cautious not to become the very people they seek to reach. Salvation by force is no salvation at all.

Bio: Justin D. Howe

admin — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 21:22:00 +0000

I love my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. I cannot think of anything better to say than that, but if you want to know more about me, read on. I grew up in New York, Virginia, and Wyoming. I have lived in Oklahoma and Georgia as well. As a young child, I invited Jesus to be my Lord, and I received a call to ministry when I was fifteen. Currently, my family & I are living in the Watauga/Mid-Cities area where I serve as the Children’s Minister at Woodland Heights Baptist Church (since October 7, 2007). I am currently in pursuit of a degree at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (obviously- technically I’m a junior in the college, and I intend to pursue at least an M.Div.). I served in ministry for six years prior to moving to Fort Worth. Four of those years, I worked as a youth pastor and associate pastor at Hope Baptist Church (a mission in Afton, WY). Following that experience, I moved to Tulsa to begin completion of my formal education. I volunteered in many ways and served as the Outreach Director and Pastoral Intern at Woodland Acres Baptist Church. After completing an Associates Degree at Tulsa Community College (TCC), I transferred to SWBTS. I married on August 11th, 2001 my lovely wife, Dorothy, and we have one daughter, Alyssa (4), and one on the way (sometime in June)! I have a passion for the Lord and people. I long for people to know Jesus as their Lord and to grow in their relationship with Him. Working with kids is a wonderful opportunity for me to play with those on my own level, teach them at an early age about that relationship with Jesus, and it provides a doorway to encouraging parents as well.

Favorites:
College Team: VA Tech
NFL: Buffalo Bills, Cowboys bringing up a close second place.
MLB: Atlanta Braves (my Dad was a chaplain for the AAA-Richmond Braves)
NBA: Phoenix Suns
NHL: don’t watch often enough
Foods: Pizza, bacon cheeseburgers, Mexican, Italian, and much, much more.
Bible Verse: Philippians 3:14
Author: Ted Dekker, Frank Peretti (for fictional)
Movies: I-Robot, Star Wars, any Veggie Tales, and Jimmy Neutron
Song: I can only imagine, It is well with my soul, Friends, When God Ran, and more
TV Shows: House, Monk, Psych-(not what it sounds like)
Hobbies: love softball and snowmobiling (though I don’t get to snowmobile very much now.)