If you have not heard anything about Phil Robertson or Duck Dynasty or A&E over the past week or so then you need to crawl out from under that rock and take a look at the sunlight. Okay, it might not be that bad, but everywhere you look there is "Support Phil" articles and social media pages cropping up just a little more often than the anti-Phil regime who is also posting and blogging in rare form about the things Phil said in an article interview with GQ magazine. (If swearing offends you, watch out. This article is not censored. Sorry.)
I usually do not chime in on things just because they are a popular topic or because of the widespread issues they promote, but this one piqued my interest. I have watched most of the Duck Dynasty episode with my family. I found them to be funny, entertaining and family friendly. After seeing all the controversy online and reading articles from both the supporting and opposing entities I decided to read the article for myself.
Drew Magary went out to the Robertson's house and interviewed Phil (he also went out and shot Phil's .22 and crossbow #soundsfun). The article was very well written and showed the "real" Robertson's. It also helped me understand where this whole things is comming from. I am not a political activist or a "Bible-thumper" like Mr. Robertson, but I am a Christian and I do believe the Bible. I do think that there is much to say in the Bible about sin and sinners. And that is the reason I felt like I should write this blog.
The first thing that I thought of when I read through this article was not that I supported this man or his beliefs. Nor did I offendedly shudder at the tone he took regarding sexual orientation. I did picture a man sharing what he believed with someone who has a public platform to share the information he learned about Phil. (Magary tweeted that an A&E representative was with the Robertson's and Him the whole time).
Now, if one man can share with another man his thoughts, beliefs, and the shooting of a crossbow, and the two of them come out the other side unscathed then it has been a good day. This does not seem to be the case according to many who stand in opposition of what Phil has said. Some of the things he believes are very difficult for some people to handle. But, on the other hand, if I found out that my lifestyle is considered sinful by someone else, I would probably have a hard time with it.
To those Christians who support Phil: I ask you, "How much more of a sin is homosexuality in your 'book' than slander?" If you read the very next verse that follows the "homosexuality is a sin" verse (1 Cor. 6:9-10) then you will see that revilers (or verbally abusive people/slanderers, as some translations say) are in the very same list of those who are not going to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Now what was it that you were going to say about A&E or the "gay rights" activists?
Here is where I think Phil supporters have gone wrong; they justify their own sin by degrading other "sinners". As long as the other one looks worse than themselves they are the lesser of two wrongs and therefore must be right. I say this to Christians because you cannot claim to hold biblical truths in abhorrence of one sin through committing another. That is why there are so many people who want nothing to do with Christians, the church or God, because we do such a poor job of portraying our beliefs through our dislike of others choices.
Now, sin is sin. Thats just the way it is. If you do not agree with that, I am sorry. But your lesser sin does not make someone else's sin worse. If you want to point out sin in other people's "eyes" take care to look at the sin in your own (Mathew 7:1-5).
It is not popular for a Christian to stand up for a "sinner" but Jesus did give us that example. He told the accusers of the woman caught in adultery to go ahead and stone her for her sins. The only condition he put on it was this, "He who is without sin cast the first stone" (John 8:7, paraphrased).
This is not to say that you cannot stand up for what you believe in if you have ever sinned. The people accusing the woman were right in saying that she had done wrong "according to the law". but their actions, according to Jesus, were just as bad or possibly worse than hers.
Stand up for what you believe in, sure. But not at the expense of compromising your stance with God. That is to say, if you can condemn others for sin, be prepared to defend your state of perfection. If you cannot, you will forever be labeled as a hypocrite and never be taken seriously again.
How about this, "If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men" (Romans 12:18 NKJV). In your support of Mr. Robertson are you striving to fulfill this command? Are you thinking about the repercussions of your comments on social media sites or blog responses? are you becoming agenda driven just as much or worse than those you are calling agenda driven? Are you reflecting the love Christ demonstrated through your words?
To those who support Phil but may not call yourself Christian: I have to ask you some similar questions. I will not use the Bible to support them, just simple logic. Do you want to change the mind of those you are railing against? Do you want them to see your side of the coin? If so, is this the best way to do it?
The use of logic in arguments goes way back to Socrates (and even further I am sure). Socrates (whose student was Plato, whose student was Aristotle, whose student was Alexander the Great, who conquered most of the known world) used the socratic method of dialogue to come to a conclusion. It would be illogical to think that the one who speaks the loudest and is heard by the most people is the one who is right. That is probably what you think of the liberal media who you are standing in opposition of. And so you respond in kind by shouting at your computer screen or TV when a new report about A&E comes up. Your loud voice is attempting to use the very thing you are arguing against as its support for your stance...how's that working for you?
Logically, your stance against something or someone ought to include dialogue. Do you know any gay people? Are you friends with them? Do you love them? If not then you have no place in this discussion. You only have a one-track mind that points out something about someone else that you view as a fault. That does not give you the platform (or soapbox for that matter) you need to change anyone's mind.
Get to know someone who is a homosexual and you will have a better place to have a discussion about their choices. Think of it this way, do you think bank robbery is wrong? If you do then would shouting "robbing a bank is wrong" change a robber's mind? Would he to decide that he ought not rob the bank? Logically, no, it would not change his mind. Now, if you knew a robber and knew their intentions and were able to talk to them about the issue, do you think you would have a better platform to have influence with them?
Now, don't get me wrong. I am not saying that you will be able to change someone's sexual orientation just by being their friend and entering into discussion with them. But simply from a logical standpoint, that definitely would be a better place for you to start. You will probably have a problem with this when you get to the point where you become vulnerable. Because when you are vulnerable you may change your mind. That is why we go into an argument hoping to catch someone in a vulnerable state.
That is the problem we all have to face. Are we willing to become vulnerable? Chances are pretty slim because we think we are right in what we believe (that's why we believe it I guess). But that is also why the one we are arguing against believes what they believe—they think they are right. This does not have to put us all at an impasse where two logics are forever interlocked or opposing like magnetic fields. If anything it puts us in a position of power. Power to make the choice to become vulnerable and enter a discussion with an open mind instead of screaming like a child trying to get their own way. (no Bible, just logic)
To those who are in opposition to Phil: I have to ask, "What if you stood up for your beliefs and were reprimanded by your employer?" I know that the right to free-speech has entitled many right-winged legalists, but how much has it empowered you? I know that you believe with all your heart that you are right. I know that you believe you have the right not to have to put up with hose who stand in opposition to what you believe. I also know that there are those who do believe in opposing ways to what you believe and they want to have the same rights to express it as you want to have.
So, again, is this just the battle that we will forever have to fight? Your rights infringe on my rights...no, your's infringe on mine...nah nah nah nah nah!! This sounds like something you would hear on a playground filled with six-year-olds. I had it first, its mine! No, I had it first, its mine!! The screaming match begins until either one party or the other loses out to the volume of the other, or a teacher steps in and settles the argument for both of them. "No," the teacher says, "its mine. Now go play on the slide!"
Herein lies the problem. We are in a "mine! mine!" shouting match and there are no teachers in sight. So how do we settle our argument? There is an adult way. Give-in. (this goes for everyone involved in this argument! Not just those opposing what Phil said!) Thats right Christians, right-wingers, gays, and homophobes alike. Give in! Would it be too much to ask for you to swallow your elevated pride and give in? Then you can go your way and find something else to play with and we all can be happy!
From a Christian perspective, this is not a betrayal of your belief system or a compromise of your faith and standards. It is the way that leads to peace. You will never get your way by rebelling and standing in opposition to something. Unless it is war you want and you intend to kill everyone who does not believe what you believe.
Jesus came into Jerusalem in what is known as the Triumphal entry and he wept over the city. Why did he weep? It was not because he knew that coming there would lead to his crucifixion. He said, "If you had known in this day, even you, the things which make for peace!" (Luke 19:42). He then he went on to predict the destruction of Jerusalem. He was saying that the Jewish people who were standing in opposition to the Romans who governed them were not going to get their way by rebelling. In fact, it would lead to their destruction. And he was right! In 70AD, according to historian Flavius Josephus (War of the Jews, Book VI), the Roman soldiers destroyed Jerusalem in response to the militant rebel Jews.
You see, I have never won an argument by voicing my opinion more boldly or louder than my opponent. I may have caused them to walk away shaking their head for a moment as I bask in my own glory that I created in my mind resulting as a "win". But I bet I did not change their mind. I bet I did not change their heart.
Yes, I am suggesting that we talk this out. Not yelling and screaming our agenda, but as humans discussing our hearts with one another. Interestingly enough, this is part of the article that has not made national news. Magary said: (censored)
"Whatever you think of Phil’s beliefs, it’s hard not to gaze upon his cultivations and wonder if you’ve gotten life all wrong. This is life as summer camp. It’s gorgeous, in a way that alters you on an elemental level. I feel it when I breathe the air. I feel it when I survey the enormity of the space around me. I shouldn’t be sitting around the house... [complaining] because the new iOS 7 touchscreen icons don’t have any drop shadow. I should be out here! Killing things and growing things and bringing dead things home to cook!"
What I am suggesting is that we get to know those who are on the opposite side of our beliefs. It's hard to spend time with someone, get to know them and begin caring for them to then turn around and oppose them so aggressively. You begin to see things from their perspective and you begin to have what is known as compassion for them. Compassion does not compromise, it offers life, healing and grace.
Now, this may or may not lead to changed minds. Christians may change their views on homosexuals. Gays may change their minds on Christians. And there will be some who will choose this as a hill to die on. But, we should watch out if we continue to bite and devour one another, we may be consumed by one another (Gal. 5:15). The only thing that will be changed is that we will go from standing for what we believe in to the point of our destruction.
If only we knew the things that lead to peace we would be have more ability to live at peace with all men.
No comments:
Post a Comment