Love (it is Valentine's Day after all)

I've been at Chi Rho Mid-Winter this weekend. It's basically a weekend mini-camp for 6th-8th graders. We had a cool experience during our worship this evening. We all had to say "I love ____" where we filled in the blank. I, being the good husband that I am (wink, wink), said "I love Tara." I then listened to all the kids and the adult sponsors share who they love. It was amazing to hear 70 some-odd people give their responses. That got me thinking about this: what should love look like?

We live in this world where love is not as prevalent as it should be. We live in a time where the (D)'s and the (R)'s are constantly bickering about one thing or another, but what they do affects us in ways that go far beyond partisan politics. I simply don't think they realize it. I'm not suggesting that everybody simply agree, but we should be agreeable in how we disagree rather than point fingers and act like a bunch of 4 year olds (I wonder if any member of Congress will actually read this ... doubt it). Don't get me wrong - I don't think that Washington should be in control of our lives, nor do I think they exercise as much control as many think they do. We are responsible for living our own lives the best we know how and to constantly strive to be better, to grow in Grace. For me that means striving to be the best husband, father, employee, and (most importantly) representative of Christ that I can possibly be - and trust God to fill in where I fail or where my ignorance gets in the way of being all I should be.

I almost gave a less than loving salute to another driver today - the only reason I didn't is that I realized that I was driving the church van and I might get caught and get in trouble with the missus. I didn't do what I was tempted to, but not out of love but out of fear of the consequences. How much to we do things (or don't do things) because it's expected of us? Or that we think we'll get in trouble if we get caught? We should be more motivated by love than by fear, hate, or obligation.

This probably looks like a bunch of rambling, and it's okay if it does. It's a quarter to midnight and sleep has been a precious commodity lately. I hope something in all this makes sense. The point is simply this: we should always choose love. What does that look like? There is no simple answer, but it always means that we should seek to consider others greater than ourselves.

Good night, and Happy Valentine's Day.

From the Wall Street Journal - 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

This is one of the best OpEd pieces I have ever read. It's amazing how fiction authors from the early to mid 20th century could paint word pictures that resemble today's reality.


Link: http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB123146363567166677-lMyQjAxMDI5MzAxOTQwNjkzWj.html

Text:

Some years ago when I worked at the libertarian Cato Institute, we used to label any new hire who had not yet read "Atlas Shrugged" a "virgin." Being conversant in Ayn Rand's classic novel about the economic carnage caused by big government run amok was practically a job requirement. If only "Atlas" were required reading for every member of Congress and political appointee in the Obama administration. I'm confident that we'd get out of the current financial mess a lot faster.

Many of us who know Rand's work have noticed that with each passing week, and with each successive bailout plan and economic-stimulus scheme out of Washington, our current politicians are committing the very acts of economic lunacy that "Atlas Shrugged" parodied in 1957, when this 1,000-page novel was first published and became an instant hit.

Rand, who had come to America from Soviet Russia with striking insights into totalitarianism and the destructiveness of socialism, was already a celebrity. The left, naturally, hated her. But as recently as 1991, a survey by the Library of Congress and the Book of the Month Club found that readers rated "Atlas" as the second-most influential book in their lives, behind only the Bible.

For the uninitiated, the moral of the story is simply this: Politicians invariably respond to crises -- that in most cases they themselves created -- by spawning new government programs, laws and regulations. These, in turn, generate more havoc and poverty, which inspires the politicians to create more programs . . . and the downward spiral repeats itself until the productive sectors of the economy collapse under the collective weight of taxes and other burdens imposed in the name of fairness, equality and do-goodism.

In the book, these relentless wealth redistributionists and their programs are disparaged as "the looters and their laws." Every new act of government futility and stupidity carries with it a benevolent-sounding title. These include the "Anti-Greed Act" to redistribute income (sounds like Charlie Rangel's promises soak-the-rich tax bill) and the "Equalization of Opportunity Act" to prevent people from starting more than one business (to give other people a chance). My personal favorite, the "Anti Dog-Eat-Dog Act," aims to restrict cut-throat competition between firms and thus slow the wave of business bankruptcies. Why didn't Hank Paulson think of that?

These acts and edicts sound farcical, yes, but no more so than the actual events in Washington, circa 2008. We already have been served up the $700 billion "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act" and the "Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act." Now that Barack Obama is in town, he will soon sign into law with great urgency the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan." This latest Hail Mary pass will increase the federal budget (which has already expanded by $1.5 trillion in eight years under George Bush) by an additional $1 trillion -- in roughly his first 100 days in office.

The current economic strategy is right out of "Atlas Shrugged": The more incompetent you are in business, the more handouts the politicians will bestow on you. That's the justification for the $2 trillion of subsidies doled out already to keep afloat distressed insurance companies, banks, Wall Street investment houses, and auto companies -- while standing next in line for their share of the booty are real-estate developers, the steel industry, chemical companies, airlines, ethanol producers, construction firms and even catfish farmers. With each successive bailout to "calm the markets," another trillion of national wealth is subsequently lost. Yet, as "Atlas" grimly foretold, we now treat the incompetent who wreck their companies as victims, while those resourceful business owners who manage to make a profit are portrayed as recipients of illegitimate "windfalls."

When Rand was writing in the 1950s, one of the pillars of American industrial might was the railroads. In her novel the railroad owner, Dagny Taggart, an enterprising industrialist, has a FedEx-like vision for expansion and first-rate service by rail. But she is continuously badgered, cajoled, taxed, ruled and regulated -- always in the public interest -- into bankruptcy. Sound far-fetched? On the day I sat down to write this ode to "Atlas," a Wall Street Journal headline blared: "Rail Shippers Ask Congress to Regulate Freight Prices."

In one chapter of the book, an entrepreneur invents a new miracle metal -- stronger but lighter than steel. The government immediately appropriates the invention in "the public good." The politicians demand that the metal inventor come to Washington and sign over ownership of his invention or lose everything.

The scene is eerily similar to an event late last year when six bank presidents were summoned by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson to Washington, and then shuttled into a conference room and told, in effect, that they could not leave until they collectively signed a document handing over percentages of their future profits to the government. The Treasury folks insisted that this shakedown, too, was all in "the public interest."

Ultimately, "Atlas Shrugged" is a celebration of the entrepreneur, the risk taker and the cultivator of wealth through human intellect. Critics dismissed the novel as simple-minded, and even some of Rand's political admirers complained that she lacked compassion. Yet one pertinent warning resounds throughout the book: When profits and wealth and creativity are denigrated in society, they start to disappear -- leaving everyone the poorer.

One memorable moment in "Atlas" occurs near the very end, when the economy has been rendered comatose by all the great economic minds in Washington. Finally, and out of desperation, the politicians come to the heroic businessman John Galt (who has resisted their assault on capitalism) and beg him to help them get the economy back on track. The discussion sounds much like what would happen today:

Galt: "You want me to be Economic Dictator?"

Mr. Thompson: "Yes!"

"And you'll obey any order I give?"

"Implicitly!"

"Then start by abolishing all income taxes."

"Oh no!" screamed Mr. Thompson, leaping to his feet. "We couldn't do that . . . How would we pay government employees?"

"Fire your government employees."

"Oh, no!"

Abolishing the income tax. Now that really would be a genuine economic stimulus. But Mr. Obama and the Democrats in Washington want to do the opposite: to raise the income tax "for purposes of fairness" as Barack Obama puts it.

David Kelley, the president of the Atlas Society, which is dedicated to promoting Rand's ideas, explains that "the older the book gets, the more timely its message." He tells me that there are plans to make "Atlas Shrugged" into a major motion picture -- it is the only classic novel of recent decades that was never made into a movie. "We don't need to make a movie out of the book," Mr. Kelley jokes. "We are living it right now."

Mr. Moore is senior economics writer for The Wall Street Journal editorial page.

Cheap Grace by Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Let the Christian rest content with his worldliness and with this renunciation of any higher standard than the world. He is living for the sake of the world rather than for the sake of grace. Let him be comforted and rest assured in his possession of this grace - for grace alone does everything. Instead of following Christ, let the Christian enjoy the consolations of his grace!

That is what we mean by cheap grace, the grace which amounts to the justification of sin without the justification of the repentant sinner who departs from sin and from whom sins departs.

Cheap grace is not the kind of forgiveness of sin which frees us from the toils of sin. Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves. Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without personal confession.

Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.

Costly grace is the treasure hidden in the field; for the sake of it a man will gladly go and sell all that he has. It is the pearl of great price to buy which the merchant will sell all his goods. It is the kingly rule of Christ, for whose sake a man will pluck out the eye which causes him to stumble, it is the call of Jesus Christ at which the disciple leaves his nets and follows him.

Costly grace is the gospel which must be sought again and again, the gift which must the asked for, the door at which a man must knock.

Such grace is costly because it calls us to follow, and it is grace because it calls us to follow Jesus Christ. It is costly because it costs a man his life, and it is grace because it gives a man the only true life. It is costly because it condemns sin, and grace because it justifies the sinner. Above all, it is costly because it cost God the life of his Son: “ye were bought at a price, and what has cost God much cannot be cheap for us. Above all, it is grace because God did not reckon his Son too dear a price to pay for our life, but delivered him up for us.

Costly grace is the Incarnation of God.

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

An American Creed (the number one reason I cannot vote for Barack Obama)

I Do Not Choose to Be a Common Man

It is my right to be uncommon—if I can.

I seek opportunity—not security. I do not wish to be a kept citizen, humbled and dulled by having the state look after me.

I want to take the calculated risk; to dream and to build, to fail and to succeed.

I refuse to barter incentive for a dole. I prefer the challenges of life to the guaranteed existence; the thrill of fulfillment to the stale calm of utopia.

I will not trade freedom for beneficence nor my dignity for a handout. I will never cower before any master nor bend to any threat.

It is my heritage to stand erect, proud and unafraid; to think and act for myself, enjoy the benefit of my creations and to face the world boldly and say, "This I have done."

By Dean Alfange
—————
Originally published in This Week Magazine.
Later reprinted in The Reader's Digest, October 1952 and January 1954.

Another dose of common sense from Dave Ramsey (Now that the bailout is law...)

Text of article:

YOU fix you!
Question: Dave talks about something that he finds very disturbing. It has to do with people's attitudes toward Washington, and what they think will come out of there.

Dave Ramsey's advice: By and large, 70% to 90% of you wanted something to be done to calm the economy, but you didn't want $700 billion in new debt to bail out Wall Street. The stock market has had record declines since then. What's going on?

You need to remember that you need to take control of your life. It's disturbing that people in government totally disregard what the people tell them to do. It's disturbing that the market goes down and the media panics about this. It's disturbing that greedy banks made loans to people who couldn't afford to repay, and people signed up for the trip when they couldn't afford it. It's disturbing that Washington ignores its constituents and takes huge strides toward socialism.

All of these things are disturbing, but none will cause this great nation to cease to function. They are not the beginning of the end. But the most disturbing thing is some people's reactions. Don't react based on fear or panic. Another negative reaction is that you are looking to Washington to fix your problems. They have never fixed your problems, and you want Obama or McCain to fix things. There has never been a president who can fix your problems. They always say they can and they never can.

YOU are in charge of your destiny. YOU are in charge of your life. When you look to Washington to solve your problems, we've got the seeds to destroy this country. It's time for you to change your life. It's not Washington's job to fix what's going on with you. If you are waiting on Washington to change something, you've got a very long wait! It is YOUR job to take care of you. Don't sit around and watch TV and panic and think you can't do anything. I've made and lost money, and every bit of that had to do with me being smart and diligent or stupid.

Quit blaming Congress or looking to them to fix you. YOU have to fix you! When you wait on the government to fix your life and wait for money to be taken from others and given to you, that's a spirit of envy. The only system that works is capitalism functioning under moral restraint. Go be somebody!

Man, I love me some Dave Ramsey!

Ticking Time Bomb Explodes, Public Is Shocked

Ticking Time Bomb Explodes, Public Is Shocked

Posted using ShareThis

09/11/2001 ... Seven years later

Maybe it's because of what happened in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. Maybe it's because my birthday is September 11. Maybe it's because I am too sensitive to the presence of evil in the world. I'm not sure what it is or if it's a combination of these things, but 9/11 really hit me hard. Each year I am flooded with emotion on this day. I believe it is important to write this, not as much to present my thoughts and feelings, but more to release them from within me.

The Murrah bombing is a pivot point in Oklahoma's history. I've seen how the community has reacted after the Murrah bombing and how, thirteen and a half years later, there are still scars, pain, and loss. I was a student at a small college located about an hour's drive west of the bombing site. I am not going to say that I know what is was like to lose family or friends because of that bombing, so I'm not going to suggest that anyone should act one way or another. Our pastor's mother was killed in the Murrah bombing. I've seen how April 19th affects him. I have no idea how I would react or feel if my mother, father, wife, son, or friend was killed in such a way, and I hope I never have to find out.

While there are still scars, pain, and loss, there is also hope, healing, and redemption. The bombing site hosts a memorial now. There is a marathon held every year to remember and to celebrate the lives of those killed that April morning. There is a museum dedicated to the events of that day and a terrorism education center. There is an annual remembrance that garners appropriate public and media attention, including video footage from that horrific event. All these pieces were in place by April 19, 2002 (seven years after the bombing). While painful for some, these events and places bring healing, education, closure, and peace for those who survived that attack, for those who lost loved ones, and those who simply want to remember how fragile and precious life, liberty, and security are.

What happened seven years ago on this day should have been a pivot point in our national history. Unfortunately it has not been emblazoned on our national conscience as it should have been. It was a tragic event, one that many don't want to relive. My heart breaks for those who lost loved ones at the World Trade Center, at The Pentagon, and on the planes that day.

Unfortunately many have failed to recognize the impact of that day, either because they were too young, too uninformed, or too hurt on a personal level to fully appreciate what happened. The events of that day should be as significant to our national history as the Gettysburg Address, the attack on Pearl Harbor, or the assassination of JFK. Unfortunately it is viewed by some about as significant as the Taft administration (I use that as an example since the only thing I remember from his administration is that they had to install a new bathtub because of his size). We should have national remembrances every year. We should be able to see footage from that day so that we can have a clearer vision of the world in which we live.

Some view any sort of remembrance as political pandering. I have no interest in leveling accusations against people for how they react to the events of 09/11/2001 or any mention of those events. I am disgusted that many claim that the events of that day are being politicized. This was not a Republican Party event. This was not a Democratic Party event. This was not a Green Party, Libertarian Party, Constitution Party, or Independent event. A commentator delivered what would best be described as an editorial during coverage of the Republican convention, claiming that a video tribute to the events of that day was offensive and that if the Democrats had a similar tribute at their convention that the Republicans would cry foul. I fail to understand that in either a political sense or a human sense.

As I previously stated, this was not a political event but a historical one. We should remember it. We should have the opportunity to view footage and to recall those events. I can remember the parking space in the parking garage I had just pulled into when I first heard about the first plane crash. I don't know anyone over the age of 18 that does not remember where they were and what they were doing when the first heard the news. I realize that can be very painful for those who lost loved ones that day, but I also believe that burying the horror of that day in a video vault devalues the worth of those who lost their lives that day. Those who don't want to relive the events of that day have plenty of options other than watching the television or listening to the radio during tributes. Unfortunately those of us who want to view tributes and remember what happened have few options on this day.

I mentioned earlier that seven years after the Murrah bombing that a memorial and museum had been constructed. Seven years after 09/11/2001, The Pentagon has been repaired and a memorial has been constructed in rural Pennsylvania. Unfortunately the most prominent symbol of that tragic day has not been repaired or replaced with a memorial ... there is simply a crater where the Twin Towers once stood.

I still have questions about that day and our reaction to it. I remember in the days following 09/11/2001 that we promised ourselves that we would never forget, but have we? Why is New York City still marked by a crater rather than a memorial? Why are remembrances viewed as political? Why don't we have more remembrances?

Country singer Darryl Worley recorded a song a few years back entitled "Have You Forgotten?" I am including a link to a site with the lyrics for that song. I encourage everyone who reads this to also read the lyrics of that song. Here's the address: http://www.countrygoldusa.com/have_you_forgotten.asp

May we never forget.