Brant Hansen's blog on faith, life, and much more

The Krusty Sage: Your Kids Don't Need Your Stupid Success Track

Brant — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:55:00 -0700

(This guy keeps posting to my blog. He's WAY krusty, and I, for one, am continually offended by him. Who SAYS this stuff? I admit I'm envious of his awesome beard and also that awesome chair. But still.)

Your kids don't need your stupid success track.

Quit signing them up for a bunch of garbage and racing them around everywhere, and then griping about how you "just don't have any time anymore to eat dinner together", blah blah blah.

You had time. You gave it away, because you're afraid.

Don't send them to schools that brag about their academic "rigor" (ie, "We'll load them down with homework so you'll think we're rigorous"), let them sign up for multiple sports and extra-curriculars and then complain about how hard it is to be a kid these days.

It's possible -- just possible -- that's it's not so hard to be "a" kid these days as it is your kid.

Gasp! But what if they don't get into a good college? What if we don't sign them up for myriad art lessons and soccer-specific-weight-training programs in the offseason and dance classes and computer camps and calculus tutorials and the traveling baseball team? How will we develop their skill areas?

You're not here to develop skill areas, pops. You're here to develop character.

You can't develop character if you're crazy-busy developing stupid skill areas.

But how will the kids' survive in the global marketplace? And --

Right. You honestly think they're not going to "make it" somehow if you don't hustle them around like the world's going to blow up in ten minutes? You honestly think it's your job to impart career-training at all costs? Where -- honestly, where -- did you get this idea?

You think your kid will starve to death if you don't send him to a high-tech school with state-of-the-art laptops? (Ooh, laptops! Quality education!) Like it's really hard to learn to double-click? How did I figure it out?

You're not here to develop skills. You are here to develop character. That means spending lots and lots of time with you kid. You. Not some hired expert. You.

But my kid WANTS to do all this stuff, she loves her lessons and band and her sports and the homework and her job and --

Yeah, and when she was a baby, you let her diet consist entirely of Smarties, because she liked them, right? Kids -- even teenagers -- are not often rich in wisdom. Maybe you noticed. Maybe this is why you are still rightly called the "parent". They just might need you to draw an actual line, and model a life unmotivated by fear of fitting into corporate America, uncluttered by do-it-all-ism, and all about people.

But you don't understand. It's today's society, and all kids just have these demands and there's no way around it, and it's just our culture these days, and --

And if our culture jumped off the Empire State Building...

You know, you COULD be counter-cultural. You could help them avoid a crippling performance-perfectionism when they get older. They might even choose lifestyles that eschew materialism for relationships. Maybe they could value people over achievements.

Who knows? Maybe you still could, too.

If Jesus Had a Blog: Go and Sin No More!

Brant — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 19:31:00 -0700

What up!

Haven't blogged for awhile because Matthew ditched his Mac and got an iPad, which he says is great, but I can barely type on the thing. (So NOT a replacement for a laptop.) I'm a carpenter. I build stuff. I'm not a super-typist.

Anyway: MAN, this planet is off-kilter. Seriously.

For example, these religious leaders today. They decided to stone a woman to death, because they caught her in adultery. (Where's the guy she was with? Don't ask. Double-standard.)

Anyway, they're all the "good", Bible-reading, law-keeping sort, and take "stands" against sin - other people's, anyway. So I pointed out that they could go ahead and do that, provided none of them have sinned.

That ticked them off (surprise!) and they left.

And I told the lady that I didn't condemn her, and to go and sin no more.

This made her VERY happy.

Posted today at 4:32 p.m.

------------------

COMMENTS

Well, Jesus, I'm sure your well intended, but once again, your not really teaching her a lesson. She DID sin, and sin is serious. Those were some of our top Bible teachers there today, and you certainly came off like you think its OK to do adultery.

Again, I know you're well intended, but you can't let people think its OK to sin.

-- lizlovesjesus21

Ya, I agree with Liz up there. It's one thing to be for "grace", because we ALL are for that, of course, but its another thing to just let her walk away after what she did. You probably had some kids watching, too, who now think God is just fine with sexual immorality.

Grace is great, BUT... we can't be all "grace, grace, grace..."

-- randy_g

Jesus, you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater, again. There's a whole movement of people like you who are just trying to be "cool", and aren't taking a stand against adultery. I'm sure it earns you friends, but at what cost? You can take the grace thing TOO FAR.

-- christie

I've been reading your blog for awhile, Jesus, and I'm afraid I'm going to have to switch blogs.

I know you're God and so forth, and I go to church multiple times a week to be on your good side, along with my kids. But they read this blog, too, and they are going to get the idea that, when they grow up, it's okay to have adulterous sex. That's not something I want them to be doing.

I like the stuff you said about how we need to be a GOOD person. Maybe stick to that. I'm switching to a blog that's safer for my family.

-- concerned mom

Well, I like the "sin no more" part, but in our culture, so many people just ignore that.

-- Bill

Wait: Are you guys serious?

You honestly think this woman's life wasn't totally changed by this? You honestly think the law changes people, deep-down?

You'd seriously RATHER they kept their law and killed her?

You guys genuinely don't think you're just as guilty as she is?

You think if people are afraid of the law, their hearts will be right with God, and they'll stop sinning?

UH... obvious question here, but... have YOU?

You actually say, "Grace, BUT..."? Like you really, truly WANT a "but" when it comes to the grace God is showing YOU?

REALLY?

You're worried about the example for everyone ELSE, when you, yourselves have sinful hearts, and you're fully aware of the law?

You WANT to be under the law?

You'd RATHER have big-shot religious leaders pretend they've got their moral acts together, so your kids learn to be THAT way?

You think, "I don't condemn you, go and sin no more," doesn't take sin seriously enough? Do you think what Jesus does on the cross takes sin "seriously enough" to cover this woman's sin?

Or, let's be honest here, you'd actually rather it didn't. That way you can keep your, "Grace, BUT..."

You know what? It's sad, really. Apparently, you haven't experienced grace at all, like this woman just did, or you'd never have this reaction.

-- Paul of Tarsus

Yeah, Jesus, I'm with most of the people here. Grace is great and all, but you can over-do it.

I *know* you've got a good heart, and love how you've healed some people, etc.

But just telling someone to "sin no more" after taking away the consequences isn't going to work.

She'll just go do it again, since now she doesn't have to worry about the consequences because you got involved.

-- Ed H.

Yeah, I'm confused, Jesus. I thought you came to teach us how to stop sinning. If that was your point, then why would you do this?

I mean, if you're whole point is "Stop sinning NOW!" it doesn't make any sense that you would do something like this.

-- Ashlie23asdfasdf

HEY THERE I TOTALLY WORK FROM HOME AND MAKE $36 AN HOUR AND YOU CAN TOO!!!! I NEVER THOUGHT IT WOULD HAPPEN TO ME JUST CLICK ON THIS LINK AND START MAKING DREAMS COME TRUE WWW.WORKFROMHOMEMAKEMONEY.ORG/BIGBUCKS

-- iworkfromhome

Well, Jesus, I happen to know several of the men you TRIED to embarrass today. And they are EXCELLENT men of God. So for you to side with a KNOWN adulteress, in front of everyone, when THEY were just doing what God's law calls for, well, that's terrible.

I can see why they are really made at you. And you claim to be a Christian!

-- Upset

jesus i am so glad u rescued me, to.

-- horsegurl9

On the Chair Next to You

Brant — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 21:09:00 -0700

Each Sunday morning, Kumar sits on a folding chair, waiting for the rock band to start up, and the preacher to give a seeker-sensitve sermon. The chairs are partly filled, in a school gymnasium, just outside Washington, D.C.

He's a small man, from Chennai, India, and here, in the rows for the audience, he's part of someone's Big Vision. Like many others, the church start-up has a visionary, who hopes it becomes the next Big Thing, even hoping to buy 40 acres in suburban D.C. (Anyone got a half-bil for that?)

And Kumar, who's 36, drives each day to his office job at Sun Microsystems, where he spends a lot of time checking urgent email from very far away.

Friday night, I walked with Kumar, and our mutual friend, Woody, to a crowded Whole Foods Market in Alexandria. I made a salad about four times bigger than his, but when we got back to the hotel room, it took him a couple hours to finish. I kept asking questions. He kept answering.

-------------

Kumar was on a crowded bus in Chennai, India. He heard God's voice. "Unmistakeably," he says. I heard God say, twice, 'Seek Me.' That was it. Twice."

Just "Seek Me"?

"Just 'Seek Me'. And I knew it was God, but which God? I was Hindu. Was it Vishnu? Calli...? No idea. I just knew it was God. Somehow, I knew it. Unmistakeable."

And Kumar isn't the gullible type. He has multiple advanced degrees in Aero Engineering and Physics, for starters, from the M.I.T.-equivalent in India.

He studied and researched, but just wasn't satisfied that it was one of his familiar gods, and eventually found a friend with a Bible -- a "good luck charm" -- and traded a textbook for it. He started reading, got confused, but eventually was pointed to Jesus.

He became a Jesus-follower.

Costly decision.

-------------

His parents weren't happy. They scheduled an arranged marriage. Kumar met his wife-to-be on Friday, told her and his parents on Saturday about his Jesus decision, and got married on Sunday. "They thought it would blow over," he says. It didn't.

Six months later, there was an intervention. Her family, his family, neighbors, friends -- 150 people strong -- all telling him to repudiate his faith. He refused.

His parents, fearing for their reputation, said he should leave the area immediately. They would tell everyone that he was dead.

-------------

Kumar took a job in the states. He drove to a big church building. "I didn't know what else to do," he says. "Nice cars everywhere. I liked that."

He walked in, and was taken aback. "It was a fancy church, and everyone was a black person, and they were quite animated. They were walking on their chairs around the room. I was confused, but they were happy.

"They had a testimony time, and I like microphones, so I got up and told them, 'I am so happy about Jesus! I do not want a Mercedes or a BMW! I want to go back to India to tell people about Jesus!' Everyone applauded me! I was the center of attention! But I had just lied! I did not want to go back. Actually, I did want to be rich. I did want a Mercedes."

But some brothers took him to a room and prayed with him, that his return to India would happen. "I did not want to go back to India..."

-------------

A few years later, he went back to India. Kumar took his vacation from Sun, and headed over... with no plan. He just went door-to-door, and told people about Jesus.

The first day, 45 people decided to become Jesus-followers. How'd THAT happen?

"I don't know. I just went door to door, and neighbors would introduce me to others, and I was amazed."

-------------

Kumar still takes his vacations, two weeks a year, and heads to India. But things have grown. From those first 45, and from his trips over the past seven years...

More than 100,000 conversions. 139 communities. More than 100 pastors. Model orphanages for children suffering from AIDS Schools for Dalit children, the lowest-of-the-low in India. Shelters for little girls, now rescued from prostitution. Food. Medicine. Jesus.

They want to name projects after Kumar. He does not allow them. He spends hours every day, after work, praying and communicating and wondering what the next move is. He doesn't raise financial support. Not his style.

"God always provides. Children are dying in a project, because all we have is rice for them, and not much. Woody gave us some money for a down-payment on four acres with hundreds of coconut trees, and then several families who know us each called me, unaware of what we were doing. 'God woke us up last night, and we can't get you off our mind. Here's five thousand dollars...here's a thousand dollars...we got the forty-thousand we needed to buy the land. I am always amazed."

-------------

"Kumar...I don't get it. We made a quantum leap in your story. 45 people decide to follow Jesus, and now more than 100 thousand. Wha...? How...?"

We sit at our table in our hotel room, and Kumar starts laughing. I laugh, too! -- and then, I realize, he's not laughing. He's crying, and he can't speak.

"So many have died..."

Who has died?

"So many of our pastors, so many of our people..."

I look at Woody, who knows the stories, and he bites his lip and nods.

"They are beaten to death, they are killed, because they are talking about Jesus. It happens all the time in India, but the country is very concerned about image, very concerned about foreign investment, they pretend it doesn't happen.

"They are the reason this growth has happened. Their blood. I ask God, 'Why do you let this happen to these people who love you?' They have nothing. Our pastors are not paid. There is no money. But I realized, God is releasing them, at last. They have nothing, they are beaten, they are hungry, they live on the ground, in the streets, and God finally releases them to go home."

Pause. And I can't talk, either.

-------------

Woody, who met Kumar at that seeker-sensitive church in suburban D.C., says I should let Kumar eat his salad. He's right. It's getting late.

-----------

If you're reading this on a weekday, Kumar is sitting in a little room at Sun and doing his job, and answering far-flung emails while he prays. And on Sundays, he sits on a folding chair in a high school gym, and hears about the church's big plans. It will be costly, but just think what could happen, with a new building!

He admits he wonders sometimes...

"They have now added us to their missions budget. They give $1,000 per year. I guess I am happy for that, but..." and his voice trails.

But...the church has other priorities, and a Big Vision for another affluent suburb that, need we remind, needs Jesus, too.

The Krusty Sage, on Sheltering Your Kids

Brant — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:49:00 -0700

(From Brant: This guy sure is cranky. But occasionally, he takes over my blog, and says some stuff, and I can't stop him. I just want you to know that I am thoroughly offended by his tone, and am already drafting a strongly worded letter to me about it. I'm more offended than you, even.)

"Should you shelter your kids?"

Yes.

Duh.

The Krusty Sage and the Mrs. Krusty Sage have homeschooled their kids. (Mostly Mrs. Krusty Sage, to be straight-up honest, yo.) Now, the K.S. does NOT care whether you homeschool or not. Don't want to? Can't? Whatev, man. Your kids, your situation, your call.

But please spare the Sage your concern that he "shelters" his kids. Why yes, we do, and have. Thanks. Glad you're concerned. By the way: If you don't "shelter" your kids, you're a traitor.

Remember the Sam Kinison sketch on SNL? He's a kindergarten teacher, and a shiny, happy mom and dad walk in for their first Parent-Teacher conference. He tells them their daughter is seriously whack. They can't believe it. How? Why?

He shows them a picture she drew, with a happy little house, and a smiley-faced sun in the sky. "See this?! This is insane!" They don't get it. So he walks them over to the class window.

"Look at the sun up there. Can you see it? Let me ask you a question: IS THERE A SMILEY FACE ON THE SUN?"

He then launches into a tirade about sheltered kindergarteners, unaware of the gritty real world. "That's why I've chosen THIS text," he says, slamming down a thick tome. "It's about the REAL WORLD! VIETNAM! Lying in a trench in the mud, watching your friend get his head blown off!"

Yeah, man, Vietnam. The real world, man. Get those kids exposed, now. As if there's not a season for everything, as if childhood isn't fit for children, as if "sheltering" weren't one of the things you are precisely charged with doing as a parent.

If you don't shelter your kids, you're a traitor. Maybe I mentioned that. "Shelter", "protect" -- what's the dif, dad?

Maybe it matters what you show them on TV. Maybe it matters that a six year-old may not be ready to watch the new Batman movie, or that your 13 year-old son is seriously wondering why you're not creeped out by watching a sex scene on TV along with him in the room. Maybe your daughter actually does absorb foolishness from Seventeen and MTV, and maybe that matters.

("But I watched some sex scenes when I was a kid and some inappropriate shows and I turned out okay, and --" Really? You're "okay", huh? You sure? The K.S. wouldn't even say he's "okay". But you are? Neat.)

Maybe allowing your 14 year-old a computer in his room isn't really helping him learn the "real world", but about fake women, and he's in there sabotaging his future marriage, and you're letting it happen because you're a) breathtakingly naive, or b) you're not man enough to "shelter".

It's your job to shelter, pops. And if you think the mindless entertainment/consumption lifestyle is somehow "the real world", the K.S. is going to get out of his big, awesome, wooden chair and hit you with it.

The K.S. has a friend who was seriously concerned about how the Sage family hadn't let his kids watch "Superbad". Sadly, the same friend later said his dad had shown him porno mags when he was seven. No sheltering there. I feel for him.

Another friend once worked at a pre-school with both Amish and non-Amish children. They occasionally showed Disney videos to the kids, but the friend got a warning: "Be careful and make sure you watch the Amish kids closely. They aren't used to movies, so they can take things too seriously and get emotional." Weird, huh?

-- except it's not the Amish kids who were weird. They lived in a real world. A different one, sure. A "sheltered" one, sure. But far, far more real than Ariel and Belle. They aren't the odd ones. They're children. Childhood has it's own seasons, its own rhythm, its own implicit modesties, and, if allowed, its own sweet, and more real, charms.

So here's an idea: DO show your kids the real world -- in time, in season, and informed by wisdom. Help them to understand, from the outset, that some things aren't appropriate for them yet, but will be in time. Take them out of the country to the third world. Give them lots of great (usually not modern) books. Gradually give them more and more latitude as they demonstrate their own wisdom, with the goal of producing a well-formed, free-thinking, independent adult by their very late teens. (By the way, we steered our oldest to the largely non-sheltering environment of his new context of UC-Berkeley.)

Here's the downside: In order to do this, properly, you'll actually have to know them -- really know them. May mean giving up your awesome car or house and getting a different job. Sorry. Also means you can't watch a bunch of garbage on TV yourself. Sorry.

That's one problem with helping people grow up: You have to be a grown-up.

Parental Warning: This Blog Contains Actual Bible Stuff

Brant — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 12:52:00 -0700

So is the Bible "family-friendly"?

I asked the guy from "Focus on the Family" that question. A great guy. Totally appreciate what they do at "Plugged In Online", where they review the content of movies and such, since I've always been strict with what my kids see and hear. But his answer was wrong.

"Yes."

You guys rate things on a family-friendly level according to "stars". Given the content of the Bible, how many "stars" would you give it?

A pause. "Five."

Really? So, if there was a movie, realistically showing the actual stories in the Bible, you'd say it was appropriate for all viewers?

"Yes."

Man, I wouldn't take little kids to see Lot fathering his daughter's children. Maybe I'm more media-conservative than Focus on the Family...?

----

I know he gave the political answer, and the one he had to give. (Imagine Focus on the Family getting complaints, "The Bible's not 'Family-Friendly'???") But with due respect: You gotta be kidding me.

"Well," you might say, "it's family-friendly, because I read the Bible with my little ones every night…"

Well, you read SOME of the Bible. Parts of it. Why? Because you're a smart parent, and don't really want to be explaining what "like the emissions of horses" is all about, right before lights-out. That's Ezekiel 23, and that's for starters. Nevermind Lot getting his own daughters pregnant, or Samson taking advantage of prostitutes or Noah getting naked and trashed, or Song of Solomon's well-known lusty stuff. Kids have a sense of modesty, and wise parents protect that.

Here's another reason it's obvious: The Bible isn't family-friendly, because there's plenty of content that I couldn't share on the air without a disclaimer. Or at all. I can read direct quotes from Jesus, on a Christian station, and send people to their computers for emails of complaint. "My kids were in the car, so I don't appreciate you talking about how prostitutes will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven before the religious leaders."

Other people notice the decidedly unclean, non-family-friendliness of the Bible. Many Muslim leaders criticize it for being full of "abhorrent tales of sexual escapades as done by the Bible's 'holiest' men." And, indeed, these stories ARE abhorrent, they ARE horrible, they ARE scandalous in the worst way if...

IF...God's ultimate, highest call on our lives is for us to be "family-friendly."

But it's not. Not even close.

-------

"Well, okay, but but the Bible IS family-friendly, because it shows us the best way to put our families first, and..."

Actually it doesn't do that, either. The Bible doesn't buttress the primacy of the family. It threatens it.

For those who want to idolize the importance of the nuclear family, Jesus, himself, is a threat. He turned the entire idea of family on its head.

He says his kingdom matters more than your family, and my family, in Matthew 19. He does it again, in explicit terms, in Luke 14.

He says the poor, the imprisoned, the sick are his brothers and sisters in Matthew 25.

Shockingly, in Matthew 12, he compares his - what we would call - "real" mother and brothers with the people who were following him. And he said the LATTER group, anyone who "does the will of my Father" is his real brother, and sister, and mother. He redefines family, itself.

"Yes, but that was a different time, and family is much more important now, in these troubled times."

I've thought that before, too, but... it's exactly wrong. Family was your very IDENTITY at that time. Your past, present, and future, all in one. It was ALL about family. And Jesus, God among us, redefined it. And no, it didn't go over well then, either.

For the believer, the Jesus-follower, "family" is redefined, and the centrality of our nuclear, physical family, is threatened. Like the old western, Jesus walks into town, confronts our worship of other things, even good things, like our families, and says, "There ain't room in town for the two of us."

-----

I thought about ending the blog, here. But then I anticipated the responses, attempts to take the shocking reality of Jesus, and simply make it fit what we're already doing. "Well, thanks, Brant! This is all true, of course, etc., but it doesn't mean we shouldn't care about our families, and…"

Yes, yes, of course. But don't use that as a means of escaping what Jesus is saying, here: If you are a believer, you are part of the body of Christ, and that means integrating your life, with others, in a way that recognizes this new conception of family.

It does not mean retrofitting the radical teachings of Jesus to keep doing the same thing. And that's good news, because the way of Jesus is BETTER, even if it doesn't fit our idea of what a "good Christian" looks like.

Imagine: Your money. Your time. Your home. Your everything, woven with the lives of others. Less isolation, less stressful relationships in the home, more healthy marriages, and true families for the lonely, the orphan, the widow, the divorcee, the single, or the misfit. Jesus has a plan, and it's a good one. Don't short-circuit it by defending your status quo. (Frankly, as America becomes more post-Christian, we may find ourselves, by necessity, rediscovering just how great this family, his Real Family, is!)

No, by our definition of "family friendly", the Bible doesn't cut it. Once again, Jesus takes our little categories and leaves them in tatters.

And once again, he threatens us, because he loves us too much to let us stay the same.

Email: Why Do I Feel Far Away from God?

Brant — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:29:00 -0700

Hey Brant,

So I have been feeling really far away from God reasently. I've tried praying and reading my Bible but nothing is changing. Do you have any advise?

Thanks,

Maddie

-----

Hey Maddie!

A couple thoughts about this:

I have felt like this before. MANY times, and sometimes... for years.

I've thought, "Maybe I'm sinning so much, and maybe that's the problem." And I had people even questioning whether I was really a Christian at all. But I don’t think that was it. I was honestly calling out to God for forgiveness, honestly calling out to him for some kind of sign, or reassurance that he was the there – all that.

And you know what? I'm a stronger believer now.

Turns out, the "feelings" element of our relationship is a wonderful thing, but FAITH is not founded on that. If we're dependent on it, we begin to mistake feelings for reality. We are called to actually TRUST God.

You can hear the words "trust God" or "trust Jesus", and they start to lose their meaning after awhile. But now, now that you have no warm, God-is-here feelings, you really DO have to trust him, and what he has promised you. "I am with you, always," Jesus said.

Always. He's with you, whether you feel it or not.

I even think, now, that the loss of that God-is-close feeling helped me understand him more, and my faith is more mature.

Some of my "heroes", the people I admire for their faith, have gone through the same thing, sometimes for decades.

This is not a reason to despair. It IS a reason to re-think what a relationship with God might look like. Remember, God blesses us in many ways, not just feelings. And – this is REALLY important – God wants us to want him for HIMSELF, not for the stuff he gives us.

As a father, I "get" this. I want my kids to love ME, their loving dad, and not just for the fact that I give them stuff like, say, food, a phone, college, or even warm, protected feelings. I want them to love me not for what they get, but because they freely can love someone besides themselves.

And THAT, of course, is real love. If they love ME, I'm thrilled. In our relationship with God, valuing his GIFTS higher than God, himself, is actually idolatry. He's a jealous lover. And he's good. He knows the "stuff", even feelings, aren't, ultimately, what we need. What we need is him.

So be honest with him, call out to him, even be open about your anger or frustration. But TRUST him, and know that he may be taking you to a place you haven't been before.

One last thing. Someone gave me a brief example on this: If I'm in a large room with you, and I'm yelling our conversation, you can hear me just fine. But if I whisper, just barely whisper, you can only hear me…

...if you come closer.

I think there's something to that. And I think there's something maturing about just KNOWING God is good, being reminded by other believers that he is good, and serving people, even without the feelings.

Okay, one REALLY last thing. I mean it this time, since I have a meeting to go to: Our feelings are just plain untrustworthy, anyway.

They're dependent on so many things that have NOTHING to do with the subject of our feelings. Like, am I sleeping enough? Have I eaten well today? Am I hydrated? Have I had too much (or not enough!) coffee? Am I exercising? What's happening to me, physically, right now? Am I tired? Have other things happened that have been really stressful, like a break-up, or a move, or a death in the family, or even something good, but big and stress-inducing, like a recent trip? Many reasons to be suspicious of our feelings.

So many factors. Everything changes.

He does not.

God bless you, Maddie!

Best,

Brant

Marriage is Body and Soul

Brant — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:08:00 -0700

I've edited this email. Changed the name, some of the circumstances, etc. I showed my response to Sherri, our producer, and she thought a lot of people might want to read it, because so many deal with this sort of thing.

I don't claim to have "all the answers", ever. I do know that God loves "Vanessa", and her boyfriend, more than I can put into words.

----

Hi Brant,

Four years ago, I met a man who was a Christian, and we started dating. Eventually we became intimate, and I've felt horrible about this, and my relationship with God has almost come to a total standstill.

I am feeling extremely convicted and even fearful of what God will do because of our disobedience. When I bring it up he gets angry and says that why do I choose to obey this and why not everything else the Lord says?

He gets my mind going and makes me think that maybe I'm wrong to think that shouldn't be a part of our relationship especially since we have already had that be a part of our relationship. He says we're going to get married anyway, so there's nothing wrong with it. I'm confused what the Bible says about this, based on what he's telling me.

Please help me. I'm tormented because I feel like I'm putting my boyfriend before God and I don't want to go to Hell for this. But if I don't give in I feel like maybe I'm being foolish to try and change things now.

Thank you for reading this!

Vanessa

-----

Hey Vanessa,

THANK YOU for your honesty. I'm not sure if I'll provide the best guidance, but I will be as honest as I can be, while I'm typing hurriedly!

There are no sins worse than others. They're all tragic, and represent rebellion against the only true, lasting love we'll ever have.

I've been married nearly 23 years, and have a dynamite marriage, and it's still true: He's it. Marriage is a wonderful analogy, or shadow, of the love He has for us, but it's not the full picture of the love God has for us.

Rebelling against that love is painful for awhile, and then ultimately numbing, because we become less human, less the way we were supposed to be. We stop feeling, and things lose their joyfulness, and their color.

Will you go to Hell for your sexual sin? Jesus told the "righteous" people, whose hearts were proud, that tax collectors and prostitutes would enter the Kingdom of Heaven before them! The real question isn't, "Will this sin send me to Hell?" It's "Do I want the Kingdom of Heaven? Do I even WANT God in charge?" - because, guess what, that's who's in charge when everything is restored. If you do want Him in charge, and you have made Him king NOW, demonstrate it. As I type that to you, I type it to myself. There will be plenty of proud, upstanding, moral people in Hell. Too proud to want God as King, really. We all sin, and Jesus has already paid the price for that. It's a question of the heart, now.

This said, some sins are WAY more impacting than others. Marriage is saying, "I commit body and spirit to you." And sex is a commitment of body, but outside of marriage, it's not backing it up with the lifetime commitment of the soul.

It's been proven, particularly for women, that sexual contact forges an intimate bond that goes WAY beyond mere physical exercise. You are sharing your soul with someone who is not returning that exchange.

I suspect we all know this deep down. His body is writing a check that his soul is not willing to honor, not now.

This is very, very UNLOVING. Very selfish of him, and, frankly, if he doesn't understand how a woman works, how a woman's heart works, or the link between sex and your very identity… Why would he be a good husband?

Marriage is ALL about putting AWAY your selfishness. And he's demonstrating he wants to have his fun regardless of cost to you, so far as I can tell. I don't get it.

All sin is equal rebellion against God, but sex is ridiculously powerful, and the consequences are identity-changing. You become less YOU.

If he's not willing to serve you in this area, to honor your desire to please God, to guard your own heart - and you should, you're NOT married - I'd dump him. Perhaps after explaining it, lovingly, he'll "get it", and respect this, and you can make a new start, with pre-marital counseling involved.

I'm always amazed, too, at the "Well, we're GOING to get married," defense. Sometimes people do wind up getting married, sure, but if it were a sure thing, why aren't you already married? Finances are used as an excuse, often, but it's usually CHEAPER for two people to live together than apart. So…?

Maybe there's a lingering sense that a commitment like marriage isn't the best thing right now…? Fair enough. No sex until your soul will cash that check your body's writing.

That's my take. And yes, the Bible is quite clear that sex outside of marriage is sin, just as lust is, according to Jesus. (The commandment against adultery is often given a crafty "Well, this doesn't apply to us" spin, but there it remains. In our modern culture, we just can't STAND the idea that God wants us to live with sexual limits, because we worship sexual autonomy above all other things, no matter the cost. But yes, God cares about our sexuality. It'd be odd if He didn't, as powerful as it is!)

We're all sinners, but we can't use that as a justification to just keep doing what we want to do. If he's a "believer", great. "Even the demons believe," it says in James. Does he have a heart for God, a desire to grow in love? He's demonstrating he values his own urges more than you, and that's not a good prescription for a long-lasting marriage, that's for sure.

Even if he doesn't agree, Biblically, a good future husband would protect the heart of a woman he loves, control himself, and quit taking advantage of her weakness. He'd help her get where she wants to be.

And that's what marriage is, as it turns out. Clearly, much as he wants the sex part of marriage, he doesn't want the part where he has to be a man and take responsibility for the wonderful gift he could have in you. You can bring that man out of him, perhaps, by saying, "This is the way it's going to be, or we're done. Now, what do you want?"

God bless you, and I'm praying he grows up.

Either way, you're playing with a strong hand. Your longest-lasting, best, most passionate lover, body and soul, is with you, and will never leave you.

Best,

Brant

An Ultimate Question: Will God Protect My Kids?

Brant — Mon, 17 Dec 2012 09:50:00 -0700

Brant, my dog growled last night and I thought of this question and decided I'd ask you.. My husband travels a lot (like 2 weeks a month) and so I am home alone with my two babies, my dog, and my two cats, and all the scary noises and shadows that make you wonder how safe you really are.. I normally follow my dog's lead when I get worried as his hearing is better and he is very protective of us.. I read a prayer book to my babies at night (just a collection of prayers) and a couple of them contain "Protect my family", "watch over us", etc.. but here's my hiccup.. God lets bad things (horrible things) happen to good people.. to HIS people.. People are raped and murdered every day so how is trusting God to keep us safe supposed to happen?? Yeah, Daniel may have walked through a den of lions unscathed, but I'd be willing to bet Stephen felt every stone that was thrown at him.. So how do we sleep at night knowing the world is full of evil and that sometimes (a lot of times) that evil hurts good people?? Just wondering what your thoughts are on this topic..

Amy

-----

Amy,

Okay, here are my thoughts, such as they are. And I hope you don't mind the picture up there. I have no idea who that is. I just like putting pictures next to blog entries. Thank you. But back to the question, and I think a LOT of people are asking it, even if not out loud.

As a dad, I think the answer to this is scary. And this may not be true for you, it may not be exactly YOUR inner conversation, but the conversation can go something like this:

Honest question: If I am a good Christian, and have faith and stuff, will God protect my children?

Honest answer: He might. Or He might not.

Honest follow-up question: So what good is He?

------

I think the answer is that He’s still good. But our safety, and the safety of our kids isn’t part of the deal. This is incredibly hard to accept on the American evangelical church scene, because we love families, and we love loving families, and we associate Godliness, itself, with cherishing family beyond any other earthly thing.

That someone would even challenge this bond, the primacy of the family bond, is offensive. And yet...

Jesus did it. And it was even MORE offensive, then, in a culture that wasn’t nearly so individualistic as ours. Everything was based on family: Your reputation, your status -- everything. And yet He challenges the idea my attachment to family is so important, so noble, that it is synonymous with our love for Him.

Which leads to some other spare thoughts...

We can make idols out of our families.

Again, in a “Focus on the Family” subculture, it’s hard to imagine how this could be. Families are good.

But idols aren’t made of bad things. They used to be fashioned out of trees or stone, and those aren’t bad, either. Idols aren’t bad things, they’re good things, made Ultimate.

We make things Ultimate when we see the true God as a route to these things, or a guarantor of them. It sounds like heresy, but it’s not: The very safety of our family can become an idol.

God wants us to want Him for Him, not merely for what He can provide.

As wonderful as “mother love” is, we have to make sure it doesn’t become twisted.

And it can. It can become a be-all, end-all, the very focus of a woman’s existence. C.S. Lewis writes that it’s especially dangerous, because it seems so very, very righteous. Who can possibly challenge a mother’s love?

God can, and does, when it becomes an Ultimate. And it’s more likely to become a disordered Ultimate than many other things, simply because it does seem so very righteous. Lewis says this happens with patriotism, too.

Mother-love, even when disordered, and placed before a desire for God Himself, always looks perfectly justified. And that’s why it’s deadly.

Children are truly gifts from the Lord. And, still, God wants us to want Him for Him, not His gifts.

This is the whole point of “trust”.

We say “I trust Jesus”, or “Trust in the Lord, and...” and all that stuff. But here’s where the words actually mean something.

What if... the worst happens? Do you still trust Him? Do you believe it’s really the end of the story, if it does happen? Isn’t that the point of trust, itself, is that you’re stepping into mystery?

Job is the classic example. He had no idea what was going on, and he was left with only one thing: His trust in God, Himself. He did not know the big picture, and yet he believed... there has to be a picture, here, and it’s one that I can’t see. As we know from the story, he was right. There was a backstory, he just didn’t know what it was.

Do we really believe that God is good, and will ultimately set things right? The real “trust” comes, I’m afraid, when what we think is “right” in our present reality doesn’t happen.

------

Not long ago, my wife and I visited the mom and dad of a little girl who was the victim of an unspeakably horrible crime. A relative was in their home for Thanksgiving, and went on a shooting spree, concluding with deliberately taking the girl’s life while she slept in her bed.

We sat in the little girl’s room, days after the shooting. The dad sat on her bed, and pulled down a beautiful, embroidered picture that was on the wall above it. He was crying, and pulled down the picture, and showed the back of it to us.

He still thinks God is good. Somehow.

“I feel like we’re only seeing this part right now, where it looks like chaos,” he said. “But someday we’ll see the front, where the stitches make more sense, and it will be beautiful. It doesn’t make sense, but I have to trust God.”

There are those who would say he’s naive, but I think this is the very essence of trust, and the whole point of it.

We see dimly now, and we know in part now, but we will someday see it all. This is trust.

And one last, radical thought:

By becoming a Christian, we say we are giving our lives to Christ. If that’s true -- if we’ve given our lives to Christ -- we’ve given it all. Everything.

And if that’s true, it includes -- and boy, is this tough to say, as a dad -- it includes our very children. They’re His.

No one can take anything, or anyone from His grip. They can take from ours, but not His.

So watch them sleep, and thank God for them, and know that they’re on loan. He loves them, more than you, even. And whatever happens, He’s got the big picture, we don’t.

That is trust.

Not sure if that helps... but those are some thoughts, for what they're worth...

Best,

Brant

Good News: God is Still Allowed in Public Schools

Brant — Sun, 16 Dec 2012 14:49:00 -0700

A listener asked me what I thought of the thought expressed on this t-shirt.

So here goes: Putting it in delicate terms... it's hogwash.

God isn't "allowed" anywhere. He doesn't need permission. He doesn't need a hall pass from a teacher, and He doesn't need to report to the office on the way in.

We didn't "kick God out" of our public school system. We don't have that kind of power, unless you're such a big fan of the Supreme Court that you think God must first parse a majority decision to determine where He can go.

When Jesus said, "Lo, I am with you always," he didn't leave it subject to court review by our robed lawyers.

Do I think the courts have it right, that they've interpreted the constitution fairly, to allow students religious expression? No way. They've been all over the map. Incoherent, even. They've overstepped their bounds, in restricting free citizens the very first freedom mentioned in Bill of Rights. That's my opinion.

But they did not kick God out of schools, because... they can't. And God doesn't take on the role of dispassionate observer to prove a point for you.

So don't tell us otherwise. And, because words matter, don't give kids the impression that God waits, sadly, outside, waiting for the final bell, when they can rejoin Him.

God loves little children, and He does not hear their cries from without, and then refuse to be with them. He loves teachers, too, who often feel overwhelmed at their jobs, and thousands call on Him daily. He does not offer a wistful, "I wish I could go in, but..."

It's true: He does not promise an absence of suffering. In fact, he promises just the opposite.

But lo, students and teachers, he is with you, always. And when God says He draws near to the broken-hearted, there's no asterisk that says, "Except during homeroom, pending an appeal." When He draws close, He doesn't consult the reigning opinion of the Sante Fe ISD v. Doe decision for boundaries.

Turns out, the Bible doesn't talk about our courts much. It does, however, make it clear that evil precedes the McCollum case of 1948. In fact, it dates back thousands of years, and Jesus' own birth into our world was greeted with unspeakable evil, an infanticide on an unimaginable scale, with a single purpose: Disallowing God.

But you know what? The authorities didn't get to determine where God goes, and where He is. They never do.

There's nothing new about evil. This is our world, as it was, as it is, but not how it shall ever be.

"In this world, you will have trouble," Jesus tells us. "But take heart! I have overcome the world."

Good news, kids! And good news, teachers!

God is in your school. He has not left the building.

On Saying "Merry Christmas!"...or "Happy Saturday"

Brant — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 09:09:00 -0700

(Here's my response to the now-tired "Christmas wars", I wrote for the South Florida Sun-Sentinel a few years back. I post it during the - ahem - "Holiday Season", in case you want to pass it along, or start some discussions with it with those who might object to "Merry Christmas!" Or, you know, school districts who don't want to acknowledge our cultural history. And, by the way...Merry Christmas.)

Happy Wednesday!

No, wait. Check that. You likely know that “Wednesday” really means “Woden’s Day” -- a nod to the Teutonic god.

I, for one, do not worship Woden. I'm not wont to worship Woden, and, well, wouldn't worship Woden. Perhaps you pursue a personal relationship with Woden. But maybe not.

So forgive my insensitivity. Granted, in this culture, the fourth day of the week is, most obviously, “Wednesday” – why, it’s as obvious as, say, December 25th is Christmas – but we shouldn’t simply say things like that out loud because “it’s been that way” for centuries.

It’s time to recognize, and celebrate, our differences. Joining the celebration of religious expression is easy: Simply be offended by everyone else’s religious expression. Celebrate good times, come on.

What’s disturbing: Our own government continues to refer to this day as the Day of Woden, clearly embracing one religious view over others. Even our public schools embrace Woden, throughout school publications and practices. While I’m not steeped in Teutonic lore, I suspect, based on our monthly cafeteria calendars, that Woden remains the Teutonic Lord of pizza square, pear, brownie and choice of milk.

Not to mention these “Saturdays” we keep having! I try to be open-minded about this stuff, but c’mon: “Saturn” is just the Roman equivalent of the Greek god “Cronus”. What did Cronus do? Oh, boy.

“Cronus was the ruling Titan who came to power by castrating his Father Uranus. His wife was Rhea. There offspring were the first of the Olympians. To insure his safety Cronus ate each of the children as they were born..."

That's pretty much not cool. I don’t want to judge, I'd have to walk a mile in his shoes, etc., but -- I don't know, man -- this just seems out of line.

But he gets his own DAY for that. He castrates his dad, eats his kids…and then mall stores honor Cronus with “Saturday Sales Events”? I don’t even want to know what goes down at those things.

So yeah, stop saying “Saturday” around me. New rule: Even if the culture is steeped in it, and even if most even prefer it; even if it might seem to be reasonable to expect I could accommodate it, heck, even if it IS Saturday: don’t say it.

I remember my public high school (!) marching band, performing that song by Chicago: You know what day of the week, in the park, I think it was the fourth of that month named after a militaristic dead white guy. I doubt the whole crowd at the Assumption, Illinois football game was into Cronus. Krokus, yes. Cronus, pretty much no. Couldn't we have found something else to play? Times are changing.

Let’s re-name everything, and pretend our culture appeared out of thin air, thirty seconds ago. Sure, it would be a massive, and massively strange, project. We could make a court case out of it, since the Constitution itself doesn’t afford different protections for expression of mostly-dead religions and expression of religions more widely practiced.

Or, we could just chill, and recognize that, for example, Saturday is Saturday, whether I worship Saturn or not.

And we could even say that December 25th is “Christmas” whether you’re a Christian or not.

Heck, maybe then, with one of the most painfully annoying melody lines ever written, we could even wish you a merry one.