On Slipp'ry Terms

"Tolerance is the virtue of a man without convictions." - G.K. Chesterton

Discrimination. Tolerance. Diversity. One's bad and two are good, right?

Absolutely! Sort of. Maybe, because it kinda depends. And stuff.

You know?

I recently read on the Christian Science Monitor (not a site I frequent often) about how "[c]enturies of British royal discrimination came to an end... after Commonwealth leaders agreed to drop rules that give sons precedence as heir to the throne and bar anyone in line for the crown from marrying a Roman Catholic."

That word, that d-word, "discrimination", is so powerfully loaded in today's culture. Any time discrimination is ended, we should be glad.

Right?

Wrong.

In other news, I was reading through "Teaching Tolerance" magazine a few weeks ago. What a read! Every once and a while I even found things that I agreed with!

But what is the Christian perspective on "tolerance" and "diversity"? Jesus said "love your enemies." God has chosen and redeemed sinners from all walks of life and all depths of sin. So we should just accept everyone as they are.

Right?

Wrong.

And here's where it gets tricky, and the deceitful and un-taken-captive thoughts of this world will pull the wool over our eyes, if we aren't careful.

What's wrong with this sentence?

"We're working towards a world that is full of peace and tolerance for people of all races, genders, sexual orientations, and religions."

How about this one?

"We are proud to announce that the discriminatory policies of the military against blacks and women have been repealed, and that now both African-Americans and the daughters of our country are free to join our nation's armed forces."

I'll give you a sec to take those sentences captive before I point out what one of my big problems with them is.



"He who defines the terms, wins."

Tolerance, diversity, and discrimination can all be good things OR bad things depending on how they are defined.

But it gets even more tricky when the definitions given mix apples and oranges.

Race, Religion, Gender, Sexual Orientation. These four so often are said in the same breath.

But they are totally different.

Race: A matter of birth.

1. Something you have no say in.
2. Something you are born into.
   
3. Something that does not change your status towards God in that you are still made in His Image (though there will be plenty of spiritual inheritance from your forefathers which will either help or hinder your growth in The Grace and Knowledge of God).
4. Something that gives no Biblical justification for discrimination (that is, discrimination against a certain race as being inherently less valuable. This kind of discrimination is not Biblically acceptable. Gen. 1+2)
   

Religion: A matter of Truth.

1. Something that you must choose.
2. Something that, while you might be "born into" or "raised into" it, is not an unchangeable part of you.
3. Something that very much changes your status towards God in that you are either believing His Truth or believing a lie and walking in rebellion to Him.
4. Something that does give Biblical justification for discrimination- in fact, Scripture commands us to discriminate against false teaching, to preach The Gospel, to proclaim that God is the only God and Christ is The Only Way and Truth and Life. (Jn. 14:6)
   

Gender: A matter of birth.

1. Again, something you have no choice in.
2. You cannot change it (well, technically you can- kind of- today, but you shouldn't change it, at any rate.)
3. This also does not change your status toward God. He created male and female in His Glorious Image.
4. But this category is different from race in that there is Biblical justification for good discrimination. What does this look like? It looks like difference in roles- not difference in value. The husband lays down his life for his wife- the wife lays down her will for her husband. The men fight. The women keep the home. The man is the head of the home, the wife is his helper. So on. (Gen. 3)

Sexual orientation: A matter of Truth

1. Something you have a choice in. And if you're going to argue that you were born a homosexual, I must reply that God does not make provisions for that in His Word.
2. You can change your "sexual orientation"- for better or for worse, it is a choice you make.
3. This does change your status toward God in that it is an area of obedience (just like any other area of moral decision that He has addressed in His Law).
4. This is an area which is Biblically discriminated against in that homosexuality is Biblically condemned. It's a crime on the level of murder or adultery. So sexual orientation isn't just a choice like red socks or blue socks- it's a choice like whether or not to murder someone. That's how Scripture presents it. (Lev. 18:22)
   

Interestingly enough, it seems that very few take issue with discriminating against murderers.


So to go back to the sentences above:

"We're working towards a world that is full of peace and tolerance for people of all races (non-moral issue- we should be tolerant of other races), genders (non-moral issue- we should be tolerant of the opposite sex), sexual orientations (moral issue- you will either obey God or you will rebel against Him), and religions (moral issue- you will either obey God or you will rebel against Him)."

"We are proud to announce that the discriminatory policies of the military against blacks (no Biblical difference of role between black man and white man) and women (plenty of Biblical difference between the roles of women and men) have been repealed, and that now both African-Americans and the daughters of our country are free to join our nation's armed forces."

See how this mixes categories? See how it compares apples to oranges? Hopefully this will better arm you to take those thoughts captive as you read the next liberal tolerance magazine promoting such hoggidy-washidy.

What about racial profiling?

Well, there's a difference between saying "You're black therefore you are inherently less valuable than me" and "You're black, we're inner-city and I've seen a lot of inner-city crime being committed by black people so I'm going to be careful until I get to know you."

There's a difference between "All Arabians are bad" and "Most terrorists are Muslims, most Muslims are from the middle-east, so if I see a guy with a turban and big black beard boarding my plane I might switch flights."

There's a difference between "Mexicans are unworthy to come to America" and "Most Mexican drug cartel members are... um... Mexican."

Duh.

The first example in each case is a wrong thought process. Someone's race doesn't change their inherent value before God, so it shouldn't change their inherent value before us.

But in the second case it is simply a examination of the "fruits" of a certain race- watching the patterns and simply being wise and using common sense. If I'm looking for good Mexican food odds are I'll look for a Mexican chef. If I'm looking for illegal immigrants from Mexico- odds are I'll be looking for Mexican people! (Which isn't to say that I agree with our current immigration policies- far from it!- but another topic for another time.)

Martin Luther King Jr. gave his dream speech, hoping for the day when his kids would be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

I still don't think that dream has been realized. What a group of people does will be used- should be used!- to evaluate individual members. Maybe the individual is better or worse than the reputation of those with whom he lives, in which case he can prove himself and be respected- or despised- for it.

But, today, when we do judge people (or a people group) by the content of their character we are criticized for being discriminatory.

Examples:

Homeschoolers: Smart and respectful but dress funny
Tea Partiers: American flags and small government
Dogs: Slobbery
Tennesseans: Confederate flags and banjos
Texans: Sweet tea. Like, really sweet tea.
New Yorkers: Wild accent
Blacks: Very athletic; also prone to crime
Whites: Can't dance or jump
Mexicans: Probably illegal
So on.

(Side note: Isn't it interesting that I can insult whites all I want and it never feels weird, but the moment that I say that blacks as a class are prone to crime I feel like an edgy hater?)

Are there legal Mexicans? Absolutely. Are there athletic whites? Sure. Smart, upstanding blacks? Most definitely. My "economics professor" is one of them.

But the stereotypes are there for a reason. Instead of bemoaning the stereotypes and trying to duct tape every mouth that might speak according to those societal prejudices, perhaps we should focus on fixing the root issues that led to the stereotypes. Things like insanely high fatherlessness in black communities. You take the fathers away from white families and watch the crime skyrocket. These things have causes. But instead of trying to stop everyone from noticing the fruit, someone ought to fix the tree.

Back to the initial concept of slippery terms. I have one for y'all to try.

I'll leave you with this gem- you can tear this one apart yourself, and let me know how the thought-capturing goes in the comments:

"They should also know how symbols like swastikas, nooses and Confederate battle flags can offend and anger other students." - Teaching Tolerance article

(Oh, by the way, I feel very discriminated against by the Teaching Tolerance magazine. The amount of white males shown in the pictures in the magazine is nowhere near proportionate to the actual percentage of the population which we make up. It's almost like they're judging us or something.)

Music: The Other Side of Midnight

Psychological thriller with a touch of action. Let me know what y'all think! I have a story for this piece- what's yours?

I'm imagining someone fleeing. Her name isn't Alice, and she's certainly not in Wonderland, but there is a sense of the fantastical in her quest. The landscape is foreign and barren and cold. It's dark and she's lost- but not lost in the sense of making a wrong turn- lost in the sense of being alone in the world, or even being thrust into a world that is not your own.

Why do they want to capture her? Maybe because she found something she wasn't supposed to. Maybe because she wasn't supposed to be here.

At any rate, she finds a house. Like a dream- maybe it is a dream- the gate opens for her. The door opens, too, and she steps inside quickly, gasping for breath. Maybe- maybe somehow this house holds the key to her return home. She keeps onward- down halls and up stairs. And then something catches her eye- it's a door. In this cold and dark house such a bright and clean door seems out of place. There's a clock atop the door, and it says 11:59.

Suddenly, with a great crash, the door downstairs crumbles into the house. Shouts and footsteps. Down the halls, up the stairs. She steps nearer to the door. The clock turns. The door clicks and begins to slide open. Just as her pursuers step into the hallway behind her, she runs, through the door, to the other side of midnight.

The Other Side of Midnight by gabrielhudelson

Oh, and which image do you like better? I went with the white one.

Music: Shadows in the Fog

This piece was actually begun as underscore for Ponder Pictures' "Brothers II" (working title), but we didn't keep it and so I took it and turned it into a stand-alone piece.

The story in my head:

Prologue- defeat and death, a wasted battleground covered in the slain.

Now, a small, battered group of men trudges through the forest- constant fighting, cold, misty weather, incessant marching- they are worn out. But still they march on. Soon enough, they begin hearing things- seeing shadows in the fog. Their leader stops them and looks around. The enemy closes in and we realize how close to defeat they really are. The leader, in the midst of the struggle, has his own reverie- remembering something, I don't know what, but something important. Maybe you can tell me what it was. At any rate, it invigorates him, and he encourages his men to stand fast for just a little longer. The battle presses in around them, and everything appears to be nearing an end.

Yet it's not over, for now we see someone else. He's running, looks like for help. Or is it to rescue? Ah, a few others are behind, rushing forward. One by one, they burst through the fog onto the battlefield, without hesitation, without regret, without even a moment's thought, one by one shouting a battle cry and throwing themselves into the fray. This gives a much-needed surge of strength to the drowning remnant. The battle's final end is now just as clear in view as before, but clearly different, and with but a few moments' struggle the battle is ended- the enemy scatters- and our men are left to count their dead and to prepare themselves to fight another day.

What do you think? What's your story?

Shadows in the Fog by gabrielhudelson

Music: Because I Love You

How's that for another excellent image by my sister and Genesis Effects?

Love it.

Yes, this piece-of-the-week is a love theme. I really enjoy this kind of music. The scene I'm envisioning in my head is obviously romantic. I believe that romance is a good and Godly thing to portray in films if done properly. (For example: having married couples play the romantic parts, having the romance that's written into the film follow God's Law, and not defiling the viewer with scenes that are unnecessary and inappropriate.)

I'd love to see more God-honoring romances in modern films!

So I'm thinking maybe a wedding, or the reception of a letter, or even just an reunion of husband and wife after a long absence- they're finally together again. I think I like this last one best. They're finally able to see each other after months or years apart. And the embrace/kiss/reunion, that would happen at right about 2:42. What does this piece make you picture?

Because I Love You by gabrielhudelson

Book Review - Red Rain

Watch the book trailer here.

Red Rain is a recently-released sci-fi novella by Aubrey Hansen- her first published work, actually. I read it last week (actually, I read the finished version for the first time, though I had read a rough draft previously before agreeing to score the trailer).

The Worldview

The Good

The worldview in this book is obviously a big selling point, as it is a Christian book. But that could be said of just about any "Christian" book, couldn't it?

I doubt it. Red Rain isn't just a story with a "sinner's prayer" slapped in there somewhere. It's constructed on the worldview of Christianity. And while there's never a "gospel presentation", the whole book is a presentation of the Gospel lived out.

The heroine is feminine- strong, but very clearly female.

The relationship between the heroine and her family is a very good one, beautiful to behold. She is submissive to her father, and honors and obeys him. The stereotypical free-willed girl and oppressive father are totally absent here- what a relief.

Just because there's no "pray-a-prayer" scene does not mean that this book is weak on Christianity. To the contrary, it is quite distinctively Christian, but doesn't have to rely on a cheap and forced "gospel" presentation to make it so.

The book shows homeschooling as a good thing. Oh yes.

Altogether, from a worldview perspective, very good...

The Bad

...though not perfect, of course. The thing that bothers me most about it is the possibility of spiritual pacifism and isolationism coming through. I don't know what Aubrey believes on this subject (and it wouldn't surprise me if I find out shortly after writing this review! :-), but the book could be interpreted to say "if they'll let us keep our religion and our Bible when we're in our house, that's all I ask." This must be reconciled with The Great Commission and The Dominion Mandate.

Any other worldview concerns aren't really even worth mentioning, as I recall.

The Art

The Good

Well, I was given an e-book for my involvement in the project, but we bought a paperback because I like those better. Plus, it was signed, so it might be worth millions someday. :-D

And it looks very nice. A bit simplistic on the front and side covers, but professional and clean. As for the inside- quite nicely done.

Now for the real art of the book- the story. The characters were very engaging and easy to visualize. The dialogue scenes were, in my opinion, some of the best parts of the book. The dialogue is well-written and engaging, and there are a few points where it's so heartfelt it's heartbreaking. The protagonist is very endearing and the villain is satisfactorily villainous. The book is also complemented well with a small (it is a novella) host of supporting characters that are memorable and believable. Aubrey's writing style is very enjoyable, moving from funny to poignant with ease.

The story was excellent. My family and I have talked about this. It seems to me that so many homeschoolers write stuff, but that they rarely take the time to learn their craft and craft their art so that they move from good stuff to good stories. This is a pet peeve of mine.

Aubrey, however, has apparently done her homework. The story was twisty, bittersweet, not quite resolved yet satisfying. Very nicely done. My heart wouldn't break if there were a sequel. (Just thought I'd join the crowd, Aubrey. ;-)

The Bad

There were a few lines that kept popping up that I thought were painfully cliché and/or over-epic. Not that I read or watch a lot of sci-fi, so that could be just me, but a few phrases seemed too forced- like they were supposed to be epic but just ended up cheesy.

There were a few weak scenes, and a few religious inclusions that seemed forced- not because they didn't belong there, but perhaps because they could have been better integrated into the story.

My last critique (for now, mwahaha) is that it seemed rushed. It wasn't terribly so- just a bit fast. I wished that there had been a little more time taken explaining and developing. Yes, it's a novella, but just a few pages more might have gone a long way.

Altogether,

If you're going to read fiction, this one is worth it. Its combination of good worldview and good story is very much worth the price and time. It lacks the last bit of professional polish, which might be expected from a first book. It also delivers very well on tension and gripping, bittersweet fun. Will I read it again? I doubt it. But, counting the rough draft, I read it twice, and enjoyed it both times. Will I have my kids (LORD willing, one day) read it? Probably. Would I recommend it?

Most definitely.

Learn more about and/or purchase Red Rain here (you might still be able to get a signed copy!)

4/5

Music: The Remnant

Was this piece inspired by the Bourne films? Not exactly, though the piece has some similarities. Inspired by a trailer scoring group notorious for their epic music, I wanted to write a piece that was consistently intense yet satisfying- and didn't go much beyond 2 minutes in length. Did I succeed? Well, you tell me!

So why the picture? Well, I think it fits the genre, and the title. I'm envisioning a few, beaten and battered faithful, tenaciously defending their last stronghold as it falls around them. Do they win? Well, you can tell me that too. :-D

Enjoy. :-)

(Check out the nice job my sister did, helping me with the text, on the YouTube version of this piece.)

The Remnant by gabrielhudelson

More Thoughts on Biblical Masculinity

A continued exploration of some of my thoughts from my recent post on this subject.

A friend of mine was discussing this through e-mail with me and we talked about the distinction between personality traits and character flaws- a very important distinction.

So what is the difference between a quietness that is OK- or even admirable- and a quietness that is weak and unManly? What is the difference between (another discussion with another friend) a man having a perfectly manly desire to stay inside and do computer work and a man being a mouse who can't handle a good, rugged hike?

God has given us different personalities.


God has also called us all- all of His sons, that is- to be men. Manly men. To obey Him, serve Him, advance His Kingdom.

So to the degree which our personality traits hinder our obedience to Him- to that degree our personality traits are character flaws.

You may be a quiet warrior or an outgoing one, a musical warrior or an outdoorsy one, a blogging warrior or a fishing one.

But as a son and ambassador of The Most High God- you must be a warrior.

No matter your method, you must slay the dragons.

So, to make it practical. If your quiet personality means you talk less and listen more, that's probably a good thing that we could all learn from. If your quiet personality means that you don't evangelize, don't meet new people, don't truly love others, then your quiet personality is now more than that- it has gone into the realm of sin, because it is preventing you from doing what God has called you to do.

On shyness. I don't think shyness is ever a good thing. Quietness can be Biblical, but shyness is a manifestation of love of self. So instead of being shy, we should turn our attention from ourselves to others, and start loving God and loving the people He has placed in our lives. (1st and 2nd greatest commandments)

On to my next point. Hear ye, thou wimps.

"The glory of young men is their strength, and the honor of old men is their gray hair." (Pr. 20:29)

Note to Mr. Hiccup: If a girl is showing you up (or beating you up) in physical contest, either she had better be quite the man or you had better be quite ashamed. Fortunately for you, young sir, Astrid is quite the man.

We are to be the protectors of the "weaker vessels"- that adjective is Scripturally applied to all of womankind, though the passage in question speaks specifically to the marriage relationship.

As young men, we should be strong. The stronger vessels.

So, my brothers, what are you doing to be strong? To be a good steward of the body that God has given you, of course- that goes for my sisters in Christ as well!- but specifically to be strong. Ruddy. Healthy. Able to protect and serve.

Do push-ups. Run a few miles. Something.

If your natural smallness means you aren't the fastest kid in the Church or the record-holding pusher-upper, fine. That's how God made you. Learn to use your mind. Hiccup is a good example of this- he can't throw the iron ball thingies, so he invents a machine to throw them for him.

But if you take that to be an excuse to be pale and wan, with bent shoulders and limp wrists, then you had better invest in some P90X or something.

Point three in my post addresses the girlyman syndrome.

This is something I've done myself in the past, and I regret having done so. I want to warn my brothers lest they too fall prey to this condition.

The girlyman syndrome is likely to happen when a young man hangs out around girls a lot. Note that it doesn't have to be this way. Not at all. It just takes a man of superior vision to be able to retain Godly masculinity even when he spends most of his time with those of the fairer sex.

A godly young man can be thoroughly manly when spending time with sisters in Christ- pure, masculine, respectful, chivalrous, edifying, and downright a pleasure to be around!

But the girlyman tries to be like the girls he admires or hangs out with (or is infatuated with). He'll read the books they like, and at least act like he enjoys them, just to please them. He'll listen to the music they like, he'll eat the same foods, he'll- well, the list goes on. You get the idea.

He's the kind of guy who says that he's not insecure about his manhood, therefore he can proudly carry around Pride & Prejudice or wear pink or collect stuffed animals.

Neither said book nor said color nor said pets are my issue. My issue is a man who is, ultimately, fearing (wo)man instead of fearing God, and who is acting out of regard for others instead of vision for The Kingdom (Mat. 6:33).

This is no true man at all.

Sadly, it can be very endearing to the young ladies since this young man is sculpting himself in their image.

And they might be Godly girls. A young man made in their image might be externally a pretty straight-laced and Godly fellow. (Maybe I should put a comma after "pretty". :-)

But the reason for his Godliness isn't true repentance and worship of God, nor the working of The Spirit in his heart, but rather a fleshly desire to please others.

Such sculpting in the end only results in a girlyman, not a true man seeking conformation to The Image of Christ.

These might be hard words for some. Know that they are spoken in love and with a smile! I hope this post edifies both brothers and sisters in Christ. Brothers- if you find yourself falling into these categories, and can see why that is Biblically reprehensible, repent and reform! Sisters, perhaps this will better arm you to look for the right things in men instead of being attracted by a man who molds himself to your will just to please you. Perhaps it will also prepare you to encourage Godly Vision in your brothers.

Men. We need to be devoted to a cause higher than ourselves. That cause must be The Kingdom of God. And for that cause we must be prepared to forsake all else.


For The Glory of God.