Thank you Neil, but what does it mean?

I got this picture emailed to me from my good friend Neil. He comments here on occasion and is one of those sort of "scary smart" kind of people. I have a lot of respect for him and what he thinks and does.

Anyway, enough of the Neil love, he sent me a picture of which I have no idea what it means.

So I post is here for comments and help to understand what it is saying.

In case you cannot read the sticker it states, "On judgment day you'll Wish your car had JESUS STICKERS"

Boy do we really care about...

Annual conference of the Central Texas Conference happened from June 6-8. It the the "annual business meeting" of the Conference in which the 300+ churches in the conference come together and give reports on the state of the different ministries of the conference. In addition to these reports (some great and others not so great), there are conference resolutions. These are bits of legislation for the conference which can call us to action on a wide range of issues. Most of the time, in my experience, these resolutions are usually not calls to actions but more like statements of belief for the conference.

This year there was a resolution in which the conference voted to approve. It was a statement on "Welcoming the Migrant". (If you click the link you will go to the entire conference report by which you can just search "Welcoming the Migrant" and it should get you there.) This resolution passed with zero debate. Not a single question or comment. I am glad, as I think this was a good resolution and responsible for the conference, but I was amazed it passed without a single comment because of what happened next...

The next resolution took three votes before it was upheld (which meant the resolution failed as the conference church and society committee did not recommend, or think this resolution was "concurrent" with the Central Texas Conference. A vote to uphold the recommendation of the conference church and society committee and thus reject this resolution was actually to vote "I". If you are confused, you can thank Robert's Rules.).

The three votes were:

1) To allow the creator of the resolution to speak on this resolution for three minutes. He was not a delegate to annual conference and thus did not have the free option to speak on this without the consent of the body. The body voted to allow him to speak.

2) To call the body to a vote on the resolution. (There were three speakers 'for' and three speakers 'against' the resolution each of which were allowed three minutes to speak their position. After these speakers, in order to not allow any other questions or debate, one member of the body called for a vote to see if we were ready to vote on the resolution - of which the body was.)

3) To uphold the recommendation of the conference church and society committee and reject this resolution.

What was the resolution that took so long, had the maximum speakers and a "call for the question" vote?

The Resolution to "Support the Teaching of Creation Science".

Why we spoke so long on this topic and not very long on the topic of the conference supporting a path way for the migrant? I do not know. I think it is interesting.

When I sin

Currently there is a practice in the Senate known as the "Secret Hold". The Secret Hold is the ability for anyone to anonymously object to someone being appointed by the President to a position. Here is an NPR report on the practice which both sides of the isle are moving to remove the practice.

The Secret Hold is an odd thing to me, one which I am not sure I can imagine a world which would originally think this practice would be a good idea, but I am not that good with my imagination. However as I think more and more on this practice I see such great connections to the cycle of violence and scapegoating which God through Jesus came to expose and eradicate.

The crowd standing around the woman caught in adultery are all nameless in the Bible. Not even the names of the accusers are given. They are all anonymous. They all object to something of Jesus and bring this woman before Jesus in order to justify their own understanding of the Law (that is that God demanded this woman be stoned). Jesus interpreted the same law a bit differently.

He knew the first stone was the hardest stone to throw. It is always hard to be first and much easier to follow a crowd. So Jesus made it even more difficult for those who would be brave enough to throw a first stone - to actually throw the first stone in this situation. As a result, the anonymous crowd, who are convinced they are doing Good by the Word of God, disperses without casting a single stone. Not one stone was thrown.

I think that I am generally a compassionate person. I think that I am generally a kind person. I think I am generally a decent guy. Yet, there are times when I can do so wrong. And the times I do so wrong (aka in Christianity as sin) that I am acting not on my own but acting as part of a crowd. When I lose my individual self to an anonymous crowd I cast a ton of stones. in these moments I even think the stones I cast are good and I sometimes even think that I am doing right, but I am not.

This is why, in part, I am Christian and attend a worshiping community. Worship allows me not to lose myself to an anonymous crowd but to become an individual in the Body of Christ.

I don't fear much, but I fear the times when I am wrapped in an anonymous crowd.