Rosie O’Donnell recently caused a controversy by saying Christian Extremists are as dangerous as Muslim Extremists. This led to other talk shows debating the topic by comparing the body counts of Christian and Muslim Extremists. When these people refer to “Christian Extremists,” they are  referring to groups like the KKK and people like those who bomb abortion clinics, and those idiots who picket soldier’s funerals.

From the beginning, this has bothered me. These groups are not Christian Extremists at all. Calling them “Christian Extremists” would be like calling me a “Vegetarian Extremist” because I eat vegetables and meat. Eating meat doesn’t make me an extreme form of a vegetarian. It makes me not a vegetarian at all. In the same way, when these groups hate and murder, they aren’t being “Christian Extremists.” Their actions are fundamentally opposed to the most basic principles of Christianity, showing that they are not Christians at all. (Or, at the very least, really messed-up Christians.)

The issue I have with this is that it gives the message that it’s only acceptable to be a ”moderate” Christian. It is wrong to really take it to an extreme. The Bible has a word for “moderate” Christianity. It’s “lukewarm” (Rev 3:16). The Bible also referred to this as “a form of godliness but denying its power” (2 Tim 3:5). God has not called us to a moderate, socially acceptable Christianity.

So, what does Christianity look like when taken to extremes? A real Christian Extremist is someone who is saved by grace, loves God with all has and is, and loves his neighbor as himself. Someone who lives a life a radical obedience to God. A real Christian Extremist is not someone who hates, but someone who loves. Not someone who kills, but someone willing to die to himself.

Too often, I’ve settled for the moderate, watered-down, socially acceptable version of Christianity. I’ve decided I want to be a Christian Extremist.

So, how about you? Are you willing to settle for the moderate, watered-down version of faith that the world finds palatable, or do you want something more, an extreme, all-consuming relationship with God that impacts every area of life?

In addition to being an entertainer, I’m also somewhat of a geek. I used to be a professional geek, working full time as a computer programmer. Now that I’m a full-time performer, I have to find other ways for my “inner geek” to find expression. One way I can do that is by working on the internet.

I just completed putting together a website for a god friend of mine. It is www.BobDavisPCS.com. Bob does property and home owner association management. If you’re in need of these types of services, you should check out the site to see what he has to offer.

I came across an interesting article today. It seems the Vatican has issued a statement defending Darwinism. I know there are a lot of Christians who believe this, but I was really surprised to hear this coming from the Vatican.

“Theistic Evolution,” the idea that evolution is the tool God used to create the universe, presents a lot of problems. For me, the biggest issue is the origin of suffering and death. The Bible teaches that suffering and death are the consequence of mans sins. However, for evolution to be true, suffering and death were around millions of years before man ever came in the scene. This calls into question the very nature of God. If Darwinism is true, then suffering and death don’t exist as the result of mans sin, but because God chose to design suffering and death into creation from the beginning. This is just one of many theological problems that arise from Theistic Evolution.

In the Vatican’s statement, Cardinal Paul Poupard is quoted as saying, “The fundamentalists want to give a scientific meaning to words that had no scientific aim.” I certainly agree that the Bible was never intended to be a book on science. However, if the Bible is true, then whatever statements the Bible makes that reflect on science must also be true.

So, what about all the scientific evidence for evolution? If you believe what you see on TV or read in the popular press, you’d come to the conclusion that evolution is an established, proven fact.

The truth is, there are multiple ways the evidence can be interpreted, depending on your presuppositions. Darwinism is a popular interpretation, because it is the best answer if you begin with the presupposition that the world came into being through entirely natural means. In other words, if you choose to be an atheist, Darwinism is all you’ve got.

However, there is some evidence that is very problematic for Darwinists. For example, the ocean gets saltier over time. However, it is nowhere near salty enough to be as old as it would need to be for Darwinism to be true. Another problem is Carbon-14 being found if fossils, coal and diamonds. The amount of Carbon-14 decreases over time. If these items are anywhere near as old as Darwinists claim, the Carbon-14 should be long gone.

The same evidence used to support Darwinism can also be interpreted in light of a Biblical framework. You don’t have to turn your back on science to believe the Bible. A good source of information on this is Answers in Genesis. I encourage you to check it out.

I came across an excellent article at Harpers, The Christian Paradox, How a faithful nation gets Jesus wrong. It’s a long article, but it’s worth reading. While I don’t completely agree with every detail in there, I think the vast majority is right on.

Here are a few excerpts…

“America is simultaneously the most professedly Christian of the developed nations and the least Christian in its behavior.”

“[Dominant teachings of American churches] undercut Jesus, muffle his hard words, deaden his call, and in the end silence him. In fact, the soft-focus consumer gospel of the suburban megachurches is a perfect match for emergent conservative economic notions about personal responsibility instead of collective action.”

So, is America a “Christian Nation”? I’m not so sure. When traveling overseas, people have asked me what percentage of Americans are Christian, and I don’t know what to say. Sure, the majority claim to be Christians, but do our actions back that up? Are even half of Americans really Christian? A third? I don’t know.

Personally, I’m tired of the soft, comfortable, easy philosophical belief system that passes for Christianity in America. I want the kind of faith I’ve seen among the poorest of the poor in third world countries. The kind of faith I’ve seen in Christian workers in India. The kind of faith that Jesus taught about. The kind that costs something. The kind that is willing to risk everything.

I guess the real question is, am I willing to do what it takes to have that kind of faith, or am I too comfortable where I am?

A lot of the programming I do is geared toward “family” audiences. Of course the American family isn’t what it used to be. I just read an interesting article on the family. Less than one quarter of American families are “traditional families” with a married mother and father with kids.

In the church, we often complain about the state of the family, and what it means for our society. While that may be valid, to a point, I think there is something more important. Whether or not we like what is happening to families, we have to meet people where they are. Our churches have to meet the needs of the family as it is, not as we might like it to be.

Are our churches doing a good job or reaching out to single moms, unwed couples, divorced and blended families, and so forth? Do they feel welcome in our churches? Are their needs being met? For that matter, what should family ministry look like in the modern church? I don’t know what the answers are, but these are definitely questions worth serious consideration.