4 Starbucks-like Companies that Forsook their Christian Message

Once again we are at war. Of course we didn't ask for it, but Satan is on the prowl. This time he has found a way to strip our joy from the Christmas season. There will be fewer "Noels" this year. After all, how can there peace on earth when there is no Christmas on my coffee cup? As you've probably heard by now, Starbucks has fully given into their pagan ways and removed all references to Christmas from their cups. Without any white emblems of holy reindeer, sacred snowflakes, or SAINT Nicholas on the cups, all we are left with with is a crimson abomination--interestingly enough the same color often used to depict Beelzebub himself. See for yourself:

New, non-Christmas cups (creepy)

 This is clearly a sign that Starbucks has declared war on Christmas and on Christians. But, it didn't always used to be this way. As we all know, Starbucks used to hold strong Christian convictions. They used to boldly proclaim the correct winter holiday on their seasonal  Christmas cups.

A CHRIST-mas coffee

 As is clear, Starbucks used to value keeping Christ in Christmas, but they have since strayed from their faithful beginnings and have become just another secular company. It's as if they believe their mission is to run a business selling coffee in a pluralistic society rather than using their caffeine to promote Christmas as the one true December holiday.

But this move from sacred to secular should not surprise us. Starbucks is only the latest in a long line of companies that moved away from their Christian roots to embrace a worldly message. Since those who fail to learn their history are doomed to repeat it, I give you the top 4 companies in recent history that have watered down or forgotten their Christian heritage:

1. Solo cups

Everyone knows about red Solo cups, but not everyone knows their history. This is especially unfortunate as their story eerily resembles the current Starbucks debacle.

For years, Solo proudly displayed Christian slogans and verses on its cups. It's primary market was Baptist church potlucks. Although they made wholesome containers for all seasons, their most notable product was their annual Christmas cup, such as the one displayed here:

 

However, in November 1969 the Solo Cup Company changed leadership and the decision was made to try broadening the market for the cups. In an attempt to do so, it was decided that the company should drop the strong Christmas message and simply go with a plain red cup. No message at all meant that no one would be offended...except Christ that is. No message also meant no Christmas message, which was a soulless mistake for sure.

History has proven that this early attempt at "political correctness" destroyed the morals of the company. Today, this vessel has become an emblem, not of sacred fellowship among fellow believers, but of drunken orgies, even becoming the subject matter of a Toby Keith song that mentions alcohol, "testicles," and uses profanity.

2. Apple, Inc.

Apple was founded in 1976 to develop small computers. The original logo  featured Sir Isaac Newton and was a good image that represented the discovery and ingenuity the company was after. However, it was a rather boring and complex logo, so later that year they changed it. Most historians will tell you that the change looked something like this:

 

However, most historians forget there was an intermediate step in the design process. For about a month the Apple logo actually looked like this:

 

The text in the red bar is an obvious reference to Genesis 2 and 3 when Adam and Eve are commanded not to eat of the forbidden fruit. In one company memo it states that the text was placed on a bar of red to represent the blood of Christ that the first sin cost, and the whole apple is colored in a rainbow to remind consumers of the grace Noah received in the covenant of the rainbow. This background also explain why the apple in the logo has a single bite taken out of it--it is the bite Adam and Eve took.

In this original context, the logo was to serve as a warning against human pride and faith in knowledge, something a computer company could easily fall into and a reality the Newton logo failed to warn against. Sadly, one of the founders (it is unclear whether it was Jobs, Wayne, or Wozniak) rebelled against this demonstration of faith and insisted the company stay away from religious overtones. Thus, the scripture reference was removed, leaving a rainbow apple without context. One also can't help but wonder if it was this lack of context that led to the homosexual revolution with this rainbow being co-opted for "gay pride." Perhaps Apple's lack of religious boldness is the reason why gay marriage is now legal.

3. McDonald's

We all know America is a Christian nation. So naturally all businesses within America are really Christian businesses. It is embedded within their nature. They cannot escape it. One company that realized and embraced this was McDonald's. In 2003, when McDonald's launched their "I'm lovin' it" slogan, they simultaneously launched another ad series--"I'm lovin' him." The "him" was intended to refer to Jesus. 

Sadly, the ad campaign was dropped after 6 months. The official reason given was that too many people were confused by the "him" and didn't know to whom it was referring. According to company statements: "Although the slogan was written to point people to our loving Savior, Jesus Christ, we fear that misinterpretation is happening and we might accidentally lead our customers to love another man, such as Buddha, Joseph Smith, or Mohamed. Or for our male customers, they may become gay."

On the surface level, this public statement seems to be acceptable. However, after further thought one realizes that the matter could have easily been cleared up by adding a clear Christian image (such as a cross or an American flag) to the slogan. The darker truth is that someone in the company was likely ashamed of the Gospel and pressured marketers to scrub away the Christian message. This is most likely what happened as there have been no more positive, messages about Jesus coming from the company since the retraction.

 4. Trojan

The final company that used to hold strong Christian leanings was Trojan. It may seem strange that a condom company was once Christian since the church throughout much of history has been skeptical about birth control, but it's true. Trojan realized the uphill battle of being a Christian company making condoms, but they were driven by the conviction that sex is a gift from God and is meant to be enjoyed. And, what better way to enjoy it than without the risk of children materializing?

So, to unite these two passions--faith and sex--designers for the company decided to include a Bible verse about sex on each of their condoms. They started flipping through the Bible to find such a verse and found what they were looking for there on page 1--"Be fruitful and multiply." This verse was immediately included on the package design.

 But, the designers' eagerness got the best of them. Several months later, a customer pointed out a discrepancy to the company. While the Bible verse references making love to produce offspring, the product itself is designed to prevent offspring.

Embarrassed by the lapse in judgment (and experiencing pressure from many churches who opposed the idea of a Christian company talking so openly about sex) Trojan decided to drop the Scripture references from its products. But, as we have seen over and over again in these examples, the loss of a Christ-centered message on their products ultimately led to the loss of a Christian identity within the company itself. Today, a Trojan product is just as likely to be used in a lustful one-night-stand as in the bonds of holy matrimony.

So Starbucks is not alone

This Christmas season we should not be shocked at Starbucks and their loss of a Christian identity. They are simply the latest in a long line of Christian commercial failures. The battle is raging and we are losing. Perhaps all we can do now is pray for the rapture to come quickly and deliver us from this mess. Merry Christmas!

*Before you re-post this to expose these companies, please make sure you realize this is satire. But of course, I'm not going to stop you from posting even if you don't realize it, so go for it!

Marlin Strong

I've experienced an interesting conflation of two worlds this past week. On the one hand, I have been finishing a training presentation for my work at Family Abuse Center that spends some time looking at the "Strengths Perspective" in Social Work. On the other hand, I've witnessed (and participated in) the discussion surrounding the potential closing of Marlin ISD. In the midst of this discussion there has been plenty of worry, and plenty of criticism, particularly from places in Waco.

As some background, the Waco Trib ran an article last week about the closure announcement. Although the journalist was probably doing the best she could, many of us here in Marlin (and those who have worked in Marlin recently) knew the details of the article to not fully represent the true situation. I for one have seen remarkable improvements in the 5 years I have lived here, some of which I outlined in an email I wrote to the article's author.

One of the main points I made in that exchange was that we in Marlin are very aware of our problems. We also watch as the vast majority of news stories Waco media organizations run about Marlin end up being negative. I informed the author that there is a whole other side to the story that goes untold and that what we in Marlin need is hope. Sadly, a few days later, the Waco Trib ran this Editorial essentially continuing to blame the Marlin community for its problems and continuing to ignore the signs of improvement some of us tried to bring to their attention.

That is where this discussion collides with my other work. The Strengths Perspective of social work essentially argues that you can bring about change by calling out the strengths and skills of a client. You then play to those strengths to overcome the weaknesses and dysfunctions. It is a perspective based on optimism versus pessimism. It is a perspective built upon encouragement, not endless criticism.

And isn't that what Jesus did? He first approached his disciples with a call to "follow me." He didn't say "follow me because you're hopelessly screwed up." Rather, he saw their potential and invited them on an adventure. Or think of the woman at the well. Jesus knew her flaws and could've called them out immediately. Instead, he chose to engage her in theological debate because he saw her wisdom and knew she would become a greater witness in that town than his own disciples. He used a gentle hand to guide his flock to greater things. He knew the flaws, but he came alongside them and patiently molded them. Although he had every right to pull the God-card on them and start ordering them around because he "knew best," he chose to take the role of a servant calling out the strengths in his disciples.

That is what our city needs now. We need hope. But hope does not come from simple optimism and well-wishing. It comes from identifying our strengths and utilizing those strengths to get to work.

There is lots of work to be done for our schools. Even though we have seen improvements these past 2 or 3 years, prior to that there were many years of mismanagement and poor decisions that led to our current state. So it will take some time to undo the damage. Unfortunately, TEA does not seem to be as forgiving when it comes to time.

So, my proposal is to start calling out our strengths and start using those strengths to achieve change. Feel free to comment below with the strengths you have seen among us. I will end with what I have seen:

• We have teachers and staff that genuinely care for our students. This is not the case in every school district.
• We have creative students. I have known many students who are amazing artists.
• We are a resilient community. How many times have we faced bad news? How much negative press has been given to Marlin by insiders and outsiders? How are we still walking after years of driving through potholes? We have dealt with all these and more, but we are still here, and there is still a great deal of pride. Don't let anyone take that pride away!
• We have a Wal-Mart (hey, that's pretty impressive for a city our size!)
• We have a really awesome program (No Excuses University) at the elementary school that starts preparing students for college and academic success.
• We have diversity in our community.
• We have a community that cares for our schools. There were 1,000 people who showed up to the school meeting this past Wednesday! (That a freaking 1/6 of our entire city!!)

Please add more, and let's start the change. Let's create the hope. We are strong!

Marlin ISD article...disappointing

 Here is a copy of an email I sent to the author of the Waco Trib (and 2 editors) in response to this article written about the "struggles" in Marlin ISD:

"Ms. Butts,

I just read your article in the Waco Trib about the potential closing of Marlin ISD next year, and I'm sorry to say I was a bit disappointed in your reporting. As someone who has lived in Marlin and served as a youth pastor here for the past 5 years, this article did a very poor job of representing the actual situation with Marlin ISD. For instance, most of the comments and facts given about the monitoring by TEA or about unresponsive administrations were from when I first arrived in Marlin or even earlier. Those people are all gone now. Nowhere did I see any meaningful comments about staff or administrators from between 2011 to now.

I also found it very unfortunate that the only administrator you seemed to interview was the new superintendent who has only even been around for about 3 months. The reality is he was not here and doesn't know what has really happened with the school district in the past 5 years. It would have been better to talk to those who have been on the front lines seeing improvements in the schools in the past several years. You could have talked to Wes Brown, the principal at the elementary school, who has helped completely transform that campus through the No Excuses University program which has gotten parents and students talking about college and careers even at the elementary school level. You could have talked to Mallory Herridge or Deborah Raphael who have served with CIS on 2 of our campuses and can testify to the improvements that have happened in the past 3 years. You could have talked to any number of staff or teachers and they would tell you that TEKS was constantly at the forefront of teaching and discussion, or that Marlin has great participation in parent and family nights, especially when compared to many Waco schools. But no, you chose to focus on the one person who hasn't been around and has the least direct knowledge of the school's history and improvement. You couldn't even find a parent who had some pride in the school district but featured just another voice of negativity.

Another problem I had with your article is that it shares the same faulty assumption as TEA that STAAR tests are the ultimate measure of a school's success. Yes it's true that STAAR tests may not have shown great improvement, but Marlin ISD has made significant strides in other areas, such as in reading levels. In the end, a school's or student's success or knowledge cannot be summed up in a test score, and it's the assumption that we can evaluate a school by a test that is harming Texas schools all over the place. Such an attitude ultimately leads to "teaching to the test" and handcuffs true, meaningful education.

Marlin has had its share of troubles, and so has our school district. What this community needs is to celebrate its victories and be reminded of its strengths and successes. But when some outsider reporter comes in and writes a "shock and awe" piece that focuses on the negative, it is done without thought of the damage that article may do. It is fine to report on facts that have happened (such as a warning of a school closing), but the reporting needs to be balanced, researched, and constructive. Many of us in Marlin know some of the comments in your article to be misleading or flat out untrue. But that is the only story that gets told in your piece, and the result is a further chipping away at the little hope that is left in this beat-up town. I don't know if your apocalyptic interpretation of the events was the result of a lack of investigation (which would be lazy), or a desire to increase readership and online clicks (which would be dishonest). Either way, we in Marlin need better. We need hope. We need the real picture.


Micah Titterington

Marlin Resident"


**Update, 10-2-2015**
I received a response from the article's author this morning. Here is what she wrote:

"Thank you so much for your letter. I appreciate your honest opinion of my piece and always welcome feedback.

Just so you know, I desperately tried to speak with teachers from the district but no one was willing to talk to me on the record. I spent all day yesterday in Marlin, knocking on doors and trying to find parents to speak about the district, but again, all but the one parent refused to speak to me.

There will be many more articles on the subject in the future and I plan to spend considerable time fleshing out the nuances of what is happening in Marlin. If you know of any teachers who would be willing to speak to me on the record (I don't do anonymous sources), please feel free to give them the number below. I would be happy to speak to them.

Again, thank you for your feedback.

Stephanie Butts

Staff Writer

The Waco Tribune-Herald

sbutts@wacotrib.com

254-757-5707"

So, if you have worked in Marlin ISD in the past 3 years, please contact her and let her know about the many positive things you have seen happening. Tell her about the improvements that have taken place that won't necessarily be reflected in test scores. As I stated in my first email, we don't need more criticisms and negativity in Marlin. We know our problems already. What we need are people ready to work towards solutions and offer a positive attitude. We need to hear about our strengths and successes, not just our shortcomings. We need hope.

"Birdman" Review

I finally watched the Oscar-winning Birdman, and to be frank, I was much underwhelmed. I expect a movie awarded as the “Best Picture” of the year to be something impressive, moving, or thought-provoking, but Birdman wasn’t really any of those things for me. It wasn’t horrible, but I certainly think some of the other nominees were better.

So, here is why I think Birdman won the award for “Best Picture.” It won because it reflects the narcissism, insecurities, and disjointedness of Hollywood itself. Although the film centers on a washed up actor on Broadway, its core is just as much about Hollywood. In that sense, an Academy vote for Birdman is really a vote for themselves.

In fact, it is interesting to see how frequently films about film-making and Hollywood end up either being nominated for “Best Picture” or winning the award in recent years: The Artist (2011), Hugo (2011), Argo (2012), and Birdman (2014). Three of the past four winners have been films about Hollywood. It seems as if the academy is not really interested in what is truly the “Best Picture,” but in what film best reflects their own values and culture.

That seems to be the case with Birdman. Certainly the struggles of Riggan in the film are very real for many actors (perhaps even Michael Keaton himself whose own career is eerily similar to Riggan’s). Just like many ordinary people in mid-life, actors and those in Hollywood encounter the questions of meaning, significance, and success. It may even be worse for them because of the dangers of celebrity and fame.

But here’s my problem, I don’t really care. Perhaps the most engaging part of the film is Riggan’s daughter’s (Emma Stone) rant against her father about the pointlessness of his current endeavors. 

  “Let’s face it, dad. You are not doing this for the sake of art. You are doing this because you want to feel relevant again. Well guess what, there’s an entire world out there where people fight to be relevant every single day, and you act like it doesn’t exist. Things are happening in a place that you ignore, in a place that, by the way, has already forgotten about you…You’re doing this because you’re scared to death, like the rest of us, that you don’t matter. And you know what, you’re right—you don’t. It’s not important, ok. You’re not important. Get used to it!”

 I felt drawn to this monologue because it rings true. The reality is that actors and celebrities are no more important than any nameless person on the streets. So, I don’t really care for the struggles of Riggan in the movie. His self-loathing does not elicit sympathy, not when there are real people with real struggles in the world. So, you’re an actor who’s discovering you’re human…Get used to it. You really aren’t important in the grand scheme of things. Your inner-conflict does not deserve any more sympathy or applause than anyone else’s.

And yet, the whole point of the Academy seems to be to deny this truth. In the end, all the Academy really seems to be is a group that gathers together to celebrate themselves, tout their own accomplishments, flaunt their wealth, and give each other fancy awards for doing something just about anyone in America can do—fake it. So whether a film celebrates actors (like Argo did), or critiques the excesses of fame (like Birdman), any such film acts like a mirror. And in the egocentric world of the Academy, the award, of course, is going to go to the reflection in the mirror.

This is not to say that Birdman was without artistic merit. The seamless, one-shot style in which the movie was filmed was unique. There were also some very touching and thought-provoking scenes. However, to say that it was the “Best Picture” seems an over-statement.

Perhaps the excessive amount of language in the film contributes to my cynicism. I don’t know about you, but there seems something disingenuous about throwing around the f-bomb and s-word over 150 times in a movie and calling that “acting.” It really just sounds like angry, nonsensical babbling to me (imagine if we substituted every version of “fuck” in the movie with a version of “poop”—poop, poopin, poop you, etc.) Far from offering an intense exploration of the human experience, that excessive amount of profanity just seems like you really have nothing to say.

Which is about where I ended up with Birdman. It tackles a number of themes—fame/celebrity, love/admiration, blockbuster/art, age/relevance—but in the end I felt it really did not have much to say to me. I have little sympathy for a character who complains about problems that seem so out of touch with the real world. In the end, it just really made me feel sorry for actors and those in Hollywood who have all the glitz and glitter but are so often lacking substance and meaning. These are things fame cannot buy. But, me feeling sorry for actors does not equate an award for Best Picture.

And so, the Academy’s decision to award Birdman that accolade just feeds into the cynical narrative that Hollywood is out of touch and self-absorbed—“Yes we do matter, because we say so.” Well, that’s great. Now the rest of us will continue along our ordinary lives until the next time we are beckoned to the worship service for Oscar.

What is "Home"?

In some ways, this is a follow-up post to yesterday's post. I just watched a powerful video containing a message to ISIS from Christians. While ISIS incites the world to violent conflict with its atrocities, and the world responds with a mission to "degrade and destroy" ISIS, this video speaks the Gospel-truth that not even ISIS warriors are beyond redemption if they will but heed the call of Jesus. Check out the video below:

Who Would Dare to Love ISIS? (A Letter from the People of the Cross)
Posted by International Christian Concern on Sunday, April 19, 2015

While there is certainly plenty to discuss with this video, I actually want to make a few brief observations about one of the comments on the video I saw. In the FB comments, one member posted about ISIS: "They don't realize when they kill a christian the are just sending them home."

Let's think about this statement for a second. Is this really what we mean to say? I think I know what the commenter is trying to get at, but the way the post is written is theologically problematic. What we should actually say here is that although those Christian martyrs were killed, they are now resting in the presence of God. My issue is with saying that killing those Christians has "sent them home."

So, what's wrong with calling heaven "home"? The problem is that such an idea buys into a gnostic/Platonic belief that physicality is evil or temporary and that our ultimate future is a disembodied state called "heaven." As I wrote about yesterday, the ultimate Christian hope is in the resurrection from the dead. Heaven is temporary. One day heaven and earth will be united as one (cf Rev. 21).

You see, if the above video comment is true and those martyrs are now "home," this has several problematic implications:

1. Death's evil is minimized
    If heaven is "home," then what does that make earth? If it's only a place I'm visiting, then shouldn't I try to get "home" as fast as possible. The answer to this is obviously "yes." In fact, the only reason I can see why we should linger longer and not commit suicide or seek to be murdered is we need to get other people to believe in Jesus so they can also live forever in heaven (oh wait, that seems to sum up the driving motivation of evangelicalism). We should also be careful whenever we celebrate the martyrdom of our Christian brothers and sisters. The Bible always maintains that death is an enemy. It is never to be viewed as a kind gateway to our true destiny. Rather, it is an evil obstacle God is working to overcome.

2. God made a mistake in creating the world
   If heaven is "home," then what kind of cruel God do we serve who banished us to an earthly existence? Why create matter at all? How can we call call heaven "home" when God Himself placed us on earth?

3. We dismiss the Bible
   Is there crying in heaven? Most people would say "no" because they have been tricked into believing that heaven is forever and that it is our "home." But I suppose those individuals have never seriously read passages like Rev. 6:9-11. This is a scene from heaven (slain martyrs), and yet it does not seem like a perfect paradise. Instead, the souls of these saints cry out and lament to God. They are waiting for something beyond heaven. They are waiting for judgment and resurrection. They are not truly home yet.

4. We dismiss any theology of judgment day.
    If judgment day is all about deciding who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, how does this square with the popular theology of people going directly to heaven or hell upon their death? If we arrive at "home" immediately upon death, then what does God's future judgment mean for us? Is God just going to say, "Ok, you get to be in heaven...oh, wait, you're already there"? No, Judgment Day is when God sets the world right. Everything the righteous lost through sin and death is restored and redeemed. The world experiences resurrection and recreation. Evil is finally put away for good. It is at this moment when heaven and earth are married that we can finally say we are "home."

Again, I appreciate the sentiments of the commenter, but they are theologically troublesome. If we really want to reach ISIS, we need to have a good grasp on the Gospel Jesus, Paul, and the early Christians preached, and it is a Gospel of resurrection. So to be clear, when ISIS martyrs our brothers and sisters, those fellow disciples of Jesus find peace in the arms of God. But they too, like us still on earth, are awaiting our true home--a resurrected reality where there is no more pain, murder, rape, sin, or death on earth. Maranatha.

If You had been here...

It has now been two weeks since Easter. This is the time of year when I always ponder whether or not we can truly claim to be a people of the resurrection. Each year comes with grandeur and glory. We proclaim "He is risen! He is risen indeed!" among stained glass windows and brilliant sunshine. We sing "Christ the Lord is Risen Today" while inhaling lily-infused air. We fill our sanctuary with bells, organ, guitars, cymbals, and strings. And the sermon, well it practically preaches itself. It is impossible to miss the Gospel truth of the Resurrection.

But give us two weeks, and we will largely forget all about resurrection. Yes, we still believe that Jesus was raised from the dead, but that is about as far as it goes. We dismiss the idea that the same spirit who raised Jesus is resurrecting our spirits in the here and now. We continue to ignore the truth that our bodies will one day be raised from the ground. But these are crucial truths that fill us with courage to live lives of faith in the midst of fear.

In John 11 we read the incredible story of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. As I was reading this story today, I noticed that one statement (or versions of it) is made at least three times to Jesus in the story--"If you had been here, Lazarus wouldn't have died." Both Mary and Martha tell Jesus this (11:21, 32) and the crowd also wonders about this (11:37).

I don't know why this phrase stuck out to me in reading the story. Maybe it's because it echoes our own desires. We are, by nature, people who desire escape. No one likes suffering. And so, when evil does rear its head, we are left questioning God's love. "God, if you love me you will stop this from happening." "God, if you had been here, this would not have happened." Yet, implicit in this reasoning is the concept that God is our butler who must do whatever we think is best. Embedded in this thinking is a belief that we need to avoid pain at all costs.

When it comes to facing the reality of death, Americans take this same tack. Honestly, most American Christians take a very unbiblical approach to death. When confronted with the truth that our bodies are wearing out and will one day die, most of us simply deny that this is any real loss. We have bought into the Platonic idea that, once we die, our souls will fly off to a disembodied "heaven" and dwell there for eternity. It's as if we think, "If God really thought these bodies were a good idea, then he would stop us from dying. But since we die, He must intend for us to leave these bodies behind." I hear echoes of Mary, Martha, and the crowd--"If You had been here, he would not have died."

But Jesus is not afraid of death. He grieves it and weeps over it because death is evil, but He knows it is not the end. Instead, Jesus' message is that God's love is stronger than death and can turn the evil of death into an opportunity to glorify God.

Yes, God could stop our deaths, but death is the reality we created. We have all sinned, and so we all die. But the Gospel is not just about defeating death, it is about using death to defeat itself. It's about God being so powerful and loving that He takes what is broken and dead and breathes new life into it. What evil and death ruin, God takes and transforms into something even better. Our hope is that God is in the process of allowing death to occur to open the possibility of resurrection. We will die one day, but those who follow Jesus will experience a life raised from the death. And through the pain of it all, we will realize the glory, love, and brilliance of our King.

So after Easter, let's hold tight to a strong theology of resurrection--one that not only believes Jesus rose from the dead, but also believes we will be raised one day as well. If we do this, we will stop saying with the crowd, "If you had been here...," but will start saying, "I accept my death, but stand amazed in your power over death and loving willingness to raise this prodigal life." May we be a people who desire to redeem and restore, not to escape. May we be a resurrection people.

I leave you with this song as a reminder of what Jesus means for us post-Easter.

Baby Enemies

One of the great joys of my life is getting to play with my two little girls, Hadi and Lailah. It is exciting to see them learning about their world and laughing with each other. When playing with them, I frequently end up on the floor as their daddy jungle gym, which is fine until Hadi decides to jump on my stomach without abandon (she's not quite as light as she used to be).

As I was playing with my girls yesterday, adoring their wonder and playfulness, the thought crossed my mind--this is how every human starts out their life. Now, I know that many children do not have  parents who play with them and love them or who are even present. Many children are neglected and abused. But, nonetheless, every person in the world begins life as a harmless child. Everyone who has ever lived was once a helpless blob of cuteness that had the same desires for love, affection, and play as the rest of us.

And so, as I stared into the beautiful eyes of my daughters, I realized that I could just as easily have been staring into the eyes of countless dictators, criminals, and terrorists when they were babies. No matter how "evil" a person is, there was a time when they were not unlike my own daughters.

Just take a look at these pictures.

Hitler as an infant

Kim Jong II

Jeffrey Dahmer

Charles Manson

Emperor Hirohito

Normal children, adorable faces made in the image of God. And yet, all of these children grew up to become murderers, maniacs, or dictators responsible for some of the worst evils in modern history.

This thought reminds me of two things. First, evil runs through each one of us. Just because we start off cute and harmless does not mean we will always be that way. Regardless of our beginning, we are each capable of horrible evils just as these above individuals were.

But second, as I looked at my daughters, in some small way it humanized these "villains" for me. This fact helps me to see past the atrocities and anger to begin feeling a true sadness for them. Something in their lives went horribly wrong for them to abandon their innocence and compassion. As evil as individuals like Hitler or Bin Laden were, perhaps it would do us good to remember that they were once children as well--children who played with balls, yearned for love, and giggled at the simplest surprises.

One of the toughest commands of Jesus is to "love your enemies" (Matt. 5:44). I don't know how to fully do this, particularly when it is MY enemies. However, perhaps offering love to our enemies begins with reframing their humanity. Instead of looking only upon their offenses, perhaps we look wider to see their full story. Yes, they have become monsters, but they began as infants. If we do this, maybe we can move past pure anger and into grief, and out of that grief we can learn to forgive and pray for their well-being and salvation.

So the next time you look into a child's eyes, offer a prayer for them and their family that they will stray far from evil and cling to righteousness. And when you look into that child's eyes, imagine for a moment that you are also looking into your enemy's eyes, for your enemy was once a child too.

"To the flag..."

I remember attending Vacation Bible School as a kid and reciting the 3 core pledges good Christian kids were supposed to learn. Remembering these pledges wasn't a problem for me because I also knew them from Wednesday night children's activities at my church. These pledges were the Pledge to the American flag, the pledge to the Christian flag, and the pledge to the Bible (in that order).

Recently I found myself thinking back to those pledges, and in particular to the Christian flag itself. I was driving to work last week and saw a flag pole with both the American and Texas flags flying on it. Of course, in accordance to the US Flag Code, the American flag was flying above the Texas flag. Yet for some reason, I found myself thinking about the Christian flag instead of the Texas flag. In particular, I began thinking about how the Christian flag is (and is not) flown next to the American flag. This also got me wondering about the history of the Christian flag. How did it come about? So, I did a little research.

The Christian flag was developed in America. This should come as no surprise given the color scheme. It was first proposed in 1897 by Charles C. Overton in New York. Overton was selected to fill in as teacher when the guest speaker for his church's Sunday School hour failed to show up. Looking at the American flag, he began to talk about flags and symbolism. At some point in his lesson, he suggested it would be a good idea to have a flag to represent all Christians. Apparently this idea stuck in his mind as he designed such a flag and presented it the following week. By 1907, Overton had partnered with Ralph Diffendorfer, secretary to the Methodist Young People's Missionary Movement, to promote his creation. Within a few years, Methodist pastor Lynn Harold Hough had written the first pledge to the Christian flag. The flag and pledge gained such popularity within churches that they continue to be used today.

One of the interesting conundrums that the creation of this flag has posed, though, is how to fly it in relation to the American flag. As noted above, the US Flag Code states, "No other flag or pennant should be placed above or, if on the same level, to the right of the flag of the United States of America." Exceptions are not even made for the U.N. flag or for other "international" flags:

"No person shall display the flag of the United Nations or any other national or international flag equal, above, or in a position of superior prominence or honor to, or in place of, the flag of the United States at any place within the United States or any Territory or possession thereof."1

 However, many Christians have not felt comfortable flying the American flag above the Christian flag. To do so seems to be saying that America is more important than God's Kingdom, and surely that isn't right. At the same time, most Christians also feel very uncomfortable placing the American flag in the secondary position. To illustrate my point, take a look at the following photo:

What was your gut reaction? If you consider yourself patriotic to any degree, there was probably a part of you that thought, "Wait, the stars and stripes should be at the top!"

And the truth is, most Americans agree. In fact, the above is not even a real photo. I could not find a picture on Google with the Christian flag flying above the American flag. I had to Photoshop this picture. The closest you ever find to the above picture are the two flags standing side-by-side at equal height. (The exception to this is on naval ships where sailors are allowed to fly a church pennant above the American flag to signal that the ship is currently holding chapel services. But this a different flag and is probably more to signal to other ships that the crew is not in combat mode and should not be fired upon according to the Geneva Convention.)

The side-by-side solution has become normative. We set both flags in stands of equal height in the sanctuary (the side each flag gets may depend on the particular congregation). At VBS we say BOTH the pledge to the American flag and the pledge to the Christian flag. Churches will invest in a second flag pole to fly the flags side by side (or they will just refrain from flying the Christian flag). We want to say, "Yes, we are fully American, and we are fully Christian."

But the great problem of all of this is that sometimes being an American butts up against being a Christian. Indeed, in recent years I've wondered about the language of our pledges. It seems increasingly odd to pledge one's "allegiance" to one government, and then pledge your "allegiance" to another Kingdom in the next breath. Yes there is such a thing as dual-citizenship, but eventually that breaks down.

I have several relatives who were born oversees in England, Spain, and Germany. I myself was almost born in Germany. And yet, since the parents were American citizens, my relatives became dual citizens. But, dual citizens eventually have to choose. After a certain amount of time, many countries will revoke your citizenship if you fail to live there, or they will make you choose which citizenship you want to use. Even if you are allowed to retain both citizenships, if the two countries ever came into conflict, you would have to choose a side. If the two countries went to war, you can't serve both militaries without being called a traitor in both places.

The word "allegiance" means "loyalty," "devotion," or "obligation." When we pledge "allegiance," we are vowing to give our complete loyalty.  Is it possible to promise your complete allegiance to two different entities and governments? I seem to remember someone once warning against trying to "serve two masters." And the uncomfortable truth is that the Kingdom of God (and yes, "Kingdom" is a political word) often clashes with the Kingdom of America. When push comes to shove, where will our allegiance be?

At the end of the day, I'm not particularly fond of the Christian flag anyway. Personally, if we are going to have a flag to represent the Kingdom of God I'd like to see something a lot more stylish. Maybe a lion or a lamb, or a crown or something. Or at least pick some different colors besides red, white, and blue. But, that's neither here nor there. My point is that we already have a plethora of symbols for God's Kingdom. Whenever we break the bread and drink the wine we are reminded of the dynamics of God's Kingdom. The gathered Body of Christ is a signpost of this truth. Whenever we gather together as the church, we proclaim that we belong to God's Kingdom, not primarily to the Kingdom of America. Our everyday mission and ministry should also be a testimony of our heavenly citizenship.

But I do appreciate the Christian flag for at least one reason--it (should) force us to think about allegiances, citizenship, and treason. It places the conflict of Kingdoms onto symbolic cloths for our eyes to wrestle with. It demands we have uncomfortable discussions about how our culture and government impact us and sometimes blind us to the commands of God.

How do you fly these two flags together? American on top, Christian on top, side-by-side, no Christian, no American, no flags at all? I can't answer that for you. However, one thing the Bible does make abundantly clear is that our primary calling as Christians is to God and His Kingdom--a Kingdom that transcends national boundaries and binds Americans, Iraqis, Israelis, Russians, Chinese, Mexicans, and countless others together. That is where my citizenship lies.

" For, as I have often told you before and now tell you again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is set on earthly things. But our citizenship is in heaven." Phil. 3:18-20a