In these wishy-washy days, people don't seem to be keen to be defined by what they are, but prefer to be known for what they aren't. I got to thinking about this on the way home from the in-laws today as I drove past a large'ish Seventh Day Adventist church building. Now, I'm sure they have things they stand for, but mostly they're known as the folks who think that we're wrong for having church on Sundays and that we should celebrate on Saturdays like they do. Hmmm.
And for those who like a little more politics in their reading material, we can make similar observations about President Obama and especially so of his advocates. A large part of the campaign approach of then candidate Obama centered around the point that he wasn't Hilary Clinton and then even more emphatically that he wasn't George W. Bush. And pretty much that was it. Oh sure, he made promises and expressed opinions, but all politicians do that. It just strikes me that being the un-Bush is a pretty weak platform to run on. (It did get him the Nobel Peace Prize, for what that's worth these days!)
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:The Seventh Day Adventists are not wrong for having church on Saturdays, but nor are we for choosing Sundays.
Colossians 2:16 [KJV]
And for those who like a little more politics in their reading material, we can make similar observations about President Obama and especially so of his advocates. A large part of the campaign approach of then candidate Obama centered around the point that he wasn't Hilary Clinton and then even more emphatically that he wasn't George W. Bush. And pretty much that was it. Oh sure, he made promises and expressed opinions, but all politicians do that. It just strikes me that being the un-Bush is a pretty weak platform to run on. (It did get him the Nobel Peace Prize, for what that's worth these days!)
No comments:
Post a Comment