Skip to main content

A Taste of Heaven?



On Fox news, Shepherd Smith first drew out attention to a new phenomenon, if you choose to call it that, in which people are now eating hamburger, laden with cheese, and whatever, and putting it all between a sliced, Crispy Cream doughnut. Some years ago, it was Aristotle who mentioned the need for "balance" in all things. But the issue is really not one "balance" but of glorifying God in all that we do, in this case, our bodies, the temple of the Holy Spirit.

It may appear as a small thing, but to apply the claims of Christ to our ever-dissolving culture, we must not overlook a single thing. Is putting a hamburger between a doughnut (see the video above and you'll gain a better sense of how hedonistically wacko this idea is) too small a thing for a Christian response? We live in a culture of pleasure, and one that is forever discovering news ways to seek it, even in the most cavalier and indeed stupid ways. The hamburger/doughnut combo is the equivalent of skateboarding down a rail-banister. It may be new, thrilling, and in some sense exotic, but in the end dangerous and mindless, insofar as it produces nothing more than a sense of an Art-Nouveau form of sensual pleasure. Even the Epicureans had more sense than this. If Christians are to bring every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, as part of our grand cultural mandate, let's not feel it beneath us to have something constructive to say about something even as far-fetched and ill-advised as a greasy hamburger on an even greasier doughnut.

Comments

  1. Sounds like a candidate for thisiswhyyourefat.com.

    Tom Terry

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Spurgeon Doesn't Help Us With Trump

Of two evils, choose neither." Spurgeon's quote has been posted numerous times on social media by Christians who find themselves in a moral conundrum at the very thought of voting for either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. Here’s the problem with Spurgeon’s idea. Biblically there is no such thing as a choice between two evils. Let me explain.
Moral philosophers and theologians have long spoken of the problem of "tragic moral choice", also known as the “incommensurability in values.” The man on the street simply calls it “choosing between the lesser of two evils.”  
The best known example of tragic moral choice is the one about the Nazis during WW II. Do you handover the Jews knowing that your choice makes you complicit in their deaths? Or do you lie and violate the Ninth Commandment? The Lutheran scholar, John Warwick Montgomery, has argued that such choices are unavoidable and of necessity cause us to sin.
The Bible, however, takes a dim view of the so-called less…

Andy Stanley and the “NEW Hermeneutic”

The problem of faith and reason is longstanding in the history of theology. Augustine held that faith aids reason (credo ut intelligam) and that reason aids faith (intelligo un creadam). The church father is, however, inclined to stress the later over the former. It was with Thomas Aquinas, and his Summa Theologica, that the effort to reconcile faith and reason reached its apex. Rejecting the medieval doctrine of double truth, he placed natural reason prior to faith in effectively every area of the Christian life. The restrictions are the mysteries of the faith that reason cannot penetrate.
Thomas’ affirmation of the high role of native reason in Christian belief is linked to his stress on dialectical method in study, seminally set forth by Peter Abelard. The form of study is dependent largely on logic to argue both sides of a theological question. Christian belief is thus the proper result of process or synthesis. Faith then assents to the final proposition arrived at by reason.
Thom…

Fighting Abortion is Not the Fourth Sign of the Church

Some Christians are what I call, “single-issue.” I recall one family that left a church because everything did not revolve around Evangelism Explosion. But that's just one issue.
The issue I'm thinking about is abortion on demand. Some concerned Christians expect their pastor to thunder away almost each week on this topic, or at least mention it. He must make it is his central motif. He must protest outside the abortion clinic. If he doesn’t, he can say he’s against abortion all he likes, but it’s not enough.
Motivating the single-issue congregant is a deeper judgment. He thinks that the ultimate reason abortion on demand still happens is because pastors let it. Churches let it.
As one who has taken a virulent stand against abortion, both in the pulpit and with pen, I can say without qualification, “I hate it.”  Period. I pray the day that Roe is overturned. Nonetheless, as a former pastor, an as one who may return to the pulpit someday, here’s the bottom line.
We are called to …