One of the biggest stories online today is the fact that "Touchdown Jesus", a 62-foot-tall statue in Monroe (just a handful of miles south of here) was struck by lightning late last night and burnt down. The day before yesterday, the church announced they would be giving touchdown Jesus a face-lift thanks to the wear and tear from the past harsh winter; I'm thinking the face-lift will cost more than anyone expected.
As we Christians tend to do with things, many have sought to find a spiritual explanation for this event. Some declare that it was an act of Satan, that he burnt down the statue because of any positive influence it was having on passerbys on the highway the statue faced. To the church's credit, Solid Rock Church, the statue itself did draw many people onto the church's campus; at the same time, the many negative affects it has had--that is, making Christians look foolish and thus bringing about mockery not of Jesus but of those who are his followers--may very well exceed any positive affects. People have written about that elsewhere, so that's all I'll say. Other Christians are saying that it was an act of God, that God was judging Solid Rock Church for their ridiculous spending of $200,000 on such an eyesore. In this line of thinking, God was just so embarrassed by it and Jesus had enough of it that God decided to take it out with a very well-placed lightning bolt. Those who take this position constantly point to the fact that the statue cost $200,000 (quite a lot of money), and that the church should've been using that money elsewhere. Never mind that the church itself actually does a lot of ministry-oriented stuff; not just sensational worship services, but they have built orphanages and done tons of charity work in foreign countries and they take care of their own members like the early church did. One can get all up in a bundle about their somewhat questionable practices and beliefs in some areas (this made headlines quite a while ago), but in the end, the church is doing far more than most churches--and, for that matter, most skeptical and stoic Christians, including myself--ever do.
So then, what's my viewpoint? It goes something like this: there was a six-story, 62-foot tall fiberglass/styrafoam statue erected in a generally treeless area during one of the worst storms of the year. Twenty miles north, where the storm was not as bad, I sat on the front porch and watched lightning dancing all over the place. A tornado warning was issued for Cincinnati (I know, because my sister called me wailing because she lives there). My point is that this storm produced a considerable amount of lightning, and we know that lightning generally strikes the tallest points in its vicinity, and the Jesus statue was quite tall (taller than nearly anything else around it) and made of highly-flammable materials. In my view, the statue burnt down not as an act of Satan (if you can call it that) or a judgment of God (if you want to be like a revised Pat Robertson from the liberal end of the spectrum), but rather due to human stupidity. DON'T BUILD A 62-FOOT TALL STATUE OUT OF FLAMMABLE MATERIALS. It's really that simple, folks.
And for all the Christians who are saying this was an act of Satan: I think Satan probably has better things to do with his time than send lightning bolts into tacky statues (you know, like infecting the hearts of men and prospering genuine evil throughout the world). And for all the Christians who are saying this is an act of God: I remember when Hurricane Katrina struck, one preacher declared that it was an act of God against the pagans of New Orleans. Within the next week, a big storm tore down his mega-church. My only point being: be careful about deciding what is and is not an act of God. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Who knows. But I'll bet it has more to do with the way lightning, tall structures, and flammable materials don't mix very well.
As we Christians tend to do with things, many have sought to find a spiritual explanation for this event. Some declare that it was an act of Satan, that he burnt down the statue because of any positive influence it was having on passerbys on the highway the statue faced. To the church's credit, Solid Rock Church, the statue itself did draw many people onto the church's campus; at the same time, the many negative affects it has had--that is, making Christians look foolish and thus bringing about mockery not of Jesus but of those who are his followers--may very well exceed any positive affects. People have written about that elsewhere, so that's all I'll say. Other Christians are saying that it was an act of God, that God was judging Solid Rock Church for their ridiculous spending of $200,000 on such an eyesore. In this line of thinking, God was just so embarrassed by it and Jesus had enough of it that God decided to take it out with a very well-placed lightning bolt. Those who take this position constantly point to the fact that the statue cost $200,000 (quite a lot of money), and that the church should've been using that money elsewhere. Never mind that the church itself actually does a lot of ministry-oriented stuff; not just sensational worship services, but they have built orphanages and done tons of charity work in foreign countries and they take care of their own members like the early church did. One can get all up in a bundle about their somewhat questionable practices and beliefs in some areas (this made headlines quite a while ago), but in the end, the church is doing far more than most churches--and, for that matter, most skeptical and stoic Christians, including myself--ever do.
So then, what's my viewpoint? It goes something like this: there was a six-story, 62-foot tall fiberglass/styrafoam statue erected in a generally treeless area during one of the worst storms of the year. Twenty miles north, where the storm was not as bad, I sat on the front porch and watched lightning dancing all over the place. A tornado warning was issued for Cincinnati (I know, because my sister called me wailing because she lives there). My point is that this storm produced a considerable amount of lightning, and we know that lightning generally strikes the tallest points in its vicinity, and the Jesus statue was quite tall (taller than nearly anything else around it) and made of highly-flammable materials. In my view, the statue burnt down not as an act of Satan (if you can call it that) or a judgment of God (if you want to be like a revised Pat Robertson from the liberal end of the spectrum), but rather due to human stupidity. DON'T BUILD A 62-FOOT TALL STATUE OUT OF FLAMMABLE MATERIALS. It's really that simple, folks.
And for all the Christians who are saying this was an act of Satan: I think Satan probably has better things to do with his time than send lightning bolts into tacky statues (you know, like infecting the hearts of men and prospering genuine evil throughout the world). And for all the Christians who are saying this is an act of God: I remember when Hurricane Katrina struck, one preacher declared that it was an act of God against the pagans of New Orleans. Within the next week, a big storm tore down his mega-church. My only point being: be careful about deciding what is and is not an act of God. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Who knows. But I'll bet it has more to do with the way lightning, tall structures, and flammable materials don't mix very well.
No comments:
Post a Comment