From Instapundit:

YOUNG VOTERS WANT SPIRITUALITY, BUT NOT NECESSARILY RELIGION. Well, that’s because religion often tells you to do things you don’t want to do, or to refrain from doing things you want to do, while spirituality is usually more . . . flexible.

Indeed. "Spirituality" just means one wants to have religion without the rules, to feel saved without having to obey God. That the fairly libertine Glenn Reynolds correctly perceives that speaks volumes.

From time to time, I'm told that churches of Christ are notoriously divisive, fight over minor quibbles, and act in a way quite different from denominations (which are apparently havens of peace and unity).

And then there's the real world. Read this - in particular this part:

A ladder placed on a ledge over the entrance sometime in the 19th century has remained there ever since because of a dispute over who has the authority to take it down.

There's no question we should be considerably better, but I can't see much evidence that we're any worse.

Here's an interesting tidbit from the news. Muslim teaching forbids paying interest, which makes buying a house difficult. In order to still be able to buy a house, they've developed a workaround: they figure up the amount of interest they would pay on a 30 year loan, add that to the base, and then acquire a loan that is technically zero percent for the total amount. Thus, the banker gets his interest in full, while the Muslim can skate by on the technicality that he paid no interest.

Trying to find loopholes and workarounds in religion is not restricted to Muslims. This was one of Jesus' objections to the religion of the Pharisees. In Mark 7:9-13, Jesus condemned their practice of "Corban." The Law of Moses required Jews to care for their parents. In order to get around this financial burden, some would dedicate all their possessions to the temple, declaring them "given to God" (Corban). They would maintain complete control over their possessions as before, buying, selling, and consuming them. However, when their parents had a need, they would excuse themselves from their obligation by stating that they had nothing they could give to them; everything that had been theirs was now Corban.

Jesus said that turning the Law against itself in this manner was "setting aside the Law" and "invalidating the Word of God." They were using the letter of the Law to create loopholes in order to escape the obligations the Law placed on them. The law of the Lord isn't like man's law. Cleverness in evading the intent of it isn't going to be rewarded. Those who practice such are going to have the same condemnation the Pharisees did. Friends, let's be careful we don't fall into that trap.

I usually prefer not to blog on current events, but this one is too good to pass up. (Plus Alan has been a bit behind lately.)

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is fond of quoting a particular passage of Scripture. The quote, however, does not appear in the Bible and is "fictional," according to biblical scholars.

In her April 22 Earth Day news release, Pelosi said, "The Bible tells us in the Old Testament, 'To minister to the needs of God's creation is an act of worship. To ignore those needs is to dishonor the God who made us.' On this Earth Day, and every day, let us pledge to our children, and our children's children, that they will have clean air to breathe, clean water to drink, and the opportunity to experience the wonders of nature."

I'm not sure which is less surprising: that a politician would falsify Scripture to suit their purposes, or that a reporter would go to three "scholars" instead of just using Bible Gateway.

One of my principal rules here in posting is "no anti-religious bigot of the week" stories. I'm not sure if this story qualifies, but I'm linking to it for the (unintentional) humor and possibly some educational value. A summary?

I thought creationists were monsters, until I married one.

Has to be read to be believed.

There's a certain kind of group city governments increasingly don't want located in their city limits, and especially not downtown. Bars? No. Adult bookstores? Nope. Strip clubs? Uh-uh.

No, the offending organzations are churches. Why? The oldest of reasons for governmental action: money.

Churches are being turned away by cities and towns that hope to enliven a fading downtown or boost their tax base.

"There's more interest than ever in attempting to exclude churches and other houses of worship," says Kevin "Seamus" Hasson, president of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. "They say they don't want churches there. They want something that generates tax revenue."

How interesting that in the age of new urbanism (placing houses, jobs, retail, and entertainment near each other), some American cities are trying to evict churches. That's what happens when the national religion becomes materialism, I suppose.

You can read a companion article here, in which a small town government decides it would rather have decaying, boarded-up storefronts than have a church locate there.