Jesus Gave Blood For You
Warning: This is Frustrated Ryan talking. Frustrated Ryan doesn’t always agree with Regular Ryan. The views expressed in this blog should may or may not represent his standard feelings
There’s this bible study in one of the girls halls at the school where I serve. It’s filled with absolutely fantastic Christian girls 6 or seven of them who were raised in the church, know Jesus as their Lord and savior, come regularly, and discuss fancy vocabulary words. They’re smart and funny and they earnestly desire to follow God with their lives. Several of them have picked majors specifically to help them make a difference in the world.
But somewhere along the line they forgot how to apply the gospel to their own lives.
They know all about every common sermon take-away you could possibly imagine, but they don’t. actually. take. it. away….
I’ll show you what I mean
We’re going through John. Last month we were at Jesus and the Paralyzed Man. So our application was “How can you take up your mat and walk in your own life?”
::crickets::
The next week was Jesus and the Pharisees. We thought the last application might not be specific enough so this time we said “Jesus reamed the Pharisees for knowing the scripture but not really doing what it says. One very simple thing the scripture says is ‘love your neighbor’ how about tonight at dinner we all make friends with someone new as a way to increase the amount of love we share”
…Nobody did…
The next week was Jesus feeds the 5000. To we talked about what we give to Jesus and whether we have a mentality like Phillip or Andrew. our take away was “So last week we kinda made excuses like Philip. How can we find a way this week to really do what we say we’re going to do?”
Nope.
So this week we did Jesus Walks on Water and we didn’t even read the passage (these are church kids, they know it) we just left and said “Find a person you don’t know and try to make their day better”
You know what happened?
Six kids. Six awesome christian women. who have known and sought Christ with their lives for years, walked over to a dining hall and stood in a semi circle. There was a booth right by them for the Red Cross Blood Drive. They needed donors and volunteers, and the Christians looked awkwardly at one another and said:
“Where are we possibly going to find somebody that needs our help?”
…
…
I GIVE UP!
…
I fresh out of ideas. because if you call yourself a christian and you don’t give blood I just don’t know what the hell that means.
People are dieing. and you can stop it, right now today and you can help stop it.
Would you like to?
It’s going to take a pinprick to the arm. But somebody is going to die if you don’t do it.
Awwww… Is that too much of a sacrifice? Poor baby! Okay. Go back to church and sing more songs. I’m sure that’s good too.
If you don’t give blood and say are a christian I don’t know what the hell you mean by that
that you believe something?
No you don’t.
If you actually believed the God of the universe came here and died for you I don’t think there is any possibility that you would entertain he thought that it might not be worth 20 minutes of your time and a poke in the arm to donate blood to a reputable organization.
At that point you need to be evangelised.
You don’t need to be preached to, you don’t need another bible study, and you certainty don’t need another fellowship event, you need Jesus.
You’re Not Jesus!
One of my students recently put up a Blog Post. I’d love to link it here, but considering what I’m going to say about it I think I had better not for fear of inciting a flame war.
Suffice it to say she wrote about the disaster in Japan. It was honest, It was vulnerable. She referenced scripture, she provided pictures. She cried out publicly to a God who didn’t appear to be listening. Everything one would expect from a modern psalm of lament.
It should go without saying that I’m totally proud of her for the courage she demonstrated, and for the maturity of faith that invites doubt rather than feeling a need to cover everything up neatly with a little religious blanket. As a minister there isn’t much you can ask for that could be better than seeing your students grow closer to Christ.
But somebody out there decided to take the opportunity to question her motives and make her feel awful about stepping out. He accused her of failing to glorify god, because under his definition apparently glorifying God means you never let ‘em see ya sweat.
Well she’s awesome, so of course she talked to him about how the psalms contain similar statements. And that even Jesus himself says “My God my God why have you forsaken me?”
But guess what he said?
I bet you can guess!
He said “Well are you Jesus?”
…
…
And that’s how it arrives. “Well are you Jesus?” and then the conversation is over of course. Because no self respecting Christian is going to say “Yes I’m totally Jesus and what’s true of him is true of me” and once you invalidate Jesus you really can’t use evidence from the bible anymore So now we just have to shut up. My student goes home with her tail between her legs.
But wait a sec!
Are we seriously going to let him get away with that?
No, No we’re not.
I wanted to give you the context because I feel like without the context it’s hard to separate truth for emotion on this question. But my hope is that in this situation you can see that this is clearly argumentative behavior. It’s used to win arguments that can’t be won using truth. But it’s insidious. I’ve used the “your not Jesus” argument. I bet you have too, and at the time we both felt that we were right to use it, because after all the point we were defending was right… because after all it was our point…
But from an objective perspective, Like the one we get when we see it being used against my student. I think it’s much easier to see it’s wrong. If we disregard everything Jesus said or did as inapplicable because “we’re not Jesus” well frankly we just don’t have a whole lot of Christianity left to work with.
In fact even the word “Christianity” the Christ-Ians or “Little Christs” implies that we are in fact supposed to be like Jesus, to follow his example, and yes even be him.
Galatians 2:20
I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
So next time somebody gets into your face and tells you “You’re not Jesus” You just tell them right back “Yes I am! And you should be too!”
Rob Bell
I have refrained from speaking for a long time.
At times I have thought it prudent to be quiet.
At times I have been a coward.
But here is the truth. Rob Bell is a good man and a good pastor.
More than that. He has good theology.
I don’t agree with everything he’s ever said, and I don’t expect to agree with everything he ever will say. He is a human man, and he sins like the rest of us. But he is a brother, and a co-worker in the ministry, and I am deeply deeply embarrassed for my church that has crucified him in the eye of public opinion the way we have. It’s bullying, and it’s disgusting.
We’ve been accusing him of heresy since the book was first announced. well now the book is out. The results are in, and guess what?
Rob Bell is not a Universalist.
I’ll say that again.
Rob Bell is not a Universalist. And all you christian leaders who took time away from teaching the bible in order to string him up in the public square are guilty of lieing to your congregations.
James 3:1
Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.Luke 17:2
It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin.
Rob Bell believes in Kingdom Theology, and with it he accepts a variant understanding of heaven and hell than the one that is commonly taught. It’s actually a fascinating variant, and one I’m partial to myself.
Simply speaking heaven is coming now, beginning here on this earth, Our eternal lives start now and in so much as we live them in the presence of God we are already in heaven. In so much as we reject God we are in hell.
This notion does not preclude a traditional conservative interpretation as well (It’s quite possible that after we die hell becomes much more flamey, and there’s nothing about this theology that says it can’t be)
Bell also expresses awareness of the mystery of salvation. He doesn’t know who is saved and who isn’t. I’m very concerned about any supposed biblical teacher who claims anything different. The Bible says there will be those who cry “Lord, Lord” who will not enter.
And he believes that we will have the ability to choose Jesus even after death. I don’t think that’s biblicaly justified. So there you have it. Then again, I can see where he gets that idea based on the character of God.
S0 Rob Bell is batting 2/3 for his horrible heretical book that is going to lead this generation astray. What about you, conservative christian leader? I sincerely doubt you will find a reading of scripture that is as tolerant of your lying as it is on Bells NotUniversalism.
So why don’t you repent? go ahead and turn from your evil ways. Write a retraction to your articles, post follow ups to your facebook statuses, and admit you lied. Our God is abounding in steadfast love, and he will forgive all of us for the way we have hideously cannibalized one another. If you still don’t like Rob Bell that’s fine, but he’s not guilty of what you accused him of.
And while you’re at it… Do you remember that supposed 9/11 Victory Mosque?…Yeah…That too….And that ordinance we lied about… and that… and that…
Work
One of my favorite things about by job as a campus minister is it’s amorphous nature. Between ministering, fund raising, networking, and personal development it is very difficult to find an activity that I might participate in which is not part of my job.
Flying Kites in the park? That’s a “Gathering Event”
Read a book in the local coffee shop? That’s called “Reasearch”
Going to a bar with some freinds? We call that, “Evangelism”
Earlier today I went to an event at the International Student Center and ended up being interviewed about multiculturalism by the campus newspaper… But I didn’t go with the intention of forwarding InterVarsity’s value of Ethnic Reconciliation. I went because I like Korean food!
I understand how this might drive someone else crazy, because you’re never really off the clock. But you’re also never really on the clock, you do the work you want to do, when and where you want to do it, and if it get’s interrupted, so be it! Nobody is going to tell me that my 15 minute break is not for another 6 minutes.
Often I’ve been out somewhere, at about 10 at night. and people will start to recognize that they need to get to bed. “I’ve got work in the morning” someone will say “I’ve got to be in the office by 9” Another will say “Yeah I’m opening tomorrow, I have to be up by 6” and one lucky person will say “I can stay up, I don’t have to be in until noon”… That’s usually when all the heads turn to look at me as if to say “And what about you Ryan?”
And I look around at them, shrug and say “I’m pretty sure I’m at work” It’s phenomenal.
But that’s not something available only to Campus Ministers. Actually I’d argue that’s the call for all of us, we just have to define “work” differently.
See I’m lucky enough to get paid for what every christian is called to do anyway: Spread the Gospel, Love the Neighbor, Make the World a Better Place. The difference between me and a Mechanic, is that a Mechanic also fixes cars for people.
And It’s my hope that everyone will have a job they love. Whether that’s fixing cars, or performing surgeries, or teaching windsurfing, because when you love your job you never work a day in your life. But it’s also my hope that every christian, would love their ministry, and engage in it constantly, and never, never, be off of God’s clock.
Dissagreement and Understanding
I’ve found myself frustrated lately by a number of discussions that were more heated than they needed to be. If fact, they were more existent than they needed to be, they could have just as easily not happened at all! So even though you guys are not the problem I’m writing the blog in the hopes of making the world a slightly better place, by avoiding needless arguments with the help of a very simple distinction.
There is a difference between “I don’t understand” and “I disagree”
It seems simple, but I keep getting into these arguments with people I agree with who don’t understand something I say, so they argue with me until they do understand. Don’t do that!
And you can’t do both either. In order to disagree with a statement, you have to understand it. If I made the claim that “colorless green ideas sleep furiously” and you wanted to say “No they don’t” You would have to be able to affirm in your head that you know what it is I intended to mean by that statement, You know it is not correct, and you are prepared to tell me why not. If you don’t understand, you really have no choice bit to reserve judgment until you do.
Sometimes you understand partially. and the part you do understand is enough to disagree with. The statement “An echidna would make an excellent pet for you” might be something you disagree with, even without knowing what a echidna is, provided you don’t like pets for instance.
Sometimes you’ll be tempted to fill in the gaps in your own understanding. That’s okay, we all take shortcuts in colloquial speech, and nobody wants to be the dumb one who “doesn’t get it” But do yourself and the speaker a favor and assume you agree with them as your fill those gaps in. For some reason I see people who misunderstand that, so they assume their opponent is saying something wrong they’ve heard before and begins to argue with them on that basis. That’s really annoying, and really presumptuous. To assume you know what a person actually meant, and not only that, but you also know it’s wrong.
So really then. Debate is necessarily respectful. Because disagreement is an act of respect. In order to disagree with you I need to understand what your argument means, and think it sounds reasonable, if I didn’t think it sounded like something you would say on purpose I’d have to assume I misunderstood and withhold judgment until I had something to disagree with that made sense. So the phrase “I won’t even dignify that with a response” really means something, because responses do dignify ideas.
Meanwhile when some Hippi tells you something like “We are everything and in everything” there’s really not much to say other than “How interesting, and by ‘we’ you mean….’everything’…okay, go on”
Today Was A Good Day
People often ask me what an “average day” looks like for me as a minister at KSU. My answer is always the same, “there’s no such thing” In the field, every day is different, and in the line of service to the cross I have done everything from preaching to a congregation of octogenarians on Easter morning, to dressing up as a giant chicken and throwing candy around.
Some days I mess up and end up hurting people, some days things work out and I end up changing people’s lives. Some days I wonder if I ever accomplish anything at all. But today was a good day, So hopefully if I tell you about it, you’ll be able to get some idea of what sorts of things go on. (better than if I were to tell you about a terrible day where I was stuck in the snow for most of it anyway)
Today I woke up at the crack of noon, and promptly went back to sleep. No appointments, might as well take advantage of the opportunity to oversleep.
At about 2 I got out of bed, checked e-mail, and started cleaning my basement apartment. Administrative duties; Organizing receipts to deduct, creating a list of follow ups, dishes… that sort of thing. By 4 I was at Bluestem, my local haunt, the Coffee Shop where I go to mingle when I don’t have anywhere in particular to be. I wrote out my Ministry update letter, and sent out a vulnerable e-mail to my Sunday Night Group, asking for some help with it.
Bluestem is always filled with acquaintances, Baristas and other locals chat, and hang out, A Statistics Prof, gives me advice on my shorthand poker game while two other friends discuss the finer points of acknowledging one’s ex’s birthday.
Around 5 I make a trip to the Verizon Store because I’m going over the limit on text messages. I’d had a conversation earlier this week with two students over text about the differences between Men and Woman, John Henry Newman’s seminal work, and Die Hard and it put me clear over the top.
By 6:00 I’m back at Bluestem finishing a Blog post. And I got a call from another student wanting to know the “name of that kind of study we’ve been doing” He and I have been leading a manuscript study for the last couple of weeks, and he wanted to know the name of it, because he was going to try it with his house church…AWESOME!
Long story short, I end up attending the gathering, where I get to see one of my leaders lead others, into leading an inductive study of the Bible. I get done just in time to make it to “Theology on Tap” a ministry of the Episcopal Canterbury to talk about God in a pub. I brought a non-christian friend and we both loved it. Most of us were ministers, all of us lean left of center (pub and all) and the conversation was great. I got the number of a potential new mentors. My friend got to see Christians being christian while recognizing their own mistakes.
When it was over at about 11 many of us stayed and began to dream about a place open 24 hours where you could go to connect with people. We discussed the next generation, and what the world will look like when they’re in charge. We discussed what matters in life, and came to the conclusion that helping people matters, and not much else.
At 1 am we went back to his house, at 1:30 we were searching the internet for some 24 hour prayer ministry we had heard about at 2 we arrived there, and found it empty, so we decided to hold down the fort until 4 when the next shift arrived, and then we prayed with them for another hour
My night wasn’t over until after 5 AM this morning.
I’m sleeping in again
Dear California Police
Dear California Department of Justice, Local Police Departments including especially CHP and La County Sheriff, and the State Legislature: Dear California.
Three generations ago my great grandfather crossed the Brooklyn bridge by foot. Coming to America he got the best job that a young Irish Immigrant could hope for. Police Officer.
I never met him but I did meet my grandfather, who followed in his father’s footsteps in joining the NYPD, eventually becoming captain In Staten Island.
His son, my uncle moved to the great American south, and became Sheriff in Alachua County Florida, where he is now among the best bomb experts in the south, training teams in explosive ordinance disposal.
I say this to illustrate a point. I’m not an enemy of law enforcement. I come from a line of men who from a certain perspective, had every reason to expect me to become an officer myself. Growing up I played with toy police cars, and understood intuitively in my large imagined universes, that cops were always good guys.
There was a time when I used to see a squad car in my neighborhood and be thankful. I would think “Oh cool, the cops are here” or later (as I became more articulate) “It’s great that these civil servants are here to make us safer”
Those times are gone.
You’re disgusting to me now. A symbol of oppression and corruption that used force and coercion to harm decent people while doing little to reduce violent crime.
Now, as a Law-abiding citizen, when I see a squad car while I’m driving somewhere, I panic.
CRAP! Was I doing 66? Is my registration up to date? Oh No, Oh No! “Hands on the wheel, 10 and 2” Oh No! Is my seat belt securely fastened? Is my Tray Table up? SHOOT! Is it March Already? My new proof of insurance is still sitting on a desk at home. Please don’t pull me over, please don’t pull me over…
…And of course they do pull me over, and I wind up with a “fix it” ticket for about $150, which I can get resolved with a series of bribes and a day off work.
I have to get my proof of insurance (that he already knows I have because it’s in the system) and take it to a local station, where I have to wait in line bribe the officer at the front desk to do their Job, so I can get the ticket signed off that “yes this is actually an insurance card”
Then I have to drive to the county courthouse… being careful not to run into any other cops, and bring the signed off ticket to the courthouse, where I have to bribe them to process it. And they don’t take cash, or credit, checks only.
This is the case with any ticket. The best-case scenario. This is what happens when the cop that pulls you over I nice. And I describe it using the term “bribe” for a reason. Because this activity takes place independent of any crime that has taken place. They want to call it “fees” but that doesn’t make any sense, because I don’t just have to pay the fees when I’m guilty, I have to pay the fees no matter what, just to get the ticket fixed.
Once I got a Fixit for an expired registration, that wasn’t expired at all. I had an up to date registration that was up for renewal, and I’d payed it before the deadline but the DMV (California Government) didn’t send me my tags until it was a month late. So in that month a member of the CHP (California Government) gave me a ticket for not having a sticker on my license plate in time.
So I had to wait online at the DMV to find out what had happened, learn that I had had up to date registration all along, and wait for them to send it to me, meanwhile I’m driving my totally legal car as if I’m loaded down with illicit substances, trying to avoid getting another ticket. Then when It arrives I have to drive to the Irvine Police Department (California Government) where I had to pay them to agree that the first cop had been wrong, so that I could go to the Court (California Government) and pay them to process the ticket.
There is a word for this. When an agency (such as the California Government) charges you for a service which is actually non-existent or which they themselves created the need for. It’s called Racketeering. The most common type of which is the “protection racket” whereby a thug informs you that you will need to pay him a sum of money for “protection”… the monies payed out to said thug are called bribes.
You’re the thug, California
You force me to appear to break the law, which you then accuse me of, and charge me to get it dismissed without fair trial.
And trial is even worse!
Don’t make the mistake of thinking I’m upset about fees. Fees are a symptom of a corrupt system that incentives punishing good people for crimes that don’t exist.
Once I got a ticket for running a red arrow, at an intersection where no red arrow actually existed. I had proof that this was the case (I took video) I was happy to get take it to trial.
But in California you cannot contest a ticket until it’s “in the system” which takes a few weeks to a few months depending on how much they feel like screwing with you. You know it’s in the system when they mail you a copy of your ticket, but they never did.
Instead they waited six months and mailed me a notice that I had been charged with a misdemeanor “failure to appear in court” Well I didn’t fail to appear in court, because I didn’t have a court date, because they didn’t give me one, because when I called they told me to wait until it was in the system. But to be fair.. the ticket had a date on it, and that date had passed.
Well I got this ticket in LA, and the officer had the prerogative to choose which court he would like to try it in, so he put it in Santa Monica (about 3 hours away from where I live) And I can’t drive there because I’ve been accused of a misdemeanor and my license has been revoked.
I go to court to be arraigned and find that the date had been shuffled, and that my failure to appear (FTA) was therefore illegal. So I was invited just to pay the ticked (about $250)… but since I wasn’t guilty I didn’t want to do that. I requested a trial by written declaration, but doing that would have required me to pay the ticket up front and wait for it to be refunded. Well the San Diego PD was already holding onto about $200 of my money that I’d had to pay them for Felony Not Speeding and they hadn’t refunded me yet, so I wasn’t going to hold my breath and I made plans to appear personally. I figured it was worth the tank of gas, to be able to keep what money I still had.
Big mistake
Well I had to bribe the LA court to give me proof that the FTA had been dismissed, which I then had to take to the DMV so I could bribe them to give me my license back, now that I had proof they never should have taken it in the first place, so that I could drive back up to court with the video I’d taken of the intersection where I was purported to have run a red arrow that never existed.
Well the weeks passed, and my court date arrived. I woke up, grabbed my summons, and started walking to the car when a sudden chill or horror ran down my spine, I looked at the trial time 7am… I was sure it was 1pm, the same time as the arraignment. It was already 8! What was I going to do.
I called the court. I had missed my trial, so in my absence I’d been found guilty. Guilty of the Red Arrow, Of the FTA, and charged with an additional FTA for that morning. No more opportunity to contest.
So I had to drive up to the court again anyhow. Get the slip that said I was guilty or two misdemeanors. Pay them off. And then take the proof to the DMV again so that they wouldn’t take my license away.
And that’s how you work, California. That’s what it costs to not run a red arrow on your watch. $1,100; plus fees; 2 tanks of gas; $80 to the DMV; and plenty of pain and suffering.
But at least I’ve learned my lesson.
When a thug in uniform accuses you of something you didn’t do and let’s you pay $250 to take care of it. You should just pay the $250!
It’s just too bad though. I really wanted to like law enforcement….
What Are We In Favor Of Again?
Christians are against abortion, gay marriage, and evolution. Against the continuing decay of moral values, and the increased need to be “PC” at the expense of frank honesty. We’re against socialism, communism, fascism, and liberalism. We disagree with postmodernism, nihilism, materialism and probably existentialism (though we’re not exactly sure what that last one is)
We know saying “Yes” to Christ means saying “No” to every other religion and worldview including (but by no means limited to) Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Baha’i, Zoroastrianism, Atheism, Agnosticism, Taoism, Jainism, Confucianism, Rastafari, Shinto, Sikhism, Animism, Druidism, Paganism, Wicca, Scientology, Christian Science, Mormonism, and maybe even Catholicism.
And as well we should.
I want to be clear hear and now that this is not a post about me saying that the church shouldn’t be against things. I know one of the biggest things we’ve been against lately is people telling us we can’t be against anything, so let me say now: I think we should be against things sometimes.
But holy guacamole people, What are we FOR?
We’re for Jesus, obviously, but how does that play out? What does it mean? He died and rose again so that what? We go to heaven?
Is that what we’re for? We’re in favor of going to heaven when we die? There’s gotta be something else…
What about Good morals. Christians are for good morals, and family values. But again, what does that mean?
it means no premarital sex, no adultery, so stealing, lying or cheating, Opposition to militant feminism, insolent children, obscene entertainment. Great things to be against. but I ask again, What are we FOR?
Small government, Lower taxes?
Nope! You’re getting confused. That’s republican, not christian…
I fear we have become an anti- religion. We have become a people, defined by the things we are not. we are like a hole in the ground, not a thing in itself except by contrast to the ground around it.
This is one of the reasons I’m so careful not to enumerate problems without suggesting solutions here on this Blog. It’s not that I think I know all the answers it’s just that anyone can find fault. I want to find answers instead.
And this topic is no exception.I’m not just against not being in favor of anything. I’m In favor of being in favor of some things:
I think we should in favor of Love.
In favor of Faith Hope and Charity,
In Favor of the Fruits of the Holy Spirit and all the things that bring them about.
And we should be in favor of creative and constructive ways to increase those things.
This week, how can you create something that promotes global goodness?
How can you support something that makes the world better.
If you get an idea about how to oppose something that makes the world worse write it down and do it another week. This week be in favor of something.
Then comment me up and tell us about it.
HOLY $#/+!
I want to talk a bit about some f***ing profanity.
I feel strange doing it. I find myself asking “Really? This is the most important thing to talk about right now?” But I honestly think it is. Not as an end in and of itself, but as a means to an end. There are some topics I really feel aught to be talked about, and I feel that I can not do them justice without using words which may not be appropriate for children.
(incidentally if you are a child reading this please go read something else, and if you are easily offended by profanity please grow up, get a pair, and keep reading because this S*-t is biblical)
There is of course no list of “Bad words” in scripture. If there were, they would be words like “Mamzer” and”Raca” not “bastard” as the bible was not written in 21st century English. The Recourse our Sunday School teachers take then is to argue that we shouldn’t use any words that are considered offensive, in whatever society we happen to be living in.
But the Bible doesn’t follow that rule! Both the Hebrew “Mamzer” and the Greek “Raca” can be found in scripture[1]. both words refer to illegitimate children, both are more offensive to their cultures than the word “bastard” is to ours. Matthew 5:22 says:
But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
Here Jesus clearly speaks against filippant profanity. But not so much that he feels compelled to refer to the “R-Word”. Instead he essentially says “You’re right you probably shouldn’t say “bastard”. You shouldn’t call people morons[2] either” the irony though. Is that no translator I’ve found has been so bold as to translate it that way, so we censor it by leaving an untranslated Greek word in our English bibles. I daresay if Jesus wanted the blow softened he could have done that himself.
So do we stop there? Should we take Jesus word on the subject as final and literal?
Maybe we shouldn’t say bastard or moron because those are bad words, Jesus just said them each once so that we wouldn’t have any doubt which words were the bad ones.
But if that’s the case Jesus must have changed his mind because later in Matthew he does refer to people as Morons (6 times[3])
If we look holistically at scripture we can see a clear pattern emerging. biblical authors (Jesus included) are not afraid to use harsh language and profanity to get a point across, they do not pepper their speech with expletives, but neither do they censor themselves. The prophet Isiah said in 64:6:
But we are all like an unclean thing, And all our righteous acts are dirty tampons ; We all fade as a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, Have taken us away.
The Hebrew reads “‘iddah beged” literally meaning “menstruation cloth”
In Galations 5:12 Paul wishes the Judiazers would cut their dicks off
In Mark 7:27 Jesus appears to use an ethnic slur
In 1 Kings 18:27 Elijah taunts the worshipers of Baal that perhaps their god won’t answer because he’s taking a dump
And Ezekiel 23:20… Well… Even I won’t say that one. you can look it up…
Perhaps the most impressive instance of biblical profanity though is Philipians 3:8
Yea doubtless, and I count all things loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and consider it a pile of shit, that I may win Christ,
The Greek word being “skubalon” which is refers literally to excrement, particularly that of animals. Josephus used the word this way, along with Strabo and Aretaeus. Philipians however is the first instance on file of it being used metaphorically to refer to a worthless and profane experience, Implying that Paul not only approves of this kind of swearing, he actually invented it!
—————————————————————————————-
1. Deuteronomy 23:2 contains “Mamzer”, Matthew 5:22 contains “Raca”
2. Literaly. “Morons” from the greek μωρός (Moros)
3. Matt 7:26, 23:17, 23:19, 25:2, 25:3, and 25:8
Surviving the Zombie Onslaught
If you follow the blog and have been reading along you’ll have heard all about how our behavior as Christians mimics Zombies in the sense that we both don’t mean any harm as we mindlessly attempt to assimilate people. And if you care about the church, it may be that in reading, you’ve started to become very depressed.
It’s ON now!
Life in a zombie church can be depressing for people with brains. But take heart! I have good news! Zombies have a natural enemy, so there is hope yet. And there are still some left in the church, in fact, there’s one writing this blog right now! Yes that’s right, I’m referring to the Nerds. Zombies worst nightmare.
Nerds are not often considered effective in battle. They’re paralyzing and irrational fear of girls tends take them out of the running for any valor awards you may be thinking of giving out. but against Zombies, or Raptors, a nerd is exactly what you need. We know this enemy, we know their strengths and weaknesses, we have prepared for this.
Here’s what you need to know about how to survive the onslaught of Christian zombies in your town.
1: Shoot Them in the Head
A zombie’s weakness is the head. They’re like Highlander immortals, they just keep coming unless you take out their head. Christian Zombies are no different, their will is immovable but their brains are soft and mushy. Since their illness is the result of a misunderstanding, you need to kindly, but forcefully demonstrate from scripture and experience, that thought is a good thing! But be careful, because the Christian Zombies already think they agree with you so you will have to “Double Tap“even when you think you’ve won the debate, you need to win it again. Really drive the point deep into their cranium.
2: Get to a Safe Place and Hole Up
Thinking Christians, and thinking people in general have got to stick together. As thinking becomes less and less popular outside, you need a pocket of people who are willing to be “impolite” enough to intellectually disagree with you and rationally explain why. you need practice thinking, or you might stop! In the movies, this means a mini mall, or a skyscraper you can barricade, but for us this means book clubs, and Star Wars groups. anything that will keep Zombies out.
But be careful, if somebody who’s been bitten gets back into the safe house it may become the most dangerous area of all! Similarly, if you create a group full of a bunch of the same kind of “smart” Christians all of whom think similarly you risk creating an ideal environment to foster zombie-ism where all of the humans in the room suffocate in a cloud of their own agreement. (5-Point Calvinists are especially prone to this)
3. You’ll Need Plenty of Food and Guns
As Columbus said in Zombieland “It’s a marathon not a sprint. Unless it’s a sprint, then sprint” In the church today, Now is not the time to go on a Zombie Killing spree while armed with only a baseball bat and this article. You’ll only make enemies, feel guilty, and return zombiefied in the third act to kill your former love interest. Instead you need to arm up and renew your strength. Know the truth, learn the arguments be prepared with a sawed-off single barrel shotgun of knowledge, to defend your stance against any zombies. And fill up on the Bread of Life that is available through scripture. Know the Bible and know God because as it says in Isaiah
They that wait on the Lord shall renew their strength. They shall mount up on wings like eagles, They shall run a tractor rigged with C-4 straight through the heart of the zombie stronghold and not grow weary, they shall walk and not be faint
…or something like that…
Life in Zombieland
All Last Week I’ve been talking about zombies. And I wonder if some of you aren’t wondering if I’ve been a bit melodramatic. “Ryan” you might be thinking “I’m sorry you’ve run into a couple people who seem to want to eat your brains, And surely that’s a bad thing. but this problem can’t possibly be as widespread as you’re saying it is. So before I close this series tomorrow, I want to take a post, and talk about the signs and immediate results of this problem I’ve been talking about.
The anti-intellectuality of the christian sub-culture has lead to a social hierarchy not unlike High School. When cognitive capabilities are considered a detriment, those possessing them are considered with suspicion and relegated to the bottom of the social ladder. People with other notable traits, Such as proficiency in sports or innate physical beauty are boosted to the top of the ladder, along with a considerable portion of people who are simply unremarkable, but well liked.
In other words The Jocks and the Popular kids reign over the Freaks and Geeks.
Typically this social construct reverses polarity by the end of college, and in certainty the employment sector. But in the church the pattern is mostly holding with a few exceptions.
Cameron, With “Crocoduck”
- Plantinga With Books
Kirk Cameron is a sought after debater at churches who fetches a high honorarium, Alvin Plantinga is scarcely heard of.
Let me say that again: The kid from growing pains, has more influence in your church that the Evangelical Professor Emeritus Of Analytic Philosophy at Notre Dame. here are some pictures for you to compare.
Pretty people rule Christendom. Musicians, Actors, Charismatic Personalities, folks who can work a crowd. If they’re smart we’ll try not to hold it against. Scientists, Philosophers, Historians… They can come to our church anytime they want. But don’t ask us to put them up front. What are you Crazy?
This rule of the Jocks isn’t the problem of course, It’s just a symptom. Jocks are better than Zombies, Jocks are people too. But they’re being in charge helps us understand that we don’t like thinking when we can help it… And I will say this.
In a Zombie attack. Jocks are usually the first to turn. They don’t tell you when they’re bitten, and if they do survive the the third act, they’re always the ones that leave the door open. Always.
The Cause of The Zombie Apocalypse
Yesterday I rhetorically asked “what gives?” regarding the anti-intelectuality of many Christians today I want to take a shot at answering my own question.
Why do we, as a people group, fear logic and reason? Why do we clip verses out of context and put undue emphasis on them that diminish the importance of sources of knowledge other than church? It’s not native to scripture, so where do we get it from?
Well I think there is a number of causes, but the first major problem is we think we’re saved by thinking the right things, rather than by Jesus. So out thoughts become a very touchy subject because the implication is that thinking the wrong things could send us straight to hell.
Also we don’t really believe Christianity is true. We don’t think it lines up with the real world, so we’re afraid of the real world, because paradoxically, we think if we study science too much, we might realize evolution is true, and then lose our faltering faith in Jesus, and then go to hell.
Which is ridiculous because obviously if you proved Christianity was wrong you wouldn’t have to worry about hell. But these conversations don’t take place in the sense-making parts of our brains. if they did, then we would just realize we don’t really believe and move on from there instead of getting defensive.
The final problem I see is that the church has become a business, and pastors the CEOs. Pastors are expected to keep people in the seats and keep the lights on. Doubt may be good for a healthy human existence, but it’s not good for business, so rather than let people search for answers in fields that pastors are unfamiliar with like Biology, our automatic subconscious response is to be fearful and defensive of the question, and our congregants follow suit.
On Sunday, when it comes time to preach a sermon on something, Pastors are busy (another result of putting them at the head of a business in addition to asking them to care for people’s spiritual needs personally) and it’s much easier and safer to preach a sermon on the first part of 1 Cor 8 “Knowledge puffs up while love builds up” Than it is to explain that 1 Cor 15 was a rational treatise that invited free inquiry, or talk about the message of the Pauline story being one of truth prevailing, or telling about Kepler, a monk who some might credit with inventing modern science, doing so for the Glory of God. These things run through the christian narrative like a scarlet thread, but they must be exposited, they must be found and dug up and understood, and that takes work, and work takes time, and time is money, and the sermon… is due… tomorrow.
Zombies and Evangelism
Yesterday I wrote about a rising tide in Christianity that resembles the behavior of Zombies.
many Christians think that doubt, rationality, and booksmarts are all worldly, and by extension “bad” And they want you to join them in this level of thoughtlessness. “Just trust Jesus, and let go of everything that gets in the way of that”
have you noticed what a strong resistance the normal people are putting up to evangelism lately? I mean you have the New atheists who are insisting The Pope should be arrested, and trying to prove that Jesus never existed. You’ve got the Relativists who are convinced that no belief is wrong except one that believes it’s right, and everything in between all united in one conviction, that following Jesus is bad and wrong.
Why do they hate us so much?
Could it be because we keep trying to eat their brains?
I don’t know. but I do know this: I’m a longtime christian and spiritual leader, familiar to just about every church tradition in America and I have a bold personality, and I don’t feel free to doubt in Church. When I have a question I keep it to myself and address it in a super safe environment with one person at a time because I’m afraid of judgment.
If I were a non-christian, I’d probably be petrified.
And yet Christianity is the only world religion I can think of that is falsifiable. That invites scrutiny, and that boasts holy scripture is written mostly by unabashed intellectuals (Paul was a Scholar, Luke a Doctor, and the OT was written mostly by historians)
So what Gives?
Zombie Christians
Johnathan Coulton sings a song about a polite Zombie. The chorus goes
All we want to do is eat your brains,
We’re not unreasonable, I mean noone’s gonna eat your eyes!
All We Want to do is eat your brains
We’re at an impasse here, Maybe we should compromise…
Something about that song reminds me of several Christians I know. They have good hearts, these Christians, they try to be polite, and kind, but at the end of the day, they want to eat your brains so you’ll be just like them.
Like Zombies, many Christians make no use of their rational faculties, and they don’t want you to either. because thinking, in their mind, is bad.
I think this phenomenon has to be related to the classic “Faith vs Reason” or “Science vs Religion” problem but it goes much deeper than that. I certainty won’t be the first or last blogger to insist that Faith is compatible with Reason, and that Science is harmonious with Christianity when both are rightly considered. But I may be the first one to point out that that fake debate has resulted in what amounts to a rampant anti-intellectualism in the modern church.
So we say things like “Science and religion are not incompatible, and besides scientists make mistakes” or “Philosophy, means ‘love of knowledge’ but I love Jesus instead” or ” Why are you trying to rationalize God? Don’t you know he is beyond our understanding that’s what faith is for, It’s better than reason”
BLAM!
And it’s not just science and reason anymore! It’s gotten to the point when anytime I say anything “smart” about math, history, or even theology I’m met with rolling eyes and reminded that “God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise” and that “Knowledge puffs up” Never mind that that first passage refers to the scandal of the cross, and the second, to food sacrificed to idols! Forget about the fact that there is a running Pauline narrative here that comes in the form of a logical argument. Totally ignore anything that would indicate there might possibly be a cultural backdrop to this text. We’re too busy having “faith like a child” to worry about that stuff.
The problem is that what you call faith like a child is what I call faith like a zombie.
Children aren’t stupid, they aren’t anti-intellectual, and they aren’t judgmental. They’re “uninformed” certainty. but I’m pretty sure that’s not what Jesus meant when he asked us to come to him like little children.
Opposing the Devil
So I have a confession.
I’ve been watching the show “Reaper” on The CW.
I know, I know, guys like me aren’t supposed to watch formulaic pulp comedies like Reaper, We’re supposed to be reading stuff and watching NOVA reruns… I do that to, but I’m a sucker for anything theological and Reaper is about a kid who’s soul was sold to the devil by his parents before his birth, so now he is forced to serve as the devils bounty hunter for all eternity in between shifts at the hardware store where he works…
…I told you… it’s not a smart show.
But honestly, theologically speaking it’s not terrible.
It’s not great (I’m on the 14th episode and Jesus hasn’t come up yet) but considering it’s Hollywood they have done a decent job of sticking to a single Judeo Christian mythology and running with it. I’m used to seeing some Hinduism mixed in somewhere along with some stuff they just made up. But Reaper sticks to Angels and Demons and is clear on the fact that angels are heavenly beings different from dead humans, and demons are fallen angels who participated in the rebellion.
One episode was particularly poignant (whether they realized it or not)
it depicted a group of demons, who Sam (Our Hero) connects with that have formed an underground revolution against Satan. They regret the fall, and are going to attempt to overthrow Lucifer. When Sam attends their secret meeting however, he finds them supporting and encouraging one another to do good. They talk about planting flowers, and a sign in the back of the room reads “12 helpful steps” (to overthrowing Satan) Here’s a snippit:
Bob: Hi, My Name is Bob, and I’m a demon
Group: Hi Bob!
Bob: The week started out great, I rode around Monday, collecting recyclables, then uh, I dropped coins into expired meters, then I- Tried to eat a child… I knew right away it was wrong so I- Untied the kid and called my sponsor Randy and we had a pretty tough talk. Thanks man, I owe you my life.
Randy: Thank you man.
Okay, so silly… not intelligent, but it also brilliantly illustrates a theological perspective that is currently being forwarded by folks like N.T. Wright and Dallas Willard to folks who still think Noah’s wife was Joan of Arc.
It’s called kingdom theology, and one of the key pieces to it is the idea that what we do here and now, has the potential to add to or take away from the Kingdom of God. And our job as Christians, is to add to it.
That means that we are actively at war against the devil to bring heaven down to earth and destroy hell. We all, through the power of the blood of Jesus Christ, oppose the dark forces in this world. and what are our weapons?
Alcoholics Anonymous.
Seriously that’s one of our strongest weapons.
I was speaking to a Non-Christian AA Graduate and Economics Major earlier this week about how he might use his Econ knowledge to make the world a better place. “Global economic interdependence, may be the best way to bring about world peace” I said, but he was doubtful. “I don’t think so man, and I don’t think Global Christianity is the answer either” I agreed “Not if by Christianity, you mean going to church” but then he continued “You know what would work? An army of recovering alcoholics! … If we could get everybody to practice the 12 steps man… it would be perfect!”
He’s absolutely right. that would change the world utterly.
We are using AA to turn the coats of some of Satan’s strongest allies into warriors for our side. We also have WorldVision, IJM, The Invisible Children and yes, InterVarsity Christian Fellowship.
Passive, Nonviolent Resistance to the Darkness. That’s life in the Lords Army… Don’t laugh… I’m dead serious.
Marraige As The Last Resort
One popular mantra in christianity today is “What if Jesus really meant that”
It’s a powerful question, when applied tho things like “Sell all you have and give to the poor” or “Judge not lest ye be judged” or “early in the morning while it was still dark Jesus went to a quiet place and prayed” Assuming that Jesus wrote the Bible (as a functional member of the trinity speaking through the Holy Spirit to the Biblical authors) the prospect of taking seriously some of the least popular elements of Biblical teaching is both dangerous and revolutionary.
But one verse I have never seen this applied to is 1 Corinthians 7. Let’s take a look:
Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. But this I say by way of concession, not of command. Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am. However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that.
But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
Oh That’s right! I’m here to make friends with this one!
What if the Bible, really means what it says here? Are we even willing to admit that’s a possibility?
I think it is. and I think that though understanding it may require an Aspergers-level ability to ignore social norms,this passage may be the most romantic thing ever written into any holy book.
“Don’t get married” says Paul “Unless you absolutely have to, then go ahead” he then goes on to say “And then have lots of sex”
It reminds me of that scene in “A Beautiful Mind” where Nash is trying to hit on a girl, and he’s a mathematical genius but he just can’t figure out how to talk to women so he ends up saying
I don’t exactly know what I am required to say in order for you have intercourse with me. But could we assume that I said all that. I mean essentially we are talking about fluid exchange right?
Husbands, try this line with your wife tonight:
“Well Honey, I need it!… So Satan won’t tempt me for my lack of self control”
tell me how it goes
…But if we can ignore the social awkwardness that this writing presents to our culture and consider the meat of the point, it’s actually very good… It’s more than good, it’s beautiful.
I wrote in my last post that when my car died it felt similarly to when my past relationships ended. Well apparently I wasn’t authentically in love with those girls!!! Hopefully if there’s a woman out there for me, I’ll care about her more than my truck! That’s the one you marry.
“Wait until you can’t bear it any more, Until you can’t live without her when the thought of being apart makes you feel as if you’re on fire… well then at that point, ‘it’s better to marry than to burn”
Do you think it’s “true love” because you cried when she dumped you and “You never cry”. That’s nothing. Maybe when you can’t breathe, then we’re ready to start thinking about marriage.
But absolutely not before.
My Car
(This was written on Tuesday and published late in order to ensure that none of my closest friends would feel undervalued for having to hear about this on my blog first.)
I had no idea, not the vaguest hint, yesterday morning as I woke up, I would be saying goodbye to my 1995 Toyota 4Runner
I had been worried about a sore throat that I felt was coming on, which would interfere with my ability to engage at the meeting I was headed to in Lawrence.
But while I was still outside of Topeka I got stuck in the snow, and when I called the tow truck they recommended bringing it to the mechanic. Even when he said those fateful words “I think ya burned our yer tranny” I figured we were talking about an $800-$1000 repair.
It’s a $4,800 repair. on a car worth $2,900. and I have $600 to my name. (minus school dept)
The transmission was the only thing left. I’d had the engine rebuilt, replaced the radiator, kept up with brakes and electronics (that’s just regular maintenance) I just had a CB Radio Installed… I’d been planning to keep it forever, just as long as the transmission held out. But it’s toast.
The care is gone. I’m going through he steps to negotiate selling it for scrap metal. I’m saying goodbye.
The word for this emotion is heartbreak. I can tell because it feels the same as when my past girlfriends have dumped me (maybe worse) my face feels chapped, like it’s been sunburned, my eyes are full of tears.
I feel like it was a member of the family. It was my constant companion since high school, When friends turned their backs on me, excommunicated me, judged me, and abandoned me, my 4Runner was dependable. It was my shelter, my tectum et tempestas the only constant in my often transitional life.
I’d slept in that car when times were hard. It had become my home in a literal sense for several periods during my ownership, and in a very real and figurative sense for the rest of the time. When tensions were high and emotions flared, I always knew I had my car, and I could always drive away.
It was Serenity
It is dead.
She had a full life, We’d traveled all over together. I won’t lament for having neglected to to do ____ while I had it. We’ve done donuts, taken road trips, helped people move, gone off road, and hauled a truckload of candy home for Halloween. She came Urban Camping In San Diego, Helping Homeless folks at Midnight in Downtown LA, taking a girl on a first date to Dateland, and all the way with me to Kansas.
Now I’m starting to ask the hard question of what it means to live without her, and trying not to ask the easy questions like “why, God why?” I’ll probably be without a car for a while. Maybe I’ll get a Motorcycle when I can afford one, maybe someday I’ll get another 4Runner. For now My call is simple:
John Ch 5:8: Jesus Said to him “Get up, take up your pallet and walk”
Christ’s Alignment
It’s clear to me where Christ stands on the scale of Alignment he is obviously Neutral Good, The same alignment as Dirty Harry, the same as Spiderman, Luke Skywalker, The Boondock Saints, and The Doctor.
Jesus cares about others more than himself, he is not self seeking, he is not attracted to violence or detriment, he seeks justice and peace. And he does not give a rip what the rules are supposed to be, not according to human standards, not according to any standards but The Father
Christianity is not a Chaotic institution. We don’t seek to overthrow governments and instate theocracy (yet). Our Bible encourages us to “Be subject to governing authorities” (Romans 13:1) and Jesus himself advocated paying taxes (Mark 12:7 and others) Together these sorts of teachings have been absorbed in america into a generalized teaching to “obey the laws of the land”
But let’s not forget that Jesus was tried and sentenced to capital punishment by governing authorities. That all the first disciples were martyred or fell into serious legal trouble, and that Christianity has been and remains to be illegal in numerous countries throughout the history of the world. Forming a contradiction between out command to “obey the laws of the land” and our command to “go and make disciples of all nations”
So we Christians have modified the teaching into a distortion of its self “Obey the laws of the land except where they directly contradict scripture” which is strange, because Paul never said that. Somebody just made that up to make the teaching work, which is a big theological No No.
It turns out “obey the laws of the land” is not a verse at all… Well it is…(D&C 58:21-22) Written by Joseph Smith and considered essential Latter Day Saints scripture, but it’s not a bible verse (not one that I’ve ever found anyway) and as to Romans 13 it needs to be understood in context; Literary and Historical.
Literarily Paul has just finished talking about humble service in Christ, and helping your enemies, he moves there to submitting to Rome. And historically Rome is that same government that killed Christ, that persecutes Christians, where Christianity persists to be illegal (or will soon be depending on what year you believe Romans was written)
The teaching in context is not “We are Lawful Good” it’s just not. The teaching is “We’re not Chaotic Good” “We’re not the Zelots, we’re not here to overthrow Rome by force, we’ll just be a redeeming influence even as they kill us” that’s Neutral Good.
but American Christianity has stopped being revolutionary, it’s stopped being subversive, It’s stopped being like the Church in Rome which was Neutral Good while threatening to be Chaotic Good . The Church in Kansas is Lawful Good and is threatening to become Lawful Neutral
And the world already sees us as Lawful Neutral (they don’t value our standard or morality) and as we shift down the scale From Good to Neutral what do you suppose they think we’re turning into?
Let’s fix this.
Alignment
Christians don’t like Dungeons & Dragons as a rule.
We generally suspect that it just may possibly be a little bit The Devil.
But since when have I ever payed attention to christian social conventions? I think D&D provides some great fodder for analogies. Since when you boil it down it’s a rulebook for a simple created universe, it can often help us understand our own complicated created universe.
For example, when dealing with a characters allegiance, D&D found that the universe did not work well enough with a dichotomy. It’s not fun enough to create a world full only of “good guys” and “bad guys” so they invented the concept of “alignment”
D&D (3rd edition) measured characters according to 2 axis. Good vs Evil, and Lawful vs Chaotic with the understanding that some characters are neutral on each axis. Good vs Evil, measures how altruistic the character is, vs their willingness to benefit at the expense of others. Lawful vs Chaotic Measures the characters willingness to follow rules vs their propensity to break them. So all together it results in 9 possible alignments.
I’ll go through them here:
So Now that we’ve been educated about D&D philosophy here’s the question. What alignment is Christ?
What alignment are we called to?
I mean He wasn’t evil right? So that leaves 6. He was probably good but I could hear an argument for Lawful Neutral…
What say you?
Comment me up and I’ll have my answer next week at this time
Serve God and Die
“They called me Mr. Fun” said Mick, as he sat there on stage. We all understood what he meant, periodically the community would need something to break the tension or the monotony, a game, or a joke, maybe a song. Mick was the person who the community would turn to, the person they expected that to come from.
But that was a long time ago, way before I joined the team, and Mick’s spot had long been filled by Gamemaster Choe. Now Mick, with his long resume of experience raising kids, and preaching in the iron curtain, took a seat alongside the other responsible adults as one of the respected wise elders of our team.
He was a part of a panel, assembled among us at the last minute when the Keynote speaker fell through, to answer questions and share wisdom. he was just like us once. 30 years ago after he graduated college he joined IV staff, and he’s still here.
I forget the last question of the evening, but I remember the answer. it was something along the lines of “What is one thing you would leave us younger staff with that has benefited you in ministry the most?” The other two panelists had answered, it was up to Mr. Fun to wrap it up.
“Our job on earth, is to serve God,
And then die” Said Mr. Fun
“And retirement… Is after that”
He expanded on the thought a bit, but that was the force of it right there. Everything else just helps that sink in. “Serve God and die”
When you’re finished doing both of those things you’re finished, and not before.
It really is whimsical when you think about it. It’s ironically non-ironic that Mr Fun would have told us. What are you doing? what should you be doing? If you’re not dead.. Guess what? Serve god… and then, when you’re done with that, die.
Amen
Did Jesus Exist Part II
In the last article I introduced the new problem of defending the historicity of Jesus the man. And spent time “setting the goalposts” in such a way that there will be no room for wiggling away from what the evidence shows.
When last we left our heroes I suggested that the case should be so fragile when robbed of it’s precious ambiguity that it would almost fall on it’s own weight, and I proposed in this article to blow it out of the park.
Since evidence abounds, I won’t bore you by defending all of it, only some of my favorite early, non-christian extra-biblical sources. But just to give us all a sense of the mountain I’m mining from, let’s briefly list off what sources I won’t be using:
The 13 Cannonical Pauline Epistles (Romans, Ephesians…) the Non-Canonical Pauline Epistles (0 Corinthians, the Harsh Letter…) The Cannonical Non-Pauline Epistles (1,2,3 John, 1,2 Peter…) The 4 Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) The Apocryphal Gospels (Thomas, Judas, Mary) The Q Document, The Acts of The Apostles, The Ancient Christian Creeds, Early Church Fathers (Justin Martyr, Clement of Rome…) And everything medieval, no matter how reluctant the source (Toletoth Jesu…)
For our purposes, we will assume that all of these documents, or more accurately, all of these groups of documents are inadmissible. We’ll assume that they are either a part of, or a result of, the most elaborate and ridiculously unnecessary prank in the history of pranks that every early christian was in on, and willing to be martyred to protect.
What else have we got?
Well for starters, There’s Mara Bar Serapion:
For what benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death, seeing that they received as retribution for it famine and pestilence? Or the people of Samos by the burning of Pythagoras, seeing that in one hour the whole of their country was covered with sand? Or the Jews by the murder of their Wise King, seeing that from that very time their kingdom was driven away from them? For with justice did God grant a recompense to the wisdom of all three of them. For the Athenians died by famine; and the people of Samos were covered by the sea without remedy; and the Jews, brought to desolation and expelled from their kingdom, are driven away into every land. Nay, Socrates did “not” die, because of Plato; nor yet Pythagoras, because of the statue of Hera; nor yet the Wise King, because of the new laws which he enacted.
This was written before the year 200 and possibly as early as 73, predating even some biblical books. To my knowledge no scholar anywhere denies the authenticity of the text, but some claim that it does not necessarily refer to Jesus and might refer to some other wise Jewish king murdered just before the decline of Judea…
Well there were of course no kings during that time considering the Romans were occupying them. but just to be super safe let’s do another one. How about Tacitus, the roman historian who between AD 56 and 117 wrote the following:
Nero fastened the guilt of starting the blaze and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians [Chrestians] by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontious Pilatious, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.
Even Bart Ehrman, counts this passage as confirmation that Jesus existed, and suffered under Pilate. (Ehrman, is probably the worlds leading scholar on the new testament, and disagrees strongly with the claims of Christianity)
Here’s what’s even more interesting. Do you see that little typo up there? The original text had the word Chrestions instead of Christians, as the name of the followers of Christus (the Latin version of the Greek word “Christ”) it appears to have been corrected on the page but the original “e” is visible under ultraviolet light
Now consider this passage from The Twelve Caesars:
“As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome”
Worthless without Tacitus, This now provides valuable corroboration to the claim that Christ existed, and his followers interacted with Rome in the first century. Both major roman historians of the period confirm it!
Is that all?
No, That’s not all, but that’s enough.
During this time in history, experts predict that there were probably hundreds of claims to messiahship in Jerusalem, among the people who didn’t believe Jesus was the real deal, he would hardly have been considered notable, and yet he apparently is…
It’s almost like something was going on here…
Wouldn’t you like to learn what?
Did Jesus Even Exist?
The answer is “Of course he did, don’t be silly”
Nonetheless it’s become popular for semi-learned skeptics to deny even the historical existence of Jesus, just for fun.
I say “just for fun” because it’s not important in their mind that Jesus didn’t exist. They don’t care, what’s important to them is that you can’t prove that Jesus existed, and that’s ridiculous, so you are obviously an ignorant brainwashed religious fool… It’s a sort of a test, you see.
And armchair apologists play right into it when they memorize proofs verbatim from Lee Strobel about things like the reliability of scripture and the Case for Miracles while holding very few cards on the obvious things because nobody in their right mind would deny something like that.
The good news though is that if you can defend the historical existence of Jesus, you have the opportunity to impress a skeptic who’s not at all expecting you to meet their challenge. Often these people will have read one website about how Jesus may not ever have existed, and how the silly xtians can’t even prove that much, and then walked away satisfied that Christianity had been thoroughly debunked, without bothering to learn that they could challenge us to prove some much harder things if they wanted to.
So let’s do that shall we? Let’s get a good defense going for the historical Jesus, so we don’t end up embarrassing ourselves when the time comes.
There are 3 base assumptions of the critics that I want to address first, to help us have a nice clean discussion and don’t end up subtly misunderstanding one another. All of these statements are trueish And in order to speak accurately we need to be able to parse the truth from the fiction, and agree with clarification.
There are no contemporary records of Jesus’ life
This is technically true, The historians who wrote about Jesus did so in retrospect, after his death. There are no newspapers from 31 AD recording the Wedding at Cana or anything. But it’s also misleading. I’d much prefer to say “No contemporary records of Jesus’ life have been preserved.” usually the skeptic will make it sound very problematic by saying something like “I’m supposed to believe that this guy was running around performing miracles and nobody wrote anything about it until almost a century later?” and you want to correct them by saying something like “I’m sure lots of people wrote stuff about it, but none of what they said was copied over and over and preserved in monasteries for 2000 years, or hidden in airtight jars, or carved into stone, so we don’t have it anymore. What we do have is good historical evidence just like any other character in antiquity.”
There’s another implicit assumption hidden within this statement: that contemporary evidence is something we should expect from someone who lived 2000 years ago. That’s not the case. We learn about Socrates from Plato, about Alexander the Great from Plutarch, about Julius Caesar from Suetonius. All of them writing after the deaths of their topic people.
This is how it is done.
…Of course most of us believe there were some surviving documents written by eye-witnesses, the problem is just that those eye witnesses converted and their writings were included in the bible. Which brings us to our second assumption
You can’t use the Bible, that’s circular reasoning!
Once again, like Santa Clause, this is true and not true. many Christians, when confronted with this or any issue for the first time will start spouting the first defense that comes to their mind, and often those defenses are biblical and circular. Since most articulate atheists have heard and seen this happen over and over, they are used to responding to the word “Bible” with a knee jerk reaction of “Circular Reasoning!” because 99% of the time they’re right.
However, since the bible is old, even if it were not reliable as the word of God it would be useful to teach us about the time in which it was written, just as the Qur’an, Bhagavat Gita, And Enûma Eliš are.
It’s important to understand the subtle of the difference between using the New Testament as a inerrant text to prove itself true, versus using it as a series of documents from the 1st century which give us historical clues. It will be critical when the time comes to defend something hard (like the resurrection)
In this case however, you can knock this one fairly out of the park without ever mentioning the Bible, And you might as well since it’ll score you brownie points and save your argument from appearing circular (even if it isn’t) When you do, you’ll no doubt run head first into assumption #3
The Historical Jesus is different from the Jesus of the Bible
This is true of course, In the sense that proving Jesus was a man that existed is very different from proving that Jesus died for your sins. But it’s very false and unfair to take for granted out the outset of the argument that the Jesus that existed is not the one that died for sins. He might be, he might not be, you think he was, they think he wasn’t, that’s the argument!
Like I said earlier it’s not important to most skeptics that Jesus didn’t exist, only that you can’t prove he did. It’s already pretty obvious from the fact that Christianity began in the first place that there is some human person upon whom the legend is based. Peter James and John hung out with somebody before they became radicals, certainty.
So when backed into a corner they’ll often grant this for you, and then explain that “what they really meant” was that you can’t prove the Historical Jesus is anything like the Biblical Jesus. You can’t prove he turned water into wine, or preached the sermon on the mount, or anything!
The Historical Jesus may or may have been named Jesus, he may or may not have been from Nazereth, he may or may not have died on the cross. And you’re going to have to prove each of these things individually from extra-biblical contemporary sources or else admit to them that “You can’t prove that your Jesus even existed”
This is of course not, in any way shape or form what they “really meant” to start with. So to avoid this, you’ll need to establish very clearly at the outset what it is they do mean. Set the goalposts before you kick or you’ll find them moving on you.
And if they say at the beginning “What I mean by Jesus existed is that he existed as described in the Bible, and did everything the Bible said he did” then you should humbly admit “You’re right, I can’t prove that everything in the Bible is true, You need to believe the Bible before you believe the healing of the lepers. What I can prove was that Jesus was a guy. And then later, we can move on to his claims being true, and the resurrection, and eventually come back around to the Bible”
More probably though, if you ask them as the beginning “What do you mean by ‘Jesus never existed'” They’ll say something like “You can’t prove Paul didn’t just make the whole thing up” Which is a much fairer thesis. Or if I were to put it in my terms “There was actually a person upon whom the gospels were based”
Once you’ve clarified those things, and done so winsomely and articulately, you should find that the problem is ready to crumble all on it’s own. You could blow on the case for the historicity of Jesus and it would fall over in your favor.
So let’s drop a train on it shall we?
Stay tuned for the next article
Storage Unit II
I wrote previously about my thoughts as I moved my few worldly possessions into a storage unit. I want to take a post and talk about the conclusion to those thoughts
At the time I questioned the impulse to keep things and wondered if I might be being materialistic. On the other hand I thought I might be finally getting a permanent home shortly, and didn’t want to do anything rash. Here’s how the story ends.
I was right. After I arrived in Kansas I was offered a fully furnished private basement apartment. All of my fear of perpetual transition, and my willingness to live as a vagabond were proved unwarranted and unnecessary.
But I was also right that I was being materialistic. There’s very little doubt in my mind now what I should have done “sell everything and follow”
I’d keep what I used daily to live, a few changes of clothes, and a couple irreplaceable things like my grandfathers stamp collection, nothing that wouldn’t fit in the back of my car.
I know that sounds radical. That’s because it is. But I don’t think it’s radical in a bad way
At the time I was willing to leave everything, but I thought that would mean giving up hope of a home as a “place to put stuff”. And I thought doing that… pushed it. I wanted to be sure that God had called me to that before I became another weird Christian who was glorifying homelessness for no reason in particular.
What I never considered in this ridiculously overzealous hyper intellectualized brain of mine was the possibility that God might provide.
That perhaps I wouldn’t need dishes, not because I’d never get my own kitchen, but because there would be an old couple in Kansas that would give me dishes.
I’m still learning the voice of God, and I’m confident now that impulse was it. If I’d listened to it I’d have saved $140 in storage payments made money instead. It would have taken me no more time then moving 3 times did, and caught the attention of people in Cali, probably helping our fundraising efforts (I know I’d me more likely to support a missionary if I happened to know he sold everything to give)
As it stands I still have a reasonably happy ending. God’s good, I’m home and this way I get to keep my stuff. But I have way more than I need, and I believe there are blessings I’m missing out on because I failed to trust.
Here’s to doing better next time!
May you listen to the righteous impulses you don’t yet understand in your lives.
A·~A
Note: This is Part 4 is a series on Santa Clause. If you are reading through the archives you will want to Start with Part 1, and then read 2, and 3 before this one.
In the last three posts I have demonstrated that If Santa ever existed, he’s dead now, And then I demonstrated that he did and does exist and pitiful is the man who can’t understand it. In the last post I pulled the two perspectives into a single article to show the controversy in tension. In this article I intend to resolve it.
The resolution of course will prove more fantastic than the problem. How could a problem like this have a simple resolution? If I gave a simple scientific answer I would fail to acknowledge the significance of the Virginia Letter. And if I insisted despite evidence that Santa exists despite overwhelming evidence and consensus to the contrary I would have to acknowledge that that is indeed the definition of “psychosis”
If I had to pick one, I’d be Psychotic. hands down. I’ve read Don Quixote, I know what’s up. But I have something else planned.
But I don’t have to choose. I say both are true! A and Non-A. Belief in Santa is both foundational and ridiculous. disbelief is both reasonable, and small minded.
How is that? how can it be that I can so brazenly affirm a contradiction? That I can violate a fundamental law of logic? Well I’ll tell you.
Hopefully it’s clear that what we’re dealing with here is an epistimological clash (big words, I know, I’ll explain) The argument consists of “ships passing in the night”. The don’t really argue against one another, only for themselves. The reason they don’t refute another is because they can’t. And the reason they can’t is because they don’t understand one another!
The Savvy Santa Advocate, and the Savvy Santa Denier think differently on a foundational level. Their ideas about what truth is and how it is obtained (their epistemologies) are contrasted.
In this particular case it’s easy to recognize, all the talk about sentimentality and magic on one side versus all the math and physics on the other makes it obvious, but epistemological clash is actually a common problem (Here’s an example with two kinds of math geekery)
So if I want to pick a single conclusion. I need to pick a single way of looking at the world. Is the world best understood through Sound logic, good reason, and mathematics. Or is there something beyond and besides that which is much grander and yet much more basic, something touched by poetry and music.
And both are true.
They’re true each in their own way, and both are right about Santa, each in their own way.
No Homo Sapiens come down the chimneys of the good gentile children on christmas eve. The flues are usually shut. But it is NOT just a lie we tell children. No way! It’s much much more than that.
Merry Christmas
The Controversy
Those articles are both cute, but I also think they do a better job than I could of articulating an important point about Santa Clause. They say exactly opposite things, but yet each, in it’s own way, very meaningfully demonstrate that their point is correct.
The first article proves belief in Santa is irrational, utterly, ludicrously irrational. The mathematics don’t work! There is no way a reasonably intelligent person could grow up and still believe in Santa Clause.
I suspect the second perspective will be the harder sell for most of you (there are a lot of disbelievers in America today) but it makes a strong point against such argumentation. It’s “not comprehensible to their little minds” and they fail to realize that “The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see”
Expanding on the argument: I’d point out that every year at christmas time good boys and girls all over the world are given gifts for which credit is given to Santa Clause. Much more than a single Lego set, children receive their hearts desires from anonymous givers over and over again year after year. hearts are warmed and people buy gifts for one another, and for their children, and for other children in families they’ll never meet, so that they too can have a Merry Christmas.
You say the sleigh can’t go that fast, I say it’s magic! Deal with it, you can’t argue with results.
Yes yes, sure sure, say the rationalists. But being a good skeptical observer means not attributing to magic what can be explained by guilt and sentimentality. People buy those presents with money made of dollars and cents, not hopes and dreams. Certainty christmas results in some wonderful things, it also results in some terrible things like debt and suicide. People are nice to each other at christmas, isn’t that alone enough without externalizing it and putting it in a red suit?
But the believers reply “Is it enough?” Enough for What? For you? Maybe. Apparently! It it enough to explain that between Black Friday and Christmas Eve the entire polarity of our economic system reverses to allow for customers shopping for others more often than themselves? No it isn’t.
It it enough to explain a phenomenon so fantastic as millions of people who do not believe in Jesus taking time out of their lives to celebrate Christmas and engage in sacrificial giving to the point that the Christians actually get annoyed by it? No, that’s too incredible!
Here’s the thing:
1700 years ago a Turkish man named Nikolaos made a habit of giving secret gifts to the underprivileged and to this very day And children keep watch by night for Saint Nick despite the most powerful forces the world has ever seen rising and falling, despite the world being changed on an unimaginable scale since the 4th century. His random acts of kindness continue.
It’s remarkable. Say the engineers of the world. but it’s no reason to lie to children! So there is a sentimentality of the season that’s been socially reinforced thanks to a series of fantastic coincidences. There is still no fat man with a sleigh pulled by reindeer.
Yes there are there was one at the mall!
He was just an actor.
No he wasn’t! He wasn’t just an actor, he was also Saint Nick to thousands of children. He was also a guy named Harvey, he wasn’t “just” anything! Nothing is “just” anything. Don’t you see?
No! No I don’t see. And if you do you’re delusional.
I’ll conclude this controversy in my next post. Stay tuned!
Yes Virginia, There Is a Santa Clause
This one is something of a rebuttal to the last. Even though it was written about 100 years earlier. It’s a response of a Newspaper editor to a little girl on Santa Clause. You may have already seen it, but it’s worth another read. Note how artfully he forms the argument so that he never has to lie (unless you count “Yes there is a Santa Clause” as a lie, which you won’t after reading this)
We take pleasure in answering thus prominently the communication below, expressing at the same time our great gratification that its faithful author is numbered among the friends of The Sun:
Dear Editor—
I am 8 years old. Some of my little friends say there is no Santa Claus. Papa says, “If you see it in The Sun, it’s so.” Please tell me the truth, is there a Santa Claus?
Virginia O’Hanlon
Virginia, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men’s or children’s, are little. In this great universe of ours, man is a mere insect, an ant, in his intellect as compared with the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.
Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no Santa Claus! It would be as dreary as if there were no Virginias. There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished.
Not believe in Santa Claus! You might as well not believe in fairies. You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the chimneys on Christmas eve to catch Santa Claus, but even if you did not see Santa Claus coming down, what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that’s no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen and unseeable in the world.
You tear apart the baby’s rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived could tear apart. Only faith, poetry, love, romance, can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, Virginia, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.
No Santa Claus! Thank God! he lives and lives forever. A thousand years from now, Virginia, nay 10 times 10,000 years from now, he will continue to make glad the heart of childhood.
On Santa Clause (A Rational Perspective)
Today I want to share with you one of my all time favorite Christmas writings. It’s posted elsewhere on the net, but I think it deserves another post. If you can. Try to read it out loud. It’s even funnier that way.
There are approximately two billion children (persons under 18) in the world. However, since Santa does not visit children of Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist (except maybe in Japan) religions, this reduces the workload for Christmas night to 15% of the total, or 378 million (according to the population reference bureau). At an average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household that comes to 108 million homes presuming there is at least one good child in each. Santa has about 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming east to west (which seems logical). This works out to 967.7 visits per second.
This is to say that for each Christian household with a good child, Santa has around 1/1000th of a second to park the sleigh, hop out, jump down the chimney, fill the stocking, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left for him, get back up the chimney, jump into the sleigh and get onto the next house. Assuming that each of these 108 million stops is evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false, but will accept for the purposes of our calculations), we are now talking about 0.78 miles per household; a total trip of 75.5 million miles, not counting bathroom stops or breaks.
This means Santa’s sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second – 3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man made vehicle, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second, and a conventional reindeer can run at 15 miles per hour.
The payload of the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium sized LEGO set (two pounds), the sleigh is carrying over 500 thousand tons, not counting Santa himself.
On land, a conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that the “flying” reindeer can pull 10 times the normal amount, the job can’t be done with eight or even nine of them -Santa would need 360,000 of them. This increases the payload, not counting the weight of the sleigh, another 54,000 tons, or roughly seven times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth (the ship, not the monarch). 600,000 tons travelling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance – this would heat up the reindeer in the same fashion as a spacecraft re-entering the earth’s atmosphere.
The lead pair of reindeer would adsorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy per second each. In short, they would burst into flames almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them and creating deafening sonic booms in their wake. The entire reindeer team would be vaporised within 4.26 thousandths of a second, or right about the time Santa reached the fifth house on his trip.
Not that it matters, however, since Santa, as a result of accelerating from a dead stop to 650 m.p.s. in .001 seconds, would be subjected to acceleration forces of 17,000 g’s. A 250 pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of the sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force, instantly crushing his bones and organs and reducing him to a quivering blob of pink goo.
Therefore, if Santa did exist, he’s dead now. Merry Christmas.
God is Not in Danger of Ceasing
I get in a lot of theological conversations with people. It’s my job. I rely heavily hypothetical questions as a tool to get Christians off of the script and begin thinking with their logic centers as opposed to memory centers.
Usually from there we end up at some sticking point. A theological of philosophical principal which is unsupported, but fiercely protected often to a believers detriment.
Calvinism is a big one for a lot of believers, they feel that if God sends people to hell he is unfair, and he would cease to be God. On the other side of the issue there are some 5 Point Calvinists who think that if God didn’t choose and foreknow, then he must be only partly sovereign, and partly knowing and would therefore cease to be God.
…If he did he’s probably cease to be God
For some people it’s not Calvinism at all, I spoke to a person recently who’s sticking point was comprehensibility. He kept saying “But God’s logical, he made logic” as he struggled wit the idea that something might be true of God that he didn’t understand yet, because in his mind if God stopped making sense he would cease to be God.
Sometimes the sticking point will find me. “Omnipotence doesn’t mean God can do anything” said one person “For instance: he can’t lie”. Sure God can lie. I can lie, God could totally lie! He doesn’t and I’m very thankful for that, but if he chose to what would stop him? “If God lied he would cease to be God”…no…
We get very defensive over these sticking points, we dig our feet into the ground and won’t budge, there’s a lot of fear involved. Sometimes this fear leads us to stay around toxic people or churches despite our better judgment, or to push away newer more mature ideas and fear learning because it may cause us to doubt. In short, fear leads to dogmatism
I’m going to go out on a limb and say I think I know where all this fear is coming from. I think it’s this ceasing to be God business.
Where did we get the idea that any number of things would cause God to cease to be God?
Where did we get the idea that anything would cause God to cease to be God?
Is God Mr. Mxyzptlk, where if you can get him to say his name backwards he loses his powers?
God is not in danger of ceasing. Honestly, Not even close! There are no other qualified applicants for the position. God could spend all day being Calvinic, Arminian, Illogical, and Dishonest all at the same time if he wanted to and he would still be God. This one time, God totally DIED and he’s still God after that. God became a baby and pooped his pants while still retaining the fullness of the godhead bodily.
If God were to stop being God it would be his greatest miracle yet I assure you. It would not be a side affect of anything. I don’t know when we started thinking it sounded smart to say that, but please let’s stop. I think it’s hurting us.
Misquoting Beeblebrox
WARNING: This article may contain spoilers to “The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy”. If you somehow haven’t read that book yet, Go read that first! It’s great!
One social group I tend to have an easy time getting along with is Atheists. Ultimately I think they’re dead wrong about the origins and state of the universe, but they tend to be groovy people in the meantime, and typically they’re intelligent and logically consistent. And if there’s one thing atheists love it’s Douglas Adams, the author of “The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy”
Atheists often use Adams as a poet laureate of their worldview, using his words and characters to make analogies about atheist thinking, and add spice to statements made about how great it is to live with neither gods nor masters. Much like the way we use Tolkien
The New Atheists seem especially fond of this. For instance Richard Dawkins, in his book “The God Delusion” in order to defend the premise that the world is wonderful enough on it’s own, and we shouldn’t need to invent a “creator” or any such silliness to appreciate it, quotes Hitchhikers:
“Isn’t it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?”
Or sometimes I’ll hear another phrase from the book used as a rallying cry for logical atheists who find the whole idea or theism self contradictory
“And God disappeared in a puff of logic”
That sort of thing
But I must say, I finally finished “Hitchhikers” this morning and I’m disappointed.
Not in the book of course, the book was brilliant, but I’m disappointed in my atheist brothers and their interpretation of the text. I don’t at all see what they seem to see in the book, and in fact I see some very Pro-Christian ideas.
First of all, all of the quotes I’d heard before turned out to be taken utterly out of context. The bit about God disappearing comes from a very tongue-in-cheek argument against the existence of God that relies on 3 false premises that don’t support the conclusion.
In context it’s quite clear that the intent of the author is to make fun of philosophy, not theism. Adams is saying that Philosophers will argue about the existence of God no matter what, such that even if incontrovertible proof of intelligent design were to be found, it would be used by the philosophers to disprove God (who said He would leave room for faith) as much as to prove him.
Adams returns to this theme in a later chapter (25), introducing a philosopher called Majikthise who is upset that a machine is being used to calculate answers to life’s mysteries saying
“What’s the use of our sitting up half the night arguing that there may or may not be a God if this machine only goes and gives you his bleeding phone number the next morning?”
Same message, same point, but this time God clearly exists (the capitalization is Adams’)
As to the Garden with the fairies? That’s from the mind of Ford Prefect who is appreciating a binary sunrise on what he thinks is a perfectly normal planet, rather than the legendary planet Magrathea. It doesn’t have to be Magrathea in his mind, it’s good enough already…
…Except that in the book it totally IS the legendary planet, and Ford is missing it.
What a fitting analogy for Dawkins. Yes Dr. Dawkins, you’re quite right, the earth would be enough if there were no God… But there is a God… So what’s your point? You’re acting like Ford Prefect visiting Magrathea while grumbling that this normal planet isn’t enough as it is.
Ultimately Adams, though an atheist, ends up writing a book which doesn’t threaten Christendom, but casts a dark shadow on Scientific Naturalism.
The Guide Itself is a comprehensive book written over many centuries by multiple authors about how best to get through life. Sound familiar? Within the pages, Adams consistently upholds the value and importance of asking how and why questions about the nature of the universe, while still expressing comfort in mystery
He upholds creationism, with the earth having been intelligently designed and created by something which is, in his own words “needlessly messianic”.
He describes the burial of fossils, the sculpting of coastlines, calls glaciers “high art” and as to scientific naturalism, in Chapter 30 The Planet Engineer says this
“Science has achieved some wonderful things of course but I’d rather be happy than right any day”
Put that in your reductionist pipe and smoke it.
Uproar
“We could play ‘Uproar’ She said”
I cringed. I had no idea what kind of game “Uproar” was going to be. But I was sure it was going to be some squeaky clean mixer game like Charades, or Pictionary, that I had played one too many of, only more christiany.
Jill continued “It’s like a mix between Charades, Taboo, and Pictionary”
…CRAP…
Jill is one of the most stereotypical Christian girls I know of. She’s reasonably attractive, but very plain, engaged (of course) to a immaculate Christian Security Guard. She herself? she’s a teacher. She avoids R-rated movies, plays poker only when the chips have no cash value and we share them if someone runs out and speaks in a particular christian-girl cadence that gets higher near the end of a sentence, making everything sound like it’s a question. And boy does she love mixer games! Especially the “rules” part of mixer games, this girl loves rules!
And in case you can’t tell, I can’t stand her
Which is odd, It’s odd for two reasons, One for me and one for her.
It’s odd for me because I don’t have trouble getting along with most people. I spend time with debaters, unicyclers, philosophers, artists, athletes, Asians, anteaters… the list goes on. It’s unusual for me to be put off by a people group.
And it’s odd for Jill because she’s there’s nothing exactly wrong with her. It’s not like she’s some kind of hypocrite (not any more than average) she’s a good person, she’s polite, I’m sure she’s nice to her neighbors, she probably votes, and she’s actively involved in making the word a better place by building up special needs children… I didn’t mention that did I? I said teacher, yeah, she’s a special-ed teacher.
See I often have problems getting along with really Christian Christians, but usually I can find some reason. Usually they are stupid, or useless, or dogmatic, or judgmental. Jill is none of those things. She’s just flipping annoying.
And so she’s a proof of concept for me that I don’t just dislike certain things common to Christians. I actually Dislike Christians. The personality traits that for me represent someone I’d like to spend time with, and the personality traits that I see expressed in a typical Christian, are worlds apart.
And this all makes me wonder “why?” Why should Christians be like this? Why does the average christian young person play Apples to Apples more often than he takes communion?
How did there get to be a standard christian dress code?
When did Jesus add the admonition to the Lords Prayer that the names of God needed to be spoken more often in any prayer than all the other words combined
“Lord, we just ask Lord That Lord You Lord would act Lord God, and God Lord Jesus join us Lord in Lord Our Lord Worship Lord God Jehova Jirah Jesus God El Shaddai Lord my aunts cancer, Eloheim Lord Logos God Holy Spirit Lord Lord…”
And when… When the HELL did the community surrounding the BIBLE be the same community that’s perpetually preoccupied with simple answers, black and white thinking, and comprehensive lists of rules? How in the world did they get this from that?
God gave us 10, Jesus reduced it to 2. Now I have more than 100 just governing what I have to do before a first date! Where did that come from?
The answer is I don’t know. But my friend “MB” has a theory. MB is a blogger and Christian leader from Iowa. Her blog can be found here. She and I have been discussing our own theologies for a few weeks by e-mail and this issue came up.
Here is my understanding of MB’s theory (my own words):
It’s all about power structures. From very early on in church history Christianity was discovered to be a powerful tool for gaining political power and it still is. These power people then govern the church in a way that encourages the things they like (power, rules, simplicity, submission, tradition) and discourages the Christ-like things they don’t like (Sacrifice, authentic humility, ambiguity, complexity, rebelliousness, vulnerability) until such things begin to permeate the culture.
Now Sunday school teachers are not actively and consciously trying to gain tremendous power and influence, but might make it a point to be the only one with the keys to the craft closet, because she likes being indispensable, and the next generation being raised up in that Sunday School will get along more easily with their teacher and their peers if they jump in the bandwagon and act like everyone else, so the cycle repeats and perpetuates.
Until now, people begin to feel out of place even around powerless churchgoers, simply because power structures have imprinted these unwritten rules on our collective unconscious.
…Like I said I don’t know if that’s it, but it’s certainly the closest think I’ve ever heard to an explanation that makes sense, and it’s certainly an idea that’s going to haunt me…
A Prophet Out Of His Hometown
In Kansas I expected cold, and weather, I expected cultural differences, I expected bad ethnic food, and good ol’ boys in pick up trucks. I mentally prepared myself to adjust to these changes, but I never predicted that I would need to adjust to being taken as a spiritual leader.
…After all I was already a pastor in California, that sounds pretty impressive even compared to CSM for InterVarsity. And even before that I’d been in professional ministry since 2005 with extensive volunteer experience but always in and around people who knew me when I wasn’t.
In Kansas that sounds impressive. In California nobody even really knows that about me, and those that do don’t think of it that way, They knew me in high school, and I was a Jesus Freak then, and I’m a Jesus Freak now, apparently at some point along the line somebody started paying me for it.
Now I’m Ryan The InterVarsity Guy. And that’s it, nobody knows me outside of a professional ministry context. It’s crazy!
Pastors want to meet with me, and they do so as peers, people want to get to know me as a missionary, and everybody who meets me in this entire state is meeting a minister first, and any modifier of “strange”, or “intelligent”, or “handsome”, or “neurotic” or “heretical” gets added onto that base noun “minister”
Whereas in California “minister” was typically an adjective modifying something or somebody else people knew me as “handsome guy, who is also a minister”
I don’t have a point to make. That’s the story, I just thought I’d share. It’s an interesting contraposotive of Mark 6:4 of course, but you got that from the title.
Please be in prayer for me as I strive to be deserving of this reputation.
How To Get Me To Come To Your Church
I had a phone conversation recently with a sweet old lady (I meet a lot of sweet old ladies out here) and discussed a subject which seems to be on the hearts and minds of a great deal of people in older churches.
These old churches are universally in fear of closing their doors, as their congregants get older and die their membership shrinks and if no new blood enters the church goes up for sale. So the question becomes “how do we bring in young people” with the answer inevitably being “we need to become more ‘modern’” which leads to all sorts of discussions about PowerPoint, and cool music as if those were the essential elements of the ubersuccesful churches like Saddleback and Willow Creek
I worked at an old church for 2 years where I planted a successful young adult ministry, meanwhile attending a popular young church after having been raised in a much emulated Megachurch… And I’m in my 20s… so I figure I’m about as much an expert as anyone on how to get 20 somethings into your churches. Here’s my advice:
Dear Old Churches,
Stop it! You’re going to ruin everything.
There is one thing you have going for you, and it’s that you are a cool old church with a rich history and stained glass windows, We 20 somethings might not understand what the heck you’re doing with a “Paschal Candle” but we’re willing to learn… Seriously, most of us are Professional Students, learning is one of the only things we’re good at.
That might not seem like much, but if you trade that in to become “Purpose Driven” you’ll have nothing. You suck at being purpose driven.
I know old churches don’t like terms like “suck” but that’s the technical term. I can’t count the number of ways I don’t want to hear your choir trying to sing “Every Move I Make” when I can hear it done better at the church up the street, but more importantly, even if you did do it well, I wouldn’t want to come. You know why? Because the 90s ended, and I’m not 10 anymore!
At best, If you managed to catch up with the times and become an exemplary modern church (which you won’t) you would manage to attract my mothers generation.
People in their 80s like what you’re doing, people in their 50s like what you’re trying to do. They like PowerPoint, and acoustic worship bands with three point sermons that alliterate, they think that’s neato.
But people in their 40s are already starting to yawn
If you want to attract people in their 40s you can’t read books on what churches did 10 years ago to become successful you have to do what churches are doing right now. And if you want people in their 30s you have to look at what churches are just starting to do.
But what you want is the people in their 20s, the EchoBoomers, the Up And Comers, the folks that can meet at your church and have babies and stay for the next 100 years.
To get people in their 20s you are going to have to do what churches are going to start doing 10 years from now.
Sorry.
So if you haven’t given up and decided that I must be wrong because what I’m proposing is too hard, you’ll be asking “Okay Hot Shot, So what’s that?” and you’ll get the obvious answer “Well I don’t know of course, It’s not here yet” but if I were you I would take refuge in Solomon’s declaration that there is “nothing new under the sun” you’ve been around for about a century, you know the trends always come back. Kids my age are wearing Horn Rimmed Glasses and Fedoras again. Do you really believe that the Organ has less staying power than Hush Puppies?
Now that’s not to say you can keep doing what you’ve always done (that’s clearly not working) but doing that would be better than doing megachurch badly. What I am saying is leverage what you know, and invite us to experiment with you.
-So you do hymns, that’s chill, We know like three of those that have been transposed to guitar. What if we brought some of the music that was added there back into the choir? Would that be horrible? I have no idea.
-What does “A Mighty Fortress” sound like in electric cello?
-This call and response business is kind of interesting, Like a football game right? Except why does everybody who’s doing it sound like their cat just died?
-Say what ever happened to what was cool in churches 20 and 30 years ago? What’s with the gap, between the 60s and the 90s? Doesn’t anybody in church still know how to rock the tambourine?
-I get that there’s a church calendar. But other than the fact that Melba brings different flowers and everybody thinks about wearing red on Pentecost… What’s it for?
-Wait Lent? Seriously? I thought that was a catholic thing…
-I came to check out your church and there’s all sorts of cool old people here. Before I came here to college I went to a church that had nobody over 40. It would be awesome to get mentored by some old Myagi-like dude! Why won’t any of them talk to me?
Emo Blogging
Do you ever notice how blogs tend to be filled with angsty prose about how nobody understands the author? I’ve always wondered why that is.
Some of you who are my more consistent readers may have noticed that I’m having trouble keeping up the regularity of this blog. Or maybe (I hope) not. But it’s true. Since I’ve arrived in Kansas I just haven’t had the drive to type I had previously.
So I got to thinking tonight. “I wonder if that’s because I’m happy”
Kansas is beautiful right now, the weather is great, I have a homeish home for the first time in years and the ministry is going really well. Last night I was able to sit in on out IV bible study for the first time and it was incredible, About a third of the group hadn’t made up their minds about Christ but were interested if figuring it out, and all of us from all of our different backgrounds were able to peacefully exegete the passage together.
Earlier tonight I was at a Crew meeting as part of my research in “spying out the land” which was also crazy fun, and everyone’s been generally accepting of me both as a friend and a spiritual leader.
Previously I was writing while in the middle of fund raising in between work as a Youth Pastor and a Campus Minister, and before that in 2008, I had an active blog while between work as a volunteer and a youth pastor. Both times I lacked a church, and had been ousted from my previous community. I wonder If I just needed an outlet, and now that people are listening to me in the meatworld again, I don’t need that outlet so much.
Wouldn’t that be strange? That an entire form of mass communication caters to authors in a particular emotional state? It would certainly explain some things though…
I’m going to try to prevent this blog from atrophying due to my happiness. But I wanted to let you know about it for three reasons:
1: I think it’s really interesting and I want to hear your comments
2: I may decide to change the format shortly and talk more about my life, or about the subject of this weeks bible study or a chapter of some book I’m writing, and I want you to know why
3: Hey, at least it’s something to say right?
Books
Today as I was unpacking my books to shelve them in my new home I came across an oddity. It was a 1,000 page full A+ Certification Guide for the “New and Updated” 1998 exam.
A+, in case you don’t know is an exam for computer technicians so obviously in 2010 the book is a useless relic. There simply isn’t much in that field that’s stayed the same since the days when about a third of American households had internet access, and those that did, did it through AOL with Windows 95 on their Pentium IBMs (if they were rich).
You may be wondering how or why I hung onto a large and useless book for so long. But the smartest of you will wonder at the even more perplexing question “What on earth was a 12 year old doing with a book like that?!?!?”
The truth of the matter is, I am a nerd.
And I have been for some time.
At some point in my life previously I was convinced that when I grew up I wanted to be a computer technician. and as a result I filled my bedroom with computers to practice on, met with an older experienced technician, and read pages and pages of material about how to fix computers. For really no good reason other than I was passionate about it, it interested me.
You see the connection of course. This isn’t the only book I read. It’s the most comically outdated, but I have others. All of them over 500 pages. And I believe everyone, or at lease every big reader, has some subject of books that they have read upwards of 10,000 pages about single spaced, no pictures. It could be Marketing or Psychology, or Harry Potter, whatever.
How many of us have read the bible all the way through?
I think very few. and those that do, generally do it bit by bit every morning supplemented with large doses of feely devotional material, as if it were some kind of rancid meat that needed to be forced down with plenty of water.
But I’m not going where you think I am with this…
The obvious place to go is to say “So read your Bibles! because God is more important than computers” but that’s not the realization I came to tonight.
The realization I came to is that we don’t need to be told that.
Not only do we not need to be told that because it’s a common message and we in the church don’t suffer for lack of a pastor telling us to read the Bible more, but on top of that it’s simply not something we need to be told.
I didn’t need anyone to tell me “Listen Ryan, if you want to say you’re into computers and you don’t want to be a hypocrite you really need to read this book” all I needed was to know “This book will help you know about computers” and I read the thing. because after all, I wanted to know about computers.
Imagine with me for a second that Batman was real, and he wrote a book. Woulden’t you read Batman’s book? I would!
Now Imagine God is real. If he wrote a book… Wouldn’t you read it?
I believe you would. Without insistence, without urging, without accountability or discipleship I believe that if you knew of a book written by God you would read the thing cover to cover.
…
But many of us haven’t…
…
So then… If that’s true, then if you haven’t read the Bible, it means you don’t really believe what you think you do.
Either you don’t really want to know about God, You don’t really think the Bible is the source for that, or you don’t really believe in God at all… Because if you did you’d read it, and you wouldn’t need me to tell you to.
If we as the church, believed in God, we would be desperate to read and understand more of any source of knowledge from him but for some reason we see ministers begging and pleading to get more of the Bible into us.
“Us” being the same people who will power through the first Twilight book unprompted just “to see what all the fuss was about”
… this of course raises all sorts of questions about what it is we call “evangelism” and “conversion” but that’s fodder for another post.
Vampires and Jesus
At this time of year it’s not surprising to see the vampire hysteria that’s overwhelmed out nations tweens reach a fever pitch. And with it the conservative counter-frenzy against vampires and all their demonic origins from the fundamentalist right. I thought I’d take this opportunity to put a moderate spin on this polarizing issue
Consider this, as you consider that more than 50 percent of the costumes you’ll see tomorrow are likely to be vampire themed in one way or another. Is that really such a bad thing for our youth to be fixated on?
Yes, I know vampires are demonic, but they’re also the bad guys I know more than one piece of literature Christians approve of featuring demonic bad guys, not the least of which is the bible itself.
And if the next generation of youth becomes preoccupied with a universe where vampires that stalk in the night, fear crosses and holy water, and make decisions to raise their family as “vegitarians” for fear of eternal damnation, then doesn’t that mean they’re preoccupied with a sort of christian universe? A universe where the cross still has power?
And what of the modern vampires? The Post-Anne Rice breed of vampires that inevitably decide that they want to oppose the blood sucking variety and fall in love. Well that, to me sounds like a pretty fitting analogy for the christian life. What is Blade, or edward but
- A Damned being
- With an Evil Nature
- And a Dependency for Blood
- Granting Immortality
- Which is Torturous unless One denies Onesself
- To become a Champion for Good
I can’t say I see anything particularly wrong with that message.
Now of course the writing quality of twilight is another matter entirely. Surely that is a sin!
Happy Haloween Everyone.
Newsletter Article
This is an article I wrote for the newsletter at the church I used to work at. It was published, in a modified form. Now that I have this audience I thought I’d share it with you. In case you can’t tell or didn’t know, I was the Youth Pastor of a small youth group on the grounds, and for a while we had youth coming and hanging out on the campus, this resulted in some graffiti,and the sprinklers having been left on one night. So older congregants began telling anyone young they saw to leave and quit causing trouble. This was my response.
I had the opportunity this past month to meet some of the young people who have been hanging out in our prayer garden. I have a report for you that should be very disturbing.
They said that young people don’t often come around anymore, they used to, but the bench has been removed and the hedge has been trimmed, and they don’t feel “safe” here any longer.
One young man expressed to me that he knew one of the vandals, didn’t think highly of him, and would have liked to step in if he could have, another expressed that nobody who came around was a criminal, so much as troublemaker. We’re dealing with hooligans, seeking independence from their parents through anti parental activities.
I told them we had a couch and an air conditioned youth room, they were rather interested in that. I talked to them about our mission, told them if there was any way to bless them I would be interested to hear it, because this was a place where we served Jesus the Christ and we were interested in sharing his love in non-judgmental ways.. and the news took a turn for the worse
“People here don’t trust us”, they said, “they don’t seem to want us around”. “When we’re approached people assume we are going to destroy something”. “One kind act could do a lot.”
I’m Livid!
I don’t know if it is coming across without tone of voice but I am very very angry at our church right now. Because I am here, attempting to reach the youth of La Mirada, and I’m not sure that’s something this church is actually willing to do!
Yes, I’m aware that there has been some vandalism, that it has cost our church time and money, I know there have been nefarious activities at this campus. If we are successful in reaching the well-meaning youth, we will probably attract troublemakers too, problems will almost certainly increase, and maybe one of those troublemakers will have his or her heart changed for Christ. That is the business I’m in. That we’re in…I hope.
So It’s time to make a choice. Do you want this to be a place that is open and welcoming to people who are different from you or not? Because you have to understand that if you do it is going to mean sacrifice, picking up the cross and following Jesus means moving out of our comfort zones and opening ourselves up to problems, but it also means the real possibility of affecting people’s lives.
And if not we will earn the opportunity to live and have church in the manner to which we have become accustomed for a while longer, but I warn you, if we do that this church will not be empowered through any gospel that is true, and it will wither, and it will die!
If we proceed down the second path, the rest of my interaction here will be entirely missional. Because if that’s how we do things then we need Jesus
As I finished taking with the unchurched youth, quite a crowd had gathered, and one mentioned it was hot. I left them with a couple bottles of soda, a pitcher of water and some paper cups.
What will you do?
Matthew 25:35
A Humble Proposal to Reform Our Dating System
I wrote previously, and hopefully humorously, about some of the problems with our current conceptions in the church regarding dating. Essentially we’ve made it way way too complicated, resulting in way way too much pressure being put on an interaction which, to my mind, should be fun. Since I’m not one to criticize without providing a better alternative, here is an explanation of how I do it. I think it makes good common sense.
A typical first date (a movie and a unique dinner) will cost me $50 for both of us.
If It’s worth $50 to me to get to know you better for an evening, I’ll probably ask you on a date. Unless of course I’m concerned that you will misinterpret that gesture and it will lead to social awkwardness. Unless you are so repulsed by me that the prospect of spending the evening with me is not worth a free dinner, you should say yes.
A second date is usually much cheaper (maybe a picnic lunch and a walk) averaging maybe $20 for the evening. For this reason, if the first date went even alright, I’ll probably invite you on a second. At this point in our interaction there is absolutely no commitment implied or intended. We may both be dating other people at the same time, that’s fine, if not, that’s fine too. If it doesn’t go that well, I might even recommend that one of my friends take you out, that’s okay, we’re not getting married anytime soon at this point.
By the time I’m asking you on a third date It’s safe to assume that I like you, I want to kiss you, I’d like to see this go farther. My idea of a third date could cost $100. I may still be interested in other people at this point and unsure about where I stand in your book, but if you got this far it’s a safe bet that you are the most interesting girl in my life at the moment. If you are totally uninterested, you might consider at this juncture turning down the opportunity rather than letting me waste my time, But more than likely you are at least a little curious and it’s worth it to me for a chance to impress you.
It might be, that for any of a number of reasons, our third date doesn’t look like that and we just grab coffee or something. That means I’m not sure how I feel. It’s a bad time to ask me. Either it will level out into a real third date and beyond, or it will slowly devolve into a friendship (or there will be some hysterical crying and throwing things at my car, but we’re not going to go there)
After a while, if things are going well, it will get to the point where we are going on dates at a steady pace. This is called “going steady” or being in “a relationship”. If you are seeing anyone else, now would be the time to stop (with one of us or the other). If you’re not sure whether or not we’re at that place, check facebook. It’ll say “In a relationship” with you in my profile.
Simple enough?
On Dating
I feel, that in the church in particular dating has become terribly overcomplicated to the great detriment of many of our relationships. For the sake of all Men, I’d like to make a few things clear
-The bible has passages that apply in virtually every situation, but it has nothing specific to say about dating. Don’t tell me it does, they didn’t have dating back then. Any idea you’ve developed from scripture about how dating ought to be done is subject to interpretation.
-Despite being a man, and the future spiritual leader of a household, I am regrettably unable to project the will of God for the rest of our lives by the first date. I’m sorry, I just don’t know, That’s what dating is for, if I knew who God wanted me to date, woo and marry. I’d just let her know and marry her
-Interpersonal relationships, especially romantic ones are very complicated and unique. When we find ourselves in an awkward and complicated position that seems sort of romantic, don’t ask me to “Define The Relationship” if you don’t have a word for what kind of relationship it is neither do I, we’re figuring it out, drink your coffee!
-Some relationships however are easy to define. For instance: If you like a boy, and he likes you, you two spend inordinate amounts of time together, talk about your feelings, make plans to go places alone together, and leave groups to go hang out just the two of you, there’s a word for that. It’s called “dating” It doesn’t make it more somehow more holy if you call it just being friends, there’s a word for that too “lying”.
-Nobody has ever been able to explain to me how a relationship that can be terminated at any time for any reason by the single consent of either party can be considered “committed”. There are only two kinds of committed romantic relationships I know of. One is marriage, and the other is the period that comes just before that after I promise to marry you called “Engagement” You’ll know if you’re in either. There will be a ring.
-The word “courting” seems to change definition depending on which Christian girl I’m talking to. But I’m pretty sure whatever it is I’m not interested. Either it’s essentially the same as dating, or the same as engagement, only more Christiany… Please refer to This Post, on how changing things to make them Christian is an ancient heresy.
-I haven’t read that book that you did about dating, and chances are I wish you didn’t either. I get really sick of Christian women telling me they want me to lead them, and this is exactly how they want me to lead them and into what.
-You do not ever owe a man anything for spending money on you, that is his choice. Prostitution is illegal in this country, If a man expects something in exchange for dinner he deserves to be both disappointed and dumped. More than likely however, you’re just over thinking it, If a christian guy asks to take you to dinner, that’s probably exactly what he wants, just smile and enjoy the free dinner, it it turns out he wanted anything other than your company it’s his stupid mistake.
Did I miss anything?
Good Doctrine, and Salvation
I’ve noticed a recent and disturbing trend in the modern church to act like people are saved by their good doctrine. This is far from the case. I wrote the following study to help combat that sort of thinking.
Matthew 8:29
Mark 1:24
Mark 3:11
Mark 5:7
Luke 7:34
Luke 4:41
And of course James 2:29
Etc.
What I hope you’ll notice from these passages is that demons have really impeccable theology. You were of course already intimately familiar with the earlier part of 7 where Satan himself reveals to have memorized scripture.
Now compare that with the disciples.
Matthew 17:4
Luke 8:45
Matthew 16:22 (also in Mark 8)
Galatians 2:11
Mark 10:35-37 (Note that he’s “teacher”, in that passage. Not “son of God” like the demons, not even “good teacher” like the rich young ruler. Note also Jesus’ reply “yeah you want to obey me, sure, sure, what do you want?” and of course their final desire.)
And my personal favorite: Matthew 16:6-7
Seriously guys? Jesus just fed a huge crowd of people miraculously, YOU passed out the bread! How do you think he has a problem with you now because he got hungry and suddenly he can’t take care of that. I mean Really?
But consistently, the disciples of Jesus demonstrate to us that they just don’t get it. They missed the point, they’re confused, they’re not sure who Jesus is exactly. The scriptures go to great length to communicate this “loserness” to us. At the transfiguration we learn that “the disciples were very sleepy” In the garden at Gethsemane they actually fall asleep when they should be praying. John, when recording the story of the resurrection, sees fit to inform us that Jesus Christ is raised, and death has been defeated, and the world will never be the same, and also that he’s the faster runner!!! (John 20:4)
Peter finally figures out who Jesus is “the Christ, of God” (Luke 9:20) but his revelation comes in a lackluster way. Not only because he completely fails to affirm the divinity of Christ “The Christ, Who is also God in the flesh” but also because immediately afterward (as we learn in parallel passages) he brazenly asserts that Jesus will never be crucified! leading to the famous “get behind me Satan” quote I offered above.
Now do this one on your own.
How many times does Jesus affirm the faith of children? Of Samaritans? Of thieves? Of people who have no idea how or what or who this Jesus character is but they’re sure they want a piece?
Jesus.
Jesus is who saves us.
Not what we do, not what we know, not the information we have about Jesus. Jesus isn’t what saves us, Jesus is who saves us, and he does it by grace, alone through faith alone.
Amen.
P-Con
I spent a year in Collegiate Debate, it was some of the most fun I’ve ever had in school. I often lament that not everyone had the same experience. Debate is excellent for training one to think and communicate quickly and critically, It is an introduction to logic class on steroids, and it inbeds the information it teaches is a very permanent part of the brain.
To this day I can communicate with debaters more quickly and easily than almost any type of person. Both of us have been trained how to relate universal implications of intricate government decisions in 5 minutes or less, so when the topic of Nuclear disarmament comes up and they can say “Nuke Prolif increases MAD which reduces GTNW’s likleyhood” and I’ll know exactly what they mean. Then I can say “Martyrdom” and they’ll know exactly what I mean. Debate over.
That means when we’re in a group arguing about whether to go to Panera or Carl’s for lunch she can say “CP Chipotle” and I can say “No disads” and we can turn the car around and start heading there before anyone else has figured out what just happened.
It’s a beautiful thing.
One particularly powerful concept from debate is called “P-Con” it stands for Performative Contradiction. Here’s how it works:
Suppose you get the short end of the stick and are assigned to defend some terrible proposition. Maybe you are against a stimulus bill which, though expensive, is really the only choice we are to prevent the stock market from crashing. Well you know it, and you know the other team knows it and is preparing all sorts of arguments against any criticisms you can come up with for the bill because after all wasting money is better than everybody starving.
Suppose then that you get a brilliant idea, instead of opposing the bill on the grounds that it’s insufficient somehow, or to expensive, or full of pork, you oppose it on the grounds that it will save the terrible american capitalistic system, and in doing so, you render all of their preparation useless.
Suppose you speak passionately from the podium about the evils of capitalism and the free market society. You demonstrate that our rampant consumerism is destroying the planet and multiple third world countries, you enrapture the audience until they are eating out of your hand believing that if they continue to worship the almighty dollar they will never truly be free, and the only thing we can do to save ourself is crash the economy as soon as possible!
Then suppose your opposition asks as a POI “Say where did you get those sunglasses?”
“Oakley why?”
“P-Con”
You just lost the debate.
The reason is because it’s now obvious to everyone that you don’t believe a word you are saying (and if anyone missed it. your opponent will be sure to make it clear to them in his next speech) His argument, which he offered simply by saying that half a word “P-Con” is that by reviling yourself as a person who shops for designer eyewear you have betrayed a truth within your heart that you cannot possibly be the anti-capitalistic hippi you claim to be, so even if he doesn’t show your argument is false, you have proven it by persisting to live in contradiction to it.
And it really is that brutal, P-Con, you lose! This debate is now about your sunglasses.
This comes up in other ways also:
Suppose you are assigned to defend same-sex marraige and you happen to mention that “this is a way to ensure equality for the gays”
“The Gays?” did you mean “The GLBT Community?” P-Con, You Lose.
Suppose you have built yourself halfway into a Kritik about profanity, and the evils thereof, but you happen to stub your toe as you return to your seat, shouting an expletive.
“What do you just say?” P-Con, You Lose.
I can’t tell you mow many times I’ve wanted to explain this to non-debaters.
Say I’m arguing about theology with some friends of mine within earshot of a freshman girl from Point-Loma
“Ummmm… Excuse me, but like, Arguing is stupid! It’s like, not like, you’re going to convince one another”
“Oh Yeah, arguing is stupid huh? Would you like to argue about it?” P-Con! now leave me alone!
Here’s the point, and I know I took a long time to get to it, but I was having fun.
Most people do not have the vocabulary to describe what I just described, and if you are a Christian, and you try to tell people about Christ, and you try to counter their arguments You might very well win. Christianity is true which comes in really handy for winning arguments about it. But if you don’t live as if it’s true, If you are a nasty selfish argumentative person, they will not believe you.
Even if you’re just a little xenophobic, or just a little hypocritical, or you got drunk that one time and kissed that girl you shouldn’t have… They won’t believe you.
They might not be able to explain why not, They might not know why not, They might offer other objections that they do understand to what you’re saying, but if you do not get your life straight those objections will never run out, and the people you talk to about Jesus will never believe you, because your life and your words form a performative contradiction so they know that you don’t really believe what you are telling them to.
P-Con, You lose
Key:
Nuke Prolif: Nuclear Proliferation- The spread of nuclear weapons technology to new countries.
MAD: Mutually Assured Destruction- The concept that you won’t destroy me if you know destroying me would also destroy you
GNTW: Global Thermal Nuclear War- WWIII which most debaters can show is likely to happen if the other team gets their way, regardless of what that team is arguing for
CP: Counter Plan- An option that had not yet been considered
Disad: Disadvantage- A negative result of the plan coming to fruition
POI: Point of Information- A question asked during the middle of a debate round by ones opponents
Kritik: a Critique- We debaters refuse to use the hegemonic male-dominated spelling of the word critique because it is just another tool the white man uses to keep us down!
Point Loma: Point Loma Nazarene University- A Christian College on the beach in San Diego, California.
Language Learning
I believe that the language a person speaks is one of the most important, if not the very most important factor in determining how they think. If you speak English you think in English, and that comes with all sorts of connotative meanings to English words.
I’ve studied some Spanish, but not nearly enough to begin to think in Spanish. When I speak Spanish, I have to translate what my friend is saying into English in my head, then formulate a response, and then translate my English response back into Spanish.
Eventually through practice I’m told it’s possible to develop enough fluency for me to begin to think in Spanish, and I aspire to do that, not only because it would help me avoid embarrassing mistakes, but also because Spanish has a different feel than English and learing to think in Spanish could hardly help but open my mind.
When I think of what it means to “Know Jesus” I have very little choice but to use that English word “know” in my head. “Know” is related to “Knowledge”. It associates in my head with facts and figures and books. I automatically think of knowing Jesus in terms of what I believe, and whether or not those beliefs correspond to reality sufficiently.
If I spoke Spanish I wouldn’t have that problem because I would find in my Bible a variant from the root “conoser” which is related to “ser” meaning “to be” it is a word that refers to familiarity, as in “I know my friend Jessica” while contexts like “I know the formula for the area of a triangle” use a different Spanish word. (“Saber”) so the biblical term would associate in my mind with the person of Jesus, as an associate of mine, and being familiar with his ways.
And that’s just one word!
Do you know how many words Spanish has!!!
So I’m excited by languages and language learning, I think it’s a force for peace, unity and broad mindedness. Which is why I was so incredibly excited when I found this.
It’s called “Where Are Your Keys?” and it’s an open sourced language learning game put together by some nerds in Portland who are obviously insanely awesome. I’ve not played it, They’re in Portland, but I’ve read up on it and watched some videos, from what I can tell, it’s like Mao, but instead of a soul crushing sensation that you are wasting your life, you get to learn Mandarin.
I think the church should rock this thing. Do any of you readers know anybody in Portland?
PS. If you don’t know what Mao is, e-mail me, we’ll get a game on!
Protecting the Sanctity of Marriage.
Would somebody please explain to me how having a battle with the federal government in the courts about the interpretation of the constitution is supposed to protect the sanctity of a God ordained institution between men and women?
Seriously, use the comments section and explain it to me, I just don’t get it.
How can we possibly say out of one side of our mouths that marriage is a sacred institution which God alone is in control of, while at the very same time saying that if this or that bill passes it will be ruined?
It seems to be that the only way we can truly interfere with marriage in the church would be to allow ourselves to become convinced that what the government has to say actually has anything whatsoever to do with who is and who is not married in the eyes of God!
So on one side we have the holy institution of marriage, a part of what Lutherans call the “Right Hand Kingdom” a Godly practice undertaken by two people who love each other and form a covenant to death. And then on the other side you have the civil institution of marriage, a part of the “Left Hand Kingdom”, wherein two people decide to file with the state in order to garner certain benefits and hold all assets jointly until they file for divorce.
And these two things, though they often coincide, have absolutely nothing to do with one another. the fact that they are both called “marriage” is an unfortunate circumstance. But considering the word “bow” can mean anything from a decorative knot to a device used to play a violin I should think were more than able to overcome the idea that the same word might have two different meanings.
This is a lesson I really wish we would learn well as a church, it affects more than our theology of same-sex marriage.
Consider the number of young couples, who being sexually tempted, remember the words of their youth pastor, and decide to get married. And so they file with the state and have a left handed ceremony, but fail utterly to comprehend the significance of a lifetime covenant of sacrificial love with one another. I call it “Premarital Marriage” and it is notably more damaging and immoral than premarital sex, what it essentially does is create two problems out of one, where now the couple is not only sexually active prematurely, but also married in the eyes of the state, causing problems with bitterness, divorce, and children.
And speaking of divorce how many couples in the church today have broken their covenant before God to love one another in sickness and in health? How many married couples hate one another? How many supposedly unbroken homes exist where husband in wife sleep in separate beds, separate rooms, or separate houses because they can’t bear to look one another in the eye? Ans what is it that’s gone wrong with a church that tells such couples not to file for divorce, because that would be a sin?
That is the same perverted logic that causes catholic school girls to become pregnant at 15 because they thought using a condom while having premarital sex with their boyfriend would be immoral. At the point where you hate one another, you’re already divorced. The paperwork just makes it easier come tax time.
Now just to be clear: I’m against divorce, and against premarital sex, I think young couples should get married, and older couples should seek reconciliation in their marriages, but I also think that if you are not going to do that then you might as well be honest about it in the eyes of the state and make it easier on yourself.
So in closing consider this:
When you fall in love, and promise one person that you will be theirs and they will be yours as long as you both shall live, and when you have a wedding in Paris at Notre Damme presided over by Billy Graham himself and doves descend into the sanctuary as a sign from heaven above that even The Father God is celebrating your union on this day, remember that even on that great morning there will be couples plotting the murder of their spouses in their heads, teenagers driving to Vegas, to “make it legal”, former strippers marrying 70 year old millionaires for their money, and a whole host of illegal immigrants marrying for citizenship. But none of that will matter. You will be joined in the eyes of God with the person you love and the US government could do nothing to tarnish that in a million years.
And neither can Adam and Steve.
They’re Making Christian WOW
World of Warcraft (WOW) is a massive online game made by blizzard entertainment. It has absolutely revolutionized the genre of Online RPG gaming and perhaps gaming itself. So much so that we Christians decided we needed to get in on the action by creating one of our own!
Yes you heard right. WOW is fun, safe, and not explicitly Christian, and that just won’t do! “The Bible Online: Heroes” however will finally provide Christian nerds with an MMORPG that they can play without having to learn to relate with to all of those pesky…normal nerds.
Am I the only person who is really offended by this?
I feel like:
First they came for our secular books, I stayed silent, because it happened 100 years before I was born,
And then they came for our secular music, and I stayed silent because when I tried to say anything people just told me that I “don’t get it”
Then they came for our secular clothing, and that one really kinda ticked me off but it was like, what was I going to do? Endorse the regular clothing industry?
They’ve come for our bumper stickers, and Our coffee shops and out breath mints (seriously)
And Now they’re here for our awesome computer games that don’t take place in bible times and I fear it’s too late
It’s not okay people!
It was never okay. The entire dichotomy, the whole separation of the sacred and the secular is heresy!
I’m not using sensational language either. The book of Colossians was written to combat the heretical notion of the Gnostics that there was the material, and the spiritual realm, and the Material was bad, while the spiritual was good. The Bible says no, Jesus was both, deal with it!
I really do think that’s the problem. I think we have Christians walking around today who are really Gnostics.
Wikipedia defines Gnostics as believing in “esoteric knowledge through which the spiritual elements of humanity are reminded of their true origins within the superior Godhead, being thus permitted to escape materiality” In other words they think they’re better off because they know something the rest of us don’t. And this knowledge of theirs is going to help their spirits fly away from everybody who doesn’t believe forever.
Does that sound like what you believe?
Because it’s in direct opposition to the teachings of Christianity.
I Didn’t Know Any Worse
All those years ago today, I can remember where I was… I was a sophomore in high school, we got a call at about 7 in the morning, before breakfast, he said that something terrible had happened, and I should turn on the news.
I think the second tower had just fallen as we turned it on. The news footage that day was almost all of the standing towers, replaying the shots of the crash, of the towers smoking.
I still had to go to school. My first period Geometry Teacher Mr. Duskett had a phrase on the board “September 11th 2001 a day that will live in infamy” quoting FDR’s famous speech about December 7th.
In second period English we didn’t study at all, we just watched the news. My friend Salim sat right behind me and we both watched in awe as details began to pour in about the attacks. By this time it was clear that this was no accident.
“Who would do this?” he asked with tears in his eyes “Who could do this?”
I brought that story up recently in a discussion, when the anti-American sentiment of Islam was brought up, hoping the prove a point.
My mother asked why I’d never mentioned it before, she said when I got home from school that day I had told her we barely talked about it we just sat in stunned silence.
There certainly was a lot of that. I told her “I guess at the time I didn’t think that comment was terribly relevant”
At first I didn’t know why, and then I realized. Why would it be relevant? On 9/11 an American was upset, aghast, and confused about who could do such a thing? Of course he was. So was I!
Salim was my friend, he wasn’t my “Muslim friend” or my “Middle Eastern friend” he was just a guy, I went to Jr. High with him, we talked, I gave him an old laptop once. I was compassionate loving and non judgmental to him, Why? Because at the time, I didn’t know I wasn’t supposed to be.
I didn’t know any worse.
Salim’s comment was in second period. It wasn’t until Mrs. Delong’s Social Studies 5th period we learned Osama Bin Ladin was responsible. And it wasn’t until several days after that we high scholars figured out who Al Queda was. (actually we called them the Taliban back then) and it wasn’t until the following months and years that our understanding of the middle east, and of Islam and of Muslim people began to change and sour
So now when you think of the Middle East you think of words like Haamas and Jihad and Hezbollah, you think of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the terrorism in Israel. That wasn’t the case at 9 in the morning on September 11, 2001.
I thought of Salim… and Omit, and that little guy from wrestling what was his name? …Salmaan. Nice guy.
None of them hate America
None of them want to hurt Christians
It’s become commonplace now for Christians to cite that Islam is a dangerous religion, that they want to take over the United States, that they lie, that their prophet was a murderer, that it’s a theocracy over there in the middle east. It’s usually backed up by some half remembered verse in the Koran about what you should do to infidels…
I dunno what the Koran says, I can’t read Arabic, and translation is considered theologically problematic. But if it says you should hurt people then these guys don’t believe it, and there are others like them. As a matter of fact, they’re ALL like them, nice guys and gals who love America and were shocked at the 911 attacks.
Of all the Muslims I’ve ever met in the US, Not one of them was cheering that day.
And a great many were crying.
They must have known what was coming.
A Creed
I’ve been working for a while on a new kind of creed. I want to figure out what a belief statement would look along the lines of the Apostles or Nicean creed, that focused less on the historical facts, and more on the teachings of Jesus and living as a christian. This Is what I’ve come up with, It’s a work in progress, this is my third draft in as many years.
I Believe in the Christian Life
In the depravity of mankind.
And in the desperate need of every human being for love
I believe that the world will be a better place if everyone who was asked to walk a mile, walked two, and everyone who was asked for a hundred foreskins gave two hundred.
I believe that is more productive to respond to someone who has hurt me by allowing him to hurt me again, than it is to hurt him in turn.
Though I often fail, I believe in loving my enemies.
I believe that more can be accomplished through peace than through violence. That wars can be won by laying down to die. And that under the right circumstances victories can be earned only by admitting defeat.
I believe in truth
I believe that truth is always better than falsehood, that it should be sought after, fought for, and protected
I believe that everyone everywhere is important, and that the things that separate us mean less than the things that unite us.
I believe that men are supposed to cry. And so are women. I also believe we are supposed to laugh, and sneeze and live life,
I believe in life, in love, in hope, in faith, in sacrifice
I don’t believe I should hide, and pretend like I’m the same as other people, but sometimes I wish the televangelists would.
I am a Christian. This is what I believe.
Oh Yeah, I also think some stuff happened in Jerusalem a long time ago.
Not Exactly My Fault
I was going through my phone tonight. Particularly the notepad app where I store little tidbits of information that I don’t want to write on scraps of paper lest I lose them. Contact info, driving directions, ideas for books, those sorts of things. Once in a while I write down a lesson I’ve learned or a thought to ponder, so as I went through my phone tonight, I got an opportunity to remind myself of things of some life lessons I’d forgotten.
One note I found was about a time a little over a year ago when I was at the Dallas airport with Don, on my way to a gathering of evangelists who specializes in apologetics so see if I might have a future in their organization. Don was, and persists to be one of the kindest and most sanctified men I have ever known, and he had mentored me for a year or so in his ideology of ministry, this trip was a sort of a culmination of that.
As we were waiting for the layover in Dallas I got myself distracted and lost track of time. When I eventually returned to the Gate, Don was there waiting for me, with a smile on his face, to inform me that I’d missed my flight, and that he had waited so I wouldn’t have to fly alone. Then he rescheduled our flights and took me out to dinner.
That however, despite being awesome, is not what the note was about. I had written it down to remind myself how I felt afterwards, as we continued to travel. It was a tremendous amount of personal responsibility.
I had caused Don to miss his flight, and in so doing, I sent us into a contingency plan, after that, No matter what went wrong, I felt it was at least partially my fault. If I hadn’t of missed the flight we wouldn’t even be here.
And I realized. Isn’t that always the case? No matter what you do or where you are, or what goes wrong in your life, In some ways it was only able to happen because of you and the choices you’ve made to impact the world. If things were different, things would be different.
In my phone The line in the note said:
“This helps me take responsibility for things which aren’t exactly my fault”
What a lesson! How often am I accused of something falsely and I curl up and get defensive and look at everything else that caused it. The fact is everything might have been different if I had done different things, and I can own that. And if there’s even a low percentage of responsibility that’s mine, well then I have to admit that if that percentage weren’t there, it probably wouldn’t have happened.
Now I can say it “I’m sorry about that”
I got out of a relationship a few months ago and I was totally exhausted. My girlfriend and I had been fighting to make it work for months, and both of us are really good at fighting. She became generally unsatisfied with me and I felt there was nothing I could do to change that. Anything she asked me to do or change or improve about myself that I succeeded in doing, in my mind only reminded her of 10 more things she needed fixed about me.
As a result when it finally ended, I got this breath of fresh air and self justification. I felt, and with considerable support, that she was simply unsatisfiable, and that no matter what I did to please her it would not have been enough. After all I had bent over backwards in many ways and it didn’t seem even to help, let alone solve, the problem.
I felt perfectally justified to say “It’s all her fault. If she would have been satisfied by anything I would have found it, I would have climbed any mountain for her, but even if I had she would have just coldly told me that she wanted me to climb a bunch more. There was nothing I could do, It’s her!”
There was another note in my phone tonight.
It read: “Plumerias, Gladiolas, Jasmine, Garden Roses”
Those were her favorite flowers.
There was a time in our relationship (or, as happens to be the case, a time just before our relationship) when I was so enamored with her and excited to surprise and please her, that when I happened to overhear her mention her favorite flowers I wrote it down so I wouldn’t forget.
Shoot man. I barley got her flowers at all near the end. When I did I got her regular roses. She liked garden roses, with the vines. I forgot!
Something somewhere in me that was there in the beginning of the relationship left. I stopped caring enough to surprise her with flowers. I started to feel imposed upon by her.
And it’s true that forgetting about flowers, that my losing that lovin’ feeling isn’t what finally killed the relationship, but it’s also true that if things were different, things would be different.
So now I can say it “I’m sorry… It could have been different if not for me”
And I hope I can learn to be sorry more often for even those things that aren’t exactly my fault
Freeeeeedom!
The lesson in church today was out of 1 Peter, and it began with a discussion question for the tables we were seated at “If you could be free from anything what would you want freedom from, What would that do?”
It was pretty clear where the pastor was headed bless his heart. We were all supposed to name silly things like freedom from weight gain, or punishment, or busyness, and then he was going to flip it on us and show that what we really need freedom from is our sin.
Would you like some milk with that colostrum?
Meanwhile we at the table were playing the small group game where we go in a circle and each say the same right answer in a different way so as not to make anyone feel like they already answered it because it’s a stupid obvious question. “Temptation” , no for me it’s “doubt” I’m saying “the flesh”…
But there’s actually something that’s really good here. I don’t know if it was by design or not, but this becomes really interesting when you leverage wish fulfillment.
If you could choose which would you rather have: Freedom from the responsibility to righteousness or freedom from sin nature?
If God approached you and said “Tell ya what, I’ll give you a free pass, You can love me while doing whatever the hell you want with no moral consequences, or if you’d rather, I’ll take away your old self so you won’t be tempted anymore” Which would you take?
Obviously the correct church answer is the sin nature but would you really rather have that? I for one think a very strong case could be made for the freedom from righteousness!
Knowing God, It’s better to love him and serve him then rebel against the world the way he made it, obviously. But if he was willing to give you a let you off the hook, and say “Don’t you wish I made it this way?” I might be tempted to say “yes I do!”
Put another way: If pleasing God was not an issue, would you rather live in sin or righteousness?
Sin really has it’s advantages!
I still pick righteousness.
I know, I’m sorry I’m landing with the right answer people. But I do really think that’s better. That virtue is it’s own reward if only I could get past this stinking flesh.
I believe that it is a more extravagant gift to free me from what I want than to give me what I want.
Do you believe that?
Don’t just rightanswer me and say you believe that because you’re supposed to, think about it for a sec, there’s more here than meets the eye.
You could have what you want, still worship God, still go to heaven, no guilt. Or you could die to the flesh. Do you want that?
Ok now here’s my next question. Do you think the world wants that?
I kind of think they do.
The Car Accident Incident
A strange thing happened the other night… I was out for a walk late at night, and I found that the intersection by my house was all blocked off in police tape because of an accident, walking by I could clearly see two cars involved, and a body in the street covered by a tarp, somebody had died. I walked by slowly, for once appreciating the opportunity to see how collisions are handled without holding up traffic, and noticed one of the parties involved was being questioned by the police with her family. I decided to continue with my walk, musing as I went about the fragility of life and the fact that at the moment this happened, I was less than a mile away telling jokes with my neighbors.
By the time I returned en route back to my house, one of the lanes had been cleared, most of the shrapnel had been cleaned up, and the family was sitting on a bench outside the police line, One woman who had clearly been driving, was bent over in tears. My heart went out to the woman and her family, she had killed a man that night, she knew it, and she obviously felt the full significance of that. I heard someone way “Well, they say we’re free to go” and the woman looked up from her tears and choked out the words “You mean, they’re not gonna put me in prison?” almost in unison the family responded “NO! You’re okay it was an accident, the police know that” As they tried to comfort her I quietly and politely walked by, or at least I tried to.
This is probably a good time to mention that I’m pretty skeptical as Christians go, I don’t do a lot based on emotion or tradition, I like facts and figures. This translates poorly into certain doctrines and certain spiritual experiences. For instance, I have never been “slain in the spirit”. I don’t speak in tongues, I hate it when people investigate first dates in terms of “God’s will for their life” and I have never, ever, felt supernatural pressure to talk to, pray for, or evangelize a stranger. Ever!…until the other night.
So God and I had this argument in my head that went something as follows. (if you’re reading and you’re not a Christian, The voice of God sounds to me much like a thought in my head. Sometimes I get the two confused, but in situations like this where I’m apparently thinking things I disagree with it’s easier to tell)
So In my head I said “Boy I sure hope God puts some people in her life that can help her through her grief” and the idea arrived in my head that went something like “I just did”
This all happened very fast, and I’d love to say that at that moment I realized that it made no sense to be arguing with the almighty in my head and proceeded to make the right decision, but I didn’t have time to think that through before I retorted back “No I mean like a grief counselor or something, someone who’s an expert in this…” and almost as soon as the thought was formed it dawned on me…” You’re a Pastor”…
“Shoot, missed opportunity, I’m already passed them now”
“You could go back”
“I can’t go back, that’s awkward, that’s weird, this person does not need another stranger who…”
“What did you think you were on this walk for anyway?”
…Well now that shut me up. I don’t know, I had just felt the need to take a walk, It’s not normally my style to leave a social environment to go for a walk but sometimes you just need a walk, and now I’m here, and there was this accident and this woman needs someone to comfort her, and I’m arguing with myself that I need to go back and…Got it, I need to go back.
So I turned back towards them, the oldest son caught my eyes and I felt completely creepy, I was a total stranger, younger than anyone there, wearing jean shorts and a cotton green sportcoat from a thrift store, walking towards them… barefoot…
“Hi… I’m so sorry to but my nose where it doesn’t belong, but… Is there anything I can do to help?….I’m a pastor, Can I pray for you?
The man didn’t pause “Yeah!” he said nodding “That’s okay ma?”
She looked up at me “Yes….I’m Jewish, but…”
I smiled, “That’s okay” I said waving my hand
The group gathered around in a circle there was about 8 of us, I put my hands on the backs of the women to either side of me, the driver was across from me, her name was Fran, and we all prayed together, a Christian pastor, a Jewish mother, certainty some people who hadn’t prayed in years if ever. It was a simple prayer, lasting no longer than a minute, I called on God as Father, to hold us closer in the wake of this tragedy, and to help us to live out our days in this fallen world, I prayed specifically for Fran to be filled with a sense of his love and forgiveness of her, that she’d know she is always loved and always accepted.
When the prayer was over she looked at me, holding back tears. “Thank you! Thank You….thank you.” and she gave me a hug and then headed to her car to go home.
As I left another woman approached me “You’re a pastor?…Where do you work.” I briefly explained and she said “I mean where can I find you? I’m a lost lamb, I need a church” So I have her my contact info to help her find a place locally.
And that’s the story, that’s it. No fire from heaven, no spirit descending like a dove, she didn’t accept Christ that night, she just prayed with me, and I think it helped.
Bread
So I’ve been learning to bake this year, and in my experimentation I found to my great joy that bread is incredible when the 5tsp or so or butter is substituted for ½ cup of Bacon grease. Further proof of the idea that everything is better when you add bacon.
The whole baking experience has had me thinking about the Lord’s supper. What with all of the biblical references to bread and leavening that are beginning to make more and more sense now. I wondered if it might be a neat ministry to provide churches with fresh baked steamy loafs to use for communion on Sunday instead of the seemingly expensive store-bought loafs most churches now use, and when I made the bacon bread, I thought about how cool it would be to use that in the sacrament. I could just see the words of the invitation
“At this church we believe that the sprit of Christ is spiritually present within the bread and the cup, we also believe that the body of Christ is delicious so we made it with bacon! Any and all who have accepted Christ as their savior are invited to come forward and eat of this loaf and drink of this cup…”
Unfortunately I think this would probably offend some vegetarians who now wouldn’t partake, so most churches probably wouldn’t be interested. Which is okay, In fact after thinking about it for a bit I’m pretty sure the loaf is vegan as well. They probably don’t use eggs and use oil instead of butter… And that got me thinking…
Should Jesus’ body be vegetarian? Because if so I think it takes us down a slippery slope. If Jesus needs to be made without animal byproducts doesn’t it follow that he should also be low-carb, low-fat, sugar free, gluten free, fair-trade, organic and processed in a bakery that doesn’t contain peanuts? Because that sounds like some really horrible boring bread.
The question goes deeper than the bread of course. When we present Jesus the man at our churches, just what sort of Jesus are we allowed to present? Must we actually offer fourth an unaffiliated, politically uninterested, non-denominational Jesus. Does Jesus need to be depicted as androgynous, independent of ethnic origin and cultural influence, existing without socioeconomic status and secular opinion?
Might that just possibly create an object of worship as safe and bland as a horrible communion wafer?
But otherwise we run a risk that is not to be scoffed at. That if we don’t, we create a quorum of people who will have no choice but to leave Jesus on the alter.
Thoughts?
CTR
I finally found my CTR ring again. I’d taken it off for a shower nearly a year ago and thought it was gone forever. While I’m celebrating I thought I’d take some time to explain on the internet what so many people ask me “Why do you wear a CTR ring?”
For those that don’t know, it’s a Mormon invention (hence the controversy) CTR is something of the Latter Day Saints version of our protestant WWJD. It stands for Choose The Right, the implication of which is that in any choice you are offered, It is wise and in keeping with Christian holiness to consistently choose the most righteous option. Pretty simple
So why bother wearing the ring? Well I happen to love it, and I think the CTR concept is superior to WWJD in a number of ways. WWJD or What Would Jesus Do? Is an excellent question to ask, and the book that spawned the interest “In His Steps” by Charles Sheldon is absolutely foundation, but it has a few marked weaknesses is assuming:
1: That I actually know what it is Jesus would do in every situation. I get that I should strive to come to know but for the most part the prospect of determining whether or not Jesus would take an extra piece of cake is easier said than done.
2: That what Jesus would do is what I should (and can) do. The fact of the matter is that in some situations what Jesus would do is spit in the dirt to make mud, and rub the mud in your eyes until you can see again. That’s just not always going to work for me
3: (and this one is probably the worst) That there is only one right good Christian response, that being what Jesus would do. I don’t know if Jesus would ever play a video game but I certainly do, and think it’s often right of me to do so. What Paul did is dissimilar to what Jesus did in a number of ways and I think that’s to his credit, if he had stayed in Israel open air preaching we would all be suffering for it today.
CTR has none of these problems, and I find it particularly hospitable to my own personal understanding that when a choice is presented to me, I have not two options, but a plethora of different moral options all representing various degrees of nearness to or distance from the right, and my goal is to pick the rightmost one I can.