The Core Blog

Comforting the Oppressor

2010-02-01T08:29:00.003-06:00

And the winner is... oh s***, not again.

Wouldn't you love to hear this from an announcer at an awards ceremony? When Titanic just kept taking on Oscars, or Beyonce's name was called again and again at the grammys? If I was an announcer, opening the sealed envelope, I would want to call out a name that's surprising and unique; a real come-from behind champion; a cinderella victor. But somehow most of those revered but un-nominated envelope celebrities manage to read the names with a degree of gravitas or joy.

I couldn't do it.

The unfortunate fact is, even the surprise winners at the Oscars or Grammys or Golden Globes, etc, are not very big surprises. Every last nominee is a member of the inner circle in some way or another. Maybe there's a few nominees for "Best Reggae Album" or "Best Foreign-Language Film" that have escaped our notice over the past year, but they certainly are the exception.

And I will guarantee you one thing: the best album of every year is almost certainly an album that 99% of Americans have never heard. And the best new artist is some nobody practicing day and night in their basement or garage. But they will not walk the red carpet this year, or next year. Nor will they want to.

Our society has a narcissistic way of rewarding fame and fortune--the last things on earth that need or deserve a reward. You sold a gazillion albums! Here's a little gold statue! You starred in a movie that netted a billion dollars! Here is a moment in the spotlight, and the finally the recognition you deserve!

What a bunch of bull s***.

It's not just the entertainment industry, either. Who were the primary recipients of the government's bail-out money? The Fortune 50 companies who should have known better. Instead of taking pity on the broken and outcast, our tears are shed for the gilded insiders. Instead of comforting the oppressed, we comfort the oppressors.

Jesus was not impressed by royalty, or status, or wealth. He didn't go out of his way to talk to members of the upper-class, unless it was to call them out of it (think Zacchaeus or the rich young ruler.) He said that the first will be last and the last will be first.

I kind of hope there's no such thing as an awards ceremony in heaven (I'm sure hell will be full of them.) But if there is, I have an idea what it would be like. The nobody-artist practicing in her garage will get center stage, and the director with imagination, skill and a shoe-string budget will take home the statue. But most importantly, the people who have surrendered their lives and comforts for the sake of broken will be lifted up and crowned with honor.

They will hold their crowns high in the air for everyone to see, but they will not give a speech. They will throw them all down at the feet of Jesus. The cinderella victor.

+

The 2010 Cure for the Maturity Disease

2010-01-01T16:13:00.005-06:00

I forget who said it, but here's a good New Years' Quote: "Youth is when you're allowed to stay up really late on New Year's Eve. Middle Age is when you're forced to."

I'm 30 years old. Have been for 8 months now. Maybe it's just because I hang around a lot of college-aged and mid-20s types that the late night thing hasn't worn off on me. And maybe it was because I didn't wear out the party urge in college the way many people do. It's true that my wife and I were definitely the oldest in our group of friends that rang in the New Year last night, if only by a year or three.

But I can look down the tunnel of middle age from where I sit, and I can see how pointless the party thing will look in retrospect. (Note: I advise everyone to drink with caution, and I will be the first to set that example. I only "party" to be with friends, and perhaps make some new ones. But the party atmosphere can be a bit infectious while you're young, and that's the thing that can wear off, even if drinking was never an issue.)

I'm sure that when I'm 40, or maybe even when I'm 35, I'll look back at the way I spent some evening weekends with friends, and regret having invested so much in something so silly. Nevertheless, I can say one thing: all the silliness was with friends. I wasn't trying to be someone I'm not, or trying to cozy up to a crowd that I don't belong in. I was spending real time with real friends, and whether the time was loud and crazy, or quiet and dignified, doesn't change that fact.

But there is one benefit, one insight, I receive from being part of the loud and crazy, and I think if I wasn't sober I wouldn't notice it. I have observed that every desired result of what some call "nightlife" seems intended to restore something in childhood that's been lost in the maturation process.

Think about it... how do little children party, when they're left to their own devices? If they hear music with a beat, they dance. If they see a food or treat they like, they eat it. If they hear a funny joke, they laugh uproariously. They make up stories and play games and talk loudly and run around and make new friends, and if they party hard enough, they'll collapse and fall asleep wherever they land.

But maturity doesn't stand for this. There is a standard of dignity and propriety that causes us to forget what it means to enjoy ourselves, to celebrate, to bind ourselves together in happiness and a recognition of blessing. We grow up, and we mature. But the fact is... the child never leaves us. It simply hides behind a veneer we call "sobriety," which can only be removed by alcohol. (That children's party I described above? Just add sex and booze, and I've perfectly described a frat party or a bachelorette party or a 21st birthday party.)

Might there be another way to remove it? What if we just started accepting each other exactly as we are? What if those around us had our affirmation in advance, and knew that had nothing to prove? What if we learned how to stop taking ourselves so damn seriously?

Because alcohol doesn't cure the maturity disease, it only relieves the symptoms. Perhaps the cure, if we're ready to accept it, is plain, old-fashioned Love.

Happy New Year.

+

Regina Spektor on Religion

2009-12-07T08:21:00.004-06:00

God can be funny
When told he'll give you money if you just pray the right way
And when presented like a genie
Who does magic like Houdini
Or grants wishes like Jiminy Cricket and Santa Claus

God can be so hilarious
Ha ha
Ha ha

No one laughs at God in a hospital
No one laughs at God in a war
No one's laughing at God when they've lost all they got and they don't know what for

NPR's World Cafe: "Do you feel that people only turn to religion when we are stressed? And do you see that as hypocritical, or just natural?"

Regina Spektor: "No... there's not any kind of specific dogmatic way I feel. I'm suspicious of people that have it all figured out, and feel very strongly and specifically about such giant issues, and such mysterious things. So, if anything, I'm critical of people that hijack these concepts and these questions, and these kind of, worries that people have and use them to sort of make people feel like they know better, about how the universe works, or how God or, however you call it, works. But a song like this, it's more just ideas. And, kind of my own questions. I don't have a hard line with people.

Cafe: "Did your parents immigrate from Russia, to begin with, for religious reasons?"

Spektor: "Yeah. The main reason was, they wanted to have freedom to be Jews and to practice Judaism. And we did, as soon as we got to the Bronx. We became part of a really nice Jewish community, and I got to go to school and learn Hebrew and learn all the traditions, and all the stuff that they didn't have a chance. Now I love learning all the mystical side and the stories. There are definitely things that I wish weren't in there. And it's like, why sometimes they have to mix in... Why can't it just be good things? There has to be something that's sexist, or homophobic, or self-righteous or self-congratulatory, etc. Stuff that doesn't seem very spiritual, or it doesn't seem to bring anyone closer to any higher power. So, to me, that kind of stuff, I'm very picky. And I, there's a lot of things that I love about Judaism. And I'm a practicing Jew. But I always wish that there's something... When I listen to interviews of people that are Christian or Muslim or Buddhist, there's always those things that irk people in their own... It's like, in your family. You love your family, but there will just be those certain things that drive you crazy and you wish they weren't there. I guess your religion is like that."

Me: Is your religion like that? Are you skeptical of certainty?

You can hear this interview, along with several of her songs, at NPR World Cafe's website. You can read the complete lyrics, and discuss the meaning, of Spektor's song "Laughing With" (excerpted at the top of this post) here.

Will the Real Muslims Please Stand Up?

2009-12-03T20:00:00.002-06:00

A great question came up in our Socrates Cafe discussion last night. (Topic: Muslimerica) The question is, does a Christian have any right to decide who the True Muslims are?

Or the true Hindus? Or the true Buddhists? Do Muslims have a right to decide who the true Christians are? Wouldn't that bug you, if you're a Christian, to hear a Muslim pontificating on the "correct" way to follow Christ?

In other words, does anyone have the right to decide the right way to follow a religion that is not their own?

Some Christians will say that Muslims are a peaceful people, with a few bad apple extremists poisoning the well. This would certainly be true if, by "Muslims" they mean "all those who call themselves Muslims." But other Christians point out that the Koran has many violent mandates, to eliminate those who will not follow the teachings of the Prophet Mohammad. They will tell you that the only "True Muslims" are the ones who take the Koran literally, and do what it says.

But is it appropriate to superimpose an evangelical view of the Bible onto a Muslim view of the Koran? Must all sacred texts have the same role within their respective faith communities? It's impossible, because many religions have a hierarchy of texts, including semi-sacred writings. Muslims have the Hadith. Jews have the Talmud. And many religions have no monolithic divine work, but rather a collection of revered and renowned writings.

I believe my only chance at understanding how to be a "true" Christian, is in knowing Jesus. Not just knowing about him, but knowing him personally. If many sincere and growing Christians fail often at this, then how could someone know better who's not even trying to follow Christ?

If we're careful, we can still make a few blanket generalizations about those people who identify themselves with a certain faith. But I think we'd have to leave it at that.

+

Captain Hook: the Only True Biblical LIteralist

2009-11-12T06:35:00.003-06:00

Do you read the Bible 100% literally?

"If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell." (Jesus, Matthew 5:29, 30)

Don't call yourself a biblical literalist unless you look like this guy. ----->

Don't get me wrong. I believe the Bible is 100% true. But if it were 100% literal, then we would worship a Messiah who is a loaf of bread. And a vine. And a door. And a light bulb.

If you'd like to know my real take on the Matthew 5 passage, check out a post I wrote on February 6, 2009 called West Bank Choppers & Gougers.

+

Scripture Memorization is for Old-Timers

2009-11-07T15:18:00.004-06:00

I would say I have internalized a fair amount of Scripture. Maybe more than average for an American my age. Maybe less than average for a pastor.

And some of that internalized scripture is indeed memorized. In other words, I can quote the verse(s) with some confidence in the accuracy of the words and their order. But the vast majority of my Scripture memory is less specific. I can recall the message, I know what's being said, and I have enough of the words in my head to go find it, but I don't have it memorized verbatim.

Worst of all, though, is my memory for references. Even my ability to find the book that contains the verse in question is sorely limited. Did Jesus say that in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John? Did Paul say that in Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians or Colossians? Or Romans or 1 or 2 Corinthians? Or was that Peter?

Don't get me wrong: often my recollection will get me close, but it's bad enough to give me a type of biblical inferiority complex, and to damage my confidence when talking about scripture with a "memorizer".

But here's my question for you. Does it really matter anymore?

Certainly, in the past it has been vitally important for rabbis, or ministers of the gospel to have a thorough grasp of Scripture. Torah teachers typically had the Old Testament memorized from cover to cover, and most certainly Jesus did as well. And as difficult an undertaking as that would be, it was important. Hardly anybody had a copy of the Scriptures in their home... they had to take what opportunity they could get, when they had access to the scrolls, to internalize them thoroughly, so they could then access them from their minds anytime they chose.

Even in subsequent (Gentile Christian) cultures, where learning and interpretation were less pervasive, this practice would be crucial for those teaching Scripture and ministering to the people. And this remained true until Gutenberg's invention of the printing press, and well beyond it, until the possession of vernacular Bibles became commonplace.

At this point we see the importance of Scripture memorization begin to wane. If everyone who wants one can have a Bible on the shelf, complete with a concordance, then thorough memorization is not necessary for mere reference purposes. Having a firm grasp on the contents and message in the Bible, along with a fair collection of verbatim verses, is probably sufficient.

But now things have changed further still. Not only do I have a few Bibles on the shelf, I have access to virtually every translation, commentary and word study ever written with the click of a mouse. I can view countless maps, diagrams, and photos without even getting up. In additiona, there are so many writings and interpretations of Scripture on the internet that Google has replaced any Bible website as a concordance, since every verse I might want to find has been written about dozens, if not hundreds of times over, for public consumption.

So let me ask you, what place does Scripture memorization have in the age of the internet? Naturally, it helps us to meditate on the words of God in our hearts, and to have an answer ready for those who ask, and to find what we need when we do have the internet in front of us, but how much time should we be spending specifically on memorization?

How much time do you spend? Is it less than you would like? Or is your "spiritual growth" time better spent elsewhere?

P.S. Yes, the title is just a provocative attention grabber, nothing more.

+

The Danger of Light and Joy

2009-10-17T09:30:00.006-05:00

Allow me to share an insight with you from JRR Tolkien's The Fellowship of the Ring; something that, unfortunately, did not make the cut for the film.

Tell me, Legolas, why did I come on this Quest? Little did I know where the chief peril lay! Truly Elrond spoke, saying that we could not foresee what we might meet upon our road. Torment in the dark was the danger that I feared, and it did not hold me back. But I would not have come had I known the danger of light and joy. Now I have taken my worst wound in this parting, even if I were to go this night straight to the Dark Lord.

Gimli son of Gloin is not a Man, he is a Dwarf. Nevertheless, he represents the courage and fear of the male of our species better than Aragorn or Boromir. At our best, men will walk right into the darkness, ready to fight. And at our worst we mock it, feigning bravery and dismissing the dangers that present themselves to us. We believe this to be our central virtue: courage in the face of the enemy, whatever form it might take. And once we have overcome the fear of that enemy, we proclaim ourselves fearless. This is Gimli, bearing his axe and marching into the shadows of Moria without hesitation.

Gimli was ready for Moria; for the utter darkness, the labyrinthine passages, the orcs that held it and even the cave-trolls with their deadly spears. But Gimli was not ready for Lothlorien, the Golden Wood, brimming with light and wisdom and peace. Nor were any of them really ready for it, as evidenced by the misgivings of Boromir:

"Against my will we passed under the shades of Moria, to our loss. And now we must enter the Golden Wood, you say. But of that perilous land we have heard in Gondor, and it is said that few come out who once go in; and of that few none have escaped unscathed."

"Say not unscathed, but if you say unchanged, then maybe you will speak the truth," said Aragorn. "But lore wanes in Gondor, Boromir, if in the city of those who once were wise they now speak evil of Lothlorien."

The Fellowship of the Ring was prepared to be scathed, even to be killed, but they were not prepared to be changed, to be undone. And of all the transformations that occurred, Gimli was perhaps in the lead; it is said that he wept openly as they floated away from Lothlorien. The reason: Trust and Reconciliation between two hostile peoples.

In the distant past, the Elves and Dwarves were partners and friends: the Dwarves garnered the Elves' speech and learning, and the Elves garnered the Dwarves' crafstmanship and industry. But after the Dwarves dug too greedily and too deep, and awoke the evil Balrog of Moria, the peace of the Elves was marred beyond repair, and no further kinship existed between the two races. And this rift was in itch on Gimli's back, as he traveled with Legolas the elf among the Fellowship of the Ring. Although he was tolerant of Legolas as a fellow traveler, he was not prepared for real friendship, for trust, or for love.

This was the transformation that occurred in Gimli's heart. Trust in him came slowly on the part of the Elves of Lorien; at first they blindfolded him while leading him through the forest. But when Galadriel herself, the queen of the Elves, showed him honor and respect, it changed everything. Darkness and evil could not defeat him, but light and love did, and he was undone like Isaiah the prophet. "Alas for Gimli, son of Gloin!" he lamented. And Legolas replied,

Alas for all that walk the world in these after-days. For such is the way of it: to find and lose, as it seems to those whose boat is on the running stream. But I count you blessed, Gimli son of Gloin: for your loss you suffer of your own free will, and you might have chosen otherwise. But you have not forsaken your companions, and the least reward that you shall have is that the memory of Lothlorien shall remain ever clear and unstained in your heart, and shall neither fade nor grow stale.

May we all walk with courage, not only into that which would threaten life and limb, but even moreso into that which would transform us into the likeness of our Teacher, and bring us reconciliation with one another.

+

New Look, Same Old Taste

2009-10-13T09:13:00.002-05:00

When the vision of The Core and the Front Porch were in their embryonic stages, (a glimmer in our eyes, so to speak) I was writing a lot of negative stuff about the sacrosanctity of our church service formats. "Why should everything revolve around the sermon?" I asked. "What would happen if we skipped the music entirely?" I inquired. "Why are we so stuck in our predictable little routines?" I demanded.

For the most part, I've out-grown it. My thoughts run along different lines now. But from time to time, it creeps back in, and I ask myself if we have honed ourselves into a happy little rut of our own. Here's how it goes:

-Brunch at 10 am
-Two songs at 10:30 from worship team
-Announcements (Explaining the stuff on the table, upcoming events)
-Misc. (could be Communion, Baby Dedication, Interview, etc.)
-Introduction to Prayer (may include a sermonette)
-Group Prayer for 15 minutes
-Solo worship song while prayer continues
-Prayer from worship leader to re-unify the room
-Two more songs from worship team
-Message (3 weeks out of 4, from Ryan, the other week, from another leader)
-Closing Prayer
-Fellowship & Cleaning

As I've noticed how little we deviate from this pattern, the old insecurities come creeping in, and make me wonder if we have become what we hate. That is, religion by rote. Instead of a vibrant communal spirituality.

Although I have deemed it a bit immature, like I said, to be overly critical of the "order of service", I think it is something I will never stop worrying about. Nevertheless, I feel like I've been given somewhat of a new perspective on the "packaging" of church.

When you're pushing your cart down the cereal aisle, looking for something new to try, packaging is going to influence you. But once you've tried a few, and found the cereal you really like, you won't care all that much what they do to the box. You might have a passing thought if they re-design it, but as long as it holds the cereal, and it's easy to open and close, you're not going to worry much about it. You'll notice as the cereals you don't like continue to change their packaging, "New Look, Same Great Taste!" But you already know about the taste, so their new look doesn't really matter to you either.

To the consumer who knows what's really inside, the box is just a box.

I was thinking about this again as I was listening to NPR yesterday. I listened to Robert Siegel give an intro to a story, and toss it to the reporter on location: "Julie McCarthy is in Islamabad." Then Julie McCarthy comes on, mixing it up with voice-overs, interviews and ambient sounds. When she's done, she says, "This is Julie McCarthy in Islamabad." Then, Robert Siegel makes a clever segue into the next story, or if they have time, they play a clip of some interesting music that may have some connection to the previous story.

This all remains pretty consistent from one day to the next, but I hardly ever think about it. Either I'm interested with the content, and I pay attention, or I'm bored by the content, and I tune out. And I'm usually interested. Consequently, I've never thought about asking NPR to change its format. However, I have watched as other programs on other stations have changed their format over and over to make up for a lack of worthwhile content.

What am I getting at? I think I've finally made some peace with the idea of having a consistent order of activities in The Core's worship gatherings. As long as it holds and represents the content well, then the format becomes invisible, much like the programs on NPR, or the box that holds your favorite cereal. It allows us to focus on what's inside, which is what we know God is paying the most attention to, anyway.

+

There's a Why in Team

2009-09-22T06:23:00.002-05:00

The Core Fellowship has a thing called The Core Team. What you might call Church members elsewhere, you'd call Team Members at The Core. And there's about seven people planning to join it this Sunday.

And yet, I'm tempted to kick everyone out of it. Myself included.

Christina and I had a long and challenging conversation last night, in which her key point was "We don't do anything... we just talk." I countered that so many of our Team Members had been gone over the summer that we really couldn't do anything. So she asked, "What do we plan to do that has to be so exclusive? Why couldn't non-team-members join us if they want to?"

And that's what did it. I suddenly felt like a sheep who'd been walking along on top of the fence, and couldn't reach the grass on either side. We never liked the idea of having "church members" because it seemed too passive, and it automatically created a group called "non-members". But I didn't like the idea of a nebulous crowd of people, either. I personally wanted some definition to the committed group, and a designation that would express that sense of commitment. So we put together a team. And those who are not Team Members are called Family Members, so there's no such thing as a non-member.

I don't regret the idea entirely. Maybe for some churches this would be a good thing. But for us I think it's been a waste of time, and a stress-inducer on me to figure out what to do with this so-called team. The fact is...

If you consider us your church home, then Welcome Home.
If you're interested in our meetings, then come.
If you want to commit, commit.
If you are compelled to give, give.
If you are called to serve, serve.
If you see a need, meet it.
If you want to lead, pray about it, then talk to us. Chances are, you can lead in some way.

I just can't see how one's status as a Team Member or Family Member should have anything to do with any of these. The last one is the closest, but if we're a family, and we're praying and talking together, why shouldn't we be able to discern what sort of leadership each other is capable of, and called into? We don't really need a team for that, either.

One thing that's certain is that we must clearly teach the distinctions that God makes. He does divide between the sheep and the goats, the lovers of God and the lovers of this world, those controlled by the Spirit and those controlled by the flesh, the followers of Christ and the followers of the enemy. This is a real distinction, both for the present and for the hereafter. It determines whether you commit for the right reasons, and give with the right motives, and serve with the right guidance, and fellowship with the right Spirit.

But it is also a growth process: a journey. And who are we to deny someone their first steps of that journey by keeping them on the outside? Let the motives and guidance and Spirit come, as they dive into the life of the Body. The closer they get, the closer they can examine the difference.

And that Body life is about to turn a corner as well, which we'll discuss at our next (and possibly our last) Team Member meeting this Sunday afternoon. Do you want to come? Then come.

+

The Future is Facebook

2009-09-13T16:09:00.004-05:00

I'm really thinking about making my weekly newsletter a monthly newsletter.

One of the main reasons for this: Facebook. The Core Fellowship has a group for the worship gathering, and the Front Porch has a group for events. On top of that, Socrates Cafe has its own group. The Front Porch events group is one I use every week to invite people to weekend events. The other two I don't use much at all.

I have to remember that the whole purpose of writing a weekly e-newsletter to begin with, was to remind people about the upcoming weekend's events. Now I'm finding that only 15-20% of the people who receive that letter actually open it, and I think part of the reason is that it's redundant. So many people are getting their invites from Facebook, that there's no reason to open a newsletter. Once a month should be plenty from here on out.

Now that I've touched on how Facebook is the future, I'd like to air out some ideas on the future of Facebook. I think if they're smart, they'll will start enabling users to actually create their own websites on FB. Similar to Myspace, but cleaner, with options for multiple pages and a higher level of user interaction. Let me break it down:

1) For a small monthly or yearly fee, allow users to create a page for themselves (or their company, church, band, organization, etc) that retains Facebook's clean interface, but provides numerous customizable graphic options, content possibilities, and user-friendly video and audio players.

2) Allow the creators of these pages to set up multiple tabs, just like a website would have multiple pages. For example, a band could have a tab for their schedules, one for mp3s and videos, one for bios, etc.

3) One of these tabs should be a "members only" page, where people can "join" the website (much like pages have fans, now) and take part in discussion boards or chat rooms. People then would not only be able to see what other fans are online at the moment, but could engage them in conversation, either one-on-one, or in a group conversation setting.

I think these opportunities would have a huge appeal for many different types of Facebook users. Think of it...

-Bands could finally abandon the pain-in-the-arse Myspace, and help their fans to really network with one another.

-Many churches and small organizations wouldn't even need a website anymore, or at least not a very complex one. I know lots of church websites that have tried to have chat rooms, discussion boards etc, in the past, but found that they were too small to make it happen. On Facebook it might actually work, and it would take the burden of the technology off the church itself.

-What else? There's a lot of possibilities here... how do you see the future of Facebook?

+

Jesus the Con-Artist

2009-09-03T19:39:00.002-05:00

"Can I ask you a question?"

"Sure."

"Who is Jesus to you?"

"Oh, Jesus? Jesus is a womanizer. He's a megalomaniac and a paranoiac. He's also a brainwasher, a con-artist and a compulsive liar."

"OK... that was unexpected. How did you arrive at that conclusion?"

"Because I knew him. I lived with him in a compound outside Billings for three years. Along with about a hundred other people. Sadly, I was one of four people that made it out alive."

"Right... ok, then."

Here's a guy who will shake your paradigm. He rejects Jesus, and rightly so. He's rejecting a thoroughly unworthy and wicked person, and obviously not the Son of God, the historical Jesus. But as far as he knows, he has rejected Jesus, and God is probably glad that he did. Because it's not till he rejects his false Jesus, that he might have an opportunity to meet the real one. But it will take some time to disassociate, no doubt.

I wonder all the time how well I know the Jesus-followers from the rest. You might say all kinds of bad or indifferent things about Jesus, and I can't tell right away whether you're talking about my Jesus, or David Koresh. Conversely, you might say all kinds of beautiful and loving things about Jesus, without a strong clue as to his true identity. Are you talking about the Republican Jesus or the Democrat Jesus? the pacifist Jesus or the imperial Jesus? the homeless Jesus or the health-and-wealth Jesus?

We've heard it often enough by now that many people who shout "Lord, Lord" will find their cries falling on deaf ears. But this knife cuts both ways, because I believe there are also many out there with a hatred for who they think Jesus is, and a love for who he really is. It may not be common, but it's out there.

The fact is, God knows intimately who his children are, even if they never really figure it out about each other.

+

The Mustard Tree

2009-09-01T06:39:00.004-05:00

I don't like mustard. Even brown mustard is something I usually avoid, and I am most definitely not a fan of the yellow stuff.

But I got a fresh glimpse of the mustard tree this morning, and I want to share my thoughts about it.

Mark 4:30-32 has Jesus talking about the tiny mustard seed, which becomes the giant mustard tree. This is pretty familiar to most of us. But back up, if you will, to verses 26-29. This is where Jesus gives us a type of "bridge" parable, between the Parable of the Sower (v.3-20) and that of the mustard seed.

He says that the Kingdom of God is like a man who plants his seeds, and then goes to bed, wakes up, goes to bed, etc, and the seeds grow into a crop. Naturally it is assumed that he waters and tends the plants, but Jesus points out that the farmer is not "making" it grow. And doesn't really even know how it grows. He just plays his meager part, and then grabs the sickle when it's harvest time.

What would you think of a farmer who walked over to a little sprout and started yanking on it, shouting for it to grow faster? "I planted you, I watered you, and now I'm going to sculpt you into the biggest crop in the county! Now grow, damn you!" Not too bright, eh?

Now what about those church-planters or pastors or evangelists or even missionaries who have decided that they know how a church grows? They have the research and the figures and the strategies, and are prepared to train you to know exactly how to grow a tiny fellowship of believers into a vast and influential congregation, or network of congregations. They don't plant the seed, and water it, and wait patiently for it to grow... they pull it out of the ground, assuming that it's all up to them.

Jesus made it clear that we have our role to play in the Kingdom of God... we are certainly not spectators. But the growing itself is left entirely up to him. It happens by means that remain a mystery to us, so long as we're honest.

All we have to ask ourselves is, are we to be part of the Kingdom of God, or are we perhaps more interested in the Kingdom of Church?

+

Retail Nation

2009-08-24T06:31:00.004-05:00

To read the answers, just highlight the space between the brackets

Where can you buy...

modern gadgets for navigating Himalayan high-roads?
[The Sherpa Image]

trendy furniture AND Powerball tickets
[Lottery Barn]

accessories for fire stations?
[Brass Pole Shops]

a narrow assortment of tribal weaponry?
[Spear One]

lunch at the home of the throwed hamburgers?
[Burger Fling]

a wide variety of Walmart-type items, except with higher prices?
[Charget]

hippie fruit drinks at America's favorite neighbor?
[Snapplebee's]

Muslim women's fashion at a defunct electronics store?
[Burka City]

business supplies with several no-mercy financing options?
[Office Repo]

trendy clothing that always has a piece missing?
[THE G_P]

urine-proof home accessories?
[Bed, Bath and Peeon]

apparel for numerous parts of your body?
[Just for Feet, Heads, Arms, Legs and Torsos]

+

the city is a drunkard

2009-08-22T11:05:00.002-05:00

the city is a drunkard
drinking to the dregs
a sluggard and a braggart
with a story spat on passers-by
an angler clutching a fictitious fish
and a smooth finish, far less filling

drinking to the dregs of any drink it finds
it finds a bud light or a boulevard
a blue moon, bass or new belgium
taking a tonic, sipping a triple sec
expanding and elevating

where we are glad we can be ecstatic
where we are mad we can be enraged
where we are sad we can be crushed
and recycled and emptied and filled
and more and more than we'd thought before

the city is a drunkard
a chugging sluggard, tall and wide
where we are human, we can be moreso
not just in numbers, but nature
a destiny of density, of humanity amplified

and ultimately less than the sum of its parts

+

A Body In Motion

2009-08-19T09:28:00.003-05:00

A day in LA, and millions of faces are looking for movement
'Cause everything's stuck and everything's frozen
And everyone's broken and nobody moves

And everyone's scared that the motion will never come...

This is the incompletion, stuck in a line
Love is the Movement / Love is a Revolution
This is Redemption / We don't have to slow back down

Switchfoot, Love is the Movement

There is no lack of motion in our world. A surface glimpse into the people of LA, or New York, or even Springfield, will show lots of activity, lots of empty vibration, but is there motion? Is there a movement?

Sir Isaac Newton taught us that a body in motion tends to stay in motion, unless a force acts against it. In which case, its motion and energy is transferred into the object which has stopped it. Billiards is a perfect example. The cue stick transfers energy to the cue ball, the cue ball transfers energy to the other balls, and the other balls may continue the chain of motion.

For the global and eternal impact he made, Jesus' ministry was amazingly short: 3 years full of energy and full of motion, narrowly focused to transfer from the corporeal body of Christ (himself), to the universal Body of Christ (us).

The Gospel of Mark is a terse and lively account of this body in motion. And everything that we read from the life of Jesus will shed light on the motion that he has intended for us to carry on. "You will do greater things than me," he said. Because he healed the blind, we are Enlightened. Because he multiplied the bread and fish, we are Fulfilled. Because he died unjustly, we are Justified.

Because he moved, we have a Movement.

This is the idea behind my upcoming message series at The Core's Sunday morning Worship Gatherings. To follow the movements of Jesus, we'll be walking through the gospel of Mark, two chapters at a time. Here's the calendar:

August 23 - A Body In Motion (Introduction)
August 30 - Mark 1 & 2
September 6 - Mark 3 & 4

September 13 - Bye

September 20 - Mark 5 & 6
September 27 - Mark 7 & 8
October 4 - Mark 9 & 10

October 11 - Bye

October 18 - Mark 11 & 12
October 25 - Mark 13 & 14
November 1 - Mark 15 & 16

A Patch for Humanity

2009-08-12T06:35:00.002-05:00

A patient will come to you at his moment of greatest dread, hand you a knife and say, "Doctor, cut me open." Why? Because he trusts you. He trusts you the way a child trusts. He trusts you to do no harm.

The sad fact is: human beings are not worthy of trust. It is human nature to lie, take shortcuts, to lose your nerve, get tired, make mistakes. No rational patient would put his trust in a human being... and were not gonna let him!

It is our mission here to rigorously and ruthlessly train the humanity out of you, and make you into something better.

We're gonna make doctors out of you.

-Dean Walcott, from the film Patch Adams

Last Sunday I spoke about our attitude toward the church. So often, when we first gain fellowship with this motley group of believers, we are desperately seeking someone to trust. We have found the central dysfunction of humanity around us, and inside us, and now we need the solution. We know our need to trust, and have tried it a few times with disastrous results: an abusive parent, an unfaithful mate, a disloyal friend, etc.

How many have made their entry into the church, imagining they have finally found an object worthy of their trust? They have discovered the sad fact that human beings are not worthy of trust, and so they have sought out a place that will train the humanity out of them... out of everyone.

"We're gonna make Christians out of you!"

How much harder to fall, then, when the realization comes that no one in the church has had the humanity trained out of them at all. Even if the teachers and leaders and mentors of the church were doing their jobs well (and usually they are not,) it just never happens. So maybe it's not supposed to happen.

Certainly, as we grow in Christ, we should expect to grow in love, in forgiveness, in discipline, etc. And we imagine that this is a departure from the faultiness of humanity. But perhaps it is just the opposite. Perhaps a successful journey into the heart of God is the process of having humanity trained into us... becoming more and more like the most human human who ever lived. How else can you explain the word humanitarian, or humane? To be fully human is to have compassion and grace.

Some of us seek to put our trust in those we deem "less human"--those who operate with a cold precision and computer-like consistency--hoping that they are the only ones who can heal our disease.

But there are also those who seek out real humans, complete with compassion and grace, capable of relationship and humor and pathos, and discover in the end that this is the remedy for the disease that kills not only the body, but the soul.

Perhaps this is the "Church" that Jesus had in mind.

+

The Party Ends in Hell

2009-08-08T09:26:00.004-05:00

South & Walnut, Downtown Springfield - View Larger Map

"I'm going to ask you for the ninth time. Have you really sought God's direction as to whether this is the message he has for you to give these people?"

"Jesus was very clear..."

"No. I'm asking you a personal question. Have you prayed about this? How do you know, out of the thousands of sentences you could write on a sign like this, that "The Party Ends in Hell" is the best one?"

"It's a good message."

"But have you asked God whether it's his idea or yours?"

A girl about 18 years old had been standing in observation of this exchange, between myself and the bearded sign-holder at the corner of South and Walnut, and she broke in.

"OK. Let's say I'm one of the people who came here to party, and let's say I come up to you holding your sign, and ask you how I can keep the party from ending in hell. I mean, I know I'm going to heaven. But if I didn't, and I asked you how I could get there, what would you say?"

"I would say to avoid adorning yourself with braided hair, gold and pearls or costly array; to adorn yourself in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety."

"Wait," I said, "Nothing about the cross, about Jesus' blood?"

"Jesus said if you love me you will obey my commandments, and we will to do these works through the blood of Christ."

The girl spoke up again, "But if I don't even know Jesus, and I don't love him, then I could put on a turtleneck and a long skirt and it wouldn't do me any good!"

"She'll be a very modestly dressed hell-dweller," I quipped.

Our conversation with this middle-aged sign-holder had been going for fifteen minutes or so before this particular exchange began, and it continued along this vein for a few minutes more. He was not a hot-head as you might imagine. He was at all times either thoughtful, patient and shy, or somewhat of a dead-eyed automaton. If any words came quickly, they were clearly words which had been well-rehearsed, and more often than not, unhelpful to the question being asked. Nevertheless, his manner was calm and respectful.

As we went round and round, another sign-holder stepped up, with only a one-word message in his own hands: "Repent." This was a younger man, with blond hair and beard, with whom I had talked once before. Unlike some of the other sign-holders, I thought I had seen a glimmer of real reason in his eyes, and had been impressed in the past by his heartfelt motives, even if I severely differed with his method.

This younger man stepped in, ostensibly to bail out his middle-aged friend, who was apparently having trouble.

"Galatians 5:19 says that adulterers, fornicators, drunkards and revellers will not inherit the Kingdom of God, and Jesus says that those who love me will obey my commandments."

We both protested. "But it is the blood of Jesus that actually saves people."

"You are caught up in faith-only theology, pitting Paul against James and Jesus."

"But I think Paul, James and Jesus all agree about faith and works."

"Jesus taught that you are saved when you obey his commandments," the young sign-holder said.

"It sounds like you're saying that you have to earn your salvation, " I suggested.

"Look," he said, getting more agitated. "I was raised with the preaching that God forgives everything... that we can all do whatever we want and God will always forgive us no matter what. I was in the youth group, and I just sat in the back of the bus whenever we went anywhere and smoked pot."

"I was raised learning salvation by faith, and I never heard a pastor suggest you can live however you want. Works are the sign of a living faith," I said.

"But faith alone always ends up in people doing whatever they want."

"So what you're saying is that you've paid for your ticket to heaven by being good."

"I don't deserve the credit. Jesus made it possible."

"But it sounds like he's just keeping his end of the contract. What's so great about that? He said himself that a worker deserves his wages. If I do a good job, and Jesus pays me with a ticket to heaven, then what was the whole point of the cross? Jesus didn't even do me any favors; I did it all myself! He's no different than an employer writing paychecks..."

"But your boss did you a favor by hiring you, right?"

"Maybe, but if I turn out to be a good employee, you could say I did him a favor by applying in the first place."

Things were started to get heated. I felt like I was maintaining my composure well enough, but I could see the fire in his eyes; his agitation was obvious. This was not the same thoughtful young man I had met before, so I began to wonder what had happened to him between then and now. Had he become more committed to his message since then? or less? I don't know if it was right or not, but I was starting to feel like Jesus talking to the Pharisees.

"You know, I used to think that your heart was in the right place, but now I hope you don't win anyone over at all. You would only set them on a path of legalism and self-righteousness. It's like you'll travel over land and sea to win a single convert, only to make them..." he didn't let me finish.

"So you're saying I could sit in the back of the bus and smoke pot and still be saved?" He was started to sound like a lawyer badgering the witness for a confession. Objection, your honor...

I stalled momentarily. "It depends on whether your heart is..."

"Yes or no!" he demanded. "Could I smoke pot and still be saved?" I paused for a moment, slightly stunned, while I decided whether or not to play his game. Technically he could still be saved, but clearly "yes" was an oversimple answer. Nevertheless, his expression made it clear that he would only tolerate a one-word response. Right or wrong, I took the bait.

"Yes."

In a furious about-face, he and his companion turned their backs on us, and stormed away down South Avenue, away from the party, away from the drunkenness and revelry and fornicating. The three of us who remained just stood there for a moment, stunned by the fury and impulsiveness exhibited by a group we had formerly assumed to be gentle and patient. It occurred to me that anger and hatred are listed along with fornication and drunkenness in the Galatians 5 passage they loved so much.

"What do they have to be angry about?" the girl wondered aloud. "What did they think they were getting into by coming here with those signs?"

"It's like going to play paintball and getting angry when you get hit with a paintball."

"Oh no!" she said "nobody told me there'd be paint in these balls! Now I have paint on me!"

Maybe we were wrong to joke around like that. But the tensions had run so high over the past 30 minutes that it felt good. We stood around a little longer, two girls who were friends (one of which never spoke during the exchange) and two guys (myself, plus one who had randomly walked up,) who were acquaintances from a year ago.

We talked about how we should really pray for them, and I wondered if I would ever get a shot at another conversation with the young hot-head. If so, what could I say? I don't think another debate would be appropriate. A heart-to-heart maybe? I don't know, really. I thought about making a sign of my own to hold while standing next to them that says, "Talk to these guys to learn how to earn your own salvation," or something of the sort, in the interest of full disclosure. An interesting idea, but probably a bad one.

It comes to mind that quite a few people stood around while I did most of the debating with these two sign-holders. I tried to give them opportunities to chime in, but most seemed content to simply observe. I can only hope that they observed something different in me; that I could debate without being hateful, and disagree without being disagreeable.

I hope that they saw less of me and more of Christ. But looking back on the exchange, I can't be sure.

+

The Office: Beauty is in the Eye of the Boss

2009-07-30T19:37:00.004-05:00

NBC's The Office
"Business School"
Episode 3017 | Season 3 | 02/15/2007

Abridged Synopsis: Roy stops by Pam's desk to let her know how excited he is to see her art show. She reminds him that it's just a small show being put on by her art class. Pam later admits she's very happy to be back together with Roy because it shows maturity. Jim feigns indifference to the reconciliation.

Ryan discovers that he can get bumped a whole letter grade if he brings his boss in to speak to the class. Michael makes a fool of himself in front of Ryan's class by taking a student's textbook and ripping the pages out to make a point, a la Dead Poet's Society. Michael further humiliates himself in front of Ryan's peers by tossing candy bars at them during his speech.

Michael is then shocked to hear from one of the students that Ryan was harshly criticizing Dunder-Mifflin just minutes before he arrived. Michael tries his hardest to defend the company, then derides Ryan's failure at sales, before ending his speech by telling the class that Ryan didn't know anything, and neither did they!

Pam is excited to show off her artwork at the show, but a little disappointed when nobody seems to care. That changes when Roy showed up and brings his brother, Kenny. However, Roy unwittingly rubs salt in Pam's wounds when he brings up the fact that nobody from work bothered to show up. Later, Oscar and his boyfriend to stop by to discuss Pam's art, not noticing that she is standing behind them. Oscar does his best to say encouraging things, but his boyfriend is hopelessly critical.

After moving Ryan's desk to the annex to work next to Kelly, Michael goes to Pam's art show. She is already fragile after overhearing Oscar's boyfriend criticize her artwork, But Michael had nothing but praise for Pam's work. He is so impressed, particularly with her painting of Dunder-Mifflin's building, that he buys it to display at the office.

__________________

This is another one of those beautiful little Office episodes that could easily slip by as a touching, Michael-gets-it-right-for-a-change scenario. But once again, there is a very deep social message here that I'm sure is often missed.

Oscar's boyfriend, Gil, represents the artistic establishment. When Oscar reminds him that Pam is only a beginner, Gil compares her to Van Gogh, in his not-so-humble beginnings. According to the establishment, the artistic community if you will, greatness is always the goal. And greatness can only be achieved with impeccable skill, and unparalleled imagination and ingenuity.

This goes for music, too... and dance and drama and literature. To be accepted in the eyes of the elite, one must break the mold and constantly chart new artistic territory. Many an album has been lauded, and many a film critically acclaimed which was fresh, original, imaginative... and bad. Unentertaining, unrealistic, and unable to connect with anyone's actual emotions or experiences. Gil had unfortunately lost the ability to interact with art on a human level, and Pam's confidence suffered the blow.

She was about to give up when Michael arrived. He paid a few modest compliments and began to brighten Pam's outlook, but when he saw the painting of Dunder-Mifflin's building, he gushed. "That's my window! And my car! And there's your car! Wow..." he said slowly, "this is our buiding. You nailed it, Pam. You nailed it."

Certainly the aftertaste of Business School had not left his mouth... his favorite employee attacking his company, his loyalty, his livelihood. Michael's pride had surged as he vehemently defended Dunder-Mifflin as a personal place. A relational place that offers something the big box stores never can. And the pride that surged into shouting and name-calling in the lecture hall, surged again now in a quieter way.

"Pam..." Michael intoned with sincerity, "I am really proud of you." Michael and Pam connect in a way they never have before, and probably never will again. And both their needs are met.

For every one thing that Michael gets, there are 99 things that he misses. This is a one-percent moment, but it's a big one. Not only does he see that the value of art is in those who are moved by it, those who can connect with it, he knows the most important thing of all is simply showing up.

+

The Office: Games in Real Life

2009-07-22T15:14:00.004-05:00

NBC's The Office
"The Coup"
Episode 3002 | Season 3 | 10/05/2006

Synopsis: Michael had made it a point to have Movie Monday every week. He called the office into the conference room to watch a 30-minute installment of Varsity Blues, but Jan made an unexpected visit and did not like what she saw. Angela had Dwight thinking that he could run the office if Michael was fired.

Dwight thought about it and decided to meet up with Jan. He lied to Michael and then told Jan to come to an outlet center where they could meet privately. Jan informed Michael that Dwight was trying to take control of the office. She warned Michael to get better control of his staff. Michael couldn't believe Dwight's nerve to go behind his back.

Jim's branch, in Stamford, CT, became obsessed with playing the computer game Call of Duty II while at work. His boss was infuriated when he found out that Jim was the reason why their branch was losing the game. Jim is beginning to like his co-worker Karen, but is also feeling very out of place in such a video-game-obsessed office.

Michael fooled Dwight into believing that he was going to take over the office. Michael told the office that Dwight was taking over, who immediately began implementing his leadership strategies. But when Dwight refused to take the keys to Michael's Sebring, insulting it as beneath him, Michael told Dwight he'd found out about his betrayal through Jan, and that the whole promotion game was a test. Dwight pleaded with Michael to trust him again. The office watched as Dwight got on his knees and begged Michael not to fire him. He offered to do Michael's laundry for a year, and Michael accepted.

Back in Stamford, Jim is putting on his jacket to leave and turns at the door to face Karen, still sitting at her desk. He makes a motion as if pulling out a hand-grenade, pulling the pin, and tossing it towards Karen, who grabs a handful of paper clips and tosses them into the air in a mock explosion. Jim smiles happily for the first time all day, and heads home.

___________________

This is easily one of my favorite episodes, mostly because it sends a message about the difference between virtual reality and old-fashioned reality, and how hard we've fallen into the former, at the expense of the latter.

Jim loves to play games. Pranks, tricks, hoaxes, jokes, all of it. Life is a game to him. Even his job as a paper salesman can occasionally bring him fulfillment when it allows him to stretch his imagination and add some competition, strategy or intrigue to the daily interactions of life.

But when he gets promoted, and transferred away from Scranton--away from his favorite partner-in-crime Pam, and his favorite nemesis Dwight--Jim loses much of what made his occupation worthwhile. Make no mistake... there's no lack of competitiveness at the Stamford branch, it's just just that they express it in a computer game instead of real life. Naturally, Jim is out of his league in the virtual world of gaming, and starts to feel homesick.

Meanwhile back at the Scranton Branch, Michael is playing head games with Dwight... testing his loyalty by fooling him into thinking he's going to take over management of the branch. It's a tense and intriguing interplay as the lies slowly take shape, culminating in a humiliating endgame for Dwight.

Although Jim is starting to worry about not fitting in at Stamford, there's a glimpse of hope right at the end, when he plays a little miming game with Karen, and she takes the bait.

As dysfunctional as the Scranton office is, we're given a dose of perspective by Jim's experience at Stamford. Pranks and games may not be good for productivity at Scranton, but at least they're real. At least they're relational. Stamford, by contrast, is trapped inside someone else's imagination... in a highly-polished, fabricated world of World War 2 violence.

Most people's lives, anymore, are like the Stamford branch. Our realities exist largely on flickering rectangles: TVs, Computers, Cell Phones, iPods, GPS screens, and all our myriad products endowed with LCD displays.

Have we really forgotten how to play a game in three dimensions? How to chat in a room with actual walls? How to see a show live, that isn't broadcast live?

And of course, the more I type this blog, the more hypocritical I get. Swing by the Front Porch tonight, and you can hear me ramble on and on in real life.

+

Nebraska

2009-07-16T19:11:00.003-05:00

I know I've been neglectful of the blog this past month, so here's a good way to ease back into blogging mode.

Check out a few pictures here from our trip to Nebraska at the beggining of July. You can see the rest of the album on Facebook if we're Facebook friends.

Christina and I at our campsite, on Calamus Lake.

I dropped our digital camera in the sand, and pretty much ruined it. So the next three pictures are from a cheap-o disposable camera, and you can tell. This was the beach at Calamus Lake.

Here's a skillful self-portrait of me, Christina, and my Grandma, sitting out for Burwell's city fireworks show on the fourth.

And this is a sample of the undulating landscape of my Grandma's land, which we hiked around, doing our best to avoid manure and cacti.

+

Wiksell's Hierarchy of Deeds

2009-06-10T06:30:00.007-05:00

I was thinking this morning about what motivates us to do what we do. Why we make certain choices, and why we later stick them, or abandon them. As I thought about it, I realized that there is a spectrum of motivations behind our actions, from the very weak to the very strong. The very weak motivations produce no consistent pattern or reliability of behavior, and the very strong ones can define our very essence and identity.

Yes, the title of this post is a shameless pun, but (speaking of motives) the pun was not the motivation behind the post... it came after I'd already gotten the idea.

Following is my "Hierarchy of Deeds", from weak to strong: Chance - Whim - Habit - Preference - Phase - Commitment - Contract - Covenant. Let's presume that each of the deeds being evaluated here is a positive one, and "rewards" refers to the result of following through on the decision to act, and "consequences" refers to the result of failure to act according to the stated motivation.

A few things that I think are interesting about this hierarchy:

-Whim, Habit, Preference and Phase go together as factors of preference. Whim is fleeting preference, habit is past preference that affects the present, and phase is prolonged preference.

-Commitment, Contract and Covenant have similar consequences: social punishment, criminal punishment, divine punishment, respectively. A commitment is an arrangement between two relative equals, with no formal accountability. A contract is between to relative equals, under the accountability of a higher entity. And a covenant is between a higher entity and a lower one.

Chance

Motivation: arbitrary happenstance; involuntary action or re-action
Rewards: random luck
Consequences: random misfortune
Example: walking left or right around a pole in the sidewalk

Whim

Motivation: fleeting preference; mindless habit
Rewards: trivial or random
Consequences: a sense of inconsistency or inconvenience
Example: walking to avoid cracks on the sidewalk

Habit

Motivation: past preference or necessity extrapolated to the present
Rewards: ordered lifestyle
Consequences: unpredictability, loss of efficiency or pattern
Example: walking fast while at work, to appear busy

Preference

Motivation: personal taste; past experience
Rewards: pleasure; fun; satisfaction
Consequences: disappointment
Example: walking the dog on the quiet street instead of the busy one.

Phase

Motivation: prolonged preference; peer pressure
Rewards: belonging; personal identity; enjoyable lifestyle
Consequences: outsider reputation, dullness
Example: walking with a "gangsta" limp

Commitment

Motivation: conviction; belief in a cause or group
Rewards: community or relationship; making a difference
Consequences: social punishment; alienation or distrust
Example: walking a group of children to school every Monday

Contract

Motivation: business or employment; legal agreement or relationship
Rewards: profit; mutual benefit; legal mandate
Consequences: criminal punishment; civil litigation
Example: walking your rounds as a security guard

Covenant

Motivation: devotion; unconditional love; faith in a higher power
Rewards: temporal and eternal favor and blessings
Consequences: divine punishment and/or damnation (but God forgives)
Example: walking with God as a disciple of Jesus

Of course, Covenant is the most interesting to me, especially because of the way God establishes his covenant with Abram. Abram is scared to death to enter into this covenant, because he knows God is perfect, and as soon as he walks through the blood (another example of walking) he's a dead man. Covenants in the Old Testament were punishable by death. But instead, God himself passes through the blood, taking the entire weight of the covenant upon himself.

I've heard the marriage is a covenant, and also that marriage is more of a contract, because covenants are made only by unequal partners, i.e. man and God. It's true that in a legal sense a marriage really is a contract (and a commitment) but in a spiritual sense I believe it is a covenant, because it's an agreement between each spouse and God himself. That they make a covenant with God, together, in the presence of the community.

But it is not a covenant that is punishable by death, as in the Old Testament, since God took all the punishment upon himself in the form of his son, Jesus.

The ending to this post is going to seem abrupt, because I didn't really have a big finish in mind. Just wanted to express my highly analytical side for a change.

Thanks for humoring me.

If Socrates Were to Start a Band...

2009-05-27T23:02:00.001-05:00

Before I forget, I want to list some of the band-name ideas that have arisen from our intense-yet-meandering discussions at Socrates Cafe the last two Wednesdays. (Explanations are in parentheses.)

Evil Cheeses (Kraft Singles and their connection to Big Tobacco.)

Dr. Sudafed and the Beta Fish (two things you can't buy in large quantities without running all over town.)

and my personal favorite...

The Fugly Anglers (no idea.)

+

Message - The Perpetrator [adam]

2009-05-22T09:00:00.002-05:00

This is my message from Sunday, April 19, 2009. It was the first in the series called Profiles in Redemption.

http://www.thecoredowntown.com/audio/ThePerpetratorAdam.mp3

If the mp3 doesn't work yet, bear with me. I'm still trying to figure out this Podcast stuff.

Broken

2009-05-22T06:30:00.004-05:00

Please pray for my dad.

He was on his bicycle yesterday, and was almost home when he hit a slick patch on a turn and wiped out. My mom tells me that he laid there for a minute, in shock, until a fellow pastor and his wife drove by and noticed him there. They were able to get out and help him, and he thought he was going to be ok, until he tried to stand up. That's when he realized something was broken.

Fortunately there was an emergency room literally across the street, and he was quickly diagnosed with a broken hip. So he is there this morning, waiting for hip surgery, where they will set the bones and put in a pin. If experience is any guide, it will be a long recovery. But of course, we're praying otherwise.

It's hard to accept this. My dad always seemed sort of invincible. Even though he's nearly 60, he's in some of the best shape of his middle-aged life. For at least the past 5 years, he's been committed to eating healthy and getting a lot of exercise. And of course it's painfully ironic that the latter would have been the instrument of this injury.

Once again, please pray for this surgery, and that his recovery will be nothing short of miraculous.

Soft-Sell Tacos

2009-05-21T11:28:00.003-05:00

Note: This post is adapted from an e-mail about Socrates Cafe, that I wrote to a fellow leader at The Core.

Funny thing...

Somebody came into the print shop I work at yesterday afternoon talking about how he wanted to start an evangelistic hangout for youth, and he mentioned the Front Porch as a place kind of like what he wants to do, but without the FP's "soft sell". What's funny is, he was talking to me, but he didn't know I had anything to do with it. So I didn't tell him, because I enjoyed hearing his unguarded opinion.

The fact is, I don't think we have a "soft sell" because I don't think we have a "sell" at all. At least I don't want to have one. Should an outsider's experience with the church be more like getting invited to dinner with friends, or more like stepping onto a used car lot? Some of the things we do have a pointed spiritual emphasis, especially the worship gatherings, and also things like QAF, the Sisterhood and the Journeymen. And I actually miss the spiritual discussions I used to have with QAF.

But there also need to be non-spiritual things, to show people that that's not all "church" people care about, or know how to talk about. I think it makes a big impact on some people to be able to sit down with a group of Christians and talk about political or social issues without there having to be some underlying spiritual principle behind it, or an overwhelming conservative bias. I think an environment like that, one that welcomes them in and wants to hear their view, gives them a fuller picture of who Christ is. But Socrates Cafe could never stand alone... it needs the more spiritual activities around it to make sure we don't "de-spiritualize" Christianity altogether.

We've just started a series with Socrates called "pro-con", based on the website www.procon.org, where we can work through some hardcore social issues, and really hash them out together, but in a respectful and thoughtful way. Last night we talked about legalization of Marijuana, and it was a lively discussion to say the least. If you've got ideas for upcoming topics, make sure to let me know...

+