I walked into a heated discussion in the comments section revolving around Joe Carter's post Trick or Tract: Satan, Jack Chick, and Other Halloween Horrors. The article was mainly about how scary and misguided the fundamentalist Jack Chick tracts had been to young Joe, and his denunciation of them now for use as a Halloween tract. Many commenters shared similar stories of their bad experiences with Chick tracts.
Examining one particular Chick tract more closely, Mr. Carter seems to be saying that its twisted, fundamentalistic response to Halloween, that seeks to inspire "irrational fear" in the hearts and minds of young children, is more dangerous and "demonically-inspired" than the holiday itself. While Mr. Carter's article makes a good case that Chick tracts are not the best Christian response to Halloween, he really doesn't address how we should respond as Christians. He says he mostly disagreed with a post on the topic by Bonnie from Intellectuelle, but reading her article tonight, I thought she made good points about the holiday's associations that should be considered by believers deciding what to do about Halloween.
Interestingly she read the comments I had posted (see below) at Joe Carter's site and thanked me, saying that my thoughts echoed her own.
Joe:
Thanks for the post. Judging from the comments alone, it seems Halloween is one of those holidays on which the opinions of Christians are quite divided.
The day is perhaps an innocent diversion to some, an occasion for dressing up in costume, eating candy, having fun. Yet in America it is a holiday that has associations with the evil side of life-- for example, at this time of year all the TV networks bring out the horror movies and films dealing with the occult-- obviously because being frightened and spooked is associated with Halloween.
The holiday may have Christian roots, as one poster commented, or perhaps it is more pagan in origin. I suppose that if one as a Christian has given the matter some thought and prayed about it and then decided that they can celebrate the holiday in good conscience, that's fine. I like dressing up in costume and so in the past, I have enjoyed going to costume parties on Halloween. The parties were not at all "ghoulish", although some people might have dressed up as ghosts or something sinister.
Having had personal experiences with the reality of spiritual warfare since then, I have more questions and reservations now about the nature of Halloween. I don't want to inadvertently celebrate a day that in any way gives glory to Satan or demons.
I agree that unreasonable fear (or obsession) with Satan is unhealthy, but respect for the reality of the satanic realm is healthy and wise.
The world in its ignorance may enjoy the thrill of being scared by Hollywood versions of satanic activity, but satanic evil is far more subtle and yet far more horrible than what is portrayed in such movies. I don't think Christians should dismiss this lightly, but rather should resolve to be armed with biblical insight about the nature of such warfare. It is because of my own experiences in this area that I have some hesitations about Halloween. However, I would only caution fellow believers to consider whether they in good conscience can celebrate the day to bring glory to God, and not cause others to stumble.
The Dane of Nowheresville makes a case that Halloween can be celebrated in good conscience by a believer, Tim Challies of Challies.com talks about why he's celebrating it, and John Fischer of Breakpoint argues convincingly that a "hiding-from-Halloween" strategy by believers is counter-productive to the gospel.
Mr. Fisher's argument that on a holiday such as Halloween, Christians should be engaging our neighbors, rather than creating safe alternative (e.g. Harvest Celebration) that separates us from them, is compelling. Nevertheless, a holiday associated with evil and the dark side is one that many Christians (including me) have hesitations about participating in, especially if one has encountered the reality of the dark world and rightly, doesn't regard it as a joke.
I think this is a tough question to decide, but one in which we have freedom to act according to the dictates of conscience before the Lord.
One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God (Romans 14: 5-6, ESV)
As for me and my wife, if we are home, we might as well give out candy and be neighborly.
P.S. Here's what seems to be a sensible post from a Christian family that has "evolved" in its stance on Halloween.
Sunday, October 30, 2005
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Pleasing to the Master
Today I read a poetic, thought-provoking post about The Meaning of Success by Allthings2all. My attention was drawn to this post by Charlie Lehardy of Another Think, via his also very good article, Upside Down Success.
It is certainly very tempting to measure success by externals-- things like popularity, influence, sales, polls, or ratings. It sure is a lot easier to do this kind of measuring than to make a true evaluation of success, which goes beyond externals to seeing what is invisible to the human eye-- motivations, for instance.
But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the LORD sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart." (1 Samuel 16: 7)
If only I would stop to remember this more often-- that the Lord looks on the heart. Then as I ponder those who display dazzling gifts of speech, creativity, beauty, or valor, I would recognize that such gifts are from God, and that what really counts is to what end such wonderful talents are used. And this, of course, will depend on the quality of the heart.
For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not? (1 Corinthians 4:7)
Everything we have is received, Paul is reminding us. So how can we exult in ourselves, as if by our own greatness we have created ourselves or done anything? For example, our culture is obsessed with physical beauty. It used to be that in the area of beauty, one had to accept the "hand you were dealt", so to speak, but in this age of plastic surgery, if you aren't born "beautiful" (at least in comparison to the cultural ideal), you don't just have to accept it. You can re-make yourself, through surgery, in the image of your favorite celebrity. Sadly, even though I know better, I still tend to react to others on the basis of their physical attractiveness, rather than respond to the inner beauty of their character. As physical beings, we can't help but interact with things through our senses, and there is nothing wrong with admiring physical beauty, of course. But do we place higher value on a person's mere physical beauty, than on their spirit and character?
Society does, which is why we have the insanity of millions of dollars spent on megavitamins, health clubs, age-defying cosmetics and plastic surgery; skinny young girls starving themselves because they think they're fat, more men than ever fixated on improving their appearance and doing so not just by exercise, but by going under the knife. I too struggle with shaking off my culture's obsession with outward beauty. But what does being physically beautiful have to do with true success? Nothing. Zilch.
What is true success, anyway? Well, first I ask this question:
Is there a God to whom we will all one day be accountable, because He gave each of us life, and along with life certain talents, a particular body and personality, and various opportunities? Does He expect a return on His investment in us?
I begin with the starting point that there is a God like that, one who is our Creator. What then, does He expect from us? As usual, the best place to look for answers to such profound questions is to the One "through whom all things were made" (John 1:3), that is, Jesus Christ. He told His followers this story once:
The Parable of the Talents
"For it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted to them his property. To one he gave five talents,to another two, to another one, to each according to his ability. Then he went away. He who had received the five talents went at once and traded with them, and he made five talents more. So also he who had the two talents made two talents more. But he who had received the one talent went and dug in the ground and hid his master's money. Now after a long time the master of those servants came and settled accounts with them. And he who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five talents more, saying, 'Master, you delivered to me five talents; here I have made five talents more.' His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.' And he also who had the two talents came forward, saying, 'Master, you delivered to me two talents; here I have made two talents more.' His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.' He also who had received the one talent came forward, saying, 'Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed, so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.' But his master answered him, 'You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sowed and gather where I scattered no seed? Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' (Matthew 25: 14-30)
One thing the story shows is that the first two men, who had invested their talents well and thus received a good return on them, were pleasing to the Master (God). Unlike the third man in the story, these two seemed to know the character of the Master they were serving, that He would be faithful in rewarding them for their efforts. And this knowing the character of the Master led to good fruit in their lives. The third man, on the other hand, totally misjudged the Master, and it is for this reason primarily that the Master was greatly displeased with him. And the story shows too that his wrong view of the Master had prevented him from using his talents.
So from this story, how would we define true success? True success is pleasing the Master, by putting to good use the gifts He has given us, in the knowledge that He is a good, loving Master who rewards us both faithfully and fairly.
Some are given more than others, but in the story the Master deals with each of the three men as individuals. In "settling accounts" with each man, the Master's question to each could have been, "What did you do with the talents I gave you? What is your return on them?"
The parable doesn't explicitly tell us that the first two men in the story were motivated by love of the Master, but this is implied. And of course, if you are a Christian, we are told that the greatest commandment of all is to love God with all of your heart, soul, mind and strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself (Matthew 22: 37-38). We are also told that all accomplishment, if not motivated by love, is a "clanging cymbal" that does not make you any better nor bring you any lasting benefit (1 Cor 13: 1-3).
I must guard my heart as I cultivate love for God and neighbor, knowing that my gifts will amount to nothing if not placed on the altar of love of God. A heart motivated by true love of God will yield productivity, accomplishment that is lasting and most importantly, a life pleasing to the Master. That is true success.
It is certainly very tempting to measure success by externals-- things like popularity, influence, sales, polls, or ratings. It sure is a lot easier to do this kind of measuring than to make a true evaluation of success, which goes beyond externals to seeing what is invisible to the human eye-- motivations, for instance.
But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the LORD sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart." (1 Samuel 16: 7)
If only I would stop to remember this more often-- that the Lord looks on the heart. Then as I ponder those who display dazzling gifts of speech, creativity, beauty, or valor, I would recognize that such gifts are from God, and that what really counts is to what end such wonderful talents are used. And this, of course, will depend on the quality of the heart.
For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not? (1 Corinthians 4:7)
Everything we have is received, Paul is reminding us. So how can we exult in ourselves, as if by our own greatness we have created ourselves or done anything? For example, our culture is obsessed with physical beauty. It used to be that in the area of beauty, one had to accept the "hand you were dealt", so to speak, but in this age of plastic surgery, if you aren't born "beautiful" (at least in comparison to the cultural ideal), you don't just have to accept it. You can re-make yourself, through surgery, in the image of your favorite celebrity. Sadly, even though I know better, I still tend to react to others on the basis of their physical attractiveness, rather than respond to the inner beauty of their character. As physical beings, we can't help but interact with things through our senses, and there is nothing wrong with admiring physical beauty, of course. But do we place higher value on a person's mere physical beauty, than on their spirit and character?
Society does, which is why we have the insanity of millions of dollars spent on megavitamins, health clubs, age-defying cosmetics and plastic surgery; skinny young girls starving themselves because they think they're fat, more men than ever fixated on improving their appearance and doing so not just by exercise, but by going under the knife. I too struggle with shaking off my culture's obsession with outward beauty. But what does being physically beautiful have to do with true success? Nothing. Zilch.
What is true success, anyway? Well, first I ask this question:
Is there a God to whom we will all one day be accountable, because He gave each of us life, and along with life certain talents, a particular body and personality, and various opportunities? Does He expect a return on His investment in us?
I begin with the starting point that there is a God like that, one who is our Creator. What then, does He expect from us? As usual, the best place to look for answers to such profound questions is to the One "through whom all things were made" (John 1:3), that is, Jesus Christ. He told His followers this story once:
The Parable of the Talents
"For it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted to them his property. To one he gave five talents,to another two, to another one, to each according to his ability. Then he went away. He who had received the five talents went at once and traded with them, and he made five talents more. So also he who had the two talents made two talents more. But he who had received the one talent went and dug in the ground and hid his master's money. Now after a long time the master of those servants came and settled accounts with them. And he who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five talents more, saying, 'Master, you delivered to me five talents; here I have made five talents more.' His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.' And he also who had the two talents came forward, saying, 'Master, you delivered to me two talents; here I have made two talents more.' His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.' He also who had received the one talent came forward, saying, 'Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed, so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.' But his master answered him, 'You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sowed and gather where I scattered no seed? Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' (Matthew 25: 14-30)
One thing the story shows is that the first two men, who had invested their talents well and thus received a good return on them, were pleasing to the Master (God). Unlike the third man in the story, these two seemed to know the character of the Master they were serving, that He would be faithful in rewarding them for their efforts. And this knowing the character of the Master led to good fruit in their lives. The third man, on the other hand, totally misjudged the Master, and it is for this reason primarily that the Master was greatly displeased with him. And the story shows too that his wrong view of the Master had prevented him from using his talents.
So from this story, how would we define true success? True success is pleasing the Master, by putting to good use the gifts He has given us, in the knowledge that He is a good, loving Master who rewards us both faithfully and fairly.
Some are given more than others, but in the story the Master deals with each of the three men as individuals. In "settling accounts" with each man, the Master's question to each could have been, "What did you do with the talents I gave you? What is your return on them?"
The parable doesn't explicitly tell us that the first two men in the story were motivated by love of the Master, but this is implied. And of course, if you are a Christian, we are told that the greatest commandment of all is to love God with all of your heart, soul, mind and strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself (Matthew 22: 37-38). We are also told that all accomplishment, if not motivated by love, is a "clanging cymbal" that does not make you any better nor bring you any lasting benefit (1 Cor 13: 1-3).
I must guard my heart as I cultivate love for God and neighbor, knowing that my gifts will amount to nothing if not placed on the altar of love of God. A heart motivated by true love of God will yield productivity, accomplishment that is lasting and most importantly, a life pleasing to the Master. That is true success.
RODENT
Well, I spoke too soon, I'm a RAT again. Still adorable, though, don't you think? Such soulful eyes... "Squeak, squeak"!
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Hey, I'm a "K"!
I'm a Marauding Marsupial again! Yay, I'm a K!... that's more like it! (those who know me understand why this category fits me better... in a few ways. First, it's my nickname--"K" short for Kangaroo-- well, only my wife calls me this, but anyway. Second, I may be cute, but you don't want to get me mad... I'm apt to do some marauding)! The pic is not a recent one, it's from my younger days... oh, how we used to hop... "sigh"
I know, you come to this blog for the serious content and this nonsense is what you get. Don't worry, serious posting soon to come :) Be patient, please.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Still Just Squeaking
Not sure what happened-- last week, for a brief moment, I was triumphantly transformed into a Marauding Marsupial in the TTLB Ecosystem Rankings. But then, suddenly, mercilessly, I was cast down again, turning back into my Adorable Little Rodent self. Ahhh, the Christian ecosystem-- so fleeting and capricious its approbation (pitiful squeaking sounds).
Monday, October 24, 2005
Led by a Pure Heart, or Driven by Idols?
In a recent post, Doug Groothius writes "Against Multi-tasking". Decrying the worldy imperatives which seem to drive us to use modern technologies such as cellphones, laptops, iPods, etc., to "multi-task", thus distracting us from meaningful focus with the present moment, Groothius urges his readers to rebel against them. Doug's post inspired Dan Edelen of Cerulean Sanctum, who has written on similar themes before, to post his take on the topic, titled "Are You a Hamster?". And CJR of RunToWin blog provided some insightful comments on the both their articles in his post, "In Praise of Busyness?". This interesting dialogue sparked my own thinking on how blogging technology may be used for good, or for evil. I quote my own comments, in response to the Groothius post, below:
"I think Christians, especially, ought to question how much spiritual value multi-tasking holds. Our hearts are so easily distracted; perhaps we use multi-tasking as a way of making ourselves feel we are accomplishing something, when in fact we are just distracting ourselves from what really needs to be done, because of an uneasy conscience.
I'm all for using technology, but too often, technology seems to be using us. Still, like one of the other commenters here, I don't think that technology itself is the culprit.
For example, this blog that we are interacting through is made possible by technology, and provides opportunity for people who might otherwise never have met to engage with and hopefully edify one another.
I just came back from the first-ever GodBlog convention held this past week at Biola University.
One of the themes of the conference was that if Christians who blog do so thoughtfully and excellently, with a civility, humility and love that reflects that Christ is indeed Lord over our lives, then we can build a like-minded community that will be a powerful force for positive influence on our culture. Thus technology can be constructive if used properly.
Still, I agree... that if we who set about this mandate fall prey to the false notion that mere busyness equals significance and accomplishment, then what we end up saying on our blogs probably won't run very deep, (nor be very helpful)."
Building on CJR's argument that it is not modern technologies that keep us distracted from purposeful activity, but rather the propensity of the human heart, I would add that, in the right hands, guided by the right kind of heart towards right ends, technologies can be constructive.
"To the pure, all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled" Titus 1:15, ESV
I think modern life, for those of us blessed enough to live in a materially-blessed nation such as the United States, presents us with the age-old temptations to spiritual laziness and complacency that the love of money and comfort has always presented. Except that many Americans are in a position to make such things into idols perhaps in a greater way than many other cultures in this world, who don't have our wealth and means, or more than previous generations, whose lives were more dominated by concerns of survival.
So we Americans have built a "system of living" that is based on the lies of the world-- that material wealth, physical attractiveness, achieving power, etc,-- is what brings true fulfillment and happiness in life. But such false notions of what true life is about is, of course, not limited to American culture. How do we topple such a system, so that we are freed to live the abundant life that Jesus promised?
By growing in our own discipleship and understanding of what it means to be a citizen of the kingdom of God, and by destroying any idols that dwell within our own hearts. I must ask myself-- what, or for whom, am I truly living; does my lifestyle, my behavior, and the innermost secrets of my heart reveal that I am really a lover of Christ, or of this world system?
It is hard to sacrifice the goodies I've come to take for granted, and even to expect and justify, as a sign that I am "blessed of God" -- so may God have mercy on me, that I may have a right relationship to Him and thus, to everything else in this brief life.
Brad H of 21st Century Transformation also has a take on this topic.
"I think Christians, especially, ought to question how much spiritual value multi-tasking holds. Our hearts are so easily distracted; perhaps we use multi-tasking as a way of making ourselves feel we are accomplishing something, when in fact we are just distracting ourselves from what really needs to be done, because of an uneasy conscience.
I'm all for using technology, but too often, technology seems to be using us. Still, like one of the other commenters here, I don't think that technology itself is the culprit.
For example, this blog that we are interacting through is made possible by technology, and provides opportunity for people who might otherwise never have met to engage with and hopefully edify one another.
I just came back from the first-ever GodBlog convention held this past week at Biola University.
One of the themes of the conference was that if Christians who blog do so thoughtfully and excellently, with a civility, humility and love that reflects that Christ is indeed Lord over our lives, then we can build a like-minded community that will be a powerful force for positive influence on our culture. Thus technology can be constructive if used properly.
Still, I agree... that if we who set about this mandate fall prey to the false notion that mere busyness equals significance and accomplishment, then what we end up saying on our blogs probably won't run very deep, (nor be very helpful)."
Building on CJR's argument that it is not modern technologies that keep us distracted from purposeful activity, but rather the propensity of the human heart, I would add that, in the right hands, guided by the right kind of heart towards right ends, technologies can be constructive.
"To the pure, all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled" Titus 1:15, ESV
I think modern life, for those of us blessed enough to live in a materially-blessed nation such as the United States, presents us with the age-old temptations to spiritual laziness and complacency that the love of money and comfort has always presented. Except that many Americans are in a position to make such things into idols perhaps in a greater way than many other cultures in this world, who don't have our wealth and means, or more than previous generations, whose lives were more dominated by concerns of survival.
So we Americans have built a "system of living" that is based on the lies of the world-- that material wealth, physical attractiveness, achieving power, etc,-- is what brings true fulfillment and happiness in life. But such false notions of what true life is about is, of course, not limited to American culture. How do we topple such a system, so that we are freed to live the abundant life that Jesus promised?
By growing in our own discipleship and understanding of what it means to be a citizen of the kingdom of God, and by destroying any idols that dwell within our own hearts. I must ask myself-- what, or for whom, am I truly living; does my lifestyle, my behavior, and the innermost secrets of my heart reveal that I am really a lover of Christ, or of this world system?
It is hard to sacrifice the goodies I've come to take for granted, and even to expect and justify, as a sign that I am "blessed of God" -- so may God have mercy on me, that I may have a right relationship to Him and thus, to everything else in this brief life.
Brad H of 21st Century Transformation also has a take on this topic.
Saturday, October 22, 2005
How Shall We Then Blog-- Parts I, II and III
10-20-05 Mark D. Roberts, a blogging pastor who also attended GodBlogCon, posted earlier this month on the topic of blogging. I think his posts, How Shall We Then Blog, Part 1 and Part II are a good Scriptural look at the topic, and a nice follow-up to my post.
10-22-05 Pastor Roberts has added a third installment to the series, How Shall We Then Blog.
10-22-05 Pastor Roberts has added a third installment to the series, How Shall We Then Blog.
Thursday, October 20, 2005
Keeping Up With The Jones' Blog (or, Wisdom from a Talking Heads Song)
Well I'm back from GodBlogCon, invigorated by the great conversations, the encouraging words, excellent presentations, a sharpened vision of blogging's potential to change the world... and ready to blog! But then, it takes me all the way to Tuesday to finally send forth a post into the blogospehere, one summing up my thoughts on GodBlogCon. By that time, it seems there are already hundreds of posts on GodBlogCon, and many have already moved on to the next topic. Next!
I got to thinking... there's so many talented folks out there blogging. I met a lot of them over this past weekend. People with PhD's, power-blogging pastors (some who run marathons), people with national radio shows, erudite people, who know so much about... everything.
And some of these people blog so fast and furious-- the ideas just flow from them... and they're good ideas too, well-articulated. And I began thinking... how am I going to "keep up with the Jones" blog, anyway?
But then, for some odd reason, an old Talking Heads song popped into my head, and I remembered these lines from it:
"You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything.
When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Say something once, why say it again?"
Okay, I know these lines are from a song called "Psycho Killer", but they do make a certain amount of sense. I don't want to talk a lot, but not say anything. Or participate in the conversation, just to be able to say, "Hey, I was in the conversation!" Nor do I want to repeat myself, or merely repeat what everyone else is saying.
The blogosphere is a place where things happen at lightning speed, a very reactionary landscape. Sometimes it feels like if you want to say something, you better say it fast, or it will be too late. Too late for what, though? Do I have to be the first to say something in order for it to have a beneficial effect on someone else's life? Which brings me back to the question: why am I blogging, anyway?
In the days after GodBlogCon, I admired LaShawn Barber's honest and reflective post, Fallen But Forgiven, in which she admitted the pride she felt rising up inside of her as a well-known blogger, and how she was dealing with it. I too recognize that my sudden anxiety about being able to compete in the blogosphere has much to do with my own ego.
I want to be clever with a quip. Or better yet, profound with a point. But most of all, seen and recognized. But if that becomes the driving force behind my blogging, I may end up with not much of a reward. I remember Jesus' warning words to His disciples about praying to be seen by men:
And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. Matthew 6:5
Convicting words. I know that excellence is important, and I will certainly strive to be an excellent blogger-- a better writer, more informed, faster to post (maybe). But most of all, I want to be able to say something meaningful, real and helpful to others. So if you don't see any posts on my blog for a while, and you're wondering-- what's happened to that Jordan fellow, has he abandoned the faith?--
Then just remember me in your prayers and kindly pray that a few days of pondering, a few weeks of reflecting, or just a solid hour spent with my Lord, will bring me back to my blogging with fresh power, new excitement, and hopefully, something worth saying. God bless you all.
I got to thinking... there's so many talented folks out there blogging. I met a lot of them over this past weekend. People with PhD's, power-blogging pastors (some who run marathons), people with national radio shows, erudite people, who know so much about... everything.
And some of these people blog so fast and furious-- the ideas just flow from them... and they're good ideas too, well-articulated. And I began thinking... how am I going to "keep up with the Jones" blog, anyway?
But then, for some odd reason, an old Talking Heads song popped into my head, and I remembered these lines from it:
"You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything.
When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Say something once, why say it again?"
Okay, I know these lines are from a song called "Psycho Killer", but they do make a certain amount of sense. I don't want to talk a lot, but not say anything. Or participate in the conversation, just to be able to say, "Hey, I was in the conversation!" Nor do I want to repeat myself, or merely repeat what everyone else is saying.
The blogosphere is a place where things happen at lightning speed, a very reactionary landscape. Sometimes it feels like if you want to say something, you better say it fast, or it will be too late. Too late for what, though? Do I have to be the first to say something in order for it to have a beneficial effect on someone else's life? Which brings me back to the question: why am I blogging, anyway?
In the days after GodBlogCon, I admired LaShawn Barber's honest and reflective post, Fallen But Forgiven, in which she admitted the pride she felt rising up inside of her as a well-known blogger, and how she was dealing with it. I too recognize that my sudden anxiety about being able to compete in the blogosphere has much to do with my own ego.
I want to be clever with a quip. Or better yet, profound with a point. But most of all, seen and recognized. But if that becomes the driving force behind my blogging, I may end up with not much of a reward. I remember Jesus' warning words to His disciples about praying to be seen by men:
And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. Matthew 6:5
Convicting words. I know that excellence is important, and I will certainly strive to be an excellent blogger-- a better writer, more informed, faster to post (maybe). But most of all, I want to be able to say something meaningful, real and helpful to others. So if you don't see any posts on my blog for a while, and you're wondering-- what's happened to that Jordan fellow, has he abandoned the faith?--
Then just remember me in your prayers and kindly pray that a few days of pondering, a few weeks of reflecting, or just a solid hour spent with my Lord, will bring me back to my blogging with fresh power, new excitement, and hopefully, something worth saying. God bless you all.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Reflections on GodBlogCon 2005
Escaping by jet plane the downpour of rain that was drenching New York City, the clear, sunny skies in La Mirada, California were like a revelation of new possibilities, and a perfect setting for the first-ever Christian bloggers conference, GodBlogCon 2005. Hosted and organized by the Torrey Honors Institute of Biola University, the conference took place on October 14 through October 16, 2005. I was fortunate enough to be able to participate in this historic event. Matt Anderson and his volunteer team of students did an excellent job of organizing the logistics and flow of the event, and were gracious and helpful hosts.
There were 135 bloggers in attendance, and the 3 days of activities included a lecture by Biola philosophy Professor John Mark Reynolds, two multi-panel plenaries, an evening panel discussion moderated by national talk-show host and author Hugh Hewitt, and a number of "breakout sessions" on various blogging topics.
Lovely extras
There were also added, unexpected bonuses: a chance to sit in on a live broadcast of Hugh Hewitt doing his radio show as he interviewed "God-bloggers" and interviewed several people by telephone, including Cameron Crowe about his new film Elizabethtown. There was a free screening of the film on Friday night. I'm not one to turn down a free screening, but unfortunately I had to skip it because I was too tired and needed my sleep. On the last day, we also watched a preview of the upcoming film Narnia, which included interesting background on how it was made. I also got several free books!
I thought Professor Reynold's Friday evening presentation was probably the most substantive talk of the weekend. Mr. Reynolds is an excellent speaker with a quick, dry sense of humor, though at the moment I'm not able to recall examples. His presentation focused chiefly on attractive possibilities the medium of blogging presents. Contrasting the limitations and the benefits of "live" vs. preserved discourse, Mr. Reynolds made a case for blogging as a new media that has exciting potential because it incorporates the benefits of both live (theater, music performances, lectures) and preserved discourse (books, music CD's film). Like a book, a blog post is recorded for posterity, subject to examination and response [Indeed, Reynolds warned that Internet communications pose the danger of haunting us into the future, by virtue of the fact that they enter the permanent public record]. Yet the interactive, immediate, communal nature of the blogosphere turns blogs into "living books" that constitute a dynamic conversation. Original insights are extended and amplified through the comments and responses of the blogging community.
Mr. Reynolds said that Christians have a stake in both preserved and live performance, because while we live according to the preserved "Book" (the unchanging, nevertheless living and active Word of God --my words, not his), our lives as Christians are also lived in the interaction of community, which "cannot be captured, only experienced". "Christian orthodoxy cannot survive without the life of the Spirit", he said. Thus, blogging offers an additional avenue for building community that helps us move beyond holding mere propositional truth, to living out those truths together.
The breakout sessions I attended included "God and Pop Culture" with Barbara Nicolosi and Mark Joseph, "Using Your Blog to Make Money" by Stacy Harp, and "Turn Your Blogging Into A Writing Career" by James Scott Bell. All of these sessions offered decent advice and also pointed me in the direction of further resources. However I certainly have to do much more research, brainstorming and praying to figure out what role blogging can play in my future vocation, and whether I can expect it to generate anything like a substantial amount of revenue.
The plenary discussions offered words of sagely wisdom from some prominent Christian bloggers, including Joe Carter of Evangelical Outpost, David Wayne of Jollyblogger, Andrew Jackson of Smart Christian. Friday evening's panel discussion, moderated by Hugh Hewitt, included the aforementioned John Mark Reynolds, as well as Tod Bolsinger, and Mark D. Roberts. It was noted that women were not well-represented at this particular conference; I think that Amy K. Hall, aka "Face", over at the A-Team blog, offers an excellent analysis on this phenomenon.
Pursuing blogging as a spiritual discipline was a topic of the first plenary, moderated by John Schroeder. I find this idea very helpful. Like many, I have found that putting into words the insights and revelations I am receiving in my walk with God helps me both to sharpen them, and gain perspective on their meaning. And hopefully, as I share them with others, my thoughts also stimulate and bless others in their own spiritual journey. I have written before on how blogging challenges me to achieve greater integrity-- to live up to the Christian ideals I write about. The panel suggested that "spiritual formation of character" is a vital part of the spiritual discipline of blogging, and that this formation takes place in the context of Christian community, which of course includes fellow bloggers. The maturity we gain, as well as the connections we make, leads to expanded ability to influence positively for Christ.
Although the community created within the blogosphere is no substitute for face-to-face community, it is nevertheless a real community; we can meet people we otherwise would never have met, and there is opportunity to build friendship, deepen connections, expand the circle of community we're part of. "The church is other Christians", as Joe Carter said.
"Blogging should be really seen as a resource", said David Wayne, the blogging pastor of Jollyblogger. We should be intentionally integrating the web and blogs into our disciplemaking and formation of Christian character. There should be practical means of helping people discover blogs, as well as other great resources on the Internet, and to begin using them.
Blogging attracts different types of people, including those that may not be drawn to church. Thus it extends the accessibility and influence of the church.
My Thoughts and Notes on Plenary 2
Christians ought to be on the cutting edge of the information revolution of blogging, rather than mere followers. The gospel is our framework for interpreting what is happening in our culture and is to be applied to all areas of life. Higher culture needs to be impacted, because it in turn impacts pop culture. Overall, culture is in a state of continuous flux.
How do we distinguish ourselves as Christian bloggers?
The church needs to become a real community, in order to have greater impact. But Christians aren't primarily a political force--– they must be Christians first, whose primary commitment is to God and building His kingdom. Through study and careful thinking that understands and can respond to counter-arguments, Christians must develop arguments that apply to all different areas of life. Conversion is often a process, so we don'’t have to measure the success of each post by whether or not it shares the gospel.
Evangelism is not necessarily limited to a presentation of the gospel as "Four Spiritual Laws". We must make the principles and values of the gospel bear upon the whole of culture as we write our blogs. Each of us has a different "niche" in this endeavor and must follow our particular calling and temperament to discover that niche and play our part.
The blogging community will have more power in reaching culture if it can demonstrate that it is becoming a more unified force,– but this pursuit of "power" shouldn't be achieved by worldly methods. It is not primarily a political pursuit of power, but a pursuit of a greater, more unified voice, for the purpose of giving God the glory.
The gospel has public policy and social action implications, and so we try to influence government and culture and politics through intelligent, creative sharing of biblical truth and worldview.
Business models for blogging will emerge, and Christians should be proactive in developing this model. We ought to be praying for one another, especially the bloggers that we personally read. We ought to encourage blogs that are just starting. Christian bloggers ought to be willing to be accountable to one another, willing to listen and respond to criticism. We should expect and prepare for persecution, and respond in grace. Be accessible.
American Christians especially should use the blogosphere to become better informed and less ignorant about global concerns.
Making Connections
An important theme that seemed to run throughout all the various presentations was the need of building Christian community through blogging. Many bloggers in attendance had interacted for a long time via their blogs, but had never met face-to-face. The best part of the conference for me was meeting all of these intelligent, articulate, cultured people who, as blogging Christans, are impacting this world for Christ. I came away with the impression that this group of bloggers was also a group of thinkers, people who have deeply thought about the implications of their faith.
I was pleased too by the friendliness and accessibility of the group, even the "big name" bloggers. Hugh Hewitt walked up to me and made my acquaintance. La Shawn Barber wore a friendly smile and had an easy laugh. In conversation, John Mark Reynolds revealed quite the odd sense of humor; he was no stiff academic.
I met Mark Daniels, whose blog I had previously interacted with and who happened to be staying at the same hotel as me. I found him a real encouraging and interesting fellow, not to mention a man of excellent taste in music (he's a quite knowledgeable McCartney fan). I also got to spend time with Charlie LeHardy, who has an excellent blog called Another Think. Like Mark, Charlie was a good listener and a great guy. He was also very gracious in giving me a lift back to my hotel after a group of us had lunch. Also had a good conversation with Roger and Amy of A-Team blog, during which, as usual, I blabbed away.
At a final impromptu lunch gathering, I enjoyed fellowship with a great group of fellow bloggers, including Amy Hall and Roger Overton of A-Team blog, Charlie LeHardy, DJ Chuang, Lores Rizkalla, Stacy Harp and her husband, Randall Harp(a fellow musician), Christy Lynn Wilson , and Aaron Pina .
For more thoughts and summary of GodBlogCon05, visit the GodBlogCon blog. There you'll find insights from other bloggers, some of whom were "live-blogging" during the event.
It was a great event, and I'm already looking forward to GodBlogCon 2, scheduled for August 2006.
Sunday, October 09, 2005
A Wayward Blogger Looks at Being Famous vs Leaving A Legacy
I haven't posted for a while and must humbly admit that the cause has been a lack of blogging inspiration and focus, in addition to dealing with some personal issues, about which I'd rather not be too specific. Today though, I am feeling spiritually cleansed, inspired and refreshed after a particularly excellent service at my church, Trinity Church International, in Bayside, NY.
God willing, I'll be heading to the GodBlog'05 conference in La Mirada, California, this coming Thursday, and will receive much-needed vision and motivation during my time away.
One thing that has been distracting me from blogging, however, is not necessarily a bad thing-- my love of music. I attended a Paul McCartney concert here in NYC at Madison Square Garden last Saturday evening. Mr. McCartney, or Sir Paul, as he is sometimes referred to these days, is now 63 years old, but he put on a tremendously energetic three-hour+ show. The set list included songs that ranged over his entire illustrious career, Beatles songs as well as selections from his own extensive post-Beatles catalog. He also played some tunes from his latest album, Chaos and Creation in the Backyard (see my earlier album review and a related article). McCartney and his band were in fine form, and Paul seemed very relaxed and at ease on stage.
In the weeks leading up to the concert, I listened to a lot of Paul's solo music, and in the process, I was awed by the sheer volume of material he has released since leaving the Beatles in 1970, which includes 20 studio albums and a number of other albums. He has even composed pieces of classical music and had them performed by a major symphony, and, since taking up painting at age 40, he has created over 300 works and had these works in a major art exhibit.
Probably my favorite thing in the world to do is to create something new, especially songs. I envision myself as a creative communicator, and have longed to use my talents in music and writing in a greater way. Yet I know I have been held back to a degree by my own lack of focus, and I have allowed "inner demons" to keep me from being as productive as I could be. So seeing a guy like Paul McCartney, whose music I greatly admire, was an inspiration, but also a bracing slap in the face. How does he manage to be so productive? What drives him? And what am I waiting for? When will I finally record my songs for a CD?
Another thing I witnessed and was reminded of at that concert is the unique power of music to communicate. While blogging is certainly a wonderful medium in which to communicate thoughts and ideas, music is much more a transcendent language, so unique in its ability to communicate powerfully, memorably and universally. People from all different types of backgrounds can share in the feelings and messages music transmits, somehow connecting to each other through the magic of the shared experience of listening to music.
So I am burning again with a desire to write songs, and to not spend all of my free time blogging. Nevertheless, the two pursuits don't have to be mutually exclusive-- the key will be for me to have a driving vision from the Lord that will help me maintain focus, supply crucial daily strength and fresh inspiration, and help me to be disciplined and productive. I must remember too that ultimately, it's not about me, it's about the Lord, making His glory known. The closer I get to Him, savoring His glory and experiencing it for myself, the more I believe I will be touched by that glory, and this in turn will anoint my creativity in a way that nothing else can.
It all comes down to worship. Who or what am I worshipping? Will people be able to look at my life both now and in the future, and say, here is a man who made an impact on the world, for the glory of God? Or am I instead trying to make a name for myself?
Will I strive and discipline myself to greater productivity because I am driven by pursuit of my own fame, so that I will be known as somebody? Or, will I view myself as a steward of God-given gifts, on loan to me for the purpose of communicating His message that alone saves and transforms?
My songs and communications don't all need to be gospel tracts, but will I make statements and bring out truths that bring honor to God, that have the ability to touch peoples' hearts with His transformative power? Or will I settle for being admired for whatever cleverness and talent my artistic endeavors may convey?
I read recently a brief article by pastor and teacher Charles Stanley, adapted from his book "Living the Extraordinary Life". In the article, Mr. Stanley challenges Christians to consider what legacy their lives will leave behind. "When God created you, he writes, "He had a very specific purpose in mind for your life, and He endowed you with all the talents and abilities you would need to accomplish His plan." He goes on to explain that the number of years we live is "less important than how that lifetime is invested".
For example, Mr. Stanley recalls the lives of people, such as Oswald Chambers, who lived briefly here on Earth, yet nevertheless left behind a legacy of great spiritual impact. And of course, the Lord Jesus Christ, "our ultimate example", "altered history forever" in his short life.
Whether my impact is made as a well-known figure, or as a person who lives and dies in obscurity, I will leave behind some kind of legacy. What kind of a legacy do I want it to be? What do my actions each day reflect about my real priorities? I don't yet have children, but if I did, would my example inspire them to dedicate their own lives to love and serve Christ?
Today, it seems the ambition of may is to get their "15 minutes of fame". "Reality" television shows turn people into instant celebritities, celebrated not for accomplishment but merely for being known. There is, I think, a legitimate longing in the human heart for significance (there is eternity in the heart), but the quest for mere fame or celebrity turns that noble impulse towards a base end. Achieving notoriety any way you can is a cheap, ultimately empty substitute for leaving behind a legacy of real and lasting impact. The advent of multiple media technologies makes it more and more possible to shout out to the world I'm here! But will my voice merely stop at saying that? Or will I use my voice to communicate more substantial truths, with all the intelligence, eloquence and talent I can possibly bring to the endeavor? Will my blog (which, after all, is just a extension and a reflection of who I am) be "blah, blah, blah" about "me, me, me"? Or will I purposefully strive to make it a rich coversation about who God is?
The wise man Ecclesiastes' great reflection on the purpose of life (which was derived, not only through careful and studious lifetime observation, but by actual participation in all the wayward ways of men), came to a pointed close with this final admonition:
Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil (Eccles 12: 13-14). Charles Stanley's grandfather advised him, "Obey God and leave all the consequences to Him." And tonight, I say to myself, "Use the gifts, talents and opportunities God gives you to leave behind a legacy in the name of Jesus Christ that will last-- by helping bring souls into heaven."
God willing, I'll be heading to the GodBlog'05 conference in La Mirada, California, this coming Thursday, and will receive much-needed vision and motivation during my time away.
One thing that has been distracting me from blogging, however, is not necessarily a bad thing-- my love of music. I attended a Paul McCartney concert here in NYC at Madison Square Garden last Saturday evening. Mr. McCartney, or Sir Paul, as he is sometimes referred to these days, is now 63 years old, but he put on a tremendously energetic three-hour+ show. The set list included songs that ranged over his entire illustrious career, Beatles songs as well as selections from his own extensive post-Beatles catalog. He also played some tunes from his latest album, Chaos and Creation in the Backyard (see my earlier album review and a related article). McCartney and his band were in fine form, and Paul seemed very relaxed and at ease on stage.
In the weeks leading up to the concert, I listened to a lot of Paul's solo music, and in the process, I was awed by the sheer volume of material he has released since leaving the Beatles in 1970, which includes 20 studio albums and a number of other albums. He has even composed pieces of classical music and had them performed by a major symphony, and, since taking up painting at age 40, he has created over 300 works and had these works in a major art exhibit.
Probably my favorite thing in the world to do is to create something new, especially songs. I envision myself as a creative communicator, and have longed to use my talents in music and writing in a greater way. Yet I know I have been held back to a degree by my own lack of focus, and I have allowed "inner demons" to keep me from being as productive as I could be. So seeing a guy like Paul McCartney, whose music I greatly admire, was an inspiration, but also a bracing slap in the face. How does he manage to be so productive? What drives him? And what am I waiting for? When will I finally record my songs for a CD?
Another thing I witnessed and was reminded of at that concert is the unique power of music to communicate. While blogging is certainly a wonderful medium in which to communicate thoughts and ideas, music is much more a transcendent language, so unique in its ability to communicate powerfully, memorably and universally. People from all different types of backgrounds can share in the feelings and messages music transmits, somehow connecting to each other through the magic of the shared experience of listening to music.
So I am burning again with a desire to write songs, and to not spend all of my free time blogging. Nevertheless, the two pursuits don't have to be mutually exclusive-- the key will be for me to have a driving vision from the Lord that will help me maintain focus, supply crucial daily strength and fresh inspiration, and help me to be disciplined and productive. I must remember too that ultimately, it's not about me, it's about the Lord, making His glory known. The closer I get to Him, savoring His glory and experiencing it for myself, the more I believe I will be touched by that glory, and this in turn will anoint my creativity in a way that nothing else can.
It all comes down to worship. Who or what am I worshipping? Will people be able to look at my life both now and in the future, and say, here is a man who made an impact on the world, for the glory of God? Or am I instead trying to make a name for myself?
Will I strive and discipline myself to greater productivity because I am driven by pursuit of my own fame, so that I will be known as somebody? Or, will I view myself as a steward of God-given gifts, on loan to me for the purpose of communicating His message that alone saves and transforms?
My songs and communications don't all need to be gospel tracts, but will I make statements and bring out truths that bring honor to God, that have the ability to touch peoples' hearts with His transformative power? Or will I settle for being admired for whatever cleverness and talent my artistic endeavors may convey?
I read recently a brief article by pastor and teacher Charles Stanley, adapted from his book "Living the Extraordinary Life". In the article, Mr. Stanley challenges Christians to consider what legacy their lives will leave behind. "When God created you, he writes, "He had a very specific purpose in mind for your life, and He endowed you with all the talents and abilities you would need to accomplish His plan." He goes on to explain that the number of years we live is "less important than how that lifetime is invested".
For example, Mr. Stanley recalls the lives of people, such as Oswald Chambers, who lived briefly here on Earth, yet nevertheless left behind a legacy of great spiritual impact. And of course, the Lord Jesus Christ, "our ultimate example", "altered history forever" in his short life.
Whether my impact is made as a well-known figure, or as a person who lives and dies in obscurity, I will leave behind some kind of legacy. What kind of a legacy do I want it to be? What do my actions each day reflect about my real priorities? I don't yet have children, but if I did, would my example inspire them to dedicate their own lives to love and serve Christ?
Today, it seems the ambition of may is to get their "15 minutes of fame". "Reality" television shows turn people into instant celebritities, celebrated not for accomplishment but merely for being known. There is, I think, a legitimate longing in the human heart for significance (there is eternity in the heart), but the quest for mere fame or celebrity turns that noble impulse towards a base end. Achieving notoriety any way you can is a cheap, ultimately empty substitute for leaving behind a legacy of real and lasting impact. The advent of multiple media technologies makes it more and more possible to shout out to the world I'm here! But will my voice merely stop at saying that? Or will I use my voice to communicate more substantial truths, with all the intelligence, eloquence and talent I can possibly bring to the endeavor? Will my blog (which, after all, is just a extension and a reflection of who I am) be "blah, blah, blah" about "me, me, me"? Or will I purposefully strive to make it a rich coversation about who God is?
The wise man Ecclesiastes' great reflection on the purpose of life (which was derived, not only through careful and studious lifetime observation, but by actual participation in all the wayward ways of men), came to a pointed close with this final admonition:
Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil (Eccles 12: 13-14). Charles Stanley's grandfather advised him, "Obey God and leave all the consequences to Him." And tonight, I say to myself, "Use the gifts, talents and opportunities God gives you to leave behind a legacy in the name of Jesus Christ that will last-- by helping bring souls into heaven."
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
GodBlog Con '05
The first ever GodBlog 2005 Conference is coming up in just a few weeks. It's a conference for Christian bloggers to meet, network and learn more about the possibilities and potential of blogging. An recent article by Ted Bolsinger provides some interesting thoughts on the upcoming conference.
I plan on being there myself... hope to see you there.
I plan on being there myself... hope to see you there.
87th Christian Carnival
The Carnival's up again, and I have a post there. Check it out to find some recent posts of some interesting Christian bloggers.
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
Review of Chaos and Creation in the Backyard, by Paul McCartney. A Grownup Work from a Genius of Pop
Before I begin my review, I would like to retire a false legend about the Beatles, one that has circulated for a long while. Please bear with me as I address this issue briefly; it will be relevant to the album review.
The myth is this: that John Lennon was the true artist of the Beatles; their leader, and the driving force behind their magic. This legend of course misses the obvious fact that the music of the Beatles was produced by the alchemy of four unique talents, each of whom made an important and significant contribution to the mix. It was the combination of their voices, inspired songwriting, their cohesiveness as a band, and their winning personalities that made the Beatles so special-- even the Beatles themselves often claimed that they felt like four parts of the same person. So their success is not owing to any one of them alone.
Lennon certainly was a natural leader within the group and had an originality that was critical to the Beatle's sound. But his songwriting partner, McCartney, was no less an original, and it's almost certain that Paul took the lead in Beatle creative sessions on songs for which he was the primary originator (and this was probably more than half of their recordings).
Especially in their earlier work, Paul and John's songwriting was a true collaboration. But as time went on, they wrote more as individuals, and would bring in their ideas for the rest of the group to work on. One began to see the contrast in their musical personalities.
It's when we examine their output as solo artists we more readily see the differences (and similarities) in the style and temperament of Lennon vs. McCartney. Paul was clearly the sunnier personality, reflected both in his lyrics and in his more upbeat tunes. The darker Lennon exposed the pain and even neurosis of his psyche, usually with good results musically. One way that they were similar, however, is that both were Romantics [definition of Romanticism: An artistic and intellectual movement originating in Europe in the late 18th century and characterized by a heightened interest in nature, emphasis on the individual's expression of emotion and imagination, departure from the attitudes and forms of classicism, and rebellion against established social rules and conventions].
Perhaps one of the best examples of this Romanticism is that each of them wrote tender, sensitive odes to love/lover (Paul: My Love, Warm and Beautiful and countless others, John: Oh My Love, Woman, and lots more).
Paul was more of a craftsman in his approach to writing and producing, polishing final productions to a sheen; whereas it seems John generally preferred a more raw sound, one he viewed as more spontaneous and authentic. Of the two, Paul was almost certainly the more versatile musician, with a wider scope of styles in his writing and playing. But again, these generalizations are limited, for Paul could be rough and raw-sounding, and John's music shows he was quite able to create smooth, polished pop songs when he chose to.
Paul was much more prolific in his post-Beatles output, even before Lennon died in 1980. It's hard to imagine him taking off five years from releasing any music, as Lennon did in the mid-70's. His ability to generate so many ideas is a mark of Paul's genius-- yet it has at times resulted in his putting out material that is just not up to his own high standards, nor up to the high quality of the Beatles catalog. Whether writing together or separately, these two great writers sparked one another's creativity and raised each other's game, if not through collaboration, then often by competition. So we must retire all the nonsense about Paul being a no-talent, and John the true genius.
With his overflow of musical ideas, McCartney has quite often recorded what sound like "snippets" or even drafts of songs. Sometimes he molds these into great songs, but often he has just released such material "as is", with not great results. I think this is one reason why critics have not always been kind to Paul's solo work. But another, as mentioned above, is the myth that Paul was not as inspired or as edgy a talent as John. Thus Paul's solo career has been underrated by many critics, but I believe that in due time his work will garner the respect and appreciation it deserves as outstanding pop music.
Nevertheless, especially from a lyrical standpoint, it does seems that Paul has always had need of a strong editor; one that he could respect and who would unflinchingly provide honest appraisal of his ideas along with constructive advice. One imagines that John was that kind of writing partner for Paul. But writing without a partner, Paul has sometimes given in to his worst tendency-- sentimentality-- and produced mawkish lyrics or cornball songs. Every artist has idiosyncrasies that contribute to their strength as an artist, but the same strength at extremes turn into weakness. Lennon, for example, had a gift for being bluntly truthful in his lyrics, in a way that seemed to connect with many. Yet songs like "Mother", or more so, "I Found Out", are probably too revealing of the dark side to be "listener-friendly".
Likewise McCartney's gift of generating lots of musical ideas, his seeming perfectionism in the studio, his wonderful gift of melody and his optimistic nature often have combined to produce works of pure pop genius. Yet those same strengths can be liabilities. He has had a tendency either towards overproduction, or the seeming opposite tendency to release half-finished tunes. His tendency to put on his "brave face" has perhaps caused him to be a little too glib and superficial in his lyrics.
But on Chaos and Creation, working with a fresh producer, Nigel Godrich (Radiohead, Beck) Paul reins in some of these negative tendencies. The lyrics are more mature and reflective. The spare, tasteful musical arrangements complement the thoughtful quality of the words perfectly. The complex essence of Paul's musical personality emerges: optimism (Fine Line) is juxtaposed with melancholy (Jenny Wren, At the Mercy); nostalgia (English Tea) contrasted with anticipation (Promise To You Girl). Apparently Godwin persuaded Paul to leave out his band and record almost all the parts himself (something Paul has done before but not since McCartney I and II). The result is an album that feels "organic": all the parts relating to one another well. And best of all, McCartney's voice sounds incredible (it's hard to believe he's 63!)-- it's strong and confident on the uptempo tracks, and vulnerable, wise, and, for lack of a better word, beautiful, on the more mellow numbers.
Chaos and Creation in the Backyard opens strongly, with Fine Line (also the first single), an up-tempo number that may not grab you on the first listen but hooks you if you listen more than once. It has a good lyric, of more depth than usual for a McCartney pop single. This is followed by "How Kind of You", a moody, mellow piece that reflects on the kindness of a friend (lover?) who was there in a time of need. Like many of the songs on this album, it grows on you with repeated listening.
The beautiful, haunting Jenny Wren is next and features lovely acoustic guitar by Paul, in the tradition of some of his great guitar work on songs such as Blackbird, or Calico Skies. Its minor key and lovely chorus are well-matched to the simple, evocative lyrics. The plaintive solo (by Pedro Eustache, on an instrument called the duduc) is one of the high points of the album. I think this song may join the McCartney canon of greats.
At the Mercy, to my ears, has classical music elements; there are many interesting twists and turns to follow in this complex tune. The complexity of the tune perhaps makes it less easy to remember, but this is one of the best songs on the album.
McCartney has said that on the next number, Friends to Go, he felt inspired by George Harrison-- and the song does have a "“Travelling Wilburys"” kind of feel. In fact, it is the kind of tune George might have written, in his later career. It's a very likable tune and good tribute to George, if that is what it is meant to be.
English Tea changes the mood again with its opening, which sounds like a passage imported from one of Paul's classical pieces. The song itself seems to be a mild parody of aristocratic life. It reminds me a bit of "Piggies" from the White Album, except where Piggies was an attack on the aristocracy, English Tea shows affection for the old English ways.
Too Much Rain opens with chords that sound familiar (they remind me of the song Lonely People by America). But it turns into another beautiful melody from Paul, and the song has a lovely piano/guitar arrangement. The lyrics may sound trite at times, but the song works anyway. A great pop piece.
On A Certain Softness, McCartney creates a Latin-flavored piece which really works well, due to another well-conceived and executed arrangement. The song adds yet another bit of variety in texture to the overall album. The melody is excellent, if not quite as instantly memorable as some of McCartney's best work along these lines (And I Love Her, for example). Being a fan a Latin-flavored music, this is one of my favorites on the album. Paul'’s harmonies on the middle section are gorgeous.
Riding to Vanity Fair marks perhaps a first for McCartney, in that he reveals bitter feelings, the result of betrayal in friendship. The song's slow, atmospheric quality heightens the feeling of dazed confusion expressed by the words. The orchestration is excellent, recalling the song "Distractions", but is more understated here. I think McCartney should keep writing in this vein, because the lyrics in this song feel more real and more honest than the perfect ideal described in the very next song, Follow Me. One wonders, to what human being could these words be expressed ("I can rely on you to guide me through any situation"? Interestingly, since I write from a Christian point of view, this song, which seems to be about God, should probably appeal to me. But its melody isn't quite as inspired as other songs on this album, and one isn't so sure if there is heartfelt conviction in the song. For these reasons, Follow Me was probably my least favorite track.
Promise to You Girl is another great pop song from McCartney, inserting a needed burst of energy into this mostly mellow album. Paul, "looking through the “backyard of my life"”, realizes it's "“time to sweep the fallen leaves away"”. The song expresses the idea of taking stock and looking to the future with a determination to leave behind a positive mark on this world. And it does so with a catchy, fun tune that is typical Paul. This would be a good choice for the next single.
On This Never Happened Before Paul has crafted yet another gorgeous love song, with chord changes reminiscent of Burt Bacharach. In an interview, Paul relates how he lent out the song, prior to its official release, to a couple getting married (very sweet).
The album closes with a pair of love songs. Like Too Much Rain, Anyway also opens with a familiar-sounding chord progression (remember "People Get Ready" by Curtis Mayfield?). Still, Paul's song veers into much different musical territory after that. The song is a plea for lovers to re-unite (it feels perhaps as if they have been parted by a quarrel). But the narrator believes that their love is "strong enough to take it on the chin" and to "cure each others sorrow". He waits for her to "make that call", "anyway" she can. Both This Never Happened Before and Anyway could be criticized for their simplistic lyrics, but the music expresses emotional nuances that fills in what the words do not. Perhaps if the words were more complex, they might clash with the musical expression of emotion.
Finally, there is a instrumental jam that follows the last song, Anyway, that has points of interest, although it is not very cohesive. It sounds like three different musical passages strung together, but the best of these passages is the piano section.
If you're planning on purchasing the album, I'd strongly recommend buying the Special Edition version, which includes along with the CD an entertaining and informative 50 minute DVD, in which Paul talks about the making of Chaos and Creation.
Chaos and Creation is a grownup work from an artist who obviously still has lots of creative juices flowing. Some fans and critics may lament the lack of "rockers" on this album, but it seems Paul's latest batch of inspiration just didn't include those types of songs. Working with a strong producer was definitely a good move for Paul: this is a thoughtful, well-crafted album with no "clunkers", as have appeared on previous albums. Paul no longer needs to stake his reputation on the body of work he created with the Beatles, as wonderful as that body of work was. His body of work as a solo artist, and with Wings, is equally impressive. It remains to be seen whether or not this album contains songs that will live up to very high standards set by all of Paul's past work, to become his new classics. Still, McCartney is a true genius of pop, and he can (and should) hold his head up high with this album.
Friday, September 09, 2005
Was Katrina Intelligent Design?
John Piper has written what I think is the best word I've yet read about the implications of Katrina. Clink on the title link above to read his excellent article.
Thursday, September 08, 2005
Christian Carnival 86
My post Mysterious Ways appears in the latest Christian Carnival, hosted by Technogyspy.
Some very interesting ruminations on Katrina appeared in this past week's Carnival, which prompted me to think about the issue and write my own take on it.
As always, the Carnival is an excellent way to read thought-provoking Christian blogging and discover new blogs/bloggers. I am hoping to become a host for the Carnival soon (I've put in my request).
Some very interesting ruminations on Katrina appeared in this past week's Carnival, which prompted me to think about the issue and write my own take on it.
As always, the Carnival is an excellent way to read thought-provoking Christian blogging and discover new blogs/bloggers. I am hoping to become a host for the Carnival soon (I've put in my request).
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Katrina: Was It A Judgment of God?
I've been looking around the blogosphere recently and finding many posts that reflect on whether or not Katrina might have been a judgment on the city of New Orleans. First of all, I want to express my profound sympathy for those hurt in this tragic event. The hurt continues and as many in the blogosphere have pointed out, as Christians it is our primary responsibility, in the wake of this horror, to reach out and help. This shows forth the love of Christ.
Nevertheless, at the risk of being politically incorrect, I do want to examine a little further the idea of whether or not Katrina could be a judgment of God. Of course, it sounds callous, presumptuous and even vengeful for Christians to make public pronouncements that Katrina definitely is a judgment of God. Especially if they do so in a way that seems to say that New Orleans or the other people affected by Katrina somehow are more deserving of such a retributive act of God than others. Of course they are not. In arguing against this idea of Katrina as judgment, a number of blogs quote the biblical passage that also comes to my mind when such terrible events occur:
Luke 13: 1-5
"There were some present at that very time who told him (Jesus) about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And he answered them, "Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish."
The blogs I have encountered use this passage to argue that it is not right for Christians to presume that Katrina was a judgment specifically intended for the people of New Orleans, since what Jesus seems to be saying in this passage is that we are all equally sinful before God. Although I agree that Jesus does imply that we are all equally sinful before God, it seems to me that many who have quoted at this passage neglect another important part of it, that is, the conclusion Jesus makes: "repent,(or) you will all likewise perish".
I agree with many that it is presumptuous to definitively label Katrina a judgment of God; but could it not be equally presumptuous to claim that it is not? The way I interpret Jesus' response to his questioners is this: since we are no less sinners than those who have been visited with such tragic events, we too may be in danger of such acts of God happening to us. Is that not clearly what Jesus is saying? How do we avoid such a calamity, according to our Lord? Only by repenting.
Another relevant passage is the one where the disciples ask Jesus: "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?"
"Neither this man nor his parents sinned," said Jesus, "but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life. As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world." (John 9: 2-5)
In the above passage, I believe Jesus is showing that there is not always a direct causal relationship between personal sins and bad things happening to us. Taken together with the Luke passage, I believe Jesus is showing that the effects of sin are with us, whether we have sinned personally or not. He is not however, negating the idea that our sins might put us in danger of the wrath of God (in fact, quite the opposite, it seems to me).
Then also some blogs I read pointed to the story of Job, and/or verses from Ecclesiastes, to make the argument that the just may suffer while the unrighteous prosper but that in his inscrutable wisdom, "all things work together for good", "for those who love God" (Romans 8:28).
I agree that the story of Job shows us that Job's friends were completely wrong in their notion that Job's suffering was caused by some specific sin(s) in his life and therefore, Job merited what had happened to him. Likewise, Ecclesiastes also shows us that life is a mysterious thing; we can't know our future, and we certainly do not understand the ways of God. Part of this mystery is that, at times, the wicked seem to prosper, while the righteous are punished.
Taking these various truths together, it is right to be very humble before God when an event like Katrina happens. Life is mysterious. God's ways are hard to understand. We can't always look at events and easily interpret their meaning. Therefore we should be careful of making ignorant pronouncements, such as those made by Job's friends. Sometimes bad things happen to good people. And sometimes, as Jesus talks about, bad things happen to sinful people, and that should be taken as a warning to us. We are probably no less sinners than anyone impacted by Katrina. We should thank God for His mercies to us, and heed the warning of Jesus in the face of such events: to repent.
Part of this repentance means to reach out, with His love, to help those who have suffered, in whatever capacity we can. In this way, we do the work of the Father and become good representatives of the light of Jesus.
Nevertheless, at the risk of being politically incorrect, I do want to examine a little further the idea of whether or not Katrina could be a judgment of God. Of course, it sounds callous, presumptuous and even vengeful for Christians to make public pronouncements that Katrina definitely is a judgment of God. Especially if they do so in a way that seems to say that New Orleans or the other people affected by Katrina somehow are more deserving of such a retributive act of God than others. Of course they are not. In arguing against this idea of Katrina as judgment, a number of blogs quote the biblical passage that also comes to my mind when such terrible events occur:
Luke 13: 1-5
"There were some present at that very time who told him (Jesus) about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And he answered them, "Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish."
The blogs I have encountered use this passage to argue that it is not right for Christians to presume that Katrina was a judgment specifically intended for the people of New Orleans, since what Jesus seems to be saying in this passage is that we are all equally sinful before God. Although I agree that Jesus does imply that we are all equally sinful before God, it seems to me that many who have quoted at this passage neglect another important part of it, that is, the conclusion Jesus makes: "repent,(or) you will all likewise perish".
I agree with many that it is presumptuous to definitively label Katrina a judgment of God; but could it not be equally presumptuous to claim that it is not? The way I interpret Jesus' response to his questioners is this: since we are no less sinners than those who have been visited with such tragic events, we too may be in danger of such acts of God happening to us. Is that not clearly what Jesus is saying? How do we avoid such a calamity, according to our Lord? Only by repenting.
Another relevant passage is the one where the disciples ask Jesus: "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?"
"Neither this man nor his parents sinned," said Jesus, "but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life. As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world." (John 9: 2-5)
In the above passage, I believe Jesus is showing that there is not always a direct causal relationship between personal sins and bad things happening to us. Taken together with the Luke passage, I believe Jesus is showing that the effects of sin are with us, whether we have sinned personally or not. He is not however, negating the idea that our sins might put us in danger of the wrath of God (in fact, quite the opposite, it seems to me).
Then also some blogs I read pointed to the story of Job, and/or verses from Ecclesiastes, to make the argument that the just may suffer while the unrighteous prosper but that in his inscrutable wisdom, "all things work together for good", "for those who love God" (Romans 8:28).
I agree that the story of Job shows us that Job's friends were completely wrong in their notion that Job's suffering was caused by some specific sin(s) in his life and therefore, Job merited what had happened to him. Likewise, Ecclesiastes also shows us that life is a mysterious thing; we can't know our future, and we certainly do not understand the ways of God. Part of this mystery is that, at times, the wicked seem to prosper, while the righteous are punished.
Taking these various truths together, it is right to be very humble before God when an event like Katrina happens. Life is mysterious. God's ways are hard to understand. We can't always look at events and easily interpret their meaning. Therefore we should be careful of making ignorant pronouncements, such as those made by Job's friends. Sometimes bad things happen to good people. And sometimes, as Jesus talks about, bad things happen to sinful people, and that should be taken as a warning to us. We are probably no less sinners than anyone impacted by Katrina. We should thank God for His mercies to us, and heed the warning of Jesus in the face of such events: to repent.
Part of this repentance means to reach out, with His love, to help those who have suffered, in whatever capacity we can. In this way, we do the work of the Father and become good representatives of the light of Jesus.
Tuesday, September 06, 2005
Mysterious Ways
The Word of God ought to feed our spirits daily. But sometimes, if we neglect it, the Spirit may resort to speaking to our hearts directly, trying to convict us. In such cases, he may use unlikely means or tools to speak through. As far as I know, Paul McCartney is not an evangelical Christian, but he is one of those rare rock stars who managed to have a long and faithful marriage and to be an apparently good family man. I would surmise that this is the influence of the Spirit in his life.
Anyway, two new tunes from Paul McCartney's upcoming album, "Chaos and Creation in the Backyard", really speak to me. One is a haunting, beautiful tune in which the main character is young Jenny Wren, an innocent whose "song" has been stolen through the ugliness of the "world's foolish ways". Still, she somehow holds on to her pure, childlike faith in the beauty and goodness of life, seeing past the world's foolishness. By the end of the song she has become a kind of savior figure to all who know her.
Jenny Wren
Like so many girls
Jenny Wren could sing
But a broken heart
Took her song away
Like the other girls
Jenny Wren took wing
She could see the world
And its foolish ways
How we spend our days
Casting love aside
Losing sight of life
Day by day
She saw poverty
Breaking up her home
Wounded warriors
Took her song away
But the day will come
Jenny Wren will sing
When this broken world
Mends its foolish ways
Then we'll spend our days
Catching up on life
All because of you
Jenny Wren
You saw who we are
Jenny Wren.
I was convicted by the phrase "losing sight of life". Whenever I allow the world's broken perspective to darken my vision, certainly I lose sight of the life that is truly worthy of being called life.
The song doesn't explain much about Jenny Wren, who she is, or why she becomes such an important figure. As a Christian, she reminds me of the Holy Spirit. The Bible says He is gentle, pure and holy; He is grieved by poverty-- both material and spiritual. And yet, He remains ever hopeful, always seeing the good in us and also the wonder and goodness of life.
"You saw who we are", the song says about Jenny Wren. Does not the Spirit also see us for who we really are? Not just our lies and hypocrisy, all the ways in which we fail to be Christian, but also the beauty in our souls, the desire within us to be pure and loving, as we ought to be. How beautiful that through His grace expressed to us through the Cross God sees our deepest identity not as the flawed, sinful creatures we experience ourselves to be, but as the saints we were created to be.
The second McCartney song that God used to speak to me is "Promise to You Girl":
Looking through the backyard of my life
Time to sweep the fallen leaves away
Like the sun that rises everyday
We can chase the dark clouds from the sky
I gave my promise to you girl
I don't want to take it back
You and me, side by side,
We know how to change the world
That is why
I gave my promise to you girl
Hey why wait another day
That won't get us anywhere
All the time
That it takes
To repair this brave old world
Will be ours
I gave my promise to you girl
Every single second of our lives
We can use to chase the clouds away
Well there's no more barking up a tree
No more howling at the moon
They won't see you and I
Diving for the deepest pearl
That is why I gave my promise to you girl
Looking through the backyard of my life
Time to sweep the fallen leaves away
Where as Jenny Wren is melancholy, Promise to You Girl is a lively, happy number. The song reminds me of my promise to love and cherish my wife. I know how far short I fall on this. And it reminds me that the partnership we have isn't primarily about making each other happy, but about being a team as we take on the challenge to "repair this brave old world". From a Christian perspective, this means to pray and work together so that the kingdom purposes, as expressed by Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount, will be accomplished here on Earth.
I relate to the sense of urgency expressed in the song, and I love the lines that open and close the song:
Looking through the backyard of my life
Time to sweep the fallen leaves away
Thank you Spirit, for using these songs to speak to my heart.
You can listen to these songs by going to Paul McCartney's website and becoming a member (free).
Anyway, two new tunes from Paul McCartney's upcoming album, "Chaos and Creation in the Backyard", really speak to me. One is a haunting, beautiful tune in which the main character is young Jenny Wren, an innocent whose "song" has been stolen through the ugliness of the "world's foolish ways". Still, she somehow holds on to her pure, childlike faith in the beauty and goodness of life, seeing past the world's foolishness. By the end of the song she has become a kind of savior figure to all who know her.
Jenny Wren
Like so many girls
Jenny Wren could sing
But a broken heart
Took her song away
Like the other girls
Jenny Wren took wing
She could see the world
And its foolish ways
How we spend our days
Casting love aside
Losing sight of life
Day by day
She saw poverty
Breaking up her home
Wounded warriors
Took her song away
But the day will come
Jenny Wren will sing
When this broken world
Mends its foolish ways
Then we'll spend our days
Catching up on life
All because of you
Jenny Wren
You saw who we are
Jenny Wren.
I was convicted by the phrase "losing sight of life". Whenever I allow the world's broken perspective to darken my vision, certainly I lose sight of the life that is truly worthy of being called life.
The song doesn't explain much about Jenny Wren, who she is, or why she becomes such an important figure. As a Christian, she reminds me of the Holy Spirit. The Bible says He is gentle, pure and holy; He is grieved by poverty-- both material and spiritual. And yet, He remains ever hopeful, always seeing the good in us and also the wonder and goodness of life.
"You saw who we are", the song says about Jenny Wren. Does not the Spirit also see us for who we really are? Not just our lies and hypocrisy, all the ways in which we fail to be Christian, but also the beauty in our souls, the desire within us to be pure and loving, as we ought to be. How beautiful that through His grace expressed to us through the Cross God sees our deepest identity not as the flawed, sinful creatures we experience ourselves to be, but as the saints we were created to be.
The second McCartney song that God used to speak to me is "Promise to You Girl":
Looking through the backyard of my life
Time to sweep the fallen leaves away
Like the sun that rises everyday
We can chase the dark clouds from the sky
I gave my promise to you girl
I don't want to take it back
You and me, side by side,
We know how to change the world
That is why
I gave my promise to you girl
Hey why wait another day
That won't get us anywhere
All the time
That it takes
To repair this brave old world
Will be ours
I gave my promise to you girl
Every single second of our lives
We can use to chase the clouds away
Well there's no more barking up a tree
No more howling at the moon
They won't see you and I
Diving for the deepest pearl
That is why I gave my promise to you girl
Looking through the backyard of my life
Time to sweep the fallen leaves away
Where as Jenny Wren is melancholy, Promise to You Girl is a lively, happy number. The song reminds me of my promise to love and cherish my wife. I know how far short I fall on this. And it reminds me that the partnership we have isn't primarily about making each other happy, but about being a team as we take on the challenge to "repair this brave old world". From a Christian perspective, this means to pray and work together so that the kingdom purposes, as expressed by Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount, will be accomplished here on Earth.
I relate to the sense of urgency expressed in the song, and I love the lines that open and close the song:
Looking through the backyard of my life
Time to sweep the fallen leaves away
Thank you Spirit, for using these songs to speak to my heart.
You can listen to these songs by going to Paul McCartney's website and becoming a member (free).
Monday, September 05, 2005
John Roberts: Dues Paying Member of Columbia House Records?
This might disqualify Mr. Roberts from appointment to the Supreme Court (funny).
Christian Carnival 85 (I'm there)
My most recent post was included as part of Christian Carnival 85, hosted by Crossroads. There's always some good writing to be found in these Carnivals, which present "hot-off-the-keyboard" blog posts submitted by various Christian bloggers.
I'd highly recommend a visit.
I'd highly recommend a visit.
Sunday, August 28, 2005
God Is A Confounder
God is a Confounder, isn't He? Now I don't mean that He isn't also infinitely gracious and compassionate as a Revealer; for through His Word He has revealed much about His purposes and ways to finite creatures such as ourselves, knowing that without that revelation, we are truly lost.
But what I mean is that just when we think that we have got Him pegged; just when we think we understand everything about His methods, or can easily predict what He'll do next, He confounds our expectations by doing or saying something quite mysterious, something we can't explain.
I was thinking about this idea, and how it relates to the formation of theology. Traditionally Christians believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God that tells the Truth about life, and shows us the Way to relate to God and man properly. Yet that Word which is such a gift to us also challenges us to interpret it accurately. And there's the rub-- it seems so many interpret so many things in it differently, yet all claim to have the right interpretation. How one interprets Scripture leads to the formation of a theology-- our understanding of who God is and how He and the universe that He created works. This in turn affects the development of the nature of our faith and also our daily life, for we act according to faith.
Now believing that there is such a thing as Truth, I believe that yes, there is a correct interpretation on most issues in the Bible-- one that our omniscient God would stamp His approval upon. But certainly we must admit that every one of us is interpreting the Bible in order to decipher its meaning and then live according to our understanding. Whatever your theology-- Pentecostal, Reformed or somewhere in between-- we as Christians read, study and interpret the Bible to the best of our ability, seeking the leading and aid of the Holy Spirit, whom Jesus promised would lead us into all Truth. We do so because this is our responsibility and privilege as believers: to rightly divide the Word of God; to defend sound, and rebuke unsound, doctrine; to be able to teach others. These are deadly serious matters-- the eternal destiny of souls requires that we listen to Jesus and hear what He is saying correctly, and help each other to do so as well.
So what are we to make of the vast differences of interpretation of Scripture, within the body of Christ, on so many issues? Why these differences anyway-- aren't we all working from the same textbook, so to speak? The Bible though, isn't like any other book. It does not offer a systematic theology, but rather presents a narrative of God's relations with humanity, using a variety of literary forms to weave its tale. And unlike other books, its truths cannot be apprehended by intellect alone, but must be revealed to us spiritually. They are rational, yes, usually logical, but also "the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God". Jesus, when asked by His disciples why he spoke in parables, gave this reply:
"To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:
"'You will indeed hear but never understand,
and you will indeed see but never perceive.
For this people's heart has grown dull,
and with their ears they can barely hear,
and their eyes they have closed,
lest they should see with their eyes
and hear with their ears
and understand with their heart
and turn, and I would heal them.'
But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. Truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it (Matthew 13: 11-17)".
The Lord was speaking of the blind religious leaders of His day, who claimed to be searching the Scriptures in order to find God and gain eternal life, but who could not see the Messiah standing in the flesh right there before their eyes. These were educated, literate, intelligent men, but they could not understand the truths of the Bible because they were hard-hearted, sinful men, unwilling to really submit themselves to the authority of the Scripture.
Likewise all who come to the Bible and to the words of Jesus must be willing to humble themselves, and become willing to do what the word says. Jesus said, "If anyone chooses to do God's will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own (John 7:17)".
So the prerequisite for basic recognition of Scripture as God's revealed word is this humble willingness. Yet to understand even more deeply the profound truths in the Word, another condition must be met. We must be born again.
"I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.' The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."
In His conversation with Nicodemus about the necessity of being born again, Nicodemus seem surprised and perplexed by the idea of being born again. Jesus went on:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life."
Jesus showed Nicodemus that being born again is a spiritual matter, one connected with believing in the Son of Man (Jesus) for eternal life. So being a Christian means to be born again of the Spirit, to receive a new type of life from the Spirit.
Then later Jesus taught His disciples that the Holy Spirit to be given them when He was gone would enable them to remember and recall all of His teaching. The Spirit would lead them into all truth by revealing the things of Christ to their understanding.
To return now to our previous theme, it seems that although Christians of many denominations share these basic understandings of the nature of spiritual truth, nevertheless controversies still remain over other important issues. For example, are miracles for today? Are prophecy and tongues valid spiritual gifts? What is the baptism of/in the Holy Spirit? How do we know God's will- does God speak to us by an internal, subjective impression, or mostly through the correct interpretation of Scripture? Or both?
On these and hundreds of other issues of biblical interpretation, there are a variety of different answers given by many groups. Now I am encouraged by the fact that Jesus promised that our teacher would be the Holy Spirit, and that Holy Spirit would faithfully lead us into all truth. At the same time, I recognize that understanding spiritual truth is a daunting task, one that calls upon the rigorous use of the mind, with all its God-like faculties of reason and logic, and at the same time, to be led by the Spirit so that I "see" truths that apparently I would never have discovered by the use of mere unaided intellect.
Sometimes the Christian answers are simple, but they are never easy. For example, the gospel message of salvation is simple, "Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures ...He was buried... He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures". But the profound nature of what took place on the Cross and how it affects every human being and how it is played out in the life of every believer in Christ is not at all simple. It requires that we spend much time in meditation on these truths, humbly entreating the Lord for insight into them by His Spirit, and asking Him daily for His grace in order to be able to apply to our lives the truths He reveals.
Perhaps because the Bible is such a profoundly deep book spiritually, and because of the effects of sin, our spiritual perception is murky, we should not be surprised that so often, human beings interpret the Bible differently from one another. There is room for all of us to mature and grow in our understanding. This of course does not mean that all interpretations are equally valid, but so often the controversies arise because of the challenging nature of the truths we are trying to figure out.
If God's word is hard to figure out, so too is He. And I like that. If He wasn't, maybe I would become proud and silly enough to think I could manipulate Him into performing my bidding. But God will have none of that. In His sovereignty, He reigns majestically over every aspect of life, completely and utterly authoritative. No one thwarts His plans. No one can force His hand. And He confounds us with His mysteries every day. Why do some prayers for healing go seemingly unanswered? Why are evil men allowed to commit their atrocities? Why does He speak to us in the way that He does? Where is He when natural disasters happen?
To all of these questions there are only partial answers given. Yet what we do know of God is also remarkable. We know that He is good. We know that He loves us with a love that is unshakeably faithful and true. We know that:
"in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 8: 37-39)".
So long as we remain in our present in-between state, no longer of the world, but not yet fully redeemed, we will continue to make some mistakes in our reading of the Bible. We will continue to wrestle with determining the meaning of difficult passages. It is a worthy endeavor and one we are responsible to do well: "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth (2 Tim 2 :15)."
Still there are times we must humbly admit our limitations, our fumbling when it comes to God's ways. We must be bold in our convictions yet meek as we admit we don't know all. With the Psalmist, we can proclaim about God's wisdom: "Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain" (Psalm 139:6).
And yet, we eagerly look forward to that Day when we will understand, when we will see and know:
"Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known (1 Cor 13: 12)."
But what I mean is that just when we think that we have got Him pegged; just when we think we understand everything about His methods, or can easily predict what He'll do next, He confounds our expectations by doing or saying something quite mysterious, something we can't explain.
I was thinking about this idea, and how it relates to the formation of theology. Traditionally Christians believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God that tells the Truth about life, and shows us the Way to relate to God and man properly. Yet that Word which is such a gift to us also challenges us to interpret it accurately. And there's the rub-- it seems so many interpret so many things in it differently, yet all claim to have the right interpretation. How one interprets Scripture leads to the formation of a theology-- our understanding of who God is and how He and the universe that He created works. This in turn affects the development of the nature of our faith and also our daily life, for we act according to faith.
Now believing that there is such a thing as Truth, I believe that yes, there is a correct interpretation on most issues in the Bible-- one that our omniscient God would stamp His approval upon. But certainly we must admit that every one of us is interpreting the Bible in order to decipher its meaning and then live according to our understanding. Whatever your theology-- Pentecostal, Reformed or somewhere in between-- we as Christians read, study and interpret the Bible to the best of our ability, seeking the leading and aid of the Holy Spirit, whom Jesus promised would lead us into all Truth. We do so because this is our responsibility and privilege as believers: to rightly divide the Word of God; to defend sound, and rebuke unsound, doctrine; to be able to teach others. These are deadly serious matters-- the eternal destiny of souls requires that we listen to Jesus and hear what He is saying correctly, and help each other to do so as well.
So what are we to make of the vast differences of interpretation of Scripture, within the body of Christ, on so many issues? Why these differences anyway-- aren't we all working from the same textbook, so to speak? The Bible though, isn't like any other book. It does not offer a systematic theology, but rather presents a narrative of God's relations with humanity, using a variety of literary forms to weave its tale. And unlike other books, its truths cannot be apprehended by intellect alone, but must be revealed to us spiritually. They are rational, yes, usually logical, but also "the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God". Jesus, when asked by His disciples why he spoke in parables, gave this reply:
"To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:
"'You will indeed hear but never understand,
and you will indeed see but never perceive.
For this people's heart has grown dull,
and with their ears they can barely hear,
and their eyes they have closed,
lest they should see with their eyes
and hear with their ears
and understand with their heart
and turn, and I would heal them.'
But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. Truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it (Matthew 13: 11-17)".
The Lord was speaking of the blind religious leaders of His day, who claimed to be searching the Scriptures in order to find God and gain eternal life, but who could not see the Messiah standing in the flesh right there before their eyes. These were educated, literate, intelligent men, but they could not understand the truths of the Bible because they were hard-hearted, sinful men, unwilling to really submit themselves to the authority of the Scripture.
Likewise all who come to the Bible and to the words of Jesus must be willing to humble themselves, and become willing to do what the word says. Jesus said, "If anyone chooses to do God's will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own (John 7:17)".
So the prerequisite for basic recognition of Scripture as God's revealed word is this humble willingness. Yet to understand even more deeply the profound truths in the Word, another condition must be met. We must be born again.
"I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.' The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."
In His conversation with Nicodemus about the necessity of being born again, Nicodemus seem surprised and perplexed by the idea of being born again. Jesus went on:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life."
Jesus showed Nicodemus that being born again is a spiritual matter, one connected with believing in the Son of Man (Jesus) for eternal life. So being a Christian means to be born again of the Spirit, to receive a new type of life from the Spirit.
Then later Jesus taught His disciples that the Holy Spirit to be given them when He was gone would enable them to remember and recall all of His teaching. The Spirit would lead them into all truth by revealing the things of Christ to their understanding.
To return now to our previous theme, it seems that although Christians of many denominations share these basic understandings of the nature of spiritual truth, nevertheless controversies still remain over other important issues. For example, are miracles for today? Are prophecy and tongues valid spiritual gifts? What is the baptism of/in the Holy Spirit? How do we know God's will- does God speak to us by an internal, subjective impression, or mostly through the correct interpretation of Scripture? Or both?
On these and hundreds of other issues of biblical interpretation, there are a variety of different answers given by many groups. Now I am encouraged by the fact that Jesus promised that our teacher would be the Holy Spirit, and that Holy Spirit would faithfully lead us into all truth. At the same time, I recognize that understanding spiritual truth is a daunting task, one that calls upon the rigorous use of the mind, with all its God-like faculties of reason and logic, and at the same time, to be led by the Spirit so that I "see" truths that apparently I would never have discovered by the use of mere unaided intellect.
Sometimes the Christian answers are simple, but they are never easy. For example, the gospel message of salvation is simple, "Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures ...He was buried... He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures". But the profound nature of what took place on the Cross and how it affects every human being and how it is played out in the life of every believer in Christ is not at all simple. It requires that we spend much time in meditation on these truths, humbly entreating the Lord for insight into them by His Spirit, and asking Him daily for His grace in order to be able to apply to our lives the truths He reveals.
Perhaps because the Bible is such a profoundly deep book spiritually, and because of the effects of sin, our spiritual perception is murky, we should not be surprised that so often, human beings interpret the Bible differently from one another. There is room for all of us to mature and grow in our understanding. This of course does not mean that all interpretations are equally valid, but so often the controversies arise because of the challenging nature of the truths we are trying to figure out.
If God's word is hard to figure out, so too is He. And I like that. If He wasn't, maybe I would become proud and silly enough to think I could manipulate Him into performing my bidding. But God will have none of that. In His sovereignty, He reigns majestically over every aspect of life, completely and utterly authoritative. No one thwarts His plans. No one can force His hand. And He confounds us with His mysteries every day. Why do some prayers for healing go seemingly unanswered? Why are evil men allowed to commit their atrocities? Why does He speak to us in the way that He does? Where is He when natural disasters happen?
To all of these questions there are only partial answers given. Yet what we do know of God is also remarkable. We know that He is good. We know that He loves us with a love that is unshakeably faithful and true. We know that:
"in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 8: 37-39)".
So long as we remain in our present in-between state, no longer of the world, but not yet fully redeemed, we will continue to make some mistakes in our reading of the Bible. We will continue to wrestle with determining the meaning of difficult passages. It is a worthy endeavor and one we are responsible to do well: "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth (2 Tim 2 :15)."
Still there are times we must humbly admit our limitations, our fumbling when it comes to God's ways. We must be bold in our convictions yet meek as we admit we don't know all. With the Psalmist, we can proclaim about God's wisdom: "Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain" (Psalm 139:6).
And yet, we eagerly look forward to that Day when we will understand, when we will see and know:
"Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known (1 Cor 13: 12)."
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Scorecard on Justice Sunday II
My thinking about what Steve Camp calls "Evangelical Co-Belligerence" had been challenged by reading posts from his websites, CampOnThis and AudienceOne. Camp is certainly impassioned (to make an understatement) on this subject, and believes that not only are evangelical events such as Justice Sunday II misguided and wrong-headed, but its leaders are actually sinning, because according to his arguments such events:
1- use an approach to fighting evils in society not endorsed by Scripture.
2- use the pulpit to make political points, but such points are not being made in the context of worshiping God and instructing the congregation biblically about how it should engage culture.
3- distract the Church from being true to its primary calling of preaching the gospel and bringing its members to full maturity as disciples in Christ.
It was with such thoughts running through my mind that I sat down to watch the broadcast of Justice Sunday II on TBN this past Sunday evening.
The event was held at a church (Two Rivers Baptist Church in Nashville, TN), and on a Sunday, so it does seem that at least for this particular night, the church's evening service was being co-opted and turned into a political rally. Apparently, the evening opened up with praise and worship singing, such as would happen at a typical service, but this was not broadcast. In any case, what followed was definitely more a political event than a worship service. Here Camp's criticism seems valid. Is it right to turn the evening service of a church into a political rally?
There were calls to prayer made by various speakers at JS II. Yet it was my impression that the overall challenge was to political (call your Senators, call the White House, write letters, etc.) rather than spiritual action (pray for your leaders, repent, submit to authorities, etc.). Political activity must be part of the solution to America's woes, but is it not far more important that believers should first pray for their leaders as instructed, and be led by example into such prayer by their leaders? For the ultimate solution is not in political activities, which can only change laws, but in the gospel, which alone brings about transformation of the heart. So prayer, together with a clear presentation of the gospel message, must be central to our efforts to engage and change culture. Here again the JSII score card is mixed-- though there was some prayer and calls to prayer, the context emphasized praying for the political stratagems regarding the immediate issues at hand (John Roberts' confirmation to the Supreme Court; a Federal judiciary that should interpret the Constitution, rather than legislate from the bench). But if our nation's primary problems are spiritual in nature, then the Church should first be calling itself and the United States to repentance. As for the gospel, why did one not hear it presented throughout this evening?
Most of the speakers were given only a few minutes each to make their points. I understand the thinking behind this is probably that including as many speakers as possible at this type of event will help convey that this "fight for justice" has a broad range of support, but the limitations on speaker time was conducive to superficiality of commentary. I would have liked to have heard a deeper analysis from these leaders as to the problem, and a clearer presentation of the biblical and theological rationale for their solution. But mostly there was only time for "sound bites", though some of the speakers were more effective and eloquent than others. James Dobson (participating via a taped video) spoke articulately about recent Supreme Court decisions to justify why Christians need to be involved in the political process; Chuck Colson referred to a passage of Scripture from the prophet Amos to effectively make points about Christian involvement in justice, and I thought Senate House Majority Leader Tom Delay gave a good speech that challenged listeners, "it's never enough to stand on the sidelines and watch history pass you by."
Unfortunately some of the other speakers weren't as good. Bill Donahue of the Catholic League came across as angry (though trying to be humorous) as he named names and called one of them a bigot. In contrast to Chuck Colson, who had earlier said that we must suppress the temptation to get angry at the opposition and instead demonstrate Christian love towards all, Donahue's speech seemed petty, an "us vs. them” type of speech.
Zell Miller, the former Senator, is a rousing speaker and had one of the more memorable points of the evening. He asked why is it that government makes sure to post “No Smoking” signs near gas pumps as a warning of physical danger, yet removes the Ten Commandments from public places-- which gives the even more urgent warning about the dangers of a sinful life.
As I was watching here in NY, there was a storm raging outside, affecting my satellite television reception. So I seemed to have missed portions of the broadcast, including the remarks of Phyllis Schafly and Cathy Cleaver Ruse, which I understand from the live bloggers I've read were part of the evening. I also did not see the performance by musician Jett Williams (perhaps all these were edited from the broadcast)?
Analysis
Political rallies such as Justice Sunday II probably have their place in helping to galvanize Christian awareness and action on important current issues, but I am uneasy about the mix of religion with politics, and agree with Camp and other critics about the potential for compromise of the gospel message and its priorities. Also, such an event should be able to take place without substituting for a church's scheduled evening service.
On the other hand, I agree with the need and call for action that evangelical co-belligerents challenge us to. Still the warnings of Camp and others like him seem need to be taken seriously in the light of the scorecard of Justice Sunday II: no presentation of the gospel, no prayer for leaders, little biblical rationale presented for action, a church service turned primarily into a political rally.
An excellent and insightful editorial appears on this topic, by Tom Ascol, appears in The Founders Journal, titled Reformation, Revival and the Religious Right.
I quote from the article below:
<< It is not that the agenda of the religious right is too radical. It is not radical enough. They greatly underestimate the depth of the problem. We cannot "Christianize" culture. The nature of sin guarantees that. Neither are we called to try! Did Jesus or Peter or Paul ever try to organize believers into a voting bloc to "Christianize" any geo-political structure? Culture can and will be positively influenced when its participants are made disciples of Christ.
The moral crisis in our nation will not be solved by getting the right people in the White House, Congress, and on the Supreme Court. Society will not change until people change. And the only way that people can be changed is by the sovereign power of God through the gospel of Jesus Christ. Consequently, proclaiming that gospel in the power of the Spirit is the task to which churches must give themselves. This constitutes the only great commission which we have received from Jesus Christ.
The moral decadence of this generation has a spiritual root. As long as evangelical churches overlook this fact or fail to absorb its implications, they will continue to be seduced by worldly wisdom in their sincere but misguided efforts to "make a difference." Alexis de Tocqueville was prophetic when he warned that if America ever ceased being good, she would cease being great. But why has America lost her goodness? Is it because we have elected the wrong people? Because we outlawed prayer in the public schools? Because we have passed immoral laws? No. These are symptoms, not causes. The reason, very simply stated by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, is that "America has forgotten God."
But we must push the question even further. Why has America forgotten God? Whose job is it to speak for God, anyway? Not the schools; not the government; not the culture. That responsibility has been given exclusively to the Church. The sad reality is that the Church--including Bible believing evangelicals--has been derelict in her duty. Our nation is in a mess because our churches are in a mess. >>
I don't think the choice we as Evangelicals face is between engagement and non-engagement. As my brother Daniel has said on this, "we cannot simply run and hide behind our religion". Unlike the church in New Testament times, we live in a democratic republic that allows us opporunity to speak out for the Christian worldview.
I quote here Francis Schaeffer in his speech titled A Christian Manifesto, on true spirituality:
<< ... what I have been talking about, whether you know it or not, is true spirituality. This is true spirituality. Spirituality, after you are a Christian and have accepted Christ as your Savior, means that Christ is the Lord of ALL your life -- not just your religious life, and if you make a dichotomy in these things, you are denying your Lord His proper place. I don't care how many butterflies you have in your stomach, you are poor spiritually. True spirituality means that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Lord of all of life, and except for the things that He has specifically told us in the Bible are sinful and we've set them aside -- all of life is spiritual and all of life is equally spiritual. That includes (as our forefathers did) standing for these things of freedom and standing for these things of human life and all these other matters that are so crucial, if indeed, this living God does exist as we know that He does exist.
We have forgotten our heritage. A lot of the evangelical complex like to talk about the old revivals and they tell us we ought to have another revival. We nee another revival -- you and I need revival. We need another revival in our hearts. But they have forgotten something. Most of the Christians have forgotten and most of the pastors have forgotten something. That is the factor that every single revival that has ever been a real revival, whether it was the great awakening before the American Revolution; whether it was the great revivals of Scandinavia; whether it was Wesley and Whitefield; wherever you have found a great revival, it's always had three parts. First, it has called for the individual to accept Christ as Savior, and thankfully, in all of these that I have named, thousands have been saved. Then, it has called upon the Christians to bow their hearts to God and really let the Holy Spirit have His place in fullness in their life. But there has always been, in every revival, a third element. It has always brought SOCIAL CHANGE!”
The problem with the current Evangelical Co-Belligerence movement is that while it emphasizes actions we can take in response to problems such as judicial activism, abortion, gay marriage, etc., it has not yet helped to usher in that great reformation and revival of heart in the Church that would bring about the deeper social impact that Schaeffer writes about. It seems to "put the cart ahead of the horse", wanting true spiritual results without the prerequisite spiritual transformation. The movement seems to be superficial.
Again quoting Schaeffer, from his book True Spirituality, chapter one:
"The inward area is the first place of loss of true Christian life, of true spirituality, and the outward sinful act is the result. If we can only get hold of this -- that the internal is the basic, the external is always merely the result -- it will be a tremendous starting place."
So we have a responsibility first, to be good Christians: true disciples who love God with all of our hearts, souls, mind and strength; and second, who love our neighbor as ourselves. From the overflow of reformation and revival in the Christian community that comes through repentance in response to the gospel, we will be transformed, and that inner transformation will in turn move us to impact society in a more penetrating way.
Friday, August 12, 2005
Back from Vacation Into a Heat Wave
I'm back and will be posting my regular kind of stuff again shortly. But tonight, I'll just share a bit about where I've been these past few weeks. We've come right back into the middle of a heat wave here in the NYC area, and temperatures are suffocatingly hot --in the 90's-- but add to that the famous NY humidity and bad air quality and you can imagine how miserable it feels here-- except when you're inside, camped out under the AC. Well, I'm thankful we had a chance to breathe fresh mountain air up in the Smoky Mountains for almost a week and a half.
We were at my wife's family reunion, whose primary hosts were the Fees (Gordon and Miriam Jean). They were kind enough to let us stay at their mountain condo--situated between Pigeon Forge and Gatlinburg-- for our entire stay. With a pool right outside the door, a lovely view of the mountains from the terrace, good air-conditioning, fresh air and lots of quiet, it was a very relaxing place getaway. Thank you Gordon and Miriam Jean!
The Fee's son, David, is rather a well-known name in Pigeon Forge. He owns and manages a couple of entertainment businesses -- The Comedy Barn and Black Bear Jamboree, as well as a restaurant called Happy Days Diner. Since he owns them, we were invited to see these shows and eat at the diner afterward free of charge. We also went to a couple of other popular shows, the Dixie Stampede and Dollywood, as guests of the Fees. Thanks again!
Pigeon Forge and Gatlinburg are interesting towns-- together they comprise kind of a smaller, family-oriented Las Vegas, with entertainment featuring "hillbilly" humor, bluegrass, gospel, racing carts, and amusement parks, and with tons of places to eat. Gatlinburg seems to have more shops and art galleries, while Pigeon Forge was marked by its central "strip" featuring the various entertainments mentioned above.
Traffic on the strip moves along at a stately 35 miles an hour-- it seems the pace of life is a bit slower than that of New York. So it was nice to get away, though I did get a bit tired and stressed at times from all the driving.
Anyway, it's good to be back home. If you visited my blog while I was away, I hope you found something that blessed, or at least entertained you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)