Surinity Now!

Is universal sterilization the end goal of environmentalism?

2010-06-08T16:32:00.004-04:00

Environmentalism leads to universal sterilization. Seems like quite a jump, doesn't it? And yes, it is. The average environmentalist is well-intentioned and has a deep caring for the earth and humanity. We simply want to see people make positive choices that benefit all of creation, not decisions that bring short-term rewards but hurt the world in the long-run.

However, an opinion article from the New York Times (HT: Joe) reveals that this could be another realistic, albeit disturbing, route for some environmentalists.

Over the past few months I've written a few posts (Here and Here) about a trend I've noticed among some environmentalists that depicts humanity as a problem for the earth - a species the world would be better off without. I hadn't thought about it to this degree before, but in light of the NYT article, it does make perfect sense that a push for universal sterilization would be the logical conclusion of this point of view: if humanity is bad for the planet, then let's do away with humanity, right?

Hopefully Christians can begin to embrace a better view of environmentalism - one that promotes taking care of the earth (rather than the "this place is going down one day anyway" mentality), AND holds a positive view of humanity's role in creation.

Yes, humans are responsible for a great deal of evils against the planet (e.g. the oil spill in the gulf, extinction of a number of species due to over-hunting or destruction of habitats, smog, etc...), but that does not mean humanity is, by necessity, bad for the planet. Nor does it mean that humanity must be done away with. If we can hold to a view that promotes humanity and the planet, perhaps we can come to realize that when we live as we were intended to, both we and the earth are better off.

My All Conclusive Lost Theory

2010-05-24T11:18:00.008-04:00

Lost is finally over. When I began watching this show I longed for the day when it would be over - when I would finally understand what in the world had been going on. Well, as I should have expected, now that the finale has come and gone I am STILL wondering what just happened!

The debate as to whether or not the series finale was a satisfying end to the show is now under way. Personally I was pleased with the ending and found it fitting. From others, I've heard everything from "It was beautiful" to "it was utterly disappointing." And I can't even begin to count how many times I've seen the phrase, "I told you so" on message boards from all of the Lost haters out there - those who have sat just on the outside of the hysteria pointing in at all of us Lost fanatics wondering, not about the island, but rather just what exactly was wrong with all of us!

I'm not going to attempt to give a commentary on the ending itself - I think this article did that quite nicely. Instead, I want to attempt to do what the series finale did not - answer the questions, because I believe enough bread-crumbs were laid out along the way to do just that. So, without further ado, here is my all conclusive Lost theory: (And I shouldn't even have to say it, but consider yourself spoiler-alerted!)

The Island:

The Island is the heart of the show, and any theory of what was going on must revolve around this one fact. I'm going to say this up front, the island was real. The characters on the island were never dead, it was not purgatory. If at this point you're still thinking that then, I'm sorry, but you just weren't paying attention.

But the island was special. What we know for sure is that at the heart of the island there's a light which is also associated with power and electromagnetism. Somehow it turned the Man in Black into a raging smoke monster, and tapping into it caused the "incident" that forced the creation of the Dharma Swan Station and the pushing of a button every 108 minutes. Tapping into this with the wheel at the bottom of the Orchid also was able to move the island and its inhabitants through time and space.

We also know that a common phenomenon on the island was hearing whispers, which were later revealed to be the voices of the dead who were unable to move on. In addition to this, there are several occurrences throughout the show of a dead person appearing to a living person, not to mention Hurley being able to see and talk with the dead, and Miles being able to hear the final thoughts of the dead.

What seems clear to me is that the nature of the island has to do with life and death. I believe that the island is actually supposed to be the gateway between life and the afterlife. Just consider the cliche of the light itself. How many so-called near-death experiences involve seeing a bright light? How many stories of the afterlife involve someone saying, "just go toward the light?"

The light at the heart of the island is "the light" of the cliche. This is why the whispers happen - for whatever reason, some people just can't make it to the light..

The Flash-Sideways:

The island being a gateway between life and the afterlife also explains the flash-sideways. As revealed in the final moments of the finale, the too-good-to-be-true flash-sideways timeline was also some sort of hereafter for the castaways where they struggled with their inner demons and/or lived the life they had always wanted to.

In their final conversation, Jack's father Christian essentially tells him that where they are, there is no time, so the people he's with could have died before him, or well after him. They then go into the church (the Dharma Lamp Post, the station that determined when and where the island was) and have their reunion. Some of the characters had talked about "leaving" prior to this, Christian calls it moving on. While everyone sits in the pews of the church, Christian walks into the light.

I believe Christian entering the light is supposed to symbolize some sort of reincarnation or rebirth. Again, "the light" plays a key role, and I think it's the same light that's at the heart of the island. Had Jack not fixed the light, Christian's, or anyone else's, moving on would not have been possible. This is why the events on the island were so important to the events of the flash-sideways. Without fixing the light, Jack would never have been reunited with his friends.

Time Travel:

Christian's comments about there not being time in the flash-sideways also explains the time-travel that was the driving force of Season 5, other "flashes" in time that occurred throughout the series, the fact that time on the island was different, and even the fact that the island could move through time and space.

If there is no normal sense of time in the flash-sideways, or afterlife, and the light is the gateway to the afterlife, then there would be no sense of time in the light either. So remember that all occurrences of time-travel or time variance in the show had something to do with the light. When Desmond's consciousness traveled through time, it was because of exposure to the light via turning the key in the Swan (remember the sky turning purple?). When the island moved through space and many of the characters began flashing through time, it was because Ben turned a wheel that was tapped into the light. When the second plane flew over the island and Jack, Kate, Hurley and Sayid were sent back to 1977, they were accompanied by flashes of light. Finally, when Juliet set off the H-Bomb at the site of the Swan (where they were attempting to tap into a pocket of energy, or the light), there was a flash of light and the characters were sent back to their original time.

This all makes sense of there is no time associated with the light. Tapping into the light, or messing with the light, would easily result in jumping through time because time would not flow consistently in a place where it didn't exist. I believe Christian Shepherd's comments to Jack at the end of the show were more telling than we might have realized.

(SIDEBAR: As for Juliet saying, "it worked!" in the Season 6 premiere. I don't think she was talking about the H-Bomb. Instead, I think at that point she was already "seeing" the flash-sideways and the line "it worked" was in reference to Sawyer unplugging the vending machine in the flash sideways to get the Apollo Bar. "It worked" was part of the same conversation in which Juliet said, "We should get coffee sometime, we can go dutch.")

The Island's Protector:

If the light at the heart of the island is not only the gateway to the afterlife, but is also so powerful, and potentially destructive, then it makes sense to have a protector. Obviously Jacob was not the first such protector, nor, I would assume, was his so-called mother. Unfortunately, the identity of the first protector cannot be known or accurately guessed at. Was there a higher power deciding? Did this higher power set up this protection system? If so, why? And who made the rules?

I don't think we can know these things. All we can know is that this system has been around for quite a long time. It was clear from the events of his birth that Jacob came from ancient Rome (his mother speaking Latin, styles of ships, tools and clothing, the nature of the Man in Black's dagger). So Jacob likely was the island's protector for around 2,000 years.

It sure seems like the island's protector was given some special abilities (long-life, control over who comes to the island, etc...). Some of the candidates for the next protector also had abilities, such as Hurley being able to communicate with the dead. Perhaps this explains why Walt was "special," he was a candidate and was given a special ability.

The Egyptian icons all around the island, including the statue, the writings in the temple, and even the game that Jacob and the Man in Black play indicate that there had been a protector at least as long ago as the ancient Egyptian empire. These themes might also give a clue to another of the island's mysteries.

The Cork:

In the finale, Desmond is lowered into the heart of the island where he pulls a cork out of a pool, threatening to make the island sink. The cork itself appears to be a carved stone covered with Egyptian Hieroglyphics. This begs the question, did the Egyptians make the cork? If so, and the light indeed is a gateway between life and the afterlife, then did the Egyptians somehow make this gateway? If so, how? Or did they simply leave their mark on the cork, or maybe even create a new cork? If so, how were they able to do this?

Again, these are questions that can't have definite answers. My theory is that the Egyptians knew some secrets of the island that were forgotten over time - secrets that Jacob didn't even know, especially since it appears from the final episodes that Jacob was clueless about a lot of things.

The bigger question, though, is what was the cork holding back?

Evil Forces:

When Desmond pulls the cork out of the pool, the water is drained and the bright, yellow glow turns red. To me, this seems like fairly clear imagery of Hell - the fact that Jacob tells Richard that the island is like a cork holding back Hell, I don't think that idea is such a stretch.

But what are the implications of this? Again, if the island is the gateway between life and the afterlife, then does removing the cork and opening up Hell mean that the gateway becomes a gateway to Hell? Or is it rather giving Hell an opportunity to escape and come to earth? Once again, I don't think that we can know the answer for sure, but I'd lean more toward the latter, and I think the Man in Black gives us more clues about this.

The Man in Black:

The Man in Black, or the Smoke Monster, is the villain of the series, even though we didn't realize it until the start of the final season (or the end of the 5th season if you were clever enough to figure it out). What we didn't learn until the episode "Across the Sea," however, was that the Man in Black used to be a regular human being who was turned into the Smoke Monster by being thrown into the heart of the island. What happened when he entered this place? We'll never know. What we do know is that he emerged seemingly unstoppable, having the ability to change shape and take the form of deceased people, and that he was bent on the destruction of the island.

The Man in Black plays the part of a deceiver, tempting anyone he could to help him in his plot to overthrow the protector of the island and ultimately destroy the island itself so that he could leave. His role in the series seems like a strong analogy for the devil, who is already condemned but is nevertheless trying to take as many people as he can down with him. I'm not sure that the creators of the show were trying to say that the Man in Black was the devil, but rather were setting him up in a devil sort of position. Would it be possible for another smoke monster to be created by throwing another person into the heart of the island? Who knows? But the fact that Jacob's mother said that to go into the heart of the island would be worse than death might indicate that it had happened to someone before.

The Island after the show:

While the show ended with Jack finally fixing things (repairing the light), and allowing his friends to go safely home, this was not the end of the island. Instead, Hurley became the island's protector with Ben as his assistant. We can only speculate what happened after this. I would imagine that like Jacob and Richard, Hurley and Ben experienced extraordinarily long life. I would also imagine that, like Ben suggested, Hurley ran things differently than Jacob did. It became clear toward the end of the series that Jacob did not have all the answers. While there might have been certain rules that he had to obey, and Hurley would have to as well, it seems as though it would be possible to run the island differently than Jacob had. I would hope that Hurley did things, as Ben said, better than Jacob did.

I would also imagine that Hurley still ran into problems. Perhaps a new smoke monster emerged. Perhaps groups of people continued to come to the island and try to tap into it's power. As is evidenced by the fact that Hurley and Ben ended up in the flash-sideways, they clearly did not live on the island forever. So either they voluntarily passed their duties on to someone else, or they, like Jacob, were overthrown. As with many of the other questions, this can't really be known, unless of course, the writers decide to create a Lost spinoff... but somehow I doubt it!

Music Love to Music Eh?

2010-05-18T16:42:00.003-04:00

I was reading this article on Relevant's website about, well, I'm not sure what. I stopped about 5 paragraphs in, where he starts talking about what kind of music he likes, when I realized that my love for music has simply waned in the past few years.

There was a time, probably High School and College, when I bought new CD's on a very regular basis. I soaked in music, went to concerts frequently, had conversations regularly about bands I liked, wore band t-shirts and on and on.

These days I mostly just listen to ESPN Radio.

I don't think it's that I don't connect with a lot of newer music. That's not it at all. The truth is, I never much cared for Top-40 radio and always preferred either bands not many people had heard of, or at least B-side tracks that never played on the radio. So what I think my musical drought boils down to is effort.

When you don't care for the mainstream artists, finding music you like is hard work. It means reading articles, wading through hours of bad music to find a few gems, asking people what they're listening to lately, etc... It takes a lot of time and energy. If you don't spend it, you end up listening to the Top-40 stuff, getting bored of your old collection, or doing what I've been doing, listening to talk-radio instead.

So maybe it's time I started doing a little musical homework once again... any suggestions?

Making sense of Revelation

2010-05-16T21:30:00.005-04:00

For some time I've wanted to take a stab at seriously studying the book of Revelation - but with my mind more on the present than in the future. In the church tradition I come from, Revelation is pretty much only discussed in terms of the future, sometimes with curious speculation, and sometimes with paranoid predictions about how the end will come and what hot-button political figure it will involve. Either way, the conversation doesn't lend itself to much present day application.

I have to believe, though, that in light of a firm conviction that all Scripture is useful, not to mention a word up front from John that, "Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy," (Rev. 1:3) that if we could set aside for a moment the obsession with the future, that we could find a lot more ways to apply this book. It makes me wonder how much edification we've missed out on.

So tonight I started a study on this book with my youth group where our main concern will be moving from simply curiosity about the future to application for the present. I'll try and remember to let you know how it goes.

N.T. Wright announces retirement

2010-04-27T15:17:00.003-04:00

Bishop N.T. Wright announced his retirement as the bishop of Durham. It looks like he'll still being teaching publicly and writing books, and will make a return to university teaching. It will be interesting to see what kind of impact this has on his writing.

Fine, here's a real post!

2009-09-21T11:20:00.003-04:00

Okay, after typing that last post I realized that after a month of non-posting it just wasn't right to merely post that I haven't been posting. Wow, what a crazy, mixed-up sentence!

Anyway, last night in youth group I taught about how God is both infinitely big and beyond us (transcendent) and incredibly close and deeply interested in each of us (immanent). We had small groups at the end and one of the High School guys made the comment that he was driving on the highway with his family recently and had this realization that God intimately knows every person in every one of the other cars around him. He said that his family talked about that for a few minutes and how cool it is that God can know us all so well.

And suddenly it occurred to me that even though God's transcendence and immanence almost seem like a contradiction, the truth is that it is only because God is transcendent that he is able to be immanent! I mean, I'm capable of knowing the names of maybe a few hundred people, maybe a thousand or so, and I'm capable of being friends with a good number of people and closely knowing a handful of them. But God is capable of knowing absolutely every detail about every person who ever was, is and will be (well, even if you're a free will theist you've at least got to admit that God will eventually know every detail about the people who, at this point, will be!).

If God were not transcendent - if he were not completely beyond our human capacities - then he woudln't even have the ability to be immanent with all of us.

It's pretty amazing.

Wow

2009-09-21T11:07:00.000-04:00

I really haven't posted in quite a while... sorry about that.

Here we go again

2009-08-18T16:24:00.004-04:00

Apparently Brett Favre just won't give up... or won't go away. I'm not really sure which one anymore. Only a few weeks after announcing he's done with professional football for good (again), Favre reneged and signed a deal with the Vikings.

You may be thinking, "But wait, hasn't the preseason already begun? There's no way that Brett, at 39 years of age could be ready for the upcoming NFL season!" Ah, but there's no need to worry, because, to quote the ESPN.com article:

"Favre has been working out regularly with Oak Grove High school players in Hattiesburg, according to WDAM-TV, and has not missed a practice even after telling the Vikings he would remain retired."

The thing is, Brett, practicing with High School players might get you ready to play the Lions, but there are still 14 other games against REAL NFL players to worry about!

I like what the article goes on to report about Aaron Rodger's reaction:

"Aaron Rodgers, who inherited the starting quarterback position after Favre retired -- then unretired -- said, "I don't have a reaction," the Journal Sentinel reported. "It doesn't pertain to me. It has absolutely nothing to do with me. It doesn't change anything. It has nothing to do with the Green Bay Packers.""

I might go ahead and add, "It has nothing to do with the entire NFL!" I predict Favre and the Vikings make very little impact on the NFL this year and finish in the middle of the NFC North.

Teaching ideas?

2009-08-17T13:27:00.002-04:00

I'm working on some devotionals/teachings for an upcoming weekend camping trip with my youth group. There will be three lessons total. Any ideas for topics? I have a few, but I'm having a hard time settling on one. So I thought I'd fish for some ideas and see if I get anything I like better. So... shoot.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Craig Ferguson

2009-08-05T12:44:00.003-04:00

Craig Ferguson explains where Western Society went wrong... and how we ended up falling in love with the Jonas Brothers.

When you get creation wrong...

2009-08-01T11:00:00.000-04:00

A few weeks ago I wrote about how there's a disturbing trend in environmentalism that humanity is the problem. Well, I came across another example of it the other day in the form of a song by Dan Le Sac vs. Scroobius Pip titled A Letter from God to Man. I'm not including the official video here because I want the emphasis to be on the lyrics:

Ignoring the many theological issues that arise in this song, the part I'm taking issue with is the last line, "My apology is to mother nature, because I created you." The song depicts the beauty of creation and rightly points the finger at humanity for messing it up. But once again, it draws the wrong conclusion: that the solution is a world free from humanity. This song even goes as far as to depict God regretting he even made a being in his image in the first place.

The more I think about this, the more I realize why they come to this false conclusion that man is the problem. They're starting in the wrong place.

You see, the over-arching narrative of Scripture is Creation, Fall, Redemption. God created the world and it was very good, but humanity sinned, causing all of creation to fall. Fortunately, however, God's ultimate plan is the restoration of humanity and creation.

This song, and the quote from my previous blog post, clearly get redemption out of whack. They see the only hope for redeeming creation to be the extinction of humanity. (Ironically, this is the exact opposite of many Christians who see the only hope for redeeming humanity to be the extinction of creation).

And while it's clear that redemption is out of whack in this line of thinking, I think the reason for it is that the view of creation was out of whack first. Genesis 1 teaches us not only that God created the universe, but that he created it good. In fact, with humanity finally in the picture he called it VERY good. This opening scene of Scripture not only tells us where we're beginning, it also tells us where we're heading. If creation, including humanity, was created to be very good, then we should expect that in the end God's plan is for a creation, including humanity, that is very good.

The error the song makes, though, is that it doesn't view God as much of a creator at all. Rather, it sees God as a helpless being that just happened to be the one to throw everything together. He had no plan, in fact, he was taken by surprise at everything that happened. If this was your view of the creator, of course you'd have no hope he could restore anything - it's a miracle he even managed to make anything in the first place!

The quote from the previous post also gets creation wrong because it assumes creation was at its best before humanity came into the picture. But again, Scripture tells a different story. It reveals a creation that was not complete, was not VERY good, until humanity was there to take care of it.

When your view of creation, however, is that God made it, that he made it very good, and that he had a plan for it all along, then your view of the end changes. You realize that a God who could make something like that must also be able to ultimately bring about restoration - a restoration that includes all things. You realize that there is hope for a future that not only redeems what once was in Eden, but even exceeds it. And you can read the end of the story, Revelation 21 and 22, and not only see hope for humanity, but hope for all of creation as well.

Is love really that difficult?

2009-07-31T00:39:00.004-04:00

Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

1 John 4:7-12

How simple would it be for us to just live by this? God loves us, he shows his love through Christ and his sacrifice, we accept this as God's love for us, and so we respond by loving each other.

Does Christianity really have to be as difficult as we make it out to be? Should living out the love of Christ really be so difficult?

I get tired of Christianity being about who's right and who's wrong. John told us that if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us. In other words, it doesn't matter if we're right if we aren't living what we say we believe. Our believing should lead to loving, or we should seriously question whether or not we actually believe.

Sometimes I forget that this is what it's really all about. We can try to get everything in order so that on the outside it looks like we're amazing Christians. But if we don't actually love others, then we totally missed the point.

I don't think I could say it any better than my former theology professor, Dr. Wittmer, "Genuine Christians never stop serving because they never stop loving, and they never stop loving because they never stop believing."

Why I haven't been blogging lately

2009-07-28T18:34:00.004-04:00

When I started this blog I was a very occasional blogger. Then last year in February I decided that for Lent I would blog every single day. I think I only missed once, and then from that point on I always tried to blog at least 2 or 3 times per week.

But in the past few months I've trailed off quite a bit. Today's post will only be the third post for this entire month. And so now I'm officially in a rut.

When you blog a lot you get a lot more hits on your site... or as I like to refer to them, self-esteem boosters! Just kidding, although, there is some truth to that. Frequent blogging leads to frequent viewers, which means it's worth blogging because people actually read it. Now that I haven't blogged in ages, only a small handful of people will even see this post. Kind of makes me wonder why I'm bothering with it.

But that leads back to the title of this post... why did I trail off on the blogging in the first place? In part it began because I was getting too busy with the final weeks of my seminary education plus the pursuit of a job in ministry. But I also did a lot of introspection on the whole blogging process.

I came to the conclusion that I spread out my time too much. I invest into quite a bit of things that I really enjoy, and as the saying goes, "A jack of all trades is a master of none." In other words, I wasn't allowing myself to be truly great at any one thing because I was content being okay at a lot of things.

Now, I do consider writing to be one of my strong suits. It comes quite naturally to me and I think I express myself through written word better than I do through oral communication. So it might seem like blogging should be a priority for me, and at one time it was. When I started this thing I had the grand idea that it would serve as the jumping off point for a book or some other serious attempt at writing.

But what I've come to realize is that the opposite has become true. First of all, with a blog I'm forced to censor myself, I can't just freely write what comes to mind like I could with a journal. Not that I'm afraid to share my views, but I do want a certain level of comfort in what I share in a public forum. Secondly, a blog becomes more about generating hits and moderating discussions than it does about simply writing. And finally, when you read or write a blog, the style is altogether different then with a book or other form. Blog readers seem to like short pieces - even if when handed a 700 page book they'd mow it down like a pack of Skittles. In fact, I'm impressed if you've gotten this far. Thus, this is hardly preparation for writing a book or a novel because I'm not practicing the same type of writing.

And so with that, I'm honestly not sure I WANT to continue blogging. I enjoy the freedom that not blogging offers me. And I would love to commit my time to writing something I feel would be more worthwhile.

On the other hand, I do somewhat enjoy this. But if I were to continue, I'm convinced I need to be more focused. I can't just write whatever comes to mind. I'd love to have a blog that was more theme driven, such as blogging about being in ministry, or specifically youth ministry, or maybe celebrity gossip. Okay I definitely won't be taking on that last subject... but the others might have some potential.

10 Years

2009-07-18T23:22:00.002-04:00

I just got back from my 10-year High School reunion. It was a fun, and yet somewhat awkward, time.

Four or five years ago I wanted to go to my 10-year reunion for the stereotypical reason of proving to everyone that I'd grown beyond the person I was in High School. I wanted to show these people that I wasn't the socially awkward geek they once knew. And I guess there was a piece in there that wanted some of them to have not turned out so well so I could say I turned out better.

But in the last few years I've grown more. I've grown to the point where it honestly doesn't matter to me what everyone thinks and to the point where I really just want to see that my former classmates turned out happy and successful.

I was a little nervous heading to the reunion because I wasn't sure who was going to be there and I have some good friend who I knew for sure wouldn't (you know who you are :P). When I got there, though, I was happy to run into some old friends from Cross Country and we ended up hanging out for most of the night. In some ways it was just like old times, but it was good to see that things have changed too - no living in the past and regretting lost youth.

So now that I've had the chance to see everyone again, I think I'll be more excited for the next reunion - well, not excited for another 10-years to go by, necessarily, but at least not nervous about what to expect. And to anyone debating whether or not they'd like to go to their class reunion, I would say, please, go, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Change of Pace

2009-07-02T22:13:00.002-04:00

I haven't blogged much in the last few months. I think that seminary really got my thought process going - sometimes in an overwhelming way - and my blog served as a great outlet for that while I was in school. But now that I've graduated I feel like I've gone into a lull. It's like after 4 years of forcing my brain into overdrive it is finally demanding some time off, and I don't think that's such a bad thing.

But soon things will have to turn around again. I recently accepted a new position in youth ministry and I'm really excited about it. This will mean a move back to Kalamazoo for my wife and I. It also means we're finally going to be home owners! We put in an offer on a house, got a counter back and accepted it. We really love the place and we're praying that everything works out so we can make the move. My biggest concern at this point is that my student loan consolidation goes through before we need to close on the house so it doesn't mess up the mortgage loan. That said, your prayers would be greatly appreciated!

I'll start working at the church in about a week and hopefully as I study for lessons for students it will spark my desire to write and I can do some more blogging again. We'll just have to wait and see.

A disturbing environmental trend

2009-06-15T22:30:00.004-04:00

I consider myself an environmentalist of sorts. I believe it is important that we properly take care of the earth that God has given to us and I find it upsetting when people take it for granted. And while I'm skeptical that the world is on the fast-track to becoming inhospitable within the next century because of global warming, I do think that our behavior affects the planet and that we ought to be much more active about our "green" efforts.

However, I've noticed a disturbing trend among environmentalists that I think Christians ought to be careful of: the idea that mankind is the enemy.

This theme often emerges in pop culture. Take the remake of The Day The Earth Stood Still where Keanu Reeves' character states, "If the earth dies, you die. If you die, the earth survives." In other words, you can't live without the earth, but, in fact, the earth needs to get rid of you if it has any chance at survival!

You can also find this belief among the scientific community. Take this quote from biologist Edward O. Wilson:

"If all mankind were to disappear, the world would regenerate back to the rich state of equilibrium that existed ten thousand years ago. If insects were to vanish, the environment would collapse into chaos."

The obvious implication here is that human beings are bad for the earth - that human beings are in fact the worst thing that has ever happened to this planet. Additionally, Wilson makes the assertion that insects are more important, in a sense better, than humans.

But consider, on the other hand, Genesis chapter 1. This is the account of God's creation of the universe, and more specifically, the earth. With each passing day of creation (except, for some reason, the second) God looks at what he's made and declares it to be good.

On the sixth day, however, the last thing that God creates is humanity - the highest order of his creation. And it is not until humanity is present that God looks at his creation and says that it is very good.

While humanity did have a tremendously negative impact on creation by introducing it to sin (AKA: the fall), the answer to this problem is not to get rid of humanity. In fact, God decided against that route when he saved Noah and his family from the flood. Instead, God's plan is to ultimately restore humanity, and all of creation, to his original design through the death and resurrection of his Son, Jesus Christ.

So when the world, be it academia or pop culture, tells us that humanity is ultimately evil and bad for the earth, remember that this was not how God created us to be. Instead, God created us as the finishing touch on his once perfect creation and gave us the responsibility to take care of what he made. Although we have failed at our job, that does not mean he has given up on us - it just means we need a little more of his help.

Great Quote

2009-06-13T07:35:00.000-04:00

"If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself."

~Augustine

A humbling thought

2009-06-02T10:54:00.002-04:00

I read this today from Luke 17 and found it humbling as I've just finished seminary and am ready to embark on vocational ministry:

"Suppose one of you has a servant plowing or looking after the sheep. Will he say to the servant when he comes in from the field, 'Come along now and sit down to eat?' Won't he rather say, 'Prepare my supper, get yourself ready and wait on me while I eat and drink; after that you may eat and drink?' Will he thank the servant because he did what he was told to do? So you also, when you have done everything you were told to do, should say, 'We are unworthy servants, we have only done our duty.'"

Sort of puts in their place the pastor (actually, anyone serving God) who is really just looking for a pat on the back.

Jesus and Judas

2009-05-27T10:22:00.003-04:00

The other day I was reading in the book of Luke and I came across this in Luke 6:

One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God. When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.

The thought occurred to me, "When Jesus chose Judas Iscariot, did he know he would betray him?" He's Jesus, so maybe the answer is simple, but the text doesn't come out and say it. I have to think, however, that he did. He must have.

Yet the Gospels don't exactly record Jesus treating Judas any differently than the other disciples, do they? When Jesus taught the crowds he didn't ask Judas to go away or conveniently ask him to run some errand. When he performed miracles he never said, "Sorry, Judas, but you're not allowed to watch this." When he ate meals with the disciples he didn't make Judas sit at the kids table. And when he washed his disciples feet he even washed the feet of the one who was just about to betray him.

When Jesus preached, "Love your enemies," Judas was right there in the crowd and Jesus must have known exactly what he was going to do. And so Jesus lived out this command to a greater degree than most of us will ever have to. Yet this is a struggle for many of us.

I know it's not easy for me to love someone who has stabbed me in the back just as much as those who have been loyal to me. But if we are to follow Jesus, this is the kind of life he has called us to - a life of love, even for those who would betray us.

Side note - I talked about this at devotions the other day with the kids at work and while a lot of them resonated with it, one of the guys had this question: "If Jesus is God, and he prayed to God, wasn't he just praying to himself? That's kind of weird." Insightful kid... I have to admit, some implications of the Trinity are quite hard to understand.

Parents and Youth Ministry

2009-05-14T00:32:00.003-04:00

The comments from yesterday's post have me taking another look at Christian Smith's book Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers. It's not a quick read by any means, but it has a lot of information for anyone who works with youth.

Here's a quote to think over:

"Parents of teenagers appear to play an important role in the character of their children's religious lives. In the immediacy of parenting teenagers, parents may feel a loss of control and influence over their teens, but nationally representative statistics show that the religious practices an commitments of parents remain an important influence on the religious practices and commitments of their teenager children. Family socialization generally seems to work when it comes to teenagers' religious faith and practice. Furthermore, the quality of relationships that parents build with their teenagers and their own choices about marriage relationships, education, and occupation - in-sofar as they have choices in these areas - also create family contexts that again form the outcome of their teenagers' religious and spiritual lives." - pp. 115-116.

In other words, parents, don't underestimate the role you play in the spiritual well-being of your teenagers. They are paying attention and you are influencing them way more than you think you are - way more than anyone else is.

And youth leaders, don't underestimate the role that parents play, for better or for worse, in your ministry. No matter how great your program is, you won't make much of a long-term impact if the parent's of your students aren't modeling spirituality for their children.

Kind of makes you wonder who we should be focusing on - parents or students?

I really need to go through Soul Searching again. Maybe I'll write a few posts on it...

Don't Stop Believing and Youth Ministry

2009-05-12T00:33:00.007-04:00

This post is part of a blog tour about the book Don't Stop Believing by Dr. Michael Wittmer. Read other posts about this text here, or check out Dr. Wittmer's blog here.

Last fall Dr. Michael Wittmer released his newest book Don't Stop Believing (DSB). The book seeks to find a middle ground in the on-going debate between the emergent church, or postmodern innovators as Wittmer calls them, and contemporary/conservative evangelicals.

I don't want to tackle how right or wrong Wittmer may be in his conclusions. I think the important thing is that he tries to find a middle ground in this debate and opens the door for more communications. Instead I want to address the impact DSB could have on youth ministry.

For many adults in the church, we can discuss the implications of postmodernism simply as ideas that we may even feel somewhat distanced from. We realize that postmodernism has affected our culture, but since most of us were brought up with modernist presuppositions then at the end of the day we don't personally have to live with postmodernism.

For the younger generation, or millenials, however, I believe postmoderism hits a lot closer to home. Most adolescents don't merely think or talk about postmodernism (in fact, they probably don't think of it as a concept at all), instead it is much more likely that postmodernism has actually shaped their patterns of thinking.

Thus for those of us in youth ministry, texts like DSB become increasingly important. Teenagers raised with a postmodern mindset are probably not asking the questions raised in DSB, instead their faith has probably already been shaped by postmodernism without them even realizing it. Therefore it is up to us as youth leaders to address these questions on their behalf and help them wrestle with these issues.

For example, my wife recently had an interaction with a Christian, teenage girl. In the course of their conversation the topic of homosexuality came up and the girl mentioned that she had a friend who is gay. She seemed to have no issues with this lifestyle because she likes her friend and said he was happy. This conversation is indicative of a postmodern generation - this girl's opinions and ideas were shaped not by reason, but by her own personal experience.

If my wife were to have responded to this girl's comments with proof-texts about God's intentions for sexuality, or had she labeled this girl's friend a sinner, she may not only have been offended, she may have been confused. Her personal experiences simply would not have lined up with what my wife would have been saying.

For adults reading a book like DSB, we can discuss and wrestle with these issues in a very rational way - a very modern way. But if we hope to bring the teenagers in our youth groups toward the middle-ground Wittmer tries to reach in DSB, then we need to rethink how we address these topics. We need to recognize that students learn just as much, if not more, through their day-to-day experiences and interactions than they do from rational teaching. Additionally it seems that students give just as much weight or credit to their experiences as they do teaching. Thus we need to orient youth groups around more than just teaching - we must orient them around environments and experiences that draw students to Christ.

In other words, we must not only preach but also, more importantly, model Wittmer's mantra, "Genuine Christians never stop serving because they never stop loving, and they never stop loving because they never stop believing."

Don't Stop Believing

2009-05-09T13:19:00.004-04:00

One of my seminary professors, Dr. Michael Wittmer, recently wrote a book titled Don't Stop Believing about the ongoing dialog between contemporary evangelicals and the emergent church. Dr. Wittmer also has a blog where he continues this discussion.

On Tuesday there is going to be a blog tour where various authors will write about Don't Stop Believing. I'm thinking about joining the tour. If I do, I plan to write about how we can apply the ideas from DSB into youth ministry. I've got a lot of ideas for what to write, the question is, will I have the chance to do so before Tuesday? I guess you'll have to wait and see!

DONE!!!

2009-05-08T23:42:00.003-04:00

It's official, I'm a seminary graduate!

Tonight was the long-awaited graduation ceremony. I, along with my classmates, walked into the Grand Rapids Theological Seminary Auditorium at 7:00 p.m. as students and left at 8:30 p.m. as graduates, ready to take on the next challenge.

So I now have my Master of Divinity. It's been a long and arduous four years, but I finally have it and can look forward to the next thing God has in store. It's exciting.

One of my classmates gave the closing speech of the night. At one point he mentioned how in the course of study, it can be easy to let the analysis of Scripture become mundane. We can quickly forget that we're not just dealing with fun topics and academic material, we're dealing with important issues and God's word. It's a serious endeavor.

I have to admit, there have been points in the last four years when I've studied Scripture and thought mostly of a paper to turn in and a grade to earn. But now it's all different. As I prepare for teachings and sermons and whatever else I do in ministry, it's not to earn a grade or to impress anyone, it's to serve God and lead people to him. It's a challenge of a completely different kind then I've been used to in the last four years.

I pray that I'm up for it.

Disappointment

2009-05-04T22:38:00.003-04:00

I think the Tiger's just might have the record this year for blowing games in the 7th inning. How many of their losses can be attributed to a breakdown in the 7th? Seems like the starting pitchers are having trouble finishing the job... let's hope they can fix that problem soon.

Updates

2009-04-30T23:17:00.003-04:00

I don't think I've gone this long without a new post in months. But seeing as it's the end of my last semester of seminary, I think I deserve the break.

So this post will just serve as an update: namely, graduation is in one week! It's been a long time coming and it's still hard to believe it's actually about to happen, yet here it is!

I'm a little bit nervous because I'm still not sure exactly what happens next. Plus, I've been in seminary for a while now. It's become a huge part of what my life is and in a week it will be gone. I'm realizing what a loss that is.

Not to mention it's become comfortable. At seminary I'm free to ask questions and there are a lot of people who are plenty smarter than me who can provide answers. But in ministry people expect you to have the answers! I just hope I'm ready to try and make that switch.

Opinions in a postmodern culture

2009-04-22T12:28:00.004-04:00

In case you haven't already heard the buzz about Miss California's answer to Perez Hilton's question at the Miss USA competition, take a look at this video, plus Hilton's vlog response (Warning - there's some foul language in this one):

I'll just jump right into my thoughts on this.

Does Hilton honestly expect us to believe that the only answer he would have found acceptable to this question was, "Good question, that's a hot topic right now and I think we should let the states decide for themselves?" (paraphrase)

Had Miss California used the exact same words but replaced, "marriage should be between a man and a woman" with "marriage should be between anyone," would he still have criticized her and found her answer so intellectually bankrupt?

Essentially what Hilton is saying is that if you agree with him about same-sex marriage, then by all means share your opinion. But if you disagree with him then you need to hide your opinion behind the fact that it's not your decision to make - the last thing you're allowed to do is share it publicly.

This is a classic example of hypocrisy in a postmodern era. In other words, it illustrates the idea that everyone is entitled to their opinion so long as it is politically correct, or that everyone must be tolerant of everyone else's ideas, except for the ideas of those who are not 100% inclusive. Let's face it, this system is just as close-minded and discriminating as the most extremist fundamental movements have ever been - it's just hidden behind a false guise of love and inclusion.

Of course we could all love and welcome each other if we all agreed on everything and believed the same way! But we don't - so let's learn to live with that. The truly open minded individual is the one who can look past the most divisive of core beliefs and love the other person anyway.

And isn't that what Jesus did? Just look at the story of the woman caught in adultery. Jesus defended her and saved her from a brutal death. He clearly loved and accepted her. But he still said, "Go and sin no more." He didn't have to agree with everything she did and believed in order to love her.

One last thought. I found it interesting that some of the comments to the videos criticized Miss California for bringing her religious views into her political answer. I've watched the video a couple of times now and she never once mentions God, religion or any kind of faith. She does say "believe" but with a connotation that seems to imply "think," not "have a religiously-oriented faith in."

So where does religion come into the picture? Only as an assumption that the only people who could possibly believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman are people of faith.

Could meat ever be illegal?

2009-04-20T20:11:00.003-04:00

My wife and I were talking the other night and she posed an interesting question:

"Do you think the day will ever come when it will be illegal to eat meat?"

I instantly said, "No way!" and added that if that day ever came, I'd just have to go ahead and kill my dinner myself. My wife, however, pointed out that 20 or 30 years ago our parents probably never would have guessed that same-sex marriage would one day be legalized.

"True," I said, "But that's about a personal decision. This is about other people telling me what I can and can not eat."

"What about prohibition?" she said.

I pointed out that the NRA is way more influential, at least at this point, than PETA and that there are way more omnivorous Americans than vegetarians. But in a postmodern age, will we always be able to argue that humans are superior to animals... or at least superior enough to justify eating them?

I don't think the day will come in my lifetime when someone tells me I can't have a steak, but my wife did make a good argument. So what do you think?

Alone

2009-04-18T21:56:00.003-04:00

I spent the better part of the day totally by myself (for the most part) on the hiking trails at Yankee Springs State Park about a half hour or so south of Grand Rapids. The idea was to take a personal, spiritual sort of retreat.

As I got started I was thinking about how sometimes in TV shows, like Heroes or Lost, or in movies a character will take some sort of "spirit walk" or journey where they go into the wilderness and end up having some sort of vision or dream. Whatever it is, the character ends up inevitably knowing what he or she must do. It all just becomes crystal clear.

In real life I'm not so sure it works that way. I wasn't expecting to go off into the woods today and emerge a totally changed person, suddenly knowing exactly what God's next steps for my life are. However, taking the time to be alone and just spend time with God was profound and refreshing.

Most days are spent in such high-tempo chaos. We seem to move from one thing to the next faster than our minds can process the information. I hardly get even a half hour in silence without a getting a phone call or email or other bombardment of information.

So to walk around in the woods, barely seeing another human being, no cell-phone, no computer, not even an iPod (GASP!) was certainly a welcome change of pace.

Since I am so used to busyness it was actually hard to be so alone and disconnected for so long. A few times I felt like calling it quits and heading back home early, but I forced myself to stick it out until the time I'd originally planned and was glad that I did. I think I will definitely start scheduling alone days periodically from here on out.

New, New King James?

2009-04-15T21:38:00.004-04:00

What's up with this?

It looks like the KJV only crowd has eased up on being so exclusive with the creation of the KJ21 or 21st Century King James Version. They claim it's "neither a new translation nor a revision, but an updating of the King James Version (KJV) of A.D. 1611." In other words, all of the same textual criticism problems, none of the poetic verse.

I really do wonder how this updating is going over with KJV only supporters. Is it still accepted because it's based on the 1611 version, or is it, like any other translation besides the KJV, still considered a lesser rendition?

My suggestion - do your homework about Bible translations. There are a lot of great ones out there and a lot of poor ones. And selecting the most useful translation will also depend on whether or not you're looking for something that stays as literal as possible to the original words or something that tries to get as close as possible to the intended meaning. Simply saying one particular translation is hands down the best isn't very helfpul at all.

I recommend Fee and Stuart's How To Read the Bible For All It's Worth - they have a great section that explains the nuances of this discussion.

Check this out

2009-04-14T11:04:00.003-04:00

My friends Andy and Jason and I run a website called 3Twins.net where we produce flash-based comics and cartoons. We recently started a new blog that goes behind the scenes on what we're doing and is a place for us to talk about all the ins and outs of what we do.

Feel free to take a look. We'll gladly accept any feedback, comments, or suggestions you have to offer.

Here's the link: http://3twinsraw.blogspot.com/

Thanks.

Go Tigers!

2009-04-13T10:47:00.002-04:00

I just had to make some kind of comment about the Tigers' 6 runs in the 8th inning to beat the Rangers 6-4 yesterday. You just don't see rally's like that every day. Now bring on the White Sox!

Oh, and I know it's early in the season, but I can't help but notice that Brandon Inge, with 4 home-runs in 7 games, is on pace to his 92 homers this year... just saying.

Reflections on Lent

2009-04-12T07:24:00.004-04:00

I made it through Lent without Facebook!

It's been a big lesson in not wasting time. Some days I've been amazed at how productive I've been and how much faster I can get things done. Before there was always that urge to check Facebook every once in a while when I was typing a paper or doing some other sort of work on the computer. Those "little" checks would always be the gateway to long excursions surfing the web - as if Facebook was the electronic equivalent to marijuana.

Without that temptation I've been able to work with much more focus and intensity. It's freed my time up so much that I'm not sure I really want to go back to Facebook. I'm sure that I will - but at the very least I want to make sure it's not something I feel compelled to do every day.

People sometimes ask, "What did they do before the internet?" I'm realizing that the answer to that is that hey got actual work done!

And so with that, Happy Easter! He is risen!

Fireproof

2009-04-11T14:20:00.004-04:00

My wife and I Netflixed Kirk Cameron's recent movie Fireproof the other day. I have to admit, we were expecting the typical Christian movie cheese from this one but were pleased when it exceeded our standards - even if they were somewhat low.

Visually the movie was pleasing. Too often Christian films try to compete with Hollywood's special effects prowess with disastrous results. Just look at some of Cameron's past films. With this film, however, director Alex Kendrick opted to keep things simple and it worked. Other Christian films would probably benefit from taking this approach.

As far as acting goes, there was something be desired. While the core characters did a decent job, most of the peripherals felt like they came straight out of high school drama class with unrealistic overacting. The movie also contained a lot of overly sappy moments, such as the female lead's poetic soliloquy at the end of the film. Then there was Cameron himself, who did alright, but I kept asking myself why he was the only character in the film who didn't have a southern accent - even though the actors who played his parents did!

Finally there's the story itself. While it was predictable it remained entertaining - so long as you heighten the suspension of disbelief you'd likely use with other films. Most of us can resonate, at least to some extent, with the film's depiction of strained relationships - be it the struggling married couple, bickering friends or alienated parents. And the message of these relationships being worth fighting for is certainly needed.

I wanted to hit on one area, though, where I took a bit of an issue with the film, and Christian movies in general: the presentation of the gospel. There seems to be an unwritten rule that every Christian movie must contain an emotional scene depicting a main character breaking down before God and asking for forgiveness. The scene always comes complete with a confident, experienced Christian laying out the plan of salvation and leading the broken-down character in a prayer of restoration.

Typically the character who accepts Christ starts off as a fiercely independent religious skeptic. They seem to be in total control of their life and will make quips like, "I don't need your God," or "You might need that sort of crutch, but not me!" Then when trouble comes, they break down in tears and acknowledge their need for Jesus.

The problem: how often does it work like this in real life?

Not to mention, are we saying that people only need to accept Christ when they're in despair and out of options?

I understand that a movie is only about 2 hours long and it's difficult to show the slow and difficult journey that it often is to begin following Christ. Yet movies like Fireproof, which are generally intended to be evangelical tools, want to show the transformation that following Christ brings and give viewers some sort of steps follow should they want to make a similar commitment.

But does every convert in a film like this have to be a religious skeptic? And do they always have to have an emotional meltdown to accept Christ?

I wonder how these sorts of films could change their gospel presentation? How could they show that all people, not just those at their lowest, need forgiveness and can accept Christ?

Christian nation?

2009-04-08T00:30:00.004-04:00

President Obama caught some flack for saying that the United States is not a Christian Nation. This, of course, begs the question. Is the United States a Christian Nation? Should it be?

What are the implications for our country if we are?

What are the implications for the church?

New Look?

2009-04-07T00:00:00.002-04:00

I've been thinking for some time about changing the look of my blog... but being as graphic-design illiterate as I am, I'm stuck with the blogger templates available to me. But I figured, why not change things up?

So, do you like the change or not? Your comments would be very much appreciated as I may very well make changes again based on them.

My Meijer greeter made the news!

2009-04-05T09:55:00.003-04:00

When I first moved to Grand Rapids and started doing most of my grocery shopping at the Grandville Meijer, the door greeter, Gregory Baily, stood out to me with his funny and enthusiastic welcoming remarks. He has been energetic, friendly and helpful every single time I've seen him at the store.

Apparently a lot of other shoppers have noticed too as Baily's zeal for greeting landed him on the front page of the Region section in today's Grand Rapids Press. The article also mentioned that Baily has at least 2,700 fans on the Facebook fan club page dedicated to him called "Welcome to My-er," a title that reflects one of his signature welcomes.

It's nice to see that being a kind and positive person can still earn you a spot in front page news.

Productive Days

2009-04-04T23:59:00.000-04:00

I had the day off today.

A lot of times that means sleeping in, then lounging around for a few hours, then eventually deciding to do something when I suddenly feel this wave of guilt that I'd let a good chunk of the day slip away. Those are unproductive days and unless I specifically planned on them so I could catch up on rest then I'm not particularly proud of myself when I have them.

Today, though, I had the day off and I worked hard all day. I had breakfast with my family at my sister's house, then I came home and finally got my taxes done (about time!). After that I went for a run, then I cleaned up around the apartment a bit and did some organizing of things.

For some reason it seems like when I start the day by getting up and getting moving, then I have no trouble keeping myself motivated the rest of the day. But when I start the day in more of a laid back mode, then the rest of the day follows suit.

Now if only I could figure out how to motivate myself every morning...

Jim Gaffigan - King Baby

2009-03-30T13:09:00.002-04:00

Jim Gaffigan's new routine King Baby premiered last night on Comedy Central, if you missed it like me you can catch the audio on YouTube (hopefully the video will be posted soon!).

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Part 4:

Part 5:

Part 6:

Part 7:

Part 8:

"How" do you know

2009-03-29T21:13:00.002-04:00

We live in a society where information is created far faster than we can keep up with it. We literally have more information than we know what to do with. The following video illustrates this point:

I posted a very similar video about a year ago but apparently information is growing at such a rate that things like this quickly become outdated.

Here's the thing, I'm not sure how accurate these stats are because I'm not sure where they came from. Maybe the video's right on, maybe it's stretching things a bit. But a lot of this can simply be observed by taking a look at our society. Things are changing fast.

Knowledge is changing fast.

But what do we do? Do we try to keep up? Do we try to relearning all the material all the time?

It's almost impossible to stay ahead of the information curve. You might be able to do it in one niche subject, but you can't keep up in very many areas at the same time, at least not for long. Now more than ever I think the phrase "a jack of all trades is a master of none" is so true.

I think the answer is that it's not necessary what you know, it's how you know. In other words, it's almost pointless sometimes to just try and fill yourself with stats and facts. The more important thing is to learn concepts, to learn how to study, to learn how to obtain and to use the information you need. For that matter, to learn how to discern what information you need and be able to weed out the good from the bad. Because let's face it, not all of that information out there is really all that valuable.

I've said for the past few years that the most eye-opening thing about going to seminary was learning how much there was that I didn't even know. And to deal with all of the knowledge out there I quickly understood that I couldn't just try and memorize it, rather I had to learn how to study, how to sort out the useful materials, how to analyze what I came across.

In a rapidly changing world I think these are the skills that we need to stress far more than keeping up with the endless flow of information.

10 Miles!

2009-03-28T20:16:00.003-04:00

Two years ago I ran in Grand Rapid's 5th/3rd Riverbank Run. It's a 25K (or 15.5 miles for you non-metric people) race, and that run remains to this day the farthest I've ever run at one time in my life.

Last year I planned to do the race again but I got busy and lost time to train so I chickened out.

Well, this year I'm determined to do it again, so I've been training... sort of. I started running back in January but then we got blasted by snow and apparently they don't like to plow the sidewalks, so running became quite difficult and I gave up. Shortly afterward my wife and I bought an elliptical and I started using that occasionally, but not quite enough. Then last Sunday I decided it was now or never and I started to run on the road again and ran six miles.

I wanted to do a longer run today just to prove to myself that come May 9th (the day of the race) I'll be able to complete the run. When I left the apartment I was planning on doing a 7 mile loop. As I got going, though, I started to think, "Why not just make it an even 1o miles?" and I thought of another loop I could add to make up the distance.

At about the two and a half mile mark I started to think of how crazy that was.

By the 5 mile mark I'd decided that 10 miles today was just insane and made up my mind to keep it to 7.

Then at the 6 mile mark (the point where I could turn to cut it off at 7 miles or keep going and make it 10) for some reason I just kept going. By the time I thought of the ramifications of that decision it was a little too late.

So I successfully ran 10 miles tonight. By successfully I mean that I did it without stopping to walk (I did have to stop for traffic a few times). So I'm fairly certain that barring any injuries I might sustain from pushing myself too hard (which isn't out of the question) I should be able to complete the race.

Now I can set my sights on gaining a little speed. It sure would be nice to do the race in less than 2 hours!

Bye bye flood damage!

2009-03-27T23:32:00.003-04:00

So at the very end of last December my work moved across town into a brand new building on the main campus of the agency. The move was sort of a pain because even though we knew for months that it was coming, we didn't have an exact date until a week or so before it actually happened. And then it ended up happening right after Christmas. But once it was done we were happy to be in a brand new building with a layout designed for maximizing supervision of our clients.

It didn't take long, though, to realize that our pretty new building wasn't built to the same residential living standards that our previous building had been. This meant that things could break much easier and the noise from the unit above us was unbearably annoying.

And then the flood hit.

About a month after we'd moved into our new place, a sprinkler head in the unit above us malfunctioned unloading hundreds of gallons of water onto both units. We went a few weeks with fans and dehumidifiers running constantly. Going into work was like walking into a wind-tunnel every day. The noise was awful and the air was so dry that my eyes would hurt the whole time I was there.

Eventually they realized that the flood damage on our floor was more significant than they thought, and so after a few weeks we ended up moving out of unit and into the unit upstairs (those residents moved to another location the night of the flood). We still had to deal with construction, but it wasn't quite as bad. They also decided to make some improvements to the basic construction of the building as long as they were tearing apart all the new walls and flooring.

So now here it is, the end of March, and tonight we FINALLY moved back to our old unit. My boss' plan was that we would move most of the stuff tonight and then finish the rest in the morning as well as clean the upstairs unit. But since I was running the shift tonight, and then do so again in the morning, I figured why not try and get it all done tonight and make tomorrow a whole lot easier? I've had to move so much in the past few years that I've really grown to hate it. The last thing I wanted to do was spend two days moving.

So as much as it made all the kids hate me for one night, I put everyone's nose to the grindstone and we not only moved the entire unit (except for a few things from the kitchen), but we also cleaned the entire upstairs unit and got mostly settled in downstairs. We totally exceeded my boss' expectations on this one. I'll have to find a way to reward the kids in the morning for all the hard work.

For at least the last three months we've been in a constant state of transition. I actually like change, but transition sucks. It makes you feel like you have to move forward and yet you can't. There's always something holding you back. Just when we were breaking free from transition back in January, the flood hit and delayed the process for another two months. But now we're done! I'm hoping that this will make work a much more enjoyable place.

Irony in Iraq

2009-03-26T21:34:00.003-04:00

The Iraqi journalist made famous for his shoe attack on then President George W. Bush last December was sentenced to three years in prison earlier today.

The CNN article (link above) on the story repeatedly reminds readers that many people tout this man as some kind of a hero. I get that a lot of people don't like Bush, there were plenty of things about his presidency that I didn't like myself, but I fail to see how this makes the man a hero. He threw his loafers (and missed) at a completely unsuspecting man who was delivering a speech. Is he seen as a hero because he made public insult? How much more violent would his actions have to have been in order for more people to disapprove of this?

What I find most interesting, and ironic, however, is the fact that whether you agree with it or not, if it weren't for Bush's intervention in Iraq this reporter would more likely have been looking at the death penalty than he would three years in prison. Imagine this taking place ten years ago with this guy throwing his shoes at Sadaam Hussein. I think it would have turned out much differently for him.

How historically accurate is the Bible?

2009-03-24T11:16:00.004-04:00

In scholarly discussion about the Bible you often come across debate about the historical accuracy of the text. For example, there are questions about how literal the six-day creation account in Genesis is, or whether or not Abraham, Moses, David or other figures actually existed. People question the events of the Exodus of Israel from Egypt. And when you start to study the text, there is always debate as to whether or not various books were written by the claimed author or if the dating of the text is accurate.

These questions abound in Biblical study, and perhaps for good reason. As Christians there should be some desire to prove that the text we claim as truthful and authoritative actually is what we believe it to be.

However, a problem arises when we get too sidetracked because of these debates and end up missing the point.

My Hebrew professor uses the phrase "text versus event" to describe this dilemma. The idea is that often in our search for the historical proof behind the text, we miss the point of what the text is really trying to say. Take the Exodus, for example. Someone could spend a lifetime researching archaeology and other extra-Biblical sources to try and paint a picture of "what really happened." But this pursuit won't add a thing to the question of "what is the text really trying to tell us?" To answer that we simply need to study the text and begin to interpret what it means on its own, apart from other sources.

For one of my class projects I've been reading the book The Meaning of the City by Jacques Ellul. Ellul makes an interesting point about this debate:

“...And we must accept it for all history, for this is how God sees this story. And we must believe that God’s appraisal is truer than the scientific knowledge we may obtain.”

In other words, as you approach the text, forget for at least a moment the historical background and potential scientific criticism of the text. If you believe that the text is inspired by God, then ask yourself, "Why did God choose to tell this story? And why did he choose to tell it like this?"

These questions are more important than getting at the historical picture behind the text because they get at the heart of Biblical interpretation - why did God give us this text in the first place?

Emotional Safety in Youth Ministry

2009-03-23T13:21:00.004-04:00

A few weeks ago I wrote a post to gather some thoughts on my philosophy of youth ministry. My main point was that we can't force students to change, we must recognize that this is God's job. What we can do is create environments where this change is more likely to take place. I'd like to spend a few posts broadening this idea of youth ministry environments. Today I'll talk about safety, specifically emotional safety.

I started going to youth group when I was in seventh grade. Up until that point I attended children's ministry, a place I was increasingly feeling too old for and so I was rather excited to join up with the older kids... the ones who, in fact, were no longer called kids at all.

But my excitement about the youth group quickly diminished with a ritual known as "initiation:" a series of seemingly harmless pranks pulled on the new students to officially bring them into the group. I would later learn that most adults refer to this as hazing and its use has grown somewhat taboo.

On the first night of youth group for the seventh graders we were asked to go out into the hallway and re-enter the room one at a time where we would be sized for a coffin - an act that was morbid enough in and of itself. I was asked not to participate because I was wearing Umbro soccer shorts. I didn't know why at the time, but as the prank unfolded it began to make sense. As each seventh grader was led into the room they were blindfolded and told to lie down on a table as one of the youth leaders measured their limbs for the coffin. When it came time to measure their legs he told them to lift their leg straight up in the air and then one of the older students poured a pitcher of water down their legs. My soccer shorts saved me because the thin material would have made this prank considerably more embarrassing.

But I wasn't spared for long. In the weeks, and even years to follow, I went on the receiving end of various pranks including the cliche pie in the face and even "kiss the king's ring" where, again blindfolded, I was asked to kneel down and kiss a ring which turned out to be another student's toe covered in mouth-numbing Orajel.

For some reason I kept coming back to youth group week after week.

And then, finally, it was my Senior Year, my turn to be the one to deliver the humiliating initiation pranks. Years of pent up aggression were ready to spew forth on a group of unsuspecting seventh graders. I could already taste the vengeance.

But then my youth pastor, Pastor Greg, had an epiphany. Instead of pulling pranks on the seventh graders, he thought, why not actually welcome them? Why not have a service dedicated to making them feel like a part of the group? Why not invite them in and serve them and pray over them instead of hazing and embarrassing them?

I hated the idea. I had been looking forward to these pranks for years. I didn't understand why he was pulling the rug out from under us like that. But in time I realized just how right he was.

That one change had a profound impact on the entire youth group experience. By intentionally making the group a place of welcoming, we were destroying a culture of fear and competition and replacing it with a culture of safety and acceptance. We broken down the "us v. them" barrier between the upperclassmen and underclassmen. We were making the youth group into a place of unity.

It can't help but notice as I read through the Gospels that Jesus didn't have an initiation process for his disciples. He simply called and they followed. The early church didn't have an initiation process either. Rather they gave the invitation to follow Jesus and became a community marked by self-sacrifice to meet each others needs.

Right up until the night he was betrayed, arrested and ultimately crucified, Jesus' ministry was marked by service for his disciples. In John 13 we read about how Jesus got up during his final meal with his disciples so he could stoop down and wash their feet - a very lowly job in 1st Century Israel. Jesus wanted to give these men a strong visual reminder about the need to serve each other. Toward the end of the story he says,

"You call me "Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am. Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. Very truly I tell you, servants are not greater than their master, nor are messengers greater than the one who sent them. Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them."

The circle of Jesus' followers was a place of belonging. Consequently the early church was marked by acceptance and sacrifice, not competition. If anything, stories like the fate of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5 show us that those who were interested only in meeting their own needs were the exception and were excluded from the early church community.

Youth leaders must strive to make youth groups a place of welcoming and belonging for students. We must set the example for the older students so that they will be accepting of each new generation that enters the doors. We must establish a culture that invites new students in without placing hurdles and barriers to becoming part of the "in" circle.

There are enough places out there where students feel they must fend for themselves or jump through hoops to prove they belong. Why not let the church be a place where they are invited in and accepted simply as they are?

Running and serving

2009-03-22T17:59:00.004-04:00

When I was in High School I loved running Cross Country and Track and had no problem staying after school every day to run several miles for practice. Ever since the last day of track practice my senior year, however, I've always had a hard time running with any sort of consistency. Maybe it's that I'm not competing anymore, or that I don't have a team to run with every day, but regardless the lack of motivation can be discouraging.

I find myself in this cycle where I'll get motivated and run almost every day for a few weeks, and then for whatever reason I stop and go a few weeks (or more likely months) of being lazy and not running or exercising at all. It doesn't matter if I try to ease in and start with short distances or if I dive in head first and start off with five or six mile runs. I can't seem to make running a lasting habit.

I think a lot of us having this same problem of having a hard time consistently doing the things we know are good for us. And this goes for anything from diet and exercise to spiritual matters.

How many Christians, when asked what they think they could do to grow in their faith, wouldn't respond with, "Read my Bible more?" How many of us beat ourselves up over not reading Scripture enough or not praying enough or not giving enough or not going to church enough? We know that God doesn't give us a set figure for how much to do these things, but that doesn't stop us from giving ourselves one. Somewhere in the back of our minds is a number that equals "enough" and somehow we know that we don't measure up to it.

And there is some truth to this.

When we're not spending time in Scripture or in prayer then we feel the disconnection. We know that we're missing out on something. Just like when I know I'm getting out of shape if I don't exercise enough.

But just like with running, there's probably a point where I've done enough reading for the day, and maybe there's a point where I've done too much. Today, for example, I decided to go out and run and I ended up running six miles. That was probably too much for today and I can assure you I'll feel it tomorrow.

My point is that I could spend every waking moment trying to connect with God through Scripture and prayer, but is that the reason God gave me another day? There are other things he wants me to do such as growing in my relationship with my wife, taking care of myself, and serving my church, community and world. There comes a point when I need to start utilizing all the things God has been teaching me.

And I have to wonder, if I were doing those things more, would taking the time to connect with God start to take care of itself? Would I find that I couldn't continue serving God in these areas without connecting to him? Would I read and pray because I absolutely need to and not simply because I feel like I should?

Why pet rats are fun

2009-03-18T00:11:00.005-04:00

My wife and I have two pet rats, Weebal who we've had for a little more than a year and Ellie who we've only had about a month. Ellie is very adventurous and has started doing backflips inside her cage to get our attention and to try and get out. Tonight we decided to take some video of it. Take a look:

Why is it...

2009-03-17T11:58:00.002-04:00

...that every time I sit down to do a translation for class I have this sudden fear that maybe this time I'm not going to be able to read Hebrew anymore?

I guessed it...

2009-03-16T10:54:00.002-04:00

Last week I went on a full week-long vacation from both school and work for the first time since my honeymoon back in June of 2006. This was a much needed time of rest and relaxation which I tried my hardest to take full advantage of.

In the weeks leading up to my vacation I was running on empty. For about two weeks straight I averaged 4 or 5 hours of sleep a night as I worked 40+ hours and went to school and had a few projects due. I tried to find time to rest but it never quite worked out to plan. I even told my wife, "I've been running myself ragged for too long, just watch, as soon as I get to go on vacation I'm going to get sick."

Well, I was right. I hadn't been sick one time this whole winter, which is pretty unusual for me, usually I get a cold at least two or three times per winter. I thought I was going to escape this year without illness, and I even made it halfway into my vacation without coming down with anything. I thought I'd sufficiently rested up and hopefully boosted my immune system. But then on Wednesday I started feeling a bit off (the day we left to stay in a hotel), and then that night I woke up shivering, and then an hour or two later I woke up in a sweat, and every day since then I've felt crummy.

Fortunately I feel like I'm slowly getting better now... just as I'm getting back to work and school. Perfect timing, huh?

If not for a broken down train...

2009-03-13T23:28:00.002-04:00

My wife and I have been on vacation for a few days and spent some time in our hometown of Kalamazoo. Today we were driving around and decided to visit the graveyard where all of my grandparents are buried. We found the graves of my paternal grandparents without much of a problem but had trouble finding the graves from my mom's side, so we called my uncle who's a wealth of knowledge when it comes to family history.

My aunt and uncle were nice enough to drive out to the cemetery to show us where my grandparents were buried. Afterward they gave us a tour of other ancestors buried there and my uncle told us some stories about the family's history.

One of my ancestors, Adam Oliver, was the first Oliver to come to the United States from Scotland back in the early 1800's. He and his wife arrived in New York by ship and from there the plan was to take a train to the West Coast where they were going to board another ship and head to Australia where some of Adam's siblings had gone.

When the train arrived in Kalamazoo, however, it broke down leaving Adam and his wife in the area for a day. They explored the area and loved it because they said it reminded them of Scotland. When the train was up and running again they got on board but couldn't stop thinking of Kalamazoo, so by the time they got to Iowa they turned around and came back. The family has been in Kalamazoo ever since.

This got me thinking, if that train back in the 1800's hadn't broken down, Adam Oliver and his wife would have kept on moving across the country and likely would have carried out their plan to go to Australia. Consequently the course of the entire family history would have changed and no one on my mom's side of the family, including myself, going back four or five generations would have even been born.

It makes you realize the impact one event can have. What seems like an insignificant detail, or maybe a big inconvenience, at the time might just end up changing everything.

I found the source of all bacon!

2009-03-12T20:07:00.001-04:00

HT: Dan

The Weaker Brother

2009-03-10T21:57:00.004-04:00

I can't even begin to tell you how man conversations I've had with other Christians about what is good and acceptable for a Christian to do. These talks have covered all sorts of topics such as language, what movies to watch (if at all), tattoos and piercings, alcohol use, dancing, what translation of the Bible to use, etc... you name the topic, Christians have debated whether or not it's okay.

Inevitably in these conversations there is on consistent theme from Scripture that gets brought up. It enters innocently enough, but oftentimes it quickly gets used as something of a trump card, putting the kibosh on whatever action is in question. I'm talking about The Weaker Brother argument.

The argument goes like this:

1) Romans 14:1-4 says, "Accept those whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. One person's faith allows them to eat everything, but another person, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted that person. Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To their own master they stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand."

The chapter goes on to say in verse 13, "Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister."

2) There are certain actions my conscience doesn't have a problem with, but I know other Christians who say it is bad.

3) Therefore, they must be the weaker brother.

4) Therefore, I should not do that action because I don't want to put a stumbling block in front of them.

It seems like when I was in college this argument popped up a lot, especially when the topic in question was drinking alcohol. Someone would say they think that drinking is okay. They would point out that simply drinking, without getting drunk, is never forbidden in the Bible, that Jesus turned water into wine and that Paul told Timothy to "drink a little wine for your stomach's sake."

Then someone would give a rebuttal and point out a few anti-drinking verses and talk about some of the ill effects of drinking on society. Then the pro-alcohol debater would counter that, and this would go back and forth until the weaker brother argument came up.

The anti-alcohol debater would mention how there are recovering alcoholics in the church who would be tempted to drink and get drunk if other Christians were saying alcohol is okay. They might also mention all the people in the church who are vehemently opposed to the consumption of alcohol in any amount for any purpose. These people, they would say, are weaker brothers and therefore we'd all do best to stay sober for their sakes.

Sounds like a valid enough argument, but I think there's a major flaw.

The quintessential question is, who did Paul have in mind when he talked about people who are weak in their faith? In his illustration the weaker brother was described as someone who would only eat vegetables. So unless he's saying that vegetarians are weak in their faith, then we're missing something here.

The writer of the book of Hebrews also talks about weak faith. In the first five chapters of the book the writer begins to lay down an argument about who Jesus was, building into the idea of Jesus being our high priest. In 5:11, however, he (or perhaps she?) makes an abrupt stop in the argument. The text reads:

"We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand. In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God's word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil."

There is this sense where the writer is completely frustrated because there is so much he wants to say to these people, but he knows that they won't get it because they aren't mature enough in their faith. They're weak. But they shouldn't be. By now they should be strong.

There is an underlying implication here: being weak in your faith should correlate to how long you've been a Christian. While people mature at different rates, there is still a general trend that people move from less mature to more mature. And no one should be sitting still, everyone should be growing.

And apparently this author thought that after a certain amount of time (however long he'd been working with the recipients of the letter to the Hebrews), these people should have matured to the point where they were strong and not infants in the faith.

Now let's take this back to Romans 14 and ask again, who is the weaker brother?

It seems fairly clear to me that the weaker brother Paul is talking about is someone who hasn't been a Christian for very long. It's someone who has grabbed hold of the faith but who still has a lot of struggles to overcome and a lot of things to learn.

It also seems clear to me that Paul is NOT talking about someone who has been a Christian for many years, has a fairly rigorous sets of convictions, and is trying to impose them upon others.

In the previous illustration about how the weaker brother relates to the issue of whether or not Christians can drink alcohol I mentioned two weaker brother scenarios. The first involving a recovering alcoholic who has recently become a Christian and the second involving Christians who for various other reasons are vehemently opposed to the consumption of alcohol.

I believe that the first person, the recovering alcoholic, would fit the weaker brother category. The last thing this person needs would be a so-called brother in Christ taking advantage or his or her Christian liberty by cracking open a cold one in front of them.

However, I don't believe that the second example is valid. The picture that this paints in my mind is of an adult who was raised in the church and lives by a strict, personal moral code. I'm not saying that having strong convictions is wrong. But when one Christian imposes their convictions on another, this is not an example for the weaker brother argument. While drinking in front of this person may irritate them, it is certainly not going to make them stumble. We need to simply acknowledge this as what it is - a difference of personal convictions - and stop trying to judge the convictions of others under the guise of the weaker brother.

I believe that Paul speaks to this in the end of Romans chapter 14:

"So whatever you believe about these things, keep between yourself and God. Blessed are those who do not condemn themselves by what they approve. But those who have doubts are condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith: and everything that does not come from faith is sin."

Vacation!

2009-03-07T11:36:00.002-05:00

Today is the first of eight days in a row that I have off of work and school. I haven't had a vacation like this from work and school at the same time since my honeymoon in June of 2006! Needless to say I'm excited.

For about two straight weeks now I've had to be up every single day by 5:00 a.m. at the earliest and 7:00 a.m. at the latest, and I've been getting between 4 and 6 hours of sleep. So my biggest priority right now is to get some rest. Today I slept in until 9:00 a.m. and it felt great! It's weird to say that 9:00 a.m. was sleeping in because in college I'd get up then for my 10 a.m. classes and still want to fall asleep through the lecture. Then on the weekends I'd sleep until noon. I guess I'm just growing up.

This whole no Facebook thing has helped me to realize that I'm a sucker for letting my time slip away from me. That's probably the biggest reason I've gotten so little sleep - I let too much time slip by and then when it was time for bed I'd realize how much work I still had to do and be forced to stay up late. Anyway, I don't want to end up wasting my whole vacation. Granted, I do want to rest, relax and just unplug a bit. But there are also a lot of little personal projects I've been meaning to do that I want to tackle over the next week.

So I've compiled a short "to-do" list for myself. It's nothing too extreme or daunting, just something to keep me on track. I'm on something of a personal mission to stop wasting time, so hopefully this vacation will help me to work on that.

No Facebook, No Problem

2009-03-06T05:48:00.002-05:00

When I decided to give up Facebook for Lent I have to admit that I was hesitant. I thought it was going to be really rough. I thought that for at least the first two weeks I'd feel compelled to go check things out every time I was at my computer.

But the reality is, it's been easy. I evidently wasn't as hooked as I thought. The only trouble I've had has been when I open up my web browser and I almost type in Facebook's URL out of instinct just because I've been used to going and checking it.

It's made me realize how much time I've probably wasted. And not just one Facebook. I've probably wasted a lot of time on other things that I end up just doing out of instinct. For example, I used to have the habit of turning on the TV when I got up in the morning, just to relax for a few minutes before I started my day. On days off, though, I'd end up zoning out for an hour or two, sometimes more, before I would finally get moving. So recently I've tried just leaving the TV off and I've found myself being much more productive.

I'm not saying TV or Facebook or anything else along those lines are bad. But the challenge for me is managing how much time I use them so I don't end up wasting the day. Because let's face it, a few minutes a day with these things is fine, but there are far better things to spend the majority of my time doing.

God gets it

2009-03-04T07:40:00.004-05:00

Over the past three weeks in my Hebrew class we've been translating Exodus chapter two, which tells the story of the birth of Moses and his escape from Egypt to Midian.

The last three verses of the chapter are interesting, in the NIV it reads:

During that long period, the king of Egypt died. The Israelites groaned in their slavery and cried out, and their cry for help because of their slavery went up to God. God heard their groaning and he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac and with Jacob. God looked on the Israelites and was concerned about them.

In translating this I realized that last sentence is sort of tricky and can be handled a few different ways. Here are some examples:

KJV - God looked upon the children of Israel and had respect unto them.

ASV - And God saw the children of Israel and God took knowledge of them.

NASB - God saw the sons of Israel, and God took notice of them.

The ESV, however, translated it in probably the most straight-forward way, and I think this is probably the most profound:

God saw the people of Israel, and God knew.

God knew.

It's like as the people were crying out to God and groaning about the slavery they were forced into, God watched and he could completely understand. He didn't just know about it. He didn't just see that it was going on. He didn't just feel sorry for them. At some deep-seated level he understood, first-hand, what they were going through. He completely felt their pain.

At first it seems strange to come across this passage where it is. It's just tucked into the middle of the story about Moses. Moses is in the land of Midian and he gets married. After that he's tending his father-in-law's sheep out in the wilderness and he comes to a mountain.

Right in the middle, though, is this short paragraph about God understanding his people's pain. Why is it there?

When Moses is at that mountain, he comes across a burning bush. It's a familiar story. God speaks to him through that bush. He tells Moses to take his sandels off because the ground he is standing on is holy. Before this in the Bible God had spoken to other individuals, but he never told them to take any precautions like this. His speaking never changed the ground before.

This time God was showing up in a way unlike he ever had before. And I don't just mean that he spoke through a burning bush. God was getting so close that he was making the very land around this spot different... holy.

God heard the cry of his people and he understood it and it moved him so much that he showed up in a way he never had before so he could do something about it.

He doesn't just see our pain or notice it. He gets it. He knows.

Toward a Philosophy of Youth Ministry

2009-03-02T21:28:00.004-05:00

Since starting seminary I've developed a lot of thoughts and ideas about youth ministry. Now that school is almost over it's time to formulate these ideas into an approach for working with students in a church.

Up until just a few months ago the question I kept asking myself was, "How do can we, in the church, teach students in such a way that they will learn to think like Christians and not just know about Christianity?" The motive behind that question, I have to admit, was wanting to help students develop a style of thinking that would ultimately lead to them to make the right choices, or at least make them more often.

But what I've come to realize is that you can't force anyone to think a certain way. This may be especially true with teenagers. Sure, you could do your best to brainwash someone, but I don't believe that's the kind of change Jesus wants to bring. So what are we left to try and do?

1 Corinthians 3:5-9 says:

What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe - as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow. So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow. The one who plants and the one who waters have one purpose, and they will each be rewarded according to their own labor. For we are God's co-workers; you are God's field, God's building.

We can't make seeds grow, but we can plant them and water them. In other words, we don't make change happen, but we can create environments where change is more likely to happen - and then we pray and trust God that he'll take care of the rest.

But this begs the question, what kind of environment should a youth group have to encourage change and growth? That's something I'm continuing to work out, and maybe it's something that can't be 100% nailed down. Here are some of the elements I think go into it. Give me your feedback. Are these elements correct? What's missing?

1) Prayer - The leadership of the youth group must recognize that only God makes seeds grow and that to do their job they rely on him. So while this may not be an overt element of the youth group environment, it is a crucial one.

2) Biblical Focus - The Bible is God's special revelation to us. By teaching the text and creating an atmosphere that shows it is important, we can help students understand a Biblical worldview, giving them a foundation to ground their faith upon. Through Scripture we can show students that they are part of a story that is bigger than their own.

3) Relationships - Rather than flashy programming, a youth group ought to be relationally driven. Students need to know that there are loved and cared for by a team of adults. They must feel known and appreciated and trust that they won't be neglected.

4) Safety - Students must intuitively know when they come to youth group that they will not be harmed physically, emotionally, intellectually or spiritually. This does not mean hiding students in a bubble, but rather helping them establish appropriate boundaries. It also means giving them space to ask difficult and challenging questions about their faith without fear of rejection or being forced to accept easy answers.

These four elements are somewhat broad, and I know that they don't paint the entire picture. So again, what works about this? What doesn't? What am I missing? Your thoughts would be appreciated.

So close

2009-02-28T23:59:00.000-05:00

On Tuesday I went to my class Program Completion Seminar for the last time. I just have one more paper to write and a meeting with my professor.

On Friday I turned in my final paper for the Ethics course I took back in January.

That means I only have Hebrew and my internship left for the rest of the semester. Graduation feels so close I can taste it. It's exciting to think about finishing a semester and not having to worry about starting another one a few months later. It's great to not have to register for classes and worry about fitting everything into my schedule. And so far I'm really enjoying the process of searching for a ministry position when school is done.

And most of all, I really can't wait to sleep.

The thing I am most excited about is that when I'm done and I find a position in full-time ministry everything will be streamlined for me. I've heard a lot of people say things like, "If you think Seminary is tough/busy, just wait until you're a pastor!" But the thing is, I completely doubt that I could even be close to as busy as I am now. I work a 40+ hour a week job, a 10+ hour per week internship and go to seminary full-time. I'd have to put in at least 60+ hours per week at a church to match the work-load, and even if I did at least I could focus on one thing rather than having 3 areas competing for my time (in addition to family, friends, church, fun, etc...)

Well, in two weeks I'll be on Spring Break from school and I'm taking the week off work as well. It'll be nice to get a chance to rest. Hopefully it will give me the recharge I need to finish school strong.

The permanent record

2009-02-27T06:51:00.002-05:00

Every child going through school fears their permanent record - that file folder maintained by the principal containing every bad deed you've committed in school. Some kid's file folders were thicker than others, but everyone had one.

There was this looming fear that this record would follow you around for the rest of your life. Every year your new teacher would see it and know which kids were the good ones and which kids were bad. It would follow you through school, preventing you from ever being able to make a break in your reputation. One day when you applied to colleges they would get to see it and those couple of detentions for fighting at recess or chewing gum in class would be the difference between an Ivy League school or community college.

I was a fairly good kid, but looming over me was the fact that there was a detention in my permanent record. It wasn't really even my fault. Four kids surrounded me on a jungle gym at recess when I was in third grade and told me they were going to beat me up. I quickly assessed my surroundings. All but one of these kids were bigger than me. The one who was smaller was standing with his back to the slide, blocking my exit. In the spirit of George W. Bush I opted for a preemptive strike, kicked the kid back down the slide and then ran down to make my escape. Unfortunately the playground supervisor didn't hear these kids plotting to pummel me, she only saw me kick the short kid and I ended up with the detention.

I will never forget what the detention slip looked like. It was a white piece of paper with my name on it explaining the details of my horrible act and when I would need to serve the detention. It also had a line on the bottom for my parents to sign. And what was most disturbing were the pink and yellow sheets attached to the back... carbon copies. One for my parents to keep and one for the dreaded permanent record. That detention would loom over me for years. So much for Harvard.

But then fifth grade came around. At the start of the year my teacher, Mrs. Reinstein, had a talk with us about our permanent records. Guilt swept over me, but then she told us that she had gone through and emptied our records. She told us that from that point on we would have a clean slate. If we had been bad kids who got in trouble a lot, we could start over. If we had just made a few mistakes, we wouldn't have to worry about them anymore. The record was clean. My future was bright.

For years this served as an illustration of grace for me. As far back as Children's Sunday School I always heard that when you asked God to forgive you, he would remove your sins and forget about them. I had teachers tell me that God would never hold my sins against me and he would no longer even remember the bad things I had done. They pointed out Isaiah 43:25, which says, "I, even I am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more." My permanent record with him was clean. This, according to them, was what mercy was all about.

But at the same time they told us how God was omniscient - he knew absolutely everything. They told us we couldn't ever hide anything from God because he could see us and he even knew what we were thinking. And the thought crossed me mind, "If God knows what I'm thinking, but he doesn't remember my sins, then what happens when I think about my sins? Does he get confused? And if I can remember something that God can't, then doesn't that mean I know something he doesn't know?"

I quickly realized that this verse about God not remembering my sins was probably not as literal as it had been made out to be. Does God hold my sins against me? No. But does he completely erase his memory of them? That's doubtful.

So back to fifth grade and the erasing of my permanent record. Granted, my teacher was not attempting to make a theological point of any kind. She simply wanted to show her students that in her eyes we were all good kids and could start her class fresh. But my question is, was this act a good illustration of God's grace? Can we look at God's forgiveness as wiping our slate clean? As emptying out our permanent records? As forgetting his memory of our past wrongs?

As we attempt to live out our faith, particularly in communiy with other believers, I am convinced that our stories are important and powerful - even, or perhaps especially, the stories of our shortcomings. If someone else can hear my story of failure and be encouraged about God's forgiveness or perhaps motivated not to make the same mistake, then something good has come of it.

There is something comforting about the image of a God who forgets my sins. It is nice to know that God continues to give me more chances and doesn't hold things against me the way that another person would.

At the same time, though, I don't want to focus on forgetting my own sins to the point that I simply hide from them. I don't want to feel like there is a part of my story I can't tell and must keep secret. That's a terrible burden to carry. I would rather use my story, even if it means revealing some weaknesses, to help others live the lives that Jesus intended.

Ash Wednesday

2009-02-25T07:06:00.003-05:00

Today is Ash Wednesday - the day on the church calendar marking the beginning of Lent, a season leading up to Easter when Christians traditionally focusing on the suffering of Christ.

A common Lenten tradition is to give something up as a reminder of Christ's sufferings for us and to spend the time or energy we would have used on that activity to instead reflect on Christ and hopefully grow in faith. So this year for Lent I have decided to give up Facebook, which will be somewhat difficult for me thanks to the many wonderful (or perhaps terrible) games and applications the website offers. Whatever will I do for the next month and a half without Mob Wars or Scramble? (note the sarcasm)

Up until just a few years ago I fell into the camp of Christians who didn't observe Lent and thought it was pointless or even wrong. After all, Protestants don't observe Lent, do they? But when I studied it I learned, in fact, that most Protestants do observe Lent. I realized that just like many spiritual disciplines, even though it can be used in the wrong way, it can also be very beneficial if used properly.

In case you're interested, here's a good article on why a lot of churches don't observe Lent. Maybe it can help change some misconceptions.

And one last thing, if you're reading this post in my Facebook notes and you want to leave a comment, direct it here or I won't see it for a while!

Updates and Lent

2009-02-14T11:56:00.003-05:00

I'm in a blogging drought. I can't help but notice that this time last year I was posting at least once a day, and now I'm lucky to get one post in a week. Last year I committed to blogging every day throughout Lent and not only was I successful, but I managed to start early. For a while after that I continued to blog much more frequently than I had before that point, but slowly but surely I wound back down to a post or two a week... if I'm lucky.

So now I'm debating whether or not to try and post daily again this year during Lent. I have to say, I'm leaning toward "no." In fact, I'm leaning toward cutting back my internet time quite a bit during Lent. Perhaps even giving up Facebook for the whole season (GASP!). I'm a sucker for letting the internet sap my time away, so perhaps it's time I learn to discipline myself in this area.

And thanks to Matt's teaching last week at Anthem, I'm strongly considering some food aspects to Lent this year as well that might even lead to a healthier lifestyle all around once Lent is over. After all, what sense would it make to commit to something for 40 days if it didn't bring any lasting change once that time was over?

There's more going on in Genesis than I thought

2009-02-06T12:43:00.003-05:00

I'm taking my last Hebrew class this semester and we're studying the Torah, or the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. It's been fascinating to take a fresh look at these texts.

One of the questions that keeps popping up is "text or event?" In other words, when we study these books, are we simply looking to learn about a specific historical event or are we just letting the text speak for itself. If we do the former, we're tempted to search for materials (archeology, other texts, etc...) that give us more information about the event so we can learn as much as we can about it. If we do the latter then we recognize that the writer of the text had some very specific points and we try to focus on those.

I'm leaning toward the latter.

Not to say that we shouldn't study Biblical archeology (which I'm fascinated by - I'd love to study archeology in Israel some day), but sometimes I think our pursuit of the event leads us to miss the point of the text.

Classic example - the creation poem in Genesis 1. This was never intended to be a scientific textbook about how the world came to be. The point is that God created. And if you pay attention to how the text reads it actually supplies a road map for how to read the rest of Genesis.

Another great example are the genealogies throughout Genesis. The So-And-So begot So-And-So parts that we tend to skip over. The only way these are typically used in the church is to try and set a date for creation or for other events throughout the narrative. But again, this misses the point. In the beginning of Genesis God commands humans to "be fruitful, multiply and fill the land" and these genealogies provide a road map for how being fruitful, multiplying and filling happened. Again, there's more going on than we realize if we pay attention to how the text is reading rather than trying to moralize it or simply pick it apart to turn it into a history lesson.

So now I'm trying to study these books with fresh eyes, which is difficult after being familiar with them from a specific perspective for so long. As I continue there are two areas I'm particularly interested in - the theme of cities in Genesis and the theme of the younger brother being chosen over the older (particularly interested since I'm a younger brother!). Look for more posts on these topics in the future.

No one can go it alone

2009-02-01T23:59:00.000-05:00

According to the Hebrew Scriptures, the wisest man to ever live was Solomon, king of Israel. The story goes that God spoke to Solomon in a dream and told Solomon to ask for whatever he wanted. Solomon asked for wisdom, knowing he would need it to rule over God's people. God gave him the wisdom he asked for, although he apparently did not always take advantage of it as he made a great deal of mistakes in his reign.

The book of I Kings chapter 12 records the beginning of the reign of Solomon's son, Rehoboam. In the story the people come before the new king and ask him to lighten the burden, financial and otherwise, placed on them by his father, Solomon. Rehoboam asks for a few days to think it over. And here's something about the story that really struck me today. Verse 6 says:

"Then King Rehoboam consulted the elders who had served his father Solomon during his lifetime."

What hit me was that there was apparently a group of men who served Solomon to help him make decisions. The Hebrew word for elder used here is "zaqen," which literally means "old." Here the word refers to elders, or older men who sat at the gates of the city, oversaw legal matters and advised the king.

So Solomon, as wise as he was, still relied on the help of a group of other wise men to help him make decisions and lead the nation. On the other hand, many of us pride ourselves on being able to do jobs or tasks alone. Sometimes it even seems like a sign of weakness to accept help.

When I'm struggling with a problem at work and a colleague asks if they can give me a hand, my typical response is, "That's okay, I've got it," as if taking their aid means I'm less capable or valued.

I know that the point of this text is not to reveal that not even as a man as wise as Solomon made decisions on his own. But it is a friendly reminder that we don't have to go it alone and there is no shame in accepting or even asking for the help of others.

I hate snow

2009-01-31T17:09:00.002-05:00

Okay, I don't really hate snow. I think it can actually be a lot of fun. A few winters ago I had a few chances to go snowboarding and I loved it. If I could do that every winter then things might be different. But as it stands snow is mostly just something that makes me cold, gets everywhere, causes me to have to leave earlier than normal, makes my car rust and the paint chip and in general is a huge nuisance.

Which begs the question, is snow part of the fall? In God's perfect creation would snow never exist? Or is this horrible white stuff actually part of the way it was always intended to be?

I'm just posing this question in good fun. The reality is that with February coming I'm getting antsy for Spring!

Dark Knight Spoof

2009-01-26T23:51:00.001-05:00

I just thought this was hilarious...

I have no idea what to title this post

2009-01-25T23:59:00.000-05:00

So back in December I was licensed as a pastor/minister/whatever you want to call it. That's sort of like getting ordained only I didn't have to get questioned by an ordination board, it isn't permanent, and it has no bearing on my tax status. Did you know ordained ministers get taxed differently? Anyway...

The license basically gives me the legal ability to perform weddings. The reason I got the license is so I could be part of this team of lay pastors at my church. Since it's a very large church, the pastoral staff can't really handle all the weddings, funerals and other events that people need to have done - so the lay pastor team shares part of the load. That way they get the help they need and I get the experience I need. Good deal.

As part of this team, today I got to take part in some child dedication services. These are small, private ceremonies where parents get their friends and families together to commit to raising their children in such a way that will guide them toward following Jesus as they get older. Since the baby is the center of attention it makes my job really easy!

It was weird, actually, because I was fully expecting myself to be really nervous and end up tripping over my words and shaking or something. I just had this sense that I really didn't want to let these families down. But as soon as I met the first family and saw how excited and happy they were about the whole experience I knew that I didn't really have anything to worry about. They were the ones making the commitment, all I was doing was facilitating the experience.

So now that I've been through that I'm hoping that the next time I have to do some sort of pastoral duty, like another child dedication or perhaps a wedding or a funeral, I'll realize that there's nothing to be nervous about.

Change

2009-01-20T07:29:00.002-05:00

So two major events occur today... one that everyone will be talking about and one that doesn't affect many people beyond me but will most likely have a far greater impact on my life.

The first, of course, is Barak Obama's inauguration as the President of the United States of America in just a few hours. Many people are very hopeful that this will change everything. Our soon to be former President hasn't had the best approval rating and meanwhile we're fighting a war that's been rough on us and our economy has tanked. So a lot of people are putting their faith in the President to turn it all around.

I hope they don't turn on him if it doesn't.

The other major event is me starting my final semester of classes at Grand Rapids Theological Seminary. In May I should receive a degree saying I've earned my Master of Divinity and some church out there can trust me to work for them. For the past few years I've known that day was coming, but it never really felt all that close. I was just saying to my wife the other night that this has been one of those seasons in life that doesn't feel like it will ever end. Not to say I haven't enjoyed it, I've just had a hard time envisioning life beyond this. So in May I'll hopefully be able to start working in a church. And who knows, maybe there will be a lot of people expecting me to turn some things around as well.

I hope they don't turn on me if I don't.

Here we go again...

2009-01-17T11:47:00.003-05:00

It happens about once every two or three years. We wait for it. We get excited about it. We wonder if it will bring hope and change or just another season of the same old same old.

Of course I'm talking about the Lions hiring a new head coach.

This time around the poor guy is Jim Schwartz, formerly the defensive coordinator the Tennessee Titans. He touts one of the best defensive records in the NFL. But will it be enough to turn around the Lions poor defense? Will any of the talent we're promised he has be able to overcome eight years of some of the worst football, well... ever.

Let the debate begin. Let Lions fans ponder whether or not this means change... whether or not we should let our hopes get up again. But I guess we won't know for sure for at least another year.

Oh well, at least his last name doesn't start with an "M!"

Making Decisions

2009-01-15T23:30:00.003-05:00

We talked in my ethics class today about how to actually apply our ethical structures toward making decisions.

Here is the process my professor outlined:

1) Define the problem (because it's impossible to come to a solution if you don't know what the problem is!)

2) Gather appropriate information (because we need the facts in order to begin to come up with solutions)

3) Build alternatives (we tend to think in black and white, either/or terms when in reality there are often more alternatives than we know of... and if an alternative breaks one of God's commands then it isn't a valid option)

4) Predict the consequences (this may not be easy, but we need to think through all the possible consequences from as many angles as we can)

5) Identify and order your value system (you have to know what's really important to you, and in what order, and if you don't know, look back at your choices and they'll reveal what's important to you)

6) Evaluate and decide (you have to make a decision at some point, so utilizing the above process make the best possible decision)

In the course of the discussion several people in class began to ask questions about the role of the Holy Spirit in our decision making process. Does the Spirit somehow speak to us the right choice? Is there a way for us to know beyond a shadow of a doubt what God wants us to do? Is only one solution the right one, the one God wants, and the others are wrong? Or is it possible that God would be pleased with multiple solutions?

So just out of curiosity, what do you think of this model? And what would you say the Spirit's role is or ought to be in our decision making?

The Righteousness of God

2009-01-14T17:30:00.000-05:00

Growing up in the church I was always taught that none of us are truly good. From birth we are all sinners. We all "fall short of the glory of God." One of the chapters in the Bible that talks about this is Romans 3. In fact, Romans 3:23 was often quoted when I was growing up, it says, "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

Recently in theological circles, however, there is a growing number of people who reject this idea. They say that people aren't really all that bad, that deep down we're inherently good and we just make mistakes sometimes.

These people might point to Romans 3:23 and say, probably rightly so, that it has been used out of context and would tell people to read the whole paragraph starting at verse 21:

"But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."

I'll go ahead and stop there.

People who hold to this view might say, "See, we've only been quoted Romans 3:23 as if it's a stand-alone statement. But it's not! The point of the passage isn't that we're all sinners, it's that we're all the same, Jew and Gentile. We've all sinned but we've all been justified too!" They might point out that the point of this passage is hope and that saying, "all have sinned," just seems so depressing... and it does.

This makes me wonder where Paul was coming from when he wrote this. Can we pull the context back even further and figure out why he would say such seemingly depressing things about the state of humanity?

Just before this passage Paul was talking about the differences between Jews and Gentiles and he says, "What shall we conclude? Do we have any advantage? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin. As it is written:"

Then he goes on to quote pieces of several different Psalms. He starts, though, with Psalm 14 and Psalm 53 which indecently are almost identical! They both begin with the phrase, "Fools say in their hearts, 'There is no God,'" which I'm sure most all of us have heard before. Both also go on to say another often quoted verse, "Everyone has turned away, all have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one."

Other translations of this passage from the Hebrew put it, "There is no one who is righteous, no not one."

Seriously, no one does good? That's what these Psalms say? That's what Paul is quoting? Well, yes.

But don't people do good things all the time? Don't parents care for their children? Don't farmers work the fields to provide the world with food? Don't people make sacrifices every day to help protect and preserve life all around the world? Yes, they do, and most theologians would refer to that as common grace, or the idea that even in a corrupt and fallen world God provides us with the resources and ability to do some good. But this isn't the kind of good, or the kind of righteousness, that the writer of these Psalms or that Paul was talking about. They were talking about the kind of righteousness that protects us from God's wrath, the kind of righteousness that brings us into his kingdom. That kind of righteousness that, as Paul says, can only come through faith.

Psalms 14 and 53 are often only quoted for those two lines: "Fools say in their hearts, 'There is no God!'" and "There is no one who does good, not even one." And when you only quote those two lines it does sound pretty depressing. You have to wonder what kind of hope that offers.

What often gets left out is the last phrase, "Oh, that salvation for Israel would come out of Zion! When God restores his people, let Jacob rejoice and Israel be glad!"

There is hope in this Psalm. There is an expectation that even though people can not do good enough on their own, God will provide a way, he will save his people, he will give us reason to celebrate.

Paul quotes this passage not to make us feel bad about ourselves or to instill some kind of fear of judgment. He quotes them to say, "Yes, we are all in this together, Jews, Gentiles, everybody. We all are in this mess where we just can't ever quite do enough. But we can also be forgiven together, we can also have faith together, we can also be saved together from this destructive pattern. We can all be a part of God's kingdom if we just have faith in Jesus Christ."

Values

2009-01-13T10:56:00.002-05:00

According to my Ethics professor there are two types of values: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic values are those which in and of themselves are valuable and good... as in, if nothing else existed they would still be considered valuable. It's really hard to say anything is intrinsically valuable.

Extrinsic value is something that is a means toward another value and there are two types of this as well: instrumental value and beneficial value. Instrumental value is a good means while beneficial value is a means to good.

An example of an instrumental value is an atomic bomb. An atomic bomb is a good means for destroying people or things. That doesn't mean it's "good" in and of itself, but it's good at what it does... which is destruction. An example of a beneficial good might be food because in eating it you can become healthy, or sometimes money, because you can use it to buy good things or to benefit humanity.

So why do I bring this up? I think that in our culture we have a tendency to look at something's instrumental value and overlook it's beneficial value.

Take education for example. I can go to college and get a degree and take classes that are instrumentally good toward that degree but in the end I might have learned nothing of real value. Meanwhile someone else could read and study and do other things that are beneficially good toward a good education – but they don’t get a degree. Who will a potential employer take more seriously? They’ll look at the instrumentally valuable degree, not the beneficially valuable hours of study.

Why? Because it's easy to see something's instrumental value. It's objective. We can measure it. We can test it. But beneficial value... that's more subjective. We can't test it in a lab, we have to observe it over time in life. We have to take a chance on it and hope we made the right choice.

I think this relates to how we interact with people too. When we meet someone for the first time what are some of the questions we ask? What's your name? Where are you from? What do you do?

That last question, what do you do, we define ourselves by that one. It's measurable. If I'm an executive that carries a different sort of value than if I'm a librarian or a salesperson or a plumber or a waiter at Denny's. Never mind the beneficial value of that person, who they really are, because that question primarily addresses their instrumental value (i.e. what can they do, how much can they make?).

Maybe I'm just being cynical, but I just think we'd be better if off if we took more time to look into beneficial value than just the instrumental.

Am I called to Ministry? part 3 - Ethics

2009-01-10T13:13:00.004-05:00

Occasionally I like to write on the topic of how someone can tell whether or not God is calling them to ministry. It's a tricky subject that I would love to do more research on and write about more thoroughly some day, but in the meantime I like to comment on it here and there and see what other people think. So this is part 3 in this "series," even though the last part came about 7 months ago:

(You can read the other posts here and here, and another post on the subject here that wasn't part of the series)

This past week I started a J-term course at Grand Rapids Theological Seminary on Ethics with Dr. James Grier. I probably won't put this quite as eloquently as Dr. Grier did, but in the class he pointed out the distinction between God's moral will and his decreed will. To put it simply, we can know God's moral will but we can not know God's decreed will.

God's moral will consists of his commands - things like the Ten Commandments, loving your neighbor, etc... This area is concerned with what is right or wrong in any given situation. It is also an aspect of God's will that we can know and understand. We can know what kinds of things are right and wrong - for example, not killing or stealing or committing adultery.

God's decreed will, on the other hand, consists of God's eternal purposes or his plans. I know that at this point I may lose my more Armenian leaning friends, but this is the aspect of God's will that contains what he has decreed with happen.

Here's the difference between the two - God's moral law is concerned with ideas such as it's wrong to lie and so we shouldn't lie. God's decreed will, on the other hand, is concerned with whether or not God wants a particular person to be a pastor or move to Arizona or do some other specific action. Thus they are quite different.

And here's another difference. Like I said, we can know God's moral will because he's revealed it to us. We know what he considers to be right and wrong and thus we're held accountable to it. We don't, on the other hand, know his decreed will and thus we're not held accountable to it.

Since the lecture on this in class I've been thinking about it quite a bit, particularly in regards to what this means for being called into ministry. If God is calling someone to be a pastor, or to put it another way, if he has decreed for them to be a pastor, then how would they know? Would it just happen? A full-out Hyper-Calvinist might say yes, but I'm not sure that's quite it. Instead I'll offer two solutions.

First of all, if I can't know God's decreed will with certainty then I must go with what I can know: God's moral will. I know what's definitively right and wrong. So if I truly want to obey God and do what he's calling me to for my life then I need to start by doing the things he's already said to do. I need to obey his commandments.

His commands might be summed up in, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself," but if I want to know his commands more specifically I have to read and understand Scripture. There are over 200 commands in the New Testament alone. If I want to obey them then I need to be reading them consistently. When I'm studying the Bible I need to make note of commands and evaluate how well I'm doing at following them.

This leads to the second solution: prayer. We often think of prayer as asking God to grant certain requests in our lives. Sometimes I think we treat God like some sort of divine vending machine and if we insert the correct amount of change and push the right button we'll get what we want. What a horrible way to look at prayer! Sure there is a place for making requests of God, but I think the ultimate purpose of prayer is much different then that.

The Reformers like Calvin and Luther shared the belief that apart from God's grace we can do nothing. Left to our own devices we are bound to keep on making the same mistakes over and over. It is only because of God that we can escape the destructive patterns of our actions.

Prayer, then, is not so much a request for God to do what we want him to do, but a plea for him to provide us with the grace to help us do what he wants. It is about breaking from the destructive patterns of our own actions and aligning with his plans, with his will. It is about him guiding us to his decreed will that otherwise we would never know about and never be able to follow. It is about trusting him that he will lead us on a path that is far greater than any we could take ourselves down.

So whether you are wondering if God is calling you into ministry or any other purpose in life, then start with two things: obedience and prayer. Obey the commands you already know - do what God has said to do. And pray. Pray both for the ability to obey God's commands and for him to align your will with his. Then his specific purposes for your life can start to become more clear.

A bit of irony

2009-01-09T14:39:00.003-05:00

The other day I was dropping off my recyclables at a drop-off location in town. There are several large bins spanning about 50 yards or so for the different types of items: some for glass, plastic and metal, some for paper, and some for cardboard.

It was quite busy when I went so I just found a place to park and dropped off my items in the appropriate bins. As I was getting out of my car I noticed a woman, probably not a whole lot older then me, getting back into her car and backing out. I assumed she was leaving. Then after I'd finished as was driving away I noticed her car still in the lot and moving again. It occurred to me that instead of parking in one place and walking around to drop off her items in the bins shew was pulling her car up to the bin, dropping her stuff off, and then pulling her car up to the next bin.

Wasting gas (i.e. environmental harm) in order to recycle (i.e. environmental good). Didn't seem to gel quite right to me...

Getting back into the swing of things

2009-01-05T10:32:00.002-05:00

It's January 5th so for most of us it probably means two things.

1) We've already broken our New Year's Resolutions.

2) We're trying to readjust to normal life after a month or more of Holiday fun.

I didn't make any resolutions this year, so for me I'm only working on the second one. The only problem is, "normal life" seems to have taken some twists and turns, at least for the time being.

For starters, today I will start my last semester of seminary. I'm kicking the semester off with a J-Term course which meets four hours a day, Monday through Friday, for the next two weeks. Due to the timing of the course, I won't be able to work at all for these two weeks except for on weekends. In November I went to full-time at my job so for the past two months I've gotten used to working 40 hours per week. Now all of a sudden I'm working 16 hours for the next two weeks. It will be a change of pace, but I probably could use the break.

When this is done I'll start the more traditional part of the semester but will only have to deal with two classes (one of which only goes half the semester) and my internship thanks to the J-Term course. This will be the lightest work-load I've had in my entire four years at seminary. Hopefully I don't get a strong case of "senioritis" (if you can call it that at this level) and can manage to finish strong.

And when all of that is said and done I will hopefully have a job lined up and be ready to change the meaning of normal all over again. I actually plan to start this search any day now. I just need to update my resume and start looking for openings. The idea of starting this process has been one of the most nerve wracking experiences of my life so far. We'll see how it goes. I'll keep you posted.

A theoretical question

2008-12-30T13:24:00.002-05:00

When I was in college I lived with a group of guys in a house just off campus. A few of my roommates loved to play hockey, so one night we decided to go to a parking lot on campus and play roller hockey. I'd never played before so they were going to teach me.

We didn't live that far away, so we though it would be fun to ride our inline skates to the parking lot. The only problem was that this entailed riding through "the valley," a set of steep hills at the north end of campus where the freshman dorms were. There was a road that ran through the valley that would take us into campus that came to an intersection with a four-way stop right at the base of the hills.

I wasn't that great of a skater, and stopping was always the hardest part for me, so I was naturally nervous about the ride. I did okay at first with the help of one of my roommates, but as we kept skating down the hill I built up more and more speed to the point that the small brake pad on the back of my right skate did next to nothing to slow me down. I was careening uncontrollably down the hill toward the four-way-stop which, and traffic was fairly busy.

As I approached the intersection I knew I had two options. The first was to keep skating through the four-way-stop and hope for the best, knowing that I could easily run into a car or have a car run into me. The other option was to bail out, or look for a fairly soft spot of land to intentionally wipe out on.

I knew that the safer bet was probably to take the second option and bail, but I couldn't get my mind past the idea of crashing on purpose and potentially breaking a bone or causing some other harm to myself. As much as I tried I couldn't make myself do it, and suddenly I no longer had the option. I was going to head straight into the intersection and I was powerless to stop it.

At that point I was in sheer panic mode and braced for a collision with a car. I watched all the cars, wondering which one I was going to smash into. Miraculously, however, I sped right through, narrowly missing all of them, and continued onto the sidewalk on the other side completely unharmed.

My heart was racing and I hunched over with my hands on my knees, still skating along at a fairly brisk pace, and thought about how close I'd just come to serious injury or even death, and I thanked God for saving me from it.

And now as I reflect back on that moment, some theological thoughts come to mind. For example, some might say that an angel was watching over me. Others might say that God intervened and stopped any of the cars from hitting me. And since I emerged from the situation okay, it would be hard to argue with that.

But on the flip side, we're often told that the way God protects us or provides for us is by giving us the wisdom and intellect to protect and provide for ourselves. If that's the case, then would God step in and protect me even though I threw caution to the wind and stupidly skated down a steep hill when I knew I wouldn't be able to stop at the bottom?

My question, then, is what role does God play in protecting for us in these types of situations?

The post-Christmas blues

2008-12-26T19:24:00.002-05:00

If Christmas was my favorite day of the year when I was a kid, then the day after Christmas had to have been my least favorite. There was always so much buildup like watching Christmas movies, opening doors on the advent calendar, listening to Christmas Carols on the radio, going to special services and church, putting on a play, and all the other things that go into the holiday. Then Christmas day would finally come and I'd be so excited I couldn't contain myself.

But before I knew it, Christmas would be over. After weeks of buildup it was over in a matter of hours. Completely over. Christmas comes in nice and slow, but it sure ends in a flash.

The next day there are no more Christmas songs on the radio, no more talk of Santa, no more special services at church. It's just done, on to New Years and thinking about bowl games and having to endure the rest of winter.

As I got older I didn't mind the sudden end to Christmas so much. In fact, I realized that I liked how things slowed down and how I could enjoy all the wonderful gifts I'd received. Plus during the week or so after Christmas my siblings and I were all on break from school and my dad would take a vacation from work so everyone would be together for a few days. As a kid, though, it was hard to deal with.

This year I've felt a bit of that post-Christmas downer again. Somehow this year I feel like I was able to tune out the commercialism of the season and not worry about all the buying and spending that sucks the spirit right out of the holiday. Consequently I really got into the quote "Christmas Spirit," this year. So it's been hard to just try and turn it off and get back to life as usual.

I guess here's where the stereotypical line about realizing the true meaning of Christmas is in spending time with family and having goodwill toward men and whatnot. And how if we have that attitude all year then we can make every day like Christmas.

But let's face it, it doesn't work that way. Christmas is sort of like one of those mountaintop experiences where you feel excited and energetic. It's impossible to stay on the mountaintop, though, at some point you have to come down. Going back to life as usual isn't just inevitable, it's also healthy.

I think the question, though, is did we leave the mountaintop heading in a different direction from where we started? In other words, did we learn anything?

Like I said, one of the biggest reasons I enjoyed Christmas this year was that I felt I did a good job avoiding the commercialism. It's so easy to get sucked into that. It's easy to think that our worth comes from what we have, that we need more stuff and that life would actually be better if we bought more. So hopefully as I go back to life as usual after Christmas I can remember the joys of non-commercialism.

The evil effects of coffee

2008-12-22T12:37:00.005-05:00

It's just after noon and I'm starting to get a headache. I'm pretty sure the reason is that I haven't had any coffee today.

Yesterday I had quite a bit of coffee, it was one of those days where I actually made a whole pot because I had most of the morning off so I had time to sit around and slowly drink my coffee in rather than making just enough to put in my thermos as I rush out the door... which incidentally is the amount of coffee I made in the several days leading up to yesterday.

But today, no coffee... which equals a headache. Go figure.

A few years ago I didn't have this problem because I didn't really like coffee, at least not enough to ever choose to drink it. Someone would say, "Hey, let's get together and catch up over a cup of coffee!" So I'd meet up with them at some coffee shop, order a cup and them maybe drink half of it, sometimes less.

But then I started going to Seminary and sleep sort of became optional. I remember one night during my first semester when I'd been hanging out with my wife (we were just dating back them) and we were sitting on the couch in my apartment - I was really slouching and half awake - and I said to her, "I think I'm going to be tired for the next four years!"

I was right.

Hence I started to drink coffee. At first I would have some on the occasional morning when I had to wake up an extra hour or two early because my homework wasn't done. Like I said, I didn't particularly enjoy it's bitter taste, but I found it helpful for staying alert. Before long I started having it every morning when I had class. And the next thing I knew, I was craving the stuff. I actually found myself enjoying that horrible, yet strikingly delightful flavor.

And then there was the smell, the bold, powerful, enticing smell. I found I liked that better than the taste itself.

I had always been told it was an acquired taste, and I found that to be incredibly true. My question had always been, though, why would you want to take the time to acquire it? But it's amazing what four yeas of being tired will make you do.

Job on social justice

2008-12-18T08:50:00.003-05:00

On Tuesday I led devotions for our staff meeting at work and since I'm still reading through Job I decided to talk for a bit about that.

One of our therapists brought up a good point. He said how it's interesting that when we talk about Job, we always focus on the suffering Job went through, but what about the fact that every time one of his servants comes to bring him more bad news they say, "I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"

In each of the four instances of bad news all the servants present, minus one, were killed. Not to mention, Job had seven sons and three daughters and all of them died. Do we ever wonder what happened to the families of those servants? They might have had wives, husbands or children. Or what about the suffering of Job's wife, losing every one of the children she had borne. I've known enough moms to realize that must be the most terrible pain she could ever have experienced.

But Job's friends, and in many cases us when we read the book, don't mention those things. For Job's friends the focus is on whether or not Job had done anything to deserve this - on whether or not he was wicked.

I don't think Job forgot about the suffering of these other people, though.

In chapter 24 he gives a good definition of who the wicked are that they were all talking about. I'll give you verses 1-12:

"Why does the Almighty not set times for judgment?
Why must those who know him look in vain for such days?
There are those who move boundary stones;
they pasture flocks they have stolen.
They drive away the orphan's donkey
and take the widow's ox in pledge.
They thrust the needy from the path
and force all the poor of the land into hiding.
Like wild donkeys in the desert,
the poor go about their labor of foraging food;
the wasteland provides food for their children.
They gather fodder in the field
and glean in the vineyard of the wicked.
Lacking clothes, they spend the night naked;
they have nothing to cover themselves in the cold.
They are drenched by mountain rains
and hug the rocks for lack of shelter.
The fatherless child is snatched from the breast;
the infant of the poor is seized for a debt.
Lacking clothes, they go about naked;
they carry the sheaves, but still go hungry.
They crush olives among the terraces;
they tread the wine presses, yet suffer thirst.
The groans of the dying rise from the city,
and the souls of the wounded cry out for help.
But God charges no one with wrongdoing."

How do we tend to define the wicked?

Those who kill or hate? Those who steal and have no regard for the needs of others? Those who commit adultery or are consumed by lustful thoughts?

These are certainly marks of wicked people, and the rest of this chapter even goes on to identify these things. But our understanding of wickedness should not simply start and end here. In the preceding verses, Job specifically ties wickedness to mistreatment of the poor and helpless. When we see people around us in need and either do nothing about it or even contribute to their suffering, we are, by Job's definition, just as wicked as any other sinner.

Since Job is making a case that he is not one of the wicked, then he must be saying that he has not ignored the cry of the oppressed. In fact, it seems that Job's biggest concern in this passage is that there are people out there who fit this description and God seems to have done nothing about it. He has allowed it to happen.

So maybe he has left it to us to intervene. He has given us the wisdom to understand that there is suffering in the world and that it is unjust, and for the most part he has given us the resources to do something about it. We don't have to stand by and let it continue.

When we read Job it's easy to try and put ourselves in his shoes and think about how we respond to suffering. It's easy to feel sorry for Job when he loses everything and be happy for him when he gets it all back. But in focusing on Job's suffering, I wonder if we miss part of the point of this story.

Job is not the only one who suffered.

We are not the only ones who suffer.

While we can learn a lot about how to deal with suffering from this book, perhaps it is just as important to learn about responding to the suffering of others.

The Bible can use sarcasm too!

2008-12-15T23:59:00.000-05:00

I just started reading through the book of Job.

Something one of my Hebrew professors told me a while ago that I really found interesting was that when Satan is talking to God and he says how if God were to take away everything Job had that Job would "curse you to your face." The Hebrew word we translate as "curse" is actually the same word we usually translate as "bless."

So Satan essentially says to God, "Yeah, your servant Job blesses you, and if you take everything he has from him he'll still bless you! Yeah, he'll bless you right to your face!"

Did you catch the sarcasm?

It's one of those little things we tend to miss when we only get the English translation.

Reporter attacks Bush with shoe

2008-12-14T23:56:00.004-05:00

Two thoughts.

1) President Bush has reflexes like a jungle cat. Nice duck on that one.

2) Was it just me or did the Secret Service seem a little slow to react? I mean, I get that the guy had time to throw one shoe, but to bend over, grab the other one and then throw that too? Come on, guys, I think you could have done better.

Who is Satan?

2008-12-13T12:08:00.001-05:00

I'm going to start this post off with a fair warning. These thoughts aren't exactly complete. They originate from a conversation a friend of mine had in one of my seminary classes. In class we were discussing Ezekiel 28:11-19 and Isaiah 14:12-14, which a lot of people think talk about the Devil and how he fell from Heaven. In the midst of this discussion, it seemed to my friend and I that our understanding of Satan, from the early days of Israel to modern Christianity, has grown and evolved quite a bit. We were wondering where at lot of these ideas came from, or at what point things became more clear. We were also wondering if things, even now, are really as clear as we think they are. So bear with me as I try to explore this a bit.

When most people think of Satan, or the Devil, they probably conjure up images of a red faced guy with horns, bad facial hair and a pointy tail who lives in a firey underground cavern and torments sinners with a pitch-fork. But the truth is, these images of the Devil, and in fact these images of Hell, are derived from Dante's Inferno and Milton's Paradise Lost, not the Bible. Which begs the question, what does the Bible actually say about the Devil?

To start with, let's take a look at the first place the Bible actually talks about Satan: 1 Chronicles 21:1. You're probably thinking, "Wait a minute, don't you mean Genesis 3 and the fall of man... Satan in the garden with Eve?"

No, that's not what I mean. Genesis 3 never uses the word Satan or Devil or Lucifer or any of those other names, it just says that Eve was tempted by a serpent. In fact, the passage even begins, "Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made." It seems like the author was being pretty clear that he was talking about a snake.

This is not to say that we can't, with our complete knowledge of the Bible, go back and read Satan into that passage. But to take the passage in its own context you have to recognize that it does not directly talk about the Devil.

So on to 1 Chronicles. This passage says, "Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel." Without trying to dive into why Satan would do this or what's so bad about a census, I think this gives a good example of what many of us assume Satan's role is - tempting God's people.

The book of Job is the next place where Satan is found and the role is fairly similar. What's interesting, though, is that while most English translations render the term simply "Satan," the Hebrew word actually contains a definite article. In other words, a more accurate translation would be "the Satan." What's more interesting is that in Hebrew Satan means "accuser," thus all the places in your English version of Job where you find "Satan," you could translate it "the accuser." Perhaps more significant, though, is that this is the first place in Scripture where we see Satan personified. He goes before God, he talks about walking about on the earth, he actually has a conversation with Yahweh himself. I think it would be fair to say that Job gives more information about Satan than any other Old Testament passage.

In fact, the only other place in the Old Testament where Satan is mentioned is in Zechariah where once again he is depicted as going before God to accuse God's people.

Then there are, of course, the passages from Isaiah and Ezekiel. The text itself claims that these passages are written to the King of Babylon and the King of Tyre, respectively. Most scholars wouldn't try to deny that. Where the debate comes in is whether or not these passages are ALSO talking about the Devil, and in reading them you could certainly see where people get that idea. But the thing is, we can't really know. And a lot speculation about this on the part of Christians stems in part from the fact that we pick up a lot more details about who Satan is from the New Testament.

Once you enter the New Testament, Satan begins to pop up much more frequently and it is only in the New Testament that the word "devil" is used of him. We see Satan tempting Jesus in the desert. Jesus makes several references to the Devil, even accusing one of his disciples as being him! We are told in Ephesians to guard against the Devil and not give him a foothold in our lives. And of course, the book of Revelation contains several more graphic depictions of who this character is.

It seems that if you're only looking at the Old Testament, though, our knowledge of Satan is pretty slim. If not for the references in Job you probably wouldn't even conclude that there were any demons who stood out from the rest. Yet the New Testament has a fairly full understanding of this character. It makes you wonder what happened during the intertestamental period that fleshed things out.

How do we go from this slim concept of Satan through most of the Old Testament to quite a rich concept in the New Testament? Did Jesus warn his disciples about Satan and they just didn't write it down? Were the New Testament authors somehow gifted with this knowledge for our benefit? Or did these ideas somehow develop in the time between the last words of the Old Testament and the first words of the New Testament?

I have to say that I lean toward that third option. That's not to say that our ideas about Satan that developed at that time are flawed, because obviously the New Testament does canonize them. But it could help us go back and try to figure out what more was going on in those New Testament passages.

More importantly, it might help us realize that what we know about Satan is really quite limited. We need to throw those ideas about the red guy with the pitch fork out the window. Satan is not some deformed goblin who hides out trying to scare us. From what we learn in both the Old and the New Testament, he is a being who both tempts and accuses us - and we need to rely on God and obey him to make sure Satan is unsuccessful in both of those areas.

Rest

2008-12-10T01:41:00.004-05:00

I've been very tired lately. It's the end of the semester, so there has been a lot of school work due. Plus I recently went full time at work, and on top of that I still have my internship, and of course family time.

I'm used to staying up late and not getting a lot of sleep most nights, but typically I get one or two days a week to sleep in and sort of catch up. Lately with all this added stuff going on, though, that hasn't been happening. I just feel tired all the time.

I've started to develop an awareness like never before of why it says in Genesis that after creating the world, God rested on the seventh day, and why this idea of rest is such a big deal that God even gave Moses a commandment that we need to honor the Sabbath (Hebrew for rest) day and keep it holy. Holy means set apart... so apparently we're supposed to set aside a day for rest.

Seems like such a novel concept in our culture. But I know I could use one.

Sheep and Goats

2008-12-07T07:19:00.003-05:00

It's the end of another semester, so naturally I haven't had a lot of time to blog, but I had a conversation the other day with a friend of mine that I wanted to talk about a bit, and who knows, maybe it will kick me back into the swing of things.

We often talk as Christians about how we can get saved, or how we know we are saved. But I wonder if the better question to ask shouldn't be what do I do after I get saved? I mean, isn't there a reason why we identify ourselves with Christ beyond simply what happens when we die?

The book of Matthew chapter 25 contains a passage of Scripture, a story Jesus told, that has actually frightened me at times over the years and I think it is relevant to the discussion. Here it is:

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates his sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go visit you?'

"The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sister of mine, you did for me.'

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

"He will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

I say that this passage has frightened me at times because as I think through my life, I wonder how many times I have fed a hungry person, gave water to a thirsty person, invited a stranger in, given clothes to someone who needed them, cared for a sick person or visited someone in prison? While I have done these things at times, have I really made enough of an effort? And is it possible that I've missed opportunities to do them, or just flat-out denied the chance because of my own selfishness, more often then I've done something to help?

For just a minute try and forget about your ideas about salvation. Forget passages like Ephesians 2:8-9 that says "by grace are you saved through faith," or Acts 2:21 that says, "And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." Try and forget all of that and just look at this passage.

If getting into Heaven depended on how we measured up to this passage and this passage alone then how many of us would confidently say we're in? How many of us would feel relaxed about our salvation? How many of us would waste time in church committee meetings, or with petty theological arguments or judging other Christians?

I think if we looked at this Scripture as the measure of salvation we would be much more intentional about taking care of the hungry, thirsty, needy, stranger, sick and prisoner.

Now, I understand that we can't ignore the rest of Scripture, nor should we. We have to seek a way for all the passages we find about salvation to resolve with each other. We have to try to understand how on one hand we need only to call out to God to be saved, and on the other hand we're commanded to take care of the hurting people of the world.

But maybe the answer is that we are not supposed to be so concerned with whether or not we we are in or out? Maybe once we reach the point where we want to identify ourselves with Christ we need to stop worrying about salvation and start worrying about all the people God wants us to take care of?

Does America make crappy cars?

2008-12-03T08:52:00.006-05:00

About six years ago my sister sold her 1999 Oldsmobile Alero to my dad. There were a lot of reasons for the transaction but one of them was the fact that she thougt a foreign car would be less likely to have problems than her American model. She ended up with a Volkswagon that had so many problems that she sold it just a couple of years later.

The Alero on the other hand, well my dad drove it for about four and a half years and then sold it to my wife and I. In that time all it has needed (knock on wood) has been an alternator, brakes and tires.

I don't bring this up as a jab at my sister in any way. Like I said, there were a lot of reasons she got rid of the car and she now drives a Hyundai which seems to be a really great car. Rather, I bring it up because quite often I hear this sentiment that American car companies make inferior products and quite frankly I don't think it's true.

Today the CEO's of the Big 3 American auto-makers will meet with leaders in Washington to ask for a combined 34 Billion dollar bailout. This is their second attempt after their were rejected a few weeks ago for asking for this money without a clear plan of how they would use it.

In their first meeting, the auto makers were chided for flying to D.C. in their own private jets and then not having a clear enough plan on what they would do with the money. As was pointed out on the Free Beer and Hot Wings morning show today, the Big 3 were ridiculued despite the fact that AIG received over $100 billion with not much of a plan and the government has yet to criticize them for their lack of fiscal responsibility in spending a couple hundred thousand on a corporate retreat. So why suddenly crack down just when the auto industry asks for help? While any company looking for government assistance should come with a clear plan, this criticism seemed less like the government trying to assure the Big 3 would be responsible and more like an attack by a part of the country that has lost trust in American auto manufacturing.

I read an article in the Grand Rapids Press yesterday that says over 70% of cars in D.C. are foreign. This just reflects the assumption in much of the country, particularly large cities, that American cars are somehow inferior and that the Big 3 don't make cars that people want to buy. And yet across the board in the U.S. domestic sales make up just over 48% of the market despite the fact that the U.S. has the most open market in the world for auto sales. So I question, where is the evidence that American cars are inferior? Where is the evidence that people don't want to buy them?

Are American cars perfect? No, of course not. Do they break down occasionally? Yes, obviously. But all cars do that. There is a cruel reality that any product you buy is designed to only last so long so that you'll either need to pay the manufacturer to make repairs or go out and buy a new one. It doesn't matter what country your car comes from, this will be the case. If anything, buying a foreign car only means you'll pay more for the repairs. Sure, my 2000 Chevy Malibu seems to have some sort of issue about once every 4 or 5 months, but the most I've ever had to pay to get it fixed is around $300 dollars, and typically it's around $100. I don't think I'd be able to say the same thing if I were driving a foreign car.

But all of this aside, what will happen to the American economy if the Big 3 car companies fail? The working class forms the backbone of the American economy, and the auto industry is a huge part of the working class. In Michigan in particular the auto industry drives (no pun intended) the entire state.

Do we really want to let that industry collapse based on an unproved assumption that America has given up on American cars?

Thanksgiving

2008-11-27T23:59:00.000-05:00

We're finally home after spending the past 36 hours or so with family. It all started with Jen and I driving down to our hometown yesterday afternoon. Jen went out with her mom and sister and I went to my parents house to set up a wireless network for my dad and so some other technology oriented tasks. Then I went back to Jen's family's house where we hung out and spent the night.

Today we woke up and everyone sort of pitched in to make food and get things ready for dinner. We had a great meal with TWO turkeys (one roasted and one deep fried)! And all of the other food was great too.

Then after that it was back up to Grand Rapids where we spent time with my family at my sister's house, eating some dessert, watching football and playing games. My family is big on board games, especially trivia, although we all got a little bored after playing Trivial Pursuit a little too long.

All in all it was a lot of fun. I don't normally blog about my day-to-day life, but I thought it was appropriate today because I am truly thankful for my family. I'm thankful that we all get along so well. I'm thankful that I can't empathize at all with those TV shows or movies where people are afraid of their in-laws and don't get along with them, because that's just not the case at all for me. I have to say that I've really been blessed by my entire family.

Rapture Practice

2008-11-25T13:06:00.001-05:00

This looks fun but I'm not sure that I'd want to give it a try:

Child Preacher

2008-11-23T21:07:00.005-05:00

Check out this video my wife found today on GodTube.

When I first saw the video I just thought it was kind of funny, maybe even a little bit cute. But then I read the comments. They are truly interesting. Some point out that this is just a cute kid. Others find it ridiculous or disturbing. And then there are those that think this child is anointed by God to preach. Take a look at a few of the comments:

"This baby is anointed-no matter that you don't understand the childrenese. He may be imitating his Dad but he is definitely on fire for the Lord or he would not be so intent on being up there preaching like that. Very cute and inspiring!"

"I found this a bit disturbing. He's barely walking and already preaching fire & brimstone, it sounds like. The adults in the video seem to mostly find it funny, egging him on even though his voice is already hoarse...."

"it is not the actual wording you listen to it is his passion for what he knows is good"

"Preach it Baby!"

"That is so ridiculous. All the child is doing is imitating. A monkey can do that. Would that make the monkey divine?"

"Many of you have indicated that you thought this was "cute," while others said they found it "ridiculous." What you are missing is that this is the fulfillment of the prophecy of JOEL that declares: "And it shall come to pass after this, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy." Thanks for sharing the video. This is more than just a cute kid imitating the preacher man—it is the fulfillment of prophecy. It is an encouragement to see the outpouring of the Spirit during the final days before Christ's return."

"I'm sorry, but that is scary!"

I think I'll hold off on my own comments for now. I'm just curious what everyone thinks. Is it crazy to think that God would speak this way? Is this child just imitating what he has seen in the church? Or is the Holy Spirit really speaking through this kid? How could we be sure one way or the other (i.e. how do we test whether or not something is from God)?

Also, what does it say about the church that we are so divided over this type of thing that some people can believe that this is absolutely ridiculous or scary while other think it is inspiring and edifying?

What makes us think we're safe?

2008-11-20T23:53:00.003-05:00

I took an exam today on my Hebrew class that covered the Old Testament prophets. It's been interesting and quite eye-opening studying these books this semester.

One of the running themes, especially among the minor prophets, is the concept of the coming "Day of the Lord." It's spoken of as a terrible day of judgment and dread. The Israelites, prior to the exile, believed that judgment was reserved for the other nations around them. The message of the prophets, however, was that they wouldn't be so lucky.

In the book of Amos especially the concept of the Day of the Lord is applied to Israel and Judah. Amos warns God's people that, yes, the other nations will be judged for their wickedness, but God's own people will be judged even more severely because they had a covenant with YHWH, they of all people should have known better. Amos warns people who actually were looking forward to the Day of the Lord that they were going to be caught off guard because it was going to hit them too.

After the exam we were talking about this a bit and the idea of the pre-tribulation rapture, or a future time when Christians are swept off to Heaven before God judges the world, came up. My professor, who says he affirms this concept, said that a lot of people support this idea by saying that throughout the Old Testament God always spared the righteous from judgment.

Yet, the opposite is true.

In fact, God almost never spared the righteous. When Israel was practically annihilated by Assyria, the righteous were struck right alongside the wicked. When Judah went into exile in Babylon the righteous were kicked out of their homes and taken to a foreign land too.

It makes me wonder, why do we assume we're safe? I hesitate to say this because I don't want people to take me the wrong way, but have Christians gotten way too comfortable in America? The early church faced severe persecution in the Roman Empire. In the early years of the Protestant Reformation many of the Reformers were tortured and killed. Even today across the world there are thousands of Christians suffering for any number of reasons. Have any of these people stopped and said, "Wait a minute, I'm a Christian, I'm not supposed to suffer!" I don't think so.

I wonder if it is no coincidence that things like the "prosperity gospel" (the idea that if you're a good Christian God will bless you with good health and finances) or even the pre-tribulation rapture originated in North America where Christians are relatively free to practice what they believe without fear of persecution?

Have we lost the concept of suffering? And if so, what does that mean for the church in America?

What a depressing guy

2008-11-18T23:59:00.000-05:00

So I've been reading and writing a paper on John Bunyan's autobiography Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners and let me say that this is one of the most depressing and frustrating texts I've ever read. It's not long, around 90 pages, but the majority of it is Bunyan going on and on about how he can't possibly be saved because he's such a rotten sinner. Even after he learns about grace he convinces himself he's committed the unpardonable sin and it's another 20 or 30 pages of "Woe is me, I'm going to Hell."

I can't say this in my paper so I'll say it here - the man is the Eeyore of the Theological world. I'm not even kidding, about halfway through the book my internal voice for Bunyan was just a slow, low-pitched monotone drawl. "Oh alright, I guess my soul is eternally damned after all. That's fine."

I'm so glad I'm done!

Watch this!

2008-11-17T09:52:00.004-05:00

I encourage you to turn off your TV for a few minutes and take a look at this video. What do you think? Right on or just trying to scare us?

I'm not sure that every fact is correct, but I think the overall message is true, living a consumeristic lifestyle is not going to make us happy, there has to be a better way than this. We'd be much better off without a lot of this stuff that we buy supposedly to make our lives better.

Following the video you can see a list of 10 things you can do to make a difference. I particularly liked #6:

Unplug (the TV and internet) and Plug In (the community):

The average person in the U.S. watches T.V. over 4 hours a day. Four hours a day filled with messages about stuff we should buy. This is four hours a day that could be spent with family, friends and in our community. On-line activism is a good start, but spending time in face-to-face civic or community activities strengthens the community and many studies show that a stronger community is a source of social and logistical support, greater security and happiness. A strong community is also critical to having a strong, active democracy.

So, what do you think?

HT: Steve Argue

Who did Jesus die for?

2008-11-16T23:20:00.003-05:00

In my Historical Theology class the other day we talked a bit about exactly who Jesus died for.

Some w0uld say that Jesus only died for the "elect," or those chosen before the world was even created to ultimatley be saved. These people would add the note that Christ's death was sufficient for all but efficient only for the elect. In other words, it was powerful enough to save everybody, but in actuality it only saved those whom God had elected.

Others would say that Jesus died for everybody. Most of these people would claim that the only reason some people aren't saved is because they reject the offer of salvation Christ gives to them. In other words, the choice is up to them.

The fundamental difference here is choice. In the first group, God does the choosing, in the second group, humans do the choosing.

This is also the fundamental difference between Calvinism and Arminianism.

It seems that the problem is that if you choose Calvinism, you have a very powerful Christ, one who could have saved everybody, but yet he doesn't. This seems to put a damper on that whole "God is love" thing. But if you choose Arminianism then you have a very loving God, one who wanted to save everybody, but a less powerful God because even though he wanted to save them he couldn't.

Is there really a good solution to this problem?

An Ideological Question

2008-11-15T16:05:00.003-05:00

Do people who choose to be vegans on the basis of not wanting to do any harm to animals (as opposed to health concerns or other reasons), or people in organizations like PETA, also tend to oppose embryonic stem cell research?

I mean, wouldn't it be somewhat ironic to refuse to eat the unfertilized egg of a chicken because of harm to animals, but then support the destruction of a human embryo?

Just saying...

What's wrong with blame

2008-11-14T23:06:00.003-05:00

Just my opinion, but I think that the biggest problem with blaming and excuse making is that when you put the responsibility for your problems on someone else, it takes away any sense that you might actually need to change something about yourself. And if you don't change, you'll just keep running into the same problems.

Or am I just way off base?

A different perspective on the prodigal son

2008-11-11T15:30:00.001-05:00

I'm currently reading the book What Do They Hear? Bridging the Gap Between Pulpit and Pew by Mark Allan Powell. In the book Powell does a study on how culture influences Biblical interpretation. I found one of his examples very interesting.

Think of the story of the prodigal son from Luke chapter 7. What aspects of the story stand out? How would you retell it?

According to Powell, most Americans pick up on the following details:

-The youngest son asks his father for his inheritance early then takes off
-The son wastes his wealth and ends up bankrupt, working on a pig farm
-The son decides to come home to his father
-The father welcomes the son and throws a party
-The older son isn't happy about it

The moral of the story here seems to be that the younger son was wicked, he made bad choices and put himself in these bad circumstances. In short, he reaped what he sowed. But he made a choice to turn back to his father, or repent, and so the father accepted him again. The emphasis here is thus on reform.

But in Russia students understood the story quite differently. They picked up on these points:

-The youngest son asks his father for his inheritance early and takes off
-A famine strikes and the son is left broke and hungry
-The son comes home where the father was already waiting, looking for him
-The father throws a party
-the older son isn't happy about it

Here the moral of the story isn't that the son was wicked, but that he was foolish. He foolishly left the safety and security of his father's house. Yes, he wasted his money, but that wasn't the problem, lots of people were poor at that time. Rather the son's problem was that a famine hit, something unpredictable, and he didn't have the security of his family to fall back on. When he finally did go home his father was already looking for him, thus the emphasis is on recovery.

I found this quite interesting because I honestly didn't even remember the detail in the story about the famine. It seemed inconsequential to the way I have always understood the story. But looking at it from a different perspective I can see how it is such a crucial detail. In life famines do come, but will we be ready for them? Who are we relying on to get us through them?

Powell ends the chapter by analyzing how a third group understood the story, a group of students from Tanzania. These students didn't emphasize that the son ended up hungry because he wasted his money OR because the famine came. Instead they pointed to the fact that the son was in a foreign country. They felt that since the son was a stranger in a strange land, he wouldn't have known the customs, he wouldn't have known how to survive. Of course he would have ended up wasting money and not being prepared for a famine.

The real problem, they claimed, was that no one in this country did anything to help him. We are commanded to look out for the alien, and yet in this situation no one did. For them the emphasis of the story was that in the Kingdom of God (depicted by the father's household) no one, not even the foreigner, is forgotten or goes hungry.

So there's one story, one text, but depending on cultural factors, it is understood three different ways - maybe more if we looked at it from even more perspectives. Does that mean only one of the interpretations is correct? I don't think so. But perhaps by looking at the text from these different perspectives we can come to a fuller understanding of what Jesus really meant.

Churches in a bad economy

2008-11-10T20:09:00.002-05:00

Saturday's Grand Rapids Press had an article about how the economy is affecting churches. The article talked about one particular church that had raised money for a brand new building prior to the economic and was faced with whether or not to go ahead with the project now that things have gotten bad. The article also talked about what other churches are doing to try and keep their financial commitments to things like missions.

I think a bad economy creates an interesting dilemma for churches. Sometimes a poor economy translates to less giving on the part of the community, which seems natural. When people are doing everything they can to scrape by then they might not have the funds to give much to the church. The article pointed out, though, that in the last 6 recessions since 1968, giving dropped in half of them but actually increased in the other half! So perhaps this is a testament to church goers putting their faith in God for financial help.

Whether churches find themselves with more or less money during a recession, however, I think the question is the same, what do they do with the funds God provides for them? Should this have an affect on how a church spends its money? Should the church increase charitable giving? And if so, should they focus on missions that help people in the United States affected by the poor economy or give to causes around the world?

Also, is it okay for a church to continue with building projects, be it additions or improvements, when the economy is bad?

I hate not going to church

2008-11-09T21:34:00.002-05:00

My wife and I had a great weekend driving down to Columbus, Ohio with her family to attend her cousin's wedding. We had a great time catching up with family, engaging in some good conversation, hanging out in the hotel, having fun at the wedding, and eating way too much food for our own good. The only down side was that we couldn't go to church this morning.

There was a point in my life when I went to church week after week without fail (barring major illness) because I felt I had to. It wasn't that I always wanted to be there, but I felt guilty for not going. So I would either skip family gatherings such as this or I'd leave early to make sure I was home by Sunday morning.

My convictions have changed since then and even though I make it a point to always go to church and to not miss for lame reasons I think it's perfectly okay to miss a Sunday because of a family gathering like this or other important event. But even though I don't feel guilty for not being there, I do feel like I missed out. I still wish I could have gone.

In the past couple of years it seems like my wife and I have had to skip church a lot, or at least not go together. Often times I work on Sunday mornings, so Jen will go to our church alone and I'll go to a different church with the kids at work. Or there will be a family event like today. Or some other thing will come up and we can't go. Honestly, it seems like we only end up going to church together about two out of every three weeks.

I know I can "catch up" on sermons via podcast and I can read the Bible, sing songs and pray on my own. But none of these things capture the essence of what it really means to gather together with other Christians, sit and talk with each other and experience the service together. It's an amazing experience and I hate to miss it. Not because I feel obligated, but because I really just want to be there.

Fight on for Western!

2008-11-09T08:48:00.003-05:00

Western Michigan 23 - Illinois 17

GO BRONCOS!!!

Job Hunting

2008-11-08T12:00:00.000-05:00

So I was just thinking, I'm graduating seminary in May. That's only 6 months away!!! That means I'm probably not too far off from having to start the process of finding a church position! It's one of those things that is exciting and terrifying at the same time.

I really don't even know where to begin. I suppose I could start with updating my resume and using ChurchStaffing.com or other job finding sites. But what I'm really getting at is how do I even begin to sort out God's will for me in this?

My wife and I could literally go anywhere in the country, or I suppose, around the world. We could decide on an area and I could just send applications there, or we could send my resume everywhere we can and "let God decide."

I could take the first thing that comes along or I could wait patiently. I could hone in on a specific type of church (based on denomination, size, location, etc...) or be open to anything.

The past few years I have been free to think in very general terms about "someday when I'm done with seminary and working in a church..." but I guess it's time I start thinking through this stuff a little more concretely. Like I said, exciting and scary.

Infant Baptism

2008-11-07T12:00:00.002-05:00

My friend Jason and I were talking yesterday about Baptism. In our faith tradition only those who profess faith in Jesus Christ may be baptized. In other words, no infant baptism.

This differs from, well, the majority of Christian denominations around the world. The Catholic faith has practiced infant baptism since, I suppose they would say, the church began. Baptists might argue, but that's beside the point, we have no way of knowing exactly when this method started. When Martin Luther, John Calvin and many of the other fathers of the Reformation converted to Protestantism, they continued the infant baptism tradition. In fact, they held so strongly to the view of there being just one baptism (Ephesians 4:5) that even though they rejected the authority and leadership of the Catholic Church, they refused to re-baptize any Catholic converts.

In the Baptist/Bible Church tradition, however, the importance of a believer's baptism trumps the importance of one baptism. Often if someone of a Reformed, Lutheran, Catholic, etc... background who was baptized as an infant wants to join a Baptist or Bible church they must first be re-baptized.

Consider the implications of this. We are essentially telling the majority of the universal church, "We don't believe you are really baptized."

We say things like, "We can get along despite our differences," or "We don't agree on all points, but we're only going to 'die for' the big stuff like saying 'Jesus is Lord,'" or "All of this stuff will get sorted out when we get to Heaven." And yet when it comes to something as sacred as Baptism we say, "I'm sorry, but your tradition did it wrong so we're going to do it again."

What a slap in the face!

We're willing to agree to disagree on so many points, but on this one we have no room to bend, not even a little. It's as if we don't really think followers of these other traditions are even Christians at all!

But remember this: Martin Luther was baptized as an infant.

Arminius was baptized as an infant.

Thomas Aquinas was baptized as infant.

Philip Melangthon was baptized as an infant.

Augustine was baptized as an infant.

John Calvin was baptized as an infant.

Need I continue?

Are we serious that we often follow the teachings of these men, sometimes quite strictly, but we wouldn't let them be members of our churches? How ridiculous does that sound?

I know we believe quite strongly that baptism should be for those who confess faith in Christ. But if we don't believe that baptism saves us, then why aren't we willing to bend? Perhaps if we did we could go a long way toward peace and unity between denominations.

Fun with post scheduling

2008-11-06T22:44:00.002-05:00

Hey everybody,

I'm not going to be around much this weekend, but I've had a lot of things on my mind to blog about lately, so I typed a few posts up in advance and they'll automatically post while I'm gone. Feel free to read and comment, but just know that if I don't respond right away it's because I couldn't get to a computer, not because I thought your feedback was weak or irrelevant... well, most likely ;)

Peace,

Steve

Theology and Practice

2008-11-06T12:38:00.004-05:00

It seems to me that our theology tends to get screwed up the most when we neglect to think of it in terms of our practice.

For example: there's a small contingent of Hyper-Calvinists whose approach to evangelism is "why bother?" because they figure God has everything all sorted out anyway. They're focusing on their theology of election without letting it being influenced by the fact that we're commanded to be Christ's witnesses.

I pointed this out yesterday during a discussion in my Theology class but my professor, Dr. Michael Wittmer, rightly pointed out that the flip side is also true: things get screwed up when we only think of our practice and neglect letting our theology influence what we do.

So what we do as Christians must be determined by what we believe, which must then be influenced based on what we do, which... you get it.

Perhaps this could be a good grid for making sure we don't stray into either heresy or bad practice?

Confronting problems in the church

2008-11-05T12:00:00.000-05:00

Today in my Pastoral Competencies class one of my classmates and I have to present about dealing with divisiveness in the church. We were given a scenario where a popular church member and Sunday School teacher is unhappy with how certain things are going in the church and has dealt with it by complaining to his class and then organizing secret "prayer meetings" in his home to talk about his problems.

I just thought I'd throw a few questions about it out there for discussion:

1) For those who attend church, how do you approach problems you have with your church or its leaders?

2) For pastors or other church leaders, how do you confront someone whose actions are threatening the unity of the church?

3) When might it be okay for church members to meet secretly about problems they're having with the church?