So those of you who know me know that I have a very skewed ratio of ideas to actual writing. So the other day I got an idea for a story and decided I was going to just do it.
here's the result.
being my first short story I've actually finished and posted for people to read, I would love your feedback! i.e. when you read, don't just say to yourself this stinks, post it in the comments (I fixed them so people can comment now, I hope) and tell me why it stinks so that the next thing I write doesn't stink so bad.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Two Ideas I'm thinking through
I've been doing some reading today that was probably a little out of my league. This morning while I was getting my car not fixed I started "Escape From Reason" by Francis Schaeffer. Then this evening I read a post by Stanley Fish which you can find here (good luck understanding it...) So these are two thoughts that are going through my head after reading those two things. I post it here mostly because this is how I process information, but also because I want to see what other people think. (i.e. am I that crazy?)
1) truth is a word; it describes other sets of words. It's a tool rooted in language, but in the absence of words what becomes of truth? Is truth something, as Derrida might put it, exist outside the text? And by that, I don't mean is there reality outside the text. I mean is there truth apart from language, or is truth simply a measure of words in the right order. Makes me want to stop blogging and start doing some form of visual art that has no words attached.
2) When I think does my mind actually create new realities of consciousness? These mental images and events floating like dreams, do they have real existence in some dimension, the way God exists even though we don't see God? When God thinks, creation happens; matter and energy are formed in our world. When we think, do new spiritual realities exist in the realm of God? Do we, in the image of God, have the ability to think things into spiritual exisitance?
OK so there you go. If you've known me for a while you may know I have a tendency to try to think about "theories" like these. My wife knows I've always imagined being some sort of theoretical physicist. I think it has to do with the fact that I read some really interesting books about theoretical physics when I was in college. The best by far was called "Einstein's Dreams"
So no, I'm not on drugs. Other then Mucinex for a bad chest cold I've been fighting. And Claritin. maybe that's a psychoactive combination, I don't know...
1) truth is a word; it describes other sets of words. It's a tool rooted in language, but in the absence of words what becomes of truth? Is truth something, as Derrida might put it, exist outside the text? And by that, I don't mean is there reality outside the text. I mean is there truth apart from language, or is truth simply a measure of words in the right order. Makes me want to stop blogging and start doing some form of visual art that has no words attached.
2) When I think does my mind actually create new realities of consciousness? These mental images and events floating like dreams, do they have real existence in some dimension, the way God exists even though we don't see God? When God thinks, creation happens; matter and energy are formed in our world. When we think, do new spiritual realities exist in the realm of God? Do we, in the image of God, have the ability to think things into spiritual exisitance?
OK so there you go. If you've known me for a while you may know I have a tendency to try to think about "theories" like these. My wife knows I've always imagined being some sort of theoretical physicist. I think it has to do with the fact that I read some really interesting books about theoretical physics when I was in college. The best by far was called "Einstein's Dreams"
So no, I'm not on drugs. Other then Mucinex for a bad chest cold I've been fighting. And Claritin. maybe that's a psychoactive combination, I don't know...
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Evangelism 1
Tonight at our New Hope small group we started a church-wide study about evangelism. These kinds of studies aren’t really my kind of thing, but I think there is a lot to be said for doing something as a part of the larger body of Christ, even if it is just the larger body of our (other) church. It’s a series from Willow Creek called Just Walk Across the Room, a four week series of DVD’s about relational evangelism. As long as I can be at each week’s lesson, I plan to blog about it here.
Tonight was called The Single Greatest Gift. In the video we were introduced to a man named Brian, to whom Bill Hybels just walked across a soccer field. Brian eventually converted to Christianity and is now an active “creeker” (Bill’s word, not mine).
yadda yadda yadda skip to the conversation... Me and Billy are worlds apart in the way we see the Church, so I mostly just want to share about the conversations we have around the subject.
We started out just discussing the idea of “walking across the room” by which they mean starting casual friendships with people, presumably with the intent to convert them to our religion. It seems to be a sort of post-modern idea, but the B.H. version looks a little one sided; meeting someone so you can change their life. We talked about seeing it as a little more two sided –meeting people to talk, listen, and learn.
This illustrates what I see as a central difference between the conservative evangelical perspective and the postmodern “emergent” perspective. The former see relational ministry as a means to an end –the old “meet a friend, be a friend, bring a friend to Christ” paradigm. The latter see it more as a part of the end- the atonement as restoration of relationships between people, not just between God and us.
The key scripture for this section of the study was Luke 19:10, which I think puts the two perspectives into a good scriptural context. It’s introduced as a statement of Jesus’ mission, but different translations encourage significantly different understandings.
in the NIV it says “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save that which was lost”
Tim pointed out something about this and I liked the way he put it: he said this could be a reference to the idea of God recovering the broken image of God in humanity. “That which was lost” is “the image of God” and the mission of Christ is therefore framed more as a restoration of humanity than a conversion of individuals. That seems to me to fit really well with the rest of scripture as well as my experience with “evangelism.”
But the other way to look at this verse is what the ESV says: “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost” which doesn’t specifically refer to “lost people” but seems to have that implication. (I talked to my resident-Greek-expert-wife, and she said that it’s kind of ambiguous about which is more true to the Greek, though the ESV seems to be closer to the original sentence) This perspective seems to promote a kind of penal-substitution type idea that Jesus’ mission was to pay the price for each sinner who believes. While I don’t dispute the truth of that statement, it doesn’t seem to be the focus of Jesus’ ministry.
It seems to me Jesus’ ministry was much more relational and less entrepreneurial. The language of restoration makes a lot more sense to me than the language of commerce when we’re talking about the work of God.
That led us in to a little bit of discussion about our language and the way it frames our belief about an issue. When God is leading a person to reach out to someone, I think their response is shaped by the language with which they frame evangelism. For example, if I felt the Lord leading me to “walk across the room,” I may go and start a conversation, talk about life, ask some questions, learn about the person, and go from there. However, someone from a more solidly conservative-evangelical background might approach the situation differently. Feeling that same call to “walk across the room”, the conversation may quickly lead to something like “if you were to die tomorrow, do you know where you would be?” or maybe four spiritual laws, or the sinner’s prayer.
Granted this is not what B-Hizzle is advocating. He seems to fall somewhere in the middle, admitting he felt an urge to keep bringing up Church but at the same time feeling a need to let the relationship run it’s course and let the Lord work.
So after week one I have to say, I got more out of it than I thought I would. Although I feel like we pretty much got our collective head around the idea of “Just walking across the room” so it will be interesting to see what the next 3 weeks are about.Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Ideas
I walked to work today, which takes me 30-35 minutes depending (today it depended on the WIND! took me 10 minutes just to go the last 3 blocks the wind was so strong!)
anyway that's a lot of time to think, and for some reason today I was thinking about some of my favorite movies. I realized that 3 of my all time favorite movies have a very strong common theme. The movies are (in no particular order) V For Vendetta, The Dancer Upstairs, and Stranger Than Fiction. The common theme is this: Ideas can be more powerful than even the people who thought them. This is a desire for my life- to have ideas that are bigger than me. Here are the ways this theme plays out in each of these movies (in case for some reason you GASP! haven't seen them!!)
V for Vendetta- The Ideas V lives and dies for are powerful ones, so much so that people put on the mask and overthrow the government, even though V is dead by that point. V also talks quite eloquently about the power of ideas.
The Dancer Upstairs- One man's ideas about government turn into a grass-roots revolution to which he is only very loosely connected. He has an alias ("Ezekiel") but most people have no idea who "Ezekiel" is, saying things like "he is the wind in the trees" "he is every tick of every clock" or something like that. In the end... well, I won't give away the end. GO RENT IT! I can let you borrow it if you want (might not find it at blockbuster...)
Stranger Than Fiction- Karen Eiffel is an author, and her ideas have power over the life of Harold Crick. The theme is much more of a metaphor in this movie, whereas the other two are more overt (talking about revolution and power) but it's there, and it's great.
anyway that's a lot of time to think, and for some reason today I was thinking about some of my favorite movies. I realized that 3 of my all time favorite movies have a very strong common theme. The movies are (in no particular order) V For Vendetta, The Dancer Upstairs, and Stranger Than Fiction. The common theme is this: Ideas can be more powerful than even the people who thought them. This is a desire for my life- to have ideas that are bigger than me. Here are the ways this theme plays out in each of these movies (in case for some reason you GASP! haven't seen them!!)
V for Vendetta- The Ideas V lives and dies for are powerful ones, so much so that people put on the mask and overthrow the government, even though V is dead by that point. V also talks quite eloquently about the power of ideas.
The Dancer Upstairs- One man's ideas about government turn into a grass-roots revolution to which he is only very loosely connected. He has an alias ("Ezekiel") but most people have no idea who "Ezekiel" is, saying things like "he is the wind in the trees" "he is every tick of every clock" or something like that. In the end... well, I won't give away the end. GO RENT IT! I can let you borrow it if you want (might not find it at blockbuster...)
Stranger Than Fiction- Karen Eiffel is an author, and her ideas have power over the life of Harold Crick. The theme is much more of a metaphor in this movie, whereas the other two are more overt (talking about revolution and power) but it's there, and it's great.
Friday, March 28, 2008
"A Community"
I finished reading Scot McKnight's book A Community Called Atonement yesterday, and so in classic Scot McKnight fashion, I will now blog about it. (If you don't know what I'm talking about, check out the Jesus Creed blog. He blogs through a number of books... pretty good reading)
Before I picked this book up I knew relatively little about atonement theories. I knew there were a few, and that Penal Substitution was the dominant one in evangelicalism, but I couldn't really name any of the others. Actually I bought this book on amazon with the specific hope that I would learn more about the atonement theories. He does talk about them some, I feel like I have a better sense of what an atonement theory is, but not really what each one is about.
But that wasn't the point of the book. The main metaphor in the book is a bag of golf clubs. He says that just as no one goes out on the golf course with just one club, we shouldn't approach Christianity through only one atonement theory. The metaphor seems to work, though I was a little hazy on what game of golf itself represents in the metaphor. I think it must just be Christianity as a whole, or maybe Christian Theology.
But the ideas of the book do more then explain atonement theories. First, he shows the basic things all atonement theories have in common, then he explains what that should mean for Christians.
That's the part that I want to talk about. What does the atonement mean for our lives?
Scot describes atonement as "identification for incorporation" by which I think he means this: God in Jesus identifies with us so that we can be a part of what God is doing in the world. This, Scot says, is a commonality that all atonement theories have- it is the bag to hold the clubs.
Another idea that runs throughout the book is people as "cracked Eikons", Eikon being a word for image, in this case the image of God. Cracked as we are, the work of atonement is the restoration of Eikons, and ultimately the incorporation of those Eikons into the mission of God.
What I love about this language is the emphasis on justice and mission. As Christians, we're not just "evangelists" trying to "win souls" we're broken people participating in the mission of God to restore all the broken people. And it's not just about the afterlife; it's about life now, and it requires action.
Too often, it seems, we try to make Christianity into an intellectual pursuit while ignoring the injustice and oppression around us. "Know the right stuff, believe the right way, and behave yourself" thats what we're told it means to be a Christian. I believe Scot McKnight, and also the New Testament, give us a different mandate:
Accept the atonement.
Share the atonement.
Do the work of the atonement.
Live in a community called atonement.
Before I picked this book up I knew relatively little about atonement theories. I knew there were a few, and that Penal Substitution was the dominant one in evangelicalism, but I couldn't really name any of the others. Actually I bought this book on amazon with the specific hope that I would learn more about the atonement theories. He does talk about them some, I feel like I have a better sense of what an atonement theory is, but not really what each one is about.
But that wasn't the point of the book. The main metaphor in the book is a bag of golf clubs. He says that just as no one goes out on the golf course with just one club, we shouldn't approach Christianity through only one atonement theory. The metaphor seems to work, though I was a little hazy on what game of golf itself represents in the metaphor. I think it must just be Christianity as a whole, or maybe Christian Theology.
But the ideas of the book do more then explain atonement theories. First, he shows the basic things all atonement theories have in common, then he explains what that should mean for Christians.
That's the part that I want to talk about. What does the atonement mean for our lives?
Scot describes atonement as "identification for incorporation" by which I think he means this: God in Jesus identifies with us so that we can be a part of what God is doing in the world. This, Scot says, is a commonality that all atonement theories have- it is the bag to hold the clubs.
Another idea that runs throughout the book is people as "cracked Eikons", Eikon being a word for image, in this case the image of God. Cracked as we are, the work of atonement is the restoration of Eikons, and ultimately the incorporation of those Eikons into the mission of God.
What I love about this language is the emphasis on justice and mission. As Christians, we're not just "evangelists" trying to "win souls" we're broken people participating in the mission of God to restore all the broken people. And it's not just about the afterlife; it's about life now, and it requires action.
Too often, it seems, we try to make Christianity into an intellectual pursuit while ignoring the injustice and oppression around us. "Know the right stuff, believe the right way, and behave yourself" thats what we're told it means to be a Christian. I believe Scot McKnight, and also the New Testament, give us a different mandate:
Accept the atonement.
Share the atonement.
Do the work of the atonement.
Live in a community called atonement.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Justice
I've been thinking about Justice a lot lately, and I've found some interesting insights in the book I'm currently reading, A Community Called Atonement by Scot McKnight. Scot's basic ideas so far (I'm about 3/4 through the book...) are this: The Atonement, however we are to understand it, is ultimately about restoration of relationships between ourselves, God, others, and the world. He then explains that this relational view of atonement leads to a relational view of Justice, insofar as practicing justice means doing the work of healing relationships with God, others, and the world. I'm doing kind of a bad job of summarizing, so you should just read the book, but my point is this: The work of justice has to be about redemptive relationships. This is something that's going to take some more processing before I know what it looks like in my life, but I know that it's something I want to spend my life doing: working for justice wherever I happen to be.
One way I feel I can do that is in the midst of disagreement. I feel like God has been showing me more and more that beliefs are often the result of dramatic and painful experiences in people's lives. I've been learning that people believe differently things --about God, about religion, about everything-- simply because they have experienced life differently. Pain, or the avoidance of pain, has this amazing power that causes us to contort our beliefs into shapes that are least painful. We see many examples of this every day, and probably most of the time we don't even realize it.
For me, this is where justice comes in. I believe it's a form of injustice in our society when we tell people they must believe all things exactly the way we do. Now please don't misunderstand me, I still believe there are certain universal truths that are non-negotiable. But for me, that list has been melting away at an alarming rate. And what's more, the way I react to someone who disagrees with me has changed dramatically. I used to get really defensive and try to explain why my way was right, and more and more I find myself simply trying to understand why someone believes they way they do. This has lead me to much more peaceful and healthy relationships with people around me, and a more peaceful state of mind in general.
I don't know what God has in store for me next in life, but I do know that whatever it is, I will be working for justice, and I will be doing it through redemptive, relational ways. ways that hear and understand the pain behind belief.
One way I feel I can do that is in the midst of disagreement. I feel like God has been showing me more and more that beliefs are often the result of dramatic and painful experiences in people's lives. I've been learning that people believe differently things --about God, about religion, about everything-- simply because they have experienced life differently. Pain, or the avoidance of pain, has this amazing power that causes us to contort our beliefs into shapes that are least painful. We see many examples of this every day, and probably most of the time we don't even realize it.
For me, this is where justice comes in. I believe it's a form of injustice in our society when we tell people they must believe all things exactly the way we do. Now please don't misunderstand me, I still believe there are certain universal truths that are non-negotiable. But for me, that list has been melting away at an alarming rate. And what's more, the way I react to someone who disagrees with me has changed dramatically. I used to get really defensive and try to explain why my way was right, and more and more I find myself simply trying to understand why someone believes they way they do. This has lead me to much more peaceful and healthy relationships with people around me, and a more peaceful state of mind in general.
I don't know what God has in store for me next in life, but I do know that whatever it is, I will be working for justice, and I will be doing it through redemptive, relational ways. ways that hear and understand the pain behind belief.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
My Call
A lot of people lately have been asking me to explain my "call to ministry," and this is not really an easy thing for me. It's looked a lot of different ways over the years, and sometimes even nonexistent, and yet it remains. I have been learning these past few years to broaden my idea of "God's Call" from something specific like a job to something broad like a general frame of mind. God has called me to peace. God has called me to openness. God has called me to understanding.
I will follow that call.
A lot of times God's call also sounds a lot like my wife. Now I know this is a totally lame cliché that old pastors whip out at their own retirement parties, but it also happens to be true for me. I would be frothing lattés and wondering where my life went wrong if it weren't for Sarah, and now together we are looking forward to a new chapter of life and ministry. Right now I know more about what I don't want to do then what I do (one word: evangicube) but I know God will bring us to something that's right for us. Either that or I will have a lot to write about this fall...
I will follow that call.
A lot of times God's call also sounds a lot like my wife. Now I know this is a totally lame cliché that old pastors whip out at their own retirement parties, but it also happens to be true for me. I would be frothing lattés and wondering where my life went wrong if it weren't for Sarah, and now together we are looking forward to a new chapter of life and ministry. Right now I know more about what I don't want to do then what I do (one word: evangicube) but I know God will bring us to something that's right for us. Either that or I will have a lot to write about this fall...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)