Life on Life

Life on life. Can it really get more simple than that? Of course it's incredibly complicated and messy as you invest in another human creature, as honesty brings out the darkness in our lives, as pain is dealt with and conquered, and we grow. But it's worth it isn't it? I struggle with the romanticism of it all. Sacrificing is so much easier in theory. But theory makes for boring stories. How to break out of the words and invest in others, opening up ourselves to heartache, but also the extreme joy in depth of friendship?

Here is what the Church of Jesus is called to: walking with each other, pulling and encouraging to greater things, sacrificing our self interests for the advancement of others, all while unified in a common grace. A grace so satisfying that we don't need to clutch onto others for fulfillment, the cycle of using others is shattered, and we grow from brokenness into something beautiful. Not that brokenness isn't beautiful in it's own way, but if that's all you have, it's hopeless. We are on a journey. Take someone by the hand and go together.

Thr33

I've been thinking about this concept where you analyze things to three levels. My mind actually does this naturally and very quickly, which is kind of disturbing. Here's an example: I am thinking about cheese. Not sure why, just maybe I like cheese, or that it's from a yak. Probably both, but here I am thinking about cheese.

Then I realize, "Man, I've been thinking about cheese for 10 minutes now. That's weird." That's level one. Recognition and analyzing what you are thinking. Then there's the second level I always go to because I spend a lot of time on level 1. I start questioning how much time I'm analyzing my thoughts thinking, "wow, I think weird thoughts." Level two is an interesting place to be but just wait.

Now we come to level three. The third level. That platform in which lies hidden the blurry line of sanity. Ok, maybe that's a little dramatic. But here we are at number three. Analyzing how much you analyze the analysis. It really is quite twisted as I spend much time questioning how much I am doing this. Like I said, my mind does this naturally and generally very fast, at which time I almost forget what I was even originally thinking.

Yeah, now to go analyze why I even wrote this.

What Are They Saying?

There are many inanimate objects we wish could say things. Things like trees or walls or cars. But even if they could talk, would we be able to understand them? We are surrounded by talking objects through the magic of computer animation, but they usually talk in something resembling English or another intelligible language. But that's silly. It would seem natural to have them speak in languages inherent to their form, squeaks and whirs, creaks and whooshes.
There are things that can be said only in one language. The words and how they fit together convey something deeper that just doesn't work any other way. Expressing complete metal fatigue as a car in some car language could potentially be very profound and/or disturbing. It's kind of fun to imagine what a language of trees would be like and what they would even talk about. Course that's been done. Think Tolkien's Ents. But what about your house, or jeep, or the lawn gnome in the back?

Music Emotes

Music induces emotion. It seems that when certain sound vibrations tickle our eardrums, our souls are touched. This can bring to life memories of love received or places where we've laughed until we cried or remind us of great pain. We've all got songs that have special meanings to us. Sometimes it doesn't even have anything to do with the song itself, but rather the circumstances in which we heard that song. Canon in D comes to mind for me. What is it about music that influences us?

I've heard an idea that God created the universe through song. I like that. Music is powerful. It can create and destroy. In stringing together notes in certain ways, we create moods, we create passions, we communicate raw depths of our hearts in ways that mere words cannot.

For me, I love music that rises and falls, that hits the high climatic note but also goes low into the bass. I love feeling the rhythm beat through my chest. I love lyrics that mean something, that don't just sing words, but that require you to think. I love songs that are fun, but not always. I love songs that weave with an intrinsic rhythm like waves of an ocean, (usually they are in 3/4 time.) I love songs that speak truth with honesty, that don't shirk from pain, but speak to life and joy through the pain. I love songs that are complex, that took skill to write and skill to play.

I hate songs that are shallow, that speak only about sex or relationships as things to panacea. To sing about love is one thing, and I would argue, a necessary thing, but most popular songs lack any amount of depth, or strength, or sacrifice required for true love to fulfill. People fall in love all the time, and I'm convinced that a lot of times, it is real. But most people turn in inwardly on themselves, and forget how to work at the relationship. That sort of thing is rarely sung about.

Hear the Music

What's it take to wake your soul?

What does it take to impassion that which is dead?

How do we align our hearts to that music which plays throughout the universe, creaking with oak trees swaying, ripping out of the ground, bent low by the hurricane?

As we see the pain around us. Think about it. Taste it. Not the bruised pride, showy pain, but the deep, raw, broken pain that surrounds us. The screaming of people wanting to be loved, wanting to be someone special, wanting to be healed from the loneliness. Live in it. Recognize it for what it is. Don't ignore it. Or your soul will die as well. It will wither in selfish pride and ignorance until it is no more and you fight to keep it that way.

Let us break the chains of apathy!

Let us learn to love!
Not this silly, self serving love, focused only on pleasure.
No conditions.
Only forgiveness.
Only truth.
Deeper and deeper.

But how? But how?

Come to me all who are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Matthew 11:28

Wants

God,
I think you want me give you my life, to give you control, that you can use me in mighty ways.
I want to love a woman the way Christ loves the church: passionately, humbly, beautifully, ready to die for her, ready to catch her when she falls and support her in our walk together.
I want to raise kids who believe and live gospel community values in family.
I want to pour myself into their lives and watch them grow.
I want to help hurting people see their selfishness and see Jesus and his joy that overwhelms the pain.
I want to live in that joy. Oh do I want that.
I want to work outside and have deep conversations with people.
I want to be a man of prayer, who is filled with the Holy Spirit, who does not fear but is bold.
I want to laugh until I can't breath. Every day.
I want to know how to cry with someone whose heart is broken.
I want to sit down at the end and tell about all the things I've seen God do, that we did, and everything in between.
I want to create and know and appreciate beauty for what it is, to be able to encourage it and not feel threatened by other people's attempts to capture it.
Help me to know your heart and make it mine.

Paul

Debating as a Christian

This essay is intended to discuss the debating practices of Christians, both with other believers and non-believers alike. The reason for this is that I have discovered a good majority of Christian arguments, especially from the Fundamentalist side although this is found everywhere, have very little substance to them and usually resort in guilt by association, ad hominum attacks, or straw man arguments. It seems strange to me that we as Christians would resort to such low handed tactics and ultimately shows our fundamental doubt in the truth of God. We as Christians should never be afraid of the truth.

Truth is not completely limited to a Christian worldview. For example, there are many types of truth that are not inherently dependent on the Bible. Mathematics is a good example. You do not have to believe in God or the Bible to know that 1+1=2 is true. Also, the fact that I had cheese and bread this morning is true, but it is not dependant on what the Bible teaches. This is a very important point because when we debate with someone, there is almost always some level of truth in what they believe and it is important to recognize this. It is pretty hard to convince somebody an absolute lie is true. It is not hard, however, to mix truth with the lies and corrupt the whole idea.

Too often we generalize things, making things black and white when they otherwise shouldn’t be, and in the process we completely alienate those we are speaking with. We must also recognize that some truths are not exclusive and that we can agree to disagree. Of course, I also need to say that the Christian worldview does claim some truths to be exclusively theirs, such as the deity of Christ, his death and resurrection just being a few. Being willing to recognize truth in the world must be the place to start if we are to debate effectively. Simply saying that just because one of your arguments is false invalidates everything else you say is silly.

Out of all the Christians I’ve read, listened to, or met, not one will say that they agree 100% totally with everything another Christian happens to say. People like John Piper, C.S. Lewis, Martin Luther, Ravi Zacharias, John Calvin, St. Augustine, and many, many more have all come to their own conclusions about life, God, and Christianity through the study of their Bibles, their observations of the world around them, and thinking and reasoning through things. And they’ve all come to slightly different conclusions. This is very interesting. It seems that one could have differing views about many things and still claim to be a Christian. I believe that this argues for the complexity of God, as well as his personal nature, as he reveals himself differently to different people. Even in my own life I find this. I agree with John Piper on many things but I disagree adamantly with his view of Calvinism.¹ Does this mean that I then throw out all of his other arguments and thoughts because I disagree with his interpretation of scripture? Of course not. The same is true for C.S. Lewis. I love his works and his ability to make complex philosophical ideas very understandable, but I disagree with his view of the Old Testament.² Should I then discard all the rest of his teachings? No.

Of course there are going to be heretical interpretations and these must be dealt with by careful reading of Scripture, but these are and should be limited to things that are essential to Christianity. Old earth vs. young earth, pre-trib vs. post-trib, instruments in church or no instruments; these are all non-essential and while fun to debate, should not resort to heretical accusations. I have seen this over and over again. Christians argue their view and immediately place anybody who doesn’t agree with them in the heretic category. This is wrong and usually comes from pride.

The question that then arises is how does the Christian, who believes that his worldview is truth, interact with fellow believers and non-believers that disagree? By its very nature, absolute truth is exclusive. This means that two opposing views cannot be true at the same time, also called the Law of Non-contradiction. We must not fall into the trap of presuming we have it all figured out and that those who disagree with us are simply ignorant fools. This is the biggest problem I have with Christian debates. One side usually ends up questioning the salvation of the other, in the case of Christian vs. Christian, or the intelligence of the other, Christian vs. non-Christian. Of course when called out on it, these critics usually shout ad hominum or throw verses out about how Christians should love one another and not judge each other.

Tim Keller, the senior pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City, spoke to this very topic.³ His argument was that as Christians; we must continually view our knowledge of God not as academic, but as relational. The only way to argue this type of knowledge as true is through experience. For example, when you smell something amazing, the first thing you do is look around to try and find someone to share it with and you usually end up saying something like “Here, you got to smell this” as you shove it to their nose. The same is true for a good restaurant. If you had a really good experience at a restaurant, then you are likely to share that with other people. In fact, most small businesses depend on you doing this to stay alive. Now, it would be silly to judge and criticize someone for not knowing about the restaurant or what it was like if they had never been there. The same is true for the smell. You wouldn’t say “Well, you certainly are an ignorant fool since you haven’t smelled this.” No, you would say “Here, try this.” In the same way, let us invite the world around us to experience this amazing God with us and not get judgmental towards them for not knowing about something of which they’ve never experienced.

1) “We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism”; Bethlehem Church Staff, March 1, 1985 Revised March, 1998; http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Articles/ByDate/1985/1487_What_We_Believe_About_the_Five_Points_of_Calvinism/; Accessed 8/10/2009

2) Miracles, C.S. Lewis,

3) Receptive Grace, Timothy Keller, Sermon originally given on 2/10/2002

Hands are cool

Have you ever looked at your hand? There's the saying that you know something like the back of your hand but I don't think many people actually take the time to study these fleshy things on the end of our arms. I've studied mine. Simply because I don't want to lie if I ever have to use that quotation. Ok, also because I love studying things and hey, they're right there. I have a vein on the left one that I can move. I have a freckle on the right. My veins make a harp shape with three strings. My fingers can pick up basically anything I want, just like a crane, seemingly with a mind of their own it's so natural. Pretty cool things, hands. They have the power to create grand mysteries, the power to destroy everything beautiful, to mold and shape our lives. They can be used to paint a portrait that brings one to weep, or blacken the eye of one who loves deeply.
In short, hands are cool.

My Heart Cries

I am sad. My heart cries when people pursue relationships out of something other than love. The pain, the drama, the selfishness. They grow and swell and devour people. And it pains my heart to watch. I don't know why. Perhaps because I'm in love myself. Perhaps because I can see what happens when people are in it for only themselves. Perhaps my eyes are just opened to the pain around me and the humbleness to recognize it inside myself.

I was watching the fashion channel today. I know I know, but it is plastered everywhere at the mall I was at, and it too saddens my heart. People's perception of beauty is so warped. I saw one lady with a "dress" that looked like it had a big rectangular piece of cardboard taped to her back. Well, it was frilly. After I laughed at the complete ridiculousness of it, it made me sad to know that these girls, these women, are just pieces of flesh to be shown and strutted about. I felt sorry for them. Their whole job is just to look good. In the words of Derick Zoolander, "Have you ever wondered if there was more to life, other than being really, really, ridiculously good looking?" Most people have actually, I think. But the root is the same. The need for fulfillment, for the absence of pain, for a place where things seem to be alright runs very deep in our hearts. And people do anything to fill that need, with the notable exception of giving themselves away for someone else.

To kill or not to kill?

It is the chief philosophical question that superheros face. Do they kill their arch enemies when they have defeated them? Usually,the answer is quite simple and the bad guys are knocked unconscious or tied up really good and handed over to the police. There are a few heroes though that cross that line and just take them out. Although, to be fair, it would be hard, as a comic book author, to continually create new and powerful enough villains to keep the story interesting if you were always killing them in the end. All of that aside, the real question comes down to, are you really becoming the villain if you kill the villain?

While in some cases this is most definitely true; you don't want to go around wasting people who stole some ladies purse, the punishment should fit the crime. But when the crimes are monstrously evil, are you really "stooping to their level" by killing them? I think not. There is a point where evil must be destroyed, not just put away out of sight.

Perhaps this quandary is revealing of our lack of a moral foundation. When the hero himself (or herself, whatever) cannot judge why his actions are good independent of the villain's actions, then he has ultimately lost. There is no way he can truly win. He will always question if he did the right thing. Struggling with guilt and self absorption, he will always wonder if he can truly be a judge of another person. When we only define good individually, this is inevitable.

This blog will begin at the end of an ongoing 10 year thought stream so it will make little sense of how I have gotten to this point at first but if you don't start somewhere, you'll never get anywhere. I have been thinking lately about the Christian bubble. I'm referring to that stereotypical lifestyle that is marked by social ineptitude, general arrogance, and a lack of understanding of how anybody in the world can live any different.

I actually hate the Bubble. I really do.

There is something to be said for promoting a lifestyle that encourages living in a godly way, whatever that might mean, but usually what happens is a separation that leads to isolation. Jesus calls us to be separate from the world, and rightly so. When someone is intrinsically changed in their very soul, outward changes are sure to follow and this will make them different. At the same time, Jesus has chosen to use the church as his main vehicle for telling people about him and these changed people will be different. And I mean in the "oh he's a little 'different' " kind.

These people will naturally form a community of other like-minded creatures and are then faced with a choice: do we actively pursue people to join or not? If not, then the group stagnates and dies. If yes, then they eventually come to another defining moment as people who are different come and there is conflict. Does this group remain unified as diversity enters, or does is splinter into small, individual "unified" groups? How to do this is one of the great philosophical questions of history and will be saved for later posts.

I think the Bubble tends to fall into the first group as people are perfectly content to live life completely separate from all those worldly people. Now, this isn't really bad, unless one forgets that you yourself are a worldly person. You can't escape.

So how do we actually live out loving people who are different? People who make us uncomfortable, who use different substances, who look different?