Learning in the Storm

When the movie Twister came out, storm chasing had its big moment. Suddenly the broader culture became aware of these peculiar people who are obsessed with getting close to tornadoes. The storm chasers weren't just thrill seekers interested in getting close to danger. They were also data geeks that get a rush from discovering new data that no one has been able to collect before. The driving motivation of the movie is that the heroes must get their sensors into the very eye of the twister so they can release the deluge of data needed to be able to predict storms and warn us regular people so we can flee to safety. Or at least pull out our cameras in time to capture horrifying footage.

I've received a relatively large response from my last post about stepping down from ministry. The conversations I'm having with people is making me realize that I am in the middle of a really big learning opportunity. That wasn't my goal at all. I'm no storm chaser. I really like good weather, a gentle breeze, mild temperatures. I try to order my life so as to prevent, predict and avoid storms. Sometimes of course, there's nothing for it but to squint your eyes and run out into the deluge letting the rain and wind soak and freeze you until you can make it to your next refuge. What I'm seeing in this moment is that I now have an opportunity not everyone has to make some unique observations. If I activate all my little sensors and send them out into the storm I'll be able to collect lots of valuable data. In real terms, if I can remain alert to what is going on around me, I will be able to gain wisdom and insight that will help me and others know God more.

So what am I learning?

Lesson #1: I am not alone. 

I have had more than one conversation over the course of a couple of days with pastors who are feeling what I'm feeling or have been there recently. Whether you are a pastor or not it is likely you can identify somewhat with what I've been experiencing. It must be built in to the human experience that we have times of wandering and wondering about our identity and future and purpose. Most of us bear these things silently thinking we are the only ones and it is best to keep our strange problems to ourselves. Every good person considers himself honest, but the truth is that real honesty requires more courage than most of us can muster on a consistent basis. True honesty isn't "telling people what I think"; it is exposing what I am. I think that one of our greatest fears is that people will see us for who we really are. Remember the Garden of Eden? Adam and Eve's first fear after eating the fruit was that they would be seen, even by each other. She was formed out of his rib for crying out loud, and yet they didn't want each other seeing their privates! When we aren't honest about who we are--and let's admit it, that's close to 100% of the time-- we are covering our nakedness. We don't want people to see who we really are. In fact we don't even look in the mirror to see for ourselves who we really are. The tree was supposed to give us the knowledge of good and evil. Perhaps in doing that it also gave us fear. Fear of knowing ourselves. Fear of being known by others.

"Every good person considers himself honest, but the truth is that real honesty requires more courage than most of us can muster on a consistent basis." 

What this fear amounts to is loneliness. We can exist right next to each other without really knowing each other because we've fashioned thick coverings of fig leaves. We are so protective of our coverings that we spend a fair amount of energy policing other people's coverings. If we see someone exposing themselves our fear of exposure makes us go on the attack reaffirming our conviction that concealment is the best policy. Better to hide in loneliness than to reveal ourselves and get attacked. Underneath the fig leaves we actually have nothing that needs hiding. This knowledge of Good and Evil was supposed to (as promised by the serpent) introduce Adam and Eve to a greater reality. Instead it plunged them into the nightmare of pretend independence from God. Taking the fruit wasn't like waking from a dream enlightened. It was like stepping into a dream from which you cannot wake up.

The truth, of course, is that we are not alone. We're just separated. We are walking around in close proximity to other people stuck in the same dream state as us. If we can rouse ourselves for a moment we can smile at each other and say, "Oh, it was just a dream." That's what love is. It's when we, for a moment, forget the fear that we carry and give someone the permission to know us and to be known. This requires honesty and graciousness. Honesty to admit our fears and graciousness not to attack when someone lets their guard down. It's tricky business, but Jesus shows us the way.

Lesson #2 is: I am alone...kind of.

I know, lesson 2 seems to contradict lesson 1. Stick with me. When I was struggling with my decision to step down from pastoring my church, I sought lots of advice and opinions and books. There was a great amount of wisdom and examples and suggestions, but it always boiled down to a stark reality -- only you can decide what you are going to do.

Being a child means that you don't get to decide what to do. At its core, being an adult means that you have to decide what to do. Adults who don't decide for themselves lack what we call maturity, and we all struggle with it. As much as teenagers want the freedom to chose their own path, a few years later they are likely to want someone to "just tell me what I should do!" In Christian culture this is expressed in the large market of books for young adults on the topic of finding the will of God. Our hope is that if we can discover the hidden map and find our "true destiny" then we can stop worrying with knowing what to do. Once we find that one key truth "God's Will for My Life" then the rest of life's decisions will fall into place effortlessly.

The problem with this kind of thinking is that it is completely made up. The Bible does tell us that God has plans, but there are no examples of people in the Bible discovering that plan then implementing it to completion. In fact the particular passage you probably think of when I say, God has a plan for you, is addressed to a nation in exile not an individual. Jeremiah 29:11 is a reassurance that those in exile should not give up hope because of their present circumstances.

Part of "the plans I have for you"...

When we accept the fact that we are ultimately alone when it comes to making decisions (no one else can choose for you) then we are free to embrace the consequences for our actions. The truth is that it might not matter what you chose. What will matter is the person you are. Are you willing to commit to your decision and deal with its consequences whatever they may be? If so then you can stop worrying about "making the wrong choice."  We are never asked to predict the future. No one can know for sure what the outcome of their decisions will be. We are, however, commanded to live faithfully the best we know how. No one else can do that for us.

Jump back to the Garden story with me for a minute. The second fear that pops up (after the fear of seeing and being seen by each other) is seeing and being seen by God. We laugh and make fun of Adam for trying to hide from God in the garden. The thing is, Adam is doing what we all do. As irrational as it is, we have this burning hope that we can make God think something that isn't true. We think that we can out maneuver God with our prayers and good works and make him think we look so much better than we do. How silly we must look to him! God must watch us with his hand over his mouth suppressing laughter at our efforts to dress up in fig leaves and hide behind rocks and bushes. Oh, the naive children we are, thinking that God cares more about our appearance than our real selves. If He was truly displeased with us why would He endure our continued existence? Why would a creator who spoke the world into existence suffer the slightest of annoyances much less the detestable defiance that we have perpetrated with our indulgence in evil? Yes, God's wrath is real, but God's anger is not the same as our anger. We most often equate the foolish, prideful ravings exemplified by grumpy overworked bosses or frustrated, judgmental parents or whatever other hurt and imperfect people we see around us. God's wrath is terrible yet beautiful. God's wrath brings destruction, but it is a healing destruction. The consuming fire described in the Bible is a refining fire. It burns away the evil, death and fear making way for light, life and waking. That's why I sometimes picture God as being amused with our efforts to fool him. In the moment God showed his displeasure and his judgment. His righteous wrath moved with purpose and precision (and still does, but that's another, longer post). Our sin is no laughing matter, but as serious as it is, God is much greater. He alone can look death in the eyes and laugh with the joy of knowing his power to overcome.

So when I say we are alone, it is only kind of true. We are alone, in a sense, in the presence of God. In our relationship with God it is as if we are the only one in the room with him. He knows us completely, and He isn't hiding any part of himself from us. We are alone in making our decisions, but God is there with us never leaving us. He doesn't protect us from our mistakes, but he stays with us and suffers with us through them knowing that in the end He will reconcile all things. Being alone in the way I mean it, is not what makes us feel lonely. We can be alone and not feel lonely. Loneliness is the longing we have to see and be seen. It is the hunger for love.

...
Okay, well I went deeper than I meant to. I just wanted to jot down a couple of life lessons that are on my mind in the midst of drastic change in my life. In my sufferings and doubts I should remember that I am not alone, and when it comes to making choices I should embrace the fact that no one else can decide for me.

Stepping Down

Dear Online Friends and Family,

This past Sunday I announced to NorthStar Baptist Church that I would be resigning from the position of pastor.

NorthStar is more than a church to me, more than a job. NorthStar is my family. And I don't just mean that in a sentimental way to say I am really fond of them. I mean family in all the depth and complexity that that word implies. They're my family, and I've cried with them in their loss. I've celebrated with them in their births and birthdays. I've received and tried to give instruction and encouragement and wisdom. We have sometimes gotten annoyed with each other, but like family we've continued to love each other and we come together to share meals and to live the life that God has given us. We're a family centered on the message that God has revealed to mankind in his Word.

When Jana and I came to Idaho in 2006, newly married, freshly graduated from seminary, we had no idea what was in store for us. We officially committed to serve at NorthStar for two years, and poured ourselves into serving in the area of youth, lifegroups and missions and whatever other idea Scott Hanberry, the founding pastor, and Tom, our current worship pastor, came up with. We saw the youth group triple (from three to nine!), we led a wonderful lifegroup, we orchestrated mission opportunities and mission partnerships with other churches. It was a challenging, yet exciting time. We fell in love with the area so much that we bought a home and started expanding our family still not sure of God's long term plan for us. Fast forward to today and we look back on 11 amazing years of ministry at NorthStar, 6 1/2 years as the lead pastor.

After a lot of prayer and conversations and tears, searching our hearts and the Word of God we started to get a sense that it might be time to take a break from full time ministry. Jesus invites us to take on his yoke because his yoke is easy and his burden is light. Yet for me, the burden has felt increasingly heavy. In spite of my attempts to “pray it away”, delve into the spiritual help books and work through it with other pastors I trust, there's been a growing unease in my heart toward this specific calling. I've come to the decision that this unease is a growing indication that it is time for me to do something else. I'm sure that may be hard to understand. I'm still struggling with it myself. There's a temptation to feel shame and failure at such a decision. There are a lot of voices out there that equate growth and success and longevity with righteousness. There are voices that say good pastors don't take breaks. Good pastors' churches don't stop growing. Faithful ministers don't leave. If you do the right things then you'll never be weak. If you perform properly this kind of thing won't happen. Those statements, according to the biblical witness, are not true. Not for pastors - not for anybody. Some of the most faithful people in scripture were complete failures from the world's point of view.

One of the things God has spoken most consistently to me over the last few years is that He is not concerned with where you are and what you are doing as much as He is concerned with who you are becoming. In other words your identity is in Christ. It is not in what you've sacrificed, what you've accomplished, who has recognized you, your resume, your transcript, your rap sheet, your degrees, your friends list, your likes or shares. God will use those things to help you know him more, but He certainly could care less about them for their own sake. It's you that He is after and He can use whatever means He wants to win your attention. As a pastor it is easy to confuse the church's growth and success with God's favor. It is easy to take criticism, members who leave, goofed sermons, etc. as God scowling in disapproval. He has reminded me again and again, that all of those things are well within His ability to handle with or without me. He's not desperately depending on me to come through and save every situation. He gives us chances to grow. Maybe I am hard-headed and it takes repeated lessons, but He is often more patient with us than we can imagine. As proof I look to numerous characters in the Bible.

In our searching God has shown us our time at NorthStar is done. The work is not done of course. There are challenging days ahead for the church. Exciting days of opportunity for things that God will do that we haven't even imagined yet. Please pray for our church as they enter this time of transition into a new phase of their mission to Glorify God, magnify his character and multiply his kingdom work.

Also please pray for my family as we seek what's next for us. It is a scary and exciting place to be for us, but one with which we are at complete peace. If you would like to talk to us more about our decision feel free to email or call Jana or me.

I'd Rather Be Ministering to the Lord

This Sunday the sermon was a reminder that our primary purpose in life is to worship God. In American church culture we often talk about serving God, ministering to others, studying the Bible, prayer, evangelism-- all good things. All things that help us in our relationship with God. All things that are expected, even required for us to follow Jesus. But we should not confuse all those things that are a help or a result of the worship of God with the actual worship of God. 

Perhaps that is too fine a point. After all aren't we supposed to "worship God with our lives." Well yes, of course. Everything we do can be an act of worship when we "practice the presence of God". We are, after all, told to present our bodies as sacrifices to God as our spiritual act of worship. I'm suggesting that it is good for us to remember that all the things we do in pursuit of worshiping God are in addition too the simple and pure act of holding God as the sole object of our worship. Is cleaning up your neighbor's yard an act of worship? It can be, if done for the purpose of Godly love. Is preparing a lesson for a small group worship? Sure. Singing, reading, praying, speaking, all these things can be acts of worship. What is important is that all of those things are rooted in a central concept of God our Creator held as the ultimate object of our affection.

All of that nuance and explanation comes down to a really simple point. I think we ought to spend some time doing nothing but worshiping God. This is basically prayer, but I mean a specific type of prayer where we are not asking for something or explaining something about ourselves to God. I mean a prayer where we gaze, the best we can, at God as we know him (knowing our conception falls short and He is greater than what we can conceive) and worship him. How much time should we spend doing this? I have no idea. I think the ultimate goal would be "all the time." There are things in this world, of course, that prevent that, but maybe it is a start to remember while we're doing all that other stuff that there is something else we ought to be doing. It's kind of like those bumper stickers that say, "I'd rather be...*insert your favorite pass time*" You know, "I'd rather be playing golf" or "I'd rather be spoiling my grandkids" etc.

We acknowledge that this world requires us to attend to other things. Perhaps it is our sinful nature or "the old selves" that requires it. Maybe it is God's plan to give us lesser things to help us understand and appreciate the Greater Thing. In any case, we are for a time, stuck with it. Yet, while we are attending to these lesser things we should be always mindful that there is a Greater Thing. As much and as often as we are able, we are breaking from these lesser things to catch all the glimpses we can of the Greater Thing himself. Those glimpses are what allow us to live the other parts of our lives as "a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God".

I don't want to diminish the "daily living" aspect of worship, but I would like to advocate that we set aside time to remember what we are made for: worship pure and simple. Set aside time in prayer that is for no other purpose than to meditate on and express in your heart the beauty, truth and greatness of our God. If that really is our ultimate purpose then time spent doing it will never be wasted. 

Malachi

I joked with my church the other day about the pronunciation of Bible words. If you didn't grow up in church and you came across the word "Malachi" how would you pronounce it? Mah-lah-CHEE might make sense. Mah-lah-KEY. MAL-uh-she, maybe. There are many possibilities. Which one is right?

All good Christians know the proper pronunciation is MAHL-uh-Khigh. One might snicker at a mispronunciation of such a word. But how do you know that is how it is pronounced? We look at our way of pronouncing it as the definitive, correct pronunciation. The problem with that is that nobody actually knows how it was pronounced at the time. We have no recordings. There are no philological (or phonological?) descriptions of the language (or any language I know of) from that time. When people wrote in a language they assumed you knew how to pronounce it. The Hebrew language has been well preserved in written form, but it was not uniformly spoken from the time the Bible was written until today. Even by the time of Malachi himself it is possible that most Jews spoke mostly Aramaic. Pronunciation can change quickly as we can see even from the relatively short time that English has existed. It seems to especially undergo changes when peoples are displaced or invaded. That's one of the reasons English has lots of weird spellings and pronunciations. It is a language that has been transported around the world through colonization and globalization. Hebrew has been through quite a bit of disruption as well. So it would be impossible with 100% certainty to recreate the original pronunciation of ancient Hebrew. Incidentally, the closest you would hope to come would be to hear a modern Hebrew speaker pronounce it. Which, through the magic of the internet you can now do! (How to say "Malachi" in Hebrew) Go listen. I'll wait.

Turns out that American Christians might be off the mark in their pronunciation of Malachi. Hold on though. Even the Hebrew speaker's pronunciation isn't definitive. It might have the best chance of being right since there is at least a link between ancient and modern Hebrew, but there's no way of knowing if it is any closer to the truth than anything else we can come up with. If that doesn't blow your mind enough, think about this. There's no reason to think that the way Moses pronounced "Malachi" would be the same as the way Malachi pronounced "Malachi." They were 1000 years apart! Maybe Moses said, "Hamalicky"  and Malachi said, "Myalisgee". Someone who studies language development (philology) could probably make a better guess, but it would still just be a guess.

One other trivial knowledge tidbit. In modern script the name Malachi looks like מַלְאָכִי
You can see an image of a commentary on Malachi from the Dead Sea Scrolls. You'll notice the writing is very different. The the Dead Sea Scroll document was written up to 400 years after Malachi lived. And it is probable that Malachi even used a different alphabet than those who had gone before him. This means that if David time traveled 600 or so years to Malachi's time (or, even worse, 3000 yrs to our own time), he would probably be unable to read the Psalms that he had written!

So get down off your high horse, you Bible-name-pronunciation police.

The Root of the Toot

My six-year-old son had a bike wreck (he's okay), and amidst his tears he asked me why, if God can do anything, do we have owiees? That's really the question that sums up all of life, isn't it? How you answer that question sums up your religious beliefs.

I told him that owiees are just a part of what is wrong with the world. They do serve some good. They let us know that there is a problem. If your knee didn't hurt when you scraped it you might not take care of it, and it could get worse. If it didn't hurt when you bonked your head then we wouldn't try to not bonk our heads, and we'd probably all be senseless by now. So pain and suffering reminds us that there are bad things in this world that need fixing.

Being in his fourth year of The Gospel Project he knew that I was talking about the Fallen Nature of mankind. With a pained look on his face he sniffled, "But I don't remember doing anything bad today."

I hugged him quickly and told him that it wasn't his fault. Bad things happen in this world to people whether they are bad or not. "So somebody else was bad, and I'm being punished?"

"You're not being punished," I reassured him. Then my skills as a preacher kicked in. I thought of an illustration so... illustrative that I couldn't believe it. Then I had a moment of doubt. Experience tells me that whenever you share an off-the-cuff illustration it has a chance of failing utterly. Especially when speaking to kids. It is a risk I decided to take.

"When you are in a room full of people and one person toots, who smells it?"

His countenance changed from that of a wronged party to the face that all children give their dads when they are unsure of his motives. He was probably thinking, "This sounds like a dad-joke because it involves a bodily function, but that seems out of place in a theological conversation." The fate of my brilliant illustration hung upon the edge of a knife. I put on my best expression of wisdom and tender whimsy.

Quickly his face brightened to an even-handed smirk. The answer to my riddle hit home in his mind. Everyone smells it! Just being a part of this world makes us partakers of the stink-inducing fracture that has taken place between God and man. Ok, so I don't really know if he got it or not, but he stopped crying. It is possible that just thinking about tooting and smelling and stuff made him for a moment forget about the pain. Either way, I'm counting this as a daddy victory.

Next time perhaps I'll just refer him to The Problem of Pain by C.S. Lewis.

Prayer

Father,

You are a great and awesome mystery to me.
Ageless, not merely old.
Distant, vast, resounding, overwhelming,
Yet so near.

Near like the atoms that make me.
Near like the blood that flows through my body.
Close like the sound of wind in my ear.
Close like heat from the water in a shower.

The Book tells about a promise you made to a man named Abram-
To bless him and his descendants forever.
To bless him and make him a blessing to all the families of the earth.
All the families of the earth!

I don't know anything about how or why you do what you do
Other than the stories you've given us,
The Truth you've shouted at my heart,
The Beauty you've whispered in my ears.

But my soul rushes to you,
I run to join you like a child joins a parade -
Or would if they could.
I fly to you joyfully seeking to be blessed and to be a blessing.
Oh, Father, bless me and all the families of the earth.

The Female Computer

Annie Easley

As promised, here is some info on an interesting person you may never have heard of. I'll admit, most people might not be that interested in the accomplishments of Annie Easley. She wrote or contributed to such riveting works as Effect of Turbulent Mixing on Average Fuel Temperatures in a Gas-Core Nuclear Rocket Engine and Performance and Operational Economics Estimates for a Coal Gasification Combined-Cycle Cogeneration Powerplan. I don't think those have ever been on Oprah's Book Club. But if you are a fan of science or rockets or space or computers, then you should be glad for the contributions of Easley. 

What I like about her story is how she followed her interest and excelled simply by being really good at her job. She was pursuing pharmacy but ran out of options as far as education goes. So in 1955 she applied for a job as a computer. At that time complex math was still done by humans rather than machines and the NACA (predecessor to NASA) needed lots of computing power for the advanced research it was doing in aeronautics. So this southern Black lady with two years of college toward a pharmacy degree was given a government job doing math (for those lazy engineers, I guess). That was the start of a career that would have implications for the Space Race and the modern computer age!

I loved what she had to say when asked about being one of only a few minorities in the organization:

 I didn't feel like I'm a minority, I'm less. I just have my own attitude. I'm here to work. You may look at me, someone else may look at me, and see something different, but that's okay. But I'm out here to do a job and I knew I had the ability to do it, and that's where my focus was, on getting the job done. I was not intentionally trying to be a pioneer. I wanted a job, I wanted to work. But it was never a "poor me," though I know I'm not so unaware that I don't know what's going on around me. Remember my mom said, "You can do anything you want to, but you have to work at it," and that was part of it. With her strong teachings, I was able to do it.*

 And also:

When people have their biases and prejudices, yes, I am aware. My head is not in the sand. But my thing is, if I can't work with you, I will work around you. I was not about to be so discouraged that I'd walk away. That may be a solution for some people, but it's not mine. So yes, I'm sure, I, like many others, have been judged not on what I can do, but on what I look like. *

 If you have time and interest you really should go read the whole interview at the NASA archive. She has some great stories about the early days of NASA. She also has an inspiring outlook on life. The interviewer asked her about seeing the contemporary results of some of the work she did on emerging technologies, like batteries for electric vehicles, she said, "I'm happy at the time when I see it, but my big thing now is trying to learn to snowboard."

At the time she was 68! Yeah, yeah, I helped usher in the era of electric cars, but what's really neat is carving fresh pow. Ha!

So there you go. Another American we can be proud of.--a little girl whose mother told her she could accomplish anything if she would work at it. Looking back at her life she was very proud of all the work that she did and cherished the memory of the people that she worked with. That's the kind of story worth passing on don't you think?

BLACK HISTORY MONTH: What does a wrench have to do with it?

Okay, so here's the deal. One of the things about being white is that every year there's this thing called Black History Month. As a white man no one has ever told me what I'm supposed to do during this month. What generally happened each year growing up was a lesson or two in school about George Washington Carver and all the wonderful things he did with peanuts. Then throughout the month I would hear a few juvenile white folks grumble about not having a "White History Month" and not seeing the big deal about the achievements and contributions of African Americans. My black friends didn't say much at all about the month. I guess because it would have been kind of awkward. Or maybe it was embarrassing because all anyone seemed to know about Black contributions to society was the many uses of peanuts.

So now that I'm tentatively acknowledging that I am indeed a "grown up" I'm realizing that I don't have to let anyone else dictate what I do for Black History Month. It is completely up to me to decide. I recently randomly came across a short documentary on Bessie Coleman on the Smithsonian Channel. She was the first Black (and Native American) female to get her pilot's license. I found her story surprising, inspiring and just plain cool. And instead of thinking about the social ramifications of race and all that, I simply felt...proud. Yes, that's right, I'm proud of Bessie Coleman. What right do I, a white man, have to feel proud about Bessie Coleman, a black woman who died 90 years ago? Well, she's an American, for one thing! And furthermore she's a human being, and what do you know I am too! We have a lot in common. We both have faced the struggles that are common to all people. We both have asked ourselves, "What can I do with my life?" She stands as an example of the American spirit. She was an innovator with courage, gumption and creativity. That is a legacy that I want to be a part of.

Well, this feeling of pride melted into a feeling that is hard to explain. I felt like I had walked into a room where I'm not allowed. Was it right for me to horn in on African American legacy and claim it as my own? What foolishness! Somewhere along the way I bought into a lie perpetuated by who-knows-who (perhaps no one in particular) that we live in a separated society. The lie says that what's theirs is theirs and whats ours is ours. Perhaps the very celebration of Black History Month made me believe the lie. I believe that Black History Month is actually a good corrective to a great evil in our society. It reminds us to look back at our stories and remember that there were people who went unnoticed in their own time BECAUSE they were a minority. It reminds us that there have always been people willing to look past their current situation and rise above their expected lot in life. Those stories should inspire all of us. The danger comes when White folks think of it at "their" history month, and when Black folks think of it as "our" history month. The history belongs to all of us. It is ours to claim or to be ignorant of. I'm suggesting that ALL of us can take pride in the accomplishments and contributions of ALL of those who went before us? I think it would be much more fun. So if you are interested, check back here this month. I'll be posting things I come across that elucidate the contributions of some people you might never have heard of before.

For today, I highly recommend the Smithsonian documentary linked above. Or you could go read the Wikipedia entry. If nothing else, you should read about her tragic death. It is quite shocking. SHOCKING I tell you. I won't spoil it, but I will warn you that it is, of course, a sad ending and a wrench plays a major role.

When I see unspeakable evil...

How do you feel when you read the news and see that human beings are doing profanely evil things? The response I see on social media is usually outrage. We get angry. We ask "why?" and we seek to place blame. How could someone do such a thing? Then we go on to imagine how we would punish the responsible parties if we were in charge of the situation. We regret that we live in a relatively ordered society where justice comes about slowly if at all. We end up mad at the perpetrator, mad at the "system" for allowing it, mad at our society for harboring it, mad at God for not preventing it. We end up mad and frustrated.

'cause pirates are evil

I feel those things, but I also feel something else. Maybe you do too. I feel sorry. Recently, every time I read about some new horror brought about by a government or a corporation or a mom or a  coach, I find my self apologizing to God. I feel really sorry that we are this way. I feel very much desperate to see humanity saved from itself. I think, when I see evil and I respond with righteous indignation that it is only wishful thinking. I am repulsed, because I like to think that I would never stoop to such inhumanity. Seeing the evil outside of myself, I am for a moment distracted from the evil that is inside me. I truly believe, for a while anyway, that given the same life situation I would have acted completely differently and avoided the long string of errors that so many others have fallen into. Ultimately I know that is a lie. I have evil desires and deathly thoughts that haunt my flesh. By the Grace of God--literally!--I have seen those desires and thoughts for what they are. They are a result of my own death. They come from the ghost that Paul called "the flesh" that haunts me until the time of my death. When I think about it, it seems like death and evil are really the same thing. Evil is death foreshadowed, and death is evil's ultimate consummation.

These ideas, as distasteful as they are, do teach me something. There is something special about humans. We must know that we are made for something better than this. We inherently know that there is something wrong with death. For all that we've been through over millennia we've never fully grown accustomed to the fact that we all die. We have records of billions of humans just like us who have died before us, and yet we still fight against it. If evolution is the only guiding process for our creation and development, then why haven't we evolved in such a way as to be at peace with our fate? Or on the other hand why do we recognize evil at all? I'm not saying this is proof against evolution or anything. I'm sure there are all kinds of plausible theories about the answers to my questions. What I'm saying is that when I look at our situation I see something bigger at work.

I see that we as humans are above-all
shocked by "inhumanity." When people commit atrocities against their fellow humans we feel that we have all lost something. Of course, we have. We tend to think of ourselves as individuals, which is true; but, we are also part of a whole. When the Bible says, "through one man sin entered the world," it is not just saying that Adam had an influence on all future generations. Through one man an entire species became guilty before God. Call God a racist (speciesist?) if you want to, but in the bigger scheme of things we are accountable for all the sins of humanity. Anytime a human commits an act of evil it was done by "one of us." Whether we want them to represent us or not that's the way it is.

Think about this, when an animal attacks a human our reaction depends on how "human" the animal is. When a wild lion attacks a human we feel sadness for the human and maybe fear of the lion, but we aren't really angry with the lion. It was after all a wild animal just doing what wild animals do. But when a dog attacks a human we feel, to a larger degree anyway, outrage. Dog's are much more "human" in that they live with us and seem to respond with person-like emotions. I guess we feel like they ought to know better since they are integrated into human society. When a dog acts inhuman it is seen as a betrayal.

How much more so are we repulsed by humans behaving inhumanely? We'd like to believe that such things can't happen, yet we know all too well that inhumanity lives inside of each of us. There is a betrayer embedded in all of our psyches, and we have a fear that the betrayer is trying to run the ship. We see it in others and the fear of our own evil makes us react with passion. Understanding this, when I see unspeakable evil, I am driven to my knees in humble prayer.

Father forgive us, we know not what we do.

Lawyers

The founding Fathers were lawyers. This is what Jenna Ellis reminded the group of pastors gathered at the meeting I went to yesterday. It is kind of an obvious point. I mean, I knew that many of them must have been lawyers. It turns out that a large percentage of them were professional lawyers and many of the others were trained as lawyers or had extensive lay knowledge of the subject.

So why does that matter? Well, lawyers have a specific way of looking at the world and at language. The documents that they produce are not merely literary or even philosophical they are ultimately legal documents.

The Constitution is a document that gets its framework and legitimacy from the Declaration of Independence (and to some degree the Federalist Papers which are a public discussion about the ramifications of the Declaration and how to build a government based on it). The Declaration of Independence is a document that gives the basic argument for the legitimacy of the Revolution and appeals to Divine Rights and Natural Law as the basis for opposing tyranny.

You see, the unique thing about the Declaration and therefore about this whole American experiment is that those seeking independence sought and found a legal justification for what they were doing. They didn't appeal to a previous agreement or to any precedent in human history. They appealed to the natural, God-given rights of men. They argue that just like the natural laws of science there are natural laws of politics that are not formed by men. Their argument was that since the king was ignoring the Divine Law when it came to governing the colonies it was their responsibility to break the bonds of government and form a new government that would seek to protect the natural rights of people.

Is your mind blown yet?  My mind is blown because I've grown up being taught about how the American Revolution was mainly about Democracy. And yes, Democracy is a key element to the American idea and everything that came after that, but somehow I missed the pivotal fact that the Founding Fathers built their case for a democratic government on the fact that people have divinely appointed rights that are best protected when the people themselves have the biggest voice in forming their government. The argument wasn't that people have a right to rule themselves. The argument was that people have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; therefore, let's make a government where the people are responsible for protecting these rights themselves. They were applying laissez faire economics to the political process. Democratic government means breaking up political monopolies and, to use a contemporary term, crowdsourcing the influence of ideas through representation. This Divine Law isn't what they spend most of the time talking about in the founding documents, but it is the foundation for every assumption that comes after. As lawyers they found it important to have justification for everything they did. When you trace it back, every part of the governmental/legal framework they laid out comes back to the Natural Law established by our Creator.

There is no need to argue that all of the Founding Fathers were Evangelicals. They weren't. A few of them were even agnostics or non-Christian theists. Still, all of them signed on with the idea that there are Truths that are self-evident and unchanging. Contrast this with the Social Contract theory of government. The Social Contract theory is that the legitimacy of rule ultimately comes from the People. Under this assumption there is no objective Truth, only the will of the people. If the Founding Fathers had been operating under the Social Contract theory then they would not have bothered seeking a justification for their actions. The Declaration of Independence could have simply said,"We have decided that we no longer want to be ruled by the King. If you try to continue to rule us we will fight you. Good day."

The Fathers did propose a sort of social contract. They held that governments derive their powers from the consent of the people, but the people give consent under the guidance of the Natural Law. In other words people only have the right to assert their will because there are moral absolutes that give them legitimacy. The point that this brings me to is that we do have a responsibility. Every new scandal and controversy adds fuel to the voice that we have in our heads telling us that there is no point in even trying to stand up for Truth.

Stick with me. If there is a Natural Law that dictates that we are due certain rights as humans based on the will of our Creator, then it is our natural role and responsibility to stand for those rights. The conversation about what America is matters not because we need to convince more people to be on our side of the issues, but because we need to speak and defend the very idea that there is a such thing as human rights apart from any opinion of ruler or of the people. Abortion isn't wrong because most people think it is wrong. It is wrong because those innocent humans have a right to life. Government recognition of homosexual relationships as marriage isn't wrong because a lot of us disagree with it. It is wrong because it corrupts a moral understanding of what marriage is for in the first place (what the government's role should be is a whole other topic).

What Ellis advocates is a shift in the conversation. She would like for all of us to revisit our most basic assumptions about the nature of government. We must decide as a nation if we are going to hold on (and return) to our distinctive founding principal of Divine Law. Or, are we going to give ourselves over to the Social Contract and trust the future of our nation to the whims of human nature?

She's speaking tonight at Candlelight.

Inspiration

When I get in a slump, I sometimes just start writing. I usually don't post what I write, but it sits there in my drafts pile just in case.

Today I am in a slump. So here's some random thoughts.

People often do stupid things, including me and you. So perhaps we should all try to stop complaining about it so much.

We cannot accomplish our own will without asking someone else to submit their will.
Submitting your will is not evil, unless the one you submit your will to is evil.
All people are evil.
God is not evil.
The only way not to be evil is to submit to the will of God alone.

I'd rather draw a car than build a car, but cars are more fun to drive than drawings.

The slump continues...

Let's pay Planned Parenthood More

Things have gotten weird in the abortion (non-)debate. Thanks to an undercover video exposing the world of the trade of human tissues obtained from aborted pregnancies. It turns out that many people would prefer the remains of an abortion to be disposed of and destroyed rather than sold at market value.

I listened to the video in tears. I did not cry out of anger. I wasn't feeling righteous indignation toward the evildoers. I wasn't sad about the ignorance of those involved. Those are all plausible feelings I might have had. But I knew it was something else. I felt a distinct loss of humanity. By viewing the video it felt like I had re-entered the Garden to watch as our Mother and Father, Eve and Adam, fell into sin. Ok that's a little over the top. Bear with me, folks. The internet has made it difficult to have original thoughts, and so sometimes I have to blast my ideas to smithereens, just to produce something I even feel like reading. In any case, I knew I was in tears because I felt a loss. It was like discovering something ugly about your own past. Indeed, I think when we see evil we should feel this way. Seeing evil, after all, is never really seeing what someone else has done. We are seeing what we have done. There are religions and movements that talk about "One World" and the unity of the human race. These ideas ring true because they are shadows or reflections of something that is really true. We are all part of one human race. We generally think of ourselves as individuals that share common physical and mental characteristics, but it is also true that we are part of one spiritual unit called "humanity." The Bible would call us descendants of Adam. When we see someone doing evil it is a reminder that our race is fallen. As much as we would like to think that the agent doing evil is completely unconnected to us, the fact remains that we all share in the guilt of each other.

So I felt bad. Hopefully, everyone does. I guess my greatest fear is that people will see the video and respond with apathy. It would be a foreboding sign of the searing of our social conscious if no one felt it appalling.

Regardless of the prognosticative issues of this video I've thought of a response that I find compelling. What if we offered to pay Planned Parenthood more for "fetal tissue" that is allowed to survive pregnancy? So if first-trimester fetal tissue can get $100 let's bump it up for each trimester. What if we offered Planned Parenthood $300 for fetuses that that complete the third trimester and are extracted fully intact resulting in a viable living sample? That's $100 per trimester. The second and third trimester are more challenging you might say. I would counter that the second trimester actually isn't costing anyone much more than the first trimester. Even for the donor of the fetal tissue the second trimester should actually be less uncomfortable than the first. So we'll tack on $100 more for the second trimester. Now the third trimester is actually the most challenging for the donor, but it has been established that the donor cannot be compensated (she said that was an obvious point in the video, so I guess it is really unthinkable). So that will not go into our consideration. The costs for extraction of a viable living sample, however are much greater. The average hospital delivery without complications costs $9,700. Prenatal care can cost around $2,000. Since, a number of extractions will require cesarian section we'll bump up the total medical costs average to $17,000. So add this to the $200 for the first two trimesters and, let's say, a $300 bonus for the third trimester and the bill would come to $17,500 per extraction of a viable live fetus sample. I like round numbers and I'm feeling generous so let's put the price at $20,000 just to cover any issues I've not considered. Assuming Planned Parenthood provides the donor with at least average medical care throughout the entire pregnancy they would be looking at $8,300 profit per extraction.

Would we be able to raise the money? What would we do with the "extracted samples"? Well, it turns out there is already an example case with some similar numbers. If we change some of the terms then we can see a process that is currently happening that we can compare. Private adoption in the U.S. costs between $10K and $30K. Instead of donors having abortions producing tissue samples there are mothers who carry their children to term then get to choose the parents to place them with. In most cases the adoptive parents cover the costs of prenatal care and delivery, and they pay for all of the adoption fees and services.

Looking at the current supply and demand it seems that there is a "market" of people willing to pay $20,000 for the product of a pregnancy (a.k.a. baby), and they even seem willing to further invest in the product to nurture it into a contributing member of society! Surely, Planned Parenthood can see the profitability of such a plan. If only it weren't for those pesky laws against human trafficking!

So, I guess I shouldn't propose this plan. It is doomed to fail. It also ignores the bigger problem in our society. We are unwilling to connect our sexual immorality to the inhumanity of abortion. No one says this, but ultimately the "freedom of choice" is about sexual freedom. It is freedom from responsibility that we are seeking. People who try to make this a women's rights issue are ignoring the fact that this situation largely benefits men. The sexual revolution has freed men from the cultural role of taking responsibility for their sexual choices. Unmarried, pregnant women are confronted with a situation where their sexual partner is telling them, "Whatever you want to do..." That is seen as the compassionate role of men. These men think they are being responsible and progressive by telling the women they have impregnated, "I will follow your lead." When what most women in this situation are saying, "What do you think we should do?" They are looking for leadership. Most of them are realizing, too late, that they will not find the leadership they need. They will not find the support they had hoped for. Even the society that told them it is okay to be "sexually expressive" now has no answers for them other than, "get it taken care of." Abortion is seen as an unfortunate side effect of our modern sexuality that would be easy to deal with if it wasn't for all the religious nuts trying to make everyone feel guilty.

Mississippi

Where I grew up the bugs are loud in the summer. The mud is red. The winters are predictably unpredictable. The grass grows at an incredible rate. The trees are big. The highways are lined by Kudzoo.

When I was in college I wrote my one and only published opinion article for the Mississippi College student paper. There was a state-wide vote on the issue of choosing an official state flag. I think Georgia had made the change and maybe another state or two. Officials discovered that Mississippi accidentally repealed the law that declared the current state flag about 100 years ago, and so technically had no official state flag. Politicians took this as an opportunity to wash their hands of the issue. They put it to a popular vote, and everyone knew how it would turn out.

For some reason this issue resounded strongly with me. I've never viewed myself as a civil rights activist, and I can't claim to have ever taken strong positions in the issue of race relations in Mississippi. I had black friends in school and college, but I wasn't making any efforts at racial reconciliation. I guess, like many people, I was of course unhappy about racism, but I felt like it was an issue of the past that would slowly fade away within a generation. When this issue came up and the opposition to changing the flag was so strong and the reasoning seemed like thinly veiled racism I realized that if we don't change something then the problems of Mississippi won't fade away. They'll get worse. People were saying things like, "Well if they don't like it why don't they leave," or "I don't see why people are making such a big deal about it." This struck me. At best this reasoning is naive and self-absorbed. At worst it is hypocritical, subversive hatred. Why were my white friends not even taking a moment to consider the feelings and arguments of my black friends? Why were Mississippians describing a large portion of our population as "they" instead of "we"? I'm not saying there isn't an argument to be made for the preservation of the flag, but the reasoning was so terribly short-sighted and honestly disrespectful.

Heather from the MC Library Archives was kind enough to find and send me a scan of the article I wrote in the Collegian.

The staff at the MC library were kind enough to dig up the article for me. It is rather short and emotional, but if I remember correctly they gave me a word count limit and I didn't have lots of free time my senior year anyway. If I had the chance to do it over again, here are some thoughts I might include.

Romans 15:1 reads, "Now we who are strong ought to bear the weaknesses of those without strength and not just please ourselves." One way to apply this is that if you are the one who "knows better" regarding a certain issue it is still your responsibility to consider the needs of the one who "doesn't get it." Yes, from a selfish perspective, it might make sense to keep the flag. I don't understand why it brings people such pleasure to have a flag that evokes the darkest aspect of our nation's and our state's history, but I'll take them at their word. So you want to keep the flag because it reminds you of sweet tea and humidity and fried foods, but should you have no consideration for your "weaker" brother who doesn't get that? "Each of us is to please his neighbor for his good, to his edification. For even Christ did not please Himself; but as it is written, 'The reproaches of those who reproached You fell on Me.'" I guess the argument could be made from the other side. Shouldn't people who oppose the flag bear with the weaknesses of those who want the flag? Well, if you are the weaker party, then I suppose minorities with a faith stronger than yours must be asked to endure your disrespect. If you're happy with that kind of logic then I don't know what else to say.

There are so many things we don't want to and/or shouldn't compromise on, doesn't it make sense to find things that we can compromise on to make the discussion of other things a little more tolerable? If black Mississippians are concerned about the connotations of a symbol that is our state flag, isn't the respectful thing, the kind thing to do, to at least listen and think about if you can accommodate them? If you are not willing to change the flag then what are you willing to do? If the answer is "nothing" then please stop pretending that you are not satisfied with the current level of race relations. Please don't say, "Can't we all just move on?" Please don't argue about the historical "facts" (let's be honest, you haven't done any original research on this, and websites don't count) and claim that this is a made up issue. The truth of the issue is that Mississippians are hurting right now. If a black person were to explain to you why they wanted to be heard on this what would you say? I don't mean what would you say on Facebook. I mean what would you say to their face. If you have a reasoned argument, then great, but most of what I have seen is eye-rolling, exclusionary, dismissive, haughty, heavy-handed rejection. The message is clear. We do not care.

I moved away from Mississippi in 2001. My life's calling has lead me to other places, but my heart is bound to my home state. Everywhere I go I have defended my home state against the perceptions of the world. All the while I know that Mississippians (like all Americans, but that's for another post) live in a wounded society. It is a place full of heart that bears a beauty held mostly in the storied hearts of its people. From my point of view black and white Mississippians have more in common with each other than they do with their own races in other parts of the country. If the music, literature, food and spirituality that is produced in Mississippi isn't enough to bring people together what is?

I'll be interested to see if Mississippians will be willing to do what it takes to put the flag in a museum where it belongs or, even better, to realize what they've been missing by treating each other as less than human.

52 x 19.25

Do you know what is significant about 52 times 19.25?

That is the number of weeks your child will live from birth until they are 19 and 1/4. That comes to:

1,001 weeks.

Most parents have at least some level of influence over their children for the first 19.25 years. Hopefully, we have a lifetime of influence, but for a thousand and one weeks most parents are allowed the strongest voice in their children's lives. What can you do with a thousand and one weeks?

Does this number feel like a threat or an opportunity?

If you think that good parenting depends on your being perfect or always having the right answers then this is probably a pretty depressing number. After all what are the chances of any of us putting together a streak of 1,001 weeks without some kind of major failure or disappointment? How could we possibly make it such a long time without completely destroying or eternally scarring the little people who depend on us? If good parenting is about having it all together all (or even most) of the time then 1,001 might make you despair and want to give up.

On the other hand--thank God for the other hand--perhaps good parenting is about the bigger picture. What if our children learn more from the fabric of their life than the threads? By the fabric I mean the overall picture and impression that our children get from living day-to-day and, yes, week-to-week in our households. If you look very closely at fabric through a magnifying glass the threads often look like a jumbled mess of chaos. Some threads may even be broken, frayed or out of place. But when you "zoom out" on a good piece of fabric the threads all come together to make a pattern and a strong cloth that is useful. So the thread of your life may include many missteps, wrong turns and outright failures, but that doesn't mean that the fabric of your parenting can't have integrity.

When we look at the small picture 1,001 weeks is overwhelming. We experience failure as a parent and think there is nothing we can do to make it better. When we look at the big picture we can see that the failures don't matter so much as the consistent intention and attempt to protect, guide and empower our children to become adults with integrity and passion. The Bible tells us, "Train up a child in the way he should go, even when he is old he will not depart from it." (Proverbs 22:6)

The wisdom of the proverb reminds us that if we have woven the Wisdom of God into the very fabric of our children's lives then it will endure throughout their lives.

So what will you do with your 1,001 weeks?

Don't Feel Like It? So What?

What does a prayer meeting in Iraq look like?

According to VOM's Prayer map Christians in Iraq face a very uncertain situation. They cannot rely on their government or their neighbors for protection against violence. They have almost no one on earth to turn to. I wonder what it is like when they get together to pray. I wonder how many people show up and what they pray about. Are they angry with God? Do they sit in silence? Is there weeping?

I don't mean to over-dramatize the situation. I'm just trying to imagine what I would do. If I were a pastor of an Iraqi church I would be tempted to cancel public Sunday worship services, but I think I would not at any cost abandon some type of prayer gathering. Even if we had to meet secretly in uncomfortable places. Even if the time was inconvenient. Even if there wasn't enough childcare or padded chairs. I would lead my people to pray, to cry out to God for relief.

As the pastor of an American church, I ask my people to pray. And we do. We share prayer requests. We pray in our public services and in our small group meetings. We email out the occasional prayer concern. We pray for the sick and for job opportunities and for broken relationships. We even pray for those who aren't Christian in our community and for opportunities to share Truth with them.

And yet, it doesn't feel that important. We read in scripture that it is important. So we do our best to be obedient. We attempt to incorporate prayer into our daily lives and learn what it means to pray without ceasing. We schedule prayer meetings that a lot of people intend on coming to, but life intervenes. We do studies about prayer and wax spiritual about how if we would just take the time to pray maybe we wouldn't be so stressed about all the stuff that is making us too busy to pray.

I am uneasy about what it might take for prayer to become important to us. How bad does my life have to get for me to become earnest in my prayer?

Before you click away to escape the prayer guilt that you might be feeling (like me), take another moment to consider something. The Kingdom of God is often the exact opposite of the Kingdom of Man. Where we think something is important it is often the least important. Jesus said the last shall be first and the first shall be last. Profound truth here, people.

Those people who are suffering most in this world, especially those who are directly suffering for the cause of Christ, are on the very front lines of God's Epic Work in this world. We might think that God is most at work in places where his church is most visible, but if we are to take the teachings of Jesus seriously then we must realize that God generally works out of sight. The fruit that will be produced will, in the end, come as a great surprise. No one is surprised when a crop produces a 1:3 yield. But if a crop produces a 1:100 ( see Luke 8:8 ) yield that would make world news. That's how Jesus described the Kingdom of God. The unexpected becomes the norm.

So maybe you don't feel like your prayers are very important. Praying for Iraqi Christians sounds like a noble thing, but it doesn't feel very immediate. We won't know if our prayers are doing anything. We usually don't know specifics to pray for. There pretty much zero risk in us praying for them, so it feels a little empty, futile. We don't often get rewarded with an emotional response when praying over a list of needs. We aren't driven by fear or desperation. All we have is the direction of scripture and the call of the Holy Spirit.

In the Kingdom of God that means that even our measly, half-hearted prayers given at least partially out of a feeling of obligation will bear fruit and glorify God. I'm not saying we should be satisfied with that, but it is a start. And until God calls us to deeper and higher things we'd best get busy doing what we can. When the day comes when you really feel like your prayers are needed and like they really do matter it will be all the better if you have been practicing all along. My guess (my confidence!) is that we will find that even our prayers that felt obligatory and thin will have accomplished amazing things we could not have imagined on our own!

Losing Your Grip

I went climbing last night. It was the first time in about 5 months I had grabbed any rock. For my partner it had been about 6 months. We knew we were in for some disappointment. Rock climbing is a sport that requires pretty specific muscle development. You don't get better at climbing by jogging or lifting weights. The only way to stay in shape is to climb things with your fingers. Still, we talked with a little bit of optimism since we had at one time been fair-average climbers.

For my first climb I chose a route rated near the top of my all-time high skill level (5.10 for you climbers). I figured my best chance was to hit it while I was fresh. I made it maybe 15 feet before falling. My arms quickly told me what I didn't want to believe. I wasn't going to be climbing at my old level that night. My partner gave it a go too with all the optimism that comes from watching someone else fail. When you are watching someone else climb you always feel like you could have done better. Then when you get on the wall everything looks different.

I quickly downgraded myself and tried an easier route. Was it just me or were they making routes harder than they used to? I didn't do much better, and since I had nearly exhausted my arms on my first attempts I was worried I wouldn't be able to complete a single climb. Finally, we made our way over to a climb that was rated just high enough not to be embarrassing for grown men(5.7). I climbed as fast as I could before my grip strength ran out and just barely made it without resting. What a relief! We climbed with frequent long breaks for about an hour and a half. In the past we had climbed continuously without breaks for two hours. It was hard not to feel disappointed. There was no logical reason for us to have expected a better outcome, but I guess there's a pride we all have that overestimates our abilities. Just before packing up to leave I went over to the stretching/workout area and grabbed some gripper balls for doing pull-ups on. I found that I was still able to do multiple pull-ups. The problem hadn't been shoulder or upper arm strength. My failure to climb was completely due to a weak grip.

Here comes the spiritual twist.

In the Christian life we can get strong at a lot of things. We can become theological weight lifters that can expound on Biblical precepts. We can memorize the words to all the latest worship songs. We can become ninjas at encouraging others. We can master every Gospel presentation available. We can attend every event faithfully.

But if we lose our grip on Jesus, none of that strength matters. If we neglect the reality of the cross, if we habitually let our focus drift from our identity in Christ, if we don't push ourselves to keep walking in the Spirit, we will loose our grip. You may not be able to escape his grace, but you certainly can slip into spiritual lethargy that is not easy to bounce out of. Just because you had a vibrant, consistent faith years ago doesn't mean you can automatically get back to it once you're "less busy." A firm grip on Jesus is developed over months and years of spiritual discipline. Doing the daily chores of talking and listening to Jesus, loving your neighbor and humbling yourself is not our means of pleasing God. It is our method of consuming and being consumed by him.

You can't become even an average rock climber over night. You can build muscle strength quickly, but your tendons and joints have to develop over a longer period of time. That comes with practice. It is the same way with knowing and loving God. It takes practice and patience. And the payoff is amazing.

Don't Worship Facebook

See that little red circle around the black clock on my browser toolbar? That is a Chrome extension called Stay Focused. I have a list of sites that do not pertain to my work and are especially tempting time wasters. Stay Focused allows me to visit these sites for a predetermined time period. When time is up it blocks access to all the sites on my list. I've found it a great tool to help me manage my online time wisely.

My list of limited sites includes Facebook, Instructables, YouTube, and others.


But something happened the other morning that "got me ta thinkin'" about my use of Facebook. I woke up, and without much thought, reached over to my cell phone and opened my Facebook app. It was the first thing I wanted to do in the morning! I put my cell phone back down and admonished myself for being so shallow and felt really guilty for some reason. Still the desire to pick my phone back up and just scroll through a few updates was nagging me. What's wrong with me?

StayFocused keeps me from squandering internet time

I didn't know at the moment why I felt my desire was bad, why it should be labeled a "temptation" and not just a regular event in life. After some meditation on the subject I realized my danger. You see, the feeling I had toward Facebook was a feeling I had had before toward something else. I realized the desire I had to get up and discover what was happening on Facebook matched a similar desire I have had at times in my life to get up and discover what I could learn from time in the word of God. 

That "at times in m life" phrase may bother you because I am a pastor. Perhaps you believe as a pastor I should at all times be excited about reading my Bible. I confess I am not. Let me tell you why. Seeking God is an exceptional exercise. It is like mountain climbing. There is great reward, but there it requires great struggle. There are moments of ease and comfort, and there are moments that require great sacrifice and endurance. No one should be deceived into thinking that worshipping God is an easy or comfortable activity. But I can testify that it is worth it. The reward is incomparable. So, yes, I can only say that I am sometimes really excited about "getting into God's word" as we Evangelicals like to say. Other days I still make the effort. I still discipline myself to try because in the trying I am building up the endurance and patience and spiritual strength and wisdom it will take to be ready for the next thing the God has for me to experience. I have learned that it is worth it.

Now Facebook (or Pintrest or Twitter or ESPN or whatever .com it is that entices you) comes along and offers a much less rewarding yet more consistent experience of fulfillment. We have built into us a hunger to experience truth. That hunger is only rightfully fulfilled by God, but the internet offers the feeling of truth fulfillment. Social media gives us the feeling of connectedness not only to people but to a vast wealth of knowledge. Where God seems to be stingy with his revelations, the internet will leave no curiosity denied. Our smart phones represent an (apparently) endless repository of knowledge, the ability to know what all our friends are doing, instructions about how to be feeling about the world, and the chance to speak our thoughts in a way that we know will be heard and might possibly get instant feedback. All in a package we can carry around in our pockets.

When we pray to God we often get silence and waiting. When we pray to Facebook (status update) we get likes, shares and comments. When we read the Bible we often have to study diligently and endure puzzling difficulties. When we peruse our feed we don't have to spend time thinking about anything. We don't even need to read long articles; we can just watch the video and be told how to think and feel. When we allow God to speak to us we are often challenged to change out thinking or behavior. When we listen to social media we are reaffirmed in our bias, fears and comforts because we have a self-perpetuating system of likes.

I know it is all silliness. I don't really think Facebook sustains me emotionally or spiritually or intellectually. It just feels like it does. So like a drug gives your body the feeling of health and pleasure for a moment, Facebook can make my spirit feel sustained. Like candy makes your mouth happy, social media can give you an emotional sugar rush of affirmation. But drugs and candy will not sustain a healthy human! 

So if we really want to experience God--that is, if we really want to have a meaningful interaction with our creator in such a way that we are aware that He is real and He is active in our life. If you want to have that experience like I do, then we are going to have to squelch the competition. We are going to have to mute the things in our life that pretend to offer the same things that God does. It is not as easy as blocking tempting sites (though that may be a useful thing to do). There will always be new temptations, new false idols, new ways to be drawn away from a healthy hunger for God's kingdom. I do not want to allow "drugs and candy" to dull my spiritual hunger. I want to be fully alert even if it means temporary suffering, self-denial and waiting. 

Lord, watch over my heart and help me not to worship Facebook. 

Suffering for future generations

Same-sex marriage is being allowed based on the idea that marriage is a matter of individual conscience, and as such individuals who practice homosexuality should have the same rights to enter in to marriage as those who do not practice homosexuality.

What is being ignored in this debate is the question of what is the government's role in marriage? Why is marriage an issue of public policy at all? If marriage is simply a matter of individual conscience (i.e. people should be able to marry who they want to) then what basis does the government have for limiting any type of marriage? If we are going to assume individual conscience is the guiding principle for who should be able to get married, then we must soon start repealing laws against polygamy, marrying family members, marrying animals, corporate marriages, marrying fictional characters and the list goes on. To be honest, I don't know if there are laws against all of those things, but I can imagine that human creativity and perversity will force those issues sooner or later.

If, you say, the government's interest is to protect people from inappropriate sexual relationships, I would point out that our society has almost completely removed sexual relations as an legal interest in marriage. Marriage is not legally required for anyone to have sex in any way imaginable. Marriage partners are not legally bound to respect the sexual norms associated with the tradition of marriage (i.e. marital faithfulness). There are laws against sexual acts that are seen as a violation of those who do not consent (or are deemed unable to consent with understanding). But even these laws are applied unevenly and without a well thought out ethical consideration. In society's mind some things are still "just wrong." I highly doubt that many people could give an ethical argument for why unwed consensual teenage sex is legal but child pornography is not, yet it seems the majority opinion is that one is okay (or even necessary) while the other is an abomination that requires the shame of going on a permanent, public database with a mugshot and address for the perpetrator. If children cannot responsibly give consent it should not matter who they are giving the consent to. Just because other children are doing the abusing it doesn't make the abuse any less.

Returning to my point, if we are going to have any marriage laws at all we need to have a basis for doing so. The debates have been about rights and equality, but few have addressed the real question underlying these laws--the relationship of the government, the individual and the community.
If those were the terms of the debate then we could talk with reason.

As a Christian I believe that homosexual activity is a sin. I see it as a perversion of the gift of sex that God gave us for the purpose of pleasure and procreation. I do not deny that some individuals may struggle more than others with a temptation toward homosexuality even to the point of feeling "born this way." It is clearly observable that many (most?) struggle with a temptation toward adultery and pornography and all sorts of other sexual perversion, but the presence of those temptations do not make them "natural" in the sense of being acceptable before God. While it may seem cruel for me to ask others to deny themselves the pleasures they feel they were born to posses, we must recognize that we do this all the time. The entire justice system is built on the idea that we must persuade people to restrain themselves from doing what they might feel they were born or compelled to do. I see homosexual activity as a sin that is an affront to God and damaging to those who participate. Because of this belief I would encourage people to find a way to avoid or flee that lifestyle, but I also recognize that it is not currently illegal (in most places). So I can speak in one way about my moral beliefs as a Christian, but what should I say as an American Citizen?

First, my moral beliefs are relevant when it comes to discussions of public policy. Even without evoking the Bible or my personal religious practices, I have a right to speak and promote what I feel is right and wrong for others to do. Liberty is the word we use for freedom in America, but to imagine that all individuals are free to do as they want is logically impossible. Liberty in America must mean a willingness to accept responsibility as a citizen of the People. Ultimately, it is the freedom of the People that is protected by the constitution, not merely the freedoms of the individual. I know that is a radical interpretation that has lots of implications for other debates, but that's how I see it. It is on this point, I believe, that democracy is most vulnerable. There is no final standard for values. The people must decide to agree, or else democracy fails. There is no king to go to to resolve disputes. There is no American Standard Moral Code. We have to agree, compromise, or fight ourselves into oblivion.

Second, as an American I have an interest in a public policy that brings stability to our society. The cold hard scientific evidence shows that traditional families are good for our society. Traditional families promote less crime, higher education rates, higher employment rates, better health, more stable markets. I believe that same-sex marriage is a change to marriage law that will benefit neither traditional marriage couple or same-sex couples. The results will be higher family instability, confusing and damaging legal situations, emotionally scarred children, an increase in divorce, and a decrease in the marriage rate. See AN ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF SAME-SEX 
MARRIAGE LAWS by DOUGLAS W. ALLEN from Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy [Vol. 29].

In spite of my ethical and philosophical approach to the idea of marriage I know that most peoples' opinion boils down to a simple statement we hear all the time. "If two people love each other, who am I to tell them not to get married?"

This simple statement is hard to argue against persuasively because it appeals to our American ideal of "live and let live" and an echo of romanticism that still drives pop culture (even though "love" itself has little real meaning beyond a commercial drive for fulfillment. Love, for the masses, is a tool that corporations use to sell their products). We want to agree with the statement, yet a critical eye can see the problem right away. We are not debating love. We are debating legal marriage. There have never been laws dictating whom you can love. Those would be unenforceable. We are not even debating laws about sex, adoption, benefits, photographers, cakes, etc. We are talking about marriage. If two people love each other great for them. When it comes to marriage, the law has it's own requirements and none of them are love. As far as the government is concerned marriage is an institution that simplifies a common situation of a man and woman wanting to unite a household, to support each other economically, and most importantly potentially raise children in a safe and stable environment. Alternate definitions of marriage threaten the intended public policy purpose of marriage. All the laws that currently apply to marriage will be complicated as they must be applied to situations they were not designed for. Future laws concerning marriage will be difficult to craft as they will need to account for all the different circumstances that will (eventually) be considered a legal marriage. The impact on future generations will not be worth the feeling of liberty experienced by a few.

My heart goes out to all of those affected by this non-debate. I don't doubt most people's sincerity. I can see that many people feel that they are standing up for what is right. I understand that there are real injustices going on against people who practice homosexuality. I don't deny that the pain is real or that rejection hurts. I'm sorry for that. Honestly, I see ways we could mitigate that pain somewhat in our society, but I don't think this shift in our thinking about marriage will result in less pain for the people of our society. On the contrary, I am convinced that because of this more people will suffer.

With this ring I... enter into a pre-approval relationship of understood verbal consent for a limited amount of time

http://chronicle.com/article/California-Shifts-to-Yes/149057/

Sexual Consent

Where to begin? The Sexual Revolution changed society's view of when and with whom it is morally appropriate to have sex. I am not enough of a historian to say what exactly the views of society were before the Sexual Revolution, but conventional wisdom would have us believe that society was repressive in its values in that sex should only take place between individuals who had procured the legal rights to do so. Those legal rights were influenced partially by religion but more so by tradition. I say this because marriage practices vary from religion to religion, but they almost all carry the trait of defining the proper place for sex to happen.

I am not claiming that sex outside of marriage did not happen before the Sexual Revolution. I am simply stating that it was considered to varying degrees at different times and different places to be immoral--or at least for the most part, less than virtuous.

Now, in 2014, we have come full circle and we are making new laws to define the appropriate situation for sexual relations. Marriage has become... an economic arrangement? I can't think of another way to explain it. Marriage clearly no longer determines the legal bounds of sex or child raising. It no longer is a protection for women and children in dealing with property rights and inheritance. It has boiled down to a tax benefit. So since, marriage isn't fulfilling its role as defining "consent" it falls to college student policy handbooks. Yes, that's right, college student policy handbooks are now coming to the rescue of vulnerable female college students. Fifty years after casting off the restraints of sexual repression we are just now addressing a few of the ugliest results of the Revolution. It is not as if sexual assault is a new phenomenon. Perhaps it has been on the rise due to many factors, but the data is not completely clear. There are problems due to reporting and definitions. Part of the current issue with sexual assault is that society is even having a problem defining what consent means.

I don't mean to claim that sexual assault wasn't happening before the Sexual Revolution. Marriage was meant to be a protection for women, but evil men in every situation find ways to do what they will. Still, in communities where marriage was taken seriously and women were valued, it provided a structure of consent that extended not just to the married couple but to the family and community as well. It goes against our ideas of freedom to expect permission to do just about anything, but permission to do whatever we want is not one of our unalienable rights.

I wonder how far it will go. Currently, it seems they are pushing for verbal consent to be the marker for when it is okay to have sex (at least as a college student). How do they plan on enforcing this? Will college students need to use voice recorders to document their consent? That doesn't seem good enough. Video would be less fallible, but just think of the privacy concerns. Perhaps colleges should require a signature or a photocopy of a picture ID. That would be terribly inconvenient and, you know, really ruin the mood.

Some progressive student government might come up with the idea of pre-approval. Students could enter into contracts that would allow them to have consent for sex without a verbal agreement each time. Since this would put physically weaker students (usually women) at risk of sexual assault they would naturally be cautious about entering in to such an agreement. They would only want to have pre-approved agreements with men that they trusted not to assault them. Having sex without a pre-approval agreement would become risky for men since anyone they had sex with based on merely a verbal agreement would be able to deny making the agreement and thus accuse them of breaking the student policies. So all responsible college students would only be having sex with people that they had a pre-approval agreement with.

For these pre-approval agreements to be legally binding they would need to become a matter of public record to prevent fraudulent accusation. So I assume couples would need to register their agreement with the college. The college, since it has assumed the role of protector of its students, will have an interest in curbing STI's and STD's and will seek ways to limit the number of partners students are having sex with. At first it will have awareness campaigns and offer benefits to students who voluntarily limit their exposure. Then eventually, some heavy-handed institutions will restrict students to one pre-approval arrangement at a time. Before long, after a few lawsuits it will become the de facto policy of all colleges. Colleges will go to a policy of no sex without a pre-approval arrangement and students can only have one pre-approval arrangement per semester.

Of course students will roll the pre-approval arrangements into the social landscape. They will form ceremonies to recognize the formation of a new arrangement and social status will be based on whatever the norm becomes. Knowing the number of partners another student has had will undoubtedly affect students decisions about who to have sex with. Psychologist will have tons of new data to explore.

Perhaps over time social pressure, practicality and policies driven by litigation will limit students to having one pre-approved sexual partner for their entire time in college. Any students wishing to have the legal protection of pre-approval agreements will have to submit to the college's policies in order to have sex. Students who have sex without such agreements risk being assaulted with no recourse or being accused with no defense.

If it is good enough for student policy handbooks, perhaps cities and states will consider providing the protection of pre-approved consent agreements. Then finally we can do away with marriage and replace it with a legally binding agreement that protects women from abuse, provides men the incentive to restrict their number of sexual partners and as a side benefit provides stable social structure for raising children. Wouldn't that be great?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1926/07/the-russian-effort-to-abolish-marriage/306295/