Isaac Asimov is one of my favorite authors. I loved his stuff when I was a kid, and still enjoy reading and re-reading his science fiction.
Here is a quote by him which I find amusing because it is true:
Creationists make it sound like a ‘theory’ is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.
— Isaac Asimov
February 26, 2009
February 25, 2009
The illustrative tale of Charlie
Every two weeks I have a creative writing project, which other people might refer to as "Peaj's email reminder about Bible Study this week." I try to make it interesting because, you know, who needs to read another "Same Bat-time, same Bat-channel"-type of email? Since the post I have in the back of my mind about Jesus as a priest in the order of Melchizedek isn't really going anywhere (I have, maybe, two sentences), I thought that I would repurpose (fancy corporate-speak for "ripoff") the email I wrote this morning for the blog.
One day Charlie was just kinda bopping along, in that bopping-along way that he had.
Anyway, Charlie was bopping along, minding the business that was his, when a large piece of paper floated down toward him.
This large piece of paper had writing on it. "Ark" and "lampstand" and "Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here." Yes it was a copy of Hebrews chapter 9.
Unfortunately, Charlie didn't realize that it was Hebrews chapter 9, and so he moved on by it. You see, Charlie couldn't read.
A few seconds later, a large shape loomed out of the fog, and swallowed Charlie in one gulp. A huge fish had eaten Charlie. You see, Charlie was a fish too.
So, the moral is clear: Come to Bible Study, and avoid being eaten by a fish. Bible Study will be this Sunday at about 12:45 PM.
Sorry, Charlie.
I think that this was a little bit inspired by the self-heckling comedy of Jim Gaffigan.
One day Charlie was just kinda bopping along, in that bopping-along way that he had.
So who is Charlie?
I'll get to that. Just go with it.
I think you should establish your characters before you tell stories about them.
Quit it, will you? Gosh! You're so judgemental!
You spelled "judgmental" wrong.
Shut up!
I'll get to that. Just go with it.
I think you should establish your characters before you tell stories about them.
Quit it, will you? Gosh! You're so judgemental!
You spelled "judgmental" wrong.
Shut up!
Anyway, Charlie was bopping along, minding the business that was his, when a large piece of paper floated down toward him.
Oh, like that would happen.
Just listen, will you? It will make sense.
Whatever.
Just listen, will you? It will make sense.
Whatever.
This large piece of paper had writing on it. "Ark" and "lampstand" and "Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here." Yes it was a copy of Hebrews chapter 9.
Just floating out of the sky?
Yes, just floating down. Now quiet, or I'll send you away!
Ooh, I'm scared.
Yes, just floating down. Now quiet, or I'll send you away!
Ooh, I'm scared.
Unfortunately, Charlie didn't realize that it was Hebrews chapter 9, and so he moved on by it. You see, Charlie couldn't read.
Is this some sort of strange public service announcement?
Will you quit it?
I'm just trying to get where you are going with this.
Can't you take a break from analyzing everything for just one minute?
You know, mom never really liked you either.
Arrgg!
Will you quit it?
I'm just trying to get where you are going with this.
Can't you take a break from analyzing everything for just one minute?
You know, mom never really liked you either.
Arrgg!
A few seconds later, a large shape loomed out of the fog, and swallowed Charlie in one gulp. A huge fish had eaten Charlie. You see, Charlie was a fish too.
That's weird. And there is no fog under water.
I'm ignoring you. La la la la.
I'm ignoring you. La la la la.
So, the moral is clear: Come to Bible Study, and avoid being eaten by a fish. Bible Study will be this Sunday at about 12:45 PM.
That's your moral?
Can't hear you.
Can't hear you.
Sorry, Charlie.
OK, that was cute, if a bit obscure.
I think that this was a little bit inspired by the self-heckling comedy of Jim Gaffigan.
February 21, 2009
Judging
This post was sparked by this post from friend and fellow blogger, Jessica.
First, some Scriptures:
So why did I include the Scripture from Genesis 2?
My theory is that our propensity to judge goes back to the original sin. I think that the knowledge of good and evil drives us to judge - to divide everything into this black and white thinking of "this thing is good, this thing is evil." We weren't meant to handle this ability, and that's why we mess it up so much. I think that it is because of this propensity to judge that Jesus made the strong statements that he did.
Paul, on the other hand, is talking to the church, and part of his concern is church administration. In this context, it is appropriate to judge what is right and wrong, so that correction can be brought. How can a church leader speak against lying or stealing or slander if he or she is not allowed to judge these actions to be wrong? Isn't it necessary, then, to judge in some contexts?
Here is how I reconcile these ideas. I think that as a Christian that we are to discern right from wrong. But I think that what Jesus is saying is "Love, do not despise." I think that he is speaking against is the separation of our heart from a person that we have judged, but not against recognizing what actions offend God. This is similar to the idea of judging the action, not the person. The sin, not the sinner.
Easy to say, in theory. Very difficult in practice. What I have found is that the roots of the original sin are so deep in us that we fall into the practice of judging very easily. How easy it is to just dismiss a person, to classify them in our minds as "one of those people." How easy it is, too, to spread these judgments to other people for noble ends, "to warn them, to protect them." How often do we see prominent or not-so-prominent Christian leaders or sites on the web rendering a judgment on this or that person, to inform their viewers? How often they claim to be doing this for Christian reasons! Sometimes I think that if these discernments want to be seen as Christian that they should include a disclaimer, like:
"WARNING: The preceding discussion is given for informational purposes only, to inform your prayer. You are not to judge the person or persons named therein. Judgment is a sin. If you say to the object of this message 'You fool!', you will be in danger of the fire of hell. (Matt 5:22). You are not to use this information to gossip about this person(s), defame them, or despise them. Instead, your goal should be to pray for this person(s) and to love them. Again, love them. Anything less is unworthy of Christ."
Another thing that Jess's post brings up is our American concepts of what a spiritual life looks like. To many, a spiritual life is one spent in total service to the church. Anything else is second (or third or fourth) best. I think that the person that wrote to Jess probably saw her as someone who was on a trajectory to have a career in the church, and that she "settled" or got distracted into something less. Want to be a dancer or an actor or a screenwriter or a computer support person? Do it for the church!
I confess that I fall into this trap as well, sometimes concerning other people, but mostly concerning myself. I judge myself as being less spiritual because I work a corporate job. But really, I, like Jess, feel that God opened doors to get me to my current position. And I do not see a precedent in the New Testament for every person who became a believer to give up their current occupation to do Christian ministry. Instead, there is an admonission to remain in your current situation (1 Corinthians 7:17-21). Truth is, Christians can be true Christians without working jobs within the church.
First, some Scriptures:
Jesus said:I pulled just a few Scriptures on judging - trust me, there are many more. As you can see, they are kind of a mixture. Jesus seems pretty absolute: "Do not judge." Paul says "Don't allow yourself to be judged." However, then he says that we are to judge those inside the church (while adjuring us to not judge those outside the church). He then later says that we are to judge things of this life.
Mt 7:1 - Do not judge, or you too will be judged.
Lu 6:37 - "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.
Paul said:
Col 2:16 - Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.
1Co 5:12 - What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
1Co 6:2 - Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!
God said:
Genesis 2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."
So why did I include the Scripture from Genesis 2?
My theory is that our propensity to judge goes back to the original sin. I think that the knowledge of good and evil drives us to judge - to divide everything into this black and white thinking of "this thing is good, this thing is evil." We weren't meant to handle this ability, and that's why we mess it up so much. I think that it is because of this propensity to judge that Jesus made the strong statements that he did.
Paul, on the other hand, is talking to the church, and part of his concern is church administration. In this context, it is appropriate to judge what is right and wrong, so that correction can be brought. How can a church leader speak against lying or stealing or slander if he or she is not allowed to judge these actions to be wrong? Isn't it necessary, then, to judge in some contexts?
Here is how I reconcile these ideas. I think that as a Christian that we are to discern right from wrong. But I think that what Jesus is saying is "Love, do not despise." I think that he is speaking against is the separation of our heart from a person that we have judged, but not against recognizing what actions offend God. This is similar to the idea of judging the action, not the person. The sin, not the sinner.
Easy to say, in theory. Very difficult in practice. What I have found is that the roots of the original sin are so deep in us that we fall into the practice of judging very easily. How easy it is to just dismiss a person, to classify them in our minds as "one of those people." How easy it is, too, to spread these judgments to other people for noble ends, "to warn them, to protect them." How often do we see prominent or not-so-prominent Christian leaders or sites on the web rendering a judgment on this or that person, to inform their viewers? How often they claim to be doing this for Christian reasons! Sometimes I think that if these discernments want to be seen as Christian that they should include a disclaimer, like:
"WARNING: The preceding discussion is given for informational purposes only, to inform your prayer. You are not to judge the person or persons named therein. Judgment is a sin. If you say to the object of this message 'You fool!', you will be in danger of the fire of hell. (Matt 5:22). You are not to use this information to gossip about this person(s), defame them, or despise them. Instead, your goal should be to pray for this person(s) and to love them. Again, love them. Anything less is unworthy of Christ."
Another thing that Jess's post brings up is our American concepts of what a spiritual life looks like. To many, a spiritual life is one spent in total service to the church. Anything else is second (or third or fourth) best. I think that the person that wrote to Jess probably saw her as someone who was on a trajectory to have a career in the church, and that she "settled" or got distracted into something less. Want to be a dancer or an actor or a screenwriter or a computer support person? Do it for the church!
I confess that I fall into this trap as well, sometimes concerning other people, but mostly concerning myself. I judge myself as being less spiritual because I work a corporate job. But really, I, like Jess, feel that God opened doors to get me to my current position. And I do not see a precedent in the New Testament for every person who became a believer to give up their current occupation to do Christian ministry. Instead, there is an admonission to remain in your current situation (1 Corinthians 7:17-21). Truth is, Christians can be true Christians without working jobs within the church.
February 16, 2009
President's Day
It's President's Day, and I am off work. In honor of our Presidents, here are some fun facts about our Presidents. These are drawn from the book Stupid History: Tales of Stupidity, Strangeness, and Mythconceptions Throughout the Ages, which my daughter, showing a keen insight into the interests of her father, gave me for Valentines Day.
- Some people claim that David Rice Atchison was President of the United States for one day. James Polk's term of office ended at noon on Sunday, March 4, 1849. Zachary Taylor was due to be sworn in that day, but he refused to be sworn in on the Sabbath, and his Vice President followed suit; both of their inaugurations were scheduled for the next day. Since Atchison was President pro tempore of the Senate, he was thus next in line and was therefore President for one day. Family legend has it that he slept through the day, making this a great lead in for me making a crack about him being the most effective President ever, if I were inclined to disrespect the office of the President.
- From no president to two: Rutherford B. Hayes (I guess we always include the "B." to distinguish him from all the other "Rutherford Hayes" who have been President) had been beaten in the general election by Samuel Tilden (losers don't get a middle initial), but Hayes was elected President by one electoral vote. Tensions were high and there was a fear that supporters of Tilden would disrupt the inauguration, so Hayes, then-President Ulysses S. Grant (I guess we include the "S." blah blah blah) and Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite (I guess blah blah "R." blah blah) snuck off to administer the oath of office to Hayes the day before the inauguration, which also happened to be several hours before Grant's term ended. Does this mean that Rutherford B. and Ulysses S. were both President until Grant's term expired? I'm no lawyer, but if it doesn't, it doesn't really matter; it's still an interesting piece of history.
- President Franklin Pierce was arrested in 1853 - during his term of office - for running down a lady with his horse. He was probably drunk at the time.
- The Chicago Times didn't like the Gettysburg Address. Here is what they said about it:
The cheek of every American must tingle with shame as he reads the silly, flat and dish-watery utterances of the man who has been pointed out to intelligent foreigners as the President of the United States.
- Stupid History also informs that President Lincoln did not have the deep, resonant voice that the movies would have us believe, but that he had a high, shrill voice - a voice perfect for being heard long distances during open-air debates with no amplification.
February 15, 2009
The unexamined life
"The unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates
I used to always examine my life. How was I doing? Where was I going? I almost always found my life to be lacking. I seemed to be full of, even defined by, my shortcomings. Everywhere I looked in my life I found failure, deficiencies, and squandered opportunities.
Accordingly, I was often depressed. And, oddly enough, neither the poor personal report cards nor the depression led to a better life or better behavior.
Somewhere along the way, I learned two things: 1) That God doesn't want me to sorrow over my failures, unless it is the type of sorrow that leads to righteousness (2Corinthians 7:10 - Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death), and 2) a lot of bad feelings have a biochemical source.
Let me explain the second one a little: I discovered that I often feel depressed after eating a lot of sugar. Before I realized this, when I felt this way I would cast about, looking for the cause, and inevitably hit upon what was bad in my life or what I had recently failed in. I would then conclude that the reason I felt bad was because of the things that I had identified. But they weren't the cause; the sugar low was.
What I have learned, then, is that there are some ways in which it is not so good to examine my life. If I feel bad, I don't have to hunt around for a reason. If I feel less than peppy, I don't have to conclude that it is because I am awful or unloved. Sometimes, it is better to just say, "I feel bad. I don't know why, and I am not going to search for why. I am, instead, going to trust that if God really wants to tell me something, he will let me know explicitly, and won't just give me a bad feeling."
I had this experience this morning. I dragged into church. I felt tired, unloved, unspiritual, and fearful of people. Many people really got into worship today, but I was not one of them. I had the luxury of not leading worship today, and I felt that to force myself to worship hard would do violence to my soul, and so I just sat. Initially I started down the route of blaming my shortcomings, but then I realized that this was that type of generalized down feeling that is related to consuming lots of sugar the day before. So I just accepted where I was at, and waited it out. I thought about different things (I'm little ashamed to say that one of them was television shows I've recently seen) and resisted the urge to flee the room.
And hey, I made it. Here I am, not caught up in depressing thoughts, and ready to lead worship tonight. So it seems that holding off from examining myself was a good thing.
I used to always examine my life. How was I doing? Where was I going? I almost always found my life to be lacking. I seemed to be full of, even defined by, my shortcomings. Everywhere I looked in my life I found failure, deficiencies, and squandered opportunities.
Accordingly, I was often depressed. And, oddly enough, neither the poor personal report cards nor the depression led to a better life or better behavior.
Somewhere along the way, I learned two things: 1) That God doesn't want me to sorrow over my failures, unless it is the type of sorrow that leads to righteousness (2Corinthians 7:10 - Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death), and 2) a lot of bad feelings have a biochemical source.
Let me explain the second one a little: I discovered that I often feel depressed after eating a lot of sugar. Before I realized this, when I felt this way I would cast about, looking for the cause, and inevitably hit upon what was bad in my life or what I had recently failed in. I would then conclude that the reason I felt bad was because of the things that I had identified. But they weren't the cause; the sugar low was.
What I have learned, then, is that there are some ways in which it is not so good to examine my life. If I feel bad, I don't have to hunt around for a reason. If I feel less than peppy, I don't have to conclude that it is because I am awful or unloved. Sometimes, it is better to just say, "I feel bad. I don't know why, and I am not going to search for why. I am, instead, going to trust that if God really wants to tell me something, he will let me know explicitly, and won't just give me a bad feeling."
I had this experience this morning. I dragged into church. I felt tired, unloved, unspiritual, and fearful of people. Many people really got into worship today, but I was not one of them. I had the luxury of not leading worship today, and I felt that to force myself to worship hard would do violence to my soul, and so I just sat. Initially I started down the route of blaming my shortcomings, but then I realized that this was that type of generalized down feeling that is related to consuming lots of sugar the day before. So I just accepted where I was at, and waited it out. I thought about different things (I'm little ashamed to say that one of them was television shows I've recently seen) and resisted the urge to flee the room.
And hey, I made it. Here I am, not caught up in depressing thoughts, and ready to lead worship tonight. So it seems that holding off from examining myself was a good thing.
1Corinthinas 4:3 I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. 4 My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.
February 10, 2009
Dreamless
I've been thinking about Sunday's teaching on dreams for the Kingdom. If you missed it, what I got out of it (and this is probably totally wrong) is that God gives us visions for what we'd like to see happen in the Kingdom, and that we should pursue dreams in the knowledge that God will give us the power to fulfill them.
Now, maybe I'm wrong, but when I hear dream, I think something along the lines of big accomplishment, with the dreamer at the center. Like, ending poverty in the tristate area or being the motive force behind ending slavery worldwide. So, when I was asked Sunday afternoon what my dreams were, I said that I didn't really have any.
Possibly that isn't exactly true. There are some things that I have passion for, but they are sort of nonspecific. I have a desire to worship and to aid other people in worship. I don't really have a vision for the endstate of what I want worship to be like or to become - just that I want to do it and gather more people into doing it. I love talking about the fundamentals of the faith and of helping people understand them, but I don't have a specific goal in mind with this. Do these qualify as dreams?
I don't know. I know that this isn't what Jonathan said on Sunday, but the whole idea of dreams and goals as believers smacks to me as an Americanization (or, maybe, an American Idolization) of the Gospel. It makes me feel like the church is saying something like "you can be a star, too, just in the church!"
In the New Testament we certainly have the examples of Paul and Timothy and Barnabas pursing their individual destinies in the Kingdom - but what about the thousands and thousands of other believers? Did Paul exhort them to pursue their dreams? Is saying "pursue your dreams" the same as saying "now in the Body there are many parts"? Isn't the emphasis in the epistles much more on community and not on individual accomplishment? It seems to me that what Paul emphasized was more sacrificing of the individual to the greater good.
Maybe I am reading too much into this, or misinterpreting this. I look forward to your take on this.
Now, maybe I'm wrong, but when I hear dream, I think something along the lines of big accomplishment, with the dreamer at the center. Like, ending poverty in the tristate area or being the motive force behind ending slavery worldwide. So, when I was asked Sunday afternoon what my dreams were, I said that I didn't really have any.
Possibly that isn't exactly true. There are some things that I have passion for, but they are sort of nonspecific. I have a desire to worship and to aid other people in worship. I don't really have a vision for the endstate of what I want worship to be like or to become - just that I want to do it and gather more people into doing it. I love talking about the fundamentals of the faith and of helping people understand them, but I don't have a specific goal in mind with this. Do these qualify as dreams?
I don't know. I know that this isn't what Jonathan said on Sunday, but the whole idea of dreams and goals as believers smacks to me as an Americanization (or, maybe, an American Idolization) of the Gospel. It makes me feel like the church is saying something like "you can be a star, too, just in the church!"
In the New Testament we certainly have the examples of Paul and Timothy and Barnabas pursing their individual destinies in the Kingdom - but what about the thousands and thousands of other believers? Did Paul exhort them to pursue their dreams? Is saying "pursue your dreams" the same as saying "now in the Body there are many parts"? Isn't the emphasis in the epistles much more on community and not on individual accomplishment? It seems to me that what Paul emphasized was more sacrificing of the individual to the greater good.
Maybe I am reading too much into this, or misinterpreting this. I look forward to your take on this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)