I understand that God has called us to pray, but Scripture seems to speak clearly to the fact that God will hear only those prayers that are prayed in accordance with his will. This leads me to believe that prayer is therefore an act of obedience, not an agent of change. It is similar in this way to baptism. There is nothing in the act of baptism that transforms one into a Christian, but it is commanded by God. Why? It seems to be an outward showing of an inward change. So too is prayer an agreeing with God on His will. I can pray all day to move a mountain, but if it does not accord with the will of God, then no measure of faith will make a difference. It cannot even be faith if it is not in line with God's good pleasure.
The issue that I have with Piper and Co.'s explanation of God dispersing His grace through the prayers of his people is that it does not logically make sense with the concept a sovereign God. It is trying to have it both ways; a God that "...is in Heaven and does as he pleases", and a God that works through the prayers of His people. Either God acts independent of any outside stimulus or He is bound by causality. By definition, God is the first-cause, which means that He must necessarily act on His own volition. Were He to react to the prayers of men He would lose a measure of power.
My main point of contention, then, is in the term: unconditional election. If God is granting grace according to prayers of believers, isn't that a condition? I'm not trying to be cute, but it seems that conversion is conditioned on one's prayers. In theory, couldn't believers then damn someone to Hell by refusing to pray for them, or could they not do the reverse through the fervent prayers of many believers? It seems to bind God's hands, conditioning his election.
If I hold that God is completely sovereign it seems to me that I cannot be a factor in any one of His actions. Have I been called to pray, to witness, to be baptized, to fast, to study....etc? Of course, but it seems that these are acts of obedience on my part, and have no bearing upon the providence of God.
Like I said before, I do not doubt Scripture, and my goal is not to disprove anything, but in my opinion Christianity must stand up to philosophic scrutiny, and I don't know if this one does. I don't see the problem with acknowledging that my prayers do not accomplish one's salvation any more than I see a problem with realizing that though I thought I chose God, he in fact chose me. Why should that one make us uncomfortable and the other not? Just some thoughts; comments always welcomed.
This week is amazing! My kids are testing again this morning, so I have time to write yet another irresponsible and hurried rush to judgment on some issue I have no business discussing. In other words, I can blog again. (on a side note: I really enjoy this site...it's a nice outlet for my thoughts...like a journaling each day on a billboard).
Jamie gave another prompt on her site this week, and it deals with The American Dream. I enjoying abusing that phrase as much as the next guy, blaming it for most of the U.S.A.'s woes, for bringing the church down to a weekly therapy session, making me hungry for more of everything.....etc, etc, etc. I take a different stance today, though. Where did this idea come from? Any sixth-grader can tell you (and I know, because I taught sixth-grade History this year) that America was founded on a dream.
Whether it be based on religion, economics, personal rights, or any other cornerstone, America has always been a haven for freedom. People have flocked to this country since the days when we ravaged the Indians, because they/we wanted freedom from oppression in all of its forms. The problem with freedom is that it works both ways. The same freedom that allows me and others to blog about our lives and thoughts allows for the Nazi-propagandist to spread his hate speech. I am free to worship at an Episcopal church each Sunday morning, but so too do atheists have the right to not be inundated with religious language in public school. I am free to have 30 children if I choose, but others must then be free to prevent themselves from having any. The same freedoms that I enjoy are those that others hate, and vice-versa.
The American Dream has led to a world of evils. Capitalism has created a nation of greed, the rights of the individual have trumped the common-good, our legal system has made at the same time legal and illegal, and the list could go on, but it also has paved the way for the Christian lifestyle that many of us enjoy. We are free, truly free to worship. Other countries do not enjoy that freedom. Our churches and rights as believers are protected by the government itself. I teach in a Christian-school, wear t-shirts that reference Scripture, listen to music that is mass-produced and proclaims the gospel, hear these bands in bars and coffee houses, own several Bibles, and this is all owing to the freedoms afforded by this dream.
As I said before, I love to bash The American Dream as much as most believers do, but the honest truth seems to me that I exist because of it. Are there pitfalls and a massive downside? Of course. Am I an example of how to successfully live as a Scriptural-Christian in America? Hell, no! I recognize I do it terribly badly, but I can't in good conscience bite the hand that feeds me.
Jamie (who seems to be a conduit for lots of blogging lately) posted something yesterday that caught my attention. I have several friends who profess to be Calvinists, and so I have an honest question for you: How can you pray for the salvation of the lost? I'm sure you have an answer, and I think I've heard some, but I'm asking for some good, intellectually-honest reasoning.
I have some questions to ask:
1. If God has chosen whom he has chosen, why would my prayers make any difference? Couldn't I pray for the next billion years for Essau, yet God would still hate him?
2. Is it just an act of obedience as a Christian? If this is the case, am I really praying for that other person or for myself? What I mean by this is that if my prayers do not affect the outcome, and they are only an act of obedience on my part, then I am praying for my benefit, not theirs.
3. If my prayers do somehow sway God in his choosing, is he sovereign? To give man any credit for the working of God is to take a measure of credit away from God, and doesn't this negate the doctrine of Calvinism (maybe it doesn't....I really don't know)?
My past dogmatism in almost all areas has suffered a violent death, and so I find myself somewhere in a postmodern-middle ground on most issues, including Calvinism (I know, you'll say that's not possible....sue me). I wrestle with prayer as it is, but it seems to me that a professed Calvinist would run into some of these problems.
So, Calvinists, Unite!!! Let me know.
Half of my class is at the district track meet today, so we couldn't do normal work. Instead, for the first one and a half hours my 7 students and I read the Biblical account of Samson together, stopping to discuss it as we went along. I know, I know, it was a completely self-serving act, but I enjoyed it. Hopefully they did too.
I left convinced, and a few of them as well, that Samson's strength was only loosely related to the length of his hair. It seemed to serve more as a symbol of his commitedness to God, and the act of cutting it (which he knew Delilah would do) was symbolic of his turning his back on God. It was after this that Judges says that God's Spirit left him, but he did not realize it. Even after his shaving, he did not realize his strength was gone. If he knew his strength was in his hair he would have known immediately, wouldn't he?
Also rather interesting is the fact that each time Samson aocomplished a great feat of a strength it says, "The Lord came upon him in power", as if he was not strong before. Is it possible that he did not have super-human strength as is commonly thought? His strength seemed to come directly from the hand of God as specific times.
Two more things:
1. When he brings down the stadium in the end, his motives were not to glorify God. He prays for strength to destroy the Phillistines in order to avenge the gouging of his eyes, not the avenging of God's honor.
2. His story is one of continual sin, but begins and ends with God's promise to use him to deliver his children from the Phillistines. I find it fascinating when God breaks His own laws through his children to accomplish his purposes. It was sin for him to marry a foreigner, but it says God told him to. It was sin to murder, but had he not murdered those men he would not have been imprisoned, and had that not happened he would not have been able to destroy the Phillistine-empire. As in many cases, God suspended his laws to accomplish his purposes. Sometimes our faith is strange.
I left convinced, and a few of them as well, that Samson's strength was only loosely related to the length of his hair. It seemed to serve more as a symbol of his commitedness to God, and the act of cutting it (which he knew Delilah would do) was symbolic of his turning his back on God. It was after this that Judges says that God's Spirit left him, but he did not realize it. Even after his shaving, he did not realize his strength was gone. If he knew his strength was in his hair he would have known immediately, wouldn't he?
Also rather interesting is the fact that each time Samson aocomplished a great feat of a strength it says, "The Lord came upon him in power", as if he was not strong before. Is it possible that he did not have super-human strength as is commonly thought? His strength seemed to come directly from the hand of God as specific times.
Two more things:
1. When he brings down the stadium in the end, his motives were not to glorify God. He prays for strength to destroy the Phillistines in order to avenge the gouging of his eyes, not the avenging of God's honor.
2. His story is one of continual sin, but begins and ends with God's promise to use him to deliver his children from the Phillistines. I find it fascinating when God breaks His own laws through his children to accomplish his purposes. It was sin for him to marry a foreigner, but it says God told him to. It was sin to murder, but had he not murdered those men he would not have been imprisoned, and had that not happened he would not have been able to destroy the Phillistine-empire. As in many cases, God suspended his laws to accomplish his purposes. Sometimes our faith is strange.
Mercifully, the semester is coming to a close, and in my Milton class we have finished our study of Paradise Lost. I must admit that I enjoyed it more and more each week, but I am also thrilled to have completed it. It was by no means a long book, but I was forced to pour over each word and sentence, noting minute details. Needless to say, that is not the most relaxing way to read a poem.
We are finishing the semester by reading one of the two works that were coupled together after the release of Paradise Lost. Paradise Regained and Samson Agonistes were published together, but due to time constraints we were forced to choose one to study. We chose Samson, because most of us had not read it, and those who had would benefit from a closer reading. We spent nearly 2 hours out of the 3 last night talking about the form of the poem, and not specifically the content. Milton's writing is fascinating in many ways, but part of his genius is in the fact that he plays so well in the realm of ambiguity.
Samson, though written as a play, is called a closet-play, because it was never meant to see the stage. This seems a bit strange, but it makes sense when one understands the nature of the theatre. Every time a play is presented on stage interpretation is required. One must assign defnite meaning to the lines, characters must be visualized...etc. This would mar Milton's vision, because what allows for the depth of his writing is in the fact that it works on many levels. Were it to be acted out the mysteries would necessarily be solved, whether solved rightly or wrongly.
The most interesting thing from last night, though, which brought me back to the book of Judges this morning, was dealing with the main thrust of the Miltonic interpretation of the story. The very title, Agonistes, refers to 'struggle' or 'toil', and the play is filled with Samson's inward and outward struggle while in captivity in Gaza. Just as in Paradise Lost, Milton navigates through dangerous waters by filling in the gaps where the Biblical account is vague. Samson's struggle is in accepting the blame for what has happened to him, and trying to understand the concept of 'God's will', to put it in common language.
I won't give every detail, but throughout the play several implied questions are raised, one of them dealing with the origin of his strength. Did he know where his strength came from? From the time we are children we are told of Samson's hair being a source of strength, but this does not seem clear from the Biblical account. And it certainly is questionable as to whether or not Samson would have thought so. He tells Delilah, but this is after more than a few lies to that end. When the Philistines come upon him, even after his head is shaved, he does not realize that his strength is gone. He attempts to fight as he did before, but to no avail.
God's command to Manoa and his wife concerning Samson was to raise him as a Nazarite, which included several things along with the long hair, but that was not a key point. So one might assume that God's presence left him because the cutting of his hair was symbolic of breaking his Nazarite covenant with God, but he had already done so on several occasions. He had eaten honey out of an unclean carcass, married a foreigner, fornicated with prostitutes, and engaged in a serious relationship with another foreigner (not to mention the hubristic-cruelty to his enemies). So what is the cause of God's deserting of him?
Samson and others in the play debate this question, whose answer is tougher than children's (or adult's) Sunday school makes it out to be. What was so different about his sin with Delilah that caused God's favor to leave him? It's an interesting debate to say the least.
I was terribly dismayed as I pulled into the parking lot this morning at my school. As most of you know, my school is run by an Evangelical Methodist Church (think ultra-conservative Baptist), and they have a huge glowing sign hanging out into the street that usually boasts those horrible quotes, like, "Think it's hot in Texas..." or , "Faith Depot: You can do it, we can help". On one hand it disturbs me, on the other, I get a kick out of it.
Today, though, they ripped off a great saying of St. Anselm's, and now I suppose that I must retire it from my repertoire. Pop Christianity, and anything written on a church-sign qualifies as such, has cheapened it. It's a shame.
So, for the last time I will repeat the great saying (though I never say it correctly),
"Preach the gospel always, and, if necessary, use words."
Today, though, they ripped off a great saying of St. Anselm's, and now I suppose that I must retire it from my repertoire. Pop Christianity, and anything written on a church-sign qualifies as such, has cheapened it. It's a shame.
So, for the last time I will repeat the great saying (though I never say it correctly),
"Preach the gospel always, and, if necessary, use words."
In a dysfunctional effort to communicate more with my wife, I have started her a blog. We keep begging her to, and now she has no excuse. It has been started, and all she has to do is type. We look forward to your comments, Julie.
Accountant in Training
Accountant in Training
I realize that by some strange perversion of the psyche that you parents out there see your children as one of these (see left) for their entire young lives. You coddle them and protect them in the 6th grade as if they were the same innocent creature that they were when they were this (again, see left).
I have news for you, in case you didn't know. They aren't this anymore. They are some strange, almost indefinable hybrid of child/teenager/adult, but one thing is for sure...they are no longer cute and cuddly, and they must accept a modicum of responsiblity for their actions.
I was called into the administrator of my school's office yesterday and lambasted for my methods, grading, inexperience, apathy, communication skills, and in a round about way my spirituality. In short, I was beaten down, all on account of some parents that don't believe their child should be treated like a 12 year old. "How can _____ be expected to actually turn in his work if the teacher doesn't email or call everytime he 'forgets'?" "He doesn't make himself as available as his last teacher (and there's always a better, last teacher)." You get the point.
Allow me to offer some alternatives:
1. Your child is lazy - he has not turned things in for the last 30 weeks, and when he does; let's face it, a blind monkey could do better work.
2. It's your fault - I know you don't like hearing this, but where have you been for 30 weeks? You signed failing papers, report cards, progress reports...etc each week, and now you're concerned? Why don't you hold up your end of this bargain and be more than an advocate in the death chamber, begging for a stay of execution? You should have cared long ago.
3. Your child is not smart - you have him enrolled in a private school that boasts high academic standards that he is not living up to. Maybe he and his bad work ethic need to be elsewhere. Not every school is this tough on their students, and it's not fair to other students to demand that we lower our standards to meet the needs of one.
These kids wouldn't be half so bad if they didn't have parents. So, here's my unsolicited advice to you parents (like a virgin giving advice on sex): they and you are not perfect; suck it up and don't take it out on some 25 year old who makes just above minimum wage.
It was a good weekend to be a Stone. Due to a hybrid of getting most of my studies done prior to the weekend and neglecting the other part of them, I was able to really enjoy myself for a few days.
1. I completed my Milton paper. This is the last paper that I am writing for the semester, and all I have left to do is email it to my professor tonight. What a relief!
2. I watched at least a part of all 8 eight NBA playoff games Saturday and Sunday. It was great! I get giddy with excitement about the playoffs like others get about March Madness, and so I set aside as much of my weekend as possible to watch the first round of games.
After Game 1 of each of the series, my predicted winners are not terribly different than they were a few days ago. I think that all of the higher seeds will advance except the Suns and Nuggets. The Clippers are on a mission to get out of the first round, and the Nuggets just didn't look as good as LA. The Suns should be scared, though. They played out of their minds, Kobe had a sub-par game by Kobe-standards, and they still only one by 5 points. I predict bad things for them.
3. My motorcycle was repaired and given back to me. It has not run well this entire year, but I finally paid to the money to get it worked on, and now it runs great. I even drove it to work this morning.
4. Probably the highlight of the weekend was Saturday night, though. With my good friend Leslie from Denton, I went to see one of my favorite artists of the last 5 or so years. Patty Griffin played a small show at the Ft. Worth Arts Festival, and it was awesome! She is a folk singer that is full of soul, and her best albums have always been those in which she strips it down to acoustic guitars that highlight her powerful vocals. She knows how to put on a show. She spent an hour and a half belting out her songs with only her guitar and one other guitarist to accompany her. It was a nice mix of blues, folk, and americana that couldn't have sounded better if it was played on one of her cd's in my stereo. She's the kind of artist whose songs all sound like classics. She completes the trifecta of good bands I've heard in the last few weeks.
That was my weekend.....I have to teach now.
The most glorious week of the school year is upon us at Christway right now. It is test-time. Private schools do not do TAKS testing, but we do Stanford tests that take 5 mornings. We can't give homework during this week, and so I have nothing to grade each day, and for about an hour at a time I get to read, blog, etc... This once again proves that teaching is the greatest gig on the planet!
So here is what you can expect in the coming days (or hours) from StoneLife:
1. A run-down of the first round of the NBA playoffs (I'm giddy...this is like my March Madness).
2. Patty Griffin concert
3. Potential job
4. German tutor's story (first-hand account of German history)
For now I have to grade last week's papers, but I will return soon.
Viva La Tests!!!
So here is what you can expect in the coming days (or hours) from StoneLife:
1. A run-down of the first round of the NBA playoffs (I'm giddy...this is like my March Madness).
2. Patty Griffin concert
3. Potential job
4. German tutor's story (first-hand account of German history)
For now I have to grade last week's papers, but I will return soon.
Viva La Tests!!!
Jamie posed a question on her blog this morning that I have also been thinking on lately. She asked for a general response to the question of discipline, or more exactly, self-discipline. I seem to be full of opinions, qualified or not on most things, so why should this issue be any different?
One would be hard pressed to argue against discipline in the life of a Christian, but I am wary of the notion on the whole. I daily bear witness to what I believe to be the negative effects of a disciplined lifestyle, and I often don't know how to reconcile this with the benefits. I know, it sounds funny even reverberating in my mind as I write those words, but I am being entirely genuine in my apprehensions.
I believe the problem to be in two parts: pride and self-reliance.
Pride: I keep a certain set of disciplines, but many are imposed by necessity and do not thereby give me any great sense of pride. Most of these have to do with my education, and therefore are a part of my responsibilities as a responsible student, but there is one discipline that I have been able to call my own for several years now: running. Since the day football season ended in high school there has been no reason for me to engage in running apart from personal fulfillment. I take great pride in the fact that I have consistently done this for over 10 years, but it is in that statement that I am aware of the danger of pride. Though I would normally not admit this, I often have no patience or empathy for those who are slothful and lazy. It has been a source of derision in my relationship with my wife and has led to a feeling of superiority over those who are overweight or unathletic.
All these feelings of pride based on a personal preference. The danger associated with personal discipline is in exactly this. One feels compelled to study Scripture at 5Am each day, and invariavbly they grow to resent those who don't. One values education, and so that person cannot stomach a non-reader. Intellectuals mock entertainment magazines, activists thumb their noses at 'the apathetic', and Baptists look down upon Catholics. The list is utterly endless, and it is based upon personal conviction and the human nature to feel martyred and superior when one's beliefs are not held by the masses.
I work at a school that is built on the principal of individual-discipline-turned-corporate. The head of our institution has personal convictions ranging from prohibition against drinking and tobacco to definite theories on the accountablity of the believer to other believers, but he has globalized these, fearing that one who does not practice these same disciplines cannot possibly know the same Christ that he does. I attribute this attitude to pride, but it also segways into the second danger I see in discipline, self-reliance.
Self-reliance: I am strictly applying this to the Christian faith, because I have observed both in myself and others that a Christian engaged in self-discipline is often want to rely more on themself than on God. I am not one to label myself as a Calvinist or an Arminian, a Platonist or an Aristotelian, a Catholic or a Protestant, but I certainly hold to the Scriptures, and these seem to indicate a Christian's absolute dependence upon God in all things. Spiritual disciplines often, though with good intentions, lead believers into a false sense of security within themselves that leaves God out of the equation.
How often have you heard one say, "I should have had a bad day, but I wasn't prayed-up like I should have been"? They seriously believe that God's fortune rests on their prayers or lack thereof that morning. Or how about my favorite, "God told me ....."? Those who have become actively engaged in study and prayer imagine that they have some sort of supernatural connection with God that is completely divorced of themselves, but even this is an overexaltation of self, in my opinion. Does God speak, certainly, but not nearly at the rate as modern Christianity likes to tout. It is a confidence in one's own ability to hear God speak when others can't, and this is due to the level of intensity with God. Henry Blackaby has made a career of marketing this idea to believers, but potentially at the cost of believers truly relying on God and not their own whims masked as "God's will".
Solution: I don't suppose, as hard as I might try, that I can completely do away with spiritual discipline, so I suppose the answer is to be disciplined in one's discipline. I know, that's not a real answer, but I have to go be teacher for a few hours. I prefer just to present the problem and not leave the answer to you wise sages.
One would be hard pressed to argue against discipline in the life of a Christian, but I am wary of the notion on the whole. I daily bear witness to what I believe to be the negative effects of a disciplined lifestyle, and I often don't know how to reconcile this with the benefits. I know, it sounds funny even reverberating in my mind as I write those words, but I am being entirely genuine in my apprehensions.
I believe the problem to be in two parts: pride and self-reliance.
Pride: I keep a certain set of disciplines, but many are imposed by necessity and do not thereby give me any great sense of pride. Most of these have to do with my education, and therefore are a part of my responsibilities as a responsible student, but there is one discipline that I have been able to call my own for several years now: running. Since the day football season ended in high school there has been no reason for me to engage in running apart from personal fulfillment. I take great pride in the fact that I have consistently done this for over 10 years, but it is in that statement that I am aware of the danger of pride. Though I would normally not admit this, I often have no patience or empathy for those who are slothful and lazy. It has been a source of derision in my relationship with my wife and has led to a feeling of superiority over those who are overweight or unathletic.
All these feelings of pride based on a personal preference. The danger associated with personal discipline is in exactly this. One feels compelled to study Scripture at 5Am each day, and invariavbly they grow to resent those who don't. One values education, and so that person cannot stomach a non-reader. Intellectuals mock entertainment magazines, activists thumb their noses at 'the apathetic', and Baptists look down upon Catholics. The list is utterly endless, and it is based upon personal conviction and the human nature to feel martyred and superior when one's beliefs are not held by the masses.
I work at a school that is built on the principal of individual-discipline-turned-corporate. The head of our institution has personal convictions ranging from prohibition against drinking and tobacco to definite theories on the accountablity of the believer to other believers, but he has globalized these, fearing that one who does not practice these same disciplines cannot possibly know the same Christ that he does. I attribute this attitude to pride, but it also segways into the second danger I see in discipline, self-reliance.
Self-reliance: I am strictly applying this to the Christian faith, because I have observed both in myself and others that a Christian engaged in self-discipline is often want to rely more on themself than on God. I am not one to label myself as a Calvinist or an Arminian, a Platonist or an Aristotelian, a Catholic or a Protestant, but I certainly hold to the Scriptures, and these seem to indicate a Christian's absolute dependence upon God in all things. Spiritual disciplines often, though with good intentions, lead believers into a false sense of security within themselves that leaves God out of the equation.
How often have you heard one say, "I should have had a bad day, but I wasn't prayed-up like I should have been"? They seriously believe that God's fortune rests on their prayers or lack thereof that morning. Or how about my favorite, "God told me ....."? Those who have become actively engaged in study and prayer imagine that they have some sort of supernatural connection with God that is completely divorced of themselves, but even this is an overexaltation of self, in my opinion. Does God speak, certainly, but not nearly at the rate as modern Christianity likes to tout. It is a confidence in one's own ability to hear God speak when others can't, and this is due to the level of intensity with God. Henry Blackaby has made a career of marketing this idea to believers, but potentially at the cost of believers truly relying on God and not their own whims masked as "God's will".
Solution: I don't suppose, as hard as I might try, that I can completely do away with spiritual discipline, so I suppose the answer is to be disciplined in one's discipline. I know, that's not a real answer, but I have to go be teacher for a few hours. I prefer just to present the problem and not leave the answer to you wise sages.
I often have a limited blog-reading-window, but Erin reminded me of one today that I often look at and get a good chuckle. Will's younger brother Britt Norvell seems to take pride in being irreverent and controversial in his opinions, and I'm always a fan of that, so I think it's worth taking a look. Enjoy.
When did it happen? At what point did things change? When did followers of Christ go from being the elite minds of their generations to the punchlines of modern intellectuals?
Our history is rich in intelligence. Paul felt competent to stand with the philosophers on Mars Hill in Athens, and by all accounts he held his own. For that matter, Plato and Aristotle themselves acknowledged a being akin to God before such a knowledge was clearly formulated through Christian teaching. Was it not St. Augustine who said, "I find all of Christianity in Plato except the incarnation"? Belief in God (or Demiurge) was a sign of great intellect. The monastics only helped advance this thought, writing the great works of theology. St. Aquinas, St. Augustine, St. Anselm...etc. showed the reasonableness of Christianity and worship of God.
I won't detail every movement, both for lack of time and energy, and a realization that I don't know enough Christian history, but somewhere between these and now there has been a great change. Now our "great minds" are Rick Warren-esque car-salesmen who see Christianity as a marketable enterprise, but we can't even formulate an appropriate response to the likes of The DaVinci Code.
This piece of second-class literature is scaring Christians to death, yet the reaction has been to write bad books and boycott the new film. Where are the John Milton's, St. Augustine's or C.S. Lewis' of our day who will write the great work of Christian fiction that will captivate people the way DaVinci does?
No, we've admitted defeat. We'll keep making our Left Behind's (books and movies that make DaVinci look like a classic) and writing the same damn book about making the Christian life easier or more purposeful, and we will stay as culturally irrelevant as ever.
There was a day before we were scared into isolation by scary-modernity when we led the way in intelligence and culture....and today it makes me sad.
Our history is rich in intelligence. Paul felt competent to stand with the philosophers on Mars Hill in Athens, and by all accounts he held his own. For that matter, Plato and Aristotle themselves acknowledged a being akin to God before such a knowledge was clearly formulated through Christian teaching. Was it not St. Augustine who said, "I find all of Christianity in Plato except the incarnation"? Belief in God (or Demiurge) was a sign of great intellect. The monastics only helped advance this thought, writing the great works of theology. St. Aquinas, St. Augustine, St. Anselm...etc. showed the reasonableness of Christianity and worship of God.
I won't detail every movement, both for lack of time and energy, and a realization that I don't know enough Christian history, but somewhere between these and now there has been a great change. Now our "great minds" are Rick Warren-esque car-salesmen who see Christianity as a marketable enterprise, but we can't even formulate an appropriate response to the likes of The DaVinci Code.
This piece of second-class literature is scaring Christians to death, yet the reaction has been to write bad books and boycott the new film. Where are the John Milton's, St. Augustine's or C.S. Lewis' of our day who will write the great work of Christian fiction that will captivate people the way DaVinci does?
No, we've admitted defeat. We'll keep making our Left Behind's (books and movies that make DaVinci look like a classic) and writing the same damn book about making the Christian life easier or more purposeful, and we will stay as culturally irrelevant as ever.
There was a day before we were scared into isolation by scary-modernity when we led the way in intelligence and culture....and today it makes me sad.
You need to check this out. My brother told me that I could find a cheap flight to destinations on the continent once I was in Europe, but I didn't actually check it out until someone gave me the name of the carrier over there. I found a flight from London to Dusseldorf for .01 GBP. Seriously.....1 cent. Forget taking an overnight train. I'm flying Ryanair.
I'm not afraid to admit it. The truth can finally come out now that I have purchased my tickets to Germany. The real reason I am going..... (no, not to escape 'married-bliss') is to track down Dirk Nowitzki in his native land!
That's right, some go overseas to experience a different culture, to learn a new language, to hide from the authorities, but I have been given a much greater calling......I have been called by God to buy this man (see left.....the white-guy) a beer. Those other things I have just used as excuses to win Julie over to the idea of me leaving for 9 weeks.
Will I be successful? Stay tuned!
Apparently July-August has historically been a very busy month or so, because everyone's birthday is in April....but none more important to me than my beautiful-wife Julie's. (does the bold-type score extra husband-points?)
She is a whopping 22 years old today!!! In honor of her birthday (or the end of tax season) she has the day off today to celebrate, so if you get a chance give her a call and wish her a happy one.
Maybe you can help her plan her birthday present as well. She is coming to Europe for a week this summer to visit me, but we don't know where yet. We are open to suggestions as to places to stay on the continent.
I love you, Julie....wish I could be there.
I would like to say that today is a rare day, but that would be a lie. I've come to believe that the teaching profession is the greatest on the planet. I have had more time off from work this year than I had since high school....that's no joke. The pay is as bad as advertised, but it's the price one must pay to be at home on a Monday at 9:15 am. Fellow teachers, I'm sorry, but I'm blowing the lid off of our scam. Teachers love to complain about the kids, hours...etc, but I just can't allow it anymore. We get to read and talk for a living, and only for a few months at a time...We have the greatest job ever!
I got up early this morning, and am committed to finishing much studying today (I won't bore you with details), but I took a break a few minutes ago and did a couple of minutes of pleasure-reading. I am planning a potential philosophy curriculum for next year, so I picked up Rene Descartes' Discourse on Method to thumb through it. I came across a great passage that advocates liberal arts education, and I thought I might share it with you. It's a bit long, but I thought some of you might enjoy it.
"...the reading of all good books is like a conversation with the most eminent people of past centuries, who were their authors, and that it is even a studied conversation in which they reveal to us only the best of their thoughts; that oratory has incomparable powers and attractions; that poetry has very ravishing delights and sensibilities; that mathematics contains very subtle discoveries that can help very much to satisfy those who are curious, to facilitate all crafts, and to reduce human labour; that moral writings contain instructions and many encouragements to virtue which are very useful; that theology teaches us how to get to heaven; that philosophy provides ways to speaking plausibly about everything , and of making oneself admired by those who are less educated; that law, medicine and the other sciences bring honour and riches to those who practice them; and finally, that it is good to have studies them all, even those most superstitious and false among them, in order to know their real value and to protect oneself against being deceived by them" (Discourse, Part I).
My dad is an absolute genius. He has been married twice, and they both have the same birthday. What great thinking!
So,
Happy Birthday Mom(s).
Julie and I love you.
Happy Birthday Mom(s).
Julie and I love you.
I was reminded of something that makes me laugh nearly everyday. It's an everyday occurence, mind you, but some days it's more annoying than funny. Today: funny.
The teacher across the hall, of whose quirks I could write a book, has one particular habit in particular is blog-worthy. Twice a day, every day the 5th and 6th grade classes go to some kind of music, spanish, p.e....etc class, and most teachers each take turns taking them to and from each. Early in the year Nancy and I decided that I would be responsible for taking them twice a day and she would bring them back.
Here's the thing, I don't know if I would need both hands to count the number of times she has been on time. We go to these classes at the same time each day, and my class and I have to wait around for them to come out of their class each time. The funny part is that she comes out and gives me some heart-felt excuse each and every time. She will come to me and say, "Sorry, our science ran over" or "I don't know what happened, but we lost track of time." I seriously don't think she realizes how silly those excuses sound. It's EVERY DAY!
Thought some of you could relate.
The teacher across the hall, of whose quirks I could write a book, has one particular habit in particular is blog-worthy. Twice a day, every day the 5th and 6th grade classes go to some kind of music, spanish, p.e....etc class, and most teachers each take turns taking them to and from each. Early in the year Nancy and I decided that I would be responsible for taking them twice a day and she would bring them back.
Here's the thing, I don't know if I would need both hands to count the number of times she has been on time. We go to these classes at the same time each day, and my class and I have to wait around for them to come out of their class each time. The funny part is that she comes out and gives me some heart-felt excuse each and every time. She will come to me and say, "Sorry, our science ran over" or "I don't know what happened, but we lost track of time." I seriously don't think she realizes how silly those excuses sound. It's EVERY DAY!
Thought some of you could relate.
As we are in the midst of Holy Week I am reminded of those things that Jesus death and ressurection have accomplished; the forgiveness of sin, the freedom and liberty of the believer, the joy of knowing a Holy yet personal God, and of course, the right to be intolerant, abusively intolerant.
I am dismayed yet strangely entertained by the newspaper article I read this morning from the L.A. Times. I know most of you don't have time to read the entire article, so I'll hit the highpoints. Apparently Ruth from Atlanta, such a nice Biblical name, hates gays...I mean, really hates gays (like Jesus, right?). It's not enough for her to hate them, though, she says that her faith compels her to "speak out against homosexuality". She is suing the Georgia Institute of Technology because they have a ban on hate-speech based on sexual orientation. The Times said that she is joining a campaign of Christians who are seeking to "eliminate policies protecting gays and lesbians from harassment." She and her ilk are upset that "when they protest tolerance codes, they're labeled intolerant." (I ask you, then, "What is the definition of intolerant if not one who is not tolerant?")
I'm not joking here. Of course, the pop-Christian preacher-of-the-day has proclaimed this the "civil rights struggle of the 21st century". Yeah, black people being treated as second-class citizens and Christians having the right to wear a God Hates Fags T-shirt to work are exactly the same thing. Ruth and her courageous freedom-fighters are piggy-backing on the likes of an Ohio middle school student who won a court case that gave him the right and privelage to walk the halls with other 13 year olds, wearing a shirt that read "Homosexuality is a sin! Islam is a lie! Abortion is murder!" (Modern poetry at its finest). By far, the best line from Ruth comes from a letter she wrote to the local Gay Rights Club on campus, where she penned, among other things, "If gays want to be tolerated, they should knock off the political propaganda." Once again, I'm not kidding around.
In all seriousness, could this be less of a Christian movement? Have we so forgotten the command to love even our enemies that we believe it infringes on our civil rights to not be able to verbally "harrass" another human being based on their sinfulness? Have we forgotten that Jesus did not condemn the adulterous-woman, but offered her grace and forgiveness? Need we be reminded of the entirety of the gospel, where Jesus loved those lost in their sins and saved his harshest rebukes for those believers who lived as hypocrites? How are we, then, any different from the Pharisee of Jesus' parable who said, "Thank God I am not like this sinner"?
Instead of remembering these passages, we hate; we hate with the fury of a thousand Satans. Ah, Jesus would be proud indeed.
I have little doubt that no one except me cares whether I complete this thought from a month ago or not, but it bothers me each time I see The Devils on my bookshelf. So, I thought I would quickly finish the prophetic vision of Fyodor Dostoevsky as detailed in his novel.
The Devils is the story of a "terrorist" movement in Russia. The intelletual-elite purposed to subjugate the lower class and gain control over the country. Their means of controlling people are predictive of what is happening on a large scale today. I recently wrote a paper that pieced together some of Peter's speech to Nicholai in Devils, so let me first quote the book directly.
Verkhovensky's vision was that the aristocrats might rule over the people. The only way for them to successfully control the people, though, was for the many to be obedient to the chosen few. The masses must be subdued, so they sought to dumb them down. One cannot unlearn what one has learned, so they must kill the desire for the furthering of their knowledge. All desire for higher things should be killed with drunkenness, depravity, and blind obedience to the intellectually elite.
The Shigalyov System might be defined most simply in one word: mediocrity. Lowering the proverbial bar will create a greater disparity between the inteligentsia and the common man, and thereby render the latter unable to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil. At this point they can be led wherever the former might lead. You might ask, "How could this be accomplished?" or "How could people be so blind?" Allow me to add one more lengthy quotation. (Just one more, I promise)
Verkhovensky continues,
The Devils is the story of a "terrorist" movement in Russia. The intelletual-elite purposed to subjugate the lower class and gain control over the country. Their means of controlling people are predictive of what is happening on a large scale today. I recently wrote a paper that pieced together some of Peter's speech to Nicholai in Devils, so let me first quote the book directly.
To level the moutain is a good idea, not a ridiculous one...We don't want education. We have had enough science. We have plenty of material without science to last us a thousand years. the thing we want is obedience. The only thing that's wanting in the world is obedience. The desire for education is an aristocratic desire. The moment a man falls in love or has a family, he gets desire for private property. We will destry that desire; we'll resort to drunkenness, slander, denunciations; we'll resort to unheard-of depravity; we shall smother every genius in infancy. We shall reduce everything to one common denominator. Full equality...Only what is necessary is necessary; that's the motto of the whole world henceforth. But a shock, too, is necessary; we, the rulers will take care of that. Slaves must have rulers. Complete obedience, complete loss of individuality...there will be no desires. Desire and suffering are for us; for the slaves - the Shigalyov system (Devils 419)
Verkhovensky's vision was that the aristocrats might rule over the people. The only way for them to successfully control the people, though, was for the many to be obedient to the chosen few. The masses must be subdued, so they sought to dumb them down. One cannot unlearn what one has learned, so they must kill the desire for the furthering of their knowledge. All desire for higher things should be killed with drunkenness, depravity, and blind obedience to the intellectually elite.
The Shigalyov System might be defined most simply in one word: mediocrity. Lowering the proverbial bar will create a greater disparity between the inteligentsia and the common man, and thereby render the latter unable to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil. At this point they can be led wherever the former might lead. You might ask, "How could this be accomplished?" or "How could people be so blind?" Allow me to add one more lengthy quotation. (Just one more, I promise)
Verkhovensky continues,
I’ve summed them all up: the teacher who laughs with the children at their God and at their cradle is ours already. The barrister who defends an educated murderer by pleading that , being more mentally developed than his victims, he could not help murdering for money, is already one of us. Schoolboys who kill a peasant for the sake of the thrill are ours. The juries who acquit all criminals without distinction are ours. A public prosecutor, who trembles in court because he is not sufficiently progressive, is ours, ours. Administrators, authors – oh, there are lots and lots of us, and they don’t know it themselves. On the other hand, the docility of schoolboys and fools has reached the highest pitch; the schoolmatsters are full of bile; everywhere we see vanity reaching inordinate proportions, enormous bestial appetites…The Russian God has already capitulated to cheap vodka. The peasants are drunk, the mothers are drunk, the children are drunk, the churches are empty, and all one hears in the courts is: 'Two hundred strokes of the birch or stand us a gallon of vodka.' Oh, let the present generation only grow up! (Devils 421)
Though this was written in the 19th Century about Russia, it could not be more appropriate for 21st Century America. As I detailed previously, education is now thriving on reaching towards the lowest common denominator, instead of raising the standard of knowing; drunknenness and debauchery rule the day and are accepted as anything but immoral or wrong; the government advocates obedience absent of reason (it is in fact unpatriotic to question our leaders, right?); and there is something of a mass-marketing campaign in entertainment to lower the values/standards of the American consumer. Look at the the top grossing movies, music, television...etc over the last few years, and tell me that we are not becoming a civilization of mediocrity?
Conclusion/Warning: Dostoevsky's vision is as much alive today as he predicted it would be in the 19th Century. Let us be wise and discerning.
Conclusion/Warning: Dostoevsky's vision is as much alive today as he predicted it would be in the 19th Century. Let us be wise and discerning.
Deutschland, here I come! It's official, I'm going to live in Germany for 9 weeks this summer. I can hardly believe it, to tell you the truth.
I have been planning this trip for the better part of this last year, ever since I decided to become proficient in German for the sake of my potential Degrees, but it has always been in some far away place where things like "I'm going to start eating better" or "I'm going to get up early and workout each morning" live. Decision time came upon me last week, and the weight of it hit me hard. There are many factors (too boring to list) that I felt needed to be considered, but finally this weekend I purchased my non-refundable plane tickets.
I fly out on the 29th of May and return on the 3 of August. If you are the praying-type, julie and I would appreciate it, because this is not being done on a whim. We believe God has led me to the pursuit of my education in this manner, but it's neither cheap nor easy for Julie (she has to stay and work....and hope the house doesn't flood again).
Keep checking the blog, because I hope to chronicle my summer via StoneLife.
p.s. I've set a fun goal for myself - remind me to write about it later.
I mentioned them in passing a few days ago, but I'm serious now, you need to check out Judd and Maggie. They have been on a pretty constant rotation in my ipod, and yesterday on my way home from school I realized that I truly enjoy every song on their album. Maybe there's some sort of auditory-meth built into the cd that has me hooked, but it worked.
So, go ahead, click on the button above and spend the 10 dollars to buy it. If you don't like it I'll buy the disc back from you. (That's just hyperbole...I'm not going to send you money, but I'll take the copy that you don't like and give it to someone else).
If they are not your cup o' tea, I'll give one more artist a plug. By far, the best thing that I've heard in the last several years (no kidding) is Ray LaMontagne. I give Jim full-credit for giving me a free copy of this...I can't go more than a few days without a 'fix' of his "smoky-voice" (0ne of my sixth-graders actually described it like this...good for her). He just released a short live album that is more than worth the 5 dollars on itunes.
So, skip a meal this week if you have to, but do your ears a favor and give a listen to one of these guys...or just stop by and I'll let you borrow mine
.
Rationalist, Skeptic, or Pagan?
2 Comments Published by Michael on Thursday, April 06, 2006 at 6:14 AM.
Just for fun, let's play a little game. I don't know if you've heard, but it's actually the fastest growing game in the world...really, the world. You guessed it: "Rationalist, Skeptic, or Pagan?" For those of you new to this phenomenon, and it must be asked, "where have you been?", here's how it works: I lay out a scenario and you judge whether I'm a rationalist, a skeptic, or a pagan. Let's play.
Background:
Yesterday was a strange day at the o'l Academy. Each week on Wednesday there is a mandatory chapel that I lead worship for...and by "lead worship" I mean that I play 3 songs on my guitar that everyone hates and no one participates in. You know, "worship" (that's how it works, right?). So I did my song and dance and then I took off to go to lunch, because they were going to do a testimony time from those who went to church-camp with the school last week. I've been to enough of these to know that I didn't want to hang out for another.
Anyway, yada-yada-yada (I caught that Seinfeld episode late last night), two hours later they emerged from the 3rd Great Awakening. The entire rest of the day was devoted to crying and altar-calls of various sorts, which I was not privy to. I was informed of most of this during our weekly staff meeting. Our 1 hour staff meeting started as a time of reflection over the changed lives of several of the students, which I can totally support, but it got progressively stranger. Soon the conversation moved to the "R" word, and the fact that this was obviously the start of something akin to the Asbury Seminary Revival in the 70's.
The disturbing part was when we started discussing the purpose of Christway Academy. The words, "academics is secondary, spiritual life is primary" were spoken and affirmed with many 'amen's', and there was much mixing of the words "church" and "school". In other words, it was said in different ways that the church and the school must share the same mission, exactly the same mission.
My Case:
Let me be blunt: I thought I was a teacher at a school, not a minster at a church. I'm all for the spiritual regeneration of mankind, but I'm also a proponent of academic excellence. Were it not for ministers taking an interest in my spiritual health in high school who knows where I would be, but I also claim that if teachers had taken the same approach with my education I would also be quite different. I believe we are doing a disservice to these students by placing academics on the back-burner in favor of a 5-day a week church. Is God more honored with altar-calls than quality research papers? Am I less holy for desiring that my kids spend time in their studies that they could have been spending in mission work? Is the cultural mandate of Genesis to be forgotten, because it seems that willfully tossing education for the sake of religious fervor is making our students ill-prepared for work within our culture; it is divorcing them from culture entirely.
Your Turn:
So......rationalist, skeptic, or pagan?
Background:
Yesterday was a strange day at the o'l Academy. Each week on Wednesday there is a mandatory chapel that I lead worship for...and by "lead worship" I mean that I play 3 songs on my guitar that everyone hates and no one participates in. You know, "worship" (that's how it works, right?). So I did my song and dance and then I took off to go to lunch, because they were going to do a testimony time from those who went to church-camp with the school last week. I've been to enough of these to know that I didn't want to hang out for another.
Anyway, yada-yada-yada (I caught that Seinfeld episode late last night), two hours later they emerged from the 3rd Great Awakening. The entire rest of the day was devoted to crying and altar-calls of various sorts, which I was not privy to. I was informed of most of this during our weekly staff meeting. Our 1 hour staff meeting started as a time of reflection over the changed lives of several of the students, which I can totally support, but it got progressively stranger. Soon the conversation moved to the "R" word, and the fact that this was obviously the start of something akin to the Asbury Seminary Revival in the 70's.
The disturbing part was when we started discussing the purpose of Christway Academy. The words, "academics is secondary, spiritual life is primary" were spoken and affirmed with many 'amen's', and there was much mixing of the words "church" and "school". In other words, it was said in different ways that the church and the school must share the same mission, exactly the same mission.
My Case:
Let me be blunt: I thought I was a teacher at a school, not a minster at a church. I'm all for the spiritual regeneration of mankind, but I'm also a proponent of academic excellence. Were it not for ministers taking an interest in my spiritual health in high school who knows where I would be, but I also claim that if teachers had taken the same approach with my education I would also be quite different. I believe we are doing a disservice to these students by placing academics on the back-burner in favor of a 5-day a week church. Is God more honored with altar-calls than quality research papers? Am I less holy for desiring that my kids spend time in their studies that they could have been spending in mission work? Is the cultural mandate of Genesis to be forgotten, because it seems that willfully tossing education for the sake of religious fervor is making our students ill-prepared for work within our culture; it is divorcing them from culture entirely.
Your Turn:
So......rationalist, skeptic, or pagan?
That's right, last night I celebrated quite possibly my favorite holiday of the year. In case you calendar was not updated, yesterday was Derek Webb Day in the Stone household. The yearly (or thereabouts) pilgrimage to Deep Ellum, the late night spent shoulder to shoulder with sweaty strangers, the expensive beer...yes, Derek Webb Day at its finest. As I have alluded to previously, I am an unabashed fan of Webb. Everytime he comes through Dallas I do my best to catch his show, which involved ducking out of class an hour or so early last night (I hate doing that, but it must be done at times).
Last night had an uncommon charm to it. The show kicked off with the brother/sister act Judd and Maggie, which I must say are really, really good. He's very circa 1960 Bob Dylan-esque, even down to the haircut, and she has what I would like to call an innocent-soulfullness, not sultry, but smooth. I think I would have been content to have left after their short set, but next came Sandra McCracken. By this time the Gypsy Tea Room was PACKED, so I missed the first half of her set trying to make it back to the bar to get a beer. This distraction took a bit from the McCracken-experience, but she was as good as always....and the beer was also very good. (needless to say, it was the last one I had until the show ended...I wasn't going to make that trek back and forth again).
Finally, Derek Webb took the stage himself, and he did something I have never seen before at a concert. He started with a song, normal, but then he got a pad and paper out and explained that he would spend the next half-hour playing anything we wanted him to. The crowd yelled, he wrote feverishly, and sure-enough, he spent the next 30 to 40 minutes playing old-favorites. It was what you would expect from him, great music filled with witty and often lengthy commentary in between. After the first short-set he announced that he would take a 5 minute break and then come back with his wife and play straight-through his new record, Mockingbird. He said that it's the kind of record that needs to be heard from start to finish, so that's what he wanted to do. I wasn't sure what that meant, but sure enough, 5 minutes later he on guitar and Sandra on keys, they played through the entire album without interruption. No awkward banter, no long-explanations, just Mockingbird, and it was great! He's a great storyteller, and he's just one of those people I could see a thousand times and not be bored.
After the show I ordered one last beer, sat against the wall, and took in the greatness of the night. I knew then that I would be as tired this morning as I am right now, but I also knew that any level of fatigue would be well worth it...and it was.
