Subscribe to Posts
Subscribe to CommentsMonthy Archive: December 2007
« November 2007 |
Main
| January 2008 »
If you read this blog, PLEASE sign in to my guest book on frappr.
No personally identifying information is needed, so this is risk-free. Just provide a name (even a nickname), your zip code, and any statement you want to make ("hi" is sufficient).If you want to know more about me, click here.
December 01, 2007
Faith : The folly of preaching
One of the ways I serve my local congregation is as an occasional preacher on Sundays. When the pastor is out and sometimes when he is in, I get to do the sermon. So I say the following from the perspective of a preacher – I do not think that preaching is an effective way for people to learn how to be a Christian.
To some extent this relates to the same point as my previous message. Listening to a sermon is a lot like attending a lecture in college – there are a lot of things you just can't learn by listening to someone else talk about them, you have to learn by seeing it done. Actually I think sermons are less effective than college lectures. In college, you at least know you will need to apply the knowledge in the lecture on the homework and tests. In far too many cases it is not easy for people to appreciate in advance how the information in a sermon will be useful in their everyday lives.
Even ignoring that, studies in educational theory show that people who only listen to someone talk retain only a small part of what is said. Those who listen and take notes retain more. Those that listen and engage in a conversation on the subject retain a lot more. Those that listen and engage in a conversation on the subject knowing that they will apply that knowledge in the immediate future retain the most.
Which brings me back to how to do church.
Having someone stand up in front of the group and give a lecture on Christianity is just not an effective way to teach people. Those that listen to such a sermon and take notes will do better; but the whole mechanism is inherently limited. On the other hand, creating a setting where people can engage in a conversation with other people on the same subject is far more effective; and if you can have the same group plan to subsequently engage in activities that put the lesson into practice, even better, although that is not easy in most cases.
Of course, again, doing that assumes that church gatherings are small.
Posted by Steven at 11:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 02, 2007
Faith , Life : Interesting Times at Church
So the news of today is that the church congregation of which I am a part is going on hiatus for a year. We are suspending most aspects of ministry (including Sunday services). The organization will continue to exist and we will stay connected to each other; but we are stopping operations for what we expect will be a period of a year. To ensure that everyone continues to be supported, we will all be visiting another local church (not associated with our denomination) for the year. The expectation is that over the year we will all come to a greater understanding of what God wants from our little band of believers and will re-start our church with a new and clearer mission at the end of the year. The plan is to meet again as a group every quarter to reevaluate where we are and what we discern of God’s plan.
As part of the church’s leadership team, I’ve known this was coming for a while; but it was formally announced this week with the public announcement this morning (hence this blog post now). I’ll note that the leadership team is unified behind this move. We all believe it is part of God’s plan. The reasons for this a manifold, and I suspect each member of the leadership team (including the pastors) has a different sense of what the “main” reason is. The fact that our pastors are somewhat burnt out is clearly a key factor; but that alone does not justify the rest of us taking a break.
Speaking for myself, I believe there are two specific things that God intends for us in this time. A couple years ago our gathering got the sense that God was calling us to “do church differently”. We have made several changes in how we “did church”; but several of us have sensed that we have not gone far enough. I believe part of God’s purpose in having us suspending operations is to take away the inertia of how we have always done things, so that when we re-start in a year we can really do church as “differently” as God intended. This is in part why I have been putting so much energy into re-thinking the nature of the Christian Church over the last year as is evidenced by my recent blog posts.
The other factor which I believe is part of God’s plan is that our group needs to learn how to be a community better (hence the other common theme to my posts). I believe community is God’s imperative for His church; but that there is a tendency for people to think that having been part of the audience on Sunday morning, that they have “done church” and there is no responsibility to the rest of the congregation for the remainder of the week. For our gathering of believers, without Sunday meetings to bind us together, the only way we will continue to exist as an entity at the end of this year is if we learn how to be a community outside of formal meetings.
This then is the challenge that God is putting before us – learn how to be a community over the coming year (and as a community discern how God wants us to restart things in a year), or over the year dissolve into other area churches and disband.
It will be an interesting year.
Posted by Steven at 01:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)
December 03, 2007
Life : Reading Again
In addition to not blogging much over the past year, I have also slowed down the number of books I have been reading. That I took the time to re-read Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon/Baroque Cycle (4 books; but around 3500 pages) certainly didn't help. Unfortunately, I wasn't wise enough to slow down my book purchasing in proportion to my reading and so my backlog of books has grown from around forty in 2006 to a hundred and sixty-seven books waiting to be read now.
The good news is that in addition to blogging again, I also seem to have found time to read as well (and yes, I have considered the proposition that those facts are connected – that reading gets the word-oriented parts of my brain spinning and so I also write more). With the TV writers strike underway and my reconsideration of the number and kinds of computer games I am playing, I suspect this return to reading will continue for a while. Hopefully long enough to work my backlog down to something more reasonable – perhaps thirty of forty.
I also need to look back over what I have read over the last year and see if there's anything blog-worthy in the mix. Nothing jumps to mind; but looking at the titles may inspire me.
Posted by Steven at 07:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
December 04, 2007
Web : Here Comes Another Bubble
I've lived here in Silicon Valley for 17 years. If you want to know what it's been like, watch this video (with apologies to Billy Joel). Yeah, that about sums it up.
Posted by Steven at 08:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 05, 2007
Faith : Listening to God
There is a subtext to much of what I believe about Christianity that I really need to say explicitly. The problem is that what I need to say can be so easily misunderstood that when I have tried to blog on the subject, I have ended up adding so many clarifications and qualifications that the resulting post has tended to grow to be five to ten times larger than a normal post. In the end I have always given up and posted something else. However, not explaining my views can equally lead to misunderstandings, so I am just going to jump in and state my position and deal with any elaboration and clarification in later posts.
First and foremost, my theology is distinctly Non-Cessationist (specifically, Charismatic). What that means is that I believe that all the stuff that God is reported to do in the Bible, He still does today – there has been no cessation in God's willingness to perform miracles and the like. Now believing that God still does supernatural things is a long way from believing that everything that people claim is a miracle really is. In fact I will go so far as to say that most of the miracles reported today are either willful trickery or wishful spiritualization of things that have perfectly natural explanations. That doesn't however exclude the "real thing" from existing as well – only that one must be extraordinarily careful in how you evaluate claims. While I don't know that I could provide sufficient objective proof to convince anyone else, I for one have seen enough to believe that God is still active today.
While speaking of God's continued involvement in this world, there is one aspect of His involvement that I believe is critical to understanding Christianity – my understanding is that it is God's desire and intent to actively communicate with His followers. This is central to what mean when I talk about Christianity being a "relationship" instead of a "religion". Christianity is not about hollow rituals meant to please (or appease) a distant God or following a bunch of rules in a book written thousands of years ago; but rather it is an ongoing conversation with one's creator where He works with you to teach you how to be the person He intended you, as an individual, to be. Christianity without that ongoing communication is just another religion. Instead, real Christianity is all about following Jesus here and now - not just following what He said 2000 years ago.
A corollary to this is that I believe God communicates with me. I know saying that is a scary concept to many people; and why it is not a cause for concern would (will?) take many pages to explain. How I reconcile this with my claim to be a skeptic is also a fair question, and one I do hope to address in some later post. Much of how God leads me is rather mundane and, to be fair, subject to alternative explanations. However, I have enough experiences that are difficult to explain by other means that I am comfortable attributing them to God. Here's an example:
A few years ago I was praying, and I got a clear sense that I was supposed to go for a walk along a specific route in the city. I "knew" that when I got to a specific intersection, I would meet someone who needed my help. So I got on my jacket and went for a walk along the route I had sensed. As I approached the indicated intersection, I saw someone I knew approaching the intersection from another direction. The timing was such that we would get to the corner at the same time. I could see that they upset. As it turned out they had had an argument with a family member over the phone and went for a walk to try and clear their head; but couldn't get some of the things that were said out of their mind. So we walked together and I was able to help them calm down and provided some counsel on how they might handle the situation.
So, I did meet a person in need. I was able to help. We met at the exact intersection I had sensed. The route I took to get there ensured that the timing was right for us to get there at the same time. I can come up with no "natural" explanation of how I could have known all that in advance. What's more, this is not a unique event – I have other similar stories. Some do allow for alternative explanations; but many do not. Nor is this one rare occasion that worked out in the midst of many that failed (so that chance would be a viable explanation). So far there has only been one occasion in 38 years where I thought I got a sense of something from God; but it did not pan out (in theory it still could; but I count it as improbable at this point – more likely I misunderstood something). Again, most of my experience with God is less dramatic than the story above; but it is multiple experiences like that which convince me that Christianity is real.
Posted by Steven at 09:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)
December 06, 2007
Faith : Listening to God in church
Two years ago the congregation of which I am a part felt led by God to "do church differently". As we prayed on what that meant, it became clear that at least a part of what we were supposed to change was to re-center ourselves on the idea that Jesus, not us, and not the pastor, was the head of the church. One way this was manifest was that we started to make time within our meetings for everyone to listen to God and share anything they felt God gave them to share. In some respects this was like what the original Quakers did in their "silent services", although we only did it for a small part of the service (after we sang, before the sermon).
Very quickly it became clear that God was doing something. I think the second or third time we did this, a series of people felt led to read specific verses from the Bible. Those verses turned out to be the exact passages the pastor had felt led to prepare for his sermon; but no one else knew it. Needless to say, we really paid attention to the sermon that day. These kinds of "coincidences" kept happening. Sometimes people would be led to share stories or short lessons that were perfect examples of the sermon message. Not everything that was shared was connected to the sermon; but enough each week appeared to be related that it was clear that something was happening.
I am, by the way, confident that this is not because the information was intentionally or accidentally leaked to people or can be explained by the theme being obvious (or at least I discount those occasions that have such explanations). I personally have been among those who shared things that matched the sermon, and I have always considered if there was some way I could have been influenced (occasionally there was, and I disregard those times). Likewise, after we started doing this I started to be very careful to not tell anyone what I was preaching on those times I gave the sermon so as to not influence the sharing time, yet I am still regularly pre-empted in the sharing time.
One side effect of this process was that many people in our group started to gain confidence in their ability to perceive God's leading in their lives. Having a chance to practice following God and seeing some degree of confirmation that they were on track helped a lot of people realize that God was communicating with them as well. In many respects the sharing time in our meetings served as a kind of "training wheels" for learning to follow Jesus – a safe place to try it out and see if it works.
So, has our gathering found "the solution" to teaching people to listen to God? Well, no. While our sharing time has been effective in encouraging people in this, and has provided valuable confirmation to many people, it has not been effective at discouraging people who are not following God. As we do it today, the only feedback anyone gets is if some synchronicity appears between what they share and later events, so there is no negative feedback (only the absence of feedback). There have been many times where, after the meeting, I have talked with other folks in leadership and we all agreed that what someone shared was way off base and probably an invention of their own minds; but the person who shared never gets that feedback. As far as they know, they were following God's lead as well as anyone. I don't know the right way to address this – how to provide feedback that something did not seem right without having the effect of discouraging everyone form trying. Some balance need to be found to really make this a useful process.
Posted by Steven at 11:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)
December 07, 2007
Faith : On Worship vs. Singing
Eph 5:19 – "Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord."
I start with that quote to make clear I have no issue with singing as part of Christian expression. I love to sing as part of church (even if others don't want to stand too close to me when I do). I do however have problems with trends I see in how music is becoming perceived within large parts of Christian community.
Certainly within most Evangelical churches, that portion of church meetings in which there is signing have become known as the "Praise and Worship" segment. The music minister is often called the "Worship Leader" who directs the "Worship Team". So if singing is all about worship, just what is being worshipped?
I have been to many meetings at many different churches, and often hear people comment on how great the "worship time" was, or hear others talk about how great the worship is at such-and-such church. But when I start asking questions, what they mean by "great worship" is often troubling. For many people a great worship experience is all about highly skilled musicians playing well written songs. So I have to ask – just what is being worshipped here? Certainly not God – it is the musicians and songwriters who are being praised.
The second more subtle pattern I see are people for whom a great a "worship" time is one where they feel moved and carried along by the music. Music does have the power to capture us emotionally – to make us feel elated, energized. I hear people talk about "feeling like they were brought into the presence of God" by the songs, and have had that experience myself. I have two problems with this: First, I have also had similar experience of being carried away by the music at rock concerts, and the sensations were no different. Good music can make us feel good, higher, whether it is secular or religious. Second, and perhaps more important, this seems to imply that good "worship" is about what we get out of it – how it makes us feel. If what we seek out of "worship" is a music-high, then aren't we worshiping our own sensations?
If the "worship" is "great", shouldn't that mean that we believe we have better expressed our individual awe and wonder at the absolute majesty of God? What should it matter how good the band is or how it makes us feel? I fear that in our search for "bigger and better" music in church, we have somehow lost the meaning of what we are doing. Does having a 5 (or 10, or 20) piece band supporting the music help us actually express our feelings towards God any better? Or is all that a distraction that tempts us to not focus on God at all? I wonder if we might not actually worship better if we stuck with simple songs supported by one person with a guitar or keyboard.
I've actually started to back up and question what the role of music is supposed to be in the church. While it is clear (see the verse at the top of this post) that there is supposed to be music within the Christian community, is it supposed to be used for "worship" or it is supposed to serve some other role? I'm not as sure as I once was. The Greek word used in the New Testament that is commonly translated "worship" in English actually has the meaning "service". The real Christian way to "worship" God – to express our adoration of Him – is to serve Him. Singing, if it is part of that at all, is a small part. So I find myself asking – if we worship by serving, why then do we sing?
I don't have answers – this post is a work-in-progress as I consider these questions. I'm fairly certain that most Evangelical churches have gotten it wrong; but I don't think I understand yet how to get it right.
Posted by Steven at 10:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
December 09, 2007
Books : Books 2007/12/09
As I try to hammer down my list of books-I-purchased-but-haven’t-read, I thought I’d give weekly posts on my progress.
Today’s count is still 167. I read two books since last Monday, but also purchased two more (tsk tsk). The two I finished are:
Existential Joss Whedon: Evil And Human Freedom in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Firefly And Serenityby J. Michael Richardson and J. Douglas Rabb
This is a critical/academic book analyzing the works of Joss Whedon. The authors’ thesis is that Joss’s presentation of good, evil and free will conforms to the existential philosophy of Sartre, particularly as it is presented in “Nausea” and “Being and Nothingness”. This is a second-generation “Buffy Studies” book in that the authors not only comment on the shows but also consider other academic papers on Buffy, noting agreement with some with trying to refute the thesis of others. Quite a good book and I think they make a good case for their position.
It’s Not Easy being Green: and Other Things to Considerby Jim Henson, The Muppets and Friends
A short collection of quotes by and about Jim Henson and his characters. A loving tribute to a creative, kind, and driven man.
NEXT BOOK: "Real Chirstianity" by William Wilberborce
Posted by Steven at 08:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 10, 2007
Faith : The Church Gathered, The Church Scattered
A lot of what I have been talking about is what happens when the church gathers together to meet and I have much more to say on this subject. However, I want to step aside from that for a moment to acknowledge that what we do when we meet should be a small part of what church is/does. These days I spend 5-6 hours most weeks in church meetings, and I have previously been involved in churches that had a wider array of available meetings where I would spend 10 or more hours a week “at church”. That however still leaves many more waking hours when I am not involved in church meetings. So, what does “The Body of Christ” do when it is not meeting?
In most cases today, not much.
Too many feel they have done their part for God by going to church for a few hours (and giving something into the offering). They feel that having done that they are free to live the rest of their lives for themselves. Sure they try to “be good”, which is to say they avoid those activities that other folks in church would frown on (although there are many acceptable sins – pride, greed, gluttony, even hatred if you keep your tone down – which are not an issue); but they feel they have given God His due and so can pursue their own interests the rest of the week.
However as I understand Christianity, we are called to follow Jesus all day, all week. Those times we meet are not intended to be our service to God; but rather are meant to prepare us to serve God the rest of the week. The church as a community is meant to support the church as individuals as we do the work of the ministry in whatever ways God leads us as individuals though the week.
So for me, the bulk of what it means to “be the church” or to “do church” has nothing to do with meeting together in any form. Being the church is all about what we do when we each go our own ways after the meetings. That being said, if what we do when we meet does not enable or support us doing the work of the ministry when we are apart, then our meeting has failed its purpose. So again, we need to evaluate everything we do when the church gathers in light of how effective it is as preparing us to serve God the rest of the week.
Posted by Steven at 08:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 11, 2007
Faith : The Gospel of the Kingdom of God
If you ready the Gospels, Jesus spent a lot of time talking about the Kingdom of God. While Jesus was still training his disciples he sends them out to work on their own and given them this command:
“As you go, preach this message: 'The kingdom of heaven is near.' Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give.”Matt 10:7-8
What gets lost in translation here is that the word translated “preach” has nothing to do with delivering sermons. It is better translated “herald” in the old sense of that word - to serve as a messenger of the king. So perhaps a better translation is “As you go, deliver this message from The King: ‘The Kingdom of Heaven is near’. Heal the sick, raise the dead, . . .”
The same word is used in what Christians call “The Great Commission”
He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."Mark 16:15-18
It is also interesting to note that they were commanded to deliver the message not to all people; but to all creation (in this case the translation is actually fairly good). The message of good news is not just for mankind; but for the whole world.
So what’s that all about?
While there are some who would disagree, most Evangelical churches and many others would subscribe the following “big picture” version of history. God created the earth and mankind and delegated substantial authority over the earth to mankind. In The Fall, mankind yielded themselves to The Enemy and thereby yielded the authority God had given to mankind to The Enemy as well. So for a long period The Enemy ruled over the earth within the constraints that God had originally given to man. This is why the world is so messed up. Because of this, God sent Jesus and between the cross and the resurrection, Jesus redeemed (paid to regain ownership of) both mankind and the world. So the authority That God had given mankind and mankind had yielded to The Enemy was now regained by Jesus. That’s why in the Matthew version of the Great Commission, Jesus says:
“Then Jesus came to them and said, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations’ . . .”Matt 28:18-19
The church then is meant to serve as heralds for God, and the message we are sent to deliver from The King - the good news we are supposed to share - is that The Enemy has been defeated and God’s reign is starting.
But only starting
It doesn’t take much of a look around to realize that this is still not the world that God meant it to be. It is best to think of the period in which we live like a country that has been conquered; but the conqueror has not yet set up the new government. The new king has won the right to rule; but has not yet been crowned. Jesus won the battle; but has gone away for a while. Yet he plans to return someday to take up the throne. In the mean time, he has lefts his heralds, his ambassadors, his church to tell the world about their new King and to invite people to become a part of the new world order.
Fundamentally, I believe the mission of the church is to proclaim and demonstrate what the Kingdom of God will be like and to invite people to join The King’s service (which also means they get to be adopted into the King's family). We tell people about what it will be like to have God in charge and we demonstrate what it will be like by our actions and the gifts God has given us. We care for the needy, we heal the sick, we bind up the broken hearted and we set those in bondage free, all to show what it will be like when God reigns.
And most of us are expected to do that in the context of our everyday lives. Proclaiming the kingdom is not a matter of standing on a street corner shouting or holding signs. It is a matter of giving a drink of water to a man who is thirsty and telling them that God loves them and doesn’t want to see them in need. It is praying for a co-worker who is sick. It is comforting a neighbor who is troubled and telling them about when God has comforted us. It is giving a chance to someone who is trying to kick a drug habit, while praying that God will give them freedom.
Some of the people we show God’s love to will reach a point at which they are ready to make a commitment back to God – accepting Him as Lord and Savior - and we need to be ready to help them with that too; but our proclaiming the kingdom is not to be conditional on their acceptance of it. Showing what it is like to live under God’s reign is an end in unto itself – something we do because God wants everyone to understand what He is like. We don’t give food to those in need so we have an opening to talk them into becoming Christians, we given them food because God loves them whether or not they will ever be ready to love God back. That’s not to say we don’t also tell people how to join God’s service, God’s family; but we care for people regardless of their current or future relationship with Him.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 12, 2007
Faith : Against Flakiness
I have taken a stand on believing the Christians are meant to be "led by The Spirit" in their day to day lives. There have been other groups, movements and denominations that have taken a similar stance and over time most have degenerated into "flakey" (if not heretical) behaviors. While I am theologically a "Charismatic", I have seen too many churches that have descended into "Charismania" (as one well known Cessationist in the church has called it).
The root of these problems is that while God is trustworthy and will only lead people in ways that are consistent with His character; the ability for normal, flawed people to correctly discern how God is leading them must always be suspect. For all the experience I have listening to God and all of the stories I have where interesting things have happened as a result, I still accept that I can get it wrong.
I believe the scriptural and effective counter-balance to this is a solid understanding of the Bible. To me the Bible is the plumb-line, the draftsman's square, the standard against which all of my personal experiences of God must be measured. If my own experiences of God were to drift away from Biblical description of Him, then my experiences (and ability to discern God's leading) should be considered suspect.
So then, a thorough understanding of the Bible is a necessity for a Christian. Unfortunately, most Christians receive the bulk of their teaching through sermons and occasionally topical "Sunday School" classes or home groups - very few attend real Bible Studies. This is a problem for several reasons. First, with a few exceptions, preachers and teachers in such groups tend to refer to a small subset of the Bible in their lessons. Each has their favorite passages that they tend to use again and again to support their talks. Second, it is far too easy in such settings to take passages out of context. This may not even be deliberate. I confess, there have been times I have used an index of the Bible to find a passage to help me in a sermon and used it without really reading the whole context in which it was set. Third, there are some passages in the Bible that are hard to understand or inconvenient to deal with. Those parts of the Bible are almost never referred to when people are given a choice on what scriptures to use; but yet are part of a complete understanding of God.
I believe the only solution is for every Christian to participate in the study of the Bible going
verse-by-verse through books of the Bible. Each verse will be studied in context so everyone appreciate what the author was talking about, and no "inconvenient" passages will be skipped.
Even with that, the study of the Bible can be difficult. None of it was written in English, and the original readers belonged to a very different culture than our own. Without at least some appreciation for the original languages and without some appreciation for how phrases would have been understood "back then" there is plenty of room for misunderstanding. It is also useful to understand how various passages have been interpreted historically – particularly where there have been historical disagreements over a passage.
I believe such Bible Studies are then best done in groups where there is more than one person present who has made an effort to inform themselves about the language, customs, and historical interpretation of the Bible. Note, I am not saying that you need seminary graduates to teach such classes, just people who God has led to dig into the Bible and learn these things. I recommend multiple people to act as checks and balances against each other. (Because people are flawed, I never trust a situation where one person alone is trusted to be led by God for everyone else).
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Faith : Worship, reprise
My friend Barry over on Honest Faith (a blog that lives up to its name) found this. 'Nuf said.
Posted by Steven at 09:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 13, 2007
Faith : The Full Gospel
Looking back on my post on "The Gospel of the Kingdom of God" I can imagine some Christians objecting to my analysis because I didn’t express the need for the church to talk about sin and salvation (and perhaps other things as well); and they would have a fair point. While I wanted to make specific points about the Church's role with respect to the Kingdom of God, I had not meant to imply that this was entirety of the Gospel. I was already thinking of writing something to clarify this point when I read Wednesday's post on "The Gospel-Driven Church" (yet another blog I follow) entitled "The Gospel: d) All of the Above". Well said Jared.
So yes, I believe that among the things the church needs to communicate to people as we herald God's Kingdom is everyone's need for salvation and the opportunity for personal redemption open to them by joining into God's service and family.
There are two reasons I tend not to say this as much as perhaps I should.
First, I have been part of churches that were entirely focused on "Getting' 'em saved". They didn’t care much about folks before they were saved and frankly they didn’t care much about them after they were saved either as long as they didn’t cause trouble. Everything was geared around getting people to make a profession of faith and then whole church said "Next!" New believers were abandoned and while they understood how to call Jesus "savior", they had no sense of what it meant to call Him "Lord".
Second, I find that explaining Christianity in terms of salvation tends to produce lazy Christians who are only interested in "what's in it for them" and who have no interest in making Jesus their Lord. Theologically I'm not even sure such people are actually saved (the lordship of Jesus is affirmed in virtually every description of salvation in the Bible). Given my understanding of The Church being a community of people who are committed together to the leadership of Jesus, I'm not that interested in that type of "Christian".
So folks will need to bear with my weakness as I tend to not talk about that aspect of my faith and take my assurances that I do in fact believe in it. Certainly there are many others out there who are quite busy talking about salvation that I don’t think I have much to add to that discussion.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 14, 2007
Life : Pub Quiz
Anne and I went to my first Pub Quiz last Tuesday at a local English-style pub (Anne has previously been to one in the UK). Essentially the various tables competed against each other to answer the most of a long list of trivia questions correctly over the course of 4 rounds (we had a table of 8 people, all knitting friends of Anne). The questions posed were quite varied and included:
- In the movie “Back to the Future”, at what speed did the Delorean need to achieve to travel through time?
- What percentage of the universe is made of dark matter?
- What disaster occurred the same year that Fenway Park opened?
- In geography, what do the initials C.B.D. mean?
It was an interesting experience, and I had fun; but I’m not sure I had enough fun to justify spending a whole evening at it. I do however recognize that being there with a bunch of strangers may have detracted from the experience. Someday I’d like to go with a bunch of friends and see if that makes a difference.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Life : Scheduled Posts
Since I now am ahead of the game writing posts for this blog, I finally got around to setting it up so I can enter posts into the system and schedule them to be published at a later date automatically. So as long as I can stay ahead of the game you’ll be seeing my main post each day show up regularly at 5:07AM Pacific time (when I have the scheduler itself scheduled to run).
Lord willing and barring any last-minute inspiration, I now have posts set up out until Saturday the 22nd (not counting the Sunday “books I have read” posts that obvious need to be written last minute). I also have drafts of 6 other post written; but I am not sure when I’ll use them, as well as ideas for several more. Ah, it is good to be blogging again.
Posted by Steven at 05:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
December 15, 2007
Books : C.S. Lewis In A Time Of War
(so I am starting to get caught up on good books I read over the last year and didn't blog on)
C.S. Lewis In A Time Of Warby Justin Phillips
“Mere Christianity” by C. S. Lewis is a modern classic of the faith. A step by step presentation of the foundations of Christianity by a lay person written for other lay people. Multitudes of Christians have grown to appreciate this book. What many do not know is that the book was based on a series of radio programs that Lewis wrote and delivered for the BBC during World War II. “C.S. Lewis In A Time Of War” is the story behind those radio programs and how they eventually became “Mere Christianity”. It provides deep insight into both Lewis and into the workings of the BBC and also provides some background on WWII that many people would be unfamiliar with. The motivations behind certain talks (which became chapters in the book) are also explained. This is a must-read for any fan of Lewis’ non-fiction writing; but I would also recommend it to anyone interested in England during WWII.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 16, 2007
Books : Books 2007/12/16
Current count of books pending to be read: 165
Yeah! Progress! Two books down, none purchased.
Books finished this week:
Real Christianityby William Wilberforce edited by Bob Beltz
In 1797 William Wilberforce published a book with the rather ungainly title “A Practical View of the Prevailing Religious System of Professed Christians, in the Higher and Middle Classes in This Country, Contrasted with Real Christianity”. Wilberforce is probably best known as the member of the British Parliament who led the fight to abolish the slave trade (as recently told in the movie “Amazing Grace”); but that fight was driven by his own convictions about what Christianity was supposed to be (as opposed to how it was typically practiced by others). His book was meant as a plea for people to turn away from “cultural Christianity” and to adopt “real Christianity”.
The book “Real Christianity” is a modern paraphrase of Wilberforce’s book by Bob Beltz. As I have never read Wilberforce’s original, I can’t speak to how much of this book is Wilberforce and how much is Beltz; but regardless, the result is excellent. So much of what I believe about Christianity is captured in this book, and often so eloquently. This is a must read for anyone who consider themselves to be a Christian, and for anyone who has become discouraged with what they see in Christianity in America Today. This is one of those few books I expect to get a second copy of so I have one to lend.
How Mathematics Happened: The First 50,000 Yearsby Peter Strom Rudman
This is a book of mathematical archeology – looking at the historical evidence and trying to come up with theories on how mathematics evolved from simple counting to Greek mathematics. I purchased the book because a review described the effort the author spent talking about the various theories on how and why the Babylonians adopted their base-60 numbering system (which lives with us in the number of minutes in an hour and the number of degrees in a circle); but it covers much more than that. The author makes a great effort to keep what is essentially a dry topic interesting, and succeeds most of the time. A good book if you are interested in the topic; but not for general audiences.
Computer Games Played: none
DVDs Watched: none
Next Book: “Chris Crawford on Interactive Storytelling”
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 17, 2007
Faith : Who's In Charge?
One of the more common issues for Christians to argue about and divide themselves by is the question of church governance – who exactly is running things and making the big decisions. Is it the pope? Is it the ecumenical councils? Is it the bishops? Is it the senior Pastor? Is it a committee of elders? These questions have even enshrined themselves in what people call each other. Names like "Presbyterian" and "Episcopalian" are actually references to forms of church governance (led by elders vs. led by bishops).
So let me answer this quickly and simply – Jesus is in charge. No qualifications, caveats, or exceptions. Jesus is the head of the church. Any structure we build that gives that responsibility to human beings (whether they be one or many) is usurping control over the church from Jesus and will inevitably lead to error, confusion, and misdirection.
But how do we know what direction Jesus is leading His church? If all Christians are to be led by the God's Spirit within them, then Jesus leads His church by that same Spirit within us. The problem is, as I have said before, while my trust in God's leading is absolute, my trust in people's ability (even my own) to discern God's leading is always suspect.
So what's the solution? Reading the New Testament, I believe the biblical model is that each gathering of Christians identifies multiple individuals within the group who have demonstrated the ability to discern what God is doing and give then responsibility as a group to discern if some idea is God's or not. In the Bible, these people are referred to either as "elders" or "overseers". The idea is that while one person may be flawed in their discernment of what God is doing; by identifying a plurality of elders who must reach consensus, you establish checks and balances.
The most important thing is that everyone must keep in mind that these elders are not responsible for leading the church. Their responsibility is to confirm together how God is leading. It is not even the elder's job to receive direction – just to identify it when it comes. So a reasonable (and I believe common, if we allow God to work how He wants) pattern of events is for some non-elders within the community to say that they feel the community is being led to take some action and for the elders to pray and reach some consensus that this is in fact God's doing or not. It need not be done that formally (all that may be needed is quick glance at each other to make sure all of the elders are in sync); but that is the principle.
In some respects, I view the role of elder as "quality control" within the community. You start with the assumption that every Christian within the community is being led by the Holy Spirit within them; but you recognize that no one has the ability to discern that leading perfectly. So you look to several people in the community who have demonstrated greater ability in that regard to provide a double check on everyone (even each other) to minimize misunderstandings about how God is directing things.
Those who are given this responsibility should not be selected because of their education or some other external factor; but rather because they have already demonstrated that they know how to recognize God's leading. Nor are they necessarily paid for this service – it can just be part of how they serve God as part of their every day lives. They do not lead the meetings or give orders to other folks. Their role is just to confirm "Yes, this does seems to be what Jesus is doing".
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 18, 2007
Faith : Our Tuesday Bible Study
On Tuesday nights, I lead a Bible Study group for our church (this may be the one ministry that continues as the rest of the church goes on hiatus). This post is a short description of how it works – not because I hold it up as example of the "right way" to do things; but because I'd like to make some observations on the experience in later posts.
This is a book study, which is to say that we pick a book of the bible (currently John) and study it from first verse to last. I have already talked about why I think this is important.
To prepare for the study, I first break the next chapter into small pieces – usually 3-4 verses and make bookmarks for each that I can hand out. I then pray and start to make notes on each bookmark (as God leads me). This tends to include a lot of different things:
- reminders of context (connecting these verses to what went before)
- key themes (what the verses mean)
- practical applications (how to apply it in the real world)
- translation issues (places where the original Greek/Hebrew carries meaning that may not be evident in the English)
- cultural issues (places where writer was references something in their culture that would not be understood today)
- doctrinal history (where there are one or more "standard" interpretations of the passage)
On the evening of the meeting, we start with a couple of songs (led by someone on a guitar). Then, at around 7:30, we start the study proper. I hand out the bookmarks, and we take them in order. The person with the next bookmark reads the passage and then I open the floor to anyone who wants to comment on the verses and we begin to discuss the passage. I do not "teach" as much as I moderate the discussion, bringing up points from my notes only when the conversation lags. I try to avoid speaking first (unless there is some need to set the stage), and I try to avoid sharing two points in a row, so it is clear I am contributing as a member of the group and not as a teacher. I allow the discussion to wander as long as it remains related to Christianity. While folks are free to share whatever interpretation they have of the passage, where there is a consensus interpretation among most Christians, I try to reinforce those ideas while acknowledging those times when there is a disagreement between various Christian groups.
When we get to 8:30, we take a break for snacks, beverages and conversation. When we resume, there is a time for "Praise reports" – talking about things that God has done in our lives that week; and then prayer requests – issue we (or people we know) are struggling with. Finally we pray as a group. – people pray for each other as they feel led until all of the prayer requests are covered and then we break for the night.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)
Faith : It's not just me
As evidence that other people are headed the same direction I am, take a look at today's post on "Living Spiritually". It says, in part:
Our churches ought to first be true communities. People are the priority. Hospitality, love, and forgiveness are to stand out, and our communities should be places of alluring grace. Christian communities are not to be other-worldly, but to be this-worldly. We’re to be down-to-earth. We’re to share life together. We’re to be real people, living in the real world, and doing real things. And Christ is to be Lord of it all—of all life. Others are to come first—through washing feet, laying down lives, loving as Jesus has loved us. This extends to all we say and do as we live in this wild, wonderful, and broken world as broken people. Our actions will never be perfect, but nevertheless we are to continue to seek to demonstrate love in the midst of sin. This is living spirituality for the church, as it will result in further transformation into the image of Christ, empowering for mission, and diminishing spiritual impoverishment.He then goes on to talk about the Bible as our "map"; but one that too many people don't know how to read:
Churches have failed in their obligation to teach relevant, interesting, and insightful map-reading skills. There are more and more Bibles and more and more translations, but we have little encouragement and direction as to how to read the map—this precious word, this Word of God. This is not just a pastor’s, a scholar’s, or seminary student’s task, but it is the responsibility of all Christians. We have, generally speaking, become unskilled and illiterate map readers, and this is bound to carry with it grave consequences for our spirituality and our churches.Amen!
Posted by Steven at 10:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)
December 19, 2007
Faith : Summary
Over the last month I've blogged a lot of what I have been thinking about for the last year, and this seems to be a good point to put together a summary. Here are the main points I have been trying to get across:
• The church exists to serve as heralds of God's kingdom. We are to demonstrate what God's kingdom (and thereby God's character) is like and to invite people to become God's servants and family. This includes helping people understand their own personal need for redemption and the opportunities available to then because of what Jesus has done.
• God's plan is not for us to do this alone; but as part of a community of believers where each of us supports the others using the gifts and skills that God has given us. Creating distinct classes of laity and clergy within that community has a tendency to limit the flexibility of the body of believers and should be avoided.
• We accomplish this plan individually by being actively led by the Holy Sprit within us. This bidirectional communication allows us to have a real, active, current relationship with God, which is what distinguishes real Christianity from other mere religions. Recognizing how God leads us is a skill we learn as we mature as Christians, and the community needs to support people as they learn.
• However, since our ability to discern God's leading is imperfect, we must also have a thorough understanding of the character, nature, and plan of God as it is described in the whole Bible (not just selected parts); and evaluate any sense of God's leading that we get against that standard. Again, the community must support its members in studying the Bible.
• The best way to learn how to live a Christian life is to interact with and observe people doing it. We each should share with others in the community our own experiences as Christians, good and bad, successful and unsuccessful; and should listen to other people's experiences to better understand our own.
• Jesus is the head of the church and is the only one who provides leadership to it; our role is to discern that leadership as a community. We should acknowledge those within the community that have demonstrated a greater skill at discerning what God is doing and seek their confirmation that the actions of the community remain on track.
• The only doctrines that matter are those that come up in the process of trying to live out our lives as Christians in obedience to God's leading in our lives. Questions that have no such practical application only serve to divide the community. If an issue is moot if you simply focus on obeying God, then what matters is obedience and not the issue.
So given all that, the question becomes how do we structure a community of believers to best accomplish this? And related to that, what does the community do when it meets to support all this?
• How do we support people building a community?
• How do we support people sharing their practical experiences with each other?
• How do we support people learning to discern God's leading in their lives?
• How do we support people learning the nature of God as described in the Bible?
• How do we support people using their gifts to support each other?
• How do we support people doing this not just for a couple hours a week; but all day all week?
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 20, 2007
Faith : A Model for doing Church
There is no “one right way” to do church; but given all that I have thought of over the last year, here is the direction I seem to be headed. Note, this is a work-in-progress and there are some things I am still thinking about.
Church is done in small communities. Between 10 and 30 adults is probably best. Individuals can belong to multiple communities as long as they are willing to commit to supporting all of the communities they are a part of. When a single community gets too big, they should split, as long as sufficient moderators (see below) are available for each new community.
They should meet wherever is convenient: people’s homes, restaurants, wherever there is suitable space and permission. Places that are free are preferred to those that require payments; but it is up to the group if they want to take on the burden paying for a space. The seating arrangement should be such that everyone is equal – no obvious “superior” seats. They should meet at least once a week at a time that is convenient to everyone (not necessarily Sunday). Additional meetings can be held as there is interest. Visitors are always welcome in meetings and can participate as much as they are comfortable.
Outside of the meetings people should get together informally on their own and should work to support each other as God leads them. Projects to serve those in need in the area can be planned in the meetings but carried out through the week.
Within each community there should be at least 2-3 people who are identified as having a good sense of how God is leading who will serve as moderators. They are entrusted with the responsibility making sure thing stay in order and on track. They do not teach or preach and they do not lead; but rather provide gentle boundaries, based on their sense of how God is leading, within which the rest of the group operates. The moderators are not paid for this service.
When the communities meet, they should do 4 things:
• Near the start of the meeting, time should be given for those who feel God is leading them to minister to group in some way. This should start with a period of silence and then one at a time people can share what they feel God has given them. The purpose here is two-fold: First, it is meant to affirm that this is God’s church and God’s meeting and He can do with it what He wants (which is why this is put near the start). All other activities are done in whatever time remains after this is finished. Second, this is meant to be a safe time and place for people to practice recognizing God’s leading in their lives.
• Within the meeting, time should be set aside for people to just talk about what God is doing in their lives and how their week is going. Stories about how God has blessed them, ways in which God has used them, and problems they are facing are all appropriate here. Notes should be taken on issues people want prayer on. Visitor with questions should be encouraged to ask them.
• After the “what is God doing and how it is going” time, there is a time of prayer where individuals in the group pray for those who have expressed need as God leads them. This continues until all of the needs have been prayed for.
• Within the meeting, time should be set aside for Bible Study. The community should go through books of the Bible verse by verse. Those who are gifted as teachers should prepare for this time; but the study itself should be run as a discussion with the teachers adding to the discussion those things they have prepared and correcting any factual errors that come up.
And that’s it.
You’ll note that there is no sermon. To the extent to which people feel they are led to give a talk on some subject on a given week, that can take place in the “being led by God” time; but there should be no expectation that this will happen or any expectation on the duration when it does.
There is also no regular offering. Unless the group is paying for their meeting place, such a community has no fixed expenses that need to be covered. Offerings can be taken up when there is a specific need (some service project within the area, sending someone to serve elsewhere, some personal need within the community, etc.).
Finally I have not identified a time for music. While I believe music has a place in such meeting, I am still not sure what role it is to serve. I have seen it done as part of the “being led by God” time where those who are gifted in music lead the rest in songs; but I am not sure that is right. My current thinking is to use music as a separator. Sing a couple of songs to start the meeting and then another between each section; but something doesn’t feel right about that either. Regardless, music should be led by a small number of people who are skilled in music from their seats within the group (having a big band on a stage adds a lot of overhead to the group).
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)
December 21, 2007
Faith : Not New Ideas
I blogged yesterday about the conclusions I have come to about how to do church. The good news is that I am not alone in these views and that there are a significant number of people around the world who are doing variations on what I proposed. It is known as the "Simple Church" or "Organic Church" movement (and sometimes the "House Church" movement, although that term is used by several different groups so it can be misleading). What I propose clearly fits into their model (small, interactive groups; low overhead; minimal "clergy"; etc.), although I go into more specifics while the Simple/Organic Church movement tends to be more flexible (which may be the right thing overall). For those who are interested in knowing more, I would recommend the book "Organic Church: Growing Faith Where Life Happens" by Neil Cole
What's interesting is that according to Barna Research Group (Christian pollsters), the number of Christian whose sole experience of church is through groups like this is now larger than many traditional denominations. George Barna, who runs the group, wrote about this phenomenon in his book "Revolution". He is convinced that a fundamental change in Christianity is underway, being led by people who are taking church out of the big buildings and away from "professional" leadership, and focusing on what it means to being Christians together in a community.
I also want to note that there are two other models which have at least superficial similarity to what I suggest.
The first is the "home group" or "cell group" model which is used by the majority of evangelical churches these days (every church I have been a part of for the last 25 years has had a cell group program). In this model you have a traditional church service on Sunday; but smaller groups that meet in people's homes during the week (the Bible study I have been leading is technically a "cell group" of my church).
While this model looks great on paper, my experience is that it is in general a failure in practice. Ignoring the group I am now leading (which I feel unqualified to judge), I have only experienced one cell group in those 25 years that was actually effective at building a mutually supportive community of believers – and that group was disbanded by the parent church in part because the pastor was concerned that it was getting to be too much of a clique.
While I have seen many specific issues with how church have run cell groups, to me the fundamental issue that they are always viewed as secondary while the Sunday service is viewed as the main expression of the church. No matter what gets said from the pulpit, the subtext always seems to be that what is seen on Sunday is "really" church and so people's views on hierarchy, participation, mutual interdependence, and community never change, regardless of how many cell group meetings they attend.
The other variation is the "Cell and Celebration" model where weekly small groups are in fact the primary expression of the church – there is no "Sunday service" in the traditional sense. However, periodically (Monthly, Quarterly, etc.) there are larger gatherings where many small groups get together. The larger gatherings are considered optional, while the small groups are viewed as primary. I have never been a part of such a church, and so I can't comment on what the effect of the model is; but I am open to the idea. I don’t have a clear sense of what is missing from the small group experience that motivates the larger gathering; but accept that there may be something of value in this.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 22, 2007
Life : Taking it Easy over the Holidays
As of yesterday's post I finished dumping everything I have to say on that nature of Church that has been building up over the last year. I have to say I'm glad I got all of that stuff out of my system now. Once it started to come together in my mind I really felt the need to put it all down. I appreciate everyone’s patience with the rather weighty set of posts.
With the holidays upon us I've decided to stick with lighter stuff from now until the New Year. I'm off work until January 2nd, and Anne and I will be taking it easy around home – no big trips this year. I’m going to do likewise on this blog.
My personal goal for this break is to drive down my pending book count as much as possible, so I am focusing on any books that I think I can get through fast. The goal is quality, not quality, so expect a long list of fluff next Sunday.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 23, 2007
Books : Books 2007/12/23
Current count of books pending to be read: 161
Fourbooks down, none purchased
Books finished this week:
The Polysyllabic Spreeby Nick Hornby
I’m not sure “irony” is the right word, but it is certainly interesting to include in today’s post the fact that I read Nick Hornby’s “The Polysyllabic Spree” since the book is essentially a 14 month diary of the books that the author purchased and/or read over the period. As the subtitle says “A hilarious and true account of one man’s struggle with the monthly tide of the books he’s bought and the books he’s been meaning to read”. As the saying goes, I resemble that remark. While my taste varies some from his, Hornby’s passion for books is something I can completely sympathize with. What I find interesting are the subconscious themes he identified in why he read particular books in a given month.
Chris Crawford on Interactive Storytelling
by Chris Crawford
Chris Crawford is one of the "greats" in the field of computer game design. Not only did each of the games he designed in the early years of the industry break new ground; but he also founded the Journal of Computer Game Design and the annual Game Developer's Conference. Chris's aspiration was always to show what computer games could become, and his increasing disappointment with the direction the industry was heading (yet more mindless shoot-'em-ups) was evident to those who heard him speak.
In 1991, he left the computer games to work in a new direction – Interactive Story Telling. Not games, and not simple binary/hypertext decision systems (whose options could easily be graphed); but rather systems of interactive agents that tracked mood and attitudes of characters in response to the player's actions and created a good story that fit what they were doing. He tried a very simple version of this in his 1987 game "Trust and Betrayal: The Legacy of Siboot" (one of Chris's few commercial failures) and he as been working on how to do it right since 1991.
This book captures what he has learned and the progress he made in producing a real system (the first version of which is due out next year). The book is a fairly good survey of the problem, and a description of the parts of it he thinks he has solved; and the parts that he thinks will take more research (and the hack solutions he plans to use for the first product). As always with Chris's work, the book is well thought out and entertaining, and he is not above making fun of himself in the process.
While a book of rather limited appeal , it is a must read for anyone interested in the subject.
Fair Game: My Life as a Spy, My Betrayal by the White Houseby Valerie Plame Wilson
The memoirs of the woman whose story brought down Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff - "Scooter" Libby. As it turns out, there is not a whole lot of the story that she was allowed to tell (see below) that was not repeated regularly on the news, so reading this book proved to be rather redundant. The only interesting aspect was the story of the book itself. The CIA ruled that, while lengthy articles had been written about her life in many major newspapers, she herself was forbidden from talking about many aspects of he employment by the CIA prior to 2002 (even though everything she wanted to say was already in print). Having failed in court to win the right to say what everyone already knew, she and her publisher came up with a novel solution – publish the book unedited with all of the passages the CIA objected to blacked out. Some pages have a few words and phrases blacked out, while other times you have 4-5 pages in a row that are all grey boxes. Furthermore, the publisher added a lengthy "afterward", written by a journalist that essentially "fills in the blank". By reading the two sections in parallel, you can put together a fairly complete version of the story.
Feynman's Tips on Physics: A Problem-Solving Supplement to the Feynman Lectures on Physicsby Richard P. Feynman, Michael A. Gottlieb, and Ralph Leighton
In 1961-1963 the legendary (and Nobel-Prize winning) physicist Richard Feynman taught a two year introductory (Freshman/Sophomore) class in Physics at Cal Tech as part of an effort to re-think how the sciences were taught. That someone of his caliber would teach a freshman physics class was unheard of; and the results were legendary. Audio recordings of the lectures are available and the notes for the classes have been compiled into a 3 volume set.
"Tips on Physics" contains four "missing lectures". Actually, it contains the notes for one additional lecture and for a three session class he taught to prepare student for the final. Those three sessions taught no new physics; but rather focused on how to approach solving physics problems.
Feynman is one of my favorite authors, largely because he never let his success go to his head but always wanted to help people understand "the pleasure of finding things out". His non-physics books (Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!, What Do You Care What Other People Think?, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen Scientist, The Pleasure of Finding Things Out) deal with things like the secret to picking up women in bars and how he learned to pick locks while working on the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos. (I and recommend those books to everyone) He has been referred to as the "great explainer", and I can agree with that sentiment. "Tips on Physics" will have a more limited appeal; but I certainly enjoyed it.
Computer Games Played: none
DVDs Watched: Stardust (Movie and extras), Lost Season 3 (Extras and episodes 8, 17, 20-23), BtVS Season 4 (disk 5)
Next Book: "Making Comics: Storytelling Secrets of Comics, Manga and Graphic Novels" by Scott Mccloud
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 24, 2007
Life : Wii are having fun
A while back Anne and I realized we just plain had too much stuff, and started to restructure our lives to both slow down our acquisition of new stuff and to divest ourselves of a lot of things we already had. As part of that we have decided to forego exchanging Christmas presents this year. Instead, back before Thanksgiving, we purchased a Wii game system as our one present to ourselves for the year.
I have often looked at the various other consoles on the market (XBox, Xbox 360, PlayStation, PlayStation 2, etc.) but always decided that getting one would be unwise. Most of the titles available for those systems would only have been of interest to me, and I already had enough forms of entertainment available to me – I didn't need another time and money sink. Now a system that would represent a new thing for Anne and I to do together, that would be a different matter. So when the Wii came out and I had a chance to try it in the stores, I realized that this was the system I had been waiting for, and Anne agreed.
Bottom line is, yes, the Wii really is as fun to play as everyone says it is. Whether playing some of the more aerobic games (I do tend to work up a sweat playing WiiSports Boxing), or one of the more simple games that you can play from your seat, the novel control system makes the experience both new and fun. Anne and I have a great time playing together. She beats me at tennis, I beat her at golf. We're about evenly matched on Mario Party (we both are abysmal at the more platform oriented mini-games; but enjoy most of the others).
Definitely a good purchase for us!
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 25, 2007
Faith , Writing : God so loved
God so lovedBy Steven
God so loved, He created
Created the universe, with beauty and wonder
God so loved, He cried
Cried over man’s fall, and the evils it brought
God so loved, He promised
Promised salvation, for those who would trust
God so loved, He became
Became a child, weak and dependant
God so loved, He lived
Lived as a man, with all the pains and heartaches
God so loved, He died
Died to redeem us, freeing us from sin
God so loved, He rose
Rose to rule, with justice and mercy
God so loved, He dwells
Dwells within us, training us to be like Him
God so loved, He returns
Returns to end evil, restoring beauty and wonder
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 26, 2007
Movies : Enchanted
Anne and I saw the movie "Enchanted" and quite enjoyed it. For those unfamiliar, the core premise is that a bunch of characters from a typical Disney animated movie (compassionate princess, handsome prince, wicked witch, etc.) get dumped into real-world, present day New York City. The movie is full of gags and inside jokes on various classic Disney films (and how ridiculous they would be in the real world); but is also a very sweet film about (what else) "true love".
As an example, the princess talks to animals and can summon their to help by singing (as in Sleeping Beauty); but when she tries this in New York, only Pigeons, Rats and Cockroaches come to help – which is no bother to her (she loves all animals); but proves to be problematic to some of the other characters.
While not up to the original Shrek or Princess Bride, it is (at least in my opinion) in the same league as those films.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 27, 2007
Books : The Journey Of Crazy Horse
The Journey Of Crazy Horse: A Lakota HistoryMost folks who were educated in the US know about the defeat of General Custer at the battle of the Little Big Horn. Those who have read “Burry My heart at Wounded Knee” have some sense of what happened to the Lakota tribe of Native Americans afterwards. This book is essentially the “other side of the story” – a compilation of Lakota oral history (assembled into a well-written narrative) for the period in which the Lakota warrior known as “Crazy Horse” lived. The author is a Lakota himself and is honest with his own bias on the subject, yet there is a clear sense that this really is the story that the Lakota tell themselves about that time.by Joseph M. Marshall III
The book provides a good picture of Lakota culture (both highlights and lowlights) and how they interacted with other tribes before the European settlers came. It explains the many misunderstandings that took place as the Lakota started to interact with Europeans – neither side really understood the other. While the book never declines into indiscriminate “European bashing”, it certainly paints an unflattering picture of certain generals and political leaders (and the occasional Lakota leader as well).
But most of all, the book explains who Crazy Horse was, why he did what he did, and why so many Lakota followed him. As a work of fiction, this would be a great story in its own right and well worth reading. That it has truth to it makes the book doubly valuable. Even if that truth is told with bias, hearing the same story with a different bias from what you have heard before is always of value.
As a Christian, what I found most interesting was the religious aspect of Crazy Horse’s story. He was considered by the Lokota to be a “Thunder Dreamer” – one to whom the great thunder (God?) spoke; and as such he was called to live his life differently from other Lakota. As an example, while most Lakota warriors were expected to be boastful and full of pride and were expected to accumulate goods from those they defeated in battle; as a Thunder Dreamer, Crazy Horse was called to be humble (not telling stories about himself) and generous, giving away most of what he captured. What I found interesting is, most of the characteristics that the Lakota expected to be exhibited by someone to whom "the thunder" talks to are in fact the same virtues that Christianity expects. It says in the Bible that God’s truth is written in men’s hearts. The Lakota culture seemed to be full of examples of that being true.
Bottom line, this was both an enjoyable and informative read and I recommend it to anyone.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
December 28, 2007
TV : In praise of "Pushing Daisies"
Most TV shows are just some variation on a previous idea, occasionally being "creative" by mixing previous shows in new ways ("Day Break" was "Tru Calling" mixed with "The Fugitive"). TV shows that are truly innovative are rare. Those that are also commercially successful are even rarer.
"Pushing Daisies" is one of those very rare shows. From the concept to the execution, there is no show I can recall that is anything like it.
The creators have called it a "forensic fairy tale". I can certainly see the "fairy tale" part of that. The way I would describe the "feel" of the show is: imagine what it would be like if Theodore Geisel (a.k.a. "Dr. Seuss") had developed a live-action (non-animated) TV show. While nominally set in the present-day real world, everything is just a little "off" – a little exaggerated, a little unreal. The omniscient narrator, who often talks in rhyme, completes the Seuss-ian effect. The supporting characters are at least quirky, and sometimes outright bizarre.
The concept sounds morbid and depressing; but the themes are actually quite positive.
The main character, Ned, is a man who as a child discovers he has special "gift":
1. If he touches a dead thing, it comes back to life.
2. If he touches something he has brought back to life, it dies again, permanently.
3. If he doesn't touch something he has brought back to life a second time within a minute (allowing it to die), something else dies in its place.
The process of discovering this gift as a child (including the death of his mother and his childhood sweetheart's father, leaving both of them effectively orphaned), has left Ned with real issues about "touching" anyone (physically or emotionally). The series then is about the Ned (and others) discovering how to reach out and grab life.
Ned as an adult owns and runs a pie shop and helps a private investigator by temporarily bringing back to life murder victims to get information on who killed them so they can solve the case. The series picks up when he discovers that his childhood sweetheart (Charlotte "Chuck" Charles, whose father Ned was indirectly responsible for killing) has died and he brings her back to life (at the expense of the funeral director). The two rekindle their relationship with one major limitation – they can never touch each other (otherwise she will die again, permanently).
Ned, Chuck, Olive (who works at the pie shop), and Chuck's aunts (who raised her) are all people who have failed to embrace life for one reason or another, as are many of the characters in individual episodes. While the show deals with death a lot, it is really about people learning to embrace life. This is perhaps no surprise as the creator of the show, Bryan Fuller, previously created the shows "Dead Like Me" and "Wonderfalls" that deal with the same themes (and in the case of "Dead Like Me", explored them through the vehicle of death in much the same way).
This is a very strange show - too strange for some people; but I think it is one of the best new shows in many years.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 29, 2007
Life : Yeah, no post
Last night I looked at the essay I had planned to post this morning and decided that it really needed more work, so I pulled it. There also wasn’t another ready that I would want to put out today (lots for next week and beyond; but none for today), so I just let it go.
In other news, I am preaching again tomorrow – the pastor and I are each taking half the usual sermon slot to share something. As I prepared, I started to realize that this may be the last time I “preach”. With the church going on sabbatical, I am certainly not preaching again for another year; and I don’t know what is going to happen after that.
Given that my heart is towards styles of church where there is no preaching, I may never again be in a context where I do this. I’m fine with that; but it was worth noting.
Posted by Steven at 11:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
December 30, 2007
Books : Books 2007/12/30
Current count of books pending to be read: 141
I read 20 books this week - mostly fluff - and purchased none.
Books finished this week:
Nightwork: A History of Hacks and Pranks at MITA survey of the “hacks” (practical jokes) played by MIT students, going back to the 1920’s. When I was a MIT student, I (together with “Sir Jon” and “Keshlam the Seer” – I was “The Wizard”) started a hacking team known as the “Order of Random Knights” (ORK for short). What I found most interesting from this book is that apparently the institution of ORK lived on after I left MIT as there are several hacks attributed to them through the 90’s. They even signed their work with “the randomide” – a symbol we developed back in the 70’s to identify our work.by Institute Historian T. F. Peterson
The Battle for Azeroth: Adventure, Alliance, and Addiction in the World of Warcraftedited by Bill Fawcett
Smart Pop 2
By BenBella books
edited by David Brin and Matthew Woodring Stover
edited by Robert J. Sawyer
The Unauthorized X-Men: SF and Comic Writers on Mutants, Prejudice, and Adamantium
edited by Len Wein
The Psychology of The Simpsons: D'oh!
edited by PhD, Alan Brown and Chris Logan
All of these books are part of BenBella Book’s “Smart Pop” series – books of essays about elements of popular culture (mostly TV shows). Not the best books of their kind I have read; but not the worst either. I particularly liked one essay in the book on X-Men that looked at how the central metaphor of the X-Men (being “the other”) has evolved through the years as society's sense of what “other” meant changed. The best of the bunch however was “Star Wars on Trial” a mock transcript of a trial in which the Star Wars series is accused of several crimes against humanity (or at least against Sci Fi). Well argued on both sides.
Heroes, Volume One (Hardcover Comic)by Various
The first season of the TV show “Heroes” was accompanied by a web comic that filled in some background on the stories. This is a compilation of those comics.
Nineteenth-Century Britain: A Very Short Introductionby Christopher Harvie and H. C. G. Matthew
Eighteenth-Century Britain: A Very Short Introduction
by Paul Langford
A couple of books Anne had picked up and read a while back and handed off to me. As introductions, I think they were actually quite poor; but as an overview for someone who already knew a bit of British history, they were great (these made it onto my quantity reading list since they are only about 100 pages long each)
It's Not Funny If I Have to Explain It: A Dilbert Treasuryby Scott Adams
Scott Adams’ favorite Dilbert strips from over the years.
Bullet Points TPBby J. Michael Straczynski and Tommy Lee Edwards
Jack of Fables Vol. 1: The (Nearly) Great Escape
by Bill Willingham, Matthew Sturges, Tony Akins, and Andrew Pepoy
by Joss Whedon, Brett Matthews, and Will Conrad
by Mike Carey, and Glenn Fabry
by Matt Fraction, and Steven Sanders
All of these are graphic novels of various sorts and vary greatly. The worst was “Five Fists of Science” that pits Mark Twain and Nikola Tesla and others against Thomas Edison and J. P. Morgan. The best is a tough call between Gaiman’s “Neverwhere” and Willingham’s “Jack of Fables”. Gaiman’s work is more meaningful and thought provoking; but Willingham’s more entertaining.
Dream Country (Sandman, Book 3)by Neil Gaiman, Kelley Jones, and Charles Vess
Season of Mists (Sandman, Book 4)
by Neil Gaiman, and Kelley Jones
I am slowly working through Neil Gaiman’s “Sandman” series of graphic novels (and had to really fight the urge to go out and buy volumes 5 and 6 this week). The series centers on the seven “Endless” – being who are personifications of certain concepts – and specifically on Morpheus, the personification of Dream and the development of his “humanity”.
Neil’s a great writer and includes challenging ideas in all of his works. As an example in Season of Mists, Lucifer decides to abandon hell, and gives the keys to hell to Morpheus. Various other beings then come to Morpheus asking for the keys (and thereby the right to reign in hell). The story is about Morpheus trying to decide to whom to give the keys to hell.
Rare Words and Ways to Master Their Meanings: 500 Arcane but Useful Words for Language LoversA rather useless book in my opinion. I already have enough trouble being asked to explain words I use that I think are fairly commonby Jan Leighton, and Hallie Leighton
Making Comics: Storytelling Secrets of Comics, Manga and Graphic Novelsby Scott Mccloud
Back in 1993, Scott McCloud wrote an excellent book “Understanding Comics” where he provided a very convincing case that “comics” (which he prefers to refer to as “Sequential Art”) is a powerful medium within which much can be done beyond just costumed superhero stories. The book is still probably the best book on the theory of comics and how to think of them as both an art form and as a medium of communication. McCloud follow that up with “Reinventing Comics” about the impact of the web on the medium, and now “Making Comics” that details some of the technical issues involved in doing a series of comics (or graphic novels).
While I am a big fan of the original “Understanding Comics” and recommend the book to everyone; “Making Comics” did little for me, although it could be argues that I am not the book’s target audience.
Computer Games Played: none
DVDs Watched: none
Next Book: The Religion War by Scott Adams
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
December 31, 2007
Life : A Very Fine Year
Well, we live in interesting times, and between work and church, that has certainly been true for me this year. I have already posted on events at church, and as per my policy I will say nothing about my work other than what is in the pubic record - we have gone through 3 CEO's this year (I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to guess what that has been like); but on the upside we are now cash-flow positive.
Despite all that change, it has been a good year for Anne and me. Our marriage is stronger than it has ever been. Life in general is going well. I've made some real efforts to focus my life more on the things that are important to me; and that has freed up the time to invest enough in those things to start seeing tangible rewards. I even made some progress losing weight (at least until the Holidays arrived).
And obviously, I am back blogging.
I'm still ahead of the game on posts, and given the variability of my life I'd like to keep it that way. My plan for next year for this blog is to do 5 regular (scheduled) posts a week on Monday-Friday, with additional posts on any day when I have something more to say that can't wait. Furthermore, until my reading list is cut down to a manageable size, Monday's post will always be a "books I have read" post (I may actually keep that up even after I have tamed the list). So that leaves me with 4 new essays to write each week, which I think is a sustainable pace. The regular post should be up at 5:07AM Pacific time.
I also expect to return to a more diverse mix of posts again. My intent has always been that this blog reflect the mix of things I am thinking about, which lately has mostly been about church. I do however have other topics I expect to get to, including some of my game idea files. Several people have suggested that this blog would be more successful if I picked one topic and promoted the site as a go-to place for that subject; but my goal has never been to have a successful blog – I write this to get things out of my system and to engage other folks on topics that interest me. As long as there remain a few people who are willing to comment on what I say, I am content.
Posted by Steven at 05:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
