I can’t tell you how many popular books I have that I’ve read, never read, and will never reread.  

Popular Christian books are those that make the New York Times Bestseller list.  They are often written by people like Max Lucado, John Eldredge, Joel Osteen, TD Jakes, Philip Yancey, Charles Stanley, et al.

~ They Make for Lovely Decorations ~

Though we see each other quite often, I don’t think we like each other that much.  We’ve grown apart.

In fact, I think my nerves will be at peace when they leave.

Philip Yancey will usually make me mad and glad all in one column. He does it again in his last CT column. (He says he’s taking a break.)

He adds some thoughts and cautions we REALLY need to hear! (I don’t think we will, but I can only echo his strong voice.)

Although I admire the innovation, I would caution that mimicking cultural trends has a downside. At a recent youth workers conference I attended, worship meant a DJ playing techno music at jet-engine volume while a sweaty audience crowded the stage, jumping up and down while shouting spiritual one-liners. At the risk of sounding old-fashioned, I couldn’t help questioning the depth of worship. Seminaries now recommend 15-minute sermons in light of shorter attention spans. Publishers want slimmer books, with simpler words and concepts. Will we soon have a 140-character Twitter gospel?

I truly get upset when some church does something like playing music at jet-engine volume and calling themselves cutting edge. Somehow equating volume or other mimicks of this world with true spirituality or “real gospel” misses the point. What are we doing? We’re reduced to bumper sticker Christianity without the bumper stickers.

We have SO MUCH NOISE! Why not have something that offered silence?

We already buy too much stuff, why do we keep marketing CDs and T-shirts? We want to confront consumerism, so we’ll make a radical T-shirt and sell it? What’s that all about?

In the name of all that is holy, will someone please stand up and say that being “counter-cultural” doesn’t mean looking like the prevailing culture? Will someone finally confront these goofy ideas and say, “The only thing ‘counter-cultural’ about you is it’s not like some other CHURCH SERVICE… BIG DEAL!!!!”  Could we please get some guts back in our Christianity?

We need to hear a clear call concerning the gospel of Jesus Christ. Trouble is, we get into arguments about WHAT the gospel really is! Which is probably what makes us evangelical. Too bad.

Here’s some places a mouse click or two took me this week:

• I really hesitate to post another link to Pete Wilson because every time I do, he writes a personal note of thanks, and he’s a busy guy.  But I couldn’t ignore this one.   Pete had the thrill of baptizing his son Jett last week, and wrote him a note on the blog.    Here’s the part I don’t want you to miss:  “God has an amazing adventure planned for you and I want to encourage you to trust Him at every turn. Over and over again you’ll face situations where you’ll be tempted to give into fear but I pray you’ll choose faith. You’ll be temped to control but remember freedom comes in letting go. You’ll be drawn toward comfort but I pray you’ll choose sacrifice. You will feel all alone but remember God promises that He will never leave you nor forsake you.” Read it all here.
• This video has been up for a year now, but if you missed the Protestant Reformation and want to catch up, this rap video, 95 Theses, should fill you in.   (Click on more info below the advert to see the full lyrics.)  Also available at this homepage.
• Sadly, Philip Yancey marks his final regular column with Christianity Today this week with a look at the Evangelical movement.   “Perhaps we should present an alternative to the prevailing culture rather than simply adopt it. What would a church look like that created space for quietness, that bucked the celebrity trend and unplugged from surrounding media, that actively resisted consumerist culture? What would worship look like if it were directed more toward God than toward our entertainment preferences?”
  
• Jim Henderson, of Jim and Caspar Go To Church fame, has an excellent article on his site, “What The Black Church Has That The White Church Needs.”   He writes, “They’ve never had power or influence over the majority culture; They’ve always had to do more with less;  They have experience with being ignored; They’ve developed practical gospel that brings heaven to humans (as well as humans to heaven); They produced the most significant Christian leader of the 20th Century Martin Luther King Jr… ” You might find it hard to see the first few of those as being things they have.   Read and comment at Off The Map.
• A long time acquaintance of ours, Brian McAuley, has written a book on an encouragement celebration that parents can do with their children.   The Family Gold Plate meal is similar to other red plate rituals some families have, but adds a lot of extra details.   It’s sold as a book only, or with the gold plate itself.    I don’t endorse a lot of commercial ventures on this blog, but am making an exception for this one.   To learn more, click here.   (It’s also linked in this blog’s sidebar from now to year-end.)
  
• USAToday’s religion page notes the proliferation of student atheist groups on college campuses in this article. “At Iowa State, most of the club’s roughly 30 members are “former” somethings, mostly Christians. Many stress that their lives are guided not by anti-religiousness, but belief in science, logic and reason.”
• In a 7-minute video, author Stephen K. Scott, author of The Greatest Words Ever Spoken, discusses The Greatest Man Who Ever Lived.   Scott went from failing in nine jobs to starting over a dozen multi-million dollar companies.   Read the book promotional vid here.
• Time Magazine discusses the “helicopter parent” syndrome in a 4-page online article titled “The Growing Backlash Against Over-parenting.”   Strongly recommended for parents, grandparents, daycare workers, educators, etc.   Click here to read.
• This one’s a bit dangerous, since the website WTFDIB stands for ‘What the Flippity-Flop Do I Believe?’  I know that when most of you see WTF in an acronymn, that’s not the first thing that comes to mind.   That may explain the rather slow traffic on this doctrinal discussion site.  Maybe you can spark a few of the discussions.

HT re. Time Magazine article goes to Zach Neilsen at Take Your Vitamin Z

They’re golfing.  On the Links.   Get it?   Okay, I’ll just put the cat up again next week like we usually do.

Mina tidigare tre råd står fast och jag tycker du ska börja med dem. Kanske behöver du inte söka hjälp och då har du vunnit en hel del genom att inte utsättas för den sociala stigmatisering som jag menar kan följa på den offentlighet som du tvingas ut i.

Första rådet är annars att söka hjälp. Det är svårt för en del men viktigt. Svårt därför att: det finns olika hjälp att söka. Vilken ska jag välja? Hur ska jag hantera det med arbetet eller skolan? Hur går det med min integritet och anonymitet? Det krävs ett mod att stå för en så stigmatiserande sjukdom. Det krävs också ett mod att vara frisk. Det finns gott om sjukdomsvinster med depression! Har jag valt depressionen för att nå ett mål? Hjälper den mig att bli något, ger den mig uppmärksamhet? Det krävs ett beslut och en verklig vilja att bli hel och frisk igen. Vill jag verkligen bli frisk? Vad innebär det att vara frisk? Likafullt är det viktigt att söka hjälp. Man kan inte alltid förstå sig själv eller klara av att lära sig själv om sig själv – du behöver hjälp. Du klarar inte av att se eller tror inte det finns alternativa vägar – du behöver hjälp. Någon måste tro på dig och vara positiv i ditt ställe – du behöver hjälp. Du kan behöva en medicin en kortare eller längre period (det fungerade inte för mig, men kanske för dig) – du behöver hjälp. Du behöver kanske få nya uppgifter, nya mål och ny mening och terapeuten är ingen idiot – han kan hjälpa dig och – du behöver hjälp.

Många läkare eller terapeuter som skrivit böcker i ämnet depression menar att vi inte ska sitta på vår kammare med självhjälpsböcker utan vi behöver söka hjälp. Jag kan hålla med. Däremot tror jag det är ett bra komplement till en i många fall knölig vårdapparat och fyrkantiga terapier och behandlingmetoder där patienten måste anpassa sig efter systemet och inte tvärtom. Ett system som i många fall inte böjer sig fram till den hjälpsökande och sträcker ut sin hand. Patienten måste exempelvis, om det inte är så illa att du blivit inlagd, vara kapabel och aktiv, passa fastlagda tider, dessutom finns inget stöd mellan terapisessionerna. Det kan säkert se olika ut och förhoppningsvis upplever de flesta att det inte är några problem och att de får en god hjälp.

Mitt andra råd. Ska jag trots allt rekommendera en del litteratur som är bra och till hjälp så blir det följande böcker. De är i alla fall inte ytliga som många självhjälpsböcker och de står pall för en kritisk blick. Speciellt av den som vet, det vill säga den deprimerade själv. Samtidigt är de inte enbart vetenskapliga eller bara klargör orsaker och grunder, utan de hjälper och stödjer dig i att förstå dig själv och skapar hopp och lust till livet. James Hillmans bok om ekollonteorin Själens kod (tycks få sökas på antikvariat för svensk översättning) är egentligen ingen bok om depression, men är en bok full av hopp och förmedlar en tro på mål och mening med vars och ens liv (en del kan tycka den är lite new age i negativ mening och det respekterar jag), Andrew Solomons Depressionens demoner (tycks få sökas på antikvariat för svensk översättning) är den mest grundliga bok jag läst om depression ur såväl den drabbades som ur en journalists ögon. Den skänker en stor förståelse för depression och stärker din självkänsla, Viktor Frankls Livet måste ha mening handlar dels om hans tid i koncentrationsläger under andra världskriget, men också om hur hans upplevelser kom att forma hans uppfattning om mål och mening med livet och hur vi bör tackla våra svårigheter. Samt slutligen Kärlek och vilja (tycks få sökas på antikvariat för svensk översättning) av Rollo May. Den är svår och kräver en del av läsaren men handlar om viljans intentionalitet, dvs grunden för vårt viljestyrda liv, vårt varför. Oerhört klarsynt och handlar om vår existens och vårt förhållningssätt till livet. För en hel uppsats om Rollo May och intentionalitet bland annat.

Sista rådet. Ta Gud till hjälp även om du inte kallar dig kristen – inte kan det skada att åtminstone prova en bön! Vi äter ju piller många gånger helt oreflekterat i tro att de ska fungera?! Du kanske inte tror att Gud kan göra något för dig, men det finns en liten anekdot om en man som alltid sett två fotspår i sanden när han vandrat livets väg, sina egna och Guds. Nu kunde han bara se ett och ropade förtvivlat till Gud: Varför har du övergivit mig, nu när jag behövde dig som mest! Gud svarade: Inte har jag övergivit dig. Det är mina fotspår du ser, det är jag som burit dig! Ibland är det just så – vi tror vi vet och så visar det sig efteråt att Gud verkat för oss i det dolda. När det gäller det andliga perspektivet i tillvaron så kan jag verkligen rekommendera både dig som inte kallar dig kristen och dig som gör det att läsa Philip Yancey! Hans böcker har en ödmjuk ton och är förankrade i egna och andras erfarenheter med en stor insikt. Han är inte en dogmatisk kristen men han sviktar inte i tron på Gud och hans nåd. Läs med fördel Mörkerseende – när du är besviken på Gud, Med nådens ögon – finns nåd och förtjänar jag den? (finns på antikvariat i skrivande stund), Livlinor – inspiration om människor som hittat sitt varför!)

Disclaimer – för dig som läser detta! Jag tycker det är viktigt att påminna om att jag inte har expertkunskaper i ämnet.
Jag placerade detta stycke sist eftersom min mellanflicka på 10 år precis förstått att jag har en blogg och kanske läser en bit. Men, jag tror inte hon kanske orkar igenom texten ända hit ner. Jag vill egentligen bespara henne oroväckande och skrämmande tankar som onödigtvis skulle ge henne ångest eller dålig sömn av oro för mig. Det finns ingen anledning kvar till oro för mig idag. Ovanstående tillsammans med det jag skrivit tidigare i inlägget Tre små råd om depression är råd som jag tror fungerar, men de är valda utifrån min erfarenhet, dvs de fungerar för mig. Jag har inte haft den djupaste formen av depression. Likafullt har jag många gånger (speciellt när jag var yngre) funderat över självmord och i desperation över min tillvaro och mitt jag känt att det inte finns några utvägar. Självmord har dock aldrig varit helt aktuellt. Kanske för att jag håller av mina nära på ett sätt som jag upplever som stödjande i sig. Jag skulle inte kunna svika dem så eller göra dem så illa. De älskar mig och jag älskar dem. Och nu sedan jag har fått barn så finns det inte längre kvar i min föreställningsvärd. Sedan har min Gudstro hjälpt mig att inte ta ett sådant steg. Jag upplever att det även gentemot Gud skulle vara ett svek. Men oj vad jag har hållt Honom ansvarig för mycket och oj vad jag har spytt galla över Honom för mitt livs skull. Som om jag inte hade ett eget ansvar eller gjort egna val…!
Så även om jag inte är expert eller har haft den djupaste formen av depression med diagnos så hoppas jag att jag kan ha en del att säga till råd för den deprimerade. Samtidigt hoppas jag att den som just nu verkligen lider av en djup och allvarlig depression inte tar dessa ord och råd som en förolämpning mot hans situation. Jag vet mycket väl att de kan väga lätt i en sådan situation. Det är min mening att de kanske ändå kan hjälpa till något.

Here’s a small book ablaze with powerful images, text that literally spirals and runs off the page, compelling graphic design, and an abundance of font styles; And yet it manages to grab and focus your attention on a singular theme that is riveting enough–the scandalous grace of God. Based on his complete book by the same name (although that one uses only one font style), Philip Yancey weaves stories and poems and quotes and newspaper accounts into this wonderful primer on the nature of God’s grace. None of us is deserving of God’s love, but this book will test how deeply you really believe that central, Biblical truth.

I guarantee you will not be bored. In fact, I’m pretty sure you will be offended by at least a few of the pages. It reads like a deovtional guide, and I’d recommend stewing over each short selection instead of moving on too quickly to finish it in one reading (though it’s short enough to do that in about half an hour). I found my own self-righteousness revealed on more than one occasion. The very design of this book adds to the message and creates visual memories that will stick with you long after you finish it.

Here are just a few tidbits from this little book of treasures:

“Grace is not fair”

“The murdered. The murderer. Which does God love the most? He loves them both, equally.”

“The Bible’s many fierce passages on sin appear in a new light once I understand God’s desire to press me toward repentance, the doorway to grace…In other words, he awakes guilt for my own benefit. God seeks not to crush me but to liberate me.”

“Grace means there is nothing we can do to make God love us more–no amount of spiritual calisthenics and renunciations, no amount of knowledge gained from seminaries and divinity schools, no amount of crusading on behalf of righteous causes. And grace means there is nothing we can do to make God love us less–no amount of racism or pride or pornography or adultery or even murder.”

“God dispenses gifts, not wages.”

“Grace has about it the scent of scandal. When someone asked theologian Karl Barth what he would say to Adolf Hitler, he replied, ‘Jesus Christ died for your sins.’ Hitler’s sins? Has grace no limit? Grace has no limit.”

“Christianity has a principle, “Hate the sin but love the sinner,” which is more easily preached than practiced. If Christians could simply recover that practice, modeled so exquisitely by Jesus, we would go a long way toward fulfilling our calling as dispensers of God’s grace. For a long time, C.S. Lewis reports, he could never understand the hairsplitting dstinction between hating a person’s sin and hating the sinner. How could you hate what a man did and not hate the man?”

“But years later it occurred to me that there was one man to whom I had been doing this all my life—namely myself. However much I might dislike my own cowardice or conceit or greed, I went on loving myself. There had never been the slightest difficulty about it. In fact the very reason why I hated the things was that I loved the man. Just because I loved myself, I was sorry to find that I was the sort of man who did those things.”

I have often wondered how it was possible to “hate the sin and love the sinner,” especially in areas like jealousy or vengeance. People hurt us deeply and often, as I, myself, hurt others daily and deeply and often. As usual, Lewis crystallizes and lucidates my understanding of this tension for a Christian. He was and continues posthumously, to be a blessing us travelers.

There’s a common misunderstanding that is really nothing short of heresy: the idea that Jesus is somehow nicer than “the God of the Old Testament.” I’m not sure where the idea comes from—perhaps a misunderstanding of passages like John 1:17. But I’ve heard it from church members, and I recently read hints of it from no less a scholar than Philip Yancey. In his book The Jesus I Never Knew (which I’m enjoying, by the way), he suggests that Jesus is somehow kinder and gentler than the God of the OT:

“In short, Jesus moved the emphasis from God’s holiness (exclusive) to God’s mercy (inclusive)” (p. 155). [In a footnote just before this sentence, Yancey quotes Dorothy Sayers as she contrasts the attitude of Jesus toward women with that of "His prophets before Him" (p. 154). What a strange notion!]

“As Shusaku Endo sees it, Jesus brought the message of mother-love to balance the father-love of the Old Testament” (p. 158).

Jesus certainly didn’t minimize the exclusive holiness of God. He lived a perfect life to fulfill it, then died a penal death to satisfy it! He is merciful, to be sure, but His is a sanctifying mercy…as always.

There are scores of problems with the idea that Jesus is the “good cop” and the Father/OT God the “bad cop.” Here are a few that come to mind:

1. First, Jesus IS the God of the Old Testament. Evidence of this abounds. For example, John 12:41 says that when Isaiah saw the thrice-holy Jehovah lifted up, he was seeing the Son of God. To contrast Jesus with “the God of the OT” reveals a ghastly Christology.

2. Jesus reveals the Father. One of my favorite themes of the New Testament (and one of the most oft neglected, I believe) is the teaching that Jesus came to earth to reveal to us the unseen God (John 1:18; Hebrews 1:1-3). (I’ve written on that grand theme in the 2nd verse of this hymn.) As Christ tells Thomas in John 14:7, to see Him is to see the Father. If you want to know what “the God of the OT” is like, look at Jesus.

3. God has always been nice. Infinitely nice. Omninice. Thus, when asked to uniquely reveal Himself to Moses, here’s what He said:

“The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation” (Ex 34:6-7).

He’s always been merciful, as the first half of that statement makes clear. And He’s always been holy, as the second half makes clear. And that won’t change. He won’t change (Malachi 3:6).

4. Jesus isn’t as passive as people think. Those who think of “the OT God” as a God of judgment and Jesus as a God of undiluted mercy need to spend some time in the book of Revelation, which has far more blood than any OT book!

5. The three members of the Trinity are indivisible in their attributes. None is more anything than the others. Each—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—is perfect.

There are more reasons (share them!), and the ones I’ve listed could probably be expressed and illustrated more clearly. But the bottom line is this: The idea that Jesus is in any way different from “the God of the OT” is bogus. Dangerously so. Don’t believe it.

_____

Note: While I obviously take exception with the statements I quoted from Philip Yancey, I’m not suggesting that he’s guilty of all I’m addressing here. Not at all. We just need to be careful how we speak of Christ.

“Many Christians have one issue that haunts them and never falls silent:  for some, it involves sexual identity; for others, a permanent battle against doubt. For me, the issue is money. It hangs over me, keeping me off balance, restless, uncomfortable, nervous. I feel pulled in opposite directions over the money issue. Sometimes I want to sell all that I own, join a Christian commune, and live out my day in intentional poverty. At other times, I want to rid myself of guilt and enjoy the fruit of our nation’s prosperity. Mostly, I wish I did not have to think about money at all. But I must somehow come to terms with the Bible’s very strong statements about money.” – Philip Yancey (quoted in Money, Posessions & Eternity)

Travel Light (Mark 10.17-31)

He came to Jesus on his knees. It hurt to have pebbles biting into his skin, but he was earnest and genuine. With intense brown eyes, he looked up and asked our Lord, “What can I do to inherit eternal life?”

A good question. It’s like he’s saying, “I’ve seen enough, Jesus, the good and the bad. I know where it’s headed. No matter how much I do or achieve, one day I’ll die. I have an expiration date on my forehead. Can you help me out, Jesus? Is there an antidote? What can I do to inherit eternal life?”

In response, Jesus doesn’t talk to him about beliefs. He doesn’t say, “You must attend a religious meeting.” Instead, he points to the Torah, the Jewish law, the commandments. Don’t murder. Be faithful to your wife or husband. Don’t steal. Tell the truth… always tell the truth. Take care of your parents and family. Jesus is concerned above all with love and relationships.

The man thinks he’s done pretty well here. “I’ve kept all the commandments since I was a boy,” he says.

Jesus looks at him for a minute. Then he looks up at blue sky and off to the brown hills. What do you say to someone who is perfect and keeps all the commandments flawlessly?

So Jesus pulls a grenade out of his pocket and drops it in the dirt. “Sell everything you own, give the money to the poor, and you will have wealth in heaven. Then come and follow me.”

Boom… it all blows apart.

The man’s face turns white. He feels the eyes of everyone looking at him. He stands up and walks away in a daze. He never imagined the price of eternal life was so high.

+++++

So what do we do with this scripture? We who have mortgages, bills to pay, college to fund, retirement accounts (if we’re lucky). Sell everything you have? Are we all supposed to become St Francis of Assisi, living under the open sky, having dinner with the birds?

I’ll admit to you that I don’t know. This story has always made me uncomfortable. If Jesus’ words here don’t make us uneasy, then we’re not listening closely enough to him.

But I want to share with you another story, one that helps me understand this encounter Jesus has with a seeker.

The story comes from Philip Yancey, who is an editor and writer. He was doing research for a book called Disappointment with God. He was looking at ways pain and suffering can make people feel God has let them down or abandoned them.

He scheduled an interview with Douglas. Douglas’s wife had cancer, which started in her breast and moved to her lungs. Her illness put a great strain on her, on Douglas and their whole family.

But that wasn’t all. In the middle of this crisis, Douglas’s car was hit by a drunk driver. He suffered a head trauma and was never right afterward. He could no longer work full days… he got disoriented and forgetful… his vision was permanently damaged.

The two men met for breakfast at a restaurant. Philip watched as Douglas struggled just to guide the fork to his mouth with each bite. Philip felt like he was talking to a modern-day Job, that character in the Bible who suffered all those terrible things.

He described his book on Disappointment with God. Then he asked Douglas, “Tell me about your disappointment. What have you learned that might help someone else?”

Douglas was silent for a long time. He stroked his beard and thought. Finally he said, “I don’t feel any disappointment with God at all.”

He explained, “The reason is this. I learned, first through my wife’s illness, and then through my accident, not to confuse God with life. I’m upset about all that’s happened, and I vent my grief and anger. But I believe God feels the same way—grieved and angry.

“I’ve learned to see beyond the physical reality in this world to the spiritual reality. We tend to think that life should be fair because God is fair. But God is not life. If I confuse God with life—by always expecting good health, for example—then I set myself up for a great disappointment.

He concluded, “God’s existence—even his love for me—doesn’t depend on my good health or good fortune. Frankly, I’ve had more time and opportunity to work on my relationship with God during my impairment than before.”

Philip Yancey shared this story about Douglas in his book.

+++++

I’ve been thinking a lot about Douglas lately, his words and his suffering. Seeing beyond the physical to the spiritual.

You see, these last two weeks have been pretty hard… really hard. Two dear friends of mine have had surgery—they lost parts of themselves so they could go on living. And they’re not the only ones. Others are suffering too, with anxious families watching.

And even when you’re just an observer, it changes you. It smacks you in the face with the fragileness of things. Our bodies are vulnerable—they break down, and they will wear out.

What does all this have to do with the seeker and Jesus? I think Jesus wanted him to do the same thing that Douglas learned to do. Look beyond the physical reality to the spiritual reality behind.

All the physical stuff in our lives—bodies, possessions, and all the money we spend on them—none of it lasts forever. It’s important, but it won’t last. And any of it can disappear in a day. The physical passes away—only the spiritual remains.

To put it another way, Jesus wanted him to travel light, carry less, for his own sake if nothing else.

Put less stock in stuff and things, and more in love and relationships. Love of friends, neighbors and family. Love of strangers. Love of God. Love of creation. Love takes up no space in a suitcase or a garage. Love is the only currency that counts for eternal life. In the end, love is all that matters.

I don’t have much more to say, only this: old Job was right. We come into the world naked, and we leave it naked. And we’re lucky if we leave with our bodies and bank accounts intact. The only thing we can take with us is the depth and quality of our loves.

So let love be your focus, and let the rest go.

Some additional observations regarding the Fall 2009 issue of the BJU Review…

First – It appears that the interracial dating regulations have not been the only rules to have been changed.

Actually, I noticed this change before I received my copy of the latest BJU Review. While doing some reading for the “BJU Beer Summit” , I discovered a photo on the official BJU.edu website of the University’s president, Dr. Stephen Jones, with a goatee. Naturally, I thought it was a joke, so I stumbled around inside the BJU website and found videos of Dr. Jones speaking to potential students – and he still had the goatee.

Now I’m thinking, this is no joke – BJU has lifted the ban on male facial hair.

Evil Twin?

Facial hair (beards, moustaches, goatees and any combination of the three) was forbidden at BJU. Why? Well, not because of any Biblical reason – it was because facial hair was associated with a sloven appearance and with beatniks, hippies and those who were rebelling against society. Several times during my illustrious educational career at BJU I was called out for not shaving – even on weekends. “It’s not a school day,” I used to sarcastically reply, but the answer was always the same: “Doesn’t matter. Every day is a school day at BJU.”

Quick story – there were some staff members who were allowed moustaches. I remember one fellow who worked in the bowels of the University’s computer room back in the late 70’s. His moustache was allowed because he had some sort of malformed lip. (Yes – I asked.) During the shooting of the BJU/Unusual Films motion picture Sheffey (this was back in 1976-77) many students, staff and faculty were asked to be cast members and extras in the feature length film set in the late 1800’s. Naturally, real facial hair looks more realistic than fake, so these extras and cast were asked to “grow their own.” But – these bearded exceptions to the “no beard” rule were asked to wear large badges (like political buttons) identifying them as Sheffey cast members. Got a Sheffey badge? Your beard is okay.

Inside the BJU Review 2009 fall issue, I counted three – yes, 3, goatees, all sported by BJU employees. Strangely though, the picture of Dr. Stephen Jones was sans goatee. I can only speculate as to why. An old picture? More conservative (i.e., cleanly shaven) individuals still read only print media? He only wears the goatee for the BJU web presence?

Dr. Stephen Jones should wear the goatee with pride – a lot of men do.

Second – Inside the latest BJU Review, two recent Cinema grads are mentioned. One, Sarah Nevius (2009 MA Cinema) won 3rd place in a film festival with her film on grief called Solace. Always good to see a fellow cinema grad do something with the major, but the award came from Fireworks International’s Redemptive Film Festival, which, at the same 2009 ceremony, gave religious huckster Paul Crouch of TBN fame a “Lifetime Achievement” award.  Yikes.

The other Cinema major is Darcy Faylor who entered a screen writing contest and won $10,000 for her script Moody Field.  The article in the BJU Review describes her winning script as this:

Darcy’s script recounts the story of a family in World War II America…the family hires German prisoners of war from…a nearby prison camp in Valdosta, Georgia. The family learns to embrace German prisoners of war as equal members of society. The script, with its themes of love and forgiveness, contains a strong salvation message. “This story…is based on actual events,” Darcy said.

Yes – the “actual events” sound very much like the novel and the movie (the two, as usual, are slightly different) Summer of My German Soldier.  The novel by Bette Greene, was first published in 1973, and later adapted into a TV movie starring Kristy McNichol and Bruce Davison in 1978. (Kristy McNichol retired from acting over a decade ago, but you probably remember Bruce Davison as Attorney Wyck Fayer in Seinfeld.)

Here’s a short synopsis of the TV movie Summer of My German Soldier:

Patty Bergen (Kristy McNichol) is a teenager in a Jewish family living in the American South (Arkansas) during World War II. Her town eventually becomes host to a prisoner of war camp. A young German soldier (Bruce Davison) escapes from this camp and Patty finds him hiding in her “secret place” in the woods outside of town. After getting to know him, she ends up harboring him from his captors, and falls in love with him. Patty knows what she is risking to help him. In the end, his regard for her lifts her self-esteem and helps Patty face life and its heart breaks.

Short of the “strong salvation message”, the two stories sound eerily similar. Remove the Jewish girl (Patty) and substitute a Christian one. Instead of making her a loner (like Patty), involve the whole family. Move the locale from Arkansas to Georgia. Add Biblical salvation and take out respect and self-esteem.

An original script?

On the surface, they appear to have the same source material – with a few Christian “tweaks” thrown in.

Is it plagiarism?  Maybe – I don’t know.

It may not be a full beard, but it’s definitely a goatee.

“Dress Information” Excerpts, from top to bottom: BJU Student Handbook 1979, 1982, 1984, 1986.

[Goatee Panorama, from left to right: Rick Warren, V.I. Lenin, Philip Yancey, Evil Mr. Spock (Mirror, Mirror), Nathan Bedford Forrest, T.D. Jakes, Bart Ehrman, "The Master" (Dr. Who), Satan (South Park)]

Hat tip to Scot McKnight’s Jesus Creed blog for this little “food for thought” nugget.

“Love your neighbor as yourself.” This injunction is mentioned once in the Old Testament (Lev. 19:18) and seven times in the New Testament (Matt. 19:19, 22:39; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27; Rom. 13:9; Gal. 5:14; James 2:8) It is the core Christian ethic for relating to others.

The thing about these New Testament references is that love for others is intrinsically related to love for God. In fact, Jesus can’t seem to separate the two, at least not in the way we sometimes would like. It seems there is no place in the Gospel of Jesus for a love for God that does not manifest itself in love for neighbor.

I read a Dorothy Day quote in Philip Yancey’s What’s So Amazing About Grace? that has always stuck with me. She said, “You really only love God as much as you love the person you love the least.” I hope that isn’t true.

But I think it might be.

Love your neighbor.

In Principio ert Verbum. Pense no Gênesis. Pense em como era antes de o mundo ser criado. Não havia nada. Diz a Bíblia: “Era a terra sem forma e vazia; trevas cobriam a face do abismo”. E era escuro, e não havia nada. Não havia montanhas, nenhuma árvore, nenhum rio. Não havia nada. Mas havia trevas por tudo ao redor, e nas trevas algo aconteceu. Algo aconteceu! Houve um único som. Nada o produziu, mas lá estava ele. E não havia ninguém para ouvi-lo, mas lá estava ele. Surgiu nas trevas, pequeno e baixo, em si mesmo algo diminuto – como um único sopro, como vento surgindo. Sim, como o sussurro do vento surgindo lentamente e se apagando no começo da manhã. Mas não havia vento algum. Havia apenas um som, mínimo e suave. Em si mesmo era algo diminuto, apenas a menor semente de som – mas tomou conta das trevas, e houve luz. Tomou conta da quietude, e houve movimento para sempre. Tomou conta do silêncio, e houve som. Era em si mesmo algo diminuto, um único som, uma palavra – uma palavra que se desprendera do centro mais escuro da noite e fora solta no terrível vazio, para sempre, para todo o sempre. E era em si mesma algo diminuto. Mal aconteceu, mas aconteceu, e tudo começou.

- J. B. B. Tosamah

Trecho de sermão citado por Diane Glancy em “Perspectivas da narrativa escrita”, capítulo do livro “Muito mais que palavras” de Philip Yancey e James Calvin Schaap.

A comment by Anne Lamott nudged me to read Philip Yancey again.  She called him ‘a graceful writer.’  When one writer commends another, I notice.

I’m nearly done with his classic Disappointment with God, a reflection on the problem of suffering.  God has always been disappointing, Yancey concludes, but our disappointments create a space for faith — hard news, but true. This book has helped a dislocation in me slip back into place.

And I was pleased to find he’s published a daily devotional:  Grace Notes, Daily Readings With a Fellow Pilgrim.   In the preface he speaks of his experience as a writer, and he makes this comment about the gospel:

I do not try to defend the church, but instead identify with those it has wounded and point them toward the good news of the gospel.  Jesus said that the truth will set us free and that he came to give life in all its fullness.  If it’s not setting you free and enlarging life, then it’s not Jesus’ message.  If it doesn’t sound like good news, it’s not the gospel.

I wonder, who has the church not wounded?  With fundamentalism on the right, or liberationism on the left, the church often presents an angry God.  But then a graceful writer like Philip Yancey comes along to remind us of the gospel.

Estava dando uma volta no meu bairro agora a noite e ouvi, de longe em uma igreja, uma mulher que cantava muito alto e extremamente desafinado. A música dizia o seguinte “Não pode ser triste um coração que louva a Deus”. Bonitinho, não?

Sinceramente, na hora que ouvi isso, quis soltar um sonoro PQP, mas me controlei.

Eu não sei porque raios, ainda insistem que quando você “vira crente” tudo tem que ficar as mil maravilhas. Um mar de rosas. Acho que por ser meio que um discipulo do C.S. Lewis, tenho dificuldade de entender pessoas que não conseguem ver a “beleza da dor”. Na verdade, eu não chamaria nem de beleza, mas de necessidade em sentir-se mal, triste, com dor, desesperançado e tudo mais que vier no pacote. Se você sente ou ja sentiu algumas dessas coisas, ótimo. Você é um ser humano normal. E tenho certeza, que se eu pedir pra você contar sua história, haverão muitas lições aprendidas, correto?

A coisa funciona meio como diz a música “Perdendo Dentes” do Pato Fu.

“As brigas que ganhei Nem um troféu Como lembrança Pra casa eu levei As brigas que perdi Estas sim Eu nunca esqueci Eu nunca esqueci”

Pra quem acompanha meu blog, sabe que tenho “dificuldade” com triunfalistas. Preciso deixar claro alguns pontos só. Eu acredito em milagre, acredito na total atuação da trindade na história, acredito que Deus pode mudar totalmente a vida de uma pessoa. Ele pode tirar qualquer um do fundo poço, porque Ele me tirou de lá. Mas, nem por isso, apesar de todos os milagres que Ele faz na minha vida todo dia, eu deixei de chorar, eu deixei de sentir dor, deixei de ficar angustiado. Pode parecer estranho, mas nas conversas com algumas pessoas que estão passando por grandes dificuldades na vida, uma das minhas tentativas de ajudar tem sido estimula-las a chorar. E, sim. Isso tem surtido efeito. Porque muitas vezes, não sou nem eu quem comenta, mas elas próprias dizem que sua maior dificuldade tem sido chorar. Não conseguir colocar pra fora.

Pra entender felicidade plenamente, há a necessidade de ter sofrido. E sinto-lhe informar. Se você nunca sofreu, você nunca viveu. E me perdoe se não trago aqui, alguma “esperança” no final desse post. Na verdade eu só queria colocar “no papel”  o que estava sentindo. Se servir de consolo, deixo as palavras de alguém que curtiu o sofrimento, uma dica de video e algumas dicas de leitura.

“Recebi dos judeus cinco quarentenas de açoites menos um. Três vezes fui açoitado com varas, uma vez fui apedrejado, três vezes sofri naufrágio, uma noite e um dia passei no abismo; Em viagens muitas vezes, em perigos de rios, em perigos de salteadores, em perigos dos da minha nação, em perigos dos gentios, em perigos na cidade, em perigos no deserto, em perigos no mar, em perigos entre os falsos irmãos; Em trabalhos e fadiga, em vigílias muitas vezes, em fome e sede, em jejum muitas vezes, em frio e nudez.” (II Corintios 11:24-27)

“Aguardo ansiosamente e espero que em nada serei envergonhado. Ao contrário, com toda a determinação de sempre, também agora Cristo será engrandecido em meu corpo, quer pela vida, quer pela morte; porque pra mim o viver é Cristo e o morrer é lucro” (Filipenses 1:20, 21)

Clique AQUI para assistir o video.

Livros:

A Dadiva Da Dor – Philip Yancey / Paul Brand

O Problema do Sofrimento - C.S. Lewis

Anatomia De Uma Dor – C.S. Lewis

If tonight spoke to you, here are some books to check out:

• Free of Charge:  Giving & Forgiving in a Culture Stripped of Grace  (Miroslav Volf)
• Captivating:  Unveiling the Mystery of a Woman’s Soul  (John & Stasi Eldredge)
• Wild at Heart:  Discovering the Secret of a Man’s Soul  (John Eldredge)
• Crazy Love:  Overwhelmed by a Relentless God  (Francis Chan)
• What’s So Amazing about Grace?  (Philip Yancey)

El Greco – Christ Carying the Cross

Google the words atonement and emergent church together, and your computer screen will soon heat up a few degrees. A lively (and not always civilized) debate has broken out among those who defend classical theories of the Atonement and those who see them as some variation of the caricature Dorothy Sayers drew 60 years ago:

God wanted to damn everybody, but his vindictive sadism was sated by the crucifixion of his own Son, who was quite innocent, and, therefore, a particularly attractive victim. He now only damns people who don’t follow Christ or who have never heard of him.

Since Jesus’ death nearly 2,000 years ago, theologians such as Origen, Anselm of Canterbury, Peter Abelard, and John Calvin have proposed ways of understanding it: as a Ransom paid to Satan, a Satisfaction required by God, a Moral Influence for humanity, a Penal Substitution for the punishment due to humankind. Some of these theories, referencing animal sacrifices and God’s wrath, can make for a hard sell for many in modern
times.

Interested? Read more HERE.