Pleasantly surprised...spread the love!

Dude, I don't why this is true, but there's a box set of three GREAT Brian Mclaren books on sale for $13.17 on Amazon.com. Hardcover! Can anyone say, Christmas gift for my reading friends?

Interesting debate going on...

I'm a contributing member of a website you can see on my links section to the right called "Young Anabaptist Radicals." It's a community of followers of Jesus in the spiritual tradition of an intrepid group of folks (I just wanted to say intrepid) called Anabaptists that got fired up in the 16th century and who have deeply informed my faith journey. One of my mentors-through-books-and brief-reallife-interaction, Brian McLaren, has also expressed a deep appreciation for this group of people, just so you don't get suspicious and think we're a cult.

Anyways, we've got an interesting little conversation going on about sexuality and Biblical and scientific perspectives on one of the posts there. Take a gander if you'd like. Here's the link.

A little Dan Brown never hurt nobody (except those who strictly define "fact")

I'll be honest, like my friend Dustin who isn't a big fan of things that are popular (or, more specifically, faddish), I avoided Dan Brown like the plague for several years following the earth-shattering success of his book "The Da-Vinci Code"; and mainly simply because it was popular. But I picked up Angels and Demons at the EMU library awhile ago, and instantly was sucked in. I'm done now, and the book was a decent read, and like Da Vinci Code was shot through with errors and bad research (made further ridiculous by Brown invoking the literary device that the things he stated were "factual"), but one part in particular stuck out to me. I won't spoil the plot for you if you haven't read it, but the book is set up as a clash between two approaches, science and religion, that end up butting heads, and at one of the climaxes of the action, the former Pope's camerlengo gives a compelling argument for the role of religion in regulating the relentless drive toward advance in science that often obeys no signposts of morality along the way. Interesting stuff. Though I disagree with Brown's "all religions" schtick, I think he's got a point here;



'The wheels have been in motion for a long time,' the camerlengo said. 'Your victory has been inevitable. Never before has it been as obvious as it is at this moment. Science is the new God.

Medicine, electronic communications, space travel, genetic manipulation...these are the miracles about which we now tell our children. These are the miracles we herald as proof that science will bring us the answers. The ancient stories of immaculate conceptions, burning bushes, and parting seas are no longer relevant. God has become obsolete. Science has won the battle. We concede.

But science's victory has cost every one of us. And it has cost us deeply. Science may have alleviated the miseries of disease and drudgery and provided an array of gadgetry for our entertainment and convenience, but is has left us in a world without wonder. Our sunsets have been reduced to wavelengths and frequencies. The complexities of the universe have been shredded into mathematical equations. Even our self-worth as human beings has been destroyed. Science declares that Planet Earth and its inhabitants are a meaningless speck in the grand scheme. A cosmic accident.

Even the technology that promises to unite us, divides us. Each of us is now electronically connected to the globe, and yet we feel utterly alone. We are bombarded with violence, division, fracture, and betrayal. Skepticism has become a virtue. Cynicism and demand for proof has become enlightened thought. Is it any wonder that humans now feel more depressed and defeted than they have at any point in history? Does science hold anything sacred? Science looks for answers by probing our unborn fetuses. Science even presumes to rearrange our own DNA. It shatters God's world into smaller and smaller pieces in quest of meaning...and all it finds is more questions.

The ancient war between science and religion is over. You have won. But you have not won fairly. You have not won by providing answers. You have won by so radically reorienting our society that the truths we once saw as signposts now seem inapplicable. Religion cannot keep up. Scientific growth is exponential. It feeds on itself like a virus. Every new breakthrough opens doors for new breakthroughs. Mankind took thousands of years to progress from the wheel to the car. Yet only decades from the car into space. Now we measure scientific progress in weeks. We are spinning out of control. The rift between us grows deeper and deeper, and as religion is left behind, people find themselves in a spiritual void. We cry out for meaning. And believe me, we DO cry out. We see UFOs, engage in channeling, spirit contact, out-of-body experiences, mindquests- all these eccentric ideas have a scientific veneer, but they are unashamedly irrational. They are the desperate cry of the modern soul, lonely and tormented, crippled by its own enlightenment and its inability to accept meaning in anything removed from technology.

Science, you say, will save us. Science, I say, has destroyed us. Since the days of Galileo, the church has tried to slow down the relentless march of science, sometimes with misguided means, but always with benevolent intention. Even so, the temptations are too great for man to resist. I warn you, look around yourselves. The promises of science have not been kept. Promises of efficiency and simplicity have bred nothing but pollution and chaos. We are a fractured and frantic species...moving down a path of destruction.

Who is this God science? Who is the God who offers his people power but no moral framework to tell you how to use that power? What kind of God gives a child fire but does not warn the child of its dangers? The language of science comes with no signposts about good and bad. Science textbooks tell us how to create a nuclear reaction, and yet they contain no chapter asking us if it is a good or a bad idea.

To science, I say this. The church is tired. We are exhausted from trying to be your signposts. Our resources are drying up from our campaign to be the voice of balance as you plow blindly on in your quest for smaller chips and larger profits. We ask not why you will not govern yourselves, but how can you? Your world moves so fast that if you stop even for an instant to consider the implications of your actions, someone more efficient will whip past you in a blur. So you move on. You proliferate weapons of mass destruction, but it is the Pope who travels the world urging leaders to use restraint. You clone living creatures, but it is the church reminding us to consider the moral implications of our actions. You encourage people to interact on phones, video screens, and computers, but it is the church who opens its doors and reminds us to commune in person as we were meant to do. You even murder unborn babies in the name of research that will save lives. Again, it is the church who points out the fallacy of this reasoning.

And all the while, you proclaim the church is ignorant. But who is more ignorant? The man who cannot define lightning, or the man who does not respect its awesome power? The church is reaching out to you. Reaching out to everyone. And yet the more we reach, the more you push us away. Show me proof there is a God, you say. I say use your telescopes to look to the heavens, and tell me how there could not be a God!' The camerlengo had tears in his eyes now. 'You ask what does God look like. I say, where does that question come from? The answers are one and the same. Do you not see God in your science? How can you miss Him! You proclaim that even the slightest change in the force of gravity or the weight of an atom would have rendered our universe a lifeless mist rather than our magnificent sea of human bodies, and yet you fail to see God's hand in this? Is it really so much easier to believe that we simply chose the right card from a deck of billions? Have we become so spiritually bankrupt thta we would rather believe in mathematical impossibility than in a power greater than us?

Whether or not you believe in God, you must believe in this. When we as a species abandon our trust in the power greater than us, we abandon our sense of accountability. Faith...all faiths...are admonitions that there is something we cannot understand, something to which we are accountable...With faith we are accountable to each other, to ourselves, and to a higher truth. Religion is flawed, but only because man is flawed. If the outside world could see this church as I do...looking beyond the rituals of these walls...they would see a modern miracle...a brotherhood of imperfect, simple souls wanting only to be a voice of compassion in a world spinning out of control.'

'Are we obsolete?' the camerlengo asked. 'Are these men dinosaurs? Am I? Does the world really need a voice for the poor, the weak, the oppressed, the unborn child? Do we really need souls like these who, though imperfect, spend their lives imploring each of us to read the signposts of morality and not lose our way?

Tonight we are perched on a precipice. None of us can afford to be apathetic. Whether you see this evil as Satan, corruption, or immorality...the dark force is alive and growing every day. Do not ignore it. The force, though mighty, is not invincible. Goodness can prevail. Listen to your hearts. Listen to God. Together we can step back from this abyss.'

Simply no intro needed...

Interesting debate

Atheist Sam Harris and Pastor Rick Warren sat down for an solid face-to-face discussion at Saddleback Community Church in CA recently, and were interviewed by an NBC reporter. It's an interesting discussion to follow. Here's the link.

p.s. I greatly respect Rick Warren's approach to life, especially the way he loves people, is generous in dialogue, and deeply cares about issues of poverty and war that should be deeply important to Christians...and I think Sam Harris makes some challenging points. Give it a read, if you've got some time. Plus, that picture of Rick is flat-out ridiculously funny. What the crap?

p.p.s. In other news, Jeff Kent still has a pedostache




p.p.p.s. Check out this funny article title. And I'm spent.

Global warming and how one's perspective is deeply affected by one's environment

The BBC did a nice little piece on different evangelical universities (Liberty University aka College of Falwell and Eastern Mennonite University where I attend seminary) here in Virginia on the issue of global warming that is worth a read. You can find it here. Read the article, if you would, before looking at my remarks.

Did you read it? : )

I just want to raise a point related to the nature/nurture discussion that is probably raging more deeply than it ever has in society. When it comes to bringing that discussion to bear on the church, I found what Brian McLaren had to say on the Nick and Josh podcast matters greatly as another voice in the conversation. I'll quote it in full here (and yes, I'm a dork that transcribed what Brian was saying to MSWord while he was talking);




"If we think the purpose of the gospel is to deliver souls to heaven after death, then we're going to read the entire gospel in a certain way; Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and the rest of the New Testament and all the rest of the Bible in a certain way.

But if that's not the primary problem that the Bible is addressing (though it is the primary problem in a lot of systematic theology approaches that say or assume that is what it addresses); but I'm asking a rather provocative question; what if that's not really the problem it addresses, what if the problem it addresses is that God has this beautiful and good creation, and human beings rebelled against God, we have left this relationship with God (what the Bible means by sin) and that sin is suicidal...sin destroys human beings and families and cultures and civilizations, and ultimately it will destroy the planet, i mean, that's easier for us to see now than for any generation in history (naive belief that WWI was last big war b/c humans were evolving beyond war). Other people had to take it on faith, for us it is sight.

We know very well that we can destroy the planet in our human rebellion. Human sin and evil and violence, and hatred and greed can destroy the planet, so if the gospel is the message of the kingdom, and the message of the kingdom is not evacuating Earth, but it's as the Lord's Prayer teaches us, "Your kingdom come," meaning come to earth, "your will be done on earth as it is in heaven," then we have to look at every area of life and say, "What would this arena of human life look like if God's will would be done?"





What Brian has to say I think matters deeply for the issue of global warming, and led to my conviction regarding this issue that I believe so strongly I created a Facebook group representing my belief that, ultimately; It's not about global warming, it's about caring for the earth. The issue is very polarizing (often driving folks to occupy one of two extremes), but as I see it (and Brian McLaren sees it), the issue of conservation (caring for the earth) is deeply a gospel-related issue. I would agree with McLaren that salvation as it is presently conceived of in most Christian groups is about how to get to heaven when you die rather than joining up with God in His movement to reconcile all of creation, starting now. Now, certainly, this will not happen in its fullness until the "Day of the Lord," but this should not lead us (as most folks often do) to the place where we sit on our hands and wait for the sweet by and by because salvation is all God's work. There's a strong thread running through Scripture that we are to be co-creators and collaborators with God in His work to reconcile and renew all of his creation.

Thus, how one reads and the environment one grows up in deeply shapes one's way of viewing reality. So, in a very real way, Christians should seek to embrace a deeper and fuller reading of Scripture and the purposes of God, both for their sakes and for the sakes of friends, acquaintances, and future generations. This is where my bias is exposed; I think Jerry Falwell's perspective on reality is handicapped by the way he interprets the gospel, and his perspective is deeply affecting a LOAD of people that uncritically accept his reading; both at Thomas Road Baptist Church, at Liberty University, in the conservative Christian camp across America, and globally when folks from other religious traditions and countries see him and think he speaks for all Christians. I'm sorry Jerry recently passed away, but his perspective on the gospel, in my view, was more destructive than it was helpful. In the grand scheme of things, I think Falwell's legacy is more negative than positive if we're speaking of the kingdom of God and the lifestyle we are called to exhibit.

Check out the practical differences between the EMU and the Liberty responses to the question of global warming;

"A lesson taught by Dr Thomas Ice, Liberty University's senior theologian, focuses on headaches like Armageddon, salvation and the Second Coming. Compared to these concerns, global warming is considered a mere sideshow at best, or a left-wing conspiracy at worst.

Asked his opinion on whether global warming is a reality or conspiracy, Dr Ice answers forcefully.
"It's a hoax, certainly," he says. "I think global warming is being used like many political issues to try to move the world from nationalism to internationalism or global governance." And his class? Asked how many of them are worried about global warming, not one raises a hand."

Hold that opinion and environment together with the EMU report;

"There is a massive and mounting body of scientific evidence that global warming is a reality," he (Loren Swartzendruber) tells the gathered congregation. "Hone your God-given talents, grow your entrepreneurial skills and stretch your scientific minds to co-create with God a better world. As disciples of Jesus, we can do no less."
Here, when asked if they are worried about global warming, almost everyone puts up their hand.

Now, I recognize that EMU isn't perfect, and is deeply in need of critique from others who might be more conservative and challenge the leftist message some of the faculty spout off, but at the very least there is a vigorous conversation on campus where more "liberal" and more "conservative" folks have a chance to be heard and interact. In addition, I think EMU embraces what I believe to be a much deeper Biblical understanding of the gospel that includes all of creation. That seems to be almost completely lacking at Liberty; I don't think I'm overstating the reality that, functionally speaking, Falwell is almost deity status in that environment.

If you aren't interested in anything at all in this post other than one nugget to take away with you, please re-read the McLaren quotation several times because I think it's so important to be aware of. What is the gospel? How does it affect the way I see the world? And how does it affect my relationships with my environment, both in human relationships and caring for the earth?

And maybe most pointedly, how can we break out of the liberal/conservative extremes that folks want to slot us into to embrace that a life of discipleship is one that will seem "liberal" to some and "conservative" to others? I'd point you to two previous posts I made that quoted Pres. Swartzendruber's excellent article "Liberal or Conservative?" here and here where he engages what it means to reject the either/or extremes and follow Jesus with all of our being.

I love one of his quips from a mentor of his who said often, "On some issues I am rather liberal...because I take the Bible very seriously. Which is a conservative position."

It's just like, just like, a heeeey!