On Dr. Pepper

When I was growing up in a Christian home, Easter was less of a Christian holiday and more of a holiday-holiday. Me and my brothers got baskets with candy and stuff, and we hunted Easter eggs during the younger years. We usually dressed a little bit better for church, but nothing really made it stand out to me too dramatically in the regard of celebrating Jesus' resurrection on that day.

I have a drinking problem.

Four years ago (I have been saying five, but recently I think I finally realized I was accidentally exaggerating,) I started doing this thing called 40 Days of Water through Blood:Water Mission, a charity to bring clean water to the poor in Africa. This fast follows the timeline of Lent, and for the 40 days (Sundays are not included) before Easter, I made water my only beverage. For an addict like me, that's a real beat down, and I dread it every year. What 40Days tacks on to the Lent fast is the donation of all the money I save to people in this world without access to clean water, so what I'm doing over this period of time is effectively giving up my luxury to provide someone else's necessity.

But I wanted to share some thoughts I've got after finishing this fast on the kind of stuff that occurs to a person after 40 sugar-free days.

It's supposed to be hard.

My wife remarked to me as we were sharing about our fast at lunch yesterday how she would often think during these 40 days "I'm never doing this again." I think we were both there. I know I was the last three years I had done it! So many times I felt like I wanted to just give in. We already had a few DP's left in our fridge that I could just grab at any moment, and I constantly found myself fighting to urge to make allowances.

I can give myself a Sabbath (day off) today. I've been working really hard at this and I deserve it.

This is the hardest day I've had so far. If I just drink one, it will help me curb my appetite.

As you may have noticed, giving up a privilege for a fast can help you wrap your mind around the nature of sin in a real way. These thoughts were regular, and I had to constantly battle them and reassess what my purpose was, that I was doing this for something bigger than myself, and let myself be motivated by that. For the first time in 4 years I did my fast perfectly, with no breaks, and I'm pretty proud of that.

Giving up is important.

I've always been driven by the justice aspect of this, but more than ever I was struck this year at how crucial this gift of fasting is to God. His people used to make animal sacrifices to him, but even after Jesus fulfilled the need for all that, our life is really about making sacrifices for God. Unless you already loved your enemies and prayed for them, in which case Jesus is just telling you to do things you already wanted to do.

Sometimes we just have to give something up and realize that we didn't need that; that we didn't realize we'd been leaning on that crutch so hard. It's amazing how much a soft drink can make me realize that about my perspective on money and my job and my social standing. We do so much for ourselves that I really am not sure if we can even comprehend it without being forced to give up for a moment and remember what it's like to live without all our vices that we're so convinced aren't vices at all.

Easter is awesome.

This goes back to what I said when I started. Easter wasn't a big deal for me, and when you've formed a habit in your thinking over two decades, it's hard to change that no matter how bad I want to. But fasting and knowing that this thing I want so bad will be restored to me has been a really profound element in my mental reformation of the Resurrection of Jesus. It helps me empathize more with those ancient disciples who had to wait for Jesus to be raised (and read the story in Luke 24–they didn't know he would be!) It has helped me understand how worthy of an event this day is to lead up to it with 40 days of anticipation, of sacrifice, and of hope that today, everything is better because of Jesus.

Lent is like a parable you teach to yourself. It has helped me to understand a lot, and I'm amazed at how much revelation I always experience when it comes to an end. It's good to force yourself to pay attention to the important things once in a while. Though I'd warn you that it may be scary when it occurs to you how little you actually do it ;)

Gay-Okay

As I said in my previous post, this escalating debate of "Church vs. LGBT" may be, in it's own weird way, a really good thing. And I only realized that after reading about former pastor Rob Bell's interview where he sided with marriage equality. Here are his words:

"I am for marriage. I am for fidelity. I am for love, whether it's a man and woman, a woman and a woman, a man and a man. I think the ship has sailed and I think the church needs...I think this is the world we are living in and we need to affirm people where they are."

Rob Bell, author of What We Talk About When We Talk About God

I've read some articles referring to this apparent change in doctrinal stance an "evolution" in the church/society, but I think the word "evolution" is infers improvement, when what our society really does is just change. For instance, on the same page where I read this article, I linked over to another article about a teenage boy convicted of triple homicide who, in his hearing, wore a t-shirt with the word "KILLER" written on it, then against the counsel of his attorney, flipped off and insulted the parents of his victims in the courtroom. Ever heard of that happening before? Our society is changing, not evolving.

What I'm not implying is this: a man loving a man is the same as a man killing three innocent people and reveling in it. 

What I am saying is this: It is not an adequate religious/moral response to judge the values expressed in our society based on the filter statement "this is the world we're living in and we need to affirm people where they are."

Our world is a mixed bag of great innovations, horrendous actions, good intentions, unseen kindnesses, bared feelings. It is diverse, and it has the capacity to hold good and evil right against each other in the same blue and green container. Everything in it is not the same, and treating it as such would be a far more apt description of foolishness than it would be of tolerance. "Affirm people where they are." What a vague thing to say.

So yes, I disagree with Rob, but I'm not in control of what he believes and I don't need to be.

The Christian and LGBT communities have been defined through their battle by this one common ignorance: they have sought to control each other. That's why it's a "debate" and not a conversation. That's why it's a "fight" and not a disagreement. As an American, I'm confused that we're warring about this at all inside of the context of democracy. Gay marriage is in its state of acceptance/rejection by the people's vote, and do any of us ever feel any more than only partial representation by the people's vote? Personally, I've joined a line of Christian thought that wonders why the government has forced us all into this crucible in the first place, because the marriage issue is different from the disagreement issue and it has given birth to the control issue.

So how in the world is this all a good thing for anybody?

Well it's been good for the church and here's why.

Most of the growing we do in life is thrust upon us. We learn how to study by the shock of failing an exam. We learn how to raise kids by the surprise of having them (before we could read all the books about it.) The church is learning how to mesh responses that are at once Biblical, and loving, and true by stumbling through a period where "outsiders" have breached our doctrinal walls and actually demanded explanations about why we believe what we believe. We are thrust from our monologue into dialogue and we're growing because of that. Because it's important to push through this time and learn how to do it right. We're growing because it's hard, and plenty of people are willingly vocal about reminding us of this.

What a good thing that we're not going to be able to just sweep this one under the rug. That our answer has to be thought-out, not just thought-up.

^{Galatians 1:6} I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— ⁷ not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. ⁸ But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.

When I read this, I think about how Rob's words have weight for him and how mine do for me. How important the Church's response is to tough questions, and how easy it is for those answers to go fifty different directions because we're also so influenced by our feelings and personal desires.

I believe people will answer for who they have chosen to be before God. And for me to say that is not followed by a sneer for some preacher that I don't see eye-to-eye with nor a wag of the finger towards people who I'm convinced are sinning and either don't know or don't care or don't agree. It's a conviction about me. In fact it's the very thing that convinces me that I need to grow by loving the people who are very different from me, the ones I disagree with the most. And that I can be okay with "loving you" and "affirming you wherever you're at" not being the same thing.

So when I talk about putting the Christ's Gospel and Kingdom ahead of my personal agenda...

Now that's what I'm talking about.


___________
There is simply not room for all the disclaimers I would have liked to add to this post. So I'll just say thanks for reading. I hope it adds to the conversation and makes you think, and that you know that if you disagree, that's ok. Because you don't have to explain me to anyone. Except you, mom and dad...you have a ton of explaining to do.

What we talk about when we talk about "What We Talk About When We Talk About God"

I saw my first Nooma video by Rob Bell when I was 16 at a church camp, and since then, I feel like I have sort of grown up with him. Through college, and as a young pastor, he's been a very influential character in the shaping of my ministry, of my priorities, and of how I see God. Even before publishing his latest work: What We Talk About When We Talk About God.

Read my review for WWTAG

Just last week, while touring to promote WWTAG, Rob was interviewed by a reporter in San Francisco about his thoughts about gay marriage. The response of this ever-controversial spiritual leader was unapologetically for!

There are a lot of people saying a lot of things about all of this, so I'm not publishing this to be unique, but because of how personal my journey with Rob has been, and because even though I disagree with the man at times, I think what he has said, and all the controversy around him, and around this bigger incendiary debate: Christians vs. LGBT has been really good for me. And really good for the church.

Bell gained a lot of critics and lost a lot of followers with his last book, Love Wins, which questioned the existence of Hell. Then pretty much answered that question with the word "nope." Just more subtly. As a result, at least seven books were published in response to Love Wins. This requires Belline emphasis.

Seven.

Books.

(That I'm aware of.)

I hate to think that a lot of Christians will start WWTAG out jaded, or never read this at all because of how they felt about his last book, Love Wins. In the end, Rob's book are important chances for us to challenge our beliefs, to be critical of ourselves and our interaction with our church or our world, to know who we are and not feel obligated to explain him.

And that last thing, it's the most essential part. It's something that I had to wrestle my way to through my own dissent about Love Wins. I don't have to explain Rob.

You don't have to explain me or apologize to anyone because I say something stupid or offensive or wrong. Not even if I write it down. Not if I say it on record in an interview. But we get really upset about this stuff, right? We feel obligated to explain it all, right? I mean if not, why did everyone tar and feather Rob for writing Love Wins?

It was sad to see that happen. I watched and ached and sympathized for this guy I disagreed with as people spewed resentment and voiced displeasure against this man because they disagreed with him. I think Rob was really hurt by that. I think he should be. I think it comes out in some uncharacteristically cautious statements in WWTAG, but I'm really grateful that he went through it because in its own weird way, it was a really good thing. From it I learned this lesson: I'm in control of me. Rob is in control of Rob. You're in control of you. And that's it. 

Earlier I said Rob has influenced my priorities, not that he determined them.

For a nation without slavery, we really like exerting control over each other. And control is really the issue here. It's what gets us upset and at each other's throats. And it's how we find ourselves in this boxing match between the church and the LGBT community, which in its own weird way, may be a really good thing.

As you'll see in my next blog.

Help Yourself.

It's not my fault.

I think most people agree with that statement, at least through the consistency of their actions. Last night our Presidential election came to an end, re-electing President Barack Obama for a second term. As expected, social media this morning is flooded with articles and posts about their feelings on the election. For the most part what you'll see is people dissatisfied and disappointed, spewing accusation at all those who voted opposite them and "ruined our country," and it's what you would have seen from a different set of people in the case of a different result. The only aid I can offer for those who are filled with disappointment or anger is to say this: It's your fault.

After the polls were in and Romney had conceded to Obama, news anchors began to weigh in on the present failures and the future strategies of the Republican Party. They said they had failed to secure the Mexican vote. That they needed to be more sensitive to the 54% of female voters out there. They only appealed to "white working Americans." When considering who the next candidates should be in 2016, there was a lot of energy spent determining who would appeal to certain key demographics and be able to secure voters from particular states. Ironically, nothing was mentioned regarding potential candidates who have noble character, who have the capacity to lead our country out of dark days, or who champion causes of actual importance. We only need to know who is likely to get votes.

Demographics are not sinful, but in elections, they represent the word that is most synonymous to sinfulness: selfishness. Why would it bother you that campaigns can successfully target a demographic by siding on an issue that represents them, and subsequently win their votes? Well, what bothers me is that we predictably vote for what is good for us before we vote for what is good for our country, or our state, or simply some other people who are just not us. Teachers are going to vote for schools. Latinos are going to vote for immigration. Rich people are going to vote for tax brackets. It's not mere irony if you vote in a way that helps your job, your family, your wallet, and when you get a vote that can help someone and you help yourself. This is how politicians get elected not for their character, but for their appeal. We instinctively villainize them because they've taken advantage of us, when maybe they just know us.

In the words of V, "If you're looking for someone to blame, you need only look in a mirror."

When Jesus showed up as the Messiah, everyone wanted him to change their nation to give them more freedom, give them more authority; with every question and favor that asked of Jesus, they were voting to help themselves. And as a paraphrased summary to Jesus' reply, he told them "You don't need to change your nation, you need to change yourselves." We don't like that kind of advice any more than they did, but as I look at our country, fragmented and largely dissatisfied, I hope that we'll understand that we're not discontent because our country reflects our values too little, but because it reflects them too much.

It's not our nation that desperately needs to change. It's us.

Why superhero films are so serious

This weekend, The Dark Knight Rises opened in theaters, concluding a darker, more brutal, and simply more real-life rendition of the Batman saga that has ever been seen. Nolan's final film, like the sequel, depicts some pretty realistic violence, madness, and anarchy.

So, is it too brutal?

The tragic (some would say ironic) shooting in a CO theatrical premiere of The Dark Knight Rises has, not surprisingly resulted in the film industry being expected to answer for the crimes of a real-life madman. My thoughts on this must be rooted in two concepts I hold to be universally true: First, that humans are impressionable, especially to the suggestions of digital media. Second: our responses to tragedy are often too soon, too irrational, and usually crippled by paranoia.

How can the on-screen violence be explained in the wake of the actual crime? Is it culprit or coincidence?

What I find interesting is that the worlds of superheroes are merging with ours. It says a lot about us and our desires when you watch the transformation that Batman has made from Adam West's tame WHAM-POW 1960's Caped Crusader, to a crime-focused cartoon series of the early 90's, and now a thinly veiled commentary of our modern society's ills in the Dark Knight saga. Perhaps you could make a case for basing this on the degradation of American culture between now and then, or that the change has been fueled primarily by a technological revolution that has taken us from cartoonish onomatopoeia to Operation Sky Hook. But I don't think either of those things are the reason we are here.

We see the worlds of Superheroes merging with our own, not as much because we want to corrupt the digital universe, but because we want to bring heroes to our own. Perhaps it's no coincidence that movies are starting to look like our front-page headlines. At least in movies, Bruce Wayne is there to do something about all the evil and destruction. I think we make movies like this because we can create and interact in a world that is actually corrupt, quite like our own, but where people capably stand in the gap between the evil and the innocent. Even if it takes superpowers and bat-arsenals to do it.

We already know how messed up our world is. Movies help us to think that there is a brighter future to our own dark days. And the darker the days are in our films, the more real the hope seems.

It can't hurt people to start buying into this idea that they need a savior. Maybe it will help them to adapt when they realize they've got one.