exegeek::godmatic

I’ve noticed a trend, especially among teens, to employ the “Become a fan” feature of Facebook to become a fan of all sorts of things, like “HAHAHA omg yeah i remember that!” “uhmm you werent there…” and Deleting everything you’ve typed cause you saw the other person was typing.

I think it’s funny.

So here is a list of the Top 5 Christian Facebook Fan Pages that need starting.

#5. “Telling someone you’re ‘pan-trib’ when they ask what you think about the Book of Revelation.

#4. “Finding messianic allegories in movies, novels, and music, so that I can justify , watching, reading, or listening to them.”

#3. “Explaining that God can speak through anyone and then referencing Balaam’s ass.”

#2. “Trying to stump the pastor by asking ‘If God can do anything, can he make a rock too big for him to lift?’”

#1. “Playing the ‘dot game’ during service.”

 I just wanted to take a moment to point out the new “Share” feature at the bottom of the page. For the last year or so, I’ve had to painstakingly code a new one for every blog entry. For the last few months, I’ve dreaded every new post, because I knew it would mean spending thirty minutes copying and pasting HTML into the entry. But no more! Thanks to Add To Any, it’s all automatic! So please, share what you read on Facebook and Twitter and whereever else you frequent. Thanks!

John Wesley once said the following:

‘To say, “This man is an Arminian,” has the same effect on many hearers as to say “This man is a mad dog.” It puts them into a fright at once: they run away from him with all speed and diligence; and will hardly stop, unless it will be to throw a stone at the dreadful and mischievous animal. The more unintelligible the word is, the better it answers the purpose. Those on whom it is fixed do not know what to do; not understanding what it means, they cannot tell what defense to make, or how to clear themselves from the charge. And it is not easy to remove the prejudice which others have imbibed, who know no more of it than that it is “something very bad,” if not “all that is bad¹!’

How difficult must it be to decipher an accusation that is not even recognized by Microsoft Word’s spellcheck?

This very weekend, I read the status of a fellow who had been accused of heresy. This, if I may quote him, was nothing more than “ambiguous accusations” and “name-calling,” and as the story went, that sounds like an accurate assessment of what happened.

Wesley disliked name-calling, I suspect, because he and his brother were often the victims of it. In the case of John Wesley, the words “Arminian” and “Methodist” were pejorative terms, and for his brother Charles, “Pelagian” was added to the list of accusations. The problem wasn’t, I don’t believe, the summation of their beliefs into a single doctrine or word, but it was the fact that a single word could be used in lieu of a scriptural dissection of their beliefs.

Please pay close attention to what I say next, so that you don’t mistake me for a hypocrite. It is no surprise that I do not care for the teachings of John MacArthur. By his own admission, and by his own words, he is a Calvinist, and whether you wish to use the term in a derogatory sense or not, I believe he would tell you that that is the label he would prefer. The word “Calvinist,” like “Arminian,” is theological shorthand for a set of established beliefs. It is quicker for me to say that I disagree with John MacArthur on the grounds that he is a Calvinist than it is for me to disagree on the following five points: T…U…L…I…and P².

Here is the very intentional practice I must make when explaining why I dislike his teachings. I have to be careful that when I disagree with him on the grounds that he is a Calvinist, I do so only in the presence of those who understand what a Calvinist is. To spout off that word in the presence of someone who is uninformed about my theological shorthand is nothing more than name-calling. Some people assume that employing this theological shorthand should suffice as an explanation for why they disagree with another, but in order for this to be true, all parties involved must have a working knowledge of those terms which, in most situations, isn’t the case.

We find similar problems orbiting the word “postmodern.” More people employ the word as a derogatory accusation than actually understand the definition of it. If you don’t believe me, ask around. Postmodernism, by its definition, defies systemization, but in order for it to serve as shorthand, it must represent an established system with readily understood fallacies.

To close, I’ll paraphrase Wesley’s closing statement from the aforementioned essay, by reminding myself, and everyone else that it is the duty of every preacher to never publically or privately use theological shorthand as the sole method of reproach, for it amounts to name calling.

1. What is an Arminian?, by John Wesley
2. Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the Saints, respectively.

The next time someone tries to convince me that Jesus was married, based on the logic that nowhere in the bible does it say that Jesus was not married, I’m posting this.

Today, I was standing in line at one of our town’s many thrift stores, waiting to purchase a few old second-hand theological books, and a mint copy of a Cabbage Patch storybook (all of which I direly needed), when a kid comes walking in the door. If I had to guess, I’d say he was about ten to twelve years old, and from his swagger, I’d guess that he was either very popular, or wanted to be.

I watched him cross the room, and as he passed a row of mannequins, he did something rather odd. If you’ve read the title, you know what that is. He looked around, I assume to make sure no one was watching, then very non-chalantly, he fist-bumped one of the mannequins. Then he walked away.

My first thought was kind of condescending: Does he really think that makes him cool?

But then it dawned on me, he was looking around to see if anyone was watching. He wasn’t trying to be cool. So why did he do it?

Pause.

I’m talking to some teens a few years back, who are all struggling with some kind of peer pressure. One is being pressured by her boyfriend to have sex, and another girl is being pressured down the same route, but to a lesser degree. One kid wants to quit smoking but doesn’t want to look like he’s undergoing some religious conversion. They’re looking for acceptance by giving into temporal pressures, which may be more dangerous than giving into temporal pleasure. When someone sleeps around because they want to, when they’re giving into temporal pleasure, they’re at least getting something out of it, and they’re in control. When they smoke because they enjoy smoking, they’re doing something for themselves, and they can at least feel some semblance of authority over the habit. But when a girl gives it up to a guy or another girl, without actually wanting to, just to feel accepted, they’ve given up control. They’ve given up on valuing themselves and have delegated their validation to someone else. Someone who won’t last.

Someone plastic.

A mannequin.

People in the world, whether they realize it or not, are just ashamedly fist-bumping mannequins. If I had to do it again, I would have run back, caught the kid, and gave him a high-five from a real person.

A while back, I started compiling facts and suggestions for a series I was working on that dealt with a biblical approach to Netiquette. Around that same time, Hachette sent me a book called Start-Up Nation, by Dan Senor and Saul Singer, for review. Having been inoculated against defense-of-Israel books I immediately suspected that the book would build a case that God’s hand was blessing His beloved nation. Instead, the book worked through a very well-documented argument that Israel is the grease that keeps the world’s technological gears turning. And rather than direct supernatural intervention, they suggest that the nation’s success lies in the attitude of its people. The word they used to describe this Israeli attitude is this: Chutzpah.

 This word has no equivalent in the English language, but essentially represents a get-to-it attitude. As Larry the Cable Guy might say, the Israeli attitude is one of “Git ‘R Done.” Start-ups are encouraged at familial, local, and national levels. While a businessman in the US might spend months planning a new venture, his or her Israeli counterpart will have the company up and running by the end of the week. If a start-up bombs in the States, the owner is lucky to get a second shot. In Israel, one’s success is almost judged by how many times one has failed. The more the better, it almost seems.

 This same attitude is credited, though not by name, in other books like It, by Craig Groeschel and Surprising Insights from the Unchurched, by Thom Rainier, as being one of the driving forces behind a lively and growing church. What I am learning, as I slowly build my series on biblical netiquette is that not only do many lessons from the internet and business sector cross over into church development, but that many biblical truths and church-planting techniques cross back over into the business world. Chris Brogan and Julien Smith called their book Trust Agents because trustworthiness, a religious virtue, is being recognized as one of the premiere currencies of business, as opposed to the cutthroat tactics we often see endorsed by high-profile executives.

 Start-Up Nation is a book that should be on the bookshelves of businessmen and women, and pastors. It hails the benefits of honest ambition against the pitfalls of procrastination and over-thinking oneself.

 Purchase Start-Up Nation and support Exegeek, by clicking the link below:

Share and Enjoy:

Huh?

One of Marvel Comics’ most hailed characters is a fellow named Deadpool. And what’s not to love? Healing factor. Swords. Resistance to telepathy. Wise-cracking. Swords! But the quality that really sets Deadpool apart from most other characters is his ability to break the fourth wall—the imaginary wall that separates the reader from the action of the comic. He comments to the reader on the actions going on around him. It was a little bit of a disappointment that he didn’t do it in the Wolverine movie.

So why is Jesus Deadpool?

Throughout the Gospels, we Jesus speaking things aloud that need not be spoken aloud. He tells the wind and waves to be quiet and still, but water and wind do not have ears to hear. When he prays to the Father within earshot of his disciples, he prays aloud. When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead in John 11, he tells those around him that miracles occur for their benefit. It would be one thing for a biblical commentator to look at a verse and say, “Oh, Jesus performed this miracle so that those around him at the time would believe.” It’s an entirely different thing for Jesus to perform a miracle and then interpret its purpose aloud.

Imagine the scene for a minute. Jesus has his back to his audience, calls Lazarus forth, then turns around and smiles, saying “This was for your benefit, Mr. Reader.”

That’s not to say that, at the moment, Jesus was conscious of the transference of his words into memory into text, though he may have been. The idea that Jesus words are living, at that the Bible itself remains a living entity is compatible with that idea. That’s just the fun part. The important part is that Jesus was interested in building faith and realized that his actions had an impact on the hearts of others.

Share and Enjoy:

Oftentimes, something I write is spawned by something that has happened to me in real life. This isn’t a novel observation, really, writers have been using real life as the inspiration for articles forever. It’s a handy little thing we call experience. But recently, I inherited a basically non-existent youth group from my church, with tremendous helping of support, and the objective of producing a growing youth program. To make a living, I’m a self-employed tile setter. That’s what pays the bills. Organizing and running a youth program is a ministry, but it’s also something of a hobby. I enjoy the creativity and innovation that’s necessary to make it work. It’s not a paid position, but it does take up enough time to, perhaps, be considered a non-profit part-time job.

In May of 2009, Time Magazine ran an issue that predicted what the future workplace would look like. One of the observations was that, quoted from Bruce Tulgan of Rainmaker Thinking, said, “Companies already want more short-term independent contractors and consultants and fewer traditional employees because contractors are cheaper…seniority matters less because it’s about the past, not the future.” As I said before, I’m self-employed, and if there’s one thing I’m learning about running your own business: when business is slow you look for new ways to run your business, or find ways to start another new business. The lifestyle demands creativity and innovation—the same two things a youth minister needs.

To me, the pairing makes sense. Being self-employed makes me a contractor, and a type of freelancer. The freedom of that arrangement allows me to schedule the time necessary to other endeavors—in this case: teenagers. But it adds something else, too. Siu Fung Wu wrote in The Bi-vocational Pastor, “[B]i-vocational pastors are in touch with non-Christians. A full time pastor can be occupied by so many responsibilities that they do not have time to relate to non-Christians. They may have opportunities to talk to unbelievers as ministers of religion, but they have less chance to develop friendships with them.” Living in the static bubble of ministry isolates one from the problems of the workplace, and from the problems of ordinary people who work there. It creates an insulator between the content of a sermon and the needs of the congregation. It’s a more subtle version of the age-gap problem with youth and youth leaders.

One other observation came from Stefena Broadbent, who spoke at the TED Conference in Oxford, England, back in July 2009. Broadbent points out that before the industrial, familial connections were stronger because people lived where they worked. Farmers lived on their far. Merchants and pub-owners lived in the apartment over their establishment. The industrial revolution, especially the assembly line, took people out of their homes and placed them in rows inside large warehouses. Pastoral ministry has almost (needlessly) adopted this model as the norm, working pastors in offices, rather than out of their homes. Social networking and telecommuting, as Broadbent points out, can change this. The pastor will no longer need to be in an office, and neither would a freelancer. The two positions complement one another so well that it’s almost impossible to ignore the potential for ministerial effectiveness.

And just as real life experience has inspired me to address this issue, I believe that real world experience—dealing with customers and clients in a non-religious atmosphere will inspire more relevant preaching from the pulpit.

Share and Enjoy:

This week I had started a short piece on original sin, and whether or not depravity is evident in babies or small children. I was sidetracked by a project in my garage, and I never got around to it, but that’s okay, because a good friend of mine sent me a few things that just happened to fit perfectly into what I wanted to say.

My daughter’s third birthday took place a little over a week ago. Family came over. We ate cake. Jocelyn opened presents. One of those presents was a birthday card from her great-grandmother, and inside was five twenty dollar bills. My daughter knows what money is, and what it is for, and where it goes. She knows that it can be stuffed into a ceramic piggy bank, or exchanged for toys at Wal-Mart. She opened the envelope, blurted out a huge “Yay!” and giggled. But knowing what she knows, the next thing she did surprised me. She walked over to my wife and handed her one of the twenties. Then she went to her grandmother and gave her one. Then her grandfather. Then my mother. Then me. She gave away all of her money without being asked or told, then went back to opening presents. You see, I have anecdotal stories, too.

In the original sin debate, it always bugs me that people try to adapt an anecdotal story about a misbehaving child into a theological argument for depravity. I don’t expect the above story to be taken seriously, but many people hold theirs up like court’s evidence. Despite my love for both, I must point out that even men like John Wesley and G.K. Chesterton have made similarly anecdotal statements.

One of the first pieces I ever wrote for exegeek was called “Rusted, Dirty, Dented, and Sinful,” and it addressed the tendency of people to attribute malice to their vehicles, and compared those admittedly fantastical claims with equally fantastical anecdotes of malice in children. I provided a quotation from Jonathan Edwards in that article, and now I’d like to add a few more that were passed along to me this week. The first is anonymous: “Babies are the epitome of evil.” The second is from a man named Paul Washer, a Southern Baptist missionary made notable for his Youtube’d fire and brimstone messages. He said, “If a baby had the strength of a grown man he would slaughter you without remorse.”

Originally, as I said, this was only intended as a short word about the subject, but I wanted to add this video that I was forwarded, because I think it makes the point better than words. Watch and be stunned by the raging depravity.

Share and Enjoy:

Taken from xkcd.com. Enjoy.