Curiosity Leads to Life

This is a quote I heard in a sermon a while back and have been pondering it ever since. For the last several weeks I have felt a sense of plateauing in my spiritual life. When I first rediscovered my passion for Jesus Christ I felt as a small child, that everything was different, new, and exciting, and then I plateaued.

One of my frustrations with friendships is when it becomes one sided, you are the only one putting anything into it. At first all is going well and then after a time you feel as though you've discovered everything there is to know about the person and all of a sudden the friendship begins to dissipate, to dissolve as it were. All of a sudden you are the only one putting any time and energy into the friendship. I actually had a relationship like this once. I always felt more or less like a burden, like he'd rather be doing anything else but spend time with me. I wonder sometimes if Christ doesn't feel the same way about my relationship with Him?

Curiosity leads to life. Can this be true of one's spiritual life? For me to have a meaningful, joyful spiritual life it would make sense that it would require a certain amount of curiosity. We are called to have child like faith. Have you ever watched a group of children? They are full of curiosity, everything is different for them, and they are excited by it.

Unfortunately I as an adult tend to get sidetracked by other things in my life and lose my sense of curiosity, awe and admiration of my God. A relationship with God becomes another duty I have to perform. Nothing terribly special. So I wonder then, if I intend to have a meaningful and joyful spiritual would not require at least a certain amount of input on my part? Does it not also require a sense of curiosity, almost of expectancy, what is God going to teach me today?

Unconditional Love

I've always had a little bit of a problem with the concept of unconditional love. Not so much believing it exists, more accepting it to be true for my self. It is hard for me to fathom why anyone, or any god, let alone the God, would love me unconditionally.

Scripture states in Romans "there is none righteous, no note one." I suppose it is for this reason that I feel as though I must somehow earn unconditional love. However, if in fact it were possible to earn unconditional love, it would no longer be unconditional. Working for something places a condition on it.

So I guess for me the question isn't so much does unconditional love exist, but how do I accept unconditional love? This is a kind of love I am not used to receiving. This is Christ like love that doesn't care how much I screw up, it is still there. The kind of love that I am use to seeing is an if then kind of love, if you do these things then I will receive the kind of love I so desperately desire.

Yet once again it relates to the need for approval. I often make the mistake of confusing the two because in my mind the two are the same. Approval equals love. I know this is not the case, but it is something my mind has difficulty separating. So here's the thing, how does one separate these things?

Consensus Belief System

Typically I sing tenor, however for church I am singing alto. I have a bit of a strange method when I sing for choir, I must be surrounded by loud voices. I do this because when I sing in choir, I follow whoever is loudest regardless of whether or not they sing my part.

As I was singing in choir tonight I realized how similar this is to the way I live my life. When it comes to how I act and what I believe, I tend to follow whoever is loudest. Unfortunately this has led to me where I am currently.

I tend to live by consensus. Confidence is a non issue. I can be confident in something, but if I think someone will be offended or in any way give indication that they disapprove I do one of two things, hide it all together, or make a strong attempt to.

I'm reminded of the scene from the movie Runaway Bride. I seem to come back to this movie a lot. Anyway, the scene is about the middle of the movie when Ike accuse Maggie of not having a mind of her own. In a nutshell, he has just described me.

Fact is, I don't have a mind of my own. My mind is shaped by those around me. The annoying thing is that I want desperately to have a mind of my own. So how do I find my own mind, while still having the mind of Christ?

G. R. O. W.

Ok so you're probably wondering why these letters are capitalized and seem to be some kind of abbreviation for something. Part of my training through Child Evangelism Fellowship included training in using the Wordless Book. The last page of the Wordless Book is the green page. When you teach it, the dialogue goes something like this

"Now that you've accepted Jesus as your saviour there's a few things he wants us to do help us get to know him better. This green page reminds me of that, it reminds me that I need to GROW. Because the Bible says that we need to "grow in the grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." Now on this page there are four corners, and there are four letters to the word grow, so each letter reminds me of something I need to do in order to grow in the knowledge of God. G stands for Going to church, R stands for Reading the Bible, O stands for Obeying God's word and your parents (parents obviously love this one), and W is kind of a big word but it stands for witnessing, which means telling other's about the love of God."

obviously that's a quick version of how one would teach the green page, but there you have it. So why am I going off about some page in some book that you really don't care about? Over the last month and a half I have made immense progress, leaps and bounds. When I think about where I was not that long ago, and where I am now in my spiritual life I am grateful and amazed at the saving power of a loving savior. However, it would seem that my spiritual life has once again plateaued. Now I don't mean that I have lapsed into sin or anything like that, what I mean is that I am no longer seeing any tangible evidence of growth. So what am I doing wrong, and how do I fix it without becoming a legalistic Christian? Part of the problem with me is that so much of the time these things that I have mentioned as being tools of growth were held up as a legalistic standard that if one didn't partake in, one would be considered a heretic and shunned. I'm not kidding you. I remember on one occasion getting in trouble at a school I went to because I was doing my devotions in the evening, rather than the morning, because I have issues getting up early enough in the morning. So I guess what I keep coming back to is how important are these rituals that Christians are required to go through? And, is it possible to be a joyful Christian 100% of the time?

The Quest Continues

Today marks one month from the two by four God sent to the back of my head. Indeed it was exactly one month ago that I saw where the road I was going down would eventually take me. Within the last month God has brought me to a level of intimacy I never dreamed possible. In many ways I feel like a small child, everything is new, different, exciting. God is still in the process of revealing who I am as a child of God. There is much still that is uncertain, however there is much also for which I am certain. These are things I know for certain, these are also the things from which I have spent may years in hiding.

1. I am a follower of Jesus Christ who is the passionate lover of my heart, my soul, and my mind. This is something from which, for the last six months, I have been fleeing. I remember literally saying “I graduated from Corban College. Please don’t hold that against me, I am not one of them.” I was horrified when it was brought to my attention only a few weeks ago that denying the followers of Christ was the same as denying Jesus Christ Himself. “When he had gone out to the gateway, another servant-girl saw him and said to those who were there, "This man was with Jesus of Nazareth." And again he denied it with an oath, "I do not know the man." A little later the bystanders came up and said to Peter, "Surely you too are one of them; for even the way you talk gives you away." Then he began to curse and swear, "I do not know the man!" And immediately a rooster crowed. And Peter remembered the word which Jesus had said," Before a rooster crows, you will deny Me three times." And he went out and wept bitterly.” (Matthew 26:71-75 NASB).
I have grown up hearing nothing but how much God will judge me if I screw up. It has only been within the last several weeks that I have truly come to know how much of a loving God I serve. I am ever more becoming of the opinion that after one has embraced the love of Jesus Christ, Christians need to stop beating people over the head with the judgement of God. Jesus looked past the fault and saw to the need, would it not be better if we did the same?

2. I am female. I realize that in stating this many of you are sitting there going “DUH,” however, I have grown up believe that women in the church must be perfect. To me, being a Christian woman meant being the stereotypical mild tempered, quiet, definitely not outspoken, doormat of a woman. As you all are my friends it won’t take long before you realize I by NO MEANS fit this stereotype. I am loud, opinionated, strong willed, definitely not a doormat. After several years of attempting to meet the stereotype and failing abysmally I finally hit a point where I pretty much said “screw it, I don’t fit the stereotype, why bother trying?” It has only been in the last month that I have come to realize I can be loud, opinionated, strong willed, and still be used of God. Thank God for his grace.

3. I graduated from being homeschooled in 2002. I have been running from this for the last three years. Attempting to cover up the fact that I was sheltered, extremely sheltered. Never realizing that this sheltering, was in fact a good thing. From what I have seen of the world, I am learning to embrace the shelterdness of my up bringing, in fact I have come to regard it as a good thing. I have come to see that not everything in the world is a good thing. That being said I have come to embrace the fact that I am sheltered and very grateful for being sheltered.

I am still discovering more about who I am, and who God wants me to be. As I do continue on my quest for my identity, I will continue to post. When you need to worry is when I quit writing. God is showing me new and wonderful things every day as I learn to embrace his love. I am excited to see what He continues to have in store for me.

Ponderings

A friend of mine was teasing me today when she said that I needed to get a job if for the sole fact that I have been thinking too much and need to find something else to do. It's true, one of the things about not having a job is that you sit on your but alone with your computer and all you can do is think and write. Out of that come my rants. I've been pondering a lot of things lately, more like a lot of the extreme Christianity that I grew up with. For a little background, I was homeschooled, very conservatively homeschooled. I do my best to hide it and in fact I do not reveal this fact very often. In the last few days I have realized that I am in fact ashamed of being homeschooled. The reason I am ashamed of being homeschooled is that I care too much what others will think. I fear being judged simply because I am an ex-homeschooler. Truth be told there are few social inadequacies that have come as a result of being homeschooled, but I think they are so indistinct most people wouldn't know unless I told you. At least that's the theory I've deluded myself into thinking. I began to analyze though, why am I ashamed of being homeschooled? It has I think more to do with the stereotype than anything else. Think about it, homeschoolers have a stereotype for being socially awkward, nerdy individuals that have no clue how to hold a conversation. Therefore I come to the same conclusion I made earlier, I am ashamed of being homeschooled because I am afraid of being judged on the basis that I was in fact homeschooled.
As I was thinking about this I began to make some comparisons to Christianity. There is a scripture that says "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ..." To be honest, I struggle with this passage. I preach against holding a judgemental attitude and Christian hypocrisy. In certain social circles I really don't like calling myself a Christian, in fact I'd rather hide and skirt around the issue if I can. I began to think about it and analyze why it was I am so apparently ashamed of the Gospel of Christ. It occurred to me that it was not in fact the Gospel of Christ that I was ashamed of but rather the Gospel of Christianity. There is a difference. In fact, if most Christians would live by the Gospel of Christ, I think there would be more Christians in existence. Fact of the matter is, the Gospel of Christianity preaches legalism, and spiritual superiority. Not at all something with which I want to identify myself. In contrast the Gospel of Christ preaches love and acceptance, judgement yes, but first and foremost relationships. In many of the cases where Jesus told the person to go and sin no more he began by establishing a relationship. For instance with the Woman at the Well. He reached out to her by asking her for a drink of water which is something that a male jew would not normally do with even a Hebrew woman. In this manner he began to interact with her and establish something of a relationship with her before he told her to go and sin no more. Another example where Jesus was hesitant to condemn is the situation with the adulterous woman. This was a situation where Jesus told the crowd "He who is without sin, let him be the first to cast the stone." When no one cast the first stone and the crowd dispersed Jesus asked the woman where her accusers were and upon seeing there was no one he told her "Neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more." (John 8:3-10)
This is what I believe to be the Gospel of Christ. From what I can tell the Gospel of Christianity has turned into the Gospel of the Pharisees, not exactly someone I'd want to be party to. In conclusion then, I would say that I can truthfully say I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, it is in fact his followers of whom I frequently find myself ashamed. In much the same manner it is not so much being homeschooled that I am ashamed of so much as it is others who have been homeschooled and created a bad name for it. There I would ask you who call yourselves Christians to remember that you are representing the name of Jesus Christ and as such at least make an attempt to live by his word.

Frustrations X2 (Follow up to frustrations)

For the purposes of this post I am not even going to discuss the issue of whether or not being gay or lesbian is a sin because where one might stand on that issue has no bearing on how people, particularly Christians, should treat those who are gay. i would like to take a moment and define a term, the term is judgement. When I think of the word judgement I think of Christians looking down their long thin noses and completely shunning any one person who does not live in the same manner as they do. This is what I believe to be wrong. We have no right to pretend be holier than thou because fact of the matter is we are all sinners, therefore it ought to be our duty to make an attempt to show the love Christ to people with whom we may not necessarily agree. It is NOT our job to sit around and make fun of those people we think are living in sin. It is in fact more important to show them the love of Christ
Another term I would like to discuss for a moment is condemnation. This is something else I believe to be wrong. It is God's job to condemn, not ours. So again i would say it is more important to show the love of Christ rather than condemn those who are sinners. It bothers me that Christians are so prone to condemnation. Scripture tells us to speak the truth in love, we have the speaking truth part down pat, however somewhere in there we have lost doing it in love. If one looks at the life of Jesus Christ one will realize that the people he chose to associate with were not exactly perfect people. One example is the woman at the well. This was a situation where he told the woman to go and sin no more. We have no record of what her life was like after her encounter with Christ, it is very possible that she fell back into sin. However, we also do not have any record of Christ going back to check up on her. It is the same with people who are gay, if one wishes to make it clear where they stand on the issue that is fine. What I object to is rubbing their faces in it and using the fact that you are straight to make oneself superior. This is what I believe to be wrong. This is an issue of the log and the splinter in your eye. Christ very clearly tells us to get the log out of our own eye before getting the splinter out of someone elses eye. In other words, be aware of the fact that you have sin in your life that may look like a log to others. Therefore proceed with caution when making your views known.
Another issue that came up in the previous post was the claim that gay people make fun of themselves therefore it is ok for us to do so as well. This is totally and completely not true. For starters the people that I know who are gay do not make fun of themselves and furthermore it is an issue of prerogative. Going back to the issue of Nerd Day, I make fun of myself for being a nerd but do not appreciate when others make fun of me for the same reason. It's similar to the situation with siblings. I have an older sister, typically younger sibling I picked on my older sister but if anyone else picked on my older sister there was hell to pay. Another issue here that ought to be raised is the question of right vs. edifying. I would not ask the question is it right that I do this, but rather is it edifying for the other person? Since there are people who find it offensive to make fun of people who are gay I would say no, it is not edifying therefore it is no longer right.
Secondly the issue was raised that those Christians who do make fun of gay people are in fact accurate in their interpretations, this is a non-issue because they shouldn't be making fun of gay people in the first place. Again it is a question of edification rather than accuracy. Am I being edifying to myself and the others around me by making fun of gay people?
It is more important to me that I build a relationship with my friends who are gay, and as the relationship grows yes my views will come out, however I am not about to go beating them upside the head with my views on the subject matter. I've never been a huge fan of the beating the bible over the head method of evangelism. My experience has been that it is more often than not alienating to the other individual. I am much more inclined to build a relationship first and thereby show the love of Christ.
There have been times when I have thought about what would happen if in fact I was lesbian. How would I be treated? It saddens me because I can predict that I would many close friends because they would no longer want anything to do with someone they felt was living in sin. This is precisely why many of the people I know reject Christianity. Therefore I would leave you with this, would it not be better to show the love of Christ rather than show a judgemental attitude?

Frustrations

There's an event on campus that frustrates a small contingency people. The event is titled Nerd Day, it irritates/frustrates a few of us because it is supposedly representative of the small but outspoken contingency of those of us who call ourselves nerds. What it amounts to is that we feel the day makes fun of us those of us who are in fact nerds. Now the people who participate in this day would I think be mortified if they knew they had offended anyone because while their heart is in the right place the problem is they have not stopped to think twice about the people they may possibly offend. While their intentions are good it is quite obvious they really don't know anything about the group they are supposedly representing and in essence they are making fun of those of who are nerds. So where am I really going with this? There is another group of people who do something quite similar. A few people on campus have taken it upon themselves to make fun of a group of people of which they really don't know anything about. I am referring to gay people. There are few people I know who sit around and make fun of gay people. This bothers me because I know people who are gay, they are nothing like the people who make fun of them think they are. Fact of the matter is, they are people just like you and me. Simply because we claim to be Christians does not give us the right to sit and judge them or to make fun of them because they are different. Do you suppose that during the holocaust Germans sat around and made fun of the Jews? Or during the race riots do you suppose white people sat around and made fun of the blacks? In both cases it was a case of the majority making fun of a minority simply because they were different. Fact of the matter is, they are people too. Just because we might be German, White, or Straight while someone else is not does not give us the right to sit around make fun of these people. This is what people like to call bigotry and unfortunately Christianity is full of it, it is for this reason that I am hesitant to even call myself a Christian because there are so many things like this throughout history that have given Christians a bad name. Would it not be better to make an attempt to understand the culture of those who are different rather than to sit and make fun of them or to condemn them? Because quite honestly if we sit and make fun of those who are different from us it is in a sense a kind of condemning. By making fun of those who are different we in fact condemn them and make their differences blatantly obvious and thereby condemn them because they are in fact different. I would ask you then, think twice before you make fun of a group of people, or an individual simply because they are different, because someday that could be you.

Crisis in Christian Schools?

Descartes once said "in order to be a true seeker of truth, one must, as far as it is possible, question everything." I am becoming more and more convinced of this as I have seen Christians seemingly well grounded in their faith go through Christian schools and come out the other side questioning their Christianity. There is something wrong here. I know of several cases where this has happened. The first case I know of was at a Christian high school. Someone I know became so completely dissulussioned with Christianity after seeing the amount of hypocrisy at his school that this person isn't sure they want to be Christian. Part of the purpose of sending someone to a Christian school is an effort to keep this person from losing their faith. The fact that the opposite effect is happening is disturbing. So what's causeing this? Is there actually a crisis in our Christian Schools? I would say quite simply yes, there is a crisis in Christian schools. The problem, put simply, is the Christian sub culture. This is the idea that if one puts a group of Christians together who are like minded they will never question anything and in so doing will save their faith. THIS IS WRONG! Scripture commands that we be in the world but not of the world. NO WHERE in scripture does it command that we not even in be in the world and that we completely separate ourselves from the world. Christ in fact reprimands this kind of behavior in Revelation chapter two when he condemns the church who has lost it's first love. Here is a church who has done all the right things, and yet they have lost sight of the goal. I would put forth that this what happens when Christians insist upon living in a sub-culture kind of society. We end up raising children who are given the tools combat in the real world but never given the opportunity to use these tools. I would ask then, what was the point of giving the tools in the first place? If we insist upon sheltering our children to the point that they have no idea what is in the world they will no know how to deal with the things that are in the world. What will follow is a child who views the world as something that is perhaps not all bad and thus begins the slippery slope of a child who, when confronted, does not know how to deal with the confrontation and begins to agree with the ideas set before him. I ask you, would it not be better to instead begin confrontation in a controlled kind of manner that these children will know how to use the tools they have been given? It makes no sense to give the child the tools to use without actually giving them instruction manual to booklet. We must not assume that our children will simply figure it out on their own, some will, but some will come out the other side disillusioned. Again I ask, would it not be better to give them both the tools and the instruction manual to use these tools to combat the world? I would put this to parents, you know what is the world. Educate your child in both the ways of the world and the ways of Christianity and then ask them, which is better?

Upon meeting two women

Recently I encountered two women I found to be of interesting note. Of the two women, one was quite obviously an outspoken feminist. She talked as though she would be quite happy to completely eradicate any mention of man, men or anything that would even remotely hint at patriarchal values. I found this to be of interesting note because quite honestly, I was bothered by the whole encounter. The idea of completely eradicating men quite honestly bothered me. I'm reminded of a song I heard once as a child, "Reuben, Reuben, I've been thinking. What a grand world this would be, if the men were all transported far beyond the northern sea." Reuben's reply is: "Oh my goodness gracious Rachel, what a strange world this would be, if the men were all transported far beyond the northern sea." On this issue I have to agree with Reuben. Indeed it would be a strange world to live if in fact men were completely eradicated. Granted I have had my moments when I've wanted to see the eradication of men, I think most women would be foolish if they think they haven't; however I think if women thought it through for two seconds they would infact realize the folly. As much as women may try to resist men are infact needed to stabilize women. I shudder to think about what the world would be like if ran by women, though that day may soon be approaching if Hillary Clinton gets her way. Women are emotional creatures and in fact need men to reason with them. If God had wanted the world to be ruled by women he would not have created man. By the same logic if God had wanted woman to be man he would have simply created man and let it be at that. The fact of the matter is, God in his ultimate wisdom created both man and woman for a purpose. God said "it is not good for man to be alone." The same could be said of woman.

Book Review: Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury

This is I think one of the most important books of the twentieth century. Bradbury does an excellent job of depicting what happens to a society when knowledge is suppressed, books censored, and libraries no longer exist.

Quick review of the plot:
The book is set at some point in the future. Guy Montag is a fireman who burns books and begins to wonder what is in the books he is burning. Thus begins his downfall. The story unfolds with Mr. Montag's meeting with Clarrisse who begins to open a world for Mr. Montag he never knew possible.

Analysis:
At the end of the book Bradbury quite elequently gives a dialogue on the main points in his work and why he wrote the book in the manner that he wrote it. Let's talk literary theories for just a moment. Bradbury most definately comes from a New Criticism perspective, the idea that it is what is in the text that counts. He states, at the end of the book, a number of things he would have changed had he allowed himself to re-write the book. However, he also says that in re-writing the book it would be a totally new book, and would have to be titled differently. Bradbury takes to task various different minorities for their criticism of his books in that he is too far in one direction or the other. In essence he states in his appendices that he is an author who wrote about something he cared about and if those minority groups want their points of view represented, then perhaps they should write their own book. This book is a fairly quick read, but extremely important. It's hard to believe it has come so far from it's meager beginnings as dime novel.

Can Islam and Christianity coexist in a pluralistic society? (An analysis of a recent Socratic Club forum)

As stated in the title the topic of tonight's socratic club forum was "Can Islam and Christianity Coexist in a pluralistic society?" Speakers this evening were Dr. Martin Alphonse arguing for Christianity and Dr. Shariar Ahmed arguing for Islam. First will be a brief summary of Dr. Alphonse's opening statements followed by a brief summary of Dr. Ahmed's opening statements. The final part of this analysis will be a summary of my own personal thoughts on each speaker.

Summer of Dr. Alphonse

In Dr. Alphonse's opening statements he gives several reasons for the coexistence of Christianity and Islam. Dr. Alphonse states Christians and Muslims are, in a sense, blood brothers and sisters as they are both descendent from Abraham. He also makes the statement that non-Arab muslims and Christians are descendent from the same theology they merely arrive at different conclusions. Christians and Muslims can coexist because they believe the same books to be revealed by the same God and they believe in the same prophets (i. e. Moses, David etc.). Dr. Alphonse argues a textual commonality between Jews, Christians and Muslims but says that Christians and Jews have deviated from that thus limiting the textual commonality. The issue of love is yet another area Muslims and Christians have in common as both are permitted to lvoe our neighbors as ourselves. Dr. Alphonse says also that Muslims and Christians all have a coomon goal and that with both religions there is a definite beginning and a definite end to the world. The issue of peace is another area Dr. Alphonse uses as his argument for the coexistence of Islam and Christianity.
Dr. Alphonse does state there is much still separating Islam and Christianity even given these similarities. He then goes into a brief explanation of just a few of these barriers. He says the main barrier between Islam and Christianity is the idea the trinity. Muslims see the trinity as being three separate gods rather than one God as the Christians do. Dr. Alphonse argues different names of God would have to refer to different gods. He also argues another barrier between Islam and Christianity is the the claim of a unique revelation. He also accuses Christinaity of major antisemitism against Arabs.

Review of Dr. Ahmed's opening arguments.

Dr. Ahmed begins by breaking the number one rule in public speaking, never apologize for your mistakes. Thus within the first 30 seconds of his presentation he makes it blatantly clear to his audience that he is not prepared to give his presentation and in his own terms "wings it." The only relevant comment Dr. Ahmed makes about Islam and Christianity is his statement that the practices are different. The rest of his presentation he spent establishing commonality with Judaism which was not the question; however, it is to his credit that this part of his presentation was informative albeit not on topic. Dr. Ahmed begins by discussing the origin of the word Islam saying it came from the Arabic word for submission. He also points out that in the Muslim religion to talk about the divine birth is sacrilege. As he walked through the audience he went on to discuss what it would look like to never forget God. After this discussion Dr. Ahmed deals with the issue of Abraham stating that Abraham did not have a wife and a concubine rather that he had two wives. He also makes a bold statement by saying that Hagar, not Sarah, was the ideal wife.

My own personal analyisis and comments:

I haver little in Dr. Alphonse's presentation to criticize his manner was courteous, brief and to the poitn. He dealt with the issue head on and gave a most informative presentation. I completely agree with his statement at the end of his opnening presentation "there is much still separating Christianity from Islam;" however, the point I think he is trying to make is, would it not be better to focus on that which bridges the gap between us rather than focusing on that which widens the gap?
My attack then would lie solely with Dr. Ahmed. First and foremost Dr. Ahmed never actually answered the question of the evening. In fact, he never answered any question. He took 5-10 minutes attempting to answer the question and by the time he was finished the audience completely forgot the question. His speaking manner was extremely accusatory and in fact ridculing to both the Socratic Club and the audience. At one point he made a statement about the list of things expected of him as a speaker saying "I was given a list of dos and donts and decided to just wing it." Saying such he as much as admitted he found the guidlins given him by the Socratic Club to be pointless. Many times in his presentation Dr. Ahmed made statements attesting to the fact that he was unprepared. Therefore, he could not even give the Socratic Club and the audience of the forum the respect of coming with a knowledge of the subject. Given all this it would by my critique that Dr. Ahmed was extremely unprepared, unprofessional, and disrespectful both for the Socratic Club and for the audience of the forum. Any man who hogs the microphone and stiffles any other discussion except that which he leads can be deamed such.

Q&A Session critique's

Many excellent questions were asked and indeed many more could have been asked had Dr. Ahmed simply answered the question in a timely manner and indeed answered the question in the first place. The most interesting of these questions was the question about dhimitudee. It is interesting to not that Dr. Ahmed at first refused to answer except that he then proceeded to spend the next five minutes establishing how Christianity is tolerated by Muslims in this country and in fact all over the world. At one point he gave the example of a Christian, muslim born, well respected woman. What he failed to point however is that this particular woman cannot go back to her home land because she will be killed. He also failed to mention the thousands of Christians that have died by the hand of Islam in Sudan. Does dhimitudee exist? Indeed it doues Dr. Ahmed. In fact I would say to Dr. Ahmed the prime reason Christian is tolerated by Muslims in this country is because we have religious freedom and any attack made on any one person solely on the basis of their religion is deemed a hate crime. It is in fact, a crime.
I next come to the issue of Dr. Ahmed's discussion of the origin of the word Islam. It may very well have come from the Arabic word for submission; however, what Dr. Ahmed neglects to inform his audience is that the muslim idea of submission is not submission at all it is in fact slavery. Muslims live in constant fear of not following the ways of Allah and thus it is no longer submission, but it is in fact slavery.
Dr. Ahmed also makes the bold claim the Muslim religion is not a proselytizing religion. This is absolute nonsense. The only way Dr. Ahmed can make such a claim is if he completely ignores the thousands of years Muslims have threatened to cut off the heads of those who will not convert. How is this not a proselytizing religion?
In closing then I would ask Dr. Ahmed that the next time he gives one of these presentations to be a bit more prepared and do his homework.

How should one read the Bible today?

How we read the Bible today is a controversial issue even within Christianity. This is exactly the topic debated at a recent Oregon State University Socratic Club meeting. Speakers, Dr. Martin Emrich, pastor Westminster Presbyterian Church, and Dr. Susan Shaw, Director of women's studies at Oregon State University, represented two very different opinions on the issue.

Review of Dr. Emrich's opening remarks:

Dr. Emrich opened his presentation with this statement "How we read the Bible depends upon what we think about the Bible." In other words, how we read the Bible depends largely upon our presuppositions. Dr. Emrich went on to explain the key to reading the Bible is allowing the Bible to change said presuppositions. He also pointed out the idea "if the Bible is God’s word, and therefore ultimate truth than we cannot use criteria to determine it’s truthfulness that are outside of the Bible itself because there are no criteria higher or more ultimate than the speech of God." This being the case it is essential for the confessing Christian to submit themselves to life long process of allowing our presuppositions to be changed and thus gain a greater understanding of scripture.

The issue of truth found in scripture became a huge part of the debate. Dr. Emrich stated clearly that truth could be found and truth was indeed found in Scripture. "If truth really is from God then we can’t know it because knowledge is limited to this world, scientific investigation." Regarding the issue of relativity Dr. Emrich said, "if all truth is relative hence no such absolute claim can be advanced, it eventually falls apart." A fact the audience discovered latter in the debate.

Dr. Emrich furthurs his argument in how scripture is to be read by saying "We read the Bible presupposing that God speaks in it. God determines what the book is to mean." However, given the sin nature of mankind it is easy to see how this could be harmed, or distorted. In his closing arugment regarding the issue of the depravity of makind distorting our interpretation of scripture, Dr. Emrich says, "it is through the Holy Spirit we submit our presuppositions."

Review of Dr. Susan Shaw's opening remarks:

Dr. Susan Shaw, director of women's studies at Oregon State made the argument that scripture is simply to be read as any great piece of literature ought to be read. Thus it is no more inspired than say Charlotte Bronte is inspired. She claimed that in reading the Bible one ought not look at the message in each verse but rather the "overaching message, that of God’s love." Thus, it is only the overarching message that is relevant to our time, not the text itself.

Dr. Shaw also deals with the issue of truth in saying "no one man can have the whole truth." In her own interpretation of the Bible she combines three different literary theories, reader-response, deconstruction, and feminism. With the reader-response theory Dr. Shaw claims that it is not the text itself that has meaning, but rather the reader engaging in the act of the reading bringing all of his experiences to the table of interpretation that gives scripture meaning. In a deconstruction/feminist theory of interpretation, Dr. Shaw refuses to take scripture at face value and reads scripture through the eyes of those she feels are "marginalized." Thus, she retells scripture in an effort to meet societal needs. "I work on the text, and the text works on me."

My own analysis of the debate:

Personally I have very little to criticze in Dr. Emrich's presentation. His logic is sound, and so his conclusions. Which brings me to Dr. Shaw's most humorous presentation. Dr. Shaw made several points of a humorous nature throughout her presentation and at one point directly contradicted herself. As Dr. Emrich said early on his presentation "if all truth is relative hence no such absolute claim can be advanced, it eventually falls apart." The evidence of this statement is shown within Dr. Shaw's own statements particularly the statement "no one man can have the whole of truth." Following Dr. Shaw's logic, eventually this statement leads to one of two possible conclusions; either there is some sort of secret knowledge in which man kind can only have part of truth and never actually knows if in fact he has truth. The other possibility is that truth simply does not exist. Where this would fall apart lies in the fact that if in fact truth simply does not exist, then is that statement true? When the question was put to Dr. Shaw she skirted around the issue saying "I don't like to live in such absolutes . . . living in a world of uncertainties is a very comfortable place to be." The problem with Dr. Shaw's perspective is that it complete ignores mankinds need for certainty. Study after study have shown that people, particularly children need routine. This implies that people need certainty. Thus a life of uncertainty is in fact a very uncomfortable place for mankind to be and infact Dr. Shaw directly contradicts herself at the end of her presentation by saying "I like to live in a world of uncertainties, it is a very difficult place to be." Thus, Dr. Emrich's statement that relativity eventually falls apart is proven in Dr. Shaw's statements because eventually a relativist will end up contradicting oneself.

So we see that in a relatvist mindset truth simply does not exist though personally will never admit to that. Thus living in a world of uncertainty is in fact not only uncomfortable it is improbable as well as impractical. Mankind's need for certainty as well as man's understanding of reality keeps relativity thus.

Upon reading Atlas Shrugged

I've been reading Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand lately and went to poetry club today thinking about Dagney Taggert, one of the main characters in the book. I greatly admire Dagney Taggert and while I don't agree with everything she stands for, I hope one day to at least resemble something of her character. So in Stinky Bagels today I wrote a tribute to Dagney Taggert.

Dagney Taggert

She looks out
with the eyes
of her mind.
She is repulsed
mooching,
mooching,
all are
mooching,
competition,
capitalism,
communism,
will not
one man
take
ownership
for the sake
of ownership?
She cries
with the
the eyes
of her mind.

Capital gain,
for the sole purpose
of gain.
For the sake
of what
is mine.
What is so wrong
with that?
She cries
with the eyes
of her mind.

She looks
with the
eyes of
her mind.
She is
repulsed.
Mooching,
Mooching,
All are
mooching.

She shouts
to a world
of moochers
with the
eyes of
her mind,
I AM NOT ONE OF YOU!

Tragedy Twice (Article written for Corban College about Virginia Tech)

32 dead, the deadliest school shooting in American history. Even more deadly than Columbine. My heart is grieved. This is a tragedy, a huge, devestating tragedy.
I was on Facebook shortly after I heard of the incident and came by a group with the intention of offering thoughts and prayers to the folks of Virginia Tech. Yet once again my heart was grieved because no sooner was the group formed than someone began criticizing someone else over a religious disagreement. Here yet once again is a tragedy. Usually religious disputes come about because someone is feeling attacked. Think about this, the folks at Virginia Tech were attacked, physically attacked in a such a horrific manner that we cannot even imagine. Set aside yourself for just one moment and think about the needs of the people at Virginia Tech. These people are hurting, the need to know they are supported. Squabbling over religion is not helping anyone. These people ought to be ministered too, not criticized.
We have all felt the impact of this merciless killing. Imagine for just one minute what it would have been like if this had happened on our small campus of Corban College. It would be devastating, the security felt on this campus absolutely shattered. Now multiply those imaginings ten fold, this is only a sample of what the folks at Virginia Tech must be feeling. Would it not be better to forget about the fact that you are Baptist, Presbyterian, Catholic or Protestant, and do everything in our power to help these people?

Virginia Tech

My heart is so very grieved for the families, faculty, and students of Virginia Tech. When I stop and think about what if this had happened at my small campus of Corban College? It would be devestating, our sense of security absolutely shattered. I can't begin to imagine the grief these people must feel.
I saw a group on Facebook and was once again grieved. A group called "Praying for VA Tech" had good intentions, but no sooner was it formed than a huge religious discussion formed. For just a moment I would ask you to set aside your religious beliefs. Forget about that for just a moment. These people are hurting. They need to be comforted and perhaps, you reaching out to them in love will do more than anything else to bring them to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. However, I would caution you that if you go attempt to help these people with the intent of evangelism it will only scare them off. So for just one moment set aside all other needs and minister to emotional needs. These people have suffered a huge devestating loss. Imagine what it might have looked like if it happened on your campus

Movie Review: Bridge to Terabithia

An old proverb says a rich man has many friends. Friendship is definately the overriding theme in this movie. Based off the book by Katherine Patterson, Disney and Walden Media have given us the tear jerker of the year. When you watch this movie make sure you have a box of kleenexes.

While friendship is by far an overriding theme in the movie there are several underriding themes in the film. One being the use of imagination. Having worked with kids for the last ten years of my life their imagination never ceases to amaze me. I often wish I could have just such an imagination. Something else that came out in the film was how much reality can kill your imagination. I was struck with how much Jesse Aarons, played by Josh Hutcherson, really began to embrace the new world being opened up to him by Leslie Burke, played by AnnaSophia Robb. Two kids, both outcasts strike up an unusual friendship that can literally create new worlds. This is the power of a young imagination.

Another thing that came out during the movie is a discussion between Jess, May Belle (Jess's little sister) and Leslie. "You gotta believe the Bible Leslie, God'll damn everybody to hell if you don't believe the Bible." "How could a God who created all this damn everybody to hell?" I believe Leslie hit the nail on the head so without giving my own dissertation on the meaning, I will let you, my reader, to chew on the meaning, the full meaning and implication, of those words.

Along with good friends in this film you also have bullies. You know the type. The ones that stole your twinkie, rubbed gum in your hair, spit in your face over all made your life hell. Jess has those too, her name is Janice Avery, played by Lauren Clinton. As children you were told to not mind the bullies because bullies are just cowards. This comes out in the film and at several points in the film Jess nearly overcomes his fear of the two eight grade boys that torment him, and his fear of Janice, only to find himself cowaring in the corner. It is only whe Jess faces his fears in his imaginary world that he is able to overcome his fears in reality and maybe even become friends.

Overall a very powerful film. However, this movie is definately on the list of "watch only if you want to cry." I don't normally cry during movies, my eyes were misting on the way out of this film.

Christians and the Lost Art of Being Open Minded

It seems a lot of Christians have a problem, the lack of an open mind. So why is this a problem? It's a problem because for many non-Christians this is the number one thing that turns them off to Christianity. Christians who lack an open mind have made Christianity into a religion of dos and don'ts. These things you can have these things you can't have, these things you can do these things you can't do. This isn't the Christianity I have come to embrace. This is not what Christianity is all about. Christians who lack an open mind are missing out.
For most of the early years of my life I fit into the narrow minded Christian stereotype. If I still felt this way I wouldn't do have of what I am doing now. I would not be Ballroom Dancing, playing Dungeons and Dragons, and in general have non-Christian friends. This is why I am saying Christians who live in the Christian bubble are missing out.
Granted there are somethings in the world that are damaging not only to one's spiritual life, but also to one's health. I am not saying to run into everything the world has to offer with open arms. What I am saying is, it can't hurt to keep an open mind about the things the world offer that can be good and beneficial to us. Remember, the world was created by God. Once upon a time the world was good. Granted Adam and Eve screwed that up for the rest of us, but that doesn't mean we need to go around the world with spiritual gas masks. It simply means we need to be careful about what is in the world.
As Christians we are called to be IN the world but not OF the world. Many Christians are not even in the world. They are part of their own subculture. This is wrong, and it is not what we are called to do. True we are also called to be set apart, but there is a big difference between being set apart and being completely apart and so wrapped up in Christianity we fail to recognize the other members of the world even exist. And so, people like me, who are too liberal for Christians and too conservative for non-Christians are left trying to figure out to which group they belong. Is there ever a point at which you can be neither Conservative nor liberal?

The Art of Speaking Christianese

There have been a few times in my life when I've run into people who, whenever they open their mouths I cringe. They think they have it all figured out. All you have to do is pray more, be in the word more, fellowship with other believers more. To these kinds of people Christianity is a religion about more, doing something more, and then making it sound good. "Well, all you have to do is go to your knees." While these things may be true, when you're in a group of Christians, it's preaching to the choir. These kinds of people are only talking to hear themselves talk. Most of the time, these people are hypocrites. When these people open their mouths, my brain turns off. You know the type, they speak a lot christianese.
I have no problems with making your faith known, however there is a big difference between making your faith known, and beating someone over the head with it. People who preach, need to save it for the pulpit. I'm sorry to be so harsh, but I've seen a lot of people who preach and most of the time they have a holier than thou attitude and can't live up to their own standards. I guess what I'm trying to say is two fold. First, think before you speak, it could go miles. Second, Christianity is not a religion of more, it is a religion of faith. We know that, I'm not sure we need to have it beaten over our heads.

Movie Review: 300

Freedom, Valor, Honor. These three things define the Spartans, any Spartan would gladly give his life for anyone of these three qualities. According to legend, this is what happened at Thermopylae. I won't give the battle completely away as the history behind the legend is basically the plot of the movie. However, a brief synopisis can be given thus; in 480 BC, or there abouts, Persian armies, thinking themselves immortal wished to bring Sparta under their tyrantial rule thus enslaving Sparta's people and forcing Sparta's king, Leonidas to bow to Xerxes. Not happening, Leonidas basically throws it into Xerxes' face.

Now, set aside for a moment the fact the movie was based on a Frank Miller graphic novel and the fact that it came from the makers of Sin City. Also set aside the fact the violence made We Were Soldiers and Saving Private Ryan look like a walk in the park and the gratuitous sex was completely unnecessary. Setting aside all those issues, the movie was worth seeing because it deals with a number of different issues and the rhetoric within the film is outstanding.

The first issue to approach the viewer in the movie is the issue of the status of women. It become obvious from the beginning that Leonidas loves his queen very much, and values her opinion equally as much regardless of the opinions of others. This comes particularly in two scenes. One in which the king throws the messengers of king Xexeres into a pit for insulting his queen and threatening to enslave Sparta. The other scene is toward the end of the movie, unfortunately I cannot give this portion away as I will be revealing part of the plot.

A second issue that is dealt with is the issue of deformed humans. In Sparta a deformed baby would have been discarded as they would likely not be fit to fight. At one point a deformed man whose parents couldn't stand to see him discarded. This man is severely deformend and Leonidas is kind and compassionate to him, but does not give what he wants telling him that a weak leak within the system will destroy the whole system. Unfortunately the deformed man does not take it very well.

The third issues are actually four fold, honor, glory, victory, and freedom. As metnioned the movie is placed in a must see category simply for it's rhetoric on freedom. What is freedom? Why are we free? What does it mean to be free? These are all questions asked within the film. Perhaps these are questions we should be asking ourselves today. "The price of freedom is very high, it is the price of blood." - Queen of Sparta.

Couples Only

"This one's for all the couples out there,
that should be everyone here!"
The DJ called.
Couples only,
singles out.

"No it's not everyone!"
cried my soul.
Couples only,
singles out.

Walking around the room
bright flashes
capture smiles
on the faces
couples only,
singles out.

Two hearts glowing,
One heart dimming.
Couples only,
Singles out.

Two hearts hopeful,
one heart quickly
loses all hope.
Couples only,
Singles out.

Here, have a date.
Reality? He's just
another single,
who could
have been
couples only,
singles out.

O, brother,
where art thou?
My ready made date.
At least then
I might
have had
someone.
Couples only,
Singles out.

Never assume,
the whole world
is coupled,
with someone else.
All it achieves,
is couples only,
singles out.

The Fine Line

I'm talking about girls here for the moment, but guys your input here would be much appreciated as well. I am currently extremely frustrated with the love game. It seems to me, and guys correct me if I'm wrong, that the whole deal is slightly easier for guys, if you like a girl you ask her out, if not you move on. For a girl, it's what I like to call the donkey syndrome. If you jump high enough, and long enough, and be sure to yell "pick me, pick me' over and over the guy may actually turn around and decide to notice you.
However if a girl likes a guy it is somehow not socially acceptable to walk right up and tell him so. So at what point is a girl supposed to make herself known to the guy, and at what point is she throwing herself at the guy? No girl wants to throw herself at a guy, that's just not a good situation, but I don't know if any girl wants to sit around and wait for some guy to notice her anyway. I'm just not sure at what point it gets less frustrating for women. Perhaps this is because I come from the old school of thinking that it ought to be the guy's responsibility to ask a girl out, but I'm not willing to budge on this one. So with that said, what's a girl to do?

What is the heart of Christianity?

This was the title of a recent socratic club debate I went to between Dr.'s Gary Ferngren and Marcus Borg. Both professors at Oregon State University.

Dr. Ferngren, arguing for traditional evangelical Christianity, argued five major points make up the heart of Christianity. These points are: A diagnosis of what is wrong with the world: sin, The story of God’s love and his provision for the human race, The confession that Jesus Christ is the son of God and savior of the world, a promise that there is life after death, Christianity is a living faith that speaks to our hearts as well as our heads.

Dr. Borg, arguing as a member of the Jesus Seminar for the historical Jesus point of view argued that at the core of what he calls Christianity lie three basic premises: At the heart of Christianity is a robust affirmation of the reality of God, the reality of the sacred, the reality of the spirit. At the heart of Christianity lies the Bible and Jesus, these are the two primary sources of revelation for Christians, simply disclosure or epiphany of the sacred. At the heart of Christianity is following Jesus. Finally, at the heart of Christianity is the transformation of the heart.

On the outset Dr. Borg's arguments look all well and good, it isn't until the question and answer session that Dr. Borg's true beliefs came out. In the debate Dr. Borg made it clear that he did not take the bible literally. When asked abou the experiences of the apostles after Jesus rose from the dead he said, "I think some of the followers of Jesus had experiences of him after his death. Some of these experiences were visual, visions – seeing the form of Jesus, some experiences were similar to Paul’s." In other words, Dr. Borg believes when Jesus died, he really died, no resurrection involved whatsoever. Therefore, the apostles affirmation that Jesus did in fact rise from the dead Dr. Borg says is nothing more than visions, experiential claims.

These are not the whole of what Dr. Borg has rejected in the Bible. Dr. Borg went on in another question to say that all religions will eventually lead to heaven. "I have no interest in making a claim that Christianity is superior to all other religions. All religions are legitimate paths of transformation and transformation and salvation are synonymous terms." The huge problem with this statement lies in the fact scripture very clearly states "I am the Way the Truth and the Life, no man comes to the father except through me." Jesus very clearly says he is the only way to heaven. There are no other options.

Dr. Borg goes on further to completely deny the intervention of God in the world. What Dr. Borg deals with here is the problem of miracles. I have invested interest in this particular debate as I have experienced miraculous healing. Dr. Borg says that the supernatural things that do occur in the world are nothing more than coincedences saying "it's not a matter of what God can do, it's a matter of what God does do." In otherwords, Dr. Borg has come up against an issue he can't explain, so what does he do with it? Dr. Borg completely denies it's existence.

What Dr. Borg has done is chosen the things in Christianity he can explain, and completely thrown out the things he can't. What you get is something other than Christianity, what you get is pane theism. The notion that an omnipresent God is every where, in everything. The difference between this and pantheism is very slight, in pantheism it is nature that is in and through everything. Therefore I think it is safe to say that Dr. Borg reduces Christianity down to a feel good religion, it's all about loving people for Dr. Borg. As far as jesus goes, he reduces Jesus Christ to nothing more than a political revolutionary. Finally, as far as the religion itself goes Dr. Borg picks and chooses so much that it's difficult to see Christianity in the religion Dr. Borg has created.

Follow up to emotions

Previously I wrote a blog wondering what the purpose of emotions was. I think I may have an answer to that. Emotions are what makes man human. God himself has emotions, we see this many times in scripture where the motions of God are described. We, humans, are made in the image of God, Genesis affirms this fact. As image bearers man therefore feels emotions. Without these emotions, man would not be man, man would be simply a robot, going through the motions of life. Without emotions man would not be able to love, laugh, to cry, to feel sorrow. I relate to the movie Equilibrium because in many ways I feel like the main character, John Preston. In the movie, Preston relearns feelings, using the senses, relearns passion. I relate to this because in many ways I feel as though I have my own difficulties with passionate emotions. I know this sounds trite, but these emotions are what bring us closer to God. Without emotions, we could have no knowledge of the cross. There would be no passion without these emotions. In short, emotions can aid in the chief end of man. The Westminster Shorter Catechism says the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever, without emotions glorifying God and enjoying him forever would be impossible.
P. S. While you're at it you should go to www.scificatholic.com and check out the review I posted of the movie Equilibrium.

Thoughts on Single Awareness Day

So after posting something about Valentine's Day and having many people tell me Happy Single Awareness Day I decided to post something about Single Awareness Day. I have several problems with SAD. My biggest problem with having a Single Awareness Day is stated in the name itself. Every single that I know is fully aware of the fact that they are indeed single. As a friend of mine said it is simply an attempt on the part of the greeting card industry to make singles everywhere feel good about themselves. Most singles I know already feel pretty good about themselves and really don't need a day set aside to remember that they are singles.
Seriously now, if you think about it the fact our society needs a day set aside for the sole purpose of showing love and appreciation to someone is pretty sad. However, if we need a day in which we acknowledge our peers who are not in a relationship, that's equally sad. I seriously wonder how much the world would be turned around if we simply looked arund and showed support for someone we normally wouldn't do that for.
Think about the famous holidays that don't have a religious connotation to them, President's Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Veteran's Day, they all commemorate something. President's Day, commemorating George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr. Day - that's obvious. Verteran's Day, the soldiers who have fought and died for this country. What is it that Valentine's day commemorates? Initially it was supposed to commemorate a reverred Saint, but the greeting card industry, and our over sexed society have made it into a holiday commemorating love. Not phileo love, the kind of love C. S. Lewis says is between friends, but eros love, romantic love, love that our culture has made synonymous with sex. This is perhaps the main reason I am so against Valentine's Day. It no longer commemorates love, it is supposed to, but that's not what it has become. It has become a means of celebrating sex, and I will not comemmorate something a promiscuous society says I should support. Rather I would support a day dedicated to making those in our lives who don't normally feel it, feel appreciated.

Valentine's Day

How come on a Holiday when we're supposed to honor a revered saint it becomes an excuse for an already sex crazed culture to delve further into their sex crazed addiction? Seriously, personally I hate Valentine's Day. It has become a good excuse for couples to rub every single person's face in the fact that they are single. When did Valentine's Day start being about relationships and not about loving other people? I wonder what would happen if our culture actually started to love, and by love I don't mean mushy love, I mean care for the other person love, the other person.
You can say I'm just bitter because I don't have a boyfriend or whatever and you'd be partially correct. But that still does not give you the right to rub your boyfriend in my face. I am so tired of everyone else around me getting acknowledged because they are beautiful, or whatever and I get the leftovers. What about taking the time to acknowledge the girl sitting right next to you with downcast eyes? If Valentine's day is truly about making someone feel special, what about taking the opportunity to make someone you see everyday, but don't acknowledge feel special?
Growing up if I was invited to a Valentine's day party, my mom used to make me give Valentine's to everyone at the party, not just the people I liked. I wonder how we would turn the world around if we started doing something like this. What I mean is go out of your way to acknowledge a person you don't usually acknowledge. Not just an acknowledgement of who they are, or the fact that they're human, but an acknolwedgement of the fact that they are human with a need to feel special. If more people actually took time out to make another human feel special, I wonder where that would take our culture.

Poem from Pen and Chalice (poetry group at school)

URBANA with Grandpa

People here, people there
people everywhere you see.
Hold tight the hand of granda,
best not to lose the way
weaving in and out
of the clamorouing sea.
"Look grandpa,
look at all the people!"
Twenty two, but still the thought
of grandpa send me back
to childhood again.

Starting to stress
so many people,
such a big place,
so easy to stress.

Stop in the middle
of the crowd,
take in a breath,
take in the moment.
Grandpa there,
in the middle
of the clamoring sea,
set on stool,
twinkle in eye,
sax in hand,
notes of The Old Rugged Cross
in the air.

Starving Children: Thoughts from URBANA

Growing up my sister used to use the age old "there are starving children in Africa who would kill to eat some of what you just left on your plate." "That's nice, they're over there and I'm here" I responded. While that may be true, the whole force of the situation in Africa came home for me at URBANA.
Cheers greeted us as we entered the line to get our bowl of porridge. I looked down at the unappetizing dish and told myself to enjoy it. "Think of it as watered down cream of wheat" I thought. I gagged after the third bite. Looking around I began to chuckle a bit just watching the different ways people ate this soy and corn based dish.
Some people ate quickly, so as to get it over with. Others, ate slowly dreading every bite. Some cleaned theirs bowls, claiming they liked it (personally I think they're insane), others left significant portions in their bowls.
Many thought flowed through my mind with every gagging bite. I thought about Oliver Twist "please sir, I want some more." His need must have been pretty bad for him to want more of something I found so repulsive.
More thoughts ran through my brain, "Even we have it better than they do" I thought. With the unappetizing meal we were given three packets of sugar, and a bottle of purified water.
Later that night as my stomach hurt from lack of food, and I nearly passed out from lack of protein I thought "I hope my need never gets that bad." I don't think I will ever be ambivolent toward the situation in Africa again.

Defying Stereotypes

Most of you guys have figured out by now that one of my pet peeves is stereotyping. I can't stand it. It confines people to this little tiny box where they don't belong. One of the reasons I can't stand it is it happens to me more times than I care to count. Think about how many times a day you stereotype people. 'Well that's just cause you're a college kid." "That's just cause you're a pastor's kid." "That's just cause you're female." My personal favorite, "That's just cause you go to a Christian college." How many times in the course of a day have you said something like that?
You may not believe it, but it's hurtful. I get extremely annoyed when people put me into a box. I realize this happens everyday and so I try deal with it and move on with life. However, there are a few stereotypes that really get me. Like the Christian college stereotype. Yes, I go to a Christian college, and I AM PROUD OF IT!! If you have a problem with that take it up with someone else.
What irritates me about being put in the Christian college box is that it makes me feel like I have to apologize for where I go to school. It's gotten to the point where I'm almost ashamed to tell people I go to a Christian college cause they look at me like "you're one of those . . ." I have news for you, I'm not one of those. I am a Christian yes, and I am proud of that, but furthermore I am Christian and I am HUMAN!!
Just because I go to a Christian college doesn't mean I don't make mistakes, trust me I make them, oh how I make them. Along the same score just because it's a Christian college doesn't make them perfect. Christian colleges have problems too.
I try very hard to not stay within the Corban bubble. By that I mean, live on campus, work on campus, eat on campus, sleep on campus etc. Once a week I go to OSU to go dancing, the reason for that is first of all I love to dance, but more importantly it gets me off campus and around non-Christians. People who will actually make me use my brain and make me back up what I believe. I also work off campus, I work in a library at an elementary school. Each of these things provides me with an opportunity to see another part of the world. The non-Corban side of the world.
I may be a Corban student yes, but I am not whatever stereotype you think I am. More importantly, I do not try to condemn you for going to a secular university. I may get in your face about whether or not you're involved in a bible study, but I will not condemn you for not going to a Christian college. So why should you condemn me for going to one? Remember, Christ said judge not lest you be judged. Don't judge me because I go to a Christian college, I'm tired of it. Besides, is there really such a thing as stereotypical?

Confessions: Thoughts from URBANA

Close your eyes and imagine for a moment a room filled with 22,000 students and pastors from140 different countries worshipping together in at least five different languages. Sponsored by InterVarsity Christian Fellowship and held in the Edward Jones Dome in St. Louis, MO this was URBANA. Much more than a missions conference, URBANA provided opportunities to hear speakers on subjects ranging from AIDS awareness to racial reconciliation. Though these topics were a huge focus of URBANA, a side focus was the prayer ministry. Unknown to me, God started me on a journey of confession at just such a prayer ministry.

As I walked into one of the prayer ministries I thought, “What am I doing here? If I stay here I will be admitting to myself, God and everyone else in this room that I have a problem.”

Looking around at over a hundred students in the room I could feel my legs growing weak. I must have walked in and out of the room at least five times. Each time I walked out I stared at the sign “Prayer ministry.”

Finally I walked back into the room and sat down. A cute young woman in her early 20s got up and began to speak in a high pitched tone and giggling after every word.

“Oh great,” I thought “We’re going to be exhorted by this cute little chickie who’s barely experienced anything of life on how we all need to pray more.”

My brain immediately started shutting down as I slouched down and prepared myself for the worst. I realized the blond was only introducing the speaker as to my surprise, a middle aged woman who looked like she’d seen much more of life than the previous speaker got up and began to speak. An Indonesian woman, she spoke on the necessity of confessing ones sins as well as the need to forgive one’s self for those sins.

This woman spoke from her heart, as if she knew everything to say that would sear my conscience. Image after image of past wrongs, formed in my mind. After she spoke, an older man got up to speak -- same topic but a little different twist. Again I could feel myself tuning out what I perceived as a holier-than-thou attitude. However, as he spoke I could feel something happening in my mind and in my heart. While he may have had a pietist attitude, I realized God was still using him to get through to me.

When both speakers finished the Indonesian woman got up again and said “Now that we have shared with you our stories, we open this time for a confession of sins. Prayer ministry volunteers are standing, waiting to help you if you need to confess to someone.” Tears began to stream down my face.

Immediately 1 John 1:9 came to mind, a verse I had learned in childhood “Confess your sins and He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” I had been taught that this verse deals with Christ’s initial forgiveness of sins, but upon closer examination, I realized this verse was talking the cleansing process that takes place after salvation.
I sought out one of the prayer ministry workers and as I began to confess my own sins tears flowed freely from my eyes. Things that I had stuffed down for years I now confessed verbally to a prayer ministry worker. As each sin was confessed the image of the cross stood in it’s place. No longer did I need to hide from past wrongs because God has forgiven every wrong committed both past and present.

Worship: What are you bringing to the table? Thoughts from URBANA

At first I couldn't help but compare URBANA to other conferences I'd been to. Bear in mind that most of these conferences were homeschool conferences. So as you looked out over the crowd everyone looked just like everyone else. Ladies wore their long navy blue skirst without slits, and guys wore their navy suits and white shirts and a tie. Homeschool mom's had their denim jumpers and all their little girls dressed alike. Homeschool dad's looked just like their older sons in their own navy blue suits. The goal was to fit in, to conform, to not stick out, to look just like everybody else. As you looked out over the crowd the only thing that really did stand out was the fact that it was predominantly white. Maybe a few scattered African American families, but for the most part predominantly white. As far as worship goes, forget clap happy shake your booty songs, it was all hymns with no room for anything else.
As far as the sessions went, you could skip a session but you were made to feel like a realy jerk if you did. So you ended up making a concerted effort to kill yourself trying to keep up with the day. If you missed a session, you apparently weren't spiritual enough and thus ostracized.
Now compare this with URBANA. I was amazed at how different people at URBANA were. At URBANA there were people from 140 different nations. Africans, Americans, Australians, Canadians. There was no majority in this crowd. It didn't matter where you were from, you were all brothers and sisters in Christ. We sang songs in Haitian Creol, in Spanish, in Korean, and in English and that's just what I remember. As I looked over the crowd I realized that everyone was different. Replace the navy blue skirts with all different types of attire. No longer was it one set dress code because we are all different.
In the same manner styles of worship were different. I began the week very critical of the styles of worship around me. I saw it as being performanced base and too showy. I realized as the week wore on and God set me free from things in my life that were weighing me down that worship wasn't about what I thought of people. In fact, worship wasn't about me at all. Worship is about what I bring to the table to glorify God. The Westminster shorter catechism says that the cheif end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever. One of the ways we do that is through worship. I realized that in looking around at everyone else and criticizing their style of worship, I was not glorifying God. Rather I was glorifying myself. While it is true that some clap happy, shake your booty songs leave something to be desired in worship, think about what you're bringing to the table to glorify God. Because that's what counts. It's not how much you look just like the next guy, it's how much your individual style of worship is glorifiying to God because worship isn't about you, it's about the glorification of a truly awesome God.

Grand URBANA Adventure Day Five

Rose at 6:45AM and went down for breakfast again consisting of donuts, mffins and coffee. I grabbed what's becoming my usual cup of coffee with cream and sugar, a donut and sat down. I sat with a guy named Smiley Adams from Jackson, MI. This was way cool because my church did a missions trip to Jackson, MI. As it happens, it is the very church that Smiley Adams attends. It's a small world. We discussed how a predominately white school such as mine cross cultural lines. It was really cool to hear what God has been doing in Jackson since my church was there. We exchanged emails then parted ways.
After joining up with the rest of the group I again skipped out on the morning Bible study to get breakfast. Some of you have been wondering why this has been my habit. First, get up earlier would mean getting up at 5:30 in the morning to get my breakfast, not happening. Second there are no restaraunts where I can get something cheap around our hotel. Thirdly mass transportation leaves at 7:30 and that's the only chance you have to get to the convention center. Lastly, I get more out of my personal inductive Bible Study than I got out of a Bible study with 200 or more people where we were only allowed about five minutes to spend on observations. So while the rest were doing their bible studies, I did my own. Have no fear for my spiritual halth. Also, Ajith Fernando's teaching was absolutely incredible and as good or better than any large group study any day.
After standing in line for an hour and a half at Quizno's to get my lunch, I wandered around Connexions, where all the missions exhibotrs were, and the bookstore. I turned in my five dollar coupon for a copy of Why the Rest Hates the West. I am very excited to start reading this epecially after taking Middle East history last semester.
From there I went to a seminar entitled Artist Transforming Culture. This was by far the most interesting seminar I had been to. The speaker spoke on God's desire to bring color into the world and the responsibility Christian Artists have to bring do just that.
From there I met up with Stuart for dinner and we went to the main session. A woman attempted to give a summary of Ephesians and spoke of the necessity of finding your purpose. The next speaker was Terrence Nichols who was by far the best evening speaker we'd had all week. His statement "God has a desire to use you in spite of your past had a huge impact on me." Everytime I think of all that God has forgiven me, and the fact that I have been forgiven, it brings a smile to my face. Well my flight is about leave and I am returning home. Rest assured that I will have more blogs on my thoughts from URBANA. Thank you all so much for your prayers while I have been at URBANA.