Still getting through "Decoding the Universe". Tom Hanks said it best in "A League of Their Own"; "the hard is what makes it great." This is no easy book to grasp.
Finished "Professor and the Madman". Amazing story, all the more so for being a true story. I spent the entire book saying to friends and family "they should make a movie out of this" only to discover, yesterday, that they plan to.
"The Ongoing Moment" has been set down for the moment. I realized that the nature of the book allows for, and even invites, this. So, I'll be picking it up here and there. Very enjoyable.
"Exiles" is excellent. It's time for Christians to stop fighting for their rights and modeling their lives on the one who "being in very nature, God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped." Stop trying to be so powerful. Jesus never tried to be. Instead, speak truth to power and live within the power and love of God.
Finished "Miss Lonelyhearts". If you like Fitzgerald and haven't read West, pick this up.
Read "The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner", a collection of short stories by Allan Stillitoe (Sillitoe?). So good, I can't even describe it. I'm recommending this to Wellington as thanks for his recommendations to me.
Reading the advanced reader of the upcoming Michael Chabon novel "The Yiddish Policeman's Union". His best yet. And that's saying something.
Listening to The Arcade Fire and Ted Leo and Magnetic Fields. How did I miss how good "69 Love Songs" is? I'm picking this up asap.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Thursday, March 29, 2007
My co-workers are hilarious
This is just one recent example:
Salvador works as our consignment buyer, which means that any book that is self-published has to go through him for approval. Recently, he approved one titled "How To Talk To Christians" and was getting ready to shelve copies of the book. Another co-worker, Paul, asked him "Salvador, what section should these go in?"
Without missing a beat, Salvador smiled and said, "Foreign language."
I don't care who you are or what you believe, that's funny.
Salvador works as our consignment buyer, which means that any book that is self-published has to go through him for approval. Recently, he approved one titled "How To Talk To Christians" and was getting ready to shelve copies of the book. Another co-worker, Paul, asked him "Salvador, what section should these go in?"
Without missing a beat, Salvador smiled and said, "Foreign language."
I don't care who you are or what you believe, that's funny.
A Quick Note on Previous Entries
I have already written a blog on the church and homosexuality and the church and state. I feel the need to make a quick comment concerning the bringing together of all three.
While I don't believe that people should engage in homosexual relationships, I think how much the church has to say about it should stop at the voting booth. If I think racism is wrong (and I do) it doesn't mean I think racists shouldn't be granted a marriage license. Even though that means that they might have kids and raise them to think racism is ok and so on.
The church can make it's own decisions about who it wants to marry. The state should grant equal rights to all its citizens.
While I don't believe that people should engage in homosexual relationships, I think how much the church has to say about it should stop at the voting booth. If I think racism is wrong (and I do) it doesn't mean I think racists shouldn't be granted a marriage license. Even though that means that they might have kids and raise them to think racism is ok and so on.
The church can make it's own decisions about who it wants to marry. The state should grant equal rights to all its citizens.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Reading more than listening
Yes, I usually make this an every Friday thing, but I've jumped ahead on my reading. Not just because a few of my most recent selections were shorter (though that helps), but because I tripped down the stairs two nights ago and have been convalescing. Reading is about all I can do.
I finished "What Jesus Meant" and found it very rewarding, enjoyable, and enlightening. I look forward to reading Willis' follow up, "What Paul Meant".
I also finished "Envy". I won't say that Sweeney steered me wrong, but I didn't love it. It reminded me of other brilliant writers that I don't enjoy, in particular Henry Miller. The premise works, but quickly turns into a series of fever dreams that may or may not have happened and to no great consequence. Call me old fashioned, but I tend to like a plot, even if it is just a brother and sister having a conversation.
"Decoding The Universe" is slow going, but fascinating.
"Professor and the Madman" is speeding by, and also fascinating.
"The Ongoing Moment" is equally fascinating, and has no particular speed.
I have picked up two more books, both of which I am enjoying a great deal:
"Exiles" is written by Michael Frost, and is a call to Christians to embrace the end of Christendom as an opportunity to live as the rabble rousers Christ called us to be. It is a reminder that we weren't meant to align with the power brokers of this day or any other, but to seek out the marginalized and show them the love of God.
"Miss Lonelyhearts" is written by Nathanael West, the man who might have been F Scott Fitzgerald if he hadn't died so young and written so little. "The Day of the Locust" is his classic work, but "Miss Lonleyhearts" is equally excellent.
I finished "What Jesus Meant" and found it very rewarding, enjoyable, and enlightening. I look forward to reading Willis' follow up, "What Paul Meant".
I also finished "Envy". I won't say that Sweeney steered me wrong, but I didn't love it. It reminded me of other brilliant writers that I don't enjoy, in particular Henry Miller. The premise works, but quickly turns into a series of fever dreams that may or may not have happened and to no great consequence. Call me old fashioned, but I tend to like a plot, even if it is just a brother and sister having a conversation.
"Decoding The Universe" is slow going, but fascinating.
"Professor and the Madman" is speeding by, and also fascinating.
"The Ongoing Moment" is equally fascinating, and has no particular speed.
I have picked up two more books, both of which I am enjoying a great deal:
"Exiles" is written by Michael Frost, and is a call to Christians to embrace the end of Christendom as an opportunity to live as the rabble rousers Christ called us to be. It is a reminder that we weren't meant to align with the power brokers of this day or any other, but to seek out the marginalized and show them the love of God.
"Miss Lonelyhearts" is written by Nathanael West, the man who might have been F Scott Fitzgerald if he hadn't died so young and written so little. "The Day of the Locust" is his classic work, but "Miss Lonleyhearts" is equally excellent.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Ignore What The Signs Say: The Church and Homosexuality
The church is homophobic.
This may be THE hot issue of the six listed. Given that, I will promise to proceed carefully and thoughtfully, and you will promise to give me the benefit of the doubt in any areas that might be confusing.
First, a definition of “homophobic”. Webster’s defines homophobic as “prejudiced against homosexual people.”
By that definition, I would say that both Jesus Christ and biblical teaching are opposed to prejudice against any group of people. So, there’s a few directions that takes us.
First, an acknowledgement that the church, in small and large part (given the time and place in history), has not always followed Jesus Christ and biblical teaching. The Crusades are an excellent example of something the church got behind that I feel confident in saying Jesus would not have.
What that means is that members of the church (Christians) have harbored (and do harbor) prejudices against people based on ethnicity, religion, etc. This doesn’t mean that they should (in fact, as I’ve just stated, I believe Jesus teaches that they shouldn’t), but that they do.
Second, a realization that the concern in the statement “the church is homophobic” isn’t simply about certain members who might be, but that all members might be required to be. In other words, people may feel that they need to stay away from the church, because the teachings of the church and of the Bible are homophobic.
This is not true. Many churches understand that they are meant to show Jesus’ love to everyone, and live according to that understanding.
Here’s where this gets tricky. Many churches and many Christians (myself included) would make a distinction between a homosexual preference and homosexual activity.
I can already feel this breaking down as I write it, and it makes me want to stop. Instead, we trudge forward and give each other some grace.
I don’t mean to speak in terms that sound detached or cold, but this needs to be nuanced in order to be understood. Stanley Hauerwas once stated that “no normal person can be heterosexual or homosexual for more than 3 or 4 hours a week and still hold down a job.” His point was that our sexuality isn’t meant to define us so completely. I am much more often a husband and a father and an employee and so on, than I am a heterosexual. The conversation can get (and has gotten) confusing when we make our identity about our sexuality.
This is not to say that we are meant to be Gnostics or that sex is bad or that God only created it so that we’d go through the rather dreary work of making babies. If you’ll note a previous blog post of mine, you’ll find that I think sex is rather fantastic, all the more so because I am a Christian. What I am saying is that, practically speaking, sex is about action more than it is about overall identity.
This is important to note, because of a rather unpopular Biblical teaching, that homosexual practice is a sin.
A few things, before we go any further.
1) Not all Christians believe that homosexual practice is a sin or that the Bible teaches that it is. See my former blog for more on the difficulties of Biblical translation.
2) I am one of those Christians who does believe the Bible teaches that homosexual practice is a sin.
3) Many Christians make homosexual practice into a greater sin than greed or pride or even pre-marital or extra-marital heterosexual practice.
4) I am not one of those Christians.
5) Too many Christians make their beliefs about homosexual practice into a prejudice and hatred toward homosexual people.
6) I am not one of those Christians, and believe that hatred toward any people is a sin. If we were ranking sins, I’d certainly rank hate a bigger sin than homosexual practice.
What Jesus did teach (though not using this phrasing exactly) was to “love the sinner and hate the sin.” I hate the sin of lying, but I don’t hate liars. I hate the sin of pride, but I don’t hate the prideful. I hate the sin of greed, but I don’t hate the greedy. I hate sexual sin, but I don't hate those who engage in it.
But too often, too many Christians find that they’d rather not parse that out. So they just hate it all, the sinner and the sin. They carry signs at funerals that read “God hates fags.” Nothing could be less Christian, nothing could be less like Jesus. If you’re wondering “what would Jesus do” that isn’t it.
Some would (and will and do) say that simply naming homosexual practice as a sin IS an act of prejudice and hate, that you can’t love the sinner and hate the sin, because calling this sin IS an act of hate.
Obviously, I don’t agree. And I hope those who know me know that I don’t hate homosexuals. That’s all I’m going to say about that, not because it isn’t important, but because this isn’t meant to be a “but I have gay friends” defense. I do, and I hope they know I love them.
The fact is that the Bible does speak pretty clearly about this. There are other issues (see my next blog post on women in the church) where what the Bible seems to say and actually says can be different (not everyone would agree with me about that), but I don’t believe (after much careful study) that this is one of them (not everyone would agree with me about that either).
What I would say to those who say that the church is homophobic is this:
1) The church isn’t taught to show hatred toward any person. In doing so, they are not acting as the church
2) The church does believe the Bible is a story about who God is and what He is about, about what His desires are and how we can live in better relationship with Him
3) The Bible states clearly that our pursuit of sin makes our pursuit of God more difficult
4) The Bible states that homosexual practice is sin
5) Good, faithful, Christian people have read the same Bible and disagree with me on #4
6) Which means I could be wrong
I don’t say “I could be wrong” as a postmodern cop out or because I am shaky on my beliefs. But to approach an issue as hot as this with any humility is to understand that you could be wrong. To understand that we’ve been wrong before on slavery and on women and on racism. I don’t believe that this is the same, but I’m willing to hear from those who do. Because I could be wrong. And if I am, I don’t want to be.
I hope this sheds some light on a hot topic. Our churches are meant to be places where people can feel a sense of belonging and security. Anyone made to feel less than that because of what they do (even if it is a sin) isn’t experiencing what the church ought to be. We may challenge each other and even call each other’s actions as sin, but we must do so in the same spirit of love that Jesus did. We must do so with a consistent approach to sin (not just sexual sin or homosexual sin) and a consistent love towards sinners (not just the sinners whose particular sin happens to be the same as ours).
When the teachers of the law brought to Jesus a woman who had committed adultery, he had two things to say to her; “I do not condemn you” and “go and sin no more”. He showed her love and called her out of sin. The church can do no less and no more.
This may be THE hot issue of the six listed. Given that, I will promise to proceed carefully and thoughtfully, and you will promise to give me the benefit of the doubt in any areas that might be confusing.
First, a definition of “homophobic”. Webster’s defines homophobic as “prejudiced against homosexual people.”
By that definition, I would say that both Jesus Christ and biblical teaching are opposed to prejudice against any group of people. So, there’s a few directions that takes us.
First, an acknowledgement that the church, in small and large part (given the time and place in history), has not always followed Jesus Christ and biblical teaching. The Crusades are an excellent example of something the church got behind that I feel confident in saying Jesus would not have.
What that means is that members of the church (Christians) have harbored (and do harbor) prejudices against people based on ethnicity, religion, etc. This doesn’t mean that they should (in fact, as I’ve just stated, I believe Jesus teaches that they shouldn’t), but that they do.
Second, a realization that the concern in the statement “the church is homophobic” isn’t simply about certain members who might be, but that all members might be required to be. In other words, people may feel that they need to stay away from the church, because the teachings of the church and of the Bible are homophobic.
This is not true. Many churches understand that they are meant to show Jesus’ love to everyone, and live according to that understanding.
Here’s where this gets tricky. Many churches and many Christians (myself included) would make a distinction between a homosexual preference and homosexual activity.
I can already feel this breaking down as I write it, and it makes me want to stop. Instead, we trudge forward and give each other some grace.
I don’t mean to speak in terms that sound detached or cold, but this needs to be nuanced in order to be understood. Stanley Hauerwas once stated that “no normal person can be heterosexual or homosexual for more than 3 or 4 hours a week and still hold down a job.” His point was that our sexuality isn’t meant to define us so completely. I am much more often a husband and a father and an employee and so on, than I am a heterosexual. The conversation can get (and has gotten) confusing when we make our identity about our sexuality.
This is not to say that we are meant to be Gnostics or that sex is bad or that God only created it so that we’d go through the rather dreary work of making babies. If you’ll note a previous blog post of mine, you’ll find that I think sex is rather fantastic, all the more so because I am a Christian. What I am saying is that, practically speaking, sex is about action more than it is about overall identity.
This is important to note, because of a rather unpopular Biblical teaching, that homosexual practice is a sin.
A few things, before we go any further.
1) Not all Christians believe that homosexual practice is a sin or that the Bible teaches that it is. See my former blog for more on the difficulties of Biblical translation.
2) I am one of those Christians who does believe the Bible teaches that homosexual practice is a sin.
3) Many Christians make homosexual practice into a greater sin than greed or pride or even pre-marital or extra-marital heterosexual practice.
4) I am not one of those Christians.
5) Too many Christians make their beliefs about homosexual practice into a prejudice and hatred toward homosexual people.
6) I am not one of those Christians, and believe that hatred toward any people is a sin. If we were ranking sins, I’d certainly rank hate a bigger sin than homosexual practice.
What Jesus did teach (though not using this phrasing exactly) was to “love the sinner and hate the sin.” I hate the sin of lying, but I don’t hate liars. I hate the sin of pride, but I don’t hate the prideful. I hate the sin of greed, but I don’t hate the greedy. I hate sexual sin, but I don't hate those who engage in it.
But too often, too many Christians find that they’d rather not parse that out. So they just hate it all, the sinner and the sin. They carry signs at funerals that read “God hates fags.” Nothing could be less Christian, nothing could be less like Jesus. If you’re wondering “what would Jesus do” that isn’t it.
Some would (and will and do) say that simply naming homosexual practice as a sin IS an act of prejudice and hate, that you can’t love the sinner and hate the sin, because calling this sin IS an act of hate.
Obviously, I don’t agree. And I hope those who know me know that I don’t hate homosexuals. That’s all I’m going to say about that, not because it isn’t important, but because this isn’t meant to be a “but I have gay friends” defense. I do, and I hope they know I love them.
The fact is that the Bible does speak pretty clearly about this. There are other issues (see my next blog post on women in the church) where what the Bible seems to say and actually says can be different (not everyone would agree with me about that), but I don’t believe (after much careful study) that this is one of them (not everyone would agree with me about that either).
What I would say to those who say that the church is homophobic is this:
1) The church isn’t taught to show hatred toward any person. In doing so, they are not acting as the church
2) The church does believe the Bible is a story about who God is and what He is about, about what His desires are and how we can live in better relationship with Him
3) The Bible states clearly that our pursuit of sin makes our pursuit of God more difficult
4) The Bible states that homosexual practice is sin
5) Good, faithful, Christian people have read the same Bible and disagree with me on #4
6) Which means I could be wrong
I don’t say “I could be wrong” as a postmodern cop out or because I am shaky on my beliefs. But to approach an issue as hot as this with any humility is to understand that you could be wrong. To understand that we’ve been wrong before on slavery and on women and on racism. I don’t believe that this is the same, but I’m willing to hear from those who do. Because I could be wrong. And if I am, I don’t want to be.
I hope this sheds some light on a hot topic. Our churches are meant to be places where people can feel a sense of belonging and security. Anyone made to feel less than that because of what they do (even if it is a sin) isn’t experiencing what the church ought to be. We may challenge each other and even call each other’s actions as sin, but we must do so in the same spirit of love that Jesus did. We must do so with a consistent approach to sin (not just sexual sin or homosexual sin) and a consistent love towards sinners (not just the sinners whose particular sin happens to be the same as ours).
When the teachers of the law brought to Jesus a woman who had committed adultery, he had two things to say to her; “I do not condemn you” and “go and sin no more”. He showed her love and called her out of sin. The church can do no less and no more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)