Rob R wrote a great little diatribe in frustration about some real issues surrounding being a Christian NOT voting for Bush in the coming election. I sympathise and identify with his thoughts almost perfectly, but he put them into such clearer and smarter words that I have the capacity to do. If you call yourself a Christian (no matter who you are voting for), I highly advise reading this. Click here.
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Mouthing Off: Conservative Rant vol.1
Twice in the past 24 hours I have had conversations that sparked my defense of conservative Christians. This installment of Mouthing Off isn't directed at either of those people specifically, should they read this. This is a much larger issue for me, something that I hold with deep passion and conviction.
First, I will say that I am not a conservative Christian. Nor am I a liberal Christian. I'm a passionate moderate. My beef with both sides of the camp is that they are arrogant and one-sided (even for talk of open-mindedness or of love the sinner, hate the sin), refusing to see WHO the people are on the other side of their agenda for fear of WHAT they are or what they might represent. We are intolerant in our tolerance and unloving in our love. Our gospels are empty.
Here's why the conservative agenda, which I will describe as wanting to change the condition of our culture through political (rather than personal, moral, individual) means is good. It recognizes that sin is a powerfully destructive force that impacts not only the sinner, but also the sinned-against, sometimes for several degrees of separation, and it is not afraid to stand up and identify what sin is. An example: The sinner molests a young girl, who has her sense of healthy love and sex stripped from her, and then loses her ability growing up to adequately convey these ideas to her own children. In this mindset, the prevention of sinful acts is an act of protection. Neither being a Christian nor being a fan of Barbasol shaving cream prevent the affects that sins have on the lives of humans. It's the way we're built. In turn, sin affects our culture. And our culture affects us. So, when conservatives want to lobby against "progressivism," I don't think that's a bad thing at all. I think it is the only reasonable thing to do, because it provides a check & balance for our own self-gratifying nature, and it (ideally) forces us to examine issues that we otherwise ignore or neglect in favor of personal convenience (like the value of true community, or healthy family relationships, or the effects of multiple sexual partners on a person's capacity for intimacy.)
The main argument against this logic is that by legislating morality, you are not actually causing people to become moral. Only Jesus can do that. Granted. But the point isn't that people are becoming more moral, it's that the innocent are being protected from the immorality of others. Our nation is increasingly turning towards a philosophy that it is okay to be immoral, as long as it doesn't bother anyone else, particularly me. This is the thrust of the sexual revolution--if you say it's okay, then it's okay, just do it behind closed doors. Similar thing with American capitalistic materialism--you can have as much excess and wealth as you please, just don't mention what wage the worker was paid who made it for you.
All this begs the question: what is "morality", and who gets to define it? What are your thoughts on that question? I personally have little trouble identifying and describing the consequences and damage of sin and immorality, even the sins that we really don't like to call sin, like greed, lust, gluttony. The things most of us are guilty of. ("But not as guilty as they are! Just look at them!") Sin has damaged our ability to see sin as sin--in some ways, that is the entire human condition. Can you see ways that is true in your own life?
Again, I'm not a conservative, and I'm not voting for Bush. And I certainly do not think that all, or even most, conservative Christians are on the right track (including and especially the Christian Coalition).To the contrary, I believe most of them have little idea why they believe what they believe, other than the parrot answers they were given by people they foggily trust to lead them. They are prudish and fearful of getting other people's sin on them--too busy trying to keep themselves looking holy. They don't understand the completeness of their fallen condition nor the completeness of Jesus' love, mercy, compassion, and forgiveness. They are trapped in a system of fear of failure to live up to their perception of God's mandates to be holy.
But true Christian conservatives are not prudish, they are protectors. They feel the weight of sin and the enormity of its destructive power. They are different from liberal thinking in their ideology: they do not have a mindset that values the wants of an individual, they have a mindset that values an entire culture. I value their place in our culture, next to Christian liberals.
Just for equal time and space, I'd like to rant about the virtues of liberalism, but because I get the sense most of this audience is already mostly there, I'll save it. One of these Mouthing Off's is going to be a rail against Christian conservativism, so you can be on the lookout for that... Post what is on your heart and mind.
First, I will say that I am not a conservative Christian. Nor am I a liberal Christian. I'm a passionate moderate. My beef with both sides of the camp is that they are arrogant and one-sided (even for talk of open-mindedness or of love the sinner, hate the sin), refusing to see WHO the people are on the other side of their agenda for fear of WHAT they are or what they might represent. We are intolerant in our tolerance and unloving in our love. Our gospels are empty.
Here's why the conservative agenda, which I will describe as wanting to change the condition of our culture through political (rather than personal, moral, individual) means is good. It recognizes that sin is a powerfully destructive force that impacts not only the sinner, but also the sinned-against, sometimes for several degrees of separation, and it is not afraid to stand up and identify what sin is. An example: The sinner molests a young girl, who has her sense of healthy love and sex stripped from her, and then loses her ability growing up to adequately convey these ideas to her own children. In this mindset, the prevention of sinful acts is an act of protection. Neither being a Christian nor being a fan of Barbasol shaving cream prevent the affects that sins have on the lives of humans. It's the way we're built. In turn, sin affects our culture. And our culture affects us. So, when conservatives want to lobby against "progressivism," I don't think that's a bad thing at all. I think it is the only reasonable thing to do, because it provides a check & balance for our own self-gratifying nature, and it (ideally) forces us to examine issues that we otherwise ignore or neglect in favor of personal convenience (like the value of true community, or healthy family relationships, or the effects of multiple sexual partners on a person's capacity for intimacy.)
The main argument against this logic is that by legislating morality, you are not actually causing people to become moral. Only Jesus can do that. Granted. But the point isn't that people are becoming more moral, it's that the innocent are being protected from the immorality of others. Our nation is increasingly turning towards a philosophy that it is okay to be immoral, as long as it doesn't bother anyone else, particularly me. This is the thrust of the sexual revolution--if you say it's okay, then it's okay, just do it behind closed doors. Similar thing with American capitalistic materialism--you can have as much excess and wealth as you please, just don't mention what wage the worker was paid who made it for you.
All this begs the question: what is "morality", and who gets to define it? What are your thoughts on that question? I personally have little trouble identifying and describing the consequences and damage of sin and immorality, even the sins that we really don't like to call sin, like greed, lust, gluttony. The things most of us are guilty of. ("But not as guilty as they are! Just look at them!") Sin has damaged our ability to see sin as sin--in some ways, that is the entire human condition. Can you see ways that is true in your own life?
Again, I'm not a conservative, and I'm not voting for Bush. And I certainly do not think that all, or even most, conservative Christians are on the right track (including and especially the Christian Coalition).To the contrary, I believe most of them have little idea why they believe what they believe, other than the parrot answers they were given by people they foggily trust to lead them. They are prudish and fearful of getting other people's sin on them--too busy trying to keep themselves looking holy. They don't understand the completeness of their fallen condition nor the completeness of Jesus' love, mercy, compassion, and forgiveness. They are trapped in a system of fear of failure to live up to their perception of God's mandates to be holy.
But true Christian conservatives are not prudish, they are protectors. They feel the weight of sin and the enormity of its destructive power. They are different from liberal thinking in their ideology: they do not have a mindset that values the wants of an individual, they have a mindset that values an entire culture. I value their place in our culture, next to Christian liberals.
Just for equal time and space, I'd like to rant about the virtues of liberalism, but because I get the sense most of this audience is already mostly there, I'll save it. One of these Mouthing Off's is going to be a rail against Christian conservativism, so you can be on the lookout for that... Post what is on your heart and mind.
Monday, October 18, 2004
Problems with Posters
To all who have posted recently, thanks for taking the time. To all who haven't posted recently, you should post.
To everyone, regardless, here is a brief chastisement. Most of the time, I'll be inviting people to post. Most of my intent with this weblog is to mouth off, but in so doing I want to stimulate interaction and thought and sharing about junk that feels very important, but doesn't seem to get much cultural airplay. We all realize that the 80's were pretty dang good, but that wasn't exactly the purpose of the "Nod to..." post. Likewise, no one has posted about the porn commentary thing, which is something we should be thinking about in some context because it affects every one of our lives, to varying degrees. (I recognize it was lengthy, and for that I'm sorry...I wanted to give an overview of a broad-spectrum issue, to get some discussion rolling. Maybe it didn't work.)
I hope this can be a place of honesty and challenge, or minimally consensus if that's the best we can do. It can be a place of outrage, frustration, and confrontation, as long as we're being reasonably respectful. Feel free to post anonymously, if that's more comfortable. For a refresher on what this weblog's goal is, run a search for "Gandalf" in the search bar up top. Squidzaus' first post ever is at the bottom of that page.
If there are things that I could do be a better provoker, post it. If you have thoughts on some of those other issues, post them. Keep in mind, I ain't mad atcha. But we can do better, yes?
To everyone, regardless, here is a brief chastisement. Most of the time, I'll be inviting people to post. Most of my intent with this weblog is to mouth off, but in so doing I want to stimulate interaction and thought and sharing about junk that feels very important, but doesn't seem to get much cultural airplay. We all realize that the 80's were pretty dang good, but that wasn't exactly the purpose of the "Nod to..." post. Likewise, no one has posted about the porn commentary thing, which is something we should be thinking about in some context because it affects every one of our lives, to varying degrees. (I recognize it was lengthy, and for that I'm sorry...I wanted to give an overview of a broad-spectrum issue, to get some discussion rolling. Maybe it didn't work.)
I hope this can be a place of honesty and challenge, or minimally consensus if that's the best we can do. It can be a place of outrage, frustration, and confrontation, as long as we're being reasonably respectful. Feel free to post anonymously, if that's more comfortable. For a refresher on what this weblog's goal is, run a search for "Gandalf" in the search bar up top. Squidzaus' first post ever is at the bottom of that page.
If there are things that I could do be a better provoker, post it. If you have thoughts on some of those other issues, post them. Keep in mind, I ain't mad atcha. But we can do better, yes?
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Commentary for Comment
Here's something I read recently. I don't think it's great, but I do think it brings up some interesting cultural points. I wish it wasn't written with a hint of smirk (usually Colson doesn't do that), but c'est la vie. It's by Charles Colson, who heads up Prison Fellowship Ministries. Take the good, take the bad, but think about some aspect of what's being said and leave a comment. Think culturally.
A Little Late to Be Squeamish: Porn in the Mainstream
If you ever doubt that our culture is pre-occupied with sexual gratification, watch some prime-time television -- not the programs necessarily, just the commercials. Every hour, you'll see at least three or four ads for drugs that promise to let you have sex whenever you want it. As one ad says, it's unfettered sexual gratification that makes "our days our own" -- the revenge of Freud and Kinsey.
In this cultural setting, you would expect a book by a woman who embodies unfettered sexual gratification to be celebrated. But oddly you would be wrong.
The book is HOW TO MAKE LOVE LIKE A PORN STAR: A CAUTIONARY TALE by Jenna Jameson (which, I should add, neither I nor my staff have read). According to those who keep track of such things, Jameson is the biggest name in the $10 billion-a-year pornography industry.
Despite subtitling her book A CAUTIONARY TALE, Jameson is not cautious, much less apologetic, when it comes to her sexual escapades. As she writes, "My first love is sex, not acting. I'm not Meryl Streep." She denies that her career choice had anything to do with her, by all accounts, brutal childhood. She grew up without a mother in -- where else? -- Las Vegas and was raped several times. Instead, she depicts herself as the embodiment of feminist ideals: a strong, successful woman in charge of her sexuality.
Critics, however, are not buying it. The NEW YORK TIMES called it "amazing" that "a memoir that once would have won itself a plain brown wrapper can now be found beside books about Henry James." Another critic summed up Jameson as "a woman who has become rich and famous by doing on screen what most people reserve for the privacy of their bedrooms."
These are obviously valid critiques. The problem is that the people making them have no basis for their judgment of Jameson, at least not if logical and philosophical consistency makes any difference. They, like most of our cultural gatekeepers and elites, regard the sexual revolution as a good thing. They see this "revolution" as setting people free from unnecessary moral and biological restraints and allowing them to explore their sexuality more fully.
Well, it's hard to imagine a more perfect representative of these ideals than Jameson and the porn industry. Pornography represents the triumph of these ideals, a world in which sex is beyond moral judgment as long as both parties consent to the activity. And the young women who undergo plastic surgery in an attempt to more closely resemble women like Jameson are simply exercising that greatest of all values, choice.
If the TIMES and other critics are squeamish about all this, it's because they have been trying to have it both ways. They want the freedom promised by the sexual revolution, but then they don't want to deal with the consequences that inevitably flow from it. They resent Jameson for reminding them that their worldview doesn't work.
Only a worldview, you see, that regards sex as something more than a recreational, biological function can enable people to regard themselves and others as something more than means to animal gratification. This is yet another example that any other worldview than the biblical one in the end proves irrational and unlivable. And in this case, even the NEW YORK TIMES knows that.
A Little Late to Be Squeamish: Porn in the Mainstream
If you ever doubt that our culture is pre-occupied with sexual gratification, watch some prime-time television -- not the programs necessarily, just the commercials. Every hour, you'll see at least three or four ads for drugs that promise to let you have sex whenever you want it. As one ad says, it's unfettered sexual gratification that makes "our days our own" -- the revenge of Freud and Kinsey.
In this cultural setting, you would expect a book by a woman who embodies unfettered sexual gratification to be celebrated. But oddly you would be wrong.
The book is HOW TO MAKE LOVE LIKE A PORN STAR: A CAUTIONARY TALE by Jenna Jameson (which, I should add, neither I nor my staff have read). According to those who keep track of such things, Jameson is the biggest name in the $10 billion-a-year pornography industry.
Despite subtitling her book A CAUTIONARY TALE, Jameson is not cautious, much less apologetic, when it comes to her sexual escapades. As she writes, "My first love is sex, not acting. I'm not Meryl Streep." She denies that her career choice had anything to do with her, by all accounts, brutal childhood. She grew up without a mother in -- where else? -- Las Vegas and was raped several times. Instead, she depicts herself as the embodiment of feminist ideals: a strong, successful woman in charge of her sexuality.
Critics, however, are not buying it. The NEW YORK TIMES called it "amazing" that "a memoir that once would have won itself a plain brown wrapper can now be found beside books about Henry James." Another critic summed up Jameson as "a woman who has become rich and famous by doing on screen what most people reserve for the privacy of their bedrooms."
These are obviously valid critiques. The problem is that the people making them have no basis for their judgment of Jameson, at least not if logical and philosophical consistency makes any difference. They, like most of our cultural gatekeepers and elites, regard the sexual revolution as a good thing. They see this "revolution" as setting people free from unnecessary moral and biological restraints and allowing them to explore their sexuality more fully.
Well, it's hard to imagine a more perfect representative of these ideals than Jameson and the porn industry. Pornography represents the triumph of these ideals, a world in which sex is beyond moral judgment as long as both parties consent to the activity. And the young women who undergo plastic surgery in an attempt to more closely resemble women like Jameson are simply exercising that greatest of all values, choice.
If the TIMES and other critics are squeamish about all this, it's because they have been trying to have it both ways. They want the freedom promised by the sexual revolution, but then they don't want to deal with the consequences that inevitably flow from it. They resent Jameson for reminding them that their worldview doesn't work.
Only a worldview, you see, that regards sex as something more than a recreational, biological function can enable people to regard themselves and others as something more than means to animal gratification. This is yet another example that any other worldview than the biblical one in the end proves irrational and unlivable. And in this case, even the NEW YORK TIMES knows that.
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
A nod to conservativism
Some of the best days of my life were spent playing "guns" or "army" with my brothers in the woods around our house in KY. Not much about life in KY was good, but I did have a few very good friends, and I had my brothers, and I had summer. I know there are people who are adamantly against giving their children guns as toys. I don't really know how I feel about that, being a kid who had toy guns. I've never shot a real gun in my life, though I know my dad had a .22 rifle. (Actually, he recently told me the story of how he bought the gun when he himself was a boy, and he rode home with it on his bike in downtown Milwaukee. Things were different then, and I desperately wish that my generation knew more about what life was like for our parents.)
New direction. For those select few of you who can claim to be from my generation, weren't the 80's our greatest moment? Forget GenX and all that cynical woe-is-me garbage. I want my Transformers lunchbox back. I want to haggle someone out of their twinkies. I want scratch-n-sniff stickers as rewards for good homework, and I want my sticker album to keep my collection and to make trades. I want Saturday mornings that are filled with cartoons--GOOD cartoons, mind you--and I want Little Caesar's to have crazy pizza deals.
If they tell you that our world is improving, do not believe them. What has caused the breakdown in our culture's moral fabric (for lack of a better term)? Why have we become so...stupid, as to say that truth cannot be determined, or that one person's view is not necessarily better than another's, as if we've lost the ability to think critically? In our rush for progress, let's not forget the way things were, and what made them good. We've all been drilled on what made them bad. Not that things aren't good now, because they are. I hope some kid will be cooing about Pokemon 15 years from now. I just wish that our progressivism nodded to conservativism sometimes, recognizing the good that we came from. History doesn't always have to be bitter.
New direction. For those select few of you who can claim to be from my generation, weren't the 80's our greatest moment? Forget GenX and all that cynical woe-is-me garbage. I want my Transformers lunchbox back. I want to haggle someone out of their twinkies. I want scratch-n-sniff stickers as rewards for good homework, and I want my sticker album to keep my collection and to make trades. I want Saturday mornings that are filled with cartoons--GOOD cartoons, mind you--and I want Little Caesar's to have crazy pizza deals.
If they tell you that our world is improving, do not believe them. What has caused the breakdown in our culture's moral fabric (for lack of a better term)? Why have we become so...stupid, as to say that truth cannot be determined, or that one person's view is not necessarily better than another's, as if we've lost the ability to think critically? In our rush for progress, let's not forget the way things were, and what made them good. We've all been drilled on what made them bad. Not that things aren't good now, because they are. I hope some kid will be cooing about Pokemon 15 years from now. I just wish that our progressivism nodded to conservativism sometimes, recognizing the good that we came from. History doesn't always have to be bitter.
Monday, October 11, 2004
Friday, October 08, 2004
Chastity Candidly...
...which unintentionally sounds somewhat like a porn star name, which, as it turns out, is what this post is going to marginally be about.
I despise porn and the SI swimsuit thingy. Let me tell you why. I tire of the struggle of hating everything that is in them and what they (mis)represent, yet finding myself drawn to the pages anyway. And it's not all hormonal as many tend to believe, whether to justify their own behavior or to dissect the behaviors of others.
Here's the deal: we get Sports Illustrated here at the shelter sometimes. People donate old copies or occasionally we've received a subscription for a few months. It's not even a mag I enjoy, beyond the pictures--I'm not much of a jock or sports freak. Also, on the few occasions when we've received the swimsuit copy, it's pretty easy to pitch it because it's so entirely and obviously inappropriate for innumerable reasons. However, as I was cleaning up the living room here today, I discovered a copy of the 50th anniversary edition of SI, a huge magazine with loads of coverage on all things sports, a nifty spoof cover of the Sistene Chapel...and a few pages of fluffy swimsuit stuff. Once I recognized what was in it, I pitched the whole mag. Being the only one here, here's where the dilemma begins.
Why in the sam hell can't I just leave it where it is? Why does the knowledge of its presence create such a nagging to pull it out of the trash and just check out the pictures? (The trick is, I've never seen a swimsuit issue, so my curiosity tries to get the better of me--for investigative purposes, of course.) And it's such a small and harmless thing anyway, right? I mean, we're not talking soft-core or anything here, or are we?
I ended up removing it from the office trash and , without opening it [pats himself on the back], tossed it into the kitchen trash, which is far yuckier and less retrievable. If you don't understand why this was a bigger deal than seeing real live topless (French) folk on St. Maarten, ask me. Or ask almost any woman. Post away, all comments are welcome.
I despise porn and the SI swimsuit thingy. Let me tell you why. I tire of the struggle of hating everything that is in them and what they (mis)represent, yet finding myself drawn to the pages anyway. And it's not all hormonal as many tend to believe, whether to justify their own behavior or to dissect the behaviors of others.
Here's the deal: we get Sports Illustrated here at the shelter sometimes. People donate old copies or occasionally we've received a subscription for a few months. It's not even a mag I enjoy, beyond the pictures--I'm not much of a jock or sports freak. Also, on the few occasions when we've received the swimsuit copy, it's pretty easy to pitch it because it's so entirely and obviously inappropriate for innumerable reasons. However, as I was cleaning up the living room here today, I discovered a copy of the 50th anniversary edition of SI, a huge magazine with loads of coverage on all things sports, a nifty spoof cover of the Sistene Chapel...and a few pages of fluffy swimsuit stuff. Once I recognized what was in it, I pitched the whole mag. Being the only one here, here's where the dilemma begins.
Why in the sam hell can't I just leave it where it is? Why does the knowledge of its presence create such a nagging to pull it out of the trash and just check out the pictures? (The trick is, I've never seen a swimsuit issue, so my curiosity tries to get the better of me--for investigative purposes, of course.) And it's such a small and harmless thing anyway, right? I mean, we're not talking soft-core or anything here, or are we?
I ended up removing it from the office trash and , without opening it [pats himself on the back], tossed it into the kitchen trash, which is far yuckier and less retrievable. If you don't understand why this was a bigger deal than seeing real live topless (French) folk on St. Maarten, ask me. Or ask almost any woman. Post away, all comments are welcome.
Thursday, October 07, 2004
Girls want a boyfriend with skills
Here is a list of my skills. I already have a girlfriend. She is my wife.
drawing
strategy board gaming
guitaring
recruiting Greg Booth for a band
numchucking
watching Kevin's back
opining
answering the telephone
talking with people
I'm not sure if that is a complete list. It is now time to eat dinner. You should read the post from yesterday--I don't think many other people did.
drawing
strategy board gaming
guitaring
recruiting Greg Booth for a band
numchucking
watching Kevin's back
opining
answering the telephone
talking with people
I'm not sure if that is a complete list. It is now time to eat dinner. You should read the post from yesterday--I don't think many other people did.
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
Mouthing Off
Here is a word to American Christians. This is not directed to anyone in particular, but to a cultural phenomenon.
Please remember that there is absolutely NO implicit reationship between being a Christian and being an American. America is NOT a Christian nation, and it never has been. The founding fathers were not Christians, they were Deists. God has done amazing things in this country, in terms of revival and freedom, but that does not make us any more Christian than France.
I find myself being increasingly frustrated by the association of Christianity with America or being American. This happens unintentionally across the globe, but also intentionally as a means of bolstering political support. It should not happen regardless.
Why do we forget (or are convinced) so easily that being American means being Christian? Or more recently, that being Christian means being Republican? Why is it so hard to see that salvation will never come through the political process--not if every member of Congress and the President were all born-again, bonifide believers. Why is it that if you walk into almost ANY church in this country, you will find both the Christian flag AND the American flag up front near the podium or altar? That doesn't happen in other countries--do we realize that?
Folks, this just shouldn't be. Our citizenship is in heaven first. We belong to the Kingdom of God, not to any country on earth. Nationalism and American pride have no place in our lives. And don't get me wrong--I'm not in favor of separation of church and state, at least not the way the current cultural trends have been pushing (from both sides). I think believers should be (and in fact are called to be) active in their communities and in the land in which they live. Even the simple act of voting can be an act of worship no matter who who vote for, as long as you do it wisely and prayerfully making the best decision you can make. But we need to recognize that we are aliens and strangers in this land, on this whole planet, called to live our lives in different ways, with different purposes.
As children of the living God, I hope we can be wiser than this. I hope we can see through the smoke, and recognize that the devil has been using even some of us for his own purposes--that we are being deceived, and that the deception has soaked into our culture to such a degree that we don't even think of it anymore. Sin has corrupted our ability to see sin as sin.
This was just a rant, and not very organized. Feel free to comment. Maybe next time I'll rant about how Christians have been wooed into the trap of materialism. (Myself included.) I'm left wondering why I still try to serve both God and Money/Culture/the Jones', when Jesus said that is impossible.
Please remember that there is absolutely NO implicit reationship between being a Christian and being an American. America is NOT a Christian nation, and it never has been. The founding fathers were not Christians, they were Deists. God has done amazing things in this country, in terms of revival and freedom, but that does not make us any more Christian than France.
I find myself being increasingly frustrated by the association of Christianity with America or being American. This happens unintentionally across the globe, but also intentionally as a means of bolstering political support. It should not happen regardless.
Why do we forget (or are convinced) so easily that being American means being Christian? Or more recently, that being Christian means being Republican? Why is it so hard to see that salvation will never come through the political process--not if every member of Congress and the President were all born-again, bonifide believers. Why is it that if you walk into almost ANY church in this country, you will find both the Christian flag AND the American flag up front near the podium or altar? That doesn't happen in other countries--do we realize that?
Folks, this just shouldn't be. Our citizenship is in heaven first. We belong to the Kingdom of God, not to any country on earth. Nationalism and American pride have no place in our lives. And don't get me wrong--I'm not in favor of separation of church and state, at least not the way the current cultural trends have been pushing (from both sides). I think believers should be (and in fact are called to be) active in their communities and in the land in which they live. Even the simple act of voting can be an act of worship no matter who who vote for, as long as you do it wisely and prayerfully making the best decision you can make. But we need to recognize that we are aliens and strangers in this land, on this whole planet, called to live our lives in different ways, with different purposes.
As children of the living God, I hope we can be wiser than this. I hope we can see through the smoke, and recognize that the devil has been using even some of us for his own purposes--that we are being deceived, and that the deception has soaked into our culture to such a degree that we don't even think of it anymore. Sin has corrupted our ability to see sin as sin.
This was just a rant, and not very organized. Feel free to comment. Maybe next time I'll rant about how Christians have been wooed into the trap of materialism. (Myself included.) I'm left wondering why I still try to serve both God and Money/Culture/the Jones', when Jesus said that is impossible.
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
Urg.
Today I realized I have less than 3 months before I am unemployed. I am not scared. But I am interested to see where this all ends up. My 5 year plan is a little fuzzy these days.
I have been too distracted as of late with my own life to think about the affairs of the world. There is loads happening. But I don't know where I stand on lots of it. I try to stay up on the election nonsense, but that's about as far as I can go these days. Makes me sad, because I feel like I'm missing important things.
Band news: we have formal practice times now. Hey, that's a bloody milestone, so don't make fun. And it cost us a member, most likely. The upside is that Greg and I played some last week, and it was beootiful. I am excited about the future of this thing.
More news: Anybody want to come to a LAN party on Friday, Oct 22? It would be a PC-only ordeal (sorry Macies), and I think we would play Homeworld, Aliens Vs. Predator, and/or Medal of Honor. The idea is to play games that people can run even if their machine is several years old. Like mine. All are welcome. Let me know if you're interested, I'm trying to guage interest.
I have been too distracted as of late with my own life to think about the affairs of the world. There is loads happening. But I don't know where I stand on lots of it. I try to stay up on the election nonsense, but that's about as far as I can go these days. Makes me sad, because I feel like I'm missing important things.
Band news: we have formal practice times now. Hey, that's a bloody milestone, so don't make fun. And it cost us a member, most likely. The upside is that Greg and I played some last week, and it was beootiful. I am excited about the future of this thing.
More news: Anybody want to come to a LAN party on Friday, Oct 22? It would be a PC-only ordeal (sorry Macies), and I think we would play Homeworld, Aliens Vs. Predator, and/or Medal of Honor. The idea is to play games that people can run even if their machine is several years old. Like mine. All are welcome. Let me know if you're interested, I'm trying to guage interest.
Monday, October 04, 2004
Silver bells...
We get some seriously strange donations here at the homeless shelter sometimes. Once, someone gave us 3/4 case of Miller High Life. Occasionally we get odd assortments of clothing. Recently, we got a stainless steel counter bell--the type a small shop might have to alert the cashier that a customer was ready for checkout.
I have adopted said bell, placing it within arms reach on my desk (which is also Bradley's desk). Currently, we have no other need for it here, and it would be a shame to see it head to the thrift store. It is amazing to me how such a small bell can be so amazing to me. I like the shape and feel of the little button. The striker is well balanced and has a good weight. It has a clear, consistent ring--the kind that serves its purpose, really. Though I suppose it could be argued that it has no purpose here.
My experience so far is similar to pencil-tapping: it's pleasant, even pacifying, to the person tapping it, but quite obnoxious to everyone else within earshot. I could apologize, but that would suggest I will stop ringing the bell, which I won't.
I have adopted said bell, placing it within arms reach on my desk (which is also Bradley's desk). Currently, we have no other need for it here, and it would be a shame to see it head to the thrift store. It is amazing to me how such a small bell can be so amazing to me. I like the shape and feel of the little button. The striker is well balanced and has a good weight. It has a clear, consistent ring--the kind that serves its purpose, really. Though I suppose it could be argued that it has no purpose here.
My experience so far is similar to pencil-tapping: it's pleasant, even pacifying, to the person tapping it, but quite obnoxious to everyone else within earshot. I could apologize, but that would suggest I will stop ringing the bell, which I won't.
Friday, October 01, 2004
Suggested Reading
I resonate with the thoughts and feelings expressed here. Chris is a cool guy with wise thoughts and strong, righteous feelings. He is a guy to trust with a great many things. He would not like me saying so.
Nerd Fest!
For those of you wanting to adequately educate yourselves for the purposes of cameraderie or mockery, click here.
Yes, I am bragging. (And also listing for possible trades, Rob? Jon?) Kevin got some rad ones too. Here's my complete list of minis, after receiving my purchse from my cousin last night:
REBELS
C-3PO
Elite Hoth Trooper
Elite Rebel Trooper x2
Hoth Trooper x2
Luke Skywalker, Jedi Knight
Luke Skywalker, Rebel
Princess Leia, Captive
R2-D2
Rebel Commando
Rebel Officer
Rebel Pilot x3
Rebel Trooper x4
EMPIRE
Darth Vader, Dark Jedi
General Veers
Heavy Stormtrooper
Imperial Officer x2
Royal Guard
Scout Trooper
Snow Trooper x5
Storm Trooper x3
FRINGE
Bespin Guard x2
Duros Mercenary x2
Ewok x4
Gamorrean Guard x2
Ithorian Scout x2
Jawa
Mon Calamari Mercenary x2
Greedo
Tusken Raider x2
Twi-lek Scoundrel x2
Yes, I am bragging. (And also listing for possible trades, Rob? Jon?) Kevin got some rad ones too. Here's my complete list of minis, after receiving my purchse from my cousin last night:
REBELS
C-3PO
Elite Hoth Trooper
Elite Rebel Trooper x2
Hoth Trooper x2
Luke Skywalker, Jedi Knight
Luke Skywalker, Rebel
Princess Leia, Captive
R2-D2
Rebel Commando
Rebel Officer
Rebel Pilot x3
Rebel Trooper x4
EMPIRE
Darth Vader, Dark Jedi
General Veers
Heavy Stormtrooper
Imperial Officer x2
Royal Guard
Scout Trooper
Snow Trooper x5
Storm Trooper x3
FRINGE
Bespin Guard x2
Duros Mercenary x2
Ewok x4
Gamorrean Guard x2
Ithorian Scout x2
Jawa
Mon Calamari Mercenary x2
Greedo
Tusken Raider x2
Twi-lek Scoundrel x2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)