Finally releasing my collaboration with Donald Miller:Friday, May 29, 2009
Monday, May 25, 2009
rejoicing & mourning
life is simple...
albeit extremely complex - yet simple.
I'm not saying it's easy, but it is simple (there is a difference)...more simple than I had once thought.
- we rejoice/ we mourn
Admittedly, sometimes our natural inclination is to:
- be secretly jealous when something good happens to someone else: "how come nothing good ever happens to me?"
- be secretly happy when something bad happens to someone else: "well, I'm glad that didn't happen to me."
How selfish, no? How love-lacking it is to respond in those ways...
We walk through this life, seemingly stumbling at times, groping our way in the dark. Things happen - good things, wonderfully joyous things; and bad things, horribly mournful things. These things have happened to you. These things will continue to happen to you.
Just to let you in on a little something: these things have happened and will continue to happen to the people you co-habitate this earth with. You know this...
When these things happen to those around you (and they will), what will you choose? Secret jealousy and/or happiness.
Or will you choose the higher/ harder road?
Rejoicing with those who rejoice and mourning with those who mourn.
Life may be more simple than you thought. Rejoice and mourn and forget about yourself for a moment.
...and as you do, you may even find yourself loving. I pray you do.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
champion something
ok, this is nothing new...just something that's been on my mind lately.
everyone's got an opinion. subjective, fleeting, morphing, inconsistent, but an opinion nonetheless. and many feel the need to share these subjective, fleeting, morphing, inconsistent little 'gems' with the rest of us (oh, don't worry, I am identifying that in myself even as I am writing this - so back off, haha)
now, opinions are not inherently wrong or useless. actually, they are usually inevitable - if you think about something, you will form an opinion, as uneducated as it may be.
tweaking this a bit...think about your opinions - you know, those deep-seated 'feelings' about those things you enjoy/ appreciate/ and celebrate or loathe/ disagree with/ and attack. you talk about them over coffee. you write about them on your facebook or twitter.
politics...
religion...
sexuality...
morality...
art...
truth...
here's the question: what are you for?
which are the things that encapsulate your life? what do you identify with? what are your defining details? when people see you, what do they see?
- are they the things that you are for? or the things that you are against?
I know plenty of people, who could talk all day about what they are against. Their identity seems wrapped up in the 'anti-something'. Do you know these people? Lists and lists of things that they are not. "I hate this, I hate that..." And, there was a time that many "Christians" defined themselves by what they were not. "I don't do this, I don't do that, I'm not like him, I'm not like her."
How negative. How backward. How lacking.
What are you for? What do you celebrate? What do you define yourself by?
How different life would be if we identified ourselves by what we are for, rather than what we are against. Now, I know that it is exponentially easier to complain and pick on things that I'm not for, but it's a much higher calling to champion those things that I am for.
so, what are you for?
everyone's got an opinion. subjective, fleeting, morphing, inconsistent, but an opinion nonetheless. and many feel the need to share these subjective, fleeting, morphing, inconsistent little 'gems' with the rest of us (oh, don't worry, I am identifying that in myself even as I am writing this - so back off, haha)
now, opinions are not inherently wrong or useless. actually, they are usually inevitable - if you think about something, you will form an opinion, as uneducated as it may be.
tweaking this a bit...think about your opinions - you know, those deep-seated 'feelings' about those things you enjoy/ appreciate/ and celebrate or loathe/ disagree with/ and attack. you talk about them over coffee. you write about them on your facebook or twitter.
politics...
religion...
sexuality...
morality...
art...
truth...
here's the question: what are you for?
which are the things that encapsulate your life? what do you identify with? what are your defining details? when people see you, what do they see?
- are they the things that you are for? or the things that you are against?
I know plenty of people, who could talk all day about what they are against. Their identity seems wrapped up in the 'anti-something'. Do you know these people? Lists and lists of things that they are not. "I hate this, I hate that..." And, there was a time that many "Christians" defined themselves by what they were not. "I don't do this, I don't do that, I'm not like him, I'm not like her."
How negative. How backward. How lacking.
What are you for? What do you celebrate? What do you define yourself by?
How different life would be if we identified ourselves by what we are for, rather than what we are against. Now, I know that it is exponentially easier to complain and pick on things that I'm not for, but it's a much higher calling to champion those things that I am for.
so, what are you for?
Friday, May 8, 2009
approach cautiously
Firstly, you must know something if you are to continue reading. I make no attempts in this blog to be deep or eloquent (I'm sure you've figured that out by now.) I'm simply asking questions honestly. Thanks for reading...
As I'm finishing up The Blue Parakeet (yes, it's taken me a little while,) I have many questions floating around in my soupy brain. Scot McKnight's take on 'how' we read the Bible has been challenging to say the least. I would really like to not be the only one to have read this book, so if you have read it, please let me know (I have many questions for you.)
McKnight offers 3 approaches to reading the Bible:
1)reading to retrieve - returning to the times of the Bible in order to retrieve biblical ideas and practices for today
2)reading through tradition - giving tradition the finally authority on interpretation
3) reading with tradition - acknowledging tradition respectfully
"So, how can we read the Bible that is both a "return and retrieval" reading as well as being respectful of the Great Tradition? I suggest we learn to read the Bible with the Great Tradition. We dare not ignore what God has said to the church through the ages (as we return and retrieval folks often do), nor dare we fossilize past interpretations into traditionalism. Instead, we need to go back to the Bible so we can move forward through the church and speak God's Word in our days in our ways. We need to go back without getting stuck (the return problem), and we need to move forward without fossilizing our ideas (traditionalism). We want to walk between these two approaches. It's not easy, but I content that the best of the evangelical approaches to the Bible and the best way of living the Bible today is to walk between these approaches. It is a third way."
(page 34)
Now my questions...
- how do you read the Bible?
- maybe my first question should be: do you read the Bible? we'll start there...not as a guilt trip, but as an honest question. Do you actually read the Bible? Or is it more a little snippet here, a little snippet there...or so rarely and randomly that you can't really remember the last time you sat down to just read it? maybe you just let the Pastors read it for you...
- and when/if you do, how do you read it? straight up/ no context? lightly/ with little contemplation (dare I say prayer)? attempting to live out every single word (have fun with that - dude, AJ Jacobs tried)? or so bunged up with tradition that it skews the Word?
- now, before you think of ways to make me painfully aware of your disagreement - take a moment, step back from the computer monitor and think to yourself: what is the most God-honouring approach to reading his Word? know that I'm doing the same....
thoughts?
As I'm finishing up The Blue Parakeet (yes, it's taken me a little while,) I have many questions floating around in my soupy brain. Scot McKnight's take on 'how' we read the Bible has been challenging to say the least. I would really like to not be the only one to have read this book, so if you have read it, please let me know (I have many questions for you.)
McKnight offers 3 approaches to reading the Bible:
1)reading to retrieve - returning to the times of the Bible in order to retrieve biblical ideas and practices for today
2)reading through tradition - giving tradition the finally authority on interpretation
3) reading with tradition - acknowledging tradition respectfully
"So, how can we read the Bible that is both a "return and retrieval" reading as well as being respectful of the Great Tradition? I suggest we learn to read the Bible with the Great Tradition. We dare not ignore what God has said to the church through the ages (as we return and retrieval folks often do), nor dare we fossilize past interpretations into traditionalism. Instead, we need to go back to the Bible so we can move forward through the church and speak God's Word in our days in our ways. We need to go back without getting stuck (the return problem), and we need to move forward without fossilizing our ideas (traditionalism). We want to walk between these two approaches. It's not easy, but I content that the best of the evangelical approaches to the Bible and the best way of living the Bible today is to walk between these approaches. It is a third way."
(page 34)
Now my questions...
- how do you read the Bible?
- maybe my first question should be: do you read the Bible? we'll start there...not as a guilt trip, but as an honest question. Do you actually read the Bible? Or is it more a little snippet here, a little snippet there...or so rarely and randomly that you can't really remember the last time you sat down to just read it? maybe you just let the Pastors read it for you...
- and when/if you do, how do you read it? straight up/ no context? lightly/ with little contemplation (dare I say prayer)? attempting to live out every single word (have fun with that - dude, AJ Jacobs tried)? or so bunged up with tradition that it skews the Word?
- now, before you think of ways to make me painfully aware of your disagreement - take a moment, step back from the computer monitor and think to yourself: what is the most God-honouring approach to reading his Word? know that I'm doing the same....
thoughts?
Friday, May 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
