caffeine, please.

If its good for penguins its good for me?

In a recent column by Mark Marford in the San Francisco Chronicle, he posits that God is "slightly gay" because research continues to discover homosexual behavior happening in most animal species. 

His argument is summarized pretty well in this quotation:

Because if homosexual/bisexual behavior is universal and by design, if gender mutability is actually deeply woven into the very fabric of nature itself, and if you understand that nature is merely another word for God, well, you can only surmise that God is, to put it mildly, much more than just a little bit gay. I mean, obviously.

But let's be fair. That's not exactly true. God is not really gay, per se. God is more... pansexual. Omnisexual. Gender neutral. Gender indeterminate. It would appear that God, this all-knowing and all-creating and all-seeing divine energy that infuses and empowers all things at all times everywhere, does not give a flying leather whip about gender.

Now the column is somewhat confusing because on one hand he is tweaking Christians for saying that homosexuality, in the eyes of God, is sin.  But on the other hand, in this argument he defines a decidedly unChristian view of God.  He talks of a panentheistic god--a god who is one with creation itself.  In other words, as creation is, so is god.

This wrong starting point is a problem but we'll pretend it isn't there for the purpose of discussion.  We'll pretend that we're both talking about God in the same way as we engage the discussion of sexuality.  If that's the case, here's my summary of Mumford's argument:

Because most animal species display many different sexual behaviors including homosexual sex, we see that God designed sex to be done many different ways and still be "right" or "good".  And because animals do it many ways, people should too.  This is what God wants.  We're just slow to embrace what God has given us.

This is a strange argument.  One which, if applied to other animal behaviors, would lead to a very new set of rules.

• Many animal species eat their kids.  (Especially the weak ones. And dad animals seem especially keen on eating their kids.)  God made animals to eat their kids.  Eating your kids is universal and by design.  People should stop being so squeamish and eat their kids too.  (Wait, maybe we already do...)
• Animal murder happens all the time.  (Male animals especially love to kill other male animals that want their woman friends.)  God made animals to kill each other.  Animals killing animals is universal and by design. People should kill each other.  Murderers need protection--they're just embracing the way God made them.

Or... maybe determining what behavior is acceptable to God by pointing to animal behavior is just, well... dumb.  Christian theology never comes close to saying, "every act of nature reflects God's creative purpose and is therefore good."  It says, instead, creation has been subjected to pain and suffering and confusion because of the sin of people and is anxiously waiting for God to restore things back to His intent before the sin of mankind.  Romans 8 kind of stuff.

Maybe we should work on other approaches for solving moral issues than using animals as our reason for doing whatever we please.

Unintended roads

Sometimes in the midst of teaching a message, I feel like God sends me down a road that I didn't plan on.  In fact, I pray that this happens every Sunday.  It doesn't always, but I pray that it does. 

It happened yesterday when I was talking from Micah 6:8 about loving mercy.  What I said that I hadn't planned on was, "do you realize that God delights in showing you mercy?  That it excites him to not give you the punishment you deserve but to show you kindness instead?  That all this comes because of the Cross?" 

Now I didn't give a good scriptural backing for this in the moment.  But I knew that it was true.  If only I had read further I could have paid it off powerfully with Micah's own words.

Micah 7:18:  Who is a God like you, who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance? You do not stay angry forever but delight to show mercy.

Awesome.  God delights to show you mercy.  God delights to show me mercy.

Was Jesus a topical or exegetical preacher?

I spent the morning with our concept team as we wrestled out our preaching calendar through the rest of the year. Because of the creative work involved and because I like hanging out with the guys on our team, this is one of my favorite occasional meetings.

Afterward, as I was driving down Lake Shore Drive in 70 degree whether with the sunroof open on my way back to the North side, a thought hit me--okay really it was more of a question: how did Jesus preach? And my initial reaction was, "he preached topically".

Usually Jesus was teaching concepts and topics that were grand and sweeping in importance, rooted in particular Scriptures, and powerfully practical while at the same time deeply spiritual. I can't think of an occasion where Jesus taught "exegetically"--straight through a section of Scripture. I also can't think of a time where Jesus' words weren't grounded in some Scriptural fragment or another.

"So what?" you say. Well, I think it just strikes a note of freedom. I think its good to teach exegetically--to tackle a book or section of Scripture and go right through. But there is also important value in attacking life issues with a kingdom-mindset, grounding the life issues in relevant Scriptures and then giving wisdom-for-life application. Its a legitimate form of preaching.

Anywho, just thinking out loud.

Contrasting shallow and deeper

As we enter into 10 weeks of teaching and soaking in the concept of Deeper, I'm soberly eager (no idea if that's possible.)  I spent some time today making a list contrasting shallow spirituality with deeper pursuit.  Nothing here is new but it helps me to contrast things in order to understand them.  I like to ask the question "how is this different from that?"  By the end of the list I was challenged and convicted to go Deeper.  (If you have adds/edits, feel free to comment them in...)

 

Shallow Spirituality	Deeper Pursuit
Has arrived	Is searching
Full of answers	Full of wonder
Is doing pretty good	Feels constantly unfinished
Lives primarily off of other people’s God discoveries and moments	Invests time into exploration with the hope of God discoveries and moments
Measures expectations to avoid spiritual disappointment	Lives with the tension of expectancy and disappointment
Hopes to become a saint, maybe someday	A saint who groans against the grip and depth of sin
Hopeful about performance	Hungry for Grace
Loves to be right	Rightly loves
Fears mystery and moves away from it	Fears mystery and moves toward it
Lives off of a good faith history	Lives off of a moment-by-moment decision to say “yes” again
Doesn’t count costs and disengages when things get tough	Counts costs daily, gulps and moves forward
Seeks God in spiritual places	Seeks God in every place
Has only a few hiding places	Destroys every hiding place
Resists being challenged	Humbly receives challenge looking for God-words in it

 

 

 

Quotes I used this past Sunday...

I wanted to post some quotes that I used this past Sunday.  They are from some of the people I respect and who are helping shape me so passing along their words seems worthwhile in a forum like this.

• Christianity is largely viewed as being unChristian by outsiders.  From unChristian by Kinnaman and Lyons.
• "We need to go deeper."  Brian Zahnd, pastor of Word of Life Church, St. Joseph, MO. 
• “Some argue, with good cause, that the term Christian is now polluted beyond recognition.”  (Leonard Sweet, Church of the Perfect Storm)
• “The church must stop chasing the impossible, implausible, and dishonorable dream of re-Christianizing society.  It’s time for the church to understand that this is a missionary culture (Babylon) and that the church needs to think and act missionally.”  Allan Hirsch, author of Forgotten Ways.

Looking forward to pressing in Deeper, in Faith, Hope and Love to join in the Mission of God in 2009.

Joe the (Gay) Bricklayer

Reverend Phelps.  I have to admit, a year ago I had no idea who he was (at least by name.)   One year ago on a Friday night I was sitting in a Halsted gay bar, Sidetrack, sippin a coke and talking with a 40-something gay bricklayer named Joe.

Joe asks me, "so what kind of church do you go to that they would let you come here?"  We laugh together.  “Our church wants to get to know the people in our community.  That means getting to know people in their own environment.  I’m here to learn a part of my community that I don’t know.” 

Satisfied with my answer he asks, “so what do you think of Reverend Phelps?”  I draw an immediate blank.  Enjoying my struggle for a minute he finally offers, “you know, the God-hates-fags guy.”  Ohhhh.  That Rev Phelps.

I deduce all at once that if I play word association with your average gay man and I say “Evangelical Christian” he says, “Rev Phelps”.  (This is why writers like Annie Lamott are so reluctant to admit they are “born-again”.)

And so my question to myself one year later is simple:  What have I done since then to convince men like Joe the (Gay) Bricklayer that Evangelical Christian means something totally different than “Rev Phelps”?  Honestly?  Not much. 

I know I’m not going to hang out full-time in gay bars.  But I don’t know what I am going to do.  And that bothers me.  Its not enough to think the sign-holders fools and to say in my cozy confines, “that’s not who I am”.  I have to find something tangible that communicates a different Jesus and a different Christianity to men like Joe the bricklayer who party in Boystown in my city. 

No such thing

There is no such thing as "I don't have time."  Really, there is only:  I will choose to make time for that <or> I won't choose to make time for that.

Why don't we say it like that?  I think the reason is pretty simple.  Saying "I don't have time" allows me to function as a victim of some unseen Time Vacuum Bandit that robbed me when I wasn't looking.  I'm not responsible.  My time was eaten up without my permission.  Its the Time Bandit Vacuum's fault. 

But saying something like, "I won't choose to make time for that" (aka, that is not a priority to me) feels harsh and mean (or so I'm told.)  So instead we blame the evil TBV.

But isn't being honest--that its a decision we're making not to make something fit on our schedule--isn't it just a bit more...um what's the word I'm looking for here... um, honest? 

See, there's a problem with being "nice" as an operational ethic.  It makes you lie a lot.  If you tell the truth, even in love, you will have to say things that may not be nice sometimes.  Like, "I won't be doing that--won't make time for it." 

Can I be honest?  I prefer being nice to being honest more often than I would like to admit.  But I think its time for new vocabulary.  Something a bit more honest.