Saturday, November 21, 2009
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Life is like a bicycle Ride
Lessons learned from my bike ride:
There are basically three types of terrain when biking. Upward slopes, downward slopes, and straight stretches.
In straight stretches: We may be recovering from an arduous recent upward slope, still reveling in the joy of the momentum of the downward slope, or taking in the surroundings as we peacefully pedal along. These are important, yet complacency is a problem. In complacency we may forget to watch for the upcoming terrain, thus robbing us of precious time to prepare momentum for a coming climb.
In Upward slopes: I've found that if I focus my energy on getting to the top of the hill I do not bike to my potential. The length of the journey there, or the degree of the incline make my energy wane more than the work itself. Plus the difficulty of the biking becomes the focus rather than the journey or the surroundings. I instead set really tiny goals (regularly only a foot to a yard ahead of me). Today I biked from leaf to leaf on one such climb. When I do this I'm able to have more energy longer, bike in the moment, and enjoy the journey.
The Transition: This small step focus, however, would be a problem in other parts of the journey. A good biker will know the precise moment to switch from this small focus back to the big picture. Without returning to the big picture at the right time, we miss opportunities to gain momentum thus making the next hill harder or the ride down the hill less enjoyable. etc.
The downward slope: Sometimes, it's important to just revel in the journey! The wind in your hair the beauty of being carried along!
Enjoy the Journey!
There are basically three types of terrain when biking. Upward slopes, downward slopes, and straight stretches.
In straight stretches: We may be recovering from an arduous recent upward slope, still reveling in the joy of the momentum of the downward slope, or taking in the surroundings as we peacefully pedal along. These are important, yet complacency is a problem. In complacency we may forget to watch for the upcoming terrain, thus robbing us of precious time to prepare momentum for a coming climb.
In Upward slopes: I've found that if I focus my energy on getting to the top of the hill I do not bike to my potential. The length of the journey there, or the degree of the incline make my energy wane more than the work itself. Plus the difficulty of the biking becomes the focus rather than the journey or the surroundings. I instead set really tiny goals (regularly only a foot to a yard ahead of me). Today I biked from leaf to leaf on one such climb. When I do this I'm able to have more energy longer, bike in the moment, and enjoy the journey.
The Transition: This small step focus, however, would be a problem in other parts of the journey. A good biker will know the precise moment to switch from this small focus back to the big picture. Without returning to the big picture at the right time, we miss opportunities to gain momentum thus making the next hill harder or the ride down the hill less enjoyable. etc.
The downward slope: Sometimes, it's important to just revel in the journey! The wind in your hair the beauty of being carried along!
Enjoy the Journey!
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Trinity
Just a thought by Elizabeth Johnson I wanted to preserve. I've struggled since I started seminary with the idea of the Trinity. How I'd always thought of it was three ways we understand the one God, or three attributes of God, or something like that. What's always been important to me was the oneness of God. When I got to seminary and started learning about the Greek words for the same substance but three persons I was a bit repulsed by it. That threatens for me the oneness of God.
Whenever I try to get someone to argue for the importance of the threeness of God they have not convinced me of anything other than that it's nice to have an image of divine community. Not something I think is necessary or essential. So anyway, this is the quote that is worth dwelling on and not forgetting:
"Three corresponding distinctions may be said to exist within one God. Why [this] insight? It is based on the conviction that God is utterly faithful, and does not self-reveal in any guise other than the one which actually coheres with the essence of divine being...Basic trust in the experience of God's threefold relatedness to us suggests that a certain corresponding threefoldness characterizes God's own true being." (pg. 199-200) In other words, since God isn't tricking us and God only reveals things that are in line with the core of God, and since we experience God in a threefold way, then that must threefoldness must somehow characterize God.
I still don't know that I agree, but at least I have a window of insight into why the distinction was deemed so important!
Whenever I try to get someone to argue for the importance of the threeness of God they have not convinced me of anything other than that it's nice to have an image of divine community. Not something I think is necessary or essential. So anyway, this is the quote that is worth dwelling on and not forgetting:
"Three corresponding distinctions may be said to exist within one God. Why [this] insight? It is based on the conviction that God is utterly faithful, and does not self-reveal in any guise other than the one which actually coheres with the essence of divine being...Basic trust in the experience of God's threefold relatedness to us suggests that a certain corresponding threefoldness characterizes God's own true being." (pg. 199-200) In other words, since God isn't tricking us and God only reveals things that are in line with the core of God, and since we experience God in a threefold way, then that must threefoldness must somehow characterize God.
I still don't know that I agree, but at least I have a window of insight into why the distinction was deemed so important!
Thursday, October 29, 2009
The Language of Metaphor
In this book Design Matters, the author starts off by saying that before you learn to do any designing for projection, the very first step is to change how you think. If all we're doing is projecting lyrics and pretty backgrounds then using visual technology is a waste of money, there are many less expensive ways to do that. WOW that was harsh.
Our culture isn't just visual in terms of wanting pretty pictures. This new medium has changed how we think and process. Our culture thinks and communicates in metaphor. Take commercials: for decades the Polar Bear has been used by Coke. Is it just cute? NO, the Polar Bear is a metaphor for COLD which makes us think refreshing. Or take Music: Firecracker (about a woman), The Race is On (about heartbreak), I left something turned on at home (about a woman not a stove). I like country music but this is the case in all genres.
We need to learn to think in metaphor. My husband is really good at this. He can come up with a metaphor for just about anything. Sometimes his are too complicated, but still that's how he thinks.
This book said that a good metaphor can be connected in one simple sentence. Anyway, just really thought this was an interesting idea to dwell on. Do we use metaphor in our our church? Do you use it in yours?
Our culture isn't just visual in terms of wanting pretty pictures. This new medium has changed how we think and process. Our culture thinks and communicates in metaphor. Take commercials: for decades the Polar Bear has been used by Coke. Is it just cute? NO, the Polar Bear is a metaphor for COLD which makes us think refreshing. Or take Music: Firecracker (about a woman), The Race is On (about heartbreak), I left something turned on at home (about a woman not a stove). I like country music but this is the case in all genres.
We need to learn to think in metaphor. My husband is really good at this. He can come up with a metaphor for just about anything. Sometimes his are too complicated, but still that's how he thinks.
This book said that a good metaphor can be connected in one simple sentence. Anyway, just really thought this was an interesting idea to dwell on. Do we use metaphor in our our church? Do you use it in yours?
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Response: God as Game Designer
So my husband, who is designing board games for fun, sent me this link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wy3ORyK8CA
Since I don't want to be writing my Mid-Term on Moltmann right now I'm going to think about this instead.
The premise of the discussion is that if God designed the world like a game designer designs a game then he didn't do a very good job. If Heaven and Hell are the win loose conditions, then what are the rules? Well no one can agree, even on the 10 commandments. A good game has clear concise rules so that games spend 90% of the time playing the game instead of debating it. Christians, with their non-concise, unclear "rules" spend that 90% of time debating the rules instead. You win the game by maximizing chance, minimizing losses, and playing by the rules.
In some ways this is a reasonable argument. It would be nice to think that there are straight forward rules to live by that would lead to success, and it is clear that those have not been given to us.
I think, however that the analogy, while we long for its simplicity and ability to understand, is not accurate. Life is not a game. 1) Rules become ends in themselves and not fulfilling the Game. 2) Additionally, it seems clear that there is not one set of rules for everyone, instead faithfulness is a process. 3)Heaven and Hell are not win loose conditions to life. So here are my ideas and thoughts on those three things. I could definitely be wrong, and these are always works in progress.
Heaven and Hell are not win loose conditions - Heaven has to be more than something at the end of life, or after the resurrection of the dead. Heaven is in the moments where the divine is manifest on earth. In Charity, in Love, in Compassion, in Beauty, in Creativity, in Solidarity, in Community. It is a blessing to experience Heaven on Earth, and yes Heaven is probably also an end game scenario where "there is a new heaven and a new earth" as Revelation says, but it is not a reward for playing by the rules. In fact, most Christians believe in the impossibility of playing by the rules.
Some Christians do treat Heaven and Hell as these win loose end game scenario. It speaks to an inner longing to escape from the trials of this world. But Heaven and Hell are not about individuals winning and loosing. Heaven is about a collective salvation. Redeeming a broken and suffering world.
Summary: So really what I'm saying is that Faithfulness is not about the End result! Being a "Good Christian" is not just about getting to heaven and avoiding hell, it is about a life lived now. There are lots of things that come from this, a life lived without fear, a life of abundance, a life of blessing to the world, a life of belonging and not loneliness. There are also risks and pain. It is not easy to glimpse redemption and live in a broken world. Life is complicated. God is bigger than all of us, and when we open ourselves up to the Holy Spirit God can guide us in a way unique to us and our gifts and our situation in order to lead us in a life of Faithfulness now. Life's game is not about the end of our life, but the end of all history in a new creation.
Alright, lots more I could say but this is a way long post so I'll sign off now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wy3ORyK8CA
Since I don't want to be writing my Mid-Term on Moltmann right now I'm going to think about this instead.
The premise of the discussion is that if God designed the world like a game designer designs a game then he didn't do a very good job. If Heaven and Hell are the win loose conditions, then what are the rules? Well no one can agree, even on the 10 commandments. A good game has clear concise rules so that games spend 90% of the time playing the game instead of debating it. Christians, with their non-concise, unclear "rules" spend that 90% of time debating the rules instead. You win the game by maximizing chance, minimizing losses, and playing by the rules.
In some ways this is a reasonable argument. It would be nice to think that there are straight forward rules to live by that would lead to success, and it is clear that those have not been given to us.
I think, however that the analogy, while we long for its simplicity and ability to understand, is not accurate. Life is not a game. 1) Rules become ends in themselves and not fulfilling the Game. 2) Additionally, it seems clear that there is not one set of rules for everyone, instead faithfulness is a process. 3)Heaven and Hell are not win loose conditions to life. So here are my ideas and thoughts on those three things. I could definitely be wrong, and these are always works in progress.
Rules: The goal of the rules, can become the rules themselves. I should know as I'm a legalistic type of player. The rules of a game are not designed to be followed for the sake of following the rules. They are designed to make the game fun and accessible for all. The problem the Apostle Paul points out with the Jewish rules was that they were becoming ends in themselves instead of being instruments that empowered life to be fun and accessible for all. That is what people are trying to say when they say the New Testament supersedes the Old. Though I don't agree with that statement, it is true that the New Testament says that the old legalism is not effective. "Rules" are only good as long as they help.
One set of Rules: Unfortunately, I don't think that one set of rules works for everyone. If there were, then it seems likely that we would know them, perhaps they could be as clear as a board game's rules. Instead, faithfulness is a process, it is ongoing, it does not look the same for everyone. Nor is what was right for you in one situation necessarily right for you in another. Faithfulness requires discernment. This is the beauty of God's Holy Spirit. The "rules of life" are not written out, they are implanted, so to speak, inside of each of us. The Bible, our Community, our Experience, and Tradition helps us be attuned to, and understand, that voice of the Holy Spirit. I'm not saying anything goes. There are probably some things that are absolutely wrong (like rape) but most things are not black and white. That is why instead of rules, God gave us stories and a guide.
Heaven and Hell are not win loose conditions - Heaven has to be more than something at the end of life, or after the resurrection of the dead. Heaven is in the moments where the divine is manifest on earth. In Charity, in Love, in Compassion, in Beauty, in Creativity, in Solidarity, in Community. It is a blessing to experience Heaven on Earth, and yes Heaven is probably also an end game scenario where "there is a new heaven and a new earth" as Revelation says, but it is not a reward for playing by the rules. In fact, most Christians believe in the impossibility of playing by the rules.
Some Christians do treat Heaven and Hell as these win loose end game scenario. It speaks to an inner longing to escape from the trials of this world. But Heaven and Hell are not about individuals winning and loosing. Heaven is about a collective salvation. Redeeming a broken and suffering world.
Summary: So really what I'm saying is that Faithfulness is not about the End result! Being a "Good Christian" is not just about getting to heaven and avoiding hell, it is about a life lived now. There are lots of things that come from this, a life lived without fear, a life of abundance, a life of blessing to the world, a life of belonging and not loneliness. There are also risks and pain. It is not easy to glimpse redemption and live in a broken world. Life is complicated. God is bigger than all of us, and when we open ourselves up to the Holy Spirit God can guide us in a way unique to us and our gifts and our situation in order to lead us in a life of Faithfulness now. Life's game is not about the end of our life, but the end of all history in a new creation.
Alright, lots more I could say but this is a way long post so I'll sign off now.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
What is Salvation?
Ok, so this is now my new favorite book: A New Kind of Christian
Way to make me think!
Salvation has never made sense to me. (Maybe that's part of why I'm having such a difficult time constructing my theology of Baptism.) I've always been uncomfortable with the phrazes "born again" and "saved", and I've wanted to a laugh at the: "you can know where you're going when you die" as if we can control God or grasp the unimaginable. Most of what we think we "know" about heaven, eternal life, death, and salvation is likely just as much a parable or painting as I've come to believe the creation story is. Very helpful and valuable, but not "factually descriptive." (should I stop? I feel that this is getting into controversial territory for someone seeking ordination...oh well)
So I was shocked to read "Let's say that salvation means becoming part of the solution rather than part of the problem." Cool! again this is a painting, an image, and not a factual description that is all inclusive of what salvation means, but for me, this seems to define how I've been living into salvation my whole life! It's never been about a conversion story for me (you can read about this in an earlier post). This journey of faith is about being part of God's salvific role in the whole world!
My pastor's sermon today is on salvation (and he's read this book too), too bad I'm home sick! Sometimes they are posted on line so you can watch and wait like me :) Or just check out our new website: http://www.newleafchurch.org/web/
Way to make me think!
Salvation has never made sense to me. (Maybe that's part of why I'm having such a difficult time constructing my theology of Baptism.) I've always been uncomfortable with the phrazes "born again" and "saved", and I've wanted to a laugh at the: "you can know where you're going when you die" as if we can control God or grasp the unimaginable. Most of what we think we "know" about heaven, eternal life, death, and salvation is likely just as much a parable or painting as I've come to believe the creation story is. Very helpful and valuable, but not "factually descriptive." (should I stop? I feel that this is getting into controversial territory for someone seeking ordination...oh well)
So I was shocked to read "Let's say that salvation means becoming part of the solution rather than part of the problem." Cool! again this is a painting, an image, and not a factual description that is all inclusive of what salvation means, but for me, this seems to define how I've been living into salvation my whole life! It's never been about a conversion story for me (you can read about this in an earlier post). This journey of faith is about being part of God's salvific role in the whole world!
My pastor's sermon today is on salvation (and he's read this book too), too bad I'm home sick! Sometimes they are posted on line so you can watch and wait like me :) Or just check out our new website: http://www.newleafchurch.org/web/
Saturday, September 26, 2009
I am
In spanish there are two terms for I am. So you might say I am tired. That doesn't mean that who you are is a tired person, it means that right now you are tired. It seems to me to be a transient state.
The other word in Spanish for I am is a characteristic. I am hospitable. It speaks to a core characteristic. (I can't remember much Spanish so this blog post is coming out of my memory and the words of my friend John Evans.)
This distinction came to mind when I read a bit of Jurgen Moltmann in The Way of Jesus Christ. He said 1 John (4:16) "defines God by saying: 'God is love.' God does not love just as he might also be angry. He is love. His being and existence is love. In Christ he constitutes himself as love. This happened on the cross." (pg. 175) So "God is" would be the same verb as "I am." When talking about how closely God is tied to love it would be one not of transience, but of identity.
I found the analogy to Spanish helpful. God gets angry in the Bible, but God is not Anger. The overriding quality of God is love. I do believe that "God is love" goes even deeper than that Spanish word, but the distinction is still deeply important if we are to take seriously the anger of God (and other qualities difficult to swallow like judgment, wrath, distance etc.) while still clinging tightly to the love of God that is so central.
P.S. my husband says the words in Spanish are Soy and Estar, but we aren't certain which is which. Anyone know?
The other word in Spanish for I am is a characteristic. I am hospitable. It speaks to a core characteristic. (I can't remember much Spanish so this blog post is coming out of my memory and the words of my friend John Evans.)
This distinction came to mind when I read a bit of Jurgen Moltmann in The Way of Jesus Christ. He said 1 John (4:16) "defines God by saying: 'God is love.' God does not love just as he might also be angry. He is love. His being and existence is love. In Christ he constitutes himself as love. This happened on the cross." (pg. 175) So "God is" would be the same verb as "I am." When talking about how closely God is tied to love it would be one not of transience, but of identity.
I found the analogy to Spanish helpful. God gets angry in the Bible, but God is not Anger. The overriding quality of God is love. I do believe that "God is love" goes even deeper than that Spanish word, but the distinction is still deeply important if we are to take seriously the anger of God (and other qualities difficult to swallow like judgment, wrath, distance etc.) while still clinging tightly to the love of God that is so central.
P.S. my husband says the words in Spanish are Soy and Estar, but we aren't certain which is which. Anyone know?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)