Gadfly's Muse:

« March 2014 | Main | May 2014 »

April 30, 2014

Yet ANOTHER Star Wars Movie????

[image: Dogwood, 2014, JA Van Devender]

Matthew 13:52 (NKJV)

⁵²Then He said to them, “Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old.”

If the only artistic avenues open to a culture is the revarnishing of old achievements, then you can be pretty certain that stagnation is present as a prelude to collapse.

I have always had a kind of sneaking suspicion that there is a reciprocal relation to artistic energy and cultural health. Broadly speaking, I think you can measure the "temperature" of a culture by the vitality and movement in the arts. There are historical precedents that it would be tedious to catalog and I don't intend to go there, but a walk through of any local art museum with a significant collection can almost present a commentary on the rise and fall of cultures.

I think back to the energy of the early American movements and the raw hopefulness that was communicated in the arts. I am not going to commend any particular artists because it would distract from the main point, but pick one or two that you like and just survey their works in comparison to the wider prospects and attitudes in their surrounding times and places. What is truly interesting to me is to survey the "periods" they represent, especially when subsequent artists basically just polish the apple of the pioneers. At first glance there is some rough correlation to the lack of creativity, the retrenching attitudes, found among the whole community.

Which brings me to the planned release of Star Wars VII coming up this December... starring... the original cast in the leading roles. C'mon guys... Hans Solo at 70? Good grief... would it not be better to come up with at least a "Next Generation" epic ala Star Trek rather than resurrecting the same old characters?

This is Hollywood making money by exploiting the nostalgia of aging boomers and their kids. We are supposed to relive the thrill of that first opening sequence, with the words receding into infinity and the brilliant score strumming our imaginations even as it fixed itself into our cultural heritage. It was ground-breaking stuff... brilliance of execution transforming a mediocre plot line into the stuff of legend. Adding to that original work, especially beyond the first three, has seemed analogous to a later artist adding some background detail and "improvements" to the Mona Lisa. It was complete as it stood... what was added to it had the net effect of detracting from it.

The same with 2001: A Space Odyssey. "Also Sprach Zarathustra" is forever branded in my mind as being associated with a bone spinning in the air registering the leap of man creatures into the age of tools... and the fade in view of the spinning Space Station with its docking shuttle waltzing to the "Blue Danube" was cinematic brilliance at its best. None of the sequels came anywhere close to that achievement nor to the perplexing and thought provoking final scene with the embryo gazing at the planet earth. We talked about that for months.

Star Wars did its thing and introduced iconic characters that resonate among us to this day. Leave it alone!

Come up with something new, for goodness' sake. Let the Force be with someone else...

When art is reduced to only a celebration of technique... when special effects are the reason to see the movie and not to enhance the story line... then the true tragedy is occuring in the culture and lives of those who are paying the admission fare. Special effects mesmerize the senses but they do not inspire the imagination. There's only so many things you can do with the Robin Hood theme until you transform it into something it was not.

Show some class Harrison, Mark and Carrie... let the memory of your work then be that which abides in your fans... don't diminish it with some token attempt to regain your youth because that will be how you are remembered.

It was good as it was... leave it alone.

Posted by Gadfly on April 30, 2014 at 11:53 AM in Culture, Movies, etc. | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 29, 2014

"Hell?" You say?

[image: Flowering Pear, 2014, JA Van Devender]

Luke 12:4–5 (NKJV)

⁴“And I say to you, My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. ⁵But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear Him who, after He has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I say to you, fear Him!

OK... what do the beautiful pear flowers have to do with Hell? Well, directly, nothing. Indirectly, they are an apparent treat for squirrels and I had to move this potted tree several times to keep the little monsters from eating every bloom. As far as I was concerned, at the time, it would have been only just for each one of those little critters to be fried. If I didn't live in the suburbs I and my trusty shotgun might have translated that wish into reality.

But the real reason why I'm musing on "Hell" today is because of this article [HERE], again brought to my attention by my FB friend Al.

One essential premise of the article is that the traditional Christian doctrine of Hell is a tough sell to modern ears and particularly the younger generations. This truth is well known by Biblical preachers who face the tension between the world view of the Scriptures and the world view of the common culture at every point of intersection. And, quite frankly, the general concerns or reservations about the doctrine as expressed by this author, are ones with which I have some sympathy.

I can remember when I was preparing for ministry and undergoing trials of examination, being asked about my views on what we call the "intermediate state," that condition of the soul after physical death and prior to the resurrection of the body. I said that "if it weren't for the plain teaching of scripture, I would believe that the soul ceases to exist between death and the resurrection, but such is not the case. The scriptures plainly teach that "this day you will be with me in paradise" and there can not be any other way of taking our Lord's words than that the thief would be with Jesus that very day in paradise." Therefore, even though it is a tough doctrine, yet it is what the Scriptures teach. The same can be said about "Hell."

Which brings us to the concerns raised in this article.

The author believes, somewhat in common with the late C. S. Lewis, that "sin" and the condition of "sin" is in fact Hell. Grounding his argument in the Platonic/Socratic views that sin essentially is a willful self-denial of the good, that sinful actions separate us from the experience of the good and therefore bring unhappiness instead of happiness, he advances the idea that total sinfulness means that we deprive ourselves of all experience of the good and thus Hell is not really punishment but the cumulative effect of bad choices. We are miserable beyond belief but, in fact, we have just been given over to our sin and that is the experience of Hell.

There is some truth in this and we Christians must remember that Hell is metaphorically cast for us in terms of a variety of images. It is both pictured as a lake of fire and also as an "outer darkness". What is consistent about the scriptural presentation however is that it is ALWAYS presented in terms of judicial punishment. And it is this point that the author is at pains to deny or to find some alternative explanation.

What Christians must remember is that sending someone to Hell is a very Personal thing to God Himself. It is presented in terms of judgment and sentencing. It is cast in terms of justice, that it is the "reward" or "wages" of sin.

The view this author is promoting is most clearly distilled in his statement, "To say that an immoral person deserves to suffer for his sins is like insisting that a man with cancer deserves to have his legs broken. It's a prescription of additional suffering for someone who's already suffering." This is the "medical model" of ethics raising its perenial hissing head. "Sin" is a disease.. like cancer..... it causes the sinner to suffer... the sinner actually wishes that he did not suffer and therefore, given the chance and the right medicine, he would gladly choose it so that he may have relief... obviously this medicine has not been offered or taken and therefore the sinner does not deserve punishment... he deserves mercy. It would be unjust to have his legs broken.

This view of sin effectively undermines and completely subverts the gospel of Jesus Christ. If sin does not deserve punishment then Christ died for something other than the sin of His people. If sin does not deserve punishment then Jesus' death is just one more instance of where a good man was killed by sinners who were themselves victims... they were suffering more than he was. If sin does not deserve punishment, then God really should do something about the suffering that people bring on themselves and if He is a loving God He would cure everyone who is suffering and therefore everyone stops suffering after death because God would heal them of their sin.

At every point the repudiation of penal justice at the hands of a righteous God who has a case against sinners and whose punishment is justly eternal, turns Christianity into just one more rationalization of human merit. According to this view, no one deserves to be "punished" for eternity because human beings, by their very humanity, should be eternally loved and blessed by God.

If this author had preserved the penal sanctions in his development of the nature of sin and its death dealing aspects, then we might have had common ground on which to build complementary views. But deny God's justice and the necessity of punishment as an integral aspect of that justice and the gospel is lost.

Jesus is the Son of God or He is not. There is no middle ground in that proposition. What Jesus teaches is, in fact, the truth about God and mankind or it is not. The second question hinges on the first for the degree of authority we assign to Jesus' teaching. Jesus taught that we are to fear Him who, after having killed (note that), has the power to cast into Hell. Jesus, the Son of God, leaves the 'casting into Hell' in terms of a judicial decision to be exercised at God's discretion. He chooses to have mercy on whom He has mercy and to withhold mercy from those who justly deserve His wrath. He is God. We are not. We do not stand in judgment of Him, but He of us. It is up to us to conform to His thoughts in this matter and not otherwise.

Failing to do so is being subject to the possibility that Hell is something we will know much more about than we would desire.

Posted by Gadfly on April 29, 2014 at 09:47 AM in Christian Apologetics, Church, Commentary, Culture, Movies, etc., Discipleship, Education, Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 28, 2014

Humility & Ignorance: An Inverse Relation?????

[Image: In An Elephant's Eye, 2014, L. Borch (original image)]

Hosea 4:6 (NKJV)

⁶ My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you from being priest for Me; Because you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children.

One of my FB friends, Al, posted a link to Wiki's entry on the Dunning- Kruger effect. I had never heard of it before so I looked it up (HERE) and found it posed an interesting thought experiment.

According to this article (and I have not researched it any further), people who are "competent" (in any given area or as an overall assessment) tend to "under-estimate" their relative competence to others in contrast to people who are "incompetent" but who tend to dramatically "over-estimate" their own competence. The article moves from the specific to the general in its closing statement, rounding out the impression given by, or implications of, this statistical survey by quoting such folks as "Confucius ("Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."),^[3] Bertrand Russell ("One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision", and Charles Darwin, whom they quoted in their original paper ("ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge")."

It appears to me that a subtle logical fallacy is inherent in the structure of the article and is a potential trap for those who might be influenced by these findings. The fallacy occurs when the word "competence" is essentially equated with "humility" with regard to one's level of "competence" but that is then extrapolated to a lack of humility that is equated with "certainty." (see the quote from Russell particularly, he is a favorite sophist among multitudes of also-rans)

It is easy to understand how incompetence can make it difficult to assess one's own relative quality of execution and thereby to over-estimate its value. I am a rank amateur woodworker. It can take me hours to join boards with dove tails and make a simple drawer. In the isolation of my own shop, after shaving and sanding and chiseling and tapping away, I may pick up the drawer, run my eyes over the pleasing lines and the "close" fit and the absence of significant warping.... and think to my self, "man, I'm getting pretty good."

And then, I stop at a craft show or go to a woodworking seminar, and watch a master put together a drawer in less than an hour and when he passes out his work for our inspection, I see a world of difference between the quality of joinery. To be ignorant of our own competence requires a knowledge that (1) superior results are possible than what we achieve, and (2) that recognizing the qualitative difference between the results obtained by the relatively incompetent and the competent person, is itself part of the process toward competence.

There is no logical connection between that analysis and "certainty."

An incompetent person can be absolutely "certain" about his work. The drawer I fashioned may not have been in the same league as the master craftsman, but I could be absolutely certain that it would fit in the cabinet and that, on the whole, the finished product would be acceptable to my most severe critic ("she who must be obeyed" ala Rumpole of the Bailey).

I think this illustrates the fundamental fallacy inherent in concluding that "certainty" and "humility" exist in some kind of inverse relation.

I have had some rather uncomfortable experiences in this regard. More than once I have heard an argument shift from some basic position or proposition, to the more ad hominum attack where the person who is "certain" is accused of arrogance. This is especially true when the one making the accusation essentially desires all "opinions" to be equally valued. To be certain of one position is, by definition, to be convinced that any contrary position is false. That doesn't make the person arrogant... it is simply the necessary relation that must exist.

However, and this is where this Dunning-Kruger effect is, to my mind, wrongly applied, when it is presumed that the person who is "certain" therefore must be "ignorant" because if he/she was "educated" then they would not be "certain"... about anything. All of their views would be "provisional", adopted for their own private way of life, and are to be therefore gently promoted but never, ever, in such a way as to diminish other views. You see... it's just not nice to tell some-else they are wrong about something... because... you see... no one can really be certain about virtually anything.

"Competence" may lead to "certainty" or "uncertainty" - the more one becomes "competent" in a given field, the more that person may hold some views less strongly than others. "Competence" may also serve to verify ideas that were previously held only tentatively... hence leading to "certainty."

Which brings me finally to "faith." One cannot "believe" or "have faith" in anything without some level of conviction regarding the certainty of the belief.

To act as if the proposition "God exists" is only provisionally true is to be a practicing atheist. A person can be introduced to the idea that "God exists" and then begin to explore what that might mean... and if in so doing, he or she becomes convinced of its truth, then and only then can we say that the person "believes" in God or has "faith" in Him.

To believe something is true is to believe contradictory positions to be false. It is not arrogant to categorically claim all other religions than Christianity to be false. It is inherent in the Christian faith itself and on no less authority than God's Word itself as recorded in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament. Every Christian proclamation will find its value and power in the certainty that is associated with the fundamental presupposition "God is there and He has spoken."

All contrary positions are false.

It is important that Christians be truly humble in manner, conversation and personal relations with others, regardless of the other person's views. It is even more important that they be certain in their beliefs. This was Jesus' way and it is ours to follow as He has lead.

Posted by Gadfly on April 28, 2014 at 08:51 AM in Christian Apologetics, Church, Commentary, Culture, Movies, etc., Discipleship, Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 26, 2014

Cliven Bundy.... RIP

[image: Tawny Eagle, 2014, L. Borch (original image)]

Proverbs 15:2 (NKJV)

² The tongue of the wise uses knowledge rightly, But the mouth of fools pours forth foolishness.

One version of the "News" HERE.

Cliven Bundy, as a national libertarian/conservative rallying point, died this past week. Pity. He was a victim of that dreaded "hoof-in-mouth" (sic) disease so common to passionate people who just don't know when to keep their mouths shut.

The actual circumstances surrounding Bundy's complaint against the government is, as is always the case, somewhat ambiguous. It is the business of antagonists in cases like this to blur the facts, on both sides. I have no doubt that Harry Reid's son was about the business of making money hand over fist by maneuvering the politics behind the scenes, making land available for a lucrative Chinese (of all things, don't we make solar power equipment in the US?) solar power grid. I also have no doubt that Bundy was basically trying to get free grazing on government land. I also am very aware that the Federal State government owns a huge percentage (83% - see HERE) of the actual real estate available. Add to that the amount of State owned land and I imagine very little land is available for private ownership, especially tracts large enough to support cattle ranching.

In lush, or moderately lush areas, beef cattle need about 1 acre of land per head. Where the grass is sparse and slow to replenish, like Nevada, that ratio can increase dramatically. Cattle ranchers don't make money with small herds, the profit margin is too slim. Neither can they pay a lot of money for grazing rights for the same reason. The question appears to me to be one in which reasonable men ought to be able to find a way forward on the basic issue. And if there is a particular tortoise whose habitat is at risk... move the tortoise!

But that conversation can no longer happen... not publicly anyway. Why? Because no one cares about the central issue any longer... Bundy's racism is now the news and he has no excuse. He is entitled to his pig-headed opinions. He has a first amendment right to air them. Everyone else has the personal right to ignore him or heap derisive comments on him for those remarks. Forrest Gump's mom taught him that "stupid is as stupid does" and in this instance, blathering on about the black culture, in monolithic and stereo-typical terms, was stupid beyond belief.

His wife ought to take to the woodshed and teach him some manners.

But the true tragedy here is that the possibility of a clear rallying point, a "Joe the plumber" kind of circumstance, was lost forever. It's dead... even Rand Paul is scurrying for cover... it's the only possible course of action he can take at this point.

It might have actually proven that Bundy's case and his actions over the past 20 years would have been unsupportable any way. That is not clear at this point. The fact that he broke the law does not ultimately prove that he was morally wrong doing it even as those Freedom Riders in the 60's broke the law by traveling to the South with the intention of staging sit-ins and other demonstrations. Civil Disobedience, by definition, is law-breaking. That doesn't mean it is evil.

If Nevada wants a profitable cattle industry, and the US has not gone entirely vegetarian yet, then it was probably necessary for something like this to happen so as to garner the public opinion and visibility which alone poses a substantial counter-balance to big politics influence like Harry Reid's son. It's about the only way the average guy can make a splash.

However... when the cameras are rolling... verbal discipline is required, especially in a hypocritical climate such as is now in place. Bundy is evidently just as racist in his fundamental views as Louis Farrakhan but he cannot expect the same tolerance and minimization of his more radical views that is extended to the Black Muslim leader. It's easy to understand why... Bundy fits the stereo-typical image of the ignorant, red-neck racist. Farrakhan is suave, erudite and charismatic. There's no contest head to head. Each one's racial views are to be abhorred. Bundy has committed political suicide. Farrakhan lives to fight on.

As I said... pity. Perhaps the issue Bundy raised will get some attention behind the scenes, after all, there was a fair amount of collateral damage done to some politicians also. But... for now... sing the dirge... "Alas, poor Bundy... I did not know him well..."

Posted by Gadfly on April 26, 2014 at 07:18 AM in Commentary, Culture, Movies, etc., Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 25, 2014

The Great Leveller....

[Image: African Perspective, 2014, L. Borch (original image)]

Luke 18:13–14 (NKJV)

¹³And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ ¹⁴I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

(Note Bene: there are two spellings: leveller and leveler, and both are allowable. Both are used in the musing. So... I know that consistency should require choosing one or the other, but I just let it happen as it "flowed." )

James Shirley (1596-1666) wrote a poem entitled "Death the Leveller." It's short and well worth reading and contemplating. His closing stanza is as follows:

The garlands wither on your brow,
         Then boast no more your mighty deeds!
Upon Death's purple altar now
         See where the victor-victim bleeds.
         Your heads must come
         To the cold tomb:
Only the actions of the just
Smell sweet and blossom in their dust.

The previous stanzas explain the "victor-victim" reference, how "men with swords" reap the field and "plant fresh laurels where they kill." He meditates on how the apparent and relative successes of human life tend to elevate one individual over another. How wealth, fame and accomplishment can assume undue proportions and even constitute the evaluation of a person's worth. It is so characteristic of mankind to be focused on the "now" that those things and pursuits which are measured in terms of "now" dominate our thinking. All too easily we begin to gauge the measure of true humanity by the scale of achievement. What is even more deadly is the tendency, once we have consciously or unconsciously begun to think this way, to presume that our standards and God's standards overlap. What appears so "obvious" to us with regard to our lives and pursuits, must, by all reason, be that which God also intends for us.

Our "righteousness", as with the Pharisee in the story Jesus tells, is measured by the "things" that we do or accomplish. Importantly, in this story, the things the Pharisee draws comfort from is that his life is not characterized by the more visible sins but rather is centered around religious exercises. These are commendable attributes and ones which every Christian should pursue. Never-the-less, it is not this man whom Jesus describes as "standing as justified." It was the man who saw that his first concern was his own unworthiness to be loved by a most Holy God. It was the man who, while not lacking in good deeds ( I presume) yet did not see in those good deeds any claim on God's gratitude. Regardless of the relative triumphs of his life, in final reckoning, the bottom line was that he was a sinner, in need of grace, and apart from that grace, any of his local victories were nothing but filthy rags.

That man went down to his house "justified", as one who was not only part of God's visible covenant community, but as one who was included in God's eternal covenant community, a true child of Abraham and a true saint in the service of his God in heaven.

"Only the actions of the just smell sweet and blossom in the dust." Only those works which are the fruit of a humble and grateful heart will make a difference in the face of that great leveler, death. They say of earthly riches that "you can't carry it with you" and that is true. But there are heavenly riches that can be stored up in heaven where reward for works is patiently and infallibly extended. As with the distinction on earth, the heavenly riches/reward will not be so much 'physical' as in relatively larger mansions, or more ornate robes, or (God help us) bigger pay checks. The "good works" that are done in this life certainly register in physical ways. It is not enough to tell someone hungry, to "be fed" and then "go away and don't bother me." As with the Good Samaritan, the justified and humble heart will look with compassion on people and on the world about him and seek to ease suffering, care for the afflicted, pursue justice and mercy where needed. The physical activities will be the fruit of such a heart. But in and of themselves they do not constitute the basis for our reward in heaven. It is rather the spiritual state of our souls which shows forth the awesome power and wisdom of God. It is the miraculous work of the Holy Spirit that reconstitutes us in the image of Christ and motivates us to care about such things as mercy and truth and sacrificial living, that is the glory of God.

And it is this work which is rewarded in us. It is the transformed heart that is precious to God and which is welcomed to His house and given place at His table. At that table, all who attend are equal, leveled in status, but elevated beyond all imagining in the perfection of their being. We could say that everyone is equally rich as they are equally content in their status.

What is there, beyond the horizon, waiting for us should be the goal of our lives now. It is possible to cast our minds on the "heavenlies" and so live as to reflect that central preoccupation. We do not have to buy into the world's value system, .... and, as Jesus' story reveals, it is deadly to our religion to do so. We cannot serve God and Mammon and at the very least that teaching points to the exclusive nature of God's value system.

What we do matters in this world... it may or may not matter in the next. In the face of the great leveller, we ought to pursue a life dedicated to those things that matter to God and be far less influenced by sterile and deceitful measures of worth.

Posted by Gadfly on April 25, 2014 at 08:12 AM in Devotional Meditation, Discipleship, Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 24, 2014

Touchy and Mean Tempered...

[image: Water Buffalo, 2014, L. Borch (original image)]

Psalm 140:9–11 (NKJV)

⁹ “As for the head of those who surround me, Let the evil of their lips cover them; ¹⁰ Let burning coals fall upon them; Let them be cast into the fire, Into deep pits, that they rise not up again. ¹¹ Let not a slanderer be established in the earth; Let evil hunt the violent man to overthrow him.”

From a couple of days ago (see HERE):

A Woodlawn man was charged Tuesday with fatally shooting his neighbor, saying he felt "disrespected" when the victim left a Sunday cookout early, according to charging documents.

Police said Brandon Jerome Stanfield, 30, shot and killed Michael Jefferson Jr., 39, inside his home on Rocky Brook Court after Jefferson left a cookout before Stanfield's family arrived, one witness told police, according to documents filed in Baltimore County District Court.

The Cape Buffalo is best photographed with an long, long lens. The Rhino, from what I understand is similarly bad tempered, but the Rhino at least has the decency to have poor eyesight. It's possible he won't see you. The Cape Buffalo????.... well, it's best not to take chances. I say all this with no first hand knowledge but it's how I generally perceive the situation. According to one source, (HERE) the Cape Buffalo has killed more big game hunters than any other animal in Africa. That's not a particularly encouraging statistic and removes any hope of my ever petting one of them.

There are people like that.

I simply cannot imagine being so inflamed by a person's casual slight (if it even was intended as one) that I would follow that person and shoot him multiple times. In this instance the victim had left the shooter's cook-out before the shooter's family arrived. That's all the details we are given. The shooter said that he felt "dis-respected" and that he then followed the victim to the victim's HOME... confronted him and then shot him. My first reaction is: "you have got to be kidding me!"

There must be more background that flows into this tragedy. Both victim and shooter are integrally woven into their own or overlapping matrix. There is the culture of the streets... there is the family background or lack thereof.... there is the social reinforcement that forms the expectations of individuals, whether for ill or good. But it is in the concrete instantiation of such broad categories... where all those things funnel down to two individuals and one with a gun... that we can see the deadly and perverse reality of the abstract principles.

There is some truth to the idea that violence is in our DNA and that to a greater or lesser strength in particular individuals. I am not opposed to that general thought. However being inclined to something and acting on that inclination are two different things. A person who inclined to harmful and anti-social behavior can be subjected to counter-balancing pressures and the excitment of competing inclinations. This is the role of "role-models" or "mentors." By generating a relationship in which the person who is the "role-model" is deemed worthy of imitating and whose good opinion is important, a competing inclination is introduced to help curb behaviors that place that good opinion in jeopardy. Here is where human beings differ, fundamentally, from the Cape Buffalo.

What this terrible story illustrates is the essential unraveling of the social fabric in many of our neighborhoods, in some entire cities and potentially across the nation. The hyper individualism that is the essential feature magnifies "dis-respect" to the status of a capital offense. There is no "we" here.... only "I".... and hence there is no fabric or tapestry, there are only individual threads. When that is the case we will be ruled more by our DNA than by higher level consciousness.

There is hope and a remedy for this situation. It requires the formation of a moral community, small and large, that understands and values individuals in terms of the wider body. This community must possess a consensus that they are not a rule unto themselves but that they are subordinate to a rule that is worthy of pursuing. The Lord Jesus Christ came to institute just such a community and to vest it with His Holy Spirit unto the ends that men like these could, within its fellowship, be equipped and motivated to pursue another type of life, with different ends and different methods of attaining those ends.

He came to call men, even such as these, to that Kingdom, which is His Visible Church, and there to embrace the life that it offers. I am bold to confess that it is the only real hope we have in the face of social disintegration. Structural changes, more social programs, even more educational opportunities, safety-nets of various kinds... can all have some short-term effect... they are essentially band-aids or pressure bandages to stop hemorraghing blood flow. The only long term cure is to translate the individual from one culture to another... from one way of living to another... in short, it is for the individual to be given a new life, being born again into a different relation to the world and to the God who made that world.

Individualism, even Evangelical Christian individualism, has to be recognized as the most basic expression of "autonomy." It is the idea that every man is captain of his own soul and determines his own destiny and judges right and wrong solely in reference to himself. What happened in Baltimore is the ultimate expression of just how deadly and wicked this fundamental orientation can be.

Christians hold the key and have the responsibility to take this Kingdom entrusted to us and see it as the only hope for our land and the world in general. Apart from that we will continue to "Slouch Toward Gomarrah" as Robert Bork cautioned us.

Along the way more blood will be spilled and more sordid stories will unfold. There is urgency here.

Posted by Gadfly on April 24, 2014 at 09:00 AM in Church, Commentary, Culture, Movies, etc., Discipleship, Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 23, 2014

High Alert....

[Image: High Alert, 2014, L. Borch (original image)]

Luke 12:54–56 (NKJV)

⁵⁴Then He also said to the multitudes, “Whenever you see a cloud rising out of the west, immediately you say, ‘A shower is coming’; and so it is. ⁵⁵And when you see the south wind blow, you say, ‘There will be hot weather’; and there is. ⁵⁶Hypocrites! You can discern the face of the sky and of the earth, but how is it you do not discern this time?

Another image from Linda's Kenyan photo-safari, this one has "story" written all over it. The cats are magnificent and the cub looks like it would make such a cuddly pet that you almost want to take it home with you. The mom walking attentively behind reminds us of a scene from "The Lion King." If we listened carefully it seems we would hear her instructing her mischievous little offspring. What a warm image.

Unless you are a spiral-horned antelope (the one nearest the middle... I think) or any of the other "steak on the hoof" varieties nearby.

They don't consider the little cub nor its mother with anything near "warm and fuzzy" thoughts. They represent danger and they are not going to jump to any rash and potential fatal conclusions that these lions are just out for an afternoon stroll. Nope... the lions don't seem to be in stalking mode... but, one sudden burst of speed, a whipping turn, and the distance separating them from the herd would vanish in an instant... so, it is best to be alert, poised, spring-loaded to the fight or flee mode. When the lion is walking about caution and preparation is the order of the day.

In today's New York Times (HERE) we see yet another indication of the lion(s) walking about our turf.

The American middle class, long the most affluent in the world, has lost that distinction.

We have fallen in discretionary spending abilities ranking when compared to virtually every other first world nation. We rank somewhere behind.... wait for it... Canada. The Times article goes on to carefully note that all these other havens of human flourishing have fairly dramatic "income redistribution" taxes with guaranteed subsidies for many benefits such as child-care for working moms and three YEARS of paid maternity/paternity leave when their children were born and a very comfortable guaranteed minimum wage. Sounds like Nirvana doesn't it?

If you look carefully at the graphs though, you will note that though there may be some narrowing of the gap across the board, that the significant economies of Germany, Great Britain, Spain and France have not closed at any clear statistically significant fashion. Perhaps the real reason why these smaller enclaves are doing so well is that they are much more homogeneous and also, the benefit from the umbrella the larger countries provide.

But before we simply discount the article and think to ourselves "everyone's having the same problems as we are.... it will work itself out in the end" ... note the following quote and what it portends.

Americans between the ages of 55 and 65 have literacy, numeracy and technology skills that are above average relative to 55- to 65-year-olds in rest of the industrialized world, according to a recent study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, an international group. Younger Americans, though, are not keeping pace: Those between 16 and 24 rank near the bottom among rich countries, well behind their counterparts in Canada, Australia, Japan and Scandinavia and close to those in Italy and Spain.

To my perhaps over-simplistic way of thinking, this, more than any structural ideas about income-redistribution, etc., is the real threat. What we are facing is a moral crisis and it seems to be centered in our younger generations. We have failed to provide an atmosphere that encourages hard-work, study and social responsibility in the generations that follow.

The article talks about a loss of optimism in the various societies as well as other factors, and when you combine that with the abysmal performance of our young students compared to these other countries, especially in light of the very high amounts of money being spent on our school systems, the issue appears crystal clear. We have a potential threat facing this society that is far more immediate than global warming. As the older generation dies off, the tax income from these older, producing folks, will die off with them. Combine that with an increased tax burden and the disillusionment will not be improved, rather the opposite.

Somewhere, somehow, along the line, a revitalized work and achievement ethic must be reinstitued across our cultural and structural social order.

Recently the news in Great Britain spoke of how British kids are no longer very motivated by "winning or losing." Some of this same attitude is present today where the words "chill out" most often reflect a social pressure against any form of passionate intensity about much of anything. Along with Aristotle, I, of course, see that we must steer a middle course in such things, but it appears that we have moved way too far to the left on the "competitive scale."

When a person is not motivated to excel there is not much left to them but mediocrity... and if the prevailing attitude is such that "winners" and "losers" get the same social endorsement, then mediocrity is just one more acceptable lifestyle and life sinks into bland quests for instant gratification. The animated Disney flick, "Wall-E" pictures, perhaps prophetically, a future state of mankind, enclosed in a space ship, constantly stimulated by visual images, served by multitudes of robots, and languishing in obese inability. To its credit, the movie pictures "redemption" in terms of characters getting off their butts and doing something about their life. There is a generation or two at risk out there of never learning this lesson... and we had better be alert to the challenge.

Posted by Gadfly on April 23, 2014 at 07:49 AM in Culture, Movies, etc., Current Affairs, Education, Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 22, 2014

The World's Fair......

[Image: Kenyan Peace, 2014, L. Borch (original image)]

Location: Masai country, Kenya

Revelation 15:4 (NKJV)

⁴ Who shall not fear You, O Lord, and glorify Your name? For You alone are holy. For all nations shall come and worship before You, For Your judgments have been manifested.”

Yesterday marked the 50th anniversary of the opening of the New York's World Fair in 1964. [NYT article HERE]. I doubt seriously that many champagne corks were popped nor that there were aging "boomers" singing Auld Lang Syne with misty eyes toasting the "good ole days" in loving, and probably erroneous, memory of it.

As I have said before, I was there on my high school senior trip and, though I do not remember the specific date, it was not long after its opening. As a wide-eyed kid from the back woods of Mississippi, I was impressed though the historians rate the fair as a failure. It didn't "make a profit", you see, and therefore by 1964 standards and by today's, that puts it in the "not worth doing" mode.

Interestingly enough though, as the referenced article points out, that particular World's Fair was the first in which significant participation and cultural exchange was provided by what we now call 3rd world countries. Africa was well represented as well as other areas. In that sense the "Fair" may well have been a taste of the future... for the essentially racist America that existed in 1964, both North and South, which was not all that encouraging of non-European immigration, has all but disappeared. I suppose the ordinary white middle-class American, entering the African Pavilion, and being politely greeted by a seven foot tall Watusi warrior, might find a few of his (or her) presuppositions challenged, especially those assuming White supremacy in all things.

What the '64 Fair heralded culturally then is being fulfilled geographically now.

Linda Borch and her husband recently were able to visit Kenya and go on a photo-safari. I am extraordinarily jealous but I am somewhat mollified by her graciously extending access to her photographs. This particular scene evokes a sense of peaceful beauty that is uniquely African. I doubt that a similar vista could be recorded anywhere else and it reminds me that not only every race/tribe of man has its unique glories but also every geographic (and indeed cosmic) entity has its own brilliance also.

It is the multi-floral patterns of Creation that remind us of the depths of God's Person and work. I don't see how anyone can ever grow bored exploring the local and distant horizons available to them. God's creative genius is registered in this... that colors and patterns and textures can be arranged in an infinite variety, but as with all great artistic masterpieces, there is a central unifying theme. Every thread in the tapestry is integrally related to all the rest and the grand proclamation is the overall effect that surfaces from them all.

In the passage quoted above John hears the joyful proclamation by the redeemed and glorified hosts of heaven, singing praises to God in ecstatic anticipation of "all the nations" coming to bow down before Him. In many ways, now is the high-tide of African Christianity. Since 1964 Africa has moved on many fronts, away from the stereo-typical disparaging idea of a continent full of "poor ignorant black savages" who have never heard the gospel, to a region with fully indigenous Churches and Denominations who, interestingly enough, are sending 'missionaries' to the US. In 1964 we, the US, were at the top of the food chain, both in respect and culturally and with the strongest Christian witness in the world. Now... not so much... and it is with some shame that we Christians ought ponder what is happening.

The gospel "comes" to a people in their pre-ordained time and bears its fruit in due season. But, as the history of the great "Christian" nations that preceded us, bears witness, the "gospel" can also "leave" a people. The flow of history shows an ebb and flow, or more precisely, a flow and ebb, as the Holy Spirit takes the things of Christ and works His great work in the nations of the world.

It is God's plan to have His harvest be just as multi-floral as His Creation. It is the inter-weaving strands of various tribes and cultures and languages that exhibit His Genius. The movement of the gospel in time reflects this harvest. As in any harvest, after a field is reaped, it is only the stragglers that remain.

As we Christians ponder the spiritual state of the world, we will see readily enough it is in those very nations that in 1964 were barely blips on the cultural awareness scale that today exhibit the most vitality and energy in their spiritual walk even if the broad region is still immersed in tragic wars and persecution. It may very well be that we are in the "Century of the Third-World" as the old and tired nations that have dominated the world scene retreat into the shadows.

God never leaves Himself without a witness and even in apostate Israel, there were still seven thousand who had not bowed their knee to Baal, and so, even in a "burned over" region that has grown callous and self-focused in its Christian witness, there is still many who respond and rejoice in the good news of the Kingdom of God. However, it appears that if we want to see the most powerful works of the Holy Spirit, we might find them in an African plain more readily than an American suburb.

Posted by Gadfly on April 22, 2014 at 07:45 AM in Church, Culture, Movies, etc., Current Affairs, Discipleship | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 20, 2014

Preparation for Worship: Easter - "It is the LORD!"

[image: Easter Morning Asian Pear, 2014, JA Van Devender

John 21:7 (NKJV)

⁷Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his outer garment (for he had removed it), and plunged into the sea.

Peter must have loved fishing... and I think he was probably good at it. But when John said those words... "It is the Lord!"... all thoughts of fishing literally got cast over the side. There was nothing to do, nothing more important, nothing of any consequence at all compared to the reality of Jesus standing on that shore and he had to go there. He put on his outer garment (even though the weight of it made swimming difficult) because it was unseemly to appear before his God and King nearly naked... but he went... And I can imagine the excitement brimming out of his eyes as he came splashing ashore in the shallows where Jesus was standing.

Did he fall down before him? Did he kneel? Did he just stand there and gaze at him with excited affection? We are not told. But what we can infer is this - where the Lord is, there Peter wanted to be, and nothing other than that would satisfy.

So, we stand today in our metaphorical boats going about our metaphorical business doing our ordinary things. But, today, of all days in the year especially, though it is the same each resurrection day sabbath throughout the year, we look to our fellowship, we look over to where our worship is to begin and we hear the words ringing in our ears. "It is the Lord!"

He is risen. It is the testimony of hundreds who saw him and most especially of the eye-witness testimony of his disciples that give warrant and confirm the fact: He is alive!

He is no dead Savior nor any past and passed royal king. He is has risen victorious over death and has promised that where He is, there we who believe in Him will be also. He stands on a far shore and we are to plunge into the water and go where He is and He will receive us as He received Peter. He will forgive our sins and show us mercy and equip us with His Spirit and He will send us out to do His will.

Today we go to where He is in Spirit and we worship with our brothers and sisters and we are renewed in our passion and we gaze upon that empty cross, all dressed in pure white, with the blood stains purged because no sacrific remains for the people of God.

It is finished! He is risen! There He is! Let us go to Him!

To all my brothers and sister who today rejoice in our common King... have a blessed Easter and be renewed in the hope that is His resurrection.

Posted by Gadfly on April 20, 2014 at 07:59 AM in Devotional Meditation | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 19, 2014

A People That Care....

[image: Faded Glory, 2013, JA Van Devender]

Luke 10:8–9 (NKJV)

⁸Whatever city you enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you. ⁹And heal the sick there, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’

An interesting article in today's NYT (See HERE)

It is a generally commendatory piece on Pastor Rick Warren's (of Purpose Driven Church fame) efforts to equip and organize churches to deal with mental illness.

Warren says: "We are all a little bit mentally ill." That might be an understatement but it is on the right track. The problem of sin is an issue of the will that has its focus in the mind and heart and we all deal with that. But the reporter in this article, somewhat to her surprise, says that many street folks with mental illness find that the accepting and worshiping community is a more important support to them than the help they receive from psychiatric care. They may, for very practical reasons, not travel to get to medical help but they cling to the church. In a sample of 90 women, she found that only one in four said they "liked psychiatric services" but fully half said they had a church and they went to it at least twice a month. Supporting that she referenced a recent study that offered the very cautious observation that "community care" for schizophrenics produced "modestly better outcomes" than care in a psychiatric facility.

Christians should not be surprised at this observation nor, frankly, should those outside the church. Years ago, a Research Professor of Psychology at the University of Illinois concluded that treating people labeled "neurotic, psychoneurotic, and psychotic" as responsible moral human beings who could take responsibility for their lives and participate in human society, especially one with supportive institutions, was key to their recovery. He (a non-Christian humanist) went so far as to publish a book called "The Crisis In Psychiatry and Religion" in which he challenged the entire field of psychiatry and boldly proclaimed that the "medical model" for treating psychiatric problems, especially Freudian approaches, were a "failure." Another man, Jay Adams, studied under Mowrer when he did this work and came to the conclusion that the Church of Jesus Christ was, or should have been, better equipped to deal with much of what passes as "mental illness" and in so doing, should consider itself, "Competent to Counsel" (the name of the book from which the details above are referenced and quoted). Adam's started a movement called "Nouthetic Counseling" which has evolved substantially from his pioneering work and is now more commonly called "Biblical Counseling". Lest anyone should get the wrong idea, this counseling does not consist in showering Biblical platitudes on a person... rather it seeks to awaken in an individual a self-understanding that provides answers and discipline by which a more integrated and responsible life can be built.

There is no question that in the years since Adam's laid the foundation, hundreds and thousands of people have been helped. The Christian Counseling Education Foundation in Philadelphia has trained and equipped counselors and therapists for years. The movement now is far more nuanced and subtle that Adam's originally promoted and some of his admittedly hard-edged observations and rhetoric have been softened. Most Biblical counselors understand that there is a place for medication in the treatment of some mental disorders and do in fact embrace and adopt some of the secular methods (but not the underlying moral and anthropological presuppositions) in the wider field.

But the bottom line of all this is entirely consistent with what Rick Warren is trying to do and what the writer of the NYT's article observed. Jesus established His Church to be a "healing community." It is not only through the Evangelistic message that the Kingdom is advanced. Rather it is through the "good works" done in His name, backed up by the witness of a caring community which furnishes evidence that another life is possible other than that despair found in the wider world, which then forms the forum from which the Evangelistic message is proclaimed.

Yesterday was Good Friday... tomorrow is Easter. Tomorrow we celebrate the man who died on the first Good Friday and rose from the dead on the first Easter. This man is described in Scriptures as "He who comes with healing in His wings..."... healing.... repairs for the human condition... the restoring of nobility to depraved creatures. This is inherent in His message.

Christians ought to be taking the lead in furnishing exactly what this article illustratess. We ought to have (statistically) the reputation of stability, encouragement and hope for people who have fallen prey to the pressures of a dog-eat-dog social order. We ought to be the place where people who don't smell all that great, act a bit strange, and are used to not looking people in the eye, find acceptance, kindness, the offer of friendship, and a disciplined strategy for extending help. The surface issues must always be addressed and many seek only hand-outs. But some, as this article demonstrates, see the hope represented by the church, as the only place they can have a "friend."

That's a place to start... the first step in what is often a very long journey... that can be trying for those who help as well as those who receive it. But in the end, it is what Jesus commands and we dare not hide behind some false idea that the Church exists only to talk about spiritual things and that dealing with physical issues is going beyond its mandate.

That's not how Jesus worked... and neither is it how He expects His people to follow.

I have not always agreed with Rick Warren. My heart goes out to him for the loss of his son. But in this general approach we are in fundamental agreement. I hope that the entire Church of Jesus Christ might take note and learn.