On February 12, 1809, two men --- one near Hodgenville, Kentucky, the other in Shrewsbury, England were born. Two men who would change the world forever.
On this, the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin, I am deep in thought. Which man has had a greater impact on the world --- and 100 years from now, which will be more significant.
By way of press coverage of their birthdays the answer seems quite obvious. Lincoln has had all kinds of press, while many do not even recognize that Darwin was born the same day.
Lincoln has always been a hero of mine --- that is probably the product of growing up in Illinois, and also being a student of Civil War history. I have read numerous biographies on Lincoln, including Carl Sandburg and Ward Hill Lamon (Lincoln's bodyguard). I am currently reading Team of Rivals and am loving it.
Darwin, on the other hand, has always been an enigma. Sure, I learned about his theories in school, and I grew up in a church that had no problems with evolution. But other than watching Inherit the Wind, the rather inaccurate movie about the Scopes Trial, I really know nothing about him.
I keep abreast of the new, and i think ridiculous debate about Intelligent Design (Creationism in sheep's clothing), but I have never read Origin of Species, or any biographies about Darwin. I think it is probably time . . .
What difference does it make? Evolution vs. Creationism is one of the litmus tests for conservative Christianity. The fear that if we begin to believe in evolution, the whole religious house of cards will cave in is a huge fear for many. I don't get the debate because religion and science are not incompatible for me, like it is to so many.
Lincoln will always be revered for his role in the emancipation and the elimination of slavery in America. But as we all know, racism persists even to this day. Getting rid of that taint is a much deeper problem. I am not sure Lincoln would be possible without Darwin and his understanding of our interconnectedness. Slowly, ever so slowly, we are understanding that we are all connected to each other: white, black, brown, yellow, red --- we are all children of the same God.
100 years from now I think we will look back on Darwin as the one who ushered in the new age that is emerging. He has opened our eyes to realities that seemed impossible only a few years ago.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Monday, February 09, 2009
The Five People You Meet In Heaven
I just finished Mitch Albom's book: The Five People You Meet In Heaven. I read it for a book group that I am a part of. I have to start out by saying that I found it pretty sappy. It is a quick read, very predictable, and too cute for me. I think that I would have liked it if the title wasn't THE five people, because I hope I meet more than five!
Mitch Albom is the author of the moving Tuesdays With Morrie which was a powerful and profound book. I think he wanted to do the same in this one (actually I heard an interview with him, and that seems like exactly his goal.) He missed the mark!
The book is about Eddie --- a war veteran, wounded in the Philippians during WWII. Eddie suffers through a debilitating wound, the death of the love of his life and a cruel and uncaring father. Eddie believes that he has lived an unimportant life. On his 83rd birthday, Eddie, who still works at an Oceanside amusement park dies while trying to save a little girl from getting killed in an accident at the park.
Eddie finds himself in heaven where he has to meet five people who have crossed paths with him in his life and help explain his life to him. Like I said, it is pretty hokey! These five people try to show the meaning and purpose to Eddie's life.
It is not a bad read --- you can finish it in a few hours. But it does not live up to the hype, nor the expectations following Tuesdays With Morrie.
Mitch Albom is the author of the moving Tuesdays With Morrie which was a powerful and profound book. I think he wanted to do the same in this one (actually I heard an interview with him, and that seems like exactly his goal.) He missed the mark!
The book is about Eddie --- a war veteran, wounded in the Philippians during WWII. Eddie suffers through a debilitating wound, the death of the love of his life and a cruel and uncaring father. Eddie believes that he has lived an unimportant life. On his 83rd birthday, Eddie, who still works at an Oceanside amusement park dies while trying to save a little girl from getting killed in an accident at the park.
Eddie finds himself in heaven where he has to meet five people who have crossed paths with him in his life and help explain his life to him. Like I said, it is pretty hokey! These five people try to show the meaning and purpose to Eddie's life.
It is not a bad read --- you can finish it in a few hours. But it does not live up to the hype, nor the expectations following Tuesdays With Morrie.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
John Updike
I just hear on the news over lunch that author John Updike passed away after a battle with lung cancer. Updike is probably best known for the Rabbit series (which if you have never read you should), but I remember him best for a little known book that was assigned by a Church History Professor at Duke (Bob Gregg) called A Month of Sunday's. I am not sure if we were actually assigned the book, or if we were told to put it on our summer reading list (which 25 years later I have not finished all the books on . . .). I learned more about what I was getting into from Bob Gregg's Church history class than all of my other classes combined. THANKS!
Last year I read what may have been Updike's last novel, The Terrorist. This is a powerful story of how a young man can get caught up and enrolled in terrorist activity. A wonderful and thought provoking story.
Sex, religion, science and culture always seemed to be the currents in Updike's stories and none may be as provocative as Roger's Version about a young computer geeks attempt to prove God. As we remember the death of this great American author, I encourage you to take some time and go back and read some of his classic works.
Last year I read what may have been Updike's last novel, The Terrorist. This is a powerful story of how a young man can get caught up and enrolled in terrorist activity. A wonderful and thought provoking story.
Sex, religion, science and culture always seemed to be the currents in Updike's stories and none may be as provocative as Roger's Version about a young computer geeks attempt to prove God. As we remember the death of this great American author, I encourage you to take some time and go back and read some of his classic works.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Agnostic about the afterlife
The other day in my reading I came across an article by Marcus Borg in which he made the comment that he was "a committed Christian and a complete agnostic about the afterlife." I find that to be a fascinating concept, because I too would say the same thing.
If you look up the word agnostic in the dictionary you find that the etymology of the word is Greek agnostos which means unknown, or unknowable. If I am fully honest, I don’t know and in this lifetime thing that afterlife is by definition unknowable. Believing about an afterlife really has nothing to do with whether or not there is one or what it is ultimately like.
My theology, as it has developed over the years, does not follow the popular theology that has risen up recently that places such an emphasis on aferlife. I, like Borg, would suggest that is one of the negative characteristics of modern Christianity. By putting such an emphasis on afterlife, we somewhat mute our responsibility in this life.
When I was in college, I wrote my senior thesis on John Wesley and his affects on the English Working Class Movement. My argument was that John Wesley, unintentionally held the English workers from striving for improved working conditions because of the promised reward in the afterlife. Karl Marx argued basically the same thing.
Borg offers some other reasons why he is agnostic about the afterlife. I think he is right on and I will just quote the rest of the article (I wish I knew where I got it from).
If you look up the word agnostic in the dictionary you find that the etymology of the word is Greek agnostos which means unknown, or unknowable. If I am fully honest, I don’t know and in this lifetime thing that afterlife is by definition unknowable. Believing about an afterlife really has nothing to do with whether or not there is one or what it is ultimately like.
My theology, as it has developed over the years, does not follow the popular theology that has risen up recently that places such an emphasis on aferlife. I, like Borg, would suggest that is one of the negative characteristics of modern Christianity. By putting such an emphasis on afterlife, we somewhat mute our responsibility in this life.
When I was in college, I wrote my senior thesis on John Wesley and his affects on the English Working Class Movement. My argument was that John Wesley, unintentionally held the English workers from striving for improved working conditions because of the promised reward in the afterlife. Karl Marx argued basically the same thing.
Borg offers some other reasons why he is agnostic about the afterlife. I think he is right on and I will just quote the rest of the article (I wish I knew where I got it from).
When the afterlife is emphasized, it almost inevitable that Christianity becomes a religion of requirements and rewards. If there is a blessed afterlife, it seems unfair to most people that everyone gets one, regardless of how they have lived. So there must be something that differentiates those who get to go to heaven from those who don’t – and that something must be something we do, either believing or behaving or some combination of both. And this counters the central Christian claim that salvation is by grace, not by meeting requirements.
Another problem: the division between those who "measure up" and those who don’t leads to further distinctions: between the righteous and the unrighteous, the saved and the unsaved.
Another problem: an emphasis on the afterlife focuses our attention on the next world rather than on this world. Most of the Bible, on the other hand, focuses our attention on our lives in this world and the transformation of this world. At the heart of the Lord’s Prayer is the petition for the coming of God’s kingdom on earth: your kingdom come on earth, as it already is in heaven. There is nothing in the Lord’s Prayer asking that God take us to heaven when we die.
As yet another reason for my agnosticism about an afterlife: does it involve the survival of personal identity and reunion with those we have known in this life? Are family reunions part of the afterlife? For some people, this is much to be desired, for family has been the primary source of love and joy in this life. But for perhaps an equally large number of people, family has been the primary source of pain and unhappiness. So, are we going to be with those people forever?
What I do affirm about what happens after death is very simple: when we die, we do not die into nothingness, but we die into God. In the words of the apostle Paul, we live unto the Lord and we die unto the Lord. So whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s.
For me, that is enough. My not knowing anything more does not bother me at all.And I am very wary when the Christian gospel becomes a message about the afterlife. I am convinced that it invariably leads to distortion. This is not the Christian gospel.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Rest in Peace -- John Mybeck
Last week I had the difficult task of presiding over the funeral of Dr. John Mybeck. It was an amazing service! Keven Mybeck did a beautiful job in eulogizing his dad, and Mark Mybeck and John Carpenter shared an original song; The Liberty Trail.
On the way to the cemetery in Crown Point, I was talking with Kevin Kish about how hard it is to preside at the service of a dear friend — who else would you want to do it? And he was right — I knew John — I loved John and I cannot think of anyone else who should have been leading the celebration of his life.
John was a special friend. He has been a mentor, friend, brother, father, patron to me these last 10+ years. He always was interested in my life and my families life — genuinely interested! He helped arrange an internship for Jessica at the Theatre at the Center.
At the beginning of December, it was pretty clear that the cancer was going to steal John’s life — so I began trying to talk with him about how he wanted to be remembered. He wasn’t ready to talk about it yet. I could force a few things out of him, but he really wasn’t ready. By Christmas, he began to get ready, but it was too late and we really could not discuss it. It broke my heart that we could not ever really talk about those things, but that is all to often the case.
Have you thought about your funeral.
How you want to be remembered?
Where you want to be buried or if you prefer cremation.
What scriptures you want read, songs you want played?
Someone in particular you want to speak (or someone you don’t want to speak)?
I will post what I want for my funeral in a few days, along with a form that you could use to record your own thoughts.
DO THIS, Your family will thank you!
On the way to the cemetery in Crown Point, I was talking with Kevin Kish about how hard it is to preside at the service of a dear friend — who else would you want to do it? And he was right — I knew John — I loved John and I cannot think of anyone else who should have been leading the celebration of his life.
John was a special friend. He has been a mentor, friend, brother, father, patron to me these last 10+ years. He always was interested in my life and my families life — genuinely interested! He helped arrange an internship for Jessica at the Theatre at the Center.
At the beginning of December, it was pretty clear that the cancer was going to steal John’s life — so I began trying to talk with him about how he wanted to be remembered. He wasn’t ready to talk about it yet. I could force a few things out of him, but he really wasn’t ready. By Christmas, he began to get ready, but it was too late and we really could not discuss it. It broke my heart that we could not ever really talk about those things, but that is all to often the case.
Have you thought about your funeral.
How you want to be remembered?
Where you want to be buried or if you prefer cremation.
What scriptures you want read, songs you want played?
Someone in particular you want to speak (or someone you don’t want to speak)?
I will post what I want for my funeral in a few days, along with a form that you could use to record your own thoughts.
DO THIS, Your family will thank you!
Monday, January 19, 2009
The Pillars of the Earth
I recently finished reading Ken Follett's book, The Pillars of the Earth. This is a book that has been on my read list for years, but with the second volume completed by Follett in 2007, I decided now is the time.
It is a huge book --- 983 pages. But despite its size, I could not put it down. It made great reading following Christmas while Nancy and the girls were in North Carolina. There were many nights when I did not want to go to bed!
If you have read other works by Follett (Eye of the Needle, The Man From St Petersburg, On Wings of Eagles) you might be surprised by Pillars. It is not a "thriller" like many of his other works. Instead it is historical fiction, set in 12th Century England. It really is the story of the relationship between the Church (Roman Catholic) and the state. Ken Follett says the story is about building a church --- but I think that is just the location for all that takes place between the clerics and the royal officials.
The story revolves around a ambitious young man who rises to the role of Prior of Kingsbridge. Prior Phillip seems to really care about the people in his parish (unlike many of the other clerics in the story) and desires to make their life better and fuller. One way to do that is to re-build the church in Kingsbridge. He meets a man (Tom Builder) and his family --- who ultimately becomes the master builder for Phillip. The story covers almost 50 years, so much takes place.
What is fascinating (at least to me) is how the story leads up to the death of Thomas Beckett, which sets the stage for Magna Carta in another 35 years.
Follett weaves a marvelous tale and well worth the time it takes to read it. I am looking forward to reading World Without End, the sequel to Pillars sometime this year.
It is a huge book --- 983 pages. But despite its size, I could not put it down. It made great reading following Christmas while Nancy and the girls were in North Carolina. There were many nights when I did not want to go to bed!
If you have read other works by Follett (Eye of the Needle, The Man From St Petersburg, On Wings of Eagles) you might be surprised by Pillars. It is not a "thriller" like many of his other works. Instead it is historical fiction, set in 12th Century England. It really is the story of the relationship between the Church (Roman Catholic) and the state. Ken Follett says the story is about building a church --- but I think that is just the location for all that takes place between the clerics and the royal officials.
The story revolves around a ambitious young man who rises to the role of Prior of Kingsbridge. Prior Phillip seems to really care about the people in his parish (unlike many of the other clerics in the story) and desires to make their life better and fuller. One way to do that is to re-build the church in Kingsbridge. He meets a man (Tom Builder) and his family --- who ultimately becomes the master builder for Phillip. The story covers almost 50 years, so much takes place.
What is fascinating (at least to me) is how the story leads up to the death of Thomas Beckett, which sets the stage for Magna Carta in another 35 years.
Follett weaves a marvelous tale and well worth the time it takes to read it. I am looking forward to reading World Without End, the sequel to Pillars sometime this year.
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Environmental Series
A few weeks ago, I picked up a copy of Thomas Friedman’s newest book, Hot, Flat and Crowded. I don’t know if any of you have read it, but I think it would make for some very interesting and lively discussion.
One of the things that comes to mind to me, is the need to preach a sermon series on the environmental crisis that we are facing. As I looked at the schedule for this year, Lent seemed to be an excellent time to look at the direction that the world is currently going in, and offer a vision for what the world could be like (sounds like resurrection to me).
I would like your help. If you could share with me any ideas that you have about some of the themes you think should be examined during a series on the environment. If you could get me your ideas right away, I will develop some outlines and post them here so that we can continue to work on them.
Thanks for working with me on this critical issue.
One of the things that comes to mind to me, is the need to preach a sermon series on the environmental crisis that we are facing. As I looked at the schedule for this year, Lent seemed to be an excellent time to look at the direction that the world is currently going in, and offer a vision for what the world could be like (sounds like resurrection to me).
I would like your help. If you could share with me any ideas that you have about some of the themes you think should be examined during a series on the environment. If you could get me your ideas right away, I will develop some outlines and post them here so that we can continue to work on them.
Thanks for working with me on this critical issue.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Bears Game
I was invited last night to attend the Bears vs. Saints football game at Soldier Field in Chicago. I had a great time watching the Bears win.
I have to admit I wasn't really ready for the United Club. Wow. The food was delicious, the service was great. What a way to get ready for the game.
It was cold last night. 26 at game time with the wind chill in the teens. I was never cold until we went inside for half time and came out during the third quarter.
Bears won the game in overtime. 27 -24.
Here are a couple of pictures I took on my cell phone.
Pretty good seats!
Compassion
Interesting day today.
Went to the wife of a member's funeral --- held at a local funeral home.
The service started about 10 minutes late because the priest showed up late (plus he had never met the family so he needed to talk with them for a little bit.)
It was the coldest --- most un-compassionate service that I can recall.
The priest wanted to make sure that we prayed the person into heaven --- but other than inserting her name into a slot into his prayerbook he never mentioned her.
I could write so much more . . . but that would not be nice.
It made me think of the "standard" funeral that I do for families that I have no relationship with, and how I need to do some things differently. Especially the part where we talk about the need to suffer --- just like Jesus did. Is that really what God wants us to do --- suffer? Or have the powers that be used that as a means to keep everyone in line? Just a thought.
Went to the wife of a member's funeral --- held at a local funeral home.
The service started about 10 minutes late because the priest showed up late (plus he had never met the family so he needed to talk with them for a little bit.)
It was the coldest --- most un-compassionate service that I can recall.
The priest wanted to make sure that we prayed the person into heaven --- but other than inserting her name into a slot into his prayerbook he never mentioned her.
I could write so much more . . . but that would not be nice.
It made me think of the "standard" funeral that I do for families that I have no relationship with, and how I need to do some things differently. Especially the part where we talk about the need to suffer --- just like Jesus did. Is that really what God wants us to do --- suffer? Or have the powers that be used that as a means to keep everyone in line? Just a thought.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Catching Up
Been way too long since I last posted. And I unfortunately don't see that changing any time soon. Oh well, that is the way life goes.
Monday I will head to Indianapolis to attend a training session put on by the United Way of Indiana to help Long Term Recovery Committees. I think that we will have six or so from LARRI coming for the event. After it is over, I am going to try to take Jessica out for a quick dinner --- she has a commitment that night, and then load up some of her stuff, since she will be moving out on the 21st. Next semester Jessica will be in Australia. Must be nice to be a student today!
I have a few books to share with you. A few weeks ago I finished Who Were The Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? by William Dever. Not a book that I imagine that many of you will run out and buy, but I really enjoyed his analysis of the development of the Israelite people. His view runs counter to the view of Finkelstein, whose book I had read earlier. I would have to say that Dever's suggestion seems to make more sense. Of course, like many archaeologists Dever questions the historical accuracy of the Biblical story. From my experience in Israel and my reading, again I would have to agree with his position. The final chapter of the book does an excellent job in explaining why he questions the value of the bible as a "history book", but also why it has value despite it's flaws. If you want to really dig into a book that goes into explaining how archeology works and why it is important --- I would recommend Dever's work.
I just finished on Monday, John Dominic Crossan's newest book God & Empire. This is a powerful book. The writing style left something to be desired, but the content is very important! Crossan argues how civilization and violence go hand in hand. The norm for civilization is Peace through Victory. That victory may come by me conquering you, or by my dominating your life. If one thinks about it, this argument is very true. Whether we are talking about the Monroe Doctrine or the Bush Doctrine. Peace in the United States of America is sought through coercion --- or at the end of a gun.
Crossan suggests that Jesus offers to us another way of seeking peace. Not through Victory (or violence) but through Justice! Crossan then goes through the biblical stories (as only he can) identifying what most likely goes back to Jesus and how his life was all about seeking Peace through Justice until the Romans (civilization) decided to seek their Peace through Victory (ie. killing Jesus and many others on a cross).
The most interesting part of the book was when Crossan worked through Paul, and John of Patmos and their understandings of Jesus. Paul, Crossan argues, was on the same page with Jesus and sought Peace through Justice. Wait a minute you are saying, isn't this the same guy who told women to shut up. No, Crossan argues, it is not the same guy. He goes through the 13 books attributed to Paul (1/2 of the New Testament books) and divides them three ways --- those certainly written by Paul --- 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon (7 books) those probably not from Paul --- 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians (3 books) and those certainly not from Paul --- 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus (3 books).
In these books, Crossan argues that Paul moves from the Radical Paul (who agreed with Jesus) to the Liberal Paul and then to the Conservative or Reactionary Paul. His arguments make great sense. But I could never articulate them here. But let me say this, after reading Crossan's analysis I can say something I never thought I would say before --- If Crossan is correct -- I really like the Radical Paul! Yes, I really said that.
This part of the book is worth the difficulty in reading it!
The last section he looks at John of Patmos --- maybe his chapter title says it all "Apocalypse and the Pornography of Violence." Crossan walks through how we turned the Prince of Peace into an avenging God seeking to destroy the world. WOW! Being someone who by nature is a pacifist his analysis struck home with me. Jesus did not come to destroy --- we chose to "re-invent God" so that his great clean up would get rid of all those people we didn't like.
This is a powerful book that is work the effort it will require to read.
Crossan asks: "The fundamental question is whether we Christians imagine our God as violent or nonviolent." Well, how do you view God?
In the epilogue he asks three questions:
If anyone wants to read this book and sit down and discuss it --- count me in!!
Monday I will head to Indianapolis to attend a training session put on by the United Way of Indiana to help Long Term Recovery Committees. I think that we will have six or so from LARRI coming for the event. After it is over, I am going to try to take Jessica out for a quick dinner --- she has a commitment that night, and then load up some of her stuff, since she will be moving out on the 21st. Next semester Jessica will be in Australia. Must be nice to be a student today!
I have a few books to share with you. A few weeks ago I finished Who Were The Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? by William Dever. Not a book that I imagine that many of you will run out and buy, but I really enjoyed his analysis of the development of the Israelite people. His view runs counter to the view of Finkelstein, whose book I had read earlier. I would have to say that Dever's suggestion seems to make more sense. Of course, like many archaeologists Dever questions the historical accuracy of the Biblical story. From my experience in Israel and my reading, again I would have to agree with his position. The final chapter of the book does an excellent job in explaining why he questions the value of the bible as a "history book", but also why it has value despite it's flaws. If you want to really dig into a book that goes into explaining how archeology works and why it is important --- I would recommend Dever's work.
I just finished on Monday, John Dominic Crossan's newest book God & Empire. This is a powerful book. The writing style left something to be desired, but the content is very important! Crossan argues how civilization and violence go hand in hand. The norm for civilization is Peace through Victory. That victory may come by me conquering you, or by my dominating your life. If one thinks about it, this argument is very true. Whether we are talking about the Monroe Doctrine or the Bush Doctrine. Peace in the United States of America is sought through coercion --- or at the end of a gun.
Crossan suggests that Jesus offers to us another way of seeking peace. Not through Victory (or violence) but through Justice! Crossan then goes through the biblical stories (as only he can) identifying what most likely goes back to Jesus and how his life was all about seeking Peace through Justice until the Romans (civilization) decided to seek their Peace through Victory (ie. killing Jesus and many others on a cross).
The most interesting part of the book was when Crossan worked through Paul, and John of Patmos and their understandings of Jesus. Paul, Crossan argues, was on the same page with Jesus and sought Peace through Justice. Wait a minute you are saying, isn't this the same guy who told women to shut up. No, Crossan argues, it is not the same guy. He goes through the 13 books attributed to Paul (1/2 of the New Testament books) and divides them three ways --- those certainly written by Paul --- 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon (7 books) those probably not from Paul --- 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians (3 books) and those certainly not from Paul --- 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus (3 books).
In these books, Crossan argues that Paul moves from the Radical Paul (who agreed with Jesus) to the Liberal Paul and then to the Conservative or Reactionary Paul. His arguments make great sense. But I could never articulate them here. But let me say this, after reading Crossan's analysis I can say something I never thought I would say before --- If Crossan is correct -- I really like the Radical Paul! Yes, I really said that.
This part of the book is worth the difficulty in reading it!
The last section he looks at John of Patmos --- maybe his chapter title says it all "Apocalypse and the Pornography of Violence." Crossan walks through how we turned the Prince of Peace into an avenging God seeking to destroy the world. WOW! Being someone who by nature is a pacifist his analysis struck home with me. Jesus did not come to destroy --- we chose to "re-invent God" so that his great clean up would get rid of all those people we didn't like.
This is a powerful book that is work the effort it will require to read.
Crossan asks: "The fundamental question is whether we Christians imagine our God as violent or nonviolent." Well, how do you view God?
In the epilogue he asks three questions:
How is it possible to be a faithful Christian in the American Empire?Tough questions! He answers himself by saying: "It is the radicality of God's justice and not the normalcy of civilization's injustice that, as a Christian, I find incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth." Me too!
How is it possible to be a nonviolent Christian within a violent
Christianity based on a violent Bible?
How is it possible to be a faithful Christian in an American Empire
facilitated by a violent Christian Bible?
If anyone wants to read this book and sit down and discuss it --- count me in!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)