think on these things

In general, I am not a big believer in all the new diseases that have been invented in the last decade so that kids could be drugged instead of disciplined, so that they could handle with Ritalin what would be handled quite effectively in my day with a simple “Sit down and shut up or we’ll call your mother”.  Believe me, when you have to call your mother and explain to her why you are sitting in the principal’s office because you got caught spitting in another kid’s mouth at lunch, it is something that sticks with you for the rest of your life. And to this day I do not spit in other kids’ mouths at lunch.

But having said all that, I wonder if perhaps I might be afflicted with a touch of one of these diseases I don’t believe in.  I think I might have ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder).  I am pretty sure that I am not ADHD, because I think the H stands for hyperactive, and I am the very antithesis of hyperactive.  If there is such a thing as hypoactive, that would be me. And in fact there is, I just looked it up.  According to dictionary.com, “hypoactive” is an adjective meaning “abnormally inactive”.  And imagine my surprise when I saw my picture next to it.

So why ADD? If you recall from my last post, I mentioned I fell well short of my goal last year of a book a week. What I discovered was that I find it extremely difficult to sit down and commit a couple of hours to reading a book. But you may have gathered from my 157 movies watched last year, that I had no such difficulty committing a couple of hours to a good movie. But I no longer have my dad to tell me to “turn off the TV and read a book” (which I recall him saying many times).  So I had to figure it out myself. And I think I found a cure. And it doesn’t even require Ritalin.

My original goal was to read 100 pages per night, then I cut it to 50 when I didn’t find 100 attainable. But lo and behold, I now find 100 pages per night quite attainable, as long as it is not 100 pages in one book, but rather 50 pages in one book and 50 pages in another. I guess that’s where the ADD comes in.

So I now have two books going at all times. The first is non-fiction, serious in nature, for education, for gaining knowledge, for gaining spiritual maturity and wisdom, alternating between old and new, between dead authors and living authors, both sacred and secular. And the second is fiction, lighter in nature, primarily for entertainment, but I would be the first to say that one can gain knowledge and spiritual wisdom from fiction as well, for example, “The Chronicles of Narnia” and the “Space Trilogy” by C.S. Lewis, or “The Lord of the Rings” by J.R.R. Tolkein, or anything by my favorite fiction author, Charles Williams, a friend of Lewis and Tolkien and fellow member of the Inklings. Check him out.

And another part of this, to free up my evenings from the felt need of watching a movie, I have also set aside Friday night as a guilt-free movie night, where I put the books down and clear off the Tivo as best I can. It is Oscar month on TCM, so there is always a huge stack to choose from.

So why am I telling you all this?  To be honest, this started out as a short intro to a book review, to share with you the fruits of my ADD discovery and treatment. Yes, I finished a book. But at this point it would be such a hard U-turn to jump into a book review right now, that you just might get whiplash. It just doesn’t fit with what I have been talking about, and it deserves its own post. Besides, I feel like I need to go do something else right now. Go figure. 

P.S.  You can now subscribe to this blog by e-mail (see the upper right corner), so you will be notified every time my sporadically scheduled posts come out, instead of having to come here and be so often left wanting.

Yes, this is my year-end, year-in-review, what-will-next-year-bring blog, and yes, it is almost February. I will explain in the form of a parable.  Suppose you are in a car stalled on the train track, and a train is rounding the bend.  I suggest you get out of the car.  The weight of the train combined with its speed will be greater than the ability of any brakes to stop it.  From my Freshman Physics days, this is called inertia.  Well, such is the inertia of laziness.  I was so lazy for so long, it took me nearly a month to snap out of it enough to even write a blog post.

So first, a review of my 2008 New Years Resolutions.  Based on the above paragraph, you would be right not to be overly optimistic.  I did not meet or make a single one….

• Read through the Old Testament once, and the Psalms and New Testament twice. Probably came closest on this one, but hit that lazy streak I was talking about in December and fell behind.  Did get through the Psalms and New Testament more than once, the Old Testament almost once, and I was on my fourth trip through the Gospels, when I ran out of year.
• No more snooze alarms.  Was going good on this for awhile, but fell into the same old habits.  Probably have cut down from ten to five though.
• Read a book a week. Not even close. Not even half.  Don’t even want to go there.
• Lose 50+ pounds.  What was I thinking.  I weighed in to the Fat Boys contest this year just a few pounds less than I weighed in last year.  Let’s just say I am back in the eighth of a ton range. But the contest is underway, and I have lost 10 pounds in two weeks, over halfway to my contest goal, weighing in on April 9th.  Piece of cake.  Mmmm…cake…
• Blog weekly.  This one is self-evident if you are reading this blog.  Change the spelling slightly, and I can say I made it…blog weakly.

So a pretty sorry report.  But I did happen to watch 157 movies, and that’s only the ones I remembered to record in my spreadsheet. (Yes, I have a spreadsheet).  Any correlation between my sorry report and my 157 movies?  I don’t see it.

And here is a list of my New Years Resolutions for 2009:

• Solve the Rubik’s Cube
• Memorize Pi to 260 places (that’s 5 a week) 

As to why I am not so big into New Year’s Resolutions this year, aside from the crushing failure of 2008, I think it goes back to what I have learned most from Erwin McManus, on which I blogged back in April, in Recalibrate Your Priorities. That is, life is not lived a year at a time, or even a day at a time.  It is lived a moment at a time. And I need in any given moment to resolve to “take every thought captive to obey Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5b).  Of course I am not in every moment successful. For example, when the snooze alarm goes off, the “hit the button” thought needs to be taken captive, and more often than not it escapes. But the more that I am successful in these moment-by-moment resolutions, the more likely these year-long resolutions are to follow.

I know this was short, but I’m baby-steppin’ back into the blog world.  Extra credit if you can identify the movie reference.

This story starts about a year and a half back, to the beginning of 2007. For those of you who don’t know, I work as a computer programmer in the IT department of a large investment company. At this particular time, I was looking at a hard deadline of March 1st, 2007 to get a project done, or the investment company for which I work would cease to be able to sell options. Personally not high on my list of the top ten disasters that could befall our planet, but professionally speaking, it would have been problematic to say the least. This was causing incredible amounts of mental stress that did not end when I left work at night. I took it home and brought it back on a daily basis.

And since I work downtown, I brought it back on the bus every day. My morning bus routine at this time was to pull out my iPod and put it on shuffle play and close my eyes seeking one last chance at sweet unconsciousness before arriving downtown and trudging to my cubicle for another day’s progress to my inevitable March 1st demise. Good times.

So on one of these bus rides, what should come up on my shuffle play but a Christmas song. I don’t even remember for sure which one it was, but it was a Christmas song, one of many that I have on my iPod and leave in play year round for reasons that will become clear. So in the midst of my workaday worries, this Christmas song fills my head, and for a brief minute I am transported nine months into the future, when I know all this stress will be over, one way or another, and I will be in the midst of the Christmas season, my favorite time of the year since childhood. It actually made me smile.

Fast forward. March 1st came and went, my project went in successfully, I kept my job, and ironically, exactly one year to the day, March 1st, 2008, we were outsourced, and all my blood, sweat and tears of the winter of 2007 went into the bit bucket of oblivion, never to be seen again. Yes, that’s right, everything I was stressing over a little over a year ago no longer exists today.

Fast forward again. The aforementioned outsourcing, besides trashing everything I have accomplished on the job over the past 8 years, also brought with it new challenges. After doing what I do for 26 years and able to do it in my sleep (sometimes literally), I have moved into a new position that deals more with people than with computers. I like computers better. As a result, it is as though I am starting over, and here I am again all stressed out and dreading the ride downtown every morning.

You guessed it. The Christmas song came up on the iPod again. My first sensation was Deja Vu. It brought me back to the identical experience a year ago. And I was able to look back and see that I did indeed survive, and Christmas did indeed come, and I did indeed enjoy it. And now here I am again, listening to this song and dreaming of Christmas just four months away, and how wonderful life will be then.

Then it hit me like a brick. Is that what my life has become? Always waiting for Christmas? What kind of life is that? Yes, Christmas will come, I will enjoy my friends and family and shopping and giving and receiving and carols and the Christmas story, and it will come and go and about mid next year I will hear “Away in the Manger” and wish it were Christmas again.

What I have determined after much contemplation is that this is no way to go through life. And as I am in the midst of this contemplation, I happen to be reading Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s “Letters and Papers from Prison”. I guess my little air conditioned window cubicle four floors above Marquette Avenue compares somewhat favorably to a Nazi prison, so if Bonhoeffer has something to say on this very subject, perhaps I would be wise to listen. The following is a letter to his dear friend Eberhard Bethge, after a year in prison:

To Eberhard Bethge [Tegel] Laetare [19 March 1944]

Dear Eberhard,
With the news of the heavy fighting in your neighbourhood, you’re hardly ever out of my thoughts; every word that I read in the Bible, and every line of a hymn, I apply to you. You must be feeling particularly homesick…in these dangerous days, and every letter will only make it worse. But isn’t it characteristic of a man, in contrast to an immature person, that his centre of gravity is always where he actually is, and that the longing for the fulfillment of his wishes cannot prevent him from being his whole self, wherever he happens to be? The adolescent is never wholly in one place; that is one of his essential characteristics, else he would presumably be a dullard. There is a wholeness about the fully grown man which enables him to face an existing situation squarely. He may have his longings, but he keeps them out of sight, and somehow masters them; and the more he has to overcome in order to live fully in the present, the more he will have the respect and confidence of his fellows, especially the younger ones, who are still on the road that he has already travelled. Desires to which we cling closely can easily prevent us from being what we ought to be and can be; and on the other hand, desires repeatedly mastered for the sake of present duty make us richer. Lack of desire is poverty. Almost all the people that I find in my present surroundings cling to their own desires, and so have no interest in others; they no longer listen, and they’re incapable of loving their neighbour. I think that even in this place we ought to live as if we had no wishes and no future, and just be our true selves… We can have an abundant life, even though many wishes remain unfulfilled - that’s what I have really been trying to say. Forgive me for putting such ‘considerations’ before you so persistently, but I’m sure you will understand that considering things takes up a large part of my life here. For the rest, I must add, as a necessary supplement to what I’ve just written, that I’m more convinced than ever that our wishes are going to be fulfuilled, and that there is no need for us to throw up the sponge.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer never did “throw up the sponge”, but neither were his wishes fulfilled. One year later he was dead, hanged by the Nazis just days before the end of the war. But he speaks to me from the grave…

“But isn’t it characteristic of a man, in contrast to an immature person, that his centre of gravity is always where he actually is, and that the longing for the fulfillment of his wishes cannot prevent him from being his whole self, wherever he happens to be?”

Wow. Characteristic of a man, in contrast to an immature person, that his centre of gravity is always where he actually is. So what does that make me, sitting here waiting for Christmas? Yes. An immature person. Ouch. Dietrich doesn’t mince words. But he is right. I won’t keep quoting him, you can read it again for yourself if you like, but he goes on to say that one of the positive effects of living in the present is that he is so much more able to help others. If I sit here bemoaning my present life and wishing it were Christmas, I am no good to anybody.

So that is the first lesson learned. Live where you are, in the present, and look for ways to serve others in it. But there is another lesson here, which I came up with all by myself. I didn’t learn it from Bonhoeffer, though I am sure he knew it better than I, especially as he neared his end. There is a saying in the “Chronicles of Narnia” about the White Witch, who has made it “always winter, but never Christmas”. What I have come to find out is that waiting for Christmas is extremely short-sighted. What I really should be waiting for is Heaven, where I think it will be “always Christmas, and never winter”. Just one way of looking at it.

In closing, I quote another author who has also gained much wisdom whilst in prison….

So we do not lose heart. Though our outer self is wasting away, our inner self is being renewed day by day. For this light momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison, as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.

- 2 Corinthians 4:16-18

Christmas is coming…

…or “How I Spent My Summer Vacation”. There has been so much buzz about this book, “The Shack”, by William P. Young, both positive and negative, that I purchased it at Half Price Books and brought it with to read on our road trip to Colorado. I read it in just over a day. So what did I think? Good question. Read on…

First of all, I would like to say that what you take away from this book depends largely on how you approach it. Where I think that many reviewers are getting hung up is in approaching this book as an exhaustive treatise on theology. It is not. It is a work of fiction. If in fact you are looking for an exhaustive treatise on theology, and you are standing in the bookstore with Wayne Grudem’s “Systematic Theology” in your left hand, and “The Shack” in your right hand, by all means go with the heavier tome on your left. When it comes to exhaustive treatises on theology, heavier is usually better, and this case is no exception.

So having stated what this book is not, let me take a stab at what I think it is. Another thing that I see missing from many critical reviews is any mention of the backstory of the kidnapping and murder of Mack’s daughter Missy. The whole first half of the book describes in heart-wrenching detail the experience of a father discovering that his beloved daughter has gone missing. As a father of two daughters myself, this hit home. I know that heart-in-the-throat feeling of losing sight of a child, but never for more than a minute or two in the mall. I cannot imagine what it would be like to lay my head on the pillow at night not knowing the whereabouts of my child. He speaks often of the The Great Sadness that weighs down every day of his life like a blanket. I know exactly what he means by that, and can almost imagine it over myself if I were in the same situation. All this to say, with this sad story permeating the plot of the whole book, I think it is mainly a treatise on the problem of unspeakable evil happening right under the nose of a supposedly loving God. Everything else is peripheral in my opinion. I will discuss this in detail later, but first I would like to address some of these commonly criticized peripheral issues addressed in this book. This is not to say that it is a perfect book by any means, but I don’t seem to have as much problem with it as some do.

First, the fact that God is portrayed in this book as a large black woman. Blasphemy! God is not a large black woman! But to say that God is definitely not a large black woman is to say that he definitely “is” something else. Then what is he? White? Red? Yellow? How old? 40? 50? 60? Blonde? Brunette? How tall? At some point this exercise becomes ridiculous. Of course God exists outside of race, gender, age and any other human characteristic. He is no more a big black woman than he is a grandfatherly old man with a long white beard. This point is even made in the book itself.

Second, I have read the criticism that Jesus is portrayed as having “died for the sins of all people”, and that it is up to the individual to accept or reject Jesus’ atonement for their sins. This is nothing more than the standard Arminian position on the atonement, with the criticism obviously coming from a staunch defender of the Reformed position of Limited Atonement, which is the “L” in TULIP, the acronym used to explain the five points of Calvinism. It is not my purpose to explain “TULIP” here, but follow the link and come back here if you feel the need. The concept of Limited Atonement, that Christ did not die for everyone, but only for the elect, is a tough one to grasp, even for some of the Reformed persuasion, thus the term, “Christmas Calvinists” (no L - get it?). I myself lean toward the Reformed position, but not to the point of some who regard the Arminian position as heresy, thus I do not regard this particular position taken in the book as heresy. Rather, it is just another view of one of the mysteries of life and faith that has been debated for 2000 years and will be debated until we see Jesus face-to-face and no longer see “through a glass darkly”. But I know there are some of the Reformed position who will be very surprised and dismayed in heaven when in their first round of golf they find themselves in a foursome with three Arminians. I don’t happen to be one of them.

Third, the problem of revelation. The idea of God, big black woman or not, talking directly to a human being, is abhorrent to some. This criticism I have seen leveled by someone who is obviously of the strict dispensational position, being of the belief that God’s final word was given to us in the Bible, and he has not spoken since, nor will he speak again until the Last Day. I do not hold to that position, so I guess this part of the book did not bother me. I can’t say that God has spoken to me directly, (I have enough trouble keeping the other voices in my head straight), and I do give some credence to the caution that these God encounters can be extremely subjective and as such we must be discerning, but the bottom line for me is to ask myself, who am I to put a big piece of silver duct tape over the mouth of God and declare that he cannot and must not speak to mankind in the present day? If he chooses to do so, he can.

OK, I could go on, but having got those off my chest, I will move on to what I think is the main theme of this book, the problem of suffering in the presence of a sovereign good God. So this is basically just another, albeit very creative, attempt to resolve the theodicy trilemma (pronounced like The Odyssey with a hard ‘th’), from the Greek theos, meaning “God”, and dike’ meaning “justice”. The theodicy trilemma is basically this:

Picture a triangle with three points (as if there is any other kind of triangle). Label one point “God is all good”. Label another point “God is all powerful”. Label the third point, “There is suffering in the world”. Declaring any two of these points true seems to render the third false. If God is all-good and there is suffering in the world, then God must not be all-powerful. If God is all-powerful and there is suffering in the world, then God must not be all-good. If God is all-good and all-powerful, then why is there suffering in the world? This is in a nutshell the theodicy trilemma. How do you resolve all three points to be true? Why is there suffering in the world if there is an all-good and all-powerful God in control of the universe?

This is precisely what I think “The Shack” is trying to address. In coming up with an example of suffering, I think it would be hard to come up with a more heart-wrenching scenario than the kidnapping and murder of a little girl. It happens all too often in real life, so it doesn’t even strike us as particularly fictional, or beyond the realm of reality. On the contrary, it is sadly all too real.

Particularly thought-provoking to me was Jesus telling Mack, the grieving father of the murdered Missy, how he was there with Missy during the whole ordeal of her kidnapping and murder. Think about that. Nothing that happens in this world, good or bad, goes on behind the back of God. He is there. He was there with Missy, and Missy knew it. She was in God’s hands to the end. But he did not prevent it. I had to grapple with that myself. How could Jesus watch this man take Missy from the campground, and drive her into the woods to this shack and eventually kill her, all the time as a seemingly casual observer? But he was not a casual observer. He was loving and comforting Missy through this whole ordeal. But again, he did not prevent it. More grappling. I grapple still.

But somewhere in this mystery free will plays a part, including the free will of the villain of the story, the serial kidnapper/murderer of several little girls, of which Missy was just the latest. He chose to reject God and go his own way, and God let him go. But without the ability to choose, there can be no such thing as love. God created us to choose him freely, to love him the way that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit already loved before the creation of the world. But allowing that choice leaves open the possibility of choosing the other way. This happened because of the free choice of an evil heart, and not because God desired it. As in the parable of the weeds of the field in Matthew 13, when the servants ask the master of the house, “Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?” And he said, “An enemy did this”. This is Jesus’ explanation to Mack. “An enemy did this”. But this does not mean that all is lost. God is sovereign, and he can bring good out of evil, no matter how heinous, and Mack finally comes to realize that. The Great Sadness is lifted and he can go on with his life missing terribly his beloved Missy, but still loving a sovereign good God.

So my last word on this is to say that I can see how this book has been an encouragement to many who have suffered the effects of evil in their world, up to and including the violent loss of a child or worse, and coming through it with not only a belief in, but a love for, a sovereign, good God. And by this standard, I think the book succeeds. If however someone is coming to this book wondering if God really is a big black woman, then yes, this book is dangerous. Give them Grudem instead.

Here it is, the blog I have been dreading for weeks. We are halfway through 2008, and it is time to report on how my New Year’s Resolutions are going. The fact that this blog is itself a week late should give you a small indication of how this will go. And ironically, I am breaking one of my New Year’s Resolutions just to do this, unless I can write it in less than 11 minutes (unlikely).

First the good news…

OK, now for the bad news. I will take them one at a time, in the order they were written back on January 1st.

• Read through the Old Testament once, and the Psalms and New Testament twice. The good news is that I made my goal (actually raised since Jan 1) by June 30th. Halfway through the Old Testament, once through the Psalms and New Testament and twice through the Gospels. The bad news is that I sat down on the evening of June 30th and read 12 days worth to catch up. Wouldn’t recommend it, but I did it. The other bad news - I’m already a few days behind again. The good news - I have time to catch up.
• No more snooze alarms. The snooze alarm lives. What can I say. Maybe not as many as I used to, but still not up at first sign of consciousness. That’s the goal. And I think I added to this resolution somewhere along the way that I would be in bed by midnight to make this happen in the morning. That is what the “less than 11 minutes” comment at the top of this post was about. But alas, that was significantly more than 11 minutes ago.
• Read a book a week. It would take a mighty comeback and a lot of Dr. Seuss books to make this one. Look for my upcoming review of “Green Eggs and Ham”.
• Lose 50+ pounds. About 40 pounds to go. Made my weight for the diet contest back in March, but have been creeping back up ever since (including +6 pounds that first afternoon after the contest alone).
  • Eat sensibly. This one is somewhat subjective. Depends on your definition of sensibly. I’d give myself maybe a C+. I usually don’t go for the salad, but neither do I go for the chili cheese fries. Could improve on this one.
  • Exercise regularly. Got nothing. Nada. Have not been to the club since the weight contest ended. Probably the most poorly spent $90/month in my budget right now.
• Blog weekly. More like blog weakly. I think I’ve even used that joke before, but too tired to look it up right now. And guess what. I’m done making promises on this one. Maybe a compromise is in order. I will make an effort to go bi-monthly, anything more than that is gravy. mmmm….gravy….

So the reason for my utter failure on every front? By my last count, I am 1/500th of the way through my “1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die” list, and a full one-third of the way through my “1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die” list. That could be a clue. I have found that the path of least resistance for me has always been the couch and the clicker. Period. But I am going to go out on a limb and assert that the path of least resistance is not always the best path.

So new rule - couch and clicker moves to the bottom of my daily to do list. After Bible, after book, after exercise, before midnight. Which means most nights it gets squeezed out completely. So be it. All the better. And new rule to go with that rule. Don’t make rules unless you intend to follow them.

Oh Joy! I got to the bottom of my original New Year’s Day post only to find that I did actually keep one of my resolutions…

• No lying about the status of my New Years Resolutions.

See, I feel better already.

For those few of you who have wondered where I went the last few days, I have been in the process of changing web hosts in order to save a little money. But timing is everything, and I began this process Tuesday night without regard to the fact that I would be out of town on Wednesday, so it turned out to be neither seamless nor user-transparent.

But here we are, up and running, and over the next few days I will put back all the posts going back to the beginning. I did not find any easy way to import Wordpress to Wordpress across two web hosts, so I have all my posts saved as html files locally, and will restore them one by one, from newest to oldest.

Keep checking back, and with any luck, I should even have something new up next week.

I have not been with you for a few weeks, but I have a good twice-in-a-lifetime (for me) excuse. My oldest daughter got married last weekend. So there has been a flurry of activity around our house for the past few weeks, culminating on the day of the wedding, this past Saturday, May 24th. In the days and weeks leading up to the big day, I did not concern myself with the nitty gritty details of the preparations. I let the bride and the mother of the bride worry about that. My job was to write the checks and keep my mouth shut, and not necessarily in that order. But as the day drew nearer, it really began to press upon me that my oldest daughter, at the tender young age of 21 years, would no longer be living under my roof.

Oh, I could go on and on about regrets, and about wishing I had spent more time with her growing up, all of which is true, but also, I have found out, all of which is extremely unproductive. “If I had it to do over again…” is a wasted mental exercise, because I don’t have it to do over again. Besides, even if I had spent every waking moment with her from birth, I would still be wishing I had spent more time with her. About the only productive result of this kind of thinking is to tell any young parent who will listen, to cherish your time with your kids now, because before you know it they will be gone. I know, I never listened to that stuff from my elders either, but now here I am on the other side, and I’ll be darned if they weren’t right.

Now that I got that off my chest, back to the wedding. It was a beautiful day, which is important for an outdoor wedding, if not perhaps a little too windy, which only made the ceremony that much more fun and unpredictable. While at the same time acknowledging the solemn nature of the vows being made, it was important to Ben and Betsy that there was to be a spirit of worship and joy and celebration, and yes, even some fun and laughter to the proceedings, right down to the recessional, “This Will Be (An Everlasting Love)” by Natalie Cole. This was not run by me beforehand, but it is so Betsy, I can’t see it being any other way. It made me smile. Compare this to our wedding recessional some 27+ years ago, “Guide Me O Thou Great Jehovah”, played on a pipe organ. Times have changed.

Probably the highlight of the evening for me was the traditional Father/Bride dance. We danced to the song “Cinderella” by Steven Curtis Chapman (partial lyrics below), which makes me cry anytime, but dancing with my daughter at her wedding, I didn’t have a fighting chance. It is probably the most intense mix of the extremes of happy and sad in a single moment that I have ever experienced…

Well she came home today

with a ring on her hand

just glowing and telling us all they had planned

She says,

Dad the wedding’s still six months away

and I need to practice my dancin’

Oh please, daddy please,

So I danced with Cinderella

while she is here in my arms

’cause I know something the prince never knew.

I danced with Cinderella

I don’t wanna miss even one song

‘Cause all too soon the clock will strike midnight

And she’ll be gone…

- “Cinderella” by Steven Curtis Chapman

So what about that old saying, “you’re not losing a daughter, you’re gaining a son”. Part of me says, BALONEY! But another part of me has to put this in perspective. While we were dancing to the above song, Betsy informed me that just this past week, Steven Curtis Chapman’s youngest daughter died in a tragic car accident. So can you imagine what that song, which he wrote and recorded, means to him now? Compared to that, I am not losing a daughter.

Also this past week, just two days before the wedding, I attended the funeral of Tami Palumbo, a lifelong missionary to Mexico, who grew up in our church. I have thought often this week of her parents, Bill & Shirley McQuoid. My whining about “losing a daughter” might sound a bit empty to them at this time.

Then on Sunday, the “day after”, we went to meet with the caterer to pick up our leftovers (about a week’s supply of my favorite chicken salad!) and to settle the bill, and he had just come from serving a luncheon at a funeral. So he saw the joy of my family followed less than 24 hours later by the sorrow of someone else’s family, unknown to me.

Then, curiously enough, after the joys of Saturday, a strange sense of melancholy set in for me on Sunday and Monday. It got me waxing philosophical about the peaks and valleys of life, and looking past all the weddings and funerals to come, to the Great Marriage Feast of the Lamb…and I felt better…

6Then I heard what seemed to be the voice of a great multitude, like the roar of many waters and like the sound of mighty peals of thunder, crying out,

“Hallelujah!For the Lord our God

the Almighty reigns.

7Let us rejoice and exult

and give him the glory,

for the marriage of the Lamb has come,

and his Bride has made herself ready;

8 it was granted her to clothe herself

with fine linen, bright and pure”-

for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints.

9And the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.” And he said to me, “These are the true words of God.”

- Revelation 19:6-9

If you are about my age, when you were a kid, if you heard the word “Rocky”, what would come to mind is an image of a flying squirrel and his moose friend. If today I say the word “Rocky” to my kids, they will say, “Who’s Rocky?”. OK, bad example. But somewhere between my childhood and their childhood, the “Rocky” franchise was born. It was 1976, to be exact, when a relative unknown named Sylvester Stallone wrote and starred in a little movie about a boxer with more heart than talent.

So why in the world am I blogging on this today? How random is that? Not that random. One of the many movie lists that comprise my current Netflix queue, is the AFI Top 100 Films, which I am in the process of viewing chronologically. I am up to 1976, which means that “Rocky” just last week floated to the top of my queue and showed up in my mailbox. I had seen it when it came out, (me and everyone else), and even bought the soundtrack album (one of your more recognizable movie soundtracks - music by Bill Conti), so this was kind of a trip down memory lane.

Though the plot is about as formula as it gets, I still get sucked in and even as I am fully aware that I am being manipulated, played like a cheap violin, I still find myself cheering Rocky on to the end. So what is the formula of which I speak? You know it when you see it. You have an underdog, usually poor, down on his luck, against a cocky, usually rich and unlikeable antagonist, leading up to some kind of a contest at the climax where the underdog and the cocky unlikeable foe go head-to-head with predictably heart-warming results as our underdog hero overcomes all the odds. You may know others, but these come to mind for me:

• Ben-Hur (1959) - the lowly slave Ben-Hur (Charleton Heston), through a (long) series of circumstances, eventually ends up in a chariot race against his childhood friend, the wealthy and powerful Messala (Stephen Boyd). One of the most famous action sequences in movie history, I will leave it to you to guess who won. Or just watch it to find out. There are probably other classics in this genre, but I will leave that as an exercise for you.
• Breaking Away (1979) - shot entirely on location in Bloomington, Indiana, if follows the lives of four kids (Dennis Christopher, Dennis Quaid, Daniel Stern, Jackie Earle Haley), from the poor side of town, dubbed the “Cutters”, because their families derive their income from the stonecutting plant in town. One of these, Dave (Dennis Christopher), has taken an interest in bike racing, but otherwise hangs out with his “Cutter” friends. On the other side of the tracks are the preppy kids on the bike team at Indiana University. The movie of course culminates in a bike race, with Dave wiping out and hurting his ankle, putting his three non-bike riding friends into the race and way behind, and yet, after taping up his ankle and getting him back on the bike, Dave takes chase after Preppy highly trained college bike team and…you guessed it. The “Cutters” take the stage and the trophy as the credits roll. Sorry to spoil it for you, but you see this coming about ten minutes into the movie.
• The Karate Kid (1984) - young Daniel (Ralph Macchio), mentored by Mr. Miyagi (Pat Morita) in the finer points of karate, has several run-ins with the karate class bully and his bully teacher, until of course they finally meet in a championship match. And even to this day, when I see Ralph Macchio go up on one foot, I know exactly what is coming, and I still love it.
• Hoosiers (1986) - small town Indiana basketball team against a much bigger, better, stronger team in the state high school championship. Small town team wins at the buzzer. One significant difference with this story. It happens to be true. Sometimes the underdog really does win.
• The Mighty Ducks (1992) - ex-hockey player and hotshot lawyer Gordon Bombay (Emilio Estevez), as a term of his probation, is forced to coach a rag-tag bunch of street kids, and somehow trains them to play hockey. The movie culminates with a game against the rich hockey kids who have been together since Pee-Wees (perhaps you know the type - or perhaps you are the type), and believe it or not (of course we have already paid the $8.00 to believe it), the street hoods beat the professional rink rats. And of course in the sequels, they up the ante each time, in D2 beating the evil Swedes (or is it Norwegians?) in the Junior Goodwill Games, and in D3 the evil preppies on the varsity team at the exclusive Eden Hall Academy - the kids we love to hate.

I’m sure there are others, but in the interest of time (mine and yours), back to “Rocky”. The premise is flimsy, but we have to get these two together somehow - the champ, Apollo Creed (Carl Weathers) has no one to fight, so as a publicity stunt, agrees to fight an unkown, a nobody, and they pick Rocky, because they like his nickname - the “Italian Stallion”. Rocky agrees to the fight, and spends the rest of the film training and philosophizing, moving from belief to doubt and back again, (”I just want to go the distance”), until the bout itself, which takes up the last several minutes of the movie (sorry didn’t time it). What I really like about the ending is that it wasn’t so predictable and unbelievable that Rocky knocks out the champ, but rather he does go the distance, losing by a split decision, which was much more realistic and every bit as satisfying. And of course what would this movie be without the love interest, Adrian (Talia Shire), running into the ring at the end and telling Rocky, “I love you”. Magic. Pure formulaic magic.

A couple points. First, I am no big boxing fan, but back in the mid-70s, boxing was an integral part of our culture. We had Ali-Frazier, Ali-Foreman, (OK, we had Ali), and everyone knew about the “Thrilla in Manila” Ali-Frazier bout whether they were a boxing fan or not. That fight was 1975, and this was the world into which “Rocky” entered. Nowadays, boxing is so far out of the public consciousness, I am not sure that this film could be made, or at least had been the success that it was.

Second, I am sure someone else has said this before, and better than me, but this movie seems to be a metaphor for Sly Stallone himself. A virtual unknown, he shops around this script, demanding to play the lead role or he doesn’t sell it. He finally gets the chance, and is probably thinking as he is making this movie, “I just want to go the distance.” He did better than that. He made millions and won the Best Picture Oscar. And though he could never seem to score big outside the Rocky franchise, he did come back with Rocky II-V (of which I think I may have seen Rocky II, but not even sure about that), where we find Rocky facing ever more formidable opponents and each time overcoming insurmountable odds.

I said earlier that I didn’t think this movie could be made today. But it was, in 2006, as “Rocky Balboa”, or as some would dub it, “Rocky VI”. But this was a new phenomenon, but rather, this was like coming back to an old friend, and we wanted to see what he has been up to all these years. Kind of like a 30-year high school reunion. I say “we”, but I never did see it in the theater. But after seeing “Rocky” again, I moved “Rocky Balboa” to the top of my Netflix queue, and watched it a few days later.

I am glad I watched them both together, because a big part of “Rocky Balboa” is the subtle reference and the not-so-subtle flashback and archive footage of the original “Rocky”. One of the subtle references I would have missed had I not viewed the original three days prior, was the first scene of Rocky getting out of bed, and in the background we see two very large turtles in an aquarium. That is Cuff and Link all grown up! How cool is that!

The plot follows closely the original Rocky story. The heavyweight champ, Mason “The Line” Dixon, has no one left to fight. Meanwhile, ESPN runs a computer simulation of Rocky Balboa in his prime against Mason Dixon, and the computer says Rocky knocks him out. Dixon doesn’t care for this, so of course they lure Rocky out of retirement and the exhibition match is set for Las Vegas. But first, a few other plot notes of interest.

To begin with, Adrian is dead. I don’t know if that is because it was written that way, or because Talia Shire did not want to appear. For whatever reason, she is dead, and Rocky sits in front of her grave in a wooden chair, which when he is done he folds up and sticks in a nearby tree, which seems to indicate that he does this often.

And in her memory, he opens “Adrian’s Restaurant”, where he plays host and walks around telling old boxing stories to the guests. And there is one interesting regular guest of note, named Spider. He is a former boxing opponent of Rocky’s, who he lets hang out and eat at the restaurant as much as he wants, and he is always there, reading his Bible. He is not portrayed as crazy, just a very nice old friend who Rocky likes to have around. And when it came time for the big Las Vegas showdown, Spider was in the locker room reading Scripture to Rocky, quoting Zechariah 4:6 and 1 Corinthians 15:57 together: “Then he said to me, “This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the LORD of hosts…But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.” I found this interesting. Stallone did not have to do this. There was no other reason to have Spider in this movie to move the plot along, except to be seen often in the restaurant reading his Bible, and quoting Scripture to Rocky before the fight. Tells me something, makes me ask why.

There is also someone to take the place of Adrian in this movie, by the name of Marie. Clearly not a love interest, as she is young enough to be his daughter, but one of the young street kids he yelled at in the first Rocky movie, now all grown up and a single mom trying to raise a kid. And just like Rocky had a way with words in coaxing Adrian out from behind a locked bedroom door in the first movie, likewise a similar heart-warming speech convinces Marie to take on the job of hostess at his restaurant.

Rocky also has a son, Robert Jr., all grown-up, and trying, unhappily so, to make it in the business world, and to get out from under his father’s shadow. This all comes to a head in a confrontation between Rocky and Robert Jr., as the latter tries to talk Rocky out of this fight, not because it will make Rocky look bad, but because it won’t do him any good. So Rocky goes off on him with a talk about courage and being your own man and not worrying about what other people think, and in the next scene, again at the grave, we see father and son make up, Robert Jr. having quit his job, and is in dad’s corner for the remainder of the movie. This is also a key ingredient of the formula that I forgot to mention. There is usually a naysayer close to the underdog who is constantly bringing him down, but who usually comes around to see the light at the end. Dave’s dad in “Breaking Away” is another good example.

And lastly, the fight. Like the original, a lengthy finale of a boxing match. Fast cuts and editing probably make it seem like there is more going on there than we really see, but it is exciting to watch nonetheless. And you guessed it, as in the original, Rocky goes the distance and loses in a split decision, but not having been expected to last two rounds, he still emerges the hero, and the crowd goes wild.

And in the final scene, just as Rocky in the original was yelling “Adrian! We did it!” as Adrian climbed into the ring and embraced him, so here we see Rocky putting roses on Adrian’s grave, giving it a kiss, and saying, “we did it Adrian, we did it” and walking away, first out of focus, then disappearing altogether. As a way to tie the two movies together, I thought it was the perfect ending, a poignant period on the Rocky story. So please Sly, no Rocky VII.

Wow. Blogging before midnight. This is unexplored territory. I have been thinking ever since I posted a review of the book “unChristian” that it was in need of a follow-up. It felt unfinished to me. To read it now, you would think that my goal is to go out of my way to be as offensive as possible, and to regard all the ticked-off people I leave in my wake as a badge of honor. Not true. Jesus did not instruct us to try to be offensive, but rather that we would be offensive just by the nature of the message.

To finish my thoughts of a few weeks ago, of course there is a place for civility. The same Paul who said “the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing” (1 Cor. 1:18), also said, “Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making the best use of the time. Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.” (Col. 4:5,6).

But there has to be a middle ground. On one extreme, we have the likes of the Rev. Fred Phelps and his followers who attend the funerals of homosexuals and scream at their grieving loved ones, “God hates fags!”, recently expanding their “ministry” (tongue planted firmly in cheek) to military funerals. What God really hates is having his name dragged through the mud, and though I make no claim to be the one appointed as judge of the living and the dead, it is my humble opinion that Rev. Phelps is in for a big surprise when he meets this God whom he purports to serve.

But then on the other extreme are those who are willing to say, “Dude! Jesus is whatever you want him to be, man! Just please don’t be mad at me”.

So now to the subject of this post. I think that middle ground is struck nicely by Timothy Keller in his book, The Reason for God:Belief in an Age of Skepticism. It is a book written to both Christians and skeptics, and though I have no idea what percentage of each are reading this book, at #76 on the Amazon best seller list, I would have to believe that at least some honestly seeking skeptics are giving it a try. The following Amazon review is just one of many, but perfectly illustrates this middle ground of which I speak:

“This is a unique book, though not necessarily in subject matter, as there are certainly many books that deal with the arguments for the existence of God. What sets Keller’s book apart from the rest, is his willingness to truly explore objections to Christianity and not to simply write off skeptics as idiots. Keller’s writing is ingrained with a rare, refreshing humility that only adds to his credibility and arguments for Christianity.”

Of course not every review was five stars, and I will address some of those later. But for myself, I would have to concur with the above. Obviously Dr. Keller wrote with this mixed audience in mind, as he brings the introduction to a close:

“…In another incident, Jesus meets a man who confesses that he is filled with doubts (Mark 9:24), who says to Jesus, “Help thou my unbelief” - help me with my doubts! In response to this honest admission, Jesus blesses him and heals his son. Whether you consider yourself a believer or a skeptic, I invite you to seek the same kind of honesty and to grow in an understanding of the nature of your own doubts. The result will exceed anything you can imagine.”

Then in Part 1, “The Leap of Doubt”, he addresses the following:

• There Can’t Be Just One Religion
• How Could a Good God Allow Suffering?
• Christianity is a Straitjacket
• The Church is Responsible for So Much Injustice
• How Can A Loving God Send People to Hell?
• Science Has Disproved Christianity
• You Can’t Take the Bible Literally

First of all, I must say, that I am the guy who for my final paper in Freshman Comp (circa 1975) wrote on the topic, “Is There a God?”, when most of my classmates were writing, “How to Tap a Keg”, (and yes, I got an A), so I have had an interest in this topic for some time (at least since Freshman Comp), and I found this to offer all the tried and true arguments, but also gave me some new points to ponder as well.

One common thread throughout is that Keller gently and respectfully turns the skeptic’s argument upon itself to show either its inconsistency or its basis on a faith of its own, or both. One example from the chapter on suffering and evil:

“People, we believe, ought not to suffer, be excluded, die of hunger or oppression. But the evolutionary mechanism of natural selection depends on death, destruction, and violence of the strong against the weak - these things are all perfectly natural. On what basis, then, does the atheist judge the natural world to be horribly wrong, unfair, and unjust? The nonbeliever in God doesn’t have a good basis for being outraged at injustice…If you are sure that this natural world is unjust and filled with evil, you are assuming the reality of some extra-natural (or supernatural) standard by which to make your judgment…In short, the problem of tragedy, suffering, and injustice is a problem for everyone. It is at least as big a problem for nonbelief in God as for belief. It is therefore a mistake, though an understandable one, to think that if you abandon belief in God it somehow makes the problem of evil easier to handle…”

Did you see the confident once-and-for-all answer to the problem of evil and the wagging finger of disdain for any who would raise the question? Neither did I. Several observations - first, he does not give a definitive answer to the problem of evil. He admits that it is a problem for everyone, even himself, even Christians. That in itself is refreshing to hear. Secondly, he points out the skeptic’s mistake, but that it is an understandable one, showing compassion for his reader who is struggling with this. But understandable or not, his point is valid, that saying there is no God gets you no closer to solving the problem of evil than acquiescing to his existence.

Part 2, “The Reasons for Faith”, goes beyond an argument for the existence of God to point out the rational basis for belief in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Again, much familiar ground covered here, but some new points to ponder as well. Again, in the interest of time, I will give just one example, from chapter 13, “The Reality of the Resurrection”:

“It is not enough for the skeptic, then, to simply dismiss the Christian teaching about the resurrection of Jesus by saying, “It just couldn’t have happened.” He or she must face and answer all these historical questions: Why did Christianity emerge so rapidly, with such power? No other band of messianic followers in that era concluded their leader was raised from the dead - why did this group do so? No group of Jews ever worshipped a human being as God. What led them to do it? Jews did not believe in divine men or individual resurrections. What changed their worldview virtually overnight? How do you account for the hundreds of eyewitnesses to the resurrection who lived on for decades and publicly maintained their testimony, eventually giving their lives for their belief?”

Again, my interest in this goes back at least to college, when I read the book, Who Moved the Stone by Frank Morison. Still available at Amazon, and a great little book written by a skeptic who set out to disprove the resurrection and upon the weight of the evidence ended up writing this book instead. But I digress. Back to Keller, again most of the standard arguments are here, the last of which he stated, of why the martyrs, is the one with which I am most familiar and would quote most often. But the question of the church growing so rapidly if based upon a lie, and that of the many Jews changing belief and practice virtually overnight, are both compelling to me as well.

Paying close attention to the footnotes harvested an additional eleven books for my Amazon Wish List (hint hint), most in the area of apologetics, all of which I hope to get to eventually, but with one word of caution to myself and to you, my readers. It is good to have the apologetics and reasons for belief down cold. Surely you will quote to me the Scripture - “but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15), and I would say I agree with you, and with Peter.

But there is also something in me that says apologetics and logical arguments are not enough. Without the work of the Holy Spirit acting upon the heart, mind and soul, a person can hear all the right words, but still remain in unbelief. Paul said it like this:

” 1Therefore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart. 2Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. 3And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5For we do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. 6For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,”made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.”

- 1 Corinthians 4:1-6

So we can have all the logical arguments in the world, but to some who are still veiled from the truth, it is foolishness. As one Amazon reviewer put it, “Imaginary Friends are for Kids”. That reviewer seems to me far from the kingdom of God. But no farther than one Saul on the road to Damascus…

I will close with a quote from Bono, of U2, (is there any other Bono), only because it blew me away, and I have no better place to put it. For some time I have not been sure what to make of Bono. I have always been a fan of U2’s music, and have been aware of Bono’s work in African Aids Relief and other causes, and have no reason to believe that he is anything other than the real deal. And even more so after I read this, quoted in the Epilogue to The Reason for God, from a conversation with Michka Assayas:

Assayas: Christ has his rank among the world’s great thinkers. But Son of God, isn’t that far-fetched?

Bono: No, it’s not far-fetched to me. Look, the secular response to the Christ story always goes like this: He was a great prophet, obviously a very interesting guy, had a lot to say along the lines of other great prophets, be they Elijah, Muhammad, Buddha, or Confucius. But actually Christ doesn’t allow you that. He doesn’t let you off that hook. Christ says, No. I’m not saying I’m a teacher, don’t call me teacher. I’m not saying I’m a prophet. I’m saying: “I’m the Messiah.” I’m saying: “I am God incarnate.” And people say: No, no, please, just be a prophet. A prophet we can take. You’re a bit eccentric. We’ve had John the Baptist eating locusts and wild honey, we can handle that. But don’t mention the “M” word! Because, you know, we’re gonna have to crucify you. And he goes: No, no, I know you’re expecting me to come back with an army and set you free from these creeps, but actually I am the Messiah. At this point, everyone starts staring at their shoes, and says: Oh, my God, he’s gonna keep saying this. So what you’re left with is either Christ was who He said He was - the Messiah - or a complete nutcase. I mean, we’re talking nutcase on the level of Charles Manson…I’m not joking here. The idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside-down by a nutcase, for me that’s far-fetched…”

Yes, I missed last week. How observant of you. But it dawned on me last weekend that April 15th was coming up fast, and the Internal Revenue Service is just slightly more cranky about missed deadlines than my faithful blog readers, so I had to satisfy them and forsake you last week. But, you might say to me, had you recalibrated your priorities, and finished your taxes earlier, you still could have made time to blog. Wow, what a coincidence. You have touched upon the very topic of my post. Read on…

I may or may not have mentioned this earlier, but I have cut back to subscribing only to weekly podcasts, because keeping up with the daily’s became a daily impossibility. And it is working out well. I have just enough to fill up my week now without getting behind. And one such podcast is the weekly message of Erwin McManus, pastor of Mosaic in California. He is often falsely lumped in with “The Emerging Church”, but really, he was around before “The Emerging Church” was even a buzzword.

Granted, his emphasis does most often seem to be motivational in nature, encouraging his listeners to be all that they can be, to maximize their potential, to be courageous, to dream big dreams, to fulfill their destiny, but always with God at the center and with Jesus Christ as the foundation. Not to be flippant, and I don’t even remotely mean this as a criticism, but I think of him somewhat like a Tony Robbins with a Bible.

He is worth listening to every week, but this past week, with his podcast titled “Recalibrate Your Priorities”, dated 04/13/2008 (in case you wish to find it yourself), he particularly struck a nerve with me. It is as though he is in my head and knows what I am thinking.

Using the account of David and Bathsheeba from 2 Samuel 11, he made five points regarding what the source and motivation of our priorities should be, in reverse order; (5) Legacy, (4) Mission, (3) Relationship, (2) Character, and (1) Spirit. The last two (that is, the first two) of these I will expound upon here, as that is the part that I feel he took right out of my head. Erwin says…

2. Character…This is the essence of your life, who you are. This is really central to the choices you will make. Because no one else can decide for you who you want to become. No one else can impose on you or choose for you the person that you aspire and long to be.

David blew it! But in his heart he longed to be a person who knew God’s heart and reflected it. So this tells us something. It tells us that someone can actually love God, and long to be the best kind of person, and still crash and burn. And that is why you need to continually recalibrate your priorities and make sure you are prepared for those moments in life.

So who do you want to be? Or what is the essence of your life?…I don’t think it’s beating us up that gets us to rise up to a different level of living. I think that sometimes it is actually looking up and realizing who God has made you to become.

So why did this hit me between the eyes? “Because no one else can decide for you who you want to become. No one else can impose on you or choose for you the person that you aspire and long to be.”

For years, as long as I can remember, I have always had this concept in my head of the Ideal Me. That person “I want to become”, that person that “I aspire and long to be”. But then there is the Real Me that I live with on a daily basis. Unfortunately the Real Me and the Ideal Me have never met. Some examples…

• The Ideal Me is up at 6:00 every morning, showers, dresses, pours himself a cup of fine Starbucks coffee, prepares himself a healthy breakfast, and sits down to spend time in Bible reading, prayer and reflection, before pouring himself a thermos of fine Starbucks coffee and making his way to the Savage park ‘n ride in time to catch the 7:10 bus downtown.
• The Real Me got up at 7:10 this morning with no breakfast, no coffee, no Bible, and caught the 8:00 out of Burnsville.

• The Ideal Me is in bed by midnight every night regardless of what is left on my to do list, so that the same Ideal Me can be up by 6:00 every morning (see above).
• The Real Me is up at 12:40am writing this blog post.

• In a slightly later iteration of the Ideal Me above, he pours himself a cup of fine Starbucks coffee and makes his way to the basement, where he manages his multi-million dollar Web Applications Empire in his pajamas, on his new MacPro.
• The Real Me has several Web Development books sitting on the bookshelf (I can see them from here), untouched for years, and most likely technologically out of date by now.

• The Ideal Me reads voraciously, devouring a book every few days, and as a result can speak intelligently on many subjects in the realm of spirituality, theology, philosophy, history, science, literature and the arts.
• The Real Me reads sporadically, choking down a book every couple weeks, sometimes skipping so many days at a time, that I have to back track a chapter or two, so as to refresh my memory on what I was reading about.

• The Ideal Me has committed the New Testament and Psalms to memory.
• The Real Me is currently in the process of “recovering” the Gospel of Matthew, after a brief hiatus, for about the tenth time.

• The Ideal Me is outgoing, gregarious, a great conversationalist, a people person.
• The Real Me would rather take a poke in the eye with a sharp stick than to have to talk to anybody.

• The Ideal Me can talk about Jesus as easily and naturally as he talks about the weather.
• The Real Me needs an opening the size of Duluth to say anything.

I could go on and on with many more, but on the most personal and spiritual level, perhaps the best description of the Ideal Me can be found in Psalm 63 (ironically, written by the same David of David and Bathsheba fame). The heart of the Real Me at the same time soars, because this is what I “aspire and long to be”, and yet aches, because it knows I am not there yet:

1 O God, you are my God; earnestly I seek you;
my soul thirsts for you;
my flesh faints for you,
as in a dry and weary land where there is no water.
2 So I have looked upon you in the sanctuary,
beholding your power and glory.
3 Because your steadfast love is better than life,
my lips will praise you.
4 So I will bless you as long as I live;
in your name I will lift up my hands.

5 My soul will be satisfied as with fat and rich food,
and my mouth will praise you with joyful lips,
6 when I remember you upon my bed,
and meditate on you in the watches of the night;
7 for you have been my help,
and in the shadow of your wings I will sing for joy.
8 My soul clings to you;
your right hand upholds me.

-Psalm 63:1-8

So now on to the last (i.e., first) point of Erwin’s five bases upon which to recalibrate our priorities:

1. Spirit. What is the source of your life? 2 Samuel 11 ends with the statement, “Now the thing that David had done displeased the Lord.”

If you are living in relationship to Jesus Christ, this needs to be the number one factor that influences your priorities. Is my life bringing pleasure to God? The highest pleasure to God? Or are my choices and my actions, is my life bringing sorrow and breaking the heart of God…What would happen if we began to recalibrate our priorities and at the very core of it all we said, what we want to do is first and foremost guard our hearts, the spirit of our being, the source of our life. Because when you live a life that is pleasing to God, you begin to experience the pleasure of God.

Choices. Much of this talk had to do with choices. David made a series of choices, beginning with staying home from war, which meant he was there to see Bathsheba, leading to a series of choices that resulted in a sordid tale of adultery and murder, and the death of his child.

My choices may not necessarily be leading to anything like adultery or murder, but I am responsible for my choices just the same. It has been some time since I have read it, but it seemed to me that this talk had much in common with Erwin’s book, “Seizing Your Divine Moment” (or you may know it under its re-release title of “Chasing Daylight”). What I remember from that book, and what was reinforced from this talk, is that life is not lived out all at once, or even a year, a month, or a day at a time. Rather it is lived out moment by moment, and what we make of this life is a product of the choices we make in any given moment.

So the concept is Erwin’s, but this illustration is mine, so I take full responsibility for its genius or lameness - you decide. Don’t ask me why or how this came to me, as I have never played it, only seen it in the movies, but it occurred to me this week, as I was contemplating this very blog post, that my life on this earth is like a giant Pachinko machine. Heard of it? My massive Japanese readership (at least for the Ideal Me) knows exactly what I am talking about. Pachinko is a very popular gambling parlor game in Japan, which could best be described as a cross between a pinball machine and a slot machine. A silver ball is launched into the playing area, and as it drops through a series of pins, the direction it takes as it encounters each pin determines where it will end up at the bottom, which in turn determines the winnings (or lack thereof) of the Pachinko player.

So the trajectory of my life is like the trajectory of the silver ball; the force of gravity propelling the ball downward (it cannot go up), just as the force of time propels my life forward (I cannot go back), falling through millions of rows of pins, which represent the millions of choices made in the millions of moments that comprise my life. And whether that ball goes left or right (right or wrong), as it encounters each pin (moment in time), determines where that ball (my life), eventually ends up. So I am where I am today, with whatever gap I find between the Real Me and the Ideal Me, because of the unique combination of choices I have made, both good and bad, in the millions of moments leading up to this point in my 51+ years.

But there is a point where the metaphor breaks down. The ball has no heart, mind or soul. It has no choice in the path that it takes. The force applied by the launcher, combined with the force of gravity working upon the mass of the ball as it strikes each successive pin, determines where that ball will fall.

But I am not a silver ball. God did make me with heart, mind, soul and strength, and I am commanded to love him with all of them. Theoretically, I should have a say in the choices I make, and it should be a no-brainer to pick the path leading to the Ideal Me over the Real Me every time. But alas, it is not that easy.

My closing comments will be a reiteration of Erwin’s closing comments (brackets mine):

“…the more decisions we make that resonate and connect our values with our vision [the Real Me with the Ideal Me], the more we will enter every situation and every circumstance of life no matter how critical, no matter how difficult, no matter how much crisis or temptation there may be, and you will find yourself with the resilience and the resolve to see yourself through that moment, and find yourself rise above it, and that is what I hope and long for you. So take some time and recalibrate your priorities. So that when you have to make that critical decision, that instantaneous choice, when you don’t have time to reflect or deliberate, and there seems to be an endless number of options, and there is just one truly noble extraordinary choice, you will be prepared in that moment to make it, because long before that time you already decided who you were, who you were becoming, and where you were going. “

So Erwin has captured in a sentence what I mean when I speak of the Ideal Me - “you will find yourself with the resilience and the resolve to see yourself through that moment, and find yourself rise above it”. And the good news is that I don’t have to fret about making that happen over the next fifty years. I only have to make it happen once…in the next moment.