If You Weren't Looking for Me...

...you still might find me.

My buddy Ed has a hilarious series that he calls "How to Get Here." As I am a fan of shamelessly stealing other people's ideas smart memes (I know, right?), and as I get a lot of bizarre search strings when I check my stats, I thought it might be a fun tradition to start here.

Beware: before you look at Ed's blog--particularly this series, latest edition 8 Feb--just know that his wit is razor sharp. You might be left gasping for air and desperately clutching your sides. Don't say I didn't warn you.

I'll preface this by telling you the articles that get the most hits from this blog. Here's the short list:

1. Created to Be His Help Meet series. The whole series is linked at right.
2. Is All Sin Equal?. Obviously, this is an issue about which many people are confused and curious. Maybe it's because you hear the pithy saying so often, but it defies logic. Everyone knows Hitler's sin and the local teen klepto's sin are not quite the same, but Bibically speaking, I think people have a hard time articulating why.
3. Heads and Hair. For the first two, people are actually looking for something related to the content of my post. Unfortunately, many people who get Heads and Hair are looking for, like, wigs. (A recent string that tugged at my heart: "Is wearing hats to church ok". If you're a woman, YES IT IS.)

And now we come to the other list. In the spirit of Ed, here are a few ways to get here, however haphazardly:

1. Jessica Simpson these boots are made for walking video. Soooo sorry to disappoint! I get these quite a lot, actually. Those strings usually wind up here. Heh heh.
2. Blouses from the 1980s. Because this is the place to find those. Clearly.
3. Mohamed big picture. I have no explanation. And I have never spelled his name that way.
4. What koran thinks about abortion. Haven't a clue!
5. Michael Pearl satanist. What? You know, even the people who vehemently disagreed with my reviews didn't go that far...
6. Wives who henpeck husbands. I've seen a bunch of these over the months. I'm moved every time. Behind every "string" is a person. Is it a hurting or indignant husband? A repentant wife?

Seven Sevens Meme

Donna tagged me a long time ago, and since my day has been CRAZY (C-R-A-Z-Y), I think I need a leetle game.

Seven Things to Do Before I Die:

1. Learn to sew. Hey, I've only had my machine for three years now.
2. Learn to Knit, or Embroider, or something. Kinda like number one. Can you tell I have a longing for the feminine domestic arts? I just...stink at them. Except for cooking. I can do that.
3. Read the Bible as many times as possible.
4. Learn not to freak out, worry, be anxious, or fret.
5. Learn when to shuddup.
6. Travel. I'd put a specific place, but there are so many I want to see.
7. ADDED ESPECIALLY FOR MULEY: Learn to complete a simple task. Like making a list of seven things.

Seven Things I Cannot Do:

Besides sew, embroider, and knit?

1. Speak Spanish. I took French. Maybe it'll come in handy if the Lord does allow us to travel to Cameroon, but man, Spanish looks pretty useful here in America, with our rising Hispanic population. French just seemed much more romantic at the time.
2. Tell time. Well, actually I CAN, but it might take a second. Let's just say I prefer digital watches.
3. Keep a poker face. I stink at any game or situation that requires you not to show your emotions. Oops. Balderdash, anyone?
4. Figure out technical things. I can't fix anything or figure out how anything works. Remember those tests in 8th grade that required you to fold up the box in your head? WORST TEST EVER for me.
5. Stand licorice. That stuff is jus' nasty.
6. Deal with commercials. I have always hated, hated, hated them. Good thing we don't have TV anymore. But I hate them on the radio, too. And don't get me started on the music they play at the gym...
7. Curl 50 lbs. But I will. Right now my high weight is 40.

Seven Things that I Admire in My Husband:

1. His gentle nature.
2. His generous heart.
3. His willingness to stand for truth, no matter how unpopular it is.
4. His faithfulness and loyalty.
5. His smarts.
6. His discernment.
7. His choice of me. HA! HA! I crack me up!

Seven Things I Say Most Often:

I can already tell I am going to be embarrassed. Really, a lot of the things I say are inside jokes with Ryan. And these aren't in any particular order of how often they're uttered.

1. Dude!
2. Why, the windows are FULL WEST.
3. Clearly. (Said with mock-sarcasm, often at the end of a sentence)
4. I know, right? (This is a Californiaism I picked up last year. Look, I did practically live in the Valley, okay? Sometimes it's abbreviated to "Right?" pronounced "Raeyyyyt?")
5. Yesssss.
6. "Sweetie, could you...?"
7. "Army ROTC, this is Kristen..."

Seven Books I Love:

OH BOY!

1. The Bible
2. Pride and Prejudice By Jane Austen
3. The Unschooling Handbook by Mary Griffith
4. The Way Home by Mary Pride
5. A Return to Modesty by Wendy Shalit
6. Bleak House by Charles Dickens
7. Body for Life by Bill Phillips

Seven Movies I Would (or Do!) Watch Over and Over Again

1. Pride and Prejudice. (1995, A&E/BBC) Duh.
2. Napoleon Dynamite. "Tina, come get some HAM!"
3. Megiddo: March to Armageddon.
4. Megiddo II: The New Age.
5. Body of Work.
6. Rock N Roll Sorcerers of the New Age Revolution.
7. Winged Migration.

Yeah, like anyone will READ all of this!

Psalm 4

I'm going to piecemeal this psalm. It's so wonderful--a great psalm on which to meditate (not that any of them are too shabby!).

I love how so many of the psalms are encouraging, comforting, convicting and instructive, all at the same time. God is like that.

Psalm 4
For the director of music. With stringed instruments. A psalm of David.

1 Answer me when I call to you,
O my righteous God.
Give me relief from my distress;
be merciful to me and hear my prayer.

Right off the bat, I identify with David's desire for God to hear and answer. Look how he characterizes God: righteous. Merciful. Has the power to calm and comfort.

2 How long, O men, will you turn my glory into shame?
How long will you love delusions and seek false gods?
Selah

I have to think this isn't David. Literally, 'sons of men' are addressed here. I take it as the Lord asking these questions. How long will we allow deception to penetrate our hearts? How long before we will cast aside lies and delusion, and follow the Lord's commands to love, obey, and serve?

That challenges my heart.

3 Know that the LORD has set apart the godly for himself;
the LORD will hear when I call to him.

David again. I love his confidence that God WILL HEAR and, by implication, protect and deliver.

4 In your anger do not sin;
when you are on your beds,
search your hearts and be silent.

Selah

5 Offer right sacrifices
and trust in the LORD.

Verse four is an important verse in my eyes, because it's one of the places in Scripture where we can begin to understand how God views anger. Many people think that anger in itself is wrong--it's not. Jesus was quite angry as he drove the moneychangers from the Temple (unless you think he 'mildly' mentioned to them that they'd made His Father's house a den of robbers [Matt 21]!).

Without going into a word study on anger right now (because the Bible does have a good bit to say about it), we can know that the bottom line for those who love God is this: "In your anger, do not sin." Anger is like a fire. It can be extremely dangerous, or it can be harnessed and controlled.

6 Many are asking, "Who can show us any good?"
Let the light of your face shine upon us, O LORD.
7 You have filled my heart with greater joy
than when their grain and new wine abound.

I see here a contrast between the godly and the wicked. Those who do not have the Lord may become despondent and jaded, but the lover of God looks to Him for sustenance and joy. In Him is no darkness at all (1 John 1:5).

It also calls to mind Jesus' assertion that He is the bread of life (John 6:35). Others' god may be their stomachs, but ours ensures we will never hunger and thirst again.

Phil 3:18-20
For I have told you often before, and I say it again with tears in my eyes, that there are many whose conduct shows they are really enemies of the cross of Christ. Their future is eternal destruction. Their god is their appetite, they brag about shameful things, and all they think about is this life here on earth. But we are citizens of heaven, where the Lord Jesus Christ lives. And we are eagerly waiting for him to return as our Savior.

And finally,

8 I will lie down and sleep in peace,
for you alone, O LORD,
make me dwell in safety.

I love to think about how much David trusted God. I think about the nights David faced, watching as dusk fell, knowing that Saul was pursuing him to take his life. David chose to remember that God is sovereign. He trusted the God he knew.

And Now for Something Completely...Embarrassing

I can't believe I am doing this.

MY PIG PICTURE. Such as it is.

(It's all Michelle's fault.)



Pathetic! Looks like some kind of devil pig!

Is there an artist in the house?

Draw your own pig! Show me up! (Not that it would be hard.)

Margaret Sanger: Enemy of the Family

Amy provides an eloquent primer on the anti-family beliefs of Margaret Sanger, American birth control activist from the early 1900s. According to Wikipedia:

"In 1914, Sanger launched The Woman Rebel, a newspaper advocating birth control. She also separated from William Sanger. In 1916, Sanger opened a family planning and birth control clinic in the Brownsville neighborhood of Brooklyn, the first of its kind in the United States. It was raided by the police and Sanger was arrested for violating the post office's obscenity laws by sending birth control information by mail. Sanger fled to Europe to escape prosecution. There, she had an affair with the famous science-fiction author, H. G. Wells. The following year, she returned to the U.S. and resumed her activities, launching the periodical The Birth Control Review and Birth Control News."

This part was a little funny, especially in light of what many Democrats said before GWB's election:

"During the 1960 presidential elections, Sanger was dismayed by candidate John F. Kennedy's position on birth control (though a Catholic, Kennedy did not believe birth control should be a matter of government policy). She threatened to leave the country if Kennedy were elected, but evidently reconsidered after Kennedy won the election."

Bwaaahaaa! But I digress.

I call her an enemy of the family because she was. Here's an excerpt from Amy's piece (emphasis mostly mine):

I wanted to preface her quote with the case that Sanger makes autonomous statements, and that as Christians, we do not have the right to do as such, though it may seem a proper and logical thing to do in a post-modern world. In the chapter which the quote appears, The Wickedness of Creating Large Families, Sanger begins by saying this, "The most serious evil of our times is that of encouraging the bringing into the world of large families. The most immoral practice of the day is breeding too many children."

And I’m making sweeping statements, broad judgments?! By her statement, this cookie baking stay-at-home mom with a minivan is worse than Hitler, Stalin, and some guy making video tapes in Afghanistan (or is it Pakistan?).

Sanger argues that large families are a burden on mothers, fathers, and society at large. The context in which the quote is found–-The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it–-is among a paragraph discussing the morality and mortality rate of children in large families.

[Amy quotes Sanger, below]

"Many, perhaps, will think it idle to go farther in demonstrating the immorality [Amy wrote: notice the word here is 'immorality,' not 'mortality!'] of large families, but since there is still an abundance of proof at hand, it may be offered for the sake of those who find difficulty in adjusting old-fashioned ideas to the facts. The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it….The probability of a child handicapped by a weak constitution, an overcrowded home, inadequate food and care, and possibly a deficient mental equipment, winding up in prison or an almshouse, is too evident for comment. Every jail, hospital for the insane, reformatory and institution for the feebleminded cries out against the evils of too prolific breeding among wage-workers."

Sanger's words, particularly "The most serious evil of our times is that of encouraging the bringing into the world of large families. The most immoral practice of the day is breeding too many children," struck me as very similar to something Aleister Crowley, the most prominent and prolific satanist of the last century, once wrote. He said that the family was "public enemy number one." "Curse them! They are always in the way," he said. Sounds like he and Sanger were of like minds to me. here's the Wikipedia's version of his life, but I would argue with conviction that he never stopped being a satanist.

I've only partially quoted Amy here, so certainly check the whole post out for yourself. More than worth the read.

If you want to know more about Crowley's role as the human architect for the New Age, get a copy of Rock N Roll Sorcerers of the New Age Revolution. One of the best tapes EVER.

Bono Revisited

I've got to tell you, I probably received the most hateful comments and e-mails to date for writing a post that didn't sing the praises of Bono. But when I saw this incredible article linked from Ambra Nykol's blog, which I love, I really wanted to share it with you. Ambra wrote:

A recent editorial on Bono's message of "co-existence" (i.e. that Christians, Muslims, etc. can all live together in harmony hogwash) is kicking up some dust with Christian-folk and I love it. I personally, have never quite "gotten" this world's obsession with Bono the humanitarian or U2. Sorry, but they weren't big around my "neighborhood," not even when Bono did a song with Kirk Franklin. Good conversation fodder.

She's referring to an editorial from Relevant Magazine, whose audience probably didn't appreciate the comments by one Tara Leigh Cobble. Check out what happened at a recent U2 concert:

I’m pretty sure I won’t get much opposition if I say that U2 is the greatest rock band of all time. When I scored two great seats to one of the shows at Madison Square Garden last month, I thought my life had reached its pinnacle.

It was a euphoric experience. During the first few songs, I stood, along with the rest of the stadium, as we pumped our fists into the air and sang along with every word. The energy in the air was emotionally overwhelming. And if you’ve never been to a U2 show, let me tell you that it was everything you’d ever expect it to be.

But it was also much, much more.

About five songs into their set, Bono stopped the show and strapped on a headband with writing on it. I stared up at the JumboTron to see that the handwritten lettering said: COEXIST.

Coexisting sounds like a great idea. I fully support the peaceful philanthropy that Bono has encouraged, and this seemed like another way that he was trying to spread the message.

Except, it started to feel like more than a political message. The “C” in “coexist” was the Islamic crescent moon, the “X” was the Star of David, and the “T” was the cross of Christ. Bono pointed at the symbols on his headband—first to the cross, then to the star, then to the crescent moon—and he began to repeat:

'Jesus, Jew, Mohammed—all true. Jesus, Jew, Mohammed—all true.'

He repeated the words like a mantra, and some people even began to repeat it with him. I suddenly wanted to crawl out of my skin. Was Bono, my supposed brother in Christ, preaching some kind of universalism? In just a few seconds, I went from agreeing with him about Christ-like “coexistence” to being creeped out by the ungodly, untrue thing he was saying. What’s going on here? What if he believes that all ways are the same, and he just thinks of Christianity as his particular way? Aren’t universalism and true Christianity mutually exclusive?

I’ve heard the urban legends of amazing things Bono has said about his faith, I’ve read the books, and I’ve peered deep into everything he’s said hoping to find something that makes his beliefs clear. For years, I’ve adored him and clung to the notion that he is believer, too. After all, he identifies himself with Christianity, doesn’t he?

When he stated that lie so boldly, it devastated me. It was, without question, the most disturbing experience of my life; I felt like I’d been covered in bile. As I looked around, I saw all the people standing and chanting with him—it was disgusting and beautiful all at once. Unity can be so enticing. It made me think of the one world religion and how that will probably look benign and beautiful from the outside, too. I even started to wonder if universalism just might be poised to be that religion. All these things were running through my head.

After the show, I ran into a friend who had been sitting in the back row of farthest. 'What did you think of that headband thing?' I asked. 'Well, I couldn’t hear what he was saying because it was bouncing off the wall behind me, and I couldn’t read the headband, because I wasn’t near a JumboTron. But honestly, I felt like I was witnessing an antichrist.' I stood frozen as she spoke. I’d had the same feeling.

Let me be clear: I’m not saying that Bono is the Antichrist. Perhaps he’s just guilty of being overzealous about his politics. But I hope that if he is a believer, the Holy Spirit will convict him that equating Christianity with other religions is false prophecy. II Timothy 3 tells us to avoid people who have a form of godliness but deny the true power of God. And I believe that the most deceptive thing of all is to identify yourself with the truth and preach a lie.

For a long time after the show, I couldn’t talk about it. And I still don’t know what to think because I don’t know Bono’s heart. All I know is what he said from that stage and how it shook my footing. God used that to show me something ugly in myself that needed to be fixed. It felt like He was saying, “If you’re looking to Bono, you’re looking to the wrong place.”

The reality is that Bono held too high a place in my heart. And I don’t think I’m alone there. I’ve wrongly held him up as the heroic ideal—the cool representative for Christianity; he may have been my “Christian idol,” but he was my idol nonetheless. And that’s not okay. Yes, it should bother me to think that Bono might not be a believer; but it should not bother me any more than if a random guy on the street does not believe.

I think Miss Cobble is extremely brave for being so honest about her experience. I know--also from experience--that it won't win her many friends. Perhaps afraid of the vitriol she is about to incur, she ends the article with the typical "I don't know his heart," and "If Bono has a saving faith in the one true God, I can only hope that he would speak the Truth without ambiguity." Um, there was NOTHING ambiguous about having people chant "Jesus, Jew, Mohammed--all true. Jesus, Jew, Mohammed--all true." Unbelievable.

I thank God, though, that Miss Cobble had the courage to speak out about what happened at the concert. Now if Christians who continue to cling so tightly to their love of Bono will only listen. I post this not in hate, but in love--the kind of love that tells the truth. I don't want anyone to be deceived, and that's clearly what's happening here.

Tozer on Movies

I thought this might be a good time to bring up an article by one of my favorite Christian thinkers, A.W. Tozer. The Menace of the Religious Movie is his discourse on drama in Christendom.

This is--I'm sure I don't have to tell you--even more controversial today than when Tozer wrote it. I don't quote him here to declare my total opposition to the use of any kind of drama, but I do think his words are worth considering honestly, in light of the Word of God and not our own desires and preferences. After reading it, I understood my own discomfort with films like The Passion of the Christ much better. I quote Tozer below, but please, read the whole thing. It's not long and I can't do it justice by snipping. He writes,

The temptation to introduce "new" things into the work of God has always been too strong for some people to resist. The Church has suffered untold injury at the hands of well intentioned but misguided persons who have felt that they know more about running God's work than Christ and His apostles did. A solid train of box cars would not suffice to haul away the religious rubbish which has been brought into the service of the Church with the hope of improving on the original pattern. These things have been, one and all, positive hindrances to the progress of the Truth, and have so altered the divinely-planned structure that the apostles, were they to return to earth today, would scarcely recognize the misshapen thing which has resulted....

Within the last few years a new method has been invented for imparting spiritual knowledge; or, to be more accurate, it is not new at all, but is an adaptation of a gadget of some years standing, one which by its origin and background belongs not to the Church but to the world. Some within the fold of the Church have thrown their mantle over it, have "blessed it with a text" and are now trying to show that it is the very gift of God for our day. But, however eloquent the sales talk, it is an unauthorized addition nevertheless, and was never a part of the pattern shown us on the mount.

I refer, of course, to the religious movie.

For the motion picture as such I have no irrational allergy. It is a mechanical invention merely and is in its essence amoral; that is, it is neither good nor bad, but neutral. With any physical object or any creature lacking the power of choice it could not be otherwise. Whether such an object is useful or harmful depends altogether upon who uses it and what he uses it for. No moral quality attaches where there is no free choice. Sin and righteousness lie in the will. The motion picture is in the same class as the automobile, the typewriter, or the radio: a powerful instrument for good or evil, depending upon how it is applied....

The idea that religion should be entertaining has made some radical changes in the evangelical picture within this generation. It has given us not only the "gospel" movie but a new type of religious journalism as well. It has created a new kind of magazine for church people, which can be read from cover to cover without effort, without thought---and without profit. It has also brought a veritable flood of religious fiction with plastic heroines and bloodless heroes like no one who has ever lived upon this well known terrestrial ball.

That religion and amusement are forever opposed to each other by their very essential natures is apparently not known to this new school of religious entertainers. Their effort to slip up on the reader and administer a quick shot of saving truth while his mind is on something else is not only futile, it is, in fact, not too far short of being plain dishonest.

One thing about films I'm personally uncomfortable with is the insertion of images into my mind which I can never erase. Media is so powerful, we must be so careful--but we are bombarded with harmful images as never before in human history. Even items marketed to Christians can be full of evil--but even if it's not blatantly evil, is it serving God's purposes?

Did you know that the origin of the word 'hypocrite' is Greek?

hypocrisy
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.

[Middle English ipocrisie, from Old French, from Late Latin hypocrisis, play-acting, pretense, from Greek hupokrisis, from hupokrīnesthai, to play a part, pretend : hupo-, hypo- + krīnesthai, to explain, middle voice of krīnein, to decide, judge.]

Kinda interesting. Again, I'm not drawing conclusions--just putting out a viewpoint to consider.

Good Conversation Alert

There's a great discussion going on over at Choosing Home Blog regarding Chad Allen's role in End of the Spear.

The controversy is this: a gay actor is playing Nate Saint in a film about an event that is very precious to many Christians--the martyrdom of several American missionaries to Ecuador in January, 1956. Many Christians are upset at the selection of an openly gay activist for the part of Saint.

Like many women who have commented on Molly's post, I see both sides of the argument. Many women there have made excellent, thoughtful posts that don't come across as snide or angry. I love when we can disagree so kindly (Molly and Spunky are historically good at that, by the way!).

Molly quotes Randy Alcorn:

Many nonbelievers know only two kinds of Christians: those who speak the truth without grace and those who are very nice but never share the truth. What they need to see is a third type of Christian — one who, in a spirit of grace, loves them enough to tell them the truth.

And really, that "third type" is the only "type" with any legitimacy. Speaking the truth without love drives people away from the Lord and exposes the speaker's hardened heart. Never speaking the truth exposes cowardice and a false love.

I like Molly's point about Christians and homosexuality; I think she and Holly together make a great point:

Molly: "Sodomy is an abomination, yes, but so is lying....[I]f we must boycott this movie because it has a gay man, let’s be consistant. We need to discover the character and morality about everyone else, not just this one movie. Movies in general, probably need to get the boot (and maybe that would be a good thing?). Grocery stores need to be investigated, the product makers searched out. Where does my toilet paper come from? Are the folks who run Google morally acceptable? Does the lady at my bank indulge in fornication or drunkeness after hours? Pensees says that the fact that Chad is an activist is where we must draw the line. Maybe he’s right. But to me, it’s more complicated than that.

We need to ask the question--it’s important--and consider the relationship the Christian should have to the world. But let’s be able to clearly explain where we draw our lines and where, instead of reacting emotionally simply because a gay activist is more repugnant to us than a heterosexual adulterer.

Holly, later, in a comment: The only thing I would like to insert here is the underlying reason evangelicals tend to be particularly annoyed by homosexual sin. It is not that it is a pet sin, or “worse.” It IS the agenda, the radical agenda, which evangelicals perceive (rightly, I think) as being shoved down their throats via public school educations and television and movies. Do you all realize how much things have changed in the last twenty years regarding this issue? When I was a kid, being “gay” was not a good thing. It has become normalized, even celebrated…it has and will continue to change the face of our world (not just the US) by manner of inclusive laws, curriculum, and directly affecting the “specialness” of marriage. By glorifying it in the media, many kids copy cat it….they declare themselves bi or gay simply because it is cool…not because they have been abused. (By the way, my sister was left to raise three young children because her husband abandoned her for the gay lifestyle. I’m not remote from this. I feel the pain of the individual who struggles with this…I just don’t think it has to be widely celebrated and lauded as an acceptable lifestyle.)

Okay, enough...I'll let you read it all for yourself. :)

Ryan and I actually just watched a documentary about the missionaries and the Aucas called Beyond the Gates of Splendor, so we probably won't see this movie. I'd rather see the historical footage of the missionaries and the interviews with the living Aucas than actors any day.

Discipline: Body and Spirit

Remember Pineapple Throat? That was December 15. I'd already been sick for several days when I wrote that post; I've been to the doctor three times since then and am still on antibiotics (and believe me, I am one of those people who doesn't take them unless absolutely necessary). It's been a long time since a bug nabbed me this hard!

The illness required me to stay home from work quite a bit, and I had time to ruminate on the blessing of health, and on the connections between our physical and spiritual lives.

A little bit of background: before I got sick, and smack in the middle of my Couch to 5K running program I had been striving to complete, Ryan and I decided together to begin Bill Phillips' Body for Life (BFL) program. In a nutshell, the program consists of intense weight training, high-intensity interval aerobic training, and a (common sense) nutrition plan. I know it's cliche to say it, especially in January, but it's truly a lifestyle change for us. (And we started in November! So THERE! ;-) )

BFL is a twelve-week challenge, but it's not really meant for you to just do twelve weeks and then go back to your old way of life. It's meant to change how you look and feel so dramatically in those twelve weeks that you'll never want to go back to being a couch potato. I was extremely excited that this is something Ryan and I could do together; with C25K, I'd been running on my own. Ryan was just as committed and gung-ho as I was about weightlifting and eating right.

We were about two or three weeks into the program when I got sick. In my personal journal I wrote,

"I've been sick for two weeks now. There's nothing like an illness to make you really appreciate the health you normally enjoy. It fires up in my heart a desire to take advantage of feeling healthy: to apprehend and consistently practice and display discipline and drive to meet my goals.

I've treated my spiritual life the same way that I had treated my physical (fitness) goals before BFL: no planning, no real/concrete 'goals' set. Just wishes and vague plans--dreams. I realize now that I've got to be much more deliberate, or the enemy, who is quite willing to be calculating and deliberate, will best me, because I have not run to the Lord and hid beneath His wings."

The enemy isn't seeking to throw someone off their BFL program. He wants to turn them from God. But there are parallels between physical and spiritual discipline that I am just learning and that intrigue me. There is a connection.

1 Corinthians 9:24
Do you not know that in a race all the runners compete, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. So I do not run aimlessly; I do not box as one beating the air. But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.

Now, Paul isn't telling the Corinthian believers to get out to the track; he's talking about keeping the flesh under subjection to the Holy Spirit, having the Fruit of self-control. He's talking about persevering in our relationship with and obedience to Jesus Christ. But look: an athlete exercises self-control in all things. Is there something I can learn from that, something that might help my walk?

I think it's safe to say I've never been an extremely disciplined person. Academically, yes--I made A's my whole life. For me a B was an F, and a C simply unthinkable, devastating. But in pretty much every other area, I've done what pleased myself and haven't worried too much about self-control or self-denial. Jesus helped me with that a lot when we met, but I have come to realize how much I haven't listened to the Spirit in many areas where I believe it would please the Lord for me to exercise self-control, or to be more disciplined.

1 Tim 4:7b-8
...train yourself to be godly. For physical training is of some value, but godliness has value for all things, holding promise for both the present life and the life to come.

Going back to my journal--when I wrote that I want "to take advantage of feeling healthy: to apprehend and consistently practice and display discipline and drive to meet my goals," I saw a connection between what I am doing physically and what I need to do spiritually.

You can't "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" with God. It doesn't work that way; it's not all about you and your effort. It's about crying out to Him, listening for Him, watching Him. But there is something to be said for being consistent and goal-oriented in seeking to obey Him. I think we actually have to be. I'm not being a type-A yuppie. I'm just agreeing with Paul. "Run that you may obtain [the prize]" and "I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified."

The goal, the prize is eternal life: to know (John 17:3) and be with Jesus, whom I love and who redeemed me from death, forever. Yeah, I want to be goal-oriented.

Ephesians 5:8-10
For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth) and find out what pleases the Lord.

Hebrews 10:36
You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised.

Relativism's Ugly Offspring

The success of "Sex and the City" didn't astound me. Its adoring fan base wasn't surprising. But the content of the show (which, no, I haven't watched but have read enough about to know I DON'T want to see it, thanks) is another in a long list of dividing lines that increase exponentially in our country every day. It separates those with some sense of virtue and morality from those who, increasingly, don't care.

Romans 1:28-32
And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

I wanted to point you guys to this article by Monique E. Stuart, Program Officer for the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute. I am more interested in what Stuart is saying than in the political aspect of the Institute's work. I thought this passage particularly incisive:

"In their moral relativist world, no one has the right to judge others. In Columbia University’s sex column, Sexplorations, Miriam Datskosky explains why the all too common 'walk of shame' shouldn’t be shameful at all. She argues that men and women should be able to go out and have sex whenever and with whoever they like, and when walking home the next morning—wearing the same clothes from the night before, their make-up smeared, and their hair a mess—they shouldn’t be judged. 'It is not up to a random stranger to make you feel ashamed,' she declares. Moral relativism and the sexual revolution had a baby, and boy is it ugly!"

The "Walk of Shame," for those of you fortunate enough not to know, is a woman's trip back to her car/apartment/dorm room after, um, having relations with someone she didn't plan on copulating with the night before. Thus the references to smeared makeup and the previous night's mussed attire.

It's so pathetic and hits so close to home that I am almost without words. My heart breaks for all those deceived women, walking back to their dorms or cars and trying desperately to feel "proud" of what they've just done, like Cosmo and Glamour said they should and would. They hope he'll call tomorrow (he won't--and if he does, it's for one thing, and sweetie, it doesn't involve a ring or going home to his mom and dad). Instead, they uncover the gritty reality the glossy magazines conveniently left out of their "Are You Normal?" sex article: anger, guilt, sorrow, and for many women, disease.

God set me free from that kind of life, through the blood of a Messiah who actually cares about women who have not lived virtuously; when the world would have thrown me out like garbage (after lying to us and telling us this life would bring happiness), He made me worth something. He gave me a totally new heart, a new way of looking at everything. He cleansed me and made a completely new person.

John 8:3-11
As he was speaking, the teachers of religious law and Pharisees brought a woman they had caught in the act of adultery. They put her in front of the crowd. "Teacher," they said to Jesus, "this woman was caught in the very act of adultery. The law of Moses says to stone her. What do you say?"

They were trying to trap him into saying something they could use against him, but Jesus stooped down and wrote in the dust with his finger. They kept demanding an answer, so he stood up again and said, "All right, stone her. But let those who have never sinned throw the first stones!" Then he stooped down again and wrote in the dust.

When the accusers heard this, they slipped away one by one, beginning with the oldest, until only Jesus was left in the middle of the crowd with the woman. Then Jesus stood up again and said to her, "Where are your accusers? Didn't even one of them condemn you?"

"No, Lord," she said. And Jesus said, "Neither do I. Go and sin no more."

I'm still working on that whole "sin no more" thing, but I sure am glad He sacrificed Himself for me...unworthy, unholy, unfit. If I am worth anything, it's because of His love for and His redemption of me.

Fighting to Win What?

My buddy Spunky (whose blog is so awesome, by the way!) has a really thought-provoking post up now about intelligent design and the battle being waged on campuses. Spunk quotes a Washington Post article about a Republican judge who is trying to vanquish the whole Intelligent Design argument; she then asks,

"Why do parents keep fighting these battles with the schools?"

I'll let you read the rest of her commentary there, but wanted to point you guys to it. I wrote in her comments:

I think this is definitely one of the more pertinent questions I've seen asked on the topic. I think Christians need to be informed about what we believe and why (ready to give an answer for the hope we have), but we're delusional if we think we're going to "win" battles like this. History is headed to a specific conclusion, and before the return of Christ, things like this are going to happen and get worse. I realize everyone doesn't agree with my eschatology, but...suffice it to say, Spunk, that I agree with your view here, absolutely.

And that's not to say that there are no battles worth fighting; I'm not a defeatist. But which battles are really worth it? Are we going to change a system, or should we read the writing on the wall and get our children OUT?

I saw a GREAT Focus on the Family video about ID/evolution once--here it is! Boy, it was great. I heartily recommend it. But the veracity of ID versus evolution certainly isn't what I am bringing up here: it's the 'battle' that Christians are waging against the secular media, in the schools, etc. The same could be said of the sex ed battles, for instance. What exactly are we trying to do? What is the intended outcome?

On one hand, sure, we are a part of the public forum and should not have to be silent. I don't recommend holing up in a Montana survival home, waiting for an imminent departure or apocalypse. But at the same time, 'pearls before pigs' does exist. The System, the Institutions, the World: they're not going to wake up one day and "get it." They're not going to see the Light: they're blinded, collectively. (Yes, I realize ID is not the gospel and that Christians have differing opinions on it. Pick another issue if this one is offending you, and apply it to my point.)

Individuals, of course, can see the Light, turn, and change, which is why we should be informed and ready to share. But I believe that at some point we have to realize the horse is dead and seek other transportation: public schools fail our children in every possible way, and we should not send them there. Trying to fight battles there is expending a lot of effort in a mostly wasted direction--other than its usefulness in stimulating discussions among individuals.

I'd be willing to fight for the right to homeschool. It's so important to me that I'd move out of the country if I had to in order to keep my kids from public school. But intelligent design vs. evolution WITHIN those very schools is not a battle I think worth plunging into whole-hog (no pun intended with the pearls before pigs, HA HA!! Okay, time to go home).

Should Christians be fighting it out in the schools over controversial issues? I am probably not as fiercely opinionated as I make it sound here. I realize we are called to different things, and that's not what I am called to do. As a graduate student and then as a teacher in a PS, though, I saw how VERY DEEPLY the schools are entrenched in New Age philosophy, practice, and methodologies; perhaps that will account for my despair concerning them.

I always thought it should be.

Uh, oh...does this post count as fluff, though?

Your Blog Should Be Green

Your blog is smart and thoughtful - not a lot of fluff. You enjoy a good discussion, especially if it involves picking apart ideas. However, you tend to get easily annoyed by any thoughtless comments in your blog.

What Color Should Your Blog or Journal Be?

3 AM Thoughts

I think this is the first time in my really, really VAST blogging career (yes, that's a joke) that I've plunked out some thoughts in the middle of the night. I'm not at all the "night owl" type; if it tells you anything, I start getting cranky at 9 PM. Anyway. I'm in a random mood, so expect anything.

First, though, the predictable whiny update: I'm up so early because my throat is swollen and painful. I feel like I swallowed a pineapple whole, and it's refusing to go down. (Too much information?) I started getting sick on Monday and my fever broke on Tuesday, so I thought yesterday was "recovery day" and I'd be fit as a fiddle, whatever that means, today (Thursday). AU CONTRAIRE! NOW I HAVE PINEAPPLE THROAT! ...Which is, of course, a very serious condition. If you know anyone who has died of Pineapple Throat, please do not tell me now. Crying would only make my acute condition worse.

So, let's talk about something else.

Ryan and I did go see The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, and I still feel much the same way as I did last March, when I discussed LOTR a bit. I don't feel up to a full review, but please see Amy's absolutely excellent thoughts and Rachel's spot-on review.

In other news, did I mention I can barely swallow? Oh, yeah. I did.

Watched a documentary the other day called The Corporation--it was a fascinating look at whether corporations, which are considered 'persons' under the law, are psychopathic:

TO THE anti-globalisers, the corporation is a devilish instrument of environmental destruction, class oppression and imperial conquest. But is it also pathologically insane? That is the provocative conclusion of an award-winning documentary film, called “The Corporation"....People on both sides of the globalisation debate should pay attention. Unlike much of the soggy thinking peddled by too many anti-globalisers, “The Corporation” is a surprisingly rational and coherent attack on capitalism's most important institution.

It did seem to have a socialist slant to it, but the criticisms, IMO, were quite well-done, some inarguably so. Definitely worth seeing! Makes you want to spit contemptuously on all big-business blowhard rhetoric. (I also saw and liked Super Size Me; a good companion book for that film is Eric Schlosser's Fast Food Nation.)

Kim! Ack, you're sick, too! I haven't forgotten about you and we need to talk as soon as we are recovered, okay?

Giddy-yup at Saddleback!

I saw this the other day at Slice of Laodicea (one of my favorite blogs):

Come for the Worship, Stay for the Sounds of the Islands

Now, if you've been reading my thoughts for even part of the year I've been blogging, you know that Rick Warren ain't my favorite teacher. I knew that Saddleback, the church Warren pastors, probably reflected Warren's approach to Christendom. I wasn't quite prepared for this, though. Note particularly the text in bold.

Main Service is our venue for those looking for a Saddleback style of praise and worship with a full band.

Praise is our venue for those who prefer to spend a little longer singing songs and features the Saddleback Gospel Choir. Praise! Meets in Venue Tent 3.

OverDrive is our venue featuring a rock 'n roll music style. This venue is for those that like their worship loud. OverDrive meets in Venue Tent 2

Ohana Come for the worship... Stay for the sounds of the islands. Experience hospitality and hugs. Learn to worship through signing or hula. Room 404 near the Beach Cafe and island huts.

Elevation is our venue for all singles. Elevation has two services. One on Fridays at 7:00pm and the other is on Sunday at 11:15am both in Venue Tent 2 . You'll get the same great message along with live music.

Passion Join us for a time of expressive worship and heartfelt praise. The look and feel is younger than our main service and more intimate.

El Encuentro Worship with music in Spanish and listen to the live message in either English or Spanish. El Encuentro meets in the Plaza Room.

Traditions Enjoy a lower volume worship experience with a mix of classic hymns, old favorites, and cherished choruses. The message is videocast on the big screen for great viewing.

Country Country music, boots, and buckles are all part of this worship experience with a videocast message. Line dancing for novices and experienced dancers happens after the service. (Note: Children and youth programming is not available for this venue.)

Now, look. I don't have a problem with choices, inherently. And I realize that many churches have tried to deal, with varying degrees of success, with older people wanting hymns and younger people detesting organs and "dorky music". But something about this doesn't sit right with me. Something about it speaks to me of "having it YOUR way." I don't even know how to properly put my great discomfort with the whole paradigm into words, but I do know that it is unrecognizable to me as Biblical Christianity. It's entertainment, not humility and sacrifice and service. I am not saying the people at Saddleback exhibit none of these things; I am saying that this paradigm is not conducive to cultivating them.

And hula? Does that really, really have a place in the gathering of the saints to admonish, encourage, exhort and prophesy? FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! "Room 404 near the Beach Cafe and island huts"!

I just found this really bizarre, and definitely funny. In a sad way, if that makes sense. My flesh likes the idea of getting exactly what I want, but my spirit knows that is not always the best thing.

Thanksgiving Pictures

We spent Thanksgiving at the home of Ryan's sweet cousin Jessica and her husband Kurt. Here are a few of the pictures we took there (the first, though, is at the home of our friends Felicity and Chris, where we ate an early Thanksgiving meal before pigging out mere hours later at Jessica and Kurt's).

Kristen and Felicity





The CUTEST Little Gal in the WORLD (Jess and Kurt's daughter, Malia)





Ryan and His Parents





Ryan and Me





Starting Good Habits Early





My Mother Laughing with Ryan's Nana

Reflections on Psalm 2

I'm doing a series on Psalms. I don't think I am going to go through each one, one at a time; I intend to just reflect on and discuss what I feel the Spirit is highlighting to me as I read through them. Rachel is going to join me, and you, of course, are welcome as well to blog through Psalms with us.

Psalm 2 is a Messianic psalm; in my opinion, there's no mistaking that:

Why do the nations rage
and the peoples plot in vain?
The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the rulers take counsel together,
against the LORD and against his anointed, saying,
'Let us burst their bonds apart
and cast away their cords from us.'

He who sits in the heavens laughs;
the Lord holds them in derision.
Then he will speak to them in his wrath,
and terrify them in his fury, saying,
'As for me, I have set my King
on Zion, my holy hill.'

I will tell of the decree:
The LORD said to me, "You are my Son;
today I have begotten you.
Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,
and the ends of the earth your possession.
You shall break them with a rod of iron
and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel."

Now therefore, O kings, be wise;
be warned, O rulers of the earth.
Serve the LORD with fear,
and rejoice with trembling.
Kiss the Son,
lest he be angry, and you perish in the way,
for his wrath is quickly kindled.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

Immediately I am struck with the greatness, the utter superiority and sovereignty of God. No one is remotely like Him, and no one can stand before Him in defiance (!). History is rife with men of hubris who sought to further satan's kingdom rather than serve God, actively dedication their lives to anti-Christian purposes (Karl Marx, Adam Wieshaupt, Adolf Hitler, and Aleister Crowley leap to mind). But what is God's response to those who plot against His Kingdom? Laughter. Derision. And wrath.

I believe God laughs (in scorn, obviously) at the very idea of weak creatures, made of dust, seeking to subvert an omniscient, omnipotent Creator. As Jesus said,

Matt 5:33-37
"Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.' But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God's throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one."

We don't have the power to create and destroy, to know and to judge, to understand and to love the way God does. Any of those things that we can do are because we are made in His image, and in His gracious love He made us a little like Him. So I can paint or draw a sunrise, but I cannot make the sun rise.

Psalm 8:3-5
When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

Job 38:3-5a
Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.
Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!

And, of course, this is a Messianic psalm. Jesus is the "Anointed One" of whom David was a type. It is Jesus Christ who is the only begotten Son of God, whom God Himself has placed at His right hand.

I believe that one day the nations of the world will gather against the Christ in an unprecedented way:

Rev 16:12-16
The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, to prepare the way for the kings from the east. And I saw, coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs. For they are demonic spirits, performing signs, who go abroad to the kings of the whole world, to assemble them for battle on the great day of God the Almighty. ("Behold, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake, keeping his garments on, that he may not go about naked and be seen exposed!") And they assembled them at the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.

This psalm helps me remember that God is my sovereign, all-knowing, all-powerful King who is in control of the past, present and future.

Pride and Prejudice (2005) Review

Rachel did a wonderful job summing up the new Pride and Prejudice that's now out in theatres. I could have written her post myself...almost.

Long story short, it must be understood before engaging in any conversation about (or reading anything about) this film that, more than likely, NOTHING will EVER compare to the 1995 BBC version. While I do have some small quibbles with that series--which Rachel elucidates in her post, actually--I do think it's as close to Austenian perfection on celluloid as we're ever going to get.

I went into it with the "this is not the BBC version" caveat in my mind, but the fact is that I can't divorce my experience of reading and viewing from my present experience in the theatre.

Ahem.

With that said, I'll tell you what I liked and disliked about this new film.

LIKES (AKA THINGS THAT WERE OKAY):

1. Mr. Darcy (Matthew McFadyen) is all right. No Colin Firth, mind you, but "tolerable, I suppose." He's not very handsome, but I'll reluctantly admit that he grew on me as the movie progressed. And the cheesy, anachronistic lines he was sometimes given weren't his fault.

2. I did like the softening of Mrs. Bennet, and will reserve further comment on her for the 'dislikes' portion of my post. Suffice it to say that my ears are thankful to be spared some of Mrs. Bennet's shriller moments.

3. I liked Charlotte and thought the explanation of why she married Mr. Collins was extremely well done (except for the "Don't judge me!" silliness...see my complaint about anachronisms below). This is an excellent example of something that was done better than even the 1995 version, where I thought the treatment of Charlotte's marriage wasn't sympathetic enough to her situation.

4. Rachel's right: Mary is truer to the book in this film. BBC Mary was hil.ar.i.ous, but it was a caricature.

5. Nice cinematography!

6. Lady Catherine was fun, as she should be. I was afraid my dad would choke from laughing while munching popcorn.

7. Some of the dialogue was included from the novel that the BBC version omitted. I noticed this with some of Mr. Collins' speeches particularly. Of course, he's also the one who inadvertently makes an "intercourse" joke (see #3 below). Can't win fer losin'.


DISLIKES:

1. The overarching thing that annoyed me about this film was its lack of subtlety. Everything was spelled out so that the American audience would get it, perhaps? One of the delights of a great film or a great book is that every theme and nuance are not spoon-fed to the viewer or reader. "We're so alike! We're both so stubborn," Lizzy exclaims at the end. Oh, really? You're kidding me...I didn't know.

2. The emasculation of Mr. Bennet's wit. In this version, Mr. Bennet is a doddering, doting old dad who is far milder than what I hoped for. The tension between Mr. and Mrs. Bennet, and the verbal sparring that results from it, are essential parts of their characters and of the family's ethos. Unlike Rachel, I blame this on script and direction more than casting. Donald didn't have a lot to work with once his best lines or delivery methods were taken away from him.

3. Anachronistic language. At one point, the word "intercourse" is used as a bawdy joke (though, as Lizzy might say, "it was most unconsciously done"). It's not in the novel and adds nothing but an Americanized, Westernized, modernized, juvenile guffaw to the film. And that word wasn't even used in that context at that time. Rachel pointed out other examples of anachronisms in her post.

4. The Opening and Netherfield Balls. Blech! Blech!! While I agree with Rachel about the energy of the dances, it was all so rushed and unsatisfying, which could serve as the perfect description of the movie itself. The joy and wonder of Austen lies in the savoring of moments: the dances, the witty repartee, the looks, the solitude, the proposals. This movie granted me no (well, hardly any) satisfaction on any front. It was Austen on Fast Forward. I laughed, but it was more in remembrance of my 1995 friends than my love of the 2005 newcomers.

5. General slovenliness. HELLO, PEOPLE. They DID have HAIR COMBS way back in Elizabeth's day. Is it too much for me to ask for one? Or how about a bonnet?! While I give credit where it is due for the slightly more "realistic" (read: less sanitized) feel of this version, I have my limits. There was entirely too much difference between Lizzy and Darcy's circumstances as presented here. They were trying too hard to get the modern audience to appreciate the class issues between Darcy and Elizabeth, I think (see complaint #1).

I was particularly disappointed in the "six inches deep in mud" scene. Elizabeth's appearance (hair down and general I-just-rolled-out-of-bed-ness) was so entirely inappropriate that in this instance I am quite on Caroline Bingley's side of the equation (horrors!). Her HAIR, Louisa! Oh, which brings me to...

6. Where were some of my peeps? Rachel covered this, but there were many beloved characters, Louisa Hurst included, who were missing and were missed.

7. Did anyone notice Jane was nice and all, but not the beyond the beyond-o sweet that she is in the book and 1995 film? She actually says something negative about Darcy after the first ball (gasp!) and calls Caroline "pernicious" toward the end! A Jane who disses others is...not an Austen Jane. The screenwriters didn't take Jane's otherworldly sweetness entirely away, but she's more of a modern dame than I like to see her. And her romance with Bingley was flat, except for the well-done scene when Jane returns from London and tries to convince Elizabeth (and herself) that she's over Bingley.

8. Speaking of Bingley, this is one area where I disagree with Rachel. Bingley is written and directed as a VAPID IMBICILE in this film, and it's annoying. Come on, now. Charles Bingley is easily persuaded, yes. He is kind and agreeable, yes. But he is not a dumb boy who cannot speak a full sentence without second-guessing what he just said. LAME AND NEEDLESS COMIC EFFECT. Sorry--was I yelling? Oh, yeah...and Charles actually calls himself an, um...a donkey. But he doesn't say donkey. LAME.

9. I won't even get started on the axing of much of the morally pertinent parts of Wickham's story. What else would I expect of a quickie modern adaptation? Those pesky moral ins and outs are the first to go, I would think.

10. Darcy showing up at NIGHT in Lizzy's ROOM. What?

This is feeling like one of those sessions that could go on all night. Argh, and I haven't even talked about Georgianna's exuberance, or Bingley's entering Jane's sickroom!

OVERALL SUM-UP: Eh, it's okay. It's far better than anything else you'll see in theatres right now, I'd bet. I wondered while watching the movie how it would be perceived by someone who didn't know the story intimately already. Can a newbie really follow it?

Sure, go see it. Rabid P&P fans like me will enjoy comparing and contrasting the film to the book and BBC movie, and newbies won't realize what they're missing and will get a (wheeze) okay adaptation of Austen's novel.

here's another review I liked.

Colin, we hardly knew ye!

Psalm 1

Rachel and I, in some form or fashion, are going to go through Psalms. Not quite sure how long that's going to take!

I'll probably take several at a time and focus on whatever the Spirit seems to be highlighting. Psalm 1, though, deserves to be all by itself:

Psalm 1 (ESV)

Blessed is the man
who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,
nor stands in the way of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;
but his delight is in the law of the LORD,
and on his law he meditates day and night.

He is like a tree
planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season,
and its leaf does not wither.
In all that he does, he prospers.
The wicked are not so,
but are like chaff that the wind drives away.

Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous;
for the LORD knows the way of the righteous,
but the way of the wicked will perish.

Psalm 1 has always been a great favorite of mine, and as I've been meditating on it a bit, I've tried to figure out why. I have a few ideas.

I love being convicted, exhorted and encouraged, especially all at once. Here I learn that I'd better straighten up and fly right. Those who live righteously, who meditate on the Word of God (here, particularly His Law) and find their delight in the things of God, will live, will prosper. The word "prosper" here is tsalach, and its meanings include "to advance, make progress, succeed."

We know that the righteous do not always "prosper" in the worldly sense. Those who follow God are to expect persecution and trials:

Rom 8:35-37
Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? As it is written:
"For your sake we face death all day long;
we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered."
No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.

Matt 24:9-14
"Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake. And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

2 Cor 11:26-27
I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my own countrymen, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false brothers. I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked.

But the righteous DO prosper, because it says so in Psalm 1. I don't believe the psalmist is referring to a material prosperity, even though God does provide everything His children need. No, they advance, they succeed, they make progress in the things of the Lord--in the things of an eternal Kingdom that is not passing away.

I also love the high view of the Law that is communicated in this Psalm. Right away we understand that the Law is not our enemy, no more than a schoolmaster (Gal 3:24) is the enemy of his pupil (though I know some students don't understand that, heh). Right away we see that the Law is something we can delight in and meditate upon--and that there are great rewards for doing so.

Psalm 1 also serves as a stringent warning against keeping the wrong company: the wicked will not stand in the judgment or be counted in the congregation of the righteous. I know where I want to be found.

And there's a simplicity that is appealing in a world that can seem contradictory and where the gradient of righteousness can seem like a slippery slope: there is a plumb line, and it is the Word of God. Really, it's not that complex. The righteous will find their delight in God, His Law and His ways, and follow Him; the wicked will do as they please (for now), and God will judge all in the end according to their deeds. Here's a passage that goes well with this Psalm:

Rom 2:3-11
Do you suppose, O man--you who judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself--that you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.

He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality.

Not Coming Out, Just Wading Through

I haven't posted in a long time because my fingers feel frozen.

It's not the temperature outside (although today is a CHILLY 28! O California, where art thou?). It's my heart. I've been going through something I can hardly describe, but I thought you guys, as my friends, deserve to know what's going on with me. And maybe I can snag some prayers from you over this.

I don't want to go into details, but suffice it to say that I've been hurting, dealing with the consequences of my own faulty decisionmaking. My own sin and distance from the Lord.

I didn't want to talk about it--much less publish anything for the world to see!--but my good friend admonished me. She reminded me that some non-Christians think that Christians think they are perfect and never do anything wrong. The perception is that once a person gets 'saved,' they are holier-than-thou, prideful, arrogant. "Look at me, I was a SINNER. But now I am NOT. But poor thing, you STILL ARE." God forbid that I should ever think like that for one second. So, in that spirit, I am laying out my stony heart for you today.

I don't recommend stony hearts, by the way. Opt for the flexible, easily warmed versions. Stony hearts are rigid, heavy, and tough to break. I don't think there will be any in heaven.

Here's where I am:

Psalm 13

For the director of music. A psalm of David.

How long, O LORD ? Will you forget me forever?
How long will you hide your face from me?
How long must I wrestle with my thoughts
and every day have sorrow in my heart?
How long will my enemy triumph over me?

Look on me and answer, O LORD my God.
Give light to my eyes, or I will sleep in death;

my enemy will say, "I have overcome him,"
and my foes will rejoice when I fall.

But I trust in your unfailing love;
my heart rejoices in your salvation.
I will sing to the LORD,
for he has been good to me.

Don't you love how David, even when he's throttled with pain, anger, or sorrow, ends things with hope in the Lord? He's awesome. I want to be like David.

So, my friend (Rachel) and I will be going through Psalms in some form or fashion on our respective blogs. I need the raw honesty of Psalms right now--the "I think I am dying, but Lord, I really need and want you" and "Boy, I really just screwed up, but Lord, I need and want you. Help me!" Yep, sounds like medicine.

I feel like I want to get close to God again but don't know how. I feel so stiff. I know what to do on some level: I've been getting back to reading the Bible regularly, and I need to pray more. But how do I soften my heart?

Maybe that's the thing: I can't. He has to do it for me. I am such a numbskull, thinking I can do everything myself! "I'm fine, thanks. I'll handle it." No, I won't. I can't.

I know He can, though. If there's anything I do know, it's that He can.

A New Love

I'll admit it: I am a little obsessive. When I find something I like, my passion is deep and usually immediate, and it can find a source in anything from cereal (ahem), to people, to activities.

Lately I've fallen in love again--this time with running. I never thought I could run because I always was out of breath after running for just a few minutes. I never knew you could train yourself to be a better runner, and nor did I care. Who would want to run?, I thought.

Then I was challenged to run with some people from work. Unfortunately for me in this instance, I work with Army guys who have been running for YEARS. It probably doesn't take much brainpower for you to imagine just how red my face was or how hard I huffed and puffed after, oh, about five minutes of running with them one sweltering late summer afternoon. (Oh, OKAY, I'll tell you the truth: I almost passed out! It was the closest I ever want to get to an out-of-body experience.)

My pride was hurt. I thought I was in pretty good shape: I hike almost daily, I work out. I thought I'd last longer than I did.

I decided to start training myself to run. I used to joke that I only ran when chased; I don't like the thought of not being able to run if chased, you know?

I have a very long way to go, but I've already tasted how very awesome it feels to run (well, run/walk) at 5 AM. Seriously. I don't know when I have felt so alive and so clear--and the feeling lasts for hours afterwards! I'm hooked. So, like any fool in the first rush of love, I had to come tell you all about it.

Any other runners out there?