Irby Vaca Day 1

Well we did it.  Six of us piled into our suburban and drove across Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, and into Illinois. Twelve hours in the car.  Laurie was the trooper who drove most of the way because she can get easily car sick if she attempts to read or watch a movie.  So, instead of being bored, she drives.  The reason for our trip is to drop in on Laurie's cousin Emily and her husband Kyle who live in Granite City, IL.  We are excited to be here for the first time since they moved here 4 years ago.  Wanda and Jerry have visited once prior, but were glad to join us.  Tommy, Nece, and Brooke met us here so we are all together under one roof.  Should be exciting.


Story of the day:  We were driving through Oklahoma and Jerry and Wanda recommended we stop at a McDonald's located on a turnpike on I-44.  This particular restaurant has been there quite a while because Laurie remembers eating there MANY years ago on the way to Branson.  The plans to stop there began being formulated in Lawton, OK and it was decided that this restaurant is between Oklahoma City and Tulsa.  Well the road from Oklahoma City to Tulsa came and went with no McDonald's.  So, SURELY the restaurant is "right up here."  Well over 50 miles fly by and still no McDonald's.  We are now all getting really hungry and our bladders filling up at a rapid rate.  The McDonald's turns up 3/4 of the way from Tulsa to Joplin, MO.  Now, I am not a huge fan of McDonald's, but I had never been so happy to see a set of those golden arches in my life!

What I learned: 

• Oklahoma is a GREEDY state!  All the way up the interstate were toll roads, two of which were $4.00 tolls.  We spent nearly $20 to drive through Oklahoma and the roads were still crappy.  
• The landscape on the drive was beautiful!  Even Oklahoma had small mountains and green rolling pastures.  Missouri is incredible from Lebanon, MO on up to St. Louis.  Wonderful green contoured landscape and TREES.  Things we are not used to seeing in our part of Texas.
• The movie "Where the Wild Things Are" is worth a viewing.  Very interesting take on the children's book.  This was my viewing entertainment for the day.  I am still reading "The Idiot" as well.
• We stopped at a DQ in Lebanon, MO and I have never seen so many white people working at a DQ.

Oh, well, off to bed and in the morning the real adventure begins!

Coincidence

Toward the end of this semester of the Life Span Development class I teach,  we were discussing Erikson's middle adulthood stage of Generativity  vs. Stagnation.  Simply put, it is in this stage that 40-somethings begin to reflect on their life and see what kind of legacy they are leaving behind.  As a part of this discussion we address the existential issue of meaning.  Since HSU is a Christian University, as a part of this chapter I introduce the notion that the idea that "everything happens for a purpose" might be a bit off-base.  What I believe to be true, is slightly, but importantly different.  I believe "from everything a purpose can come."  I don't want to take too much time clarifying and explaining the difference (I already did that in a previous post a while ago).  As I offered my reasoning for the difference, a student raised her hand and asked me if I believed the saying, "there is no such thing as coincidence."  I thought for a moment formulating a response because I know how fervently some people can cling to such cliches as theological "shortcuts."  I decided the best route to follow was the frankly honest route. 

No, I don't believe that there is "no such thing as coincidence."  Simply because of the absolute nature of the statement -- "NO such thing..." I understand and appreciate the sentiment of the cliche which is to illustrate how God can work covertly to bring about "divine appointments" that others might simply explain away as simple coincidence.  It is the notion that every thing is connected and predetermined for a deeper meaning that only we can know in hindsight in this life or ultimately revealed to us in the next.  Again, I take issue with the absolute nature of that sentiment.  As an example, I shared how the other day my boss and I coincidentally wore the same color scheme to work (melon green polo shirt and khaki pants).  We don't have a uniform at work and we didn't call each other and arrange to be "twinkies" it just happened by coincidence. To believe there is "no such thing" would be to assign some type of deeper meaning to the unwitting coordination of colors.  I simply don't believe that to be the case.  Therefore, I do believe in coincidence.

However, I have had experiences that many would chalk-up to coincidence that I believe is true to the spirit of that cliche.  There have been numerous times I have had a random thought about an old friend or a former client who have not been an active part of my life for months or years and this friend calls out of the blue or the client returns to therapy within days of that seeming random thought.  It is almost like retrospective foreshadowing and I immediately believe there is a reason and orchestration to this "coincidence".

God still works in mysterious ways.

Considering the Controversy

If you have been paying attention to the latest news from contemporary evangelical leadership or even this morning's broadcast of Good Morning America, you have probably run across some reference to Rob Bell's new book, "Love Wins" in which he is purportedly said to "come out" as a universalist. Most of the attention he has received from Christendom has been sweepingly negative with the likes of Al Mohler and John Piper "writing him off" and bidding Bell "farewell." It should be noted that in the most general sense the term "universalist" is one who believes that on the Day of Judgment all will ultimately be redeemed and, in essence, "hell is empty." Universalism has a long-standing place in Christian history and my friend, who happens also to be a distinguished Baptist theologian, Steve Harmon has written an invaluable piece dedicated to the historical context of universalism and how the church as responded to such doctrine.  I recommend anyone desiring to make an informed assessment of Rob Bell and his latest work, to first read this post by clicking on Harmon's name above.  I do not wish this post to be an apologetic for Rob Bell, universalism, or his book "Love Wins."  I do, however wish to use this controversy as a spring board for discussing critical thought with regard to teachers, preachers, Christian authors and the individual Christian's response to those with whom he/she might differ.

In the interest of full disclosure, let me first state that I am not a universalist and I can certainly understand how adopting such a doctrinal stance can detract from the theology of grace and redemption which I hold dear.  Also, it should be noted that I have been a subscriber and faithful listener to the Mars Hill podcast for the last two years, have used many of his Nooma videos to enhance my teaching adult Bible Study, and am an aficionado of Bell's book "Velvet Elvis."  

In light of this disclosure, let us move forward considering the more broad issues.  First, allow me to suggest that Christians as well as non-Christians should read first-hand what a purported false teacher has to say rather than relying on the interpretation of others to make his/her determination.  Those of us from a traditional Baptist flavor would do well to revisit the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer (1963) which can be loosely applied here.

Additionally, there is no Christian teacher, preacher, or author that is without critique.  One should not simply listen to, or read one person's teaching and fully adopt what is being said without careful scrutiny.  One guideline for discernment is found in the Apostle John's first epistle (1 John 4:1-3) where Christians are challenged "not to believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God" (NET).  The only criteria posited in this passage is examining what the teacher says of Jesus -- is He the Messiah who has come in flesh and from God.  Recognizing that this particular admonition was in specific response to the Gnostic teachers does not prevent this criteria to be generalized into current Christian thought.  Specifically with regard to Rob Bell, I would be surprised to read him assert anything less about Jesus in this book if it is to echo what has been taught from his pulpit and stated in his previous texts. 

Lastly, a question is posed:  Should one doctrine (apart from the trinitarian theology) be a catalyst to completely dismiss one teacher's complete body of work as heresy?  I don't believe so.  Rob Bell, whether universalist or not, still has valuable insight into scripture and living the Christian life that is worth consideration. If doctrinal unity were the standard the Christian church would be regressing in its history by being most defined by it's division and disagreement than it's agreement.  Should this standard be carried into Christendom we would have Baptists "writing off" our Church of Christ "cousins" because they believe in baptism for the remission of sins and Baptists believe in baptism because of the remission of sins.  The comparative list can go on and on.  Our history has shown this is not the way of spreading the love and call of Christ.  And while we are on the subject, those who purport that Bell is not evangelical would be wise to watch or re-watch his Nooma video "Bullhorn" where he advocates for a more relational, rather than confrontational style of evangelism. 

It is good for people to read and be challenged by those who hold differing views.  It advances our cognitive abilities, stretches our understanding and conception, and can further solidify those beliefs we value.  A consistent theme of critical thinking is learning to weed through the good and the bad.  Personally, I believe Rob Bell has more good to share than heresy.  I look forward to critically reading "Love Wins."  I just downloaded it on my Kindle. 

Love and Fear

“There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love. We love because He first loved us.” 1 John 4:18-19

“We love because He first loved us” – This is not the first occurrence of this phrase. The repetition of this idea means it is important. The tendency of many Christians is to interpret this notion as an obligation (i.e. Because he loves us we now HAVE to love others). It is His love that inspires us, it does not obligate us. It is His love that empowers us, because if we were to give our love it would be conditional and shallow. God’s love is unconditional and deep. If we truly recognize the depth of his love – that he would love me despite myself – I am going to want to share this love and acceptance to others. Love is the great equalizer, by recognizing God loves me despite myself, I recognize I have no room to not love others. I am no better than anyone else. Human beings are typically a fickle lot. We tend not to give ourselves the “benefit of the doubt” we give other people, but we also are guilty of thinking ourselves more highly than we ought. The psychological side of me understands that we take these vacillating stances of ourselves to avoid feeling anxiety or guilt.

“There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love.” -- What keeps us from completely loving? Fear (a.k.a. anxiety). While this passage most definitely is social in nature, we tend to make the social focus more about loving the poor, needy, and those we find unlovable. This is certainly true! However, we must also keep in mind that this passage applies to our home; those closest to us. Fear keeps us from completely loving our spouse and children. Fear keeps us from loving those extended family members that have hurt us. The most common fears are: rejection, being hurt again, and losing control. These fears push people away from us, while love draws us closer. “Fear involves punishment” can mean that we fear punishment (e.g. being rejected and hurt) or use fear to withdraw love and inflict punishment. The effect is the same, creating emotional distance which goes against what we truly want which is to be loved and accepted deeply and unconditionally.

CLARIFICATION: I am not suggesting that we become “doormats” (esp. with regard to leaving abusive relationships).

More Than We Can Handle

The following is an unedited copy of an article I wrote for the Abilene Mental Health Association's series on integrating faith and psychology that will be published sometime in December in the Abilene Reporter News. This subject has been a pet-peeve of mine for some time.

=========================================

I know why we do it. We know and love someone who is experiencing grief related to a death or surviving a trauma of some sort and we want to offer words of encouragement and hope to let them know we love them and are hurting for them. For many people, being around those who are hurting is an uncomfortable experience so they reach for something to say that might break the tension they feel. One of the most common offerings given to those grieving is common Christian clichés that many believe are grounded biblically and therefore can bring comfort. One of the most common clichés given is “God will never give you more than you can handle.” This statement is going to be examined along two levels. The first level is looking at the biblical basis for the cliché and the second is following the logic of the cliché and assessing whether or not we are expressing what is true and helpful to those grieving.

“God will never give us more than we can handle.” The only place in scripture I can find any semblance of support for this sentiment is in 1 Corinthians 10:13 that reads: “No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it” (NIV, emphasis mine). This text speaks of temptation and not trial. James’ epistle speaks of trials as a testing of our faith, not a testing of our own strength. The life of faith is a life to be lived dependent upon God’s work in and through us. In fact, it seems to be a central theme to the whole of scripture that God consistently gives us more than we can handle because when we recognize we cannot handle our circumstances, we are open to recognizing our God who can handle any and all of our suffering and pain. Consider the Old Testament account of the 12 spies sent to investigate the Promised Land. Ten of the spies returned discouraged believing the land would never be theirs as God had promised because the men were like giants. Two of the spies, the faithful spies (Caleb and Joshua) focused rather on God’s ability not man’s inability. The message of this cliché seems to be that it is God’s role to filter through trials, protect us against those that are too tough for us, and allow only those we are strong enough to bear. While God is in the equation of this cliché, the focus of the cliché is on us and our ability which, again, seems contrary to a life of faith.

Evangelist Richard Jackson has said that God often does not get enough credit for things he is responsible for, and often gets too much blame for things He is not. It is this sentiment that fuels my examination of these cliché’s. If we are to offer words of comfort, let’s make sure they are genuine representatives of God in our suffering. The place of God in our suffering is with us and in us via His Holy Spirit. In this example of God’s presence with us, that we can find how to truly be a comforter in the lives of those we love. Honestly, the best comfort most people can give is not in their words of wisdom, but in their presence. The Jewish people have a tradition of “Sitting Shiva” for those who are grieving. In this practice a person is simply being present. There is no pressure to speak or act, simply to be. The presence of one person who cares is more powerful than a book filled with clichés.

Raising a Teenager

A friend of mine posted a link to an article on parenting teenagers that for some reason "struck a nerve" with me. The article is an interview with psychologist Dr. Wendy Mogel with regard to her new book "The Blessing of a B Minus". I would link to the article here, but for some reason my blogging skills aren't that developed.

I felt compelled to organize my mixed responses to this article, so, as a result, I offer the choppy, rambling, responses below in terms of my agreement and disagreement with the psychologist interviewed.

AGREEMENT:
“Parents should not shield children from mishaps, but teach them to learn from their experiences.”

“Parents should be less obsessed with achievement and college applications and more tuned in to enjoying their teens.”

“If a teen’s job is to take out the garbage, parents can’t complain if they act sour about it or roll their eyes and stamp their feet. You can’t ask for both doing the job and doing it nicely.” COMMENT: Parents must “pick their battles” with teenagers and often the foot stomping or eye-rolling derails compliance with the task because parents choose to be corrective about those undesirable responses. I take issue with the semantics of her statement: parents CAN complain and CAN ask for both doing the job and doing it nicely, but it depends on what your desired goal is, and how that standard is set. Fussing and complaining about their fussing and complaining sends the wrong message.

“We are raising them to leave us.”

“They have to do really dumb things to get smart.” COMMENT: So, in following this logic, kids who do REALLY dumb things will become REALLY smart, but this just isn’t true. Teenagers don’t HAVE to do really dumb things, they CAN learn from the mistakes of others. However, the lesson might be more potent to those who experience it first-hand, and yet those who experience it first-hand might be immune to the lesson. It is up to parents to help their teens navigate through and to the lesson learned.

“The way to make it easier is be alert without alarm, be observant without prying or spying, and be compassionate but not too enmeshed.” COMMENT: It has been a contention of mine that parents should trust their teen up to the point the teenager gives them a reason not to do, so. Privacy is a privilege to a teenager, not a right. The major point in this quote is MODERATION and I believe this is a good “default” for parents who are tempted to vacillate between extremes.

“Delight in your kids. Sit down to Shabbat dinner, light candles, and say what you’re grateful for… and no one can look at their iPhone! Make sure you protect Shabbat dinner the way you protect math tutoring.” COMMENT: Great principle for Jew and Christian and all those in-between – it’s about relationship and valuing and capitalizing on the time shared together. As parents of teens know all too well, time together is less the older they become.

DISAGREEMENT:
Without going into the disagreements quote-by-quote, I can summarize my disagreement by explaining that teenagers do need to experiment and be encouraged to experiment as a means of establishing their own identity (as rightly suggested by the author and proven in the research of James Marcia), and teenagers will by virtue of their still-maturing prefrontal cortex make boneheaded decisions. It is the parent’s role to help the teenagers navigate and even engage in preventative planning for that experimentation; teaching them wisdom, forethought, and emphasizing godly virtues/values not out of a legalistic mindset, but one of seeing God’s plan “for us” not against us. Teenagers should be encouraged to THINK and PRAY rather than just experiment and regret. Those regrets will come as a course of life. A part of raising our children to leave us is teaching them how to minimize the boneheaded choices and how to glean wisdom and maturity as a result of those that will inevitably come.

Never Be the Same

I believe it was the spring of 1990, I was a junior in college and one of the professors (that I considered more of a mentor) recommended attending a retreat called "This is The Life." The purpose of this retreat was to explore and illuminate truth of "Christ in you, the hope of Glory." I remember much about this retreat, the location, much of the teaching, and even the name of the main speaker/pastor. However, the one person at this retreat that had the most lasting and recurring impact on my life was the somewhat awkward but pleasant worship leader. His name was Kevin Walker. I don't remember any of the songs he sang, and honestly, his voice was not one that impressed me. What did impress me was the joy in which he not only led in singing, but engaged me and others around him.

Two years later, I went to serve as a Youth Pastor at the East Side Baptist Church in Haskell, Texas. I quickly found out that like most churches there was always that "one" youth minister that seemed to be legendary. East Side's legendary youth minister happened to be Kevin Walker. While this church had a history of high turn-over in youth ministers, Kevin was one that not only served for a stable and consistent period of time, he was infectious. People young and old were drawn to his joy and his love of Christ. For the nearly 5 years I served at that church I often felt the weight of his shadow and was honored when positive comparisons were drawn between he and I.

Because of this connection through East Side, our paths crossed on many occasions and I had the pleasure of not only just "hanging out" with Kevin, but being led in worship by him. Those of you who know me well, know that I am not a mystical or an overly emotionally driven person when it comes to issues of faith. With that clarification in mind, I can honestly tell you that there was something unique about being led in worship by Kevin Walker. The only word that can describe it is "anointed." As he sang and led us to sing, my soul was stirred. It is rare to encounter this. It is not the emotion of sentiment driving it, or even the "hook" of the music. It is the genuine outpouring of the Holy Spirit from Kevin to those being led. I have no other explanation.

Last Sunday, after awakening and getting ready for church, I checked my email. I received an message from a friend informing me that Kevin had lost a long, hard-fought battle with cancer. I had known of his illness and prayed for him, but honestly believed he would be healed -- that the medications would have their desired effect, or a miracle would occur. In a way, a miracle did occur. Kevin is now face-to-face with our Savior. The one of whom he sang, is visible to him.

My Facebook status that day read, "I know one day I will be able to worship with Kevin Walker again, but until that day, my heart mourns." My heart does mourn. As I sat down to this keyboard to compose this post, I had Kevin's latest CD playing. The song was "Never Be the Same." While I know Kevin was singing about how an encounter with Christ leaves one different, I could not help but think how Christ in Kevin has left me to "Never be the Same."