That one thing

If you've ever seen the movie City Slickers, perhaps you remember that scene in which Billy Crystal's character asks Curly, the intense but wise veteran cowboy, about the meaning of life. Curly just holds up his index finger and says "One thing. Just one thing." Billy Crystal asks the obvious question, "What's that?" to which Curly replies, "That's what you have to figure out."

I think we tend to skim right over this question in real life, or we give pat answers with no depth. We say things like the meaning of life is finding happiness, or raising a healthy family, or enjoying what you do. Others, holier than these, reply that Jesus is the one thing. I probably would've counted myself among those with a pat answer, and I probably would've said "Jesus" as well. But that's not really enough, is it?

I mean, what do we do when we've decided to follow Jesus? What direction do we take? To whom do we listen? What about all the bazillion small decisions that must be made every day? What do we do with those? "Jesus" just doesn't seem to fit neatly, especially since many people claim to follow Jesus, but live radically different lives.

Then there's the question of those who don't follow Jesus for one reason or another. Do we conclude that their lives are meaningless? Can they never be truly happy? Perhaps there are some religious types who would argue that non-Christians can never be truly happy, but I'm pretty sure I've met some pretty happy people who aren't devoted to Jesus.

Hopefully, you can see what I'm getting at. There's no easy, one-size-fits-all answer to the question of life's purpose. I think that it's unique for everyone. As Curly said, it's something we've all got to figure out.

But why do I bring this up? Lately, I've been feeling stressed more than usual, and I've been frustrated. I think it's because there's something in me that's afraid to choose that "one thing." Instead, I'd rather keep my options open - forever, if possible. For example, when I was in college, I was a double-major in Biblical & Theological Studies and Economics - the only of my kind in my class (or any class as far back as my professors could remember). Was this because I dreamed of someday being a biblical economist or of being an evangelist to Wall Street? No, it was because I was afraid to shut one door and walk boldly through the other. I was afraid to make a decision. What if I was wrong about the "one thing" - that thing that would define much of who I would be for years to come? Sure, I told myself that I was just being wise and responsible, but the truth was I was paralyzed. And so, though it meant much more work, I refused to decide and instead graduated with an odd mix of studies under my belt.

And it wasn't just with college. If I sit back and really think about it, I can remember all kinds of compromised and half-hearted decisions. As a result, I feel like I'm constantly at odds with myself, trying to live up to certain priorities in one area of life, while struggling to get by in another. I took the job I have for practical reasons, but it sucks the life out of me on a daily basis. It's taking me way too long (and costing way too much) to finish seminary, because it took me such a long time to decide if I even should go. I don't speak up when I ought to, but then I get overwhelmed and run my mouth off when I shouldn't.

It's as if everything in me is screaming for simplicity and a chance to focus, but I'm juggling too many things to slow down and let that happen. Sure, there are areas that I'd love to just shrug off and let fall away, but that has become harder and harder with time.

I'd like to end this post on a positive note. However, I'm sure I haven't got it all figured out yet, at least not well enough to offer any sense of hope or direction. Right now, it's a struggle to get back to that one path - the one where my strengths, gifts, passions, and responsibilities collide in a beautiful sense of purpose and belonging. I'm trying (the Lord knows), but right now, it's a hope not yet realized.

Anyway, I hope these thoughts may have resonated with someone somewhere and maybe they provided the impetus to figure out that one thing.

Another reason breakfast is the best meal of the day

>

Imagine there's no heaven...

In less than an hour, Melinda and I are headed to the Garden State (New Jersey, for anyone who's unaware) to meet up with good friends of ours. As I usually do for any road trip, I made a mix CD. Now, a mix CD is a curious breed. It's a cut above the classic mix tape because a CD can be made with far less effort, and there's no need to change up the song order just to fit the sides of the cassette. The mix CD was the format of choice in the '90s; I'm still not yet able to just bring my iPod along in the car. No adapter in ye olde Subaru.

The last mix CD I made was not met with rave reviews from Melinda. I made the mistake of stocking it with all new songs, so there really was no comfortable ground to return to after visiting an exotic or unfamiliar musical destination. So, this time, I tried to make sure that there were enough old standards to keep the mix enjoyable.

One of the old songs I chose for the CD was John Lennon's "Imagine," a classic among classics. I always liked the emotions evoked by the song, but was troubled by the lyrics. I mean it's hard to square being a Christian with lines like:

Imagine there's no heaven

It's easy if you try

No hell below us

Above us, only sky

By traditional Christian standards, it's heresy to imagine there's no heaven. I mean, heaven is where God's will is done, where his presence is made manifest, and where the faithful go when they shuffle off their mortal bodies. So, to "imagine" there's no heaven is to shoot a big hole into Christian theology.

Lately, however, I've realized just how ugly the traditional idea of heaven can seem to other people. If Christians are living for heaven, that means they're basically fine with the world going to hell. I'm not saying this is true of everyone, but it stands to reason that if heaven is our destiny, and there's no continuity between this world and the next, then who cares about our planet, our cultures, and the people all around us who don't give a rip about Jesus, right?

To someone not in the fold, this worldview is not only weird, it's downright ugly. No wonder John Lennon could long for a world without a heaven to dream of. Maybe then, people would start trying to make this world a better place. However, I can't embrace his vision; a worldview without a heaven is just extreme and problematic as one where heaven is the only hope, goal, and prize.

And I don't believe either worldview does justice to the biblical picture of heaven. In the book of Revelation, John is caught up into heaven and views, among other things, the end of the story. The curious thing is that the earth is not completely destroyed - it is recreated as a new earth. Neither are the faithful turned into ethereal spirits who dance on the clouds (except, of course for the baptists, who would never dance - even in heaven). Instead heaven is brought to earth - God comes to live with his people:

And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away" (Revelation 21:3-4, NIV).

I realize some may object by saying that the old earth has passed away, but there must be some continuity between the old and the new. Why else would the apostle Paul write, "The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies" (Romans 8:19-23, NIV).

Also, the tongues, tribes, and nations worshiping God in heaven point to a continuity between this life and the next. What good are languages and cultural markers if there is to be no connection with the world of the past? It's as if God takes everything good - everything hopeful and beautiful that the world has ever known - and strips away the sin, the evil, the sorrow, the pain, and the incompleteness, in order to make everything "good," as it was in the beginning. What human beings have created is given eternal value in God's divine judgment.

The hope of the Bible is the reconciliation of heaven and of earth; it's the fulfillment of Jesus' prayer: "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven" (Matthew 6:10, KJV). Now, if we really believed that the good, beautiful, positive, true, and graceful things we did on this earth - in this life - had eternal value, I think the hope of heaven would be something that even the biggest cynic could get behind.

I imagine there's no heaven like the one that many are wishing for.

Source: John Lennon, "Imagine."

How the fake news got real

As a disclaimer, I need to start by saying I love The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report. I think that both shows are pure genius. Still, I think it's kind of sad that lots of Americans use these shows as their primary source for news. They're supposed to be comedy - a satirical look at the world of politics and world events. But every once in a while, the line gets blurred and The Daily Show becomes more than just "the fake news."

It's been all over the Internet, but in case you don't know what I'm talking about, Jon Stewart interviewed Jim Cramer of CNBC's Mad Money last night. Over the last couple of weeks, Stewart has spent several segments of his show talking about the financial meltdown (just like everyone else on TV). He got fired up after Rick Santelli of CNBC went on a rant about Obama's desire to help struggling homeowners. This opened up the whole issue of how Wall Street works and how financial experts and business reporters can't really be objective. After all, no one simply advises on the markets without actually being invested in them personally.

Stewart has been critical of Jim Cramer because he is supposed to be an "insider" and an "expert" and he routinely (though probably not intentionally) led people astray during this past year. Weeks before Bear Stearns went under, he urged people to buy its stock. And time after time, he told his audience there was no doubt that we'd seen the bottom of the stock market.

Some people think Stewart was being unfair. After all, Cramer never claimed to be a psychic, just a financial expert. (And isn't "expert" kind of a relative term?) Stewart is able to catch him in a few lies, while at the same time, exposing some of the shadiest tactics of Wall Street trading. But, really, this whole issue is bigger than Jim Cramer and CNBC. Stewart rightly points out that our economy can't just be about trading pieces of paper. Wealth comes from work. For a nation to have true financial prosperity, it needs to produce something. People need to take something of little value and add value to it... like the way we take metal, rubber, glass, plastic, and fake wood trim and turn it into a car. Older white men swapping pieces of paper can never and will never create wealth.

Anyway, I'll let you decide. Here is the full interview (in three parts):

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Pt. 1

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Pt. 2

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Jim Cramer Pt. 3

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

I give props to Jon Stewart for asking the tough questions and getting at the root of the problem. He may not know everything there is to know about how the financial services industry works, but he clearly understands when things are not working and when something's just plain wrong. "Real" reporters should take notes.

Source: "Jon Stewart's interview with Jim Cramer," The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, March 12, 2009, Comedy Central. Videos, including the complete unedited interview, are available at http://www.thedailyshow.com/.

A New Kind of Christian

I just finished reading Brian McLaren's A New Kind of Christian. In some ways, I feel way behind the times, since it was first published in 2001, and I just read it for the first time. In 2002, after some lengthy meaning-of-life-type talks in a car to and from a church retreat, a friend had recommended the book to me. To be honest, I didn't read it then for two reasons: 1) Until the last couple of years, I've been kind of non-committal about reading books; I like TV, and 2) I was a bit worried that what I would read would provide me with more questions than answers. Now that I have read the book, I can attest that my second reason for not reading it earlier was valid.

Still, I wouldn't go so far as to say it wasn't worthwhile reading. It was actually just the opposite, even if it was unsettling. In fact, many times, I was surprised to read things that seemed to be poured from my own experiences and my own exploration of Jesus. Maybe that's what's so unsettling about it: It'd be easy if I thought Brian McLaren and others like him were completely wrong. If I could simply dismiss these folks as liberals who've lost their minds and who clearly don't love God. But I can't do that. If Brian McLaren is guilty of anything, it's of asking the tough questions. I don't always agree with his conclusions or his leanings, but the conversation is refreshing.

In a truly postmodern style, this book is a narrative story, rather than a lecture set to paper - a nod to the fact that modernity often reduces truth to static propositions and accurate information stated in as neutral a tone as possible. The story centers around a frustrated pastor who becomes good friends with his daughter's high school science teacher. Over the course of their friendship, they talk about faith, and God, and Jesus, and the Church, and the way we perceive the universe. So A New Kind of Christian is not really a book on theology or Christian living. It's really more of an exploration of what the gospel really means and what true followers of Jesus looks like. As the characters talk and discover truth, the reader is invited to partake.

Nothing is off-limits either. This was the most unsettling element of the whole work. If you accept that some things are not right in the modern, contemporary church, then you have to be willing to explore the alternatives. The picture becomes clear: "fixing" the church really means reimagining how we do and think about almost everything. And that kind of change is scary. But, just so I don't give the wrong kind of impression, this book is not about fixing the church. It's about what it means to follow Jesus and be a part of the kingdom of God - what it means to be "a new kind of Christian."

Without getting into the specific discussions. I think this quote from the science teacher in the story, Neo (nicknamed because of his initials, not The Matrix) summarizes the overall theme well: "The lowest available risk that I see is the risk of journeying on in faith. You see, I believe in the Holy Spirit. I believe Jesus meant it when he said the Spirit of God would be with us, guiding us, to the very end. So I believe that he will guide us through these winds and currents of change, no matter what storms come. In fact, I believe that he is the wind in our sails, leading us into the change, because that's his way. He always moves ahead. He's not about taking us back into the past, some beautiful illusion of good old days. He has a purpose he is working toward, and I want to keep up with him. I suppose that's my greatest fear, not that I'll go too fast or too far, but that I'll lag behind."

McLaren is not alone in his understanding that change is coming. His popularity and his ability to draw criticism are likely due to his ability to communicate the coming tide of change so well. As I stated in my last post, I think that God is doing something huge and I suspect that someday soon nothing will be the same.

Source:

Brian McLaren, A New Kind of Christian.