pinakidion.*

or How to Acheive Ugly Part Two.

Instead of offering commentary, let me say only that I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I believe it is important that a bad thing shouldn’t be allowed to continue simply because it is easier. On the other hand, I am sure that there are historical issues within my own church that may negate present reforms.

I am encouraged that publishing documents must meet the following criteria listed here. (Link has been fixed.) It prevents the spread of needless innuendo and speculation.

Because of the recent lawsuit in Nashville, some former members hope that this will result in a class action lawsuit or several smaller suits. Being skeptical of the legal profession as a whole, I am hoping that regardless of verdict, the case will promote needed financial openness with historical records.

Caveat Emptor

I’ve been enjoying some reading into Roman history. For those that may not know, I am creating a world called Dir for the purpose of building a fantasy world. The main idea is that an empire controlled most of the known world until the abrupt introduction of magic. Most stories will take place roughly 100 years after the cataclysm.

Limits of Magic
The use of magic, though, can only happen under certain conditions. This prevented the entire world from plunging into chaos, though the cataclysm created quite a bit of upheaval. The conditions are:

Magic occurs only in the presence of a substance called adamite.
Nihilite cancels the ability to use magic.
Certain lands contain so much nihilite that magic is impossible to use.

Effects of Adamite
The presence of adamite does create genetic variation at a much faster rate than evolution. There are reports of all manner of strange creatures, especially away from major human populations. Some changes are more exotic than others. For example, there are two legged pack animals appearing in less settled areas. Keep in mind that certain ‘fantastic’ creatures existed before, namely dragons, basilisks, unicorns, etc. However, these creatures may be different from conventional fantasy.

For example, adult dragons are smaller requiring about 500kg of food per week (roughly equivalent to a horse). They breathe fire because of weak digestive system that cannot process raw meat well. They eat similarly in frequency and manner of snakes (dislocating the jaw and swallowing whole, eating once a week or two weeks, etc.) Basilisks have a bite that petrifies (not a gaze). The petrifaction is not a literal turning of flesh to stone, but a neurological toxin that causes paralysis marked by rigidity of the major muscle groups.

With the advent of magic and the presence of adamite, more ‘traditional’ fantasy creatures are beginning to appear. These creatures develop or may develop abilities that are unnecessary for survival and threaten to current food chain.

Sentient Species
One other item of note is the existence of other sentient species before and after the cataclysm. The dominant empire conquered not only other humans, but other sentient species as well. The dominant empire recorded the complete extermination of at least one species, and may have led to the elimination of a few others. As a result, there are more humans in the world than any other species, but given the current disposition of the empire toward internal affairs instead of conquest, that is becoming less the case.

Hesberian Empire
The dominant empire is called the Hesberian Empire. They exhibit many traits of the Roman Empire in engineering, architecture, military tactics, and culture. They are now a republic (much like the Greeks) due to the cataclysm. The republic has focused more on internal affairs, especially on rebuilding infrastructure, re-establishing trade, and culture. Much of the rebuilding is due to a significant loss of land area for the empire, slave revolts, and short-term economic collapse.

Awrelias Severus Tigius - Father of the Republic
Two years into the cataclysm, (5839 ED) the senate took a risky move by deposing Junias Metellus. Junias had served as a general in the military for 25 years and done much for the empire as emperor for the past five years. He was noted for capturing the Ikan lands, as well as destroying a great Sook threat in the south. During his brief reign, he built roads throughout the border territories and began to allow Ganarii traders in the common markets. However, due to overwhelming military losses from attempts to retain the eastern reaches of the empire, the soldiers did not object to his removal. The republic was restored and Awrelias Severus was made consul. Awrelias had also served in the military mostly by fighting the Siptidrans (humans) in the northern frontiers. In areas where he encountered magically augmented forces, he developed a system of strategic retreats and razing the land as they left. This allowed them to retain some territories in lands where magic is possible while creating a barrier between to protect his outmatched forces. History also records a gambit whereby he tricked the Siptidrans into believing that he had mastered certain magical abilities combined with an inventive use of archers and cavalry. No doubt that Awrelias displayed some kind of military ingenuity, diplomacy, and cleverness to retain territory against a vastly superior foe.

As Awrelias took the consulship, the Senate wisely passed many of his reforms quickly without much debate. This allowed the fledging republic to quickly respond to various threats and begin to establish order.

The new consul first created the Awrelian Demarcation. Using various concrete columns bearing the inscription “gafe nekorum” (beware of magic) the ‘boundaries’ of magic were quickly marked and discovered. Continuing his tactics from the northern frontiers, he also instructed military commanders to make strategic retreats to the demarcation line along the eastern front. Having successfully defended the northern boundaries years earlier, the military could focus on the eastern boundary. Special units on horseback sent messages quickly up and down the eastern line allowing troop movement to areas of greatest need. Five years after the cataclysm, the bulk of the fighting ended except for periodic skirmishes in the southeast. This allowed Awrelias to move to promote stability and realign Hesberia in the face of a new reality.

He had increased the grain dole when he first took office, but after five years reserves were rapidly depleting and the current level could not be maintained. Rich farmland in the east was no longer available and the western lands could barely meet the demand. However, the northern lands he had been able to retain continued to increase their harvest. The grain was not considered to be as good as grain in the southern lands, but the increasing volume met the need. He instructed the governor of Tecia in the north to investigate the increase and in short order, a new system of fertilization with the use of adamite was developed. This advance averted a widespread famine, though areas of the west experienced local famines of their own.

Spending reserves of the empire, he created several large building projects throughout the empire. He encouraged slaves to become a part of these projects promising citizenship and soldier’s pay in return for five years of service. This helped to quell the small slave revolts and artificially created demand for important goods and services. More roads were built under this program than at any other time in the empire. Temples to the Old Gods were created in many cities - this sated the superstitious belief that the Old Gods were punishing the empire for ignoring them. Awrelias’ minister of Religion and minister of public morality also actively suppressed “Eastern” ideas seen in many religions dedicated to the so-called New Gods.

In 5851, the Bredurium guard, the personal protectors of the consul, attempted to assassinate Awrelias. The empire had lost much of its former glory. A plague the year before along the eastern border discouraged some of the generals in the military. In addition, many soldiers were involved in construction projects - this was seen as shameful to the soldiers and to their commanders, especially Lysias Cosas. Lysias had led unauthorized raids into the east with modest success. He began to build support amongst the other generals under the belief it was time to reclaim the lands that were lost. The senate had begun to slow down reforms and were seen by citizens as needlessly quarreling and corrupt.

The story goes that Awrelias, himself, fought off the attack and killed his would-be assassin with his own blade. Cutting off the assassin’s head, he carried it to the Senate where he made an impassioned speech “for the glory and people of Hesberia”. He declared that he was not too weak to defend himself and neither was the empire. He then spoke against the slowness of the senate and demanded that the senate stop vying for position and start caring for the people. He declared that a politician was the most destructive of assassins.

Lysias, not knowing that the assassination was foiled marched into the capital leading a procession of plunder, strange beasts, and prisoners. Upon hearing the trumpets, Awrelias marched to greet him. As the senators held their breath, Awrelias publicly congratulated Lysias on his military success and love of the empire. Awrelias claimed victory on his behalf and held the first public games in several years. To thank Lysias, Awrelias promoted him to his cabinet in a position that took him far away from the capital and the eastern front. Lysias passed away in his sleep two years later while returning to the capital. (It is said he was struck by lightning).

For the rest of his reign, Awrelias spoke of restoring the glory of Hesberia. He expanded his various construction projects and even discovered new lands across the seas to the southwest in 5867. The discovery of these large islands brought in much needed resources and materials and goods. In 5870, Awrelias died of a fever. His successor, Rufus Quintus Livius appointed by the Senate, was another military general that had served as a young soldier under Awrelias. In 5875, Awrelias was deified and a temple to him was built. Rufus took the name of Cajus (Kai-us) Tigius on his appointment.

The abnegation of reason is not the evidence of faith, but the confession of despair. Reason and reverence are natural allies, though untoward circumstances may sometimes interpose and divorce them. - J.B. Lightfoot - Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians

I was reading on thinklings and I found the quote of the day to speak to feelings I’ve had for awhile. The quote sent me to the entire commentary where I read the entire introduction.

There are times when I believe my desire for contemplation works against me. In other words, I think too hard. I see people like Joel Osteen and Brian McLaren and I believe that I am really thinking too much and with too much effort.

Joel leads the largest church in the U.S. and he seems more concerned with being positive than with any real deep thought. Don’t get me wrong, his sermons are uplifting and it is enjoyable to hear them. I’m not down on that. What bothers me is the lack of any emotional and mental depth. Then I think that his audience is full of reasonable people and maybe I am looking for something that it is not fair or right to expect.

There are times I wish I was just happy with things at face value. Sometimes I believe that I am the genesis of my own misery.

Brian McLaren, on the other hand, definitely fills my need for mental depth. His articles are well-thought out and enjoyable to read. Working through his works, I remember my days in college, especially studying literary theory. I enjoy reading intelligently written articles and books. However, the aspect I enjoy most is also the aspect I enjoy least when it comes to Christian expression. I remember literary theory as using as many words as possible to say nothing at all. Scores of poetical and literary commentaries managed to produce page after page of sometimes delightful, sometimes tedious meanderings. I discovered two keys to a succesful commentary: suggest meanings without making conclusions and define a distinct and unique vocabulary. The former generated more than enough text for the size and thickness of the commentary desired. The latter allows critics to be dismissed as ’simply not understanding’. Both are examples of mental sloppiness that I absolutely abhor, despite the fact that reading these commentaries feels like a neverending stream of cotton candy to my brain.

Then I think, at least McLaren is enjoying his Christianity (read Summer Update). At this point in my life, I am not enjoying it. It’s true, I would love to make no stands and evade any pinning down of my beliefs. I would love to engage in conditional conversations and have the adoration of thousands for sounding profound. Doing that would feel very good to me. I’d like to do that for several years.

To the point, I started reading in Galatians and read the entire book. I am struck by Paul’s reasoning through the Scriptures and take some comfort. There is at least one way for faith and reason to work together as partners. I know that there is such a thing as overthinking (hypercerebric dysfunction) and I know that I am guilty of it. However, it is encouraging to know that the solution is not to check the brain at the feet of the altar. Faith and reason are not enemies.

Anywho, enough of my ramblings this morning. There’s more personal enjoyment of Galatians, but I’m off to read it again before posting.

The world’s longest plaindrome is here.

I figured a bit of weirdness is in order. I’ve been WAY too serious today.

I am not a fan of the ICoC subculture at all. However, when I read on Google News that there will be a lawsuit filed against one of the churches, I stop and wonder.

Certainly there is the admonition of Paul that believers shouldn’t take other believers to court. Based on my limited history with both parties, I believe that each would consider the other a non-believer. (To be fair, though, the burden of this admonition is on the plantiff, not the defendant.) Because of this verse, though, I have mixed feelings about this specific lawsuit and others, in general, that may follow.

On the one hand, it was best for me to admit to myself that I allowed others to control me. I was afraid of those in leadership so I let them control me because it was easier. A bitter pill to swallow to be sure, but it is true for me. I thought of taking vengenance of some kind, but I believe that vengenance is the domain of God, not me. Deciding to let go has helped me to find a safe emotional place and ultimately to find my wife and my heart. It’s true I spent the time and money to talk to most of the people I felt harmed me, even upper level leaders. I didn’t always have healing talks, but I did have atwo good talks, and that helped a great deal emotionally. This also helps me because no one can accuse me of not trying Matt 18 - my conscience is clear.

On the other hand, I am not Jack Pelham, one of the plantiffs. In my conversations with him, I get the sense that he did not have any good talks. In fact, he experienced the opposite. I do not like him, but I can sympathize with no one being of any help. I can understand the machinery in place that shut down any ability to grieve, express grievances, be heard, and be loved. Jack is a human being trying to do the best he can to deal with a tremendously difficult situation. I think of Prov 12:25 and wonder if a kind word could have averted this mess.

Then I wonder if God allowed this to happen for some reason. This line of reasoning goes as follows:

The HKL(tm) was written by one that had competence and experience to write truthfully about the issues he raised. Almost anyone that was a part of the ICoC Subculture that read it, quickly recognized the issues he raised. In short, it rang true and most everyone realized it. However, now there is a lawsuit that could encompass former world sector leaders and Hope Wordwide(R). Maybe this will be a stiffer warning and penalty to those that did not address the financial corruption of the former ICoC. It’s not uncommon for God to work this way - he used the Babylonians and Asyrians to discipline his people throughout history. Why wouldn’t he do this now?

The problem with the line of thinking is that it assumes a lot. It assumes that the Nashville Church specifically is guilty. It assumes that HOPE Worldwide(R) and former WSL’s will get involved. It assumes that other former ICoC congregations will take note and make changes if the court finds for the plantiff.

It’s tempting to assume that the defendant is guilty. Other ICoC Subculture related websites may call this ‘persecution’ and go on to disparage the plantiff’s character. The temptation is to provide equal time to balance out a different reaction. The other issue with assuming that the defendant is guilty is that it would be a judgement on my part without knowing pertinent facts. Association does not prove guilt, nor does it imply guilt in a logical sense. As such, I want to be careful in making a hasty judgement.

In any case, I can see this as a good thing. No, really. I mean that, and not because I believe that the folks in Williamson County deserve it. What I mean is, if the court finds for the defendant, they are exonerated. If they are found guilty, then other former ICoC congregations will need to institute some kind of reform. Both of these are positive outcomes.

Outside of that, I’m trying to avoid looking at events as signs from God. Too much of that and you get situations like Hal Lindsey and others: everything is a sign of the end times. I want to avoid looking at situations as a measure of God’s approval or direct involvement. Truth is, God’s ways are higher than my ways, so I can never be certain. What I can do is to allow God to do what he has already decided to do.

I look forward to going home over the Fourth of July weekend. I hope to see some friends, I’ve emailed you and I hope to work out details.

Well, I haven’t written in a while, but I will say a little about what is coming soon.

• Forsenic Account of the Crucifixion. A personal thing for me.
• First Father’s Day.
• Audio helps for the Omaha Church of Christ study series.
• Various entries for the WikiChristian site.

May the Force Be With You Parts Two and Three are on hold and will probably not be written. The Scriptual Issues with McKeanism will replace any commentary on a specific sermon. And, in case you’re wondering, I did listen to the Father’s Day sermon and read Bertalot’s commentary on ’spiritual fathers’.

Tell me exactly what an ‘elder-in-training’ is? I thought their life, circumstances, and faith were the training for that position.

See you soon - my love to all.

As you would expect, an important occasion such as this brought out a tremendous amount of emotion. All of it was good, though its expression was laughter, joy, love and even all-out weeping.

My wife went all out to take care of me on what she insisted was “my Day”. She asked me what I wanted to do, and I had said that I want to be home, I want a beer, I want a Dagwood(R) sandwich, I want to watch the race, I want to talk to my father, and I want to talk to our baby.

Sure enough, we got home after church at about 12:15. She had me sit on our balcony in the reclining Eddie Bauer(R) chair and enjoy a wonderful, slightly cool Guiness(R) Stout.

The saga continues…

From several reports of those who weekly visit Portland, there are pulpits proclaiming a more enlightened, “open-minded” path to salvation. These pulpits are silent on the narrow path’s challenge, “If you love [Jesus], you will obey [His] commands.” (John 14:15) Openly proclaimed as optional are daily prayer, daily evangelism, daily discipling, daily fellowship and daily Bible study. Confusing comments such as, “Seek discipling if you need it” or “do what you feel is right in your heart” are common. Some “prophets” shy away from or even mock that we are in a battle, a war in which our very souls are at stake. We are in a religious fog - warfare should be preached as part of the normal Christian life. (Ephesians 6:10-19) Yes, we are family, but a good shepherd is not naive about wolves. “Fuzzy-wuzzy,” “You’re okay, I’m okay” relationships are lauded as “mature.” Contrast the previous appealing but Satanic definitions of relationships to: be”baptized…and teach them to obey all [Jesus] commands.” (Matthew 28:20); “warn the idle, encourage the timid, help the weak” (1 Thessalonians 5:14); “for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears.” (Acts 20:31) Jesus’ mission was “to seek and save the lost.” Do not be naive. Satan’s is exactly the opposite! His mission is to “seek and lose the saved!” As the Emperor went after Anakin’s heart, so Satan is actively pursing every disciple’s heart to turn each of us to the dark side. (1 Peter 5:8-9)

What is this open-minded path to salvation? I look at Chicago’s study series and it is still clear that a person must believe in Jesus, repent of their sins and be baptized. I look at LA’s ‘First Principles’ and it is centered around Ephesians 2 (one faith, one Lord, one baptism, etc.). I look at other study series and they are not much different from the original. Phoenix’s series still deals with belief, repentance, and baptism, but with a different motivation that works. San Deigo’s series presents the gospel as Acts 2 and John 1 while dealing with the person of Jesus, as well as other important things. Our own study series is modeled after Phoenix’s with elements of our own study and the other series combined. Where is the open-mindedness? Baptism is still preached, as well as repentance of sins and faith.

Some clues are provided by the next statement, “Openly proclaimed as optional are daily prayer, daily evangelism, daily discipling, daily fellowship and daily Bible study.” Maybe he really has gotten reports that some places say that prayer doesn’t have to be daily. Just because I haven’t seen it, I can’t dismiss his claim. However, I can point out the “daily discipling” is being equated with a command of God. On the surface, this seems okay, especially in light of Matt 28:20. However, what he terms as discipling is not the same as the biblical command to teach others to obey.

What is discipling? Here’s a quote from A Great Light has Dawned:

Secondly, I call everybody to a decision tonight to rededicate yourself to discipling. I’ve asked several people, how is discipling coming, they say well I think we have discipling. Well, I say, who is discipling you? Well, I don’t know. Now let’s see, if we would have asked Peter, Hey Peter do you know who is discipling you? Maybe Timothy, Timothy, do you have any idea who is discipling you these days? I mean, you know, he discipled you when you were 18 and everything when you first started out, and we had that little thing we had to get right with you. But is he still discipling you at 35? What? He’s writing you from prison? That sounds like a lot of control. You’re telling me the dude is in prison and he’s telling you what to do? And he’s 35! Get out of here! Don’t you think you to just simply have just a friendship? I mean, you’re mature. What do you need people in your life for?

Discipling to him means that there is one person that is providing spiritual guidance to you. It’s not about growing, but answering the question, “Who disciples you?”. Peter and Timothy didn’t use this terminology. Supposing they did, what do you think Peter’s answer would be? Paul? The council in Jerusalem? James? Honestly, if asked who provides insight and wisdom about your life, I believe he would answer ‘everyone’.

A great post about fatherhood that was greatly encouraging to me this morning. Thinking about the birth of my child, I am praying to be a warrior, lover, and monk as he describes.

Enjoy the article.

Forgive the irreverance, but everytime I heard that phrase, I always thought “and also with you”. It was something I learned in an Episcopal Church that has always stuck out in my mind. It was just so automatic. The priest would say to the church, “the Lord be with you” and instantly a crowd of 400 would reply in one voice, “and also with you”.

It’s a rhythm thing, I can’t resist.

On to serious matters, though, it seems that our brother in Portland has been to the movies lately. It seems that his rhetoric is racheting up and is only bound to increase as he works through a study of the book of Revelations. I’ll give you a hint into those sermons - Thomas and his doctrine will be on the side of God. All others will be on the side of Satan. All symbolism that points to the Christian church will point to his specifically controlled, er, influenced congregations. The message intended to remind early Christians that God is sovereign and encourage them in their fight against Satan (and not the Romans) will be twisted into grow faster at all costs. Read more…

File under “Well, DUH”

What's your theological worldview?
created with QuizFarm.com

You scored as Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan. You are an evangelical in the Wesleyan tradition. You believe that God’s grace enables you to choose to believe in him, even though you yourself are totally depraved. The gift of the Holy Spirit gives you assurance of your salvation, and he also enables you to live the life of obedience to which God has called us. You are influenced heavly by John Wesley and the Methodists. Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan 96% Emergent/Postmodern 71% Reformed Evangelical 71% Neo orthodox 64% Fundamentalist 61% Classical Liberal 43% Charismatic/Pentecostal 32% Roman Catholic 29% Modern Liberal 7%

An interesting article here on ministers and ethics raised these major issues:

• The tax break for ministers (also for military officers) is a privilege, not a right. Ministers should be grateful for this deduction and also understand the government that provided it, has the right to interpret and even remove it.
• The housing allowance originated when most churches owned parsonages. Ministers then would have difficulty, especially with their meager salaries, paying additional taxes on this church owned property.
• This tax law allows ministers to exclude what for most is about 25% of their taxable income; thus most ministers pay income taxes on the remaining 75%. The law was not intended to allow or encourage ministers to claim most of their income as non-taxable. (A certain well-known minister claimed 80% in 1995—100% earlier).
• Most significantly for Christian ministers, how can our lifestyle in affluent America reflect the example of Jesus. If I live in a luxurious home that only the upper 5% in America can afford, and I work to avoid paying taxes on my six figure salary, what does that say about my values? What does this also say to the majority of ministers who make less than adequate salaries and do pay their fair share of taxes?
• “You cannot serve God and wealth,” warned Jesus (Mt. 6:24). Paul added, “Pay to all what is due them—taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due” (13:7). Paul’s words included both sales tax and the hated tribute tax. Even to a pagan government the Christian citizen had a responsibility.

Although tempting, this isn’t a reaction to certain events in Arizona. Any connection made is your own idea, not mine. This is just some observations of various ministers throughout the US. Some I have seen directly, others I have not.

My old church in NC, the ministers lived in an exclusive neighborhood in big homes. One of the ministers was on track to no longer take a salary from the church, so I didn’t begrudge him. Some of the others, though, I wondered how they paid for it. At the time, I didn’t know that the minister and his wife both took salaries.

A nationally famous Texas minister drives an expensive car, lives a rich lifestyle, and wears gold chains. He doesn’t believe that it is wrong to be successful.

The aforementioned California minister that made 100K in 1995 and tried to claim almost 80K as housing allowance.

My present minister lives in a home assessed at 114K. My wife and I together make more than he does, much more. We have no children and he has two.

As far as me, I make 48K a year. (I work for a school, so it’s public record.) I have done some noble things like refuse help from the church to attend two ITS events. I also do not charge the church for their webspace. But I also own a 2001 Cadillac Catera. When I first arrived, most people said, “nice car”. I felt guilty sometimes having it around, but my more recent aggravation with it is not my appearance of wealth, but difficulty with expense and parts. I live in a fancy apartment on the rich side of town.

My first job after college paid $5.85/hr, but I left making almost $9 two years later. I began my career as a schoolteacher making $17,600 in 1997. I graduated up to $20,000 as a Jr. Tech writer a year later. Before I left that company to move to Nebraska 4.5 years later, I was making $45K as a DBA. I started here making 40K as Help Desk Specialist, now I’m an analyst making 48k.

My happiest days came when I got a huge raise to 30K. I had a good little Pontiac Grand Am that worked okay and I lived in a small house with two roomates. I could finally pay my bills and have left over money for savings and fun. Now, six years later, I make much more and I feel like I don’t make enough. When did I complicate my life so much?

I did it when I decided that $1100 for rent wasn’t bad. I did it when I decided that a $27,000 car was better than a $14,000 car. I did it when I decided that I could eat in resturants more often than cook at home. In short, I gave in to the temptation of materialism. I bought the lie that more is better and more expensive is better.

I would gladly give it all up to have a job I love and have my wife stay at home with our baby, but it’s hard. I went looking for apartments that would save us money and I discovered that I had become a snob along the way. I think that I cannot start my own business without a year’s salary in the bank (at present salary). I have to have a washer and dryer in the apartment. I have to have 1000 square feet. For what? Magazines I never read? Crates of books? I used to be able to fit all my earthly belongings into a Ford Escort, now I have trouble with a 10 foot U-Haul. When did I decide that I need all this stuff?

I have recently wanted to be a teaching minister, or at least a school teacher again. However, I think that I cannot because the salary would be a double digit cut. I regret that making a set amount of money has become more important. I mean, if my church offered to hire me tomorrow, would I refuse it because it would be a 30 - 40% paycut? My current minister has taken more than that and he hasn’t quit.

In any case, I say all this because I understand how it can happen.

I understand how buying a 300K home is justified because I would be heading that way if my wife wasn’t pregnant. I understand how 100K is no longer enough, even 200K. I recently figured that if I got a second place winning ticket in the Powerball, that I could spend the entire 100K on car payments, student loans (not mine), repair on my stuff and other misc things and still be little better off than I am now. I actually figured that I’d have to win the Powerball to be well-off, and not the 10 million minum prize, either. It had to be 40 million dollars minimum to be worth winning. What kind of warped thinking is that? When did the minimum price of financial independence become FORTY MILLION DOLLARS?

So believe me when I say that a minister with a million dollar home, or an upper class home with a chandelier, or two homes worth over a quarter-million each should be ashamed of themselves. I’m ashamed of where my thoughts have been leading. Why on earth would a minister that makes more than 95% of the people in their congregation feel the need to buy a bigger house? How can you minister to a church where some members are poor while you drive a Porsche?

I’ve seen many minister in the higher eschelons of the ICC live in luxury. Who pays for all their flights to monthly conferences on both coasts? I know of one minister that billed back airfare on trips taken for free on frequent flyer miles. I know of other ministers, ICC ministers, than spoke at conferences in vacation resorts, received an honorarium, and still billed the expenses, though they stayed for several days on vacation. There are elders and lead evangelists that get paid six figures, even under new salary structures, and yet this doesn’t seem to be enough. Peh! Jesus was homeless at times. Even when financed by rich women, he still did not live in luxury and comfort. I do not believe it is proper that those that set themselves up as leaders should be above the teacher. I don’t beleve in a vow of poverty, but I don’t believe in multiple homes, either. I don’t believe it proper for me, either.

Thoreau cried out, ’simplify, simplify’ and I believe it is time that I did. More on this later. Feel free to ask me about it.

Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. - Matt 7:15

In reading the passage Matt 7:13-23, three ideas are expressed in the text:

• Few find the narrow gate that leads to life.
• False prophets are known by their fruit.
• Not everyone that says ‘Lord, Lord’ will make it to the kingdom of Heaven.

Jesus begins with a warning that many find the path to destruction. The narrow path to life is difficult and few find it. After saying this, he then talks about false prophets. Presumably, the false prophets find their way to the path of destruction, just like many others. Since these false prophets look like one of us on the outside, how can we tell a false prophet from another sheep?

Jesus said to look at their fruit. He doesn’t define it here, instead choosing to make striking analogies.

You know, I have had two great weekends in a row. Oddly enough, I have been out of town for both of them. I hope this isn’t a trend.

Camping this weeking with many folks from my church was so much fun. I had asked for a cabin because I wanted to make sure that my wife was more comfortable. Normally, she and I would be in a tent, but the pregnancy is causing some back pain by itself.

You have to realize that she is used to real camping on the boundary waters of Minnesota. By real camping, I mean, carrying the tent and supplies, hiking several miles, cooking on fire or Sterno(R), and all kinds of real ‘roughing it’ activities. By comparison, we took a hotel vacation.

One of the couples brought a ton of stuff - gas grill, lots of chicken and potatoes, lots of other food, a motor scooter, etc. This family tirelessly serves our church through their overwhelming generosity. On the first morning, when I couldn’t cook on charcoal very well, they graciously offered their grill. Other couples brought a meat and a side dish. Some brought dessert items, others salads of all kinds, etc. We had any kind of grilling meat except buffalo and other exotic meats. I suppose those will emerge if we ever have another BeastFeast(tm). In any case, we brought hamburgers, hot dogs (all beef), brats, and pasta salad. There was food available for everyone.

The first night provided a good campfire - apparently I missed the hour long process to get wet wood to burn. I’m told that the firemakers in our camp resorted to using bug repellent soaked twigs to get the fire going. The circle of chairs provided an atmosphere of easy conversation. It was good to talk to folks outside of the formal church context. With the pregnancy, I haven’t seen folks like I used to, or been over to their homes fixing computers. I mean that, but I feel I have gained so much more than I lost.

Saturday was a day of activity - my wife and I went canoeing on the Loup River. Friday night provided an intense thunderstorm and rain so the river was high and fast. I have never steered on a canoe before, but I figured it’s not that different from a sailboat or any other manner of boats I have run in my time.

I was wrong.

However, my wife and I had a great time bonding and drawing closer together through a two hour canoe trip. We stopped at one point to eat lunch. Not having an anchor and wanting to use both hands to make sandwiches, I held on to a branch on one of the banks with my big toe. I know, we could’ve grounded the canoe and got out, but where’s the fun in that? I have a picture of this, so I can verify that I am not exaggerating or making this one up.

Saturday evening was leisurely and fun. Lots of goofiness around the campfire. If I ever hear the song “Throw Another Log on the Fire” again, I may have to resort to violence. Although I have not seen Napoleon Dynamite, I have heard the entire movie quoted. I am apprantly not the only Monty Python fan as we quoted the Grail and Life of Brian and made up our own Pythonesque things.

My wife and I also had a very positive and life-changing talk that night. I feel like I am being a good husband when I can encourage her in a powerful way. It is also encouraging to reflect on what it means to belong to our family and the family of believers. It fills a deep need when you know that you belong somewhere in the universe - and discussing that will only strengthen the bonds between my wife and me.

Saturday night’s lesson on God as Fire was inspiring, especially with most of us huddled aroudn the campfire. Sunday’s lesson was also wonderful - it was an exposition of Philippians 3 dealing with righteousness that comes from faith vs righteousness that comes through self-effort. It was a message that I truly needed to hear.

Church was fun. The camp had a chapel on the premises. On Saturday, a wedding took place. The chapel used to be a Methodist church. In fact, we sang out of Methodist hymnals (including a new song) the entire service. The building wasn’t much in the urban sort of way. It was more barn than church. Their were no walls, you could see the two by four’s of the walls laid bare on the inside. Behind the altar was a big square window with a view of the sky and trees behind the church. At sunrise, the sun would make its way up the window shining light through the cross and onto the pews below. It reminded me of going to church growing up. I even rang the bell to start the service, something I did often at the Stumpy Point United Methodist Church. When asked to share a Scripture, I read Psalm 139. It is my favorite psalm as it reminds me of God’s goodness to me and the formation of my yet unborn child. I choked up reading it. John 17 was read twice, it just shows me that the Spirit works well when planning is not overdone.

All in all, my wife and I had plenty of time for romance, fun, fellowship, and relief. It felt good to get out of town again. I didn’t use a computer for two and a half days, something that I know is good for me. In any case, I returned with increased love for my wife and family and friends. Considering this wasn’t a retreat, it sure felt like one.

It has been awhile, so I wanted to give some brief excerpts on a couple things until I’m able to sleep better at night. When it gets hot and the A/C conks out, the C-Pap machine is impossible to wear.

1. The baby is doing well and so is mama bear. We have names picked out and we’re looking for midwives in order to deliver more naturally.

2. A certain minister in Portland is up to no good. He is ‘reconstucting’ Salt Lake (his word), helping Montreal and Santiago, Chile, and trying to influence Mexico and Latin America. In any case, I realize that what I believe in regard to him can come across as cruel or reactionary. So let me state my concerns with Thomas ‘Kip’ McKean plainly:

Kip McKean is teaching a doctrine that unbiblically adds to the saving faith necessary to become a Christian. The unessential items he adds are: 1. becoming a disciple prior to baptism, 2. the necessity of a discipling partner, 3. the requirement to be in a small group. Discipling as demonstrated by the 28+ year career and teachings of Kip are not in line with what Jesus commanded.

In addition, he has taught on several occasions that autonomy is wrong citing the need for overseeing evangelists for other churches. It has become plain that he does not believe his congregation needs oversight, but that he is more than qualified to oversee most other congregations. Despite several attempts to work with Kip, he has not responded to any form of cooperation with evangelists in other chruches. It appears that if he is not the overseer, then he wants no part in working with other churches.

Lastly, in listening to the past five months of his sermons and reading his numerous articles, it has become clear that Kip is selfish and will only think about himself above others. The church is about his dream, not the dreams of others and certainly not about the dreams of Jesus in this present generation.

For these three reasons, I believe that Kip should be avoided. He does not teach sound doctrine. He only believes in his own teachings and methods. As evidenced by his family life and church history, he destroys many that are a part of his life. He will not compromise and has demonstrated an inability to listen to others. Therefore, I urge everyone to publically denounce his teaching and leadership. It is my ardent prayer that God will have mercy on all our souls and that I will see him in Heaven. May God grant him mercy for all the divisiveness, pain, suffering, and destruction he has wrought in the world. However, he is a false teacher teaching a false gospel.

If you want a version of the above statement with Scriptures, I’ll be happy to post it.

3. I look forward to camping this weekend with my entire congregation. It will be fun.

Leaders within the Energent Church have written a response that you may read here. In a way, it reminds me of the early church striving to define orthodoxy. The Christians are dealing with various persecutions and spreading the message and all of a sudden, this Marcion character shows up and says that the God of the OT isn’t the real God. He can prove it with a few of Paul’s letters he collected, bound together with the Gospel of Luke. Most of the other Christians didn’t have more than one or two letters, if they had any at all.

In the same way they had to define what was orthodox by criticism and heresy, it seems the ec is now doing the same.

I was quite happy to see a thoughtful, well-written response. I was also encouraged by several nods to the traditional Christian faith. As someone that was duped by a church that believed it had all the answers, it was refreshing to read humility in responding to critics.

I ask that if you will, engage me in conversation. I have a few questions and I would like to know what you think. Yes, I call the ec the Church of the English Majors. I do so because my previous attempts at conversation left me feeling like I was discussing litearary theory, not Jesus Christ. I have an English Literature degree, so I am affected by this reference. I also believe that I meet many of the aspects of the English major stereotype. I have no problem making fun of myself and taking myself less seriously.

I should be fair and tell you that I am feeling things from the emergent response that may not have been intended. I come from a church that does not take kindly to criticism. Members were encouraged to stay away from critics and even the internet as a whole because it would damage your faith. Someone that was a critic was labelled as bitter or slanderous and quickly dismissed. I have been hurt very badly because I joined a church that wanted to make a difference in the world. I joined because I wanted to help people and not argue over doctrine. Instead, I got abused, manipulated, and minimized because I did not conform to the characteristics of an ideal member. So far in my attempts, I have received similar treatment. I feel like if I do not use ec specific words and phrases and if I do not go along with 90% of what is proposed, that I am labelled as unworthy of dialogue. I honestly want to feel differently and will be fair in my dialogue. Please engage me.

Here are my questions:

Fourth, we respect the desire and responsibility of our critics to warn those under their care about ideas that they consider wrong or dangerous, and to keep clear boundaries to declare who is “in” and “out” of their circles. These boundary-keepers have an important role which we understand and respect. If one of your trusted spiritual leaders has criticized our work, we encourage you, in respect for their leadership, not to buy or read our work, but rather to ignore it and consider it unworthy of further consideration. We would only ask, if you accept our critics’ evaluation of our work, that in fairness you abstain from adding your critique to theirs unless you have actually read our books, heard us speak, and engaged with us in dialogue for yourself. Second-hand critique can easily become a kind of gossip that drifts from the truth and causes needless division.

If I believe that certain ideas of the ec are wrong, am I a ‘boundary-keeper’ interested in who is ‘in’ or ‘out’ of a circle? I do not believe it is possible to draw a solid boundary to who is in or out. When asked, Jesus replied that the questioner should worry about their own soul.

Fifth, because most of us write as local church practitioners rather than professional scholars, and because the professional scholars who criticize our work may find it hard to be convinced by people outside their guild, we feel it wisest at this juncture to ask those in the academy to respond to their peers about our work. We hope to generate fruitful conversations at several levels, including both the academic and ecclesial realms. If few in the academy come to our defense in the coming years, then we will have more reason to believe we are mistaken in our thinking and that our critics are correct in their unchallenged analyses.

If I believe in the need for professional scholars, does that give me membership into the guild?

We regret that some of our critics have made hasty generalizations and drawn erroneous conclusions based on limited and selective data. We would welcome future critics to converse with us directly and to visit our churches as part of their research. Of course, they would find weaknesses among us, as they would among any group of Christians, including their own. But we believe that they would also find much to celebrate and find many of their suspicions relieved when they see our high regard for the Scriptures, for truth, for worship, for evangelism, for spiritual formation, and for our fellow Christians – including our critics themselves.

I am not trying to be obtuse, but how many folks do I need to engage in conversation? Two? Seven? Twenty-three? I did not know you existed until two months ago. I cannot afford the books, but I have read blogs by Brian McLaren, information of emergentvillage.com, trying to engage in conversation, etc. When have I read enough to ask a question?

With millions suffering from hunger, disease, and injustice around the world, we hope that all of us – including our critics – can renew our commitment to “remember the poor” (Galatians 2:10) rather than invest excessive energy in “controversies about words.” “They will know you are my disciples,” Jesus said, not by our excessive disputation, but by our love. Words and ideas are essential, for they often set the course for thought and action, and constructive dialogue is needed and worthwhile, but we cannot let less productive internal debates preoccupy us at the expense of caring for those in need.

If I seek to understand by presenting my viewpoint, am I neglecting the poor? If I go and give all my possessions to the poor, can I then present my case and ask questions?

Do I really have to agree with the ec on many points before we can enter a conversation? Can’t I become convinced over time or do I have to believe in advance?

Thank you for your time.

I’ve been interested lately in the various medical accounts as part of a study series for my church. Searching around, I have found various accounts that agree in many areas, but disagree in others.

For example, many accounts believe that when Jesus prayed in the garden of Gethsemane he prayed so intensely that blood became mixed with his sweat. This medical condition known as hematridosis has appeared in medical literature. Many notable cases include a British woman during the bombing of England during WWII and Civil War soliders during amputation. However, there are some, including Douglas Jacoby, that believe the phrase “like drops of blood” is more a metaphor than a literal mixing of fluids.

The punishment during Jesus’ trials has also been characterized differently. More than one account believes that the Roman lictors had training in Jewish law. In other words, that they delivered forty minus one lashes. The Romans had no such law that I’ve seen, but it does appear in Jewsih law, Deut 25:3. Some accounts make mention of the repeated blows to the head, but no one seems to agree on the size of the staff used. To further complicate matters, despite many Christians urging the use of The Passion as a coversion tool, there is controversy that the movie over dramatized the beatings and exaggerated Jesus’ endurance.

Lastly, the effects of crucifixion are in doubt. Most accounts believe that the victim suffocated due to an inability to exhale. Dr. Frederick Zugibe and others disagree. With a book detailing methods that seem to be from CSI, he detailed the various physical tests and the specially crafted crosses used for measurements. He contends that victims on the cross could breathe just fine. He also believes that Jesus was crucified through the hands, not the wrists.

In any case, I want to take a look at it for myself. I hope to produce two versions, an investigative one and a narrative one. In the meantime, here are some accounts:

Dr. C. Truman Davis
Joe Zias
On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ by William D. Edwards, MD; Wesley J. Gabel, M Div; Floyd E. Hosmer, MS, AMI
Appearing in the JAMA Vol. 255 No. 11 March 21, 1986
An animated look
David Terasaka, M.D.
Keith Maxwell M.D.
Dr. Frederick Zugibe

and of course, CSI Jerusalem