I don’t mean the tv show. I’ve never seen a single episode.

There are rules here at work that prohibit discussion about religion and politics. This, of course, means that we generally talk about these things when supervisors are on vacation. No one emails as all of them are meticulously tracked and stored for posterity. No one visits various political websites as network logs are all of them are just as meticulously stored for perusal of future archeologists. In a place that makes the Great Firewall of China look like an anonymous proxy, all we can do is talk. We believe that the wireless router installed in the cieling is really hiding a camera, but we’re pretty sure that the camera doesn’t have audio.

And if it does, well, that’s just more work for future archeologists.

There’s a local theater production that is proving to be popular called Late Night Catechism. Attending the show brings you face to face with a nun that treats the audience like one of her classes. She explains a lot about Catholicism, much to the delight of many of those in attendance. I haven’t seen it, but I’d like to. Unfortunately, the show ends this Friday.

Co-workers here have discussed it as a reflection of their own lives. As two of them discussed it yesterday, one, a former seminary student, shared a poignant experience. He said that growing up he was told not to read the Bible because it would confuse him, but that at seminary, all he did was read the Bible.

How odd, I thought. It’s funy that many in the Protestant tradition would say that their experience was exactly the opposite. Many Protestants grow up reading the Bible. The reasons why varied quite a bit, some of us did it because it was The Christian Thing to Do(TM). Some of us did it because all our other church friends said that they did, a few others of us did it because we had to be first in all classroom situations, including Sunday School. Whatever the reasons, though, Protestant seminaries are usually criticized for the de-emphasis of the Bible. It’s like saying, Don’t worry about reading the Bible, we’re just going to deconstruct it anyway.

I didn’t attend any kind of seminary, but my own experience is a little of both. I grew up reading a Children’s Bible to understand the stories, but I didn’t retain very much. What was important was faith in action, not necessarily understanding. We didn’t deal so much with how the Bible applied to our lives with much depth, but we always talked about what we could do for the community.

Going to college, I joined the church and began just reading the Bible for understanding its personal application in my life. After a few years, though, I stopped reading it once I memorized all the verses in the studies. The great strength in the study series was boiling down essential truths in a manner that was easy to pass on to others. It’s greatest weakness, though, was avoiding any instruction in how to read other passages besides them. (Even Deep Convictions wasn’t much better in days 34-40 which were supposed to cover this topic.) As a result, we heard the same set of 25 passages preached constantly. Acts 2:36-38, Matt 28-18-20, John 8, Hebrews 4:12-16, and most certainly James 5:16.

One other thing I learned early on was that all official doctrine came from LA. The first Teacher’s Conference told us that we could drink without sin, women could baptize women, and services could have instrumental music. It was the first time I remember an official kingdom-wide communication about doctrine. Subsequent messages came by way of KNN, but the effect was the same for me: why study when the spiritual folks in LA would explain it all to me eventually, anyway?

One exception to this was an exposition of Ecclesiates that Sam did at a conference in Atlanta. I really enjoyed that exposition, and still consider it a very good one.

In the post-HKL Renaissance, I’ve looked for all manner of ways to better understand the Bible for my own life. I tried CENI for a while. (More CENI here.) I can do that kind of mathematical percision to a lot of history, but six months into trying to do it to the Bible, I was exhausted and empty. I tried crowdsourcing it for a while, but it seems that Calvinist bloggers (of all flavors of Calvinism) outnumber non-Calvinists 30 to 1. I also found that, like me, most religious bloggers are angry. I was/am angry at those that should know better within the former ICoC (the teachers, World Sector Leaders, Geographic Sector Leaders, and their associated members of their individuals entourages.) Most bloggers appeared to me to be angry at other professed Christians and their endless array of errant doctrines.

I also spent a lot of time trying to explain that I’m not really an Arminian or a Pelagian only to be called both repeatedly and summarily dismissed. I even had one apologetics site insist that I was bound for Hell because of my association with the Restoration Movement.

So then I moved on to the Historical Method espoused within the book, “How to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth”. This is still the most fulfilling method to me despite the one glaring drawback. I spend a lot of time trying to put myself in a place two millenia removed in an effort to hear the words like the original audience heard them. I even persued Greek to better put myself in that place. Some years later, I am still left wanting.

I have been trying to develop a hermenutic that is still honoring to God. In other words, I don’t want the Bible to say what I want it to say. I don’t want to read my personal biases into it in and effort to avoid personal change. Thus far, I have been able to figure out a few things that are true:

• The Bible is a book of faith that happens to contain a little history and literature. It is not a book of literature that happens to contain historical material.
• Logic is not the Magic Key to unlock Biblical mysteries.
• Greek is not a more intense or more accurate form of English.
• The Bible is meant to be understood by God, although it is also meant to be a challenge.
• Useful study is slower than I would like it to be.

Now, there’s more to this, but I need to sign off for now. More later.

It’s serendipitous that two folks would be talking about salvation at the same time. Alan is working on a comprehensive series on his site. For my friends that are not from a Restoration Movement background, it is not a discussion on baptism, it is a discussion on what constitutes a saving faith. In other words, what does a person need to know in order to be saved. I say that because I’m linking to him - a discussion of baptism is a non-sequitir.

Last Sunday, we were covering this topic in Sunday School. Unlike Alan’s series, though, we actually talk about baptism. It’s partly the what-you-need-to-know part with the how-do-I-get-saved part. I’ve attached it as a Word filefor your perusal. It has a few diagrams that do not translate well into web formatting, so I leave it in all it’s M$ glory.

I got to co-teach this lesson. Our minister is on call once a month as a chaplain in a local hospital, so he gets a helper just in case he has to leave. (The same is true for the Sunday sermon as well.) This short lesson is designed to get people talking about salvation and what it means to them. It is by no means comprehensive, but it does get down to the essentials. The essentials are: relationship, grace, and faith.

I like it better than the traditional, Hear, Believe, Confess, Repent, Baptized formula because salvation is more than a procedure. Coming from two traditions that can be dogmatic about proper procedure, I understand that the message can easily get lost in the method. It’s simultaneously funny and sad that so many aspects of the Christian faith devolve into arguments over proper procedures and methods.

Salvation is primarily about relationship, not baptism. In helping people to know God, I would much rather point them to the relationship and talk about what that means. Whether or not you believe in original sin, the fact remains that the relationship between God and a person is broken because of sin.

Like any broken relationship there must be trust to repair the breech. God does all he can to demonstrate his trustworthiness: sacrificing his Son, extending grace, showing love to us. The most important thing to see is that God is reaching out to us.

For our part, there must be faith. It’s one thing to be given a great gift, it’s another to attach significance to that gift. Yes, God sacrificed his Son for us, but there is no meaning unless we have faith. Thousands of people were crucified by the Romans. Many Jewish people were crucified in Judea in the first century AD. Various cults believed that people had returned from death. Knowing this has no power. However, once we believe that the sacrifice and resurrection of this specific individual has cosmic meaning, then there is power. I can say that the Flying Spaghetti Monster assures us through the comforting touch of his noodly appendage, it’s another to actually believe that FSM is more than a satire of intelligent design. (and a good one BTW)

So if this individual, this Jesus, is part of the reconciliation process, who is He? That pretty much leads into Alan’s series again. What you need to know is important. Before the what, though, it is important to understand the why. God desires relationship. Without the understanding of relationship, the life and times of Jesus is nothing more than a biography.

Believe it or not, I am glad that campus groups are excited about New Orleans. I would have enjoyed having a service component as part of a conference in my college days. What a good idea to establish the idea of community service as part of campus ministry.

I went to the new site and read the news about things happening around the world. It makes me shrug that most of the good news stories are baptisms - that metric isn’t going to change as I’ve mentioned before. I looked around and saw older messages, and a few pictures. The RightTurn folks made a beautiful sight.

I saw the Study section and found materials provided by the church in Boston. The sections are Apologetics, Bible Talks, D-Groups, Quiet Times, and Study Series Materials. I thought it would be interesting to see what was made available.

Some of the materials are quite disappointing. The discipleship study continues the error that one must be a disciple before baptism. The church study is the same “only one physical church”, the one church is determined by doctrine of salvation. These two are related because of the unique addition of “Have the heart of a disciple” added before baptism. Very disappointing to see Kip’s doctrine perpetuated.

The more stuff I read, the more it felt like 1995 all over again. Building Family talks about spiritual family being more important than physical family. The sin and baptism study includes a note that folks leading the study need to know what the person studying believes about their salvation and to determine if that person is, in fact, saved.

Again, we don’t address doctrine years ago so nothing changes. We are teaching bad doctrine all over again, at least in Boston. These days, though, I think some in attendance are smart enough to know better. I wonder aloud, though, how long those folks will keep coming.

Still, the inclusion of the book How to Pray by RA Torrey is encouraging. A couple of the Apologetics materials are pretty good as well.

When we first met, it seems like you weren’t certain if I could be trusted. You are quite fond of her, and I understand your natural protectiveness. Still, I was glad that we could come to an agreement on that first day. Little did you know that I was going to take you and her a couple states south in a year.

It ’s funny. You complained the entire trip south, yet you let me be your friend. You didn’t get angry at me very much despite feeling sick for most of the trip and despite a lingering sense of mistrust.

We put you in a stranger’s house for a few months after that. You and she were both guests at first, but after a while, it was just you. Just you, a good friend, and that dog you completely despised. I understand, I’m not a small dog kind of person.

After she and I came back from Rome, the three of us lived in a fancy high rise for a short time. It was, in many ways, the place where you always belonged. You could look down at the entire world from the top floor. You basically owned the house all day as we both left to go to work. I’m sure you miss those quiet days now. Don’t worry, someday soon, those quiet days will return.

When we left to move into a house over a century old, you didn’t complain very much. In fact, you enjoyed the fact that she was home quite a bit. In fact, it was then that we started talking to each other more than ever. You would say hello when I came home and then we’d talk about all kinds of things.

She’d roll her eyes at us, but us guys have to stick together, you know.

When we came home that October night, you wouldn’t leave her side. It took awhile for us to explain it, but all you knew was that she had changed and she was very sad. You brought her a lot of comfort although you didn’t see much of us for a couple weeks. When we got home, you would politely say hello to me and then join her in the living room. She still talks about those times.

And one day, we brought him home.

You complained at how noisey he was and how demanding he was and how he took away time that was rightfully yours. Yeah, I can see your point there. Still, when he was asleep in his bassinet, you came back to comfort her through the tears, just like you had always done for the 13 years previous.

You loved the basement in that old house. Unlike me and her, you could ignore the gunfire. You didn’t flinch that night the police came and asked me what I saw and heard. (You did, however, come up to visit me after he left. Thank you for not telling the cop about the Cadillac in the back yard with expired tags.) We stayed over a year at that house and you were mostly happy there.

When we moved again, you were getting used to it, I think. You took to the new house right away. There was real carpet, real heat, no gunfire, closets, and lots of warm sunbeams. He was still your nemesis, but you could easily escape for the first seven months. After that, you decided to sleep downstairs, away from us.

When we brought her home a few months after that, you pretty much decided that we were crazy. Yet, those first few nights when we came home, you knew something was wrong. You were there for her again. I was glad you were, because I couldn’t be there in the daytime. That was a hard one on all of us, but you gave us so much.

Thank you.

But now, dear friend, I see you hurting. You don’t complain, but I know it hurts a lot. I also know that you are embarrassed about this morning, so I don’t mention it to anyone. I wish I could say it happens to all of us, but you and I both know that is not true. I know that you’re much older than me, but it’s no comfort to me. I wish this circumstance was different.

Saturday, I have to transition you again. This time, though, we won’t be joining you. I know you want to do this alone, but I wish you weren’t leaving so soon. I just wish that you knew it was coming. After all you’ve done for her for these 17 years, I just wish it wouldn’t be a big surprise to you. Unfortunately, I cannot change that.

Thank you for noticing that I am feeling sad tonight. I appreciated the quiet time we shared downstairs while the kids and she are asleep. Maybe you know, I dunno. I mean, I saw the xrays. We both know you haven’t been eating. Anyway, you haven’t purred in quite a while, but you purred a good twenty minutes earlier.

For a brief time, I almost forgot.

I don’t know what our time will be like this week. I dread Saturday in some ways. Our children are so fond of you. I am, too.

Let me say this while you are asleep tonight:

Goodbye old friend. May your suffering end. Tell grandma that we miss her, too.