Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Good Thinking

One of the major themes, which has reverberated throughout human history, is the concept of an epic struggle between the forces of “good” and “evil”. And while there is, no doubt, some amount of credence to this idea, I believe that the parameters of that conflict have become increasingly distorted and exaggerated. Unfortunately, a failure to understand the bounds of that battle could ultimately cost us a much greater defeat.

Based on westernized Christianity one might assume that the Garden of Eden’s “forbidden fruit” came from the tree of “evil”, as opposed to the tree “of the knowledge of good and evil”. By applying that flawed understanding, the problem becomes that we ate of the evil fruit, which introduced sin and whereby Jesus becomes the antidote for our poisonous blight. While there is certainly a strand of truth in that picture, it fails to adequately represent the full scope of mankind’s eternal struggle.

In reality, the options in the garden came down to the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. By partaking of the latter, mankind not only gave evil a place in creation, he also birthed the presumption that men have the ability to discern what is “good” for themselves. Choosing between “life” (which can only be found in the person of Jesus Christ) and our own understanding of what is “good”, has been a problem ever since. By characterizing this life as a struggle between good and evil, mankind continues to walk by the tree of life, as he strives to achieve what he imagines to be “good”.

Jesus chided those who referred to Him as “good” teacher; telling them that there was “only one who is good”; while the book of Proverbs says that there is a way that seems right (or good) to a man, but that in the end it leads to death. Those who reject God often do so on the basis of things like, “why would God send a good (by their own definition) person to hell” or “why would a good (also by their own definition) God allow ______ (i.e. bad things) to happen to good (again, by their own definition) people”. Even amongst those who count themselves as followers of Jesus, it is often the pursuit of things we perceive to be good that keeps us from pursuing the things that God has actually called us to. I believe that this is the trap that the Apostle Paul was trying to warn us about when he exhorted us to walk in the Spirit, to live in the Spirit, to be led by the Spirit and to test everything by the Spirit. He was telling us that quite literally, apart from God you can do “nothing”.

Another problem with magnifying the emphasis of good versus evil is that it lends too much credibility to the power of evil. The truth of scripture is that evil has already been defeated. While it makes for great human drama to portray the forces of good hanging on by a thread, the reality is that darkness is defenseless against the power of light. There is no real comparison between these two forces; the actual battle is for the hearts of men, who have an unfortunate penchant for choosing the darkness (John 3:19) over the light.

I would submit that few people will knowingly embrace what they recognize to be evil, which is why the scripture tells us that our enemy often comes disguised as an angel of light.(2 Cor. 11:14). But if that is true, then it is the things which we’ve characterized as being “good” that have the greatest potential to lead us astray. While that doesn’t necessarily make us evil, it may well qualify us as deceived; which from an eternal perspective can be just as perilous.

As we start a new year, it has become commonplace to see lists compiled of the Top Ten movies or songs or news stories… from the previous year; and every once in a while, someone sets out to create a new list of the Top Hundred… of all time. Being a lover of rock and roll, I’m always interested in these lists as they pertain to the area of music; and as I recently reviewed yet another list of the top rock artists of all time, it occurred to me how difficult it is to agree on a particular artist’s rightful place in music lore. I believe that is because there are so many different ways in which you could measure an artist’s greatness. Perhaps the easiest measure is that of an artist’s popularity, which could be gauged by record and ticket sales. But a musical purest would rightly argue that popularity does not necessarily equate to quality and therefore favor some other scale. For some it might be the artist’s impact on music; for others it could be their impact on popular culture; for others it might be based on their skill as a musician, or as a performer, or as an artist or as an innovator. Depending on which measure you choose, certain artists can rapidly ascend or descend on the scale.

A great example of this would be Michael Jackson. He was undoubtedly one of the great performers of all time. His dance moves were almost surreal, his popularity was phenomenal and his use of the music video format was revolutionary. Based on those measures, he’d be high on the list. But for the musical purest, his singing and songwriting skills were less than spectacular and arguably his songs did little to impact the face of popular music or culture.

On the other end of the spectrum is someone like Bob Dylan, who many consider to be a voice that spoke for an entire generation. Based strictly on his songwriting ability he might make many a critic’s all-time list; but as a musician and a performer his stature becomes debatable. While die-hard fans might consider his music to be “nuanced” and his vocals to be “distinctive”, others might view these aspects through a less charitable lens. Where Dylan might fall on one’s list would likely depend on their overall perception of him as a performer.

The results will vary greatly depending on which aspect we choose to center our attention. If we focus strictly on performers, names like Elvis, James Brown, the Rolling Stones, Jim Morrison, The Grateful Dead, Bruce Springsteen, Michael Jackson, Freddie Mercury and even a band like Kiss might rise to the top. If we talk about performers who changed the face of music, we would have to include artists like the Beatles, the Beach Boys, Led Zeppelin, Marvin Gaye, U2, Prince and maybe even groups like the Sex Pistols, Public Enemy and Nirvana. If we focused on artistry, we might add names like Bob Dylan, Carole King, Simon & Garfunkel, Elton John and Sting. If we think of innovation, we would probably incorporate artists like Jimi Hendrix, Credence Clearwater Revival, Frank Zappa, David Bowie, Peter Gabriel, Pink Floyd and Steely Dan. If we talk about virtuoso musicians, we would need to include people like Jeff Beck, Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Carlos Santana, (the band) Yes, Stevie Ray Vaughn, (the band) Rush and Eddie Van Halen, in the conversation. If we consider incredibly talented assemblies, we might add groups like The Byrds, Cream, Crosby-Stills & Nash, The Eagles and Fleetwood Mac. If we take mass appeal into account, groups like the Bee Gees and ABBA would also have to be considered. Some of these artists, like the Beatles, Jim Morrison (and the Doors), Marvin Gaye, Led Zeppelin and Bruce Springsteen, would rank high in multiple categories. While others, like The Grateful Dead, Freddie Mercury (Queen), Steely Dan, Yes, Prince… might not even appear on many people’s top 100 list. Ultimately, it all depends on the measure that you decide to use.

As a lover of music, I’m less inclined to consider an artist’s impact on music or culture and more apt to judge them on their sound. While I can appreciate that a group like the Sex Pistols helped to usher in a new era or that Frank Zappa took music to a place it’s never been, I don’t have any real inclination to listen to their recordings. For me, the song is the thing. Based on that, I’d take the Beatles over Bob Dylan, Led Zeppelin over the Stones, the Doors over Hendrix, Simon & Garfunkel over Clapton, Springsteen over Neil Young and the Eagles over the Grateful Dead. For rock historians that may not be very satisfying, but on my CD player, it’s right where it needs to be. Beyond these members of rock’s royal family, there are a whole slew of other bands, who aren’t necessarily revered by critics (e.g. Three Dog Night, Bad Company, The Doobie Brothers, Heart, ZZ Top, Boston, Journey, Tom Petty…), but who created a sizable catalog of highly listenable music. For me, some of those recordings would be more welcome in my collection than many of the ones which have been hailed as “classics”. Though these lists are interesting to ponder, in the end, it’s doubtful that any two people would pick them the same.

What About Him?

At the end of John’s gospel (John 21:18-22), he speaks of an incident, which happened at the time of Peter’s restoration, following the crucifixion. Within the context of the story, Jesus foretells some of the unsavory circumstances which will accompany Peter’s eventual death; and in response Peter questions Jesus about John’s death. In typical Peter bluntness he asks, “Lord, what about him?” From a human standpoint, it isn’t hard to relate to Peter at that moment; after all, he just found out that he is going to meet a bad end and he’s wondering if he’s the only one who’s going to have to endure that kind of thing. But even with a small amount of wisdom, it’s hard not to cringe at the idea of posing such a question to Jesus.

Repeatedly, the scripture speaks of the folly of trying to use other people or their circumstances, as a reference point for our own journey. In the parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matt 20:1-16), Jesus spoke of the workers who grumbled about those who received a full days wage for only an hour’s work; even though they’d been paid the full and agreed upon price. Paul also warned about measuring ourselves against each other (2 Cor. 10:12) and admonished us to “fix our eyes on Jesus”, who is the “Author and Finisher of our faith” (Heb. 12:2). Even the commandment against coveting has this idea of comparison (e.g. what we have with what other people have…) entrained within it.

Questions like the one Peter asks in this story are bound to lead us in a bad direction and they implicitly question the goodness and/or justice of God. Undoubtedly, Peter was to some degree challenging the fairness of his fate, if John wasn’t going to have to face a similar circumstance. Jesus quickly slammed the door on this line of questioning by saying, “If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me.”

Whether we want to admit it, each of us has had moments like this; times when we’ve questioned why we got what we got, or didn’t get what someone else got; times where we’ve viewed other people’s trials or gifts or callings or circumstances as more desirable than our own. In those moments we need to remind ourselves that we are completely unique beings; handcrafted in our mother’s wombs by the God of creation and that all of our days were written in His book before one of them came to pass (Psalm 139:13-16). We need to trust in His goodness and mercy toward us; and we need to remember Jesus words to Peter, “What is that to you? You must follow me.”

Soul Food

Why are you downcast, O my soul?
And what has caused you to become troubled within me?
Did He not say that His grace would be sufficient for us?
Is there something else that we’re looking for?

Why are you so weary, O my soul?
And what has caused you to become anxious within me?
Did He not tell us that His joy would be our strength?
Is there something else that is fueling us?

Why are you in such despair, O my soul?
And what has caused you to become disturbed within me?
Did He not warn us that “all that is seen” is perishing?
Is that where we thought our help would come from?

If He is for us, who or what can be against us?
If He is with us, how can we be without hope?

All it takes to remain firmly planted on the path to destruction is someone else to blame for your condition.

As humans, we tend to be very focused on the things that other people do, despite the fact that our greatest limitations are ultimately rooted in the things that we are unwilling to do.

Today is my brother Kevin’s 50th birthday and it seems like a good time to reflect on all that his life has meant to me. I suppose that I could do what a lot of siblings do and wait until his funeral to say something nice, but for me that is a trend worth bucking.  Kevin is just 372 days older than me and through a quirk in the government education system (we lived in Germany at the time) we wound up in the same grade throughout school.  For most of those years we shared a room, played on the same sports teams and had a lot of the same friends.  Despite that closeness, no one ever mistook us for twins.  Kevin was a blond haired, blue eyed, athletic type; who looked a lot like my dad.  While I was a smallish kid, with much darker hair and looked a lot like my mom.  Beyond just our appearance, Kevin seemed to be almost stoic compared to my emotionally volatile persona.  Generally, you had to pull words from him, whereas you’d be more apt to stick a sock in my mouth just to shut me up.  He tended to do most things well, while I frequently turned things into somewhat of a crisis.  As I watch my own kids interact with each other, I have a new appreciation for how patient both he and my brother Tom were with me.  I had a big time chip on my shoulder about being the youngest and I deserved a thumping a lot more frequently than I got one.  Despite the occasion scrum, I derived a great deal of security from my relationship with Kevin; as a matter of fact, when we were little, I’d crawl into bed with him when I was afraid.  In those moments, he could have paid me back for my often bad attitude, but I never recall him making me feel small.  I doubt that many annoying little brothers could make such a claim.

Surprisingly, Kevin didn’t stick with college any longer than I did and shortly after that, we joined the Navy together.  Just after boot camp, we went our separate ways, as I headed for the submarine fleet and Kevin headed for an aircraft carrier (i.e. the USS Enterprise).  We’ve not lived in the same area for any appreciable amount of time since then and we’ve both stayed busy raising our families.  Despite the miles and years, our sense of closeness has never really diminished.  Kevin is good about keeping in touch and we see each other when we can.  Both of our lives have taken some unexpected turns along the way and it’s been good to have someone you can trust in those seasons.  At 50, Kevin finds himself at somewhat of a crossroads, which I pray is the opening of a great new chapter in his life.  Whatever the coming days bring, I am grateful for all the years we’ve already had.  God knew from beginning that I’d need a lot of help and Kevin was undoubtedly part of His plan.  As we share the journey of discovering who God made us to be, I feel certain that He will continue to meet us along the way; and I pray that I can be as big a blessing to Kevin as he has been to me.  Happy Birthday big brother!

As I come dangerously close to reaching the half century mark, it is amazing to ponder the dramatic cultural changes that I have witnessed.  As a child of 1960’s, I was born just as the counter-culture movement was reaching full swing and to be sure, those were tumultuous days.  By the end of that decade it seemed as though the revolution had truly begun; but in just a few short years (i.e. by the mid 1970’s) the movement seemed to fizzle into a haze of disillusionment, cocaine and disco music.  Initially, it didn’t seem as though this war on the “establishment” had been very successful in significantly transforming “mainstream” thinking; but with the benefit of hindsight, it has become clear that the impact was far greater than anyone could have imagined.

Considering the forty years that proceeded that period, it’s easy to see that the stage was set for something dramatic.  The people had grown weary from decades of constant struggle (e.g. World War I, the Great Depression, World War II, the Korean War…) and they were restless to break out of that cycle.  As the country found itself on the threshold of yet another significant conflict (i.e. the Cold War / the Vietnam War), the collective fortitude began to waiver.  Many weren’t sold on the idea that America needed to engage in this latest battle, as the voices of dissent began to grow louder.  After years of largely standing united against the external forces of adversity, many started to doubt the wisdom of that approach for the future.

In many ways it was a perfect storm and it ushered in a decade of great cultural upheaval.  Most Sociologists would likely characterize this as a time of “enlightenment”, whereby traditional doctrines and values were questioned; and where concerns over the rights of the individual began to gain traction against the concept of what might be needed for the good of the whole nation.  Amongst those cultural elements that were challenged was the largely Judeo-Christian based value system that had been so prevalent during the war years.  From the earliest days of the movement, the seeds of secular humanism began to find fertile ground in the minds of its purveyors.  One aspect of this assault on traditional values was the overt sexuality that would eventually become a hallmark of the movement.  While the general public did not necessarily embrace the hedonism of the counter-culture, there is no doubt that there was a definitive shift in mainstream ideas about what was both normal and acceptable.

Although there is no doubt that the culture was changed by those years, I would submit that the greatest impact was still yet to be seen.  By the late 1970’s America was fully emerged in the Cold War era and seemed to have returned to some new state of normal.  At least on the surface, our national trajectory did not appear to be greatly altered; but within the collective consciousness, the seeds of this revolution continued to germinate.  Culturally, as we opened our minds to “new truths”, our belief in absolutes progressively eroded; and with the explosion of new technologies, our sense of self-reliance continued to grow.  With each successive generation, our thinking moved steadily toward moral relativism and secular humanism.  Truths that were once perceived as etched in stone became like balls of clay, which could be molded and shaped into whatever form might suit us.  Our concept of freedom shifted from maintaining a national landscape of opportunity to establishing an atmosphere of personal autonomy and entitlement.  Little by little, who we are and what we stand for, steadily migrated away from where we’d been as a nation.

Despite this migration, I do not believe that it would be accurate to say that we’ve arrived at a purely secular humanist point of view.  As an inherently religious nation, we’ve retained many of the trappings of our Judeo-Christian past; and instead of becoming a culture of atheists and/or agnostics, we’ve simply revised our brand of religion.  Despite our pension for rationalization, the vast majority of Americans still consider themselves to be “spiritual” and to believe in some form of “higher power”.  In keeping with the theme of moral relativism, we’ve chosen to retain those aspects of God and religion that we feel comfortable with and to disregard the rest.  This has created a strange amalgam of beliefs that are based on wildly diverse concepts, such as the Bible, Hedonism, Capitalism, Marxist Socialism, the “American Dream” and Darwinian Theory.  Despite the confusion caused by attempting to merge these disparate views, our culture seems to pursue this ideology with such fervor that this hybrid of religious-humanism should likely be characterized as a religion unto itself.  Though many still identify themselves as being a part of one of the more established religious traditions, this new paradigm has largely replaced anything that might pass for an orthodox theology.

In this new religion, we still extol the virtues of faith; but now that faith is rooted in the basic goodness of mankind, in the advances in our technology, in the power of our self realization and in the superiority of our ideologies.  It also acknowledges the value of hope; but that hope is based on the idea that every generation should do better than the one that came before it and that America is somehow destined to live at a level that is far beyond what the rest of the world does.  It also believes in the concept of love, but does not bind itself to the constraints of things like loyalty, self sacrifice or turning the other cheek.  Ultimately, this new theology will accept a god who “is love”, but not one who would attempt to hold a man accountable for his deeds.  It will embrace things like angels and prayers and heaven; but it will not accept any orthodox view of sin, hell or judgment to come.

Despite the fact that many of these ideas (e.g. enlightenment, humanism, socialism…) are old and have a track record of utter failure, our new found faith frees us from feeling bound to their history; as we are confident that we have somehow evolved beyond the level of those cultures that came before us.  Because of the numerous contradictions inherent in this patchwork of philosophies, it seems almost immune to rational criticism.  After all, if one can reconcile this belief system, it seems doubtful that facts or logic would hold much sway.  If anything, our culture seems to be aiming for ambiguity, as a means to head off the potential for accountability.  Within our new value system, the only thing that is truly sacred is our right to choose our own way.

Even those who perceive themselves as the guardians of orthodox religion have largely compromised the purity of their message in an attempt to remain “culturally relevant”.  In Christendom, the gospel has been blended with the “American Dream”, to create a message of endless, God ordained, prosperity; or with secular marketing strategies, in the name of evangelism or with futurist doctrines, under the guise of advancing the kingdom of God.  A recipe that’s proven successful at many of the country’s most popular ministries is to mix a little motivational talk, with a pinch of self-help seminar and a cup of musical theater; all served up in the comfort of a posh coffee bar.  It’s all about making the people feel comfortable and to keep them coming back for more; which just happens to play well with the populist view.

For the remnant, who still stubbornly cling to the ancient texts of the Bible, this all should come as no real surprise.  The Apostle Paul told Timothy, “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.  Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.  They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths (2 Tim 4:3-4).”  In his letter to the Colossians he warned, “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ (Col 2:8)”; and in speaking of the end times he said, “There will be terrible times in the last days.  People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God – having a form of godliness, but denying it’s power (2 Tim 3:1-5)”.  As I turn on the television or listen to the radio or look at my computer or even just attend one of my kid’s ballgames, I can’t help but think that this is becoming a pretty fair description of our culture.  Ultimately it is the fruit of our new national religion.

It is easy for the young to be ambivalent about history, viewing it as little more than outdated information.  But the longer one lives, the more apparent it becomes that there is truly nothing new under the sun.  Though every generation likes to consider itself as completely unique, the consistency of human nature leaves little doubt that mankind has, in some form or fashion, “passed this way before”.  Of course, the cost of being ignorant of history is the near certainty of repeating it.  As the older generations in America watch the mainstream culture flirting with principles and ideologies, which have so clearly been disastrous across history, it must feel like watching a teen aged son, being drawn into the alleyway by an old prostitute and knowing that her pimp awaits there with a club.

My oldest son officially became a teenager this year and over the summer he was excited to find out that his feet had grown bigger than mine.  I suspect in the next year or two he’ll weigh more than I do as well.  These changes have got him thinking about becoming an adult and the other day he asked, “Dad, when will I know that I’ve become a man?”  I took a few seconds to ponder my answer and said, “You’ll know that you’ve grown up when you can take care of yourself and you’ll know that you’re a man when you can take care of someone else”.