Lifelong Learner

The Internet has altered the writing / publishing world in a way that I think will only be fully realized when it is looked back upon in the future. I am in the midst of it and enjoy it. I read things I would otherwise never be able to read. My research can be much more broad and encompassing without constantly jumping up and running to my shelves, which still must be done of course! Due to this change I am able to read a broader array of writers than I normally would. I would never have purchased their work but when it is written for all to see on a blog, like this one, then I am more inclined to read it. It is interesting how so many more folks have become experts on one subject or another simply because they have a forum to write it.

A few weeks back I was reading a blog written by a young theolog who was waxing eloquent about all he brings to the table. He described himself in some pretty interesting ways, many of which may be totally accurate. One phrase stood out when he called himself a "lifelong learner." I must admit I thought (and I hope I did not say it aloud since I was in a coffee shop!): "That would be more impressive if the life was longer than just thirty years, especially since the first 2/3 of that time was  not so much his own choice."

Do I consider myself and "lifelong learner?" Well, I certainly hope so. My Dad used to say I was a professional student. I think once you stop learning and stop opening yourself up to the possibility that you may actually have been wrong on some topics, you begin the process to die mentally, and I am convinced it carries over into the spiritual realm of our life as well. There are things I now believe that are almost 180 degrees removed from what I stated dogmatically in pulpits years ago. So, if I a true lifelong learner I am growing, improving, changing, admitting my many faults and seeking a more steady diet of Christlikeness in my life. As I approach my 60th birthday this year, I hope that is read differently than if I had written that when I was half this age.

Who has your back?

Asante Samuel of Philadelphia Eagles makes many interceptions. At times he will see something and tell the other defensive back “Cover my man for me,” and make his play. The play works when someone has his back, giving him the freedom to go for it.

Who has your back allowing you to go for it?

Whose back do you have allowing them to do the same?

SBC Statement on Agreement and Differences

Today I ran across the statement that was released by the Southern Baptist Convention regarding the various area of belief where they agree and where they differ. I found it quite interesting and in most areas a statement that could have been written for the Evangelical community at large. It does not address some hot topic issues that are used to divide today, which I like. It actually appears to recognize that those topics will change as time goes along. It looks at the overarching theological concepts that seem important. It clearly is addressing the Calvinism/Armenian divide. I like how it says repeatedly, “We agree that . . . but we differ on . . .” or “agree to disagree” while remaining believers in the same camp. I have pasted it below. It would be interesting to see how other view this statement.

With a full recognition of the limitless wisdom of God’s Word and the limited wisdom of ourselves, we urge Southern Baptists to grant one another liberty in those areas within The Baptist Faith and Message where differences in interpretation cause us to disagree. For instance,

§  We agree that God loves everyone and desires to save everyone, but we differ as to why only some are ultimately saved.

§  While we all heartily affirm the article on election in The Baptist Faith and Message (Article V), we differ as to whether the response of faith plays a role in one’s election.

§  We agree that the penal and substitutionary death of Christ was sufficient for the sins of the entire world, but we differ as to whether Jesus actually substituted for the sins of all people or only the elect.

§  We agree that the Gospel should be proclaimed to everyone, but we differ as to whether or how every hearer will be enabled to respond.

§  We agree that everyone has inherited Adam’s hopelessly fallen sin nature, but we differ as to whether we also inherit his guilt.

§  We agree that men and women are sinners, but we differ about the effects of sin on the mind and the will.

§  We recognize the differences among us between those who believe that sin nullifies freedom to respond to the Gospel and those who believe that freedom to respond to the Gospel is marred but not nullified.

§  We agree that God is absolutely sovereign in initiating salvation, uniting the believer to Himself, and preserving the believer to the end, but we differ as to how God expresses His sovereignty with respect to human freedom.

§  We agree that the Holy Spirit working through the Gospel enables sinners to be saved, but we differ as to whether this grace is resistible or irresistible.

§  We agree on the necessity of regeneration that results in God-ordained, Christ-centered, Spirit-empowered obedience from the heart, but differ as to whether faith precedes regeneration or regeneration precedes faith.

§  We agree that most Southern Baptists believe that those who die before they are capable of moral action go to heaven through the grace of God and the atonement of Christ, even as they differ as to why this is so.

The History Channel’s The Bible: My Thoughts, Part 6

This weekend we will see the final segment in the mini-series. As I look forward to this Sunday I have been asked by some to give it a grade. I have said, I do not think that is fair to do for a couple of reasons. First, it is not over yet. But also because that would cause me to focus on some of the things I did not agree with when there were far more things I did agree with.

One of the more pleasant surprises for me has been the way they have woven extra-Biblical history, and Jewish Rabbinical commentary, into the accounts. The beauty of the history is that it supports the accuracy of the Biblical text. It allows us to see how these other nations records weave into, quite often, briefly worded accounts in our Bible. The beauty of the Jewish commentaries and other historians is we get a view that we miss in simply reading the Biblical account. They often reveal the utter sinfulness of the nations of Israel and Judah which led to their judgment. This also forces us to ask questions about God and not simply gloss over things we do not understand. One example would be when we see such violence portrayed on both sides, as it really was in the ancient world. (More will be said on that in the next posting.)

As we look forward to this weekend’s segment, it will cover the crucifixion, resurrection and early church. I have seen several clips ahead of time and already know some responses. It will show the suffering of Jesus more graphic than most of these movies do, without being quite as “on screen vivid” as The Passion of the Christ. This week I would encourage you to watch how Jesus interacts with Peter. Peter denied Jesus, and cannot forgive himself or even as Jesus for forgiveness. Watch Jesus say things like, “Tell our brothers . . . and Peter.” I would like to go into how at some point Peter received a private time with the risen Lord, but I will resist.

I am eager to see the depictions of the early church and how it grows. As I said in an earlier post, “People are actually talking about the Bible!” Many of them have never read it or do not understand it. Perhaps this series will lead some to a beginning of faith, while it leads other to a deepening of their faith. Count me in the latter group.

The History Channel’s The Bible: My Thoughts, Part 5

Week three of The Bible mini-series is now history. I am sure that once again there are an numerous critics who will feel the need to point out the “errors” in the presentation. I am encouraged by the many folks who have reached out to me and said they intend to look beyond the perceived differences to see what God may be saying to them as they watch the series, just as I stated I intended to do. As I have stated, there is more than one account where I think they have some details incorrect. But there are far more where I feel they got it right. That is encouraging.

This week my thoughts went a different direction. As I sat and watched week three, I was taken by the number of times they took a different slant on the interpretation of how an event (we both believe actually happened) may have gone down. Here are a couple of cases in point.

When Joseph is visited by the angel to tell him to go ahead and complete the marriage to Mary, it happens right out in a public environment. A child takes his hand, who then transforms into the angel of the Lord and gives the word by the Lord to Joseph. After the visitation, Joseph is alert and still in the same location and no one around him notices what has taken place. Earlier, when Mary is visited by the same angel, it also happens in the middle of the day. Now, do I think that is exactly how that scene played our 2,000 years ago? I do not know. And neither do you. But as I said to my wife as we watched it, “Now that is an interesting take on the event. God could have an angel visit someone in broad daylight and in a full crowd if he desired. Who is to say the visitation occurred in the middle of the night as he slept as we usually picture it.” He was in a dream and asleep according to Matthew, but it does not have to have been sleep as we think of it at night. There are accounts in Scripture of this sort of event in front of folks who had no idea what was taking place. In Luke, Mary’s visitation does not mention sleep at all. Whether or not I agree is not the point. It is a dramatic interpretation that comes from the mind of someone who believes Jesus birth was miraculous just as I do, and it speaks truth to me and I am sure to many who viewed it.

A second time this was well played was at the birth of Jesus. (And witnessing that scene HAD to bring tears to your eyes; the portrayal was very moving!) While I do not think the Magi and Shepherds appeared at the same time, the scene where they were all present and at once bowed to Jesus was magnificently done! The look of shock on Joseph and Mary’s face was masterful directing and incredible acting on both their parts. It showed how this young couple (although Joseph may have been in his thirties) would have probably responded to the actual worship being given to this child. In Luke it never says the Shepherds bowed down. In Matthew the Magi clearly did, just as depicted. That does not take away from the power and the beauty of the scene and God spoke peace to my heart while I watched it.

Before closing this entry, I must say that I was troubled that some tried to make the depiction of Jesus’ temptation political in 2013 by implying a Satan character was chosen to look like the current President of the United States. When you see the renowned actor who played Satan, without makeup, it makes the controversy seem even more ludicrous. My fear was that something such as that could slow the movement of folks who may actually read the Bible after watching The Bible. I will pray that is not the case, especially as we move into these final two week.

The History Channel’s The Bible: My Thoughts, Part 4

Week three of The Bible mini-series will air tomorrow evening. Since I have access to portions ahead of time, I am privy to some of what we will see. I am sure there will once again be the array of critics who will feel the need to point out the “errors” in the presentation. I intend to look beyond that to see what God may be saying to me.

One of the scenes to be depicted involves Daniel and his interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s disturbing dream. That is the very passage I will be speaking on in worship tomorrow as I follow along with the series throughout the month of March. It is one of the most marvelous passages in the entire Bible when it comes to God giving His plans to humanity. One of the most interesting parts in this passage carries a great parallel to Joseph in the book of Genesis. In both account, God reveals what is going to take place to a non-believing monarch. In both instances the recipient is very distraught over the incident. In spite of the fact that they have no idea what it meant, they both know it is something of extreme importance.

Tomorrow in my sermon I will not be spending much time tomorrow in the analysis of the interpretation of the dream. Others far superior to me on all levels have undertaken that task. But that is not the primary reason I do not intend to camp out there. It is because the man who interpreted the dreams for the king, Daniel, did not think that was the primary lesson. He thought the primary lessons revolved around the character and attributes of God, in this case God’s wisdom and power. It is pretty clear why Daniel focuses on those attributes of God. He is wise enough to understand all that is in store for humanity and wise enough that humans cannot understand it on their own. But also, God is powerful enough to see that it comes to pass, just as He said it would.

That would be cool if it simply stayed there, but of course that is not how I roll. I am going to push into it with my hearers a bit tomorrow. Do they really believe in those two things? Do they really believe Gods is wise enough to know what is best for them in all circumstances and responses they may have to activities in their life? Do they really believe God is powerful enough to see that things in their life transpire in a way that would be in their best interest, even in cases where they may make a decision that is less than what He would desire? Can God take an act meant for evil or just simply for foolishness and redeem it into something honorable? Does God know what it should be and can God bring it to pass in my life and in your life?

The History Channel’s The Bible: My Thoughts, Part 3

The second night of the series is now history. (Pun fully intended.) I can almost hear the screaming at the sets across the nation. I would be less than honest if I were to say that I agreed with every interpretive element and the way it was portrayed on the screen, because I was not. Numerous time sensitive elements we out of place, or skipped over but for crying out loud, as I said the first week, they only had ten hours to cover a this material.

However, once again, I intend to look beyond those to what I consider to be the bigger picture. The way I view the “bigger picture” falls into two primary categories.

Folks are actually talking about the Bible! It is “trending” on Twitter. Facebook is screaming with folks comments. I cannot help but think that if folks are talking about The Bible on television, that many of them may actually be reading the Bible . . . perhaps on their free app! If we who believe the Bible, believe it as we say we do, then we believe that God’s word will not return to Him barren or void. We believe it is alive and powerful. We believe that if we just get it out there it can take care of itself. The Bible does not need us to defend it any more than a lion needs us for defense. Just let it out. It can take care of itself. The ensuing dialogue among co-workers, students, neighbors, friend, acquaintances and family members will bring fruit for the kingdom.

The producers got the big themes right. For the sake of cinematography and film making, some items are a bit different than we may like. I get it. But the primary themes have been accurate. Do you hear the characters saying some of them?

   ·         “What the Lord gives, he can take away.”

   ·         “You think God doesn’t see everything?”

   ·         “If we obey the Lord, anything is possible.”

   ·         “You have a God who commands the winds and parts the seas.”

   ·         “A king is never above his God.”

As we move toward the final three Sunday nights, I have great anticipation that the portrayal of Jesus will do just what he said. “If I be lifted up, I will draw all men to myself.” While that “lifting” first occurred on a cross 2,000 year ago, perhaps now we can do a different kind of “lifting up,” and Jesus can draw folks to him. Look around friends. Our nation is in deep need of the love and grace and direction only Jesus can bring.

The History Channel's The Bible: My Thoughts, Part 2

After my first entry on The Bible, a friend of mine asked me about my statement regarding our “interpretive differences.” His comment was that does not Scripture have only one interpretation and many applications. It is a good, honest and worthwhile question. Here is a part of my response to him along with some further discussion.

First, I have heard (as you have) the “one interpretation – many application” thing for as long as I remember. What I have found often is it is a hermeneutic ploy used quite often when someone wants to trumpet their particular interpretation of a passage. While “technically” it is a very true statement, and I agree with it, the fact is, quite often it is not as easy to determine what that “one interpretation” is. I cannot tell the times I have gone into a passage with my one interpretation, only to have someone suggest, “Have you thought about it this way?” It has often caused me to reexamine my “one interpretation” as truly accurate to what God was actually saying. This to me is not a lowering of Scripture but a raising the standard of the text. I so believe that the Scriptures are “God breathed,” to quote Paul, that it behooves me to be sure I really am getting at what was being said, and not allowing my western eyes or my evangelical eyes or my male eyes or whatever to influence me from the truth being taught in a particular passage.

Secondly, and more to the point in this discussion, most of the “interpretive differences” that occur in a video or television series such as this one are from narrative passages. They are not depicting the letters of Paul, Peter or John for example because . . . well, how would you? They are depicting what 85% of what the Bible actually is . . . narrative. The many narratives are given to us to show how faith in God is played out in real life experiences. In these narratives we have different views (or interpretations, although as I think about it, perhaps “interpretations” is not the best word) as to what may have happened. For example, in the account of Isaac, they surely omitted some items in the television production. Some quick examples: They did not depict clearly the three days travel of Abraham and Isaac and the servants were not with them. Another would be that Moses wife and children never appeared on the screen. A final example would be the number of Israelites in the Exodus. There were possibly as many as 3 million persons who crossed the Red Sea. That would be difficult to show on screen I imagine.

But here is where our difference can get in the way. Take two examples. Abraham, Isaac and his servants traveled for 45 miles from Beersheeba to the region of Moriah. In that entire time, Genesis 22 only records two one sentence conversations. One was Abe to the servants and the other was Abraham answering Isaac’s question. Surely in a three day journey there was more said than that. Surely in the 2-3 hours it would take Abraham and Isaac to build the altar more was said than the one sentence that is recorded. Yet we are left to our own to think what that discussion may have entailed. It does not take away from believing in the text just because what I think may have been said and what someone else thinks is different. The narrator who wrote the passage (Moses?) is only giving details that support his main point, which is “Abraham was tested.” A second example is the crossing of the Red Sea. There was no image of the pillar of fire/cloud that separated the Israelites from the Egyptians and the parting of the waters was done in very dramatic fashion. That is to be expected. However, all Scripture says is that a strong east wind blew all night and dried up the ground for them to cross. How it looked, we do not know.

Those are some of the types of differences I am referencing. They are just different ways of looking at the same event, while both lenses may give equal credence to the accuracy of Scripture. 

The History Channel's The Bible: My Thoughts, Part 1

I was a speech communications major in college. That meant 30 plus hours of speech, theater and classes in that vein. I was involved in several productions and enjoyed the time spent acting immensely. After college I remained in the speech realm in preaching and teaching. Later I was in a drama group where we performed all manner of productions. In addition to acting, I was able to be involved in directing and writing a lot of drama, including a full three act play.

While I was in that group, we led our church of 3,000 in an annual production called a “Praise Pageant,” which was a combination of music and theater done with the highest quality by trained individuals. It was attended by 10,000 folks a year. I was privileged for four years to play Jesus in that production. It was, and is, the highlight of my dramatic involvement. I have some of my fondest memories from those events.

In addition to other outcomes, it also led me to a great love of what I like to affectionately call, “Bathrobe Dramas.” Some are quite well done and very accurate Biblically. Others are less well done, and less accurate. I simply take them as they are intended and enjoy them. At times they have given me a new perspective on a passage that I had not thought of before.

In my collection I have numerous DVDs of Biblical productions. Many have some of the biggest names in the entertainment industry playing key roles. For example, I have one on the life of David where Leonard Nimoy (Spock from the Star Trek series) plays the role of the prophet Samuel. These DVDs are a great source of Biblical discussion between Gavin and me. He and I will play a portion of one and then talk about what we have just seen. At a later night we pick up where we left of. It is a great way to open up discussion with children regarding the Scriptures.

For those reasons and many others, I was very excited to learn that the mini-series The Bible was in production and sought to be Biblically accurate and cinematographically done of the highest quality. You will notice some “artistic license” in this series as with all of its predecessors. After all, they only have so much time and so much material.

I was a bit dismayed reading online this evening some of the numerous criticisms on the production after only one installment. Can we not forget our interpretive differences? I know some things shown do not line up exactly, but come on people, if you get lost in those all I can say is you have simply lost the plot!

While we are at it, let’s be honest here, some of the things folks are complaining about are not as clear in the Biblical text as we want to believe they are. In many of the Biblical narratives, there are details that quite honestly are not given at all! What do we do? We fill in the details as WE think they were or as we want them to be. Some of our blank filling comes from ideas, thoughts, past sermons, or whatever, that we bring to the actual text. Then when it is not portrayed on the screen as we think it should be, we get all over it. In truth if we go back read the text slowly and thoughtfully, we find it is not as cut and dried in some of the narratives as we may have thought.

Can we not simply be glad that people are actually talking about our Bible in a positive light on two major cable TV channels? Do we need to pick apart items that are moved around for the sake of artistic license or to make a story flow on the screen? Do we have to get on them because of the English or American flavor in places? Can we not give credit where credit is due? This was a monumental task they have undertaken and I for one cannot applaud their efforts enough. Would we really rather folks were watching Honey Boo Boo or Teen Mom? Have WE lost the plot of why God has us here in the first place?

I have read so many criticizing the accents, or the portrayals that I wonder if they noticed some key items. Did you not notice that there were more people of color in this version than in any of these films I recall ever seeing? There were two angels with Abraham and Lot. That should be accurate enough for the most cynical. But did you notice that one was portrayed as a Black man the other as an Asian? Did you see that throughout each scene, God was portrayed as ultimately FOR us not against us?

In my weekly emails to each congregation I have served as pastor in recent years I close them with the phrase “Come expectantly,” in regard to Sunday worship. For this television mini-series my phrase is “Watch expectantly.” See what God may have for you.  Why is that so hard? Could it be that somewhere deep down we are afraid of what God may actually say to us?

Praying With My Grandmother

Seldom do we have a life impacting experience. Events that could be called seminal would be even less frequent. This past summer I surely had one.

December 26, 2012, my paternal grandmother will turn 96 years of age. Her name is Dora Canup Mann. It is pretty astounding for me to even think about that. Long life has not been the hallmark of my family. My mother died at 41 and my father at 67. All of my other grandparents died at a relatively young age. So to be able to talk to my grandmother achieving this age is pretty amazing. (She is an astounding woman on multiple levels by anyone’s account, but that is the stuff for another entry.)

I have lived in a separate state from my family for over 35 years, so spending time with them is a rarity. This past summer while on vacation, I was able to visit her as usually try to do. This one was different than any visit in the past. I owe that in part to my cousin Beverly. She, along with a several other family members, has been one of the care givers for my grandmother. This gives her some very good insights into what makes my grandmother tick. Beverly commented to me about how important it was for her to be touched and held. (I am reminded that this is actually true for most elderly folks.) As she was talking I realized, to my dismay, I had not done that nearly enough with my grandmother.

When visiting her later that evening, she was not feeling well and was in her bed. She sat up when I came in and I sat beside her. I then reached over and held her hand and just slowly stroked her hand and her arm as we talked. This lasted for half an hour to 45 minutes. My wife Kay and grandson Gavin were in the room for a while, but after a few moments they excused themselves. It was far and away the most intimate experiences I have had with this very important woman in my life.

When it was time to leave, I said something that astounds and shames me even today that I have never done it before. I asked her if we could pray together. We placed ourselves where our faces were touching and I prayed aloud. I do not recall everything I prayed for, but it was for our family, for all of my cousins and their children, for my uncles, and so on. I then prayed for her. I prayed for God to look out for her. I thanked God for caring for her through others. I prayed for God to care for her as long as he allowed her to be with us. I thanked God for my grandmother and the impact she has had upon my life. She then began to pray as well. She prayed for, me and my family. She prayed for our safe travel home. She thanked God that a grandson of hers was in ministry, something that was very important to her I could tell. The experience was so moving to me that tears well up in my eyes as I write this some four months later.

The next day I returned to see her again before I left town. Gavin came with me. He played with some children of my cousin Ed, who lives with her, while I spent time with my Grandmother alone. She was still not feeling well and was lying in her bed. I knelt beside her bed. I placed my face close to hers. For the next half an hour we just talked while I gently stroked her arm. I do not remember exactly what we talked about. It really does not matter. We were together.

When it was time to leave, while I was still kneeling beside her as she lay in her bed, we prayed together again. This time was with more ease and more passion than the previous evening. These two times of prayer are without a doubt near the top of the list of the most significant moments of prayer in my entire life. I was changed by those two days.

I owe thanks to Beverly for pointing out to me that touch was important to her. I told my wife the other night, I am not sure why I did not realize it before. Physical touch is one of my primary love languages. It is the first on Gavin’s list. It is the first on my son Richard’s list as well. I should have already known, but it took some reminding.

As important as that touch was, and is, I learned that for this woman who is by all accounts nearing the end of her days, prayer with her grandson and just getting in touch with God together was just as important. In addition to touch, prayer together is something else we now share.

A side note, it is ironic that I am writing this on December 11. This is the day that in 1999 my father died. I am the oldest grandson of her oldest son, who is no longer here. I am sure that fact is not lost upon her.

Election Season

I love that we have elections. I love the opportunity we have to vote for representatives in this country, some of whom actually turn out to be leaders. I have seldom missed an opportunity to exercise that voting privilege since I was 18 and voted in the Nixon / McGovern election. That has remained true even for me when I had to hold my nose while I voted. If you study our nation's history, you will see that "election season" has always been, shall we say, less than civil. Sometimes in the 1800's it was ugly and downright mean in ways that far surpass what we see in our era of attacking another person while remaining politically correct in our word choice.

That being said, I really dislike the 6 solid months of posturing by men/women of power seeking the one thing that men/women of power have always sought . . . more power. Issues are raised and ignored, on pretenses quite often, when in reality most often it appears it is just about getting elected.

In an attempt to view this from a theological perspective, I pose the following question  for personal pondering: Are we seeing ourselves played out before our eyes? Are we simultaneously seeing both the image of God that is in all of humanity and the depravity of humanity that comes from what sin has done to all of us on display in a very public manner?

How Times Have Changed OR Temporal Viewpoints

This summer I had the privilege of being giving the invocation and closing prayer at the Fourth of July celebration for the VFW in the town where I was pastoring. It was an honor.

While the normal events were moving, the parade, the veterans, etc. two things stood out. The high school young lady who won the annual American Heritage Award really showed how times have changed.

The first thing that stood out was that she was 100% oriental. She was attractive, did a nice job and presented herself well, but it revealed a true changing of the culture racially in America for her to receive the American Heritage Award. I am not being critical in any form. I am simply making an observation.

Her words were likewise telling. She spoke of how wonderful the country is and how you can accomplish so much her with so little to begin with. Her two primary (and only) examples: Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg. They are not any of the normal historical figures usually associated with such comments. If the first item I noticed showed a racial shift has occurred. This one shows a age or generational shift has likewise occurred.

Times have indeed changed.

The Death of Andy Griffith

Kay and I were discussing yesterday the vast amount of Internet traffic and incredible number of Facebook posts regarding the death of Andy Griffith. I have seldom seen anything like this. It got me to wondering just what was it that attracted him to the general public. He did not fit the typical actor mold. He was seldom political or out front on any contentious subject. So, why all the interest?

While Andy Griffith had multiple iterations of his acting career, including Shakespeare, outdoor theater, and a gig in comedy, he is most well-known for the roles of Sherriff Andy Taylor and Matlock. His most famous role was clearly the small town sheriff in the television series that carried his own name. If you think about it, in many ways, Matlock was an older and even wiser Taylor.

Still I ask, what drew people to him and why did folks feel the loss in such a personal level? I have tried to speak my thoughts on that question here. I know it was a part of many of our “childhood,” but I think it goes deeper.

Southern Cooking Made Genuine

I am a southerner. I was born there. It was and is in my blood. Now, I have loved living 1/3 of my life in the north. I love the people here. I love  my home here, I love my various ministries here. However, even at that, they remind me often of where I am from. I am not longer offended. I am proud of that piece of my heritage. Having grown up in North Carolina, I remember being so happy to see a program on the black and white television that was set in North Carolina, albeit a fictitious town in North Carolina. It gave us a feeling of credibility I guess.

Andy was from the south. Why is that an important part of his allure? For one thing, Andy could make fun of us southerners because he was one. He could talk about the south with sincerity, because he was part of it. There have been many actors who have played southerners, but deep down the southerners did not really respect it. It was sort of like Amos and Andy pretending to be African American to us. African Americans did not take them seriously, because they were not black.

Andy poked fun at the folks in the south and our way of doing thing and did so in a way that was not offensive, because he was part of it. It was in his blood as well as ours.

Loving and Challenging Acceptance

I think the real genius of Andy Griffith’s characters lie here. He accepted peoples where they were and as they were but was not content to leave them that way.

It did not matter if it was Otis, or Floyd, or Barney, or Gomer, or Goober, or Opie, or Helen or Aunt Bea, Andy accepted them for who they were and what they were. His character may not have approved of the other character’s behavior (e.g. Otis and his alcoholism) but he loved and accepted them. At the same time, there was this challenge to move and live beyond whatever it was that needed addressing. It may have been oh so subtle, but it was there.

This is an important lesson to me. As a Christian minister, is that not how I should behave? Shouldn’t I accept people where they were, but not be content for them to remain there? Is that not what Jesus does for me? He accepts me as I am, but he is not content to leave me as I am.

If I learn no other lesson from the character that was Andy Taylor, that would be enough. Enough indeed.

Scarecrows and PC

These Federal "Reports and Continuations" are killing me time wise, but we all need  break time and again.

Last weekend, The Wizard of Oz was on the tube so Gavin and I sat and watched a bit of it. We own it, but it still  captures you in the story. I noticed something on the TV edited version we were watching. In the original  movie there are a couple scenes where the Scarecrow is caring a handgun. It is while they are headed to get the broom of the wicked witch. He was obviously not very good with it since no one is hurt except him! He is totally dismembered and has to be rebuilt. On the TV version we saw, those portions were edited out. Gavin and I both looked  for them to joke about it. (Please, no lectures on handguns. He and I have talked at length about this subject.)

That got me to thinking, does editing out portions of old movies you do not agree with make revisionist history? Are we changing something that "was"  because in our day things are totally different? Did you hear the uproar resurface last week during the Titanic's 100th anniversary regarding the wealthy getting on lifeboats and the poor (steerage) not? I am not agreeing with this, but in the early 1900's the world worshiped the wealthy much like we do celebrities today, thus making it: "Well, of course they get on the lifeboat," in the minds of some.

This  plays into our reading of Scripture as well.  I am doing a message series in my church on the Book of Ruth and the world was just different then. Not better, just different. We have to be careful not to "revise" what we read into what we think it should mean. This is especially true when applying principles from these passages.

Let's not be too quick to judge folks who lived before us because we are "more enlightened," or have more facts. If the Lord does not call everyone out of the pool, in less time than we care to admit, we will be the ones folks are looking back on and having our behavior judged by another standard.

Generosity and a 9-year Old

Gavin (my 9-year old grandson) has a heart that is very pure when it comes to caring for others in need. He comes home quite often and asks us to pray for a friend at school who has fallen, has hurt himself, has a family member who is sick, and many other things. He will share details about why this is important to him and why it impacts the individual. He has prayed with us many times for our friends in Tennessee whose 28 year old daughter is having surgery for a brain tumor. He has never even met Katie! No doubt he care partly because he has seen it modeled for him, but at times it goes beyond that.

Let me give you a case. In Gavin's room he has three glass jars. They are labeled "Spending" "Saving" and "Giving." Each week he takes his $2 allowance and places $1.50 in spending, .25 in saving and .25 in giving. We have done this for years with him. (Kay and I both actually wish we had been better at this with our three adult children.)  In any event, he has witnessed us, and heard us talk about giving of our income to ministries, our church, the less fortunate, and overseas. (We support three children through World Vision in Africa.) There are some weeks, many in fact, where Gavin has said, "I want to put all my money in giving." He has earned extra money for report cards, etc. and portions have gone into the "giving jar."

Now back to my case. Some time back (over a year I imagine) Gavin began talking about the advertisements on TV for the children at St. Jude Research Hospital in Memphis. He said to us once, "They have a different kind of cancer than you had Annmomma, and they are just kids!"

This concern for those kids continued until he came to us last fall and said he wanted to take the money from him "giving jar" and send it to St. Jude to help the children there. How do you say "No" to a pure generous heart like that? He and I counted his money out, and went to purchase a money order with his money for $55.00. (Think how long it took him to save that $55.00 even adding in extra at times.)

I had him write a letter to St. Jude, in his hand writing, explaining why he gave this money. I wrote a cover letter giving them the information. He signed his money order; we put it in an envelope and away it went to Memphis. I wondered if we would hear anything.

I learned that St. Jude did not know what to do with this gift and its donor.

In late December I received a letter, mailed to ME from St. Jude. It was thanking me for my gift to St. Jude in honor of Gavin Mann. They totally missed what had happened.  I did not give it . . . Gavin did. (I also think they missed a golden fund raising opportunity, but that is another subject entirely!)

Now, I have not told Gavin the results of this event since we mailed it. I did tell him we received a thank you letter and he was pleased, but unfazed by it. He gave from a sincere and a pure heart out of his ability to someone in need that was laid on his heart.

I have to admit, I was, and am, challenged by the purity of his heart and the generosity displayed by this 9-year old boy. I was, and am, convicted of my need to care more for others. I imagine you are also.

Joe Paterno and My Faith

This week will be the funeral service for Joe Paterno. I have kept pretty quiet about this entire series of events over the past fall, but finally feel it is time to state some of my opinions, for me if for no one else.

Let me begin with a few disclaimers. First of all, I am not and have never been a Penn State fan. I am originally from North Carolina, so I hold no particular allegiance there. The truth be told, I actually dislike Penn State from an athletic perspective. I have always however had great respect for Joe Paterno as a person. I have admired him from afar. I say that because I have no particular axe to grind here in relation to the school.

Secondly, and I say this in spite of the sports writer pundits who keep saying, “It is about the kids who were molested.” Let’s not forget the kids. Yeah, and let’s not forget the ratings either.

I am not in any way putting down the impact of what happened to those kids. Lest you doubt those words and say, “You cannot understand what it is like to be sexually molested by an adult.” Well, actually, yes I can. You see, I myself and a victim of sexual abuse. I experienced this when I was a young adolescent, so I know full well what that feels like to be in a position where an adult abuses you and you feel powerless to say or do or feel anything. So you do not say, or do or feel anything.

I am not an impartial observer when it comes to this issue. I know it is horrific beyond words. It is indefensible and should never ever ever occur. But it does. As bad as it is, it is not unforgivable. I myself had to forgive those who were responsible for my abuse when as an adult I came to grips with what had happened. I confronted one of the responsible parties in order to state that forgiveness. This entire incident has caused me to relive some of those moments in my mind, and be hurt again, but I released the anger years ago and have never picked it back up.

Back to my thoughts on the Joe Paterno situation. The day this entire episode broke, I told some co-workers that Joe would be dead within a year. This was before it was released that he had cancer. I just knew it. The job, and the people around it, was who he was. His family and the football team were all he cared about. When that was taken away, and he was terminated for a “neglect” that he himself wishes has never happened, the clock began to tick. The following week, I had the church where I serve to take some time praying for Penn State, for the coaches, for the leaders and for the young men who were molested.

I am not going to write a new exposé or bring up and angles you have not thought of before, but I want to hinge my thoughts on two questions and go from there.

Question #1: How did we get to the point that we define someone’s life by their worst moment?

I am not making light of what APPEARS to be Joe Paterno’s failure to follow up further in a situation that should have been followed up on. I have read so many articles where folks talked about his deeds and caring that were beyond selfless. He cared for others. He gave to others. He was a man of wonderful character. But for this one incident he would have received accolades in Happy Valley that would be tough to match.

It is amazing for me now that we are taking an 85 year old man’s life and summing it all up in one incident. One terrible oversight. One horrible neglect. But one out of thousands if incidents in his life.

When I look at Scripture I see people with great lives who had horrible acts of failure and then I read where God calls them righteous or even better. How does that happen? How can Abraham, Moses and David, repeat liars and murderers, be called “the friend of God,” "the most humble man on the earth," and “a man after God’s own heart?”

It is a matter of perspective . . . ours versus God’s. We view life in linear fashion. We see how a life is lived out one incident after another. We have a difficult time doing anything else. We are bound up in our temporal world. Time limits us. We have a hard time stepping back since we live in time. This makes us see the most recent items more clearly than the more distant.

God is not bound up by time. God created time. This allows God to view our life in panorama. God sees us as a child and as an adolescent as a young adult and as an older adult at the same time. God sees our entire life at once. God does not see one incident after another like we do. This perspective difference allows him to judge a life “as a whole,” and not by the latest act.

I wish we had more of that. It may allow us to see Joe Paterno’s life in more clear perspective. It would not make the incidents a decade ago any more right, or any less heinous, or resolve anyone of deserved guilt, but it would give a man’s life perspective.

Question #2: What would Jesus say about this entire situation?

This question is just as tough as the first one. Jesus had some serious words to say about anyone who harms a child. He used harming a child as an illustration of harming a child of his. The words Jesus directed at those who harm children, are arguably the harshest words to come from his mouth. He made his thoughts pretty clear on the matter.

While that is true, Jesus also spoke about faith and forgiveness always being available when it is genuinely requested. He told a man who was wicked and breathing his last breaths that he would be with him in paradise later that same day.

If Jesus were here, he would in no way make light of the horrible incidents that appear to have transpired. I also do not think he would allow us to sit in condemnation of anyone from a morally superior position, because we are not in one, no matter how much we may feel we are.

Is there a legal process to play out? Yes. Are the consequences for such horrible acts of violence? Of course. But let us be careful that we do not put ourselves in a position higher that we ought to  while this plays out.

I am very saddened by the entire sordid affair. It dredges up pain from my past, but it also reminds me of forgiveness I was able to extend and still extend today.

Kid's ID Songs

When I think of my three kids there are certain songs that sort of are their ID Song for me. In no order and for varying reasons here they are.

Alyssa - Love Shack

I learned just before her wedding that she loved this song and called it one of her favorites. I think I was surprised because it doesn't fit her normal style of music . . . whatever her normal style is! She plays a game (or used to) according to John where you turn on you radio alarm at night and you get to hear only two or three notes of a song, and she can almost always name that song he says. Her musical knowledge is pretty broad.

Richard  - Jessie's Girl and Crazy Train

This is weird one. I have to pick two. Jessie's Girl is the first song I heard Richard play on the guitar and sing around the house, after he taught himself guitar. He does not recall it, but he said, "I really like this song." We all have songs where we love the music or the beat but the message, not so much. This may be one of his. He (like Alyssa) began piano lessons when he was five, so musically they both are very broad in their abilities. At eight years old, Richard was faking out his piano teacher, but picking out the songs by ear and not reading music. She was sharp and caught on however, and forced his hand. Crazy Train is a song he listened to on the pc while doing homework and he would do the Ozzie cry right along with it!

Lori Beth - M-m-m-m Bop

Lori Beth absolutely loved Hanson when she was in elementary school. While her music tastes have changed a lot since those days, I think she still likes this song by the then boy trio. She probably even knows what they are up to now. I have attended more concerts with Lori Beth than any of my kids. We have seen Alice Cooper twice and Tom Petty and The Heartbreakers, to name a couple good ones! We even bought matching t-shirts at the Petty concert.

God's Timing and Purpose

Have you ever noticed these words in Exodus 3, “The Lord said, ‘I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying our because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering.’”

That is pretty amazing when you slow down and realize that this suffering had been going on for hundreds of years. They had been in Egypt now for nearly 400 years. But now, when Moses is at the point of being ready to serve as the hand of God’s deliverance, God comments on seeing their misery and their suffering. God did not just now notice.  It is not as if God was taking a walk and just came back to see this taking place. God had seen it all along, but the time to act was not right . . . until now.

How do you think those folks felt who year after year after year, did not see God act to end their suffering, and actually saw it intensify?  They felt exactly as you I have would feel in the same situation. Do you ever feel like you are in year 350 out of 400 and there is no end in sight? Does it feel like God has not even noticed your “misery?”

Herein is a lesson for us. God has noticed. God does notice. God does care and God will act.

This is a major element of faith. We believe that in the end, God will perform justice. God will do right. As Abraham put it, “Will not the judge of all the earth do right?” Even when that is not the “right” we may wish it would be? God will indeed make things right. I need that reminder often it seems. I may not always like the timing and the purpose of God, but it has always proven to be right.

Community

I told the congregation where I spoke on Sunday:

"I do not think it is possible to grow spiritually apart from community. It is not just the support and the encouragement, although that is extremely important. It is the rubbing edges against people. Other people point out your growing areas.

The opposite is likewise true. If you have bad habits or some dangerous addiction you are trying to break, how important is the community you are a part of? Are you hanging around people who participate in what you are trying to cease? Your efforts are in all likelihood doomed to failure! Are you around folks who have broken free of that issue? Then, your chances of success dramatically increase."

Vacations

The summer is almost over. This has been a much better one for our family on many fronts. In spite of some tough items this summer, Kay was not having chemotherapy, so it has to be improved!

Vacations this year involved some bit of travel for us. We spent a week in the mountains of NC in June. We were able to see our son and his family several times during that trip, and our two daughters were with us, so it was very cool. We did travel about 1,750 miles that trip, but it was worth it. This past week we got back from two weeks in southwest Florida on the gulf coast in the home of some very gracious friends. We drove down and back. On the trip down we visited our son and his family again. On the return trip we were able to see my family. This involved 3,500 miles driving.

If you do the math, that adds up to over 5,000 miles in the car. We enjoy one another, but no one can talk that much! Well, maybe I could, but the family does not want to listen. What Kay and I did was listen to many podcasts I had been building up. Here are some of them:

• John Ortberg: Always worth hearing. He had a great great message on forgiveness!
• Rob Bell: I love listening to Rob. I agree most of the time, and love his communication style!
• Andy Stanley: A good communicator and one of my favorites. I usually agree with him exegetically, although not 100% since he can be rigid in his interpretations.
• Erwin McManus: Never deep exegesis, but he had one or two talks that were incredibly challenging to me this time.
• (I never listen to any other staff members at these locations. That would be a confession.)
• PTI: Yep I love Tony and Michael!
• Around the Horn: I love these sports commentaries even if they are off a lot.
• Dan Patrick Show: Entertaining, but good sports analysis
• Stuff You Should Know: I love listening to these guys. I disagree with them often, but they almost always have some great items to learn about. Gavin loves them too!
• This American Life: The program is from Chicago Public Radio. I love most of them and have sent them donations. It has the usual public radio feel to it. You know: The announcers have Barry White voices, adding extra bass. The music can be anything from bluegrass to Stairway. Usually a lot of alternative stuff with a bit too much treble in the music, but most of the musical transitions sound like they should be in a porn video! It is broken into what they call “Acts” - It almost always starts with a long story, then two medium ones and finally a short one but on occasion they switch it up.  The entire episode on Hamlet being done in a prison was wonderful! I enjoyed it immensely!

Oh . . . we also listened to a lot of music. This trip it was a lot of Jackson Browne and Alison Krauss mixed with worship music, classic rock, alternative rock and country. I am a mutt in so many ways! It rubs on my family too I think!