this morning, what i truly only want is social..
reading the news or finding the latest toys won’t do it
not to recieve.. not as in some transaction..
but yes, to know(trust/convinced) i am loved.

is it evidence? no.
it is experience.
experience which is cognitive, but emotionally *E*ffected.
but i in myself must be convinced..
and i do think that i am rationally convinced when i am emotionally changed.
until then i’m a bitter skeptic..
So through my bitter skepticism, i say in semi-blind faith (truly in faith, trust in previous knowledge & experience) “Come.. and love me..”
with the follow-up.. “I know I need it.. you”
and the poem:
“oh how I hurt so! And I’m so very sure you bring it! i know you want me, i know i deny. my bitter skepticism so strong! some days i can deny & ignore & be strong/sufficient.. but it only adds up & builds the tidal wave.”

this makes so much more sense than any purely intellectual approach.. using my will(which is only arrogance- not needing Jesus, only self) to bash my emotions.. rather, here, i have a legitimate problem, with the true solution, founded on truth deeper than i like, but at least as deep as i need. and it’s wholly logical.. but the will and emo’s won’t take pure logic alone.

Need I say more? Such a great phrase for the indulgent! (Note: gluttony as a deadly sin!) A quick review of the singular english word in the Bible will reveal it’s association with laziness and poverty.

Now, for the emotional gluttons, who have not learned emotional control, the end can be quite the same. As to a more precise definition, is it simply, “wanting what’s ‘not allowed’”, with “not allowed” as determined by God primarily, who has rulership over all this world, who sets up authorities over us, against whom we prefer to rail.

He has set up even our own souls which operate and function best within certain parameters.. one is absolute love over fear or paranoia. 1 Jn 4 so well clarifies this. But how we wish our souls were designed differently, according to our own desires, that we should not be bound by a deep sadness or unsettledness despite our actions and choices of what to desire..

So in our dream-world of wishing our own souls to be of different composition, we run from love and hope still for peace. The love of God is so very capable of bringing peace, for the one who IS love, is also peace’s prince!

Coming to grips with our own souls’ anatomy & dietary requirements can *so* be a guide unto the truth of absolute love, when we’re sick of our soul-sick hangovers from our gorging into emotional and physical delicacies..

And this is the soulish behaviour all parents wish their children to avoid. Oddly enough, they may be fully against their child ACTUALLY going about being a glutton of food, time, money and lovers, but what of the same activities going on in the soul of their child? But it is not the place for us to barge in with claw and nail into the heart of another, seeking the witch to burn, the heretic to stone. Such activities must be undertaken by the soul’s own keeper not the parent or pastor. Exterior to the self can only remain exterior, and the work of burning heretics of our hearts and amputation of mis-fed, diseased portions of our heart can only be done by the One who is internal.. So with 1 John 4:12-13 I confess, “we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit” and that Spirit is able to bring about in us love for one another, which is His love perfected in us.

So to all the gluttons out there, come to the one who, as “the friend of sinners” was himself considered a glutton(Luke 7), yet did “not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” He’s there to help, He’s sent his Spirit to help. Why wrestle yourself alone..

How do I describe what’s in my brain? Perhaps a historico-contextual approach will do.

So I’m sitting in church hearing some guy with a PhD “preach.” It’s not preaching though. It’s not even counseling. Luckily, it’s not opinion spouting either. Rather, I’m listening to what I deem as “80’s fallout”– making the gospel “palatable.” So that’s the context. Time for history.

Historical Situation

I’ve put a lot of time into my perspective on the development of American Christianity in the late 20th century. I’d like to think it’s rather accurate. It’s more a sociological-linguistic dig than anything, but here goes..

My adaptation of Wikipedia’s Birth Rate Chart shows 4 groups, oddly enough easily divisible into 15 year groups.

But being a 15-year split, there’s plenty of variation possible. Take this age chart:

For the past two decades we’ve been hearing the rumblings of those who grew up and gained their social identity in the 80’s(late boomers & early GenXers).. These are the ones who have been infiltrating teaching on the PhD level, and teaching our churches in the “slick” and “sophistic” fashion, still using modernism to their own ends. Their message of glory to the mega-churches are money and “Vision, Mission and Goals(Pragmatic-Modernism!).” Theology was for the baby boomer’s parents, stuffy and having no pragmatic utility.

Now, the late Gen-X’ers, who gained their identity in the melancholic 90’s are starting to lead churches. Their message is no longer the 80’s “Big/fast money” but highly social gatherings in the “third places” of Starbux and online. No longer quick-fast-easy, but promotion of “struggle,” “questioning,” and other PostModern/Melancholy “I don’t know it all and neither do you!” values. Theology has returned, but in a non-authoritarian, descriptive (changable) way.

What’s on the horizon? The “Happy Entitlement Do-No-Harm” People. The kids who’ve grown up with all the goodies and expect “quality” over anything else. I expect theology will again be subject to uber-pragmatism, much like all other intellectual enterprises(going to uni).

Church Today

So back to my experience in church today. It makes complete sense. The guy who spoke today was form the 80’s church(theology-blendering for “vision” pragmatism), speaking to a church who’s used to a 90’s-mindset preacher(who’s bringing in the social return of theology-in-life).

Now, Christianity has typically divided epistemology into 2 varieties: that which everyone has access to(General revelation) and that which no brain could “prove”, but which God has made known to us(Special revelation: Jesus). Today, I did not hear any Special revelation. Rather, I heard generation revelation. Thus the newly oft-quoted line, “I don’t see the church offering anything different.” No kidding. I left my church in Chicago for the same reason. Jesus came to tell us something more than what we already know and can find out on our own.

The trouble is that the church hasn’t been “finding out” but has been a few decades behind, stuck holding on to whatever “life” is had. Living in fear of liberalism, conservatives have decided the brain isn’t such a terrible thing to waste, and besides, thinking too much turns one liberal, right? Wrong: thinking too little does. Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin were hardly ill-aquainted with intellect. So without attacking life and methods of living it with our God-given brains, the church apparently now has to teach it’s children how to become “normal” social beings.

But that is too harsh a critique. The world with it’s ill-advised idealism has offered no solid stone to stand on, indeed the point of PostModernism is to remove such a stone for free-flailing of self as one would please, only then able to move beyond self and society to become the Nietzschian uber-mensch.

That life is not so happy an existence, since most are not willing enough to overcome all of life, but get caught in their own addictions, bringing only more brokenness into their lives.

Life 1.0

It’s good that the church offer counseling into truth. We all need that. We’ve all been broken and twisted by sin, whether inside or outside the walls of the church. But I suppose that as much as such redevelopment of self in accord with reality a good thing, it alone is weak.

Say we have Reality. It’s going. It’s moving in the direction it’s going, and like a multi-threaded cord, we each have our own “wave” to ride. Some seem determined not to ride it, but to define it. Insofar as that works, they become prideful(and usually alone). If it doesn’t & Reality pushes back, they become bitter. Hmm..

So maybe we should just “go along” with reality. And perhaps being so compliant isn’t a bad thing, we’ll get “something” at least. But that is rather despair-ish. I *do* have desire and a will I wish accomplished! Perhaps there’s a symbiotic relationship?

Christianity holds (in various forms) that God has Reality in motion. Likewise, he put us here to “tame” it(Gen 2) and there’s always a sense of “placed here in this time and space for God’s own purpose/reason.”

I keep going with that idea and understand that God has placed me where I am(in so far as I follow him, and not run off) to do what he would have for me, and oddly enough, since he made me, he made me to enjoy what he has for me.

Everyone else out there doesn’t have such sense of purpose with the force of omnipotence behind them. With our own brains, we just can’t figure out which data is “real” and which is “interference” to block out. And that’s the goodness of God’s spirit– bringing us just enough subtle “hints” which is real data, and which is fuzz to block out.. what to push off of and what to push aside.

I like such a message. It helps so very much in living life. It’s so very rational: I use my brain to figure out what I can.. there is a rational structure behind Reality (Truth). And I love analyzing, so I’m always analyzing what *could* be real data and what *could* be fuzz. But such analysis is only fun when you actually know what *IS* fuzz. Otherwise it dumped me into depression.

Deeper Life

I’ve already hinted at it, and most of my blog-life is about understanding it: Jesus did come for some reason right?

Did Jesus explain general revelation to us? Yes. He certainly did cut out the fuzz. There *IS* a structuring which is necessary for life to be enjoyed. And the fact that “even the Gentiles” can pull it off is a good thing!

But there’s more. The structure of Reality which we can rationalize out isn’t the Gospel. Reality isn’t “news” as all, but the Gospel is “good” news.

Proverbs makes available to us a standard structure for living. Most call it “wise,” but Proverbs also calls it “righteous.” That’s a new one for ya. It’s a “wise” idea to keep the house clean isn’t it? Well, apparently it’s also “righteousness” too.

Proverbs makes clear that such wise-righteous living will provide what every pragmatic dream desires: life that “just works.” That’s pretty good for house-cleaning! Why? Because you’re going along with reality.

But going along with reality is available for all men to accomplish. It’s just that reality is bigger, and God’s plan is uber-Reality as well as through Reality. Sure, I can love my friends and clean my house on my own. But loving those who you feel back-stab you? Those who you’ve had dreams for and they’ve ran off with their own idealism? Not just when you’re addicted and need to be “normal” but more than fine? More than normal? More than what you even want to do? Somehow that’s not going to happen through the almighty merits of “vision.”

I’m still trying to get a grip on all this myself.. I’ve been happy with living just & only in accord with the Reality my own brain can come up with. That alone has been plenty enough for me. I know there’s this “more” out there, in here inside of me.. it’s the difference between letting go of desire and expectation, loving enemies and hating them, even to those you don’t and won’t know.

Appendix:

Regarding my conclusion, some may say, “That’s irrational! See! You don’t need to think about it! You just need to love others!” Not exactly. Take that graph above. There’s a reason for each and every up-tick and down-fall. I only know the Major reasons for the Major changes.. WWII and basic economics. That is reason enough to describe the pattern(reality). To not think about it and “just love others” tells me nothing, and gives me no means nor method of love. This entire article has been entirely rational, and from it, I am able to know what aspects of love ought be displayed.. where the vacuous holes are in society and where there’s too many already rushing the hill. “Just love” just isn’t enough. It’s the same as “I teach.” Who do you teach? What do you teach? What direction of teaching is needed?

Since God’s desire is not wholly antithetical to Reality in some way which we must then “do our best” to synthesize. Rather, God’s desire as understood in this article is in accord with Reality, which is his own making. Thus the answer to those questions about who to teach or love is hardly “not my brain” but it is rather “more than just my brain.”

Let’s start here:

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20070721/lnq070722.gif

Let’s continue here:

I had a conversation with an old-roomie-turned-married-fellow friend (I have too many of those.. count: 5/0) of mine yesterday. There’s a little too much bunk flyin’ round Christianity. And one for being counted among the liberals (at least by the stupid-conservative.. note, this is a subset, not all conservatives are stupid) I took him up on his rant. What’s wrong with saying that “God made Adam from the dust of the ground” requires this to be through non-scientific means? That is, why not let science have it’s place and help inform the discussion about the means of man’s existence? Besides, thus far in the game it’s inconclusive (in a final sense) in either direction.

It seems that both parties (Christians & Scientists) have a tendency to read each other inherently with discredit, and read themselves with undying-trust-unto-ridicule. Likewise, they seem to miss the we’re-still-in-process-no-conclusions-yet method/message of science. Do I have a problem with these? Of course. Should you? Only if you know ppl with these perspectives.

So what of the line in the comic “..only acknowledges science that doesn’t conflict with the ancient scriptures”?

There’s a long line of history that most everyone on both sides of the camp are uninformed of.  Socrates sought truth by denying he had it, and asking others for it. Good start I suppose, humanity generally finds humility agreeable.  The Catholic Church defined the order of method of truth-finding to be: explicit in the Bible itself, co-equal with tradition, reason and papal statements ex cathedra. I’ve been told Wesley edited these 4 to have an ordered precedence, from Biblically clear statements, tradition, reason and then personal experience.

Taking this quadratum for truth-finding (though more clearly: simply a method by which we put confidence in propositions as being correspondent with external, independent reality) seems rather clear. First, we listen to the one who made reality, then we listen to those who’ve studied it through the years, then we listen to our studies and thoughts on it, then we listen to how it works when lived out in our context. Each iteration starts as widely as can be had, rather than starting within my own little bubble.

Then the role of science is in the category of our reason. Reason unbounded is like emotion unbounded: they are both guides we follow, but neither absolutely. We can only absolutely follow the absolute body of absolute, complete knowledge. And since our experience is more than content-knowledge, but relational, I’m stuck making this set of all knowledge into a personal being. And since independency is required of knowledge, and relationship is one of dependency, I’m stuck making this personal, all-knowing reality multiply-united: the Triune God. If my reason gets me this far by studying life, and if the Scientist reason gets them as far as they are by studying the ‘hard sciences,’ then we need to understand the unity of this external reality: how both of our views unite in the context of both.

If my Christianity has a place for reason, then I must follow it, not fear it like a plague. Science-ism has no place for the soft-sciences, but even itself is ruled by the hard-sciences, by their unwavering commitment to denial of independent reality being being more than content-knowledge.

–note: all capitalized references of “You” are toward God–

Love for You?
Your Kingdom? I have already taken part in what I understand Your will to be: I have written, I have processed, I have understood. And it is my joy. I love writing. But this writing is for me.. for me to understand my life and my world I live in. It has no direct relationship to You.

Go back a few days Mark.. dost thou love the world? You were floating before.. disconnected from affection for it. Now what? Because you have desired some things in this world.. because I have desired a laptop to function, and desired relationship.. Now I am entangled here to this dirt.
When can I now say that I desire nothing here? That I desire only my Savior?
I certainly desire my Savior for he has known me, and knows what I understand myself to need.. relationship.. task..

I know this.. that though I think I know what His will is for me, though I think I know what His kingdom coming into my kingdom looks like.. there’s always more.. there’s always kingdom expansion.. there’s always growth.. and growth is being made new daily. So today I can embrace what I know of His kingdom into my life, and think that’s enough.. but I know.. there’s an unsettled part of me that knows it’s not about what I know of what He’s doing, but always and forever to come to Him to know what He’s doing.. or at least to be ready for what He’ll soon be doing..

Some will fight and whine over “be ready” in the past sentence. They’ll say, “but are we ever really ready for what God will do in our lives?” They expect a “no” answer, based on the omni-everything of God over us. But I say that we CAN be ready for what God has for us. That is to say, it may not be when we think we are ready, but fact is, when God brings something our way in our lives, He has deemed us ready for it.

But right now I’m worried. I’m so very worried that I’m so close to being close to You, and now I”m going to run off to work. that I’m going to get mad today.

I’m ready now to say, “who’s to say?” about all this.. about becoming alive.
cuz it’s not a routine. cuz it’s not a “thing I do”. It’s a thing You do, and I need to come to you. It’s You. and I deny that. and I don’t like that. Your kingdom.. sure, I can do that. You will, sure, I’ve got it covered. but YOU? oh no.. that’s too much to handle. that requires another person. that requires externality. there must be an object then. Your kingdom and will I can subjectify in my own knowledge of it. But I cannot subjectify You.

Do I need? Need outside of me? yes of course.. of course I’m a contingent being: I need food. I need sleep. I need relationship.. I need You.
and it’s not about HOW do I need you? It’s just that you’re there. Always and forever You. Here.

Last week, Ben, my Berlin friend asked me “when did you ‘get it’ about the Bible?” I didn’t know how to respond. “Sometime about sr. year in high school i think.. but also after college, really living truth.” I knew what he was asking, but I didn’t have a real answer.

Then a few days ago a friend returned Rob Bell’s “Velvet Elvis” to him, which he immediately threw at me saying, “you need to read this, just don’t leave the country with it.” So I’m reading Rob Bell, who apparently has a little following like MacLaren & Driscoll.

To start off, I’m more than a little cautious/paranoid about books written by pastors on philosophical topics(read: the death of epistemology). And the back of the book offered no condolence: “founding pastor of one of the fastest growing churches in American history.” Great. Get ready for some ear-tickling.

The subtitle is “repainting the Christian faith” and that can be understood a few different ways: (1) It needs paint? (2) is this about marketing? (3) or more like ‘whitewashing’? (4) or “God, yes! It’s about time it doesn’t look so dead!” I naturally presumed the latter, knowing those who recommended it.

I’ve been on a little quest myself to find a church that is honest, painfully so about life, emotion, our screw-ups, what Christianity is and isn’t about and generally “how not to fake it”. I found my quarry in Sojourn church of Louisville, and a few similar churches in Chicago and Berlin. Mark Driscoll and Tim Keller are always the ‘big names’ behind the churches and people I find looking for exactly what I’m after: truth, beauty, love.

So Mr. Bell comes and writes this book (and second I’m told). He’s starting from somewhere other than the Modernistic framework of Systematic Theology.
He starts (dare I use such language) from the same place the Bible starts: God + people.

And his whole theology(read: approach) is based on a few central ideas that are simple and clear:
* Romans 1: Creation speaks of God, so people already know something about Him, just not so clear that it’s Him they know about.
* God is all about bringing people to Him.

No kidding.

Somewhere in here Ben’s question to me starts to make sense. “When did the Bible become more than the Bible?” It was around my first year at the uni, maybe senior year in high school. I finally had my question: what’s God’s ‘big plan’? What is his continual call out to people? What is the unified message he has to all people at all times? How were Adam, Abraham, Moses, David, Peter, James and John all “saved” like me? It only took a quick read-through of each of these men’s lives: God has for each of us a life to life, a command to follow, a will to abide in. If we choose “God’s way” then we’re choosing Him, and will forever be with Him. If we choose “our way” we will not be with Him then, having found Him of little worth now.

That was when I “got” the Bible. That was when it was more than just stories and moralism. (The other issue about this time was realizing that Jesus didn’t HAVE to die for me. There was no moral obligation on God. He chose to on His own.)

The other part of my own story is John Eldredge. Suggested to me sophomore year of uni quite randomly and senior year found bootleg weekend-conference cd’s quite accidentally.. it took the next 3 years to unpack this man’s stories, ideas and perspective on life and the Bible into my own life. Without him I would have been medicated or dead. That life is a battle, that there’s a role for my life, that there’s a storyline bigger than anything I can come up with, and that there’s more to me than my sin.. how could this not be LIFE?

And Mr Bell does the same. The storyline he presents is much longer-term than any one of us would think.

But what I find most laughable are the people who label Eldredge as heretic. From open-theist (which he flatly denies) to mis-directed, the conservatives have had their meal of him. My reaction: “if you think Eldredge is bunk, wait ’til you read Bell!”

Here’s a few choice ideas any theologically conservative mind rages against:
* “And as part of this tradition (of reformation), I embrace the need to keep painting, to keep reforming. by this I do not mean cosmetic, superficial changes like better lights and music, shaper graphics and new methods with easy-to-follow steps. I mean theology: the beliefs about God, Jesus, the Bible, salvation and the future. We must keep reforming the way the Christian faith is defined, lived, explained.” -p12

* “Is the greatest truth about Adam and Eve and the fruit that it happened or that is happens?”-p58
** wow. this sounds like it’s straight from liberal theology. His point is the parallel experience, not to pose Genesis 3’s original story as being fictional.

* “God believes that people are capable of amazing things. I have been told that I need to believe in Jesus. Which is a good thing. But what I am learning is that Jesus believes in me.” -p134
** This one from the idea of a rabbi “believing in” his students. I’ll not debate this much from where he starts, but rather on his conclusion. It seems weird. It sounds like open-theism to say that God “hopes” we will choose His will. But I think God trusting us can be understood in accord with anti-open theism. There is always reality and it’s perception. If I’m drunk, and turn my head(reality), my vision will take a second to catch up(perception). Likewise, God knows us. God knows what we are capable of. God knows what we will do(reality). Do we? Not always(perception). As to God ‘hoping’ in us, that seems wrong since we understand hope and trust in post-keirkegaardian forms: faith being without knowledge. Thus the argument usually goes, since God is with knowledge, he is therefore without faith.
But here’s another approach: what if faith and knowledge are more united? What is reason points to reality, and faith is required to complete the image? I know in part thru my reason, I know in full thru faith. Which ‘faith’ is legit is what which is also reasonable. Thus, God is with reason, and that absolutely, he needs not faith, but I think His desire for us to do His will (even apart from His knowledge whether we will or not) comes across to us as faith.

* “This is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be that “Scripture alone” is our guide. It sounds nice, but it is not true. In reaction to abuses by the church, a group of believers during a time called the Reformation claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible. But the problem is that we got the Bible from the church voting on what the Bible even is. So when I affirm the Bible as God’s Word, in the sam breath I have to affirm that when those people voted, God was somehow present, guiding them to do what they did. When people say that all we need is the Bible, it is simply not true.”-p68
** More ‘heresy’ of course. Forbid that we also affirm that God gave us a brain. But then again, Prov 3 denies our use of intellect doesn’t it.
But in a more serious vein, he is not saying anything that is false; just that he is saying something different than we are used to hearing.. something that requires a few seconds on thinking instead of the simplistic rally-cry. something that requires honesty, and admission of vulnerability.

070607-morning

It feels good: to have an upbeat song in my head
It feels good: to have a few open projects to manage
It feels good: to be making progress on “all fronts” of life
It feels good: to feel hungry and be able to fill it
It feels good: to have a plan for the day
It feels good: to have the day be open-ended
It feels good: to not be able to demand my way all the time
(hence I prefer roommates/living abroad)
It feels good: to sit up straight
It feels good: to have the tools for the job

but still, there is a ever-deepening hole in my chest, which I hold out while sitting/standing up, and that’s what makes it hard.

(and maybe i’m distracted by the food in my mouth!)

What’s in my soul?
Some days i hate that question cuz it exposes me and my weakness and fear,
today i’m willing to face all that cuz i know the goodness it will bring,
but that still doesn’t stop me from feeling the immediate sadness over weakness and fear.

Having a definitive answer of what is in my soul is not the point. It’s only part of the process.. of which the next step I usually don’t want to take.. but I must, because that is when what is in my soul is revealed and killed.

I can make any judgment on myself, my soul, my emotions, my actions..
But God has the final word.
(that’s an infinitely impossible ‘but’ by the way)
and with the word, ‘come’.
Not, “come and tell me..” or “come and do..” or “come and change..” just “come..”
This “come” is from Him to me.. but also me to Him.

and I suppose there’s a few storylines that clarify that..
1) He is always with me, always near me, always wanting to be ‘in’ me.
I am the one who keeps him from being ‘in’ me. So I must open the door and let Him ‘in’, inviting him in with the word “come”.

This has a danger. I can think I’m being spiritual by asking him to come.. I can think His coming is always in nice, neat, clean ways. “Yes, you can come in, but only into this part.” That’s not an invitation. and that’s not an invitation for Jesus. It may be an invitation for someone who has no authority over you, but that’s saying to the police who have a warrant, “you can only come into my living room.” The police already have the authority over the whole home. Now, it’s a matter of violence. “To the arrogant, bring a sword.”

2) The other option isn’t so much arrogance(though it still is involved) so much as fear,weakness, addiction. You do not cut down those who are already bleeding. Here, a bandage, comfort is needed.

The storyline goes as follows: He is always with me, always near me, always wanting to be ‘in’ me.

I am the one who burns the bridge, bars the door and holds a loaded and cocked gun. It’s a hostage situation.. and it’s me holding myself hostage. Call it dual-personalities.. call it ‘acting out’ v. ‘what I truly want’.

There’s 2 ways in: megaphone and force.. but force only brings force. To force in causes resentment and I’ll fire at anyone who comes, and I’ll fire at myself if I don’t see any way out.

But the other way.. is gentle. You don’t bring force to a hostage situation, you bring calm. If someone who is gentle, someone who is a true friend comes.. they speak the words of truth about the circumstance. They bring out what is happening, and bring words and external affirmation to the weakly formed idea of what I truly want.

I won’t let someone come close out of nowhere. and it’s not just “time” that I need. I’ll only starve myself into bitterness over time. I need gentle words of truth about where I am, in my soul, in my emotions, etc. While it is about hope, hope takes the form of the words spoken and affirmation given to what I want deeper than the demands of the hostage situation. And with that, it’s validation of those demands. It’s saying, “yes, we know you want that, and we understand why you want that. If I were you, I’d want that too.” (Those ‘demands’ are our short-term ’savior’s.. our ‘pet’ sins.)

So where is the invitation here? This invitation is Jesus calling gently to me.. “come.. come out of your hurt.. come out of your pain.. there’s another option.. there’s life another way without the bitterness, whose end is full life..”

Sometimes I’m so far gone that I can’t call out “come”. My invitation to Jesus only comes from me after some hard work of getting the truth in me, whether by me, by another through friendship, by 3rd-party hearing of someone’s true life.. truth spoken, and invited in. When you’re not ready for the person, sometimes only words can cross over to melt the heart.

On the train ride over this morning (after just having enough time to get here to the church to meet with a friend) I was a mess and wondered why.. I couldn’t even say.. no words or feelings would come, just a big icky block of emotional mess. After attempts at prayer, it came: I fear myself. I fear all I am capable of, and how I can make that emotional mess worse, and that I presume that I will. That’s quite different than fearing God of course (which is ONE phrase I DO take literal!)

So that was nice to be able to put my circumstance on a map of reality. Pin me to the wall, have a “You are here” flag on the map of theology. And that’s kid of the point of theology (and Bible-reading, and other intellectual practices for that matter)

I’ve gotten caught up in this whole “finding out” where I am emotionally so very much. It’s either really good or really bad. If I know where I am, then I can “work with” where I am. I can act, I can learn. I can talk with God about where I am, how I got here, and know experientially how Jesus is the solution from that circumstance/emotion/spiritual condition.

But that’s pretty me-centred. My other option is to trust that God knows where I am, and He can work with me and show me what I need to know, which may or may not be to know where I am.

I’m a fan of both: I need the latter to not be paranoid about where I am and so remove focus from God and His knowledge of even me, but I need the former as a drive to live today with God, and understand His present goodness.

Part of my on-going series to display for readers what goes on in my soul and mind when I spend time with Jesus in the morning..
oh, what of today, now?
9 hrs of sleep is good..
I was mad at ppl who would say, “I just want something that will work.”
My response: “Like I don’t? Like my productivity isn’t hurt by a server being dumb? Like I enjoy fixing it, and so make it weird so as to break on it’s own to give me something to do??”
But that’s bitterness.. and it’s not where I wanna live- it’s no joy.
But it’s not like I can “just stop”. Cuz then I’ll “just be mad” all day, unresolved within me only produces unresolved around me in my life. It’s not like I try to have things crash around me, but they do cuz I’m not thinking straight when my heart is unresolved. Heart pushes emo pushes mind.

Like I said yesterday, I’d be ok calling it only my emo’s, but it’s not an emotional answer, it’s a truth-personal. That truth doesn’t START in my head. It doesn’t start in my emo’s.. Sometimes it starts in my head..

I’m kinda having some trouble here.. Oh right.. I’m still me. I haven’t invited Him in. Call it disbelief. Are You bigger than this music blaring in this room? Are you bigger than whatever is in my soul? yes.. you are.. you’re not when I don’t want you to be.. but when I say yes instead of blaming ya.. Am I big enough to ignore the music blaring? Yeah, PersonalResponsibility.. Life is always there. There’s no reason to try to live without it. Dang it… more tears. Without fail.

This is no speculation. This is why I can commit to You. I don’t need to look around.. I don’t have to ‘try’. I’m here, and You’re here, and we’re ok.

So what is it today? What am I to know? Anything I need to know?

..how many years have I gone without knowing Your presence in my life? Practically, actually..

What else could I need? Yet, I think that question is rosy-coloured spiritual glasses..   I could really use another *actual* person here. And that’s why you gave us the church (and marriage!).

Looking at my natural responsibility given in Gen1/2.. to bring about Your(the only true-functional) order in this world.. I almost said that I should probably go about and get rolling on that, but then no.. this is it. I’m here bringing Your order into my life, and I’m “logging” it, hopefully for the benefit of others to know what it’s like, what can be expected out of the LIFE you have and continually call us into.

ok.. on to Romans 2.. (to come in time.. it’s hard)

22.05.07:
I  had one of the more interesting events in my life over the past 24 hours, and I figure I should write about it. I’ve already let some of my friends in on the story, but there’s always more to tell.

I suppose there’s a few levels to the story, my context in it’s short and long-term form, the actual narrative, and my reaction.

My context, long term:
I took my first intro to philosophy class because I had to, not out of burning desire. I had no prior interest and I didn’t really know what to make of it when I did take it. It was with a hard prof, and for the most of it, it was just about old ideas. This was fall semester, sophomore or junior year. I don’t know why but sometime in the class I asked the prof if there was a class on more “contemorary” philosophy.. like what’s happening now. He said in the spring, and I planned to take the class. Eventually though, at the same time as this contemporary philosophy class, I needed to take another class (tues-thurs) for my music minor. I asked if I could sit in on monday and wednesday. He was fine with that, and so began my intense interest in philosophy. This class introduced me to Critical Theory, Habermas, Derrida, Foucalt and Baudrillard. And I loved it. I even asked the prof about Grad School, which he termed, “the snooze button on the alarm clock of life.’ I even told my parents I wanted to go to a secular grad school for philosophy. And yes, I even took the GRE. I did ‘normal’.. ’standard’. Not above and beyond. That, with trying to do a book review 400 pages thick by Rorty tempered my interest.

I went on to live life, learn through depression and eventually forget about philosophy on every level. But I still kept it as a background. I would say I liked it, but display no active participation in it. Then I was free to go to SBTS, where I found myself more interested in my Philosophy paper than in my Greek exegesis paper. Theology? I’d had enough in undergrad. It’s time for philosophy!  And meeting my girlfriend got that ball rolling all the more! She’s read up on a lot! So I’m now planning on taking post-bacc classes at GSU next spring, with an MA and PhD in time.

On another front, I’ve never been anywhere outside the US, until this past month. And I’ve never really considered going anywhere, until last year, when I heard someone tell her story of her love for another people. So I get curious, and I start reading and I start to wonder about Germany. This land filled with thinkers and theologians of past ages, now turned by skepticism.. and this leads me to wonder about my role, my interest in philosophy, and my years of studying myself– what good is it? What could it be used for? Who needs to know what I’ve learned? Cuz all my “average joe” friends in America don’t understand me at all. I’m too far out for them, and I offer little in terms of their practical mindset. So I came here with one question: is all my learning of life and self and God of any use to a nation filled with thinkers and skeptics and agnostics afraid to commit?

Narrative:
So I’ve been in Germany for almost 1.5 weeks now, 5 days in Frankfurt, 6 in Muenchen. I get a late start to my day- I want to book reservations for when Carmen comes, I want to check out and hit Regensberg to find (literally, since it’s not on any map ANYWHERE on the internet!!) Vallhalla. Well, after getting up late, missing breakfast at the hostel, and misbooking the wrong month on a few reservations, I’m off to the Hbf. I grab my baguette– in europe, apparently a sandwich consists of a 6″ piece of dry bread, with 1 slice of deli-meat, lettuce, a tomato and a cucumber on it. Not super-filling. So I grab a cranberry.. thing. And I forget the time and JUST get on the train after running for it! I find my seat and am, well, tired. I notice my ears being wierd, and on this train ride, I’m not going without water. So I pay the guy 1.60eu. I thought he said 1.57. No, that was 1.75. Don’tcha love german numbers. so we get that straightened out, after looking like a dumb american. Then I open it, and it explode over my pants an the edge of the macbook. Dandy. I quit. I’m tired. I just want peace, and I have none. It’s hot. I’ve messed 3 things up already, and I haven’t had any time with Jesus. Of course.

So I get to Regensberg, and there’s no washroom. There’s no tourist office. I try to get  bike, and they’re closed. Good thing, cuz the DB attendant tells me bus #5 goes to Valhalla. Great! Where’s bus 5? I look on a map, and it tells me only the NW side of town. Great. Time to walk. My camera is in my bag, and I miss a few good shots. It’s hot so I change into shorts, put on sunsscreen and grab my camera at a McDonald’s, as well as ENTIRELY in german asking for a milkshake.. large.. strawberry.. to go.

It’s good that I walked, because I found the altstadt, with the dom. It’s big. And very 400 years old. So I keep going after killing half my camera battery. I kinda get lost and ask where bus 5 is. 30m behind me. Perfect. I wait 5 minutes watching high-school jokers try to flip a hat from their mouth to their head. Apparently “potato-head” is a valid derrogotory comment. Bus comes. I pay my 2.50. I thought he said 5. My GPS saves the day, and I track the trip to valhalla. I have coodinates, and dangit, I know where it is! The bus stops, and I find out that I need to walk up a road.. up a path to Valhalla. Dunno how long it is, and I’m running out of time, so I hit it hard. Yes, with my 15-20kg pack on. I get to the top only stopping once, and it was roughly as bad as Heidelberg. GPS is my friend: altitude change, 60m. I take all the pix I could want, including me with Kant, and then my battery dies. Ok. Time to check out of Regensberg. Oh look, the bus goes RIGHT to the bahnhof, and I never had to walk like a fool earlier! Oh well. I got the Dom.

Head back to the train station, and find that I just missed a train to Hof by 3 minutes, and I have to wait an hour, and I won’t get to dresden until 0:30. Hmm.. wonder if my hostel closes at night.. wonder where it is.. close to hbf? probably not. So I pay .50 eu for the inet..get a map.. no, it’s not close. Well, whatever. Grab Burger King and a 1.5L wasser for .30eu for the ride.

Ride=work. I think.. a lot about the “Human Network” and “Theological Network” that exists within groups. And I think on Human Nature.. corrupt will, corrupt mind, and how God is dependent on his other 2 persons for knowledge of love-relationship. Fun stuff. Amazingly ordered and clear. Still haven’t really had time with Jesus. Kinda forgot at this point.

So 2 stops later, it’s 22:20 in the middle of nowhere, and I’m waiting for a train. it comes, a double-decker. I go up top, and I’m alone. Good. Laptop is dead, and I need rest. A guy comes up to me and asks something in German. I miss it and ask for English. He’s asking if I have “room on my ticket”.. sorry, railpass doesn’t have multiple ppl. So he knows I’m travelling and we talk. It’s good. He grabs his stuff and his friend, and sits with me. They finish their beers, and we talk. It gets interesting pretty quick.

Christoph is studying transportation economy (efficiency) at the uni at Dresden. Andrew is studying philosophy. They both are coming with their 35L backpacks from working waiting tables at Wiesbaden over the past weekend. Christoph’s English is better– he’s been to Chicago when he was 17. Andrew hasn’t been across the ocean.. never flown either. They’re both 21-22. They ask where I’m from, where I’m going, what I do. I tell them from Frankfurt to Munchen to Dresden to Berlin, for the fun of it, working as I can over the internet. ..That I’m studying philosophy at a uni. That I’m writing philosophy for my job on human nature. ..And we’re off to the races. I say that I think the human mind isn’t big enough to understand ourselves nor our world, thus we are unable to ‘use’ it and make sense of it, especially when we deny parts of it we don’t like. At that point, Andrew asks if I’m Christian or something. I have to admit I am. I usually like holding out and surprising ‘em. Chrisoph says, “oh really, I am too!” I think, “yeah right.. he’s nominal like the states. No one is REALLY a christian in this country, right?” but then Andrew says how Christoph is always saying he “fears for my soul.” Ok. Maybe there are saved people in germany. But he still smokes, drinks and curses!

Andrew and I talk more about philosophy. He brings up Camus and fear and how he thinks the mind is actually bigger than all else, just encased in the body that limits it.

I can’t remember all the details, but I think I got the gospel of Jesus’ substitution for me.. ah yes.. we talked about moralism, how that’s not good enough for God. Of course, that’s not his standard. His standard is relationship with Him. And a messed-up human will and selfishness.

So we arrive, and they find a map, and I tell them where my hostel is.. it’s a ways off, and waiting for a tram that may not come isn’t worth it. So they invite me to stay the night with them. Ok, sure. Sounds great. I like these kids. We take their tram, walk to their apartment which they admitted was a bit dirty, and, well, ‘college kids’ live there! It’s Christoph, another dude, and Andrew and his girlfriend. We get there and crash after showers. This morning we all rose at around 11am. I packed and we had breakfast in the kitchen, I meet Sarah, Andrew’s girlfriend. Andrew and Christoph leave the kitchen for whatever reason, and I talk with Sarah.. she’s a philosophy chic too, but has turned to psychology, since it’ll pay more.. well anything. Yeah, philosophers in germany are poor too! We talk about schooling and uni, and somehow.. we’re back at it- I’m telling her the same things I told Andrew last night. She’s willing to hear me. She’s watching me, listening, asking. And skeptical, just like Andrew, “well I AM his girlfriend!” she says. I laugh, because I know Carmen would be just like me on these topics too! We talk about the unknown, God’s plan vs. my plan. She seemed surprised about God speaking to me. I admitted it was on a spirit-spirit level, which is able to ‘push’ my emo’s and mind, so as to ‘hear’ God. She is so skeptical, unwilling to commit. I admitted I committed out of pain. I HAD to. and that I still fight against God, but he’s still my answer. She’s familiar with Job, grace, catholicism. I mention Rom 6 and John 16. Christoph comes in and laughs at me again for going at it again. I’m NOT trying here! It’s just happening! I admit to her (like I did Andrew) that I cannot change her, only hope that her answer works, and to tell her how well my answer works. But they always want to have an open set.. “just in case” because “who can tell” what is real. Can’t prove nor disprove. So I turn pragmatic. “Works for me, hope yours works for you. Lemme know when it doesn’t.”

So Christoph and I exchange email and phone, and say we’ll hang out tonight. He takes me to the train, and we’re off. I make it to my hostel which is effectively in SoHo. Neustadt is Soho.

And so I wonder– was I of any use this past 24 hours? I was involved.. I DID something. I “wasn’t ashamed of the gospel and it’s power”.. (ok, so they did have to ASK if I was christian.. and I was reluctant to some level.. reluctant over being labelled and dismissed though..) Is the role I had with Andrew and Sarah for me to have with many more? Here? States? I dunno if it was of any use, but I sure had fun! I’m so glad to talk with people who think, and told them as much.