July 09, 2009

You Supply The Caption

Hot off the presses: President Obama at the G8 Conference.  Um... Mr. President?

obama

July 08, 2009

What Do You Think?

quotes Ran across this quote a couple of weeks ago.  It's been on my mind ever since.

"Live as if Christ died yesterday, rose this morning and is coming back tomorrow."  Martin Luther

How does that strike you?

 

What's On My Mind?

Coffeecup  A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

MJ's Kids ~ I caught most of the memorial service for Michael Jackson yesterday.  I'm struck at how easy it was to poke fun at the man--and how it all changes for me seeing his young children and knowing they are hurting in the loss of their daddy.  The image of his little girl (the same age as my youngest) stepping to a microphone in front of the world and proclaiming, "I love him so much!" will stay with me for a long time.

Writing ~ Here's a quick update from my literary endeavors: Manuscript revision is ongoing with the Big Buts project.  The Chronicles of War podcast is fast approaching 2000 subscribers through iTunes and my writing blog.  My newest experiment, Lies, a short story composed in 140 character 'Tweets' on Twitter is gathering a few follows and views.  I have no idea how that will turn out.  You can check it out by floowing my twitter feed, searching #shortstorytweet or by clicking that tab on my writing website.

Daniel ~ I'm preaching through the book of Daniel this summer at Christ's Church.  As such, I've been studying the first half of the book over the last several weeks.  I'm really enjoying the study and the way it is feeding my soul.  I hope some of that comes across on Sunday mornings.  I look forward to shifting my study to the second half of the book beginning next week and through vacation.  I look forward to waking up with the sun in the Smokey Mountains, a cup of coffee in my hand and the book of Daniel across my lap. 

3 Chords ~ It's fun again.  We're playing twice this weekend.  Hope you'll stop out to one or the other, or both.  www.3chordsband.com

July 06, 2009

Buts From Sunday's Sermon

bigbuts Daniel chapter four contains a public decree of Nebuchadnezzar.  Think of it like a press briefing.  The king shares that he has had another dream and that he once again summoned his soothsayers to interpret it.  Am I the only one that finds it strange that he has any soothsayers left after what he pulled with them back in chapter two?  I suppose I figured those guys would have had an urge for vocation change and any file of applicants would have dried up. 

The first but in the text tells us how it went down:

"When the magicians, enchanters, astrologers and diviners came I told them the dream but they could not interpret it for me."

Well, at least this time the king told the poor guys about the dream.  No matter.  They couldn't deliver an answer for him.  The king put out a call for Daniel.  I find myself wondering why the king consulted these other guys in the first place.  I wonder if he was uneasy about what the interpretation would be.

Notice that when the king spells out the dream for Daniel it includes a pretty significant but:

"Cut down the tree and trim off its branches... but let the stump and its roots remain."

This big but sets up a most critical part of the message.  If you look ahead a couple of verses you see that this dream was intended "so that the living may know the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes and sets over them the lowliest of men."  The fact that God says take the tree down, but let the stump remain is demonstrative of the fact that God--not Nebuchadnezzar or any other king or kingdom--holds these things within His hand.

The king tells Daniel, 'those other knaves I called upon couldn't help me.'  Confidently then, "But you can, because the spirit of the holy gods is in you."  Nebi's not sure who or what this deity is, but he knows Daniel's got it.

As Daniel interprets the dream, he restates it, careful to include that big but--leave the stump.  He tells the king that this is a decree against him.  But acknowledges that God, in His mercy, offers a new start.  "When you acknowledge that heaven rules," Daniel assures the king, then his prosperity will be continued.

The rest of the chapter is Nebuchadnezzar's testimony of having repented and God having restored him.  The chapter ends with the beautiful profession: "Now I, King Nebuchadnezzar, praise and exalt and glorify the King of Heaven."

I come away learning again that God is sovereign over kings and kingdoms.  But also that God's judgment is extended with an offer of mercy and grace.  That shows me that it is indeed God's kindness that leads us to repentance--and repentance that honors God.  Food for thought as we head to chapter five.

Your thoughts?

July 02, 2009

Little Literature: Lies

Lies Twitter offers glimpses into a person's day 140 characters at a time.  I thought it would be fun to try to compose and tell a story in that manner--piece by piece.  I began a short story entitled Lies yesterday.  You can follow me on Twitter by clicking here.  You can find my story, Lies, by searching #shortstorytweet within Twitter, or by visiting my writing website www.darinmichaelshaw.com and following the appropriate link. 

Lies is a story that is all too true.  Follow along and let me know what you think.

As Promised

sarducci A week ago I linked to a story about the SBC ousting one of their churches because of the "church's perceived toleration of gay members."  That article goes on to state that the dispute arose over whether to include pictures of a gay couple in a church directory next to heterosexual couples.  I asked folks who read my blog to chime in and promised I'd offer some of my thoughts later.

Few offered thoughts through my blog.  While no one commented directly at Interactive Sermon, I've had a few face to face conversations with people who had seen the post on the blog.  I've noticed a couple of comments at the original story that are from folks who read about it here.  And I've seen a couple of tweets related to it.  But it's been pretty quiet overall.  Anyone?  Bueller?

I suspect (please correct me if you think I'm wrong) that it is simply a matter of this story being very uncomfortable.  As bible believing Christians we recognize some verses of scripture as being so clear--yet the emotional side of it all to be very real and painful.  We don't want to weigh in on the side of the SBC and appear like Pharisaic jerks, harshly judging others and expelling them from the temple as wanting.  Yet, we also are uneasy about siding with the Texas congregation, fearing we might be labeled soft or liberal.  We'd much prefer, I think, to thank the Lord that... well, at least our church's directory doesn't include photographs!  Never liked those photo-directories anyhow.  Black and white, ink and paper, names, addresses and phone numbers--that way no one's personal baggage is any more obvious than someone else's.

If you care to look back at the original story, I chimed in there under the name dmspreach.  I was grieved by the tone of the back and forth.  I wanted to (and did) ask which of ANY of the comments looked as if Jesus might have penned them.  Someone whom I don't recognize answered later--with an appropriate blank space.  I'd even suggest that the tone of the debate improved a bit from that point on.  Maybe it's just wishful thinking--but appears that way.  I was also struck by a question that was implied: How can Christians stand firm on some verses (those related to homosexuality) and not on others (verses about remarriage after divorce, for instance, in the commenter's post)?  After pondering that accusation for days--that we routinely stand on some verses and look past others--I've concluded I am guilty.  I've concluded that I am pretty comfortable standing on verses that point out sins and shortcomings of others, and all too willingly look past verses that speak more to my sins and shortcomings.  I've concluded that I want to see the sins and shortcomings of others as being more 'gross' than my own.  I'm not talking just about matters of homosexuality and heterosexuality anymore.  I'm talking across the board.

Years ago there was a regular skit that aired on Saturday Night Live involving a character named Father Guido Sarducci (comedic actor Don Novello).  In one particular episode I recall, Father Guido was trying to explain how salvation worked.  He compared God's judgment to a ledger sheet--God viewed each of us as having a starting balance in our accounts.  When we did good things God made a little deposit, upping our balance.  When we sinned, God would deduct from our accounts.  And salvation, the character taught, was a simple matter of having a positive balance in our account when we died and stood before God's judgment.  The comedian then rehearsed a list of sins and the fines that they merited.  The reason this skit was funny was that when he got to his list, it was clear that the sins he had no personal involvement in were weighed very heavily.  "Stealing hub caps, for instance... maybe like a hundred dollars!"  But as he got to sins he himself might commit (as a part of the character and a coarse-humor play on the celibacy of priests), "like masturbation... isn't much... maybe like 35 cents or something... but it adds up!"  My point in referencing the skit is this: the comedian spoofed something that is true of us--it is so much easier to judge and condemn others than to honestly evaluate our own hearts and lives.

So for me, this wasn't about homo or heterosexuality as much as it was about my heart.  No matter what the truth says--am I speaking it in love?  No matter what the truth says--am I applying it to my life as consistently as I am tempted to apply it to others?  I suspect that acknowledging there is a plank in my eye might help me to more genuinely assist and encourage others dealing with a speck of sawdust in theirs.

Any thoughts?

Oh, and for kicks and giggles: here's a link to a clean Father Guido routine called 5 Minute University.  Cute stuff.

June 30, 2009

21st Century Worship Participation?

twitter-1 For as many years as I've been a pastor (17, but who's counting?), one of the most often recurring discussions about Sunday morning worship services has been about how to draw and encourage members of the congregation into participating rather than observing--i.e. a gathering of active worshipers rather than an appreciative audience.

In my experience this conversation has run near and far, far and wide.  People have argued that it's about the style of music, or the tempo of music, or the key that the music is in (too high for men, too low for women).  People have argued that it's about the elements that are included in the service--are they traditional, contemporary, engaging or confusing to people?  Aimed at church-goers?  Aimed at the unchurched?  People have suggested it's about the preaching of the word.  Is it expository?  Topical?  Relevant?  In other words: Can the preacher quote lyrics from the song Boom Boom Pow to illustrate his point?  My personal favorite was a debate several years ago about any instrumental solo or fill sections in worship songs, "That," many argued, "is where worship ends and and performance begins!"

A handful of congregations have embraced a new idea for congregant's actively participating in worship services: Tweet in church.  Give this article a read.  Or this one.  Or this one from Tall Skinny Kiwi.  I'd be interested to hear from you--what do you think?  Is it sacrilege?  Would it be a distraction?  Just think, someone could tweet: "This would be a very worshipful service except for the solo--that was performance!"  Is participating in 140 character quips that would be visible to all a good idea, or a horrible one?

I'll give you some of my thoughts in the coming days.