Great video of the new cross recently installed in Goodson Chapel at Duke Divinity. It was a neat experience to watch the cross be lifted up and talk to the men making it happen. With commentary and explanation from the cross designer and our Chaplain, Rev. Sally Bates.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMsLvtjjKjI]
Next time you're in Durham, make sure to stop by and see it.
-B
When people say that, laugh in their face. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaIhEXZ7WW4]
Consider that an order.
-B
Great commercial. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMfSGt6rHos]
I love progress, but accountability has to be a part of it.
-B
Steve Jobs used to explain Apple something like this
Our goal is really simple, we like to make GREAT products for people. Then, we tell people about them. If they like them, we get to come to work tomorrow. It's really simple.
Apple has had quite a few iconic ad campaigns since its inception. With the exception of the 1984 commercial, they buy A LOT of air time.
Here's the newest addition (expect to see much more from where this came from):
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uS6d7fsPnM]
In the biography by Walter Isaacson, Steve is quoted as saying this before he passed:
“I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs said. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”
If you want to watch a good fight, this is going to be a good one.
Apple is ready to battle and they have the resources and infrastructure to do it.
It began with those Samsung lawsuits. Now it is time for the ads. Again, I'd expect to see a ton of these ads in the near future.
-B
My good friend, and one of the brilliant minds behind the "Come in Pluto" movement, Jordan Stout, is heading up the Occupy Occupy movement beginning in Tampa. It's a quality movement and quite enlightening. Their work is solid.
Lucky for you, he's releasing a documentary. And so, with that, he has posted a teaser video for what will surely be the film of the century.
Nice work with iMovie if you ask me.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfAiV8wFSrY&w=640&h=385]
Find them on Facebook.
-B
In light of the Hitler and ESPN controversy, I'm reminded of this song.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxEmry5lRKk&w=640&h=385]
The question is, of course, would we have had it made? And who is "we"?
Make no mistake, Florida does need to get back "on the right track" but it is not because of "Miami" and the need to "take it back".
Rather, it is because of this guy:
I say we take back Tallahassee.
I'm tired of this being a Republican vs. Democrat argument. I'm tired of this being a liberal vs. conservative argument. I'm tired of it being a Fox News vs MSNBC argument. It's not ok to compare people or leaders to Hitler unless they are oppressing and killing their constituents. And this is isn't a North vs. South argument or a Hate vs. Heritage argument either. This is about being responsible citizens of America.
Sometimes, for us all to get along, we all have to let go of something. I'd day this kind of country music would be a good place to start.
-B
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg959d7a2JE&w=853&h=505]I'm disappointed that I haven't been watching this show. Because of that, I've been wasting most of the morning catching up.
So perfect in nearly every way.
The emotions and crescendos are placed exactly right, and the harmonies are tight when they need to be and wide when they don't.
Truly great work.
-B
(They had a third performance that was a lot less creative than these two and not as good...so they're not infallible.)
"Grenade"
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6YlmEVyGrE&w=640&h=385]
Magical.
-B
Since Steve's passing, the world has honored him at Apple Stores, via social media, via television talk shows, and countless other ways.
The world, even Apple haters, has been kind to honor the work and change he's made.
But, now, it's been a few days. And we've all had a small chance to grieve. And we've all had a small chance to reflect a bit on his direct impact on OUR lives. It is like when Michael died, we all grieved because the world had lost another Mozart; then we began to reflect on what kind of difference was made on our personal lives. For some it was sad to lose Michael, but not for too long. The same has been true of Steve, for some.
He's been compared quite a bit to Thomas Edison, the famed inventor of the light bulb. I was asked this question the other day, "Edison created the light bulb, how does Steve even begin to compare to that?" My honest first reaction was to automatically assume that the asker simply doesn't think about what they do day in and day out.
To me, the impact is simple to see: almost everything that consumers do with computers today has so much to do with Steve's work. He was the driving force behind making the graphical user interface popular (a paradigm we take hugely for granted today...I think my evidence above proves it). He made using computers simple, and I'd argue that that is what brought forth widespread adoption. Because of some of Apple's poor decisions and Microsoft's willingness to copy, it happened indirectly...but it was Steve who did it.
This morning, the point was raised to me,
"i[sic] think he was brilliant for sure but are we better off as a people to have the newest toy but as a whole we are going broke to afford them.[sic] i[sic] think these things have made a much more selfish world that are[sic] self centered and spoiled."
It's a fair point with a certain amount of validity. There are also many claims going on here:
Again, it's a fair argument. I know there are families that struggle to feed themselves each night, but give their kids smartphones. I know, and have acknowledged in the past, that texting and driving has become one of the most dangerous parts of our lives.
The main point though, I think, is that Apple's marketing has encouraged people to want the next big thing all the time. Our emotional draw to the company has forced us to wait in long lines, complain excessively, and stop everything we are doing for product announcements. Yes, it's true and each any every one of those statements applies directly to me.
I think it would be fair to account that a large objection to the future and progress of technology can be summed up inside of this argument: these things (and the marketing of them) have made us worse people.
I think I've recognized the bit of truth to this argument. We text instead of call. We avoid face to face confrontation if at all possible. We have gained a new sense of individualism, and less of a sense of community. I might argue that things like Skype and FaceTime have actually counteracted this argument, but I'll leave it be for the time being.
The question for me though is, "Who is to blame?"
The Church has discussed this for ages. The questions has always been, "Are we a part of the culture or are we not?" or "Is progress good or bad?" or "Can we have material things, or should we deny ourselves?" or "How is Scripture interpreted for this purpose?"
Throughout time, religion has made use of new mediums. In example, George Whitefield's popularity in early American Christianity is largely due to the newspaper reports of his preaching. There are tons more examples.
Isn't it a question now in the Church as well? We've got churches who attract more members because of their light shows and moving backgrounds. We've also got churches who speak down on these churches and worship in a very liturgical, high church way. Both have dying churches. Both have growing churches.
This argument currently going on in the Church is not separate from the argument made to me this morning.
However, even more high church churches are beginning to figure out how to relate to people. They sometimes break it down by "worship" vs. "outreach". For example, it's ok to have a website, because people want to know about you...but no computers in a worship service. But...even that's becoming less and less true.
I know where your mind is going..."Who is winning?"
STOP
This isn't about winning. This is about living a Christ-like life. This is about hearing a call from God. This is about Resurrection and Salvation.
I am convinced that these things, these most important things, are still possible with progress.
I actually think that progress helps these things. For instance, because of the advent and popularity of texting, we have been reminded that living, talking, and being in community is important. And now, now that we know this, we are able to use these new fangled inventions and technologies as tools instead of distractions.
Sure, these tools have the ability to distract, and ARE VERY TEMPTING in this sense. But, what if the Church were to look at these tools as better ways to communicate, as better ways to outreach, and as better ways to live as disciples in 2011?
What exactly are we afraid of? That we won't be creative enough to figure it out? That God won't show us the way? We've got to have more faith than that.
What I like so much about Apple's approach to technology is that they don't do things just because others did. They don't make a bigger screen just because others have bigger screens. They don't implement a voice recognition piece of software just because Google did. They don't have an open platform just because other companies did.
No, they approach it from the perspective of use. What good is voice to text software if you still have to hit buttons? What good is a big screen if you have to use two hands to use it and it no longer fits in your pocket? What good is an open platform if its very openness is one if its greatest downfalls as an experience? It's not even really about being ahead of the game...it's about taking a technology, a concept, an idea and applying it in a real world situation for a real purpose in a way that helps people communicate. That's what spurred Steve's innovation. That's what defines who Apple is in today's world.
So has Apple's marketing asked people to become self centered? Their new iPad ads don't seem to support that.
No, it doesn't seem so. No, what has spurred on this idea is our reaction. I can no longer blame the technology companies for my failings as a human. I can no longer blame McDonald's for the hot coffee I spilled on my lap. I can no longer blame the cigarette companies for my lung cancer (post-revelations that that was actually bad for you). I can no longer blame the city for me not paying attention to that huge stop sign. I can no longer blame the fast food companies for my fatness. I can no longer blame the Church for my lack of faith.
No. Because at some point, I must take up my own cross. At some point, I must learn that it's not the new things that bother us...it's the way we use them. It's not the progress that makes us worse people...it's our sinful nature. It's not someone else's fault that I'm not the disciple I could be, it's me.
(It's worth adding that this is mostly true in America, currently. There are places in our world where girls are used in conjunction with the exploitation of men's sexual desires. This is not the girls' fault, this is the both the faults of the brainwashers above them, and the men who readily support these ventures.) I, in these cases, think the Church has to speak up for the girls...speak up for those who can't. It is still worth noting that those reading this in American CAN almost assuredly speak for ourselves.
As soon as the Church realizes that our mission is active and not passive and that we are not controlled by others, but only influenced by the grace of God through Christ, then we will be able to look at our culture with new glasses...in a way that is beneficial to the life of faith and the progress of the Gospel.
We don't do things just because. We don't slobber at the feet of our favorite company just because they brainwash us. No, we appreciate what they do because it makes a difference. It changes what we can do. It changes how we do things. It's up to us to be able to step back and see where we have succeeded and faltered.
Apple made tools. Thankfully, they made good tools.
Let's use them for good. Please.
-B
PS - Lack of recognition of Steve's contributions to society is a great example of just how well he succeeded.
Steve Wozniak remembering Steve Jobs through an interview with AP. Touching, particularly the last few seconds.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK_XEGrzHUo]
-B
There are no words to fully describe the sadness within my heart and the hearts of the world. I will miss him, his taste, and his vision for the future.
I am always reminded at moments like this of the nastiness of disease, cancer, and other human afflictions. It is most appropriate that he has been most likely THE largest instigator of technology in a world where we work to rid cancer, disease, hunger, and many other things. His insight has garnered a passion for an industry that has changed the world.
Steve had lots of money. Nothing could buy him out of his illness. But, now, he can rest in a state not concerned with fleshly afflictions. Cancer did not beat him, it inspired him to live every day like it was his last. We may never know how the last 6 or 7 years may have played out if he had not struggled as he did.
We must, at this time...in our sadness, be thankful for all he has given us, contributed to our world, and inspired us to do.
Here’s to the crazy ones. The rebels. The troublemakers. The ones who see things differently. While some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.
Think Different.
-B
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=namFjcOgHSE&] She was so good and so bad at the same time. I wonder if she ever really knew how much talent she had.
-B
You've all seen this, but I had to post it, because I tear up every time I see it.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsOo3jzkhYA&w=640&h=385]
ABCFamily's Switched At Birth is the greatest television series considering the deaf world I've seen, I think. It has a different take on being deaf than this video seems to portray, but it still seems to be a video worth watching. No matter your feelings on "curing" deafness, this video portrays why I tend to be a fan of progress and technology, no matter if it is in my cell phone (think Stevie Wonder's thanks to Steve Jobs) or in the saving of a life through medicine.
As a musician, I often take my ability to hear and gift to hear differently for granted far more than I'd ever admit to. This type of video often reminds me of the important things in life.
-B
I went to a tiny liberal arts college in Central Florida. It's not known to many outside the state, except for foreign tourists, and was recently awarded the "US's Most Beautiful Campus" by the Princeton Review.
We had a bunch of national championships (I used to know exactly but I've lost count) in D2 sports and rarely had much of a following from students. At least not like some other schools have.
I've been criticized (getting close to being on a daily basis) for the teams I choose to follow.
I'd like to be clear, though:I've always been a baseball fan and have only recently come to follow football and basketball. I have never claimed to know a whole lot about any sports and am not as addicted to ESPN as some of my friends are. I've dealt with feeling left out of conversations and feeling stupid by many people's conversations. In an effort to NOT make that happen, I've attempted to pay more attention to sports. I've chosen a few teams to pay attention to, some of which my family members follow, some of which are schools I attended or have friends who attended, some of which I've followed for a while, and some of which I simply chose. I don't purchase a lot of team paraphernalia and so I think I'm completely within my right to follow whatever teams I'd like without the criticism from outside voices who happen to disagree. I have a few Duke hats and t-shirts (and by the way, I attend that school) and one Boston Red Sox hat. That's it. If I hear another criticism of what teams I do or don't follow, why, and why you look down upon me for following them, I WILL NO LONGER CONSIDER YOU A FRIEND. HEAR ME LOUD AND CLEAR...IT HAS BEEN ENOUGH, it is no longer funny.
For grad school, I selected Duke University. In case you haven't heard, Duke's basketball team (and this silly one down the street) is pretty competitive. Since going to Duke, I've found a new love for college basketball. I mean seriously, go to one game in Cameron Indoor and you'll love it. I do. I love it.
But Duke students suck. They really do.
Wait, we.
We yell, scream, shout obscenities, boo refs, scream some more, jump up and down, blow out your eardrums, and us Divinity students forget we have a life of faith for a couple of hours once a week or so. We talk a lot of basketball outside of Cameron but most of us leave the rude behavior in the room. Or, at least we try.
But now...college football season is here. While Duke has a pretty awful football team, I am from a state with a few good ones. And the hate circling Facebook (and I admit, I add to it) is again out of control. Rivalries vs. Rivalries, teams seemingly forgotten about trying to prove themselves, teams ranked highly trying to maintain their rankings, teams from the middle of nowhere going 5-0, and certain conferences dominating. It makes for "fun" conversation but the addition of Internet trolls (again, I'm not innocent) has made it worse.
But college football has gotten worse with the advent of social media.
Rivalries that bordered on hatred have developed into full-on hatred. And relationships are hurt and broken. It's no longer about disagreements, it's about who is right and why your loyalty to a team is far better than another person's loyalty. And if you cheer for a team and didn't attend that school, your fandom is somehow less than the other person's fandom (there's a strong argument to be made that this theory is correct...I used it with Duke earlier...but I don't ever think that a Duke fan who didn't attend is less of a fan than little old me who has been here for a year and a half). And if they think about things differently, you're wrong.
And it all comes down to winning and losing.
And I suppose I'm starting to see that this does nothing for unity.
It does nothing for society. Except sell t-shirts when your team wins.
I guess I'm kind of tired of the world taking themselves too seriously.
I guess I'm kind of tired of people not taking jokes.
I guess I'm kind of tired of us acting like winning is everything.
I guess I'm kind of tired of us thinking that our colors define who we are.
I guess I'm kind of tired of us.
We hurt others. We don't have conversations. And we alienate large groups of people. And while we may be unified inside those stadiums, we segregate ourselves.
I'm guilty of it, and I'd imagine many of you are too.
-B
Seriously, enough with the hate on the teams I follow and comment on. It's enough. Really. What do you gain by making fun of me? Like really, what?
Rob Bell announced yesterday that he and Carleton Cuse (of LOST fame) will be writing a TV show that has been picked up by ABC. He and his family are moving to Los Angeles from Grand Rapids, Michigan. It is only now appropriate for his Mars Hill family to wish him "Farewell, Rob Bell". I wish him serious luck. Hollywood is a mean, ripyouupeatyoursoulandthrowyououtwiththedogs kind of business and if the show doesn't play well, you'll be able to buy all ten episodes of "The Complete Series" at Target for $39.99 in a year or so.
Most Christians I know have become very cynical of this news. Wait, the word "cynical" is too generous.
I've been thinking, though, what my reaction might be if I was all the various types of Christians out there. These are generalized statements and intended to be humorous, so don't get too angry if you fit into these categories:
Reformed Piper Followers - "This guy has been going off the deep end for a long time. When will he learn that Love is not for everyone and that God picks and chooses who He saves? Farewell, Rob Bell. Welcome to your life of fame."
Roman Catholics - "These evangelicals will never understand that the Church, even above God, AND DEFINITELY NOT TV is at the center of all things good in the world."
Nondenominational hip Churches - "Dang, wish we could have thought of that. I guess our Twitter account won't cut it anymore."
United Methodists - "Hey, will someone tell us what to think of this? We can't seem to make up our minds about anything important."
Mormons - "He thinks a TV show is an effective way to change the world? Why doesn't he just run for President?"
Southern Baptists - "At least it's not a woman."
Passion 20somethings - "When can we get Chris and Louie on a TV show?"
Divinity Students - "Bell is too centered on himself and his megachurch obviously isn't big enough for him anymore. Down with the megachurch! Down with the megachurch!"
It seems absurd to me that so many of us might be so quick to judge because of a few website headlines we read. Bell is a phenomenal, charismatic, well-read communicator who happens to have followed a call into ministry off of a chance preaching opportunity years ago. He's been picked as one of the most influential pastors in America and has made it his mission to welcome back those hurt by the church by incorporating relevant and trendy cultural points into his sermons and speaking engagements.
Beyond that, Bell is controversial and not afraid to be so. He borders on being more "spiritual" and less "Jesusy" with the hopes that if he can attract people to a new way of life and understanding of Scripture, he can make better disciples. This, because it seems to be less traditional, is controversial. But Bell is not afraid to be so. People respect that, and because he is quite charismatic, and they follow him. The strongest argument against him is that he lost Jesus, but if you study him carefully...you'll find that it's simply not true. Jesus is a significant part of Bell's theology, rightly so.
Bell isn't as anti-traditional as some have made him out to be. I've seen nearly all of his videos and listened to countless sermons of his and I've rarely come across some sort of exegetical insight that I strongly disagreed with (at last not any more than you might find in any mainline church in any town in America).
It's time we stop thinking of religious innovators (and while that term probably does mean progress, it DOES NOT mean a loss of tradition) as inherently "bad". We must judge the preacher on the content and gifts and less on how we view people who have the same church-style.
And beyond all that, it's time we start approaching ministry and those attempting it from a positive stance, and only after that criticizing his/her work from an understanding of their theology, and not from our own personal bias.
If we fight inside these walls and don't go out there, they'll always find another one. Something is wrong...something is terribly wrong.
-B
I'm reminded today of this video from 1997. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yE3Ta_NK4-I&]
In it, Steve describes his computer setup at the time between his offices at Apple, NeXT, Pixar, and his home. This technology (and implementation of it) has been in use by institutions, corporations, and many other places for years now.
What strikes me is that it may have taken this long to get to iCloud (Apple's closest offering of something like this) where it will be in a few weeks, but this idea is finally coming to instantly, always connected smartphones, tablets, and laptops. No more reliance on ethernet, no more being tied down to a computer at a desk.
Google is trying this (and has been) with their Chromebooks and their wide assortment of online apps, but Apple is doing it in a way where the code is actually compiled on the device itself, rather than the device just being an outlet to a server. Apple's implementation will undoubtedly be more reliable, but it'll be interesting to see which approaches garners more attention.
Microsoft is doing much the same thing with their Office 365 approach, but they currently charge for it. Apple's will be free for any iOS device owner and sync between them and their Macs or PCs.
I'm looking forward to it. You?
-B
Yesterday, Reed Hastings (CEO of Netflix) included this statement in his apology letter to Netflix's customers:
For the past five years, my greatest fear at Netflix has been that we wouldn't make the leap from success in DVDs to success in streaming. Most companies that are great at something – like AOL dialup or Borders bookstores – do not become great at new things people want (streaming for us).
(Keep this thought process in the back of your mind for now. We'll get back to it)
Today, Google opened up Google+ up to everybody (something I argue they should have done since the beginning), including anyone without an invite.
Coincidently (or perhaps not so) Facebook made some significant changes to their layout, functionality, and design over the past week. We all know the one constant in our lives: when Facebook makes a change, the whole world complains.
Without a doubt, the changes Facebook made are significant. The way stories show up in a news feed is almost completely different and they've now instituted an extra "creeper bar" (not mine or Facebook's terminology) to show the user what's going on with their friends, in real time.
Most of the comments I've heard are not based around the design factors, the content, the creepiness, or anything else. No, the comments I've heard have almost all been monolithic: "STOP CHANGING, FACEBOOK!"
I suppose that somewhere inside of all of us is an inherent desire to remain comfortable. I suppose we all want to stick with what we have. It is the same reason that sooooo many people are still running Windows XP. If something costs money and is likely to make things more confusing, people are likely to forego it if at all possible.
What occurred to me, though, was that no one complains about Windows coming out with a new OS because it changes(I have it, more comments later on it). No one complains about Apple coming out with a new OS because it changes. Why? Probably because it costs money to upgrade. **I'll forego, at this time, my argument that everyone should upgrade (except for Windows Vista) to a new Operating System whenever possible.**
But with Facebook, you don't get a choice. They upgrade your account and Facebook experience for you, without your permission. And no, they didn't ask you first.
And Facebook is free. They control what you can and can't do (no matter how much we convince ourselves that we are in control of our own information) and we are their mercy.
So why the problem? Why the complaints?
Because Facebook has to change. Because there was this little company that started a social network with a dumb bird as a logo that is growing at unbelievable speeds. And because one of the biggest companies in the world that seemingly controls all of the information on the internet and how we find it decided to create a pretty good competitor to the big FBook.
And, people don't have a lot of loyalty to Facebook. They don't have any money invested in it. And switching networks will become more feasible as more people are on both.
There's a threat at hand. Facebook is facing an enemy, one who is trying to steal their user base. This hurts page views. This hurts ad clicks. This hurts profits. This hurts their business model.
They can't remain stagnate. No one can.
The best thing a Facebook user can do is to accept the fact that one of the biggest things they're addicted to in the world is really, at its heart, a competitive business and nothing more. Zuckerberg might try to sell you on their "connect everyone better" mission, but they won't survive without money. Like any capitalistic group, Facebook is a business and needs to stay that way to move any further. When people invade their turf, they're going to fight back with everything they can because...they simply have to.
The better question ought to be, "How can you change, make yourself more useful, and still maintain a simplistic atmosphere moving forward..one that doesn't confuse people?"
This is what Google has nailed. When they came into the search scene, they didn't just stay with search. They made themselves better. They evolved. They made themselves more useful. But, when you're trying to find something on Google.com, there's no question as to where to start typing.
None.
-B
Netflix is facing a lot of heat, even AFTER Reed Hasting's (their CEO) email yesterday apologizing to the entire Netflix community about how he handled this. The wonderful world of JoyOfTech provides insider information on how this all went down. Original post here.
Sure seems to be what they were thinking. I tend to think Reed knows what he is doing, and he is fighting an uphill battle against the content companies, who keep demanding more and more and more money.
It'll be interesting to see how it shakes out.
-B
I was in second period band when someone from the front office of the school came into the room, whispered something in the band director's ear and then announced to the class that two planes had hit the World Trade Center. She began her statement by saying, "I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but our country is under attack as two passenger jets have hit the World Trade Center in New York City."
It's funny the things you remember so perfectly. I feel like I even remember the temperature of the room.
I also remember this well: George Bush standing with firefighters and his bullhorn saying, "The people who hit these buildings will hear all of us soon!" According to his book, he said this in a response to someone in the crowd shouting, "We can't hear you!"
Chills. I got, and still do get, chills.
Retaliation. There's got to be some sort of inner (almost definitely sinful) human desire to get someone back who has wronged you. So, when the President of the US stands at Ground Zero and tells those who had gone into the fallen building and the country that we were going to get them back for what they had done and we were so overwhelmed with emotion and anger, we cheered. We clapped. We went to war.
Today, we remember all of those who lost their lives on 9/11/01. Today, we remember and honor the lives of those who we now consider heroes: those who risked their lives to save another. Today, we remember all of the loved ones who lost their lives fighting insurgents and terrorists in far away countries. Today, we honor those still serving overseas.
And we should. We should remember. We should honor.
But, I can't help to rethink my original feelings when I heard Bush's bullhorn moment. What is it that makes me feel so patriotic? What is it that gives me chills? What is it that still angers me when I see the TV footage?
Can I get the chills? Is that right? Or am I moved by something I shouldn't be? Doesn't God call on us to forgive completely? Does Jesus call on us to love our enemies? If so, and I truly believe that, why is it that I constantly think about how angry 9/11 made me? Can I truly get excited when I find out that the man who masterminded these attacks has been shot and killed by our own forces?
These are some of the most difficult questions an American Christian can ask themselves.
Because, as a Nationalist, the first reaction is to flood the White House gates with an American flag around our shoulders. Because victory, over something so tragic, is sooo sweet.
We are a nation with a history of getting what we want.
We've always had an innovative military system. We've always had a string of religious principles that has been with us throughout our short history. We've always been geographically separated from so many of the world's problems. We have led the Christian movement in many ways in the world over the past 200 years. We were also that nation that dropped two obliterating bombs on the nation that invaded our naval base. We helped end the Nazi regime, but we also interned Japanese and Native Americans. We fought each other hard over ending the enslavement of humans. And even after that, it took another 80 years (and we are still not there) to treat all American citizens like actual humans. Our leaders sometimes swear oaths with God's name mentioned. We have religious, Biblical themes throughout almost everything we do. We allow churches to function without the headache of paying taxes. But we also highly profiled Muslim citizens wanting to fly from place to place after 9/11.
We are used to getting what we want. We are strong. We are relatively united. And our culture is that which supports and encourages any citizens to strive their best to get what they want or need.
Which is why, I think, we are so offended when we are attacked on our own soil. And, because we operate inside of that paradigm of thinking, our reaction draws emotional stimuli. And when our leader says out loud what we are feeling deeply inside ourselves, we get chills.
Because we have to defend our lands. From our very beginnings, we don't like people telling us what to do.
The question, then, truly is this: can American Christians, a group that from our Jewish backgrounds has been somewhat nomadic and lacks a centering geographical location for our "home", live in an authentic dual citizenship between God and country?
There are so many fundamental conflicting values between the two. And, perhaps, these are best seen and discovered when we remember times when we were so offended by actions against us.
To me, these questions, these ponderings, and these conflictions are the reason that as American Christians, we must study the Holy Scriptures. We must learn and synthesize the history of the Church. We must read and prayerfully consider what Christ asked us to do when he spoke about how we interact with one another. We must read Paul as a guide for our lives of faith.
There seems to be a movement in American Christianity to refer to Scripture whenever they don't know the answer to something. I tend to think that they're right...they just often choose the least important decisions to focus on, rather than overarching themes and principles. We focus so much more on gay marriage, something Jesus didn't even mention by our records, when we ought to be focusing on loving our enemies, something he spoke strongly about.
If we forget who we as Christians are, and we often do in America, we run the risk of making hasty decisions that increase violence and war in the world, rather than bringing about peace and love.
Isn't that our goal? Isn't that God's goal? Peace, hope, faith, and love?
I think so.
America has changed Christianity significantly since 1776. I can't explain it, but I'm convinced that we can be both American citizens and Christians.
The question, for all of us, should be on a day like 9/11, how?
-B
Throughout my life, I've struggled with a lack of discipline in many areas of my life. I was never one who thoroughly enjoyed exercise or the simple discipline of it and I LOVED eating. As time has progressed and my metabolism has been unable to keep up with my poor habits, my body has taken the brunt force of those "bad" habits and it has become a factor of embarrassment for me as I try to relearn what it means to take care of my body, from the way that certainly seemed more "natural".
So, recently, I've been watching what seems to be the new trend in television: shows on losing weight. After all, when A&E does a series, you know it is the trend. I suppose it most likely started with "The Biggest Loser", but "Extreme Makeover: Weight Loss Edition" and A&E's own "Heavy" have been most popular in recent months. I've watched significant portions of each show, trying to wrestle with how these people came to be in the position they are, what lifestyle decisions they've made, and why it is that they can't seem to change themselves, by themselves.
All of the participants in these shows are significantly overweight. More than I ever hope to be. Yet, I still find it intriguing because I recognize their lack of desire to work and equate it with my struggle as well. No, I'm not 500 pounds, I'm not even that close to half of that, but I figure that if I can learn about what it is they need to change about themselves, perhaps it will assist me in changing myself as well.
The question always seems to be begged: why is the change necessary?
These people break down into two distinct groups (as I can see it). About half of them have been overweight since birth. The other half had some sort of traumatic experience in their lives that has driven them to compulsive eating. Most of the second group deal with some sort of depression.
The first group, though, is the most interesting to me. They've always been overweight. They've always eaten a lot. They've rarely exercised. Surely some of that is due to their upbringing, the sudden growth of fast food, etc. However, it makes me wonder, why is it that they never exercised? Why is it that they ate more than a normal human should? And I wonder these things because I wonder them about myself as well. Why is it that I chose to go play the piano or guitar before going for a run? Did I not find running interesting? Did I find running painful? Why is it that some people are encouraged when the pain sets in? Why is it that some people can easily fight through the pain when others of us cower in fear? If it is "natural" to exercise, why is it that most of us don't? Why is it that we come up with easier ways to get around so that we can avoid exercise at all cost?
Surely when our societies were hunters and gatherers, we were in great shape because we had to hunt down the food we were going to eat that night. And we weren't eating fried potatoes.
But that wasn't sustainable for the long haul. It seemed easier, and profitable, to do the hunting FOR other people. Then we'd sell them the food. That'd make it easier. Then we'd be able to feed more people more efficiently. And we are humans...we love efficiency. We build tools to help us be more efficient.
It's obvious what has occurred: we've built tools to help make our lives easier. That's why we are all addicted to our smart phones and iPads. We spend more time inside than any generation before us. We walk and run less than any other generation because there are enough distractions other than exercise. And it has come to the point that when we are walking around the mall our mood goes down when we see stairs, because we'd rather ride the escalator.
But I return to my original thought: discipline. Have we become undisciplined and lazy?
Or, has laziness simply become a byproduct of progress? Or "naturally", are we more inclined to create tools to help us? Or is the hunting and gathering mindset what is really "natural"?
Which leads me to my ultimate thought: does what is "natural" always fit into a societal norm? And, is what is "natural" always the high road and good?
Some people are born with a chemical imbalance that leads them to abuse alcohol. We all know the phrase, even after you're clean, "Once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic." On ABC Family's "Switched at Birth", one of the characters is an alcoholic. She's hard on her biological daughter who chose to drink prior to being an adult. The daughter didn't understand why she was being so hard on her. But the mother explained that she simply doesn't have luxury of being able to have one drink. It's not possible because of who she is. But just because her bodily inclinations and behavior lead her to act in certain ways, doesn't mean that society thinks it is okay to be an alcoholic. We look down on drunks.
The same is true of drug users.
The same has been said of gay people.
And so, I suppose the question ought to be asked of societal norms: are societal norms (and accepted practices) based on what we might consider "destructive" behavior? In other words, do we judge others' actions because what they do puts them (and often others) at risk of dying sooner than they might?
The extremely obese people will die because their body and heart simply can't keep up. Alcohol abusers will drive themselves out of house, home, and family, because they use alcohol to cope. Drug abusers run the very real risk of overdosing or taking something that they thought was something else.
And they all become addicts. They become so engorged in what they are doing that they don't care about anything. They lose their families, they lose their jobs, they lose their lives.
Because these things...the unnatural foods, the copious amounts of alcohol, the drugs, all seem...unnatural.
The laziness is unnatural. Because that's not how we once lived.
And we draw this line to connect the dots between "unnatural" and "destructive". And we assume, in almost every instance, that these two are inherently connected.
And if we think under that paradigm, we can perhaps see why homosexuality has been treated, in our society, the way it has. Biblically, it seems unnatural. Many of the conservative voices have argued time and time again that it is "destructive" to our society because it breaks down how we view humanity and the design of a family. Many view it as an addiction, one that can be "treated" (see Michele Bachmann's husband).
Because we've connected those dots. We operate under that mindset. We equate "unnatural" with "bad". We think everything that is "unnatural" is "destructive".
There's no doubt in my mind that many of the Biblical writers (for the most part) consider being gay (or participating in homosexual acts) "unnatural". AND, because of the societal norms of their culture, and the cultures working against them, they equated "unnatural" with "bad" or "sinful".
So the question becomes: can we read "unnatural" in the Scriptures and equate it with our definition of unnatural now...post French Fry? Can we read into God's creation of Adam and Eve and assume that that is what is "natural"?
Because that is what we are doing. We are reading texts out of context. We are placing our own 21st century definitions on words used thousands of years ago. And we assume, that because what seems unnatural now has proven itself to be destructive, that that's what "unnatural" has always and will always mean. And we assume that what society currently considers "normal" behavior is the correct way to be. And when we do that, we lose sight of humanity and of God's creation of it.
It's a tough thought process, one with unclear implications and most likely more divisiveness than unity. It's troubling.
I was not born with an inherent desire to exercise. I have always been a fan of progress. This is the "unnatural" reality I live in. At the end of the day, I really like my iPad...but I still need to exercise.
-B
Yes, I know this doesn't make a clear and decisive argument, as you might be used to getting. That's because I'm not sure this can all be answered.
