smoking

Had lunch with 24 year old friend Thom today and he shared an interesting insight. Smoking is an important sign of teenage rebellion. As a result, the anti-smoking ads, in particular TRUTH, are actually a tool that will increase teenage smoking. They may be extreme and cutting edge, but they just make the case for smoking as rebellion even better.

“Don’t you know smoking is bad for you?”
“Exactly!”

We also see way more cigarette “commercials” with the anti-smoking campaign, than we did when tobacco companies were limited to their access of many media venues. It will be interesting to see the long-term impact of these anti-smoking ads.

tolerance

"Tolerance"- allowing a conduct or point of view of someone you disagree with and showing them respect in the process.

When people use the term "tolerance" correctly, it is refreshing. Usually people mistake its meaning by considering "tolerance" as "neutrality" or "everyone has an equally valid viewpoint." Someone is "intolerant" if they think they are right and someone else is wrong. On the contrary, in order to be tolerant, you have to disagree with sommeone else, by definition. I cannot show tolerance for someone I agree with.

So let's be careful with our language. Someone isn't being "intolerant" because they disagree with you, unless they are specifically trying to find ways to silence you.

compared to what?

I think Christians have brought some cloudiness into the world's thinking. First, let me speak about the issue and then I'll show how Christians may be part of the problem.

There is false logic called, "Moral equivalency." In this way of thinking, one person or group's nastiness or nasty behavior is equal to the others. So, for example, we hear the Palestinians and the Israelis are no different. After the revelation of prison abuse, the USA is no different than Iraq under Sadam. How did we get to this non-logical thinking? Here is the Christian contribution.

One of our key verses from the Bible is Romans 3:23.
"For all have sinned; all fall short of God's glorious standard."

This is where the confusion lies. Compared to Jesus, there is moral equivalency with people. None of us measures up. Compared to Jesus, for example, the difference between me and Mao is microscopic. But, the difference between Mao and myself on a strictly human level, well I am not connected to 35 million or however many deaths as Mao is.

So we must not confuse categories. I will argue that from a strict human standard, some people ultimately bring more good into the lives of others and some people bring more evil into the lives of others. But compared to Jesus, our differences pale compared to his infinite goodness.

It all depends on what you are comparing.

urban normal

So what's it like to live in LA? A couple of obsevations. This morning I went with our daughter to sign up for classes for the new school year. Kids from a ton of different cultures at her public high school, waiting to get in. I guess if you can "speak" chemistry and world history together you can go to school together. No big deal.

Later in the day saw the movie "Hero," starring Jet Li. Went with our twin 12 year olds. It is an awesome film, with many of the same people from "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" involved. What's amazing is how normal it seems now to watch a film in a "foreign" language for me and the boys. It's not as if we don't hear "foreign" languages every day.

I guess growing up in LA is a little different than it could be. Certainly than my own upbringing in Wisconsin. But you know I've been here about half my life now and the kids are native, so they don't know any better. I wouldn't give this experience up for the world, though, of course, I might just be a glutton for a whole lot of stimuli.

hate

“Hate” in the Bible is connected to the word, “persecute.” It assumes actively working against what God wants for the other. Like the word, “love,” I would argue “hate” has lost its meaning in our culture. Concepts like “hate” crime or “hate” speech are dealing with perception of emotions, not reality. These are not logically helpful terms, and worse, they are not helpful in the legal realm, as you find yourself legislating emotion. Then, for instance, many a psychopath would not be capable of a hate crime because they don’t have an emotionally-charged connection to their victim.

No, we need to think more deeply about what we mean by “hate.” If I disagree with someone about anything today, that person may say I am being “hateful.” If that person lashes out against me, then has he/she just committed a hateful act? Who decides what’s hateful in the first place? If you are a Christian, you can’t assume you know if someone is being hateful if you are basing it on their emotional response because God says he is the only one who really knows what is going on inside a person (Psalm 44:21). I, for one, would recommend a moratorium on using the word, “hate,” until we can consistently support a common meaning.

the difference in sin

"Everyone sins, so why do we focus only on certain sins, like, for example, sexual ones?" This question is asked often today, and it is a good chance to do some clear thinking.

It isn't the sinful act that is at issue, whether it is premarital sex or acting out excessive anger. Forgiveness is available for the person who practices either behavior. What is at issue is if the act itself is considered a sin.

For example, if one doesn't think acting out in excessive anger is sinful and practices it on a regular basis without remorse, then this is a serious issue. If one even celebrates his/her anger it would be a serious miscalculation for a person of faith. One has the danger of becoming the type of person who will not seek forgiveness for his/her sinful act. The technical term for this is "serial, unrepentant behavior."

Relishing acting out in anger is totally different than someone who has a bad temper, acts upon it, feels remorse and is working on dying to that emotional response. The act is a sin in either case, but there is hope in the latter. The temper, if kept in check, is not a sin. There are certainly underlying issues that must be dealt with, but this would occur by moving toward God, not separating from him.

Columbo method

When you are dealing with people with another viewpoint, how do you prevent them from setting up a wall against you quickly without considering your viewpoint? The most helpful method I have seen and one that has worked well for me is from Greg Koukl of Stand to Reason ministries, the "Columbo" method.

It goes something like this.

When you are addressing an issue, ask the other person two lines of questions first.

1) "What do you mean by that? Tell me more."

After they have spoken about the topic, ask,

2) "How did you come to this understanding? How can I find out more about that? What are helpful resources I could check out? "

In this way you will see if they have thought this through, are simply parroting someone else, or maybe just stating an unsupported opinion. Now, you know where they are coming from and you have to make a quick decision. Three choices.

1) They may ask you what you think and then you can answer.
2) They may seem defensive or irritable, to which you reply, "Thanks, I'll look into that further. Maybe we can talk about it again."
3) Or if they seem open, say, "Have you ever considered..." and then give your view.

The question-asking Columbo style, like the TV detective, asks questions. Someone isn't that interested in what you think unless they know you are interested in what they think. Notice you aren't challenging anything they are saying; just being an attentive listener. If they give you an opening to graciously respond- use it.

positive and negative

Negative campaign ads are normal during elections. I read the other day that they are remembered way more vividly than positive ads. Obviously with a finite amount of money for ads, we are going to see negative ads.

This is an important consideration when you are sharing your faith with someone. If you show the weakness in other viewpoints, speak about the logial inconsistencies of others, and so forth, you will be more influential, right? Not so fast. There is a tension, here. You see, if you are negative, you likely have a wall being set up by the other person. Even if you are right. Which brings us to the most important rule of thumb when it comes to sharing faith. "Do you want to be right or do you want to be helpful?" If you want to be right, don't share. If you want to be helpful, then you can be.

Making a positive case for your evidence and allowing the other person to be the one who brings up challenges in other viewponts is the way to go. There are ways to make this likely. I will speak more about this.

life from non-life

There are some things that are so obvious, you don't even think about them. But of course, this may be a challenge if you are seeking understanding. Take the basic mechanisms of Darwinian evolution. Natural selection necessarily needs something to select from. Genetic mutation needs something to mutate. What in the world would that be for the origin of life? This is one of the key unanswered challenges to Darwinian evolution. It is striking in it's simplicity. How can natural selection or genetic mutation be the evolutionary mechanisms of first life? How do you get life from non-life?

discipline

Read an article in Sports Illustrated about the "best" high school football team in the nation, De LaSalle High of Concord, CA. They haven't lost since 1991. 151 wins in a row. So, how do they do it?

The players are allowed to express themselves. Each is given the opportunity to decide how he should practice. They have consensus building sessions every Thursday to prepare for the next game. The players help choose the play strategy. Then, on game day they have periodic play calling reviews during timeouts...

No, not really. Just unbelievable discipline and focus. These can be fairly helpful in much of life. Really.

August

I started my call as a pastor 22 years ago this month. I can't remember the day; could be the 15th. But, I didn't really think of it. In fact, this is the first time I can think of when I didn't think of it. Weird.

It's not a countdown to retirement. I can't imagine what that term means. I do have a sense of discomfort knowing there is so much I wish to be part of and will God keep me healthy enough to thrive? If this is what is called "half time," then why can't it be "a third of the way?" If I am going to reach my 90's I don't want to stop thinking. Connecting. Influencing. Leading. I'm just starting to get in the swing of things, now. I have a lot more learning time coming up. Third of the way, it is.

who knows?

I prayed with a group of pastors again today and I was reminded of one of the challenges we face. This small group of leaders seems authentic to the core. Each one has a heartfelt desire to reach others with the good news of Jesus. So what gives? Wrong style of worship? Wrong methodology? No sense of urgency? Maybe, but I don't think so. Maybe I'm asking the wrong question of the wrong people? Maybe I should ask the potential Christian why he isn't one, yet.

"You aren't a Christian? Really? Tell me more."

Church Leaders Lead Churches...Really

Hugh Hewitt's In, But Not Of is a great book for young people, high school and older. I found one section particularly helpful. It dealt with being a pastor or church leader. Hewitt called on us to stay out of speaking on political issues in our church role. I, for one, probably read as much as anyone on current events and the situations we face as Americans at this time. I think Hewitt is absolutely right. No matter how eminently qualified we think we are, we aren't. Not really. We have such a dangerous job fallout of thinking we know everything about everthing. It's hard enough speaking on practical matters of faith filtered through God's Word, let alone trying to speak about issues of state. Issues of which we have so little real information available to us. Issues on which we have no promise of the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

think again blog

This will be a blog experiment giving me an opportunity to record what I am thinking about and see if this might be of any benefit to anyone else. Following the model of thinker, Bob Buford, I am going to use these four guidelines:

1. Build on the islands of health and strength
2. Deal only with the receptive
3. Only do things with a big kingdom payoff
4. Focus on what I am for, not what I am against

Let's see how it goes.