A Christmas Story

"I had always felt life first as a story: and if there is a story there is a story-teller."
~GK Chesterton, as quoted in The Jesus Storybook Bible.

I’ve met some great story-tellers in my lifetime. I’m reminded of Dorris Smith, an octogenarian from the true South, in the Florida Panhandle. Ms. Smith always had a story to tell; and she told it in such a way that always kept me asking, “and then what?” Storytelling came natural to her.
I am captivated by the engaging tone and rhythm of Garrison Keillor and his ability, when he’s at his best, to subtly pull a thread of truth through an entire story. I have to work to tell a good story. I gather details, I think about plot movement, I pick up on a theme and highlight it, I rehearse the story. Years of practice with our children has made me a decent story reader. But, I am envious of natural story tellers, like Ms. Smith.
Maybe what it means for us to be created in the image of God is that we have the capacity to tell a good story. Think about it; God is an amazing story teller. And the Christmas story is one of his best tales.
There are a number of people who have convinced me of this fact in the past few years. One of these people is Sally Lloyd-Jones, writer of The Jesus Storybook Bible: Every Story Whispers His Name. Now, this is a children’s Bible; but it’s a must read for every adult who loves God and a good story. Every story in this book, beginning “in the beginning,” points to Jesus and God’s plan to rescue the world through Him. When you finally get to the Christmas story—titled “He’s Here”—and see all the threads woven together in a little baby, the power of the story alone is enough to bring tears to your eyes.
You are a part of this story as well. God is weaving a theme and a plot together in your life. Romans 8:28-30 speaks to this truth. According to this verse, God’s amazing storytelling power is displayed in the lives of those who love him. When you were born plot threads were woven together that began at creation.
The Christmas story is part of your story. The Son of God & Son of Man was laying in a feeding trough for you and I. The power of that story, alone, is enough to bring tears to my eyes.

Read more...

Re: It's Satire, Intentional or Not

Here's a follow up to the previous post.

Read more...

It's Satire, Intentional or Not

A friend of mine shared the following video with me today.

I did a cursory search to find out whether or not this was real, but didn't find anything concrete. Whether or not this video was intended to be satire, it is; and it gave me many good laughs.

Read more...

"The Dao of St. Paul"

After the tsunami of fandom that surrounded Third Eye Blind's success with post-grunge, 3-chord, guitar-driven, pop-rock became a slow rolling wave, I allowed myself to explore the some of the deeper tracks on their first self-titled album. I was way wrong about those guys; I've been a fan ever since. Stephan Jenkins is a respectable (ok, maybe not morally respectable, but respectable in the professional sense) lyricist and producer. I love subtle--he does subtle well. When the Blue album came out, I was hooked. I waited 4 years for Out of the Vein and was not disappointed. So I was a little surprised when I missed the release of Ursa Major back in August of this year. We were in the middle of a move, it had been six years since their last release, and the album was released on a smaller label, so it was off my radar screen. I gave it a listen two weeks ago, and was blown away by track 10, "The Dao of St. Paul."

A note for my fellow Christian readers: There is much that you may find offensive in the 3eb set-list. I mean, Jenkins is an honest-to-goodness current-generation San Fransisco hippie. That's why I love the lyrical and artistic quality of 3eb, but its also the reason I choose to skip some tracks.

That said, "The Dao of St. Paul" is a beautiful moral diamond in the rough. I know that some theologians will find much over which to object in the concept of this song. "Dao" (or Tao), is not necessarily consistent with Christian moral teaching (even though C.S. Lewis, in The Abolition of Man, uses the Dao ("Tao" in The Abolition...) as a synonym for the Natural Law, as described by none other than St. Paul in verses like Romans 2:14-15). But, this song picks up on a particularly Taoist thought in the the book of Philippians--rejoicing in suffering. In Taoism, rejoicing in suffering is an echo of the highest morality (we reflect the true nature of things by existing in the tension of good and evil). In Christian thought, however, suffering and evil are things to be conquered in the future by the source of all good--i.e. God (Romans 8:24; Revelation 20:3-5).

The 3eb song picks up on this Taoist theme in the writings of Paul and applies it to a romantic relationship. I think Jenkins misses the point of Paul's rejoicing. Paul rejoices in the fact that there is something beyond his suffering--Complete Joy revealed. The person in this song, seems to rejoice for the sake of getting along in life. All that said, the choral ending of this song is beautiful. It ties all of these themes together--eastern Taoism, failed relationships, Christian virtue, complete joy revealed--and sets them to music. Perhaps that's what Lewis found so promising in the concept of Tao--it draws near to the good, even if the good cannot be explained; it seeks, in this world, that which is beyond this world; it gets close to God, even if it comes up short.

As we live our lives, I hope that you will not stop drawing near when the song resolves. I hope that you will continue to rejoice in hope long after the choral ending. I hope that you will not come up short in seeking, in this life, that which is beyond this life. I hope that you will find the source of Paul's rejoicing--his hope in God's grace through Jesus.

Ladies and Gentlemen, for your listening pleasure, and potential edification, "The Dao of St. Paul."

Read more...

A Wise Mentor's Advice

In a recent radio interview Ted Danson said that Kelsey Grammer gave him career-changing advice when they worked together on the set of the long-running TV comedy series, Cheers. Grammer's advice was that "an actor should have a requisite disrespect for the material" (by which he meant, the script), and he should not appear "too eager," or be perceived as "leaning forward." Danson says that, in retrospect, he probably came across as "too eager" and "tilting too far forward," as the series began. However, as he took this wise mentor's advice to heart, Danson was able relax and enjoy the process of creating with his fellow actors; he now had nothing to prove. He also believes that, because of this advice, he was able to give his character, Sam Malone, an air of confidence that seemed to endear the audience too the show. As a result Cheers became one of the longest running TV comedy series of all time.

In the gospels, Jesus seems to have the kind of confidence that Danson describes. (Is it sacrilegious to compare Sam Malone to Jesus? Maybe.) Religious leaders constantly brought accusations against Jesus' authenticity. His answer always seemed confident, not too eager; as if to say, "Here is the truth; take it or leave it." The poor, sick and needy sought Jesus out, hoping to receive what he had to offer. He neither turned them away nor eagerly waited on them hand and foot, but gave what he had and directed them toward the truth. When Jesus encountered those who needed truth, he always shared it; but, he didn't beg them to accept it.

The Apostle John describes Jesus' approach in the opening lines of his gospel:

11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God...

--John 1:11-12, NIV

Jesus simply shared the truth of who he was. He was confident in that truth. Those who accepted this truth were accepted. But, he didn't cater to those who rejected the truth. He was cool, collected and confident. He had a "requisite disrespect" for the script that people had written for him.

As disciples of Jesus, we ought to imitate our Mentor's approach. We ought to have a requisite respect for the Word of God, but a requisite disregard (disrespect may be too strong of a word) for the script others have written for us. We ought to be confident in the truth that we have been called children of God on the basis of our belief in the truth of who Jesus is, and eagerly invite others to receive Jesus as well. But, we are not actors. We are not role playing. And, we ought not to convey that this is the case, by "leaning too far forward" as we share the truth. Play it cool. Be authentic. Be confident. Relax and enjoy the process of leading others to Christ.

A wise mentor gave his disciples some career-changing advice one day. Jesus' advice was that his disciples ought to wipe the dust off of their feet when they left a town that did not listen to the truth of who Jesus was (Matthew 10:14). In other words, they ought to be confident, sharing the truth with those who will listen, and not catering to those who won't. As a result, Christianity has thrived for over 2,000 years.

At Safeharbor last Sunday, we were encouraged to share the "good news" about Jesus with those who might not know it, or to invite a coworker to a Safeharbor Connection Group. Perhaps you are intimidated by such a task. Learn from your mentor, Jesus. Play it cool, stop acting and just be who you are—a child of God.

Read more...

Jesus' Complete Guide for the Christian Life (7)

This is the final message from the Sermon on the Mt. Series. If you've been listening, I expect that you were as challenged by Jesus' words as much as I was. However, Jesus' final point from this passage seems to be that it matters not if we are simply challenged by these words. No, the wise person will hear these words and and put them into practice (Matthew 7:24-27).
Jesus' words stretch us. We may be daunted by this high calling. But, such is the nature of all revolutions. Join us in this revolutionary kingdom of heaven, as we strive to live out Jesus' words.

A Decided Disciple,
dan

Read more...

The Essence of Discipleship

This meditation is less devotional; more direct. I'm asking you to meditate on a question.

A few days ago I posted a status update on my Facebook & Twitter pages in which I stated that I was pondering the "essence of Christian discipleship." I also invited people's thoughts on the issue. The results were not surprising. Turns out, most of us have our own particular version of what discipleship means. It's a curious word; and, its use in the context of the Christian faith has certainly been wide and varied. Yet, Matthew 28:19 makes it clear that the #1 priority of the apostles, which was, in turn, to be handed off to the church, is to "make disciples of all nations." And, most churches cite this verse in their mission statements (you weren't a successful church/business in the 90's or at the turn of the millennium if you didn't have one of those, you know). So if making disciples is the church's responsibility, if discipleship is our mission, shouldn't we have some inkling of what discipleship is on the most basic level? Shouldn't we be able to readily identify the essence of Christian discipleship?

I want to invite you to ponder the "essence of discipleship" with me. Share your thoughts with me on facebook , twitter. or right here. In your mind, what is the essence of Christian discipleship?

A Curious Disciple,

dan white

Read more...

Jesus' Complete Guide to the Christian Life (6)

Here's the audio version of Sunday's (9/6) message, A Community of Grace. This is message 6 of 7 in the Sermon on the Mt. Series. Comments/questions/thoughts welcome.

Read more...

This is an article I wrote for a Safeharbor meditation/commentary series on Matthew 5:21-48.

38 "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Batman is the quintessential antihero—the protagonist of the story who exacts justice, but displays major character flaws and a dark side. There is a struggle within Bruce Wayne, the bat-man. He desires to bring criminals to justice; but, in so doing, he takes out his own pain on those who we deem deserving of it. Batman sometimes goes beyond justice.

In the Old Testament, there was a principal, referred to by today's legal experts as lex talonis, which serves to ensure that the retribution apportioned on behalf of an offended party does not exceed the nature of the crime. The phrase that captures the essence of that principal comes from Exodus 21:24—"Eye for eye, tooth for tooth...." This concept is often misunderstood. It would seem, when taken out of context, that this principal would have us do to others what they have done to us. In actuality, this principal is not a personal ethic; it was a national standard of justice, to be applied in the Hebrew legal system.

In the above passage, Jesus does not reject the idea of justice, on which legal systems are based. Rather, he rejects the use of "eye-for-eye" retaliation as a personal ethic, and replaces that notion with the idea of self sacrifice. Again he uses the formula, "You have heard that it was said,...But I say to you...." The problem is not with the idea of lex talonis. The problem is with the improper application of it.

To illustrate what he's getting at Jesus uses 3 examples from Jewish daily life:
1) Suppose someone slaps you on the cheek. In Jesus' day a slap on the cheek was a common insult, which would normally be returned. This retaliation could easily escalate to a knock-down-drag-out brawl.
2) Suppose someone sues your for your tunic. The tunic was a simple garment worn under an outer cloak. The cloak was often required as collateral in legal cases.
3) Suppose someone forces you to go a mile with them. The Persian government began the practice of forcing commoners to help couriers, on official government business, along their way. The Roman's borrowed this practice. In Jesus' day, Roman soldiers had the power to conscript common citizens to help carry their military supplies.[1]

In each of these cases, Jesus says that his disciples should not only resist the temptation to retaliate, but that they let go of pride and humbly extend grace—turn the extra cheek, give the shirt off your back, go the extra mile.

We live in a culture that celebrates justice. And, with good reason; justice is a godly virtue. But we have sometimes perverted justice. We celebrate over the gruesome beating of the bad guy. The antihero lacks grace and mercy; and we put him on kids' lunchboxes. For Jesus, however, the hero, the strong person, the one who triumphs, the true disciple is the one who is able to stop the cycle of retaliation and begin a cycle of grace. Jesus celebrates when grace is served. How has grace been served in your life?

------

[1] Mark Moore. The Chronological Life of Christ, volume 1. College Press, 1996, pg. 197.

Read more...

Faithful Hearts

This is an article I wrote for a Safeharbor meditation/commentary series on Matthew 5:21-48.

27 "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' {27 Exodus 20:14} 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

31 "It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' {31 Deut. 24:1} 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

Recent Hardee's (Carl's Jr., for you West Coasters) commercials have illustrated just how sinful we have become as a culture. We know sex sells. But, hamburgers...? Sex sells hamburgers? In 2005 Carl's Jr. insisted that they were not sorry for the "Spicy Burger" commercial, featuring a scantily clad Paris Hilton. To prove the point they've made more commercials, featuring lesser known, but equally clothed females.

Apparently, in Jesus' day, a lift of the veil was all it took to drive men to unfaithful acts. Public displays like those of the infamous Carl's Jr. adds, were less common (though not unheard of). And yet, unfaithfulness was still a problem. A quick read of the Old Testament will prove that point.
However, according to Jewish tradition, the term adultery was restricted only to sexual intercourse with the wife or the betrothed of a fellow Jew. In contrast, Jesus' words must have seemed austere. To look at a woman lustfully; that's adultery?[1] Not only so, but the indication of vs. 30 is that such sin, if left unchecked, can lead one to eternal condemnation in hell.

Part of us wants to take vs. 29-30 literally. We want to be faithful to Jesus. We don't want to be lost in hell. We want to please God to the deepest degree possible at the deepest level possible. If my eyes cause me to sin, take them away God! But when we pick up the gouging tool of choice, it becomes obvious that Jesus words are hyperbolic (in the literary sense). And even if I did gouge out my right eye, I still have another to sin with. What we ought to do, then, is remove temptation. Turn the channel, turn your head, don't stare—easy solutions. But what we need are not strategies; we need a heart devoted to God.

The discussion of divorce (21-32) naturally flows from that of adultery (27-30). Jesus makes more extensive comments on this topic in Matthew 19:1-12. That passage is helpful for understanding God's attitude towards divorce (as if Malachi 2:16 wasn't clear enough). For our purposes here, it should suffice to know that, according to Deuteronomy 24:1-4, a man could divorce his wife for something "improper."[2] The rabbis debated the nature of that improper thing many times over. According to some teachers, something as "improper" as burnt food was acceptable grounds for divorce. In such a situation, a certificate of divorce was necessary, if the woman was to be married again.

However, in Jesus' teaching from Matthew 19, it's clear that a piece of paper does not make one divorced. No, the bond of marriage is an everlasting bond, and the terms of the marriage covenant are sexual faithfulness.[3] In a society where women had difficulty finding means to provide for themselves, remarriage was nearly a necessity for a divorced woman. After divorce, the children became property of the father, and he retained all possessions; she never got the house. Because a piece of paper does not make one divorced in the eyes of God, the woman who finds herself faced with the decision to remarry or starve, is forced to commit adultery.

In view of such a strict standard. I'm thankful for God's grace. The divorce rate in the U.S. is currently around 50%; and the rate of divorce among Christians is comparable. It is God's mercy that allowed the Hebrews of the Old Testament to issue a certificate of divorce. It is God's grace that allows those of us who find ourselves on the other side of divorce, to renew our commitment of faithfulness to the spouses we currently have.

Whether we have been unfaithful with our eyes or we have forced our spouses into adultery, by leaving them alone, true repentance, marked by a commitment to faithfulness in the relationships in which we find ourselves, is what pleases our gracious God. A faithful heart is what he desires.


[1] In Jesus' day, men were responsible for the sin of adultery, not women. Women were viewed as property. When another man violated his brother's property, he was sinning, not only against himself, his own wife, and God, but his brother as well. If caught, adultery was punishable by death.

[2] In Jesus' day, men could divorce their wives, but wives could not divorce their husbands.

[3] The prominent feature of the ancient Hebrew wedding ceremony was the consummation of the marriage in sexual intercourse.

Read more...