Poolside Blogging Sunday, June 28, 2009

Ok, so I wimped out and didn't bring my laptop out to the pool to blog. It's been so nice lately, that I've been bringing my book out there and reading in the sun. When I get too hot, I take a dip for a few minutes and then sun dry. After watching a couple games (the end of the FIFA USA vs Brazil game, and the Mariner's game) I didn't really feel like writing just then, and decided to again bring out my book.

Emma's reading the Wheel of Time series and keeps asking the incredulous question, "How could you not like these books?" She's only on book two. I think that's all I should have to say about that. But something about her makes me care when she thinks something's wrong with my views. I don't get it, and it's getting on my nerves. On a side note, I think when I'm done with the Sword of Truth series (now about a quarter into book 9), and had planned to pick Wheel of Time back up, I think I'll reread the first 5 and a half again, rather than trying to remember everything that happened. It should be a quicker read this time, having already read it, but then, I read Eldest in a day the first time, and in a month or so the second time.

Finding a new church has given me a new view of things. There are a lot of things to think about, and a lot of differences between churches and doctrine and such. There was a song maybe a decade ago by Clay Crosse called Savin' The World, which basically suggested that churches bicker too much, and that it's about a man - dying on a cross - saving the world; rising from the dead - doing what he said he would do. I have issues because I agree with that statement, but I also agree that there needs to be sound doctrine being taught. I think you're liable to miss something if you simplify scripture that much.

The church I attended this morning, which I'll give at least one more week's consideration, is a liturgical church, meaning it's the same structure every week. It seems like they don't do it out of tradition, but for a structure, so that they don't miss anything, maybe. Somehow it doesn't feel odd to me, even though I grew up in a more laid back contemporary setting. The sermons have this huge focus on reading the scriptures and digesting it, plain and simple. The churches I've previously attended tended to do something more like this: take a section of scripture, pull out the major themes, and then pull in more scripture from elsewhere in the Bible to make a point, and to say something about living. Personally, as I've never been able to digest or read between the lines of any scripture besides rare epiphanies, I prefer the method this church offers. I wonder, though, if this misses something, misses the bigger picture. Maybe there's room for both, or for a mix. I preferred Lulu's, Solomon's, and Josh's sermons at CCF and the INN to the ones here, and they were all topic-driven.

This church focuses on preaching the Gospel, making it all about Jesus, and during the sermon today, a question came to mind: Is there more to Christianity than Jesus? It sounds like a simple enough question. But I want to assertively answer yes and no in parallel, and that doesn't make sense to me.

Statements Yes. 'Christian' literally translates to little Christ, someone who lives and acts as Jesus did or would have (something tells me Jesus never played Nintendo, but I don't think he'd turn down the chance to own me at Mario Kart, you know what I'm saying?). Jesus is the center of our lives, our role model in every aspect, our Lord God, our friend, and perhaps most astonishingly, our savior through a death he didn't deserve and resurrection. Though it's become a catch phrase, and is rarely taken seriously, What Would Jesus Do? is a perfectly valid question, and an important one to keep at the front of our minds. No. Jesus is but one third of the Trinity. How could we forsake God the Father and God the Holy Spirit? Further, 39 of the 66 books of the Bible were written before Jesus was born. The stories of Moses, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Noah, Samson, David - a man after God's own heart! These are not purely about Jesus, but they are about Christianity. These are books that Jesus read, studied, knew and understood. These are what he used to teach, but they are not about him. Further, Jesus was not a man about money. He talked about giving, and used it in metaphors and parables, but it didn't seem like he focused that much on the topic. I've not personally counted, but I've heard several times that the most talked about topic in the Bible is money. If Jesus didn't fixate on it, and money is the most talked about topic in the Bible, and the Bible is the basis of the beliefs of Christianity, how is it that Christianity is no more than Jesus?
Rebuttals The Godhead, the Trinity as God, is one. Jesus is God, and to know Jesus is to know the Father and to know the Spirit. Likewise, to study the Father in the Old Testament is to study the Son. The OT contains the Mosaic Law, the law that Jesus came to fulfill -- the OT is about Jesus. The Old Testament directly talks about Jesus in prophecy. Without the Old Testament, we wouldn't understand why Jesus needed to come, or how significant his life was. If nothing else, it feels limiting to scope Christianity down to one subject, even if that subject is the core of the religion. Maybe that's just it; he's the core. The core is not the whole, but without it, it wouldn't even closely resemble the whole. It's like the WASL. Perhaps reading, writing, listening, mathematics, and science are the core of education, but it's not all of it, and to limit education down to those topics cheapens it a little -- you miss parts of the big picture. But if you don't understand those, then you're education is seriously lacking, not an education at all. The thing is, it's not possible to completely grasp Christ's life. You could study it for eternity, live it out on a daily basis, and never know everything. The same with those core educational elements, I guess, but we want the extras too, and the extras are important.

I don't know. Maybe what I just wrote was blasphemous, but I don't know which side would be. Maybe they're both right; maybe they're both wrong.

I was talking to a guy after the service today. I mentioned that I couldn't decide what I thought about the church. I think I wrote this in a previous post, but I remember a night at CCF that we just felt like worshipping more after the service. It was probably Spirit-led, but it was also joyfully led. We just were filled with joy and the best outlet we had at hand was more singing. About half the students there that night stayed and sung more. I was running Powerpoint that night, and Rufus went up and just sang whatever came to mind. He and the band hadn't practiced at all. I scrambled to find the songs in the database and put up the lyrics. Sometimes the songs weren't on the computer, and oh well. Somehow we managed. My guess is most of the students knew most of the lyrics by heart anyway. It's one of my favorite memories of CCF. I don't think that an experience like that could occur, even if the Holy Spirit willed it, at this church. I don't think it could have at the church I grew up in. I know it could have at the INN. Anyway, I sited that experience to the guy and asked whether he thought it could. He said something that sort of turned me off; he said something to the effect that such experiences were immature, or part of a phase you grow out of. Basically that college is a good time for experimentation. I don't know if that's what he meant, but that's how it came across to me. For better or for worse, it painted the church as a little smug in my eyes, that if you aren't a liturgical church, you're doing it wrong, or you haven't grown.

If I don't find a church with the same oomf, the same excitement, the same joy as the INN or CCF, I think I'm going to be bored. Just because I was spoiled with something that wonderful, doesn't mean I should have to accept something less now that I'm not in college, not when it comes to Christianity. There's certainly something to be said for all hype and no substance. That's my prejudiced view of megachurches. I've only been to one, once, in my life, and I won't say it was substance free, but I don't think you can deep-dive with a congregation that size, and maintain that size. I might very well be wrong. But I think there is also something to be said for all doctrine, all the time. If there's not that spark, that spirit, that nondeterministic unstructured relationship, then maybe that's not as deep as you would think.

I think I've figured out how to place my finger on what's different. In all the churches I've been to, save Harper back home and sometimes LatR, since I left college, the songs were sung almost out of obligation. It seemed like going through the motions. How can we call that worship? Woship needs to be heartfelt! If we love Christ, then we will worship him, we will sing and make music. We will do it because we cannot contain ourselves. We love him. That is true worship, in my mind. Just singing because that's what you do in church -- that is dead.

Anyway, I'm hoping to meet one of the pastors for lunch this week. Also, the worship leader's husband wanted to get coffee with me sometime soon, so that might be this week. Also, the pastor of my old church had said last week he'd send me an S+ for lunch, but he never did. I'm guessing he got busy and forgot, so today I sent him an email asking if we were still going to do this. It should be good. I soak this stuff up. I love talking about God; I don't think I'd ever tire of it, because there is so much to talk about.

And now for something completely different. Hime a few weeks back asked, what I think was offhandedly, if I would take a week off and go be a counselor at her summer camp. At first I kind of laughed it off, especially with how busy we are at work. But the more I thought about it, the more I felt like God was pushing me toward it, so I brought it up with my boss, whom I'd previously told I hadn't planned to take vacation this summer. I phrased the question this way: "If, in the super hypothetical, highly unlikely event I get a week ahead in my work by late July or August, could I take a week off...?" He said that even if I didn't get ahead, that I should. So, I will. Odds are, it will be the July 20-25, but I need to double check that that's late enough and doesn't overlap some major due date or something.

The meds I'm on, dare I say it, have made me more than I used to be (avoiding at all costs the phrase "a new person"). I feel more creative, more willing, more active and energetic, more appreciative, and even more likely to enjoy the presence of kids. There are definitely still some issues to work through, but I think working through all the issues would still leave me as I was to some degree, and that I'd still need the meds I'm on. I'm actually on a very minor dosage. When I went to the full dose, I lost almost all of my appetite, and was actually crankier than on the 2/5 dose.

Well, I'm off to Swood's to see Transformers and have dinner with him, Bob and Bob's version of Hime.

P.S. Continue to refresh every few seconds, because it appears I'm still blogging. Also, I have a cat on my arm. It's hard to type.

top | 0 Comments