Goodbye FeedLounge, Hello, Google Reader!

I’ve been using FeedLounge for several months now (ever since they came out of beta!) as my online feed reader. It has, without a doubt, the nicest UI (user interface, for my non-geek readers) of any feed reader, online or off, that I’ve ever come across. At the time I signed up, none of the other online feed readers were much good; Bloglines was the best of the bunch, but still not great. So I ponied up my $5/month and felt like it was an OK deal.

The convergence fo a few events have caused my thinking to change in the past week. First, I ran across the new and improved Google Reader. And boy, is it improved. There are still a few little things I wish it had (like choosing your sort order - I like to read from oldest to newest), but for the most part, it does everything I want a feed reader to do. Second, FeedLounge has been through a couple of frustrating hiccups this week, two separate issues causing multi-hour downtimes. Third, I’d like to save the $5/month. So, I dumped my OPML file from FeedLounge, imported it into Google Reader, and I’m good to go. I cancelled my FeedLounge subscription this morning.

Now I know Geof will have some comment to post here; he’s been using FeedLounge since the very beginning, maybe even before that; heck, he even had a version of it named in his honor! And I can’t fault him for sticking with it; it’s a great product. But market forces really do work; given the choice of a lower-priced, similar-and-acceptable functionality product, I’ll make the switch.

Gracious Words

In reply to the “controversy” of John Piper’s comments regarding Mark Driscoll at the DG2006 conference, Driscoll has graciously posted an email interaction between him and Dr. Piper. A brief quote:

As far as your comments regarding me, I welcome them but must confess that maybe telling me them before they get sent out to cyber world like fresh meat to feed all my critics would be preferable. Either way, I love, respect, and appreciate you very much and have an open ear for any counsel or criticism from you. Perhaps some day I can take a few minutes to tell you my life story as it may help to explain a bit of who I am and make our friendship even simpler. It was a tremendous honor to be in the company of men I have learned much from over the years and made the celebration of 10 years in ministry all the more memorable. This past weekend was one of the highlights of my life. So, thank you very much and I pray you get some rest after the conference.

Praise God for gracious servants who are willing to openly share their lives with us. Blessings on both Dr. Piper and Pastor Driscoll.

DG2006: The Audio is Up

One of the things the DG folks do right: all the audio from the Desiring God 2006 National Conference is available, online, for free, today. That’s right, no waiting 2 months for an expensive tape set. You can download it this morning.

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/EventMessages/ByDate/

DG2006: Piper rebukes Driscoll's "cleverness"

I am sad that this is the moment that most sticks in my mind from the Desiring God 2006 National Conference, but it’s still rankling me, so I’ll post about it here and see if it generates any discussion.

Josh Harris has posted the best summary of Piper’s comments thus far. Note that all this was said after Driscoll had left to catch his flight back to Seattle. Josh narrates:

Piper began by explaining how he thinks about who he hangs out with and how he decides who to invite to speak. “I have a litmus paper and its called theology,” he said. He referenced a point Driscoll had made in his talk about the importance of holding certain unchanging truths in our left hand that are the non-negotiables of the faith, while being willing to contextualize and differ on secondary issues and stylistically (these are “right hand” issues). Driscoll had listed nine issues we need to contend for, including the authority of God’s word, the sovereignty of God, Penal Substitutionary Atonement, the exclusivity of Christ, and gender roles, to name a few.

So Piper said, “If he [Driscoll] has those nine things in his left hand, I’m not even going to look at his right hand.” The audience clapped loudly for this. Then Piper went on to share that he does have some differences with Driscoll on some so-called “right hand” issues of style, which he feels free to share with Driscoll. He went on to share a specific one, noting that Driscoll would get to see this on video. (This was the moment I was glad I wasn’t Mark!)

As if he were speaking to Mark, he said (and I paraphrase), “A pastor cannot be clever and show Christ as glorious. Mark Driscoll, you’re clever. You have an amazing ability to turn a phrase and make statements that draw people back week after week. But it’s dangerous. So many pastors will see you and try to imitate you and then try to watch all the movies and TV shows so they can try to be like you.” In essence, Piper was bringing correction to certain aspects of Driscoll’s style and delivery, while stating that they agreed on the most important issues of doctrine.

Now Josh is very charitable in his evaluation of these remarks: “I felt in his statement not just a correction for Driscoll, but for me and every other young preacher learning to proclaim the good news of the glorious savior. Thank God we get to learn from guys like Piper. Thank God they’re talking to us. I’d rather be corrected by John Piper than cooed over by someone else.” But they rubbed me the wrong way. And yes, I’m aware of the irony of posting critical comments about someone’s critical comments.

Two things. First of all, Piper contradicts himself. First he says that as long as the doctrine is sound, I’m not going to look at the “right hand”. But then he goes on to look at, evaluate, and rebuke the right hand. Decide which it is, brother.

Second, I think Piper should’ve stopped after the first part of the statement. Affirm the guy, say you’ll stand with him if he’s right on doctrine, then stop. If Piper felt a public rebuke was necessary, he should’ve done it in the context of a discussion where Driscoll was present and able to respond. But to rebuke Driscoll after he had left, and on matters of style, not of content, to me seems to have been the wrong move. It only served to highlight the discomfortable divide that still remains between the “old guard” and Driscoll. And as Piper himself said in the first part of the statement, we need to contend for doctrine, and then let the other stuff go. I think he should have followed his own advice.

Update: Adrian Warnock reports. Michael Spencer discusses.

Desiring God 2006 National Conference

I got home about 2:30 this morning from two days in Minneapolis at the Desiring God 06 National Conference. Richard and I got up there Friday afternoon, and after a tasty dinner at Brit’s Pub, we perused the massive book sale before heading in for session one.

I’ll just thumbnail the conference in this post, then if I’m motivated I may post more in depth in future posts. If you want to get a good summary of the conference speakers, go to challies.com. Amazing how much info he’s got on there.

The opening night speaker was David Wells; he’s a professor at a seminary in Massachussets, a charming older British gent who spoke on The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World. Good stuff.

After the opening session I walked 8 blocks or so over to Block E to meet several folks from the dot net. It was fun to get to meet these people face to face; Erik and Rhea, Mike and Rachel (and little 3-week old Emma), Rae and Amy, and Jamie.

Saturday morning brought a continued quality slate of speakers: Voddie Baucham, Tim Keller, Mark Driscoll, and Don Carson. They were very good, excellent, best of the conference, and somewhat academic, but still thoughtful, respectively.

We took off right after Don Carson spoke in the evening and high-tailed it back to Iowa. Richard still had to be at church for Sunday morning; I got my brother Andrew to lead music for me so I could sleep in. Thanks bub!

Things are changing

I made this announcement after both services at Noelridge today. I didn’t read from a script, so this isn’t verbatim, but is the gist of the message I had for the folks.

After much prayer, thought, and discussion, I have come to the decision that the best thing for me and my family right now is that I step back from my role as the worship leader here at Noelridge. Now, that’s not a fun announcement to make, but let me explain a little bit.

The key factor playing into this decision is time. This hit home the most to me when I recently realized that my current life schedule of work and ministry is the same or busier than it was seven years ago when we moved to Cedar Rapids. However, in those seven years God has blessed us with two little girls. And while Becky’s schedule has changed drastically since the girls were born, my schedule hasn’t changed at all. And it needs to.

I also want the time to be able to get involved in community things. My entire social life and structure has been within the church, and that’s not good. I need to have the time and freedom to be able to be involved in the “real world”, to reach out to my community. You have also entrusted me with a role as an elder here at Noelridge, and I want to make sure I have the time to do that well.

Let me emphasize that we are not going anywhere. Noelridge has been a great blessing as our home church for seven years now, and our desire is very much to stay here, I will just be in a different role. Sunday mornings will look at bit different; we have many other talented musicians in the church here who are capable of helping with music, and we will be calling on them. Worship team may also look different for a while, we’re still having discussions on that.

So thank you for letting me lead these past years, and for understanding as I move to fulfill responsibilities in a new season of my life.

It is a big relief to get this off my chest and officially announced. I’m looking forward to see how God will use the folks in the church to fill in and minister in different ways.

Spartan Fund Run 5K

Last Saturday I ran in my first-ever 5K, the Solon High School Spartan Fund Run. They had a few hundred folks show up, many to do the half-mile and mile walks, another 83 for the 5K, and mabe a few dozen for a 10K. My sister Rebecca had agreed to run it with me, so we got up early and headed down on the 30-minute drive to Solon.

The race was done well; the organization was good, the t-shirt design was pretty decent, and they had procured a bunch of donated food which was good as a late breakfast after the run.

The one thing this 5K had that I hadn’t trained for was hills! I didn’t realize how flat my neighborhood course is until I got out there and had long uphill climbs at both the beginning and end of the race. And the last half-mile not only did you have to go uphill, but you were running directly into a 15 mph wind. But, we toughed it out. There were 83 competitors in the 5K, and I came in 53rd in a time of 31:12. Rebecca came in 69th in about 35:00. (Reba, leave your exact time in a comment and I’ll fix it here.) I didn’t get under 30, which had been my goal, but at least it was a good test.

I think I’ve got the bug; I’m looking for another race around here yet before the season is over. The one that’s reasonably close and on a day I could make it isn’t a 5K, though - it’s a 5-mile. I’m not sure if I’ll be ready for that by November 12 or not.

Don't know much about... anything!

Last night I took the opportunity to visit Conversation Cafe, a discussion group at a local coffeehouse that is led by my pastor. The guest speaker for the night was Rick, the minister from the local Unitarian Universalist (UU) church. It was, to say the least, an interesting night.

Rick is an older single man who has a fascinating life story. He has at various times in his life been a New York City taxicab driver, a journalist, a lawyer, and a teacher, in addition to being a minister for the past 15 years. He shared some of his beliefs and perspectives on spirituality, and it was quite a grab bag. He is an agnostic, but chooses to believe that God exists. He is happy with belief in things that he can see, feel, touch, and quantify, but is really unwilling to make truth judgements outside of that experience.

Rick told us that UUs are “sin shy”; they would acknowledge that there is some human behavior that just seems “evil” and that we can’t explain any other way, but that for most human actions that seem to be “sin” there is some other more useful explanation for their behavior, be it conditioning, circumstance, or something similar. He told us that the UU church has no creed, which is “actually harder than having a creed”, because you have to figure things out for yourself. Each person at that church can define God to be whatever they want God to be.

There was a decent bit of discussion throughout the night, but I felt like on the key questions he either didn’t understand quite what we were asking, or was quite skilled at dodging them. I tried to ask about one major conflict I saw in his thinking; maybe I didn’t phrase the question well. But I was trying to ask this: in one breath you say that God is whatever you make him to be, that your observations and reason are the definers of truth and reality for you. But in the next breath you admit that you are human, with a finite understanding, uncertainty, and weakness. Isn’t there a conflict there? Doesn’t that make your “truth” weak and uncertain? Doesn’t that make God weak and uncertain? I’m not sure he really understood the question; basically he just agreed that yes, he is human, and uncertainty is part of the human condition.

My heart breaks for this man who is so close to understanding some things, but still so far away. He spoke very candidly about having, in years past, a drinking problem. And it frustrated him greatly, because he saw it as a “moral failure”, and couldn’t figure out how to get past it. Thinking of it as a moral failure “wasn’t useful” and “didn’t take you anywhere”. So he associated with some folks who encouraged him to see the drinking problem as a sickness rather than a moral failure, and he decided to accept that “truth” since it was useful, and allowed him a path to move on. Rick is so close; if only his eyes were opened to see that he is right, that sin (aka “moral failure”) is a dead end, and that we as humans are stuck. If only he could understand that the reason Jesus came, died, and rose again was to solve that sin problem. My prayer for Rick will be that he can come to faith in a God larger than his understanding, and know the grace that is greater than all our sins.

This 'n' that

This weekend wasn’t too busy, but I wasn’t on the computer, so no blog updates.

Rebecca and I ran in the Solon Fund Run 5K on Saturday and did OK. I didn’t hit my goal of sub-30-minutes; I finished in 31:12. I’ll blame it on a 10 mph headwind and a long uphill the last half mile. Still, it was a lot of fun, and I’m looking for another race to sign up for yet this fall. I’ll do a full post with pictures when I get the chance.

Watched a bunch of football over the weekend, the Hawkeyes won, setting up a bit showdown with Ohio State in a couple of weeks, but the Huskers couldn’t score the upset over USC. Not that I expected them too, but it would’ve been cool.

Now it’s Monday and back-to-work. I’m going to start working on some new stuff, though, so that should be interesting. Gotta brush up on my C++ coding skills - haven’t used them since school!

Oh, and I’m looking forward to next weekend - I’ll be heading up to Minneapolis along with Pastor Richard to the Desiring God 2006 National Conference. The list of speakers:

  • David Wells
  • Don Carson
  • Voddie Baucham
  • Tim Keller
  • Mark Driscoll

And of course John Piper. I can’t wait.

Last training run

Well, my last training run before the Solon 5K on Saturday. I woke up before my alarm this morning (no small feat when the alarm is set for 5:10 am!) and headed out on my usual 3.2 mile course. It was a beautiful early morning, chilly and brisk, the sky bright, clear, and full of stars.

For not having run much the past two weeks, my times were ok:

Mile 1: 7:38. A nice brisk pace. Mile 2: 9:59 (total: 17:37). Slowed a bit here, was starting to feel it by about the last 1/4 mile. Mile 3: 10:38 (total: 28:16). That long hill the last quarter mile gets me every time. Total time: 30:39. Didn’t quite get in under 30:00. :-(

My goal for the 5k on Saturday is to get in under 30:00. Should be a fun test.