Category: Longform
You are viewing all posts from this category, beginning with the most recent.
Winnie the Dude
On the topic of my previous post, I had this Twitter interaction with Stephen Granade:
But then I started wondering… what about Lebowski?
So then I had to do it - casting The Big Lebowski using Winnie the Pooh characters.
The Dude
This one is pretty obvious. Winnie the Pooh himself gets to play The Dude. His laid-back personality is nicely analogous to Jeff Bridges’ beloved stoner.
Walter Sobchak
Based on my Twitter assertion, I’m gonna commit to it. Tigger is the only Hundred-Acre Wood inhabitant with a personality big enough to play a John Goodman character. Think of it as the grittier side of Tigger. You know he’s not always been such a jovial tiger.
Donny
Who’s gonna be the weasely, nervous sidekick to Tigger’s Walter? I think it’s gotta be Piglet.
The Big Lebowski
A large, pompous man with a big attitude? Owl gets to play this role, no question about it. And then to serve his needs:
Brandt
This nervous young assistant (played brilliantly by Philip Seymour Hoffman in Lebowski) goes to Rabbit. You can just see him puttering around straightening all of Lebowski’s photos and trophies outside his office.
Minor Characters
- With Kanga being the token female in the Hundred-Acre Wood, we’ll give her the role of Maude Lebowski.
- Christopher Robin would have to paste on a mustache and work on his Texas accent, but we’ll give him the role of The Stranger.
- And where’s Eeyore in this whole thing? Based on his general outlook on life, I think he’s one of the Nihilists. However, as my friend Andy said:
https://twitter.com/The_Pulpiteer/status/530449494027296769
O Bother, Where Art Thou?
You gotta love this: an artist created movie drawings based on movie title typos found on Reddit.
This one is titled “O Bother, Where Art Thou?”
I’m thinking a Coen Brothers / Winnie the Pooh mashup has potential.
Living the Bachelor's Life
My wife and kids have been gone for the past two days. They planned a trip to visit Grandma for dates where I had planned to be on a business trip. The business trip got cancelled, but the trip to Grandma’s remained. So, for the past two nights I’ve had the house entirely to myself. As far as I can recall, this is the first time such a thing has happened since we’ve had kids.
So how have I lived it up as a bachelor for the past two days?
- Worked late both days
- Read a book while eating out at my favorite restaurant one night
- Take-and-bake pizza the second night (hey, I got to choose the toppings I wanted!)
- Rented two DVDs from the local video store and proceeded to watch other movies on Netflix instead
I have managed to get the trash out on the correct day, the dishes washed, and the mail brought in from the mailbox. Haven’t done much else, though.
The house is really quiet with everybody gone. I’ve burned through more podcasts in the past two days than in the prior two weeks just to have something to break up the silence. I think the cat is taking it harder than I am - he has actually acknowledged my presence these past couple of days, and while he still refuses to sit on my lap, he has been willing to sit up on the top of my chair while I’m sitting watching TV.
The family returns to the house this afternoon, and all the lovely noise and chaos along with them.
I wouldn’t want it any other way.
Yeah, I only gave Augustine''s "Confessions" 4 stars
I went on a quick business trip this week which gave me several hours of airplane time to do some reading. I finished up both Confessions by St. Augustine (a foundational bit of Christian theology from a millenium ago) and The God Who Risks: A Theology of Divine Providence by John Sanders (a rather dense defense of open theism from not too many years ago).
I read a lot, and being the nerd that I am, I keep a log of my reading over on Goodreads. And when you add a book to your shelves on Goodreads, it prompts you to rate the book, using a 1 - 5 star rating system. Being the nerd that I am, I can’t not rate them. And so as I add the books to my “read” shelf and to the shelf for the current year, I also give them a star rating, and those star ratings are automatically tweeted on my Twitter account.
So, back to this week. Not only did I finish both Confessions and The God Who Risks, but I gave them both 4 stars. Having the temerity to even assign a star rating to St. Augustine got me a bit of good-natured flack on Twitter. So I figured it was time (for my own sake, at least) to explain how I assign star ratings. (To the 3 of you who want to continue reading past this point: seek professional help.)
Whether I’m rating fiction or non-fiction, I tend to value similar traits in a book: well-written prose; an engaging topic; a coherent plot or argument; an appropriate length. I’ve gotten choosier over the years and more willing to give up on lame books. (It’s getting harder and harder to find fiction that’s worth my time.) When I’m reading non-fiction, and particularly theology, my rating isn’t based at all on the relative importance of the work in history (I’m actually not well-qualified to judge that) or whether I agree with the position being argued. I will base my rating, though, on how even-handed the author was in argument, how well I felt like the case was made, and how well the book kept my interest. I also like to reserve 5-star ratings for books that are really top-notch, can’t-beat-em volumes. The ones that make a significant impact on me, that I want to read again or buy copies for other people.
So, Augustine got 4 stars for Confessions. The translation I read (downloaded for free from Project Gutenberg) was a little big of a slog, but significant chunks of it were (in my untrained opinion) quite brilliant, and kept me thinking. Definitely glad I read it. Quite certain I don’t have the seminary education I’d need to understand how it molds the next thousand years of Christian thought.
But Sanders also gets 4 stars for The God Who Risks. It’s also a bit of a slog. (At one point in the text he refers back to an earlier section in the book by its section number, something like 3.4.6.2-5. That’s some serious outlining going on.) Still, Sanders makes a reasonable argument for openness and I felt like he dealt fairly with the topic and opposing viewpoints. I don’t know that I completely agree with him, but I’m glad I read the book and gained a better understanding of that perspective of the topic.
Mid-way through writing this post I went and counted up the number of 5-star reviews I’ve given on Goodreads. Of 530-ish books I’ve read, I’ve given 5 stars to about 70. (That’s more than I would’ve thought if you’d asked me.) I’ve given 5 stars to more non-fiction than fiction; some history and biography, a lot of theology, and a bunch of classic fiction. Upon reflection, does Augustine deserve 5 stars for Confessions? Yeah, probably. Maybe I should go do a re-read and see if I have a better appreciation for it after another go-round. On the other hand, maybe if I’m allowing myself the cheekiness of assigning reviews at all I shouldn’t be ashamed of just assigning scores as I see them.
In the end, I’m glad to have that list of books and the associated ratings, if only to look back and remember some favorites, help me recommend books to others, and to find some re-reads. And, I suppose, because I’m a nerd. Somethings never change.
10 years of blogging
The first post on this blog was written on October 29, 2004, in typical new-blogger fashion noting that I had a new blog. Over the past 10 years I’ve written 1597 posts, squashed innumerable spam comments, migrated themes a few times, and even tried a non-Wordpress blog engine for a bit.
10 years ago I was still in my 20s, had only one child (a baby), was leading music at a little Baptist church, writing software for my employer, and had been in the first home we owned for about a year. Today I’m much closer to 40, have three kids all now school aged, lead music at a bigger EFCA church, still work at the same firm though I haven’t written a line of airborne code in years, but we’re still in that same little house.
I’m not really sure why people still read my blog; I’m an inconsistent writer and go on far too much about music, books I’m reading, and generally nerdy stuff. I’ve passed my theo-rage-blogging phase, so I’m not likely to get linked by any of those folks any more. (Pretty sure my biggest day in terms of visits was a Saturday that Rachel Held Evans tweeted a link to something I wrote. That’ll likely never happen again.)
I have no idea what blogging will look like another 10 years from now, but assuming it’s still around in some form I imagine I’ll still be doing it. After all, where else can I narcissistically blather on with my own image staring skeptically at me from the sidebar and delude myself into thinking that people read it and find it meaningful?
Ruiz: First Church of Authenticity and Trends
Miguel Ruiz, over at Internet Monk, has this gem:
If you can indulge me a moment of satire, what if the impression we sought to give our communities for the reason our church exists looked more like this:
“Grumpy people, bored or frustrated with life, mundane diet of dirges, dull worship, droning sermons, focused on just surviving, burnt coffee, constricting atmosphere, hiding behind a mask of formalism, and little activity outside of Sunday morning. What kind of a God would want us? Join us on Sunday to hear all about the wonderful love of a crucified Savior. We might bore you to death, but you’ll be in good company!”
The whole piece is worth a read.
A few thoughts on Mark Driscoll's Resignation
Mark Driscoll resigned today from the pastorate of Mars Hill Church in Seattle. Driscoll has been embattled in several controversies over the past year including allegations of plagiarism, verbal abuse of staff. For the past several weeks he had been on a leave of absence while a small group of Mars Hill leaders investigated a long list of charges brought against him by many former church pastors, elders, members, and staff.
Driscoll’s resignation is he latest blow to a church already staggering under the recent closure of several campuses and the resignations of many other pastors and staff.
I will continue to pray for Driscoll, his family, and the many people who have been hurt by his words and actions over the past years. I hope this can be the first step in a process of healing and reconciliation for all concerned.
That might be a good place to stop this post, and yet there is more I think it’s worth saying. Perhaps you may think it uncharitable to say any more, but I think not. I get no pleasure out of Driscoll’s resignation, and want to hope that this is really his first step on the road to repentance. And yet to be as wise as serpents we should consider what he said as well as his actions.
Driscoll’s resignation letter is addressed to the Mars Hill board of investigation, but was clearly written with a broader audience in mind. In the letter Driscoll didn’t confess to anything that hadn’t been addressed before.
I readily acknowledge I am an imperfect messenger of the gospel of Jesus Christ. There are many things I have confessed and repented of, privately and publicly, as you are well aware. Specifically, I have confessed to past pride, anger and a domineering spirit.
A couple of thoughts here: first, that we are all imperfect messengers of the gospel. Which makes this a very non-specific confession of something that he doesn’t even identify as sin. Yes, he reiterates confession of ‘past’ pride, anger and a domineering spirit, but doesn’t address any of the multitude of very specific charges that have been levied against him. Second, he doesn’t address the plagiarism or the use of a quarter million dollars of church money to get his book on the NYT Bestseller List.
Driscoll still seems to be blaming others a lot for the situation:
many of those making charges against me declined to meet with you or participate in the review process at all.
And later:
Recent months have proven unhealthy for our family—even physically unsafe at times…
While these statements may be true, they seem to be deflecting attention from his faults and calling attention to his accusers. This hardly seems like a contrite spirit of repentance.
In addition, he says his resignation is not because he did anything wrong, but because “aspects of [his] personality and leadership style have proven to be divisive within the Mars Hill context” and it would be best “for the health of [his] family, and for the Mars Hill family, that we step aside”.
He also emphasizes that there haven’t been any charges of anything criminal, [sexually] immoral, or heretical, which would disqualify him from ministry. The Mars Hill board who investigated him also state that he is still qualified for pastoral ministry. My question here is how the scope of qualification has been narrowed so far that only crime, sexual immorality, or heresy will disqualify you. Consider 1 Timothy 3:
Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?) He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil’s trap.
This is a sobering text for anyone considering a call as an elder. But if we truly believe these are the qualifications for the office, Driscoll, by his own admission in many cases, is disqualified.
As a friend of mine noted, this move by Driscoll also allows him to leave on his own terms, and to suddenly place himself outside of any structure that could hold him accountable. (This, too, seems to have been a pattern of Driscoll’s over the years.)
It will be interesting to see what becomes of this situation over the coming months. This isn’t the end of difficulties at Mars Hill; there are still the Global Fund shenanigans to deal with that may yet bring additional charges. Will the neo-Reformed types who once championed but more recently distanced themselves from Driscoll take this opportunity to now declare him again fit for ministry and bring him back into the regular rotation of conferences and book deals? Or will there be a longer-term awareness that there is confession, repentance, healing, and reconciliation that needs to occur?
If you’ve read this far and think I’ve been unfair to Mark, take a few minutes and go read some of the other statements of confession that have come from Mars Hill pastors: Lief Moi, Jeff Bettger, Kyle Firstenberg… Then compare them in detail and tone to what Driscoll is saying. One of them is not like the others, and we should not be afraid to ask ourselves why.
Let’s continue to pray for the Mark Driscoll and his family, for Mars Hill Church, and for all those who have been affected, both positively and negatively, by Driscoll over the years. God’s heart is for grace, healing, and reconciliation. Ours should be, too.
Sure, *my* story is complex, but yours?
This article over on CT is so much more than its title - “What not to say to a Dad of 4”. The nut graf:
This is one of our our greatest failings in the modern internet age, that we rightly believe that our own lives are complex things that defy easy comprehension, but fail to extend that same grace to others. When it comes to their lives, especially those with whom we disagree, we suddenly possess the ability to derive a doctorate thesis’ worth of conclusions about their story and motivations, from only the smallest fragments of data. “You follow Marc [sic] Driscoll (or Rob Bell) and John Piper (or Brian McLaren) on Twitter? - Then I know what you’re ALL about.” * disapproving grimace *
Yes, yes, 1000 times yes. I have been guilty of making this judgment myself and have had it made upon me by others. We all need to do better, to extend more grace. Lord, help us do so.
Paul counting his privilege as rubbish - Alistair Roberts' take on Philippians 3
There’s an interesting piece from Alistair Roberts over on Political Theology today. Roberts thinks through Philippians 3:4-14 and has a slightly different perspective than most I’ve read before.
In Philippians 3 Paul recounts his credentials:
If anyone else has reason to be confident in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. Yet whatever gains I had, these I have come to regard as loss because of Christ. 8 More than that, I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord…
I’ve typically read and heard this taught as Paul recounting all of his accomplishments, and then recognizing that his good works were worth nothing compared to knowing Christ. But, Roberts suggests, we should recognize that much of what Paul recounts here isn’t a result of his work, but of his position from birth. Roberts draws a striking analogy:
If the identity that Paul is describing here is not that of the classic legalist, what is it? I believe that an analogous sort of identity could be found in the patriot. Paul wasn’t that unlike the patriot who takes pride in the fact that he is a true American (as opposed to all of those unwelcome immigrants). His family’s presence on American soil dates back to the Mayflower. His forefathers fought for their country. From as early as he can remember, he has been steeped in American culture. He has a large stars and stripes flying outside of his house and a wall devoted to portraits of the presidents within. He is a hard worker who is living his own American dream, attending church twice a week, and putting money back into his community. He only buys American products, he devotes himself to studying American history, and has always been politically involved and invested in the wellbeing of the nation. The ‘performance’ of such a patriot isn’t undertaken to ‘earn’ American status, but to demonstrate and broadcast his claims to it, to mark him out from those who aren’t Americans (or are ‘lesser’ Americans), and more fully to ground and celebrate his sense of identity in it.
It’s an angle worth considering in a day when American exceptionalism and Evangelicalism usually go hand in hand.
My musical find for the week: Ólafur Arnalds
I started an Arvo Pärt station on Pandora earlier this week and one of the artists that kept coming up was someone by the name of Ólafur Arnalds. Having never heard of Arnalds, I set off to learn more, and to listen. And I liked what I found.
Arnalds is a young (still in his 20s!) Icelandic composer/musician whose sweet spot musically is sort of minimalist ambient instrumentals. Think Sigur Rós without all of Jónsi’s vocals and turned down a couple notches on the intensity meter. Or think happier Phillip Glass, or what you’d get if you crossed Brian Eno’s ambient stuff with Jim Brickman’s piano and harmonies. However you get there, his music pretty well hits a sweet spot for me, especially as these grey fall days start to fade to winter.
Side note: if you’re pedantic like me, writing about ambient European musicians will also make you learn to find all the accented letter character key codes. You have been warned.