It's not about being comfortable...

It's about being free.

Whom the Son frees, is free indeed. (John 8:36)

It was for freedom that Christ set us free...(Galatians 5:1a).

Unintentionally Christian: Singing to Him

It's suppose to be a guy singing to a girl. But is it just me, or is it like our hearts singing to Him during those times He seems so close in our struggles. It's amazing how freeing it is to see Him, even in those things that are not even meant for "good." He can truly be on our minds in weird places and unexpected ways.

Farther Down
by Matthew Sweet

Into you so far our words go
so much clearer then you hear
into you goes everything I know
no one else knows how I feel

farther down I'm desperate for you
where you never have to know
farther down I'm still without a clue
just something, something takes my pain away

only chance can change my fortune
so I'm not sure why I try
as if I could swim the ocean
as if you could start to fly

farther down I'm desperate for you
where you never have to know
farther down I'm still without a clue
just something, something takes my pain away
something takes my pain away
something takes my pain away
farther down I'm desperate for you
where you never have to know
farther down I'm still without a clue
just something, something takes my pain away
something takes my pain away
something takes my pain away
something takes my pain away

Infancy and Maturity

• An infant consumes, the mature gives.
• Baby eats, a parent provides (feeds).
• Infants are consumers of life. The mature are givers of life.
• The new disciple learns life. The mature discipler points continuing and solely to Life, Christ Jesus.

Tangled Conversation: To the Lens

Here's an old quote from May 19th. "A Christianity anchored in meetings as its foundation for our expression of life will become performance based and focused. Performance based in our expectations of what those meetings should achieve, and therefore performance focused in our expectations of the people attending those meetings." There's a point I'd like to illustrate, shall we play Gracehead-Lawhead? I'll be Gracehead, you be Lawhead.

I'm game. I'll start....okay, let me get in character...and you do know I can never stay in this character more than a few minutes, anyway...okay...ready...Hey, you're saying we should not have meetings.

No.

So we should have meetings, just not focus on performance.

No.

So we should not have meetings, except when necessary.

No.

Then I don't get it, what should we do?

I can't tell you.

What! Why not. You think you're better than me? Why can't you tell me?

I cannot tell you until you can receive it. I cannot tell you until you are willing to see it. Until you are willing to drop your lens, and pick up my lens. The problem wasn't in anything you said, except for one word, should. Get rid of that, and you'll find you have less trouble understanding what I'm saying.

Get rid of should? So you're saying I should stop using should?

Well, let's not turn this conversation into a fugue (hat tip Hofstandler) of self-referencing and strange loops. I'm talking about the attitude and dependency behind the should. There's nothing wrong with the word "should" itself, but it's overuse, well strike that, misuse reveals an inner attitude. And it is this attitude that blinds you to seeing what I'm talking about. I guess the best way I've found into discussing this is to shock you into questioning one of your secret favorite words.

Well, what else is there? There is should and there is should not. There is right and there is wrong. Unless of course you're one of the benighted moral relativists who don't believe there is right or wrong.

Interestingly enough, I'd say the moral relativists are right in that they have it exactly wrong. It's sort of like you have a yard with a fence going through the middle of it. One side is the right side, the other side it the wrong side. What else is there here? What else is obvious, but we miss? It's that there is ground below the yard and sky above it. The moral relativists goes subteranean in their leaning. Rather than right and wrong they define it as whatever you want -- now this is simplistic. There is another way, and it's above the yard, the sky.

Okay, interestingly illustration. What's your point?

For Christian you can be above the yard of right and wrong. Above should and should not is IS.

That's crazy talk!

Not really. Above the Law of Sin and Death is the Law of Life. Above the Law there is the I AM. The one Who is. The Truth. Christ. The one you are in and the one Who is in you.

Intriguing, go on, you have to make some semblance of sense eventually.

Well, does Christ worry about shoulds and should nots? Or does He just do? His character is perfect love, so does He bother with the oughts and ought nots? No, that's ludicrous.

So what are you saying?

A preoccupation with should and should not in Christian community is an occupation NOT with Christ. It is a focus on rules, regulations, etc... which is a self-focus. It is not watching Christ. You cannot be watching Christ if you are watching yourself and others follow the rules.

So what should we do?

When God shows you what He's already done and who you are to Him, then it won't be so much a question of what you should do. You'll see and you'll know.

So meetings?

I don't know, seems kind of small compared to the whole Christ thing?

Yeah, definitely. Get Him, and you've got the meeting question.

Yep, and frankly every other question one could argue. I mean, if you have the one who IS love, what else do you need?

All in all. Christ is all in all.

Couldn't say it better myself.

What if: Ministry

Based on a great article at In Search of a City

"The newborn Christian, who is “unskilled,” may require TEMPORARY nurturing toward this end. I lay great stress on the word “temporary,” as it speaks of the limitation of time or season. In truth, ALL ministry is temp-work. It is not a steady job. It is to work yourself out of a job. It is as quickly as possible to establish the new Christian’s dependency upon Christ—never allowing them to place their trust in anyone but Him."

What if all ministry is temp-work?

What if discipleship is ministry?

What if discipleship is to work yourself out of a job?

What if this job destruction is a death?

What if their intimacy and dependence on Christ is the ALL?

What if our approach is more steered toward having people dependent on us?

Prayer: Always talking?

Are we so uncomfortable with our Father that one of us must ALWAYS be talking? Can we not just enjoy the others being? How amazing would it be if their presence was enough? Or if even knowing that they are there is enough, whether we EXPERIENCE their presence or not.

Christ, the DNA of the Believer, the Church

Had a thought along the lines of biology, let's see where it goes. It is from the DNA that a thing is a thing. That a thing grows, repairs itself, matures, etc... It is because of the DNA that a body recognizes friend or foe.

Each cell in a body constantly goes back to the DNA for all it's activity (yes, I know the mitochondria is a little different, let's not quibble over small matters). Cells that do not die, becomes diseased or worse become cancerous. They do not have the same DNA, they are looking at something else, something that is similar but corrupted. It is a pseudo-DNA, a replacement for the real DNA.

If a cell does not go back to the real, it will go back to something. A replacement...an idol perhaps?

It's a metaphor, and a good one for the believer as well as the church, no?

Why we want our relationships to be painful, and what it tells us.

Relationship Stacks
Let's suppose your problems with others are peeves. Let's say you can hold a list or stack of 12 pet peeves about a person. Suppose they change the top one. Are you happier? Yes, for a short period of time, but the 2nd worst peeve now pops up to become the first, and the bottom of the stack is empty space. Well that empty space is easily and naturally filled by you. Remember you could only hold 12 pet peeves at a time, you have an empty compute cycle, an empty bin, a vacuum. Spend 5 more minutes with the person and sure enough, number 12 will pop into the stack. So there is no real improvement in the relationship dynamic at all.

Why? Self-centeredness. Sure they "fixed" their problem but you still have to same stack, just a different mix. It's the same thing, it's the same song, a different beat. It's a remix, it's a cover, but it's the SAME thing.

Relationship and love -- it's about looking beyond and not on the stack. It is not having a stack, for is love a recorder of wrongs? Why? Because love does not NEED the other person to give back, to transact. Love is from one already satisfied. If you are not already satisfied then the relationship is not love, it is use. Now there is mutual use, it's called business. And in relationships it is usually referred to as prostitution (I use this illustration for shock value, it's sometimes useful to amp the volume on the mundane to ear-piercing decibels). But in order to truly love one party must be satisfied or at least their source of satisfaction is not found in any way upon the object of their love, with the other party. Now they are truly free to shower their object (the other party) with true love. Unconditional. Whether there is anything intrinsically loveable about the object is immaterial.

So in our relationships how can we DO this? We cannot. Are you completely satisfied in and of yourself? Are you not dependent on sooo many things physically, mentally, financially, and emotionally? So a system based on needers will find that none are filled, none satisfied (current pop culture just makes it obvious, but we've been building the system since we started eating weird fruit in nice places).

No, we cannot look to one another, nor to creation for our needs, for our true needs to be met. We look to God, who DOES NOT NEED US. He DOES NOT NEED ANYTHING. He truly is LOVE because without needing us or anything He created anyway. And so it can only be through a union and a relationship and a walk with Him that true love can manifest. We are vessels of His love. Vessels hold something that comes from the outside and is then placed inside themselves. And when something on the outside sees fit, they dispense what is inside to something outside them. We are vessels of love, for we are temples of God, we are walking epistles, we are earthen vessels holding inside a tremendous treasure (and that treasure is NOT a thing, but a Person).

And so it is only in and through and by Christ that true love manifests. Otherwise it is going to be mutual use or one-sided manipulation. Eventually the mutual use will break down, the business merger diverges and collapses. Eventually the prostitute leaves to go on to the next trick and the John to the next fix. Eventually the object of manipulation is fully tapped and the manipulator moves on to another mark. Either way the party ends.

So why do we want our self-centered relationships to be painful? Because they are not real, they are not in and of Christ. Why would we want an illusion to feel good for anything more than a season (if it didn't feel good at all, we'd never do it; no one, well few, are tempted to become gluttons with Castor Oil, but Pop Tarts, heck yeah I'm tempted and they seem sooo gooood...for a season).

Grace Based Action?

Faith in Him => Rest in Him => Action by Him => Action through us

Random Thoughts: Worldviews

Can a generation capture God? Can they fully see Him in all His manifold wonder? Can they integrate His glory into human language? It is not that they are so much as wrong, but their perception is incomplete and it is proven so by the time the next generation is up and thinking for itself [could be the next mind or worldview]. And so we look back in history and see a progression. Is it into fullness? I don't know, for how can one progress from the finite into the infinite?

A riddle and a parable

The progression of worldviews -- is it that 2nd grade is better than first? Does a second grader have a fuller knowledge of reality than a first grader? Is the second grader closer to knowing more about everything? No, not really. But they are closer to maturity. Maturity does not relate to knowing more -- though we think so. No, it is about being more. And so it is with man and so it is with His church which is in the world but not of it. Both grow side by side and in many ways similarly. Be careful, do not pull them up before harvest lest you pull up the good with the worthless.

A Few Questions

• Should we even have a worldview?
• Should we just be able to engage another's worldview?
• Can our progression be the same song, different beat? What if worldviews were just remixes of the same old song?
  

A Different Perspective on making the RIGHT Decision

Is a child too concerned over whether playing in the sand or playing with toys inside will significantly impact their identity in the future? They know they are safe now and will be safe then. They are confident in their decision because their confidence is not in decision making -- it is in their environment that their parents provide for them to inhabit and their comfort in that, is in knowing their parents. Knowing that their parents love them and care for them and accept them.

It's not that the sandbox or the toys will yield a better future -- no, each will yield abandonment to the moment, an adventure. Parents lovingly let the child choose, for there isn't a right or wrong here -- there is just life. The problem would be not choosing life, not choosing to inhabit it, not choosing to see that they are loved and free.

Does this mean the parents do not guide? Does it mean that they do not let pain or discomfort enter the environment? No, but the parent knows, protects, and provides. There is the marvelous in even the foolish and painful.

Questions: 3 More Quotes from Fischer

From True Believers Don't Ask Why by John Fischer pg. 14

Too many answers, too many connoisseurs.
Too many cancers and too many cures.

----------------

Questions leave us vulnerable, weak, needy. They open up gaping holes in our personality, our theology, or our lifestyle.

----------------

This morning I counted 288 question marks in the book of Job. Many were from the mouth of Job; others were spoken by his counselors who turned out to be much like the side-show con artists of today. "Who is this that obscures my counsel without knowledge?" God said of them. But surprisingly, when God finally speaks in the closing chapters, His answer to Job comes in the form of more questions -- 78 of them, to be exact. Of the 288 question marks in the book of Job, 78 of them belong to God; they are His answers to Job.

Sometimes God answers us with questions -- questions that leave us humbled, awed, speechless, weak, and believing -- believing not because we've found the answer, but because we've seen God. It doesn't matter that we have more questions now than when we started. It matters that we see God, for in the seeing, we discover that the truest answer to all questions is to worship Him.

It's about a Relationship

From True Believers Don't Ask Why by John Fischer, pg 12

"And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like the pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him." (Matt. 6:7-8).

So why bother? Because even though He knows what I need, He doesn't address it until I ask. It's as if the asking and the receiving are only secondary as far as the Father is concerned. he already knows that I need before I ask Him. He simply wants to hear from me, to talk with me. It's a relationship He desires more than anything. All this asking, seeking, and knocking is just an excuse for a nearness God longs for more than we can ever know or fathom. God wants to be friends with us! It is for such a relationship that we were created.

Tangled Conversation: Talking to God

Ever notice how our language changes when we talk to Him? It becomes staid. It's boring, it's almost chanting, you know like a mantra.

Yep, I'm as guilty of that as anyone else.

And then there's our habit of saying one of His names over and over. You know as a vain placeholder while we collect our thoughts. Oh and theology, stating our theology in the prayer. And another thing, why do we have to talk sooooo long.

So is this just a vent session, and you want me to nod and pretend to be interested, or is this a dialogue? I just want to know the rules before I play this game.

Haha. Yes it's a dialogue. Besides as so often is the case, the only reason I "complain" about something is that I recognize it, and the only way for me to recognize it is for me to possess the problem myself. So in this case, yes, I find myself doing all this. So, that being cleared up, shall we return to the points at hand?

Indubitably.

Let's go deeper. So I guess the question is why? Why do we talk this way?

Is it necessarily a bad thing? I mean we are talking to God you know. Perhaps it is a product of our reverence.

Yeah, I could see that, but I don't think that's it. Reverence is not that big a thing with us, or else our behavior would be different. So that's an entirely different issue, though certainly a problem. No, I wonder if our behavior stems from misunderstanding.

How so? Misunderstanding what?

Well...and give me latitude here, I'm just fleshing this out...it's religious. It's us trying to reach up to God. What if He's saying, and has said, "Knock it off. I've come down to you. So I could bring you up to me." In other words, talk to him where you are.

Ooooo that is intriguing, and ripe for discussion. An attitude of faith is not one where we say I can (on my own), but one where we say I cannot, but You can.

Riiiiiiiiight, wait, what? What does that have to do with prayer conversational tendencies?

Just this. We don't have to change, He changed us. We don't have to dress up. He put the robe of righteousness on us. We are His child. The child of a ruler does not address the ruler by their position, but by their relationship. The son or daughter would not say, Mr. President, but would say Daddy.

Yes, yes! That's what I was getting at I think. We pray like we're talking to the President, addressing the office. But why not pray like we are addressing our Father, the person.

So in the relationship of intimate sonship we don't need the accoutrement of pretense?

I don't think we do. Not that the high sounding traditional words and style are wrong or right. It's the attitude behind the actions, which often, but not always, define the word choice in the first place. And the attitude is the atmosphere of our prayers. We have this attitude of fear -- so we use this fearful sterile language. But if we know His perfect love, it will cast out all fear. And corporately we have this attitude of needing to be accepted by our peers -- so we pray in an acceptable stilted manner. But if He's all we want and need, then we are free to be different as He has led us to be so.

But couldn't being conversational be construed as disrespecting Him?

Yep. But He went a long way out of His way to show us how much He loves us. Entering His creation, being subjected to it, being beaten and tortured by it, and finally when the work was complete dying in it [laying down His life]. So to me I don't think He's got this immanence hang up. Now He IS immanent, omnipotent, and omniscient. But what if He's comfortable with all that and doesn't need to be constantly reminded of such? WE NEED TO BE CONSTANTLY REMINDED, not Him. But if in our prayers we are constantly reminding Him, we are really just talking to ourselves, because, again,WE need the reminding, not Him.

So you'd argue that a more conversational prayer would be more in line with the reality of His work and His Person?

Well, not that formally. We are just having a conversation. It's not up for scholastic review. I would say that a more conversational prayer style could INDICATE a heart attitude that is more in line with who we are in Christ, what Christ has accomplished, and Who He truly is. But I'm not advocating a conversational prayer program where one just flips a switch because some elder says we are going to begin praying this new way and then he starts saying, "Whaddup, JC. How is my Lorizzle and Lifizzle? Wanted to rap with you a bit 'bout dis family stress I gots this week..." I would think that as we are brought deeper into an abiding relationship with Him, we'd not allow old prayer traditions to get in the way of expressing our hearts to Him.

Lorizzle and lifizzle?

Lord and life, you need to get out more. You know, developed and popularized by Snoop Dogg. It's like a hip-hop pig latin....oh never mind.

Questions are more of faith...

Trent of Gracehead.com by way of an absolutely marvelous post got me thinking about the whole question/answer thrust in contemporary Christianity. Then today was this post by Robbymac, and I felt the urge to quickly get some thoughts down.

QUESTIONS

Here's a great quote from Christian author and singer John Fischer.

Says Fischer: "Questions leave us vulnerable, weak, needy. They open up the gaping holes in our personality, our theology, or our lifestyle. Questions force an honesty that we are unwilling to confront an honesty that requires us to live with our lives unresolved. We don't like that, especially when we're trying to sell a theology that Christianity is the answer to every problem we face."

With questions you have relationship. With questions both parties lean toward one another. If one knows the answer, in love, they may whisper it to you, or they may, knowing you, illustrate it in such a way that you may grasp it, or they may come back with another question that guides your thinking/searching/knocking. And if they do not know, in love, they think and reason with you. With love, there is no dismissal, there are no nice pat you on the head pleasantries that mean "Silly little child, you just don't get it, listen to the adult folk more, learn more, and then we can have a conversation when you've caught up." With love there is engagement, the temporary intertwining of lives and minds.

Finally the faith aspect. Questions are the mental posture of reception. A true question is not trying to score points, for any such matter is a deception. For in doing so one is really disguising a statement in the form of a question. Now there are many times when this "tactic" is necessary, but one should be wary of its use towards God the Father (not that He'll zap you, it's simply a pointless activity). But true questions have the posture of not knowing, not being sure, not able, all the realities that we have apart from Christ. Questions often are a representative of faith reception. They are coming to the One Who is the Truth. Coming for revelation seeing the Way in a new way, a deeper way. Through questions we get go deeper, through questions we go through.

ANSWERS...

Are where there is usually disengagement. Not that answers are bad in and of themselves. Answers and questions are simply tools. Just as fire is so, any tool can be misapplied or used malevolently. That being said, our focus on having the answer, on being propositionally right, on having our proof-texts all lined up, more often than not, does some violence to our relationships. It ends discussion and dialogue. It is a method to lord over another because you have superior knowledge therefore you are of higher worth or deserving of greater honor. More often than not our answers are not from an attitude of love (not that WE ourselves can drum up this attitude by our own self-effort BTW), but from pride or some other insecurity.

The faith issue. Having a lot of answers often means having a lot of pride. There is a strong correlation -- BUT IT'S NOT 1:1. There are many wise people who have plenty of answers, but those who know Love and do love they don't have a strong bent as some of us (like me) seem to find a way to show how much we know.

So often we connect knowing with answers, but is that always the case? Do the ones..using a natural parable here...who deeply know some thing, the artists, the genuises, can they give an answer to much of what makes them great in our eyes. They may know the path that got them there (their history) but more often than not their response is not an answer but a shrugged shoulder, "I just do," or the powerful "I just am." And then the advances we esteem, they are not from our greats who had the answer, no, they were from the ones who asked better questions. Through better questions they were opened to becoming closer to the object of their purpose.

So can it be with us who follow Christ? Is He not our object, individually and corporately? Perhaps, we know the Way (Christ Jesus, a person) NOT through answers, no, but how about beginning to know the Way through the humility of questions?