Rosa Parks and Birmingham in 2005

From December 1, 1955, to the passing of Mrs. Rosa Parks this week, the struggle to eradicate racial divides in Alabama has remained at the forefront of the minds of many in the United States. When one thinks of the Civil Rights Movement, Alabama is naturally one of the places that comes to mind with the obvious contributions of Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr., only to mention two of many who have worked hard and sacrificed for what is right.

As a transplant to Birmingham only 1 1/2 years ago, I see two Birminghams. The downtown city of Birmingham is a run-down, exhausted city that shows glimpses of a time when the steel industry was booming and the city was thriving. There are efforts underway to revitalize the downtown area, and I hope they succeed, but one has only to drive through on I-65 to make a judgment that is basically true. While the UAB area of downtown is growing exponentially, the future of the center and northern parts of downtown are still up in the air. Downtown areas west of I-65 become increasingly dangerous. When murders are reported on the news, the Ensley area is usually assumed unless otherwise noted.

The other Birmingham is what is commonly called "Over the Mountain." Red Mountain serves as a geographical border between the city that thrived in the early and mid-20th Century and the areas to the south that are now thriving. Red Mountain also serves as the socio-economic divider for the area. Property investments have obviously moved away from the old into new for the metro area over the past 50 years.

Is there a racial divide present in Birmingham? Apparently, yes. Is there an economic divide? Obviously, yes.

While my personal observations are limited (and fallible), it appears that both divides are problematic and tend to fuel each other. Obviously the history of racial segregation has impacted the way that the area is settled. Regardless of skin color, the majority of those who live in middle and upper class income brackets live "Over the mountain," and the majority of those living in poverty live in Birmingham proper.

Life "Over the Mountain" seems to be fairly well adjusted racially. (I'm not saying things are perfect or that there is not progress to continue to seek.) People live and work in harmony, and there are many races represented in the work force. While life may fall short of the average beer commercial ratio of racial perfection, interaction and life seems to be close to arriving at the right place.

Not so in old Birmingham. There are plenty of reasons that could be discussed, but traveling around downtown and areas west of I-65 would lead one to ask whether anything has changed since 1955. I can only imagine what Booker T. Washington would write today, 104 years after his visionary book Up From Slavery if he were to take a walk through the streets of West Birmingham. The poverty is blatant. The crime is daunting. There is a feeling of hopelessness on these streets that calls for fresh thinking and something to be done in 2005.

Something Fishy

Exxon Mobil Profit, Sales Soar to Records
There are lots of questions to ask our beloved oil companies now...

Big Business

Coming Soon to a Church Near You demonstrates how marketing is 'catching on' to the church audience behind the doors of the church.

"Twenty-five years ago, there were fewer than 50 churches in the United States that attracted more than 2,000 people each week. Today, there are more than 1,200. Many boast professional-quality sound systems, large-screen projection systems and comfortable seats that rival those of any commercial theater. Most also have bookstores or gift shops."

I might add that the changing of money and the availability of doves for purchase are also a growing industry within the church.

The rest of the article further turns my stomach.

Heaven, Hell, and the Gospel

Along I-65 between Birmingham and Louisville there are plenty of 'evangelistic' billboards at which to laugh, but a sad reality lies behind the message - a message that choosing heaven or choosing hell is the essence of religion in this world. Jesus does teach quite a bit on the topic of hell, but today the topic has become so distorted that either escaping hell or assuring oneself of heaven seem to have been completely separated from the person of God.

I am reminded of an evangelist (with perfect evangelist hair, of course) who preached a thrilling message on heaven and the wonders of heaven. He preached with passion and great zeal in this first message to our church, and then, having adequately painted a picture of the gloriousness of heaven, he gave an invitation: "Come, now, and you can have heaven." (My paraphrase.)

Removing the message of the Cross, the death and resurrection of the Son of God, the absolute need of mankind for redemption, or the fact that our salvation is supremely for God's glory (not to satisfy our own desires for a better place) is to take the gospel out of the gospel. Just as Scott Slayton has pointed out the lack of an explanation for the invitation given by Joel Osteen, there is an absence of the gospel out there in places where some unspecified religion is being proclaimed.

I certainly believe that the Bible teaches a literal heaven and a literal hell, but making the choice out to be a simple Eternal Choose Your Own Adventure is to present a lie to people. Holding heaven over a person's head like a carrot and then leading them to pray a prayer that equates to the ticket is from the father of lies.

Update:
Speaking of the fire kindled in us by God, Richard Sibbes writes:
"Heavenly truths must have a heavenly light to discern them. Natural men see heavenly things, not in their own proper light, but by an inferior light. In every converted man, God puts a light into the eye of his soul proportionable to the light of truths revealed to him. A carnal eye will never see spiritual things." (from A Bruised Reed)

The Apprentice - As Good as it Gets?

I'm not initially impressed with this 'season' of The Apprentice, the only reality show I watch (and pretty much the only TV aside from sports.) My early favorite is Randal – he's smart and sensible, not so self-absorbed, and educated to the hilt. I think he fits the pattern of the other three winners so far. Trump doesn't seem to hire other 'Trumps.' The reason I'm not impressed overall is that there just seem to be a lot of ridiculous people on the show. Pretty people and abrasive personalities make the ratings better, I'm sure, but there just don't seem to be many that would truly be capable of running a business in Trump world. (My second favorite would be Alla, maybe the truest entrepreneur of the group.)

While George and Carolyn (Trump's 'eyes') are so easily likable, Trump himself is another matter. In some ways I think he is a true representative of the American persona (both good and bad...maybe a topic to flesh out later.)

Accommodation

Accommodate. v. to make fit; adjust; adapt; to reconcile.

Accommodation has long been a dangerous element in people's theology. The church today is no different. One of the antonyms listed by Roget's for 'accommodate' is 'inconvenience.' Churches that ask too much are considered an 'inconvenience,' an inconvenience that people are easily able to overcome:
1. Go to another church that has fewer inconveniences
2. Stay at the inconvenient church, but smooth over (and ignore) what is troubling.

Rather than taking an approach to the Bible and one's subsequent understanding of God that asks: What needs to change about me?, people would rather just accommodate their theology for the areas that they might 'disagree with.' Most churches have lost any notion of authority that has historically (and correctly) come from an authoritative view of Scripture. Christians (I use the term loosely) join churches but hold on to their own understanding of the ways things should be. Concerning the Bible, people read and even study it without being truly open to change within themselves. Maybe that's why there are 1,527,983.75 different theological positions within a church of 500 people.

Rather than working through conviction, our very nature is to figure out another way. We accommodate our beliefs rather than admit that our thinking on a topic is wrong. Very quietly the church is full of Jeffersonian Bibles with pages cut out and verses marked out. Sure, other verses are highlighted and underlined – these are agreeable – "I will live by these," we declare.

Not only on the level of how we live, but our very understanding of God is shaped more by how we think God should be than by what the Bible actually says: "I don't think God is like that" or "I can't believe in a God like that." A person who accommodates the God of the Bible to be the god of their wishes cannot be called "Christian."

Likewise, entire churches and denominations are built on a spirit of accommodation. "Loving" or "compassionate" are usually key terms emphasized as the reason for their convenient interpretation of Scripture. "Acceptance" is more important than any biblical standard of how believers should live. The latest CNN poll on public opinion is their Bible. Their own feelings serve as their 'god.'

How to Cover a Hurricane

Obviously many people are glued to their TV's when a major hurricane threatens. I am usually one of them as a practicing amateur meteorologist. The funniest part, though, in addition to every major news channel, local channel, and the Weather Channel covering every drop of rain and every gust of wind, is the method of Wind-leaning. Even before Hurricane Katrina was finished one of the news crews had compiled a "One Shining Moment" type video of clips of reporters leaning at 10, 25, or even 45 degree angles into the wind. Somehow this method of reporting is one of the most important for conveying to the viewers the strength of the storm. I guess when all of their guesswork as to where and how strongly a storm will make landfall comes together to actually permit a reporter or a full-fledged meteorologist on the beach or in the hotel parking lot where the hurricane is making a severe impact there is a right to do this LEAN of celebration as if to say: "Hey, look at me. I found the storm and it's this bad."

"Another hour deeper in the night
Another mile farther down the road
A man can drive as hard as he can drive
And never get as far as his heart was meant to go."

-Rich Mullins 10/21/55 to 9/19/97

New Wave?

New wave: strategy-coordinator churches.

This article in The Commission describes how churches are being identified as "strategy-coordinator" churches that seek to be directly involved in missions:
"It’s a church that is owning the task of taking the gospel to an unengaged people group,” says Ken Winter of the International Mission Board’s Church Services Team.

Sounds a little biblical to me. Isn't that old fashioned?

It may be old fashioned in a good sense. Churches should be as directly involved in missions as they possibly can. Of course, the churches in the article are Southern Baptist churches, and the International Mission Board is the 'missions' wing of the Southern Baptist Convention. There is some irony to the whole idea, as the very founding of the Southern Baptist Convention has roots in the 1840's when Baptist churches agreed to work together in the effort of mission work forming a cooperative system where many churches would pool resources to support missionaries that a single church probably could not have afforded to support.

Without arguing the good and/or bad of the cooperative program, there seems to be something very healthy about churches sending their own missionaries to specific places to reach the specific people there. The authority that governs such an endeavor is directly located with the sending church. The people praying for the missionaries are those that have helped send them. The church itself gets the opportunity to directly be involved in the work of reaching the nations by sending its own people, whether long term or short term, to help.

According to the article, even smaller churches are involved in this 'new' approach. Money was the issue in forming a cooperative over 150 years ago. Now there are so many churches and missionaries that many churches could afford to send their own. When we consider how our funds are allocated, shouldn't our churches at least be considering this type of work? If we could send a church-planting team to a region instead of remodeling our own multi-million dollar facility, shouldn't we at least consider it? While the IMB currently has over 5,000 career missionaries, I find much more reason to rejoice with the people to which our local church has ties, whether they serve with the IMB or not.

I wrote down a quote from David Penman a few years ago, though I do not recall precisely the source:
"No local church can afford to go without the encouragement and nourishment that will come to it by sending away its best people."

High Country

The view from 'Round Bald' on the Appalachian Trail, Cherokee National Forest near Roan Mountain. The view is of North Carolina. The other direction is a similar view of Tennessee. Photo taken Labor Day Weekend.

The Bible versus Higher Education

To destroy the validity of Scripture is to destroy Christianity. That is precisely why so many in academic circles seek to undermine the authority and the testimony to the complete verbal inspiration of the word of God. While it is one thing to see such an approach in the Religion Department of a secular university, such an attack is even greater and much more detrimental from the inside of supposedly Christian institutions. "Christian" in the description of a college or university breeds a trust among Christian students that they are learning in a Christian environment. However, a line must be drawn when the validity of Scripture is at stake. To this end, I've tried to compile a list of books that help explain the problem and/or give an adequate defense of Scripture:

The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel

The Great Evangelical Disaster by Francis Schaeffer

A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible by Robert Stein

A General Introduction to the Bible by Norman Geisler and William Nix

The Hermeneutical Spiral by Grant Osborne

Scripture and Truth by D. A. Carson and John Woodbridge

Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon by D. A. Carson and John Woodbridge

The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible by B. B. Warfield

Christianity and Liberalism by J. Gresham Machen

Strobel's book gives a great summary of the documentary evidence for the historical validity of Scripture. Schaeffer's book adequately describes what it is stake for Christianity. Stein's book is subtitled "Playing by the Rules" appropriately because it demonstrates how interpretation must be done according to a standard. Geisler and Nix provide a great general overview of the issues. Osborne writes a detailed manual of interpretation. Carson and Woodbridge also provide trustworthy explanations of precisely how interpretation is to be approached. Warfield simply writes a classic (using no less than 4 languages) that serves to defend the Scriptures of the Christian faith. Machen, like Schaeffer, describes much of what is at stake, going so far as to describe those who adhere to anything other than Bible-believing Christianity as some other religion and "not Christianity."

Lord of the Flies

Given a reason, men will be their absolute worst. Or, without a reason to refrain, the utter depravity of humanity rears its ugly head.

As the situation continues being reported from New Orleans, both 'life' inside the Superdome and 'life' on the flooded inner city streets have displayed the capability of mankind to perform evil. While some are risking their lives 24/7 to rescue people from danger, some are taking liberties at the absence of enforceable law. Just as in Golding's Lord of the Flies, when the structures of society are removed an inherent evil comes out of some people. The age-old question, 'Who are you when no one is looking?' is being answered by men with guns on the streets and people shamelessly stealing anything they can.

Part of this scenario we've all seen before. Every time a riot breaks out in a city, some people flock to the scene to start fires, flip vehicles, and break windows. Looting is a given. Sometimes the occasion is a feeling of injustice. Sometimes the riot starts as a celebration for a sports championship. Either way the event serves as an excuse for some men to go to the extremes that only the laws and structure of society hold back on a regular daily basis.

The heart is more deceitful than all else
And is desperately sick;
Who can understand it?
-Jeremiah 17:9

A Telling Image

Hurricane Katrina by satellite @ 5:44 pm on 8/29/05

Paid Admission to Worship

From al.com:
[Joel] Osteen and his wife, Victoria, will be leading a worship service at the Birmingham-Jefferson Convention Complex Arena in Birmingham on Tuesday, Aug. 30, at 7:30 p.m. Tickets are $10 each through Ticketmaster, with information available on his Web site, www.joelosteen.com.

1. All other problems with Joel Osteen's self-help theology aside, how can he be on tour and charge admission for 'worship.'

2. This is not worship. If you want to feel good, watch The Natural, don't go listen to Osteen's smile.

the deth of 'death' in the english langwege

"i kno u r gona b there..."

I joke about it when I see it, but the reality of the impact of the language of instant messaging (IMing) is becoming increasingly evident. I see it at work. I see it in blogs. Not only the extremely abbreviated spelling of words (never, ever use a double consonant like 'bb' or 'nn' in the middle of a word) but also the increased use of a developing shorthand full of acronyms. There is no punctuation unless, of course, to illustrate some point or draw a picture. Words are kept to a minimum (you try typing on your phone!) and short words are preferable to longer ones.

Before you cry "foul" thinking about the possible direction the English language is heading, remember from where we've come. Most words that we use today that have been around from early English have been transformed to some degree...a letter here...drop an ending there. Ever read Beowulf? How about 'King James' English? The language evolves to be more practical and usable, right?

While I find myself fighting the trend toward watered-down English, I can also admit that some change is good. Maybe we can quit using all those silent letters like 'gnat' and why do we need both a 'c' and a 'k' in 'kicking'? For pronunciation, you say? English hardly follows the rules. Why do 2 z's make 'pizza'? Why not write it like it sounds, 'peetza' or something?

Though lacking the vision to see what is next in the technology of communication, I suspect there are going to be other radical innovations in the next few years that will further alter how we communicate. I'm not ready to throw my Harbrace Handbook away nor to write off the Chicago Manual of Style just yet, but we do have to realize that language is never static.

What makes something "Christian"? ---> Some interesting thoughts over at TruePravda.
As for a vehicle, it is obviously that little fish thing, right?

The Da Vinci Code: Using Fact in Fiction

How should fiction deal with history and fact?

There are plenty of places to find out about the discrepancies in Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code, but one of the questions that should be posed concerns the genre of writing and the subsequent standards for the handling of history and fact.

Novels are fiction. No matter how true to life and to history a book may appear the fact that it is fiction makes it a work of literary art. When Tom Clancy writes a book on the topic of submarines he is held to a different standard than when he writes a fictional novel about a submarine. Clancy does not write Alice-in-Wonderland-type books. While fantastic, the characters in his books are supposed to be real people and the events are supposed to be feasible.

The problem that is encountered concerns the right of the author to use both historical fact and to create history that accords with the story. In Dan Brown's case, he masterfully intertwines the two. His characters Langdon and Teabing are supposedly scholars, and so their views and teachings in the book are treated as academic fact.

Personally, it seems ethically acceptable in making up a fictional story to altar the facts so long as one is not slandering a real person – but there would be many obvious gray areas in between when it comes to the possibility of offending persons or groups. The danger is only truly present when a novel is written in a genre and style that conveys that the events taking place are true to life, realistic fiction.

For Dan Brown, the popularity of The Da Vinci Code brought the issues to the forefront as Americans have made the book a bestseller for a record-setting length of time. Many Christians have read the book and find it interesting. Many Christians have also read the book and failed to distinguish fact from fiction, and therein lies the problem. Much hype has surrounded Brown's use of theories and fictional historical ideas to embellish the novel. He is certainly not the first fiction (nor non-fiction) writer to take factual events and distort them to fit his story. He will not be the last.

Making up facts for the NY Times is wrong. However, making up facts for a work of fiction seems to fit well with the definition of fiction. As much as I (and history) strongly disagree with the presentations made by Langdon and Teabing in the novel and with Brown to the extent that his characters represent his own views, I do not fault him for writing in this style. In fact, for a man whose worldview appears to be significantly different from a biblical worldview, this novel is precisely what I would expect.

The Pool of Siloam and the Usual Suspects

The L A Times is conveying a report that a pool has been discovered in Jerusalem that is thought to be that of the gospel of John where Jesus instructed the blind man to go and wash (John 9:7). After he washed he came back seeing.

Whether this is actually the biblical pool of Siloam is yet to be determined and may never be actually "proven." My point is not about Archeology nor about the pool itself. Rather, it is concerning the immediate response found in the article by a liberal theologian:

"Scholars have said that there wasn't a Pool of Siloam and that John was using a religious conceit" to illustrate a point, said New Testament scholar James H. Charlesworth of the Princeton Theological Seminary. "Now we have found the Pool of Siloam … exactly where John said it was."

First of all, it is common knowledge that liberal theology doubts many if not all of the miracles of the Bible. Just as Charlesworth of Princeton confirms, so-called "scholars" believe only what they wish of the biblical account.

Secondly, in terms of archeology, liberal theology takes the approach that anything that has not been found, dated, and 100% confirmed as having existed must not have really existed. Whether a town, a building, a pool, or a person in the Bible, liberal theology has no place except as metaphorical usage for any reference on which they cannot put their hands. Case in point, if the 'pool of Siloam' hasn't been uncovered, it must not have really existed - when John wrote this account, he was simply making an illustration about the washing.

Finally, and quite revealing, is that response of Charlesworth to the report. "It is the pool!" Now, the article may be taking Charlesworth out of context, but it would appear that he is now perfectly willing to accept that this new find is the pool of John 9:7. Where is his skepticism now? I, a conservative, am highly skeptical every time a discovery like this is made. I would love to eventually accept that this is the same pool mentioned in John, but I need a little more evidence. The irony is obvious, is it not?

Voting for Facts

Notice that at Accuweather.com there is a daily trivia question. A few days ago, for instance, the question asked something along the lines of which of these East Coast cities had the least rainfall average for the month of July. Then, as the reader, you are asked to "vote" for Boston, New York, Philadelphia, or D.C.

Voting, however, is by definition an expression of a choice or an opinion. After one 'votes' at Accuweather, the "results" are shown as a graph presenting how many 'votes' each answer has received. The problem is that no matter how many 'votes' any city receives, the answer is a concrete fact. Even if every person votes for Philadelphia, if Boston receives more rain in the historical records, then the answer is "Boston" (or whatever the correct answer was.)

Certainly this is just a matter of terminology at Accuweather, as weather history at least is a matter of scientific record. (Now, weather prediction is a whole other thing...)

If you take a look at the larger framework of factual reporting, such polling has become central to the presentation of the news. News organization are constantly barraging their viewers and readers with poll results than sometimes border on the absurd. You can poll people about whether or not they like to eat cheeseburgers. Polls, however, have no place when dealing with facts. It does not matter how many people 'vote' that Iraq is or is not a threat to the United States any more than we can vote on whether or not men landed on the moon.

Similarly, public opinion has become the supreme foundation for morality. If a CNN poll shows that 90% of Americans approve of stealing, then the viewer is supposed to understand that this is the majority and thus the right way.

Democracy is a great system in which to live, but the modern understanding of opinions has taken over our understanding of truth and facts. We are rewriting reality faster than the Soviet Union rewrote their own history.

When it comes to facts, or when it comes to morality, there is such a thing as absolute truth, and absolute truth is not subject to any vote. If the temperature today is 94, a 99% vote does not change the facts or make it any cooler.

Like Books?

Read this article about Michael Gaydosh (3rd article on page) and visit his company's website: Solid Ground Christian Books where he is bringing back some of history's great books.