MENU

Culture
Category

On June 13, 2014 By In Culture, Family and Children

I’ve Stopped Yelling. Can I Stop Scowling?

by Marc Hays

Over a year ago, I stopped yelling at my children. The urge to vent my displeasure became increasingly distasteful until I could hear myself snap at them just before I did it. Whatever the child had done, whatever infraction had occurred, ceased to kindle my ire like the thought of hearing myself lash out at them. Accompanying this conviction, my sin decreased. Go figure. It is encouraging to no end for a man to see that the deeds of his flesh can be mortified as Scripture says they must and for a man, alive in Christ, to experience the Holy Spirit at work, bearing good fruit on formerly dead limbs.

As my desire to shout the fear of God into my children waned, I found an increasing zeal to see my children flourish. Replacing the idle threats about their doom, should they fail to mend their ways, was an increase in instruction concerning righteousness and sin; wisdom and foolishness; repentance and forgiveness. I yell less, if at all, which is good, and instruct more, which is better still, but as with most virtues, too much of a good thing is no longer a good thing.

I’ve found that my new virtue has become my new vice, for at some point a father’s instruction becomes a father’s lecture, which at yet another point becomes a father’s tongue-lashing. I am quick with my mouth and hasty in my heart, therefore my words can in no way be described as “few.” Quick with my mouth—speaking before thinking, and hasty in my heart—not patient enough to raise them over a lifetime, wanting to accomplish it all at once. As I lecture, and lecture, and lecture some more, I can see that they go from being instructed, to being irritated, to being bored—anxious to get back to the life that comes at the end of my soliloquy.

If my verbal instruction merely waxed long, there would be less of a problem than there actually is, because along with this extended scolding comes an explicit scowling. My voice is calmer than it once was; I’ve learned to keep the decibels down, which prevents the veins in my neck from popping out as far, but I know that my face tells the story of a dad who is not remembering his own sin at that moment, a dad who is not treating his children the way he wants to be treated, a dad who is not loving his neighbor as himself.

If Jesus is King over every square inch of creation, which He is, then wouldn’t that include every square inch of my face as well? Can I be serious about sin without scowling about it? Can I handle my children’s sin biblically without acting like they’re the first ones to ever do it? Does it help for me to act like I’m surprised that they don’t do everything right all the time, or that they committed this particular household crime again?

Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not behave itself unseemly. It is not rude.

God is patient. God is kind. He does not behave himself unseemly. He is not rude.

When it comes to raising our children in the fear and admonition of the Lord, are we patient? Are we kind? In disciplining our children, do we behave ourselves in a way that would be embarrassing for anyone else to see? That would be unseemly. Even if we’ve stopped yelling, do we berate them with our words? That would be rude.

Children are to respect and obey their parents; parents are to respect and disciple their children. To put it technically, the economic relationship is different, but the ontological relationship is the same. Parents must correct; parents must instruct. Children must take heed; children must amend their ways. This economic reality is one of complementary difference, but ontologically—in our being—we are exactly the same as our children. We are no more image-bearers of the triune God than they are. We are exactly the same in our being—identical.

It is this identity that makes the whole parenting thing work. Can a wolf raise a Mowgli? Probably. Can a wolf identify with a Mowgli? Barely. Can we identify with our children’s struggles and temptations? Yes, indeed. Can we long for their sanctification as we long for our own? Definitely. Can we stop lecturing long enough to think about how we would like to be treated? Can we remember how it feels to be scolded so that we keep our scolding at a minimum and our patient, kind instruction at a maximum? In Christ, empowered by His Holy Spirit, we can, and we must.

Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not behave itself unseemly. It is not rude.<>как продвигать недвижимости

Read more

On June 11, 2014 By In Culture, Theology

Kill Your Idols

Satan is the master of the bait and switch. It is the old game where someone is led to believe they will receive one thing, usually good, and they receive another, usually bad. An example from a while back is where a young lady thought she had won a Toyota car. However, when she went to get her prize she found that she had won a toy Yoda doll instead.  Satan loves to do this. He promises us something great and tells us to pursue it. We believe him and run after what he has promised.  But right at the end he switches the prize.   Satan tempted Adam and Eve to believe that glory waited if they just ate the fruit. Eat this fruit and you will be like God. But what they got was death, alienation from God, alienation from one another, getting kicked out of the garden, and dead son.

Ezekiel 23 gives a terrifying picture of this exact thing.  Israel longs for help from the nations surrounding her.  Instead of trusting in God, she listens to Satan and runs to Assyria for aid.  Ezekiel says, “She lusted for her lovers, the neighboring Assyrians” (vs. 5, 12).  Like a young woman longing for the arms of a coworker instead of her husband, Israel looked upon the glory of Assyria, all her mighty captains, all her great warriors, all her great power and she left her husband, the Lord, and slept with Assyria.  However, this did not bring her the satisfaction she expected.  Like the young man addicted to pornography, she found herself destroyed by the very thing she lusted for.  Ezekiel says that Assyria slew Israel by the sword (vs. 10) and that God sent those nations that she lusted after to deal furiously with her, take her children, and strip her naked (vs. 25-26).  Like Adam and Eve in the garden, Israel expected to find glory and deliverance, but instead they found death.  So is the end of all who trust in idols. The idols promise bread, but in the end give us stones.

idol 1

We must kill our idols or they will kill us. Nothing outside of Christ will bring peace, satisfaction, or deliverance. Just like Israel, we love setting up idols, things we lust after that we think will satisfy us. These idols can be another man or woman, a new job, more money, more power, more time, control over other people, a bigger church, children that are holier than anyone else’s, a better education, a better sex life, better friends, a new president, a new congress, etc. etc. etc.  The list never ends. However, these things will not fill us. We will not be delivered or satisfied if we get those things. They are cracked pots that hold no water.  If we pursue them in an ungodly fashion, if we long for them instead of longing for Christ, then we are headed for nakedness and the sword. Idols are merciless.

How do we kill our idols?  We bring them to Christ. We seek his mercy. We confess our adultery with the world. We confess our sins. We believe that he forgives. And we believe that by His Spirit and His Word he will slay our idols.  Only when Christ cuts off the heads of idols can we have true life. The idols promise life but give us only death. Christ promises that if we die, and our idols with us, then and only then can we have life eternal. 

 What happens to our friends, jobs, marriages, sex, churches, money, reputation, etc. when we stop making them idols? What happens to these things when Christ slays them with the sword of his mouth? They become what they truly are: gifts of grace given to us by Christ to enjoy and to use to build his Kingdom.  If we put them under Christ they become a joy and we find satisfaction in them.  If we put them in place of Christ,  beside Christ,  or on the throne with Christ they become beasts that devour us.   We must slay our idols or they will slay us.

<>где можно дать рекламу

Read more

On June 6, 2014 By In Culture

Calvin Didn’t Flinch

by Marc Hays

During my childhood years, my family lived in a 12’ x 55’ single-wide mobile home. When we bought it in 1980 it was already about 20 years old. The plan was to live in that home while my dad built a house on our property. Given the economic recession of the early 1980’s, we never built that house. As my brother, my sister, and I got older, and consequently larger, my dad closed in a front porch to create another bedroom. He completely remodeled the inside of the home over the 15 years that we lived there: drywall, trim, carpets–the whole nine yards. The exterior would occasionally get painted, the roof tarred, and the underpinning, which had rotted from ground contact, replaced. It was a lovely home, and I do not remember being particularly envious of my friends who had nicer homes than we did. However, that doesn’t mean that I was not aware that they had nicer homes than we did.

I can remember being 9 or 10 years old when I went to spend the night at a friend’s house from school. He lived with his family in a small brick ranch home. It couldn’t have been over 1000-1100 square feet, i.e., relatively small, but I remember being enamored by the fact that the house went all the way to the ground. This wonderful home had no underpinning; it had bricks. Its roof wasn’t flat; it had a gable-ended roof with shingles on it. It seemed so sturdy. So strong. Once again, I was not beset by the fact that our home sat upon concrete blocks 2 feet above the ground with the resulting void between floor and earth being hidden by plywood, but that doesn’t mean that I didn’t plan on living in a site-built home when I grew up.

fast_forward

 

 

 

I am now 40 years old, and I own my own house. It is no Taj Mahal, but it is quite lovely. It has a gabled roof with shingles, and the concrete block foundation, sporting a brick veneer, rests upon a couple dozen cubic yards of concrete. It is sturdy. It is strong. And I am blessed to get to live here with my wife and six children.

The other day, my son Calvin and I were making a delivery to some friends who live in a manufactured home community near our house. (Manufactured home community is the new, friendlier way to say “trailer park.”) As we drove away, Calvin saw some children riding their bikes together in the street and exclaimed how much fun it would be live there.

In that trailer park.

In a mobile home.

He saw kids and playtime, while I saw single-wides and underpinning. Instead of possessions, he saw people and didn’t give a second thought to changing from our lovely home in the middle of a 20-acre field to living in a manufactured home community in order to create more opportunities to be with people.

I think Calvin has one-upped me. I truly believe that I could give up everything I have acquired in my life; move back into a single-wide home; and be really, truly happy. But I honestly think that I would flinch when it happened. However, that day–in that trailer park–Calvin didn’t flinch.<>online mobileоптимизация web ов

Read more

On June 4, 2014 By In Culture, Politics

Gay Marriage, Civil Disobedience, and the Christian Future

“Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.” George Orwell, 1984

Jack Phillips is a Christian baker in Lakewood, Colorado. In 2012 Jack Phillips refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. This couple then reported him to to Civil Rights Commission. A lawsuit followed. The judge ruled against Jack Phillips. The Civil Rights Commission has now come back with its ruling, which consists of three parts.

First, Jack Phillips must change his store policies immediately and begin make wedding cakes for gay couples.

Second, his entire staff must attend training on Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws and agree to abide by them.

Third, for the next two years he must submit quarterly reports to show that he has not discriminated against customers based on their sexual orientation.

Jack Phillips might appeal the decision, but it is hard to see how anything will change.

Here are few quotes.

The Commission chairwoman, “You can have your beliefs, but you can’t hurt people at the same time.”

The ACLU attorney, “Religious freedom is undoubtedly an important American value, but so is the right to be treated equally under the law free from discrimination…Everyone is free to believe what they want, but businesses like Masterpiece Cakeshop cannot treat some customers differently than others based on who they are as people.”

The judge, “At first blush, it may seem reasonable that a private business should be able to refuse service to anyone it chooses. This view, however, fails to take into account the cost to society and the hurt caused to persons who are denied service simply because of who they are.”

Let the tearing begin.

1984

So how should we live in this country where the rejection of God’s created order is law? How should we live when those in power want to reshape our minds in ways contrary to Scripture? Here are a few thoughts in no particular order.

First, we are past the live and let live stage (if one ever existed).  The sodomites are not saying, “We will live this way and you live that way and we can coexist.” They are demanding that we publicly accept their sins. Anyone who believes that we can all just get along will soon wake up to find their position overrun.

Second, they will come for our children. How long before the State demands that home schooled children and children in Christian schools get “sensitivity training?” If they can make a business owner train his employees why not a principle his students and teachers? Why not a parent their children?

Third, Christians in all walks of life should expect more traps. Think of Daniel 6. Pastors should expect homosexuals to visit their congregations to see if they are preaching against homosexuality. Christian business owners should expect homosexuals to come in and see if they get turned away.  Christian politicians should expect homosexuals to try and out them in some way. I am not encouraging hand wringing, just open eyes.

Fourth, human sexuality, including male-female roles, marriage, procreation, female ministers, sodomy, abortion, divorce, rape, pedophilia, sexual abuse, transgender, etc.  is the battle line right now in America. There are other issues, but none as pressing as this one. Therefore this is where we must fight.  I am not saying this is all we talk about. And I understand that there are many ways we fight against this wave of immorality, such as love our wives, worship the living God, evangelize our neighbor, teach our children, live holy lives, and preach the Word. But let’s not miss the obvious: one way we must fight is by saying clearly and without apology what God’s Word teaches on these subjects.

Fifth, any pastor or public Christian leader who refuses to speak against these things is a coward.  Again, I am not saying this is all we to talk about or that we speak with malice . But our stance on sodomy, and issues related to it needs to be clear and public.  It our duty to stand in the line of fire, to preach the Word, and to rally God’s people around the truth. A pastor or public leader whose stance on the above issues is vague or unknown is not being a faithful shepherd.

Sixth, pastors and Christian leaders need to teach their people what godly civil disobedience looks like. There is a lot of freedom in how we resist the State’s growing power.  But the time for abstract theological discussion about civil disobedience is passing quickly. We must study God’s Word, meditate on it, pray through it, and study our fathers in the past to learn from them. Then we must teach our people the proper responses to the State. What can we do as Christians? Is there any place to take up arms?  (Maybe those debates about the Revolutionary War and the Civil War are not so arcane after all.) Should we march? Should we keep our businesses open even if there is the threat of police action? Should a Christian business owner reject a homosexual job applicant? What should we do if they come for our children?  What if they come for our guns? Should Christians accept government money in any situation? What should Christian schools do if they are commanded to teach that homosexuality is fine? How should Christian magistrates function? Should Christian soldiers get out or resist from within?  Pastors and churchmen should be leading the charge in answering these and other questions.

Seventh, Christians should expect to lose money, businesses, tax breaks, jobs, etc. for taking a stand against unbiblical sexual practices. The Church and her members need to be prepared for this. We should think long term in our financial dealings so that we can “have something to give him who has need.” (Ephesians 4:28)

Eighth, churches should pray for leaders in corporate worship. I Timothy 2 is clear on this point. Do we pray for our leaders? Do we pray for new, righteous leaders to rise up? Do we pray that God would cast down those who hate his Church? Do we pray for pagan leaders to repent and turn to Christ? Do we pray for that we may lead a quiet and peaceful life in all godliness (I Timothy 2:2)? Do we pray for our leaders by name?

Ninth, Christians need to be known as a peaceful people. Psalm 120:7 says, “I am for peace, but they are for war.” We should be the ones who long for peace. This does not mean we are quiet about everything. Nor does this mean we compromise the Gospel to be at “peace with all men” (Romans 12:18).  But it does mean we are careful about what battles we fight. Young people, of whom I am one, especially need to hear this.  We tend to think that every sin is worthy of fire bombing.  But we need to make sure we are hitting the big targets and not spending days chasing one lone enemy through the forest.

Tenth, we must not despair. Jesus sits on throne. We should act from faith, not fear.  We should not be anxious, worried, fretful, fearful, depressed, or discouraged. Our Lord told us this would happen. Our Lord told us to rejoice when we are persecuted.  The Church will march on. We have a job to do. Let us do it with joy in the Holy Spirit, faith in Christ, and dependence upon our Father. In the end, all will be well.<>наполнение а текстом

Read more

On June 4, 2014 By In Culture

Not buying what the Vanity Fairians are selling

by Marc Hays

This article was originally published in Every Thought Captive magazine.

1-bunyan-pilgrims-progress-grangerAs Pilgrim and Faithful passed through the town of Vanity Fair, they created a “hubbub.” Pilgrim and Faithful dressed and spoke differently from the townspeople and refused to purchase the fleeting pleasures being peddled there. Upon being asked, “What will ye buy,” the Christians responded, “We buy the truth.” (Proverbs 23:23) At this answer, the people of Vanity Fair railed against the Christians, beat them, caged them, arraigned and tried them, and eventually murdered Faithful.

Why did the people of Vanity Fair react so violently at Faithful’s response? Why all the hubbub? The answer lies in the fact that the assertion for truth necessarily implies an assertion against falsity. The Deceiver is happy with any deception at all, for all lies point away from the single truth, and it is also true that anyone who speaks the truth necessarily condemns all falsities. Truth and lies are as mutually-exclusive as light and darkness.

John Bunyan points this out through three examples as Pilgrim and Faithful walk through Vanity Fair: their garb, their speech, and their refusal to buy what the Vanity Fairians are selling.

Their garb: Christians are clothed in “white garments” in the eternal, justificational sense, but for the moment let’s look at how this spiritual reality is manifest in the here-and-now. We are not to be like the world, but being in the world, we need to wear clothes, just like the world does. I wear my jeans on the lower half of my body and my shirt on the upper half, just like everyone else on earth, whether Christian or not. As America publicly undresses and Christians continue to cover themselves, no one will think twice about Christians wearing modest apparel unless and until some bold Christian asserts the truth that everyone should cover their nakedness. At that point, the Christian will encounter opposition. The “Truth” will be spoken, and the citizens of Vanity Fair will cry foul. While the world around us exults in their freedom from all constraint, the Christian, who loves their neighbor enough to step into their lives, will find that the particular freedom of speaking the truth in love has been vilified and must be constrained. “We’ll have none of that truth-telling here. Thank you very much,” goes the rule for that crowd that has “no rules.” Jesus said there is freedom in truth. The world wants freedom from truth. I doubt there will ever be a law prohibiting modesty, but there are, and will be, plenty denying the fact that modesty even exists.

Their speech: Many words can, and ought, to be spoken regarding coarse jesting, idle words, slander, gossip, etc., but the battle lines are not drawn on any of these minor skirmishes. The enemy will send out the berserkers when the Christian begins asserting that all of the issues of man’s tongue are judged against God’s single, unchanging standard of Truth. The world truly believes that there is no contradiction in imposing their maxim, “What’s true for you is true for you” on everyone, while also maintaining that it is wrong to insist upon one truth for everyone. Whenever they speak, they are implying that there is a meaning behind their utterances, all the while stating that no inherent meaning lies behind their vehement tongue wagging.

Christians in America speak English; secular humanists in America speak English, too. We do not need a new alphabet, new words, or new syntax to be holy; in fact, the vulgar vernacular is the only tongue that will be any use at all. It will not be different words that get us in trouble; it will be the ordinate use of the ones we have, asserting such a thing as an ordinate use that will cause a fuss.

Their investments: Christian and Faithful would not buy what was for sale in the markets of Vanity Fair. In order to be “relevant,” many American Christians are not only saying that we should buy what they’re selling, but we should slap a fish on it and sell it too. The issue at hand is not about silk-screened t-shirts, trendily-embossed Bible covers, bumper stickers, or WWJD bracelets (or whatever the current trends are); the issue is about where Christians go to find the answer to the question, “How can I best keep the two great commandments: to love God and neighbor?” If we seek to faithfully keep these two commandments before the watching world, we will be cities on hills whose lights cannot be hid, no matter what t-shirt we have on. As the world cries, “be yourself,” what they mean is “be trendy.” As the contemporary church around us cries, “be like them for the sake of the gospel,” we should respond, “no thank you, thank you very much.” We should want to be like Jesus for the sake of the gospel, not be like those who look like they’re all about Jesus. Don’t get me wrong—if you want to wear a “Jesus fish” while loving God and loving your neighbor, then go for it, but it will not be the uniform of a “relevant” Christian that makes you relevant. It will be the steady application of the two great commandments. On these hang ALL the law and the prophets. Christian love, exhibited through the keeping of the two great commandments and all subsequent corollaries, is unmistakable. They will know we are Christians by our love: love of God and love of neighbor.

May God preserve us from being “different” by Christianizing the garb, speech, and baubles of American Vanity Fair; may God gives us grace to speak this truth in love.<>уникальность акак продвинуть в поисковиках самому

Read more

On May 26, 2014 By In Books, Culture

Book Review: With the Old Breed

With the Old Breed: At Peleliu and OkinawaWith the Old Breed: At Peleliu and Okinawa by Eugene B. Sledge

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

A great read. Straight forward, not overly sentimental or harsh. Just a man who survived two of the worst battles in the Pacific telling us what happened. I think the HBO series  “The Pacific” was based on this. As I read it two things struck me.

First, the invasion of Japan would have been the most costly battle in the history of mankind. There are problems with dropping the atomic bombs. After Nagasaki and Hiroshima the world was never the same. As a Christian I am adamantly opposed to civilian deaths. But reading this book one begins to realize that the Japanese had no intention of surrending. The toll on American soldiers, Japanese soldiers and Japanese civilians would have been astronomic if America had been forced to invade. So all the armchair generals who think we messed up by dropping the A-Bomb need to read this book and remember that it took more than 80 days and over 110,000 dead Japanese to get a six mile island named Okinawa. My point here is not to justify the dropping of the atomic bombs, but simply to say that the things are never as cut and dry as we want them to be. It is easy for us to look back and say, “We should have done this or should have done that.”  War is hell. Often there are no easy, right, or bloodless answers.

Second, I realized that if our generation (I am thirty-six) was called upon to do what these men had to do there is little doubt we would fail. As a culture we do not have the backbone or courage to fight like those men did. I am not saying there are not brave men in the military. I have family members whom I love and admire who are in the military. So there are individuals and groups, who could do this. But WWII was a sustained effort over many years, by hundreds of thousands of people, that was a huge sacrifice, not just for the soldiers, but for those at home as well. I am not convinced that in our narcissistic, entitled, American culture we could do that again. I am reminded that our generation has not been called upon to sacrifice much.  If the moment came where we had to, would we? Would I?

View all my reviews<>mobile onlineраскрутка  а через социальн ые сети

Read more

On May 13, 2014 By In Culture

Foundational prog albums – Moving Pictures

Moving Pictures

If you click and enlarge the picture you can see good ol’ Charlie Brown pulling out his well-worn vinyl copy of Moving Pictures.

Moving Pictures – Rush (released in 1981)

We’ve come now to the third album in our series on “foundational progressive rock albums,” Moving Pictures by the Canadian band Rush. Most progressive rock fans consider albums 2112 or Hemispheres to the prototypical Rush prog albums, and they would be correct. However, these articles are meant to be introductory and it is my feeling that albums like Moving Pictures provide a newbie with a better gateway into Rush’s music than beginning with other, more overtly progressive albums.

I will admit from the outset that talking about Rush’s music with any level of objectivity is difficult for me. I grew up listening to various album rock radio stations on my transistor radio, but I loved both the Jackson 5 and KISS. It wasn’t until 1982-83 that I discovered Rush. I was told by a classmate at school that MTV would feature the band in concert that Saturday night. I had a babysitting job that evening but, after putting the kids to bed, I flipped the channel over to MTV and my life changed forever.

Of course I loved all of the songs. But seeing guitarist Alex Lifeson and bassist Geddy Lee playing their double-neck guitars on the song “Xanadu” completely knocked me out. What I saw was similar to the picture below. Seriously! What could be cooler to a music-obsessed boy in Grade 8 than something like this?

rush_group_1978.jpg

I decided that very night I was going to learn to play the guitar (which I did) and become a musician (which I also did).

Rush’s music presents tremendous challenges to a young musician. Lee and Lifeson are both considered virtuosos on their respective instruments while drummer Neil Peart is widely acknowledged to be one of the finest drummers in rock music. The songs contain numerous unison passages that are difficult even for seasoned guitar and bass players. Peart’s drum tracks are very complex and the band is just as likely to write a song in and odd time signature (e.g. 5/8, 7/8, 9/16) as they are in 3/4 or 4/4.

Most young instrumentalists learn Rush songs in the privacy of their bedroom and that is that. Not so for me. I was blessed with two other friends who were as eager as I was to learn this complex music. And learn it we did. I will never forget the feeling of satisfaction when the three of us made it all of the way through “Fly By Night,” “Natural Science,” or “La Villa Strangiato” for the first time.

Ever since 1978-79, Rush has moved away from sprawling, epic compositions and toward shorter, more succinct musical statements. They have also expanded their palate to include synthesizers, sequencers, and electronic drums. These two developments have alienated some early fans of the band that prefer the longer works of the band’s early career as well as the purity of the guitar/bass/drums format minus all of the electronic extras. For most fans, Rush is a band that has held true to the “power trio” format while continuing to augment their core sound in exciting ways through technology.

Rush’s scaled-back approach first appeared on record on the 1980 album Permanent Waves. But it was on the 1981 album Moving Pictures where the band fully hit their stride and produced one of the finest progressive rock albums ever released.

After the jump you will find a track-by-track exploration of Rush’s Moving Pictures.

(more…)

Read more

On May 9, 2014 By In Culture

Eye screen, you screen, we all screen for eye screen

Over the years there have been more than a few memes and videos posted to social media about the ways that laptops, tablet computers, and smart phones (a.k.a., “screens”) are causing us to become socially inept hermits who are missing out on “real life.” The latest example is this video. Go ahead and watch. We’ve got all the time in the world.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

I will grant that there is more than a little truth in the message that videos such as this try to deliver. Screens have become nearly ubiquitous and it is good for every right-thinking man, woman, and child to step back and ask, “Is my life is an over-connected life? Are there changes I need to make in the area of limiting exposure to ‘screens?'”

Having done that, I would suggest that modern evangelicalism also needs to step back en masse and practice a good measure of overdue introspection. How many evangelicals that robustly “amen” the above video also attend a church where the most prominent architectural feature in their sanctuary is one or more video screens? How many attend churches where the pastor ascends into the pulpit armed with nothing other than a Kindle, an iPad, or some other tablet device? How many attend churches where texting, live tweeting, and/or Facebooking during the service is de rigueur? How many people are following along with the Scripture readings in church on their smartphones instead of shutting those devices down in order to stand and give an attentive hearing (with their ears alone) to God’s Holy Word?

In a more thoughtful, less wired time church architecture revolved more or less around two things–the pulpit and the communion table. From the sparse sanctuaries of the Puritan churches to the more ornate cathedrals of the high churches, it was clear to all that God’s herald would ascend into the pulpit to declare the Good News of Jesus Christ and then would descend to serve as an under-shepherd at the Eucharistic banqueting table of King Jesus.

For centuries Christian churches arranged things this way because they knew that the pattern of preaching and food in Luke 24 was paradigmatic. Empowered by the Holy Spirit, the ordained minister would declare the Good News concerning Jesus to the people, feed them the Eucharist, and then have confidence that the afflicted would be comforted and that the comfortable would be afflicted. The Second Great Awakening blew that paradigm out of the water and we have been downgrading ever since. The modern church no longer has any confidence in the Holy Spirit working through Word and Sacrament. Today’s church must innovate and invest in new techniques, new gadgets, and new technological gee-whizzery in order to “win the unchurched to Christ.”

I suspect that most churches don’t install jumbo-trons to aid the visually impaired or to compensate for poor sight-lines in the sanctuary. They install them because we live in an age of “screens” and because the average religious consumer expects the latest and greatest technology to be front-and-center in the church of his/her choice. At least that is what we were told by the high-dollar church growth consultant.

If we are going to “amen” videos extolling the unplugged life, why can’t we put our money where our “amens” are and begin unplugging on the Lord’s Day during His service? Is it really necessary to have so much technology going on during our services? Can evangelicals stand to be a even a little bit counter-cultural and (gulp!) “uncool” by scaling things back and restoring the centrality of the pulpit and the table during our services? Or are our church services really so barren that if they were forced off of the grid by a massive power/Internet outage would we be left looking around at each other and wondering, “No band, no screens, no words, no access to my online Bible, no latte machine. Now what?”

Before society at large can even hope to address their issues with “screen culture,” evangelicalism needs to take the beam out of its own eye and address its own technological addictions, especially as they pertain to corporate worship on the Lord’s Day.

—-

Derek Hale has lived all of his life in Wichita, Kansas and isn’t a bit ashamed about that fact. He and his wife Nicole have only six children–four daughters and two young sons of thunder. Derek is a ruling elder, chief musician, and performs pastoral duties at Trinity Covenant Church (CREC). Derek manages a firmware lab for NetApp and enjoys reading, computers, exercising, craft beer, and playing and listening to music. But not all at the same time. He blogs occasionally at youdidntblogthat.tumblr.com.<>позиция а в поисковике

Read more

On May 9, 2014 By In Culture

Carpe Symphoniam – Seize the Symphony

The Schermerhorn Symphony Center
Nashville, Tennessee

Last Friday night, I accompanied my Classical Conversations, Challenge 2 students and their parents to the Schermerhorn Symphony Center in Nashville, Tennessee, to hear the Nashville Symphony. The symphony orchestra, conducted by Christopher Seaman, performed three Mozart pieces, one of which was his 21st Piano Concerto, featuring Benedetto Lupo on the piano. It had been too long since I had experienced a live symphony orchestra, and, chances are, it has been too long for you as well. Even if you do not enjoy classical music, I think you should go. In fact, if you don’t like classical music, it is probably because it has been too long since you went to hear it be performed. Assuming that to be the case, I submit three reasons why it should not be very long until you attend a live symphony orchestra performing in their local concert hall. First, music is to be heard; second, music is to be seen; and third, music is to be felt.

1.) Music is to be heard. No surprise here, right? Everyone knows that music is to be heard. That’s the main point of music, of course, but my point is that until very recently, say the last 100 years, music had to be heard live. It was written to be heard live. Now, don’t get me wrong. I have a very good set of speakers at home, and I love to sit in front of them and turn the volume up high enough so that the music fills me up. This is a fantastic way to listen to a good recording, but it will always be that: a recording. My head between my speakers or my headphones does not equal the acoustics of a finely constructed concert hall. At home, the best I can do is “stereo,” and I guess some folks can do “surround,” but at the concert hall you are listening to 50-100 different instruments producing their own sound, from their own location, and then bouncing around the room that was created to bounce music before reaching your ears. Surround sound cannot replicate the acoustics of concert hall. At home you hear a recording; at the concert hall you hear the music.

2.) Music is to be seen. Okay, I know, under normal circumstances, you can’t see sound waves. But what I mean is that music does not birth spontaneously from empty space. People make music, and people are alive, so music is alive. (Not exactly a flawless syllogism, but I stand by the assertion none the less.) If you attend the performance of a symphony orchestra, you not only hear the music, but you see the music being made by the creators themselves. The conductor will lift his arms–baton in hand, and the musicians will respond. He is the head and they are the members of this music-producing body. The violin bows will point toward heaven, praying for the gift of music to be granted. The conductor will momentarily lift baton and eyebrows, both will fall, and the dance will begin. The musicians will sway, shoulders will lean, feet will arch, eyes will close, and chests will rise and fall. The music is alive, because its creators are alive. The instruments themselves come to life as their masters lovingly draw the music out of them while stage lights shimmer on brass and lacquer.

All of this focuses on the musicians themselves leaving out the lighting and architecture of the building. At the Schermerhorn in Nashville, we are blessed with exquisite chandeliers; ornately decorated, vaulted ceilings; and stately, columned architecture. The pipes from the organ stand at perpetual attention behind the stage and exhibit their visual beauty whether or not they are producing their aural beauty.

All of this is yours to take in at your discretion. Watch it all at once, or focus on one specific thing at a time. It’s your call, but only if you’re there.

3.) Music is to be felt. You will not only see and hear the music, you will feel it. There is a visceral delight that can only come when the mezzo piano pizzicato of the strings cadences and the full ensemble enters at a solid forte. It hits you. You feel it, and it feels good. You’re alive and they’re alive, and the music is alive. You’re right; you can feel the boom of speakers at home or in the car. We’ve all experienced the boom of the speakers from someone else’s car, but the feeling I’m talking about is not detached from the other two points I’ve made.

The “feeling” of the music is the culmination of the acoustics, the lights, the conductor, the musicians, and even the little old lady sitting next to you, who smiles when the cadence is especially sweet. Life doesn’t happen in boxes. It happens all at once, and feeling the music at a live symphony performance happens all at once. You must hear the music and see the music and be in the music in order to feel the music in this way.

Inside the Schermerhorn

A symphony orchestra is a crowning achievement of the triune God who made heaven and earth. He is one, and he is three, all at once, all the time. A symphony is 50-100 musicians living and breathing together for 1-2 hours. It is one and it is many, in a way that no other genre of music has ever come close to achieving. A symphony is on a whole other level. It transcends, yet it is right there in front of you, as well as around you, to enjoy.

So, carpe symphoniam, seize the symphony. If you don’t love it now, devote yourself to it, and grow to love it. You will be blessed, and the world will be blessed that another image-bearer of God has become a patron of symphonic music. In our decadent culture, orchestral music needs all the patrons she can get.

This article was originally published at The Untamed Lion Pub.

Listen to a recording Mozart’s 21st Piano Concerto here.

<>создание и поддержка аadwords контекстная реклама

Read more

On May 8, 2014 By In Culture, Family and Children, Pro-Life

Abortion Isn’t Scary? Please, Cut to Camera Two

An amateur video titled “Emily’s abortion” has gone viral on the internet this week, chronicling the experience of a young mother undergoing an abortion procedure. In the video, Emily Letts explains her intentions:

“I wanted to show it wasn’t scary — and that there is such a thing as a positive abortion story.”

It should be noted that we never see any part of the actual procedure. The camera is focused solely on Letts’ face, showing her talking, laughing, and humming. It’s as if nothing horrific is happening at all. When the abortion is over, she says, “Cool,” and exits the room. Yes, it is true, abortion is no scarier than a yearly pap test – at least for the mother. (more…)

Read more