New Beginnings

So . . . I've decided I need to be posting regularly to this blog, or shut it down. I don't want to shut it down, so I've taken this opportunity to rethink what I'm doing here and try to ensure that there'll be something good to read here regularly - and thus hopefully make it worth checking regularly. I've spoken with three good friends, and we've figured that if we all post at least semi-regularly, it should be enough to make this blog worthwhile. They're all good people with good things to say - I think the blog will be better for their contributions. I expect they'll each begin posting here soon. I suppose it goes without saying, but just in case . . . I'm not responsible for the opinions they post, nor are they responsible for mine.

Since the blog is kind of "starting over," I figured I'd reiterate the reasons I started it in the first place.

1. I want it to be a place for dialogue regarding issues that are important to me and the other posters. Hopefully they are issues that are important to people reading as well. It'll probably cover a lot of space due to some of our varied interests - Christianity (and religion in general), pop culture, movies, music, politics, law, education . . . just about anything you can think of. Whatever the topic, my goal is to bring a Christian perspective to a variety of topics.

2. I view myself as somewhat involved in the enterprise of "reclaiming Christianity" (I'll admit, I borrowed the phrase from a friend). I suspect that the other posters would agree with this sentiment. If that sounds at all arrogant, I apologize - it's not meant that way. What I mean is that I think there are a lot of poor examples out there of what it means to be a Christian - usually by well meaning Christians who are struggling, as I often do, with how to relate the Bible and what we believe to be true about God to what we see in the world around us. I hope that I can contribute, even in a small way, to helping Christians become better at interacting with our culture--again, I know the other posters feel the same.

3. I'd like this blog to be a place for posters to share other resources/articles/etc. on the internet that they find helpful. In particular it can be a place to reference and discuss helpful news articles, essays, etc. So I hope readers will be in the habit of checking links out - at least if its on a topic that interests you!

4. I hope people will feel free to comment. I'd love for this to be a place for people to discuss different ideas. I find good blogs have helped me begin to think through a lot of different issues - I want this to be a place where people can thoughtfully and respectfully discuss their ideas, even when we don't agree.

That's plenty for now - I'm sure the other posters will be posting relatively soon. I do hope the blog is helpful to any of you who take the time to read it.

Update

Cari's mom passed away about 4 AM this morning. Funerals will most likely be both tomorrow and Wednesday. We appreciate everyone's prayers.

Jim Wallis & James Dobson - What are the "great moral issues" of our time?

I received this article in Sojourners Magazine's free weekly email "Sojomail" (you can find it here if you're interested - its usually pretty good). I was aware of this issue and Wallis' request for a debate/conversation with Dobson. The article is quite good - I thought it would be worth posting for you all to read, and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. Personally, I'm encouraged to see the NAE broadening its idea of what constitutes a "moral issue" - I find Dobson and his supporters' definition far too narrow, and I find it extremely distasteful that he would call for Cizik to be fired because he doesn't agree with him.

The Big Debate (by Jim Wallis)

Last week, a letter from James Dobson and friends to the board of the National Association of Evangelicals challenged NAE vice president Rich Cizik's efforts on global warming as "dividing and demoralizing," claiming they shift "the emphasis away from the great moral issues of our time."

In response, I invited Dobson to a debate on the question, "What are the great moral issues of our time for evangelical Christians?" and suggested that a major evangelical Christian university should host it.

On Saturday, the Los Angeles Times reported on the debate invitation, and this response: "A Focus on the Family vice president, Tom Minnery, said he would be happy to take up that debate. Dobson himself, Minnery said, is busy writing a book on child rearing."

I’m also busy writing a book, but I suggest that when we’re both finished, we hold that debate. My personal invitation to James Dobson still stands. And since he was the primary driving force behind the crucial letter, the conversation should be with him. But let’s change the tone of this from "a debate" to "a conversation." This is, in fact, the big conversation going on among evangelicals (and Catholics, too) across the nation and around the world.

In his letter, Dobson named the "great moral issues" as "the sanctity of human life, the integrity of marriage and the teaching of sexual abstinence and morality to our children." I said in my last blog that I believe the sanctity of life, the integrity and health of marriages, and the teaching of sexual morality to our children are, indeed, among the "great moral issues of our time. But I believe they are not the only great moral issues." As many writers have been saying in this blog, the enormous challenges of global poverty, climate change, pandemics that wipe out generations and continents, the trafficking of human beings made in God’s image, and the grotesque violations of human rights, even to the point of genocide, are also among the great moral issues that people of faith must be - and already are - addressing.

Just in the last few days, we have already received invitations from six major Christian universities eager to host this conversation between James Dobson and me. But this is bigger than just two people: It’s the conversation we need to have on every Christian campus, in every church, and in public forums around the nation, especially as we approach another election season. So let’s do that together.

The board meeting of the National Association of Evangelicals also ended Saturday, and in the words of their own press release: "NAE Leaders Advance Broad Agenda with Landmark Document on Human Rights and Torture." The release begins by noting:

The board of directors of the National Association of Evangelicals advanced a broad public agenda at its annual meeting this week, endorsing a landmark document on human rights and torture, and reaffirming its "For the Health of the Nation: An Evangelical Call to Public Engagement," first adopted in 2003.

Specifically, the board noted it

...reaffirmed its support for the landmark "For the Health of the Nation" document unanimously adopted in 2003, commending its "principles of Christian political engagement to our entire community for action."

These principles include: (1) We work to protect religious freedom and liberty of conscience; (2) We work to nurture family life and protect children; (3) We work to protect the sanctity of human life and to safeguard its nature; (4) We seek justice and compassion for the poor and vulnerable; (5) We work to protect human rights; (6) We seek peace and work to restrain violence; (7) We labor to protect God's creation.

The only mention of Rich Cizik, whom the Dobson letter had singled out and called upon the NAE to fire, came with these words in the official NAE press release:

Speaking at the annual board banquet, Rev. Richard Cizik, NAE vice president for governmental affairs, quoted evangelical theologian Carl F. H. Henry in his wake up call to evangelicals sixty years ago: ‘The cries of suffering humanity today are many. No evangelicalism which ignores the totality of man's condition dares respond in the name of Christianity.’

The NAE statement went on to say:

Speaking of a new generation of evangelicals that has responded to those cries, Cizik said: ‘We root our activism in the redemptive work of Jesus Christ on the cross and are giving it a proper temporal focus by emphasizing all of the principles that are found in the Bible. We come together in a positive way as a family bonded by the love of Christ, not as fractious relatives. We desire to be people known for our passionate commitment to justice and improving the world, and eager to reach across all barriers with love, civility, and care for our fellow human beings.’

I knew Carl F. H. Henry, during my seminary years at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and through many conversations together during our early years of Sojourners. His biblical theology, social conscience, and political balance provided a younger generation with crucial moral guidance. We miss his voice today.

But the NAE board, and its president Leith Anderson, know that a new generation of evangelicals wants that same sound theology and good balance, and believe that Christian moral concerns (and God’s concerns) go beyond only a few issues. Recognizing how their broader agenda is resonating with evangelicals around the world, the NAE announced that at its fall board meeting in Washington, D.C., October 11-12, "the association will host an ‘International Congress on Evangelical Public Engagement,’ drawing prestigious leaders from around the world to meet with American leadership around the principles of the Association's ‘For the Health of the Nation’ document." It seems the broader evangelical social agenda has solid support and is moving forward.

So, let’s have the big debate, and make it into the kind of deep and necessary conversation among the people of God that it needs to be. And to Jim Dobson I say, let’s finish our books (as a Dad with two young boys I look forward to reading yours on child rearing!), and then agree to a public conversation at the right place and the right time. I look forward to that.

A Long Overdue Update

I've been putting off doing a much-needed update on what's going on in our lives for a couple of weeks now while waiting for final notification on a fairly major change in our lives (no, Cari is not pregnant, so just put that out of your mind right now). However, it is much needed, and things have finally developed to a point at which I felt it was a good time to post.

As most of you know, we've been living with my mom since May while saving up money and figuring our next move, which we had believed would be to move some place (possibly overseas) for me to pursue a Ph.D. I've decided not to do so - the short reason why is that I discovered that there were no positions available teaching the topic I wished to teach (Religion and Culture). We weighed several different options for a month or so (teaching in a university, teaching a different subject, educational work in a church, etc.), and finally determined that I liked the idea of doing educational ministries in a church if I could find the right church.

About the same time as we reached this decision, an Adult Ministries position opened up at my home church in Omaha, and I knew this would be an ideal position for me. Its a strong, growing church that is outreach-minded and pretty progressive as far as Christian Churches/Churches of Christ are concerned. I've known several of the ministers and elders for years, and knew I would enjoy working with them. And the position is exactly what I was looking for - it is primarily focused on the church's adult education and small groups program, with additional duties including occasional preaching, pre-marital counseling, weddings and funerals, etc. I've been pursuing the position for almost 3 months now, through 3 interviews, and was offered the position today - my first day on staff will be April 1. I'm very excited about the position, and really looking forward to getting started in a few weeks.

Of course, this new position means we'll be settling in Omaha - I never expected to be saying that! Over the next week or two we'll start looking for a house out near to the church - obviously we're looking forward to that as well. It'll be nice to know that we're settling down without the constant knowledge that we'll be moving in a couple years, and it's certainly nice that we're going to be near both Cari and I's families.

In the midst of this career change, we also learned several months ago that Cari's mom, MaryAnne, had cancer. By the time it was discovered it was already pretty advanced, and had spread to several different organs. They attempted treatment for a couple of months, which slowed the growth in some areas but not in all of them. A few weeks ago they went to the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, where they recommended that they discontinue treatment and work to control pain and symptoms. Obviously this situation is difficult for us, and certainly for MaryAnne and the rest of Cari's family. We greatly appreciate everyone's prayers.

These are the major developments in our lives over the past few months. I'm sure I left some things out - if so, Cari will remind me and I'll post them later. Hope everyone is doing well. Take care.

Global Education and the "Information Explosion"

I know its often said that people are less apt to follow links than to read a complete post, but I'm going to start occasionally linking to interesting posts, articles, etc. that I find - I think its one of the most useful features of a blog, in that it allows me to draw readers' attention to relevent/interesting information located in other places on the internet. So, I do hope you'll check these links out. And in this case, I don't yet know how to embed a YouTube video, so I couldn't post this video here even if I wanted to do so.

Anyway, this video on a friend's site is quite interesting - it certainly helps to give a more realistic perspective regarding globalization and education, and offers some intriguing statistics in relation to the "information explosion" that is currently occurring worldwide. I'm interested to see if anyone has any comments.

An Inconvenient Truth Part 2

I hope my friend Carl, who commented on my last post, will not be offended that I am using his comment as the occasion for my next post. I do so not because I think his comments are foolish, but because I think he raises objections to An Inconvenient Truth that I believe many other conservatives would also raise. I think they're worth discussing, and so I am including them in a post in order to draw attention to the discussion, rather than having it hidden in the comments section.

Here is Carl's response:

I cannot make any judgments on Gore's politics, simply because I haven't had the time to keep up with them. But I do find a bit of irony (if I could even call it that) in the whole enterprise, which leads me to the question of: how much jet-fuel did Gore burn while promoting his endeavor to be more friendly to the environment? It seems to me that if you want to be a poster child for being more eco-friendly, then you should find other ways to market your ideas instead of using ones that only contribute to the problem.

On a completely different but slightly connected note: I also found it interesting this past weekend that, while watching the History Channel, some scientists were working out scenarios of how to cope with a possible mini Ice Age--much like the one that hit in the 14th century. Here's why it strikes me as interesting: these scientists are running predictions for such an event taking place this century. Yet, other scientists are running predictions for global warming for this century.

As I see it, Carl has raised two issues - I'll respond to each in turn.

First, Carl indicates that he sees Gore's actions as inconsistent with his message, in that he uses large amounts of fuel traversing the globe in order to spread his message of energy conservation and care for the earth. This observation may or may not be true, although I would argue that if Gore is successful in getting his message heard, what is gained is probably much more than the fuel he uses. However, I also feel compelled to say that I don't think it matters one way or another. This argument, in philisophical terms (for those of you who don't know Carl, he has a strong mind for philisophical arguments), commits the ad hominem logical fallacy. Essentially, he is making a personal attack on the bearer of the message (in this case, Al Gore's warnings regarding global warming), while not dealing with the argument itself.

My essential point is that, whether or not Gore's actions are problematic, this has no bearing on the truth or falsity of his message. This is my fear regarding political conservatives' reactions to this movie - that they will reject the warnings about global warming without really considering them, simply because they don't like or agree with the bearer of the message. I was never a fan of Gore when it came to politics - nevertheless, I believe that his arguments regarding global warming should at least be given fair consideration.

Carl's second point is a significant objection. I will confess that I am a newcomer to this issue and at this time I do not understand the science behind the issue with a great deal of sophistication. However, my limited understanding is that some scientists who believe global warming is taking place fear that it could eventually lead to another ice age. If I understand correctly, and at the risk of over-simplifying complex scientific theories, they believe this could happen as a result of shifting ocean currents brought on by global warming. As the effects of global warming are felt, it is believe that this will affect the complex ocean currents which govern global weather and climate patterns. Frankly, I'm not sure anyone actually understands what will happen when these currents change, but an ice age is one of the possibilities that has been advanced. So, I am not sure that scientists who fear a future ice age contradict the arguments that global warming is occurring. (Here is one article, which is a few years old, which explains this idea).

My thinking about global warming is that if Gore's warnings are legitimate, our children and our children's children are the ones who will pay for our refusal to deal with the issue. For this reason it is worth considering. And whether global warning is ultimately a legitimate fear, reducing global energy consumption and pollution is a worthwhile goal. From a Christian perspective, it is astonishing to me how often we forget that God entrusted us with the care of the earth - for this reason Christians should be leaders in taking care of the world we live in. With this in mind, I want to draw my readers' attention to this .pdf document, which gives ten simple suggestions for cutting down on energy consumption. Americans should particularly pay attention to these suggestions, since we are by far the largest contributor, per person, of pollution in the world.

New Movies

Hmmm . . . so it's been a little while since I posted. And the long promised TV posts are still coming . . . but not yet. Instead I thought I'd get things started with a short post about two movies we've seen recently - one which was quite good, one not so much.

First, the not so good. "Music and Lyrics" looked promising, as romantic comedies go. Hugh Grant's movies often have a dry, quirky humor that can be quite enjoyable. Sometimes they are a little satirical, like last year's "American Dreamz," which, while you can argue about the sophistication and success of its satire, was a fairly enjoyable satire of American culture. I also will admit to having enjoyed "About a Boy" and "Love Actually." This movie, however, was a disappointment. It started out somewhat promising - the opening scene, which consists of a terrible 80's style music video, was pretty amusing. The majority of the movie was passable, but the ending was inexcusable. Not only was it completely cheesy, it lacked any internal coherence with the rest of the movie. I won't say anymore, since I might give away something for those of you who dare to see it.

So, on to the good. While some of my readers may be skeptical, my wife and I thoroughly enjoyed "An Inconvenient Truth." I'll admit, I enjoy well-made documentaries, and this one qualifies. I'm not positive where I land on the global warming issue, although I do not find it nearly as easy to dismiss as some people do. Al Gore makes a convincing argument that it is a pressing danger - certainly enough to warrant further investigation. My one criticism of the documentary is that there are several sections that deal slightly with his political career, and I think these could have been left out. The sad truth is that many people will be turned off from this documentary because they don't agree with Gore on political grounds. However, I would challenge anyone to try to watch "An Inconvenient Truth" with an open mind, free of any disagreements with Gore's politics. The reality is that if Gore is right about global warming, we (meaning the entire human race) have a great deal to lose. If he is incorrect, curtailing pollution and conserving energy is still a very good thing. We have a great deal to gain, and very little to lose, by taking this issue seriously.

Jake Goes to Washington

Cari and I are flying to Washington D.C. tomorrow morning - we'll be spending almost a week in the area. Cari is going to visit our good friends Curtis and Amy, who live in Maryland about 30 miles away from D.C. (that's them below). While she is partying away, I will be attending the joint annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature and the American Academy of Religion. Its the largest gathering of biblical and religious scholars in the world - last year I believe there were over 10,000 people. Believe it or not, it is my idea of a good time. I was able to attend the conference last year and thoroughly enjoyed it - a lot of stimulating discussions, and I really appreciated the free exchange of ideas that occurred in the discussions after scholars presented their papers. This year I will also have the opportunity to meet with several scholars from the Ph.D programs I am interested in, so it should be a good week.


Needless to say, the likelihood is I won't be posting much or at all while I'm at the conference. However, rest assured I will return next week with a couple of posts on television - I know you're all waiting on the edge of your seats.

Good Television - Part 1

Many of you are probably aware that I enjoy TV a great deal. Our collection of DVD seasons -- which includes the full run of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Dark Angel, Firefly, The Office, and Friends, in addition to incomplete collections of Seinfeld and Scrubs -- stands as witness to my obsession. I try to keep the number of shows I'm watching in a given season down to a minimum, but inevitably there are 2 or 3 (or 4 or 5) shows that I try to keep up with on a regular basis. Despite this fact, it occurred to me that I have not yet written a single post about television. So, in an effort to remedy this oversight, I am writing a couple of blogs about some of what I believe to be the best current shows.

First, I thought I'd begin by offering an explanation of why I enjoy good television so much. As I have reflected on my enjoyment of television, I've come to the conclusion that on the whole I enjoy television series even more than most movies. The primary reason, I believe, lies in the character development that occurs in many television series -- at least, in the ones I tend to enjoy. I find that in most all narrative media I enjoy -- fictional literature, television, movies, etc. -- I am most drawn to longer series' which provide an opportunity for the audience to get to know the character(s) and watch as they develop over time. There are numerous examples: books like Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, Stephen King's Gunslinger series, and Robert Jordan's massive Wheel of Time series; in movies, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars (the original trilogy, of course), Harry Potter (I still haven't gotten around to reading the books), and X-Men; in television, virtually all of the DVD collections noted above fall into this category, and almost all of the shows I discuss in these next couple posts will as well. However, while character development is present in any good example of fictional narrative, I find that it is typically present more in television than in movies, simply because of the amount of time available to the show's writers to explore the characters and their story. This conduciveness of the television medium to character development, coupled with the fact that the quality of writing for television seems to have improved a great deal over the past 10 years, explains why I enjoy television so much.

In the interest of keeping this relatively short, I'll cut this installment off here. I'll post another one or two within the next few days.

Christian Voting

To anyone who is interested in such things, I commend to you this excellent Issues Guide for Christian voters - it was put together by Sojourners, and a longer version is available here after a short registration. Christians are too often guilty of one or two issue voting -- certain issues like abortion are highlighted as the only significant moral issues, and candidates are therefore chosen solely on the basis of their positions on a very short list of issues. While abortion is undoubtedly an important moral issue, there are other important moral issues. This issues guide does an excellent job of highlighting this fact. I know I found it helpful - I think many of you will too.

Compassion and Economic Justice

They shall build houses and inhabit them; they shall plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They shall not build and another inhabit; they shall not plant and another eat and my chosen shall long enjoy the work of their hands (Isaiah 65:21-23).

God shows a special concern for those in poverty and acts in history to lift them up. The Bible teaches that societies should organize so that all members have genuine access to the resources needed to live a decent life and provide for those who are unable to care for themselves.

Does the candidate support measures that provide for family economic success and security by “making work work,” that promote fair and decent wages, that show a serious commitment to lifting children out of poverty, and support policies on aid, debt, and trade that would bring extreme global poverty to an end?

Peace and Restraint of Violence

They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more (Isaiah 2:4). Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God (Matthew 5:9).

We face a major challenge of how to resolve conflicts, reduce violence, and defeat terrorism without endless war. War has become a first resort instead of the last resort. In a world full of terrorists, terrorist states, unilateralist superpowers, and weapons of mass destruction, we need practical alternatives to an endless cycle of violence.

Is the candidate committed to a serious plan for ending the war in Iraq, to joining a real national debate on how to remove American forces while seeking both security and peace for Iraq, to the elimination of nuclear weapons, to supporting security and freedom in the Middle East, and to strengthening international law to fight terrorism?

Consistent Ethic of Life

Then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being (Genesis 2:7).

We believe that all life is a sacred gift from God, and that public policies should reflect a consistent ethic of life - and address all the places where human life is threatened. We believe abortion is always a moral tragedy, but how do we find real solutions for preventing unwanted pregnancies and supporting women caught in very difficult and desperate circumstances?

Does the candidate support policies that will dramatically reduce the number of abortions, end capital punishment, and stop genocide, especially in Darfur?

Racial Justice

There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28).

Full humanity and dignity are denied when people are discriminated against for ethnic or racial reasons, whether intentionally or due to systemic structures. Racism is a sin and undermines the integrity of a society.

Is the candidate committed to reversing and ending racial discrimination in all aspects of our society, especially in the criminal justice and education systems?

Human Rights, Dignity, and Gender Justice

So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them (Genesis 1:27).

We recognize each human being as created in God’s image. We urge policies that both protect life and promote human dignity. On the issue of torture, for example, it really isn’t the terrorists and what they stand for; it is about us, and what we stand for. On immigration, how do we welcome the stranger, respect the law, and insure national security? And how do we combat the growing epidemic of sexual trafficking and virtual slavery?

Does the candidate support humane and holistic immigration policies and comprehensive immigration reform? Do they insist on policies that end torture, stop human trafficking, promote religious freedom, and protect women?

Strengthen Families and Renew Culture

Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God (Romans 12:2).

Strong families are the essential foundation of a good society. A culture that promotes healthy families is necessary to raise our children with strong values. And parenting has become a countercultural activity in America. How do we find real solutions, and not just scapegoats?

Does the candidate support policies that strengthen marriage and families, restore integrity to our civic and business practices, and act to prevent violence in our society - especially the alarming incidence of domestic violence against women and children.

Good Stewardship of God’s Creation

God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good (Genesis 1:31). The earth is the Lord’s and all that is in it, the world, and those who live in it (Psalm 24:1).

The earth and the fragile atmosphere that surrounds it are God’s good creation for the sustenance and enjoyment of all things. We support policies that protect creation from interests and activities that damage it. We believe global warming is a religious issue.

Does a candidate support protections to clean air and water, to reduce the dangerous emissions that cause global warming, to shift from our addiction to oil and fossil fuels to cleaner, safer, and more renewable energy sources? Do they support the transformation to conservation and new energy sources that could provide jobs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, help solve the Middle East crisis, and even reduce the threats of terrorism?

Next Tuesday, we will not establish the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God is not on the ballot. But you can vote to strengthen the common good. There are important things at stake in this election, including many lives in the ongoing war in Iraq. This is an important election for our country, and I urge all Christians to take time this weekend to think and pray about their choices, evaluate candidates on all these issues, then go to the polls on Tuesday and vote.

And after we vote, no matter who wins, we must be at the doorstep of politicians the next day to hold them accountable to the issues that arise from a broad biblical agenda.

Image and Word

There's a short, interesting commentary on Breakpoint's website here regarding CNN's recent choice to air footage of a terrorist sniper shooting an American soldier. (For those who don't know, Breakpoint is an organization formed by Chuck Colson, a conservative Christian author.) The author of the commentary takes issue with CNN's decision, comparing it to Rome's choice to publicly crucify more than 6,000 slaves who revolted in the first century B.C.E. While I think the comparison might be a little overblown, I agree that CNN's decision seems to be in extremely poor taste--they justified it with a claim of presenting the "unvarnished truth," but in an era where any form of controversy can generate attention, it is difficult not to see dollar signs behind the decision.

What caught my attention more than the issue with CNN is the author's claims regarding the use of images in general. He quotes from several Christian thinkers who are critical of the use of images--the following two quotes particularly caught my attention:

"Far from offering truth, [Francis Schaeffer] said, "every television minute has been edited. The viewer does not see the event. He sees . . . an edited image of that event.""

"And as Christian philosopher Douglas Groothuis notes, with television, reality becomes the image, "whether or not that image corresponds to any objective state of affairs—and we are not challenged to engage in this analysis.""

These are strong statements regarding the use of images in general, and the medium of television in particular. Both Schaeffer and Groothuis, as far as I know, are extremely critical of television as a medium of communication--Groothuis seems to view it as a completely debased and useless form.

It is worth noting that these criticisms are valid. Television, as with any form of communication, has weaknesses, and it is good to point them out. One should always bear in mind that television is a highly edited medium, and Groothuis is at least correct that many people do not take the time to think about what they are watching. My difficulty, however, is that the implicit assumption behind these statements (and I believe Groothuis' writings confirm this interpretation) is that image is somehow inferior to word. That is, textually based information is viewed as having a greater claim to truth, or at least a much greater ability to communicate truth.

However, I'm just not sure that this is true--that image is inferior to word when it comes to communicating truth. Different, certainly, but inferior? Part of the problem is that it seems to be barely acknowledged (if at all) that texts suffer from the exact same limitations noted above regarding the use of images. All textually based material is necessarily edited by its author, and is written with an agenda in mind. Word/text is always produced for a reason--everything is subjective, and any claims to complete objectivity are automatically suspect. I believe this is part of the human condition--while we may legitimately try to limit the extent to which our own experiences, ideas, and agendas influence what we produce (be it image or word), true objectivity will always elude us.

Accordingly, while the above criticism of images, and of television in particular, is certainly valid, it seems inappropriate for it to be used to privilege word over image. God himself seems to value both--while the Bible is the Word, isn't Jesus the ultimate Image?

Recent Movies: The Prestige

Cari and I had been looking forward to seeing this movie for the past few months - the previews looked great, and its hard to turn down a movie starring Christian Bale, Hugh Jackman, Scarlett Johansson, and Michael Caine, and directed by Christopher Nolan (Memento, Batman Begins).

The movie centers around two dueling magicians in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. I don't want to reveal any more of the plot because much of the enjoyment of watching the film comes from trying to navigate the different twists and turns of the story (in the interest of full disclosure, I will admit that Cari figured out the big "secret" before it was revealed--I did not). The movie is well worth seeing--I found the characters to be well developed (particularly Bale and Jackman's characters) and the plot twists did not feel as contrived as they did when we saw Martin Scorcese's The Departed a few weeks ago (Scorcese's movie is also worth seeing, but I enjoyed The Prestige more).

Republicans and Democrats Can Work Together? Who Knew?

My friend Carl pointed out this interesting story on GetReligion.org, a blog which is run by several journalists and is devoted to discussions regarding the media's coverage of religion. The post is about the Joshua Green's cover article "Take Two" in the November issue of the Atlantic, which deals with Hilary Clinton's attempts to turn herself into "the consummate Washington player." According to Green's story, the primary catalyst for Hilary's "transformation" has been her involvement in a prayer group on Capitol Hill.

Apparently there are a number of these prayer groups where lawmakers gather together for some form of private worship. Most of these groups are affiliated with a secretive organization known as the Fellowship--according to Green, the Fellowship was:

established in the 1930s by a Methodist evangelist named Abraham Vereide, whose great hope was to preach the word of Jesus to political and business leaders throughout the world. Vereide believed that the best way to change the powerful was through discreet personal ministry, and over his lifetime he succeeded to a remarkable degree. The first Senate prayer group met over breakfast in 1943; a decade later one of its members, Senator Frank Carlson, persuaded Dwight Eisenhower to host a Presidential Prayer Breakfast, which has become a tradition.

While the existence of such groups is interesting in and of itself, what is particularly interesting is what occurred through Hilary Clinton's involvement in one of these prayer groups. These groups are primarily attended by conservative congressmen and women, and Hilary was in a group with Senator Sam Brownback, a well known and influential conservative from Kansas. Here is how Green describes what happened in the group:

One spring Wednesday, a few months into the term, Senator Sam Brownback’s turn came to lead the group, and he rose intending to talk about a recent cancer scare. But as he stood before his colleagues Brownback spotted Clinton, and was overcome with the impulse to change the subject of his testimony. “I came here today prepared to share about this experience in my life that has caused great suffering, the result of which has deepened my faith,” Brownback said, according to someone who watched the scene unfold. “But I’m overcome now with only one thought.” He confessed to having hated Clinton and having said derogatory things about her. Through God, he now recognized his sin. Then he turned to her and asked, “Mrs. Clinton, will you forgive me?” Clinton replied that she would, and that she appreciated the apology.

Green goes on to explain that as a result, Clinton and Brownback have worked together on two separate initiatives--one to protect refugees fleeing sexual abuse, and another to study the effects that violent video games and television shows have upon children.

There are two things that are significant to me about this story. First, it is refreshing to see two politicians who could not be on more opposite sides of the political spectrum working together. One could hope (probably futile, but lets pretend it is not) that such activity could become the rule, rather than the exception. Second, it is interesting that this bipartisan cooperation came about as a result of a regular prayer group. Green notes that these groups may be one of the last venues in which politicians feel free to share their faith and thoughts in a private setting--a place in which they can truly be themselves with one another. I find it fitting that this venue would be a prayer group, because it is exactly how the church should function--bringing together people from diverse backgrounds on the basis of their shared belief.

Of course, everything states in this story could be political rhetoric--certainly Hilary could benefit politically from being viewed as more moderate. While the cynic and realist in me thinks this is probably the case, the idealist in me hopes that maybe, just maybe, this story is an example of politicians doing something right.

Recent Movies: Little Miss Sunshine

While I'll still likely post plenty about politics, simply because it is a topic I'm increasingly interested in, I also want to guide this blog a little more towards pop cultural topics as well. I'm going to try posting about some of the movies we see (there haven't been very many lately) and we'll see if any of them are "discussion-worthy."

A few weeks ago we caught "Little Miss Sunshine" - we'd been looking forward to this one since first seeing the previews several months prior to its release. We loved it. Its a pretty "off the wall" comedy/drama about an extraordinarily dysfunctional family that ends up taking an ill-fated road trip through California when the 7 or 8 year old daughter makes it into the national Little Miss Sunshine contest. The family includes a motivational speaker (the father, played by Greg Kinnear), a suicidal Proust scholar (The Office's Steve Carrell, in a characteristically great performance), and a teenage devotee of Nietzsche who has taken a vow of silence. I don't want to go into any more detail because this movie really is worth seeing - it is an endearing study of family dynamics and how members of a family support one another, no matter how flawed they may be.

Update #2

My apologies to anyone who has been faithful in checking this blog with any regularity over the past couple weeks. I haven't been able to post as often as I had planned or would like to, partially because of a lack of time recently, and partially because of a lack of ideas. Still, I hope you'll all stay with me - I do plan to continue posting, and hope to do it at least a little more regularly.

By way of an update as to what's going on with Cari and I, we're doing well in Omaha. Its been nice to be closer to family for a little while, after being 9-12 hours away for 5 years. I am currently working at TD Ameritrade opening new accounts - while it is not my dream job, its not bad. I spend my days processing new account applications while listening to my headphones (usually jazz - instrumental music is better when I have to concentrate), and occasionally I speak with customers when I need additional information. Its a job that requires a good deal of technical knowledge, but I'm starting to feel more comfortable with it. Cari is still working for Avantas.

We had a chance to travel to Spearfish, SD over Labor Day to visit our friends Matt and Becky Branum, who moved there a couple years ago to plant a church. They're doing well, with a very cute little girl around 2 years old (and I don't always think kids this age are cute) and a growing church. Cari and I saw Mount Rushmore for the first time (it was cooler than I thought it would be), and we visited Bear Country as well. Bear Country is a drive-thru outdoor zoo - lots of animals (I'm sure it will surprise you to learn they have bears), and at one point our car was literally surrounded by a pack of 6 arctic wolves. It was pretty cool.

This week (Thursday, September 21) we'll be celebrating Cari's birthday, and this weekend we'll travel to Des Moines to celebrate her Dad's birthday as well. We also hope to make it to Norfolk, NE soon to visit some college friends. Sometimes it seems like we travel every weekend, but Cari assures me that is not the case.

Jim Wallis' "God's Politics"

Thanks to Carl for bringing this interesting review of Jim Wallis' God's Politics to my attention. The author is fairly complimentary toward the book, although she does offer some serious criticisms as well. For my part, I have not yet read the book, but I find Wallis' writings to be excellent and thought provoking - he does an excellent job of challenging both conservatives and liberals to think more deeply about their beliefs in light of the Bible's teachings.

I appreciated the review because it raises some interesting questions about the intersection of religion and politics. I offer the following quote as an example:

"Nevertheless, certainty grounded in unbending religious conviction can (and often does) produce a remarkable rigidity that brooks no compromise. Which is precisely the place where religion and politics may not blend very well: Whereas compromise is the coin of the realm at the political negotiating table, it is often a sign of moral failure in a religious frame."

While I absolutely believe that religion has a place in political discourse, this quote does highlight one of the chief difficulties in meshing the two. There is a constant tension between the absolute claims a religion like Christianity makes, and the demands of democracy in a pluralistic environment, which inevitably require compromise.

Sunday School Teacher of 54 Years Dismissed Because She is a Woman

My friend Stewart brought this story to my attention. An 81 year old Sunday School teacher who had taught in her Southern Baptist church for 54 years was "dismissed" from her teaching duties, ostensibly because she is a woman. The news story can be found here, and an insightful post on the subject by biblical scholar Ben Witherington can be found here.

It's pretty shocking that what looks to be a very young pastor (watch the videos on the news site) would dismiss a woman who had faithfully served the church for such a long period of time. I suppose if he really believes the Bible prohibits women from teaching (I don't) , he may have felt it a move he had to make. The problem, it seems, is that there is some doubt as to the real reason. The letter in which they dismissed her (yes, it was a letter - he did not even have the courtesy to do it face to face) refers only to 1 Timothy 2:8-15. However, it appears that church politics are also in play - the church has now said that there were other (undisclosed) reasons (which were not listed in the letter) and it does appear that the teacher had some disagreements with the pastor in the past. This possibility makes the situation even more disturbing because it seems likely that the Bible is being used as a smokescreen to cover up more personal issues.

While I do believe that some allowance needs to be made for differences in interpretation regarding the Bible, such prohibitions of women from service in the church grieve me deeply because they stifle the gifts of many very competent women, whose abilities will never be fully utilized in their churches. There are other (I believe better) ways to interpret passages such as 1 Timothy 2:8-15, and most interpretations that prohibit women's activities in the church are remarkably inconsistent (for example, how many people honestly prohibit women from braiding their hair, or from talking at all in church?).

Interesting Video - Can the Media Be Trusted?

A friend brought this video to my attention, and I thought it might be worthy of discussion. For those who choose not to watch it (you probably should if you're able), it presents numerous examples that the authors (of the video) believe demonstrate that the news media have doctored photos of the destruction in Lebanon in order to create more sympathy for the Lebanese, and less for the Israelis. Aish.com is a Jewish website, but I'm not sure who produced the video itself.

First, I think that if these examples are true, they are undoubtedly problematic. I would probably quibble with a couple examples - most notably the woman decrying the destruction of her home. Just because one photo came out several weeks after the first does not necessarily indicate an attempt to mislead - for whatever reason, it was simply published later than the other. However, I have no trouble believing that some of these photos were indeed staged, which certainly highlights the fact that some reporters are not honest in the way they report the news, and it is always good to think critically about what we are told.

However, I cannot help but think that the same should apply to watching this video. While I don't doubt that some of what it says is true, I do think that we should think critically when viewing this "expose" just as we should when dealing with any other piece of reporting. The video is obviously put together by someone who supports Israel's current actions against Hezbollah in Lebanon. While this is not necessarily problematic, it is nonetheless true that this report is every bit as informed by the author's agenda as any other report. I guess I'm just a little troubled because I see political conservatives talk about the left's "agenda" quite a bit, and I think we need to remember that both sides have an agenda, and both sides are full of rhetoric. Legitimate complaints have been advanced against the so-called "liberal" media (and I view this video as one of those complaints), but there are also legitimate complaints against news sources like Fox News, which in my estimation is also far from an impartial news source.

The question remains - should this video have some impact upon those who believe that Israel has acted inappropriately in the current conflict? The authors of the video clearly believe it does - the entire video seems to argue that the fact that these photos are doctored indicates that what is going on in Lebanon is not as bad as has been reported, and that the damage is being exaggerated to turn people against Israel. The response the authors of the video seem to desire is for people to accept that news reports have been falsified, and to support Israel's actions based upon this information.

I'm not sure, however, that the video accomplishes this purpose - at least it didn't in my case. While it is certainly an indictment of some of the techniques used to "report" the news, it had little impact on my thinking regarding the current conflict - mainly because my reasons for thinking that Israel has gone too far are based upon accounts from multiple news sources (including those favorable towards Israel's actions like Fox News), not upon pictures from the media. The possibility that some of the pictures taken in Lebanon are doctored really does not affect the validity or non-validity of the arguments against (or for) Israel's actions in the current conflict.

Unintentional Effects of Israel's Offensive in Lebanon

My good friend Jody noted this article on one of the comments pages below, but I thought it was worthwhile enough to bring to everyone's attention here. I would quibble with a few points, and at times his tone is a little more argumentative than I think is helpful, but he argues a point I have tried to argue here - that Israel's actions in Lebanon are actually counterproductive - much more eloquently than I have been able to do.

Jazz Improvisation

"This is an important distinction for an understanding of jazz. Improvisatory creation is not a medium that half-heartedly tries, but won't rise up to, a written composition: on the contrary, it gives jazz its grandeur, which is a potential to eclipse written music in its performance. . . . [I]f all the written music in the world suddenly burned up in a flash, who could still do a gig the same night, with complete strangers, and no rehearsals?"
-- Brad Mehldau, from the liner notes to Art of the Trio 4: Back at the Vanguard, writing about the difference improvisational and more structured forms of music

I just liked this quote - nicely captures at least a little bit of why I enjoy jazz music so much.