Interesting...

I guess what goes around comes around for Mike. It found the link in this cnn/aol article. Make sure you watch the trailers for this guy's movie...they actually look pretty good. The thing that catches my attention is that the maker of Roger and Me is now the one not responding to questions. I also wonder if Moore will be as adamant about films not being censored by big production companies with this movie as he was with his own.

I do want to see Fahrenheit 911 this week. Anyone seen it yet? (Jesse...?)

I think I'm going to write two books to cover the whole thing and make a buck...What Does Jesus Think About Michael Moore and What Does Jesus Think About George W. Bush. Or maybe simply 4 Reasons Why the Rapture Will Be In 2004...and then I can just bash Bush, Moore, Kerry, and Nader in one big swoop. Either I'll make a killing or be killed. You can't go wrong offending everybody.

In the meantime, Cheney has really F'd things up...but has no regrets. I wonder how the FCC feels about this...
posted by Jimmy at 1:09 PM | |

 
He's Not A Bad Guy
From MSN

'Nick O'Brien, 4, was at a Texas Rangers (search) baseball game with his parents Sunday night when a foul ball hit by right fielder Gary Matthews Jr. landed at his feet.

Before Nick could reach down to pick it up, a grown man leaped in front of him, pinned Nick to the seat and grabbed the ball.

"I couldn't believe someone would do something like that to a 4-year-old boy," Nick's mother, Edie O'Brien, told the Dallas Morning News. "He wasn't friendly."

Edie O'Brien swatted the man with a cardboard fan and called him a jerk, among other names.

"I said, 'You trampled a 4-year-old boy to get this ball,' and he said, 'Oh, well,'" she told "Good Morning America" Wednesday, adding that the man seemed proud of himself.

Thousands of people saw what happened on Ameriquest Field's (search) giant video screens, and a chant of "Give him the ball!" started up. Rangers announcer Tom Grieve called the man "the biggest jerk in this park."

The man [who took the ball has] said nothing publicly. But his pastor described the married landscaper and former youth minister as "not the bad guy he's been made out to be."

"He probably got a little aggressive and did something he regrets," Rick DuBose of the Sachse Assembly of God Church told the Dallas Morning News. "But that's not Matt. He's a good kid, a good young man.'

What do you have to do to be a "bad guy" these days?


posted by Jimmy at 10:12 PM | |

 
I was searching for reviews of the movie "Saved!" and came across this website:

http://www.av1611.org/index.html

I laughed out loud because it reminded me of another website:

http://www.landoverbaptist.org

Of course, Landover Baptist is a joke. It's satire on the more extreme elements of Christianity, but I couldn't help but notice that the previous website looked and sounded a lot like it. I hope it's fake, but my cursory browsing didn't yield any signs of that. The paranoia level was off the charts. They proclaimed that conservative, fundamentalist Christians were the most persecuted lot in the world. They even have a "666 Watch" to help us identify the mark so we won't take it.

Look at the two and see if you see the similarity... or more depressingly, see if you notice the difference.
posted by Stephen at 10:36 AM | |

 
Andrew Jones.it appears your hotmail account is full.
posted by riddle at 8:27 AM | |

 
Movies

My wife and I movied ourselves out this evening. I'll start with the second one we watched first:

Joy and I rented Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine", which I've been skeptical of seeing for some time after hearing that Mike manipulated how some things appeared through editing and insinuations in his commentary. If this is true, it's sad, because the true point of his documentary didn't need such fabrications, and it only served to hurt his credibility. The right-wing immediately got defensive about this movie, because it had to do with guns. But that wasn't the overall point of the movie (at least, that's not what I got from it). Ultimately, the movie is about fear and its choke-hold on our society. We are a nation that is motivated to act, positively or negatively, by fear.

The movie makes a particular point about the news we watch. Violent crime has been decreasing nationwide for the past 2 decades, yet reporting of violent crime has skyrocketed. I, myself, got to thinking about the nature of advertising. How many of the commercials we watch play to our fears in one way or another? We don't want to stink, get injured in a car wreck, get diseases, or spend more money on another comparable product. Kids attend school out of fear that they'll grow up to be penniless and alone if they don't make good grades. Fear is part of our lives every day.

This also caused me to think back to the other movie that Joy and I saw today: "Saved!" It was good (although I'm of the opinion that Jimmy and I could have written it better... being on the inside and all). But Joy and I were talking about some of the points it made after the movie. At one point, the principal of the Christian school is debating morality with his son, and says something to the effect of there being no moral ambiguity in the Bible on whatever the subject was, and saying, "There is no gray area." To which the son replies, "It's all gray area, dad!"

This is tough for me as a recovering fundamentalist to swallow. I happen to believe that there are "moral absolutes" (altough I don't often draw my lines in the same places as other absolutists). Yet, the direction that I've been going in appears more relativistic.

I believe that this might be because I've come to want for my interactions with others to be governed by love... and love is hard to make black and white. It requires us to do what is best for individual people given individual circumstances, and it's hard to make a formula out of that. But our natural response is to want to make things easier on ourselves by making formulas, rules, black-and-white areas. We are then left with the task of enforcing those. Given that our church doesn't have the muscle of the state behind it anymore, how many times do we resort to using fear to get people to see things our way?

Fear is a great manipulator, I guess. We spend a good deal of time and effort into learning how to get others to do what we want them to do (we call it leadership). Whether it's buying a certain car/home security system/life insurance, getting our news from a certain outlet, or using a certain system of morality, we want people to see things our way.

Yet love doesn't give us a spirit of fear... and it certainly doesn't lead us to hold it over others.

It's something to think about.
posted by Stephen at 12:33 AM | |

 
no words for how this picture impacted me.


An Iraqi man comforts his four yearold son at a holding center for prisoners of war, in the base camp of the US Army 101st irborne Division near An Najaf, southern Iraq, on March 31. The boy had become terrified when, according to orders, his father was hooded nd handcuffed. A US soldier later severed the plastic handcuffs so that the man could comfort his child. Hoods were placed over detainees' heads because they were quicker to apply than blindfolds. The military said the bags were used to disorientate prisoners and to protect their identities. It is not known what happened to the man or his son.
thanks to jonny baker for putting this on his site.
posted by riddle at 1:32 PM | |

 
Dan Hughes is smarter than I am
"if the emerging church is of value at all it is as a presuppositional critique leveled at our convenient stories of triumphal self-centeredness (aka our happily dominating little metanarratives that presume an object divine view that just so happens to coincide with our own and the blunt historical minimalism that presupposes a direct line of continuity between Jesus and our hip, new, insufferable pretenses in his name).

perhaps the future of emergence is divergence: allowing the marginal a seat at the table in the kingdom that we are beginning to realize was never ours in the first place.

Divergence: A Generative Friendship of Otherness"

Dan Hughes on what happens to Emergent when it stops emerging and becomes an institution like everything before.



From the comments section of Andrew Jones
posted by riddle at 4:07 PM | |

 
Random thoughts on the Future, the church and you and me...

I may just be slow on the draw and everyone knows this already, but I'm going to say it anyway.

The folks who read this blog and who write blogs of their own might be able to be divided into 3 groups.

Group #1- The Loyal Transitionalists.

This group is loyal to the church as we know it and desires to see reform happen within the current church structures, (i'm specifically talking about American churches, but it may be applicable to others)
these are the folks who are spending an inordinate amount of time trying to transistion to being an "emerging church", perhaps with emerging staff and emerging generational ministries. Transistion is a key word for them. They have spent their lives transistioning. They transitioned from a traditional style of worship to contemporary. They have transitioned from contemporary worship to becoming a seeker church. They moved from being a seeker church to being a equipping church. They transitioned from pastors to leaders. They transitioned from committee's to teams. They transitioned to being purpose driven, though that only took 40 days. Transition transition, transition. To the Transition they are faithful and loyal. The emerging church is nothing more than the latest trend to transition their church too. They give lip service to being more than "coffee and candles" but that's really all it is to them. 6 years ago this was me.

Group #2- Loyal Fundamental Traditionalists
This group sends me emails regularly telling me I'm a heretic. They are dogmatic and dedicated to being a church reaching a world that no longer exists. They a relentless in thier understanding of belief and how culture is to be engaged and to this we should give them credit. But they wonder why it doesn't work, and why the younger people say things like, "This church has nothing to do with real life". They are loyal to a worldview that only exists within the church. Many of the young leaders, feeling dejected by this group become Loyal transistionalists down the road. The Loyal Fundamental Traditionalists view the emerging church as heretical. I've never really been in this camp.


Group #3 - The emerging church - who dislike the term emerging church
This group is called a heretic often by both of the other groups. They are relentless in their quest for truth and it's relation to culture, and their experiences in the world. They are no longer trying to transition the churches they are a part of. They do not believe in transition any more. They do not believe in revolution either. For to believe in revolution is to desire to transition on some level. Though the other groups say these people have abandoned them, Group #3 people feel abandoned by their former churches.

They have come to terms with this. They are no longer bitter. They are no longer angry. They simply are. they are living what it means to be the church. They don't play the comparison game. They aren't trying to set themselves apart from anyone else. They aren't trying to reform, or reimagine... They simply are doing life, creating life giving relationships, and facilitating the work of God in their lives.

They are theologians, they are joining God in the creation of beautiful and good things. The are not trying to change the church, however they are undermining the previous groups understandings of church by creating an alternative. This is not some subversive plot to destroy the other groups, but a neccesity they feel to live lives of meaning and purpose in the real world. I am one of these.

more to come...


posted by riddle at 1:20 PM | |

 
William Hung Worship

Years ago I sat in a worship service listening to a retarded girl in her twenties sing a song she had written. She started slowly, awkwardly, the room felt uncomfortable. As she sang the words were difficult to understand her pitch and timing were absolutely terrible. Strangely something about her song brought me to worship. The next woman to sing had an amazing opera voice. I'm sure it was a beautiful song but it was anything but contemporary. I suppose I felt it was unworthy for true worship. The next girl to sing was the pastor's daughter. Like the second woman, she too had a beautiful voice, I had never met her but she seem very snooty, she sang a contemporary worship song, one that I liked, but I sat annoyed by her singing.

Looking back over the years I've thought about that situation many times. Was it anointing? My attitude? Their attitudes?
I had grace for the retarded girl and not for the other ladies.
My lack of grace cause me to miss out on worship an activity that helps me or were they just performances I didn't like, simple as that.
Regardless, I think a lot of pressure has been put on music ministers to perform and deliver excellence.
I don't think Jesus is critical of a persons singing voice, or style of music. I do believe he looks at the heart. Maybe we need better ways of teaching excellence in the heart.

Ps. I think the excellence movement is actually a "seeker" friendly tactic churches have adopted to draw people inside the church. I think it can corrupt the very heart of kingdom values.



posted by Andy at 9:26 AM | |

 
Plunge

I would bathe myself in strangeness:
These comforts heaped upon me, smother me!
I burn, I scald so for the new,
New friends, new faces,
Places!
Oh to be out of this,
This that is all I wanted
-save the new.

And you,
Love, you the much, the more desired!
Do I not loathe all walls, streets, stones,
All mire, mist, all fog,
All ways of traffic?
You, I would have flow over me like water,
Oh, but far out of this!
Grass, and low fields, and hills,
And sun,
Oh, sun enough!
Out and alone, among some
Alien people!

--Ezra Pound
posted by Stephen at 11:14 PM | |

 
What Do You Think?
Hey gang...I've been having different conversations about our little blogspot lately (kind of creative thinking, direction kinds of conversations), and I would like your input on a few things.

First, I've been wondering lately about opening the blog to other voices. Basically, inviting a few others to come along and blog their journey and thoughts with us here. Maybe 2 or 3 other people. Is that something that would make our site better or would it make it feel too much like a message board?

Along the same line, we recently received a request from someone for permission to blog here using an alter ego. This is someone who Riddle knows better than I do, but we both respect this person and like what he has to say. His reasons for using an alter-ego are entirely his own, and I think they are valid. What do you guys think about letting someone post here on the blog without using their real name?

Lastly, what do you think about a full-fledged site? We'd still have the blog but also let people write articles and such? Maybe create a liquidthinking think-tank where various conversations and ideas are being shared. Maybe open chats and IM sessions? Or maybe a liquidthinking blog central, where several people could have their own blogs here...I don't know. Any ideas?
posted by Jimmy at 10:59 PM | |

 
Home
"You know that point in your life when you realize that the house that you grew up in isn't really your home anymore? That idea of home is gone. Maybe that's what family is...a group of people who miss the same imaginary place."
quote from this movie.

"Home… hard to know what it is if you've never had one
Home… I can't say where it is but I know I'm going home
That's where the hurt is."
Walk On by U2

posted by Jimmy at 12:28 PM | |

 
Church in the UK and USA
Good insights from Rob Lewin concerning UK and USA churches. I'm getting to the point where I don't understand or remember what "emergent" really is or means, but his insights on the current situation with American churches were...well...insightful.
posted by Jimmy at 12:20 PM | |

 

One Day
It's amazing what 24 hours can bring. Sixty years ago one day changed the tide of a 5 year war for the world. In one day thousands of mothers woke up loving children who would not be there when they went to bed. In one day the hope of liberation came to many others.

Two thousand years ago one day brought the redemption planned since creation. One day brought the promise of resurrection for eternity. One day brought the fulfillment to centuries of longing for an indwelling by the Spirit of God.

My own life has changed so much in different 24 hour periods. One day when I was 16 I woke up not knowing Christ and went to bed knowing Him. In one day I woke up single and went to bed married. In one day I woke up childless and went to bed a father. One day I will wake up and never see the end of it.

It's amazing what 24 hours can bring.

(When I found this flash file I was thinking about D-Day and just happend to have "Dare You to Move" by Switchfoot on the headphones. It was a cool experience. "This Is Your Life" by switchfoot was also cool. ;-) Put those songs on, go to this link, and just think about your life a bit. Do it as a meditation.


Seriously...)


posted by Jimmy at 1:24 AM | |

 
Ronald Wilson Reagan: 1911 - 2004


Think whatever you want about the man's politics, but he was an extremely important President, and there hasn't been one like him since. He wasn't a party man like the last three have been. His main concern was not personal power, nor the power of his party. He was an ideologue, and he believed wholeheartedly in his philosophical foundations. He was an optimist who could say things that, if anyone else were to have said them, you'd role your eyes and wonder who let Pollyanna in. But when he said those things, you wanted to believe them.

There are times when you look back at history and say, "Despite that person's foibles and weaknesses, we needed that person at that time." Ronald Reagan was not a god. He wasn't the savior of America, as I'm sure many a right-wing radio host will be telling us for the next couple of weeks. But he did happen on the scene right when we seemed to need him.

Yes, he contributed to the end of the Cold War. He helped the economy. But more importantly, he changed the attitude in America. History goes in cycles. At that point in the cycle, we were pretty down on ourselves. Reagan came in and told us it was okay to think things would be okay. He reminded us of the things we were doing right and permitted us to be proud of them. Some might argue that, since then, the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. That might be the case, but that's not Ronald Reagan's fault. He did what he needed to do. He played his role in history.

Ride on, Mr. President. Continue that westward journey.
posted by Stephen at 12:23 AM | |

 
The Faith of a Child

My daughter is wonderful. I love the way she looks at everything with absolute awe and wonder. She's really into the moon and stars right now. Whenever we go outside at night, she starts looking around for them. She knows the signs, so whenever she sees the moon, she starts moving her little hand in a circle. Sometimes we blow kisses to the moon, and I tell her that one reason God put the moon there is because he knew how fascinating Annabelle would find it.

The cool thing is that it's rubbing off on me. I find myself being fascinated by things that have, for a long time, been mundane. Part of it is that I wonder what it is that my daughter finds so fascinating about these things (apart from the fact that she hasn't seen whatever it is thousands of times like I have). That helps.

I really don't want things to become routine. I don't want to be a robot. I know that I have been like that. I see people like that all the time. Some of my students, as young as they are, have had all the thrill and wonder of life either beaten out of them or drowned by material wealth or suffocated on the vine... sometimes it seems like we train people to be callous toward how amazing life is. One time, I took a bunch of sand to school with me and encouraged the students to play in it. For a while, they responded almost like I had asked them to speak martian. The idea that they would play with sand, especially at school, was so foreign that they literally didn't know how to respond. But, gradually, they remembered... and it all started to rush back. They PLAYED!

I've been wondering just what on earth it is I expect of believers around here... why it is that I can't be content with a "church home". I want believers around me to encourage me to keep this sense of wonder... this playful, unquenchable, optimistic curiousity... not to get suffocated by the routine of life. I want my daughter to hold on to what she's got and not trade it in for a concern over what the latest trend is or have her spirit crushed by people who want her to be like them.

That's what I want.

posted by Stephen at 5:15 PM | |