Monday, June 06, 2005

praying for rain

yesterday in church we prayed for rain. most of the state of nsw, in fact most of australia, is besieged by one of the worst droughts on record (and in many places it is the worst on record). the inland city of goulburn, just an hour down the road from where we live, is at under 10% of it's water supply capacity. warragamba dam, the main reservoir for sydney's water, is getting close to 40% capacity. farmers all over new south wales are being forced deep into debt or off the land completely. so we pray for rain.

the problem is, i feel very uneasy about asking god to supernaturally send rain at this time and in this place. it's not that i don't believe all good things come from god and it's right and proper to acknowledge our reliance on god, it's that praying for rain feels extremely disingenuous when the reason it isn't raining is because of what we've done as humans to the climate and the environment.

tim flannery writes about a few of these human causes in today's smh ("Forecast deteriorates for the dry country"). according to flannery, the three major mechanisms behind the lack of rainfall are:
"the 0.63-degree warming that has occurred in the past 100 years, which has caused Australia's winter rainfall zone to contract";

"the ozone hole: with less ozone the stratosphere is cooler, causing circulation around the Antarctic to speed up, which draws winter clouds further south";

and that "[the] Pacific Ocean has warmed, and computer models predict that this will cause a semi-permanent el Nino phase of the el Nino southern oscillation cycle - the part that brings drought to Australia."
from other reading, i would add to this list the massive and ongoing land-clearing which has been done in eastern australia especially, because trees and bushland attract rain and also help to retain water in and under the ground.

how can we honestly rely now on god to save us from the effects of our greed and folly? is it even right to do so? in many ways it seems just another example of the modern malaise of do what you feel like and somebody else will pay to clean it up. as the u2 song says, "daddy's gonna pay for your crashed car".

god is infinite in mercy, but i don't believe he really wants to bail humans out for their wickedness or stupidity. what he wants is for us to grow up, to learn from our mistakes, to be better stewards of this incredible, beautiful planet he's given us.

will we learn greater respect for the earth and to treat her resources and environment better if god comes through now and sends rain supernaturally (because it just ain't gonna happen naturally)? maybe, but i think it's wrong to just sit back and expect god to intervene. all we can do is throw ourselves on his mercy, acknowledging our failings in caring for the earth and asking him to forgive us and save us. then we need to back up our words by doing as much as we can to fix the problem, relying on his boundless forbearance to do what we cannot and send rain back to this parched country.

Thursday, May 26, 2005

you'll never walk alone

liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool liverpool

need i say more?

not that i'm a fanatic or anything, but what a comeback and what a win. only my masochistic streak kept me watching the game at halftime. nobody comes back from 3-0 down, especially against italian teams that are historically shut-up-shop defensive. but in "six minutes of madness" (as ac milan's coach put it), liverpool scored 3 goals to even the score, then managed to hold on right through 30 minutes of extra time before winning on penalties. actually, i don't feel as elated as i would have been if it had been a field-of-play win. i don't like penalty shootouts to decide these kinds of games, and i feel sorry for milan losing in this way, but they're professionals and they'll get over it (and they did in fact win the championship league final - on penalties - against juventus two years ago).




(pictures courtesy of soccernet)

Friday, May 20, 2005

universalism and all that

or, dave comes out of the closet...

to put it bluntly, i just can't believe that sending sinners to eternal torment in hell amounts to justice, no matter what the crime. it defies every principle of justice and punishment fitting the crime that we hold to as humans, and, as george macdonald says, if we don't think something is fair or right, it's tantamount to blasphemy to attribute it to god. god's sense of fairness must be at least as strong as ours, or else he's not the holy and just god we believe he is. on the other side of the coin, we also need to beware of attributing to god our human sense of revenge and wanting to get even. god's righteousness would mean nothing to us without his infinite capacity to forgive.

compounding the issue is the fact that we sin in ignorance: no child knows or understands before they start sinning that they will be forever damned for their actions. still further, even if we did understand the consequences, it wouldn't make a difference because of the innate sinful nature we inherit as descendents of adam. so we are in a catch-22 situation: we cannot help sinning but we are forever damned for it. how is that just?

this of course is an argument that has been made many times. i do not deny that we have been gifted (or burdened?) with free will, so we must take responsibility for our actions, but at the same time i do not believe god looks at us with a demanding, legalistic attitude, just waiting for us to slip up so he can get the rod out. i do not do this with my daughter, who i love more than my life, but instead expect her to be independent and (increasingly) rebellious, wanting to go her own way and do what she wants. in the same way, i believe god understands our rebellious natures and treats us with immeasurable forbearance, going so far as to give his son to provide a way out of our bondage to sin and into a new life of true freedom.

george macdonald put forward another argument against the eternal punishment doctrine which i find, if anything, even more compelling. if even one soul is separated from god for eternity, with no possible means of return, it means that satan has won a victory against god, and that is unthinkable. god must have the final, complete victory, but it would not be, could not be, an absolute victory if satan has succeeded in capturing any souls forever. when he died, jesus descended to hell and opened the gates, rendering it no longer an inescapable prison. if anyone chooses, they may simply walk out, and the eternal father is forever on the lookout to welcome each one with great celebration. since jesus' death, it is only our will that keeps us from god, but the way back will never be closed off. never ever.

obviously the implications of a universalist stance are many, going right to the heart of how we are to live as believers in this world. most importantly, i think, it puts a big question over many missionary and proselytising efforts. to my mind, that's not such a bad thing, because these kinds of endeavours have often had disturbing overtones of manipulation and coercion, if not downright convert-buying. at the more mundane level, i've always been at least a little uncomfortable with exhortations to befriend people in the hope of 'winning them to christ', because it smacks of false pretenses. don't we befriend people because they are fellow human beings who we can share our lives with and whose outlook and experience can teach and inform our own lives?

so why tell anyone about the good news of jesus, and why bother believing it and living it ourselves if it doesn't really make a difference for whether or not we go to heaven? after all, it's a lot easier and a lot more fun to ignore god and do our own thing...

well, no doubt it'd be easier, but since when was that the point? since adam and eve ate the forbidden fruit it's always been easier to follow our own desires, but that doesn't mean it's the better way to live. on the contrary, the bible makes it abundantly clear that the best way to live is according to god's law. as michael casey says in his book toward god:
"The ultimate truth of human life is that all our searching leads to God. In Saint Augustine's timeless words, 'You have made us for yourself [O God] and our hearts are restless until they rest in you.' This is something we know about every human being. He or she is made for God; there will always be an incompleteness until a person arrives at God.

...

"We were created with an orientation toward God, and so actions that direct us toward God accord with the imperatives of our nature. When we try to live moral lives after the example of Christ, and open our minds and hearts to prayer, we are not simply doing something 'religious'; we are fulfilling the most fundamental requirement of our humanity. By God's gift we can turn away from the intangible and immediate, transcend the attractions of sense and image, and stretch forth into the infinite sea of eternity. We can add a new dimension to our human experience." (p.3)
just before he slipped away, jesus gave his disciples 'the great commission':
"All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." (matthew 28: 18-20, niv)
jesus knew what people need, how their lives can be lived to the full, and he taught this to his disciples, then told them to go tell it to the ends of the earth. there is nothing here about telling people that if they don't believe they'll go to hell for eternity, and neither was such a message part of the "everything I have commanded you" he told the disciples to pass on. it's true, especially towards the end of his ministry, jesus said a lot about the consequences of not following his teachings, but those words were all directed at the believers. in the parable of the sheep and goats, it is to the ones who claim to know jesus, who call out, "lord, lord," that he says, "depart from me, i never knew you." the others, who put their faith into practice, didn't even realise they were doing it for jesus, and he welcomes them into his rest.

which brings me to the second reason we should be following jesus and encouraging others to do the same: what we do has consequences, both here and after we die. i don't subscribe to the view that we'll all just stroll into heaven the minute we leave this mortal coil. such a view makes a mockery of god, and isn't in any way consistent with the bible's teaching. god is holy, and demands holiness from us. but while purity is a state (that disappears quickly!), holiness is a life. we cannot be declared holy, we can only learn to be holy through repentance. even jesus needed to be proved holy by his life, as it says in hebrews 5:8-9:
"Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him." (niv)
this doesn't mean jesus wasn't perfect through his life, but his perfection, his holiness, wasn't complete until he'd finished his work. we tend, i think, not to apply this to ourselves, but it doesn't make sense to me how i can be, for example, hateful to my neighbor one minute and holy the next, just because i died in between. being holy means learning how to love my neighbor, and i won't be holy until i've done that. and we will never enter the holy city of god, our final destination where all our desires will be completely fulfilled, until we are holy, until all unholiness has been purged from our lives, which can only be achieved by a long process of repentance, turning from our pride and selfishness and choosing to love.

george macdonald frequently made the point that jesus saves us from our sin, but not the consequences of our sin. i don't fully understand what he meant by this, but one of the obvious examples is our inevitable human death. the promise to adam and eve was that if they ate of the tree they would die, and as children of adam we inherit that promise, and hence we will all die as a consequence of our sin. but that's not the end of the story, as romans 6:23 says:
"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (niv)
this verse has most popularly been used to support the eternal punishment doctrine, but it doesn't seem inherent to me that the second part cancels out the first. instead, i think it makes sense to see it as saying that, yes, we die, but then god gives us eternal life as a gift, completely gratuitous and unearned. and this gift, this act of grace on god's part, is meaningless unless it is also universal, given freely and in equal measure to all.

finally (and maybe ironically having spent so much time on the subject), i don't actually get the impression from reading the bible that what happens to us after we die is an issue god wants us to be concerned about to a great extent. i believe that saving is god's work, and our task is to live as true followers of christ. the commandment of jesus was for us to love each other as he taught and modelled, and thus the world will know we are his disciples. to me this means that the primary mode of evangelism is believers living in community, demonstrating to the world the kingdom life which is love and service to each other. of course, this doesn't mean we ignore non-believers and stay in our holy huddles, but that we go and live the life of following jesus out in the open, in the view of all, and especially where there is no witness of this kind. and by being salt and light in the dark places, we will be used by god to draw all people to himself.

Thursday, May 12, 2005

the good war?

there's a great piece in today's smh by richard drayton, senior lecturer in history at Cambridge University, called War's moral compass is flawed and points in all directions (originally published in the guardian as An ethical blank cheque).

drayton mentions taken by force, a book by robert lilly which is a study of the rapes committed by american soldiers in europe between 1942 and 1945. lilly suggests a minimum of 10,000 rapes (which is probably a conservative estimate). elsewhere in the essay, drayton talks of crimes committed by allied soldiers in the pacific against japanese captives, quoting edgar james, an 'embedded' pacific war correspondent:
"We shot prisoners in cold blood, wiped out hospitals, strafed lifeboats, killed or mistreated enemy civilians, finished off the enemy wounded, tossed the dying into a hole with the dead, and in the Pacific boiled flesh off enemy skulls to make table ornaments."
the point of bringing these things up is primarily because they are never mentioned or talked about, and thus largely unknown by the general population. we very readily remember the atrocities committed by the 'enemy' but sweep our own shameful actions under the carpet. once again marx's adage that history is written by the victors is proved correct. it's not just an issue of good guys and bad guys, needing to believe your side is right in order to sustain the will to win the war. as drayton says, the effect is much farther reaching:
"All this seems innocent fun, but patriotic myths have sharp edges. The 'good war' against Hitler has underwritten 60 years of warmaking. It has become an ethical blank cheque for British and US power. We claim the right to bomb, to maim, to imprison without trial on the basis of direct and implicit appeals to the war against fascism.

When we fall out with such tyrant friends as Noriega, Milosevic or Saddam we rebrand them as 'Hitler'. In the 'good war' against them, all bad things become forgettable 'collateral damage'. The devastation of civilian targets in Serbia or Iraq, torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo, the war crime of collective punishment in Falluja, fade to oblivion as the 'price of democracy'."
i find this all very interesting, and i'm not just trying to wack the purpetrators and supporters of the iraq war over the head once again (no matter how much i enjoy it :^). at the least i think we need to keep being reminded that, especially with issues of war, there is no black and white, right and wrong. not for the first time, bruce cockburn puts it perfectly:
God, damn the hands of glory
That hold the bloody firebrand high
Close the book and end the story
Of how so many men have died
Let the world retain in memory
That mighty tongues tell mighty lies
And if mankind must have an enemy
Let it be his warlike pride
Let it be his warlike pride

(from It's Going Down Slow, Bruce Cockburn, 1971)

Friday, April 29, 2005

new music

a couple of weeks ago i received the shipment of 4 cds i'd ordered from pastemusic: drunkard's prayer, the latest offering from one of my favourite bands, over the rhine; their live cd changes come; one time otr guitarist ric hordinski's solo cd when i consider how my light is spent; and whoever it was that brought me here will have to take me home by welsh singer/songwriter martyn joseph.

all four discs are superb and i'm very happy with the purchase. over the rhine write some of the more thoughtful and challenging lyrics going around at the moment, their music is rich and melodic with generous (often sole) use of acoustic instrumentation, and karin bergquist's classically-trained voice is a delight to listen to. ric hordinski's half-instrumental cd is beautiful and atmospheric. and after wanting to get more of martyn joseph's music for ages (i've had the live cd an aching and a longing for over 10 years), wiwtbmhwhttmh doesn't disappoint, confirming my regard for him as an excellent songwriter who faces up honestly to the struggles and ambiguities of life. as the opening sentence of the pastemusic review puts it, "Perhaps there’s never been as adept a blend of the Bruces (Springsteen and Cockburn) as Welsh singer/songwriter Martyn Joseph."

one of the things i especially appreciate about both otr's drunkard's prayer and the martyn joseph cd is that they contain songs which deal with mature relationships going through less than rosy times, a place i know well. drunkard's prayer actually grew out of a period of major re-evaluation for linford and karin, as linford writes in the liner notes:
"[A] few months into our [Ohio] tour, Karin and I realized that although good things were happening with our music, there was just very little energy or creativity or time left over for our marriage, and it was taking a toll on us. I think we had to learn that puting a long-term relationship on autopilot indefinitely can be dangerous if not fatal. We decided we had to pull the plug on the tour and go home and figure out if being together was something we were still committed to.

We opted to start over, reinvent our own relationship, dig deep and do the homework to see if we could make our marriage sing. We decided to redirect the same thought and energy, that we had been putting into writing and performing, toward our life at home together. We prayed a lot. Our friends prayed a lot. It was the beginning of a wonderful new chapter for us..."
talking about the song Born:
"When we came home from the tour, we bought two cases of wine and decided we were going to put a bottle on the kitchen table every evening and start talking until nothing was left. The idea was not to get plowed, but to talk face to face deep into the night."
sounds like a great idea, though it would be difficult for couples with kids or for whom one or both had to go to work in the morning!

my favourite song, though, is from martyn joseph. i can relate to so much of what he says. janette had her hair cut quite significantly a few days ago, and she had to mention it to me before i noticed. of course, there were mitigating circumstances - it was dark, i was late home and tired, she went to bed early - but the words of the song ring too true, there are many days when i don't see her anymore, missing...
Every Little Sign

Susie, drain your glass
Let’s head on up the hill
Bring the coat I bought you
Against the evening chill
There's question marks between us
As you slip your arm in mine
There are days when I don't see you
I miss every little sign.

The lights are throwing shadows
And the streets are raining slow
In the yellow of the valley
We can hear the dreams below
I hope I read you right
From the angle of your chin
The our hearts are feeling sore tonight
And this town has hemmed us in

I want to take you somewhere
Where the clouds are never seen
Where now could be replaced
By a bigger brighter dream
Those nights when we were lovers
Have made us distant friends
Can you tell me how this happened
And who goes first to make amends.

I want to bless your heart with magic
And give you all you're due
I want you to have your radiance back
I want to fill your glass anew
To turn our bland verse conversation
Into sentences that rhyme
We could maybe make a rainbow
Instead of marking time.

It's hard to find the strength in love
When everything is frail
When words are wrapped and guarded
Too scared they're gonna fail
But we could ask for healing now
'Til all the veils have gone
And let the moonlight find for us
A better journey on.

Copyright Joseph/Henderson, 2003

Friday, April 22, 2005

more committed?

thanks to backyard missionary andrew hamilton for the link to this excellent article, It's No Longer About Commitment.

i especially agree that real, 'deep', discipleship must start with the those in leadership (not just pastors, but including elders, deacons and those who may not hold any 'office' but who are effectively leaders because of their maturity in the faith). As the author, stephen hinks, says:
"The starting place for sacrifice to re-enter our parlance and practice is with leadership. Leaders need to lead the way with deep personal change. Leaders need to model what sacrifice is, how choices are made, how costs are weighed and how fruits are enjoyed. When the language of sacrifice is recaptured by individual Christians we can put depth into our disciple-making."

Thursday, April 21, 2005

bunch of scheming swindlers

i know this is lazy blogging, but i came across this excellent quote by soren kierkegaard at emergingsideways (picked up originally from mike at waving or drowing?) and wanted to pass it on:
The matter is quite simple. The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand we are obliged to act accordingly. Take any words in the New Testament and forget everything except pledging yourself to act accordingly. My God, you will say, if I do that my whole life will be ruined. Herein lies the real place of Christian scholarship. Christian scholarship is the Church’s prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close. Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament.