I've had it with these mother-effin snakes on this mother-effin island

Today is St. Patrick's Day.  That's pretty much apparent to everyone, what with all of the green attire, faux Irish people, and expensiver colored beer going on.  What is perhaps less certain is my motivation for writing on this day as opposed to other, different days that I did not write on.

Simply put, I was struck by inspiration this morning.  Actually, I was struck by hot water in the shower, but some of that water obviously morphed into liquid inspiration, infiltrated my ear canals, wove its way into my brain and somehow penetrated the Great Matrix and became one with my soul.  I became like the Avatar Of Whatever I Am Going To Now Start Writing.  Even now, I can feel the pulsing of your anticipation and hear the heavy breathing of curiosity in lieu of my awesome intro- so I shall ease your suffering and immediately "get in the zone".

So I had a random thought the other day about God, and I'll be the first to admit that it isn't the most well-thought out and researched thought, but I had it and I'm running on liquid inspiration, so anyways the thought was, why does faith have such a huge focus on proselytization?  Why is getting the word out such a big deal?  I know, I know, it's a commandment- but why?  Shouldn't it just be that God is, like, so big and huge that everybody already knows and rebellion is then a blatantly stupid choice that some people make?

(Just so you know, I'm not going to be answering this question, or any other questions, about God in this post.  So if you came here searching for wisdom, you might just want to hit the 'next blog' button there at the top, although I think it's algorithmically engineered to give you a random blog, so you should probably just stay here anyways in case you go do an even dumber blog)

Please don't misunderstand- it's not that I'm opposed to the idea of evangelism.  The essence of evangelism is telling someone something they don't know that you think they should know.  Nothing wrong with that- in moderation. 

Think of everything you've ever learned, ever.  You were, at one time, ignorant of your non-learningness and needed to be shown the light by someone with greater wisdom and knowledge than you.  It's how we learn to speak, and write, and use the bathroom.  All throughout our lives, we're learning and growing and much of that information has to come from outside sources who had some sort of passion or urge to help us improve the quality of our lives (although with toilet training, the motives are much less altruistic and more rooted in the mindset of JUST USE THE FREAKING TOILET ALREADY!!!!!). 

While faith evangelism is different in that it's higher up on the hierarchy of needs, the principle is still sound.  Faith works for many people- it gives them hope, helps them through stressful times, and can provide a built-in sense of community.  In that sense, it's not preposterous to believe that others would want their friends and family to be a part of that.  It's not that simple though. 

The problem is that often evangelism comes from a pre-supposed position of superiority that makes it difficult to relate to other people on a "human" level.  When you meet someone on the uneven playing field of "I already know that what I have to say is true, and it is true because I believe it is true, and therefore nothing you can say will shake my knowledge of the truth of what I say", your victory is assured because either they will see it your way or else they will fall further into their "delusion".  Either way, you've done your "job".

A few years ago, I was studying for an upcoming test in one of the lounge areas on campus when a girl I'd never met came up to me and struck up a conversation.  I instantly pegged her as trying to convert me and sure enough- after a rousing round of small talk, she asked me if I went to church anywhere (a Jesus and Bible believing church, to be sure).  I assured her I did, and after a few minutes of this (and also making sure that my sister's mission trip to Thailand was under the auspices of the Bible-believing Jesus banner), she left, and I resumed my studying.  She probably felt further emboldened in her faith by approaching such an intimidating stranger ('sup)- and I felt a sort of sadness at the death of what could have been a real human moment.

See what bothers me about that whole interaction is that I pegged it from the beginning.  Sure, I could go off on a separate post about the human distance in our society, and how we are becoming increasingly absorbed into our own little worlds and more detached from the lives of others- but the liquid inspiration is almost gone.  Some of you might even say it never quite 'took'.  Po-TAY-toes, po-TAH-toes.  But after the whole ordeal was done I felt like I was a statistic.  I felt like, to this girl, I was not a fellow person to interact with; rather, that I was some sort of spiritual trophy to be taken and adorned on a belt full of other "lost" souls that she had won. 

So as we celebrate the life of a man who brought Christianity to a nation of people who may or may not have been receptive to it, let's remember to respect the life story that each of us has embarked on.  I'm not saying that experience=truth, I'm saying that they have just as much right to believe what they believe as you, that they probably have as many sufficient reasons for those beliefs as you do yours, and if you engage people in relationships that are built upon converting them onto the trophy case...then you might have missed the main message of whatever faith you converted them to in the first place.

Everyone wants to keep CHRIST in Christmas...what about MAS?

Well, November is over halfway done, and Thanksgiving is next week (this week if you're one of those crazies that starts their week on Sunday), which can only mean one thing- Christmas season started 3 weeks ago.

Normally I'm all gung-ho for Christmas.  A couple years ago, I spontaneously decorated the house one early November weekend because we got an inch of snow.  This year....well, this year I'm trying to remember that Turkey Day technically comes first chronologically and there's still a whole month to enjoy the Christmas festivities afterwards.  Besides, snow (obviously) plays a huge role in my Christmaspiritometer, and Marquette has been going through a period of snow impotence lately.  I mean, I woke up to our first snow day of the year to find this on the ground:

In serious need of some snow Viagra.

Most people don't care about that though, and so Christmas has begun.  Viva la Christmas!  

With the onset of the Christmas fever, it is inevitable that Facebook walls, Twitter, message boards, and church signs everywhere will begin the War on anti-christ-mas and those unholy spawns of Satan who want to ninja-sneak into our beds and slice the CHRIST right out of CHRISTmas- leaving behind a poor, tired, huddled -Mas.  Indeed, it has already begun, and can only lead to a holly, jolly blood bath, some amped up rhetoric, and all of us waking up on December 26th just to realize no one really changed anyone's mind or made any headway in winning the war.  Nope- we just took a month of peace and goodwill, dragged it out back, and shot it in the face.  Ho ho ho indeed.

It doesn't have to be this way though.  Because here's the thing about holidays- they are what you make them.  You.  Singular.  Emphasis on YOU.  You decide the meaning of the holiday.  I literally cannot make this any more clear.  Seriously, I can't.  I bolded/underlined/italicized it.  Then I changed the size and the font.  Finally, I gave it some color (Christmas colors in fact).  The only thing I could do at this point would be to provide a hyperlink, but if you can't understand it here, you sure as heck aren't going to understand it there, where they don't even go to the trouble of providing such witty banter and excellent service.

Think about the various Christmas traditions.  Santa Claus.  Christmas trees.  The decorations.  The giving of the gifts.  Even the date (December 25th).  All of them have some basis on Pagan traditions.  But most of us don't care about that because all of those things mean something completely different to us now.  Saturnaila is out of the picture.  We aren't worshipping the trees by adorning them with precious idols. 

And we are able to celebrate free from the stain of guilt on our pious consciences because we have made these customs our own.  Each person, each family folds a desired practice into their celebration and lets the other things fall by the wayside.     

This doesn't just go for Christmas, either.  It's all holidays.  In our family, Halloween is not some big Satan fest (we celebrate that on 'SomeBigSatanFest Day')- it's a day where we get to dress up like Batman and go get free candy.  I'm sure I have spent at least a few Thanksgivings without giving thanks for anything besides that big old turkey we chomping at the bit for.  On Easter we teach our kids about the time the Easter Bunny rose from the dead to check if there was six more weeks of winter and to give all the good little boys and girls of the world pastel candy.

Of course, we also have the freedom to ignore holidays should we so choose.  Columbus Day pretty much comes and goes like any other non-Columbus Day in our house (except with disruption to the mail and banking sectors.  Even in death, Chris Columbus is giving us the finger).

No holiday pay for you, SUCKAS!!!!

I believe the reason that things started to shift away from Christmas and towards Wintersmas is that some people couldn't understand/accept the idea of different beliefs being taught than what they believed and felt persecuted.  Then they went on a crusade for their beliefs.  So the powers-that-be, not really understanding how to accommodate minority belief systems without upsetting the majority, just decided that nobody gets to play Special Winter Holiday today (which is honestly how any good parent decides a dispute between their two children fighting over the same toy.  That is what good parents do, right?).  Many Christians, not understanding/accepting the idea of different beliefs than what they believed, started to feel persecuted and began to crusade for their beliefs.

Just saying.

Personally, I have no problem saying 'happy holidays' to someone. I'm acknowledging the fact that there are like, a bunch of holidays in the span of a month as well as acknowledging respect for another persons feelings and beliefs. Maybe they celebrate Christmas because of Jesus, maybe they even celebrate Christmas without Jesus (because, let's be honest- the idea of unlimited sweets, free stuff, and two weeks off of school are all pretty good non-religious reasons to celebrate Christmas), and maybe they don't celebrate Christmas period.  In a country that was forged by a group of people fleeing religious persecution, I don't mind not persecuting someone's religion.

If you want to keep Christ in Christmas, then first try being Christ-like.  Jesus didn't run around waving the sword of "Na-nana boo-boo" or smashing people over the head with the hammer of "Pwn'd n00bs".  By and large, his earthly ministry was based on kindness, compassion, and humility.  Of course, we take that example and become the religious equivalent of John McClane.



Shoot first, shoot later.  THEN ask questions.  Then shoot them too.

Myself, I wouldn't mind if schools allowed the incorporation of different festivities- and not just so I could keep my CHRISTmas.  It'd be a way for my kids to learn about people outside their tiny bubble.  I mean, come on- most children end up believing what their parents believe anyways so it's not like our kids are going to drift away into heresy.  As long as we're actively involved in their lives, and they know we love them and want what is best for them, we have nothing to fear about them being exposed to things outside of our comfort zone.  If we actually embraced differences (instead of treating them like they're a great big game of Hot Potato) then maybe our kids would grow up and realize that 'Hey.  We can, you know...actually talk about our differences in a respectful fashion and maybe not just hate each other because of some invisible, ideological divide'.  Crazy talk, I know.

Look, Jesus was the Son of God, right?  The Son of freaking God.  Not only that, but He was freaking God Himself.  But He humbled Himself to come down to Earth to hang with us, teach us all really good lessons, and then die for our sins.  I think if God was willing to do that...then maybe this Christmas we can all humble ourselves and spread some peace and goodwill instead of lobbing culture bombs at our demon neighbors.

PICS- Columubs- http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2005/10/10/o_henry/
John McClane- http://media.screened.com/uploads/1/13855/580047-3.jpg

The Least Likely to Succeed: The review

Last week, I privileged you with a copy of my first (and so far only) published work.  If you haven't read it (and judging from the page view stats from Google, almost 7 billion of you haven't), then you need to stop doing whatever it is that you are doing that isn't reading my blog- and go read it.  It will change your life- or at least give my page view a bump.

Now that you've read it, I can tell you that it's not my best work (it's about ten years old after all).  Hey I couldn't have told you that before you read it- then you might not have read it.  Sometimes a little trickery is involved in this business.  I don't make the rules- I just play by them.

Understand that I still think it's pretty good.  I proudly claim it as my own.  It's just....rough around the edges.  In fact, when I first went through to type it out, I got about two paragraphs in when I realized that some serious rewriting could be done.  I danced around points, was overly wordy, and on more than one occasion did not successfully link points together.  STOP NODDING YOUR HEADS, ALL OF YOU!!!! 

I ended up deciding against it- on the condition that I could critique it.  Not really critique it (that's an actual skill that I actually don't possess)- I guess I was thinking I'd provide, like, the directors commentary as a bonus feature.  Like any good directors commentary, I will seek to be equal parts informative, funny, and not-boring.  

Let's just start with a technical issue- my love of the comma has not cooled at all.  It's as if I'm working on a comma commission, or a comma-ission.  Come to think of it, that's not a bad idea.  I could be rich!

And have a beard.  And also, I'm punching a giant squid on my shoulder.

Seriously though, grammar has never been one of my strong suits, and this piece wears my incompetence proudly.  Although I do feel that grammar is merely an artificial system set up by higher education to further illuminate the difference between the haves and the have-nots.  So maybe I'm just like the grammar Robin Hood, sticking it to the establishment every time I misuse punctuation.  That's how I sleep at night, anyways...
Second, I was so focused on discerning the mystery meaning of Tolkien's words that the idea that an audience will attach their own meanings onto the subject completely passed me by.  Yes, Tolkien's beliefs would at the very least shade his writings in some way- but a reader would do the same thing with their own beliefs, meaning that my role was not so much herald of Tolkien's secret message- but more of hit-you-over-the-head harbinger of my own message.

In fact, that's probably my biggest frustration with this piece- I wrote it through the eyes of my younger, fundamentally religious self that looked to slap the Jesus label on anything and everything.  There was no part of me that would have ever thought "Hey, maybe Tolkien just wrote this book because he had some really cool dreams"- everything was black and white to me, and I had to try and fit my own ideas and beliefs with the fact that Lord of the Rings existed.

That doesn't nullify my paper necessarily.  Obviously I was writing out of the meaning that I attached to it.  It's not wrong to have opinions, and my interpretation was pretty 'pro' actually (for the non-inundated, 'pro' is pretty much the best thing you can be called).  Isn't that why we read movie reviews and book reviews and watch shows like 'The View' and 'Pardon the Interruption' (and no, I don't watch 'The View' anymore)?  We enjoy to hear what other people thing about things.  That way we can either strengthen our own beliefs and views or else feel righteous indignation that someone doesn't agree with us.  

It's just that when I read this piece, it's like 23 year old Jason is in the room, talking to me, and I want to acknowledge him for everything that he meant to 32 year old Jason- while also telling him to chill out and just enjoy life.  There doesn't have to be a spiritual meaning in everything.  It's okay to just watch a good movie or read a good book.  You don't have to write Bible verses on the cash drop envelopes at the Gas Station.  If you see a license plate from Texas, don't read too much into it.  Some things in life...just...are. 

Back to technical disproficiency.  As I am wont to do, I strayed a little off topic and spent a few too many words that were ultimately inconsequential to the main point, which was that Frodo was a parallel to Christ.  I still like that premise- I think Frodo's quest parallels the Jesus QUEST of biblical lore.  I just could have shaved a couple paragraphs by skipping over the Messianic qualifications of Aragorn and Gandalf (and saved that for my own little trilogy of essays) and just gone straight to Frodo...which was the point of the essay.

Of course, it doesn't matter what the point of the essay was if there was nobody to deliver it to, and that's probably the biggest glaring weakness- no real focused audience.  Sometimes I feel like I'm writing to Christians, other times to non-Christians.  Sometimes I'm explaining basic Lord of the Rings concepts like I'm writing a 'One Ring for Dummies' book, explaining the Ringwraiths and Rivendell.  Then I basically turn around and quote the Silmarillion, quote Erestor, name-drop the Ainur and I even freaking called Mount Doom Orodruin. 

At that point, I really don't think I understood the importance of knowing your audience.  One could make the argument that I still don't, to which I say 'hold still while I go get a heavy iron pan'.  My favorite authors to read are the ones who know their audience and cater to that audience.  Bill Simmons.  The guys at Cracked.com.  Granted, they chose largely to write to simpletons like me- but still.  I love it.  It might just be that I feel like I'm a part of a bigger community when I read their stuff, so I view it more favorably- or it could be that they know who they are and who they're writing for, and that leads to more focus.

I'm also struck by a lack of research.  Back then, I really didn't have any clue how big the world is, and how much information is out there.  Of course, a lot of it is just airheads like me flying off the cuff.  But at least I have the pretense of subjecting myself to a higher standard.  Not back then though.

For instance,my comparison between Sauron and Satan was not necessarily based in empirical fact or comparison to other literary villains- or even an actual literary assessment of Satan himself- but my own understanding of what I had been told about Satan.  The problem with that is that it can easily sound like I know what I'm talking about without actually knowing what I'm talking about.  That's how misinformation can spread.

I'm better now about fact checking than I used to be, but sometimes things get past the goalie.  A few weeks ago I forwarded around what I was told was the last-ever strip of Calvin and Hobbes comic strip.  It's been out of circulation for about 15 years, so I knew it had ended, but I didn't explicitly remember the strip.  The one forwarded to me was this terribly sad strip where Calvin has been put on some medication and is furiously working on some report.  Hobbes wants to play, but Calvin wants to get the report done.  The last shot is Calvin working while the stuffed Tiger Hobbes just sits there.  It almost brought tears to my eyes- how sad, that Calvin's imagination and wonder were taken away by the system trying to control him!

Of course, then when I actually Googled the last strip, it was something much more hopeful and the above-mentioned strip was some sort of sick, bizarre fan submission or something (of course, maybe it's not.  CURSE YOU INTERNET!!!).  The point is that I'm trying to work towards a point where the things I write and say are either blatantly personal opinion or well researched stated facts.  Least Likely To Succeed was blatantly personal opinion mixed with a lot of heresay facts.  That might cut it some places- but that's not where I want to be, either as a writer or as a person.

The thing I missed the most though was my trademark humor (although some people might not miss it or worse yet- not think I'm funny at all.  EEK).  I do think this was probably intentional, partially because of the tone of the piece (serious) and largely due to the fact that I really hadn't discovered my own voice yet as a writer (other than the overuse of commas and utilizing superfluous words like they were going out of style).

Despite my missteps and whatnot, I do feel like it was a fairly well constructed essay, and I was setting up for the dramatic ending haymaker and.....well, I just sort of fizzled.   "With the victory He purchased, we don't have to".  Really?  That's the dramatic ending?  Geeze- the haymaker ended up more like a grazing slap across the shoulder. 

All in all, I'm glad I went back into the vault and read this piece.  It's always good to look back and see areas of growth as well as areas that still need tweeking.  As cringing as it was at times, it was still a tremendous experience to have something I crafted see publication- no matter how small of an audience got to see it.  I had a lot of fun working on the piece, and I am proud to have contributed to keeping the Lord of the Rings alive- a timeless tale of fantasy, good-versus evil, friendship...and whatever else you decide it is.
PIC- https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXDHHkvaIYk_gAZ6O45BhBHnhmMVbomahLsInlxnv6-rk99FnSmfBnKom6AJg-aABZCyizmKxAzy7llRocaOpSKlE9H2OiFc5Yfm2gH_iy14Bi9VpsMRZFKUVKKFGP-jKsKqtbJBM068A/s1600/nice+ad%252C+old+spice+sea+captain.png

The Least Likely to Succeed: The actual

A couple of weeks ago (closer to a month, but still countable in weeks), I promised to deliver you a rendering of that one time when someone actually set my words to type and sent them around the globe.  Today, I come to honor that promise.  The long awaited world-wide Internet presentation of: The Least Likely to Succeed!

Despite the constant cringing and incessant temptations to change things (minimally at times, often drastically), I have decided to present the essay in its pure, undistilled form.  And....here it is.

Non can foretell what will come to pass, if we take this road or that.  But it seems to me not clear which road that we must take.  The westward road seems easiest.  Therefore it must be shunned....Now at this last we must take a hard road, a road unforseen.  There lies our hope, if hope it be.  To walk into peril- to Mordor.  We must send the ring to the fire- Elrond

In the midst of the excitement of seeing The Lord of the Rings masterfully translated onto the big screen (although in truth I was more versed in The Hobbit as a child), it is important to remember that Tolkien's work is not just entertainment but an extension of who he was.  Try as we might, we cannot fully separate entertainment from reality because entertainment is really just an outlet of creative expression of who we are.  Whether it is music, or acting, or writing, as an artist it is impossible to completely sunder who we are from what we want to portray. 

The Lord of the Rings is no exception.  I don't claim to know what J.R.R. Tolkien intended in his writing, nor do I know what he was thinking.  What I do know is that Tolkien was a Christian man who could not separate his Christianity from his writings.  The Lord of the Rings is an unbelievably well designed tale, with depth that very few stories have ever attempted and stirring of the imagination that few stories ever achieve.  Reading The Lord of the Rings is like taking a trip to another world, a world with it's own extensive history and stories of it's own.  When reading, the reader feels not only that Middle-earth actually exists, but that they are actually there.

However, the Lord of the Rings text contains more than a story; it is filled with Christian parallels.  Indeed, reading the Trilogy has helped me in my Christian walk, in that I've been able to see some things in a different light.  Things such as understanding God as the King, creation (from The Silmarillion), and the corruption of sin.  These are things I knew about, but by applying Christian principles to Tolkien's work, I have gained an even greater understanding and appreciation for them.

The One Ring serves to show us the power and enticement of sin.  Sauron is very much a form of Satan, pure evil and hatred personified, as opposed to the typical watered down Dr. Evil type of villain ("I'm holding the world ransom for one million dollars!").  Sauron, like Satan, does not merely desire to rule the world; he desires to completely annihilate all that is good.

But ultimately, every element of the story serves to compliment one central theme: final victory over evil.  In The Lord of the Rings, this theme is embodied in Frodo's quest to destroy the One Ring.  In Christianity, it is the death and resurrection of Christ to defeat Sin and Satan. 

There are three Christ-types in the story (according to my count; there may be more): Aragorn, the victorious King, the healer, the social outcast whose return marks the end of the age and ushers in a period of peace; Gandalf, the wise wizard, the Istari sent by the Ainur to guide the protect men, who gave his live to save his companions from the evil demon Balrog; and Frodo.

Aragorn is the image of Christ's return.  We first meet up with Aragorn in the Bree, under the guise of a Ranger named Strider.  Strider is suspicious at best and has the appearance of someone who is up to no good.  As the saga unfolds, however, more of Aragorn's kingly nature shines through, climaxing at his daring adventure through the Paths of the Dead.  Much of Aragorn's life is fulfillment of prophecy.  In addition to his jaunt through the Paths of the Dead, Aragorn turns out to have 'healing hands', which only the King returning is said to have.  His reign on the throne ushers in the beginning of the fourth age, a peaceful age.

Gandalf could be said to be the one who illustrates Christ's death.  Just as Jesus was sent to help people find God (both through His life and His death), Gandalf was sent by the Ainur (who were sent by Ilu'vatar to be gods of Middle Earth) to help all beings of a good heart.  More than a man, but less than the Ainur, Gandalf has some power allotted to him, but only within the confines of Middle-Earth.  When the fellowship is trapped in the Mines of Moria by a Balrog, Gandalf lays his life aside to battle it, and falls "into shadow".  Gandalf defeats the demon and emerges from the confrontation, changed, more powerful and wise.  Gandalf the Grey has become Gandalf the White, much like the Lamb who was slain is now the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

There are two follies to avoid.  To use this [Ring] is perilous.  At this hour, to send it into the hands of a witless halfling into the land of the enemy himself, as you have done...that's madness- Denethor

Frodo is the most unlikely Christ-type of all.  Aragorn had the credentials of being a descendant of the Dunedain, the greatest of all the race of men.  Gandalf was a wizard, given great power with which to battle against the forces of Sauron.  But Frodo?  He was a hobbit, which was mockingly called halfling by other people.  Most of the tales of of lore in Middle-earth don't even allow for the existence of the little people, especially the tales involving heroic deeds and valor.

As the story begins, Frodo seems to be caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.  His adopted father (and cousin also) Bilbo, who found the Ring while on an adventure with dwarves, had reached the ripe old age of eleventy-one, or one hundred and eleven years old if you prefer.  Reaching a point in life where he was starting to "feel like butter spread across too much bread," Bilbo set out to Rivendell and left the Ring in the keeping of Frodo.  This occurrence just happened to coincide with the reemergence of Sauron in Mordor.  Sauron had discovered that the One Ring was in circulation and began to draw evil to Mordor in anticipation of his retainment of the Ring and subsequent destruction of Middle-earth.

One of my favorite scenes from the movie occurs shortly after Frodo discovers the nature of the Ring.  Gandalf is leaving to counsel with Saruman while Frodo and Sam are setting out to Bree.  Gandalf tells Frodo that the Ring "wants to be found" by the Dark Lord.  It became clear at that moment that Frodo wanted no part of this quest.

Thus we return once more to the destroying of the Ring, and yet we come no nearer.  What strength have we for the finding of the Fire in which it was made?  This is the path of despair.  Of folly, I would say...-Erestor
I said victory could not be achieved by arms.  I still hope for victory, but not by arms- Gandalf

After a close call with the Ringwraiths (former kings of men who succumbed to the power of the Ring to become Sauron's slaves), Frodo arrived at Rivendell, the house of Elrond.  There several leaders met, representing the Dwarves, Elves, and Men, to figure out exactly what course of action to take in regards to the Ring.  At the council, every conceivable plan seemed doomed to failure against the powers of darkness.  A battle of arms would be futile, for Sauron's forces far outnumbered those of Gondor and its allies.

The Ring could not be hidden, as Rivendell had insufficient power to resist Mordor, and the other strongholds were even less resistant.  Even throwing the Ring into the Sea, which would at least buy valuable time, would only delay the inevitable.  The Ring could only be destroyed in the fires of Orodruin, Mount Doom.  Even that course of action seemed folly, because Mount Doom was located in the very heart of Mordor, the stronghold of Sauron.  In truth, no course of action seemed any better than the other because all seemed destined to fail, to the complete ruin of Middle-earth.  With that in mind, the wise were forced to make a decision to choose the best path in the interests of all the free peoples.  They chose to destroy the Ring in Mordor.

Why do you speak ever of hiding and destroying?  Why should we not think that the great Ring has come into our hands to serve us in the very hour of need- Boromir

What was he thinking?  The council had to be filled with doubts and 'what-ifs' when the decision was made.  Even those who had the most faith in the mission couldn't feel too secure in the thought of taking Sauron's Ring, which wanted to join with him, into his acropolis unprotected.  It would have been impossible to take a sizable force into Mordor undetected.  Neither Gandalf nor Elrond, the wisest and most powerful of the council, could bear the Ring for fear of the potential danger they would wield.  After listening to Boromir, nobody was ready to completely trust Gondor with it.  After a period of thoughtful consideration, Frodo felt the call to bear the Ring into Mordor.

Despair or folly?  It is not despair, for despair is only for those who see the end beyond all doubt.  We do not.  It is wisdom to recognize necessity, when all other courses have not been weight, though as folly it may appear to those who cling to false hope.  Well, let folly be our cloak, a veil before the eyes of the enemy!  For he is very wise, and weights all things to a nicety in the scales of his malice.  But the only measure he knows is desire, desire for power, and so he judges all hearts.  Into his thought will not enter that any will refuse it, that having the Ring we may seek to destroy it.  If we seek this, we shall put him out of reckoning- Gandalf

To make the long trilogy of books short, the Ring is destroyed in the end, in spite of what seemed to be overwhelming odds.  The plan which seemed to defy all wisdom, in the end, provided a victory that was not only final but satisfying in the sense that the victory was accomplished beyond all reasoning, via means that Sauron didn't even account for.

Jesus also went on a Ring-quest.  In fact, Frodo's quest is remarkably similar to Christ's life.

The fact that Jesus chose to lay aside His Godhood to become a man like us is against logic, kind of like trusting the fate of Middle-earth in the hands of a halfling.  Jesus, as Creator of the world, probably could have chosen from any of a million different ways to reconcile men to Himself, and could have saved Himself a lot of pain and sorrow.  Instead, He chose to show us how much He loved us.  With that in mind, there was only one course of action to take, no matter how foolish it seems to us.  The God of love had to bring about reconciliation through the greatest act of love He could have shown: to lay down His life.

In our wisdom, God's decision to take the form of man and live among us is hard to comprehend.  But it's what Jesus chose to do with His life that really confounds most people (Isaiah 55:8- For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord).

Instead of flaunting His Godhood and setting up the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, Jesus became the servant extraordinaire.  He showed remarkable self-sacrifice, frequently laying down His rights and desires for the good of others.  Jesus even humbled Himself to the point of washing His disciples feet!

Jesus also said things that clashed with traditional thinking.  Jesus said that the poor in spirit were blessed, as were those who were persecuted.  He said that in order to gain life it had to be lost.  In the mind of Christ, it was better to lose everything to gain eternal life than to gain the whole world and lose our soul.  In the Kingdom of God, the last shall be first.  These are some examples of radical words from Jesus, who spent His life on Earth going against everything that man said was wisdom and truth.

1 Corinthians 3:19- For the wisdom of the world is foolishness in God's sight.  As it is written: 'He catches the wise in their craftiness' and again, 'The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile'.

 However, none of the things He did while He lived on Earth flew in the face of human reason the way His death did.  Indeed, His very mission in life was to die.  His disciples were confused because they thought Jesus wasn't advancing His "political agenda" enough.  The people were confused because they saw the Man who saved others and chose not to save Himself.  The Pharisees were confused because the man who openly challenged their self-righteous, dead religion go quietly to death without so much as a word of defense.  Even to the end, Jesus chose to go against the norm, choosing humility, self-sacrifice, and obedience over power, self-preservation, and rebellion.

And that is why the quest to destroy the Ring is the central theme, not only in The Lord of the Rings, but in our lives.  It is as if the King, the Istari, became the halfling and chose to bear each of our rings into Mordor, so that we don't have to.  The life of Christ may not make sense to us.  But one thing is for sure: with the victory He as purchased, it doesn't have to.

1 Corinthians 1: 18-23, 25- For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.  For it is written: 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate'.  Where is the wise man?  Where is the scholar?  Where is the philosopher of this age?  Has God not made foolish the wisdom of the world?  For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased that through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.  For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.



Well, there you have it.  If you made it all the way through until the end, congratulations.  You have must have Wolverine-like healing and regeneration skills- at least in the eye and brain area.  Even though I was able to resist the urge to basically revamp it completely, that doesn't mean that I'm not going to be discussing my thoughts on it.  But that will come another day.  Hopefully another day next week.

I debate with myself- because I always lose

Recently I've begun to challenge myself to read things that are beyond my understanding from perspectives other than my own.  And I'm not just talking about 'The Cat in the Hat', either.

Today's reading: Anthropomorphism, Trisyllabic Meter, and Dr. Seuss- Why Mike Myers Isn't All That Funny

In the midst of one particular academic foray, I stumbled upon an article in which Richard Dawkins lays out a reason for refusing to engage in debate with William Lane Craig.  Heady stuff, to say the least.  After my brain temporarily shut down because of intelligence overload, I figured I could use this as a good segue into my struggle right now in regards to understanding the Bible and its role in my life.

I'll write more about this in much more depth later on (after lots of reading and research).  Suffice it to say that for a long time, I took the Bible as the true word of God because that's what I was told.  I was told that the Bible said it was the true word of God, and so therefore it was- perfect and infallible.

Lately I've been trying to think about it more objectively.  That is, if you look at it on an organic level, the Bible is a collection of history, legends, songs, and rules that were written by people thousands of years ago.  It has an elevated place because we are told it is God's direct word to His people- but is it possible that it is nothing more than the ongoing journal of one group of people from the Bronze Age?  Right now, I'm not sure either way.  But I intend to find out. 
That's all stuff for another day.  Let me get to the point of this blog- which is about the idea of genocide, and whether God is for or against it.  Actually, scratch that- I'll link you to William Lane Craig's response to a question about the genocide of the Canaanites, found in the Old Testament.  I'll let you read it.  Then I'll get to the point.

From the Christian perspective, I can see where you would say that God is the end-all-be-all, that He can do what He wants to whomever He wants.  Otherwise, He's probably not a God worth serving.  And I get it when Craig talks about us approaching this from a Western perspective. We tend to see the human race much differently (for the most part) than the Biblical writers did- and even though I think we are less xenophobic/ethnocentric than they were, I have to concede the fact that there is a bias in my viewpoint.
However, that still doesn't mean that there isn't some bias from the writers themselves.  Winston Churchill said it best- "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it".  When you have power or obtain victory, you have the opportunity to spin the history however you want.  You get to decide who the players are and who gets ignored.  You can choose who plays the hero and who plays the villain.  It usually isn't until much later when people can look back more objectively (as much as is possible, anyways) to smell the BS.

And if you demonize certain populations, then certain actions can be justified.  Think about Hitler and his quest to exterminate the Jews.  Think about African-Americans and slavery.  Think about the Native Americans and Manifest Destiny.  Think about the Catholic Church and the Inquisition.  All of these events are simply appalling and horrific in our eyes today.  At the time, though, they were "justified" because of certain beliefs about the victims.  That's the power of labels. 

I feel like I'm having a hard time connecting the dots here, but the main point is that the slaughter of the Canaanites is the same thing in my opinion.  Historically, there is no reason to believe that this was a moral venture because it involves the demonization of a people (Canaanites) from the perspective of another group of people (Israelites) that were the more dominant military force.
So why would such an account have authority to make claims about the morality of genocide- it is already skewed to the perception of the author, right?  Maybe Israel just wanted to take the land of Canaan, so they did- forcibly, under the banner of Yahweh and the cause of righteous judgment.  We don't know, because we weren't there.  All we can do is apply our own interpretation (which is skewed no matter how we try to approach it because of our own worldviews).

There's a lot more we could talk about on this issue- the idea of grace in Old Testament/New Testament theology, the effects of domestication and civilization over the years, the Monkeysphere, etc.  And as I said before, the events could have happened as reported- God may have well wanted Israel to smote the Canaanites in retribution for their sins.  But that doesn't mean we should just assume so because we are told to assume so.  God gave us eyes to see.  He gave us ears to hear.  And He gave us brains to think about things critically.  Well, that and the many other things that the brain does, which is pretty much everything.

Tim Tebow: Savior- or saviorest?

If you even thought about accessing any sort of media relating somehow to sports, then you surely know that yesterday was Tim Tebow's first start of the season.  And I'm gonna take him to task.

I actually have nothing against Tebow- from what I've read/heard, he's a fine and upstanding young man, a devout Christian, and an excellent teammate.  Tebow has done humanity a solid.  His parents should be proud.

He definitely doesn't deserve most of the venom being spewed towards him.  You can't blame Denver for reaching to draft Tebow in the first round.  He (probably) didn't ask the fans to start cheering for him when Kyle Orton's career started to tailspin.  It's definitely not his fault that everyone everywhere nitpicking his football career the past two weeks- talking about how inaccurate he is, why he is inaccurate, how his arm isn't strong enough, how his arm is strong enough, how he needs an offense specifically tailored to his skill set, how he needs to be a pocket passer, how he isn't ever going to be a pocket passer, his intangibles...and I didn't even actually read most of the articles- this is all information gleaned from headlines and the NFL pregame shows that I watched today. 

I understand why this is- we're like information sponges, and the Internet is Bikini Bottom.  Bill Simmons has talked before about the culture of the Internet, and the 24 hour news cycle, and because there's so much more air time to fill, things get analyzed and reanalyzed, and the analysis gets analyzed and so on and so on.  And of course I could rip on the process...but using my own blog to do so would be a little hypocritical.  I just don't believe that you should bite the hand that feeds you (especially since most of the time it's my own hand). 

I do think that this over-overanalyzation had a ridiculous impact on the development of young players.  Head coaches too, but I'm not talking about coaches here- I'm talking about the man Tim Tebow.  I remember as a kid reading this book of NFL player profiles from the early 1980's.  One of the player profiles was Bert Jones, a young QB for the Baltimore Colts, and his head coach made a comment akin to QBs taking about five years to really fully understand the NFL game. 

Every time I stumble across an article about Tebow or see him being virtually dissected, I think about that quote.  I think about Tim Tebow, starting for the 4th or 5th time in the 2nd year of his NFL career, and I think it's absolutely preposterous that people would be trying to make declarative statements about his football future at this stage in his career.  Especially since everybody knew that Tebow was going to be a project coming out of the funky spread offense that Florida ran.  But hey, we have to fill the air time, so let's keep talking and talking and let's run this kid's career into the ground before it even gets started.  Poor Timmy.

But enough about that.  On to the game!

Full disclosure- I didn't actually get to watch Tebow play very much yesterday.  Apparently 1-4 Denver at 0-5 Miami didn't really make for must-see TV, Tebow or no Tebow.  So I watched San Diego at New York (the Lions were on, but I couldn't stand to watch them suck).  Ergo, my discussion of Tebow will be mostly academic.

I know that his passing numbers were so-so.  I know that he led the Denver offense to within field goal range a couple times in the first half but the Denver kicker missed a couple of field goals.  I know that Tebow led the Broncos from 15 points down in the last 3 minutes of the game (thanks on-side kick team!) and then about half-way through the OT period the defense delivered a turnover that eventually led to a 52 yard game winning field goal.  I know that after the game they interviewed Tebow and he thanked Jesus and then his teammates.

People with way more time and money on their hands are going to sit around and dissect the film of this game and be able to determine whether Tebow played good, great, or more great.  So I can't really comment on that.  He led them to a win, which is always a big deal in the NFL.  He's definitely an exciting player, if not slightly unorthodox.
 
What I want to focus on is his post game comments- particularly how they rubbed me the wrong way.
 
Maybe it's just because I'm a little older, a little wiser, or maybe I'm about to get ungrafted from the Vine- but I really wasn't feeling the shout-out to JC.  Far be it for me to make any sort of judgments or assumptions or mind-readings, but it really felt forced.  It was like Tim spent all week with a series of post-it-notes around his house that said "If get interviewed, thank Jesus Christ Personal Savior". 
 
I don't have any problem with athletes being outspoken about their faith- as long as its in context.  If you're speaking to a bunch of church camp kids- yeah, tell them about your faith.  If you're telling a reporter why you set up this charity or that fundraiser- sure, that's appropriate.  If the NFL analysts are asking you about game situations- you should probably leave God out of it.  Especially since you just got sacked 7 times, went 13-27 passing, and spent most of the game struggling against the worst defense since Helms Deep.
 
I don't know- I just think that it's okay to talk about football when they ask you football questions.  If you repped Christ because you're wanting to stay humble, try looking at your statistics instead.  Plenty there to keep yourself in perspective.  If you name-dropped Jesus because you wanted Him to get proper praise and glory, try going 31-35 for 325 yards and 5 TDs.  But don't take my word for it:
 
-If anyone speaks, they should do so as one who speaks the very words of God. If anyone serves, they should do so with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. If anyone plays quarterback, he should complete at least 60% of his passes with an average yards/attempt of about 7-8, and a 3-1 TD-to-INT ration.  To him be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen- 1 Peter 4:11 (Bolded part was not part of the original manuscripts.  Or any of the manuscripts, for that matter)
 
That's all I got.  I don't know if it's good enough, but thanks to the Internet we have nothing but time to kill and space to fill.  I do hope that Tebow does well- I like to see the good guys succeed and the underdogs prove their doubters wrong.  I'm also partial to left-handed QBs  TTFN!

Happy International Blasphemy Day!

Thanks to tumblr and Google, I learned something new today.  And let me tell you, what a relief!  I haven't learned anything new in like a week, and I was afraid that I was just going to have to throw in the learning towel and go live in Mississippi. 

Anyways, one of my tumblr peeps posted a picture of a piece of poop with a halo and tagged it #international blasphemy day.  Curiosity piqued, I went and googled it.  And I learned what International Blasphemy Day is all about.  The end.

If you want to read about it for yourselves, go here.  If you just like to have someone tell you what to think, then allow me to explain it in simple terms- INTERNATIONAL BLASPHEMY DAY IS TEH DEVUL!!!1!!!

It started as a protest over some Muslim fall-out over some anti-Muhammad cartoons published in a Danish newspaper.  I didn't know that the Danish made newspapers- I thought they just made delicious fruit-filled pastries.  Seriously, it actually sounds like a worthwhile cause.  I actually have no problems with this the observation of this day- for 3 reasons:

1) I believe strongly in freedom of speech and freedom of religion
Whether you believe that we were created as free-willed moral agents or just monkeys that evolved higher consciousness, you should at least agree that each person should have the right to speak their mind and believe what they want to believe.  And if not, then just get out.  Leave.  Right now.

Now obviously there is (I believe) a need for people to have educated opinions and beliefs- but that doesn't mean that I believe people should have conditional rights in these areas. 

The International Blasphemy Day is "a day to support free speech, support the right to criticize and satirize religion, and to oppose any resolutions or laws, binding or otherwise, that discourage or inhibit free speech of any kind" (from that one site that I linked that you probably didn't read).  Will some people will probably take it too far into the offensive realm?  Sure.  But I believe that there are other people that look from the outside in and are able to see the flaws in our religious belief systems that most of us are too close to see.  When we censor the ability of people to do this, we will definitely cut out the annoying squeaky wheels of opposition.  But we'll also eliminate the voices of those who can help us to develop a more meaningful faith system by causing us to take stock of what our faith system looks like.

2) Blasphemy is largely (in my opinion) a socially constructed issue.
In The Count of Monte Cristo, Colonel Villefort says this great line to his son when they learn of Napolean's escape from Alba- "Treason is all a matter of dates".  I feel the same way about blasphemy.  Things that some people in other countries find deathly offensive are run-of-the-mill jokes on our television channels.  Things that get our blood boiling might cause endorphin release for someone else. 

To me, blasphemy is strongly related to the idea of the God Card.  Did you ever play Rock/Paper/Scissors- and have some snot nosed, brat-faced kid come up with The Nuke?  So you have Paper covering Rock, Rock smashing Scissors, Scissors cutting Paper, and The Nuke just blowing everything to smithereens?  How is that fair?  You cheated!  I hate this game, it sucks- leave me alone mom!!!!

And we're back.

That's the God Card.  It's the card we play when we want to win an argument or make our actions above reproach in our minds.  Quit a job?  "God told me to do it".  Get a divorce?  "After our argument, Jon and Kate came on...it was a sign...".  Blow up an abortion clinic?  "God said 'Git 'er done".  Wife who committed adultery?  "Everybody must get stoned".

Blasphemy is the tool of the God Card.  The God Card gets played, and if it is not adhered to, then the next step is the Blasphemy Bloody Knuckles. Blasphemy in my mind is mostly about maintaining order and the status quo.  It keeps people in line and stops them from forcing certain issues or pressing into new territory out of fear of the social repercussions.

The problem, as I alluded to before, is that blasphemy is just a matter of dates.  Because eventually someone comes along that successfully challenges the powers that be and changes the mold.  They called Jesus a blasphemer.  Said the same about Galileo and Martin Luther.  And yet, these three men played significant roles in upsetting the preheld notions and causing social revolution.  Because people eventually realized that they had valuable things to say, regardless of how much they had rocked the boat.

3) Blasphemy is more of an attitude of the heart than an act of the flesh.
I push the envelope.  Or is it that I use envelopes?  I can never remember.

Ask my wife or those who get close enough to get past my facade.  I say things that might be considered to be risque'.  Nothing too crazy, mind you- but things that would probably cause some people to turn their heads, raise their eyebrows, and shoot me with the hate rays.

I was talking to a friend last winter about this.  We had just got done sharing a laugh about something outrageous and probably inappropriate.  Looking back, I'm thankful that we weren't been struck by lightning.  After our laughter subsided, a legitimate discussion was sparked and we came to the conclusion that blasphemy is much more of a heart condition than it is one of outward actions.  I think that God understands that when I say things, I'm not saying them out of a spiteful rebellion.  I think He knows that I love to find humor in situations where humor might not be apparent.  I think He realizes that He created me this way, and I'm not an asset that He's ready to liquidate quite yet.  I'm kind of banking on that, actually.

Look at how Jesus spoke to the pharisees- they did and said all the 'right' things, and yet Jesus treated them with the kind of contempt one might normally reserve for the New York Yankees.  His disciples picked grain on the Sabbath and he was cool with that.  This tells me that the Jesus Justice scale isn't calibrated to ours.  Could it be that God looks at our hearts and not our outward actions?  I feel like I've read that somewhere....

Oh wait.  I have.  It's in the Bible.



When it's all said and done, we need people in this world who are brave enough to confront the ideas and beliefs of the majority- no matter what those ideas might be.  Challenge can bring discovery which can bring change which can lead to health, happiness, and hope.  Obviously some people will blaspheme just to push buttons and to be idiots- but some religious people just try to push buttons and to be idiots.  See?  We aren't so different. 

Let us never be so afraid to question that which we hold to be so infallibly true that we devalue the existence of those who do not feel the same way.  We can hold our beliefs tightly without losing a grip on our shared humanity.  And if we loosen up a little and look at things from a different window- well, we might see things in a new light that strengthens our faith and makes us better people.  I call that:

PIC- Dogs- http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2008/10/6/128677868549452426.jpg
Sheen- http://www.twisted-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Charlie-Sheen-Winning.jpg

Passion play

My cousin is pretty phenomenal. He's the other half of the famous Scottish Cousins that terrorized Alma and several Parks family Christmases. He went to the Ohio State University because U-M screwed him over (that might not be true). He's a NASA man. He competitively swing dances. He rocks a fedora. Every day, he takes a picture of whatever he's doing at 7:59 p.m.- just so you know what he's doing every day at 7:59. Geez, I feel like I'm writing a spot for the Most Interesting Man man. But that's just who he is. He's like Miles Davis.

So why did I write this paragraph of gushing praise? It's to let you know two things.

1) The following piece (in italics) was written by him as a Facebook note.

2) It would have been an amazing piece had anyone else written it. The fact that he wrote it means that it is amazing multiplied by all that stuff I said about him. To say that it had a Deep Impact on me would be to say that Ryan Reynolds is 'cute'.

Anyways, I'll stop talking (for now). Here is what he wrote.

This week there has been a big flap about the second coming of Jesus thanks to Harold Camping and his followers. Anyone who reads the overt literal text of the new testament can see that the bible is clear that no one knows when Christ will return. So in view of this, I've done my share of making fun of them. But in the middle of all of that, something has bothered me.

I never hoped that they were right.

Today, May 22, is the day after the end of the world. And for the people who sincerely believed that yesterday was supposed to be different, it's got to be unsettling. "Obviously I was wrong, but how much have I been wrong about?" The fact that the sun came up today finding everyone still on earth would shake my faith if I were in their shoes.

The thing is I believe the bible does say that Christ will come again... sometime. But, if Christ never came, I doubt that it would shake my faith. Which makes me ask, do I really believe it?

In the same way that the followers of Harold Camping are asking themselves how much they were wrong about, I find myself asking how much I actually believe. What are the parts of my worldview that, if I were wrong about, would shake my life to the core?

Honestly, I'm not sure if there's anything. And as someone who claims to follow Jesus, that troubles me. It troubles me that I have not arranged my life around the things I claim to believe. It troubles me that I have not pushed all my chips to the center of the table. I have diversified my portfolio of belief, between Christianity and deism. And in doing so, I can't help but think that the impact of my life is less than it could be.

People of passion make a difference. And say what you will about Harold Camping, for the last month or so, his passion has made a difference in his world.

People of passion make a difference. People with passion for the right things make the right difference.

Lord, give me a passion for the right things.

After reading that, I realized that I haven't really ever been a person of passion either. Not just with this Jesus thing- I mean with everything. Sure, I've had passions, but there are no passion fission chain reactions in my internal fuel rod core.

Before I get too rock-n-roll, let's look at what Mr. Dictionary has to say about passion. I'm only listing what I feel to be the relevant-to-blog definitions.

Passion (taken from dictionary.com)
–noun
1.any powerful or compelling emotion or feeling, as love or hate.
6.a strong or extravagant fondness, enthusiasm, or desire for anything.
8.an outburst of strong emotion or feeling.

So I can breathe easy. I've had moments of passion before. Felt a powerful feeling? Check. Extravagant fondness? I can think of a few. Outburst of strong emotion? Uh huh. But what about being a person of passion- a person not merely experiencing passion, but living their life in a passionate fashion?

Passionate - adjective 1. having, compelled by, or ruled by intense emotion or strong feeling; fervid

Houston, we have a problem.

I've always been like an outsider looking in. My emotional spectrum doesn't have very many colors, and the ones it has aren't well developed. I'm an objective observer in a subjective life. I exist primarily in my mind. Life happens all around me, and I watch. I soak it all in, playing out the scenarios in my brain, trying to unravel the mysteries without so much as a peep or a facial twitch.

When I first got 'saved', it was largely because of fear- my scattered base of biblical knowledge started to bubble up when I was in my first collegiate tour of duty. I was afraid of the end of the world. I was having thoughts of Jesus coming back and me being left there as my mom and sister were whisked away. At night, I began to pray 'Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord my soul to keep' because I was afraid of what might happen to my soul if I were to suddenly pass away. Eventually, through a series of what I still believe to be divinely orchestrated events, I found a church, and I found Jesus. I did the whole sinners prayer thing, and I was off and running- and my fear of God was fed continuously by things like Y2K, the Left Behind books, and 9/11. And when I say 'fear of God', I don't mean the 'reverent awe that is the gateway to wisdom' fear. I mean the 'Crap, I better toe the line so I don't get zapped' fear.

Even in those days, I was not a passionate person. I was never "on-fire" for God- at least not in a way that I envision people being on-fire. Several times I have heard the verse from Revelations admonishing believers to "return to your first love" and it might as well have been delivered in a foreign language. I do believe that I have loved God with all of the ability to do so that I could muster. But I've never had true passion or zeal for the Lord- because I've never had an inner well to draw these things from.

The Facebook note really brought all of these issues to a head, and I realized that I had become perched on a precipice of sorts. A professing Christian man who has been hedging his bets with a faith that in reality has sort of danced between deism and pragmatic agnosticism. A thirst for knowledge, a desire to challenge the conventions of our society (including the religious systems)- and a deeply held belief that Jesus is who I have been told He is.

See even though I question things about the Bible- and sometimes feel like just disregarding it altogether- I cannot shake the fact that for all my faults and flaws and mistakes and half-faiths and doubts and questions, I have had meetings with spiritual forces greater than my own understanding in the name of Jesus. I met and eventually married an amazing woman in the name of Jesus. I started playing drums in the name of Jesus. So to me, there simply has to be something to this Jesus.

I suppose the preceding paragraphs could be seen as an exposure of a fraud. After all, I've been a youth leader. I've worked at a Christian bookstore and a Christian school. I've played worship music for over ten years. All without having a life that was defined by a passionate pursuit of the One to whom I said I was living for.

I disagree though. I feel that I've loved God and lived a Christian life to the best of my abilities for these past 12 years. But I know now that this is not enough. The note my cousin posted on Facebook resonated very deeply with me. I realized that I have managed for these 32 years of life to be a shallow surface person. That doesn't just go for God- that's friends, family, and even my wife. I constantly keep things in the kiddie pool because not only am I unsure of what lies in the depths of myself, but I'm not sure how to get there. A friend spoke a word over me a few years ago, telling me that I was like an 'iceberg of greatness'. I've been lying in wait for most of my life, slightly visible from the surface. But now the great ship Titanic has come (in this analogy, my cousins writing) and struck in a place that no one could have possibly imagined if they were merely glancing at the oceans top.

So what now? A clean slate- a God-sanctioned do-over. In a place of brokenness Sara and I came together last night to pray about all this. As I prayed I felt this sense of heavy, overwhelming peace just flood my being. At the same time, I felt a sort of weightlessness. It was amazing! Afterward I started to try and think of any sort of physiological causes- and I stopped. I realized that whether it was the physically manifest presence of the Lord or some sort of neurological response was irrelevant. The fact is that I prayed and felt the most intense, yet softest, peace I have ever felt. And it happened during a prayer. To this Jesus. I don't need a reason. I don't need a reason.

So this is me starting to go all in. This is me pushing my chips gently to the center of the table. This is me building my faith not upon fear of the end, but upon tangible peace that engulfs me. This is me- becoming a person of passion.