Amusing Our Infantile Selves to Death

Store, in Ann Arbor

Over 2000 years ago the Greek philosopher Aristotle wrote:

"It is indeed a strange thought that the end should be amusement, and that the busyness and suffering throughout one’s life should be for the sake of amusing oneself." (In Skidelsky, Robert; Skidelsky, Edward, How Much is Enough?: Money and the Good Life, p. 96)

This is where we now are as a culture, amusing ourselves to death. 

Think of the people of Panem in The Hunger Games. Think of Philip Seymour Hoffman consenting to the needle of happiness that one day would suffocate him. Think of the increase of happiness studies and "happiness economics" that have their statistical fingers on the pulse of our satisfaction.  Economic growth has been divorced from any humanly intelligible end. (See Ib.)

The Skidelsky's write:

"To make happiness itself, independent of its objects, the chief goal of government is a recipe for infantilization— the prospect memorably dramatized by Aldous Huxley in Brave New World. We do not want to banish the engineers of growth only to see them replaced by the engineers of bliss." (Ib., 97)

**

See also:

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Amitai Etzioni, Happiness Is the Wrong Metric: A Liberal Communitarian Response to Populism

 ***

My two books are:

Leading the Presence-Driven Church

Praying: Reflections on 40 Years of Solitary Conversations with God

In the Real Church Influence, Not Numbers, Matters

My praying chair, in my backyard by the river, emerging from the winter

Reading Eugene Peterson's The Pastor: A Memoir, solidified in me an idea

I have had for many years. Which is: as a pastor and Jesus-follower,

I am to desire influence, rather than size, in terms of numbers of people. 

It is not important how big or small a church is. It is important 

how influential a church is. Influence, not size, is what really matters. Just a handful of Jesus-followers in the first century changed the world, right? Why not your church family, or mine? 

By "influence" I mean the kind of things Jesus talked about when he used 

metaphors like "salt" and "yeast." "You are the salt of the earth," Jesus said (Matthew 5:13). 

A little bit of salt can flavor a lot of food. What's needed are salty Jesus-followers. Your church is the influencer of the earth.

Salt influences food, rather than it is influenced by it. Salt is active, not passive. 

I am to influence the world, rather than being influenced by it.

Non-salty "Christians" are, in Jesus' eyes, "no longer good for anything, 

except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot." (Matthew 5:13) Whether your church is large or small, if it lacks influence it is worthless. (Read Matthew 5:13 again.)

I now think of my philosophy students. For most of them, "church" flavors nothing in their lives. They can't taste "church" at all. Most of them have never had a bite of Real Church. They eat the world's food, minus the salt of the Church. Church, for them, is a flavorless, hence worthless, thing. 

How many people are in my church? Wrong question! Instead, ask, How salty is my church? Is it influential as regards Jesus and the Kingdom? Reject what Peterson calls "the lust for size." Pray instead that influence would be multiplied. (Forget the words "success" and "metrics.")

Begin by being yourself influenced by Christ. Influential power flows from the Vine to the branch (that's you), as you continuously abide in Christ. The strategy is not on numbers, but staying connected to Jesus. This results in a daily being-influenced by him. You become salty. Then God pours you out of the saltshaker and into the world. (See here - still, a book that has influenced me.) As you are impacted by the living Christ you will not be able to contain your salty self.

The core prayer of a Jesus-following pastor is not, “God, supersize us!” It is, “God, use us.” 

At this point numbers do not matter. Neither smallness nor largeness secures influence.

Peterson says that he "wanted to develop a congregational awareness that was shaped under the influence of Sunday worship and that then infiltrated the hours and days of the week implicitly in every workplace and household." (Peterson, The Pastor: A Memoir, p. 275)

Influence infiltrates.

My understanding of church history is that cultures, communities, and even nations that began to follow Jesus did so as a result of what God was doing in a small number of Christ-abiding, salty people. My church, and your church, can make a difference. This is where the numbers do not matter,

***
My two books are:

Leading the Presence-Driven Church

Praying: Reflections on 40 Years of Solitary Conversations with God

Join Me This Summer in Green Lake, Wisconsin!

Of all the conferences Linda and I have attended, the annual HSRM Conference is our favorite. Much more than a conference, this annual event has brought us into a family. 

We began attending in 1992. Since then, we've been able to make every one of them except for one summer.

We'll be there again this coming June, and would love to have you join us.

A special invitation to pastors: If you've not yet come to one of our conferences, but are interested in this summer's event, we have a scholarship for you. Please feel free to contact me for details. I'd love to spend time with at this beautiful conference center discussing presence-driven ministry!

(My two books are:

Leading the Presence-Driven Church

Praying: Reflections on 40 Years of Solitary Conversations with God.)

Click here for Green Lake Conference Center website 10 REASONS TO GO TO THE HOLY SPIRIT RENEWAL CONFERENCE: 1.  God's presence is there 2.  God's power is at work  3.  Faith gets enlarged 4.  Strongholds are broken 5.  Worship is anointed 6.  Healings happen 7.  Deeper understanding of the Spirit-filled life is gained  8.  Revival, Renewal, Restoration, Refreshment, Rest, Recreation 9.  Kids love it, teens love it, adults love it, pastors love it 10. It's a family...! Go here for information / Register is open  Share with your friends HOLY SPIRIT RENEWAL MINISTRIES

God Speaks to Me Today

Our back yard  - 4/16/18

Our front yard -  4/16/18

It's early Monday morning. I'm in our home office. It's on the second floor. I'm looking down on the water in our front yard, and across the street in Munson Park. One hundred seagulls are enjoying the soggy conditions.

I walk to the travel room Linda has designed. This is a reading room for her. She has displayed photos and gifts we have received from traveling the world. Looking out the window, my back yard is a mini-pond.

Yesterday was a crazy weather day in Southeast Michigan. Winds blowing from east to west caused Lake Erie to flood many homes on the shoreline. An ice storm hit. Our trees were coated with ice in the morning. The winds were 20-30 mph.

The icy conditions increased as you went further north. Some of our people texted me and said they decided not to venture out on the roads. That was a good decision.

Our farmhouse was built in 1860. It is so quiet. I love it! 

This morning my heart is quiet as well. Out of this solitude I am praying, "Speak to me this day, Lord. I desire to hear your voice."

This is a common prayer for me. Decades of praying have brought me to this place of great expectation. I expect God to speak to me, because I have experienced his voice, many times. 

Dallas Willard writes:

"The primary manner of communication from God to humankind is the Word of God, or God’s speaking to us." (Willard, Hearing God Through the Year: A 365-Day Devotional, p. 65)

Some Christians are suspicious of the idea that God speaks to me today. They believe God speaks through the words of the Bible, but no longer to us. But the words of the Bible indicate that God speaks to us, extrabiblically. There are no Bible words that say, one day, God will not speak to us beyond the words of the Bible.

For example, God spoke to Ananias in a vision, telling him to go talk to Paul (Acts 9:10). Willard writes:

"According to the biblical record, such things happened to Paul over and over. When he was about to go into Bithynia, the Holy Spirit would not let him go. As he waited at Troas, he had a dream that instead of staying in his home territory in Asia Minor, he should take a radically new direction and enter Europe. In the dream a man from Macedonia called to him, saying, “Come over . . . and help us” (Acts 16:6-9)." (Ib.)

I have experience with this sort of thing. God's speaking to me includes comforting, guiding, correcting, strengthening, and encouraging.

An old hymn confesses, "I need Thee every hour." I need Thee, in my experience.

God, speak to me, this day.

***
My two books are:

Praying: Reflections on 40 Years of Solitary Conversations with God. 

Leading the Presence-Driven Church.

I'm working on:

How God Changes the Human Heart

Technology and Spiritual Formation

Our Sermons Online

Sermons given at Redeemer by myself, Tim Curry, and others can be found HERE.

The American Church Is Mostly Powerless In Influencing American Culture

Western Michigan shoreline

If I am conformed to the pattern of this world, then I will be rendered impotent when it comes to influencing culture. 

The American Church is mostly impotent when it comes to influencing culture ("the world"). Yes, there are pockets of Jesus-followers making a difference. But the American Church is not an issue for most people. We are not part of the discussion. 

Why not? Arguably, this is because the followers of Jesus are following the ways of the culture than they are following Jesus.

Consider this argument:

1. Only if the American Church is conformed to Christ will it influence (change) American culture.
2. The American Church is not influencing (changing) American culture.
3. Therefore, the American Church is not conformed to Christ. (Again, mostly.)

This is what writers like Os Guinness have been saying for some time. He writes:

"A striking symptom of the church’s problems in the West today is the fact that in a country such as the United States, Christians are still the overwhelming majority of citizens, but the American way of life has moved far from the way of life of Jesus—which means simply that the Christians who are the majority are living a way of life closer to the world than to the way of Jesus. In a word, they are worldly and therefore incapable of shaping their culture."

(Guinness, Os. Renaissance: The Power of the Gospel However Dark the Times, p. 60)

My proposal to change this is in Leading the Presence-Driven Church.


***
My other book is:

Praying: Reflections on 40 Years of Solitary Conversations with God. 

I'm working on:

How God Changes the Human Heart

Technology and Spiritual Formation

Stephen Jay Gould and NOMA (Science Does Not Explain Everything)

(For my MCCC Philosophy of Religion Students. Gould's essay "Nonoverlapping Magisteria" is an important one and serves as an entry into the discussion of the nature of science and religion and their relationship, if any. Gould also debunks the myth that "science explains everything.")

1. The Independence Model

Re. the relationship between science and religion, Gould puts forward the “Independence Model.” The Independence Model prevents religion from dictating to science, and prohibits science from claiming higher moral or intellectual insight than religion.

In the Independence Model there is a lack of conflict between science and religion since, independently, their domains of study are disconnected.

“The lack of conflict between science and religion arises from a lack of overlap between their respective domains of professional expertise – science in the empirical constitution of the universe, and religion in the search for proper ethical values and the spiritual meaning of our lives. The attainment of wisdom in a full life requires extensive attention to both domains…” (Gould, “Two Separate Domains,” in Peterson et. al., 516)

2. NOMA 

Gould proposes “NOMA” – Non-overlapping magisteria.

“Magisterium” = a “domain of reaching authority.”

Science and Religion are non-overlapping magisteria or epistemic domains.

Gould writes: “The net of science covers the empirical realm: what is the universe made of (fact) and why does it work this way (theory). The net of religion extends over questions of moral meaning and value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry (consider, for starters, the magisterium of art and the meaning of beauty. To cite the usual clichés, [science studies] the age of rocks, and religion retains the rock of ages; [science studies] how the heavens go, and [religion determines] how to go to heaven.”

3. The Two Magisteria Bump Up Against Each Other

These two magisteria do not stand far apart. They are not “separated by an extensive no-man’s land. But, in fact, the two magisteria bump right up against each other, interdigitating in wondrously complex ways along their joint border.”

For example, evolution has “made us the only earthly creatures with advanced consciousness.” But this scientific belief raises a moral question which science cannot answer; viz., “what responsibilities are so entailed for our relations with others species?”

4. You Can't Derive 'Ought' from 'Is'

Science is “cruel” and “indifferent,” “because nature does not exist for us, didn’t know we were coming, and doesn’t give a damn about us (speaking metaphorically). I regard such a position as liberating, not depressing, because we then gain the capacity to conduct moral discourse – and nothing could be more important – in our own terms, free from the delusion that we might read moral truth passively from nature’s factuality.”

In other words, science gives us “is,” and morality gives us “ought.” Famously, you can’t get “ought” from “is.” (To think so is to commit "the naturalistic fallacy.")

5. NOMA allows us to “respectfully discourse” between science and religion. This discourse provides “constant input from both magisterial toward the common goal of wisdom.”


A helpful review of Gould's thesis is given by H. Allen Orr, "Gould on God: Can Religion and Science Be Happily Reconciled?" (Boston Review)

See also my little piece on POMA ("partially overlapping magisteria"), according to Alister McGrath and Francis Collins.

The Presence-less Pastor Pulls People Away from God

Assisting pastors in their praying lives in Eldoret, Kenya

The pastor who loses sight of living in God's presence, as their first order of being, leads their people in the wrong direction. They engage in anti-God activity, like the religious leaders Jesus addressed in Matthew 23:13:

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, 

nor will you let those enter who are trying to.

A pastor who has no time to pray, no time to worship, and no time just to be with God, becomes, by their being, a hindrance to people who desire to know God. Because they themselves are not entering in to God's presence.

Henri Nouwen expresses it this way.

"When we no longer walk in the presence of the Lord, we cannot be living reminders of his divine presence in our lives. We then quickly become strangers in an alien land who have forgotten where we come from and where we are going. Then we are no longer the way to the experience of God, but rather in the way of the experience of God. Then, instead of walking in God’s presence we start walking in a vicious circle, and pulling others into it. 
At first sight this may seem rather pious and unrealistic, but not for long. The emphasis on ministry as a profession that has dominated our thinking during the past several decades may have led us to put too much confidence in our abilities, skills, techniques, projects, and programs. In so doing, we have lost touch with that reality with which we are called to connect, not so much by what we do, but by who we are."

(Nouwen, The Living Reminder: Service and Prayer in Memory of Jesus Christ, pp. 29-30. Emphasis mine.)

***
My two books are:

Praying: Reflections on 40 Years of Solitary Conversations with God. 

Leading the Presence-Driven Church.

I'm working on:

How God Changes the Human Heart

Technology and Spiritual Formation

How to Deal with Anger - Some Resources

Tonight on One-Hour Seminary I responded to the question "How Are We to Deal with Anger?"

Here are some resources, some of which I mentioned.

Books

David Augsburger, Caring Enough to Confront

Gary Chapman, Anger: Taming a Powerful Emotion

James Dobson, Emotions: Can You Trust Them?

David Powlison, Good and Angry: Redeeming Anger, Irritation, Complaining, and Bitterness 

Links

Using Logic to Manage Anger in Relationships

Face-to-Face Your Anger and Interpersonal Conflict (Not Facebook It)

Understanding and Overcoming Unrighteous Anger

Be Slow to Anger - Three Tools for Communicating When in Conflict

How to Communicate When In Conflict

Bertrand Russell's "A Free Man's Worship" (For My Philosophy of Religion Students)

Philosophy of Religion Exam 3, Question 2:

EXPLAIN BERTRAND RUSSELL’S “A FREE MAN’S WORSHIP”

What, then, are the beliefs of atheism? Some (but not all) atheists have come forth with them. The famous British philosopher and atheist Bertrand Russell has done so, in his 1907 essay "A Free Man's Worship." I think Russell has done an admirable and logical job; i.e., were I an atheist I would believe these things. (I'd probably side with Nietzsche on 5.)

1. Russell is an atheist who presents the logic of atheism. That is, if atheism is true, then here is what life is like.

2. State Russell's 4 Pillars of Atheism.

#1 -  Humanity is the product of causes that had no prevision of his appearing.
I am certain Russell is correct on this. If there is no Creator-God, then the universe and all that is in it is not some "creation," like every work of art has a creator-artist. If there is no Supreme Personal Agent who has made everything and is responsible for everything, and who is the cause of it all, then no one or no thing or no being "had us on their mind" when the universe began. Sometimes I hear someone who self-designates as an "atheist" and believes there is some reason or purpose for their existence. They don't realize that, on atheism, such thinking is nonsense. Humanity just is, for no reason.

#2 -  Humanity is but the result of an accidental collocation of atoms.
A "collocation" is a "coming together," a "being located together," a "co"-"location." An "accidental collocation" is an unplanned, random "coming together." For example, I am writing this from my home office, located on the second floor of our house. I'm looking down on our front lawn, and leaves from one of our maple trees are scattered randomly. Why are the leaves scattered as they are? Not because an intelligent agent arranged or designed them that way. Purely natural conditions caused them to lie where they do. Beyond this, there is no meaning or purpose. Sometimes I read an atheist who believes their existence is more than some cosmic accident. But this is more nonsense. On atheism the formation of humanity is no more or greater than the random, accidental blowing of the leaves on my front lawn.

#3 -  There is no personal existence after death.
Russell was once asked what he thought would happen to him after he dies. He responded, "I believe that when I die I shall rot, and nothing of my own ego will survive.” (In Paul Edwards, “Great Minds: Bertrand Russell,” Free Inquiry,December 2004/January 2005, 46) If the worldview of atheism is true, then I am certain this logically follows. On atheism all that exists is matter (accidental collocations of atoms). There is no non-physical, non-material reality. Persons have no spiritual being or essence or "soul" or "mind" that survives physical death. Obviously, on atheism, "soul friends" don't exist. "You" and "I" simply will not be, on death. 

#4 - All the heroism and human fire in the world cannot stop the fact that all man’s accomplishments will ultimately be destroyed and come to nothing in the vast heat-death of the universe.
According to physics, this is true. Of course, it's not going to happen tomorrow. Nonetheless, on atheism, it will happen. Nothing can stand in the way of Nature (Russell capitalizes it). I use this analogy to explain. Imagine life is a voyage on the Titanic. Imagine also that we know the fate of the Titanic, and that nothing can prevent it. We can choose to polish and rearrange the deck chairs if we desire to do so. But in the end all this labor will be undone. All heroic talk of "Let's make a better world" is, ultimately, futile. This atheistic fact has caused a number of atheists to despair (see especially atheistic existentialists)

3. State Russell’s “Temple”

For Russell, these four truths are certain. They form the pillars of a "temple" upon which humanity erects a scaffolding and dwells within. Russell writes: "Within the scaffolding of these truths, which are nearly certain and cannot reasonably be denied, humanity must build its temple for worship on a foundation of unyielding despair. (“Unyielding” refers to the inexorable destructiveness of Nature. "Despair" describes the emotion felt about the absurdity and meaninglessness of life.

4. Russell is amazed at... 

Astoundingly, nature has produced “man” as a conscious and self-reflexive being. (Here is the matter of consciousness arising from unconscious matter, no less astounding today than it was in Russell's time.)

5. Worship Goodness, not Nature (Power)
 Even though nature is and will do its horrific thing, in our minds we are free and should not bow to Nature (as Nietzsche calls us to do). This is our freedom in the face of the inevitable – free to create, act, live, be moral, rational agents.