dazuma's Xanga

The best political commentary...

Sat, 13 Sep 2008 19:02:15 GMT

The best, and funniest, bit of political commentary I've read so far during this election, was also the shortest:

http://stackblog.wordpress.com/2008/09/12/

Very good article about the Lakeland revival

Wed, 21 May 2008 23:03:28 GMT

Thanks to Pam for the link to this article from Charisma Magazine editor J. Lee Grady. For the original link, click here. The entire article is reproduced below.

Honest Questions About the Lakeland Revival (by J. Lee Grady)

I support any holy outbreak of revival fervor. But let's be careful to guard ourselves from pride and error.

God is stirring deep spiritual passion in the hearts of the thousands of people who have traveled to Florida during the last month to experience the Lakeland Healing Revival. Since these meetings began in a 700-seat church on April 2, the crowd has moved four times to bigger venues, the fervor has intensified and the news has spread worldwide—thanks to God TV and online broadcasting.

Within a few weeks, the bandwagon effect was in full swing. It's safe to say that no outbreak of Pentecostalism in history has gained so much international exposure so quickly as these meetings have.

I'm a cheerleader for the charismatic movement, so I rejoiced when I heard the news about revivalist Todd Bentley's extended visit to Ignited Church. It was thrilling to hear the reports of miracles and to watch the crowd grow until a stadium was required to hold everyone.

When I visited a service on April 15, I was blessed by Heather Clark's music and the audience's exuberant worship. And I laughed with everyone else as I watched Bentley shout his trademarked "Bam! Bam! Bam!" as he prayed for the sick and flailed his tattooed arms over the crowd. Hey, Jesus didn't pray for people according tothe Pharisees' rulebook, so I'm open to unconventional methods.

But I would be dishonest if I told you that I wholeheartedly embraced what I saw in Lakeland. Something disturbed me, but I kept my mouth shut for three weeks while I prayed, got counsel from respected ministry leaders and searched my heart to make sure I was not harboring a religious spirit. The last thing we need today is more mean-spirited heresy hunters blasting other Christians.

I am not a heresy hunter, and I support what is happening in Lakeland because I know God uses imperfect people (like me and you) to reach others for Jesus. At the same time, I believe my questions are honest and my concerns are real.

My motive is not to criticize Bentley or the pastor who is sponsoring these meetings, Stephen Strader. In September 2002 Charisma featured a seven-page article about Bentley's amazing conversion from drug addiction. I believe Bentley is a sincere brother who wants people to encounter God's presence and power. No doubt this 32-year-old evangelist needs our prayers now more than ever, especially since he has become the focus of international media attention.

But as the noise from Lakeland grows louder and its influence spreads, I'm issuing some words of warning that apply to all of us, not just the folks in Lakeland. I hope everyone understands that these cautions are offered in love:

1. Beware of strange fire. The name of Jesus is being lifted up in the Lakeland revival, and three people came to the altar for salvation the night I attended. Larger numbers have come to the front of the auditorium to find Christ every night since then.

Yet I fear another message is also being preached subtly in Lakeland—a message that cult-watchers would describe as a spiritual counterfeit. Bentley is one of several charismatic ministers who have emphasized angels in the last several years. He has taught about angels who bring financial breakthroughs or revelations, and he sometimes refers to an angel named Emma who supposedly played a role in initiating a prophetic movement in Kansas City in the 1980s. Bentley describes Emma as a woman in a flowing white dress who floats a few feet off the floor.

All of us who believe the Bible know that angels are real, and that they work on our behalf to protect us and minister to us. But the apostle Paul, who had encounters with angels himself, issued stern warnings to the Corinthians, the Galatians and the Colossians about angels who preach another gospel or that demand attention. In Colossae, believers were so enamored with angels they had seen in visions that they became "inflated without cause" by spiritual pride (Col. 2:18, NASB). Paul was adamant that preoccupation with angels can lead to serious deception.

We need to tread carefully here! We have no business teaching God's people to commune with angels or to seek revelations from them. And if any revival movement—no matter how exciting or passionate—mixes the gospel of Jesus with this strange fire, the results could be devastating. We need to remember that Mormonism was born out of one man's encounter with a dark angel who claimed to speak for God.

2. Beware of bizarre manifestations. When the Holy Spirit's power comes on people they may feel weak or even fall. The Spirit's power can also cause people to tremble, shake, laugh or cry. Such manifestations are biblical and we should leave room for them. But where do we draw the line between legitimate experience and fanatical excess?

The apostle Paul had to deal with outrageous charismatic manifestations in the Corinthian church. People were acting like raving lunatics—and turning the church in to a free-for-all of unbridled ecstatic behavior. Paul called for discipline and order, and he reminded early Christians that "the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets" (1 Cor. 14:32). In other words, Paul was saying that no one under the influence of the Holy Spirit should act out of control.

In many recent charismatic revivals, ministers have allowed people to behave like epileptics on stage—and they have attributed their attention-getting antics to the Holy Spirit. We may think it's all in fun (you know, we're just "acting crazy" for God) but we should be more concerned that such behavior feeds carnality and grieves the Spirit.

When exotic manifestations are encouraged, people can actually get a religious high from jerking, vibrating, screaming or acting intoxicated. (I have even been around people who writhed as if in pain, or made sexual noises—thinking this was a legitimate spiritual experience.) But emotional euphoria doesn't guarantee a heart change. The person who is bucking like an untamed bronco in a church service would benefit more from sitting still and reading the Bible for an hour. When we put bizarre behavior on the platform we imply that it is normative. Thus more strange fire is allowed to spread.

3. Beware of hype and exaggeration. Our hearts are crying out today for a genuine move of God. We want the real deal. We've read about the Great Awakenings of the past and we long to see our nation overcome by a wave of repentance. The church is in a backslidden state, and our nation has rebelled against God. We are desperate!

In our longing for a holy visitation, however, we must be careful not to call the first faint breeze of the Spirit a full-fledged revival. If we do that, we are setting people up for disappointment when they realize it may not be what we blew it up to be.

Some of the language used during the Lakeland Revival has created an almost sideshow atmosphere. People are invited to "Come and get some." Miracles are supposedly "popping like popcorn." Organizers tout it as the greatest revival in history.

Such brash statements cheapen what the Holy Spirit is doing—and they do a disservice to our brothers and sisters who are experiencing New Testament-style revival in countries such as Iran, China and India. We have a long way to go before we experience their level of revival. Let's stay humble and broken before the Lord.

I am rejoicing over all the reported healings at the Lakeland meetings. Miracles are awesome. Crowds are great. But miracles and crowds alone don't guarantee a revival. Multitudes followed Jesus during His ministry on earth, but many of the people who saw the dead raised or ate food that was supernaturally multiplied later crucified the Son of God.

It was the few disciples who followed Jesus after Calvary who ushered in a true revival—one that was bathed in the fear of God, confirmed by signs and wonders, tempered by persecution and evidenced by thousands of conversions, new churches and the transformation of society. We should expect nothing less.

J. Lee Grady is editor of Charisma.

Monday, May 12, 2008

Mon, 12 May 2008 16:06:26 GMT

"We spend vast amounts of time and energy crafting a thesis in our heads of how life should play out. Then Almighty God spends an incredibly brief amount of time blowing our thesis to bits."

--- Ray Blackston

What in the world is Easter about?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:05:12 GMT

Highly recommended:

The Subversiveness of Easter (by Dr. John Stackhouse, one of the Regent professors.)

What in the world is Easter about? It makes no sense to celebrate the gruesome death of a minor country preacher, making a virtue, as Nietzsche warned, of failure.
There's no subtlety to the symbolism of the alternative celebration of fertility this weekend, all eggs and rabbits and rainbows and yeah, we get it. Yet the odd, dark events of that ancient Passover/Easter weekend warrant a closer look. For here some important matters are being transacted in disguise, in irony, in spite of the intentions of some of the lead characters in the drama.

The Ancient Art of Blog, episode 3

Sat, 01 Mar 2008 22:54:06 GMT

Most blog postings are fluff. These aren't. It's time for my semi-irregular survey of some of the best blog entries I've encountered recently from my friends-- writings that go beyond the usual "we had a great get-together, praise God", and actually, you know, say something.

The Social Commentary Award goes to Jess Hong's "like a koala without a pouch".

i think about whittling down my bank of 419 myspace "friends" and weeding out those who i am rarely [if ever] in contact with in the vain hope that it would make myspace more authentic. i don't for fear that i'd hurt someone's internet feelings, which is both absurd and completely realistic which makes me contemplate deleting my myspace account altogether. but i know myself well enough to know that i'd no sooner cancel my cellphone plan and throw my treo in the the depths of puget sound.
it's not technology that grosses me out -- it's me.

The Insight Award goes to Dr. Stackhouse of Regent College for his piece on western vs eastern humor, "Why No One Here Is Laughing at My Jokes".

I like our humour better. I like clever, I like witty, I like sardonic, I like wordplay, I like irony. I hate slapstick and most physical comedy (although I love David Hyde Pierce on "Frasier" re-runs, but he's a genius). So I'm glad for our sort of jokes, and when I re-pitched my humour for the benefit of my audience, I was genuinely glad they were amused, because I care about them, but I also was inwardly embarrassed. ("Oh, brother: You call that a joke? Why not put on some funny pants and honk a horn?")

The Global Justice Award goes to Bill's "the price of 'freedom', the cost of war,... the poor get jacked".

In economics, we use the term "externalities" to describe the social harm and "passing of the buck" by large corporate entities onto society to maximize their profits. In war, we use the term "collateral damage" to describe the inadvertent casualties of innocents and destruction in civilian areas. Are human lives about cold, hard math? What generally happens in war is those who profit from it (war profiteers, who if caught generally get executed for war crimes) and those who lose (the countless killings of innocents, the voiceless, the powerless, the ones who get jacked). Someone I admire greatly declared there is no just war, because innocents will always lose.

The Best List Award goes to Yasuko, for a list that only a scientist could love (or perhaps understand!)

You know you're a lab rat when:
You open the toothpaste with one hand.
You can identify organs on roadkills.
You say "orders of magnitude" in regular sentences.
No-one in your family has any idea what you do.
etc...

The Best Story Award goes to Estela's experience with "Getting a Driver's License" in California.

They say all driving tests are the same level of difficulty... so they say. I went back and counted that 5-way intersection... there were 11 lanes of traffic and one of them disappears at the intersection.

The Poltical Rhetoric Award goes to Pastor E's "george bush - the worst president?" for stating the obvious.

Bush will be defined by this war - and rightfully so.

The Ethics And Values Award goes to David's "To TV Or Not To TV?"

we decided to intentionally avoid getting a replacement tv in the hopes that we would instead invest in our marriage through such creative activities like talking to each other. [...] my in-laws are great people and we love them a lot, but with each year that passes, they seem increasingly puzzled and frustrated by our tv-free lifestyle. whenever they visit, and especially around christmas, they always want to take us to costco to buy us some big flat-panel tv.

The Deep Thoughts Award goes to Chris's "Hooked on a Feeling?" where he wonders whether everything we do and value, even our relationship with God, tends to be based on how it makes us feel.

Zach was telling me today that it seemed like my posted item of Josh McDowell's testimony makes it sound like Christianity is just an anti-depressant. And maybe that's not far off. That's more or less how I use it these days. Maybe it used to be more than that, but now that I've been tricked into following this feelings-driven lifestyle, then that's what it's become.

The Best Photos Award goes to Jess Liu for her shots of life on the mission field in Cambodia. They're not fancy. Just expressive images that draw you into the beauty and stories of real people.

See samples here, here, and here.

The Best Comment Award goes to Jack Canty's comment on Pastor Eugene's entry "Pee Pee". The most hilarious, and pointed, comment ever, but I can't do it justice in a quote. You have to read it in context.

Read Pastor E's blog entry and Jack's comment

The It's About Time Award goes, of course, to George and Viv.

Read about it here...

Earthquakes

Sun, 24 Feb 2008 06:54:42 GMT

This will be a bit of a personal entry, for my friends who haven't seen very much of me recently. I know I haven't blogged much in the past few months, nor have I (it seems) been around all that much. Some of you who may be reading this, I've been meaning to get together to catch up for some time now, but just haven't had the chance. I don't want to give excuses. I've been quite distant lately, and that's a fact of history that won't change. The future, on the other hand, can and will change, but I'm just not quite sure exactly when.

The story, in a nutshell. I'm not quite done with my studies at Regent, but on account of work I had to move back to Seattle as of August last year. I'm continuing to study, commuting up to Canada one day a week for classes, and hope to finish either this fall or next winter; and I'm still doing most of the principal architecture and development work for zoodango, which is a huge time commitment.

In the meantime, however, I'm starting to look toward the future and what I'll be doing with myself once I'm done with school. That search, along with the invitation of a very close friend, led me to attend Missions Fest Seattle last October. There, something happened that I can probably best describe as about a 9.0 on the Richter Scale personal earthquake. The weight of everything I'd been learning over the past two years at Regent, the wise words of the aforementioned friend, the exhortation of a particular Missions Fest speaker, and the direction of the Spirit of God who invades the hearts of men with the force of His kingdom of justice and grace, all smashed into me at once. I was uprooted. Everything was rearranged-- from my engineer's thought process and biases; to my approach to career, vocation, and calling; to my view of people, communities, and relationships. And I had to repent of some pretty serious failings.

A fairly strong earthquake took place near Wells, Nevada on Thursday. It caused significant damage to the historic district of the town, and generally disrupted people's lives in that mostly rural area of the high Nevada desert. After Missions Fest, my life was similarly disrupted. Some of my values were changed around, and I've spent the months since then re-evaluating and re-figuring out how to approach work, school, church, and friends.

Now, I do want to emphasize that earthquakes are not a "bad" thing. Indeed, they're the outworking of a planet that is very much alive, constantly changing and renewing itself. The beauty of our landscape, our mountains, continents, and oceans, are here because of the moving and trembling of the earth's crust; and indeed without that constant mixing and motion, it is doubtful that we'd find the mineral variety on the earth's surface needed to support life. Change is good, and necessary, and that applies both to plate tectonic tremblors and to personal reorientation. It's just... sometimes hard to deal with.

Another property of earthquakes is that, when one happens, it changes the stress patterns on nearby sections of fault line, and thereby tends to cause additional earthquakes. They're commonly known as "aftershocks". When something significant happens in one's life, it often similarly triggers a chain reaction of readjustments. I've had a number of aftershocks rumble through my life over the past few months, including a huge one (that I think of as an 8.0) just a week ago. Despite all this, significant tension remains over parts of my life, and I expect the aftershocks to continue over the coming few months.

All this to say that I'm going through some tectonic upheaval right now, and if I seem aloof, it's nothing personal. I'm just a bit dazed, and need some time to regroup.

Now I'm sure most of you find this entry boring and pointless, so for those of you, here are a few pictures from a backpacking trip I did last summer, so you won't feel like you clicked on this entry in vain. This is the Galena Chain Lakes area near Mount Baker. It's a gorgeous area, and not a difficult hike, if you're looking for an easy back-country camping trip.

Time to move to Canada...

Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:47:24 GMT

My co-worker just forwarded me this video.

These are the people who are voting on our presidential candidates?!? No wonder Huckabee is still in the race...

Jesus, am I "in love" with You?

Tue, 18 Sep 2007 00:53:59 GMT

The Christian believer's love relationship with God: it is a pillar of the spirituality of many a Christian, both modern and ancient. Many a praise song tries to express it by likening it to a romantic relationship, Jesus the heavenly spouse to the adoring believer. "Let my words be few: Jesus I am so in love with You," writes acclaimed worship leader Matt Redman in his popular song Let My Words Be Few, while Jubilee Evangelical Church's own assistant pastor Joe Wandler, in his song Can't Get Enough, effuses: "I sleep but my heart is still awake... Cause I'm so in love with You." Many a theology is modeled on it: Jesus the lover and deepest friend who romances the Christian and proves it by dying for His beloved.

But could it be wrong theology?

Dr. John Stackhouse, professor of systematic theology at Regent, suggests that it probably is. In his blog, he expresses his displeasure with the way many Christians express the metaphor:

It's wrong, and I try not to sing wrong lyrics... I'm not in love with Jesus. The locution "in love with" is one I reserve for one person only: my wife... Jesus is not your boyfriend, not your fiance, and not your eventual husband.

Professor Stackhouse gives several very good reasons for his position, including the all too obvious but usually ignored fact that it is simply weird for most of us males to be singing such things to another man. In a world where sexual identity has sometimes become a little too hazy for comfort, is it smart to be encouraging such behavior? Instead, argues Stackhouse, it is Biblically correct to say that we as the church together constitute the Bride of Christ, but not I as an individual.

Regent's friendly chapel coordinator concurs on her blog. Well, she's usually friendly, but she rails mercilessly against the lyrics to Let My Words Be Few, which I think she's had to sing a few dozen times too often at her church. In a comment on Stackhouse's blog, she confesses:

I usually use "the boyfriend songs" as times of silence mixed with times of confession of my disdain and contempt.

(ajt, that was a hilarious comment, by the way... Loved it!)

Stackhouse's blog has attracted quite a discussion on the matter so far, including a few who disagree. Songwriter Dan Wilt, for example, chimed in on the comments, agreeing partly with Stackhouse that the lyrics are often overdone, but suggesting that the romantic language nevertheless makes up an important part of the Christian tradition and can be used in moderation. Myself, I've been thinking about this matter for a little while as well, since we seem to have little shortage of "boyfriend songs" at Jubilee, a trend that I've never been comfortable with. Is it beneficial, or even correct, to say "I am in love with Jesus"?

I agree with Stackhouse that Jesus is definitely not my boyfriend, fiance, or husband; nor is He that to the women out there; I agree that the relationship is different than that of husband and wife; and I share some measure of disdain for the sappy boyfriend songs that pass as Christian worship nowadays. And I have a lot of respect for Professor Stackhouse, from whom I've had the privilege of taking two classes so far at Regent. Nevertheless, flat-out labeling language like "in love with" as "wrong" is, I think, grossly overstating the problem.

There remains something fundamentally and mystically romantic about the relationship with God--and not just between God and the church collectively but also between God and the individual. As my good friend Ed Park preached last Sunday at Sanctuary, it is not enough to say "I love" God in the same way I love my family members, friends, brothers and sisters in Christ. Nor is it just a difference in degree: that I love my friends but I love God more. There is a difference in kind: an exclusivity inherent in the relationship that elevates it into the category of the romantic--I am to love God and no other--in the same way that the exclusivity of the arrangement is one of the most important elements of a marriage relationship. Is it the same as a marriage? No. But there are clear similarities that make the metaphor worth using.

And, I would emphasize, this applies to the individual as well as to the community. Yes, Scripture applies the term "Bride of Christ" to the church, not to individuals, and the romantic language in the Old Testament is chiefly, if not always, applied to Israel as a nation rather than to individuals, but that does not negate a romantic or exclusive element to the individual's relationship. "You shall have no other Gods before me," commands the Lord as the first of the famous Ten Commandments, and the "you" is in fact singular rather than plural, directed to you as an individual person, not just Israel as a whole. God is more than just a friend, and the love between Christian and Creator is more than just a friend's love.

Precisely how this love is different may be a mystery, but so, fundamentally, is the love that binds boyfriend and girlfriend, or husband and wife. Whether the phrase "in love with" is appropriate may be debated, and some will bemoan its use. It is certainly not the perfect phrase; but since the perfect phase doesn't seem to exist in our language, and since, somehow, this mystery must be expressed in our worship, I think that phrase is likely as good as any. If we cannot explore its romantic connotations, I think we cheapen God's love for us as individuals, and our love for God. So I will continue to say "I am in love with Jesus," with caution, knowing it is not the One Perfect Picture, knowing that it is just part of our muddling through figuring out what it means to be the people of God, but also knowing that it expresses something important that we ought not lose.

That said, the modern evangelical church has certainly greatly overused, and sometimes abused, the metaphor, to the detriment of other important matters. For example, Dan Edelen insightfully points out that the image of Jesus as a good husband may be a major reason why men often seem not to be as active in the church as women--an issue we definitely see at Jubilee. When the church too heavily promotes this idea of Jesus as a good husband, it builds up the women (and primarily the single women) in the church, while leaving us men without a coherent image of who Jesus is or who we are in relation to Him. This is the fruit of the overemphasis on a good but by no means perfect metaphor, and we ought to take heed and think more holistically about our theology.

Interestingly, I used the very song ajt reviled, Let My Words Be Few as a positive illustration when I preached on worship last year (sorry for you west-siders; I preached only on the eastside that day.) Worship, our primary mode of relation and interaction with God, needs to encompass all aspects of who He is. While there are not many "modern" praise songs that I truly like, I do appreciate this one in its effort to express worship holistically: that there is both an intimacy, yes, even a romantic-like intimacy ("Jesus, I am so in love with You") and an awesome holy other-ness ("and I stand in awe of You") to worship, and it is good not to lose either aspect.

Theological Worldview Revisited

Fri, 17 Aug 2007 19:43:44 GMT

So around two years ago, I took this quiz, a fascinating quick measure of your theological worldview. Back then, I scored mostly postmodern, with Wesleyan evangelical close behind. Now, Mike inspired me to retake it, and I thought it'd be interesting to see how my second year at Regent has affected me. The results are mostly what I expected:

You scored as Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan. You are an evangelical in the Wesleyan tradition. You believe that God's grace enables you to choose to believe in him, even though you yourself are totally depraved. The gift of the Holy Spirit gives you assurance of your salvation, and he also enables you to live the life of obedience to which God has called us. You are influenced heavly by John Wesley and the Methodists.

Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan

79%

Emergent/Postmodern

75%

Neo orthodox

68%

Roman Catholic

43%

Classical Liberal

43%

Charismatic/Pentecostal

36%

Reformed Evangelical

36%

Fundamentalist

21%

Modern Liberal

11%

What's your theological worldview?
created with QuizFarm.com

Well, I switched from predominantly postmodern to predominantly Wesleyan. I think the main thing that happened here was the second-semester history class that I took last year, in which I did a lot of study of John Wesley, the Methodists, the Holiness movement, and the birth of Pentecostalism. It's a fascinating story, and I relate strongly with the early Methodist spirituality. (Sadly, many of the modern Methodist offshoots have devolved into liberalism, and I think have lost the connection with where the Methodists came from.) That study probably explains the increased leaning towards evangelical holiness, and the drop in evangelical reformed (John Wesley was Arminian) as well as the drop in modern liberal.

The increased neo-orthodox leaning was also not surprising-- I've had a chance to read a number of Eastern Orthodox theologians recently, and there's some good stuff there. What did surprise me was that my charismatic/pentecostal leaning did not change. I still expect it to be higher than how the quiz lists it. I suspect it's because my charismatic side sympathizes more with traditional Pentecostal theology, rather than with the modern charismatics that seem more interested in feel-good pseudo-prophetic utterances, showmanship, and financial prosperity. If the old-time Pentecostals could see us now, they'd smack us upside the head.

Brown Beauty

Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:19:29 GMT

This is for all of you who are into the Arbonne thing...

The video was done by HappySlip, which, incidentally, is a pretty funny YouTube channel to follow. All the characters are played by the same actress, who modeled them after her family members. A few other HappySlip videos: