1. "Language barrier is a figurative phrase used primarily to indicate the difficulties faced when people who have no language in common attempt to communicate with each other."
2. "Typically, little communication occurs unless one or both parties learns a new language, which requires an investment of time and effort."
3. "Language barriers also influence migration. Emigrants from a country are far more likely to move to a destination country which speaks the same language as the emigrant's country."
The above quotes are from wikipedia. The purpose of them is to help explain the following idea that author Alan Hirsch puts forth in his book the forgotten ways.
"Perhaps the single most significant source of the malaise of leadership in our day comes from the way, and the context, in which we form leaders. For the most part, the would-be leader is withdrawn from the context of ordinary life and ministry in order to study in a somewhat cloistered environment, for up to seven years in some cases. during that period they are subjected to an immense amount of complex information relating to the biblical disciplines, theology, ethics, church history, pastoral theology, etc. And while the vast majority of this information is useful and correct, what is dangerous to discipleship in that setting is the actual socialization processes that the student undergoes along the way. In effect, he or she is socialized out of ordinary life and develops a kind of language and thinking that is seldom understood and expressed outside of the seminary. It's as if in order to learn about ministry and theology, we leave our places of habitation and take a flight into the wonderfully abstracted world of abstraction, we fly around there for along period of time, and then wonder why we have trouble landing again."
I have experienced both sides of this to some degree. I came into a christian environment that had it's own sort of language and after a period of years left speaking that language. I have had some trouble learning how to communicate within the context I now live in. I am familiar with bar life, that used to be my life, the problem is not talking the bar languag, but being able to translate what I have learned and seen in the available language.
Sometimes the language of christians irritates me so much. Jargon is very frustrating when you don't know it. Lauryn Hill says her songs can sound a little cryptic...(she gave her audience opportunity for explanation, but i wonder if it got edited out for the unplugged 2 CD).
I think that the definitions of language barrier give us some insight into these problems.
2. Both parties must be willing to learn. (Jesus certainly walked in our shoes.) Relationship requires an investment of time and effort.
3. Migration is more common to a place where language is similar. Perhaps the reason many of you chose MIU as your church.
(There is something about spacehog that people in Paris LOVE)me too.
I recommend reading Chapter 4 of hirch's forgotten ways. It is about discipleship and this is the chapter that I pulled the quote from. He has lots of other interesting things to say, but the thing that really strikes me is the differences he points out between hebraic concepts of knowledge and Greek concepts of knowledge. One he says is right acting leads to right thinking--while the other is right thinking leads to right acting. I think that both have merrit. And that both are limited. Positive thinking only goes so far, and doing dance steps without hearing the music only goes so far. It is precisely here that I realize that relationship with Jesus is necessary. YES act, Yes Think, but must know him.
I am still wondering how to know him since he is not here physically as with the disciples...and since he had to leave so that the spirit would come which seems pretty important, and what that can be like. I don't see how discipleship can look the same since Jesus is not here right now with me, but I think that he has made a provision that involves his people and the holy spirit.
gotta hit the hay.
matt.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Power VS Authority
In Alan Herch's book "the forgotten ways" he makes a interesting distinction between power and authority. The example he used was this.
"George Bush has power; Mother Teresa had authority!"
I like this for a few reasons. 1. the difference between their positions & 2. their genders.
I looked at both power and authority from the stance of "Why do I obey this form?".
A. For power I obey because of fear, fear of consequences, or potential gains/incentives I might recieve.
B. For authority I obey because of love or respect. It is more relational.
Where power is bestowed by the position (President), I see authority gained by the character and relationship of the person. (Perhaps from caring or time spent--trust)
I think that the genders are good because men tend to be more factual while women tend to be more relational. (not always the case in all situations at all times.)
Many problems occur when we try to use power for a job that requires authority.
To be balanced we need to understand both. They both have their place.
Alan Hirsch points out that Gandhi`"altered his world, not through political maneuvering or institutional power, but rather through the sheer inspirational power of an integrated life based on religious, moral and social virtues." and that Jesus changed the world through" the power of his teachings and the sheer quality of his life.
"George Bush has power; Mother Teresa had authority!"
I like this for a few reasons. 1. the difference between their positions & 2. their genders.
I looked at both power and authority from the stance of "Why do I obey this form?".
A. For power I obey because of fear, fear of consequences, or potential gains/incentives I might recieve.
B. For authority I obey because of love or respect. It is more relational.
Where power is bestowed by the position (President), I see authority gained by the character and relationship of the person. (Perhaps from caring or time spent--trust)
I think that the genders are good because men tend to be more factual while women tend to be more relational. (not always the case in all situations at all times.)
Many problems occur when we try to use power for a job that requires authority.
To be balanced we need to understand both. They both have their place.
Alan Hirsch points out that Gandhi`"altered his world, not through political maneuvering or institutional power, but rather through the sheer inspirational power of an integrated life based on religious, moral and social virtues." and that Jesus changed the world through" the power of his teachings and the sheer quality of his life.
next time you argue
More than likely you will have arguments and disagreements throughout your life. Something that I have learned recently is a way to objectively look at arguments. I noticed that when my wife and I and I argue it can be looked at simply like this...
2 different people with 2 different goals.
This can look more like a competition than a collaboration very quickly.
If you both try to get your goal there is a good chance that your personalities will collide. Your differences are easily seen, but if you are going opposite directions even the things that you have in common will be conflicting.
This is where the art of living and negotiating comes in. If you and the other party/parties can agree upon a common goal then all of your differences and similarites are going in the same direction. Doesn't mean you won't have opportunity to cut eachother off and ding some fenders, but you can avoid a head on collision. Hopefully your differences will help to build eachother up in weaker areas.
I see this in business too. Two people with conflicting ideas of what a business is for. An overarching purpose, idea, story, is necessary. It seems that people with often argue right and wrong when the problem is clearly not a moral problem. The problem is the same as the one above...different people with different goals...in this situation I think it is best to clarify your ideas of the purpose of the business. Then combine your efforts to find an over-arching goal that you can both agree on. Then, when you have future disagreements, you can all look at your mutual goal and discuss how your "opinions" help or hinder the common goal without it becoming a matter of right or wrong.
I am a person who DOES NOT LIKE CONFLICT! And I have found this model to be helpfull for me. It allows me to remain calm, for the most part, and see complex problems in a simple way that can be talked about without the often emotionally charged RIGHT and WRONG coming into play.
Thank God for answers to bath tub prayers! because I have found this to be very helpful.
love, matt.
2 different people with 2 different goals.
This can look more like a competition than a collaboration very quickly.
If you both try to get your goal there is a good chance that your personalities will collide. Your differences are easily seen, but if you are going opposite directions even the things that you have in common will be conflicting.
This is where the art of living and negotiating comes in. If you and the other party/parties can agree upon a common goal then all of your differences and similarites are going in the same direction. Doesn't mean you won't have opportunity to cut eachother off and ding some fenders, but you can avoid a head on collision. Hopefully your differences will help to build eachother up in weaker areas.
I see this in business too. Two people with conflicting ideas of what a business is for. An overarching purpose, idea, story, is necessary. It seems that people with often argue right and wrong when the problem is clearly not a moral problem. The problem is the same as the one above...different people with different goals...in this situation I think it is best to clarify your ideas of the purpose of the business. Then combine your efforts to find an over-arching goal that you can both agree on. Then, when you have future disagreements, you can all look at your mutual goal and discuss how your "opinions" help or hinder the common goal without it becoming a matter of right or wrong.
I am a person who DOES NOT LIKE CONFLICT! And I have found this model to be helpfull for me. It allows me to remain calm, for the most part, and see complex problems in a simple way that can be talked about without the often emotionally charged RIGHT and WRONG coming into play.
Thank God for answers to bath tub prayers! because I have found this to be very helpful.
love, matt.
Monday, January 21, 2008
as you read these posts consider....
"Our business is to present the Christion faith clothed in modern terms, not to propogate modern thought clothed in Christian terms. confusion here is fatal"
J.I. Packer
I wanted to put this quote in for discussion. There is a man by the name of HUD that spoke on self deception. He said that it's when you have forgotten that you forgot something. I know that there are many things I do that I am quite unaware of and so I got married...and they are becoming more visible daily.
love, matt.
J.I. Packer
I wanted to put this quote in for discussion. There is a man by the name of HUD that spoke on self deception. He said that it's when you have forgotten that you forgot something. I know that there are many things I do that I am quite unaware of and so I got married...and they are becoming more visible daily.
love, matt.
Punktuation
Even after this simple explanation I still don't get it.
So I will use the only punctuation I know. Punktuation.
I think that Jesus was a treausure hunter.
In the book Freakonomics there is a description of the book that caught my eye.
here it is.
"So the aim of this book is to explore the hidden side of ...everything. This may occasionally be a frustrating exercise. It may sometimes feel as if we are peering at the world through a straw or even staring into a funhouse mirror; but the idea is to look at many different scenarios and examine them in a way they have rarely been examined. In some regards, this is a strange concept for a book Most books put forth a single theme, crisply expressed in a sentence or two, and then tell the entire story of that theme: the history of salt; the fragility of democracy; the use and misuse of punctuation. This book has no such unifying theme. We did consider, for about six minutes, wtiting a book that would revolve around a sinle theme--the theory and practice of applied microeconomics, anyone?--but opted instead for a sort of treasure-hunt approach. Yes, this approach employs the best analytical tools that economics can offer, but it also allows us to follow whatever freakish curiosites may occur to us. Thus our invented field of study: Freakonomics. The sort of stories told in this book are not often covered in Econ 101, but that may change. Since the science of economics is primarily a set of tools, as opposed to a subject matter, then no subject, however offbeat, need be beyond its reach."
When I read this description I thought about the unifying them and the way I read the bible. Is it a tool or suject matter? Could it be that I read the bible for the "History of religion; the fragility of the church; the use and misuse of the knowledge of good and evil?" I like to think that no subject, person, etc. no matter how offbeat is beyond the redempive claim of God. Beyond the understanding of God. I see Jesus approach people in such a way that he finds the treasure of their heart. He sees into their heart and what they value most, fear most, controlled by and he frees them. The book the forgotten ways by alan hirsch talks about putting religion and spirituality back in the hands of the common man. Jesus had such wonderfull methods. I think that his tools were what we call the fruit of the spirit.
I cannot really explain what I am trying to say here. It seems cryptic, but I would love to talk about your treasure if you want to.
I was speaking with my wife yesterday about wrestling. She watched me and my friend throw down in his living room. She said "women don't do that." "They fix eachothers hair and nails" etc. It dawned on me that men seek to cultivate strength in one another and women seek to cultivate beauty. In the blog dazed and confused I talked about how Hazing seeks to take a mans strength and a womans beauty. Then I spoke about how time takes everyones (external) strength and beauty. we cannot escape that. If you are a person whose treasure is their looks or strength then you know all to well that it is fading as you get older. I think that to us Jesus says, but what about you character? Your spirit? The eternal gifts that I have granted you. You focus on the temporal and treasure the temporal, but it is failing you. Go and cultivate that which death has no hold on. The life I have given you.
here it is.
"So the aim of this book is to explore the hidden side of ...everything. This may occasionally be a frustrating exercise. It may sometimes feel as if we are peering at the world through a straw or even staring into a funhouse mirror; but the idea is to look at many different scenarios and examine them in a way they have rarely been examined. In some regards, this is a strange concept for a book Most books put forth a single theme, crisply expressed in a sentence or two, and then tell the entire story of that theme: the history of salt; the fragility of democracy; the use and misuse of punctuation. This book has no such unifying theme. We did consider, for about six minutes, wtiting a book that would revolve around a sinle theme--the theory and practice of applied microeconomics, anyone?--but opted instead for a sort of treasure-hunt approach. Yes, this approach employs the best analytical tools that economics can offer, but it also allows us to follow whatever freakish curiosites may occur to us. Thus our invented field of study: Freakonomics. The sort of stories told in this book are not often covered in Econ 101, but that may change. Since the science of economics is primarily a set of tools, as opposed to a subject matter, then no subject, however offbeat, need be beyond its reach."
When I read this description I thought about the unifying them and the way I read the bible. Is it a tool or suject matter? Could it be that I read the bible for the "History of religion; the fragility of the church; the use and misuse of the knowledge of good and evil?" I like to think that no subject, person, etc. no matter how offbeat is beyond the redempive claim of God. Beyond the understanding of God. I see Jesus approach people in such a way that he finds the treasure of their heart. He sees into their heart and what they value most, fear most, controlled by and he frees them. The book the forgotten ways by alan hirsch talks about putting religion and spirituality back in the hands of the common man. Jesus had such wonderfull methods. I think that his tools were what we call the fruit of the spirit.
I cannot really explain what I am trying to say here. It seems cryptic, but I would love to talk about your treasure if you want to.
I was speaking with my wife yesterday about wrestling. She watched me and my friend throw down in his living room. She said "women don't do that." "They fix eachothers hair and nails" etc. It dawned on me that men seek to cultivate strength in one another and women seek to cultivate beauty. In the blog dazed and confused I talked about how Hazing seeks to take a mans strength and a womans beauty. Then I spoke about how time takes everyones (external) strength and beauty. we cannot escape that. If you are a person whose treasure is their looks or strength then you know all to well that it is fading as you get older. I think that to us Jesus says, but what about you character? Your spirit? The eternal gifts that I have granted you. You focus on the temporal and treasure the temporal, but it is failing you. Go and cultivate that which death has no hold on. The life I have given you.
I thought you did. You thought I did?
This is an excerpt from the book "The Tipping Point".
"The 1964 stabbing death of a young Queens woman by the name of Kitty Genovese. Genovese was chased by her assailant and attacked three times on the street, over the course of half an hour, as thirty-eight witnesses called the police. The case provoked rounds of self-recrimination. It became symbolic of the cold and dehumanizing effects of urban life."
Many thought that these people did not care. "The anonymity and alienation of big-city life makes people hard and unfeeling." This explanation made sense to me, however, Gladwell then points to a study by two psychologists (John Darley & Bib Latane) who sought to understand the "Bystander problem". They found that "the one factor above all else that predicted helping behavior was how many witnesses there were to the event."
"When people are in a group responsibility for acting is difused."
The lesson learned was this "Not that no one called despite the fact that thirty-eight people heard her scream; it's that no one called because thirty-eight people heard her scream."
This is what hit me in the tub this morning. In a large church congregation you have hundreds or even thousands of "witnesses." How does this effect the dispersion of resposibility. "Feed my sheep." Who will go? The great commision?
Also think about this. In a "christian" nation how does this effect our behavior with specific emphasis on sharing our beliefs.
Perhaps this is why the home church and small group movements are being characterized by such prolific growth. Perhaps the people within them are more responsible. More accountable. More likely to participate in "helping behavior". Eveyone can use a little help.
Doug said something in regards to MIU that I really thought was awesome. He went in for a meeting to decide the structure of MIU. Whether or not he would pastor so on and so on. I called him later to find out what happened and I asked him "Are you still the man?" his response was something like this--"I'm the man more than ever, but the great thing is that they are the TEAM!" He went on to talk about searching out the future while we cultivate the present...I love that guy.
love matt.
"The 1964 stabbing death of a young Queens woman by the name of Kitty Genovese. Genovese was chased by her assailant and attacked three times on the street, over the course of half an hour, as thirty-eight witnesses called the police. The case provoked rounds of self-recrimination. It became symbolic of the cold and dehumanizing effects of urban life."
Many thought that these people did not care. "The anonymity and alienation of big-city life makes people hard and unfeeling." This explanation made sense to me, however, Gladwell then points to a study by two psychologists (John Darley & Bib Latane) who sought to understand the "Bystander problem". They found that "the one factor above all else that predicted helping behavior was how many witnesses there were to the event."
"When people are in a group responsibility for acting is difused."
The lesson learned was this "Not that no one called despite the fact that thirty-eight people heard her scream; it's that no one called because thirty-eight people heard her scream."
This is what hit me in the tub this morning. In a large church congregation you have hundreds or even thousands of "witnesses." How does this effect the dispersion of resposibility. "Feed my sheep." Who will go? The great commision?
Also think about this. In a "christian" nation how does this effect our behavior with specific emphasis on sharing our beliefs.
Perhaps this is why the home church and small group movements are being characterized by such prolific growth. Perhaps the people within them are more responsible. More accountable. More likely to participate in "helping behavior". Eveyone can use a little help.
Doug said something in regards to MIU that I really thought was awesome. He went in for a meeting to decide the structure of MIU. Whether or not he would pastor so on and so on. I called him later to find out what happened and I asked him "Are you still the man?" his response was something like this--"I'm the man more than ever, but the great thing is that they are the TEAM!" He went on to talk about searching out the future while we cultivate the present...I love that guy.
love matt.
Monday, January 14, 2008
a short film about addiction
I have been thinking about a short film about addiction.
The idea that I have so far is to go to the jail near my house (If I can get permission) and ask for volunteers. I want people who admit to being in prison because of their addictions. I will pick people of different ages, gender, and ethnicity. I then want to ask them what outfit they would like to leave prison in. (Kind of like your first day back to school outfit.) Then I want to have them try to get out of a jail cell with the door wide open while being sprayed with a water cannon/fire hose. I would like to use radiohead "just" or maybe DJ shadow for the water fight scene. I thought that if the jail would allow for them to be rewarded for escaping the cell that perhaps it might make their victories or agonies more vivid. Perhaps not. (These are the things I need input on)
I also can't decide if guards should be holding the water cannon or, the other participants, or the shadow people (what many people see during withdrawls, I think they are actual demons).
So you have a person in a prison cell with the door open-(A prison which can be left)
Fighting a deluge of water, being pumeled by the water-(forces of addiction/effects)
Dressed in the clothes they want to leave prison in--(the idea of freedom and what it will look like.)
So if any of you have suggestions, they are welcome. Or if any of you have resources and want to run with the project let me know.
matt.
The idea that I have so far is to go to the jail near my house (If I can get permission) and ask for volunteers. I want people who admit to being in prison because of their addictions. I will pick people of different ages, gender, and ethnicity. I then want to ask them what outfit they would like to leave prison in. (Kind of like your first day back to school outfit.) Then I want to have them try to get out of a jail cell with the door wide open while being sprayed with a water cannon/fire hose. I would like to use radiohead "just" or maybe DJ shadow for the water fight scene. I thought that if the jail would allow for them to be rewarded for escaping the cell that perhaps it might make their victories or agonies more vivid. Perhaps not. (These are the things I need input on)
I also can't decide if guards should be holding the water cannon or, the other participants, or the shadow people (what many people see during withdrawls, I think they are actual demons).
So you have a person in a prison cell with the door open-(A prison which can be left)
Fighting a deluge of water, being pumeled by the water-(forces of addiction/effects)
Dressed in the clothes they want to leave prison in--(the idea of freedom and what it will look like.)
So if any of you have suggestions, they are welcome. Or if any of you have resources and want to run with the project let me know.
matt.
don't read this yet.
I just noticed that my clothes are wearing out. Shoes too. The thought that popped into my mind was "God has left me".
I thought that this was a strange thing to think just because my shorts are tearing really easily.
I then started thinking about where that came from. I remembered a story in the bible about Israel's 40 years of wandering in the desert. The story records that their clothes and shoes did not wear out. They also recieved food every day that appeared with the morning dew. Perhaps they never wore old clothes because people were able to make new ones. Or perhaps the clothes were miraculously preserved. Whatever the case, they were amply provided for and did not lack food or clothing.
My father in law says that money won't make you happy, but being broke as shit sure will make you miserable. Having your needs met in the dessert certainly makes it more liveable.
It was after a little processing that I became glad that my clothes are wearing out. Perhaps this means that I am not as lost as previously thought. (Read blog "I've lost my idols")
Deuteronomy 29:5-6 "During the forty years that I led you through the desert, your clothes did not wear out, nor did the sandals on your feet. You ate no bread and drank no wine or other fermented drink. I did this so that you might know that i am the Lord your God." Preceeded by you have seen miracles, "but to this day the LORD has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear."
Joshua 5 Today I have rolled away the reproach of Of Egypt from you. "Circumcision"
Rolled away stone from Jesus Tomb.
14th of the month, PASSOVER! in Gilgal (Circumcission)
15th ate unlevened bread and roasted grain of the promised land.
16th the mana stopped---no longer any manna for the Israelites, but that year they ate of the produce of Canaan.
Purpose of the clothes shoes and food/Wandering for 40 years.
Deuteronomy 8
8:2-5 "Rmember how the Lord your God led you all the way in the desert these forty years, to humble you and to test you in order to know what was in your heart, whether or not you would keep his commands. He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your fathers had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD. Your clothes did not wear out and your feet did not swell durnig these 40 years. Know then in your heart that as a man disciplines his son, so the LORD your God disciplines you."
LOVE the LORD your God.
Deuteronomy 6&7 The shemah. burn money
I thought that this was a strange thing to think just because my shorts are tearing really easily.
I then started thinking about where that came from. I remembered a story in the bible about Israel's 40 years of wandering in the desert. The story records that their clothes and shoes did not wear out. They also recieved food every day that appeared with the morning dew. Perhaps they never wore old clothes because people were able to make new ones. Or perhaps the clothes were miraculously preserved. Whatever the case, they were amply provided for and did not lack food or clothing.
My father in law says that money won't make you happy, but being broke as shit sure will make you miserable. Having your needs met in the dessert certainly makes it more liveable.
It was after a little processing that I became glad that my clothes are wearing out. Perhaps this means that I am not as lost as previously thought. (Read blog "I've lost my idols")
Deuteronomy 29:5-6 "During the forty years that I led you through the desert, your clothes did not wear out, nor did the sandals on your feet. You ate no bread and drank no wine or other fermented drink. I did this so that you might know that i am the Lord your God." Preceeded by you have seen miracles, "but to this day the LORD has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear."
Joshua 5 Today I have rolled away the reproach of Of Egypt from you. "Circumcision"
Rolled away stone from Jesus Tomb.
14th of the month, PASSOVER! in Gilgal (Circumcission)
15th ate unlevened bread and roasted grain of the promised land.
16th the mana stopped---no longer any manna for the Israelites, but that year they ate of the produce of Canaan.
Purpose of the clothes shoes and food/Wandering for 40 years.
Deuteronomy 8
8:2-5 "Rmember how the Lord your God led you all the way in the desert these forty years, to humble you and to test you in order to know what was in your heart, whether or not you would keep his commands. He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your fathers had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD. Your clothes did not wear out and your feet did not swell durnig these 40 years. Know then in your heart that as a man disciplines his son, so the LORD your God disciplines you."
LOVE the LORD your God.
Deuteronomy 6&7 The shemah. burn money
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Becarefull what you allow to take away your restlessness.
Restlessnes is that energy that pushes you toward greatness.
Let God be restless in you.
consumerism seeks peace from restlessnes. Do all our Idols seek that.
Christ is the prince of peace.
When did I trade in simple humor for complex irony. Restlessness moving you past both stages onto what?
What do you do at the crossroads? Buy something? Consume something? Ask for direction? Just Go? Wait? Press on?
Let God be restless in you.
consumerism seeks peace from restlessnes. Do all our Idols seek that.
Christ is the prince of peace.
When did I trade in simple humor for complex irony. Restlessness moving you past both stages onto what?
What do you do at the crossroads? Buy something? Consume something? Ask for direction? Just Go? Wait? Press on?
Friday, January 11, 2008
Room for God when you're high
Would God speak to you while high? Or would he avoid such a situation.
Does God only talk to you when you are high? Do you need something to reach him?
Does God only come around when you are at church? Doing Good?"Doing something Bad?
Doug has me reading a book by Alan Hirsch. He said some things that I really like.
He is talking about how Christians say Jesus is Lord. If we really meant this then the natural extension is a biblical worldview that "can conceive of no part of the world that does not come under the claim of Yahweh's Lordship. All of life belongs to God, and true holiness means bringing all the spheres of our life under God."
Perhaps this quote will make it even more clear.
"If the world and all in it belongs to God, and comes under his direct claim over it in and through Jesus, then there can be no sphere of life that is not radically open to the rule of God." !!!!!!!!!!!!"There can be no non-God area in our lives and in our culture."
When we "assign spirituality to the realm of the merely private and religious" (The basic practice of christendom for a long time now) "our understanding of the presence of God in all places" is damaged.
For example: "A bar is a church without God." Well actually a bar is a building with people in it, just like what most people call a church. In actuality we are the church...I am....and I work in a bar....so for me I guess a bar is a building with a church inside of it 6 days a week trying to make tartar sauce that would make God proud.
I have had a few people tell me about experiences they had with God while high on one thing or another. The most recent person was just suprised he showed up for the party. I was excited to hear about it because I want to believe that "God is everywhere and particularly loves to abide with his people."
I am not going anywhere that God already isn't.
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Humans in Cages, A Society of Captives
">
" border="0" alt="" />
">" border="0" alt="" />
">" border="0" alt="" />
My dad was reading a book called tipping point and he brought up a case study from the book called the Stanford Prison Expirement. I was very excited to hear about it because I have been thinking about "Humans in Cages" for a few months now. The thought that I had was this. We try to make animal cages at the zoo as natural as possible so that the animals will exhibit natural behavior. Yet, we put humans in a very unnatural environment to try to rehabilitate them to act normal. At this point you probably have a very strong opinion. Over the last few months people that I have talked to have pretty much had one of 2 very strong opinions on the matter.
1. wrong doing must be punished, without prisons we would have chaos.
2. People who go to prison often come out worse and often go right back in.
I have noticed that generally people who have not been to prison hold #1 and people who have hold #2.
This study is very interesting. If any of you have looked at it in depth I would very much like to read your comments.
I think that our "Idols" make us all a society of captives. I think that we can all learn something from this especially as we think about authority, judgment, punishment, forgiveness, love, anger,right/wrong, roles, control, Justice, Legalism etc....
The following quote gives some food for thought as well.
"If Jesus' critique of legalism was not devastating enough, the apostle Paul added another, fundamental complaint. Legalism fails miserably at the one thing it is supposed to do: encourage obedience. In a strange twist, a system of strict laws actually puts new ideas of lawbreaking in a person's mind. Paul explains, "For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, 'do not covet.' But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire." In a demonstration of this principle, some surveys show that people raised in teetotaling denominations are three times as likely to become alcoholics."
-Philip Yancey, What’s So Amazing About Grace
I have experienced many different types of behavior modifications personally. Counseling, Jail, Rehab, Church, Bible School, Spankings, Positive/negative reinforcement, lifestyle management, drugs, legal drugs, legaly prescribed drugs, etc. The most effective programs in my opinion seek to change the heart much as a good parent does...using love, discipline, patience,, the works.
Below are some articles put together by others. (Followed by an extensive Bibliography)
"I want a complet case study on the effect of anger on a psychiatric
patient in a prison environment with discussions, references and a
bibliography"
The Stanford Prison Experiment is the most comprehensive and respected
studies on the subject.( I will provide an overview of the study and
then some analysis as to how it relates to anger in the prison
environment. The experiment was and is controversial because of the
extreme and frightening results. Some question whether the experiment
was ethical. Thus, there are very few similar experiments and it
stands as a landmark study of conformity, obedience and authority.
In August 1971, an advertisement appeared in the Palo Alto Times:
"Male college students needed for psychological study of prison life.
$15 per day for 1-2 weeks..." Seventy men responded. Among them, two
dozen were chosen to participate in the experiment because based on
interviews and a battery of psychological tests they were judged to be
the most normal, average and healthy. They were then assigned
randomly, by a flip of coin, either to be guards or prisoners. “
It didn’t take long for the individuals involved in the experiment to
exhibit extreme behavior:
“Two days into the experiments, the prisoners started to exhibit
rebellious behavior. They began to taunt and curse the guards and even
stage a revolt. The guards were enraged and retaliated, initially by
using a fire extinguisher. They broke into each cell, stripped the
prisoners naked, took the beds out, forced the ringleaders of the
prisoner rebellion into solitary confinement, and generally began to
harass and intimidate the prisoners. They also applied psychological
tactics such as setting up a "privilege cell" for model prisoners to
break the solidarity among prisoners. Alternately, they also put "bad
prisoners" in the "privilege cell" in order to create confusion,
suspicion, and aggression among prisoners. By then, these research
participants had really taken on the roles that they were randomly
assigned to play.”
Both the guard and prisoners quickly fell into their randomly assigned roles.
“Guards applied total control on each prisoner's life, including going
to the toilet. Prisoners were often not allowed to use the toilet and
forced to urinate or defecate in a bucket in their cell, but not
allowed to empty the buckets. Repeatedly, guards also punished
prisoners by forcing them to do push-ups, jumping jacks, cleaning out
toilet bowls with their bare hands, and acting out other degrading
scenarios. Often, they also coerced prisoners to become snitches in
exchange for reduced abuse. Especially when they were bored or thought
that the experimenters were not watching, their treatment to the
prisoners would escalate and became more pornographic. The humiliation
and dehumanization got so severe, that the experimenters had to
frequently remind the guards to refrain from such tactics.”
“The prisoners, on the other hand, started to experience acute
emotional disturbance and rage. They exhibited disorganized thinking,
uncontrollable crying, withdrawing, and behaving in pathological ways.
As a result, researchers had to release five prisoners from the
experiment prematurely.”
This experiment sought to explore the issues of conformity and
compliance in relation to roles and group identification in the
specific prison environment. The results seemed to confirm primary
researcher Dr. Zimbardo’s contention that "most evil is the product
of rather ordinary people caught up in unusual circumstances that they
are not equipped to cope with in the normal ways" (Zimbardo, 1999).
On aggressive behavior; from Dr. Zimbardo’s lecture on the Holocaust:
Holocaust Studies Center, Sonoma State University
http://www.sonoma.edu/users/g/goodman/zimbardo.htm
“I failed to mention that in my Deindividuation research and Bandura's
Dehumanization research, that aggression, once it got past initial
inhibitions, rapidly escalated and increased over time and trials, as
it seemed to become self-reinforcing, violence became its own reward.
We do not want to recognize the pleasure many people take in
participating in violent acts, whether directly or vicariously, as in
spectators at boxing or wrestling matches, The Roman Circuses, men in
mass rape, police in riots, and soldiers in massacres. It is not alien
to human nature but a shard of its non-reflective surface.”
Both the guards and the prisoners experienced anger and exhibited in
the form of aggressive behavior. For the guards, the aggression seemed
to stem from their identification with their role as authority
figures. The role required them to control a group of frustrated
prisoners. The chaotic nature of this situation led to anger which
manifested itself in severely aggressive behavior towards the
prisoners.
The prisoners also experienced intense anger in the study. They became
increasingly frustrated with their mistreatment and became
aggressively rebellious and violent in response.
Additional Links/ Bibliography:
Homepage of Dr. Zimbardo
http://www.zimbardo.com/
International Centre for Prison Studies
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/rel/icps/home.html
Federal Bureau of Prisons Library
http://bop.library.net/
Castine Research Corporation
http://www.castineresearch.org/
FOB Office of Research and Evaluation
http://www.bop.gov/orepg/oreindex.html
Prisons and Jails
http://www.prisonsandjails.com/
Prison Activist Resource Center
http://www.prisonactivist.org/issues/
The Other Side of the Wall
http://www.prisonwall.org/
Teaching Anger Management in Prisons
http://www.thubtenchodron.org/PrisonDharma/teaching_anger_management.html
NPR Interview with Dr. Zimbardo on Iraqi Prisoner Abuse (May 4, 2004)
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1870756
The Psychological Impact of Incarceration:
Implications for Post-Prison Adjustment
Craig Haney University of California, Santa Cruz December 2001
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/prison2home02/Haney.htm
Zimbardo, Philip G. On the ethics of intervention in human
psychological research: With special reference to the Stanford prison
experiment. [Journal Article] Cognition. Vol 2(2), 1973, 243-256.
Banuazizi, Ali; Movahedi, Siamak. Interpersonal dynamics in a
simulated prison: A methodological analysis. [Journal Article]
American Psychologist. Vol 30(2), Feb 1975, 152-160.
DeJong, William. Another look at Banuazizi and Movahedi's analysis of
the Stanford Prison Experiment. [Journal Article] American
Psychologist. Vol 30(10), Oct 1975, 1013-1015.
Haney, Craig; Zimbardo, Philip. The past and future of U.S. prison
policy: Twenty-five years after the Stanford Prison Experiment.
[Journal Article] American Psychologist. Vol 53(7), Jul 1998, 709-727.
Haney, Craig. Ideology and crime control. [Journal Article] American
Psychologist. Vol 54(9), Sep 1999, 786-788.
Ireland, J. L. (2002) Bullying Among Prisoners: Evidence, Research and
Intervention Strategies. Brunner-Routledge, London: UK
Gresham Sykes, >The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security
Prison. Princeton: Princeton University Press (1958), at 63.
Richard McCorkle, "Personal Precautions to Violence in Prison,"
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 19, 160-173 (1992), at 161.
Paul Keve, Prison Life and Human Worth. Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press (1974), at 54.
Masten, A., & Garmezy, N., Risk, Vulnerability and Protective Factors
in Developmental Psychopathology. In F. Lahey & A Kazdin (Eds.)
Advances in Clinical Child Psychology (pp. 1-52). New York: Plenum
(1985), at 3.
Veneziano, L., Veneziano, C., & Tribolet, C., The special needs of
prison inmates with handicaps: An assessment. Journal of Offender
Counseling, Services & Rehabilitation, 12, 61-72 (1987).
Streeter, P., "Incarceration of the mentally ill: Treatment or
warehousing?" Michigan Bar Journal, 77, 166 (1998), at p. 167.
Human Rights Watch, Out of Sight: Super-Maximum Security Confinement
in the United States. Feburary, 2000.
Greene, S., Haney, C., and Hurtado, A., "Cycles of Pain: Risk Factors
in the Lives of Incarcerated Women and Their Children," Prison
Journal, 80, 3-23 (2000).
Lois Forer, A Rage to Punish: The Unintended Consequences of Mandatory
Sentencing. New York: W. W. Norton (1994).
Michael Tonry, Malign Neglect: Race, Crime, and Punishment in America.
New York: Oxford University Press (1995).
Mauer, M. (1990). More Young Black Males under Correctional Control in
US than in College. Washington: The Sentencing Project.
King, A., "The Impact of Incarceration on African American Families:
Implications for Practice," Families in Society: The Journal of
Contemporary Human Services, 74, 145-153 (1993), p. 145..
Chambliss, W., "Policing the Ghetto Underclass: The Politics of Law
and Law Enforcement," Social Problems, 41, 177-194 (1994), p. 183.
Google Search Terms Used:
"prison experiment" or "prison study"
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22prison+experiment%22+or+%22prison+study%22
psychology and prison
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=psychology+and+prison
anger, prison, psychology
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=anger%2C+prison%2C+psychology
I hope this helps. Feel free to let me know if you need any
clarification. Thanks again.
Regards,
">
">
My dad was reading a book called tipping point and he brought up a case study from the book called the Stanford Prison Expirement. I was very excited to hear about it because I have been thinking about "Humans in Cages" for a few months now. The thought that I had was this. We try to make animal cages at the zoo as natural as possible so that the animals will exhibit natural behavior. Yet, we put humans in a very unnatural environment to try to rehabilitate them to act normal. At this point you probably have a very strong opinion. Over the last few months people that I have talked to have pretty much had one of 2 very strong opinions on the matter.
1. wrong doing must be punished, without prisons we would have chaos.
2. People who go to prison often come out worse and often go right back in.
I have noticed that generally people who have not been to prison hold #1 and people who have hold #2.
This study is very interesting. If any of you have looked at it in depth I would very much like to read your comments.
I think that our "Idols" make us all a society of captives. I think that we can all learn something from this especially as we think about authority, judgment, punishment, forgiveness, love, anger,right/wrong, roles, control, Justice, Legalism etc....
The following quote gives some food for thought as well.
"If Jesus' critique of legalism was not devastating enough, the apostle Paul added another, fundamental complaint. Legalism fails miserably at the one thing it is supposed to do: encourage obedience. In a strange twist, a system of strict laws actually puts new ideas of lawbreaking in a person's mind. Paul explains, "For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, 'do not covet.' But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire." In a demonstration of this principle, some surveys show that people raised in teetotaling denominations are three times as likely to become alcoholics."
-Philip Yancey, What’s So Amazing About Grace
I have experienced many different types of behavior modifications personally. Counseling, Jail, Rehab, Church, Bible School, Spankings, Positive/negative reinforcement, lifestyle management, drugs, legal drugs, legaly prescribed drugs, etc. The most effective programs in my opinion seek to change the heart much as a good parent does...using love, discipline, patience,, the works.
Below are some articles put together by others. (Followed by an extensive Bibliography)
"I want a complet case study on the effect of anger on a psychiatric
patient in a prison environment with discussions, references and a
bibliography"
The Stanford Prison Experiment is the most comprehensive and respected
studies on the subject.( I will provide an overview of the study and
then some analysis as to how it relates to anger in the prison
environment. The experiment was and is controversial because of the
extreme and frightening results. Some question whether the experiment
was ethical. Thus, there are very few similar experiments and it
stands as a landmark study of conformity, obedience and authority.
In August 1971, an advertisement appeared in the Palo Alto Times:
"Male college students needed for psychological study of prison life.
$15 per day for 1-2 weeks..." Seventy men responded. Among them, two
dozen were chosen to participate in the experiment because based on
interviews and a battery of psychological tests they were judged to be
the most normal, average and healthy. They were then assigned
randomly, by a flip of coin, either to be guards or prisoners. “
It didn’t take long for the individuals involved in the experiment to
exhibit extreme behavior:
“Two days into the experiments, the prisoners started to exhibit
rebellious behavior. They began to taunt and curse the guards and even
stage a revolt. The guards were enraged and retaliated, initially by
using a fire extinguisher. They broke into each cell, stripped the
prisoners naked, took the beds out, forced the ringleaders of the
prisoner rebellion into solitary confinement, and generally began to
harass and intimidate the prisoners. They also applied psychological
tactics such as setting up a "privilege cell" for model prisoners to
break the solidarity among prisoners. Alternately, they also put "bad
prisoners" in the "privilege cell" in order to create confusion,
suspicion, and aggression among prisoners. By then, these research
participants had really taken on the roles that they were randomly
assigned to play.”
Both the guard and prisoners quickly fell into their randomly assigned roles.
“Guards applied total control on each prisoner's life, including going
to the toilet. Prisoners were often not allowed to use the toilet and
forced to urinate or defecate in a bucket in their cell, but not
allowed to empty the buckets. Repeatedly, guards also punished
prisoners by forcing them to do push-ups, jumping jacks, cleaning out
toilet bowls with their bare hands, and acting out other degrading
scenarios. Often, they also coerced prisoners to become snitches in
exchange for reduced abuse. Especially when they were bored or thought
that the experimenters were not watching, their treatment to the
prisoners would escalate and became more pornographic. The humiliation
and dehumanization got so severe, that the experimenters had to
frequently remind the guards to refrain from such tactics.”
“The prisoners, on the other hand, started to experience acute
emotional disturbance and rage. They exhibited disorganized thinking,
uncontrollable crying, withdrawing, and behaving in pathological ways.
As a result, researchers had to release five prisoners from the
experiment prematurely.”
This experiment sought to explore the issues of conformity and
compliance in relation to roles and group identification in the
specific prison environment. The results seemed to confirm primary
researcher Dr. Zimbardo’s contention that "most evil is the product
of rather ordinary people caught up in unusual circumstances that they
are not equipped to cope with in the normal ways" (Zimbardo, 1999).
On aggressive behavior; from Dr. Zimbardo’s lecture on the Holocaust:
Holocaust Studies Center, Sonoma State University
http://www.sonoma.edu/users/g/goodman/zimbardo.htm
“I failed to mention that in my Deindividuation research and Bandura's
Dehumanization research, that aggression, once it got past initial
inhibitions, rapidly escalated and increased over time and trials, as
it seemed to become self-reinforcing, violence became its own reward.
We do not want to recognize the pleasure many people take in
participating in violent acts, whether directly or vicariously, as in
spectators at boxing or wrestling matches, The Roman Circuses, men in
mass rape, police in riots, and soldiers in massacres. It is not alien
to human nature but a shard of its non-reflective surface.”
Both the guards and the prisoners experienced anger and exhibited in
the form of aggressive behavior. For the guards, the aggression seemed
to stem from their identification with their role as authority
figures. The role required them to control a group of frustrated
prisoners. The chaotic nature of this situation led to anger which
manifested itself in severely aggressive behavior towards the
prisoners.
The prisoners also experienced intense anger in the study. They became
increasingly frustrated with their mistreatment and became
aggressively rebellious and violent in response.
Additional Links/ Bibliography:
Homepage of Dr. Zimbardo
http://www.zimbardo.com/
International Centre for Prison Studies
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/rel/icps/home.html
Federal Bureau of Prisons Library
http://bop.library.net/
Castine Research Corporation
http://www.castineresearch.org/
FOB Office of Research and Evaluation
http://www.bop.gov/orepg/oreindex.html
Prisons and Jails
http://www.prisonsandjails.com/
Prison Activist Resource Center
http://www.prisonactivist.org/issues/
The Other Side of the Wall
http://www.prisonwall.org/
Teaching Anger Management in Prisons
http://www.thubtenchodron.org/PrisonDharma/teaching_anger_management.html
NPR Interview with Dr. Zimbardo on Iraqi Prisoner Abuse (May 4, 2004)
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1870756
The Psychological Impact of Incarceration:
Implications for Post-Prison Adjustment
Craig Haney University of California, Santa Cruz December 2001
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/prison2home02/Haney.htm
Zimbardo, Philip G. On the ethics of intervention in human
psychological research: With special reference to the Stanford prison
experiment. [Journal Article] Cognition. Vol 2(2), 1973, 243-256.
Banuazizi, Ali; Movahedi, Siamak. Interpersonal dynamics in a
simulated prison: A methodological analysis. [Journal Article]
American Psychologist. Vol 30(2), Feb 1975, 152-160.
DeJong, William. Another look at Banuazizi and Movahedi's analysis of
the Stanford Prison Experiment. [Journal Article] American
Psychologist. Vol 30(10), Oct 1975, 1013-1015.
Haney, Craig; Zimbardo, Philip. The past and future of U.S. prison
policy: Twenty-five years after the Stanford Prison Experiment.
[Journal Article] American Psychologist. Vol 53(7), Jul 1998, 709-727.
Haney, Craig. Ideology and crime control. [Journal Article] American
Psychologist. Vol 54(9), Sep 1999, 786-788.
Ireland, J. L. (2002) Bullying Among Prisoners: Evidence, Research and
Intervention Strategies. Brunner-Routledge, London: UK
Gresham Sykes, >The Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security
Prison. Princeton: Princeton University Press (1958), at 63.
Richard McCorkle, "Personal Precautions to Violence in Prison,"
Criminal Justice and Behavior, 19, 160-173 (1992), at 161.
Paul Keve, Prison Life and Human Worth. Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press (1974), at 54.
Masten, A., & Garmezy, N., Risk, Vulnerability and Protective Factors
in Developmental Psychopathology. In F. Lahey & A Kazdin (Eds.)
Advances in Clinical Child Psychology (pp. 1-52). New York: Plenum
(1985), at 3.
Veneziano, L., Veneziano, C., & Tribolet, C., The special needs of
prison inmates with handicaps: An assessment. Journal of Offender
Counseling, Services & Rehabilitation, 12, 61-72 (1987).
Streeter, P., "Incarceration of the mentally ill: Treatment or
warehousing?" Michigan Bar Journal, 77, 166 (1998), at p. 167.
Human Rights Watch, Out of Sight: Super-Maximum Security Confinement
in the United States. Feburary, 2000.
Greene, S., Haney, C., and Hurtado, A., "Cycles of Pain: Risk Factors
in the Lives of Incarcerated Women and Their Children," Prison
Journal, 80, 3-23 (2000).
Lois Forer, A Rage to Punish: The Unintended Consequences of Mandatory
Sentencing. New York: W. W. Norton (1994).
Michael Tonry, Malign Neglect: Race, Crime, and Punishment in America.
New York: Oxford University Press (1995).
Mauer, M. (1990). More Young Black Males under Correctional Control in
US than in College. Washington: The Sentencing Project.
King, A., "The Impact of Incarceration on African American Families:
Implications for Practice," Families in Society: The Journal of
Contemporary Human Services, 74, 145-153 (1993), p. 145..
Chambliss, W., "Policing the Ghetto Underclass: The Politics of Law
and Law Enforcement," Social Problems, 41, 177-194 (1994), p. 183.
Google Search Terms Used:
"prison experiment" or "prison study"
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22prison+experiment%22+or+%22prison+study%22
psychology and prison
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=psychology+and+prison
anger, prison, psychology
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=anger%2C+prison%2C+psychology
I hope this helps. Feel free to let me know if you need any
clarification. Thanks again.
Regards,
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
wine and kisses
This is a sermon that we read during an MIU meeting. At first it ruffled alot of feathers, but then it "Totally Redeems itself!"
Wine and Kisses
John 2:1-11, I Corinthians 11:25
July 14, 2002
Peter Hiett
According to the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, about 18 million Americans have alcohol problems. More than half of all adults have a family history of problem drinking. One-fourth of all emergency room admissions, one-third of all suicides, and more than one-half of all homicides and incidents of domestic violence are alcohol related.
Almost one-half of all traffic fatalities are alcohol related. Fetal Alcohol Syndrome is the leading known cause of mental retardation. Alcohol and drug abuse cost the American economy $276 billion a year.
Galatians 5:21 states that drunkenness is a work of the flesh. I Corinthians 6:9 is very clear that drunkards will not inherit the kingdom of God. A couple of years ago I performed the funeral service for my brother-in-law Kurt. He drank himself to death.
Why do we tolerate the stuff at all?
I know what some of you are thinking: “The Bible never says we can’t drink alcohol in moderation.” That’s true . . . but consider the following:
1. Some people seem to have genetic dispositions to alcoholism. What if you’re one of them? Why expose yourself to possible enslavement? To drink is unsafe.
2. Your drinking may influence others to abuse. As a Christian, you are an example and a testimony.
You must ask yourself in a situation where people are tempted to such sin, where there is abuse, where some might become addicted: What would Jesus do?
Well, fortunately for us, there are at least two instances in Scripture where our Lord encounters alcoholic drink in a social situation. The first is John 2:1-11:
On the third day there was a marriage at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; Jesus also was invited to the marriage, with his disciples. When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”
Now six stone jars were standing there, for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. Jesus said to them, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim. He said to them, “Now draw some out, and take it to the steward of the feast.” So they took it.
When the steward of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the steward of the feast called the bridegroom and said to him, “Every man serves the good wine first; and when men have drunk freely, then the poor wine; but you have kept the good wine until now.”
This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed in him.
Well, that’s just great! Jesus hasn’t listened to a word I’ve said! He goes to a wedding feast where, according to the steward, some people seem to have drunk freely. (Their ability to distinguish good wine from bad is diminished.) And He doesn’t warn them about the hazards of drinking. No! He makes 180 gallons of wine! Just great.
The second place in Scripture where Jesus deals with wine is on the night in which He is betrayed. And what does He do with it? Does He warn his disciples against its evil? No! He institutes a sacrament—makes it a holy activity—and says, “Do this in remembrance of me.” So now we’ve got Christians worldwide drinking wine during church in the name of Jesus!
He could have said, “Guys, have some fish soup in memory of me.” He could have made it red like blood. But no. He could have turned the water into Root Beer or milk to manifest His glory. But no.
It’s embarrassing, and I know you want to defend Him. Some say that in the Bible “wine” is the code word for “grape juice.” But if wine really means grape juice, what’s the point in saying this? —
“Every man serves the good grape juice first, and when men have drunk freely, then the poor.”
“Don’t be drunk with grape juice but be filled with the Holy Spirit.”
“A deacon must not be addicted to much grape juice.”
Paul chastises the Corinthians for getting drunk at communion . . . on grape juice? I don’t think so.
If Scripture means grape juice, why doesn’t it use the Hebrew and Greek words for grape juice?
You should see how some Bible-believing Christians will twist Scripture to get Jesus off the hook here. But if we don’t tolerate twisting Scripture for license, we shouldn’t tolerate twisting Scripture for legalism . . . or for getting Jesus off the hook.
It’s embarrassing, so for thousands of years we’ve labored to improve Christ’s work through legislation like prohibition, blue laws, age limits, and bartender liability. Obviously more
2
concerned for the public safety than Jesus, most Protestant churches serve grape juice for communion rather than wine, thereby improving upon the sacrament itself.
But then folks can just read Scripture and mess up our work!
A woman in my old church was surprised to see two of the pastors from our church sitting in a restaurant with glasses of wine. She walked up to them and said, “Oh my . . . I see you’re drinking wine.” One of them responded, “I know. I keep asking for water, but every time I touch it, it turns to wine and I can’t get it back again!”
See what I mean?
We laugh, yet my brother-in-law Kurt still drank himself to death. What’s going on here?
Well, clearly if you were at that wedding party and drank too much, that would have been a heinous sin. Yet you couldn’t blame the bartender. You couldn’t blame Jesus, because He’s perfect and without sin.
It’s like the only person you could blame would be . . . you.
So if you get plastered tonight, don’t blame me. I rebuke that accusation. And don’t blame Jesus. You chose sin.
But, you see, this is what’s troubling us: Jesus just doesn’t seem all that concerned about protecting us from our bad choices! For that matter, God doesn’t seem too concerned either. God is the Creator . . .
Why did He make wine, with the possibility some would get drunk on it?
For that matter, why did He make anything? Possessions? . . . with the possibility some would be greedy for them and hoard them while others starved?
Why did He make us with these sex organs? There are so many other biological ways to reproduce. My wife could form a bud on her back that would drop off and turn into a baby. (It wouldn’t be fun, but it would be safe.) Why did He made sex so fun, with the possibly for fornication, adultery, and rape?
Why did He even make life, with the possibility we’d kill it?
And so some, seeking to improve on this world of sin, have outlawed everything . . . like possessions. His name was Karl Marx. Some Christians outlaw sex. In fact, there were a few Christians groups throughout history that outlawed all sex. Of
course, those groups tended to disappear within a generation or so . . .
3
You know, if you outlawed everything with the potential for going bad, you’d outlaw everything good, including yourself . . . except, of course, God, who can’t go bad. But it seems God would be very lonely.
“God, why did you make wine? Why did you make saturated fats and sex organs? Why did you make me? Why did you make the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and then, of all things, place it in the very middle of the garden?”
All evil is a good thing gone bad. The better a thing is, the more freedom it has. The more responsibility it has, the more potential for bad it has.
A rock is just a rock. Cattle . . . well, a cow may be capable of a little bad and a little good maybe. People . . . they are capable of great evil but also great good; capable of love. Maybe that’s what God wants: beings capable of loving a lonely God . . . or crucifying a lonely God.
Well anyway, Jesus doesn’t seem too concerned about protecting these people at the party from bad choices. It’s like He wants them to have choices. So He says, “Drunkenness is debauchery” (Ephesians 5); “God made wine to gladden the heart of man” (Psalm 104).
“Here’s some wine. I hope you don’t drink too much.”
God says adultery deserves death. But sex with your spouse is a picture of Christ and His Bride.
“Here are your sex organs and hormones. Hope you use them correctly.”
The Lord says, “I am life, to worship and trust and obey. Anything before me is sin, death, and hell.”
“Here’s your life, your will, a garden, a tree of knowledge, and a snake. I hope you love me more than these.”
And maybe that’s it. God desires love, and love is a choice that can’t be forced but must be made in freedom. It’s like a kiss.
When I was growing up I was required by my mom and dad to kiss my sisters, my mom, and my relatives. Sometimes I was even required to kiss very pretty girls not in my immediate family, because that was propriety, a form of greeting, saying hello or good-bye.
It was all nice . . . but twenty-five years ago I kissed this girl, and she kissed me. Her name was Susan Coleman, and she wasn’t saying hello or good-bye! We kissed because we wanted to, in freedom, and it was fire! . . . power!
But then again, maybe kisses should be outlawed . . . because there is potential for a lot of sin and a lot of hurt with kisses.
4
And then again, there is also potential for twenty years of marriage and four wonderful children.
Gosh, with a kiss you could betray your Lord . . . or win a bride.
To be safe, God probably should have made us without lips.
He should have at least given us more laws and more regulations . . . clear, understandable regulations, like the government.
Talk about regulations . . .
I’m finishing my basement. Jefferson County regulates everything . . . supposedly because all these legislators and lawyers are concerned with my safety. And yet (this is the strange thing) I have no deep, abiding, passionate love for the Jefferson County Building Department.
We often think the Church is for keeping society safe, and so our job is better and stricter legislation, like the Jefferson County Building Department . . . like the Taliban. Talk about a concern for public safety! They did outlaw wine and kisses . . . and everything. They must be really good . . .
People think that’s what Christianity is about: better and better laws and regulations, and trying harder than the religion down the street.
Colossians 2: “Why do you submit to regulations, ‘Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch’ (referring to things which all perish as they are used), according to human precepts and doctrines? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting rigor of devotion and self-abasement and severity to the body, but they are of no value in checking the indulgence of the flesh.”
That is, we are not healed through more and more laws and regulations, adding to God’s commands.
I’ve read that groups like the Jews have very low levels of alcoholism . . . yet they have hardly any regulations. Children drink, but they’re taught Scripture. “This is a good gift. Drunkenness is debauchery.”
We could argue about statistics and strategies all day, and I’m no expert here, but Paul is clear: “Our sinful passions are aroused by the law.” Maybe the answer isn’t more laws.
Whatever the case, when it comes to the law, Jesus is frustrating. His chief opponents were Pharisees and lawyers who added laws upon laws, seeking to define and clarify God’s law. Jesus also defines and clarifies God’s law. He said, “This is the law: love. Love God with all you’ve got. The second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.”
5
Well, that doesn’t make it clear! Or maybe it makes it too painfully clear (to me). Technically, I may not commit adultery, but Jesus says if I look on a woman with lust, I’ve committed adultery in my heart.
“Well, can I watch Baywatch or not? Yes or no?”
Well, only I know my heart . . . and God. I don’t want the law on my heart. I want it in a book or on a chart or hanging on a tree . . . so I can walk away.
“Jesus, how much should I give? 10%? 20%?
Jesus says, “Love your neighbor.”
Well, only I would know if I love my neighbor . . . and God. And if I really did love my neighbor, I might end up giving everything! . . . and getting crucified.
So the lawyer said, “Who’s my neighbor?” (“Who do I have to love?”) More laws. Jesus told a story and asked the lawyer, “Who proved to be the neighbor?” And the lawyer answered. He knew, even though he tried to deny it with his laws. The law was written on his heart: love. And love makes neighbors.
“Be more specific, Jesus. How much can I drink? The county gives me a blood alcohol level below which I’m safe.”
Jesus says, “Don’t be drunk with wine but filled with the Spirit. Drink must never be an idol.”
Only we know the inside of our bodies . . . and God. Although we deny it and blame society, laws, and family, it’s our responsibility to make that choice . . . and we hate it! We hire pastors to free us of this burden.
Jesus says, “Love. Don’t lust.” It’s the youth pastor’s job to relieve the kids of that burden and insure public safety; that is, clear, rigid laws.
“Well, kids, that means you can kiss on the twelfth date, as long as it’s before 11 p.m., you’re outside a motorized vehicle somewhere in sight of your parents’ window, and the kiss lasts no longer than two seconds.”
Then when the youth pastor down the street says, “I’m sorry, but God desires that the kiss be no more than half a second,” we think, “Ooo, he’s really spiritual!”
Jesus says, “Love me,” and people want me to relieve them of that burden. They want me to tell them what that means . . .
“Give 10% before taxes.”
“Read Scripture a half-hour a day.”
“Never watch the Osbournes.”
6
But a demon from Hell can fulfill that law.
The law of God is love, and it’s your responsibility. When love fails, we want job descriptions and we call lawyers. We are the Bride of Christ, and we’re addicted to legislation.
When Susan and I have a conflict and start arguing, often one of us will get tired and frustrated and say something like, “Look. Just tell me what you want me to do. Tell me what you want me to do, Peter!” And I can’t tell her, because it’s what I want her to be: a bride in love with me. And when she’s a loving, passionate, faithful bride, she’ll know what to do. I want her to do what that love desires in freedom.
We go through struggles in our lives and say, “God, what do you want me to do?!” Silence. It’s what He wants you to be: a loving, faithful Bride. And then truly we know what we should do:
Love like a loving, faithful Bride,
in all things,
without compulsion but freely,
in blissful submission,
in love.
But we can’t. We see our shame. We’re dead. Our love died long ago. When? The Bride chose the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. “The knowledge of good and evil” — What is that? Isn’t that the law?
We had God, but we chose the law. We made an idol of the tree—the law. We have such a strange relationship with the law.
We love it, yet we hate it, yet we love it.
We deny it (“I didn’t know what God wanted . . .”).
We depend on it, justifying ourselves with it.
We’ve ingested it and now we’re addicted to it.
Adam and Eve ingested the law, so they knew the law and they knew they were naked. So they hated the law—the fruit—yet they tried to justify themselves with the law —the fruit.
They blamed each other;
they blamed the snake;
they hid.
We know the law in our hearts, and we try to regurgitate it back on the tree, saying, “It’s not my fault! I didn’t know. Father, it’s not my fault . . . you never said I couldn't hit Becky in the head with a stick. I didn’t know!”
“Then why are you hiding?”
7
Romans 2: Paul says we are “without excuse.” “The law is written on our hearts.” Why the old covenant law? —
Romans 5: “The law came in to increase the trespass.” God puts the idol in our face to help us see we’re enslaved to death. “Choke on it!”
The truth is that on our own none of us can choose the good. We’re so infected with shame and fear . . . so cut off from God and addicted to the tree. None of us can love as God loves. We are powerless. Admit it!
Just like the addict is enslaved to his drug,
fueled by his thirst,
We’re enslaved to the law,
fueled by our pride—our flesh.
Addicted to the tree,
we love it yet hate it;
we deny it yet depend on it.
An alcoholic feels shame over drinking . . . then turns to alcohol for comfort . . . then feels more shame.
A sinner feels shame because of the law . . . then turns to the law for comfort . . . then feels more shame.
Maybe that day at the wedding feast Jesus knew we’re addicted. But the most powerful addiction and the most dangerous idol is not some drink; it’s a tree in a garden. And it’s pointless to cure a lesser addiction with a greater addiction, to slay a lesser idol with a greater idol.
So the wedding was threatened, for the bride listened to a snake and called the lawyer.
The wedding in Cana was threatened, but the answer wasn’t law (water); the answer was wine. And the wine is blood, the blood of the wounded Bridegroom.
Jesus said to the servant, “Fill the jars with water.” The jars were used for ritual cleansing according to the law. Jesus took those jars filled to the brim—all the law . . . He took the water and turned it to wine; not applied, but ingested and digested and metabolized. It was a sign, and it manifested His glory.
Three years later He was glorified, lifted from the earth on a cross. The night before, He took wine and said, “This is the new covenant in my blood shed for the forgiveness of sins.” In the morning the Bride nailed Him to the tree.
I believe the tree is somehow the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Christ was crucified on our idol by our idolatry.
8
We crucified the Good Himself
on our knowledge of good;
We impaled Love Himself
on our knowledge of love,
And the Lawgiver
on His law.
And on the cross He absorbed our iniquities and suffered the just penalty of our crimes.
So . . . whenever you look to the law, see Jesus.
whenever you look to the tree, see Jesus.
Bride of Christ, look at your Groom and His love for you.
John 12: “Lifted up, crucified, He romanced all men to himself.”
• The cross is the Father’s kiss of supreme love on a rebellious world.
• The cross is the prodigal father’s kiss on the prodigal son’s face as he whispers, “No more shame. No more fear. No more hiding. No more justifying. No more condemnation for those in Christ Jesus. For I have done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do, sending my Son in the likeness of sinful flesh. And for sin I condemned sin in the flesh.”
He condemned condemnation. Christ fulfilled the law, and God raised Him from the dead.
It’s finished.
So in Christ you’re free . . . to love God without fear and shame. And when you love Him without fear and shame, you fulfill the law. See . . .
Law is good when God, who is Love, is in His place.
Wine is good when God, who is Love, is in His place.
Your god is not wine, and your god is not law.
You savior is not wine, and your savior is not law.
Your God and your Savior is Jesus Christ the Lord.
I think that for a while my brother-in-law’s god was wine, and it filled him with shame. I bet Kurt tried to make a million laws. (“I’m not going to do that again.”) But they didn’t save him. They filled him with more shame.
I visited him in the hospital right before he died, and I read him the story of the prodigal son. At the end I said, “Kurt, what did you think?” He said, “Oh that’s cool!” A few days later I asked Kurt, “Are you ready to meet Jesus?” He said, “Oh, yeah! Let’s do it!” And we prayed.
9
I don’t think Kurt is a drunkard. I think he’s a prodigal son at his Father’s banquet drinking new wine.
If you struggle with alcohol, or sin, your hope isn’t better laws. Your hope is Jesus . . . confessing your sin . . . believing His grace . . . trusting His power. He is the Highest Power.
And if you say to Him, “I never want alcohol to touch my lips again, for I am easily tempted, and I must flee temptation for the love of you,” then you made that law freely, in love. It’s law in service of love, it’s law in its proper place, and it’s so good.
But if you stumble, don’t look to the law first. Look at who’s hanging on the law for the love of you. He loves you no less. Confess your sin, believe His grace, drink His wine—His blood—His life. We stole fruit; He gave us His life to drink.
In I Corinthians 11 Paul records that at communion Jesus took the wine and said, “As often as you drink it, do it in memory of me.”
What if He really meant that?!
What if every time we drank (if we did) we remembered Jesus and communed with him?
Well, it would be a holy activity. And maybe we’d drink or not drink just the right amount. How so? — The law is written on our hearts. Even more, the Lawgiver, who is love, lives inside. And lo and behold, we know good and evil. We choose the good in love, made in the image of God.
What if every moment we “remembered” and “communed” with Jesus? Our entire lives would be a holy activity as we commune with the kiss of God.
Trust the kiss, or you’ll be enslaved to the old idols. “For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand fast, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.”
Fyodor Dostoevsky told a story through the mouth of one of the atheist brothers in his novel, The Brothers Karamazov. The atheist thinks it vilifies Christ, but the Christian thinks it glorifies Christ.
In the story, Jesus returns during the Spanish Inquisition in Seville, Spain, a time when the Church enforced Christianity with law and made the Pharisees look mild. Jesus walks the street. He loves the crowd and heals them and sets them free. But the Grand Inquisitor has Him arrested, not because He doesn’t know who he is; he knows all too well. Jesus is locked in the dungeon, and the Grand Inquisitor hurls his accusations:
“‘Instead of seizing men’s freedom, You gave them even more of it! Have You forgotten that peace, and even death, is more attractive to man than the freedom of choice that derives from the knowledge of good and evil? There is nothing more alluring to man than freedom of conscience, but neither is there anything more agonizing.
10
“‘And yet, instead of giving them something tangible to calm their consciences forever, You came to them with words that were unfamiliar, vague, and indefinite; You offered them something that was quite beyond them; it even looked as if You didn’t love them, You who came to give them Your life! Instead of ridding men of their freedom, You increased their freedom, and You imposed everlasting torment on man’s soul.
“‘You wanted to gain man’s love so that he would follow You of his own free will, fascinated and captivated by You. In place of the clear and rigid ancient law, You made man decide about good and evil for himself, with no other guidance than Your example. But did it never occur to You that man would disregard Your example, even question it, as well as Your truth, when he was subjected to so fearful a burden as freedom of choice? . . .
“‘And men rejoice at being led like cattle again, with the terrible gift of freedom that brought them so much suffering removed from them. Tell me, were we right in preaching and acting as we did? Was it not our love for men that made us resign ourselves to the idea of their impotence and lovingly try to lighten the burden of their responsibility, even allowing their weak nature to sin, but with our permission? Why have You come to interfere with our work? And why do You look at me silently with those gentle eyes of Yours? Be angry with me. I do not want Your love, because I do not love You myself. . . .
“‘Tomorrow You will see obedient herds, at the first sign from me, hurry to heap coals on the fire beneath the stake at which I shall have You burned, because, by coming here, You have made our task more difficult. For if anyone has ever deserved our fire, it is You, and I shall have You burned tomorrow. . . !’” . . .
“The Grand Inquisitor falls silent and waits for some time for the prisoner to answer. The prisoner’s silence has weighed on him. He has watched Him; He listened to him intently, looking gently into his eyes, and apparently unwilling to speak. The old man longs for Him to say something, however painful and terrifying. But instead, He suddenly goes over to the old man and kisses him gently on his old, bloodless lips. And that is His only answer. The old man is startled and shudders. The corners of his lips seem to quiver slightly. He walks to the door, opens it, and says to Him, ‘Go now, and do not come back . . . ever. You must never, never come again!’ And he lets the prisoner out into the dark streets of the city. The prisoner leaves.”
“And what about the old man?”
“The kiss glows in his heart . . . But the old man sticks to his old idea.”
You’re the Grand Inquisitor imprisoned in your own dungeon. In the name of Jesus, let the kiss consume you.
When I began my sermon, many of you felt a catch inside of you: “Sometimes I drink too much.” If you’ve ever drunk too much, would you raise your hand? My hand is raised. Let’s talk to Jesus about it.
“Lord Jesus, you saw us. We confess, Lord Jesus, that we think we might have, so we probably did drink too much. Jesus, thank you for forgiving us. Jesus, next time we have a glass of wine, if we do, may we commune with you. And may we drink you. Amen.”
11
In the name of Jesus, you are forgiven.
Now, how many of you have ever said something that was slander? How many of you have ever gossiped? Raise your hand. My hand is up. Let’s talk to Jesus about it.
“Lord Jesus, we confess that we have murdered people in our hearts, and God, you see our hearts. Jesus, some of us may have even told ourselves, ‘I’m going to hold my tongue next time,’ and we blew it, Lord. We made a law and we blew it. Thank you, Jesus, that you have forgiven us. Next time we speak to you, may we commune with you; may we speak you.”
In the name of Jesus, you’re forgiven. Amen.
How many of you have ever felt like you bought more than you were supposed to? How many of you have ever felt greedy? Raise your hand. Let’s talk to Jesus about it.
“Oh, God, we confess that we struggle with greed; we’re Americans, God, while the world starves to death. God, I really struggle with this one. We confess it. Thank you, Lord Jesus, that you have forgiven us. Jesus, next time we go to the store, please go with us. Shop with us, Jesus. Thank you.”
In the name of Jesus, you’re forgiven.
How many of you ever feel like you’re a jerk? Like the very thing you want to do you don’t do? How many of you measure yourself by other people and think inside, “I suck”? Is that you? Talk to Jesus about it.
“Lord Jesus, I confess that I’ve condemned myself. I’ve cursed myself. Lord Jesus, those curses have fallen on you. I have not believed your Gospel, and I’ve looked to my idol—the law. So, Lord Jesus, I confess that I’m a sinner.”
Say that silently in your heart, and now call to Jesus, “Save me, Jesus.”
“Thank you, Lord, that you have, and that you’ve forgiven us, and that we are washed clean, and that we are yours.”
If you just prayed that prayer for the first time, that’s what Christianity is all about.
“So, Lord Jesus, may we take every breath with you, communing with you.”
In the name of Jesus, you’re forgiven. Amen.
12
13
Further Reading
Likewise, my brethren, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God. While we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit. What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I should not have known sin. I should not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet." But sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died; the very commandment which promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me.
-Romans 7:4-11
For freedom Christ has set us free; stand fast therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.
-Galatians 5:1
Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a sabbath. These are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. Let no one disqualify you, insisting on self-abasement and worship of angels, taking his stand on visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the universe, why do you live as if you still belonged to the world? Why do you submit to regulations, "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" (referring to things which all perish as they are used), according to human precepts and doctrines? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting rigor of devotion and self-abasement and severity to the body, but they are of no value in checking the indulgence of the flesh. If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. For you have died, and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.
-Colossians 2:16-3:4
If Jesus' critique of legalism was not devastating enough, the apostle Paul added another, fundamental complaint. Legalism fails miserably at the one thing it is supposed to do: encourage obedience. In a strange twist, a system of strict laws actually puts new ideas of lawbreaking in a person's mind. Paul explains, "For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, 'do not covet.' But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire." In a demonstration of this principle, some surveys show that people raised in teetotaling denominations are three times as likely to become alcoholics.
-Philip Yancey, What’s So Amazing About Grace
© 2002 Peter Hiett
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)