Everyone is in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars

benj · 02-28-2003, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rach
That's what the official Mr. Rogers Website said.

Wow, that is funny. Now we know for sure where Mr. McFeely got his name. That relieves me a bit.

psalm63adam · 02-28-2003, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by benj
Wow, that is funny. Now we know for sure where Mr. McFeely got his name. That relieves me a bit.

Me too. That was the one thing that kind of creeped me out, the name Mr. McFeely.

Amanda · 02-28-2003, 08:54 PM

Let me just say that you have really good taste in books and food, and the name "McFeely" creeps me out too.

psalm63adam · 02-28-2003, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Manders
Let me just say that you have really good taste in books and food, and the name "McFeely" creeps me out too.

Thanks.

I like your quote by Mr. Rogers.

psalm63adam · 03-01-2003, 12:09 AM

Hey Manders,

You're the mod in books, right? Any new books you'd recommend or anything?

Amanda · 03-02-2003, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by parkway
Hey Manders,

You're the mod in books, right? Any new books you'd recommend or anything?

I used to be, but not anymore...I've been reading a bunch of the same books over and over lately, but I highly recommend a book called Four Souls (and it's free on the web @ www.foursouls-thebook.com! w00t!).

psalm63adam · 03-02-2003, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Manders
I used to be, but not anymore...I've been reading a bunch of the same books over and over lately, but I highly recommend a book called Four Souls (and it's free on the web @ www.foursouls-thebook.com! w00t!).

Thanks! What is it about?

Amanda · 03-02-2003, 08:57 PM

Well, a few years ago these four guys (the "souls" of the title) took a mission trip around the world, and wrote a book about it. They went to Guatemala, Russia, Egypt, South Africa, Lesotho, India, Bangladesh, Thailand, and Vietnam...very busy, these guys. Anyway, it's a really interesting read. I think you'll like it.

psalm63adam · 03-03-2003, 08:51 PM

Oh, sounds good.

I tried to go to that link, but it didn't work.

psalm63adam · 03-04-2003, 09:04 AM

RANT - week of 3/2/03

I would like to be Czar of the Universe.

No, I take that back. I'd like to be Shah of the Universe. It's easier to spell.

Unlike most people, however, I harbor this desire for Absolute Rule by Divine Right for only the best and noblest of reasons. I have no lust for unchecked power, no thirst for repression and cruelty.

There are just some minor changes I would like to make for the benefit of humanity at large, and I would like to be able to make them quickly and completely with no red tape and no whining about civil liberties.

I would like the authority to forbid fast-food counter attendants from asking, "Would you like fries with that?" when I've completed my order and intentionally left out fries. I'd like the ability to prevent the showing of any more "M*A*S*H" reruns. I'd like to be able to kick my ball out of the woods on absurdly narrow fairways without having to take a two-stroke penalty. (I'd let everyone.)

I would most definitely make a rule that there can be no more debating Calvinism vs. Arminianism in the theology forum.

Oh, and one last regulatory fantasy. This one might be a little stickier insofar as it violates the free-exercise-of-religion clause of the U.S. Consitution, but bear with me. I'm sure we could work something out.

Here's Shah Parkway's primo new rule: You pick a church like you pick a spouse. It's for life. Divorce or annulment from the fellowship of your choice is technically possible but, like de-enlisting from the Armed Forces at will or winning the lottery when it goes over twenty mill and every pinhead in the state is playing, largely theoretical. Because here's the deal: It's beginning to strike me that the greatest strength of American Christianity - the principle of voluntary association - may also be what sounds like the death knell for serious discipleship in this country.

This is not sour grapes because the church I work at is losing sheep. Actually, in the year that I've been here, attendance has doubled. I'm not, however, vain or naive enough to think that the bolstering of our body has to do with my worship effectiveness or my winsome personality as much as it has to do with the natural curiosity that inevitably attends the arrival of a new dog-and-pony show on the worship circuit.

Or worse. Several people have already confided in me, in just-between-you-and-me-and-the-lampost tones, that they disapproved of the last worship guy, and showed that disapproval by staying away from church his last few months. Me, however, they see possibilities in. They've postponed jumping membership to see if the "new guy" can lead them into the throne room of God personally. (If you look in the dictionary, "lead them into the throne room of God personally" really means to these people "sing the songs I like" and "don't add a lot of new songs" and "make sure the communion music isn't too loud".) This type of Christianity has produced an atmosphere in which commitment to a spiritual commitment has taken fourth or fifth (or twenty-third) place to people's own prerogratives and personal likes and dislikes.

Why, after all, hang around the church when conflict flares, as it inevitably does anywhere ultimate issues are on the line? (I think my next rant will be on the fact people would rather do anything, and I mean anything in order to avoid conflict.) Why not move along instead to the next congregation on the block? Or form your own congregation? Or best of all, form your own denomination?

(This latter practice, I've noticed, is particularly favored among Baptists. Cheesed off at the pastor or deacons at the local Hardshell Double-Dipped Entirely Sanctified Primitive Baptist Church? You'll show them. You'll form the Hardshell Double-Dipped Entirely Sanctified Primitive Bell-Ringing Baptist Church...if that name isn't taken.)

Which brings us to an interesting point of Shah Parkway's Till Death or Denominational Merger Do Us Part Edict. Would I extend my church-hopping ban to cover ministers? You bet your lace booties I would.

Here's the drill. You start as a minister of a little church, move into an associate role at a bigger church, take a senior position at a still bigger church and then, if you've played the game well and kept your nose clean, end your career as head honcho of First Denominational in a good-sized city or affluent suburb. An increase in pay, perks and prestige at each stop is the goal. Recognize it? Sure. It's the old career ladder.

Nineteenth-century German church leader Friedrich von Bodelschwingh (what a great name, sounds like a painful disease: I'm sorry sir, but you have a bad case of Bodelschwingh.) developed a keen appreciation for the true nature of pastoral practice. "I beg you," he wrote to a colleague, "not to look upon your church as a stepping stone, but rather say: Here I shall stay as long as it pleases God; if it be His will, until I die...Look upon every member of your congregation as if you have to give account for every soul on the day of the Lord Jesus. Every day commit all of these human souls from the worst and weakest of hands - namely, your own - into the best and strongest of hands. Then you will be able to carry on your ministry not only without care, but also with joy overflowing and joyful hope."

This I propose to do for the souls who have been entrusted to my care...if the little suckers will only stand still long enough.

(Thanks to Chuck Westerman for help.)

guitarplayer4jc · 03-05-2003, 07:51 PM

Long live the Shah!

psalm63adam · 03-06-2003, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by guitarplayer4jc
Long live the Shah!

Travis · 03-09-2003, 10:54 PM

Quote:

I would most definitely make a rule that there can be no more debating Calvinism vs. Arminianism in the theology forum.

Let's through in "no defense of the virgin birth or the divinity of Christ" while we're at it. And also add a "cut Titus 1 out of your Bibles" rule.

psalm63adam · 03-10-2003, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Travis
Let's through in "no defense of the virgin birth or the divinity of Christ" while we're at it. And also add a "cut Titus 1 out of your Bibles" rule.

You just don't get it.

Like I've said before, Calvinism vs. Arminianism is a non-essential issue. The virgin birth is an essential issue. The divinity of Christ is an essential issue. But some Calvinists on this board are making it their goal in life to defend Calvinism to the death. My question is, "Who cares?" I believe that you, as a Calvinist, are a brother in Christ, even if you believe that I don't believe in the true gospel or not. You should consider me as a brother in Christ.

I'm an amillenialist. But I see premillenialists, postmillenialists, etc. as brothers and sisters in Christ, because your view of the end times is a non-essential issue.

There is freedom in Christ to believe otherwise when it comes to non-essential issues. The problem with debating endlessly that Calvinism is right is that it doesn't matter. Really. It doesn't matter. I can be an Arminian and I'm still going to heaven. I believe in the same God as you. When it comes to the essential issues that we all need to agree on, I'm right there with everyone. I'm not a heretic, I don't preach a false gospel, I am a fellow Christian.

That's why I would make it a rule that there would be no debating over Calvinism vs. Arminianism on this board. Because it doesn't matter. Honestly.

psalm63adam · 03-10-2003, 04:04 PM

RAVE - Week of 3/9/03

A roller coaster.

The stock market over the last 15 years.

Take whatever analogy you want to take. Use whatever appropriate illustration.

It would describe my spiritual walk.

Today I was writing in my prayer journal at an Atlanta Bread Company, waiting for my wife and her grandmother to join me for lunch, and I noticed that I had written in my journal six days in a row. A definite record for me.

You see, I believe I've grown in several areas of my life in the past few years. But one area that I continue to struggle in is this:

CONSISTENCY.

I've lived a mostly up and down spiritual life. Many highs and many lows. Not a lot of middle ground that's been covered. In fact, I'm beginning to believe that I am a bi-polar Christian. Amazingly high in the clouds one moment, amazingly down in the rut the next.

For most of my life, I've felt that an inconsistent journey with God is a bad thing.

Maybe I've been wrong.

I can see the definite negatives of bipolar spiritual journeys. Inconsistency means there are times when my walk is absolutely fantastic, I'm on cloud nine, and everything seems to be going great. But it also means that there are other times when I'm doing poorly, caught up in some kind of sin, and depressed about my life and lack of spiritual maturity.

But there are positives. If I don't experience the extreme highs of my walk with God, then in the low points I won't have the hope of achieving those high points again. And if I don't experience the extreme low points, then I will not understand the grace and mercy of God and his ability to lift a person out of the depths and remind them that He is in control.

Look at some of the characters in the Bible - to me it seems like most of them are bi-polar followers of God as well. Reading some of the psalms of David is like reading a book written by a bipolar person. Half of a psalm will be filled with praise, and then in the next instant will turn into a wail of misery. Reading the story of Elijah on the mountain battling against the prophets of Baal reads like a bipolar test subject story. There's Elijah, victorious over the prophets, turning his people back to God and enjoying one of the high points of his spiritual walk. But then in the very next chapter, he's fleeing for his life and asking God if He abandoned him.

So maybe having a spiritual journey with God that looks like my mutual fund over the past year isn't so bad.

Which brings me to my next question: Is there such a thing as a spiritual lobotomy?