Word.

This has been an interesting couple weeks for me. Things have been going so unbelievably well. God is ordering so many things in my life that I am amazed. However, in the midst of these wonderful moments I have for some reason been unable to really dive into the Word. I suppose it is largely due to the fact that I have been pursuing scholasticism and had began to suck the life out of the Word because I was analyzing and critically thinking it to death. As ashamed as I am about this predicament, I have found that in my "murdering" of Scripture by my red pen marks and highlighter trails has caused something incredible to occur. Instead of trying to keep my thinking about Scripture stayed on my perspective, I just let it "die." However, in that "death" I realized something. The Word doesn't die and even when it seems like it is dead, give is about three days and watch the Resurrection that changed the world. That is what I am finding today - resurrection in my life. My separation from the Word caused my loss of the life giving power of the Word, and thus I rendered myself dead. But strangely I found that as I asked God to help me as I approached the Word, I was rejuvenated. I found so much power in the words of the Word. Immediately I realized that the Word is so connected with Jesus, in fact it is called Jesus a few times in the Bible - so if I divorce myself from the Word, I divorce myself from Jesus, who is everything. I love that God totally spoke to this last night in small group and I was reminded the necessity of getting in the Word not to know with our heads but to know relationally. Knowing the Word is getting to know Jesus, since the book is about revealing him to the earth. I encourage you to get in the Word. He'll blow your mind with how he speaks. 

- peaks out. 

just a thought...about metanarratives...

metanarratives have been lost in our society and in our cultural. i know this isn't a common term for most. the best way i can explain it is that a metanarrative is about the "larger story" that our lives are really about. instead of buying into the quality of the whole,  we tend to submit to the smaller in-between-the lines-text of our selfish existence. how unfortunate is this for both our lives, our churches, our world? this is the death of purpose. the inward thinking of our society has lead to the pursuit of our stuff, our desires, our wants, and our satisfaction. but how can we neglect the world and its aches, hurts, and slavery? if we begin to neglect these people, what else have we neglected? i submit that we have missed love. we have missed truth. we have missed wholeness. we have missed Jesus. note that Jesus consistently pursued the greater missio Dei (mission of God). he is constantly in communication with the Father, regulating his situation and submitting to the command of the Father. let's just begin to think about how often that his personal story was shadowed by the story of redemption that the Father set forth from the beginning in Gen. 3.15. what if we did the same? submitted to the thelema Theou (will of God) at every thought, action, and decision...wait, even every relationship. i believe that this is the key of the metanarrative. that is relationship and love. it is dripping from every page of Scripture and every wound that Jesus bore. Jn. 13.1 says that Jesus "loved them to the end." this does not mean that he loved them until he died. it means that he loved them to the end of time, to their completion, to their ultimate result. later in that passage, Jesus sums up the metanarrative so poignantly. he says, "a new commandment i give to you, that you love one another, just as i have loved you, you also are to love one another. by this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." (Jn. 13.34-35) i was recently reading a book that  was discussing this very idea. the book is The Three Hardest Words by Leonard Sweet and it is about the words "I Love You." Here's what he says about metanarratives and love: "If the metanarrative is about anything, it's about live. And more specifically, it's about love as the form and function of life. To put life and love in their necessary context, the metanarrative tells us not only who we are, but also who everyone else is - helping us understand and live well in relationship with the 'other'...It is the story of "I love you" like no other love story. (p. 24)

so i dare you live in metanarrative and not "subtext" (as Sweet calls it), where we are function and living in love and not in selfishness and anthropocentricity. our philosophy should be as Cameron Crowe's epic film Elizabethtown says concerning life and failure. "Loving life, loving you" is the only way to live. 

-peaks out.

encarnacion!

"encarnacio-ho-ho-ho-ho-ho-hon....i love when Jack Black sings this powerful word in Spanish in the film Nacho Libre. incarnation is not exactly what he was singing. regardless, it keeps it in my memory's grasp. 

for this year, i really sensed as i prayed for this year that God spoke very clearly about this being a year of incarnation. i know that seems mystical and elusive, but really it literally means 'in the flesh.' or for some reason my mind thinks about carne being meat, so i thought, hmm, the incarnation - in the meat. what does that even mean? i don't even know. just go with it. 

nonetheless, i digress. my thoughts on the incarnation was spurred by an excellent essay by Lesslie Newbigin called Proper Confidence, which i reviewed for my hermeneutics class last semester. it truly is a must read. as i was telling my best friend about both this book and the concept of manifesting the concepts of the traditions of Christ's followers, he told me about reading a quote from Henri Nouwen. I thought it was appropriate,

"...There is so much fear, so much distance, so much generalization, and so little real listening, speaking, and absolving that not much true sacramentality can be expected.

How can priests or ministers feel really loved and cared for when they have to hide their own sins and failings from the people to whom they minister and run off to a distant stranger to receive a little comfort and consolation?  How can people truly care for their shepherds and keep them faithful to their sacred task when they do not know them and so cannot deeply love them?  I am not at all surprised that so many ministers and priests suffer immensely from deep emotional loneliness, frequently feel a great need for affectivity and intimacy, and sometimes experience a deep-seated guilt and shame in front of their own people.  Often they seem to say, 'What if my people knew how I really feel, what I think and daydream about, and where my mind wanders when I am sitting by myself in my study?'

It is precisely the men and women who are dedicated to spiritual leadership who are easily subject to very raw carnality.  The reason for this is that they do not know how to live the truth of the Incarnation.  They separate themselves from their own concrete community, try to deal with their needs by ignoring them or satisfying them in distant or anonymous places, and then experience an increasing split between their own most private inner world and the good news they announce.  When spirituality becomes spiritualization, life in the body becomes carnality.  When ministers and priests live their ministry mostly in their heads and relate to the Gospel as a set of valuable ideas to be announced, the body quickly takes revenge by screaming loudly for affection and intimacy.  Christian leaders are called to live the Incarnation, that is, to live in the body, not only in their own bodies but also in the corporate body of the community, and to discover there the presence of the Holy Spirit.

Confession and forgiveness are precisely the disciplines by which spiritualization and carnality can be avoided and true incarnation lived.  Through confession, the dark powers are taken out of their carnal isolation, brought into the light, and made visible to the community.  through forgiveness, they are disarmed and dispelled and a new integration between body and spirit is made possible." - In the Name of Jesus (pp 65-68)

I don't believe I can add a whole lot to that. 

-peaks out. 

house or home...

so i was with this amazing friend of mine last tuesday. he's one of those guys you like to do about anything with, work, talk, drink coffee, etc. so as we were hanging out, we were "removed" from the local coffee shop for they were closing, so we went on a drive. we drove all around my quaint town and for some reason started talking about houses. largely due to him remodeling this old home he is currently dwelling. nonetheless, we went to my favorite part of town, where all the "rich" folk live. 

the area is called riverview and it is a lovely place. the best part about it is that all the houses are completely unique. you can tell that different homes were built at different times, for different kinds of people, and even in very unique styles. you have the tudor mansion sitting right next to a colonial masterpiece with its opulent columns, which is adjunct to a late 70s art deco home that has more angles than a geometry textbook. as we discussed my love of architecture, we just reveled in the craftsmanship of these homes, pointing out dorian columns, keystone artistry, and sumptuous foyers that were seen through massive windows every home we gazed.  

the funny thing was that the day before as i was waiting to eat grecian food with a new friend, i traversed another of my favorite places - ghent. as i drove through riverview, i immediately resonated the same sentiments as i meandered the ghentonian neighborhoods. there was uniqueness overwhelming me in each home. i was able to see the time period and recognize even the people who lived in these homes as i glimpsed through the windows for further insight into their lives. both of these places are "historic," however, their historicity was not bound, it randomly had a "not" in their patterns of home style for each street. i was amazed to see a house that was royal blue. not that faded blue that you find in most kitchens but a blue so vivid that all i could think was of peacock's and their color palette. i was so intrigued by these houses. 

and then something hit me. what makes a house a home. what is a house? my thought was a house is merely an edifice that holds people for when they do not occupy their work. and then i thought, when you walk into a house, you don't say, "wow, this feels 'housey,' you say, this feels 'homey.' " why? because a home is a place that people don't merely stay, but it is where they live. a home is a place that invites and welcomes and extends and comforts. it a house that hugs. it makes you feel cared for and loved. and then God just blew my mind. 

people are like houses. we are all unique, we are all styled, we are all aged. we are edifices that hold things and guard things, or merely occupy a space. none of us are exactly the same, we are all unique, but in that uniqueness our houses are telling people different things. some houses have 4 foot walls around them. some homes don't have windows. some homes only have one door. in that same regard, people are the same way. we have walls, we don't let everyone in, we make people relate to us only through the door of our choice, etc. but then i looked back to those houses. 

the ones i wanted to go in, where the ones that were open for all to see. they were the ones with the huge windows, they are the ones that you could see the art on their walls, their huge furniture, their books, their tvs, and their kitchens. the ones that were inviting were the ones that were truly homes. so now as people are, how are we being homey and inviting? or are we houses that have never been called homey? have we failed to let others in because we are selfish and are fearful of what they might say or do in our house? or maybe they will want to come to secured places and we don't want them to. 

my heart was challenged as i thought that i often am probably not as homey as i should be. i still pull a house on people and make them stand from the street to engage in my life. then i thought of Jesus in the upper room discourse and how he said, i go to prepare a place for you. or in other words, i go to make my father's house homey for you. jesus shows that in our relationships we should be as the early church and be people who are hospitable. not just merely in the natural sense of our homes, but of our lives. how are we inviting and caring and warm towards those that we come in contact with. do people want to be let into our homes? or do they sense our cold house and decided to not tread on the "no trespassing" sign we have plastered on the door to our hearts. 

what if we opened our lives to others, not merely for others, but for the benefit of us as well. everyone knows that when a house is not lived it, it will fall apart. i wonder how many people are falling apart because no one has been sitting on their heart's couch. 

i want to open my doors and welcome people into my house. so that my house may become a home for both others and for Jesus. when's the last time you invited someone over? i plan to do so today. 

- peaks out.

in the beginning...

so last week i was talking to my newfound mentor and he asked a very simple but awesome question: what is the Bible all about? support your answer. 

so as i thought about things (and typically when i think of anything Bible related), i end up going to John 1, 1 John 1, and Genesis 1 - i suppose all the "beginning" texts in my mind. i ended up saying something not pieced together about what the Bible is about. something to the effect of the Bible is the story of the stories of God extending relationship to those who were not in right relationship. i focused on 1 John when it spoke about Christ coming to bring fellowship with the Father, with him and with one another (vs 3). it was nothing profound, just the first thought that came to mind. 

well as i have been obsessed with relational concepts and with "beginnings." i was flabbergasted to read an incredible quote in the newest Leonard Sweet book 11 (who if you ever get a chance to read anything by that man - do it! - he's one of my favorite authors). the quote was from another one of my favorite books I and Thou by Martin Buber. Buber said, "In the beginning is relation." i had totally forget this small but powerful phrase in Buber's magnus opum. 

so as i sit here in panera bread in ghent (one of my favorite places in the universe), i have been plagued all morning with this concept of "in the beginning is relation." i decided to look into the word "relation." since "relationships" are one of my favorite enterprising conversations, i should know these things. relation comes from relacion (Anglo-French) from relatio (Latin) from referre (past participle relatus) (Latin), which means to carry back. i was both struck by this simple etymology. relation in essence means to carry back. i will unveil my thinking of this concept after i touch the 7 definitions of relation according to Merriam-Webster. 

the first definition means - the act of retelling or recounting an account. immediately my mind began to think about the whole beginning thing. to reveal that relation is the begin, it would have to have some semblance of retelling or recounting an account. Hmm, maybe the beginning is when we start to tell or rather retell the account God has in his heart from before the dawn of time. this totally reminds me of the "deeper magic" in Lewis' Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe, where Aslan speaks of a magic that was deeper than the things written down upon the stone table. God's relation of his heart to something else was the beginning? my mind is flooded with thoughts.

the second definition is - an aspect or quality (as resemblance) that connects two or more things or parts as being of belonging or working together or as being of the same kind - a property. so relation is about a connection revealing that something is of the same substance and maybe even interactive or engaging between two parts. There seems to be something that is connective when we speak about relationships in that maybe there is a spark of sharpening or a thread of interwovenness that might occur in the metaphors of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes respectively. 

the third definition - the referring by a legal fiction of an act to a prior date as the time of its taking affect (used with back). A reference to something that has already happened in the past and its affects are now seen now. Something like "imperfective" action perhaps. A little of the Lamb being slain before the foundation of the world? 

fourth definition - a person connected by consanguinity or affinity: relative; person legally entitled to a share of the property of an intestate; kinship. Here we have both sonship and heirship. There is a sharing of the property and an affinity to recognize. It is that "congratulations, it's a boy," and a congratulations of "you graduated" all wrapped in one thing, relationship. The family is extended, the treasures expended. it's all for you and it's all for us. Recalls a little prodigal son action, eh? 

fifth definition - reference, respect as in "in relation to." This speaks of a perspective shift. From being a mere referent, which is the "lesser" field of vision to engaging someone where each becomes a reference, with their own thoughts and views who can begin to see how their views fuse with others to create an overall better viewpoint, that is most likely outside of themselves for it fuses theirs and them together. This seems to smell of the body of Christ and each part having its own function and perspective. 

sixth definition - the attitude or stance which two or more persons or groups assume toward one another. this begins the thought of relation is about knowing, but not merely knowing but rather a wrestling. an relentless desire to be face to face with another person to learn and exchange what is known. this makes me think about the beautiful story of Jacob wrestling with God, assuming he knew something about God, only to find out something very different as they pursued each other through grappling. i think of this being a confrontational approach to relation. 

seventh definition - the state of being mutually or reciprocally interested (as in social or commercial matters): dealings, intercourse: sexual intercourse. this is much like the last but it is the next level of grappling with people, it is when you realize that you are close enough to them that there is a mutual desire for the others betterment. this resonates with the Hebrew word - yadah - which means to know; it also has sexual connotations. there is a knowing that comes in this closeness with people that i think i would call intimacy. there is a reciprocity that happens when you are in the embrace of another person, a vulnerability that happens here, and a sense of trust for when you are in the embrace, you don't see anything else around you. you are completely involved. I thought of John laying on Jesus chest in the Upper Room. That is a closeness of leaning upon another's heart. What a flagrant showing of relation. 

in all of my thinking and pondering i thought about this: "In the beginning is relation." I realized something powerful. Jesus is relation. He came to relay and retell the reality of relationship that God has extended to the earth from the echelons of time. He came to show us how to live in the tension of being property of two worlds, both heaven and earth. He came to communicate how he has done it all before this began and it is being extended continually to any who will receive. He came to show that we through his relation with the Father are now family as sons and daughters, and therefore receive all of the inheritance of life with the family. He came to show not only did he have a perspective of Heaven, but also embraced a perspective of earth so that there was full understanding and experience. He came to confront us with the way we have been living life and wrestle us to the place that we could come to never walk the same again, but that we would walk with him. Jesus showed intimacy time and time again as he served, loved, spoke, listened, cared, moved, walked, and empowered those with him and us now with that unrequited trust of himself to us. 

the verse that my mentor said the Bible is all about, which i totally agree with is from Jesus' own mouth, he says, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled." I love that the story of relationship and fellowship is not merely in the "lifetime" of Jesus, but that it has always been there. relation is always there. 

in the beginning is relation. in the then is relation. in the now is relation. in the end is relation.
in the beginning, in the then, in the now, in the end, is Jesus.

i so want relation. i so want Jesus.

- peaks out.