Citizens in a Global World

There are so many things to say when tragedy strikes. I do not have the words or the eloquence to say them. I will leave that to those who are better wordsmiths than I. The tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School on 12/13/12 will be remembered and immortalized by poets, storytellers, and songwriters far better than I ever could. What I express today is an idea: a thought that has been spinning around in the back of my mind for some time that a tragedy like this finally forces me to put into words. In Russia, in 2004, a similar event unfolded at an elementary school when armed terrorists took over a school and held children hostage. In the end, over 300 children died. I remember watching images of parents holding their surviving children while other parents who's children did not survive wept or fainted or stood numb with shock and grief. I see those same images today on the faces of parents and children in Connecticut. What strikes me in the midst of these tragedies are the similarities. First, that evil, sick, twisted people will hurt anyone they can. There will always be sickness, there will always be evil, but there is a special kind of evil that hunts down and hurts children. There is a special place in prison for people who hurt or abuse kids and I think there might be one in hell too (not sure about the theology of that but Jesus did have extra strong words for people who hurt children). As individuals, as a nation, and as as global society, we need to find ways of confronting and preemptively stopping aggression against children. Perhaps, like the U.K., it is time for nations to make it illegal and impossible to own firearms. Perhaps it is time for only police and military to have these weapons. I know its an impossible dream given the state of the world, but we are citizens of a global world and we need to start acting like it. If there are people (arms dealers) or places (Ethiopia) that aid and promote the indiscriminate use of weapons, maybe it is time for our world to step up and take action. This might mean more violence initially - but in the end it may just be worth it if our children actually get to grow up. Or, we can sit back and talk about how terrible this type of tragedy is, or how it is my right to own 75 automatic weapons, and never do anything about it because, thank God, it didn't happen to my kids. Second, that no matter where you live or who you pledge allegiance to or pray to, we are all connected in ways that beliefs and creeds can not ultimately divide. We are all humans. We all love and laugh and work and sleep and try as best we can to provide protection and a better life to those we love. Whether you live in Serbia or Sweden, Canada or Chile, there is something deep inside us that makes us want to protect our kids. When I see parents on the news half way around the world overcome with grief at the senseless death of their child, I get it. Suddenly it doesn't matter if they are Muslim or Christian, Republican or Democrat, Communist or Capitalist. They are parents just like me, they are humans just like me, they feel anguish and pain and hurt, just like me. They loved their kids, just like me. We are all in this together and it is about time we started to act like it. Sting once famously sang "I hope the Russians love their children too" and I believe they do. I believe we all do. Third, it is time for change. It is time to change how we educate our children, not just here, but around the world. Children need to learn that violence is not the answer. Children need to know that while we may grow up with different values and beliefs, we do share more common values than disparate ones, and one of those values is a deep respect for life. Then, as adults, we need to model this to the children of the world. Rather than our fists, guns, tanks, bombs, and missiles being the currency of negotiation or the final solution to unsolvable situations, we need to pursue compassion, solutions that allow all parties to find common ground, and ruthlessly and relentlessly track down those who defy these things. It isn't Utopia, and it never will be, but it is better than watching another tragedy like this unfold on our television screens (or maybe in our own lives) knowing that we could have done something about it as a global world but instead chose to do nothing.....again.

Faith in the Age of Criticism Pt. 6

Without critical evaluation, our own faith becomes weak and eventually either erodes, or becomes fundamentalist fanaticism. A continual critical evaluation of what we believe and why we believe it, as well as a constant attempt to apply our faith to our daily lives, keeps us from falling into either extreme. If we truly believe that the Bible is the “living Word”, capable of speaking into contemporary situations, while at the same time believing that things written thousands of years ago to a nomadic, primitive, agrarian society still matter today, we must involve our critical skills. We must know how to engage a text, how to put it into its historical context, how to see it within the larger context of the chapter or verse in which it resides, and how to understand the use of narrative, poetry, and metaphor. Not everything is literal. Not everything is prophetic. Not every detail applies to the modern context. Are we trying to apply non applicable parts of a text to our modern situation? (Yes, there are parts of the Bible, and details in the Bible that don't apply to us today.) Are we trying to take ancient details and make them work today? Or, are we attempting to understand and see the underlying principle that applies across cultures and then apply that principle to our lives? Too many cults don't understand this type of critique. They refuse to apply simple, critical tools to their reading of the Bible and end up creating whole movements around things like what you can and can't eat, what you can and can't watch or listen to or enjoy, who can and can't preach, how to absolutely know the exact time when the world will end, or new (and usually deviant) sexual norms (this is a big one). The other eventuality to a non-critiqued faith is for that faith to become outdated and irrelevant. It is easy, over time and without critique, to lose sight of the importance of the Bible to our lives today. Soon it becomes a collection of irrelevant and boring stories that have no place in the modern world. One day we wake up and find that we haven't opened the Bible for months...years...decades...because there is no point to it. Because of this, it is vital for us to continually ask ourselves what we believe and why we believe it. This critical evaluation keeps faith growing, alive, strong, and relevant.

Life is a journey And a destination

What a journey I am on. This journey began in Boston in 1969 and has taken me through Asia, Europe, The U.S. and Canada. I love the journey even though at times it has been painful and there are parts of it that I wish I could undo or do over. Life is a journey. Just when you think you are settled in somewhere, if you are like me, you feel the need to move again. Maybe I'm the human version of a shark, always needing to be moving in the journey or else I'll die. I don't ever feel like I've arrived, or like I have it all together, or that I can sit down and say to myself "O.K. I figured it all out, I am where I am going to be until I die, I don't need to learn any more or grow anymore." So, life for me is a continual process of growth...a continual journey. This relates to my physical world and my spiritual world. I am continually reminded in this journey that God has more to teach me. Just when I think I have a pretty good grasp on something, God opens my eyes to the next level, the next phase, the next understanding, the next mission, the next journey. So, I have come to a place where I am peace with being on a journey that will last until I die. Then, and only then, will I reach the destination. And then the real journey will begin. So I keep asking myself these questions. Is my life making a difference? Am I part of the problem or part of the solution? Am I where God can best use me? Have I stopped journeying? Am I more kind, compassionate, and caring than I was yesterday? Do I appreciate those around me more today than I did yesterday? Is what I am doing today better than what I was doing yesterday? Is what I am doing today setting me up to make tomorrow better? Am I closer to the destination today or farther away? I want to be part of a community that continually asks those questions. I want to be part of a community that is also on a journey. I hope you will be part of that community with me.

Faith in the Age of Criticism, Pt 5.

4. Criticism builds a deeper, more honest, faith. Far too many people know almost nothing about what they truly believe apart from what they have been told by others or what they have heard on Sunday. If they read anything, they read “safe” books written by those who see the world exactly as they do. They refuse to read books or to engage in conversations with those who, while still holding to the same faith, have deep convictions that are in opposition to the beliefs that they hold. (Ask them to read something by someone who doesn’t hold to their faith tradition, and you might as well be asking them to read the Satanic Bible.) They label people who write these books, or who read them, has heretics and dissenters (see post #2 in this series) often without ever opening the cover of the book they are so critical of (Rob Bell’s “Love Wins” comes to mind) or of trying to understand the critique of the dissenting voices. Again, this does not advocate that they must accept the other position, but they must engage with it. Engaging in the critical dialogue builds a deeper, more honest faith, one that deals with the real issues of today. A long time ago, someone told me that whenever I am criticized I should always try to find the truth in what the critical person is saying. There may be ten things that are false, but there may also be one thing that is truth. I think this advice applies to ideas and beliefs that we do not agree with. Even as we criticize them (or engage in a critique of them) we should be asking ourselves, is their something of truth in this argument that I can learn? Even if I end up disagreeing with most of what this other viewpoint advocates, have I learned something that can enhance and grow my faith? If you are asking yourself this question, it makes the process of critical analysis far more rewarding and valuable.

Faith in the Age of Criticism Pt 4

3. Critical evaluation of what we believe and why we believe what we do does not make a person liberal. Even the terms "fundamentalist" and "liberal" need to be discarded or at least redefined because they carry far too much baggage from our history. Instead, criticism (or questioning) of what you believe is the best way to see if your faith is genuine and real and if it continues to hold true to the principle of the text while speaking to the modern situation to which you are attempting to apply the text. This is not some form of “ situational ethics” but rather an honest attempt to answer the question of how my faith applies to my world today.

Faith in the Age of Criticism Pt 3

2. We need to be critical of ideas, not people. When we can divorce criticism from personal attacks (I believe the two are very different) we can engage in healthy critical dialogue with others that can help us evaluate and sharpen our own world view. What is more, we can maintain deep and honest friendships with people who do not see the world the same way we do. This is easier said than done. It is difficult to listen to someone like Ann Coulter and not want to be critical of her and her tactics, rather than to simply be critical of the agenda she supports. Yet, if we are able to realize that every person has the right to believe and say what they do, and if that person will realize that we have that same right, we can move past personal attacks, to critique ideas. I have great friends who have very different political views than I do. We disagree on a lot of things, yet, we love to hang out and to be together. I consider them my friends and they consider me a friend. Here is a simple way of telling if you are being critical of an idea or of the person who holds that idea. If you say "You're an idiot for believing that" than you are engaging in a personal attack. If you say "I disagree with what you believe" than you are making the focus of the critique the idea and not the person. What you can't control is how the person responds. Many people believe that if you don't like their idea or their belief, than you obviously don't like them personally. So find ways of validating the person, of letting them know that you love them as a person and that your critique has nothing to do with them as a person and a friend. If we can divorce criticism from personal attack, we will be able to begin dialogues with people and discuss issues critically with people who don't think or believe like we do, without (hopefully) alienating them. This critical dialogue is vital. Only when we engage with ideas that we don't hold are we able to see our own ideas within the crucible of critical thinking. If I never engage with anyone who believes differently than I do, then who will challenge me to think, rethink, defend, and ultimately affirm or change my own ways of thinking? How will I know if my ideas are old and outdated or if they continue to stand the test of time? Critical dialogue with people who think differently than I do helps to expand my worldview and see an idea from different viewpoints. We can always learn something. We never have all the answers. People who think and believe differently than we do can help us see things from a different perspective. And, we may just gain a new friend in the process.

Faith in the Age of Criticism Pt 2

1. We don’t understand the true nature and strength of criticism. Those who wish to make themselves feel better and others feel worse, who wish to prop up their own agendas, who fear change, or who cannot build anything of their own but hate to see others build things, have hijacked the true understanding and use of the term ‘criticism’. For these people, criticism becomes the means AND the end. For them, criticism exists only to destroy and tear down. So, first of all, we need to redefine what healthy, life giving, criticism is and how we can apply it in order to create, maintain, and strengthen our faith. Dissenters and critics are vital to the survival of any belief system. Healthy criticism, self-criticism, the ability to understand both sides of any issue (without having to support the other side) allows a person to approach any issue with a sense of openness rather than defensiveness. According to Sociologist Emile Durkheim, in group formation the founders of the group initiate boundaries to which members must adhere. Within each group, there are those who critique (or criticize or question) those boundaries. These critics force the group to continually reevaluate its boundaries and make necessary changes. These critics also force the group to continually reevaluate its boundaries and maintain original boundaries when appropriate. The one thing that Durkheim's (and others') studies revealed is that although this process of criticism can at times be difficult, it is also vital to the survival of the group. Without criticism the group will not critique it's own boundaries and will, in every case, eventually decay to a point that they are unable or unwilling to defend "ancient" boundaries that they no longer engage with and therefore do not fully comprehend. Along with this, the group that does not continually critique its boundaries will lose touch with the changing nature of how its' belief systems engage with the culture around it. This means the group sinks into obscurity and irrelevance. Essentially the group no longer matters to the culture around it. It has become outdated without even realizing it. This same scenario applies to the individual and his or her belief structure.

Faith in the Age of Criticism Pt 1

Timothy Dunfield, MA, PhD dropout, gypsy, believer. In the history of the human race we have had many “Ages”. We have experienced the age of reason, the dark ages, the age of science and progress, the Age of Aquarius, the pre-industrial age, the industrial age, the age of dinosaurs, the ice age, and pre-modern age, the modern age, and the post-modern age. One thing that defined every age (at least the ones mentioned above that were real, and no doubt a few I didn't mention) was an underlying spirit (if “spirit” is in fact the right word) of criticism. If “criticism” is too strong a word, perhaps “questioning” or “evaluating” would also apply. Whatever the word, brilliant men and women evaluated, questioned, and criticized the ideas of previous ages and generations, discarded what no longer applied, what had become outdated or impractical, and then applied new ways of thinking and new ideas to current problems. Without criticism we would still be rubbing two sticks together to make fire or grinding wheat by hand in a field to make bread or believing the world was flat. Without criticism we may still believe that slavery is acceptable or that women are inferior to men. We live in an age of criticism. We have professional ‘critics’ who make their living criticizing everything from what people wear to what they watch to where they live or who they vote for. Criticism forms the basis for the academic community, yet within many religious circles, criticism is taboo, unless we are criticizing people and theologies we don’t like. Rather than being the enemy, however, criticism can be the greatest friend of the serious student, the serious seeker, the person who will not accept complacency, those who wish to see a better future; but only if we understand what real criticism is and is not. For far too long, I have listened with growing dismay to Christians (and honestly to most people of any faith) who decry the advent of criticism, who fear any form of criticism directed at their belief system, and who view criticism as somehow “evil” and those who dare to criticize their faith as at best, “deluded” or “lost” and at worst, “agents of evil”. For my own faith tradition, the response to criticism is almost always reactionary, closed-minded, and ungraceful. It is time to change this. I feel this is the result of an unhealthy fear of criticism based on a skewed understanding of the role that criticism plays in the creation, maintenance, and strengthening of faith (this theory formed the basis of my MA thesis at the University of Alberta in 2009). Because this is most likely the outline of a book I’m going to write, I will keep this blog to point form. Each day for the next six days I’m going to write briefly on a different reason why I believe proper criticism is essential to a mature faith, and is also important if we are going to engage with our culture in the “Age of Criticism.”

Leadership

Recently, I have been on the receiving end of phone calls, emails, notes, and one on one conversations from people in our church community affirming my leadership gifts and my vision for our team. I am humbled by these comments. It is always nice to hear that people appreciate what you are doing. I'm also not for the least minute tempted to think that I've done all this on my own. As soon as I start to think that I'm "all that" - that is when Solomon's words become very real "Pride goes before destruction and a proud spirit before a fall." So, in a rather public way, I want to give a shout out to some very talented people who make my life, and my leadership, successful. I believe strongly that I need to surround myself with people who are more talented than I am. One of the things I've learned about leadership is not to be intimidated with people who are smarter, more talented, or more creative than I am. Those are the people I try to draw around me. So - first off - my wife Jo makes me the leader I am today. She has the gift of discernment and she uses it. She is creative. She thinks in creative ways. She also keeps me grounded and focused and organized. Next - my co-worker Anthony. Before Anthony was on staff, when he was just a bass player on my team, I knew he had pastoral gifts and a creative streak. Now that he is on staff with me, he does lots of things that I'm not good at, and he does them really well. Really, really well. Wendy is one of the most creative people I've ever met. She "gets" what it means to connect people with God. She is never satisfied with the status quo. Wilf is our choir director. I've rarely met anyone with his grasp of musical knowledge, his ability to lead musicians, and his desire to be the church in the world. My Creative Planning Team (or A team). This is a team of mostly volunteers who think about things like video, drama, presentation, productions, graphics, and anything else creative that they can think of. I love to sit around with them and throw ideas on the table. When you have the right people sitting around a table doing that - where everyone has the best interest of the church at heart - magic happens. My Worship Teams. I learned long ago from playing with my buddy Gene, that when you have someone on stage with you who is better than you in every way as a musician, it makes you a better musician. I have great teams and great leaders for those teams. I can be gone on a Sunday and I don't worry about the quality of our services. Find good people. Find great people. Surround yourself with them. Iron sharpens iron.

Victory

I like to think of this blog as the "BLOG OF VICTORY." Yes, my friends, that is correct..."THE BLOG OF VICTORY." I have triumphed over my furry little competitor. In the words of someone else, "I came, I saw, I killed it." So, last night my wife and I are watching a movie downstairs (sidebar - the movie was crap). Suddenly right in front of us the mouse runs across the floor (cue ominous music) and then, in front of our very eyes, scales the wall and disappears into the furnace vent (six feet off the ground). What in Hades? I didn't know mice could climb vertical walls. It was terrifying (cue sounds of my wife screaming a little bit). BUT - I now knew where to set the traps. Bwahhahahahahah This morning there was a mouse caught in the trap. He was dead. I now have four traps set in the same general area in case any of his friends decide to try and crash this party. I have also cut a small notch on the side of the trap that caught the mouse. That trap my friend is special and shall receive recognition among all the traps. It shall have a high standing among traps. It shall be called The Trap of Victory. Oh its on now baby.

Mouse Hunt Pt 2

So, this mouse obviously thinks it is the evil king of my house or something. So far, it has managed to elude my traps. There have been no sightings. I am not giving up. No mouse shall live in my house. While I was hoping to be able to provide you with photographic proof of my victory in the form of a mouse in a trap (or my daughter suggested we cut off its head and mount it on a toothpick outside our front door as a warning to all other mice) fear not: this mouse's days are numbered. I am the king of my house. No mouse shall usurp the throne. Stay tuned. Moving traps to better locations today.

Mouse Hunt Part 1

I have battled a skunk that lived underneath one of our houses. It won and we moved. I have yet to battle a little critter that actually lives in your house. This blog will chronicle my Herculean struggle against the evil force pictured above - mighty mouse. It isn't my fault. I didn't start this battle. I didn't go looking for this battle. I was drawn in to it as unwilling participant. But let me be clear. I may not have started it, but I will finish it. Last night as we were getting ready for bed, out of the corner of my eye, I thought I saw a shadow moving across the ceiling. Because the lamps were on, I naturally assumed something on the floor had cast a shadow and so I leisurely looked down on the floor. There, staring me down, mano to mano, was a mouse. A real, live, breathing, mouse on my floor in my bedroom late at night. It was a shock. My heart began to beat faster (a lot faster). I did not, for the record, scream or jump on the bed, or do anything like that. I went looking for something to capture it in. while I was upstairs looking for a bucket or a container of some type, my wife yells that "it's moving" and by the time I get back downstairs, it has disappeared into the laundry room. A fact I did not know. A mouse can flatten its body so that it fits underneath a closed door. I did not know this. It freaks me out a little. What evil genius (Satan) thought up a rodent that could flatten itself almost as thin as paper. That just plain isn't fair. How am I supposed to fight a creature that can transform itself like that to escape? Well, needless to say, I am up to the challenge. No rodent...NO RODENT...enters my house, stares me down, and then lives to tell about it. I'm on my way to buy traps. The kind that maim and kill and mutilate in the most hideous of fashions in order to send a warning message to other rodents who might happen by and see their colleague in one of my traps. (I'd best protect my fingers while setting them or I'll be looking for another career but that is another story and frankly...I'm obsessed with finding and destroying the evil in my house and my fingers are only a minor secondary concern at this point). I'll be out of town for a day or so. When I get back I expect to find a mouse cut in half in my trap. I'll let you know where to send congratulatory cards and champagne when I celebrate my victory.

Identity

Who I am is made up of several interactive and, at times, competing factors. I wish it wasn't true, but the more I think about this, the more I get to know myself, the more I have to admit that it is true. I am a believer, a husband, a father, a musician, an academic, a sceptic, a sinner, and a pastor. All of these things define me and the struggle is to keep each in perspective. That struggle exemplifies the human condition. Popular culture, at least in North America, tends to define you based on what you do. When two people meet each other for the first time the natural first question that comes out after getting to know your name, or often even before that, is "what do you do?" What you do so often defines you. I've fallen victim to this self-identity far too often and I've allowed the "musician" or the "pastor" or the "academic" to take centre stage. When I primarily identify myself by what I do, it doesn't take long until I am caught up in the game called "success". If who I am is determined by what I do, then in order to feel good about myself I need to be the best at what I do. My self worth is then tied directly to my level of success in my given area, and this of course leads to jealousy of those who are better or more successful in the same field. When I don't get a promotion or a gig or a deal that I feel I deserved, it affects my self worth. Christian culture tends to define you based upon what I will call "the Christian index." The talk that most Christians have amongst themselves, at least on the surface, revolves around knowing their identity rests in the knowledge that they are a child of God and therefore forgiven and headed to heaven when they die. Noting wrong with that. There are however, things that are implied in this knowledge that are not often talked about, but which also define us. What if I am a child of God and I'm still struggling with sin in my life? Trust me, everyone does, it isn't really an "if" question. So, my Christian identity is both as a child of God and a person who still struggles with sin and does sin. Christians don't usually say that part of their identity is that of a sinner. They'd rather just ignore it, sweep it under the rug, or "deal with it" privately. What if I'm a child of God but I don't really attend a church? What if I've been hurt by so many Christians and churches that I avoid them? In Christianese, church attendance and participation are so often inversely correlated with being a "good Christian." Also, does my relationship with God exist in a vacuum? Is it completely separate from what I do? Doing so seems to me to be rather esoteric, otherwordly, and not at all relevant to the fact that my identity includes what I do as well. Finally I am also a husband and father. If I forget that part of my identity includes my responsibilities to and relationships with my family then I am not being true to who God calls me to be: in essence I am not being a believer if I neglect my wife and kids. I've seen lots of pastors neglect their families; thinking that their role as pastor defined them and therefore their family just had to take second place, to say nothing of their identity in Christ. I can't tell you the number of professionals, whether academics, musicians, businessmen, (check out actors too), who believe that success in their field is their identity and that their families are holding them back. No wonder divorce rates are so high. Having realized this stuff, I have to say that although I certainly don't have it all figured out, I am beginning to figure out who I am and who I am not. I am a complex interactive of competing and cooperative desires, goals, and realizations. I don't yet have them all in balance, and I doubt I ever will this side of eternity. The best I can do is try to realize when something is out of balance and attempt to bring it back into some type of balance. I am a believer, a husband, a father, a musician, an academic, a sceptic, a sinner, and a pastor. Hopefully in that order.

Two Days in Paradise

My wife and I began our two day adventure of the Northern Okanagan valley in Summerland. This small community on the Western shore of Okanagan Lake is home to some very unique and exceptional wineries. Along with the larger Sumac Ridge winery, Summerland contains the surprising "Dirty Laundry" winery. Along with a great story and friendly staff, this winery offers amazing views of the lake and free sampling of amazing wines, both red and white. Not far from Dirty Laundry was perhaps the highlight of our adventure, Blasted Church winery. It is hard to find, hidden up in the hills on the east side of the lake south of Penticton and below the Naramata Bench. If you do find it, as we did after a recommendation from our good friend LeRoy Brower, do not leave without sampling both red and white from this amazing little winery. The staff are friendly and extremely knowledgeable. We learned more about wine and growing grapes in half an hour than we had after hours of researching online. Summerland also offers a chance for visitors to ride the historic Kettle Valley Railway, one of the oldest railways in Canada, and when it was built, the third largest (and third highest) trestle railway in North America. The train ride lasts for approximately 1.5 hrs, although some of that time is spent outside the train taking pictures or sitting on the trestle bridge hundreds of feet above the river. As long as you don't have a screaming baby with oblivious parents sitting in the same car as you, this should be a very enjoyable trip. Finally, we stopped at LaFrenz winery. We had not intended to visit it, since there are too many to visit over a weekend, but decided to add it to our list after several other wineries suggested we try it. When the competition suggests you try it, it is usually worth it. It was. Their beautiful tasting room completely enclosed in floor to ceiling windows offers stunning views of the lake and the vineyards. The staff were friendly and the wine was delicious. Having lived in the Napa valley earlier in life, I was surprised to find so many similarities and yet so many differences. This is a unique region with its own character and appeal. Do not miss exploring this beautiful part of Canada if you get the chance.

Dealing With It

It is difficult to deal with certain types of people. It doesn't matter if you are a pastor or a policeman, an author or an actor, a writer or a welder; dealing with people is...well...difficult. In my profession, I deal with people on a weekly basis, and quite often these people are upset or even angry about something. They disagree with some song I've done or some style of music I've played or how loud it was or quiet it was or how bright or dim the lights were. I am far from perfect when dealing with these people, but I do have some experience. Here are my four basic rules: 1: Wait. I've learned the hard way not to react immediately to what people say and/or write to me. They often do not understand or grasp how their comments or actions will affect me and they are often insulted and hurt when I react to them with harsh words or hasty emails. It often takes me a few days to get over my initial feelings towards them and what they've said or written. To respond immediately is to respond out of that anger, and I've sent a few emails that I've regretted ten seconds after I've hit send. After the initial emotions have passed, I'm better able to respond gracefully. On occasion after a service I've had to tell people to talk to me at a later time or wait until Tuesday and come into the office because if I stand and listen to them for another ten seconds in the lobby I may not be responsible for my actions (you know what I mean). Also - if I receive anonymous notes - they go directly into the trash. 2: Have a friend. I have a few people I trust who know me and what I do, who know my heart, to whom I can vent when I need to. These friends are invaluable to me because it isn't healthy to always keep everything inside. Sometimes I need to say what I need to say. This doesn't sound very Christian - but trust me - it is very therapeutic. 3: Respond. I know it sounds simple, but I have to respond to these people. If I ignore them it only gets worse. Trust me. After following the advice given above in Steps #1 and #2, (perhaps several times) I have to meet with them. I dislike replying to people like this via email or text since they either seldom respond, or they take what I've written and they twist it and use it against me (now that they have written proof of how uncaring and unchristian I am) if I disagree with even the slightest thing they originally said (even if I do it with as much grace as Jesus). So, as difficult as it is, meet face to face. Get to the bottom of it, watch their reactions, read their body language, figure out if they are in control of their emotions at all. 4: Listen. On occasion, behind all the hurt and/or anger, behind the inability to communicate in a caring, loving or professional way, these people do have something legitimate to say. Not everything they say is legitimate, in fact, most of it isn't, but sometimes, way down there underneath everything, there is something important that I need to hear. When I uncover the root of the issue, I can respond to it, rather than trying to respond to all the other stuff. By the way, when people compliment me and tell me I am awesome and amazing...I do the same thing.

when you forget your wife's phone number

I left my phone in the car today. My wife has her phone with her so I thought I'd just call her and tell her to bring my phone to the office on her way back home. I tried to call my phone but she didn't answer it, so probably didn't hear it. I picked up the office phone to call her cell and suddenly realized I don't know her cell phone number. The beauty of a cell phone is that you don't have to remember numbers, they are just programmed in and you punch up the person's name and dial and never learn the number. This is great - until you have moments like the one I am currently experiencing. What is the proper etiquette in this circumstance? Do I use Facebook to ask her friends if they can look in their phones and pass on her number to me? I can't call any of them to ask for her number because I don't know their numbers either. Will I look like a bad husband for asking FB friends to give me my wife's number? Do I want to publicly admit I don't know her number? (I think this blog may do that for me) Do I just go for the day without my cell phone? Did I mention I also left my wallet with the cell phone? I really have no idea what to do next. Whatever it is, I'm sure it won't be enough. Hello couch. You look like a great place to sleep tonight.

Falling Down

When you fall down, don't stay face down in the dirt. Don't spend the rest of your life trying to fix whatever was hurt. Get up, dust yourself off, figure out what tripped you, and move on. The world lies ahead not behind. Don't live where you aren't going. If you are walking in one direction but continue looking behind you, you'll fall again. So, keep your eyes on the prize. Keep your eyes firmly fixed ahead of you. On Jesus. That is where you are going.

The Glorious Results of a Misspent Youth

Don't do things to your body when you are young that you will regret when you are older. How many times did I hear that little piece of wisdom when I was a teenager or in my 20s and think to myself "I'm invincible. None of those bad side effects will ever happen to me. I've been doing this for years and haven't had one bad thing happen to me."
This is not a blog where I label and remember every bad thing I did when I was young. For that I would need a book. Suffice it to say I did them all, twice.
I did think I was invincible.
Then one day I got older and suddenly I discovered what Joan Jett was talking about when she named her 1984 album The Glorious Results of a Misspent Youth.
Apparently some of that stuff you did when you were young doesn't really hurt you, or affect you, until you get older and your body isn't able to protect you like it used to. I wish somebody had explained it to me. Better yet, I wish someone had said "this happened to me and it can happen to you. You may not pay now...but trust me...you'll pay for it someday."
But nobody did. Somehow I was just supposed to believe what everybody said. I'm not good at that.
Why didn't somebody tell me that if I abused certain substances it would affect my teeth and my liver and my kidneys and my joints? How come nobody tells you about the emotional and spiritual and psychological effects of abuse? How come nobody said that if I did it once I'd do it again and again and that it would lead to other, harder, more dangerous things, and that in the end I wouldn't know right from wrong and my moral compass would be so screwed up that I wouldn't be able to make wise choices about anything?
I'm a guitar player and I have to deal with joint pain and arthritis in my fingers that is partially the result of living a life without much thought of the future. My voice is permanently scared after years of subjecting it to abuse. There are days I can't walk because the gout in my toe is so bad that I want to take a hacksaw and remove it. I can no longer assimilate caffeine in any form. Recovery, from anything, is a day to day struggle no matter how many years you've been clean. Don't let anybody tell you that it goes away.
Now, thankfully, I follow a guy named Jesus who loved me enough to rescue me from all of that and to give me a second shot at life. I certainly haven't always given it my best shot and I've messed up a few times along the road (some privately, and some rather publicly), but Jesus doesn't seem to mind. He continues to love me and allow me to be part of his church.
That's the good part. That is what grace is all about.
The other part, the part that is more difficult, is living with the consequences of those earlier, selfish, dangerous choices. I am saved and forgiven but I'm also human and subject to the laws of cause and effect.
I hope young worship leaders read this and take it to heart. I've been a worship leader for almost 15 years now and every day has been a struggle, not because I don't love what I do - I do love it - but because I have to fight through so many physical and emotional and spiritual things that are the consequences of poor choices when I was young. I'm not saying my life would be perfect if I hadn't made bad choices. Nobody is perfect. I'm just saying it might have been a little easier.
I can't wait for heaven when I no longer have to live in this body or have the mental scars I have. In the mean time...I think I'll put my foot up...it's killing me again!

Rob Bell's "Love Wins" Chapter 7

I could have very easily titled this blog "The gospel of entrance instead of the gospel of enjoyment." This chapter wrecked me emotionally and spiritually. Forget, for a moment, the heaven and hell stuff that Rob talks about in this chapter. His parallels between heaven and hell and the story of the prodigal son are fine, but what he says about the gospel, about God, and about how we as Christians relate to God are the things that, for me, made this chapter perhaps the best chapter in the entire book so far. I am still recovering this morning from what I read. I used the basic premise of this chapter for a devotional for our choir last night, relating it to something completely different than heaven and hell, relating it instead to self identity, and the impact was just as strong.
So, here goes.
How do you see God? What view of God colors your world and your view of grace, mercy, heaven, and ultimately yourself as a person in relationship to this God? What stories have you told yourself, or been told, about God that define who you think God is?
Are you like the prodigal son who tells himself all the way home that his Father can't love him after where he has been and what he has done? That his Father will no longer call him a son? That at best, his Father might let him be a servant?
The Father tells his younger son that no matter where he has been or what he has done, he will always be his Son. Nothing can change that. In fact, when the son returns home, the Father throws a huge party for him. The Father's story is better than the son's story.
The older brother is angry. He tells the Father "I've slaved away at home for you and you've never given me even a scrawny goat for a party." The older brother tells himself that the Father is a slave driver, mean, and cheap. The Father tells the older brother that everything he owns has always belonged to the older brother. He could have had a party anytime he wanted. The Father's story is better than the older brother's story.
The older brother and the younger brother are ultimately worried about "getting in" about "entrance" into the Father's house and love and ultimately, into the Father's favor. The Father's story is about mercy, and grace, and acceptance. The Father tells both boys that they are already in the family. There is nothing they can do, or not do, that puts them outside of the family. The Father simply wants to enjoy His sons. He isn't worried about whether they are good enough or have worked hard enough to be eligable for entrance. That isn't the point.
That is not the point of the gospel either, according to Bell. Bell writes "What the gospel does is confront our version of our story with God’s version of our story" (171).
Bell suggests that too many Christians have this idea that the Gospel is good news because it is a story of Jesus rescuing us from an angry, vengeful God. A God who one moment loves us, and then when we die, suddenly becomes schitzophrenic and wants to torture us in hell for all eternity (174). Basically our gospel is that we love Jesus but fear God. Who wants to spend eternity with that kind of a God?
Bell's argument is that the real gospel, the story that God (the Father) tells us - the story that is better than the ones we tell - is that the good news of the gospel is that God, through Jesus, is rescuing us from ourselves, from sin, from death, and from all the untrue stories we tell ourselves. God is the rescuer!
While we as Christians tend to focus on the gospel of "entrance" - trying to decide who gets in and who doesn't - God is focusing on the gospel of "enjoyment" - on having a party with all of his sons and daughters. Hell isn't a very good party. Christians who focus on the gospel of "entrance" don't throw very good parties (179).
Rob says a lot of other profound things in this chapter, but I want to end with two of them.
First, "an understanding of heaven that focuses on “getting in” rarely creates good art. It is a cheap view of the world because it is a cheap view of God" (179-180). Ouch! As an artist I need to hear that. I want to create art that celebrates a God who enjoys parties, who enjoys his children, who is not cheap, but is expressive and generous.
Second, "both brothers tell incorrect stories to themselves about God, because their perception of God was wrong. The father’s love can’t be earned (the older brother) or lost (the younger brother). It just is" (185, 187).
I want to present the Father's love like this. You can't earn it and you can't lose it. You can reject it - but that doesn't mean the Father stops loving you. He'll never stop. He'll do anything, no matter how incorrect it might seem by our human standards, to ensure all his kids get to party with Him in heaven forever.
I have kids. I know exactly how he feels!!!

Love Wins Chapter 6 "There are Rocks Everywhere"

One note of housekeeping. Chapter 5 was so uneventful and predictable I didn't bother writing a blog on it. Also, I'm reading several books right now. Some, like Bell's book are religious in nature. Some, like Douglas Coupland, are also religious in nature, but not in a way you might expect. So, I've been sidetracked a little. Oh and Easter happened. Enough excuses.
Rob Bell says that the only way to salvation is through Jesus (154). Pretty traditional stuff. Nobody, not even John Piper or the Graham clan, could refute that. What Bell then does, is take an Evangelilcal's preconceived idea of this salvation and this Jesus and blow it wide open. After reading this chapter I wasn't surprised that he has gotten so much heat from the mainly republican, right-wing, evangelical, American-centric form of Christianity that seems to dominate the media, politics, and airwaves in America. Allow me to explain....
First, Bell says that "as obvious as it is, then, Jesus is bigger than any one religion. He didn’t come to start a new religion…and he continually transcends whatever labels and cages we create to contain him, especially the one called “Christianity”. He continues, "Jesus takes his role of redemption seriously; rescuing not just everything, but everybody"(150-151).
I can sense the critics getting ready to pounce at this point. They have their charges of "universalism" all loaded up. They are ready to claim that Bell is saying that anybody can get in, that you don't have to be a Christian to get into heaven. That Buddhists and Muslims can go. Why not just say "any path that gets you there works?"
Bell answers. "What Jesus does not claim is that any path is good as long as it leads to heaven, nor that a certain people group or religious group gets to define who gets in and who doesn’t. What Jesus does claim is that he alone is saving everybody. This leaves the door wide open. He is, at the same time, both as narrow as himself and as wide as the universe (154-155).
He then goes on to, in my opinion, skewer the American-centric Evangelical Right. He says "when people use the word “Jesus” it is important to ask who they are talking about. Are they referring to a token of tribal membership, a tamed, domesticated Jesus who waves the flag and promotes whatever values they decided their nation needs to return to? Are they referring to the logo or slogan of their political, economic, or military system through which they sanctify their greed and lust for power? Or are they referring to the very life source of the universe who walked among us and continues to sustain everything with his love and power and grace and energy (156). This is perhaps, my favourite paragraph in the entire book.
If we (and I say this to everyone, not just the right) can see past our own ideas of who Jesus is and if we can stop trying to be God, judging who gets in and who doesn't, based on our own interpretations of the Bible, we might just be able to see that God is bigger than we are and salvation is bigger than we could imagine.
Bell's last words in this chapter are cautionary.
"It is our responsibility to be extremely careful about making negative, decisive, lasting judgments about people’s eternal destines. Jesus said he didn’t come to judge the world but to save it." Maybe we should be more concerned with saving the world too, rather than judging it...or judging Rob Bell.

Rihanna, Douglas Coupland and God

Friday, March 23, 2012
I love Rihanna's song "We Found Love" - not just the great groove but especially the sentiment "We found love in a hopeless place." I have been playing that song on my ipod a lot this week.
I just finished reading Douglas Coupland's book "Hey Nostradamus!" - I've been a fan since "Gen X" and I think "Nostradamus" is amazing. The main character Jason has difficulty connecting with anyone after he is part of a highschool shooting spree. He can't find love with his family and his world is hopeless. Then, in the most hopeless of all situations, he finds Heather. Although he is a doomed character, they share a connection, and a love, that forms the central section of this book. The final revelation of his father is astonishing.
So, all week I've been surrounded by this idea of finding love in hopeless situations and places. What place is more hopeless than the sinful world we live in - disconnected from God and each other - struggling valiantly to re-connect?
Jeremiah 31:3 keeps flashing through my head as I listen to Rihanna, read Coupland, and think about this world we live in. "I have loved you with an everlasting love." In the midst of this world's hopelessness, in the midst of dispair, when we could do nothing for ourselves - that is when Jesus died for us - when he displayed how much he loved, and still loves, us.
posted by Timothy Dunfield at 12:10 PM

small things done well

I am still learning how to be a patient person. It doesn't come naturally to me. Not until I began my post graduate work at the University of Alberta did I finally realize the benefits, and necessity, of patience.
The goal of an MA is the production of a thesis, an academic paper usually between 80-120 pages. The first year, a student spends the year taking courses and going to lectures, writing smaller papers, and doing research. The second year, a student begins to write his or her thesis. I didn't want to wait until the second year. I was impatient to get started on the thesis in year one. I knew what I wanted to write about, and I felt like the first year was sort of a waste of time.
What I learned in that first year was that I needed to focus on each class, on each assignment, because every final paper for each class, if I did them well and planned them out well, could become the basis for a chapter in my thesis. This meant that I had to choose each class carefully and think strategically about each assignment. The more classes I took the more I began to realize that there was no way I could write a fully coherent thesis without the knowledge I gained in each class. Over that first year, I began to see the value in patience; the value gained by not always rushing to achieve the overall goal without acknowledging and using the value of the small steps that actually led to the achievement of that goal.
In my second year, when I actually began to write my thesis, I found that I had laid a solid groundwork that allowed me to write a thesis that was almost 200 pages long and easily defended, with no significant revisions from my defense committee.
Recently I read a book by Robert Sharma called "Secret Letters from the Monk who Sold His Ferrari." In it Sharma writes
"The wise realize that small daily improvements (small tasks well executed) lead to exceptional results over time."
This reminds me of a parable Jesus told in Matthew 25. A landowner gives 3 of his servants an amount of money to look after while he is away. When he returns, two of the servants have invested wisely and made a profit. The master says to them "well done. You have been faithful in small things so now I will put you in charge of larger things." Being faithful in small things (small tasks well executed) lead to extraordinary results.
This makes me think about how I live my life.
Am I faithful in small things? Do I execute small tasks well in order to achieve extraordinary results?
If I want the world to be a more loving, kinder, and more forgiving place, am I willing to be more loving, more kind, and more forgiving to the person sitting next to me on the bus or in line ahead of me at the checkout? Do I only imagine a day when people treat each other with kindness, or am I kinder to the cashier at the store who has had a bad day? Do I imagine a world where people are more loving, or am I actively being more loving to my kids, my parents, my spouse, the person who cuts my hair? Do I only dream of a world where people are more forgiving, or am I forgiving the person standing right in front of me who actually needs my forgiveness today?
If I can start with little things, only then will I see the world I imagine become a reality.
So often we INTEND to be more loving or forgiving or kind, but we fail to take the first small step of actually DOING it.
Today, take those first small steps into a larger world....into God's world.

Rob Bell "Love Wins" Chapter 4

If God wants everyone to be saved, does God get what God wants? If not everyone gets saved, does this imply that God has failed? These are the questions that set the stage for a chapter in which Rob Bell does bring up the idea of universalism. Now, before I go any further, let me be very clear. Rob Bell does not promote universalism in this chapter. Despite what you might have heard from the likes of Piper and Graham and others, Rob does not, in this chapter, say that everyone goes to heaven no matter what and everyone, in the end, gets saved. Rob does not make a definitive statement. Instead, Rob does what Rob does best, he asks questions and provides the reader with different possibilities that could happen in the future. I suppose if you are the kind of evangelical who really doesn't have a purpose or an identity apart from conflict, then you might want to start a fight with Rob Bell where no fight exists. I suppose if it makes you feel better about yourself, about your evangelical opinions, then pick a fight with Rob Bell, lots of other people have. The only problem with that strategy is the fact that Rob Bell is not advocating a position that you can fight against. He is merely asserting that there may be different possible solutions and outcomes to the age old problem of how Christians who believe in a loving and merciful God can also believe that this same God tortures people for all eternity in hell. All Rob does is stretch your mind a little bit. I guess for some people that is too painful and they would rather condemn him has a heretic. What does that say about their own narrow-mindedness? If Rob Bell wants to free God from some small man-made box, these evangelicals want to keep God firmly encased within this little box that they have constructed.
All of this doesn't mean I agree or disagree with Rob. This chapter did stretch my mind more than the others have.
Rob argues on pages 110 and 111 that as Christians we are all about telling good stories. He says a story where God punishes most people in hell for all eternity is a bad story. A story where God saves everyone, where everyone enjoys God’s world without shame is a better story. He also admits that there are lots of objections to this story, but that as Christians, shouldn’t we at least long for it to be the true story? I have no problem with this line of reasoning, other than to ask Rob if the good or the bad stories that he suggests include "truth" - whatever truth is in this case. Where in this analogy does the “true” story fit in? Is the story just about good and bad from our human perspective? I wonder if "telling good stories" is really an argument at all? I don't know - I like to tell good stories. But more importantly, I like to tell true stories. I just want the true stories to be good stories, and I think Rob does too. Telling stories about God ordering the Israelites to kill every living person, including women and children, in Jericho is not a good story, but it is a true story.
In order for the true story to be a good story then, God, in Rob's reasoning, would need to not condemn anyone to hell, but instead, allow them all, at some point, to enter heaven. So, what about people who die without ever knowing God, or even worse, deliberately rejecting God? Rob wonders (as did Martin Luther) if God gives people the chance to turn to him after they die. This would mean that regardless of the life we live while we are alive, when we die, if we end up in hell (which Rob does affirm is a real state) do we still have the opportunity to realize our mistake, accept the mercy of God, and "get out of hell free" so to speak?
This argument, while it might also flirt with universalism, makes me think about the Catholic idea of purgatory. We get punished until we are purified and ready for heaven.
Rob continues this thought by stating that people choose to walk away (from God’s plan and design for them) all the time. That impulse lurks in all of us. So, he asks, will those who have said “no” to God’s love in this life continue to say “no” in the next (114)? This asks a fundamental question about what we believe happens after we die.
My question for Rob, at this point, is this: If we are free to choose to accept God and “get out of hell” are we also free to reject God in heaven and voluntarily (or involuntarily) end up in hell, even after we have been “saved” and have spent a million years in heaven?
Rob would say "yes" since he argues that the picture of heaven in Revelation says that the "gates of the New Jerusalem" are never shut, meaning that people are always free to come and go. My evangelical background wants to reject this idea. My Christian background says "God is bigger than me and I like a picture of God who allows us free will, even in the next life." I'm just not sure that I can handle another life of free will given how poorly I have handled it in this life.
For all of you who have read this blog, or perhaps read Rob's book, and have determined that he is indeed a heretic, that he should be kicked out of the evangelical circle (whatever that means), and that he is somehow eroding the Christian faith, PLEASE READ THIS NEXT PARAGRAPH.
As he concludes this chapter, with all of its questions and suggestions and arguments, Rob says something so traditional and so conservative that it makes me wonder if the haters closed the book before they got to this point and refused to read any more. If they had, they would have missed this:
"Will everyone be saved, or will some perish apart from God forever because of their choices? Those are questions we are free to leave fully intact. We don’t need to resolve them or answer them because we can’t" (115). On the next page he writes
"the question isn’t if God gets what he wants, but rather if we get what we want. The answer is “yes” (116). If we want hell, we can have it. If we want a lifetime of separation from God, we can have it. Its just that God doesn't want that.
Rob is saying that God wants everyone to be with Him in heaven. He'll do anything He can to ensure that outcome. Even if some of His strategies mystify us and confuse us. But I am o.k. with that God. I'm O.K with a God who is a bit of a rebel and goes against what conventional human wisdom thinks is best. I absolutely need a God like that to save me.

Where I am from is a mystery

Where are you from? This question leaves me confused. I've been a gypsy most of my life and have absolutely no "roots" or "ties" or whatever it is people who have lived in one place their whole life, or perhaps two, talk about. I don't have a connection to any one place like someone who says "I was born and raised in one place", or, "my parents still live in the house I was born in."
I was born in Boston, lived there for one whole month, then my parents moved to British Columbia, Canada, where I lived in McBridge, Sydney, and Abbotsford before I was 8. At 9 we moved to Moncton, NB. At 10 we moved to Hong Kong. At 14 to Singapore. At 17 to Edmonton, Alberta. At 20 I moved to San Francisco. At 22 I was in Red Deer, Alberta and met my wife Jo (from Kelowna B.C. via Vancouver, San Diego, and London England). After we were married we moved to Toronto, then Michigan, than Las Vegas (where I spent almost 9 years - the longest I've ever lived in any one place). When I was 37 I moved my family back to Edmonton so that I could complete my MA and begin work on my PhD at the U of A. Now, I am a worship and arts pastor in Kamloops B.C.
Where I am from is a mystery. Where I am going is not. I have my eye on the prize. I am in constant pursuit of the goal. I am on a life-long journey to heaven. Some day I will be "home". In the mean time, I will continue to enjoy the journey.

Rob Bell's "Love Wins" Chapter 3 - Hell

I keep waiting for crazy controversial stuff. If this book is as controversial as some evangelicals claim it is, if pastors get fired because they endorse this book, then I guess I just don't see it. Maybe I'm too simple or maybe I'm too naive. Maybe I'm just not a good evangelical. Honestly, I'm wondering when we get to the part that makes me go "oh, that's why Rob Bell has incited so much vitriol from the religious right" but if so, then it must be somewhere else in this book.
In Chapter 3, Rob's chapter on hell, Bell writes "there is a hell now and a hell later. Jesus teaches us to take both seriously" (79). Then he goes on to talk about what hell here on earth looks like (Rwanda genocide, rape, environmental disasters). Basically Rob suggests that the consequences of sin and of wrong choices can land us in our own 'hell on earth' so to speak. He even suggests that God allows this to happen for our own good. Rob writes "sometimes God lets people “go” so that they can experience the full misery of the consequences of their actions and realize they need God" (90). Totally agree. If my life is any indication of this, then God does let us go our own way sometimes until we end up in a place where we realize we are living in hellish conditions and we need something better.
When Rob turns to the concept of a future-hell at the end of the age, he is cautious. He suggests that the Old Testament writers had no clearly defined concept of hell or what happens after death. He also suggests that when Jesus talked about hell in parables, the point of the story wasn't hell as a literal place, but rather the consequences of a sinful heart. Rob suggests that the parable of the rich man and Lazarus isn’t about hell; it’s about a social revolution, about a change of heart (75).
Rob writes "the rich man is alive in death, but in profound torment, because he’s living with the realities of not properly dying the kind of death that actually leads a person into the only kind of life that’s worth living" (77). I want to like this sentence, I want to like this sentiment, but somehow it promises more than it delivers and I don’t know why. Maybe I just need to re-read it a few more times.
Finally, Rob makes what might be his most difficult point for an evangelical to swallow when he writes "we are handed over to punishment in order for God, through the punishment or the punisher, to do something redemptive and renewing in our lives" (89). This makes me ask if Rob is suggesting that hell is some sort of neo-purgatory where we go until we are sufficently renewed or redeemed and ready to enter the age to come. I don't know if this is the point of Rob's comment, but I do know that Jesus often talks about "refining fire" and gold "purified in the fire" and Paul talks about trials and suffering making us stronger. I understand that as it relates to my life here and now. I'm not sure if I understand how a future "hell" might accomplish the same purpose, but then again, I'm still reading and still processing.
I'm waiting for controversy and all I get are questions. Questions that make me think. While I'm waiting, in the mean time, I'll keep on reading.

Rob Bell "Love Wins" - Heaven

So, I admit it, I was distracted by "The Hunger Games" for a few days and just got back to "Love Wins" and Rob's chapter on heaven. His chapter on heaven is progressive but certainly not heretical (it is also long). Rob Bell states that "Jesus affirmed heaven as a real place, space, and dimension of God’s creation, where God’s will and only God’s will is done. On earth, lots of wills are done…and so heaven and earth at present are not one. Jesus taught that someday, heaven and earth would be one. The day when God’s will would be done on earth as it is in heaven" (42-43). This is a Revelation 21 picture of the New Jerusalem coming down and being on the earth made new. Nothing new or heretical here – pretty traditional actually.
Rob does challenge some of the prevailing myths about heaven. He says there will not be any mansions (at least in the way we on earth view mansions) or streets of gold or star-studded golden crowns that we wear forever (43-44). He suggests that these man-made images of heaven are sort of like Beverly Hills without the smog – very static – and prone to getting old. The heaven that Rob is suggesting Jesus is talking about is dynamic and changing and beyond our comprehension. I’m o.k. with all of that. I’d like God to be able to blow my mind. If God’s heaven is just what I imagine, even at my best, then it is a pretty searing indictment of what God is capable of at his best or probably of how I limit God and place him in such a human box.
Rob says heaven isn't limited to the dimensions we currently experience and therefore it is beyond our pathetic attempts to control. Rob also suggests that beyond our attempts to control what heaven is like, we also attempt to control who gets in, or what the criteria for getting in will be. He suggests that we never really stop to think about what is really important: How intimately the life we live on this earth is connected with the life we will live in the "age to come" as Rob refers to eternity. Rather than endless dabates about "who" or "how" we need to focus on what is really important - how to live our lives down here in such a way that we are prepared to experience the next reality - the age to come.
Rob writes "when Jesus tells the rich man that if he sells everything and gives to the poor he will have rewards, Jesus is promising that man that receiving the peace of God now, finding gratitude for what he does have, and sharing it with those who need it will create in him all the more capacity for joy in the world to come" (44). Wow.
Rob continues "it often appears that those who talk the most about going to heaven when you die talk the least about bringing heaven to earth right now. At the same time, it often appears that those who talk the most about relieving suffering now talk the least about heaven when we die" (45).
Rob is pretty insistent on making the point that heaven is not some place far away, a place disconnected from anything we know or experience now, but rather that heaven on earth (both now and in the future) is the point of Jesus' life and teaching.
As if to make this point even stronger, Rob writes "it is very common to hear talk about heaven framed in terms of who “gets in” or how to “get in.” What we find Jesus teaching, over and over and over again, is that he’s interested in our hearts being transformed, so that we can actually handle heaven. To paint heaven as bliss, peace, and endless joy is nice, but it raises the question: how many of us could handle it as we are today" (50)? This makes me want to have my heart transformed so that I can handle heaven. This is about far more than just going to heaven. This is about understanding heaven. How can we want to go somewhere we can't understand? Now, to be fair, traditional teaching, and the Bible too, do suggest that "no eye has seen and no ear has heard the glory that God has prepared for us." Yet, Rob seems to think that this refers to the fact that we don't experience everything God has for us to experience NOW. That if we simply lived the way God wants us to live now, we would be able to see and hear and understand (at least in part) the glory that God has planned for us in the age to come.
It also makes me realize why so many people think heaven will be boring…because they can't wrap their heads around a concept of heaven that isn't harps and clouds and endless choirs - which does sound really boring.
This is as great quote from Rob. "Eternal life is less about a kind of time that starts when we die, and more about a quality and vitality of life lived now in connection to God. Eternal life doesn’t start when we die: it starts now. It’s not about a life that begins at death; it’s about experiencing the kind of life now that can endure and survive even death" (59). I think this is the kind of stuff that makes conservatives and traditionalists (and republicans) cringe because it sounds like some sort of new-age hippy love fest where we love the planet so much we end up making it a communist utopia and then (in their thinking) we don’t need a traditional type of heaven. I don't think this is what Rob is implying at all. I think Rob is simply trying to open our minds to a bigger (and better) understanding of all the limitless possibilities that heaven can entail. This isn't a traditional heaven - it's a bigger one.
This is how Rob ends this chapter. "How would I summarize all that Jesus teaches about heaven? There’s a heaven now, somewhere else. There’s a heaven here, sometime else. And then there’s Jesus’ invitation to heaven here and now, in this moment, in this place" (62).
Not at all heretical – certainly nothing to be afraid of or to make people go on talk shows and denounce Rob as a heretic (ala Franklin Graham). At the end of this chapter, Rob simply challenges traditional views of heaven with a viewpoint that is both Biblical and progressive - exactly what Jesus was in his day - Biblical and progressive.
Tomorrow I start Rob's chapter on hell. In the mean time, I'm going to spend some time meditating on a heaven that defies all my earthly expectations, and yet, at the same time, embraces and expands on them and turns them into a perfect reality that can begin today. Experiencing a taste of heaven on earth today sounds good to me.

Rob Bell "Love Wins" Chapter 1

Thanks Rob, for asking questions that make me think. The questions he asks in the first chapter, although they revolve around the idea of who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, go deeper, into the nature of God, the idea of predestination, and the fundamentals of salvation. Ultimately, although Rob never asks this question, I think Rob is questioning the need for traditional concepts of missions and ultimately, the need for the church at all, at least in terms of the church's role in salvation.
Is there any "hope" for those who die without a personal relationship with Jesus? Rob suggests that the idea of a "personal relationship with Jesus" isn't Biblical, that this idea is not mentioned anywhere in the Bible (10). My question to Rob is this: maybe the actual terminology isn't in the Bible, but what about "come unto me all you who labour and I'll give you rest," isn't that a personal relationship? What about "deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow me," isn't that a personal relationship? Throughout the New Testament, Jesus (and the other authors) talk about people being in some sort of intimate relationship with Jesus. Apparently some sort of intimate (personal) relationship with Jesus figures into a person's spiritual journey. But Rob is right, the Bible doesn't actually say that salvation is based on a personal relationship with Jesus. So what is salvation based upon? How does a person "get out of hell" and "get into heaven?"
Rob asks "what if the missionary has a flat tire" (9)? If I don't get the chance to tell someone about Jesus because of a flat tire, and they die, do they go to hell? Am I responsible for someone elses salvation? If so, where does God/Jesus fit into this equation? Would God send someone to hell just because I got a flat tire? Great question. Disturbing question.
Is salvation based on saying the sinner's prayer? What about the guy who said it once but no longer believe it or certainly doesn't live a life in accordance with Jesus' ideals? What about a guy like Ghandi who lived his whole life to bring about peace and reconcilliation but never said the sinner's prayer? Is Ghandi in hell and the other guy, who no longer believes,in heaven (6)? I'd like to believe that I'll see Ghandi in heaven. But if I am going to see Ghandi in heaven then something in my evangelical understanding of how salvation and grace work needs to change. Or, maybe I just need to get used to the fact that I won't see Ghandi in heaven. That concept just doesn't sit well with me...
Do we just need to believe in Jesus to be saved? The Bible says demons believe in Jesus. So is salvation more than just belief (18)? Maybe heaven and hell are about something more than, or different from, simply believing in Jesus. What that might be, at least to my mind, I can't imagine. But I am open to a larger understanding of God and grace. I realize God is a lot smarter and a lot bigger than me or Rob Bell.
Rob's final idea in this chapter makes me want to read more. He writes "This book isn’t just a book of questions. It is a book of responses to these questions" (19).
Notice he doesn’t say answers…just responses…I like that. This book is making me think. It is making me ask questions I haven't ever asked publically before. I know I have wrestled privately with some of these questions and I'm glad Rob had the courage to put them on paper and get them out there. I don't have answers yet, and perhaps after reading this entire book, I still won't. Apparently, Rob may not give me any answers. He may just be stimulating a discussion. In the meantime, I'll keep reading.

Rob Bell: An Introduction to "Love Wins"

I've like Rob Bell ever since I heard him teach "Covered in the Dust of the Rabbi." I didn't like his book "Velvet Elvis" and when he came to teach at our sister Church in Las Vegas, I wasn't impressed. Maybe he was sick or something. I love his Nooma videos. They inspire me. "Baggage" took my breath away for reasons only a few of you who know me could understand if you watched that particular Nooma video. My point is this. I'm not trying to blog about Rob's neweset book because I'm a groupie or because I'm a critic. I'm not Annie Graham Lotz or John Piper or a member of Rob's (former) church. I'm just trying to understand all the anger this book has stirred up amoung Christians.
The introduction to the book is really compelling. Rob suggests that the story of Jesus, or the story that Jesus came to tell, has been hijacked over the centuries by hundreds of other stories that Jesus had no interest in telling. One of these messages is the story of "hell" because it subverts the "contagious spread of Jesus' message of love, peace, forgiveness, and joy that our world desperately needs to hear" (viii). I couldn't agree more, yet what about Jesus' messages of judgment and mercy? Without the story of punishment (no matter how you define it or why it happens), there doesn't seem to be any need for forgiveness or mercy or grace.
I grew up in an organization that held "Annihilationist" views. There was no hell, only eternal death, meaning you burnt up and that was it. So, I've always struggled with the traditional Christian concept of hell for my own reasons. Yet, I don't doubt that there is a consequence for rejecting Jesus' death on the cross as the only way to find acceptance with God and thus, entry into heaven. Rob, it seems, may be suggesting that there is no consequence for rejection and no reward for acceptance because everyone gets in. I don't know that for sure yet, but it seems like he could head in that direction.
The best part of Rob's intro is his final line. "If this book, then, does nothing more than introduce you to the ancient, ongoing discussion surrounding the resurrected Jesus in all its vibrant, diverse, messy, multivoiced complexity – well, I’d be thrilled" (xi). I couldn't agree more. We all need to examine and re-examine what we believe. We all need to be open to learning new things or at least having a discussion about new things. So, welcome to the discussion.

Creative Planning Team

Creativity is tricky. Who can say when and where creativity will strike? If it strikes once, will it strike again and will the same catalyst create a second creative outburst? The muse is a terrible and beautiful master. I write songs, blogs, short stories, academic articles, i am currently working on my first novel, and I know the value of the muse; of that creative burst that begins you on the journey of creativity. I also know the long arduous process of taking an idea from inspiration to completion, when the muse has left you and you are left to craft all that creativity into something you can present to the world.
In my world creativity is often, usually, a solitary endevour. Many of my friends co-write songs, and I have experienced co-writing on several occasions with my former band mates in my Las Vegas based band "Hooked", but in general, my creativity happens in a solitary manner.
I have learned over the years however, that in one area of my life I need creative input from many different sources. The area where I need the most collective creative input is in my full time work, where I am a Worship and Arts Pastor. Expecting all of the creativity for an entire church service, week after week, month after month, to come from one person is creative suicide.
Creative Planning Teams, creative collaborative groups of diverse people working together to plan weekends, series, and special events, need to be the foundation of what I do on a weekly basis.
Since moving to Kamloops in October of 2011 and becoming the Worship and Arts Pastor at Kamloops Alliance, I have not had a Creative Planning Team.
Now, finally, I have a team in place and we are preparing for our first meeting next week. I can't wait. I haven't been this excited in a while, and it is due to the fact that I will soon begin working collaboratively with other creative people.
If you are a creative person, find those people in your life who you can create with, and do it. I can't wait to see where our church goes from here.

twitter

So I signed up for twitter today. i think i might have signed up once before, but so long ago i can't remember my twitter account or name or anything about it. incidently i am @TDunfield. So, now I blog (occasionally), check Facebook (religiously), email (hourly), have an Android that I am tethered to, text constantly, and spend time connected to the web and connecting with others over the web on a daily basis. I'm sort of observant about who I am friends with on Facebook and currently I have only a modest group of 400 followers. I know many people who add anyone and everyone who requests them and have thousands of followers. I am not that guy. Now I find out that twitter is open source and anyone can follow me. I can't decide who follows me and who doesn't.
This makes me think about God, church and religion in general. Is God like Twitter or Facebook? What about the Church? Are the two mutually exclusive?