The Girl's First Word...

The Girl said her first word this morning at 6:30am. Clear as crystal, and right out of the blue. She stood up at her cot, desparate to get out, and said:

"Mummy."

Love, Justin.

Totally New York

This is the Boy and I and we are on the W Train coming from Astoria in Queens back into Manhattan. That’s a New York Post. A painful paper. But The Times is too big and too dense to read on subway. Trash is easier to read and easier to leave behind.

The Boy is more of a New Yorker than I am. He has spent nearly half his life here.

• He can hail and stop a cab by himself [and he is good at it].
• He pleads for Bagels.
• One of his first words was "squirrel" [and that’s not easy for an adult to say]
• He picks out the sound of a fire truck or an ambulance [at any time of day or night].
• He knows when he goes into a subway that he will not be "out-side" for quite some time.

But he doesn’t yet know that minimising hand or mouth contact with anything in the subway is a good idea. But he is learning fast.

Love, Justin.

• For points... can you tell me from the subway pic: who is that looking over my shoulder? It’s not Hitler.
• And for extra points... can you tell me where the cab is in Manhattan? [New Yorkers ought not to answer this until Wednesday. Give the Non-New Yorkers a chance.]

Jamaican Me Crazy...

Tom (the US-born Australian) and Seapea (the Korean-born Canadian) both mentioned that they had to ‘toast’ or ‘salute’ the Queen when they become citizens of their particular domains of her Majesty. But you may have noticed that Australia does not require this. Laurel certainly didn’t have to toast, salute or pledge anything to the Queen.

It would appear that Australia is being confused with:

A. Jamaica...

Of course, being in Jamaica is just like being in The Cotswolds. Here is what you say to become a subject of the Queen of Jamaica:

I, [name], do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Her Heirs and Successors according to law and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Jamaica and fulfil my duties as a citizen of Jamaica.

B. Or New Zealand...

New Zealand, as you know, is very close to England… a mere hop-skip-and-a swim across the ‘channel’. To become a Kiwi, you say this:

I [name] swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of New Zealand, Her heirs and successors according to law, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of New Zealand and fulfil my duties as a New Zealand citizen. So help me God.

C. Or Canada.

My question, that Seapea might be able to answer, is “do they say Oui to this pledge in Quebec?” [Peut il jamais être ainsi -- I don't know what that means, but it's the best I could do with Babelfish.com !]. To live in the “United Kingdom of Canada,” you must affirm this:

I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the Laws of Canada and fulfill my duties as a Canadian citizen.

The sun appears to be setting...

Love, Justin.

PS Points for the location of the pic [Tom got almost all of the points last time].

An Australian ‘Pledge' Vs an American ‘Oath'

Laurel become an Australian Citizen [dual, actually] June 30, 2005. She officially became a willing subject of her Majesty the Queen of England. Strange, isn’t it? [Let me answer that: Yes it is.]

All she had to do was sing Waltzing Matilda, drink a beer, and make this pledge **:

From this time forward, [under God], I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.

If I were ever to become a citizen of the US, I would have to take this Oath of citizenship:

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law; that I will perform non-combatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

What do you think this says about the differences in our two countries?

Be kind. [Any unpatriotic statement will be naturally deleted by either me or the American.]

Love, Justin.

** That’s not true about Waltzing Matilda, by the way.

PS Name the town for points, and the statue for extra points. For even more points, name this town's two most famous preachers…

President Moffatt of the United States of America

US President Moffatt!


No. Not me, you’ll be pleased to know.
Our daughter, or our son:

You see, at 7:46 this morning, the US topped 300,000,000 people, or so they guessed.

299, 999, 998 ... without my contribution.

I am not American. The wife is. But we have begotten two little potential taxpayers for their economy; two soldiers for their armies; two servants of their churches; two citizens of their cities...

For years, I thought that the only thing the Boy and the Girl could never become is the Commander-in-Chief and President of the United States [POTUS]. You see, they were both born in Sydney, Australia. And I’ve always been led to believe that one had to be born on US soil in order to qualify for POTUS. Australia is not US Soil. Not at last count.

But I have just found out that they may in fact eligible. Or at least I think they are.

Article 2 of the US constitution says that the qualifications for POTUS are that they have to be a “natural born citizen” of the United States. But the uncertain question is: “what is a natural born citizen”? The US Constitution online lets me know that a “natural born citizen" is a number of things. But one is this:

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totalling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

So The Boy/Girl are eligible for president; the wife is the citizen and I am definitely the alien.

That last part, I’ve pretty much always suspected.

Love, Justin.

Biblical Tourism

I don't know John. I haven't met him. And I probably will never meet him. John and his wife live and study in Atlanta... so we at least have that city in common. (My wife is from the great state of Georgia.)

But I think that John's post on reading the Old Testament texts (and especially via Ecclesiastes) is refreshing and worth reading:

(Re)Learning How to Read Scripture with Ecclesiastes

The post starts this way:

Describing the failure of modern preachers in critically engaging with the drama of the Hebrew Scriptures, Ellen Davis writes:

"Occasionally...a preacher may venture across that gulf [from the New to the Old Testament] and bring something back: a nugget, a small treasure, that is congenial with the gospel message and adds to it sparkle or depth of background."

I am convicted by this.

And also this:

We read these texts as if they were gift shops at the Vatican: browsing for a trinket, but only the one's that fit our luggage.

Worth a peak and a comment.

(John -- hope you don't mind.)

Justin.

Today’s Kosher Authors

This is a bit of fun. Please don’t take me seriously.

Have you noticed that some authors are more kosher than others? If a speaker quotes, alludes to or indicates that he or she is reading any of the following, you find a willing audience nodding and approving of whatever next thing they say. And it doesn’t matter who they are or what they believe: Quote these guys and one is considered ‘in’ and reasonable, thoughtful and a little [but not overly] academic.

This my list is in order of kosher-ness:

1. CS Lewis
2. JRR Tolkien
3. Frederick Buechner
4. Philip Yancey
5. Dietrich Bonhoeffer
6. GK Chesterton
7. Brennan Manning

Are there any others? Should anyone come off the list? And are they in the right order?

Love, Justin.

PS I quote them all, by the way [as you see in the previous posts].

Micheal Jensen is talking about YOU.

Thanks for letting me indulge with that last set of posts. Thanks for those who corresponded.

Michael Jensen and I were discussing yesterday that it’s harder to read and comment on content-based Blogs. You don't (and I don't) want to spend too much time reading, thinking and then commenting on a heavier Blog. That works for bloggers like Tim Challies and the Pyromaniacs. But for the rest of us: heavy content = less traffic.

But sometimes a Blog comes along where it’s good to read and comment - not just for its content (good), but for its outcome (a book).

So here is my commendation:

Read MPJ’s YOU Blog.
If you want to know why it’s important, Here is MPJ's plan.
And join the conversation late (don’t worry if you haven’t read the other posts).

And here is what to do:

• Comment
• Ask a question
• Make a one-liner
• Tell a story
• Make a reference to a book, movie, song, poem or whatever
• Be critical

Don't feel intimidated by MPJ’s brilliance -- it’s all smoke and mirrors, really! :) He really does want collaboration and feedback on his work.

Love, Justin.

Point 3. Jesus tenderly addresses our faithful doubts.

Reflection #3 on Mark 9:14-29
Read the introduction: HERE.
Questions, comments, helpful critiques are welcome.

I have three reflections from Mark 9:
1. Jesus enters our lives as they really are.
2. Jesus powerfully speaks to our terrors and pains.
3. Jesus tenderly addresses our faithful doubts.

3. Jesus tenderly addresses our faithful doubts.

Doubt is in vogue right now. We live in a post modern world. So interestingly, doubt has become easier than ever -- at least the expression of it. We hear of authors now saying that one of their 'strengths' is their 'capacity to doubt'. Buechner himself defends doubts as 'The ants in the pants of faith keeping faith awake and moving.' Christian leaders are now often saying the obvious truth: 'We don’t have all the answers'. Obviously! Doubt is what our society does best. And Christians want to resonate at this point.

Let me say straight up the doubt can be a horrible thing:

Os Guinness wrote:

“And underneath everything lies trust. From friendships of children to agreements among nations life depends on trust. Enjoying people is trust. Trust is the shared silence, the exchanged look, the expressive touch. Crying for help is trust, shaking hands is trust, a kiss is trust. The highest reaches of love and life depend on trust. Are there any questions more important to each of us than, ‘whom can I trust? How can I be sure’?

That is why when trust goes and doubt comes in such a shadow is cast, such a wound is opened, and such a hole is left. ... It is also why doubting God is so devastating.”

James warns against doubt. We ought not to be flippant about doubt. And we ought to know that when we entertain doubts, we are playing with fire.

So why is this Father treated with compassion? Why is his unbelief seemingly rewarded?

The Father has what I call faithful doubt. (Or even real faith in a real world).


Two things about faithful doubt:

A. Faithful doubt is paradoxically the only way that you can come to God.

What does this father do? He comes to Jesus in the first place with obvious helplessness. That’s what faith is. That’s trust. Trust coming to Jesus even in your unbelief. It's helplessness, not holiness that is the perquisite for coming to Jesus. That is good news. Faith is when you doubt yourself -- even your ability to believe. And go to Jesus anyway.

Faith is not - 'I’ve figured it all out'. 'Now I have faith in you Jesus'. 'Can I have my membership badge, now, please'? That’s not faith in God, that’s faith in yourself.

It is essential in becoming a Christian and staying a Christian that your frailty is right there next to your faith. Because then (and only then) do you depend on God.

It’s OK for me to 'light' on faith, if I come to God knowing he is 'heavy' on grace. Then, and only then, are you (paradoxically) really 'heavy' on faith.

Get that?

Its one the paradoxes of faith.

Christina Rossetti wrote a hymn -- rarely sung [we sang it at EU AnnCon at Sydney Uni] called "None other lamb". It goes:

My faith burns low, my hope burns low;
Only my heart's desire cries out in me
By the deep thunder of its want and woe,
Cries out to thee.

Lord, thou art Life, though I be dead;
Love's fire thou art, however cold I be:
Nor heav'n have I, nor place to lay my head,
Nor home, but thee.

'My faith burns low'. 'I may be dead'. 'I may be cold'. 'But my heart's desire cried out in me'. It is one of the few hymns that genuinely reflect this paradox of faithful doubt.

You see that this man has a prayer: (‘Prayer’ is the same word for ‘request’, even in old English --- ‘I pray you, come here’ is I request you come here.) He has a prayer (or a request) for Jesus: V22

“If you are able to do anything, have mercy on us and help us.”

That was all that was required. A prayer!

Why couldn’t the other disciples cast out the demon?

The answer is -- because they didn’t pray. They didn’t ask God. It's as simple as that.

V28 -- “Why couldn’t we cast the demon out?”
V29 -- “Because this kind only come out with prayer.”

The disciples were probably trying to do some sort of incantation thing?! When all they needed to do was pray. All they needed was to say: "God, help us."

In the Matthew account, Jesus said that all the disciples needed was the faith of a mustard seed. They could have done this AND moved a mountain ... all before lunch. Which -- I take it -- is a cheeky way of saying that the fact that they haven’t asked reflects that their faith is smaller than a malnourished piece of rice.

But this man apparently has the faith of a little mustard seed. And that’s all he has. And all he needed.

Because he seems to know intuitively that ‘this kind only comes out through prayer.’ That’s what he prays: “If you are able to do anything, have mercy on us and help us.”

The second thing to say about faithful doubt is this:

B. Faithful doubt always sides with faith.

Faithful doubt doesn’t side with the doubt. It sides with faith. Jesus says to the father's faithful request: V23

“'If you are able'. All things can be done for the one who believes.”

And the man says -- and again -- I think that the text is slowed up for us: Immediately -- the man -- he cries out -- the pain of this moment --

“I believe, help me my unbelief.”

I have belief, but I’m riddled with unbelief. But I’ll side with faith.

A good friend of mine says that this verse is a motto, and the man a hero. Because he believes and throws himself on Jesus in the midst of his unbelief... they are there -- belief and unbelief at the same time.' And we understand: Not on paper, but we totally get it in the heart.

He is doing what the Psalmists do -- They go to God in faith and tell him their doubts but instead of siding with the doubt, they side with faith. He is doing what the Prophets did: Men like Habakkuk who went to God to tell him their complaints. But instead of siding with the doubt, they side with faith.

Let me conclude:

• I have questions that seem unanswered, but I'll side with faith. And I will hold onto the answers I do have.
• I have objections that stump me, but I'll side with faith. I know that there smart men and women who have my same objections and still believe. I'll rely on their faith for a time, if I need to.
• I have prayers that seem unheeded, but I'll side with faith. I trust that God knows what he is doing. I side with faith.
• I can’t overcome a sin. But I trust that I am loved besides. I side with faith.
• I see so much terror in the world. And I want to give up caring. But I know that God has some cosmic answer to the question of world suffering. And in the meantime, I try to bring peace where I am. I side with faith.

'Siding with faith' is the disciples to Jesus: In John 6, when a large group of people left Jesus because his teaching was 'too hard', Jesus said to them:

So Jesus said to the Twelve, "Do you want to go away as well?" Simon Peter
answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life."

Tidy.

Here endeth the lesson. Hope you enjoyed...

Love, Justin.

Point 2. Jesus powerfully speaks to our terrors and pains.

(Pic: 'A displaced father holds his ill son at a clinic in Tawila, North Darfur'. It is a difficult picture to post. But it may help to provide some gravitas in capturing something of what the father in our story may have felt.)

Reflection #2 on Mark 9:14-29
Read the introduction: HERE.
Questions, comments, helpful critiques are welcome.

I have three reflections from Mark 9:

1. Jesus enters our lives as they really are.
2. Jesus powerfully speaks to our terrors and pains.
3. Jesus tenderly addresses our faithful doubts.


2. Jesus powerfully speaks to our terrors and pains.

Jesus comes down from the mountain and finds a crowd arguing. What are they arguing about?

(V17) Someone from the crowd speaks up. We find out that this man’s only son has been literally gripped with terror. His household has been seized by this torment for years. This man has come, in faith, to Jesus. This would have been OK... except that he couldn’t find Jesus because Jesus was being transfigured up the high mountain. And his disciples (v18) don’t seem to be much help.

V17-18 tells us about the son’s terror. He has been attacked and overpowered by an unclean spirit in such a way that his whole body was seized (V18). A spirit has taken residence since he was a boy (V21). And the unclean spirit seeks his -- and his families -- total destruction. (V22)

Let me say this: I have never seen demon possession manifested the way that they are in the Gospels. I know some who tell me that they have. I do believe this account to be completely accurate.

However, I also want to say that even though I haven’t experienced or seen the terror of this kind of demon possession, I know that demon possession in the Bible represents something bigger than demon possession in itself.

An unclean spirit represents at least two things:

First, it represents the kind of evil and pain and terror that exists in this broken world. (As with this boy, so with the world).

Second, it represents being unacceptable and untouchable. The spirit is described as ‘unclean’ (as they almost always are in the New Testament). That is, the boy is unacceptable. Untouchable. Unwanted, in that world, by both by God and by society.

So while I have not seen manifest demon possession like this, I do know -- you know -- you may know right now -- the stranglehold of pain -- suffering -- and terror in your world and the deep and painful knowledge that one is unacceptable and untouchable to God.

You may feel the stranglehold of suffering for yourself. Or like this father, you may feel it for a son or a daughter who is bearing something that you feel is too difficult for them right now. Or you may feel the weight of terror and evil in our world. I feel it whenever I read about genocide in the Darfur Region of the Sudan.

It is funny that we struggle to believe in demon possession in a world in which genocide can exist. I find that short sighted. Yes?

What does Jesus do?

Jesus speaks to the terror. He rebukes the unclean Spirit. (V25):

“Come out and never enter him again.”

Jesus is giving a 'Kingdom snapshot' here. Jesus came to deal with terror and evil and suffering. And the unclean spirit leaves the boy with convulsion. But then in V26, the text becomes all deliberate. The text slows up here.

The boy was ‘like a corpse’, so that most of them said: “He is dead.”

We are being given a glimpse, as it were, of death...

It looks bad. But Jesus (V27) then touches the untouchable, the unclean, the dead boy. And in his touch, he ‘lifts him up’ -- the original word is he ‘raised him up’. The implication is that the boy is being raised from the (apparent) dead -- and the boy had ‘the power to stand’.

Here is a glimpse of resurrection.... resurrection beyond death.

We won’t go into it now. But I think that what’s being alluded to by Mark is this: Jesus speaks to the unclean Spirit to get out. That’s Jesus’ mission: to restore a broken and terror filled world; to tell evil to ‘take a hike’.

But what will this victory look like? How will it be secured?

It will look bad for a time, but then there’ll be a lifting up: a Resurrection. Jesus is saying: It’s by death that evil is dealt with. And by the work of Resurrection we have ‘the power to stand’ free from that evil.

And we therefore need to be patient while we witness evil and terror. Christ’s death has secured evil’s departure and Christ’s Resurrection assures us of its eventual removal.But in the meantime, we choose faith.

What will that faith look like?

Tomorrow...

Love, Justin.

Point 1. Jesus enters our lives as they really are.

The picture is dawn from Mount Sinai.

For this week, I am continuing my post on my sermon for this last Sunday. Just for fun. So if you’ve joined in today, then read the text: Mark 9:14-29 [The story of the Father whose son has been gripped by terror.] And read the introduction: HERE.

I have but three reflections from Mark 9:

1. Jesus enters our lives as they really are.
2. Jesus powerfully speaks to our terrors and pains.
3. Jesus tenderly addresses our faithful doubts.

Today, I give you Reflection #1. Questions, comments, helpful critiques are welcome. [Thanks Rhea!]

1. Jesus enters our lives as they really are: Confused and complex and messy.

Look at V 14-16

What’s happening here? Jesus is entering an already existing moment. He is gate-crashing an argument. And the argument has been going on for enough time for Mark to note that a crowd has gathered. V14. ‘A great crowd’, in fact. And like many who wonder into a conversation, he says: V16 -- “What’s the argument about?” I’m up for debate. I’d like to know what’s going on.

In my research this week, I realized something that I’d not seen before: Mark places two events deliberately together: the transfiguration of Jesus and the story of the torment of this father. They are being overlapped. [Luke records that is was the next day, whereas Mark and Matthew more deliberately overlap the events.]

Here is what I think is happening: One extraordinary thing is happening up on a high mountain. And at the same time, one ordinary thing is happening at the foot of the mountain.

First, one extraordinary thing is up on a high mountain: Jesus is transfigured [in the preceding verses] on a high mountain, enveloped in a cloud, and declared with roaring approval to be God’s beloved Son. Does that sound similar to what happened up on Mt Sinai in Exodus 19?

Here is a thought about the transfiguration: You might be cynical. You may be tempted to think of Jesus as simply an historical figure that launched a thousand bumper stickers; or a pathetic figure that inspired a million bad worship songs; or worse- The figure head of the 50 million ‘militant’ evangelicals. The transfiguration will not let you keep your cynicism. In the transfiguration, we are invited to see what our senses may not tell us: that Jesus is God’s glorious Messiah. And if you met him today as he really is, you may be flattened by his glory.

One extraordinary thing is happening on the mountain.

And one very ordinary argument is happening down at the foot of the Mountain. Just like Israel at Mt Sinai, what happens on mountain tops does not always concur with life in the valleys and streets of my real life. What happens in Exodus? The people are at the foot of the mountain arguing with leaders, whining about ‘their lot in life’, and making golden calves.

You see what is happening in Mark 9? Overlapping the truth [that Jesus is Lord of Heaven and Earth] is life at the foot of the mountain [A man enduring pain and suffering, and a bunch of people fighting and arguing about it.]

And Jesus comes right into that moment and asks:

"What are you arguing about?"
“Let me in on that argument.”
“Let me into your real life.”
“What’s the debate going on in your head?
“What’s the debate going on in your communities?”
“Let me speak to it.”

2^nd Reflection tomorrow...

Love, Justin.

Sermon Introduction: “I believe, help my unbelief.”

For the next week, I shall be posting my sermon for this last sunday. Today, the introduction. Questions, comments, helpful critiques are welcome. Read the text first: Mark 9:14-29

Here goes:

--- Frederick Buechner wrote a book about preaching called: Telling the Truth: Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy and Fairytale. In it he writes about how our lives are real and complex and difficult and sometimes disturbing. And Buechner maintains that in our gospel telling, we need to know and feel and to speak to the weight of those real and complex lives.

Buechner imagines a church service thus:

“The preacher climbs the steps to the pulpit with his sermon in his hand. He hikes his black robe at the knee so he will not trip over it. His mouth is a little dry. He has cut himself shaving. He feels as if he has swallowed an anchor. If it weren’t for the honor of the thing, he would just as soon be somewhere else.

“In the front pews someone turns up a hearing aid, and a young lady slips her six year old a lifesaver and a magic marker. A college sophomore is there, home for vacation because he was dragged there, and he slumps forward with his chin in his hand. The vice-president of a bank who twice that week has seriously contemplated suicide places his hymnal in the rack. A pregnant girl feels the life stir inside her. A high-school teacher, who for twenty years has managed to keep his homosexuality a secret for the most part even from himself, creases his order of service down the center with his thumbnail.

“The preacher deals out his note cards like a riverboat gambler. The stakes have never been higher. Two minutes from now he may have lost his listeners completely. But at this minute in the silence he has them in the palm of his hand.

“Who knows what this time, out of the silence, he will tell them?”

Says Buechner: “Let him tell them the truth.”

Let him tell Gospel truth.

Today is such a passage:

In this passage, we are met in all our unique complexity and frailty. We are met by Jesus and his wonderful Gospel.

And we hear perhaps one of the most important exchanges in the Bible. An exchange that could shape the nature of your faith for years to come:

V.24: “I believe, help my unbelief.”

V 24.. Now there is a sentence that appears contradictory. It makes no sense on paper. But make total sense in the heart.

I have but three humble reflections from Mark 9:

1. Jesus enters our lives as they really are: confused and complex.
2. Jesus powerfully speaks to our terrors and pains.
3. Jesus tenderly addresses our faithful doubts.

More to come... One point per post, in fact...

Love, Justin.