There are times in life where I simply have nothing to say. While I generally can't sleep because I have so many thoughts and ideas racing around my cranium, recently I have been sleeping like a baby. I love it! But that means I have nothing to say to the world through this little blog here.
So why am I writing this?
For two reasons. First, and selfishly, I committed to blogging regularly. I did this because I wanted to keep the "writing muscle" working, and because I wanted to strengthen my ability to honor my commitments. I am writing today to say that I have nothing to say for the sake of saying it.
Second, I value transparency and honesty. I try to curate an image of boundless ideation and constant thought. In reality, I am not that way; I have days and even weeks where not a single original or interesting thought crosses my mind. I sit like a blank canvas waiting for something I read or see to splatter some color onto the monochrome of my synapses. Sometimes it happens, and sometimes it doesn't. This is one of those doesn't times.
But is saying nothing really nothing?
Is it not that my nothing might be a something to someone who needs to hear that it is OK to take a break? I push hard. I am a stay at home dad and a full time writer. I've been given an amazing opportunity to say the things I've long wanted to by a gracious and self sacrificing wife, and I am determined to make the most of it.
But being diligent does not mean being consumed by your work. When I am in that headspace my relationship with my family suffers. Ford does not get the attention he needs and Lesley does not get the attention she deserves. As much as it pains me to be mentally sedentary for a minute, it just might be good for me.
And it might be good for you, too.
Perhaps you need to take a minute and refresh. Maybe that minute involves reconnecting with God. Maybe it involves reconnecting with people. Maybe it means reconnecting with yourself. Either way, I encourage you to take a minute today to rest.
NATHAN MYRICK
Biblical Texts We Ignore
I got to thinking the other night about how every Christian position seems to orient itself towards certain interpretations of certain biblical passages while ignoring others. It seems that any doctrinal statement is at the expense of a comprehensive reading of the bible. Why is this?
"Numbers. Nothing good here; just a bunch of numbers..."- Lesley (Tongue planted firmly in cheek).
I posed the thought to my wife over dinner, and that was her response. She then agreed with me that each side of the conservaliberal divide emphasizes certain passages and ignores the ones the other side emphasizes.
What does this tell us?
It tells us that neither side is interested in being biblical. Instead, they are interested in being right. This is why I am not a liberal or a conservative. I've no interest in being right, nor in trying to make others think that I am so. I'm interested in being faithful.
It also tells us that our socio/political positions are woefully insufficient and catastrophically inadequate to partner with the God of the bible. If your "biblical" theology ignores part of the bible your "biblical" theology is sentimental bullshit. You can disagree about those parts that are troubling, but you can't ignore them and call yourself "biblical."
OR
The bible is contradictory. This is a statement of fact. How many times did David meet Saul? How many animals got on Noah's ark?
There are three options available in the wake of this revelation: You can ignore the parts of the bible that you don't like; you can throw out the bible altogether as nonsensical piety; or you can adjust your perspective of what the bible is saying until you can hold all of it together in first tension and finally a dissonant harmony.
What texts do you ignore?
"Numbers. Nothing good here; just a bunch of numbers..."- Lesley (Tongue planted firmly in cheek).
I posed the thought to my wife over dinner, and that was her response. She then agreed with me that each side of the conservaliberal divide emphasizes certain passages and ignores the ones the other side emphasizes.
What does this tell us?
It tells us that neither side is interested in being biblical. Instead, they are interested in being right. This is why I am not a liberal or a conservative. I've no interest in being right, nor in trying to make others think that I am so. I'm interested in being faithful.
It also tells us that our socio/political positions are woefully insufficient and catastrophically inadequate to partner with the God of the bible. If your "biblical" theology ignores part of the bible your "biblical" theology is sentimental bullshit. You can disagree about those parts that are troubling, but you can't ignore them and call yourself "biblical."
OR
The bible is contradictory. This is a statement of fact. How many times did David meet Saul? How many animals got on Noah's ark?
There are three options available in the wake of this revelation: You can ignore the parts of the bible that you don't like; you can throw out the bible altogether as nonsensical piety; or you can adjust your perspective of what the bible is saying until you can hold all of it together in first tension and finally a dissonant harmony.
What texts do you ignore?
Bleed.
This has been a summer where every ounce of optimism I had about being a Christian was vaporized like so much water in the California drought of public opinion. This has been a summer like so many others that will stand as the harbinger of things to come. From ISIS to Ukraine to Ferguson to Immigration to Wall Street the world has changed, and not for the better. But that's not what has sapped my hope for Christianity. That sapping is the result of the response of so many well-meaning (and that's my best hope for them) Christians to the events that I've just mentioned.
My God, what a world You love.
Christians. We are anything but. "The world will know you by your love" - Is that how you're known? That's not how I know you. I know you by your vitriol for anything you disagree with. I know you by your justification of systemic sin if it benefits you. I know you for your anger about what others do to water down the gospel, conform to the media's agenda, or take resources from the mouth of your children and give it to those less deserving.
I know you because I am you.
And I'm sick of it. I'm sick of the fact that I am a part of it, and that everything I do or say is a part of the problem. We are the problem. Christian! You are the problem! Sin is not the problem, you are sin to those you are trying to save! If you tell someone to repent of their sin while to them you represent everything evil they will not listen. And it is on you if they fail to, because the gospel you've presented is a sham.
Our gospel is a sham because it is not good news.
I've nothing hopeful to offer in conclusion. I've no good thing to say that will soothe the wound my words have opened, because the wound should not be soothed.
Bleed.
Bleed with those whom your words have severed. Let the dust drink up your blood like the blood of your brother. Suffer the rebuke that strikes me even as it strikes you. Know that I am you. I need to change. I don't know how, and I don't imagine grace will fix it without sacrifice.
God, show us how to be like Jesus in the power of your Spirit. Show us how to be for others in love.
My God, what a world You love.
Christians. We are anything but. "The world will know you by your love" - Is that how you're known? That's not how I know you. I know you by your vitriol for anything you disagree with. I know you by your justification of systemic sin if it benefits you. I know you for your anger about what others do to water down the gospel, conform to the media's agenda, or take resources from the mouth of your children and give it to those less deserving.
I know you because I am you.
And I'm sick of it. I'm sick of the fact that I am a part of it, and that everything I do or say is a part of the problem. We are the problem. Christian! You are the problem! Sin is not the problem, you are sin to those you are trying to save! If you tell someone to repent of their sin while to them you represent everything evil they will not listen. And it is on you if they fail to, because the gospel you've presented is a sham.
Our gospel is a sham because it is not good news.
I've nothing hopeful to offer in conclusion. I've no good thing to say that will soothe the wound my words have opened, because the wound should not be soothed.
Bleed.
Bleed with those whom your words have severed. Let the dust drink up your blood like the blood of your brother. Suffer the rebuke that strikes me even as it strikes you. Know that I am you. I need to change. I don't know how, and I don't imagine grace will fix it without sacrifice.
God, show us how to be like Jesus in the power of your Spirit. Show us how to be for others in love.
A New Language
Do you know anyone who is a racist? Or, better yet, do you know anyone who would claim to be a racist? Do you know anyone who would not object heartily if he were called a racist and refuse to accept that he was such?
A word devoid of meaning
It seems to me that the word "racist" and the meaning it conveys has become so much a cultural caricature that the word has lost currency. No one is a racist, because the caricature of racism is so unbelievable that it does not resonate with anyone.
Caricature is critique that has lost its power
When a critique becomes a caricature it ceases to wield power to convict. This is what has happened with the term racism. It has no power. Yet the prejudices that surround the concept of racism persist, and perhaps are even expanding. But what are we to call this ever expanding milieu of prejudice? How do we communicate with those who are such (and with ourselves if it be found that we are as well) that they are it without causing them to close their ears to our critique by the use of the word "racism/t?"
Culturism
We need a new word. I propose this: Culturism. Whereas racism assumes an essential biology, culturism reveals that the source of our prejudice is the culture--the way of speaking and acting that is meaningful--is the real source of our ire. When we are culturists when we exhibit behavior and attitudes that denigrate the normative behavior of another and find in that behavior something threatening or offensive.
The depth of prejudice
Additionally, culturism reveals that prejudice is not necessarily defined by skin color and place of birth, but is actually much less selective than that. Culturism is prejudice of action, behavior, and meaning, and this is what we actually do. So the next time you catch yourself thinking that some other group is stupid or bad, realize that what you are thinking is racist-but call it culturist so that you can still be convicted of your prejudice.
We're not racists--we're culturists.
A word devoid of meaning
It seems to me that the word "racist" and the meaning it conveys has become so much a cultural caricature that the word has lost currency. No one is a racist, because the caricature of racism is so unbelievable that it does not resonate with anyone.
Caricature is critique that has lost its power
When a critique becomes a caricature it ceases to wield power to convict. This is what has happened with the term racism. It has no power. Yet the prejudices that surround the concept of racism persist, and perhaps are even expanding. But what are we to call this ever expanding milieu of prejudice? How do we communicate with those who are such (and with ourselves if it be found that we are as well) that they are it without causing them to close their ears to our critique by the use of the word "racism/t?"
Culturism
We need a new word. I propose this: Culturism. Whereas racism assumes an essential biology, culturism reveals that the source of our prejudice is the culture--the way of speaking and acting that is meaningful--is the real source of our ire. When we are culturists when we exhibit behavior and attitudes that denigrate the normative behavior of another and find in that behavior something threatening or offensive.
The depth of prejudice
Additionally, culturism reveals that prejudice is not necessarily defined by skin color and place of birth, but is actually much less selective than that. Culturism is prejudice of action, behavior, and meaning, and this is what we actually do. So the next time you catch yourself thinking that some other group is stupid or bad, realize that what you are thinking is racist-but call it culturist so that you can still be convicted of your prejudice.
We're not racists--we're culturists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)