after some confusion, drew is most definitely on the all-star team. a total of 4 rangers got the call. 2 on the 7 year old team and 2 on the 7-8 year old team.
again, i hear ya son. you make a daddy proud.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
let's try this again
after some confusion, drew is most definitely on the all-star team. a total of 4 rangers got the call. 2 on the 7 year old team and 2 on the 7-8 year old team.
again, i hear ya son. you make a daddy proud.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Thursday, May 22, 2008
blog-in-the-round: why Jesus?
truth is, the answer changes almost daily.
i guess the best explanation is to start at the beginning. as a kid growing up in church, belief in jesus was sort of assumed. but he was pleasant enough. the songs and stories told me he loved me and could get me to heaven, so what's not to believe in? so, if you asked me as a kid, and most of the way through being a teenager, the answer to "why Jesus?" was probably "why not?"
then i went to college. and life was getting messier, and questions were being raised and for the first time i considered the possibility that it all may be bullcrap. after all, most of the world does not believe the same things about life and God that i do. and here i was borrowing money and spending time to get a degree that gives me the chance to base my entire life on the notion that christianity is true. and i began to wonder, is it?
oddly enough, it was historical philosophical arguments that started the road back. specifically, the cosmological argument. (warning: nerd alert) it basically says that there has to be an uncreated creator. it just doesn't make sense for not to be something that exists that was not created. sort of a starting point for all of life to begin with. that something, of course, could be called God. but even then, why Jesus?
on a good day, i would tell you about how i see Jesus in nature or music or my kids or my friends or the love of my wife. what scripture tells me about Jesus leads me to believe that in all good things, there is a bit of the Divine. like in experiencing music or beauty or good food, we are somehow experiencing God. and i like that idea. i like the notion that one could experience at least something of God in the good things of life. that at least gives us all a starting point.
i could also tell you about how i believe that Jesus and his way of life just has to be true because it is so amazing. the idea that we can change the world through love and hope and kindness and generosity and goodness rings very true to me. we have definitely not done any good by bombing the heck out of each other. so Jesus' message just seems like the best way to live.
other days, however, i think i would struggle to believe. admittedly, a lot of the time this corresponds directly with my circumstances. bad day equals hard to believe in God. (yeah, i know its immature, but what you gonna do?) other times, it just seems so intellectually unlikely. how could there be a God, much less a really awesome God who loves me so much he would die for me? such an idea is either too good to not be true, or it is just ridiculous. and i usually oscillate between the two.
and on those days, i guess i just try to push through and commit myself to believe and follow even when i don't feel like it. so far, i have not heard a definitive voice or seen a sign that tells me that it is all real, so i only have the hunches to go on. some days this is pretty easy, but others it is more of a struggle. so i just try to stay true to what i have committed to and follow anyway. it is not very romantic, and it won't sell osteen books, but it does feel like faith.
"lord, i believe. help my unbelief!"
i guess the best explanation is to start at the beginning. as a kid growing up in church, belief in jesus was sort of assumed. but he was pleasant enough. the songs and stories told me he loved me and could get me to heaven, so what's not to believe in? so, if you asked me as a kid, and most of the way through being a teenager, the answer to "why Jesus?" was probably "why not?"
then i went to college. and life was getting messier, and questions were being raised and for the first time i considered the possibility that it all may be bullcrap. after all, most of the world does not believe the same things about life and God that i do. and here i was borrowing money and spending time to get a degree that gives me the chance to base my entire life on the notion that christianity is true. and i began to wonder, is it?
oddly enough, it was historical philosophical arguments that started the road back. specifically, the cosmological argument. (warning: nerd alert) it basically says that there has to be an uncreated creator. it just doesn't make sense for not to be something that exists that was not created. sort of a starting point for all of life to begin with. that something, of course, could be called God. but even then, why Jesus?
on a good day, i would tell you about how i see Jesus in nature or music or my kids or my friends or the love of my wife. what scripture tells me about Jesus leads me to believe that in all good things, there is a bit of the Divine. like in experiencing music or beauty or good food, we are somehow experiencing God. and i like that idea. i like the notion that one could experience at least something of God in the good things of life. that at least gives us all a starting point.
i could also tell you about how i believe that Jesus and his way of life just has to be true because it is so amazing. the idea that we can change the world through love and hope and kindness and generosity and goodness rings very true to me. we have definitely not done any good by bombing the heck out of each other. so Jesus' message just seems like the best way to live.
other days, however, i think i would struggle to believe. admittedly, a lot of the time this corresponds directly with my circumstances. bad day equals hard to believe in God. (yeah, i know its immature, but what you gonna do?) other times, it just seems so intellectually unlikely. how could there be a God, much less a really awesome God who loves me so much he would die for me? such an idea is either too good to not be true, or it is just ridiculous. and i usually oscillate between the two.
and on those days, i guess i just try to push through and commit myself to believe and follow even when i don't feel like it. so far, i have not heard a definitive voice or seen a sign that tells me that it is all real, so i only have the hunches to go on. some days this is pretty easy, but others it is more of a struggle. so i just try to stay true to what i have committed to and follow anyway. it is not very romantic, and it won't sell osteen books, but it does feel like faith.
"lord, i believe. help my unbelief!"
blog-in-the-round: where will i be in 20 years
edited because i don't want to look like a lady robot in the future
what i will look like:
what april wil look like:
what i will drive:
where i will live:
this is the brave new world to which we are headed.
authors note: if republicans stay in charge and we continue to fawn over paris hilton and britney spears, then i am sure the world will be neither new nor brave. if this is the way we go, the future i see involves more reality TV and major advancements being made only in the field of porn distribution. please choose wisely.
what i will look like:
what april wil look like:
what i will drive:
where i will live:
this is the brave new world to which we are headed.
authors note: if republicans stay in charge and we continue to fawn over paris hilton and britney spears, then i am sure the world will be neither new nor brave. if this is the way we go, the future i see involves more reality TV and major advancements being made only in the field of porn distribution. please choose wisely.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Saturday, May 10, 2008
the medium is the message
for the past few days, a question has been floated around among sports talk people about whether sports blogging is good for sports, or if it is shady and bad journalism. that it is being talked about almost misses the point, because good or bad, it is here to stay. and i think that it is a good thing. the detractors, incidentally, have been old-guard journalists (at networks and major papers) and older sports figures (like wimp sanderson). in other words, those who are either resistant to change by their nature and those who have the most to lose. it has certainly decentralized the power of sports journalism, as deadspin and other blogs get more and more hits. no longer is espn, which i check online and watch daily, the only game in town.
and i think it says something about the changes happening all over the place. in journalism and politics and religion. for the past however many years, the power, which was in the information, has resided in the hands of a few. these hands were, incidentally, the hands of experts. with the advent of blogs, the power has become decentralized, and now resides in the hands of everyone with wifi and an opinion. and i like it. i think it is freeing and exciting and dangerous. consider that most of my sports reading is in the form of blogs. and much of my news comes from the Daily Show.
i think it started with a general distrust of authority. too many times, those who were the experts used their knowledge or influence to oppress or for selfish gain. and so the commoners have risen up and are taking knowledge from the seat of power.
i think this is important because right now i am struggling with what it means to faithfully follow jesus in my context. and more and more, i get the feeling that the future of theology, and therefore orthodoxy and orthopraxy, will be articulated best in blogs and discussions and conversations outside of churches in a traditional sense. the days of seminary trained experts being the religious professionals and the sole voice is going, if not already gone. and i am excited about the possiblilities, but also unsure how it will play out for me, when i am still firmly in the context of a traditional church.
or am i wrong? is the church just in a lull, and soon will rebound? i doubt it, but there is a lot of money and power in churches, and i have a feeling they will not go quietly into the night. so i guess the question becomes, is it possible to adapt?
and i think it says something about the changes happening all over the place. in journalism and politics and religion. for the past however many years, the power, which was in the information, has resided in the hands of a few. these hands were, incidentally, the hands of experts. with the advent of blogs, the power has become decentralized, and now resides in the hands of everyone with wifi and an opinion. and i like it. i think it is freeing and exciting and dangerous. consider that most of my sports reading is in the form of blogs. and much of my news comes from the Daily Show.
i think it started with a general distrust of authority. too many times, those who were the experts used their knowledge or influence to oppress or for selfish gain. and so the commoners have risen up and are taking knowledge from the seat of power.
i think this is important because right now i am struggling with what it means to faithfully follow jesus in my context. and more and more, i get the feeling that the future of theology, and therefore orthodoxy and orthopraxy, will be articulated best in blogs and discussions and conversations outside of churches in a traditional sense. the days of seminary trained experts being the religious professionals and the sole voice is going, if not already gone. and i am excited about the possiblilities, but also unsure how it will play out for me, when i am still firmly in the context of a traditional church.
or am i wrong? is the church just in a lull, and soon will rebound? i doubt it, but there is a lot of money and power in churches, and i have a feeling they will not go quietly into the night. so i guess the question becomes, is it possible to adapt?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
