Mondays with Michael Spencer: The Boat in the Backyard

Aluminum Boat/Lake Cordova. Photo by Bill Barber

From CM: This is one story I always think about around Father’s Day, and one of Michael’s most personal and very best posts.

• • •

When I was twelve years old, my father bought a small aluminum boat, just enough for two people to use for fishing in the local lakes. He put it in our backyard. It had a tiny motor that sat in our shed. He bought the boat so we could go fishing together, father and son. It was his dream, a father’s dream that I can now relate to as I share ball games and movies with my own son.

The boat never took us fishing. In fact, it never got in the water. It remains there in the back yard, photographed by my memory, waiting for a fishing trip that would never happen. In my tendency to personify objects in my world, I picture that boat as eager and expectant, then confused, and eventually depressed. Its purpose- its joy?- was not to be fulfilled.

At age twelve, I was about as interested in my father’s dream of fishing together as the fish were in getting hooked, cleaned and fried. I resisted my father’s overtures with a quiet, but persistent force. I was always busy. There was always something else to do. I wasn’t interested in being outside. My friends wanted me to play. Mostly, I wasn’t interested because my dad was interested, and I was at war with my dad. Not a physical battle, but a back and forth emotional war that had been going on as long as I could remember, and now that my dad wanted something from me, I was in a position to frustrate him. I felt the power, and I used it to disappoint his dream.

My father had never been like other fathers I knew. By the time I was a teenager, he was unable to work, but before that he’d done all sorts of things: worked as a flunky at car lots, made tools at a tool and die company, made change at a car wash, ran errands at local automobile race tracks, worked in the oil fields, rented boats at a lake, janitored. While he was unable to work, he was able to get out and do things he liked to do: fish, hunt squirrels, pick up pecans, hunt arrowheads, go to ball games and races.

My father was a collection of contradictions and mysteries. He was deeply and genuinely religious, but the entire time I knew my dad, I can never remember him in church more than a handful of times. He was divorced (I never knew why), and his chosen church- the Southern Baptists- ranked divorce just above treason and murder on the sin scale, so it was easy to not be present. He loved the Bible, and despised most church people as hypocrites.

He was from the woods and mountains of eastern Kentucky, but all my life we lived in cities, and he hated the city. We lived in Kentucky, and he wanted to live in Wisconsin. He was sociable and funny, the life of any gathering of family or friends, but he feared and loathed almost any other kind of gathering. He loved baseball, but wouldn’t let me join Little League. He had an eighth grade education, and was determined I would graduate from college. He wanted me to be a dentist, and never once took me to one.

He was afraid of everything. The weather terrified him to the point of hysteria. Government paperwork terrorized him. Travel was so frightening to him that I never went on a school trip if he had any say in it. Fear dominated my father’s life like no one I’ve ever met, then or now. As real as it was in my childhood experiences with dad, I couldn’t help but sense it hadn’t always been this way. I knew enough about his life to know he’d once been as wild and fearless as other boys, but somewhere along the way, something else entered the picture, changing my father from a man like other men into someone assualted, subdued and captured.

I would always compare my dad to other fathers or to my uncles, and something wasn’t right. He was older than anyone else’s dad. They ran businesses, took their boys to Little League, built tree houses and worked at factories. I understood my friend’s dads. I understood the men at church. I didn’t understand my father. He was unlike them all, different, unpredictable, like he was broken far under the surface.

It made me angry that my father was like this. Sometimes I was embarrassed. Sometimes I was humiliated. Mostly, I was just ticked off, and thought about running away, or at least spending all my time hiding somewhere he couldn’t find me. Over the years, I know I was ashamed that dad was my father, and I acted it out to him and to others. Being asked about my father by anyone else was an excuse to lie or change the subject.

Dad wasn’t without good qualities. He was very funny, warm and sociable to his friends and neighbors. He loved those who were close to him. He loved his grown children, and their children. He was broken-hearted he saw them so seldom. He had a generous and encouraging side, but it seemed to never appear for long before vanishing under the other, darker side. My father knew trees like a botanist. He was sober and dependable as a friend and a helper. He was a great partner for watching classic tv shows. He could make people feel at ease, and he was very smart. I’m convinced he knew a million dirty jokes. Though he wasn’t much of a reader, he could sing, calculate and “cypher.” He could teach squirrels to climb up his pants and eat out of his pocket.

Once dad told me about all the books he read as a young man. Zane Grey. Tarzan. There wasn’t a book in the house now. He helped start a church in Wisconsin. He worked in factories and on airplane engines. At one time, he was a skilled tool maker making great money. What had happened? How did that normal man disappear, and this person take his place?

When I was thirteen, I came home from school and was sitting on the front porch, waiting for dad to return home and let me in. He drove an old, green, 1954 Chevrolet on his daily outings. Before much time had passed, I saw the old car come up the road. But then a funny thing happened. The car drove right past the house, and dad never looked at me. Not a wave, not a glance. He drove on to the end of the block, and turned right. Heading toward the hospital.

The boat in the backyard didn’t know it at the time, but its fate was sealed.

Health problems were always part of dad’s life. He complained of dizziness and chest pains to the point I wearied of what I thought, stupidly, was just whining for attention. I, of course, was never privy to just what was going on, and I wonder how much he understood his own problems. Now our family was going to become dominated by health concerns, hospitalizations, medical bills and medications. Dad was having the first of two heart attacks that would render him helpless against the onslaught of depression.

I’ve often wondered how dad’s heart problems would have been treated today. It was the late sixties, and dad stayed in the hospital for a couple of weeks. There was no surgery, as one might expect today. No miracle drugs. I would visit him in ICU, and he was glad to see me, of course. I was afraid he might die, and felt guilty that I’d wished that many, many times. He came home, and soon was sitting in a chair in the front room. He had survived a major heart attack. We were all happy. Right?

Dad grew stronger, but something bigger than the heart attack took over. Something worse than all his previous helath problems. He wouldn’t leave the house. He wouldn’t leave the chair. He sat in the chair with his hand over his face. He wept. Mom would plead with him, but to no avail. It didn’t stop. It wasn’t a bad day. It was like a living grief, a stuck record, an endless punishment. It lasted for weeks, months and then, years. Depression overwhelmed my father.

I didn’t understand. And no one could explain what was happening in a way a teenage boy could understand, though they tried, I’m sure.

Soon my dad’s oldest son, a doctor, came down to try and help. It was the first time I heard the word “depression.” I’d heard my parents always talk about “nervous breakdowns,” which I couldn’t find in any science book. But I had no idea what “depression” meant, other than the fact that dad was depressed, and it was clearly awful. I’d never seen or heard of depression. No one else had a depressed parent. Why did I?

At some point, dad went to the hospital. The psych ward in Louisville General. (He may have gone several times. I’m unsure.) Dad’s absence was always a good thing. Mom would take me out to restaurants, something dad wouldn’t ever do. We would be happy, and feel guilty about it. There was no dark, mysterious “depression” controlling our family. I didn’t have to keep my friends out of the house. Still, I didn’t understand. I did hope my dad would come back better. Doctors and hospitals made people better. I didn’t understand how elusive an opponent depression can be, resisting and defeating every effort to cure it.

I would see the boat in the backyard every day, and I began to feel badly about how I had responded to my dad’s attempts to be a regular father and son. I mowed around it, and wished it could go in the water, and that dad could teach me to use the motor. A day at the lake with my father really would be a nice way to spend some time after all.

Dad returned from the hospital, and while things may have gotten better, it wasn’t for long. Dad was still depressed. His thoughts, feelings and behaviors were the same. He talked about his stay in the hospital in hellish terms. He looked terrorized by his stay. I still remember his descriptions of the other patients. Apparently, in the days before today’s cushy psychiatric facilities, my father was part of a ward of people we would call “insane.” He received electric shock treatments. I’ve learned far too much about those. I hope they helped, because I’m afraid to think what they did if they didn’t.

Now we entered into years that were almost unbearably bad most of the time. Dad would be depressed, or he would be angry or just lost. He projected his anger out at everyone: his doctor, his children, his family, God, city people, Republicans, the neighbors. There was never any predicting what direction my father’s depression would go, only that we would certainly be the recepients of his anger.

Because I was naively analytic and stupidly verbal as a young man, I tried to convince my father everything was his fault, and could be easily fixed. It didn’t help that I became a professing Christian at age 15, and became even more aware that my father was not in church, but was sitting home cursing out the world. We argued constantly, over everything that teens and parents argue about, and then about a hundred things that were uniquely issues dad and I cooked up to fight over. Poor mom. I cannot describe the vehemence of these arguments. Surely I pushed dad to the brink of more heart problems many times, but I couldn’t see it at the time. Mom would beg us to stop. We would just get tired and quit.

I was bitterly angry that my father had ruined his part in my life and had turned our home into a horror story. First, by just being old and contrary. Then by refusing to let me be a normal kid. Then by falling apart and becoming a depressed invalid.

And then, there was one break in the darkness. I began preaching at age sixteen. Even as a young man, I remember coming home and telling dad I was “called” to be a preacher. He was moved. I couldn’t appreciate then how much he had prayed for me, and how he lived hoping my life would be useful to God in ways his had never been. All I knew was there was finally some tenderness between us. Some definable love and forgiveness.
A gentleness began to enter our lives as I started to realize my father was a sick person. He’d said this many, many times, and I didn’t accept it, because it was too complicated and I was too afraid of something that couldn’t be fixed as easily as a flat tire. But as I got older, it made more and more sense. I started to notice my father in new ways, and to listen to him more closely. I could see that my father didn’t want to be this way. He was covered in a darkness that clung to him like a wet blanket. He fought against it, but couldn’t toss it away. It had, inexplicably, become part of him. He would have to live with it.The fighting did not stop. My understanding of depression did not increase. But Dad, slowly, began to go out again, drinking coffee with other men. On a few occasions, dad even came to hear me preach. In all my life, I believe my father heard me preach five times. Once he drove me to a small church where I was supplying, and on the way back, gently tried to tell me my sermon wasn’t very good, which I suspected, but didn’t want to acknowledge. He began to show me kindness, and by God’s grace alone, I started to receive it.

I had to live with it as well. I had to accept who my father was, and how depression had made him, and me, what we were. In my Christian journey, I was frequently confronted with my duty and need to forgive others as God had forgiven me. I never contemplated this truth without thinking of my father, and how I had denied him forgiveness for this thing that had taken so much of our family’s joy away. I needed to forgive him, because he wasn’t responsible for depression. I needed to forgive the depression more than my father. I needed to forgive myself for how I had reacted to this unwelcome visitor.

It’s funny how God works. I took a job at a local grocery store, and how I spent the money I earned became a major war zone with dad. My first paycheck turned into new clothes, and dad- who had lived through the Great Depression- was outraged that I hadn’t put all the money in the bank or paid for the family groceries. But later, I spent a good bit of my paycheck on a citizen’s band radio for my 65 Chevy. I cannot describe my father’s reaction, but it was explosive.

So it is divinely ironic that within a few weeks, my father began buying CB radios. He was fascinated by the hobby. Soon we had a base station in the house, radios in all the cars and were joining CB clubs in the area. My father loved the ability of radio users to make small talk with one another anonymously. What medications, hospitals and therapy couldn’t do, CB radio did. My father came out of his depression by talking on the CB radio. My father became “Two Bits,” and Two Bits wasn’t depressed.

Dad and I loved this hobby. I could talk to him from wherever I was, and it was actually an honor to be the son of the now famous “Two Bits.” As my interest in the hobby waned, dad’s interest increased. In the years to come, he would buy bigger and bigger radios, making friends with people all over the area, the nation and even the world. Radio brought him a magnificent amount of joy.

Dad sold the boat. We didn’t speak of the lost dreams of years ago or the bitterness that had passed. I tried to never think of those days, but I cannot help but think of them more and more as the years go on. I want my children to know about that boat. I cannot touch it, but I can feel its presence and its loss. It is real, because the love my father had for me in that boat is real.

After I married, and became a man, dad and I became friends again. We stopped fighting and enjoyed one another. He was proud of me. He helped me, and listened to me. He loved my wife and our kids. Depression never vanished, and dad’s basic personality never changed. We accepted that this was the life we had shared. Depression had taken away more than I could ever calculate, but I was determined to not spend any more time staring into the void.

Depression is now a reality I face every day in my ministry with students. I know all about it. I have my own thoughts and theories about its origins and power. I believe in the mystery of its genetic and biochemical origins. I also believe we contribute to it by our own thoughts, choices and actions. It is complex, resisting simple treatments in some cases, surrendering to the mildest of medications in others.

We were not so fortunate. Depression invaded our lives when it was a monster of unknown origin or power. I now recognize that dad was depressed before his heart attack, but succumbed to a powerful depression in its aftermath. He did not understand depression, and the chemical miracles were not available or effective.

I believe that our world is a fallen and ruined world, not so much in nature, where the glory of God shines through, but in human beings, whose brokenness takes thousands of different forms and reveals the tragedy of the wreckage that began in Eden and continues in our lives. In this ruined world, depression is a result of sin. Sin as it wrecked our minds, chemistries and emotions. Sin as our thoughts became attracted to darkness rather than light. Sin as we cower in fear rather than trust a trustworthy God who we cannot see thorugh the darkness, and from whom we run away when we do glimpse him. I am so glad that this God doesn’t count on us to find him, but has found us all along, and never lets us go. As the scripture says, “Where shall I go from your Spirit?…even the darkness is as light to you.”

Nothing I believe about depression makes depressed persons into “sinners” on some special level. Like all of us, they are broken. Like all of us, God gives grace that we can accept or reject. Like all of us, they are loved by God and have the possibility of hope, and even healing. Like all of us, they are gathered together in the wounds of Christ, and raised in his resurrection.

I have compassion for my depressed friends. In my own struggle with depression, I’ve benefited from the lessons of my father’s life. There are moments when I have found myself in the chair, hands over my face, weeping. I’ve gotten up, and decided to live. For myself, my wife, my kids, and my father. I will not go into the same night if I can help it.

I believe that fathers are put in this world to write life, goodness and wisdom into the hearts of their children. The best fathers have written boldly, deeply and legibly; they have written lessons that last a lifetime. Other fathers write painful or erring lessons, putting into their children not a path to love and joy, but a downhill slide to emptiness and desperation.

My father left many empty places in my life where he should have written his own unique imprint and example. I am acutely aware of these empty, fatherless places, and the legacy I have inherited because of them. It was my father’s depression, and his fearful, unpredictable actions and inactions, that left me with an abiding sense that I do not belong or deserve to belong in the society of normal, happy people. It was that depression that left me doubting my masculinity, and afraid to do a hundred things that boys and men ought to do to know who they really are in the world. Today, when you see me helping to coach our school baseball team, make no mistake about it: I am out there making up for those days my dad wouldn’t take me to join Little League.

It was my father’s depression that left me with vacant places where unconditional acceptance and fatherly delight ought to be. It was his fear of death that infected my mind from the time I was small, so that every suddenly ringing phone or unexpected noise can terrify me. In the place of the imprint of the father, I have written many stupid and evil legacies of my own. In my worst moments, I see my father’s depression and darkness in myself. I was so certain that I was doomed to live in illness and depression, sin’s false promises of joy looked convincingly attractive. In my own despairing, angry and confused words, I’ve heard the echo of my father’s cries.

The imprint of an earthly father is a treasure. Thankfully, the imprint of the heavenly father is a gift of grace that comes to the fatherless and the empty. Where my father did not and could not affect my heart, because depression wouldn’t allow it, God, and his manifold gifts of love have penetrated into the empty places and brought life, love and hope. In a hundred different ways, experiences and relationships, God has been a father to me in those places that my father left vacant.

I also know what my father would have done if he had not been depressed, and what I would do if I had the opportunity to do it all again. Of course, those times are past, and realities are real. Still, it comforts me greatly to know what could been and should have been. My father was not evil, but sick. Our home was not cursed, but coping with an illness that none of us really understood. The boat may have never seen the water, but the love represented in that boat is as real as ever, and more precious with time.

I know life will hold experiences where depression will inevitably return and demand its place in my life and family. I intend to resist, but I will also be realistic. There is no outrunning our fallenness, and no ultimate healing of our brokeness until heaven. There will be depressing days and seasons, but I am determined that the lessons of my father’s life will not be wasted. I believe he is waiting for me, cheering me on in the darkest of times. He made it home, and we will as well.

In fact, I am fairly certain that heaven contains a lake, where my father is waiting for me in a small boat. And I will not miss that afternoon of fishing. I promise.

Photo by Bill Barber at Flickr. Creative Commons License

Sundays in Pentecost: Open to the Spirit (5)

Living Water (2014)

Sundays in Pentecost: Open to the Spirit (5)

We are taking the Pentecost season to post a Sunday series of excerpts and reflections from Scot McKnight’s new book, Open to the Spirit: God in Us, God with Us, God Transforming Us.

• • •

Through this experience [of his son’s cancer] I found that the Bible was not adequate. I needed God in a personal way— not as an object of my study, but as friend, guide, comforter. I needed an existential experience of the Holy One. Quite frankly, I found that the Bible was not the answer. I found the scriptures to be helpful— even authoritatively helpful— as a guide. But without feeling God, the Bible gave me little solace. In the midst of this “summer from hell,” I began to examine what had become of my faith. I found a longing to get closer to God, but found myself unable to do so through my normal means: exegesis, scripture reading, more exegesis. I believe that I had depersonalized God so much that when I really needed him I didn’t know how to relate. I longed for him, but found many community-wide restrictions in my cessationist environment. I looked for God, but all I found was a suffocation of the Spirit in my evangelical tradition as well as in my own heart.

• Quote from Daniel Wallace, p. 94

To a person like me, who comes from the world I’ve lived in most of my adult Christian life, these words from Daniel Wallace are utterly remarkable. Wallace is a New Testament professor at Dallas Theological Seminary, a leading dispensationalist and cessationist school. For someone in that setting to say, “The Bible was not adequate,” that it was “not the answer,” and to speak about needing to “feel God” in order for the Bible to be of solace is to go against concepts that are regularly taught and preached against.

The next section of Scot McKnight’s book about the Spirit explores the Spirit as “the power of God’s new presence” with us and in us. And the metaphor he begins with from the Bible is that of the Holy Spirit as “living water.”

Living water is water that is bubbling up, moving, running, flowing. It is not the static water we draw from a well, it is the water rushing along like those in the currents of a mountain stream. It is not simply water that quenches our thirst. This water invigorates us!

Some church denominations require baptism in running water. To them it is a powerful symbol of the living and life-giving energy of the Spirit. This is an old tradition; in fact one of our earliest Christian writings, The Didache (c. 100 AD), said that baptism in running water, though not required, was preferable.

It has been very hot in central Indiana this past week. Today, for Father’s Day, our children and grandchildren will be coming to our house. We prepared to have them in this weather by getting our water supplies. We don’t have a pool, so we got some kiddie pools for the little ones, slip-n-slides for the older ones, super-soaker water guns, and other such things. It’s going to be hot, and we will all need to be refreshed. So we’ll be spraying ourselves with water, dunking ourselves in water, running through sprinklers of water, soaking ourselves in a wild rumpus of joy.

I’ll be thinking of the Spirit, God’s living water, all day.

The IM Saturday Monks Brunch: June 16, 2018. Dear Old Dad Edition

 

 

Father’s Song
Gregory Orr

Yesterday, against admonishment,
my daughter balanced on the couch back,
fell and cut her mouth.

Because I saw it happen I knew
she was not hurt, and yet
a child’s blood so red
it stops a father’s heart.

My daughter cried her tears;
I held some ice
against her lip.
That was the end of it.

Round and round: bow and kiss.
I try to teach her caution;
she tries to teach me risk.

From Those Winter Sundays
Robert Hayden

Sundays too my father got up early
and put his clothes on in the blueblack cold,
then with cracked hands that ached
from labor in the weekday weather made
banked fires blaze. No one ever thanked him.

 

 

The Gift
Li-Young Lee

To pull the metal splinter from my palm
my father recited a story in a low voice.
I watched his lovely face and not the blade.
Before the story ended, he’d removed
the iron sliver I thought I’d die from.

I can’t remember the tale,
but hear his voice still, a well
of dark water, a prayer.
And I recall his hands,
two measures of tenderness
he laid against my face,
the flames of discipline
he raised above my head.

Had you entered that afternoon
you would have thought you saw a man
planting something in a boy’s palm,
a silver tear, a tiny flame.
Had you followed that boy
you would have arrived here,
where I bend over my wife’s right hand.

Look how I shave her thumbnail down
so carefully she feels no pain.
Watch as I lift the splinter out.
I was seven when my father
took my hand like this,
and I did not hold that shard
between my fingers and think,
Metal that will bury me,
christen it Little Assassin,
Ore Going Deep for My Heart.
And I did not lift up my wound and cry,
Death visited here!
I did what a child does
when he’s given something to keep.
I kissed my father.

Why I am an Ally – Part 4

A Look at Leviticus 18 and Act 15.

In the last three posts we introduced some of the people I have met in my life journey, discussed Romans 1 & 2, and looked at the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Today we want to take a rather different look at Leviticus 18 and Acts 15. Rather than do an in depth exegetical analysis, we want to look at some of the typical responses to the text.

Leviticus 18:22 bans sex between men among other prohibited sexual practices. The Council of Jerusalem recorded in Acts 15, sets aside much of the Old Testament regulations.

28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.

How do we handle this?

There are two responses at either end of the spectrum.

Response 1: The Bible doesn’t matter. It has no meaningful application to my life. Therefore what it says about homosexuality is irrelevant.,

Response 2: This is a sin of significant concern. The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it. (And yes I once had an interim Pastor who used to say the latter part of this just about every sermon.)

There are a whole lot of other responses in between these two in which someone who “believes the Bible” might find some concordance.

I will itemize a number of the possibilities here. I do NOT hold to all of these, but they are listed for your rumination. Many of them overlap. Some you will in fact find contradictory. For brevity’s sake I will list them as short summary statements. Readers can elaborate on them, add other ideas, and discuss validity or lack thereof in the comments. I expect lots of “yes, but” and “no, because”, along with some level of agreement. I will discuss my own positions at the end.

Here then are some of the other responses.

Response 3: This is one sin among many. It is usually listed with other sins like greed, envy, and disobedient children. It should not be singled out for special attention.

Response 4: This is not a universal prohibition. The context of Leviticus 18 is narrow. The command is location limited (Canaan), time limited (while living there), race limited (Jews), and gender limited (only males are mentioned.)

Response 5: The tag line: “You will do well to avoid these things” is interesting because it only speaks of positive consequences of following, and does not list negative consequences for not following. Are these to be understood now as guidelines rather than outright prohibitions?

Response 6: Sexual morality is not defined in the Acts passage. Based on other passages, Paul seems to include hair length, and the wearing of jewelry as some of the prohibited things that show that you are sexually immoral. Yet today, Christians in general (with a few exceptions) do not have a problem with either hair length or jewelry.

Response 7: The Holy Spirit allowed believers in Acts 15 to reinterpret Old Testament laws based on new circumstances. The church today could be similarly led.

Response 8: Neither the Old Testament writers nor the New Testament writers had the scientific knowledge available to them that we have today. Had they had that knowledge, the laws would have been different.

Response 9: The sciences of genetics and immunology are both in their infancy. I include both here because we are just starting to learn how big a role the immune system plays in shaping our brain. We are just beginning to gain understanding about how we are wired and why we do the things we do. While our knowledge is not complete, it seems to be heading on a trajectory that says God made me this way.

Response 10: ‘Their writing was based on what they knew of the natural world, and God communicated with them in terms they could understand.

Response 11: The church has frequently reinterpreted scripture based on new scientific knowledge/revelation. The church eventually came to accept the findings of Copernicus and Galileo even though initially they seemed to be clearly contrary to scripture. The Catholic Church’s acceptance of evolution would be another example.

Response 12: Homosexuality is not a choice, it is the way they were made by God. A loving homosexual relationship then, cannot be considered sin, rather it is showing love in the way that God intended.

Response 13: From Romans 1 we see that Paul clearly didn’t understand how someone becomes gay. His admonitions can be rejected based on a faulty premise.

Response 14: Paul’s interactions with homosexuals was in a very different context than we have today. What Paul seems to have been cognisant of is a lustful hedonism.

Response 15: Gay marriage, when people lovingly commit to each other, was not known in Biblical days, and as such the Bible does not speak to it directly.

Response 16: We tend to take our modern idea of marriage and project it back onto the Bible. In reality the church wedding is a rather modern invention and has no real bearing on the discussion.

Response 17: What is deemed acceptable in marriage or sexual relationships changes over time. Polygamy was once deemed acceptable, but no longer is by society. Homosexual sex was deemed unacceptable by society, but now is recognized.

Response 18: Laws are based around revulsion. When we don’t understand something we condemn it, even if it may not be intrinsically wrong. Consider for example how much food practices vary from culture to culture. In various cultures, horse, dog, pigs, rodents, and insects are staples. In other cultures they are condemned.

Response 19: Some things that were considered repulsive are now considered high cuisine. We somehow have managed to sneak rare steak into a list of food that is now acceptable, ever desirable, even though the Council of Jerusalem specifically forbid it. (Blood)

Response 20: Jesus’ new commands are focussed on love. Love for God, love for one another, love for neighbor. If Jesus was telling the story of the good Samaritan (someone despised by the Jews) today, would his example instead include a Transgender person?

Response 21: Jesus’ greatest condemnation was for religious hypocrites. Paul warns in Romans 2 to be careful when you judge because you too will be facing condemnation.

Response 22: Paul in other passages emphasizes that Christians should be above reproach. That is, the outside world should be able to look in and not find fault. Yet this in an area in which the world is reproaching the church and saying that we are not showing love.

Response 23: If we are not sure of our position it is better to err on the side of grace, and err on the side of love.

So where do I stand in all of this?

Up to this point I have not said much beyond the idea that the bibilical texts we have tackled so far have been badly interpreted. Most, but not all, of the responses from 5 through to 23 have some level of resonance and agreement with me. My position has been in flux over the years, and things that I believed 10 years ago I might not hold today, and things I hold today. I might not hold 10 years from now. Response 23 is probably my fall back position. If I am going to err I at least want to err on the side of grace and on the side of love.

Next week I will be publishing my interview with Geoff, and you will see that some of the responses listed here (along with some others) will come up in our discussion.

To keep things fair, and to keep us on topic,I will conclude with an open forum two weeks from now, where you can raise concerns, ask questions of each other, and generally fill in some of the gaps that I have missed.

For now however, your comments and thoughts are welcome. Be remember to be nice, and be generous with one another as you comment.

The Lost World of the Flood: Mythology, Theology, and the Deluge Debate by Tremper Longman III and John H. Walton, Part 4- Proposition 15

The Lost World of the Flood: Mythology, Theology, and the Deluge Debate
by Tremper Longman III and John H. Walton
Proposition 15

We are blogging through the book: The Lost World of the Flood: Mythology, Theology, and the Deluge Debate by Tremper Longman III and John H. Walton.  Today we will look at Part 4- The World: Thinking About Evidence for the Flood, Proposition 15- Geology Does Not Support a Worldwide Flood.  This chapter is authored by Stephen O. Moshier, a professor and chair of the Geology & Environmental Science Department at Wheaton College, whose college bio is here.  Moshier is also a contributing author at BioLogos , and was a contributing author to The Grand Canyon, Monument to an Ancient Earth, which book I reviewed for Internet Monk starting here.

Moshier’s first statement is that, “Any claims about the geographic and hydrological scale of Noah’s flood should be testable by observation of the natural world”. This is the first and primary issue for those who argue for the “clear and plain reading of Scripture”.  Can Scripture be judged by science?  They would say no, science is the product of fallen, fallible, sinful men, while Scripture is the product of an infallible, all-knowing God, who cannot lie, tell a falsehood, or even inspire something that is in error.  If you believe that, then nothing Moshier or I say will convince you otherwise.  To be convinced otherwise is to leave the faith and compromise with the world.  And if your family, pastor, church, church friends, in short, your whole social fabric is structured by that premise, then the emotional, psychological, and even “spiritual” cost of rending that social fabric is more than you can bear.  And besides, there are enough creationist apologetic “ministries” around that lend enough of a patina of intellectual credibility that there is really no good reason to tear up one’s established social fabric and become a pariah to friends and family.  I get it, I really do, and I sympathize.

Of course, Walton and Longman have spent the past 14 chapters explaining why such a “plain reading of Scripture” isn’t so plain at all.  They have made it as plain as they could that the issue isn’t at all the “infallibility” or “inspiration” of Scripture (which they hold to), but the matter is a difference in interpretation between those who are reading a modern mind-set into the ancient documents, and those who are trying to address those ancient documents at the face-value the original authors and their intended audience meant them to have.

Don’t confuse my sympathy for overcoming the emotional difficulty of leaving a YEC interpretation of the Flood behind for any sympathy for the actual technical argument itself.  I have none.  So-called “Flood Geology” is as thoroughly debunked as geocentrism and a flat earth, both positions, by the way, people once thought the Bible taught had to be true.  So if you can understand this argument:

You should be able to understand the arguments that follow that Moshier highlights.

Geologists developed the concept of the rock cycle from their observations of modern processes and ancient rocks.  The three classifications of rocks are based on their formative processes.  Igneous rocks crystallize from magma or lava (magma that makes it to the surface).  Sedimentary rocks are composed of particles weathered from older rocks, or in the case of limestone, from the accumulation of sea shells.  Metamorphic rocks are those rocks transformed by heat and pressure.  Sedimentary rocks provide a history of conditions on the earth’s surface because they contain evidence of ancient life (fossils and tracks), depositional processes (bedding structures such as ripple marks, mud cracks, raindrop prints, and erosional surfaces), and even past climate conditions (biological and chemical components in the rocks).  When igneous rocks solidify, the radioactive elements that compose the rocks begin to decay into daughter products.  The ratio of parent to daughter elements along with the measured decay rate allow geologists to estimate the time of cooling, which is roughly the age of the rock.

The thickness of the sedimentary rock varies greatly across the continents and in the ocean basins.  There are places, like the Colorado Plateau, where sedimentary rock layers exceed 5 miles in thickness.  Sandstones and shales are composed of particles from mountains that long ago have been eroded away.  Limey sediments and shell fragments accumulated in shallow seas that intermittently covered the continents.  The Gulf of Mexico contains 40,000 feet of sediment shed off of North America and includes 5,000 feet of salt that could only form from evaporation of millions of cubic feet of seawater.  Based on this kind of global stratigraphic information, after 250 years of examination, the consensus of geologists is that the sedimentary rocks preserve records of deposition over hundreds of millions of years.  This is known as the geologic column.  Regarding the geologic column:

25 locations where the whole geologic colunm may be found

1) Contrary to “flood geologist’s” assertions, the entire geologic column is found in 25 other basins around the world, piled up in proper order.

2) Second, the existence of desert deposits is impossible to place in the context of a global flood.

3) Third, the geologic column is not divided by hydrodynamic sorting, contrary to flood geologist assertions.

4) Fourth, the geologic column is not sorted by ecological zones. The Silurian Interlake, Devonian Prairie, Pennsylvanian Minnelusa and Jurassic Morisson formations are continental deposits. Oceanic deposits sandwich these beds. The ocean came and went many times.

5) Fifth, the persistent burrowing which is found throughout the geologic column, the erosional layers and the evaporative salt requires much more time than a single year to account for the whole column.

The Geologic Column

6) Sixth, the fact that the fossils mammals are not found with the earliest dinosaurs, or that no primates are found until the Ft. Union formation or that no full dinosaur skeletons are found in the Tertiary section, implies conclusively that the column was not the result of a single cataclysm. Worldwide, no whales are found with the large Devonian fish. If the column was an ecological burial pattern, then whales and porpoises should be buried with the fish. They aren’t.

7) Geology, like any science, is not immune from criticism. But Christians who criticize geology should do so only after a thorough understanding of the data, not as is usually the case before such an understanding is gained. They should also be willing to advance explanations for explaining the details observed. For example, why, if flowering plants make up 80% of all plants alive today, is not one single pollen grain of a flowering plant found in any rock in the Grand Canyon below the rim, which was supposedly laid down in Noah’s flood?  Spores from lycopods (club mosses, horsetails, scale trees like Lepidodendron) and ferns are plentiful.

8) Eighth, those who would decry the use of uniformitarianism in the interpretation of the fossil record need to show how uniformitarian methodology is inappropriate when one looks at the persistent burrowing, the orbital cyclicities, the abundant erosional surfaces and footprints. They also need to show why the laws of physics (Stokes law) does not apply to the deposition of 2 micron chalk particles, and demonstrate what laws do apply in order to explain the supposed rapid sedimentation of these beds.

9) Ninth and finally, the data shows that there is no strata which can be identified as THE flood strata and there is no way to have the whole column be deposited in a single year.

Moshier notes five categories of geological arguments by which global flood proponents try to make their case.

  1. Seashell fossil in rocks above sea level. Flood geologists ask how sedimentary rocks containing abundant marine fossils could have been deposited thousands of feet above sea level on mountains unless ocean water flooded the continents. Sediments can stack up in off-shore basins many thousands of feet, like the Gulf of Mexico sediments today, with the ocean maintaining a relatively constant depth.  Tectonic activity (collision of plates) pushes the layers of sedimentary rock up in plateaus or mountain building episodes.  In mountain belts, the rocks are folded, faulted, or otherwise deformed—something impossible for soft, flood deposited sediment.
  2. Rock layers over entire continents. Flood geologists reason that only a global flood could transport sediment across continents. Many sedimentary rock layers cover vast areas of continents, but no single layer covers an entire continent from one end to the other as flood geologist’s claim. In fact, detailed mapping shows that rock layers overlap one another like leaves piled up on a lawn.  Rather than finding evidence of one massive deluge, we find abundant evidence of multiple periods of rising and falling sea levels.
  3. Rapid deposition of sand carried across continents. The deposition of sand across continents pertains to flood geologist’s interpretation of the Coconino Sandstone in the Grand Canyon (see my discussion on the Coconino here).  As I said in the Grand Canyon series:

The Coconino Sandstone is a thick sequence of sandstone that is well exposed in the Grand Canyon.  The Coconino is evidence of an enormous desert sand sea (called an erg) like the Sahara, the Sonoran in northwest Mexico, and the Arabian Peninsula. No remains of animals have been found in the Coconino, which is typical in desert environments where scavengers, wind, and hot sun remove flesh and bones rather quickly.  The Coconino Sandstone also contains no evidence of aquatic organisms of any kind that might support an argument for deposition in a deep-water, flood environment as has been proposed by flood geologists.  The trace fossils consist of large to small vertebrate tracks and also include tracks and burrows very similar to those left by spiders, scorpions, millipedes, and other arthropods in modern desert environments.

Obviously, having a desert rock deposited in the middle of a flood is a problem for flood geology.  So flood geologists try to interpret the sand as having been transported by swift currents of 2-4 miles per hour under deep water.  Some flood geologists have claimed that vertebrate tracks in the Coconino were made by amphibians walking or running underwater in an attempt to escape advancing flood waters.  Try this observational experiment the next time you’re at the ocean beach; walk down by the water in the zone where the waves are gently washing up and receding.  Make some footprints.  Watch the waves gently wash over the footprints.  How long until the footprints are gone?  How long would the footprints last in a RAGING TORRENT— YOU MORON???  (Mike takes several deep breaths, rubs his temples, and edits the previous sentence to maintain an irenic Christian tone to this article in accordance with the example Chaplain Mike sets for this blog).

  1. Layers made in rapid succession. Another problem is the thick series of sedimentary rock layers that are folded with bends in the strata as much as 90 degrees. Because they do not observe evidence of brittle fracture in the layers, flood geologists claim that bending occurred after the layers occurred in rapid succession but before the sediment hardened into rock.  In fact, geologists have reported on abundant evidence of brittle fracture and slippage along surfaces between rock layers.  This kind of deformation can occur in hard rock if high levels of stress are applied to the rock over long periods of time (millions of years not thousands).
  2. No slow and gradual erosion. There should be no evidence of erosion or exposure to air between or within sedimentary rock layers if they were deposited in rapid succession beneath the flood water. However, contacts showing evidence for erosion or non-deposition between the layers in successions of sedimentary rocks, called unconformities, are common on every continent.  Flood geologists cite “knife edge” contacts between formations in the Grand Canyon as evidence of continuous and uninterrupted sedimentation from top to bottom of the rock sequence.  They only recognize one unconformity at the base of the canyon.  There are 19 recognized unconformities in the Grand Canyon sequence, contrary to flood geologist’s assertion, as shown in Figure 10-1 from the book, “The Grand Canyon- Monument to An Ancient Earth”.

400 foot channel in Redwall Formation filled in with Surprise Canyon Formation

The most dramatic and incontrovertible example of an unconformity is the Redwall to Surprise Canyon unconformity.  The obvious clue to the existence of this unconformity is the presence of channels carved out of a lower stratigraphic unit that are filled with material from an upper unit.  Scour channels in the Redwall Limestone are filled with deposits from the Surprise Canyon formation that in places are 400 feet deep.  How do you scour a 400 foot channel in SOFT sediment (hint; you don’t it has to be solid rock).

There are also well known and documented paleokarst features in the Redwall Formation.  Karst features result from the exposure of solid limestone to open-air chemical weathering and above-ground and underground water flow over prolonged time.  It is a landscape.  Karst features such as erosional surfaces, river channels, sinkholes, caverns, and collapse structures would not have time to form on soft sediment in the middle of a flood sequence.  There are unmistakable paleokarst features in the Redwall Formation, a thick limestone layer in the middle of the Paleozoic sequence of the Grand Canyon.  In other words; it was a karst landscape at one time.  The Surprise Canyon Formation, which overlies the Redwall, completely fills in the elaborate network of river channels, karst sinkholes, collapse features, and even caverns on the upper portion of the Redwall forming unconformities.  How could any of these events have occurred within the context of a single-year flood?  Such a sequence isn’t just unlikely—– IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.

The presence of the common rock, shale, interspersed throughout the geologic column is another huge problem for flood geology.  The clay particles that make up shale are fine (less than 0.002 mm) and would remain in suspension in turbulent flood water until the very end of the flood, when the water was quiescent.  So shale should ONLY be at the top of the geologic column.

Limestone is composed of whole shells, broken shells, and limey mud.  The shells in limestone have not been transported far from where the animals and calcareous algae lived on the ocean floor.  We can see and measure limestone forming in shallow, warm, quiet seas like the Bahamas, Florida Bay, the Great Barrier Reef, and the Persian Gulf.  As Moshier says:

All the seashell animals on earth at any given moment in its history could not provide enough limey sediment for the total thickness of limestone around the world!  Limey sediments could not have been derived from the erosion of older limestone rocks by advancing floodwater, either.  Remember the caves and sinkholes?  Because limestone is so soft and soluble, weathering limestone does not produce much sediment.

We could go on and on and on with the obvious physical impossibilities of a global flood.  For a brief but comprehensive non-book length summary, let me suggest Phil Senter’s, “The Defeat of Flood Geology by Flood Geology” which you can find here.  Ken Ham is fond of saying that flood geologists look at the same evidence as real geologists, they just have a different interpretation based on a different worldview.  He says:

Evolutionists view the fossil record as a record of evolution over millions of years, with slow processes. They interpret fossils and rocks through that framework.

Creationists look at the exact same rock layers and fossils and come to a different interpretation. Starting with God’s Word, we know there was a global Flood. It radically shaped our geology. Fossils and rock layers are a result of Noah’s Flood!

Two different starting points mean two different interpretations.

But that is not what Moshier (and I) did in this chapter.  He started with the assumption that, “Any claims about the geographic and hydrological scale of Noah’s flood should be testable by observation of the natural world”.  Ham is also fond of drawing the distinction between “observational” or “operational” science and “historical” or “origins” science, but what Mosier has done here is taken “observational” science and falsified the hypothesis that, “Fossils and rock layers are a result of Noah’s Flood”.  It’s not a matter of interpretation, it’s a matter of observation.

Your Top Three Hymns?

We’re going to riff off of Jonathan Aigner today. Over the weekend he noted a post by Chuck McKnight over at Hippie Heretic: “Top 25 Hymns of Progressive Christians.” Then, Jonathan asked his readers, from a more diverse theological and ecclesiastical background, to share some of theirs.

Here are the top ten hymns that still work for progressive Christians, according to McKnight’s unscientific poll:

  1. Amazing Grace
  2. How Great Thou Art
  3. Be Thou My Vision
  4. It Is Well with My Soul
  5. In the Garden
  6. Great Is Thy Faithfulness
  7. For the Beauty of the Earth
  8. Come, Thou Fount of Ev’ry Blessing
  9. Let There Be Peace on Earth
  10. Morning Has Broken

I encourage you to go to Happy Heretic and check out the rest of the list, along with Chuck’s comments.

Jonathan listed a few of his favorites in response, to prime the pump for his readers. He listed them in no particular order.

  • God Is Here
  • Ask Ye What Great Thing I Know
  • Holy God, We Praise Thy Name
  • Love Divine, All Loves Excelling
  • A Mighty Fortress Is Our God
  • Sing Praise to God, Who Reigns Above
  • There Is a Fountain
  • Thine Is the Glory
  • Of the Father’s Love Begotten
  • Holy! Holy! Holy! Lord God Almighty

Generously, Jonathan provided YouTube samples so that you can those with which you are unfamiliar.

Here is what I would like us to today.

  1. Give me your top 3 hymns,
  2. Explain briefly what it is that you like about each one.

To get us started, here are my top 3.

Third: All Creatures of Our God and King

One of the most beautiful and joyful melodies carries a call to all creation to praise Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It delights me to sing a hymn of St. Francis, and I love to think of his spirit when I do.

Second: This Is My Father’s World

I’ve loved this hymn since childhood. I was first attracted to its gorgeous melody, but as I’ve grown older, I find that the third verse is the real reason this hymn packs a punch for me.

First: Praise to the Lord, the Almighty

A great sturdy English hymn calling us to worship God, whose sovereign care, providence, and eternal love keep us now and forever.

Here is a marvelous rendition from the 60th anniversary of the coronation of Queen Elizabeth at Westminster Abbey (2013).

Dan Jepsen: The Restless, Raging Fury that They Call the Love of God

Note from CM: We’re focusing on music this week, and today we turn it over to Pastor Dan to remind us of one of the freshest and most honest voices that ever participated in the contemporary Christian music movement.

• • •

The Restless, Raging Fury that They Call the Love of God
by Daniel Jepsen

I miss Rich Mullins.

I was listening to his song, The Love of God, today, and searched for the lyrics. I guess I had never seen their beauty and power before. Mullins understood more than many that God’s love is merciful and joyful, but it’s also a reckless, raging fury. Here are the lyrics and a video.

There’s a wideness in God’s mercy
I cannot find in my own
And He keeps His fire burning
To melt this heart of stone
Keeps me aching with a yearning
Keeps me glad to have been caught
In the reckless raging fury
That they call the love of God

Now I’ve seen no band of angels
But I’ve heard the soldiers’ songs
Love hangs over them like a banner
Love within them leads them on
To the battle on the journey
And it’s never gonna stop
Ever widening their mercies
And the fury of His love

Oh the love of God
And oh, the love of God
The love of God

Joy and sorrow are this ocean
And in their every ebb and flow
Now the Lord a door has opened
That all Hell could never close
Here I’m tested and made worthy
Tossed about but lifted up
In the reckless raging fury
That they call the love of God

I love how the dominant theme is both powerful and powerfully expressed. That theme is the summed up in that phrase, “the reckless, raging fury that they call the love of God” and is repeated three times (though modified in the middle repetition). The intensity of a fire hot enough to melt a heart of stone (not ice) in the verse one gives us the first notion of the power and fury of this love. This strength of this consuming fire leaves those who experience it with both aching and yearning, both anguish and gladness. They long to be refined, even as they acknowledge the fire’s pain.

The bands of angels in the second verse are also the soldiers marching with love over them and in them. They are the invisible vanguard of God’s love, marching into creation with song, and widening His love everywhere they place their feet. Here his love is seen as a marching army, “terrible in might”, who defeat those things that finally stand in opposition to the spreading love of God. The imagery and wordplay of this verse make it my favorite.

Though the metaphor of the final verse becomes awkward at one point (how does an ocean open a door?) it nonetheless serves the larger purpose well. The wideness of God’s love is like the wideness of the sea (I believe Mullins based metaphor on a hymn by Frederick Faber) in its vastness, wildness and inscrutability. The ebbs and flow of its great swells cannot be grasped; one can only float and be lifted up. But here we must go beyond the metaphor, for unlike the swelling sea, the ebbs and flow or our experience of God’s love in our life are purposeful and cleansing. They test us, and make us worthy. God’s love is seen not only as wild and uncomfortable, but also the very thing that saves us from the depths of destruction.

The idea of God’s love having a wild, raging dimension may startle our Sunday school sensibilities, and it should. We need to move (or be pulled, kicking and screaming) from a childlike and childish notion of “Jesus loves me, this I know” to a defiant scream against the absurdity, pain and frustration of life, a scream that hurls these words into the mouth of the hurricane: GOD IS STILL LOVE.

Reckless. Raging. Full of fury. But love all the more for that.

“A Kiss Full of Color” — Kacey Musgraves’ Golden Hour

Kacey Musgraves — Golden Hour
An Album Review

Kacey Musgraves’s new album, gorgeous, brilliant, and shimmering, with all the right hooks and atmosphere, may be the best 70s-80s country/pop/folk album I’ve heard since, well, the 70s and 80s.

Many are calling it the pop album of the year.

Golden Hour comes to us, in the words of her song “Butterflies,” as a “kiss full of color.”

Musgraves had her major-label debut in 2013, with Same Trailer Different ParkIt won her critical acclaim and Grammy Awards for Best Country Album and Best Country Song (“Merry Go ’Round”). She also took home CMA Awards for New Artist of the Year and Song of the Year (“Follow Your Arrow”), and an ACM Award for Album of the Year. She followed that up with another Billboard chart-topping effort called Pageant Material.

These solidified her reputation, in the words of one reviewer, “as a serious, smart-assed [woman] songwriter in a masculine musical lineage.” Unfortunately, her strong opinions and millennial sensibilities put her outside the mainstream of Nashville and country radio, described by another commentator as ” the kind of place where women’s contributions are referred to by radio consultants as “tomatoes in a salad” where the men are lettuce.”

There is a country core to the music on this album. Musgraves sings about Texas, horses, and cowboys driving Silverados, with complementary banjo parts and the occasional twang. But these are expertly embedded along with echoes of acoustic Neil Young, Sade, the Bee Gees, psychedelic pop, 80s synth music, and Beck into an seemingly effortless blend as she makes decades of pop genres her own. She has a remarkable sense of 70s and 80s melodic style, and she refers to the sonic textures of this record as “galactic country.” This is Nashville by way of Laurel Canyon with a splash of disco. Her voice is both strong and delicate, carrying understated but country-clever lyrics. Musgraves herself has said

The goal for this record was to sound great when you’re sitting there at 2:00 a.m. thinking about everything. It’s a melting pot of many different influences that have come together. I’ve always loved Sade, but I also love Dolly Parton and traditional country music. I thought there’s got to be a world where all these things can live together harmoniously – a place where futurism meets traditionalism. I still love steel guitar and banjo, but I thought it would be dope if we put that with a vocoder and explored that world.

Reviewers have noted that this album comes at a blissful, serene time in Kacey Musgraves’s life. Last year she left the road, got married, and concentrated on her personal life, and these songs exude a self-confident contentment that may indeed grow out of the season of life in which she finds herself.

One thing is clear. Kacey Musgrave is an enormous talent, and she’s not afraid to grow, adapt, and explore.

What a great, great record.

• • •

Here are a couple of recent performances of songs from Golden Hour:

Sundays in Pentecost: Open to the Spirit (4)

Summer Clouds (2017)

Sundays in Pentecost: Open to the Spirit (4)

We are taking the Pentecost season to post a Sunday series of excerpts and reflections from Scot McKnight’s new book, Open to the Spirit: God in Us, God with Us, God Transforming Us.

• • •

The mark of Pentecost and the mark of the new Christian movement is renewal through openness to the Spirit. The sign? God would speak to the people through prophets. In the New Testament era, God’s Spirit would empower “both men and women” to be prophets. There is no indication in the New Testament that the gift of prophecy would either die out or that it would be assigned exclusively to famous preachers and pastors. Young and old, men and women— God raises up prophets among them all.

…Is our God the God who speaks? Has he now ceased speaking, or does God still speak today?

• pp. 72, 86

Scot McKnight devotes a couple of chapters in his book about the Holy Spirit to ways that God speaks outside the Bible. Many Christians, including those in the cessationist traditions where I received my formative ministry training, deny that God does speak this way today.

But Scot reminds us that, on the day of Pentecost, the spirit of prophecy was proclaimed as an essential sign of the Spirit-indwelt church:

In the last days it will be, God declares,
that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh,
   and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
and your young men shall see visions,
   and your old men shall dream dreams.
Even upon my slaves, both men and women,
   in those days I will pour out my Spirit;
     and they shall prophesy. (Acts 2:17-18)

He backs this up with several paragraphs of New Testament epistle texts that indicate that God’s word of prophecy was being experienced in the churches. He also reminds us, however, that Paul and the other authors stress testing the prophecies that are spoken, and that not all will be judged genuine.

McKnight does not give a lot of examples of how this might work today, and I think some readers might find that frustrating

However, I don’t. It seems to me that one of the problems I’ve encountered among the Pentecostals, Charismatics, Third Wave, and other groups that emphasize the continuation of the charismatic gifts is that they end up institutionalizing the gift and practicing it in certain set ways. What is meant to be the surprising, sovereign work of the Spirit speaking to the church becomes another recognized church practice. That becomes our “biblical” model. As a result, the voice of the Spirit gets bogged down in the traditions of “Spirit-filled” churches perhaps even more than in liturgical settings.

It is my opinion that if the Spirit speaks, it will be in the Spirit’s way and the Spirit’s time. We won’t be expecting it and we certainly won’t be conjuring it up by our methods. There are few I read about in the scriptures who weren’t surprised when the Spirit spoke. I don’t know many (any?) congregations that are truly like this, but I would hope Christians and churches might be open to the Spirit speaking without expectations of how that must happen or what it is like.

If it’s truly God speaking, I would think we’d all be caught off guard. We certainly won’t be in control of it.

The IM Saturday Monks Brunch: June 9, 2018 — Yikes! Edition

Good morning, and welcome to our weekly IM Saturday Monks Brunch. All this past week, it seems like every time I looked at the news or at links on my Facebook feed, I said, “Yikes!” A whole bunch of crazy things have been happening lately. Let’s put some of them together and marvel at the wackiness of life as we enjoy our time around the table today.

We’ll start with a few photos that made me say, “Yikes!” in puzzlement, amazement, and laughter.

Yikes! Note to self: check this guy’s liability insurance before hiring…
Yikes! We’d better have the nurses check on The Don again.
Yikes! One very inconvenient design flaw…
Yikes! What’d they do in that tunnel of love?
Yikes! Toymakers finally know me and what I need.
Yikes! Would you dare fly this airline?

Here are ten of the top Yikes! stories of the week. How would you rank them?

Yikes 1! — DEADLY BAPTISM!

FROM THE BBC: Docho Eshete was conducting the ceremony for about 80 people on Sunday morning at Lake Abaya in Arba Minch town’s Merkeb Tabya district.

Residents and police told BBC Amharic a crocodile leapt from the water during the baptism and attacked him.

Pastor Docho died after being bitten on his legs, back and hands.

“He baptised the first person and he passed on to another one. All of a sudden, a crocodile jumped out of the lake and grabbed the pastor,” local resident Ketema Kairo told the BBC.

Despite huge efforts, fishermen and residents could not save pastor Docho, policeman Eiwnetu Kanko said.

They used fishing nets to prevent the crocodile from taking the pastor’s body into the lake.

The crocodile escaped.

Yikes 2! — ATTACK OF THE SEVERED SNAKE HEAD!

FROM FOX NEWS: A Texas man is recovering after he claims the head of a rattlesnake bit him — moments after he had just cut it off.

Jennifer Sutcliffe’s husband was reportedly bitten by the beheaded snake on May 27 at his home near Lake Corpus Christi.

Sutcliffe told KIII-TV the two were doing yard work when she came across the four-foot rattlesnake. She said her husband used a shovel to behead the snake, but when he went to dispose of it, it bit him.

The snake, Sutcliffe said, “released all its venom into him at that point” because it no longer had a body, and her husband reportedly began immediately experiencing seizures and internal bleeding, and lost his vision.

The man was transported via helicopter to a hospital, where doctors said there was a chance he wouldn’t make it.

“A normal person who is going to get bit is going to get two to four doses of antivenom,” Sutcliffe told the news station. “He had to have 26 doses.”

Her husband is now in stable condition but is suffering from weak kidney functions, Sutcliffe said.

Yikes 3! — EXTREME ROAD RAGE IN SACRAMENTO!

Yikes 4! — WORST OBITUARY EVER!

Yikes 5! — ATTACK OF THE FERAL PEACOCKS!

FROM CTV NEWS: Car owners in Surrey, B.C., have been left counting the costs after their cars were attacked by feral peacocks.

For years, residents in the Sullivan Heights neighbourhood have complained about the noise and property damage caused by the feathered vandals during mating season.

And now the peacocks are causing mayhem again, inflicting thousands of dollars’ worth of damage to expensive cars parked in the area.

The colourful creatures use their sharp beaks and talons to lash out at their reflections – believing them to be be rival peacocks.

“With the dark-coloured cars, they can see their reflection fairly clearly, so they mistake that as another peacock and have at it,” resident Ryan Cragg told CTV Vancouver.

He explained that the standoff can sometimes go on for hours.

“They’ll get the front panel, the side panel, the rear panel and then work around to the other side.”

[Note to self: “Feral Peacocks” will definitely be the name for my next band.]

Yikes 6! — ATTACK OF THE CHICKEN FEATHERS!

FROM NPR: Sometimes, a Wednesday evening just calls for a fluff piece — and sometimes, we mean “fluff piece” literally.

Commuters in Washington state found themselves stuck in a massive traffic jam before dawn Wednesday after a semi-truck rolled over on Interstate 5, spilling some rather curious cargo onto the asphalt: feathers. Lots and lots — and lots — of feathers.

In fact, the Washington State Department of Transportation said the overturned semi lost about 40,000 pounds of chicken feathers.

A WSDOT traffic engineer did some helpful calculations for all of us, noting the load roughly equates to 18 million feathers — or, by another measure, “almost 2,300 chickens worth of feathers.”

Yikes 7! — EXPLODING ROTTING FISH ART! (It’s not just a punk band.)

In case you were wondering, this was the “before” shot.

FROM LIVE SCIENCE: Something was rotten in a London art gallery last week — an installation of sequin-embroidered decomposing fish sealed in clear plastic bags.

But before the exhibit even opened, the malodorous artwork unexpectedly combusted and set fire to the gallery.

The installation — a piece called “Majestic Splendor” by Lee Bul — was part of an exhibition of the Korean artist’s work, scheduled to open at the Hayward Gallery on May 30. Then, hours before the show’s first preview, the gassy art blew up, causing a fire that damaged part of the gallery, artnet News reported.

…As fish decay, they emit amines — compounds of carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen — which produce odors that are intensely powerful and distinctively “fishy,” Preston MacDougall, a professor with the Department of Chemistry at Middle Tennessee State University, told Live Science in an email.

But these compounds aren’t just smelly — they’re also potentially explosive. Certain molecular bonds connecting hydrogen and carbon can release a lot of energy when vaporized — in gasoline, high-energy bonds in hydrocarbon molecules give the fuel its kick (and make it highly flammable). Similar energy reserves lurk in the molecular bonds of hydrogen and carbon compounds produced by decomposing fish, creating the possibility of an explosion under the right conditions, MacDougall explained.

For the new show and for previous installations after the MoMA debacle, potassium permanganate — also known as KMnO4 — was added to “Majestic Splendor” to reduce the smell of the rotting fish. In fact, KMnO4 is a time-honored choice for masking strong odors, Raychelle Burks, an assistant professor of chemistry at St. Edward’s University in Austin, Texas, told Live Science in an email.

“This chemical is a good oxidizing agent, reacting with a range of stinky, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to produce far less stinky or no-stink compounds,” Burks said.

But when combined with combustible material, KMnO4 is known to trigger violent explosions under certain circumstances, she added. It’s possible that the compounds produced by the putrefying fish interacted with KMnO4 to spark combustion, but it’s also likely that the explosion was caused by pressure buildup from trapped gases that had nowhere to go, similar to the effect that causes beached and bloated dead whales to explode, Burks told Live Science.

Yikes 8! — YOU HAVE A BRAIN IN YOUR BUTT!

AGAIN, FROM LIVE SCIENCE: You’re reading these words because you have a brain in your head. But did you know you also have a brain in your butt?

OK, not a literal brain — more of an autonomous matrix of millions of neurons that can, somehow, control intestinal muscle movements without any help from your central nervous system. And these neurons don’t actually live in your butt, but they do live in your colon, or large intestine — that tube-like organ that connects the small intestine to the rectum and shepherds what remains of the food you ate through the final leg of the digestive tract.

Scientists call this site of colon intelligence your enteric nervous system, and because it can function without instructions from the brain or spine, some scientists like to call it your “second brain.”

Yikes 9! — LIQUID POO IS FALLING FROM THE SKY!

FROM THE HUFF POST: Susan Allan said that on May 9, she and her adult son were sitting in her car at a stoplight when the feces came pouring in through the sunroof.

“While we were sitting there, our car was inundated with liquid poo falling from the sky,” Allan told GlobalNews.ca. “I had it on my face, down my shirt, my entire car, and the vehicle beside us were all covered in it.”

Allan said she and her son, Travis Sweet, watched the excrement fall as a large passenger plane flew overhead.

The actual sensation of crap hitting their skin was something Travis will never forget. First, he said, he felt a cold sensation hit the side of his face and shoulder.

“Then the smell hit my nose,” he said. “I almost vomited instantly. It was terrible.”

Allan contacted Kelowna Airport for answers.

An administrator for Transport Canada told her the government department would investigate the possibility of frozen lavatory waste, called “blue ice,” falling from an aircraft, according to The Globe and Mail newspaper.

…the Kelowna International Airport told CTV News that it believes the liquid poo came from one of three planes that were passing over that area at the time.

Yikes 10! — ATTACK OF THE ANGRY BISON!

FROM THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE:

  • On the morning of June 6, 59-year-old Kim Hancock of Santa Rosa, California, was gored by a bull bison at Fountain Paint Pot in the Lower Geyser Basin.
  • Hancock and a crowd of people approached within ten yards of the bison while walking along a boardwalk. At one point, people were closer than 15 feet from the bison. When it crossed the boardwalk, the bison became agitated and charged the crowd, goring Hancock. The bison immediately left the area.
  • Rangers responded to the incident and treated Hancock for a hip injury: she was transported by paramedic ambulance to the Big Sky Medical Center in Big Sky, Montana, in good condition.
  • This incident remains under investigation.
  • This is the second incident of a bison injuring a visitor in 2018 (previous release: Bison injures visitor at Old Faithful). There was one incident in 2017 and five in 2015.
  • In a little over a month, four people have been injured by wildlife in Yellowstone.

In a more serious and sobering light, rest in peace, Anthony Bourdain.

Bourdain, chef, author, traveler, television personality, is one of the “religionless” that Bonhoeffer wrote about to whom I was drawn. I loved that he took his passion for food and used it to explore and expand his curiosity for the people, places, and cultures of the world.

Anthony Bourdain could be raw and uncouth, but he was always fully human, plain spoken, and interesting. Who knows what demons he battled? May God’s mercy and comfort rest upon him.