A while back a good friend got me a coffee table book full of bathroom graffiti. Everything from the profane to the profound was compiled in this giant collection of colorful photographs, and the above quote appeared amongst some of the more profound.
On the surface it’s immediately offensive to anyone calling himself a Christian. But if one thinks about that statement for a moment, it speaks the Gospel as briefly as one possibly could: We are weak men and God is our salvation. I don’t think it could be put more humbly.
There’s no way to know if the person who scrawled that comment on a bathroom wall was aware of its double meaning, but the irony of a statement that is both extremely proud and extremely humble makes me smile.
A few years ago when I started to work out a Christian epistemology and a Christian concept of culture, many people considered what I was doing suspect. They felt that because I was interested in intellectual answers I must not be biblical. But this attitude represents a real poverty. It fails to understand that if Christianity is really true, then it involves the whole man, including his intellect and creativeness. Christianity is not just “dogmatically” true or “doctrinally” true. Rather, it is true to what is there, true in the whole area of the whole man in all of life.
The ancients were afraid that if they went to the end of the earth they would fall off and be consumed by dragons. But once we understand that Christianity is true to what is there, true to the ultimate environment — the infinite, personal God who is really there — then our minds are freed. We can pursue any question and can be sure that we will not fall off the end of the earth. Such an attitude will give our Christianity a strength that it often does not seem to have at the present time.
Francis Schaeffer, Art and the Bible
A very short book that has done more to help me get perspective on faith, art and life in general than almost anything else in recent memory.
Has the Church — or more specifically, evangelical Christian culture — perpetuated the idea that challenging norms and asking “dangerous” questions is a bad thing? To me that’s what it feels like, but I could be wrong.
Is it possible for conservative evangelicals to be respectful of their political opponents?
While I have my concerns, I can respect Christians who stand on the Republican side of the fence. What I can’t tolerate is how they seem to be the group most likely to muckrake and speak unkindly of their opponents.
I’ve long since lost count of friends and acquaintances sharing videos and links that paint the Democratic candidates as though their presidency would bring the Earth to its end while praising the Republican candidates’ every move. I can’t, however, think of more than a small handful of times when any opposing group did the same to such a large degree. Maybe this is because I am, more often than not, surrounded by Christians, most of which probably lean Republican.
Ours is the only population that I have seen doing so much to disrupt their chosen opponent. My concern is that such action is not showing the supposed fruit of a healthy faith. If anything, I would expect and hope that the community of believers would be the least likely to be planting seeds of disarray.
I’m trying to address this issue gently; I’m well aware that I’m not perfect or that more often than not I don’t show healthy fruit in my own faith. To be transparent: half of me writes this judgmentally, but the other half is out of honest concern for the way my fellow believers carry out their beliefs.
Is it loving to call a political opponent disgusting when they disagree with you on a particular issue? Furthermore, is it respectful and honoring to those who do not share your political views?
To put a face on it: I’m an Obama supporter. I don’t agree with his entire policy, but we agree on the issues that are most important to me. That’s not my point, though. My concern is that, if I feel disrespected and judged when my Christian peers speak harshly about Obama (and I do), how much more are non-believers going to feel that way?
I’m probably going to upset someone with this. That’s not the goal. I only want to explain why I don’t regret one bit that I voluntarily skipped John Piper’s Desiring God conference this last weekend.
Does “You shall have no other gods before me” ring a bell?
I love a lot of musicians. They are very important to me, and I hold many of them in very high esteem. But when I see them live, I do my very best to not treat them as anything more than the human they are. He or she may have created something greater than I can or said something that inspired me more than I can describe, but the minute I say “[insert musician] is amazing” instead of “[insert musician] creates amazing music,” I know I’m in trouble.
I feel the same should hold true of those that put so much value into prominent Christians, maybe even more so. Certainly it’s nice to see that people have so much respect for a man that clearly has devoted his life to understanding the Gospel. My concern is more with the fact that the “Don’t Waste Your Life” conference was dubbed “the Piper conference” within days of its announcement. (I had to go to his site to look up the official name.)
A rule of thumb I’d like to propose: if the person teaching the conference/writing the book/speaking the sermon/leading the worship is being held in higher regard than the content he or she is presenting, it’s time to question priorities. For as much buzz as I heard about the event, before and after, I still don’t know what it was about beyond what its official name tells me. That to me is a bad sign.
The irony is painful
I heard a lot of talk about how this “could be a once in a lifetime chance” coming from everyone from friends to respected pastors. A once in a lifetime chance for what? To spend your hard-earned money and two days of your time watching a guy speak out of the Bible you read every day, only to find that he puts the recordings on his website less than 48 hours later for free? It hurts me to wonder at the man hours that were spent to put this all together. There is pain in seeing the irony that so many “wasted” their time and money to see someone in person who could have saved thousands of hours and dollars by speaking his message into a microphone and putting it online.
I apologize for being so brash. Being so entrenched in Christian culture has only made me jaded and I don’t think that’s the way it was meant to be. I just can’t help it when the contradictions are so glaring.
I’m not going to hold firmly to my statements, though: show cases of truly changed lives of those that attended the conference or tell me where my thinking has gone wrong. Please. It hurts to tear down my own people so I don’t want to be doing so unnecessarily.
Why am I afraid to dance, I who love music and rhythm and grace and song and laughter? Why am I afraid to live, I who love life and the beauty of flesh and the living colors of the earth and sky and sea? Why am I afraid to love, I who love love?
Eugene O’Neill, The Great God Brown
For me, the question becomes: Why am I afraid to take risks that are required to continue on a path to where I want to be and, quite possibly, where God wants me to be? Lord, help me to put myself on the line when it’s easier to be comfortable.
My second song is only a week late. I’ll just blame my dad for showing up last weekend for that one. I can’t be mad at the guy, though. He’s a pretty cool guy.
So here’s the song, mentally prepared, just like the last one, to be ripped to shreds.
The vocals are a little better this time around (not including the part where the volume peaked when pronouncing a “p”) and this one even includes a wonderful half-assed guitar solo if you can make it to the end. Pretty awesome.
As far as the lyrics go, I was basing them off a quote, trying to relate it to my own life. And it turned out kind of emo. I swear that wasn’t the point, but I was running out of time so I wasn’t going to sweat it. Anyway, here’s the quote:
Those who believe they believe in God, but without passion in the heart, without anguish of mind, without uncertainty, without doubt, and even at times despair, believe only in the idea of God, and not in God himself.
Thanks to Miguel de Unamuno (by way of Madeleine L’Engle) for that wonderful quote.
Now it’s back to work because I’m supposed to have a drawing done by today too. Criticize the song in the comments, please.
Sometimes inspiration is found in the least likely of places. In this case it’s a web comic by someone that sees things in much the same way as I have come to. The only difference is his lack of acknowledgment of God. But then, sometimes I still wonder if or how He exists.
I don’t know if I should feel a sense of comfort or guilt when I admit that I often feel exactly as he does. Either way, it’s plenty to ponder for a Saturday afternoon.
The pater familias is in town this weekend so song #2 will be a few days late (again).
The Dillinger Escape Plan - Ire Works: It’s everything I hoped it would be, and then some.
Burial - Untrue: I’m not ashamed to admit that Pitchfork tipped me off on this one. I can’t put my finger on why I like it so much yet.
Daft Punk - Alive 2007: Best live album I’ve heard in years.
Jakob - Solace: Great sleeping music.
A few weeks ago, I read Rob Sheridan’s lengthy diatribe about the state of the music industry and his proposed solution to its many problems. The general idea is that the RIAA is killing its own business by using scare tactics, treating its customers like thieves and using its position of power to alter and protect copyright law for its own selfish purposes.
The solution (according to Sheridan): Stop buying music from labels that support the RIAA. Download it for free instead, and then use your money to support the artist directly through merchandise and ticket sales.
That wasn’t a perfect summary, so go read his rant if you have the time. It was both enlightening and concerning.
In the end, I was left with several questions, which I’ll leave with you to ponder as well. If you any answers I would very much appreciate them.
I subscribe to Rhapsody in order to legally access as much music as possible for a low price. Certainly some of the money I give them goes to the RIAA’s efforts. Is my subscription to their service helping or hurting the situation? Would I be better off using illegal means to sample music?
As a follower of Christ, is it my duty to follow the law put before me, or is it to recognize the corruption of the law and do what I can to help correct the situation even if my actions would be considered illegal? (I know that this would be easier to answer if we were talking about something more universally significant than music or art, such as human rights or public health.)
Does “trying before buying” help to improve the problem of there being so much terrible music that still manages to sell well? (In other words, if I only spend money after I’ve concluded that an artist is valuable, does it mean I’m “voting” for the very best and therefore helping only the best artists to succeed?)
These are just a few of the questions that have been spinning in my head for the last few weeks. Right now it’s only a dialog (mostly internal); I don’t want to take any action that I can’t fully justify and support with a reasonable argument. The only “action” I’ve taken so far is to see if what I’m buying supports the RIAA, so I at least have some idea as to where my money is going. In my selfish nature, I know I would love for music to be free and easily accessible, but I refuse to let my own desires get in the way of making a wise decision.
Those who believe they believe in God, but without passion in the heart, without anguish of mind, without uncertainty, without doubt, and even at times without despair, believe only in the idea of God, and not in God himself.
