How Do You Operate At Work?

I see three different ways we relate to our co-workers in the workplace.  The first two are opposite sides of a continuum and both tend toward distrust and abuse.  The last one is not only a balance between the two but looks to 1 Corinthians 12:12-26 to find a Christ-like model.

Victim (adversarial)
Constantly playing the blame game. Distrust at every corner. "No" is the default mode.

Advocate (vendor relations)
The customer is king and they are my customer.  If the customer wants it, it must be right.

Partnership (the body of Christ advancing)
They are my partner in Christ and I’m here to serve them and other members of the body in service to Christ.  While my upline peers' desires drive me, my primary motivation is for the entire body to make much of Christ.  In this kind of relationship I will provide feedback, exude a can-do attitude, be transparent, have similar motivations to those I'm serving, require humility, and have mature people skills (patience, empathy, kindness, respect, etc).

Also, in a body-of-Christ partnership there are no “blame games”.  All blame is placed on conditions and processes (things we can correct so failures don’t recur no matter who’s in what role).  We fix those conditions and processes so people can operate better.  Blame isn’t ever placed on people.  If we cut off every part of our body that ever had a problem we wouldn't make it.  When we fix the cause of the problem, the problematic body part functions fine again.

Call for Unity

We are One in The Spirit, We are One in The Lord.

And we pray that all unity may one day be restored.

We will work with each other, We will work side by side.

We will guard each man's dignity and save each man's pride.

We will walk with each other, We will walk hand in hand.

Together we'll spread the News that God is in our land.

And they'll know we are Christians by our love.

-Peter Scholte, 1966

Things to do in Nashville when you get tired of going to the movies

Cultural institutions in the Nashville area:

The Frist Center

Adventure Science Center

Belle Meade Plantation

Belmont Mansion

Belmont University Leu Art Gallery

Belmont University School of Music (Events)

Blair School of Music Concert Series

Cheekwood Botanical Garden and Museum of Art

Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum

David Lipscomb University Galleries

Fisk University

The Hermitage

Nashville Public Library

Parthenon

Tennessee State Museum

Tennessee State University Galleries

Vanderbilt University

(I admit, The Frist Center's web site has a list of a lot of these then I added a few of my own)

My polemic: God is not the author of evil despite verses like 1 Sam 16:14

My response to this post: http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/12/where-do-evil-spirits-come-from.html

"Now the Spirit of the Lord had left Saul, and an evil spirit sent from the Lord began to torment him" -1 Samuel 16:14

God sent an evil spirit in the same sense that He sent evil armies to capture His chosen people (Israelites) on occasion. He occasionally uses evil to punish evil. He is, however, not the author of evil (Genesis 1:31, John 1:13, 1 John 1:5, 1 Corinthians 14:33). 

As far as God being benevolent, that sounds like a strawman argument. Believers should never claim the universality of God's "benevolence" (aka, being kindly or charitable) because that's indeed not biblically accurate anyway. God is, however, universally "good". In that I mean he is always either just (in the final analysis people receive what they deserve) or gracious (people are shown favor they don't deserve). However God is never unjust. If someone sees God as not benevolent then the "fault" as it were lies with the person, not with God. God may be acting toward many different ends (refining the person through fire and punishing or judging the person's evil deeds or thoughts, are just two such examples). 

Whether you believe you or people in general are good and God if exists is evil or whether you think it is mankind who chooses evil and God who's inherently good is a if not the fundamental question at the heart of whether you are a believer or not. Your posture to that question determines your trust in God (your faith) and not the other way around.

I'll just add one other thought: the fact that we can be agents of evil doesn't make God (who created us capable of being agents of evil) held morally responsible for our evil any more than it implies we were created "flawed". Our ability to chose to rebel against God, displeasing Him at every corner, doesn't mean we're inherently created flawed rather it merely gives evidence to the fact that we were created with the ability to love. Robots don't love because they simply do the only thing they are capable of (namely to obey their creator; their programming). The fact that we can disobey and create evil is only evidence that God desired to create us with the ability to love Him. Love that is forced or coerced simply isn't love. To love means to have the ability to not love. To always have a perfect world means no one has the ability to choose evil. I think there will be a perfect world one day and all wrongs will be made right but we're not there yet. The decision is ours to choose. Not whether to be good or to be bad but merely whether to have faith that God is good or to not have that faith. As for evidence of His goodness, well that's where we find the object of that faith: the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth (or as we Christians refer to him: Emmanuel: God with us). Properly understood, He is all the evidence we need. He's the smoking gun that points to the goodness of God.

Two different filmmakers, two different films

I was curious how Gary Ross, director of The Hunger Games, was going to handle such a violent, disturbing book. A book which described, among many other things, a child beating another one to death with a rock, another being tortured by wild animals before mercifully being killed by the protagonist. The director handled the violence inherent to the story in a toned-downed, off-screen way, and removed a lot of the most heartless violence. He actually managed a PG-13 rating. In my view this was the lowest possible rating for any movie in which the theme is children killing children for sport. In short: the director did great, given the violent material he had to work with.

Peter Jackson's handling of The Hobbit, however, was a totally different story. Jackson not only added battles not in the original story, he added especially graphic and disturbing images of violence in those moments, and others, that were completely unnecessary, even to Jackson's remade version. Violent, realistic images in The Hobbit includes: multiple decapitations, chopping off of limbs, multiple mutilations by the sword, a stomach sliced open, someone's brain being repeatedly bashed in until he dies (the victim fights back at first then slowly and very clearly dies).

Gary Ross definitely didn't turn Hunger Games into Pollyanna but he lessened the violence. Peter Jackson definitely stepped it up a notch. The result is that Jackson made a film too slow for many adults new to the story and too violent for most children. The fact that this movie doesn't have an R rating is curious to me. The only excuse I can think of is that every gruesome victim is a computer-generating character, not a human. The "evil" creatures are portrayed as ugly, less-than human, hardly worth caring about as they are being mutilated on-screen. Still, in such a realistic portrayal I don't see that as much of an excuse.

Take my advice: Read The Hobbit to your kids, hold off on letting them see the film, and hope Jackson chills the extreme violent images in his next film so you can take them to see it.

A New Fundamentalism

This is a polemic to reactions like these regarding Tennessee's new legislation protecting teachers who allow discussions about the merits for and against evolution.

As one secularist defined "science" in a post today:

The systematic study of the nature and behavior of the material and physical universe, based on observation, experiment, and measurement, and the formulation of laws to describe these facts in general terms.

This definition brought up a good point. It's a decent understanding of what science is but since science itself is just a particular philosophy for describing the world, shouldn't the philosophy of science be up for an intelligent, philosophical debate? And if ever there should be a safe place for those starting out down the wonderful road of science to discuss just what science is in the first place, shouldn't it be in the classroom?

If there is a super-natural that affects the natural, then wouldn't it stand to reason that we could observe the natural being affected?  Nothing in the secularist's definition above precludes us from observing, experimenting, and measuring natural phenomena and formulating hypothesis that involves a super-natural cause. Only secular dogma would prohibit super-natural hypotheses being used to explain natural phenomena. The secular assertion in itself is not a problem.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion as to the possibility of the existence of the supernatural.

The problem for me starts when they then flatly assert that everyone else, to be taken serious, must hold to the same secular opinion that the super-natural couldn't possibly affect the natural and therefore it's outside the realm of science. Now that's just fundamentalism of another kind I suppose.  It's simply one's personal philosophy that determines whether they believe natural phenomena can potentially have super-natural causes. And if that's the case I think super-natural causes are something worth discussing in a science classroom without getting slammed, legally, for it.  Let the discussion about the philosophy of science take place in a safe science classroom environment without the teacher having to fear that she's establishing a religion and infringing upon someone's civil rights. After all, what is science for if not to challenge our preconceived notions.

Hugo: My favorite movie of 2011 and why

[Warning: if you consider it spoiling a movie to discover the underlying theme of the movie prior to watching it, don't read this post until you've seen Hugo.  The movie revealed its theme to me only in the last few minutes.  I really enjoy that revelatory experience and consider it essential for my movie-going enjoyment.  If you agree with me on that and haven't seen the movie yet, don't read on.  just trust me when I say you won't be disappointed by Hugo.]

"I'd imagine the whole world was one big machine. Machines never come with any extra parts, you know. They always come with the exact amount they need. So I figured, if the entire world was one big machine, I couldn't be an extra part. I had to be here for some reason."

 An orphan, a has-been, and a cripple. Three broken people who, more than anything else in life, just want to work correctly.  These are the central characters of Hugo, an amazing movie about one's purpose in life and about finding that purpose in the most unlikely places and in the most unlikely ways.  All other characters (and robots), regardless of their screen time, are present merely to bring these 3 central characters into the right place at the right time in order to reveal that through the midst of great human brokenness, everyone was created with a purpose.

Visually I loved the film.  It had a whimsical quality to it that made you understand, before ever experiencing them, that throughout the film you were going to be exposed to some fantastic, imaginative, unrealistic things.  This was not a study in realism and we have visual cues of that from the beginning.  So when fanciful things happen the audience isn't tempted to say, "that could never happen" but rather the fantastic events just naturally flow out of the visual style of the film.  It's all the beauty of Scorsese's Gangs of New York without all the bother of horror and violence you'd expect in a movie about a sociopath.  No sociopaths to be found here, just broken people glumly pursuing what they all believe is their lot in life, with no idea how much joy awaits them by the end of the film.

While the movie was great fun to watch, the more I recall the various themes in Hugo, the more enjoyment I continue to receive from the film after-the-fact. Hugo is a movie about a fixing things.  Things that are broken. The amazing realization we discover along with the whimsical protagonist, Hugo, is that the things that he needed to fix weren't clocks and they weren't even the amazing mechanical robot that was so precious to him. In fact at the end of the film the robot is as valuable as the scrap metal from which is was built.  It's merely an object whose purpose was to fix the lives of broken people.  Ironically Hugo, one of those broken people, thought his purpose was to fix the broken robot.

The things Hugo fixed were the people's lives who he came across. Just as he eventually fixes the station inspector's broken leg brace, he also manages to fix the inspector's broken life as well (or perhaps more appropriately, his broken heart).  Hugo also manages to fix the broken life of the once-was has-been Georges Melies.  Somehow the mysterious robot in an equally mysterious way brings Hugo into Melies' life in order to fix Melies life and in the process, Hugo's life as well.  So how did the robot seem to be in all the right places at the right times?  Serendipity? Contrived movie plot device? Fate?  Providence?  Coincidence?  If you asked Hugo he'd likely respond that the robot was just one part of a big machine that's as big as the entire earth.  And like all good machines ever created, it was just fulfilling the purpose for which it was built.  It created the most unlikely friendship (Hugo and Georges), fixing both of their lives in the process.

At an emotional climax at the end of the film Georges has to remind Hugo that the robot worked perfectly.  I feel the exact same way about the film itself.

Family Movies (what is a family movie anyway?)

I've been wondering lately, what does it mean for a film to be a "family movie".  More precisely I'm interested in what makes for a "good family movie".  What are the qualities it must have?  Here's the criteria I came up with (leave a comment and tell me what your criteria is):

Right and wrong must be portrayed as such

By that I mean that if there is a character involved in something immoral (dishonoring God) then it should be portrayed as such. Alternatively, righteousness should be seen as a virtue.  I don't mean to say that in a film the guilty must always be punished and good things should happen to those who have love for others.  Rather the tone of the film should be such that it causes us to desire those things regardless whether they happen or not.

Antagonists and protagonists should be so for good reason.  Movies where a lover who tears apart a marriage is also portrayed as the protagonist should be avoided for example.  Movies where you find yourself rooting for the thief to succeed perhaps.

Implicit in this first criteria is that it's okay to watch people portrayed doing wrong things.  If adultry takes place, the film should help us see how hurtful it is though.  If someone is portrayed as being a great parent then the film should portrary them as admirable.  Violence should not be glorified.  Divorce should not be played over lightly.

No family movie should wound a family member

I had to quickly put this criteria after the last one for obvious reasons.  Watching an adultery portrayed on screen and watching a sexual act on screen is two very different things.  There are some black and whites here.  For example, sex acts are meant for the exclusive privacy of a husband and wife and should never be shown or portrayed on screen.  However, there is also a lot of subjectivity.  We should be free to openly discuss sexual matters as a family in an age-appropriate way.  Also, what's wounding to one family might not be for another.  The age of your children is probably the biggest determining factor of what's inappropriate but other factors come into play also such as the parents' history or events in your childrens' past that makes them more sensitive than others.  Levels of violence, language, disrespectful attitudes, godlessness, etc.  All relative to your family's needs.  In the end whatever you watch, no matter how offensive it is, needs to satisfy the rule before this one or else that violent act portrayed is useless violence which ought not make it into any family movie.

Practically-speaking, never watch a movie with your kids (or allow them to get see a movie) that you haven't first looked up on iMDB.com's parental guide or on pluggedin.com.   I would even recommend doing so for movies you've seen before.  Sometimes we see movies through a different lens once we have kids.

Parents must enjoy the film as much as the kids

Too many children's movies don't fit this bill and as such they are relegated to the DVD player on long trips where I don't have to watch them.  There is definitely a difference between a children's movie and a family movie and it completely hsa to do with the amount of enjoyment the parent receives when watching the movie.  Animations are tricky.  They aren't necessarily "children's movie" automatically.  One good rule of thumb when deciding whether an animated film has gone from good children's movie to good family movie is this:  If it's made by Disney, children's movie.  If it's made by Pixar, family movie.  Done.

One thing about this mutual acceptance of a family movie is that all family members need not enjoy the family movie on the same level.  When I watched Hugo with my kids a few weeks ago, we all loved it but they didn't get some of the undertones in the movie (the motif of purpose and brokeness).  They were able to see that when we discussed the movie afterwards but they would have enjoyed the movie all the same had they not realized that the movie wasn't so much about fixing man-made machines as it was about fixing the lives of those men.

The film must give a family something to talk about afterwards

Movies not worth talking about are hardly movies worth seeing at all.  And family movies are no different.  Good movies ought to be discussed and shared among your family.  If a movie doesn't bring a family any closer together than they were before then... what's the point really?

I have enjoyed exposing my kids to many good films and by doing so have expanded their horizons.  They got a glimpse of what it was like to grow up in communist China in Mao's Last Dancer.  They'll see racism when we watch To Kill a Mockingbird or Look Who's Coming for Dinner.  Right before they leave our home and go off to college, I want to watch Citizen Kane with them so they'll be forced to graple with what's really important in life (and what's not).  I want them to see Gattaca with me so we can discuss how no one should limit their potential.

Not every film has to have this heavy of a moral.  Not everything has to be historical or even serious.  But there ought to be room for a conversation.  Questions like, "Why do you think the film maker choose to do this?" or "What was the funniest part to you?" will do fine.

Here is a very random list of films I consider to be "Family Movies" for an age-appropriate family of course, and as always look up the parental guide on iMDB.com before watching any family movie with your kids, even if you've seen it before:

Citizen Kane
To Kill a Mockingbird
The Prestige (warning: PG-13)
The Sting I & IIThe Great Escape
The Sixth Sense (warning: PG-13)
The Bourne Trilogy (warning: PG-13)
Star Trek (the JJ Abrams one; warning: PG-13)
Gandhi
The Princess Bride
Big Fish (warning: PG-13)
Pirates of the Caribbean (warning: PG-13)
Patton
The Truman Show
Mutiny on the Bounty
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner
Gattaca (warning: PG-13)
Back to the Future
Ghostbusters
Paycheck (warning: PG-13)
Better Off Dead
Minority Report (warning: PG-13)
The Goonies
Clue
Patch Adams (warning: PG-13)
Seven Years in Tibet (warning: PG-13)
Jumper (warning: PG-13)
The Hunt For Red October
Salt (warning: PG-13)
National Treasure
August Rush
Mao's Last Dancer
Babies
Apollo 13
Hugo

Protecting your family in an ever-increasingly connected world

In Lewis Carroll’s Alice In Wonderland, to get to wonderland Alice had to dirty her dress, scuff up her shoes, and slide down mud holes. She got there but it was difficult and risky. Alice was brazen. In Carroll’s later poem, “Through the Looking Glass”, the protagonist gets to wonderland by merely walking through the looking glass. It doesn’t seem to cost anything. Wonderland is just a step away, being somehow eerily inside her own home. The world many of us grew up in was full of temptations but often times it was risky; it was hard. Today our kids can walk down any back alley in the world and it’s all just a step away; a click away. The good news is that there is plenty of good solutions for keeping the back alleys where they belong.

Communication
First the obvious. Clearly communicate family expectations to your kids. Set hours of use, what’s appropriate and what’s not, consequences, etc. One idea is to have a family meeting with the outcome being a written contract which everyone in the family signs. Post it in view of computers in the home as a reminder of the commitment everyone has made to God and to each other.

Location, Location, Location

Any computers in the home need to be in public, trafficed areas. If students need to type a paper and they need a quiet place to work, send them to another room and leave a door open. Again, whatever the expectations are for where Internet surfing is permissible, make sure they are clearly communicated up front.

Third-party (free) Monitoring and Blocking tools

Blocking inappropriate web sites has gotten much easier in the past couple years. Thankfully some web filtering companies who sell very high-end devices to corporations have started making their solutions freely available for home-use. Of all the solutions I’ve tried, “K9 Web Protection” from Blue Coat Systems is the all-around winner. It’s free and works for the PC and the Mac [http://k9webprotection.com] as well as iPhones, iPod Touches, and iPads [http://www1.k9webprotection.com/getk9/k9-web-protection-browser - follow the instructions]. Once you've installed the software and told it what to block, your web browser checks with K9’s filtering servers every time you browse to a web page and either allows it or doesn't. You can customize your setup to block the categorizes of sites you want blocked and unblock those that are permissible for your family. There is also reporting, parental alerts, automatic internet shutdown after so many blocked attempts within the same period of time, and more. You can visit their web site for installation/signup procedures. One added benefit to this solution is that if it’s a laptop, it’s installed on that laptop regardless where the laptop travels: onto the neighbor’s unsecured wireless network, over to a friend’s house, etc.

Online Toasters?

If toasters aren’t internet-accessible yet, I’m sure they will be soon. In the last 5 years, more and more electronics have become “Internet accessible”. From TVs, Blu-ray players, Nintendo Wii, Playstation 3, iPod Touch, to handheld gaming devices such as Nintendo DSi and Playstation PSP, “internet-accessible” is everywhere. Just search for “internet-enabled” and you’ll find internet-enabled cat feeders, pianos, and more. The toaster is just around the corner.

The challenge with this new reality is that the K9 Web Protections of the world don’t have filtering software for a Nintendo DSi, Wii, and blueray player (only PCs, Macs, and Apple mobile devices). These devices will taut “parent controls” often but rarely does that mean much other than the parents ability to simply shutoff online capability altogether (something I recommend for devices that don’t specifically need it). There is one very cool solution that will protect all these devices with a fairly descent, although not perfect, amount of accuracy. The solution is elegant and again, free! It provides decent protection for anything using your home Internet connection, all in one single swoop. The solution is called: “OpenDNS”.

OpenDNS [http://www.opendns.com/familyshield/]

First a little Internet background. When you ask the Internet for a web page [http://www.google.com for example], the Internet first decides what the Internet address is of that particular site. It’s kind of like trying to reach me by phone but only knowing my name. You first have to find my phone number by looking up my name in your phonebook. On the Internet, this lookup service are called “domain name service” (or DNS). Your home’s router/modem is given 2 DNS servers by your Internet provider to give it the ability to lookup Internet addresses behind the scenes. AT&T, Comcast, etc all provide you with 2 of their own DNS servers. Following our phonebook analogy, what if your phonebook was nice enough to only include the phone numbers of “nice” people and didn’t include look-up information for anyone else? That’s OpenDNS. If your computer told OpenDNS to find an inappropriate website (because your son or daughter requested such a site) its look-up system knows that web site contains inappropriate material so it just wouldn’t give your computer the correct Internet address. It just won’t work. You have to create an account on OpenDNS’s system in order to tell it what categories of content you want blocked otherwise, unconfigured, it merely blocks pornographic sites (which may fit your needs just fine). In addition to creating an account on their web site (which is optional) the other step (this is isn’t optional) to implement OpenDNS is to either A) purchase an OpenDNS-enabled Internet router or to B) login to your existing router and tell it to use OpenDNSs’ DNS servers instead of the 2 DNS servers you are already using. This option “B” is obviously a bit more technical but doesn’t require any new hardware purchase. It involves typing in OpenDNSs’ 2 DNS servers which are 208.67.222.222 and 208.67.220.220. For more details about OpenDNS, please refer to the link above.

NOTE: Unfortunately, “AT&T U-Verse” customers can’t easily utilize OpenDNS (“AT&T DSL” customers won’t have a problem). There are some very advanced configuration options available to make it work (disabling wireless on the AT&T modem and daisy-chaining another wireless router off of the AT&T device) but for the most part AT&T U-Verse customers will only be able to install K9 Web Protection everywhere and will have to forego the OpenDNS additional layer of protection. AT&T U-Verse reports to have its own parental controls that might be acceptable for you. Click here for instructions on configuring those.


You could consider only using OpenDNS and not installing 3rd party monitoring solutions like K9 Web Protection but I would not recommend it unless all you are looking for is “accident insurance” (protection from you or a child in your home accidentally finding inappropriate material). For the determined one, there are ways around OpenDNS that can be tricky, but possible. I, for one, like the accountability of having K9 Web Protection available. One quick example why K9 Web Protection is so nice is if your neighbor has an open wireless network connection. In that scenario, if your home network blocks inappropriate materials, your child will still be able to hop over onto your neighbors network and will be unrestricted at that point.

Guidelines to follow:

• Recommended Content filter/monitor for PCs and Macs: http://k9webprotection.com
• Recommended Content filter/monitor for everything using your home Internet connection: http://www.opendns.com/familyshield
• Recommended Content filter for iPhones, iPads, and iPod Touches: http://www1.k9webprotection.com/getk9/k9-web-protection-browser
• When specifying a password when installing parental control software of any kind allow one person in the home to know the first half of the password and you know the other half. That way the entire family has accountability.
• If your computer is owned and managed by your company, check with your company’s technical support before installing any content filtering software on their computer. Effective content filtering software is so tamper-proof that it can be difficult for your company to effectively manage your system. Furthermore, your company likely already has content filtering and monitoring software installed on their computers, whether you are aware of it or not. Installing the free K9 Web Protection on a system owned by a business should never be done (doing so breaks Bluecoat’s software’s license agreement and puts your company at risk).
• Do not allow a child unsupervised usage of your company’s computer regardless whether you think it has an Internet connection or not. Many companies have a zero-tolorance policy when it comes to leaving traces of inappropriate Internet content on company-owned devices.
• Parental controls bundled with an Internet provider are tied to that provider’s connection; this shouldn’t be considered “safe” because if your computer has wireless capability, the neighbor’s Internet provider can often times be used as easily as your “protected” Internet provider. Every computer can have wireless capability if it has a USB port (wireless modems are very cheap and very portable).
• Keep in mind that when kids bring their DSi’s or PSP’s into other peoples’ homes, they are bringing with them a doorway into the Internet so lock down those devices using parental controls beforehand or check ahead of time whether the home they are going to has solutions like OpenDNS in place already (show those families how if they don’t!).
• Have a family meeting about Internet usage (allowed times, unacceptable sites, which places around the house are allowed for Internet surfing, about being honest when mistakes are made) and create a subsequent policy that the entire family is aware of (post it on the family computer).
• Put on your geek hat, open a user manual or two, and learn how to access your Internet router’s log of who browsed to what site when and communicate to your family that you will be checking those logs periodically. You wouldn’t let your kids wonder around a huge city without knowing where they are going and the expectation shouldn’t be any different when “wondering” around the web. Many internet routers have the capability to email those logs to you on a daily or weekly basis.
• An alternative to reading your Internet router logs is to utillize the reporting features of both OpenDNS and K9 Web Protection. Let’s face it: Even the most clever of automated solutions can be overcome by a bored, hormone-raging teenager with enough time on his hands. But knowing that every wall they hit in trying to overcome the filter will get reported to their parents/grandparents/girlfirend's parents/etc the less likely they are to try and bypass the filtering solution in the first place.

Links:

• Recommended (free) web filtering/reporting solution on a device-by-device basis: http://k9webprotection.com/
• Recommended (free) web filtering/reporting solution covering an entire household: http://www.opendns.com/familyshield/ (Click "Setup FamilyShield" and choose "Router")
• This is the same as the link above, but a version for the slightly more advanced user: http://www.opendns.com/solutions/household/
• Netgear Internet routers with OpenDNS enabled out of the box: http://bit.ly/cuWnv4
• OpenDNS response for AT&T U-Verse customers: http://www.opendns.com/support/article/305
• Instructions for setting up Parental Controls for AT&T U-Verse customers: http://www.att.com/esupport/article.jsp?sid=KB400849

Your opinion doesn't matter

A friend of mine recently turned me on to this article criticizing Baylor for not allowing homosexual faculty. The writer made good arguments, well reasoned. Intelligent. Still once finished I found the arguments ring empty to me. He acknowledged Baylor's policies rely on "the authority of scripture". But yet the writer never argued against scripture or Baylor's understanding of it. He makes a strong humanist argument and also managed to throw in a presumptuous, "Jesus would have done this". There were no direct reference to any historical truth claim about Jesus yet the author has no problem making assumptions about what the Son of Man would do today.

If the policy is wrong then it's wrong because Baylor and every group of believers up until the last 200 years is either misinterpreting what Jesus, Paul, Moses, and other biblical writers included as "sexual immorality" at the time they were writing or the bible flat-out isn't worthy of being that source of authority because it isn't the source of authority and truth that it claims to be. The author doesn't even attempt to make either case. If you wanna argue, argue biblical misinterpretations or argue anti-bible. If you don't then I'm left with your highly-educated, well-formed, thought-out, kind arguments on one hand, and the truth of the living God on the other. No offense but you lose.

Christians have expectantly waited in cool ways throughout history

Speaking of "expectantly waiting" if you made it to church Wednesday night, I'd like to share with you a really cool backdrop to of one of our most well-know Christmas "carols", O come O Come, Emmanuel.

Today that hymn is known as an "Advent hymn" It is a lyrical embellishment of a very old Gregorian chant. The chant is known as an "O Antiphon" and without getting into too much detail, the chant is recited still today during advent by many, many churches. Different parts are recited on different days leading up to Christmas day, each day focusing on a particular name of Jesus used in the Bible:

* December 17: O Sapientia (O Wisdom)
* December 18: O Adonai (O Adonai)
* December 19: O Radix Jesse (O Root of Jesse)
* December 20: O Clavis David (O Key of David)
* December 21: O Oriens (O Dayspring)
* December 22: O Rex Gentium (O King of the nations)
* December 23: O Emmanuel (O Emmanuel)

What's really neat is that if you take that list of names written in latin above and make an acrostic out of it going from bottom-to-top, you'll see that it spells the latin, "Ero Cras" which translates to "Tomorrow, I will come". Pretty neat huh?

You can thank our Roman Catholic brothers for such a rich and interesting history. Here are the lyrics of that hymn, for your consideration, keeping in mind what we talked about Wednesday night, that we are in a constant state of advent:

O come, Emmanuel,
And ransom captive Israel,
That mourns in lonely exile here
until the Son of God appear.

O come, Thou Rod of Jesse,
free thine own from Satan's tyranny;
From depths of hell Thy people save,
and give them victory over the grave.

O come, Thou Day-spring, come and cheer
our spirits by Thine advent here;
and drive away the shades of night
and pierce the clouds and bring us light!

O come, Thou Key of David, come,
and open wide our heavenly home;
make safe the way that leads on high,
and close the path to misery.

O come, Thou Lord of might,
who to Thy tribes on Sinai's height
In ancient times once gave the law
in cloud, and majesty, and awe.

A Valentine From God

For valentines day I thought about giving you flowers but it dawns on me I've already given you those. I considered chocolate but decided I'd already given you my Son, the sweetest gift I know. I was about to write you a poem but realized you already had my complete anthology to hide in your heart. I thought of jewelry but knowledge and wisdom are more rare than jewels and that I've already given you those as well. To take you out to a restaurant would be fun but more valuable is the water from which you'll never go thirsty again, that too another gift already given long ago through my Son.

As I've given you gift after gift over the years, some of them accepted with immence gratitude, others largely ignored, I decided that perhaps in view of all the incredible gifts I have given you that you might be tempted to fall in love with the gifts themselves, seeking them above all, putting them first, even above the gift giver. So with that I give you myself this year. I give you my love, my heart. Ironically by loving you, I will continue to give gifts like peace and rest and truth and love and hope but through all the gifts I hope you'll remember the gift giver.

Search for me and you will find me

Do not conceal My love from those around you

My love and truth will guard you

A New Advent for a New Testament

At the end of the Old Testament the Messenger of the Lord says this:

[malachi 3:1]

"See, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me. Then the Lord you seek will suddenly come to His temple, the Messenger of the covenant you desire—see, He is coming," says the LORD of Hosts.

This is God’s word.

And with that God's people entered a season of advent. Of expectantly waiting and preparing for the Lord's coming. That season of advent lasted for over 500 years. And then, out of nowhere (or to be more precise, out of Nazareth) almost undetected by everyone the Lord came…

[Luke 2:1-14]

In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that the whole empire should be registered. This first registration took place while Quirinius was governing Syria. So everyone went to be registered, each to his own town. And Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family line of David, to be registered along with Mary, who was engaged to him and was pregnant. While they were there, the time came for her to give birth. Then she gave birth to her firstborn Son, and she wrapped Him snugly in cloth and laid Him in a feeding trough—because there was no room for them at the inn. In the same region, shepherds were staying out in the fields and keeping watch at night over their flock. Then an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. But the angel said to them, "Don't be afraid, for look, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people: today a Savior, who is Messiah the Lord, was born for you in the city of David. This will be the sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped snugly in cloth and lying in a manger." Suddenly there was a multitude of the heavenly host with the angel, praising God and saying: Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to people He favors!

This is God’s word.

Immanuel. God with us. Christmas. Nowell. Whatever you call it, one thing is certain. The advent was finally over.

Now we today refer to "advent" as the brief period of time in which we expectantly wait and prepare to celebrate Jesus' first coming, his birth.

But as you celebrate the season of remembrance we call advent I hope you consider the advent season we live in TODAY. Not a season of the year, but moment in history we find ourselves when we “Advent” or expectantly wait and prepare for the Immanuel to come, For Jesus’ second coming.

I hope this Christmas season reminds us all that our advent is not just about celebrating an important historical event that happened thousands of years ago. But that it is also about expectantly waiting and preparing for the second coming of the Christ. Are you treating others as if you expect Jesus' return? Are you preparing yourself and others today for that return? I want to encourage us all to not let advent fade as December passed, the leaves return, and summer comes around but rather live in a perpetual state of advent, of expectation, of hope, and of preparation for a Savior's return.