Jordan Buckley

Why You Should Boldly Split Infinitives

2010-07-24T20:02:00.002-04:00

Have you ever been condemned by a teacher for using a split infinitive? It's one of the stock grammatical no-no's wielded by English teachers. For example, I was once marked down on a paper for splitting an infinitive in this sentence: "Naval forces were eventually able to completely control the Mississippi River." The issue is that "to control" is an infinitive verb, and supposedly it is an error to insert any other words in between "to" and the rest of the verb.

However, this is an artificial "rule" created by grammarians in a misguided attempt to make English more like Latin. The thinking in the 18th/19th centuries went like this: Latin is the most prestigious language in Western culture, and it has a large, complicated grammar with lots of nitpicky rules. English is an upstart language, and if it's going to rise up in the world it needs to be more like Latin. This attitude led to the creation of many stupid and arbitrary grammatical rules; one of them was the split infinitive rule. In Latin, an infinitive verb was a single word; it was impossible to split. Since Latin infinitives were unsplittable, the thinking went, English ones should be too. Thus the rule was born.

However, according to Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage, "there is nothing grammatically wrong with the split infinitive," and it's often the clearest way to say what you want to say. It's also been used since the 13th century and by writers like Ernest Hemingway and William Faulkner. In addition, a split infinitive is essential to the famous Star Trek introductory sequence:

Space... the Final Frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds; to seek out new life and new civilizations; to boldly go where no man has gone before.

If you tried to "fix" this split infinitive, you would only screw up this classic line.

Instead, with the facts on your side, you should boldly split infinitives any time you want.

Why You Should to Write in Simple Language

2010-06-01T23:51:00.000-04:00

Any fool can write learned language. The vernacular is the real test. If you can't turn your faith into it, then either you don't understand it, or you don't believe it.

- C.S. Lewis, from a letter quoted in Jack: A Life of C.S. Lewis, by George Sayer, 271.

Awesome HD Timelapse of Eyjafjallajökull Eruption

2010-05-14T15:06:00.001-04:00

Iceland, Eyjafjallajökull - May 1st and 2nd, 2010 from Sean Stiegemeier on Vimeo.

Watch it on Vimeo to see it in HD.

(HT: Jon O'Neal)

C.S. Lewis on "Childish" Things

2010-05-07T15:05:00.003-04:00

Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. . . . When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.

- C.S. Lewis, "On Three Ways of Writing for Children" in On Stories: And Other Essays on Literature, ed. Walter Hooper, 34.

The King of Kong

2010-03-22T19:30:00.002-04:00

Last night I descended into the cutthroat world of world-class competitive classic arcade gaming when my friends Matt and Becky introduced me the 2007 documentary The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters. It is absolutely side-splittingly hilarious and simulaneously sad, because the subjects take themselves so seriously. You should check it out if you like video games or if you like to laugh at people who like video games.

This is the legendary Walter Day, who calls all the shots and wears this referee outfit because he's so authoritative.

This is how fast technology has improved

2010-03-20T13:01:00.001-04:00

20GB in 1980 vs 32GB in 2010

(HT: Josh Sowin)

High-Five Etiquette

2010-03-19T00:26:00.000-04:00

Learn how to avoid those awkward high-five screw-ups.

Free New Fonts

2010-01-31T02:13:00.002-05:00

I just got some free fonts from Smashing Magazine. Here's what they look like:

Smashing Magazine is a great design blog, and they regularly post awesome free fonts from around the web. Check out their typography posts here.

Typography

2010-01-24T01:57:00.017-05:00

On a barely related note, my good friend and Resurgence art director Matt Aebersold has a great blog post up with some notes on the history and development of typography:

Read his whole post here. He's got cool art and design-related stuff on his blog all the time, and he posts a lot more than I do.

If you like typography, check out these old foreign-language typefaces:

This is a crop from a 1728 typeface specimen sheet by William Caslon. You can see the whole high-resolution image here. Caslon was an Englishman who designed guns and typefaces in the early 1700s, and he basically became one of the founding fathers of English typography. The font I used for the first image in this post is based on his work.

50 Years of Stupid Grammar Advice

2009-12-24T03:31:00.005-05:00

Geoffrey Pullum, a top linguist, on why Strunk & White's Elements of Style is full of nonsense:

50 Years of Stupid Grammar Advice

A few excerpts:

The book's toxic mix of purism, atavism, and personal eccentricity is not underpinned by a proper grounding in English grammar. It is often so misguided that the authors appear not to notice their own egregious flouting of its own rules. They can't help it, because they don't know how to identify what they condemn. . . .

It's sad. Several generations of college students learned their grammar from the uninformed bossiness of Strunk and White, and the result is a nation of educated people who know they feel vaguely anxious and insecure whenever they write "however" or "than me" or "was" or "which," but can't tell you why. The land of the free in the grip of The Elements of Style.

Read the whole thing here.

5 Christmas Albums That Aren't Lame

2009-12-14T16:06:00.002-05:00

For the past couple years I've been gathering a collection of Christmas hymns that (1) aren't lame and (2) are actually about Jesus. Here are my top Advent hymn collections so far:

Sojourn - Advent Songs
Indelible Grace - Your King Has Come
Mars Hill - Silent Night
High Street Hymns - Love Shall Be Our Token
Red Mountain Church - Silent Night

I also love Sandra McCracken's song "This Is the Christ" (based on a Christmas hymn written by Martin Luther), and the song "This Is War" by Dustin Kensrue of Thrice (thanks to my friend Nick for introducing me to that one).

I'm still looking for more, so comment if you know of more good stuff.

Amazon quick link builder

2009-10-16T15:02:00.006-04:00

Update 2: Better Amazon Referral Link Builder
Genius volunteer Valor Poland came up with a better Amazon affiliate link builder for the Resurgence.

Click and drag this link to your bookmarks toolbar (or right-click and add to favorites):
new and improved amazon bookmarklet

Then go to Amazon, find the book you want to link to, and click the bookmarklet in your toolbar (or favorites); the URL should change to the one with the Resurgence affiliate ID. Copy this URL to use for your Amazon link.

If you get an error message, search again in Amazon for the book you're looking at and click on it. Then try again.

Update: ChristianAudio referral link builder (3/29/10)

Click and drag this link to your bookmarks toolbar (or right-click and add to favorites):
christianaudio bookmarklet

Then try it out: Go to a product page on ChristianAudio.com (here's one) and then click the bookmarklet you just added to your toolbar. The URL should have changed to include a referral code at the end. Use this URL when linking to any product page on ChristianAudio.com.

A big thanks to my great friend Matt Aebersold for helping me figure this out.

Luther: The Multitude of Books Is a Great Evil

2009-09-08T00:40:00.002-04:00

Martin Luther, Table Talk No. 911

The multitude of books is a great evil. There is no measure or limit to this fever for writing; every one must be an author; some out of vanity, to acquire celebrity and raise up a name; others for the sake of lucre and gain. The Bible is now buried under so many commentaries, that the text is nothing regarded. I could wish all my books were buried nine ells deep in the ground, by reason of the ill example they will give, every one seeking to imitate me in writing many books, with the hope of procuring fame. But Christ died not to favour our ambition and vain-glory, but that his name might be glorified.

The aggregation of large libraries tends to divert men's thoughts from the one great book, the Bible, which ought, day and night, to be in every one's hand. My object, my hope, in translating the Scriptures, was to check the so prevalent production of new works, and so to direct men's study and thoughts more closely to the divine Word. Never will the writings of mortal man in any respect equal the sentences inspired by God. We must yield the place of honour to the prophets and the apostles, keeping ourselves prostrate at their feet as we listen to their teaching. I would not have those who read my books, in these stormy times, devote one moment to them which they would otherwise have consecrated to the Bible.

Samuel Johnson on Language Change

2009-08-07T16:59:00.000-04:00

Samuel Johnson (1709-1784), was an English writer and lexicographer, and the author of A Dictionary of the English Language (1755), one of the most influential dictionaries in the history of the English language. In his Preface to the Dictionary, he writes eloquently about the reality of language change and the futility of trying to hold it back:

Those who have been persuaded to think well of my design, require that it should fix our language, and put a stop to those alterations which time and chance have hitherto been suffered to make in it without opposition. With this consequence I will confess that I have flattered myself for a while; but now begin to fear that I have indulged expectation which neither reason nor experience can justify. When we see men grow old and die at a certain time one after another, from century to century, we laugh at the elixir that promises to prolong life to a thousand years; and with equal justice may the lexicographer be derided, who being able to produce no example of a nation that has preserved their words and phrases from mutability, shall imagine that his dictionary can embalm his language, and secure it from corruption and decay, that it is in his power to change sublunary nature, and clear the world at once from folly, vanity, and affectation.

With this hope, however, academies have been instituted, to guard the avenues of their languages, to retain fugitives, and repulse intruders; but their vigilance and activity have hitherto been vain; sounds are too volatile and subtle for legal restraints; to enchain syllables, and to lash the wind, are equally the undertakings of pride, unwilling to measure its desires by its strength.

-Quoted in Robert McCrum, Robert MacNeil, and William Cran, The Story of English, 3rd rev. ed. (New York: Penguin, 2003), 139.

Book Review: No god but God

2009-07-04T02:48:00.003-04:00

No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam, by Reza Aslan (New York: Random House, 2006), 342 pages.

This book is a very lucid and engaging overview of the history of Islam, written by a young Iranian-American scholar of religions. I picked up this book a couple years ago, but was spurred on to reading it by the current uprising in Iran, hoping to get a better understanding of the cultural forces undergirding some of the most momentous events of the age.

Aslan does a great job revealing the cultural milieu in which Islam was born, beginning with a chapter on pre-Islamic Arabia before moving on to the life of Muhammad, the founding of the first Muslim community in Medina, the rapid expansion of Islam after the Prophet’s death, and the rise of the Muslim Caliphates. He devotes special attention to clarifying some of the most-misunderstood aspects of Islam, including a chapter on the meaning of jihad. Aslan shows how Islamic theology and law developed as the power of interpreting the Qur’an became centralized in the hands of the Ulama, the clerical establishment. The story becomes more complicated as various power-struggles and differing interpretations of Islam lead to fractures and the various camps that exist today, including Sunni (orthodox), Shi‘ite, and Sufi Muslims, as well as smaller, more radical sects and interpretations, such as Khomeinism, Wahhabism, and the Taliban.

Aslan’s major theme is the refutation of the idea that Islam is fundamentally opposed to democracy, pluralism, and human rights. He presents Muhammad’s Medina as a radical experiment in egalitarianism and pluralism in its Arab tribal social context, and his presentation of the history makes the case that in the ensuing centuries Islamic leaders often interpreted Muhammad’s message far differently than it was originally envisioned. This leads to the culmination of the book, where Aslan argues that Islam is headed for a “reformation” to parallel the Protestant Reformation, in which the original vision for the faith will be reinterpreted or regained. The violence of groups like Al-Qaeda, he argues, points to the rumblings of this coming Reformation, because they primarily represent a struggle within Islam for the future of the faith.

Aslan’s book is grippingly well-written and fascinating in both its broad coverage and interesting detail. He doesn’t come across as completely objective, however, because he clearly aims to promote his vision of an enlightened Islam and his hope for an Islamic Reformation. It seems like he glosses over some of the questions that have been raised about Muhammad’s integrity and especially the brutality of Islam’s military expansion, saying in effect, “The Christians and Zoroastrians did it too!” Because of this at least apparent lack of objectivity I will probably want to read another perspective on Islam’s history. However, all things considered, I found this book fascinating reading and highly recommend it to anyone who wants to get an overview of the history of Islam.

You can check out more of Reza Aslan's stuff here.

The Clock Ticks Down to Doom: A Frightening Story

2009-06-28T01:46:00.002-04:00

While perusing some old files on my computer this evening, I ran across an old story I wrote for a high school English class when I was fifteen. It's a fictional, tongue-in-cheek story based on some of my experiences growing up as a nerdy kid who loved to read books from the library. I just have to get it out here for the rest of the world. I hope you enjoy it.

-------------------------------------------------------------

The Clock Ticks Down to Doom: A Frightening Story
by Jordan Buckley
1/21/02

One day in my youth, I was happily at work building my army of Legos. Outside, you could see through the trees to the Kennebec River flowing sluggishly by. Mosquitoes, black flies, and other kinds of flies buzzed around, waiting for someone to venture outside and be eaten. That time of the year was called bug season by the local Maine inhabitants.

My array of Lego soldiers was about halfway completed when I heard the garage door and knew my dad was home. Soon afterward my mom began calling me upstairs for dinner. Disappointed that my army was still not in order, I nonetheless hurried upstairs. As we sat down at the table, my dad picked up a nearby book that I had recently borrowed from the public library. It was a book about dinosaurs, and I had long since read it through. He asked me a little about it, and then turned to the back flap. Suddenly the blood began to drain from his face, and I asked him what was wrong. Wordlessly, he handed me the book, open to the back inside cover.

It felt as if an icy chill had enveloped my whole body. There, under the Date Due heading, stamped sloppily in bluish-black ink, was a single date: Feb. 23. Today’s date!

We lived two hours away from the library, and it closed at 7:00 pm. My eyes darted to the wall clock; 6:52 pm. I felt as though a huge ice-cold stone was on top of my chest, crushing the life of my soul. My doom was sealed; we would have to pay the late fee!

Abruptly, like a ray of hope piercing the darkness, my mother’s voice came. “Maybe you can call and renew it in time.” There was still a glimmer of hope. I ran to the phone directory and began fumbling through the pages, hindered by my panic, every now and again glancing at the clock as my end ticked nearer. Finally I located the number with only seconds to spare. In a mad race against time, I dialed the digits, hoping against hope that I could survive this ordeal. Time seemed to crawl as the phone rang, fear welling up inside me that the secretary might have gone home and left me to this horrible fate. To my wondrous joy, she finally answered. Trembling, I asked her to renew my books. Like warm, beautiful sunlight her words came, forever engrained on my heart: “Alright sir, you have an additional two weeks before the books are due.”

Book Review: Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue

2009-05-28T00:28:00.004-04:00

Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue: The Untold History of English, by John McWhorter (Gotham Books, 2008), 256 pages.

This is a very engaging and accessible book by a linguist on certain aspects of the history and grammar of English. I was a little disappointed at the narrow scope of this book: I was looking for a broad history of English, and based on the title that's what I was expecting. However, the book is really focused on making some very specific arguments, namely that English has been deeply affected by Celtic and Old Norse (in a way that has made English uniquely simplified among Germanic languages), and that this is true in spite of the fact that most scholars of English downplay or reject it. He goes on to stress that the history of English should lay to rest fears of the decline of 'good' grammar ("much of what constitutes ordinary Modern English today began as random novelties that floated in, despised as mistakes by the elite"), as well as the myth that language determines worldview (the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis). The book is surprisingly academic in its arguments, in that it interacts with and critiques current scholarship; but it is written in a very popular and entertaining style. I come away with a little more knowledge about the history of English and a respect for John McWhorter as a writer.

I also think it's interesting that McWhorter is not only a linguist, but also a commentator on race in America and a fellow at a conservative think-tank, the Manhattan Institute.

mewithoutYou - it's all crazy! it's all false! it's all a dream! it's alright

2009-05-07T16:46:00.002-04:00

A Kingdom View of Redemption

2009-04-14T22:32:00.003-04:00

Russell Moore on Carl Henry's call for evangelical social engagement rooted in the Kingdom of Christ and God's purpose to redeem the entire cosmos:

Salvation must be articulated in terms of the broader category of the Kingdom, since personal regeneration is about Kingdom advance—since, in the reign of Christ, God "has already impinged upon history in a supreme and decisive way through the incarnation and Christ's conquest over Satan," thereby pointing the cosmos "to a future superlative climax applying the consequences to the whole human race." Evangelicals cannot fall into the crypto-gnostic trap of seeing the material world as intrinsically evil, a very real danger when fundamentalists combine an otherworldly soteriology with a rigidly legalistic personal morality. This means that evangelicals must understand redemption to include a restoration to the creational imperatives of the cultural mandate of Genesis 1:27-28, a mandate that does not allow for a flight from public responsibilities. It further means that Christianity is concerned that social structures conform to objective standards of justice, even as Christians seek the conversion of individuals.

—Russell Moore, The Kingdom of Christ: The New Evangelical Perspective (Crossway, 2004), 85.

Book Review: The Language Instinct

2009-03-03T00:59:00.007-05:00

The Language Instinct, by Steven Pinker (Harper, 2007; first published in 1994), 576 pages.

Quite an interesting scientific look at how language works, written by one of the world's top linguists. Pinker has an engaging style, making technicalities interesting with lots of stories and examples. His main arguments are that (1) language is an astoundingly complex ability that we all take for granted because (2) we are born with a language instinct that provides the framework for us to learn whatever language we grow up around. So language is a special instinct we have, not just something we've invented and learned with our general intelligence. There's also a Universal Grammar which unifies all human grammars, so that deep down all languages are built on a common set of rules (nouns, verbs, phrases, etc.).

Pinker silences the prophets of doom who claim that our language is decaying, when all they focus on are extraneous rules of prescriptive grammar; the foundational, instinctual rules of grammar are in no danger of being lost. Languages have been evolving since Babel, losing old forms and gaining new content through slang and borrowing. The English we speak today is a completely different language than it was 600 years ago, and there's nothing wrong with that.

He also lays to rest the idea that as language "decays" (changes), it can take away our ability to think certain thoughts or express certain concepts. We don't think in English; we think in a language of thought (he calls it "Mentalese") and we use our language to express it. If there's not a word for our idea, we just describe it with other words or else coin a new word. Even though I'm a fan of Orwell, I have to admit these linguists have convinced me he was wrong about the dangers of Newspeak, in which ideas like "freedom" and "rebellion" could be stamped out because there are no words for them. That just isn't the way our minds and our languages work.

Pinker's book makes one revel in the amazing complexity of the machinery we've been given to use language, so much so that it's really incredible when he states that the only possible source of all this glorious complexity is natural selection. It's saddening to see an intelligent man refusing to recognize glory.

Inconsequential Decorations

2009-03-01T02:25:00.003-05:00

One of the world's top linguists, and a skilled writer, discusses the value of prescriptive rules of grammar (e.g., "Never begin a sentence with a conjunction").

What would it take to build a device that could duplicate human language? Obviously, you need to build in some kind of rules, but what kind? Prescriptive rules? Imagine trying to build a talking machine by designing it to obey rules like "Don't split infinitives" or "Never begin a sentence with because." It would just sit there. In fact, we already have machines that don't split infinitives; they're called screwdrivers, bathtubs, cappuccino-makers, and so on. Prescriptive rules are useless without the much more fundamental rules that create the sentences and define the infinitives and list the word because to begin with . . . These rules are never mentioned in style manuals or school grammars because the authors correctly assume that anyone capable of reading the manuals must already have the rules. . . . So when a scientist considers all the high-tech mental machinery needed to arrange words into ordinary sentences, prescriptive rules are, at best, inconsequential little decorations. The very fact that they have to be drilled shows that they are alien to the natural workings of the language system. One can choose to obsess over prescriptive rules, but they have no more to do with human language than the criteria for judging cats at a cat show have to do with mammalian biology.

—Steven Pinker, The Language Instinct, 384.

Patterns of Thought

2009-02-19T02:39:00.004-05:00

Probably the most difficult “patterns” of thought to identify as things to which we should not be “conformed” are those in any culture that the overwhelming majority in the culture think are pretty obvious, but which stand either tangentially skewed with respect to, or totally opposed to, the gospel. Most of us look back on the temptations toward ascetic and gnostic movements in the second and third centuries and marvel that so many people who called themselves Christians were taken in. But the most dangerous movements in any age are those that are so widely assumed that it is very hard to see them. It is easy to discern and denounce yesteryear’s blind spots, and even feel vaguely superior because we are able to do so; it is far more difficult to discern our own.

-D. A. Carson, editorial in Themelios 33.3 (2008): 1.

Fallout and Judgment

2009-01-18T15:50:00.003-05:00

Reading in Jeremiah the other morning, I was struck by the similarities between Jeremiah's portrayal of Israel as a wasteland and the post-apocalyptic world in a game I've been playing, Fallout 3. Jeremiah prophesies about what God is going to do to Israel if they don't turn from their sins: He will make Israel into a deserted wasteland with ruined cities, poisoned water, and dangerous beasts roaming the land (Jeremiah 8). Fallout 3 is set in a world destroyed by nuclear war. The cities are destroyed, the water is poisoned, and the landscape is infested with dangerous creatures spawned by the radiation. The similarities between the game's wasteland (the result of a nuclear holocaust) and the wasteland portrayed in Jeremiah (the result of God's wrath) are striking.

I think this hints at the fact that even today, when most people in the West have abandoned the biblical worldview, we are still preoccupied with sin and judgment. Fallout 3 reflects the fears of the Cold War era: our sin was the accumulation of nuclear weaponry, and judgment would come in the form of a nuclear holocaust. Today the most prevalent doomsday scenarios are environmental. Now the national sins are CO2 emissions, pollution, and deforestation. The prophets of global warming proclaim that judgment will come in the form of storms, rising sea levels, and UV radiation pouring through a depleted ozone layer. The only way we can avoid this judgment is by repenting of our wicked ways and going green. It's the new religion of our time. Like every other fad, it'll go out of style and be replaced by something else eventually. But the human heart won't change. That gnawing awareness of sin and a coming judgment will remain, because as Paul shows in Romans 1, every person alive knows deep down that he owes allegiance to the Creator. I'm praying that the Lord will open the eyes of many people to recognize the true coming judgment and the true salvation of Jesus.

Judging Video Games

2008-05-01T12:48:00.004-04:00

Al Mohler blogged today about the just-released Grand Theft Auto IV, warning us of the moral problems that arise. From what I've seen of the franchise, I agree with one of the game's designers (whom Mohler quotes), who says: "If you let your child play this game, you're a bad parent." However, I'm interested in this question: In what ways is a video game with "blood," "intense violence," "partial nudity," "strong language," "strong sexual content," and "use of drugs and alcohol" different from a movie, novel, or play with these elements? Do we judge these forms of art and entertainment differently? Thoughts are welcome.

Sacred and secular

2008-04-27T19:51:00.014-04:00

I have been thinking recently about the place of art, literature, and culture in the Christian worldview. This is driven partly by an inner struggle: I love these things, but I have a hard time seeing how they fit with the church's mission to proclaim the gospel, and Paul's command to "make the best use of the time" (Eph. 5:16). I can see how we all have different callings and gifts, but in light of the desperate situation of the lost world, it has seemed that the only justification for doing a "secular" job is to have chances to tell people about Jesus. If all of a Christian's energy ought to go toward the church's mission of making disciples, how can we justify spending time and energy on art, literature, music, entertainment, sports, etc., except as means for evangelism?

However, I think I'm beginning to understand that this view, like all wrong views, focuses too much on one aspect of the truth, to the detriment of other aspects. The Bible doesn't teach that evangelism is all that matters. The Kingdom of God is about more than just getting people into it. The Kingdom is not a rejection of human affairs; it's where human affairs are redeemed and made right. "The earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof" (Ps. 24:1), so Paul says, "whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God" (Rom. 10:31). Eating and drinking are some of the most mundane, unspiritual things we do; yet we can do them to the glory of God, if with thankfulness and a desire to please him. How much more can we garden, or mow lawns, or drive a truck, or build computers, or write poetry to the glory of God?

So it is wrong to elevate certain callings above others as more spiritual; to think that it is more godly to become a missionary than a musician or a computer programmer. God has given each person (unbelievers included) certain gifts and desires, and it is wrong to divide them into sacred and secular, when all tasks are sacred and meant to be done to the glory of the Creator.

Here is an excerpt from an essay by Jerram Barrs, a professor at Covenant Seminary:

We exercise dominion now by “making things” with our hands, minds, and imaginations. This task will be ours forever, for on the renewed earth all the creative glory of all the nations will be brought into the kingdom of God to honor Christ (Rev. 21:24–26).

Sometimes, Christians will insist that the only work that is truly worthwhile, pleasing to God, and spiritual is the work of serving the proclamation of the Gospel across the world. This view suggests that if we were all truly earnest Christians, we would leave our “secular” jobs, in which we are simply making a living and ruling the world, and we would all join the “sacred” work of mission. But if we stop and think about Jesus’ life, we see that He was doing so-called “secular” work as a carpenter or a fisherman for many more years than He was a preacher and teacher. It is impossible to suppose that during these years Jesus was living in a manner that was not fully godly and completely pleasing to His Father in heaven.

The import of this reflection on our human calling to “till the garden” of this world with body, mind, and imagination is that the arts need no justification; they are good gifts of God, a basic part of the creation order. Our calling is simply to be thankful for these gifts of sub-creativity. ("Christianity and the Arts," p. 5)

Here are a couple of the resources that have been helping me think through these issues:
Christianity and the Arts (the essay I quoted from above)
9 Reasons I'm a Photographer (Bill Walsh, DG blog)
The Christian Imagination (ed. Leland Ryken, 2002)

Sub-creation

2008-04-19T21:45:00.003-04:00

One of J.R.R. Tolkien's important contributions was his view that human creativity is a result of our being made in the image of God. We have imaginations and use them to create art, poetry, stories, and imaginary worlds because we are created after the model of a God who created a real world out of his own imagination. Because of this, he used the term "sub-creation" to describe human creativity. God alone creates--that is, creates out of nothing. We only make things out of the stuff he has already made; we sub-create. In his essay, "On Fairy Stories," Tolkien writes:

Fantasy remains a human right: we make in our measure and in our derivative mode, because we are made: and not only made, but made in the image and likeness of a Maker. (p. 18)

Originality

2008-04-08T18:31:00.002-04:00

No man who values originality will ever be original. But try to tell the truth as you see it, try to do any bit of work as well as it can be done for the work’s sake, and what men call originality will come unsought.

-C.S. Lewis, "Membership" in Fern-seed and Elephants, and other essays on Christianity (1975), p. 25

Poetry

2008-04-06T16:20:00.003-04:00

I would say that God speaks to us through the power of Beauty, not least because He is the wellspring of all beauty. Good poetry is the summit of literary beauty. To ignore poetry is to ignore what God is trying to say to us through the power of the creative gift that He gives to the great poets of Christendom. We ignore poetry at our peril!

-Joseph Pearce, author of Tolkien: Man and Myth

Value

2008-04-05T23:30:00.002-04:00

It is idle to say that men are of equal value. If value is taken in a worldly sense—if we mean that all men are equally useful or beautiful or good or entertaining—then it is nonsense. If it means that all are of equal value as immortal souls then I think it conceals a dangerous error. The infinite value of each human soul is not a Christian doctrine. God did not die for man because of some value he perceived in him. The value of each human soul considered simply in itself, out of relation to God, is zero. As St. Paul writes, to have died for valuable men would have been not divine but merely heroic; but God died for sinners. He loved us not because we were lovable, but because he is Love. It may be that he loves all equally—he certainly loved all to the death—and I am not certain what the expression means. If there is equality it is in his love, not in us.

-C.S. Lewis, "Membership", in Fern-seed and Elephants, and other essays on Christianity, ed. Walter Hooper, p. 20

Let us not mock God with metaphor

2008-03-29T16:36:00.003-04:00

The Sojourn devotional for this past week introduced me to a moving Easter poem by John Updike:

Seven Stanzas at Easter

Make no mistake: if He rose at all
it was as His body;
if the cells’ dissolution did not reverse, the molecules
re-knit, the amino acids rekindle,
the Church will fall.

It was not as the flowers,
each soft Spring recurrent;
it was not as His Spirit in the mouths and fuddled
eyes of the eleven apostles;
it was as His flesh: ours.

The same hinged thumbs and toes,
the same valved heart
that—pierced—died, withered, paused, and then
regathered out of enduring Might
new strength to enclose.

Let us not mock God with metaphor,
analogy, sidestepping, transcendence;
making of the event a parable, a sign painted in the
faded credulity of earlier ages:
let us walk through the door.

The stone is rolled back, not papier-mâché,
not a stone in a story,
but the vast rock of materiality that in the slow
grinding of time will eclipse for each of us
the wide light of day.

And if we will have an angel at the tomb,
make it a real angel,
weighty with Max Planck’s quanta, vivid with hair,
opaque in the dawn light, robed in real linen
spun on a definite loom.

Let us not seek to make it less monstrous,
for our own convenience, our own sense of beauty,
lest, awakened in one unthinkable hour, we are
embarrassed by the miracle,
and crushed by remonstrance.

From Telephone Poles and Other Poems © 1961 by John Updike.
Citation thanks to www.reformedcatholicism.com

Scribes on Textual Criticism

2008-03-21T19:26:00.002-04:00

"Fool and knave, can't you leave the old reading alone and not alter it!"

-Scribe in the margin of a New Testament manuscript

(Metzger, The Text of the New Testament)

Breaking news

2008-03-19T17:27:00.001-04:00

Report: 32% Of Prayers Deflected Off Passing Satellites

HOUSTON—According to an official NASA report released Saturday, nearly 32 percent of all prayers exiting Earth are deflected off satellites...

Treasures hidden in the heavens

2008-03-07T17:49:00.004-05:00

The diversity of the phenomena of nature is so great, and the treasures hidden in the heavens so rich, precisely in order that the human mind shall never be lacking in fresh nourishment.

Great is God our Lord, great is His power and there is no end to His wisdom. Praise Him you heavens, glorify Him, sun and moon and you planets. For out of Him and through Him, and in Him are all things. . . . We know, oh, so little. To Him be the praise, the honor and the glory from eternity to eternity.

-Johannes Kepler, pioneer in the scientific method, astronomy, and the laws of planetary motion.

Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion

2008-03-07T11:32:00.005-05:00

"Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion, for behold, I come and I will dwell in your midst, declares the Lord. And many nations shall join themselves to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people. And I will dwell in your midst, and you shall know that the Lord of hosts has sent me to you. And the Lord will inherit Judah as his portion in the holy land, and will again choose Jerusalem."

Be silent, all flesh, before the Lord, for he has roused himself from his holy dwelling. (Zechariah 2:10-13)

The Lord God of Heaven, the Almighty, has roused himself to come among us. Twice he repeats it: "I will dwell in your midst." Infinite God, Creator of universes and billions upon billions of light-years of untold vastness of space, has done the unthinkable, the paradoxical, the metaphysically inconceivable--he became one of us. With God nothing will be impossible--not even the impossible.

And many nations even now are streaming to him to join themselves to him, as he said: "When I am lifted up, I will draw all men to myself."

Sing and rejoice. Be silent. Both fitting responses as we gaze in awe at what our Lord has done.

What is Myth?

2008-03-05T23:55:00.008-05:00

What do we mean by the term 'Myth'? One of the most common definitions is that a myth is a story told in primitive cultures to explain the natural world. Greek mythology would be the most well-known example. The activities of the Olympian gods arose to explain the movements of the heavens, the seasons, wars, and so on. Mythology in this sense is seen as primitive and outmoded, something humanity has outgrown with the rise of science and reason to explain the natural world. This negative view of myth flows into a second common usage, in which a myth can be "a falsehood" or "a misconceived notion."

However, writers like J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis use the term 'myth' in a completely different way. Tolkien refers to "myth and fairy-story" as forms of art; Lewis speaks of myth as a vehicle for expressing the inexpressible. These writers are using the term 'myth' in an older sense of an expression of truth through story, a story that presents a way of understanding the world and deals with issues of universal significance. To Lewis and Tolkien, 'myth' is a literary category that, along with fantasy and fairy tale, falls under the broader heading of 'Faërie'--the literature of the fantastic, or that which relates to the imagination.

Part of the confusion with the term 'myth' derives from its use since the 19th century by critical scholars to describe the Bible. In the spirit of Enlightenment rationalism, some scholars explained away biblical accounts of miracles and the supernatural as deliberate fabrication by the disciples. David Friedrich Strauss sought to defend Christianity against these attacks by portraying the Gospels as myth. Thus, he argued, the disciples were not being fraudulent in making up these supernatural stories; they were honestly seeking to express in their own way the significance of Jesus to them. In this way he could argue that the Gospel accounts are valuable and 'true' in some sense, though not historically, factually true. Rudolf Bultmann used myth in a similar manner as he attempted to 'demythologize' Jesus, that is, to strip away the supernatural/mythological (i.e. unhistorical) elements and get to the core kerygma, or message of Jesus.

It is clear that we have on our hands two divergent views of mythology. Strauss and Bultmann saw myth negatively, as that which is nonfactual and must be cleared away to get to the real facts, the truth. Most of us understand the term in the same way, as that which is by definition a made-up story. However, Lewis and Tolkien used the expression in a very different sense. In a later post I want to explore further this understanding of myth and see how it affects our view of literature, Scripture, and truth.

(much of this material is from Matthew Dickerson and David O'Hara, From Homer to Harry Potter: A Handbook on Myth and Fantasy, Brazos, 2006)

Fotografia

2008-02-28T16:53:00.007-05:00

Bob Miller is a guy I met last summer on a mission trip to Reynosa, Mexico. He's a graphic design major at Samford University and an incredible photographer. He spent the month of January in Kenya documenting the violence that erupted there following a disputed election on December 27. Some kind of a deal appears to have been reached now (read about it here), but about 1000 people were killed and a half-million were displaced from their homes. He's got a gallery up with some amazing pictures, and I highly recommend that you check out the entire gallery.

(HT: Stephen DeVries - also a great photographer)

Soft-core atheists

2008-02-23T15:38:00.007-05:00

Today's prominent atheists (Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens) are wimps, argues John F. Haught, writing in the latest issue of The Christian Century (thanks to my friend Brad Davis for pointing out the article to me). Compared to the serious atheist thinkers of the last century, who actually tried to think through the implications of "the death of God," the new atheists are tame, "soft-core atheists."

Haught makes two major criticisms of this new brand of atheist. First, they don't realize that their belief system requires just as much faith as a religion. Their worldview is what's called "scientism," the belief that science is competent to tell us everything there is to know about the universe. If a belief cannot be proven through the scientific method, then it cannot be true, the argument goes. However, there is a glaring flaw in this worldview: it defeats itself. The claim that science is the sole path to truth is itself a claim that has never been and can never be proven by science. The new atheists want to put every belief to the scientific test, except for their own basic assumptions. They too have a doctrinal statement which they hold by pure faith: Science alone can explain the universe. Ultimately, the new atheism is logically contradictory; it cannot even meet its own test.

The second criticism is the reason Haught calls Dawkins, Hitchens and friends "soft-core atheists." Atheists like Friedrich Nietzsche, Albert Camus, and Jean-Paul Sartre thought through what it means for human existence if there is no God, and realized that it is a terrifying prospect. "God is dead," Nietzsche's madman wails, "And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers?" If there is no God, then we are adrift in a meaningless infinity; our existence has no meaning but what we create. Nietzsche's speaker continues:

"We have killed him--you and I. All of us are his murderers. But how did we do this? How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? . . . Are we not plunging continually? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there still any up or down? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is not night continually closing in on us?" (The Gay Science, §125)

Without God, we lose the basis of meaning and of morality. Nietzsche was disgusted by the naivete of those who thought they could keep traditional morality intact without God:

When one gives up the Christian faith, one pulls the right to Christian morality out from under one's feet. This morality is by no means self-evident . . . Christianity is a system, a whole view of things thought out together. By breaking one main concept out of it, the faith in God, one breaks the whole: nothing necessary remains in one's hands. Christianity presupposes that man does not know, cannot know, what is good for him, what evil: he believes in God, who alone knows it. Christian morality is a command; its origin is transcendent; it is beyond all criticism, all right to criticism; it has truth only if God is the truth — it stands and falls with faith in God. (Twilight of the Idols)

Nietzsche, along with Camus and Sartre, recognized the huge implications of atheism, and they believed it would take incredible courage to face up to the bleak reality of such a universe in which there is no meaning above ourselves. In contrast to this "muscular" atheism, Haught points out that the new atheists want to remove God and religion from society, but keep everything else, including a basically traditional Christian system of right and wrong. They simply haven't bothered to face the implications of their ideas. They think that they can blithely rid themselves of the nuisance of a God who deserves to be worshiped, but they are denying the Person who upholds their entire universe. Only by the grace and mercy of God does Christopher Hitchens or any one of us breathe a single breath. In him we live and move and have our being.

We should weep and pray for those whose minds are blinded by the god of this world, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ (2 Cor. 4:4). We should never see them as enemies to be beaten, but as people in a bondage we all once shared. We should love them, reason with them, and pray for them that God would shine the same light into their hearts that he did into ours. And we should pray that God would continue to reveal the places in our own hearts where we think and act as if there is no God. Thank God for his infinite mercy in Christ Jesus our Lord.

the return

2008-02-23T00:44:00.002-05:00

through mist and smoke
          he came
shattered heaven/plunged the skies
          in chaos, fire and light
every eye in hope/and terror saw
          the flaming whiteness sharp/and bright
fury gave way to laughter
          ten thousand songs took flight
no tears remain
          beneath his feet.

a living dance upon dead minds

2008-02-21T16:39:00.005-05:00

I feel I must apologize to the universe (i.e., my three readers) for my horrific delinquency about posting new blog entries lately. Until I can think of something interesting to write about, please accept this (hopefully legal) quotation of one of my favorite poems, penned by Edward Estlin Cummings.

but if a living dance upon dead minds
why,it is love;but at the earliest spear
of sun perfectly should disappear
moon's utmost magic,or stones speak or one
name control more incredible splendor than
our merely universe, love's also there:
and being here imprisoned,tortured here
love everywhere exploding maims and blinds
(but surely does not forget,perish, sleep
cannot be photographed,measured;disdains
the trivial labelling of punctual brains...
-Who wields a poem huger than the grave?
from only Whom shall time no refuge keep
though all the weird worlds must be opened?
)Love

The Lord lifts up those who are bowed down

2008-01-26T21:23:00.000-05:00

Psalm 146

Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, O my soul.
I will praise the Lord as long as I live;
I will sing praises to my God while I have my being.

Do not put your trust in princes,
in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation.
When his breath departs he returns to the earth;
on that very day his plans perish.

Blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob,
whose hope is in the Lord his God,
who made heaven and earth,
the sea, and all that is in them,
who keeps faith forever;
who executes justice for the oppressed,
who gives food to the hungry.

The Lord sets the prisoners free;
the Lord opens of the eyes of the blind.
The Lord lifts up those who are bowed down;
the Lord loves the righteous.

The Lord watches over the sojourners;
he upholds the widow and the fatherless,
but the way of the wicked he brings to ruin.

The Lord will reign forever,
your God, O Zion, to all generations.
Praise the Lord.

Moderation in Controversy

2007-12-20T10:27:00.000-05:00

So numerous indeed and so powerful are the causes which serve to give a false bias to the judgment, that we, upon many occasions, see wise and good men on the wrong as well as on the right side of questions of the first magnitude to society. This circumstance, if duly attended to, would always furnish a lesson of moderation to those who are engaged in any controversy however well persuaded of being in the right.

-Alexander Hamilton, “The Federalist No. 1,” The Federalist: A Commentary on the Constitution of the United States (New York: Random House, 2001), 4.

Tolkien on Myth and Allegory

2007-12-15T17:48:00.000-05:00

Myth and fairy-story must, as all art, reflect and contain in solution elements of moral and religious truth (or error), but not explicit, not in the known form of the primary 'real' world.

-J.R.R. Tolkien, Preface to The Silmarillion, 2nd ed. (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2001), xii.

Wine

2007-11-21T16:31:00.000-05:00

I know I should be very angry if the Mohammedans tried to prevent the rest of us from drinking wine.

-C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1952), 101.

The problem with politics

2007-11-21T16:26:00.000-05:00

An insightful perspective from my grandpa on the inefficiency of government:

I am continually amazed at how little politicians really understand what is good for the country. Maybe it comes from the roots of the word politics--poly-“many”, and tics-“blood sucking insects.”

-Don Nyberg

Every eye will see him

2007-11-10T23:20:00.000-05:00

Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all the tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so, Amen.

"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."

Revelation 1:7-8

"A Procrustean Bed"

2007-10-29T18:57:00.000-04:00

"There are theological costs to be paid when the Biblical evidence is forced to lie on a procrustean bed of absolute antitheses."

-D.A. Carson on Greg Boyd's bad exegesis of Scripture, in a book review of Boyd's God at War, JETS 42.2 (June 1999), p. 262.

If you want to know what a procrustean bed is, you'll have to look it up just like I did.

There Is A Fountain

2007-10-27T21:41:00.001-04:00

This amazing hymn by William Cowper really helps me preach the gospel to myself sometimes. He wrote it after trying to commit suicide.

There is a fountain filled with blood
drawn from Emmanuel's veins;
And sinners plunged beneath that flood
lose all their guilty stains.

The dying thief rejoiced to see
that fountain in his day;
And there may I, though vile as he,
wash all my sins away.

Dear dying Lamb, Thy precious blood
shall never lose its power
Till all the ransomed church of God
be saved to sin no more.

E'er since, by faith, I saw the stream
Thy flowing wounds supply,
Redeeming love has been my theme,
and shall be till I die.

When this poor lisping, stammering tongue
lies silent in the grave,
Then in a nobler, sweeter song,
I'll sing Thy pow'r to save.

Can you believe we sing about a fountain filled with blood? Seems like foolishness—but it's the power of God.

The Lark Ascending

2007-10-16T22:10:00.000-04:00

Tonight I attended the free fall concert by the Southern Seminary orchestra. I didn't know whether I would like it or not, but I knew there would be a violin solo. The concert was incredible. The violin solo was the most beautiful of all. It was based on a composition by Ralph Vaughan Williams called "The Lark Ascending," which is based on a poem by George Meredith. Here are a few lines:

He rises and begins to round,
He drops the silver chain of sound,
Of many links without a break,
In chirrup, whistle, slur, and shake,
All intervolved and spreading wide,
Like water-dimples down a tide
Where ripple ripple overcurls
And eddy into eddy whirls;

So thirsty of his voice is he,
For all to hear and all to know
That he is joy, awake, aglow,
The tumult of the heart to hear
Through pureness filtered crystal-clear,
And know the pleasure sprinkled bright
By simple singing of delight,
Shrill, irreflective, unrestrained,
Rapt, ringing, on the jet sustained

For singing till his heaven fills,
'Tis love of earth that he instills,
And ever winging up and up,
Our valley is his golden cup;
And he the wine which overflows
To lift us with him as he goes--

Till lost on his aerial rings
In light--and then the fancy sings.

The Lord's judgment with tears

2007-10-10T20:07:00.000-04:00

The Lord’s judgment on Moab (Jeremiah 48)

Make Moab drunk, because he magnified himself against the LORD, so that Moab shall wallow in his vomit, and he too shall be held in derision. (v.26)

I know his insolence, declares the LORD;
his boasts are false,
his deeds are false.
Therefore I wail for Moab;
I cry out for all Moab;
for the men of Kir-hareseth I mourn.
More than for Jazer I weep for you,
O vine of Sibmah! (vv.30-32)

Gladness and joy have been taken away
from the fruitful land of Moab;
I have made the wine cease from the winepresses… (v.33)

And I will bring to an end in Moab, declares the LORD, him who offers sacrifice in the high place and makes offerings to his god. Therefore my heart moans for Moab like a flute, and my heart moans like a flute for the men of Kir-hareseth. (vv.35-36)

Moab shall be destroyed and be no longer a people,
because he magnified himself against the LORD. (v.42)

He who flees from the terror shall fall into the pit,
and he who climbs out of the pit shall be caught in the snare.
For I will bring these things upon Moab,
the year of their punishment, declares the LORD. (v. 44)

Yet I will restore the fortunes of Moab in the latter days, declares the LORD. (v.47)

This morning I got near the end of Jeremiah, and I started reading where God pronounces judgment on many nations surrounding Israel. Jeremiah 48 is the Lord’s proclamation of judgment on Moab, a country to the southeast of Israel; Kir-hareseth was their capital city.

The main thing you see here is God’s judgment and wrath, which are very real and terrifying. God is going to wipe them out and make their country into a wasteland. Moab “magnified himself against the LORD,” and in justice God has to utterly crush them. This is frightening. You see a powerful, terrifying side of God. When we think about God’s wrath and judgment, we should be afraid; Jesus said, “fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him!” (Luke 12:5) God is justice itself, and he cannot bear to look at evil and sin; and thank God that he is just! Without him we would have no hope of justice ever prevailing in the world. But this also means that we are all condemned to wrath, because none of us are just.

But one thing is jolting in the midst of God’s wrath and judgment—his tears. He is pouring out judgment; he is not simply “allowing” it to happen; he himself is doing it, but at the same time he weeps for them. Our God’s justice cannot fail, but he is not capricious or sadistic. He does not delight in judgment, though he will not fail to bring it about.

God is more complex than we make him. Some try to say that if God is love, he would never hurt anyone or condemn anyone. But this ignores how awful human sin is. Rejection of God, failing to give thanks (Romans 1:21) to the One who upholds the universe, is the most awful thing possible—and we have all done it. God must deal with sin. So we cannot say, “God’s not a God of judgment, he’s a God of love”—he is both. He unfailingly executes justice, yet he weeps even as he pours out wrath.

So what hope is there for us who are guilty? The very last verse of Jeremiah 48 hints at it. God is a God of mercy. In the midst of wrath and judgment, he makes a way that he doesn’t have to annihilate us. And he does not do it by overlooking sin. Instead of tearfully wiping us all off the face of the earth, as every one of us unquestionably deserves, he tearfully poured out the wrath on his Son (who willingly and gladly accepted the task), so that now in Christ God is always for us. Jesus brings us to God. Jesus is where wrath and mercy meet.

The Return of the King and Jesus

2007-09-30T16:03:00.002-04:00

I am mid-way through The Return of the King, the third part of J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings. The story is epic, sweeping, heroic, and even supernatural. Though Tolkien spoke of his dislike of allegorical stories, and claimed that The Lord of the Rings carried no deeper meaning than a great tale, there are yet many ways that the story echoes the much deeper true story of the cosmos. There is an evil, dark lord who is trying to enslave the world in darkness and fear. Some parts of the world live in peace and prosperity, unaware that there is a great war going on for the fate of Middle Earth, and that their happy lives are possible only because nameless warriors are fighting far off to protect them. As this epic war between the forces of darkness and those of light approaches a climax, hope seems dim; but a king is returning from exile to fight for his people. Aragorn is in many ways a Christ-figure; though he is the rightful king of the realm of Gondor, he wanders in obscurity, veiling his true majesty and power until the time is right. He alone among the race of men is able to wrestle with the dark lord Sauron and not be overcome. He goes into the dark “paths of the dead” where no one else dares to go and is able to command the dead. When he returns to his own city of Minas Tirith where he should rightfully retake the throne of Gondor, having won a great victory over the forces of Mordor, Aragorn hides his true identity again in order to avoid strife until the war is finished. Then when hope is fading for those who have been wounded by the Nazgul, the chief of the enemy’s captains, he cloaks himself and enters the city in order to heal the sick, revealing the hidden power of the kings as healers. An incredibly stirring moment comes when Aragorn sits with Faramir, the son of the Steward, who is fading from the wounds and sorcery of the enemy. Faramir’s father, the Steward, who should have joyfully yielded his stewardship of the city to the returning king, instead refused to acknowledge him and grasped to keep his power. But the noble Faramir is true to his lord, whom he has never yet met, and now the king strives to bring him back from the brink of death:

Now Aragorn knelt beside Faramir, and held a hand upon his brow. And those that watched felt that some great struggle was going on. For Aragorn’s face grew grey with weariness; and ever and anon he called the name of Faramir, but each time more faintly to their hearing, as if Aragorn himself was removed from them, and walked afar in some dark vale, calling for one that was lost. . . . Suddenly Faramir stirred, and he opened his eyes, and he looked on Aragorn who bent over him; and a light of knowledge and love was kindled in his eyes, and he spoke softly. ‘My lord, you called me. I come. What does the king command?’
‘Walk no more in the shadows, but awake!’ said Aragorn. ‘You are weary. Rest a while, and take food, and be ready when I return.’
‘I will, lord,’ said Faramir. ‘For who would lie idle when the king has returned?’ (847-8)

This moment brings tears to my eyes. It recalls my thoughts to the true King, of whom Aragorn is a shadow, calling forth Lazarus from the tomb. It points to the King of glory who, after crushing the Enemy in the great victory that shook the earth and shredded the curtain, called his Bride to awake and come forth out of darkness into his marvelous light.

Aragorn is a fictional character in a fictional story. But it is story that echoes and points to the greater story. The conflict, tension, and resolution of this story and others like it resonates with us because it reflects the epic, true story of creation, fall, redemption, and restoration of which we are a part. We thrill as the true king slays the evil monster because Jesus dealt the decisive blow to the Serpent on the cross, and because he will totally annihilate him in the end. Our hearts rise when the victorious king takes his rightful throne because we long for the day when King Jesus will do precisely that. This is what he said:

“Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay everyone for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” (Revelation 22:12-13)
He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.”
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! (v. 20)

Reading during the football game

2007-09-12T16:50:00.000-04:00

Albert Mohler has a great post on his blog about reading books. For example:

In the course of any given week, I will read several books. I know how much I thrive on this learning and the intellectual stimulation I get from reading. As my wife and family would be first to tell you, I can read almost anytime, anywhere, under almost any kind of conditions. I have a book with me virtually all the time, and have been known to snatch a few moments for reading at stop lights. No, I do not read while driving (though I must admit that it has been a temptation at times). I took books to high school athletic events when I played in the band. [Heap coals of scorn and nerdliness here.] I remember the books -- do you remember the games?

The hidden power of Christ on the cross

2007-09-12T08:45:00.000-04:00

Matthew 27 - Christ is crucified for the sins of the world

And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit.

And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. And the earth shook, and the rocks were split. The tombs also were opened... (Matt. 27:50-52)

Here we get a hint of the power of Jesus, as at the moment he breathes his last breath, the earth quakes, rocks are split, dead people come to life, and the curtain rips. I visualize a shockwave erupting from the cross as the Lord of heaven and earth gave up his spirit. The latent power there! As he hung on the cross in intense pain, people mocking him (just as I would have done), he was at the same time upholding the universe by the word of his power (Hebrews 1). He seemed utterly helpless and defeated, yet he was in complete control! The triumphant Pharisees standing there spitting on him; had he simply ceased to will that they exist, they would have disintegrated into nothing. The earth, the seas, billions of light-years of cosmos--he was holding each atom together by his mighty power (Colossians 1).

When we think of the cross, we often feel sorry for Jesus. What sacrifice! He did indeed suffer greater pain than most of us ever will. He was in torment. But he was not helpless--he was in supreme control. He had brought this entire universe and race of men into existence for that moment. Everything that had happened that awful day was according to the Father's gracious plan (Acts 4:28). Everything that had happened in the history of the world had been leading up to that day, according to God's awe-inspiring plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in Christ, things in heaven and things on earth (Eph. 1:10).

Praise the Lord!
Praise God in his sanctuary;
praise him in his mighty heavens!
Praise him for his mighty deeds;
praise him according to his excellent greatness!
Let everything that has breath praise the Lord!
(Psalm 150:1,2,6)

These are but scattered beams

2007-08-12T13:26:00.000-04:00

"The enjoyment of him is our highest happiness, and is the only happiness with which our souls can be satisfied. To go to heaven, fully to enjoy God, is infinitely better than the most pleasant accommodations here: better than fathers and mothers, husbands, wives, or children, or the company of any or all earthly friends. These are but shadows; but God is the substance. These are but scattered beams; but God is the sun. These are but streams; but God is the fountain. These are but drops; but God is the ocean."

-Jonathan Edwards