Monday, May 22, 2006

Da Vinci Hype

Gary brought it out of me. Didn't really mean to go on this little tirade, but I did. It is copied from the comment section of his blog post, which is an interesting review of the movie. Here are my comments and questions:

Our church, like many others, has been gearing up for the whole Da Vinci event recently. Sermons, guest lecturers, etc., have all come and warned of the herecies and inconsistencies in both the book and the movie.

I remember back when I was in college and the first Gulf War began. I was at Cedarville and there was a learned man who came to speak in one of our daily chapel services to warn us that so many things pointed to the end being near. "Jesus is coming any minute," was his big speach. He scared us all to death, in some ways, making parallels of world events to an interpretation of the last days. At this time too, there were lots of books writen about Iraq as Babylon, all sorts of articles appeared in Christian literature pointing out the parallels.

Then the year 2000. A flip of the calendar, yet somehow we, as the church, needed to be ready for disaster, because that chip with the old date sub routine written in it in the gas meter by our house was gonna explode, even though the date routine was never required of it. More hysteria, more books, more articles, get your canned foods, find shelter, be ready for anything. And a lot of it coming from and for the Christian community.

So now we have Da Vinci, and pardon my cynicism, but where was everybody when Indiana Jones raided the "Lost Ark?" "God-in-a-Box" theology with a great adventure and everything. And the "Last Crusade?" "It's time to ask yourself 'what do you believe?', Dr. Jones..." What? that the holy grail if administered correctly gives healing powers and immortality--but wait, only if you stay behind that line.

What is it that is so new that the Christian community has to study up on because of the release of this book/movie? What skewed biblical principles are being put forth that have not already assulted the Truth of God's word in other writings, books, tv shows and movies for centuries? Why now?

What person, having seen Indiana Jones is going to ask quesitons about God, and eternal life, and the holy grail? What person, after reading or watching Da Vinci is going to start an argument with a known Christian over the elements of the story and their veracity?

Why now is the Christian community suddenly implored to learn how to defend what they believe, when all along, and all around them (us) doctrines of theology and morality have been attacked for years? We are being instructed on how to debunk Da Vinci as though that is the argument to be made. As the fabled story goes (is it true?) bankers learn to identify counterfeit bills not be studying the counterfeits, but by studying the real thing.

So let's ignore the hype and be ready, Da Vinci or not, to be able to defend the reason for the hope found within us.



What do you think?

Saturday, May 13, 2006

He Restores My Soul

Part of Austin's Sunday School assignment is that he memorize several passages of scripture. One of those passages is Psalm 23. He had memorized this before, maybe two years ago, and could recite it fairly well, though it was clear that he had little understanding of it. This time, things are a little different.

Before bedtime we have a little devotional together and I've taken advantage of this time to help him not only relearn these Bible verses, but understand them as well. This time around, instead of memorizing the verses by rote, he can read the passage himself. We are going line by line through the Psalm in a somewhat condensed inductive method, exploring each phrase as he commits it to memory. We encountered the first phrase of the third verse a couple of weeks ago and I've found myself meditating on it over and over ever since.

He restores my soul.

There is a great deal of truth and insight wrapped up in this simple phrase. Here are some thoughts word by word.

He

This pronoun refers back to vs 1. It references "The LORD," Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, here seen as a gentle Shepherd. I was thinking about how our image of this passage is often mixed with the story Jesus told about the shepherd who went to find the one lost sheep. Knowing that one out of 100 was missing and longing for its safety, he went and searched for it until it was returned delicately to the fold. I am not a scholar enough (at all) to know if this is an unprecedented way to view Yahweh. In the Psalms we see "the LORD" as a rock, a deliverer, light, salvation, owner of the earth, etc. Only in two other Psalms is Jehovah referred to as a "Shepherd" (Ps 28 and 80). Nevertheless, the picture being painted, and the dimension being revealed of the LORD in this Psalm is of One who cares for, guides and protects those who would be led by Him.

Restores

There are a great deal of implications emanating from this single word. I think of the following, implicit in this single word: past and future; on-going; teleology; exclusivity of the Spirit; necessity of action; compliance of the recipient.

Some further expansion:

  • Past and Future. The need for restoration is rooted in the past. When man sinned and each of us found ourselves with his nature, the necessity of restoration was (is) required to reestablish fellowship with the Creator. Restoration has a place of resolution seen far into the future (from the human perspective) and in fact will not be totally realized until after death
  • On-going. Not a singular event. Rather, a constant, needful prodding and shaping that took place, is taking place, and will continue to take place
  • Teleological. It is not an arbitrary process. There is a purpose and unique journey and role for each one being restored
  • Exclusivity of the Spirit. Only God can restore. Previous verses speak of the physical needs being met. (Not being in want, green pastures, quiet waters) This restoration of the soul touches a place only the Divine can intersect. Physical contentment mentioned in surrounding verses merely masks the depth of need healed only by the Creator whose image we bear.
  • Necessity of action. This process of restoration is central to fellowship with the LORD, the shepherd, and essential if we are to have hope of eternal fellowship with Him (v 5).
  • Compliance of the recipient. He does not force restoration upon us, he freely gives it, but we must accept it. I have wondered if we are best made aware of our need for restoration once we settle in the green pastures and rest by the quiet waters. Perhaps here in the quiet moments can our need of restoration cut through the din of our assiduous lives.
My

This continues to be a personal Psalm in which we realize that even though shepherds never attend just one of the sheep, this Shepherd has made himself continuously available to the individual.

The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not be in want.
He makes me lie down in green pastures,
he leads me beside quiet waters, he restores my soul.
He guides me in paths of righteousness...

Similar observations can be made throughout the remainder of the Psalm.

Soul

As mentioned earlier, this is a dimension unique to this Shepherd. Where other shepherds can only meet the needs of the physical, this Shepherd is uniquely qualified to minister directly to the spiritual needs of those He tends.

What nuggets of scripture have impacted you or ministered to you like this has to me?

Monday, May 08, 2006

Escher Re-imagined

I'm sure you have all seen this:



This is M.C. Escher's Waterfall. For the less-informed, if you look closely at this picture, you'll see that the water flow is an impossibility, though on two-dimensional paper, it seems like it ought to work. Notice how even the supporting columns look right at the top, but not at the bottom.

Well, thanks to RocketBoom, I found this clever contest held on Worth1000.com. The rules are thus:

We've all got to start somewhere, even the art masters. In this contest your task is to depict the masterpieces of the renassiance [sic] masters (or other time periods) as they were drawn when the masters were children. Do not simply edit existing masterpieces - recreate them through a child's eyes (i.e. a 3d cube would be an early MC Escher, or a paint by numbers Mondrian).

The rules of the game are thus: Show the works of the art masters (sculptures, sketches, and paintings are all fine) as though they were created by the masters when they were children (as in the themepost, "Baby Warhol" by meowza). As always, quality is a must. We will remove poor entries no matter how much we like you. You'll have 48 hours for this contest, so make your submission count.


I thought this was clever. What would a child Escher have handed in to his art teacher? And what would his teacher's responses likely be? Here's an idea:



Thursday, April 27, 2006

Create a Caption


A boy and his dog. What caption best suits this picture?

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Get an Education

For any of you who wondered what it might be like to take a class at UC Berkeley, you can now do it for free. They are experimenting with putting their lectures on iTunes for free download for anyone.

I've decided to take a philosophy class called "Existentialism in Literature and Film." Here is a description of the class:

The course will be organized around various attempts to reinterpret the Judeo/Christian God, and to determine in what sense, if at all, such a God is still a living God. We will study Dostoyevsky's and Kierkegaard's attempts to preserve a non-theological version of the God of Christianity, as well as Nietzche's attempt to save us from belief in any version of God offered by our tradition. We will view and discuss three films that deal with related issues.


In his opening remarks, the professor admits that many students will probably not show up to class, but listen to the lecture while jogging or something. This appears to be a way to solve allowing everyone who wants to take the class to be allowed to take it without a waiting list.

Kind of interesting. This is gonna be great.

Sunday, April 23, 2006

Do Not Top Off

Some time after May of 1995 my wife stopped filling the gas tank of whatever vehicle she happened to be driving. I wasn't crazy about this at first, but then it just became something that I did as a weekly routine. It gave me a chance to monitor the mileage of the vehicles--which was something I actually used to keep track of--and do little things like clean the windshield, check the fluids and all that good stuff.

I am such a creature of routine. There were a couple of things I always did (and continue to do) when putting gas in the car. First, I always wait until there is less than a quarter tank to refill it. Most people do, I think. It's just a matter of lengthening the amount of time between fill-ups. Second, I always fill the tank. I never just put five bucks in , or five gallons. I always fill it. Why? Well, I guess it's the same reason I always reset the odometer--to get an accurate assessment of my fuel consumption per mile. Even now I reset the odometer--every time--even though I never calculate the mileage. Weird.

Somewhere along the way I reasoned that I could never get a true and accurate measurement of the efficiency of the fuel I was consuming unless I knew exactly how much I was putting in. Could the automatic shut-off on the gas pumps be trusted? I didn't believe so. Especially if I went to a number of different gas stations, their mechanisms could all be very different. What if some filled me up to the top and others left a half gallon in the tank? The only way I could be sure of the most accurate measurement is if I could see exactly what was in the tank--i.e., if I could just top it off--even very slowly, I could see just where the fuel level was at the place the nozzle goes in.

Then I started noticing these little signs appearing in various places around the gas pumps. "Warning: Do Not Top Off." "Yeah, yeah, yeah," I thought, "why not? They just don't want me to spill it. I don't spill it. I'm very careful."

Finally, this week I decided to try to do a little research as to why those signs appeared at every gas station. Was it the law? Was it a suggestion? Was it personal preference?

I've since found some compelling reasons to stop topping off the tank.

  1. If you over-fill your tank, the vapor recovery system, installed on most gas pump nozzles will actually suck some of the extra fuel that you just thought you used to top off your car back through the vapor line and back into the storage tank. The bad news is, of course, this fuel has been metered and you've already paid for it!
  2. Topping off your tank affects your car's vapor collection system which in turn will cause your car to run inefficiently.
  3. Spillage. This is always an issue and no matter how careful you may intend to be, you still may spill some gas outside your car. It messes up your paint and can create a potentially hazardous mess for the next customer.
  4. Gasoline expands after it is retrieved from the cool tank in the ground. If you fill your tank to the top, you leave no room for the gas to expand, further sabotaging your car's vapor collection system.
A couple of other items of interest. 1. Fill up your gas tank in the morning or the evening when the gasoline is most dense. You will find that you can get more gas for your dollar (or dollars) at these times. 2. Make sure your gas cap is on tight and doesn't leak. Some metro areas require a gas cap check. This is for environmental reasons as well as efficiency reasons. It is estimated that 147 million gallons of gasoline evaporate through faulty gas caps each year. 3. Make sure your air filter is clean. A dirty air filter will make your car run rich, which obviously consumes more fuel but also wears more on your spark plugs.

It's a habit I'm going to have to learn to break, and even though I know I'm gonna feel like I'm not getting enough gas, from now on, I'm going to resist the urge to top off the tank! What do you usually do?

Thursday, April 20, 2006

New Theme Song

Who else noticed the new theme song of TWiT's episode 50? OK--new arrangement!

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Baseball is back

It's been a while since my last post (sorry) and I've noticed since I last had anything I felt was worth posting, the Major League Baseball season has started.

I was excited when I learned that the season started with the Indians at the White Sox on Sunday night, April 2nd. Excited because ESPN had requested that the game be pushed back from the original Monday afternoon start to Sunday night so that they could air a good division rivalry.

Eric, being the big fan the he is, and me, being the big fan that I am, decided we needed to ring the season in at a place where we could watch the game on a big screen. We found a Damon's and got some ribs. Dave B., Eric's brother in law, and former Ohioan joined us as did Mike P, whom we are slowly but surely converting [back] to baseball.

The game was a drag. They played three or four innings, ended up tied, CC left the game early with a strained muscle in his abdomen, then it rained (in Chicago, that is). It rained for three hours. We didn't stay for the conclusion of the game. We couldn't if we wanted to--the place closed at 10:00. In fact, I couldn't even stay awake for the conclusion of the game once it resumed.

In spite of a let down for the opening day of this season, there are a number of reasons to like baseball. Here's a list of random thoughts regarding the game and what's so great about it.

  • 162 games plus spring training and play-offs
  • You don't have to wait a week for the standings to change
  • A team can overcome a multi-game losing streak and still get to the play-offs
  • Minor league development
  • Minor league games
  • "Duct tape night"
  • The "game within the game" --pitcher, batter, etc
  • No cheer leaders
  • Get into most MLB games for under $10. About as much as going to a movie.
  • Fan participation (foul balls, bats)
  • Free souvenirs
  • No clock to govern the game
  • Managers get tossed
  • Players get tossed
  • Sometimes there's even a bench-clearing fight (close to hockey, Mike and Dan)
  • The defense has the ball
  • Game of threes: 3 strikes/out 3 outs/half-inning, in a perfect game, each batter can face the pitcher 3 times (27 outs=9 innings)
  • No "tie" column in the standings-each game played until somebody wins
  • You can get a tan while watching the game
  • You can eat peanuts (the perfect snack) while watching the game
  • You can leave peanut shells under your seat and someone else will clean it up
  • Sometimes guys collide
  • Double plays
  • Triple plays (I saw one once in KC)
  • Hitting for the cycle
  • A walk off home run
  • Over 100 years of history
  • You get to do corporate singing
  • No replay review by the umpires
  • Cool patterns in the grass.
  • A closer striking out "the side" (doesn't happen for Cleveland)
  • Unbelievable amount of statistics
  • Inside-the-park home runs
  • The many useful metaphors in life derived from baseball (step up to the plate, hit it out of the park, three strikes and you're out, etc)
  • Mid-season trades
What others do you like?

Monday, March 27, 2006

Nothing New Under the Sun

"Badly drawn, badly written...a strain on the young eyes and young nervous systems – the effect of these...nightmares is that of a violent stimulant. Their crude blacks and reds spoil a child's natural sense of color; their hypodermic injection of sex and murder make the child impatient with better, though quieter, stories. Unless we want a coming generation even more ferocious than the present one, parents and teachers throughout America must band together...”

Video games are out of control, right? The above quote was actually taken from a Chicago Daily News editorial in 1940 decrying the contemporary plight of comic books. The days of Mickey Mouse were over. On to Dick Tracey and Flash Gordon.


My recent interest in this was brought on by a series of articles, especially this one in the latest issue of Wired Magazine.


"Every generation believes that preceding generations had more moral fiber, were more devout, that young people are running amok, and that new fangled innovations are hurrying the world to ruin. The fact that every generation over the last 2400 years has believed this, that similar sentiments can be found in Pliny the Elder, Saxo Grammaticus and William Bennett, does not give us pause."



Can it get worse, or is "worse" always a constant hidden by parents and other moral authorities but always sought by the wild "punks?"

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Delete E-mail?

I'm not sure I'm on the same page as Merlin at 43 folders. I rarely delete an e-mail. Hard drive space is inexpensive--especially when it comes to text data. Why delete? You never know when you're going to need to look something up from three, six, twelve months ago. It's easy to do a search (esp on a Mac!).

E-mail is not like snail mail with envelopes, papers, flyers, etc piling up on a desk, always demanding a sort. With e-mail, you can take care of stuff when you need to, flag it, mark as unread, forward it, etc. Why bother erasing?You lose a convenient record of what someone has sent you. What do you do?

Saturday, March 11, 2006

Reading Test

Tihs is wlid. Form this tmie frworad, I tihnk fturue psots sahll be pserenetd in tihs mnaenr.

Saturday, March 04, 2006

Christian Doom

OK--not exactly Doom or Quake, but it's finally here! The chance for Christians to play a shoot-up game--and it's all ok to kill the enemy--if you can't convert them first. (This story has been dug).

Yes, in the ultimate extension of Christian book store "Jesus Junk," there's this from the latest issue of Newsweek:

March 6, 2006 issue - Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition: Christians are finally getting a high-caliber shoot-'em-up videogame of their own. Due out on PCs in the second half of 2006, Left Behind: Eternal Forces is the first game adapted from the blockbuster books by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins.

Let's see....what other ways can Christians still be "Christians" and still have all the fun of the rest of the world?

Friday, March 03, 2006

Firefox Extension

For all you Firefox users out there, check out this great extension. If you're into tabbed browsing like I am, this little extension activates all the tabs like Exposé does on a mac. You can instantly see all the tabs thumbnailed. Hovering over the thumbs enlarges them, then clicking on the thumb, it activates, while the rest go away and the extension closes.

Very slick, very nicely done. Enjoy!

Oh--and it won Grand Prize from Firefox in it's category.

Obeying the Law

Check out these crazy college students who made a lot of people upset by doing the right thing. The drove 55 mph!

Monday, February 27, 2006

Olympics

I didn't get to see too much of the Olympics this year. I enjoyed what I saw (for the most part) and watched with great interest the men's biathlon 12.5 km pursuit. What a cool concept! Cross-country ski for a couple kilometers, then with your heart pounding at 180 bpm+, shoot at five small targets. For every target you miss, you have to take a penalty lap! The lead changed quite a bit because of that!

Overall, the TV ratings for the Olympics were down this year. I was stunned to find this article in a USA Today last weekend with suggestions for how to improve the ratings. I still can't decide if it's satire or if it's honest. Here are parts of it with my comments included:

To many Americans — particularly younger people — the Olympics aren't relevant. Put simply, they aren't cool. "I hear no buzz about the Olympics any more," says Irma Zandl, a trends forecaster. "The Olympics has lost its soul."

Alright. What is THAT about? The Olympics has lost it's soul? Have the Olympics changed that much over the years? Are there not gold, silver, and bronze medals awarded for each event? What has changed here? The Olympics or the surrounding culture?

Fixing the Games' image won't be easy. Or cheap. Or without risk. But it can be done, say sports marketing gurus, image experts and event planners contacted by USA TODAY to brainstorm 10 ways to revive Olympic "cool."

Because "cool" is what it's all about.

1. Put more 'reality' in Olympic TV.

In a world of risqué reality TV shows, people crave nitty-gritty details and down-and-dirty competition.

"They should have athlete confessional rooms" where Olympians privately vent their innermost thoughts to the camera, says David Adler, founder of BiZbash Media, which produces an events trade website and magazine.

Yes, and we know from past "reality" TV programs that everything we the viewer sees is real. What is the deal? This is about the games, right? The conflict is on the ice/snow. Do we need to create artificial conflict so that somehow the athletic competition becomes more interesting, or we're somehow more attuned to the event?

Yet another way to offer more reality TV would be to reinvent the Olympic Village. With its global appeal and throngs of young, hormonally charged athletes, the Olympic Village is ripe for an uber-cool transformation — and maybe a few gimmicks.

Yes--intramural sports meets Mardi Gras. And stop using the word "Über" without the umlaut!

2. Let viewers have a say.

Viewer voting on televised competitions such as American Idol has given rise to new phenomena: official judges might get the last word, but they're no longer the only voice.

This is briliant. Allow the public to have a say in sports they can't even spell, let alone know the rules. The voting would be based on nothing more than superficial qulities of the athletes.

3. Tap more tech.

Rather than banking on the younger set watching TV, Olympic organizers need to move faster in distributing content through other media. Think more podcasting, streaming video, text messaging, even ring tones that have Olympians saying cool phrases...while this might cut prime-time viewing, he says NBC could make up lost revenue with the right fee structure. It could sell an Olympic package for "a couple hundred dollars" or sell viewing rights for individual events, sports or athletes.

You've got to be kidding. People aren't watching the Olympics now when it's brought to them for FREE, so this guy now thinks it would be a great idea to sell subscriptions just because it can appear on alternate media?

4. Spotlight big rivalries.

Any sporting event without rivalry is boring — especially the Olympic Games, says Michael Lynch, senior vice president of marketing for Olympic sponsor Visa USA.

"We could do a much better job building up the rivalries," he says.

Yeah, since the demise of the Sovient Union, the US has lost a real "bad guy" to go after. Who's left? China? Canada?

5. Decide more medals head-to-head.

Gold, silver and bronze medals in timed events could be decided by a single race pitting the three finalists with the best times, says Lynch. "The less done by the clock the better."

Wow--so now the arbiter of the highest standard is completely removed from the equasion. Can you imagine three or four people on the moguls...at the same time?

6. Offer more and hipper music, less and hipper talk

Olympic events need to move to the beat of diverse genres of current music, suggests Carol Moog, a consumer psychologist and blues harmonica player. "It should look more like a music video," she says.

For events such as snowboarding, she says, lose the TV commentary altogether in favor of a Gen Y-favored music mix.

When commentary is called for, NBC should find more young, hip voices, says Katie Paine of KDPaine & Partners, which consults on business reputations. No self-respecting teen wants someone like their father describing snowboarding, she says. "Instead of someone translating snowboard-ese into English, you need someone who actually speaks snowboard-ese."

This is a great point. As long as we're doing it to sport, let's go ahead and reduce music, language, and commentary to the lowest common denominator--so the kids can understand it.

7. Go back to the 4-year wait.

Sponsor pressure nudged organizers to reschedule the Olympic Games from every four years to separating the Winter Games and Summer Games two years apart beginning in 1994 with the Lillehammer Winter Games. "It's created Olympic fatigue," says management consultant Pam Murtaugh. "It was a pinnacle experience that has been diluted by its frequency."

Dude--whether the summer and winter games are combined or not, the wait IS STILL FOUR YEARS! So "Olympic Fatigue" would be reduced if we had both portions in the same year as opposed to one portion seperated out by two years?

8. Be less predictable.

"Unpredictability and surprises really can work to your advantage," says Don Mischer, producer of the Atlanta and Salt Lake City Olympics opening and closing ceremonies, as well as the 2006 Super Bowl half-time show. For the Atlanta Games, Mischer and a handful of people kept the last torch carrier a secret — and awed the crowd when Muhammad Ali came out.

I'm sorry--I think surprisingly few people watch the Olympics for the opening and closing ceremonies. The Olympics, after all are about the games, not the fireworks. And what's the deal with Avril Lavigne?

9. Be more extreme.

Olympic organizers could rip a page from ESPN's extremely lucrative X Games — adding a slate of grittier, heart-pumping events. For the Winter Olympics, organizers should consider adding a snowboarding competition that includes a terrain park with jumps and sliding rails, says Ron Semiao, creator of ESPN's X Games. For the Summer Olympics, he suggests adding skateboarding, bicycle motocross and motorized sports.

I can't put my finger on it, but something seems very diluted and impure about that suggestion. Maybe the motorized portion. The "snowmobiling" race? Could happen.

10. Rethink the Olympic mission.

"Is it about athletic competition at the highest level, or is it about generating revenue?" asks David Carter of Sports Business Group, a consulting firm. Like other big-time sports, the Olympics has become "addicted to the corporate dollar," he says. As a result, more critical decisions are being made by the network and sponsors, not athletes or organizers.

That this is even a question amazes me. This is continuing evidence of how big money has infiltrated all of sports--especially in the US. The ability of the team, the individual contributing unselfishly to the whole, the players/athletes team play is secondary to the money the teams make, the TV revenue generated, the big contracts the players get, etc., etc.

One more thought that may be an unfair generalization of age group who was primarily represented in the Olympics. Could it be that "the kids these days" don't have as much interest in the games because they can't relate to the hard work and dedication it took for these Olympians to achieve all that they have? Could it be that a kid's ability to do virtual snowboarding with cooler tricks that defy virtual reality leaves him uninterested in the true nature of the sport?

Could it be that a large part of overall disinterest in these games by most Americans is that we really don't know anything about the games? What are the rules? What is good form? How are they judged? How is a winner decided?

What about the time zone issue? Are we so used to seeing "instant" results, "live" as it happens that the tape delay just makes it seem less real to us?

I can't wait for the next round of Olympics.

Dashboard

For all you Mac OS 10.4 users, there's a nifty little widget from Google that lets you add an entry to your blog without ever logging in to the web site. I used it for the previous post. It is built specifically for blogger, so I guess I'm talking to Derrak, Emily, Dave....who else?

A great thought

A great line from Dr. Swenson's seminar this morning:

"Jesus didn't try to heal every leper in the world during his earthly ministry."

A good thought as it relates to quantifying your work and ministry.

Wednesday, February 22, 2006

Another dumb online quiz



I am a d6


Take the quiz at dicepool.com

CCM perspectives

Matt Brown, you've done it to me again. Rather than reinvent the wheel, I'm going to re-post what I wrote as a comment on Matt's blog, however incoherent it may be and let the games begin.

This started with a commentary written here, by a guy who I don't think I know, but appears to be from our old stomping grounds. Read his thing first. Here's my commentary:

Yeah--in an effort to be profound, this guy hasn't thought things through all the way. Is Zondervan publishing based on a malicious platform because they publish "christian" material _and_ make money? What about Christian travel agencies that book tours of the holy land?

The problems start with this statement--and I'll comment as we go:

Certain concepts are intrinsic to the operation of the CCM industry, namely that Christian music is a ministry,

Yeah--let's make sure that's dispelled. Companies do exist to make money. Christian radio stations sell advertising, for example. Slapping a "christian" label on something does not preclude its ability to compete with a business model that allows it to survive.

and Christian musicians are ministers (in the church leadership sense)

No. Some, maybe, but the real smart ones--I mean the ones who desire to minister in the church-- avoid being signed all together. Once signed, the label can take much more control about where the artist goes and "ministers" and this is usually at the expense of the many smaller congregations scattered around the country who could go NUTS to have an artist come to their church. Problem is, their venue is too small, so the label sees a loss. This isn't anybody's fault, it's just a reality of the business. If an artist commits to a label, they know what the consequences (good and bad) will be.

who are accorded the same privileges and responsibilities as pastors.

And we cannot blame the artists for this. This is brought to bare by others who bring these kinds of presumptions to the table.

--
In a broader stroke, let's assume that a Christian artist (CCM artist) is a Christian. What does THAT mean? It means that they can sing about anything they want. Just like I can play jazz piano in a club. Just like a (Christian) doctor can practice in a hospital. He doesn't have to go to a "Christian" hospital to work, he just needs to be a Christian doctor where ever he is. He isn't less of a Christian because he doesn't use his gifts on a mission field. The one place that could use Christian artists/musicians is the music industry. The reason Christian artists can sing about or write about anything they want is because that is the reality of life. We don't go through life without some interaction with the "secular." So why should it be ignored in the music?

The point is that CCM artists can sing about God, about biblical things, or they can sing about how they felt when they broke up with their love, or how their car broke down--the difference is their world view--their perspective on life, their view of broader heavenly context.

So--what am I saying--I don't know it's late and I need to go to bed. In a nutshell:

CCM labels are in it for the money: duh.
CCM artist=ministers: no--not in the same way a called pastor is--not all the time.
CCM can be about anything and fall under the umbrella of "kingdom perspective" and not be inappropriate.

For more on this read Charlie Peacock's At the Crossroads: Inside the Past, Present, and Future of Contemporary Christian Music.

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Dedication

I'd like to dedicate this to all my guitar-playing friends--and to anyone who ever wanted to play the guitar for this reason: