Let's talk about sex

Our sexuality is central to who we are, so it's no wonder that the media and advertising uses it so much to get our attention.

Well, Christians are no different from the rest of the world in that respect, and I was part of a packed house at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre on Saturday to talk about sex - specifically healing from sexual brokenness - at a meeting organised by Living Waters NZ.

It's so encouraging that there are many people willing to discuss this whole issue at the core of who we are, openly.

More later on this, but I was really really challenged by the words of Tony Dolph-something (my apologies, can't find his name and I didn't write it down properly).

He said we buy into the world's way of thinking when we seek happiness as the highest good. God never calls us to happiness necessarily, but to a relationship with Him.

When I put it like that it seems very bald and unattractive, but at the time it was very compelling. And still is; I just struggle to explain what a profound change of my thinking this represents.

Like I say, more on this later.

So someone reads this!

I got an email from someone who actually reads this! Wow. And not just someone, the editor of NZ Netguide, Nige Horrocks.

Made my day, and encouraged me to post again. But what to write about...?

It's not like there's not a lot going on on the spiritual front - in fact God's very busy doing stuff in me... but where to start?

I'll start with what I'm reading right now: What's so amazing about grace?

It's a classic. When I was working at Rhema many years ago I heard about it all the time, yet I haven't read it. Until now.

It's good, very good. Re-emphasising the lessons on God's grace - which is a word in danger of losing its meaning, because when you understand grace, it is crazy. It is amazing.

That's it for now, tune in next time for more...

Thoughts on truth

I recently finished partly reading Why Truth Matters, an exhausting philosophical look at why our society urgently needs objective truth.

What puzzled me was that I was reading familiar arguments for absolute objective truth, from a secular humanistic point of view.

Tres strange!

In particular this quote caught my attention:

"...[E]nquiry, curiosity, interest, investigation, explanation-seeking, are hugely important components of human happiness. This doesn't seem to be a terribly popular thought right now. Public rhetoric tends to aim much lower, for some reason. It seems to see us all as hunkered down, and settling. Settling for minimal, parochial, almost biological satisfactions - family, safety, money. But that underestimates us. We want more than that. We want to ask questions, we want to learn, we want to understand. That's a very human taste and pleasure. ... It seems a waste not to use human capacities and abilities. Anyone can settle for just survival and reproduction and comfort, but we can do more. That's a privilege - and it seems a kind of sacrilege not to use it."

They're facing the same problem faced by philosophers in the 19th century. Remove God from the equation, you can do that with your head, but your heart still wants something sacred. And if you're removed the source of all sacredness, all you have are more questions. And questions only get you so far.

Truth or lack thereof

I sat in a room at the top of the building with a woman yesterday.

Well, actually it was three women - well, two women, one girl - and a man.

The room was one of the Disputes Tribunal rooms at Auckland District Court. The man was a referee, or arbiter, or I don't actually know his title.

One woman was my mum, witness to the event that brought us there.

The other woman was Brenda, driver of "the other car". The girl was her daughter, witness to her side of the story.

It was an interesting experience.

I said Brenda's car hit mine. She said my car hit hers.

It made me think ... how do I deal with people of different belief systems from my own?

My family members, my wife, my friends at church, my work colleagues... all believe some things at odds with what I believe.

Most times, those beliefs are not that important.

But in this case, the belief had consequences. My belief meant I shouldn't pay for the damage (her car was undamaged). Her belief meant I should.

I wanted to get along with her, be on the same page, etc. But I could not accept her truth.

How about the many people I come across every day whose opinions differ from mine on key issues, like:

• whether God exists
• whether Jesus is the messiah
• whether Jesus is God
• whether Jesus rose from the dead
• whether there is an objective Truth or just many truths
• a whole host of other stuff coming out of that...

?

I'm learning the difference between communicating in an understanding way... and agreeing with, celebrating or championing the beliefs of the other.

Understanding is a whole lot different from agreement.

Many of my fellow Christians need to learn the understanding side; too often I've heard people who appear good arguers but that's only because they don't really hear what the other side is saying. They pick holes and technicalities and win the war of words, but not of hearts.

I'm kind of coming from the other end of the spectrum.

I'm learning to be steadfast in my own beliefs, still seeking to understand, but not violating my beliefs by leaving assumptions unchallenged.

Church Shopping

Strange Culture: Church Shopping on King of the Hill

LOL

Constantine

That book says Constantine is the mastermind behind what we know as orthodox Christianity. Here's a brief bio:

Christian History - Constantine - 131 Christians Everyone Should Know

Another theme that's coming up with all the DVC discussion is who cares if Jesus got married?

Good point. I know it does matter, and I'm going to do some thinking about that and post some stuff here.

Another Da Vinci resource

The Da Vinci Code: A Biblical Response -- CBN.com

What's great about this is the at-a-glance refutation of points made in the book.

I am so renting this movie when it comes out on DVD. I'm not going to bother going to the cinema to see it though.

The da Vinci-ing continues...

Christians crack | Movies | Breaking News 24/7 - NEWS.com.au (15-05-2006)

In the above story, the last quote says it all...

Adds Lutzer of Chicago's Moody Church: "There is a huge battle going on today on who has the best telling of the Christian story.

"People want to believe the Da Vinci Code so badly because they want a Christ who is manageable, a Jesus that is not going to challenge you or threaten your lifestyle."

Ain't that the truth!

The inevitable da Vinci code post

I haven't read the book, I haven't seen the movie (obviously, since it hasn't come out yet!) ... but it's pretty much impossible to avoid the da Vinci Code....

On the one hand there are those who claim to be open minded, insisting Christians should see it - what do we have to fear?

Then there are Christians saying we should see it so we're informed of what's going on.

Then there are Christians saying don't support it, it's not worth it!

Here's what I posted to an email discussion group recently:

"The da Vinci Code is compelling because who wouldn't want to challenge the authority figures that have dominated western european history? But the history behind it to my understanding is very flimsy.

No I haven't read Holy Blood, Holy Grail, and yes I am a born again Christian, so I am probably biased.

But I'd also contend that many of those who really love the idea behind dVC are also biased against traditional Christianity, and relishing a chance to "get back" at it, feeling threatened by the perceived danger of "the Christian right".

What's great though is that it has got many people on all levels communicating about the subject matter. There's a whole smattering of Christian websites that have come up since the movie was announced, including:

http://pcgmedia.org/davincianswers.html

http://www.thetruthaboutdavinci.com/

http://www.christianitytoday.com/movies/special/davincicode.html

Hopefully people who fear all evangelical Christians are rabid proselytes who can't handle a bit of digging for the truth, will see that not all Christians are fanatics and are, in fact, quite human. "

News story: Woman dies of starvation trying to emulate Christ

Woman dies of starvation trying to emulate Christ - 11 May 2006 - World News

An example of a sensationalist headline that makes Christians sound and look like weirdos.

When I actually read the story I discovered:

* They haven't determined the cause of death - so it's not certain that starvation was the reason
* She comes from a family who encouraged her in her faith, didn't see fasting as unusual
* She sounds like a normal, well-adjusted person: "she was a 'bubbly' person, who always dressed fashionably and was good with children."

Strange things to point out, but proof that Rosaline Gilbert was not a kook, nevertheless.