This is just a thought, but isn’t it weird that some people become afraid of things later in life that they weren’t afraid of when they were younger? For example, most kids are scared of the dark, but are not afraid to pet a snake, pick up a frog or lizard, or crush a spider on the prowl. But when we get older, we lose the fear of the dark (for the most part), yet in some ways we become more afraid of a lizard running loose in the house or become scared to do battle with the dreaded spider. I don’t think this qualifies as a “Deep Thought,” but as “Just a Thought.” Reminds me of an old (but I guess they’re all old by now) Bob Dylan song My Back Pages when he writes, “I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now.”

I’ve written several articles for the Bradenton Herald, but only once have they used the correct title. I know they know more about selling papers than I do, but nobody knows how to give a better title than I do. Well, I’m sure there are some people out there more gifted, but titling things is one of my spiritul gifts. I learned that I’m not good at titling art pieces, but when it comes to sermons, papers, or articles, you don’t question the Title Master. The Herald doesn’t really question, they just change. Anyhow, here’s the article, which should have been titled,
“Happy Are Those Who ‘Make It Big?'”

If you’ve never watched the Pursuit of Happyness, I highly recommend it. I recently wrote an article for the Bradenton Herald dealing with some of my reflections on the movie. But this is a different reflection, so please don’t stop reading. Is the pursuit of happiness just another ‘trivial pursuit?’ It certainly is a ‘trivial pursuit,’ or even harsher, a ‘chasing after the wind’ (as the writer of Ecclesiastes puts it) if happiness is found solely in the attaining of a goal. The problem is that this really is our mindset much of the time. You might think that money will make you happy. Eventually you’ll realize it won’t. But the danger is that you graduate (but don’t realize it) to more ‘spiritually acceptable goals.’ For example, Amy and I would like to start a family. Will we be happy only when that family comes to us (via birth or adoption)? Well should a child come to us “in the usual way,” we’ll get new things to worry about. The health of the child, sex (although I’m more inclined to take a girl now then I was a few years ago) would represent just a few concerns. Then of course, my next goal might be success in school. But is he/she good in sports (I’m thinking of scholarships of course)? What about his/her spiritual condition? Will I only be happy if he/she is growing in faith? What about what college he/she gets in to? Then who they marry-will they make a mistake? Where will they live? Again what about their faith (the most important concern a parent can have)? As you can see, the questions never stop. And as soon as one goal is reached (that is supposed to bring happiness), it is simply replaced by the next question. All along I may never have sought my delight in the Lord. I think its probaby better to do what the bible says, and “Delight yourself in the Lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart.” If I’m not happy now in the Lord, I’ll never be happy, not even with a 3 gospel centered, Reformed, Christian kids who grow up to play for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, who take me fishing in their Hewes flat’s boats in the offseason. It’s true. If God is not our first, and highest delight, we’ll never be happy.

On my kayak fishing forum, I witnessed something I wish I would see more often: an apology. Someone posted a fairly sharp unfounded accusation about a particular man stealing his fishing spots. This triggered a fairly honest and direct response from the accused party. After a series of forum posts siding with the accused, the harsh accuser actually admitted to the accused that he was wrong! An actual apology! Now of course preceding the apology was the standard, “It takes a big man to admit he’s wrong (there’s always pride mixed in with humility),” but it was an actual apology. Then posts soon followed showing great appreciation for his apology. Two things worth noticing here: 1) apologies are seldom uttered in the church, as far as I’ve experienced. I wonder if unbelievers apologize more than we do 2.) the response to an apology is more often well received than ill-received. We ought not to be afraid of sinning against others. If we’re going to be in relationships and community, we will sin (not excusing it, but it is a reality). Being afraid to apologize is really the bigger problem. We Christians ought to do a lot more apologizing than we currently do. We’d probably be suprised at how many more people will listen to us. And maybe they’ll like us more.

In listening to the Sports Animal (620 AM), I’ve come across quite an observation: people are sinful, and yet still moral creatures. When there is an absence of a Christian moral worldview, something will come in and take its place. People just can’t go live without some sense of right and wrong. This week Ian Beckles (of Ron and Ian) stated that a man publishing a book relating to OJ Simpson’s malfeasance “actually got some morals, and decided not to publish it.” But that raises a question. How did such ‘morals’ arrive to our ‘door steps’ or who brought them here? It would be interesting to ask these gentlemen (or the millions like them) such a question. Because most people are not amoral (without morals), would they truly be comfortable with an evolutionary model of their morality? Does this observation further affirm our being created in the Image of God?

While the origin of such morality is uncertain, the proverbial police man of this morality is not: Karma, the new sheriff in town. I used to think that the show My Name is Earl was a spoof on reality. But it is really more a crystal clear picture of American culture than a spoof. I hear something like this, weekly, on sports talk radio: “I can’t wait till Karma catches up with that guy for all he’s done!” And so this leaves me with another question: Is it really easier to believe in an impersonal force like Karma that governs and balances the moral order than a personal and relational God? Or does the prospect of less personal accountability make it easier to believe in Karma? Or does the fact that Karma eliminates the need for grace (which we all have trouble accepting) make it easier to believe in than a Holy and Loving God? Just some thoughts and questions stemming from Sports Talk.

Valentines Day, called Singles Awareness Day (or SAD, according to theologian/model/professional skin boarder Matthew Greenwald) has come upon us yet again. Funny how days seem to repeat themselves once a year. I can remember one Valentines Day past, where a ministry colleague smirked at the testimony of a young woman who claimed “Jesus is my Valentine.” While the term ‘valentine’ doesn’t occur in most translations, or rather any of them, I wonder if the concept of Jesus being someone’s Valentine isn’t more biblical than less biblical. For starters, Jesus does clearly call himself the bridegroom (Matt 9:15). And this is simply a continuation of a husband/wife relationship God shared with Israel-“And as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, So your God will rejoice over you (Isa 62:5).” In addition, the church is described as the wife, and Christ is the husband (Eph 5:23-33). If we sit back and reflect that God looks down upon us with joy, as though we were his bride (a difficult metaphor to grasp if you are a dude), we will see its really not a stretch. Instead of flowers or cards, we get the cross and a love that actually fulfills us. So I guess the best terminology would not be Jesus is MY valentine, but OUR (the church) Valentine. If you want to use that language, I’d fully support you without any smirk or grimace!

In preparing for my next talk on “Why Rest,” I came across a ‘rest’ principle I had previously overlooked. Gordon McDonald helped me find it; I wish I could take credit myself! Anyhow, since we derive meaning in work because we are imitating a God who worked/created, why don’t we look at God’s example in resting in order to better figure out how to rest? When God rested, he didn’t do so because he was tired. No kidding. But it is interesting to look at what one aspect of God’s rest: his reflection. He looked back on creation and deemed it good. He looked back on the work “thy hands have made,” and he said: “not bad at all (in so many or so few words)!” His reflection revealed a deep satisfaction; or in other words, a deep satisfying rest. In order to find the greatest rest on the Sabbath, our thoughts ought to turn to this type of reflection. Should we not then reflect back upon the work of our hands, as well as our relationships, and evaluate them? How are they complete in Christ? Do we ask the question: was this week honoring to Christ, was it meaningful, was it dedicated to Him? I hope to add more backward (not backward like a backwoods sense though) reflection to my celebration of the Sabbath. And in doing so, I beliee that I’ll find much greater rest and enjoyment on that day. So much so that you might hear me singing, “O day of Rest and gladness…(but of course the RUF style and in the key of C-but that goes without mention!”