Superhero personality test

Thanks to my friend Rich for the below.

Hmm...methinks this is a bit suspect...I suppose I agree with the sentence, but accepting the character reference seems a bit arrogant. Anyway, give it a shot, and see what you get! (Then leave your results in the "comment" section.)

Your results:
You are Superman

Superman 80% Spider-Man 70% Iron Man 55% Robin 44% Supergirl 42% Green Lantern 40% Hulk 40% Wonder Woman 37% The Flash 35% Catwoman 30% Batman 30%

You are mild-mannered, good, strong and you love to help others.

Click here to take the Superhero Personality Quiz

"God's Own Party" ?

I'll let the below speak for itself.

No, no...I'll add the thought that I pray George Bush really does the will of God...and rejects this car magnet.

The Quintessential American Album?

So, we're listening to music over dinner (nothing new)...and tonight, my lovely & lively wife has picked the Original Motion Picture Soundtrack to The Blues Brothers. Now, we're great fans of the movie, but this album is also fantastic!

Check out the tracks:

1. She Caught The Katy - Jake
2. Peter Gunn Theme - Jake
3. Gimme Some Lovin' - Jake
4. Shake A Tail Feather - Ray Charles/Jake & Elwood
5. Everybody Needs Somebody To Love - Jake & Elwood/Patty Austin/Vivian Cherry/Ullanda McCullough
6. The Old Landmark - James Brown/Rev. James Cleveland Choir
7. Think - Aretha Franklin/Brenda Corbet/Margaret Branch/Caroline Franklin
8. Theme From Rawhide - Elwood & Jake
9. Minnie The Moocher - Cab Calloway
10. Sweet Home Chicago - Elwood & Jake
11. Jailhouse Rock - Jake

Now, granted, many are remakes by Elwood & Jake...but look at the artists involved!

So, I'm gonna go out on a limb, and suggest that this album be considered for the title of the Quintessential American Album. My arguments:
1. Genres - largely blues and blues-based rock of course--born in America; but also Gospel ("The Old Landmark") and Country/Western (sort-of) ("Theme from Rawhide")...also American concepts.
2. Artists - Ray Charles??!?! James Brown?!??! Aretha Franklin??!?! Cab Calloway?!?!??! Forget the banner, this album is star-spangeled!
3. Familiarity - I would argue that this album would have at least one recognizable track to a vast majority of living Americans, especially both Caucasians and African Americans.
4. Appeal - I just can't listen to this album without moving! It stirs the soul!
5. Musicality - the performances are top-notch, and well beyond the simple I-IV-V-relative minor chord progression!
6. Film/Classic TV Association - I hesitate to mention this one...don't want to mix media...but there is something significant about the inclusion of two Classic TV themes ("Peter Gunn" and "Rawhide"). And the fact that the album contains the songs without which the movie would be extraordinarily lackluster means that the "soul" of the movie is the soundtrack!

Well, there's my 2 cents. Now, readers...over to you. What album would you suggest as the Quintessential American Album? Why? I'd love to hear from you! Please "Post a Comment" and let me know!

Questions and Answers: a Lenten Meditation for Reflectives

Being a "postmodern" has granted a helpful (in my view) perspective on Questions and Answers. I have come to really value Questions. They are the fuel for reflection, indeed. I am reaching a stage in life where one of my favorite pastimes is to turn a meaningful question over and over in my head, looking at it from many different perspectives. Equally, though, I have lost some respect for Answers. That is, I have lost respect for simplistic Answers. Growing in the practice of my reflective nature has uncovered for me the understanding of how few Questions there are which are not, in some way, linked to our own worldview and experience. But of course, this is a basic human truth, is it not?

What postmodernity has failed to do for me is map out an acceptable interaction between Questions and Answers. You see, I am not of the mindset that wisdom lies only in the Questions (although there is much more there than I might have earlier thought!). Just as Answers which exist without Questions are not Answers at all (but rather arguments, propositional statements, claims, etc.), I would postulate that Questions are not meant to survive completely independently. Put simply, Questions and Answers exist symbiotically.

This is where my faith steps in. (And I should note it would be unreasonable for me to attribute all of my growing reflective nature to postmodernity...faith has, I believe, played some role there, too!) My gut-level sense is that Questions tend to live in two broad (and interactive) categories: pragmatic (What time is it? What's your name? When is the bus to arrive?) and philosophical. As for the latter, such Questions can become quite intricate and profound, and there is a whiff of wisdom in believing that their intricateness and profundity suggests not only that a simplistic answer does them (or more accurately, the asker) violence, but that any answer does. But my worldview won't support that, as following that track eventually leads me to a hopeless state of existentialism or nihilism. No, Christianity, once again holding competing truths together in tension, seems to me to suggest that both Questions and Answers can be simultaneously simple and profound.

In addition, our Western, fix-it world seems to be obsessed with the natural flow being from Question to Answer. (Or worse yet, from Answer to Answer, but that's another matter.) To me, the symbiotic relationship must necessarily flow from Answer to Question, as well.

And when I follow all of this progression in any line of thinking, I again and again find my Questions and Answers both beginning and ending with Jesus, and more specifically, with his cross. Jesus teaches me to ask the right Questions, to uncover, in my soul, what is really there--even (especially?) when I don't really know, myself. Jesus invites me to explore the depths of who he is, and find satiation for some of my Questions...before introducing the next Questions to be asked. He is the Answer. Yet he is not only the Answer, he is the Question. He is the Truth...and the Truth, I am finding, is Questions and Answers.

In the surety of my relationship with him, I freely release my surety of other philosophies and wisdom. In the Answer of him, I am freed to ask Questions of him. In the conviction of his death on my behalf, I am released from the expectation of conviction. In this way, I am reborn. In this way, I am remade.

How much would you sleep?

So, I took a random poll around college the other day, and was surprised at the varying results. For anyone who'd like to respond (in the comments section), tell me:

1. If there were no limits in either direction (greater or fewer), and no physical restraints, how many hours per day (24 hrs.) would you sleep?
2. Why?
   

New word with which to impress your friends: Metonymy

http://dictionary.reference.com/ defines it as:
me·ton·y·my
n. pl. me·ton·y·mies

A figure of speech in which one word or phrase is substituted for another with which it is closely associated, as in the use of Washington for the United States government or of the sword for military power.

So, I ran across this in my readings on Calvin and the Lord's Supper. I think there's something here. Calvin posits that the Scriptures frequently appeal to such types of speech. He gives, as an example, how the Holy Spirit appears at Jesus' baptism 'as a dove'. Somehow, it is beyond mere simile or even metaphor, but there is a substantive meaning and representation present.

In reading some of the Reformation historians, I get the sense that they are engulfed in a necessity to define everything. Everything must be explained, even if (especially if?) it is not directly addressed in Scripture. (Remind you of anyone? HINT: modern-day...starts with an 'e'...ends with a 'vangelicals'.)

I dare not suggest that I am directly representative of my culture, but I certainly have an easier time with mystery than some of the Reformers (and their contemporaries) did. In some cases, I find myself a bit puzzled by this need to systematically explain that which neither has nor demands a direct explanation.

This is not to sound unscholarly or anti-intellectual. Hopefully, it only expresses the acceptance of the limits of scholarship and intellect (ooo...how very postmodern of me!). Especially in grappling with theological matters, we may well need to employ the concepts of inference, non-propositional truth, poetic illustration, and yes, metonymy (dang, it's a hard word to type!). E.g., while I don't know if the disciples understood Jesus' words of institution at the first Eucharist, there may be a way that they understood it...and something tells me it had inherently more meaning than the words, themselves.

Then again, what are words? ...but that's for another post!

On Faith: Science, Experience, the Golden Calf and/or YHWH?

To be human is to employ some degree of faith. Whether we have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow, that my heart won't stop beating in the next 30 seconds, or that my beloved still loves me, we all exhibit some sort of belief toward ends that are not 'certifiably' (scientifically?) proven (or provable).

Evangelicals, because of our propensity toward marking the instant of spiritual conversion, tend to regard an individual as not having any faith toward God until one professes (read: cognitively assents to) such faith. Unfortunately, this begs many questions. If to be human is to utilize faith, is it altogether inconceivable that some manner of faith toward God is at work even prior to such confession?

Put another way, is the 'unbeliever' who believes that the sun will rise tomorrow exhibiting faith based only upon scientific and experiential probability? Do not I, as a 'believer', maintain that my understanding--that God indeed sustains all things (including the rising of the sun)--is universally applicable to believer and unbeliever alike (ala Mt 5.45b)? In such a way, is it ever appropriate to say that the 'unbeliever' unknowingly is exhibiting faith in the Sustainer God?

The breakdown of this line of arguing, it occurs to me, is that though faith may be exhibited, the understood object of faith has inherent meaning. The ancient Israelites, when faithfully thanking the golden calf for bringing them out of Egypt, were sinning against YHWH, even when Aaron told them, 'These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.' (Ex 32.4)

So, then, if we can agree that to be human is to practice faith, but the object(s) of our faith is crucial, is the Savior God the initiator of faith in that he creates faith from faithfulness, or would it be more appropriate to say that he re-directs the pre-existent faith of all to its proper place: himself, as revealed through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ?

I believe that the subtle distinction here has something to contribute to discussions of the nature of revelation through to evangelistic strategy.

Jesusdale Mall

So, another megachurch is highlighted in my hometown of the Twin Cities. The article link (http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/local/13808038.htm) will soon expire, but basically, the story is on the weekly attendance at a new, $24m local church building being 8,000. The article highlights (with intended negative responses, doubtlessly) that the church is waiting on its cup holders to arrive to install in chairs.

The evangelical church is so funny to me sometimes. We seem to spend oodles of time and money saying how different we are from the world, yet we tend to take the world's influences in all the wrong ways, then justify them because it's 'in the name of Jesus' (or, more appropriately, in the name of evangelism...but that's for another post). The article is jam-packed with references to all sorts of consumer-driven implementations in the church building: cup-holders, coffee shop, big-screen projection, etc.

When I first read the article, I was bit perplexed. I had been predicting that the age of the megachurch was on the wane...at least in the North Central US. I honestly believed that postmoderns (though very consumeristic) wouldn't ultimately stand for their spirituality to be so indistinguishable from their weekday lives. I really thought that the struggle with intimacy that oft plagues the megachurch would eventually erode it away in a culture that longs for belonging, especially tribal (small group) belonging.

But, this new church has proven me wrong. ...but it won't stop me from praying for such things to happen!