who knows how to drive in the rain?

“People in Columbus don’t know how to drive in the rain”

It’s a common refrain I hear from anyone whenever the slightest bit of precipitation falls from the grey Midwestern sky. The traffic on the roads slow down by at least 5 MPH, and minor accidents pop up over the city, causing schedules to be adjusted by five minutes.

I’d like to find these terrible drivers, so they can be properly identified, but I can’t pick them out from the crowd. All I can find are their accusers.

I know I’m not one of the terrible drivers. The only accident I’ve ever been in was courtesy of a minivan that was too busy to stop and exchange insurance information after he put a nice dent into my rear bumper. I’m a good driver. I don’t think anyone of my friends or co-workers are the hazardous drivers either. They’re all the ones who are complaining and join me in my search for those menaces of the road.

I bet you’re a good driver too. You probably nodded your head in agreement with the first line at the top of the page.

Maybe it’s just a numbers game. Maybe there is just one bad driver our there ruining the roads for the rest of us. If you or I can’t pick him out from the crowd, it’s because he’s blending into the masses so well. He only strikes when it’s inconvenient for everybody else. The rest of us, we’re all important people. We have places to be, appointments to make, deadlines to meet. That other guy, he’s just taking abusing his privilege to operate a motor vehicle on the open road, without a care in the world. Wherever he’s going to, it’s not important. I have much more pressing matters than he.

So, to that one nameless, faceless, defenseless person who doesn’t know how to drive, please, for the sake of apparently everyone else in the city, learn how to drive in the rain.

I apologize for making a gross generalization about the public with my opening statement. Let me reword that.

“At least one person in Columbus (who certainly isn’t you or me) doesn’t know how to drive in the rain”

an open letter

An open letter to the leaders and staff of Cru (Don’t worry, it’s the good encouraging kind of open letter)

I figured out that Ohio State starts classes start again this week. I only know that because at church this past Sunday, the demographic shifted many years younger as I was forced to sit in what an older generation of Christians would term the “narthex.”

In years past, this time of year would have kept me occupied as a student leader in Cru. Of course now, three autumns removed from being a student, I can only watch from a distance. Only a handful of student’s timelines overlap with my own Cru experience. Classmates that I stood shoulder to shoulder with have moved into the next stage of life, outside the context of a Christian student body, but familiar faces still remain. Good friends populate the staff and intern teams. The summer has drawn to a close and they return to a routine that they have been doing for many years now, albeit in a different role than we had has students.

I can only imagine the stress and pressure that comes with these newfound responsibilities, the fatigue that can come from ministry. A promising contact card turns out to be a hoax, cold shoulders and mocking laughter comes from disinterested students. A student stands you up for coffee or lunch, or turns out to be simply humoring you. The constant follow ups and mentoring can be personally draining. The glitz and glamour of college ministry (if such a thing even exists) can quickly dissipate.

Despite of all the trials and hardships that come with ministry, God continues to grow the movement on campus. Somehow, among the butchered Gospel presentations, the awkward conversations, the unanswered knocks at the door, students will encounter something that they have never known before. You and I know this because we were once those skeptical students.

We were the ones who thought that Christianity was only for our parents, the ones who thought that the Bible was an outdated, unreliable, set of rules. We were the ones chasing grades over grace. We were the ones looking for acceptance when we have already been accepted. We were the ones who thought that love existed outside of Love himself. We were the ones who avoided our Bible study leaders. We were the ones who remained stoic and silent when we did show up to a Bible study. We were the ones who stood with our arms crossed and mouths closed as the band led worship in Independence Hall, wondering, “What did we get ourselves into?”

Yet we were also the ones who were asked to step up and become leaders. Yet we were the ones who started knocking on doors. We became the ones who were sharing our faith with complete strangers on the Oval, on the beaches of Florida, in South America, in Europe, and in our places of work. God continually placed people in our lives, not only that first week on campus, but throughout however many numbers of years we happened to be an undergrad, who pushed us, challenged us, and pointed us to Christ. Somehow, we became the ones who showed up to church on Sunday morning, removed from the college experience, wondering, “Where did all these young people came from?”

I ask the staff and leadership to remember, that the work God did through you, the work that he continues to do today, goes beyond Real Life or Cru or any other ministry. Cru isn’t a church, but it has been instrumental building the Church.  

Those same students have again descended upon campus again, with their preconceived notions of what their college experience would be like. We all had them at one point. But now, because of how we encountered God, our experience took a radical turn.

I doubt that the words that I’ve written are new. I just wanted you to know that the efforts of the staff and leaders before you have not been in vain. God used them before, and he is using you now. And for that, I am very thankful.

So I implore you, remember yourself when you talk to that freshman for the first time this week. Remember who you were and where you are now.  These young students are in the same position that we once were in. They won’t be exactly like us, but the similarities will be uncanny.  

They stepped onto the campus with their own plan for their lives.

Show them God’s (wonderful) plan. Sorry I couldn't resist

Sincerely,

A thankful former student, a current friend, and an eternal brother

noise report

Commercials, catch words, political slogans, and high-flying intellectual rumors clutter our mental and spiritual space. Our minds and bodies pick them up like a dark suit picks up lint. They decorate us. We willingly emblazon messages on our shirts, caps, even the seat of our pants. Sometime back we had a national campaign against highway billboards. But the billboards were nothing compared to what we now post all over our bodies. We are immersed in birth-to-death and wall-to-wall “noise”, silent and not so silent.

-Dallas Willard, The Divine Conspiracy

That book, published in 1998, was well before the dawn of the social media age, and the internet was still in in childhood stages. First it was billboards that littered the highways with advertising slogans and messages, then the constant pale light of television, and today, of course it is the internet that hurls message after message towards the masses. The dystopian future described in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 does not seem so farfetched today.

Not a day goes by when one cannot be bombarded with constant “noise,” some of it self-inflicted. True solidarity is hard to find. Gyms ironically have televisions at every treadmill and are posted all around the weight area as blaring music plays over the loudspeakers. Of course one can combat this with a good pair of headphones, but that simply substitutes the “noise” for one that is more pleasant and personal. The first thing one does after starting the car is tune to the right radio station or playlist instead of adjusting the mirrors and checking blind spots. When one gets home from work or school, the television turns on right after the briefcase or backpack hits the floor. Even the bathroom, once a sacred palace of solidarity is no longer private thanks to smartphones.

The realm of social media is a microcosm of the modern world. The noise here is amplified even more. And here people cannot distinguish between what is meaningful and what is frivolous. 

Not a day goes by without a post from someone who attempts to rise above the Buzzfeed lists and the recycled memes in order to impart some great truth upon his social media sphere of influence.

This video will change your life!

This will restore your faith in humanity!

Of course that short video will not change one’s life and do very little to alter an already entrenched world view. The instrumental music that plays in the background (probably sounds something like this, great song by the way), perfectly matched up with pictures and video designed to inspire some type of truth may bring the viewer to tears. One will feel compelled to re-post the video and raise awareness for whatever great social injustice flavor of the month, but awareness without action is useless.

The post to restore one’s faith in humanity looks good in a vacuum, when it again is accompanied by the same music that played in the video before. But after one leaves the glow of the computer screen and powers down the smartphone and encounters people in the real world, the sad corrupt and broken reality of human nature is exposed within a matter of a few seconds, and no amount of videos of people practicing random acts of kindness or children standing up to bullies or coming alongside the picked upon will change that fact.

Willard again writes later in the chapter:

In the shambles of fragmented assurances from the past, our longing for goodness and rightness and acceptance -and orientation- makes us cling to bumper slogans, body graffiti, and gift shop nostrums that in our profound upside-down-ness somehow seem deep but in fact make no sense: "Stand up for your rights" sounds good. How about "All I ever needed to know I learned in kindergarten"? And "Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty"... All that is really profound in the cute wisdom is the awesome need of soul to which they incoherently respond. We sense the incoherence lying slightly beneath the surface, and we find the incoherence and lack of fit vaguely pleasing and true to life: What is the point of standing up for rights in a world where few sand up for responsibilities? Your rights will do you little good unless others are responsible. And does one learn in kindergarten how to attract people and make a lot of money by writing books assuring people they already know all they need to know to live well? And how do you practice something that is random? Of course you can't. What is random may hit you, but whatever is purposely done is certainly not random. And no act of beauty is senseless, for the beautiful is never absurd. Nothing is more meaningful than beauty...Absurdity and cuteness are fine to chuckle over and perhaps muse upon. But they are no place to live. They provide no shelter or direction for being human.

These inspirational viral videos, the uplifting stories that come a dime a dozen, are today's "cute noise" and they are indeed a very shaky place to build a lifestyle around. I know this because I have watched those videos and am guilty of reading that article (and in this case, guilty of trying to impart some life lesson on you. The irony is not lost on me). Some of those videos are well put together and succeed at breaking through my stoic nature and would evoke tears had my tear ducts not dried up long ago. But after clicking through, I am still the same person I was before. My life has not been changed by a promotional video. Those videos are effective in proper contexts, but the internet is not that place.

Bible verses and hymn lyrics, sermon excerpts come from the Christian crowd, truths that I agree with and will affirm. But what good are they on someone’s newsfeed? I am not doubting the power of scripture to be clear, but has the person posting this truly sat down and reflected and meditated and prayed over what they posted and come to the conclusion that the rest of the world needed to know what they were thinking? Or did the Christian just want people to know that they fulfilled their spiritual duties by having a “quiet time” at some obscure coffee shop? Were these words ripped out of context to make the verse point to the person who read it rather than to Christ? In the words of John, was the person who posted attempting to decrease himself in order for Jesus to increase, or was he posting to increase the number of his notifications? When a non-believer reads these spiritual musings, do they simply feel annoyed because someone else can’t keep their religion in their pants, or chuckle because there is a glaring inconsistency between the spiritual Christian they see on Facebook and the foul mouthed self-righteous asshole they know in real life? Eventually, for everyone, it all turns to noise.

In John 12, Jesus is living is last days in Jerusalem before he is betrayed and crucified, when this happens:

“Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? But for this purpose I have come to this hour. Father glorify your name.” Then a voice came from heaven: “I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again.” The crowd that stood there and heard it said that it had thundered. Others said, “An angel has spoken to him.” John 12:27-30

When the voice of truth rang audibly into the world for people to hear, they confused it for something else. Perhaps it was thunder, or angels, but not God, not the voice of truth. The crowds around him, even though he as the embodiment of truth and goodness, 100% God and yet 100% man, still did not grasp who he was.

Though he had done so many signs before them, they still not believe in him…Nevertheless, many even of the authorities believed in him, but for fear of the Pharisees they did not confess it, so that they would not be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God. John 12:31, 42-43

When real truth breaks into your life, when something that transcends the witticisms of social media posts, will you be able to recognize it? When you hear it, will you explain it, share it with others, not out of motivation for the approval of your peers, but to bring glory to the one who made it known to you?

A solid foundation to build a life upon is there to be found, but it is not found in the noise of everyday life. It is not confined to 140 characters (Trust me, all @phildaddy90 likes to tweet about is food, bud light lime, pooping, and working out) or some angsty 20-something's blog. I have a few suggestions of where to start, but I think you can guess which direction I'll point you in. 

Sheep know the voice of their shepherd, and that voice is always calling out. I hope you can hear it above the noise.

christmas carol theology

Christmas carols are more than a welcome (or unwelcome) addition to the radio come December every year. It can be easy to take them at face value, but go a little deeper into the words and remember the verses that are cut out of many recordings, and you can find truths that go beyond the usual Christmas card platitudes.

(All links to the recordings are from the church I attend, Veritas Community Church)

Mild he lays his glory by.
Born that man no more may die
Born to raise the sons of earth
Born to give them second birth
Hark! The herald angels sing, glory to the newborn King.

That is Christmas. That is the Gospel. The words of that familiar Christmas carol echo Paul’s words in his letter to the Philippians about the attitude of the Christ

“Who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:6-11)

The rightful king of creation makes his earthly debut as a baby born, most likely in a cave with only his mother and father in attendance. Those who came and visited the makeshift delivery room are shepherds, outcasts of society. The ruler of the time wanted to kill this threat to his reign, this blameless child he saw as a usurper of the throne. It is a very humble beginning of a savior, a very humble beginning for a child who becomes the focal point of all of history.

And so what is our response?

Yet with the woes of sin and strife
The world has suffered long;
Beneath the angel-strain have rolled
Two thousand years of wrong;
And man, at war with man, hears not
The love-song which they bring;
O hush the noise, ye men of strife,
And hear the angels sing.

And ye, beneath life's crushing load,
Whose forms are bending low,
Who toil along the climbing way
With painful steps and slow,
Look now! for glad and golden hours
come swiftly on the wing.
O rest beside the weary road,
And hear the angels sing!

(It Came Upon a Midnight Clear, from the verses you've most likely skipped over. And this arrangement is way better than anything else you've heard)

People are at war with each other. We are at war with ourselves. We are too busy, too skeptical, too proud, or perhaps simply too deaf to hear a great heavenly host singing a song of glory and praise about the one true God. The shepherds were simply minding their own business, tending their flock, perhaps trying just to stay warm and find some food so they can survive another day, to continue a boring existence, when the host of angels broke into the night and changed their lives. There are angels singing the glories of God today. Men and women can now join with them.

Christmas will come and go. The songs on the radio will disappear for 10 or 11 months. The lights will gradually come of the houses and trees, the decorations will go back into storage. The church pews will empty, breaks and vacations will end, and back to school and work people will go. The spirit of goodwill and cheer will slowly fade away.

O come, Thou Rod of Jesse, free
Thine own from Satan’s tyranny;
From depths of hell Thy people save,
And give them victory over the grave.
Rejoice! Rejoice! Emmanuel, shall come to thee oh Israel

Perhaps feelings of goodwill and cheer go away, but God does not. Emannuel, God with us, is more than Hebrew trivia. It is a reality.

In Isaiah 9, the famous prophecy of a savior, the prophet writes that on the people who walked in darkness, “a great light has shone”

The Gospel of John is the only one of the four Gospel accounts that does not tell the story of the birth of Christ, at least not in the traditional sense. But it does open with this:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it…. The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
(John 1:1-5, 9-13)

That is Immanuel. He has come into the world as the light, and the darkness has not overcome it. Life will resume like normal on December 26th, but to walk in darkness is no longer necessary. A mighty God has laid his glory by, the angels and now the world can testify to this, and he is now with us.

This is why we sing. This is why we celebrate. Merry Christmas.

thoughts on the hobbitses (or part 2)

A few years ago, the mind of James Cameron took a recycled plotline and dressed it up with fancy computer graphics and out came Avatar, or as I like to call it: Blue Pocahontas in Space with No Musical Numbers. The Western-European clashing with an indignant people metaphor had been played out on the big screen several times before, but the stunning visual effects of some distant planet was enough to distract people from the fact that this plot had been explored before, and that the acting and storytelling simply wasn’t that great.

(This is a continuation of some previous thoughts)

In today’s cinema, the use of CGI lets movie makers create expansive, beautiful, detailed worlds. Despite what your feelings about the overuse of this technology, it is impossible to deny the beauty of the environments they create in contrast to a green screen. CGI allows for extended and more intricate battle and action sequences. Watching a fight unfold on screen is infinitely more exciting and infinitely less confusing than reading a play by play of the mechanics of a swordsman.

A movie maker only has a few short (or long, depending on how much you enjoy the film) hours to sweep the audience into the fictional world. Some do this by throwing the viewer into the world through action sequence after action sequence, to get the heart pumping, to hurry up and get into the thrill ride without paying attention to the rest of the surroundings. And when the viewer does get a chance to catch his breath, he will see beautifully rendered computer generated environments and then after a brief reprise, it is back to the action.

However, what makes a fictional world come to life is not look of the surroundings, but the people and creatures who populate them. Are they believable? Can they sustain an existence in that universe after the screen has gone black, or do they exist simply for the purposes of moving the plot forward?

There are several themes present in Tolkien’s works. This idea of pride and corrupting power, the necessity and strength of camaraderie and brotherhood, are both set against a much larger backdrop of a cosmic clash between good and evil. The goal film adaptations should bring these themes to the screen, where the characters who play their roles are believable and can be empathized with. These overarching themes are definitely present in the latest Hobbit film, but will the viewer care about them?

In all of Tolkien’s books, he is very deliberate. He takes the time to make sure every detail is known in his long and extended conversation with the reader. He has the page space to do so. And this adds to the feeling that Bilbo’s adventure is a long (unexpected) journey. There is a lot of walking to be done, and much to be experienced in this expansive Middle-earth that Bilbo is slowly discovering.

The Desolation of Smaug contrasted with the book, is more of a sprint, an elaborate chase scene. It is one that looks great on screen, that will keep one entertained, but at the end of the day, it could be argued that it is no more than a glorified action movie with its themes tucked away in the background, and when the quieter moments come the viewer is reminded that those themes are still there, but we must ask ourselves, do we care? Do we remember why we are here in the first place? Is the stubborn pride of the dwarves, the allure of power and the symbolism of the Arkenstone, do they justify the action that has taken place on screen? Does the tension between elf and dwarf feel organic or is it forced? When one crosses party lines to help the other side, is it groundbreaking or predictable? Are the citizens of Lake-town honest hardworking people who are have slaved under the rule of a drunken corrupt master or do they just populate the poverty stricken city as a collective damsel  in distress awaiting their heroes?

The underlying question is this: Is the world that the movie portrays a world where the audience can work, breathe, and live in, or is it just a pretty picture on the wall to be admired from a distance, and then after enough time has passed, they can move on to the next one?

Action movies are praised for the fight scenes, the car chases, the explosions, and the carnage. Plot holes abound in these types. But people don’t go into these movies expecting some sort of life lesson or revelation. Relationships are thrown in to add a douse of humanity, an obligatory love interest, some cheesy dialogue, and the audience bemoans these scenes and simply wants to get back to the action.

The preface to Tolkien’s Epic trilogy should establish familiar themes that will continue through the rest of the story and shed light on the lesser known corners of Middle-earth. The Hobbit movies certainly attempt to do so. Perhaps it is dealt an unfortunate task and an impossible follow up to the trilogy that truly transported audiences to Middle-earth a decade ago. Still, it is very possible. If a young sixth grader like myself many years ago could pick up The Hobbit and stumble through words that were too big and concepts that I did not fully understand, then surely, movie makers who are much smarter than I was once can recapture that same awe on the screen.

It happened once before. I wish it would happen again. 

thoughts on the two hobbits (part 1)

There is a big difference between a movie being “based on real events” and being “inspired by real events.” If a movie is based on real events, it tries it’s best to stay faithful to the original story and plot, without changing characters and  being very limited in its use of creative license. A movie inspired by true events will take a story and add new plot details and characters around it to make it more box office friendly.

The same could be said about movie adaptations of books and comics. Fans of the original works are always quick to point out the inconsistencies between the print on the page and the images on the screen.

Peter Jackson’s latest Hobbit adventure is inspired by the book. Somehow through two movies, almost six hours of film has not been enough to accurately tell Tolkien’s shortest book of the saga. However, I’m not here to dwell on the differences between the book and film. The question I would like to address is this: would a more accurate and faithful depiction of the book make for a good movie? Was that even the goal, and is it feasible?

Books and movies both are mediums to express a story. However they accomplish this in different ways. Reading a book is a very subjective experience. As great as an author may be at describing scenery and setting, much of the visual interpretation is still up to the reader. A book like The Hobbit  is told through the use of a third person limited point of view (Thanks 8^th grade honors English!), meaning that the reader will experience the inner monologues of the main character, but from a safe distance. The use of this mechanism allows the reader to feel like he is walking alongside Bilbo in his adventure and can hear his thoughts, but has some advantages (or disadvantages) of not seeing things directly through his eyes. The reader is free to speculate and other matters that Bilbo is oblivious to. Despite book clubs or discussion groups, reading is a very personal experience. The author is writing for one person, and is having a conversation with the reader.

A movie on the other hand is more of an objective experience (although clearly there is room for subjective interpretation). The movie maker gives his audience non-negotiable visuals and they are at the mercy of his interpretation. Most movies are told from the third person omniscient point of view, being able to see the entire universe of the film, not limited to just the protagonists. The inner dialogue of characters is very hard to capture. 1^st person monologues are rare, and so directors rely on the skill of their cast, the chemistry of the actors, to portray the desired feelings. If a book is more of a conversation between the author and a reader, a movie is like a lecture between the director and a theater full of people.

When I first read The Hobbit I was in the sixth grade, around the same time that Peter Jackson released the first of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I did not know much about Tolkien and the world of Middle-earth. Yet I was enthralled by this adventure that Bilbo embarked on. Like Bilbo, I was oblivious to much of the world outside my 6^th grade social circle as he was very content to sit in his hole in the ground in the shire and smoke a pipe and drink some tea. The unassuming Hobbit however is thrown into a world much bigger than his own. The world that he only knew through the stuff of legends, he was about to experience.

I did not know how expansive the realm of Middle-earth was. I did not know the worlds, the histories, and the backstories that Tolkien has created in his mind where he set his epic adventure. But the conversation that was taking place between a young reader and a professor of Oxford College did not need to delve into that information. Every normal conversation we have with another human being does not involve learning everything about that person at the first meeting. The longer time is spent, the more conversations, the more that is revealed. Despite not knowing anything about Middle-earth, by the end of the book, enough is known for that story, that chapter of time in the saga to be complete.

With the latest Hobbit trilogy as a prequel to a story where audiences already know the ending, it is impossible to capture the same feeling of wonder, of being thrust into a new uncharted world. Even for those who have never read the books, they have seen the movies, and had conversations with their more nerdy friends about the dealings of Middle-earth. This latest lecture from Peter Jackson is not an introductory class. The audiences want to see how this “new” material relates back to the LOTR trilogy. And while some fanboys would rather him not give into these demands, one must remember, that this is still a business. The massive global audience must be satisfied in one sweeping take. That means transplanted characters (or created) will appear in Jackson’s interpretation. Would three hours of Bilbo’s thought process and inner wonderings be very exciting to watch unfold onscreen? When Gandalf leaves the party of dwarfs to attend to other matters, why wouldn’t the movie makers take that opportunity to show what that might have looked like? The book has zero female characters in it and in this day of political correctness and necessary love interests, a female lead is needed to satisfy a movie goer. The lecture must meet the desires of the entire classroom, not just the select few who sit in the front rows. Of course in doing so, no one will be completely satisfied, but satisfaction is not the goal as much as getting people in the seats to be entertained is.

I have much more to say on this subject, but this post is getting too long. Like Peter Jackson, it looks like I will have to stretch out this line of thought into multiple parts.

coffee smelling clothes

Spend any amount of time in a coffee house and you will reek of lattes and espresso shots for the rest of the day. So you go home and take a shower to replace the aroma of stale coffee with a fresh clean scent. But as you dry off, you remember that you don’t want to do more laundry than you already have. So you grab the clothes you were wearing, the ones that have been permeated with the smell of the coffee beans. You also have an image to uphold, the style that says that you don’t care about your appearance, but you don’t want to chance running into someone again that day after changing your clothes. Then you’d have to explain yourself and why you’ve undergone a middle of the day wardrobe change. So the old coffee smelling clothes go back on, not as repugnant as they once were as time has passed by. But you certainly don’t smell clean anymore, and no one save for the utility company will know that the hot water was running twice on that day.

 “As a dog returns to his vomit so a fool repeats his folly”

Proverbs 26:11