Rick Rubin must be something else. He makes the old ones cool to the young again. He did it with Johnny Cash. He's probably going to do it with Metallica when their new album comes out. And now here comes...Neil Diamond.

Neil's new Rubin-produced Album is #1 making him the oldest guy ever to have a #1 album.

So as the mentor of the week on American Idol last week, Neil sang his new song. (Stars don't appear on shows unless it's to promote something. If you think otherwise you are naive.) It was called "Pretty Amazing Grace." The title caught my eye so I just watched it on youtube just now.



So here's my question: "Is it a Christian song?" The religious imagery is blatant, but is he talking to a girl or God?


Neil Diamond Lyrics
Pretty Amazing Grace Lyrics

I'm not the only blogger asking this question. But as the smartest blog-readers in the world, I thought maybe someone here could find out for me.

This week Phil posted this story about the son of a murder victim forgiving the murderer, and if you'll check the comments you'll see not a little bit of outrage. He's apparently forgiving too quickly, too stupidly, too unjustly. This reminds me that forgiveness is weird and it will always be a scandal. And that's why I thought I'd share this slightly edited reprint of a post of mine that originally appeared at BCC is Broken in August 2006.
---

Imagine you are one of the early church's first members. You are sitting in a home with a few other believers, sharing a meal. You pray together. You sing a few Psalms. Someone recites a bit he's heard of Jesus' biography. Then someone gets up to read a letter to you from some guy named Paul.

Paul is a guy who used to go by the name Saul. It's possible he is responsible for the murder of someone you know, perhaps even your parents or one of your children. Now you have to sit and listen to someone read not just words from this guy, but instructions from this guy. Since his conversion from Christ-hating enforcer of the Law to card-carrying Jesus freak, he's not just one of your fellow Christians. He's an authority over all Christians recognized by nearly everyone.

It is possible this arrangement would not have sit well with you.

Imagine you're attached to Peter, a guy who has his problems, but who has been with Jesus from the beginning. And this newcomer Paul actually exerts authority alongside (over?) Peter!

What in the world can explain the rise of Paul's recognized authority in the primitive church? The first explanation that comes to my mind is the authority over all authorities himself -- Jesus. If you were an early church member tempted to dismiss or disregard the teaching of a guy who used to push the killing of the ones you love, maybe you thought of something you heard Jesus said from the cross. In that excruciating place where Jewish officials like Paul had taken him, Jesus hung there dying and wished forgiveness even on the unrepentant revelers carrying out his execution.

The difference between Saul the persecutor and Paul the apostle was Jesus. The very road Paul was taking to kill Christians became his road to becoming one, because Jesus put up a roadblock and intervened. Revenge became repentance.
The difference between an early church member despising Paul's leadership and embracing it was Jesus. The same Pauline letter that might have irked became an encouragement.

Isn't that completely illogical? What weirdos this following Jesus thing makes us. C.S. Lewis was once asked what the main difference between Christianity and all other religions was, and he answered, "Oh, that's easy -- grace."
Grace isn't just amazing; it's ridiculous. It's revolutionary to our thoughts and feelings. It humbles the powerful and empowers the humble.
Jesus didn't die so you could learn how to be a better person. He died because you can't be. (That's grace offending your sensibilities right now.)

The grace of Jesus is a foolishness that, when believed, brings power to save (1 Cor. 1:18).

Grace is that bizarre missing ingredient that mucks up all human foibles, flaws, and fears. Grace is the thing that turns lives upside down. It is a sweet, beautiful irritant.
Grace is scandalous. It makes murderers into apostles, it makes victims into forgivers. It erases irreconcilable differences.

Have you been scandalized by grace lately? Has Jesus shocked you through someone's granting grace to you?
When was the last time you offended someone's expectations by extending grace to them?

This is what I see as the big idea of the Church on mission: Not that we entertain the masses as well as the culture, not that we provide a fun and relaxing atmosphere for folks tired of the stodgy church down the street, and not even that we are friendly or "relevant" or easy to understand. No, the scandalous beauty of our churches should be that we believe in bringing grace to the hopeless, to the hurting, to the shamed, to the discarded, to the confused, to the powerless. And to the despised. If we aren't about Jesus, the savior of sinners, we aren't about the Gospel. And if we aren't about the Gospel, then all the sentiment and sap in the world isn't going to make us about grace.

Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners -— of whom I am the worst.
-- 1 Timothy 1:15

Not that he needs a reason, but that our society can produce and accommodate this is essentially begging God to wipe us off the earth.

I'm not one for moral hand-wringing, and it's not like I don't know millions of babies have been murdered basically for convenience, but OH MY GOD.
When pro-choicers are appalled, you know you're sick.

That this person gets to keep doing this is proof God is merciful.

(HT: BHT)

I have nothing snarky to say about this. I think it's awesome.



"For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the sea." Habakkuk 2:14

(via the our lovely friend Jen, who has more to say on this)

The Anchoress, cogent as always, nails it:

This 2008 election - and much of our electoral process - is already a two-ring circus; Rush is simply adding a third ring, and he’s perhaps also demonstrating how absurdly dishonest and vapid has it all become - the endless campaigning, maneuvering, manipulating and lying. And like a good capitalist he is turning a profit on the thing, besides. (If the “Operation Chaos” tee shirts, hats, etc are meant to support a charity, please let me know.)

So, I don’t think Limbaugh should “be stopped.” But I also don’t know that people should be giggling and guffawing over “Operation Chaos” without considering that — if the “operation” is rooted in a spirit of spiteful payback — it is bound to reap negative fruit. Moreover, I am old-fashioned enough to think of our vote is “a sacred trust” even if that is unsophisticated of me, even if others think vote manipulation is timely sport.

I keep thinking about the Russian Immigrant who looked forward to his first chance to vote in America, and told Gerard Vanderleun, “I will vote always for best, always” and about the people in Iraq who braved so much to hold their purple fingers in the air…and about the Iraqi and American dead who fought to give them that right.

And in thinking about them, I’m a bit ashamed of our three-ring circus and the casual menace which we are bringing to our own sacred process. They all deserve better than we’re giving them, right now.

[Emphasis mine].

I don't think adding a third ring (great metaphor, that) of absurdity to our current political circus is funny, cute, moral, or, on a purely pragmatic level, ultimately effective.

Plus, many of us in the conservative camp are also purportedly committed Christians. So why are we playing the role of the insurgent in the Democratic primaries? The answer "Well, they do it to us!" doesn't cut it for me, at least when said by someone who claims Jesus as Lord. It would make us pretty mad if the Democrats were mucking up Republican primaries, especially on this scale.

Sowing to this wind has a chance of reaping a whirlwind of bitterness, hatred and revenge in our political system for years ahead. Think about it: if the plan "works" and McCain wins, the next election is going to be even nastier, since we've, by our actions, disavowed any rules of fair play. It could also colossally backfire, and Hillary could win. And there's only one good thing about that: all Limbaugh's chuckling acolytes might gain a new, more sober perspective on how stupid Limbaugh's plan was the whole time, and perhaps next time fewer of them would be willing to play along.

“So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets." - Jesus

Here's another excellent post from Prodigal Jon over at Stuff Christians Like.

And may God have mercy on us.

Case in point, last night I heard an ad for a church that is giving away a car. They want you to take their church for a "test drive" so if you visit them you can register to win a new car. When I went to their website I saw they also offered a free continental breakfast on Sundays and an inflatable thing for kids to jump on.

I like advertising. It's my job and is the reason I am able to wear such comfortable socks, but stuff like this drives me a little crazy. And here's why, when it comes to advertising and sales, customers renew the way they first purchased. By that I mean, if a special sale is why you first bought your watch, then if that watch store ever wants to get you to buy again, they have to run a similar sale. Study after study has shown that we are creatures of habit. We repeat ourselves, so if you attract a big crowd with a car giveaway or hot new worship band or anything else, you create a relationship built on a reward not a redeemer. And when you try to take away that reward you'll lose a lot of your guests. Besides that, I think they missed some really great headlines for the car promotion:

1. Forget hot rods, come win a God rod.
2. If you liked the free car, you'll love not burning in hell in a fiery lake of sulfur for an eternity.
3. Come for the car, stay for the intimate relationship with a tender savior.
4. Drive home and to heaven when you visit this Sunday.

[Emphasis mine]

Oh my. This is good stuff.

Have you heard of the (controversial) blog Stuff White People Like?
It's spawned legions of imitators, but thanks to Brian Seay, I've now encountered the trenchant hilarity that is Stuff Christians Like.

Oh gracious, it is good.

I'm still perusing the archives, but my favorite so far is #43: Metrosexual Worship Leaders

Take a few minutes to read this.

Now, here's my question:
If you're creating a ginormous hullabaloo involving dropping thousands of Easter eggs from a helicopter, some of which contain coupons for free X-Box's and such, does it make much sense to get mad at parents for being materialistic and not focused on Jesus?

Just sayin'.

Related:
The Grinch Who Stole Easter

From N.T. Wright's great Maundy Thursday sermon:

And the events of Good Friday tells us something we urgently need to know about doing God in public. If it is the true God we are talking about – the God we see and know in Jesus Christ and him crucified – then we should expect that following him, speaking for him, and living out the life of his spirit, will sometimes make the crowds shout ‘Hosanna!’ and sometimes make them shout ‘Crucify!’

We are not in this business to court either popularity or martyrdom. When they come, like Kipling’s triumph and disaster, we should treat them, imposters as they are, just the same. Speaking and living for God in the public world will sometimes dovetail exactly with what the world inarticulately knows it wants and needs; sometimes it will cut straight across what everyone else is saying.

But those who have sat at table with their Lord, and have known him in the strange privacy of the breaking of the bread, will not waver the next day when they need to stand as a sign of contradiction in the market place, in the council chamber, or in the courtroom. This is a lesson, my friends, we are going to have to learn more and more in the days to come. Work hard, you who stand up to be counted as the Lord’s publicly recognised servants, work hard at the private disciplines, so that you will know where to stand and how to stand when everyone else thinks you’re blaspheming against the secular gods of the day.

That's (a bit) what it means when Jesus said he came not to bring peace, but a sword.

Incidentally, Surprised by Hope arrived at my home from Amazon yesterday, and it is awesome so far.

(Cross-posted at The Gospel-Driven Church)

From a New York Times interview with John Hagee:

NYT: Two years ago, you founded Christians United for Israel , an influential lobbying group that has won accolades from many Jewish leaders.

JH: I’m trying to do something beneficial for the state of Israel and the Jewish people. It’s the right thing to do. If you take the Jewish contribution away from Christianity, there would be no Christianity.

NYT: That’s a touching sentiment, but some are concerned that the Zionism of American evangelicals stems from self-interest. Isn’t your involvement in Israel based on a desire to speed the second coming of Jesus?

JH: Our support of Israel has nothing to do with any kind of “end times” Bible scenario.

HT: Glenn Lucke

"A California appeals court ruling clamping down on homeschooling by parents without teaching credentials sent shock waves across the state this week, leaving an estimated 166,000 children as possible truants and their parents at risk of prosecution."

As my friend David would say, "That's just stupid."

I hope California is now ready for a wave of lawsuits from former homeschooling parents whose kids will now be exposed to whatever their parents were trying to protect them from -- violence, offensive material, religious infringement, etc.

We don't homeschool our kids, but we're huge fans of parents being in control of their child's education, and you can bet that if we lived in, say, violent South Central Los Angeles or liberal Marin County or "alternative lifestyle"-friendly San Francisco, I'd want to exercise my right to educate my children at home.

From Doug Groothuis, via Jared:

It appears that millions of evangelicals, especially younger ones, are experiencing fetus fatigue. They are tired of the abortion issue taking center stage; it is time to move on to newer, hipper things--the sort of issues that excite Bono: aid to Africa, the environment, and cool tattoos. Abortion has been legal since they were born; it is the old guard that gets exercised about millions of abortions over the years. So, let's not worry that Barak Obama and Hillary are pro-choice. That is a secondary issue. After all, neither could do that much damage regarding this issue.

Evangelicals (if that word has any meaning), for God's sake, please wake up and remember the acres of tiny corpses you cannot see. Yes, the Christian social vision is holistic. We should endeavor to restore shalom to this beleaguered planet. That includes helping Africa, preserving the environment, and much more. However, the leading domestic moral issue remains the value of helpless human life. Since Roe v. Wade, approximately 50 million unborn humans have been killed through abortion. Stalin said, "One death is a tragedy. A million dead is a statistic." Too many are now Stalinists on abortion. The numbers mean nothing, apparently. The vast majority of these abortions were not done to save the life of the mother, a provision I take to be justified. Things have reached the point where bumper stickers say, "Don't like abortion, don't have one." It is simply a matter of private, subjective taste. But how about this: "Don't like slavery, don't own slaves"? Two human beings are involved in this matter, inescapably.

Yes.

I get the shaft from eBay buyers more often than I like. I think it sucks that eBay has removed the capability to leave negative feedback about buyers. How do you warn other sellers to beware non-payers or difficult customers?

Because it's the last day of Black History Month and I'm preaching on the Good Samaritan and racial reconciliation tomorrow at Element, I figured this was in order.



HT: Monday Morning Insight

Glenn Lucke on illegal downloads:

My own experience in discussing this topic with students, including Christian students? Overwhelmingly they refuse to stop stealing, even when they acknowledge that they have stolen. I engaged literally hundreds of students about this topic at UVa, and after all the discussing, two root reasons would emerge from the students: 1) I can (technology enables me) and 2) I want to.

With a few exceptions, Christian students engaged in the same stealing, and deployed the same anti-Christian reasoning. One student finally became persuaded that it was stealing, so resolved to steal no more, but wouldn't pay for the 1,000+ songs she had already stolen, nor delete them.

Again, with a few exceptions, the only way to make a dent in the Christian students? Tell them of my personal friendship with Caedmons Call, and how Caedmon's band members related to me their perspective about having their hundreds of hours of hard work taken from them for free. Then the students would say, "Oh. Well, I won't download their stuff. I'll buy their stuff."

Meaning, these students were incapable of submitting themselves to abstract principle, but, if they felt some sentiment for a personal connection, then they might adjust their behavior. Effectively, the Ten Commandments only had force in their lives if they had positive sentiment for the person wronged in a violation of the Commandments.

Some reader will write in, as often happens here, and defend this state of affairs.

It happens almost every time we discuss it here, as well. In a post on lawsuits about four years ago, one commenter even suggested, should I ever be published, it'd be okay to buy a copy of my book that was illegally photocopied by someone selling his copies cheaper.

"I can" and "I (might) want to" was in full effect there, and the concerns of the artist (me!) over supporting his family with his work wasn't in play.

You've probably already heard about Relevant Church (real name, not made up) in Florida and their 30 Day Sex Challenge. It's been on the national news already.

Brant Hansen at Letters from Kamp Krusty has a post on it today:
When Relevance = Ew

Read it. It's good. Funny. And good.

Speaking as a guy who just taught a 6-week series on relationships and sex last year called "Rated R" that included plenty of frank talk, I have to say, as well: "Ew."

Why not 30 days of, I don't know, talking? How about 30 days of mutual sacrifice?
30 days of sex would be great, but it requires very little from one half of a marital one flesh and quite a lot from the other. How shortsighted and weird to create a program that essentially places a legalistic constraint of sacrifice upon wives. It makes sex unspontaneous, unfree. It makes it dutiful and obligatory. Which is why when you start looking at interviews with couples involved, the men are excited and the women begin their statements with phrases like, "At first I was thinking . . ."

And then of course they had to come around. It'd be unspiritual and ungracious not to get with the program, right? Who wants to hold up whatever fruit is promised from 30 straight days of sex?

I want to be clear. Sex is good. Sex on consecutive days is good. Women sacrificing to meet the needs of their husbands is good.
But sacrifice should be joyful and mutual. I don't see how this "challenge" actually creates a marital culture for that to occur. In fact, I can see how it might do the opposite.

And again: Ew.
Let's talk about sex. But let's not program congregation-wide daily sex campaigns.
Ew.

In which I will likely offend everyone by ranting about certain mommies . . .

Most of you know that I am a stay-at-home dad. I hardly ever talk about that on the blogs any more, and it's not for any real reason except that writing consistently on childraising and housekeeping doesn't interest me at all.

Despite the fact that my own day is made up largely of washing/folding clothes, washing/storing dishes, picking up, cleaning floors and counters, making breakfasts and lunches and dinners (yes, I make our dinners every night too), picking up, getting groceries, taking Macy to and getting Macy from school, picking up, helping with homework, reading with Gracie, playing with Gracie, convincing Gracie that jumping down the stairs could in fact kill her, and other such things (did I mention picking up?), I also don't read many of the endless stay-at-home mom blogs because, frankly, I just find these subjects boring. They're not boring to do, mind you. (Well, some of them are.) They're just boring to read about in a journal sort of fashion. ("Today I got groceries. You should really try the organic buffalo wings. There's a coupon on Coupons.com!" Yawwn.)

But occasionally I do peek into a few mommy blogs. The ones I read regularly are usually by mommies I (sort of) know, and I generally find them interesting solely because I (sort of) know them. But another reason I stay away from most others, besides finding the subject matter uninteresting, is the constant state of lament I find in them.
Mommies are a bunch of whiners.

There. I said it.

I am a dude. I'm not supposed to be good at all this nurturing crap. And despite my role, I'm not an effeminate dude. Yeah, I'm a creative type or whatever, but I'm still a dude, and I'm not wired to be as good at this thing as my wife is.
Nevertheless, I do it. And I realize it must be done. And I don't constantly complain that I have to wash dishes or put clothes away or clean bathrooms. That is life. That is what we're supposed to do.

Is it Oprah's fault? I don't know. But the sense of entitlement is bewildering. I even hear mommies with freaking nannies complain about how hard it is to take care of a kid! That's just ridiculous.
Yes, it's hard. But you're not special. You're not. I don't care what Dr. Phil tells you. Just do it and stop whining. The victim thing is annoying and it can't make you very fun to live with.

Yeah, it'd be nice if your husband helped around the house, blah blah blah. I'm sure he appreciates you letting everyone know of his inadequacy on your blog.

May I point out (again) that I am a dude? You're supposed to be better at this than I am, more natural than I am. You're supposed to find it more rewarding, more fulfilling. (Assuming you think that way, or want to.) So I'm at a genetic disadvantage, and I personally find your claims of victimization unpersuasive. Suck it up.
Not enough hours in the day? Get off the internet.
Too busy? Maybe Suzy doesn't actually need to be in Girl Scouts AND dance class AND Gymboree AND whatever else the heck you've scheduled your future stressed-out multitasking daughter for.

It is as if we are so spoiled today that we have to consider ourselves victims of ordinary life. The stuff our parents and grandparents did without complaint, with less than half the modern conveniences we have, usually in less space and with less money should shame us when we find ourselves whining.

If you cannot find ways to make your daily chores a sacrament, a submissive service dedicated as worship to God that makes you more like Jesus, than at least find ways to remind yourself that having to wash dishes and fold clothes and change diapers really isn't that big a deal.

By David Hayward, the Naked Pastor

I lead a ministry community for young adults called Element. Last year a Vanderbilt Divinity grad student asked if she could "use" Element for a congregational case study in her coursework. Despite our reminding her of the fact that we do not consider ourselves a church, she was not dissuaded, received approval from her professor, and was then welcome to speak to anyone and everyone who entered the sphere of our weekly gatherings, from regular attenders to first-time visitors.

I'd like to share the results of her study with you. This is obviously flirting with pride here, especially as much of her study involves appraisal of yours truly, but I'm just dang proud of the people I get to attempt Christian community with, every last one of them, and so I thought I'd share this as a way of publicizing what can happen when a pathetic start-up focuses on the gospel first. It has some interesting insights about young adults and young adult ministry, and reflects on the relative effectiveness or ineffectiveness an approach like ours might have.

If you know of someone between the ages of 18 and 30something in the Nashville area who is interested in connecting with other followers of Jesus, maybe this might convince you to send them our way. :-)

Note: It's a little long, even with some judicious editing on my part. She focuses on "style" and appearances a bit much for my taste, but I realize that's just part of the study and is valid for evaluation. I have excised portions that could be construed as critical of third parties, but anything that could be construed as criticism about me personally, in the interest of objectivity, I have left in.

Check it out after the jump . . .
Read the rest of this entry . . .

I hereby call for a moratorium on the following words and phrases:

"stepping out of your comfort zone"

"putting God in a box"

"anointed" -- as in, "That song was so anointed," or "That Christian mime really has the anointing."

"real hope for real people in a real world"

"too blessed to be stressed"

"relevant"

"check in my spirit"

"Lord, we just wanna . . ."

That is all.