CEO beats Jordan?

Does this really qualify as beating Michael Jordan 1 on 1? Or is this more of a "hey, if I heave three pointers, don't play defense, and let you win, you and all your rich friends might keep coming back" moment? Damon Wayans is funny at the end.

breaking up is hard to do

This is almost as good as breaking up with someone via a text message...

A New Chapter in History

Well today is an interesting day in the life of the good ole USA. I watched the election returns come in last night and as widely predicted, Obama won handily. As I watched some folks celebrate and some lament, I couldn't help but think that this was a bit of a victory for all of us, even those of us who did not vote for Barack Obama. I hedge this by saying I have some big disagreements with some of his domestic policies, specifically in the economic arena. But that's another discussion for another day.

I think this was a victory for all of us because the United States, just 40 or so years after the Civil Rights movement began, elected an African American President. And it's not as if he won because of minority voting, he won because white people voted for him too. It doesn't mean that racism is fixed, but it does mean that this country is an amazing place to live because it can change, and its people do not hold on to hatred and bigotry. We change, we grow, we mature, and ultimately we recognize that we have failed at times in our past and that we must learn from those mistakes in the future. I can't help but think that Martin Luther King Jr. is looking down on this and marveling at what he helped to begin.

What happened last night is historic. It, I believe, does herald the beginning of a new day for this country. The wounds of the past are still there, but clearly this is a huge part of the movement forward. I hope and pray (literally on both) that Obama is a leader who pursues God's will and heart at every decision. I also hope and pray that those of us who did not support him will be kinder to him, more merciful to him, and more patient with him than many people were with our current President, George Bush.

I think we should be proud, America. I think what happened last night was a tremendously important event and no matter how we voted, we should take a moment to reflect on the magnitude of the event. John McCain and Barack Obama both did wonderful jobs in their concession and acceptance speeches of recognizing this very thing and I echo McCain's desire to move forward, to unite, to disagree when necessary but to do it with humility and grace.

May God not only continue to bless this nation, but may He teach us through our families, churches, and even government how we might bless others.

Seriously?

Below is an article I ran across on Yahoo. It's an AP deal dealing with the new Obama/McCain ads. All I really have to say is, "Seriously?" You are actually going to run for President on the platform that you can use the internet better than the old guy? Really? That's what you've got?

Today is the first day of the rest of the campaign," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe says in a campaign strategy memo. "We will respond with speed and ferocity to John McCain's attacks and we will take the fight to him, but we will do it on the big issues that matter to the American people."

The newest ad showcasing their hard line includes unflattering footage of McCain at a hearing in the early '80s, wearing giant glasses and an out-of-style suit, interspersed with shots of a disco ball, a clunky phone, an outdated computer and a Rubik's Cube.

"1982, John McCain goes to Washington," an announcer says over chirpy elevator music. "Things have changed in the last 26 years, but McCain hasn't.

"He admits he still doesn't know how to use a computer, can't send an e-mail, still doesn't understand the economy, and favors two hundred billion in new tax cuts for corporations, but almost nothing for the middle class," it says. It shows video of McCain getting out of a golf cart with former President George H.W. Bush and closes with a photo of him standing with the current President Bush at the White House. "After one president who was out of touch, we just can't afford more of the same."

Let's see, what do you stand for? What "change" are you really proposing? What can you do better than McCain? Does this ad answer any of those questions. Nope. Look, I'm probably voting for McCain. I do think the press has given Obama a free pass on just about everything. No one is questioning his experience while Gov. Palin addresses it everyday. But I don't want to be a whiny voter.

The reality is that much of the mainstream media loves Obama, wants to see him elected. And it's getting increasingly hard to do so when McCain clearly has more experience and clearly picked a better VP. What I hate about all of this is that I've had a lot of respect for Obama. I don't agree with his redistribution of income policies, nor do I think we should just abandon Iraq, but he seems to be a man of character, he certainly looks Presidential, and he has carried himself well during this campaign. But these ads are just ridiculous. He has to be smarter than that. Surely he believes that the average American voter is smarter than that.

And comparing Bush and McCain? Really? Does anyone else remember how the press portrayed them as polar opposites during the 2000 primaries? Now suddenly they are the same guy? That just lacks thought. Yes, McCain, as a moderate conservative has seen eye to eye with Bush on some things but it doesn't take a genius to realize that those two aren't exactly buddies.

It's like the lipstick on a pig thing. Clearly Obama wasn't taking a shot at Palin, he was just going off script and using a little color in his speech. It was dumb and made him sound provincial, but McCain's guys framing it as some sexist jab is stupid and beneath the intelligence of most people. What is sexist is the grilling that Gov. Palin receives on experience vs. Obama. She has executive experience, he does not and that does need to be discussed. Oh yeah and the whole, "That takes a lot of hubris" comment from Charlie Gibson after asking if Sarah Palin believed she could lead the country and she responding in the affirmative; it does take a little hubris there Chuck. To think that you can lead the most powerful nation in the world takes a little ego and that's not a bad thing as long as you show humility too. If she says yes, she's arrogant. If she says no, she's destroyed her campaign. Yeah, good question. I can see why ABC pays you the big bucks.

Anyway, here's hoping that the ads get a bit more intelligent. If that "he can't use the Internet" thing is the best Obama's guys have got, they have pretty much lost the election.

The Dark Knight

Absolutely as good as advertised. Wow. We went to see The Dark Knight last night on IMAX and the film was just ridiculously good. The opening shot over "Gotham" was in IMAX and the crowd just gasped when it popped on the screen. The acting was great. The direction was great. The actions sequences were stunning. This is everything a superhero movie should be. To me it has redefined how one should approach making movies about superheroes. Coupled with Batman Begins, Christopher Nolan has crafted the two finest comic book adaptations that I can think of and I can only hope a third is on the way. Wow.

short stories

I'm kind of a sucker for short stories. I used to love those reading books we had in elementary school, with all of those stories from a variety of authors. I would read way ahead and usually finish everything there was well before we went through things as a class. It had nothing to do with trying to be smart, rather I just love a good story and for some reason, if you can tell a good story in a small number of pages, you've got my respect. I think it may have all started with Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery", and if you haven't read it, google it now, immediately, and read it. Dark, nasty, crazy...it's all those things wrapped up in a great short story.

Anyway, it's summer and I typically enjoy using some of my time off from seminary to head to my local library and pick up some books. I usually try to find at least one book of short stories just to see if I can find a gem. I've exhausted my supply of Stephen King short story collections (and the man can write a great short story), so I've just grabbed what looked mildly interesting and gone from there. I picked up two books/collections this week; 20th Century Ghosts by Joe Hill and Presence by Arthur Miller. I like a good suspense/horror short story so I grabbed Hill's book and I've always loved The Crucible and Death of a Salesman so discovering that Miller had written some short stories piqued my interest. I finished Hill's book today and I have to give a little credit where it's due before I start Miller's.

There is a story within called "Pop Art" that is really just a wonderful little tale, a joy to read, genuinely touching, and weird all at the same time. The basic premise is a first person narrative where the main character is a middle school aged boy who's best friend is an inflatable boy named Art. He's a real live boy who happens to be inflatable. It sounds ridiculous but is just a good story. Obviously you just have to go with the weird plot but it unfolds like a strange Wes Anderson movie (like there's another kind); humor, heart, and weirdness all rolled up into one. The other stories were all rather good (some a bit gory and some ended better than others) but this one was great, in my humble opinion that is. I am very glad that I came across it and recommend it to anyone, even those who don't like horror as there is nothing particularly horror oriented in this story.

I'm looking forward to Miller's book now. Should be an interesting read.

I've been reading East of Eden and am about halfway through. Absolutely brilliant, which I assumed based on my prior Steinbeck experiences, and enthralling, but I had to set it down for a few days. It is just so, for lack of a better word, heavy. The emotion, atmosphere, everything is just heavy and I find myself tired after reading in it, getting so caught up in the story. I found a good stopping point and thought I'd go with a little lighter fair before finishing.

great rock and roll

I love the Black Crowes. For the most part, they have represented, to me, what is great about real, raw Rock and Roll for the better part of 15 years now. They've had some foul balls along the way, but these guys do what they do really well and they just get the essence of great rock and roll; great riffs, loud guitars, and a great front man (not to mention a brilliant drummer in Steve Gorman).

One of my biggest disappointments was not getting to see them as they toured with Jimmy Page in 1999. I had fourth row seats to the Tampa show and that leg of the tour was canceled after Jimmy injured his back. I stumbled across this video of Jimmy and the Crowes kicking "In My Time of Dying". Being a big Zeppelin fan, I don't say lightly that the Crowes do justice to Zep's great songs. Do yourself a favor and take about 10 minutes to listen to great rock and roll (you can listen and watch a second time and marvel at the ridiculous drumming of Gorman too).

complicity

This is a bit after the fact, but I was watching a SportsCenter broadcast about Barry Bonds inability to be signed with a new team and how he may very well be done in baseball. Then the pundits went on to pontificate as to how Bonds had brought this on himself, blah, blah, blah.

Now, before going any further, let me be clear; I am not a fan of Barry Bonds. I never really was. Always respected his ability on the field, always thought he was kind of a jerk off the field. I am not defending any criminal action on his part or the part of others in baseball.

That being said, there's this little word that keeps creeping into my mind...complicity, the act of participating in some kind of offense or crime, assisting in some way with a criminal activity. I've been thinking since all of this steroids stuff broke a couple of years ago how complicit I and most of us baseball fans probably are in all of this mess. Let's step back a bit.

It's 1998 and suddenly Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa are in a heated battle for the National League (and Major League) lead for home runs. It seems by the All Star Break that one or both might very well have a shot at breaking Roger Maris' long time standing record of 61 home runs in a season. We've been waiting for this for sometime. Guys like Cecil Fielder flirted with the 50 homerun barrier and even that guy named Matt Williams might have made a run at that record had the 1994 season not been shortened by a strike. And then Sammy and Mark c0me along and we all sit and look at the papers day after day, looking at their side by side comparisons with Maris, the pace, the projections. We love it.

I remember where I was when McGwire broke Maris' record in 1998; sitting in the living room of my apartment in Ohio. I remember what I did immediately after he hit it, I called my dad. We celebrated, talked about all kinds of dumb stuff, we loved the moment and a good chunk of America did the same. Mark and Sammy had a good repoire and soon Sammy passed the barrier as well. In fact Mark ended the season with 70 home runs. Sammy with 66. Never mind that until that point Mark had not hit more than 52. Sammy, never more than 40. We just bought into it, because let's face it, homeruns are fun and offense is too and MLB had a heck of a time digging itself out of the 1994 strike hole. 1998 returned MLB to its previous glory, bringing families together around the TV to watch one of the most significant records fall. Was anyone rooting against these guys? Was anyone talking about steroids then?

Then in 2001, Barry Bonds hit 73 home runs. That's right 73. This guy hadn't hit more than 49 in a season previously but we didn't care. He kept parking them in McCovey Cove and we loved it. We ate it up. He was as dominant a player as there was in the 90's but evidently he still had something left for us, 73 home runs.

And then, lo and behold, Barry may have used steroids. Mark and Sammy too. Oh yeah, and those 40+ homerun years of Rafael Palmeiro 1998-2001, possibly steroids too. Wow. Really? Odd how all of these guys had these surges in power right around the same time. Even stranger still how Major League Baseball basically had no effective steroid policy during this time period, even though other major sports were already testing for it (and the Olympics for that matter). Amazing how it seems that so many turned a blind eye to these things as we were caught up in the fervor of broken records, big offense, and forearms the size of tree trunks.

Now, you and I, MLB for that matter, are not directly responsible for these and other idiots taking steroids, HGH, or any other drug. But let's face facts. MLB didn't have a policy on these things because to do so would have harmed ratings and income. They needed this surge of excitement and looked the other way when it became very apparent that some of these men might actually explode from the sheer amount of muscle contained in their skin. And we fans weren't much better. We got swept up in the momentum, in the press, in the excitement. And that's not necessarily totally wrong but it frustrates me now to see all of us turning our nose up at these same players, looking down in judgment upon them.

I did not make Barry Bonds do what he did. I did not cause him to commit a crime. I did not cause him to use steroids (and by the way he has yet to be convicted of using them, though it seems obvious that he did). But if I get carried away in the hubbub surrounding his situation. If I buy tickets, tune into his games, listen to SportsCenter tout his accomplishments (which is all they did until a few seasons ago), then I am somewhat complicit in all of this. We should be careful before we judge to harshly these guys who gave us what most of us wanted.

a long time off

Wow. Literally months since I last posted anything here. Makes me a little sad as a lot of different things have gone on about which I wished to record here but just didn't have time and/or motivation. Sad but oh well. Lots of things to put forth here but I'll begin with important stuff like movies. Here's what I've seen so far this summer and what I've thought of it. A disclaimer up front, one of the movies is very violent and very dark and I will give it a rather glowing review anyway. This is not representative of my view on violence but more of a sense of respect for how well the film was made.

1. Indiana Jones (A-) - Good movie, just about what I want in summer fare and with good ole Harrison Ford back in the hat, how could you go wrong? Plus I really enjoy Shia Lebouf and he does just fine as a wannabe James Dean. Sure the ending is bizarre and ridiculous and yes, stumbling into a nuclear testing site and saving yourself via a refrigerator borders on absolute lunacy, but have you seen the first three? It's not like the break from reality just started in the fourth movie.

2. The Strangers (B+) - Another good movie (this is the violent/dark one I mentioned earlier, definitely better to be viewed by mature audiences), that really shows what you can do with just six people in the cast and a single location in which to shoot. Too many thrillers these days go for the easy scare or thrill but this one really took its time, and the ending didn't drag on very long which is good. Best scene: Liv Tyler gets a drink of water and out of the darkness in the background, a man in a burlap mask looms into view, just barely. The whole audience gasped. Great stuff. Hitchcock would have been impressed.

3. The Happening (C) - Average stuff, especially for Shamalamadingdong. I love the man's work, even Lady in the Water, but this honestly was not a good movie, sadly enough. Opening sequence in Central Park was great. The sequence in the old lady's house near the end was really cool too. The dialogue was terrible and the acting bordered on non-existent. I kept thinking that M. Night was fooling with us, making a dark comedy, but it just never happened. At one point I actually thought Mark Wahlberg would have a conversation with a plant, that's how weird things got, and this was not a good thing.

4. The Incredible Hulk (B) - An improvement over the last one definitely. I think Edward Norton helped and this time the Hulk gets a real bad guy, not just the US military, so that makes the last 30 minutes very entertaining. I'll be interested to see if the Justice League really comes together around this (with Robert Downey's appearance at the end bringing Iron Man into the mix).

5. Prince Caspian (B) - Better than average but it seems as though the focus was basically just having really big battles. Just read the book and some interesting stuff was left out. I realize that talking lions aren't a big box office pull, but there's some interesting food for thought from Aslan in the book that just gets left out in the cold here. Overall, entertaining, but I had hoped for a little bit more, maybe a bit of theological stuff.

and the best (so far) for last
6. Wall-E (A) - Wow. Really good film. If you can go 30-45 minutes basically without dialogue at the opening of a movie and still keep adults AND children involved, you've done something very well. Saw this opening day in the morning with my family so the theatre consisted of me, my wife, my 4 year old girl, 2 year old son, and 200 summer camp kids. Everybody laughed and had a good time and applauded at the end. I love Pixar. Interesting side story to this, I got in line to get some popcorn and ended up behind about 30 boys. Their leader told me to go on ahead of the group so when I got up to the front, I apologized to the kid at the front of the line (looked about 11 or 12) and explained what had happened (I hate it when people do that to our youth when we're out somewhere without asking or even acknowledging the kids). He said no problem. Then I heard him say to himself, "Oh crud. Mom didn't give me enough for a popcorn and a coke." Then he turned and asked his friend if he had 50 cents. The friend did not and I could hear the despair in the young man's sigh as he wrestled with which to get. So, being so wealthy, I pulled out a George Washington and laid it on my friend and told him to make sure to get butter on the popcorn. His response was, "Wow. Thanks Mister!" I love that.

T-minus 14 days until I go to see The Dark Knight on IMAX. Yeah baby!

name your 50 states

This is NOT what I do all day but I did take a break to check this link out and see how I would do. I was pretty excited about the time. Anyone else wanna try? All you have to do is type the 50 states. There's a map that shows them, without names, so you have a reference for what you've typed and what you have left. Spelling can be difficult. There were two states I had a little trouble with.

In 2m 23s

Click here to Play

that's my boy

So I have two children, a little girl named Rebekah who is 4 and a little boy named Ethan who is 2. They both are amazing creatures and so much fun to watch discover the world. There's something I've noticed about both of them lately and it's beginning to help me understand the nature of selfishness better.

First off, I'm not going to act as if my kids have got it all figured out, they are just as selfish as the next kid. When one picks up a toy that hasn't been played with in six months, the other immediately wants it. They tease each other, Ethan pulls Rebekah's hair, Rebekah bosses Ethan around. They have their difficulties. But they also have those moments where you just know God has worked a bit and you see glimpses of how we all should be.

Every morning Rebekah typically gets up before Ethan. She busts into our room and asks if it's okay if she goes out and watches some TV. Usually, if it's after 7:15 or so, we say yes and she gets to watch a little Disney Channel. Usually around 8:00 Ethan gets up. He typically is slower to awaken and likes to cuddle a bit. What's funny to see is that after hugging whomever gets him up, he likes to go and greet the other two people. Then he pops back into the kitchen looking for sippy cup of milk.

Here's where it's fun. Ethan gets his cup and then immediately says, "Buba" (his name for Rebekah) and waits for a cup for Rebekah as well and then runs out to deliver it to her with a big grin on his face. But it's not just for that one time a day. Anything you give him food/drink wise he immediately asks for some for Rebekah. And he's not doing the whole "sure dad, give it to me, and I'll give it to her; wink, wink" deal. He really takes it to her. And he loves it.

Rebekah, meanwhile, is really beginning to enjoy sharing her stuff with Ethan because she realizes how excited he is to get to play with her. She says, "Ethan wants to be just like me because I'm the big sister." Wow. I just love it.

Anyway, these moments remind me of how beautiful unselfishness really is and how rewarding it is to share something with someone else. It doesn't have to be anything they need, just that you know you can make them happy and are willing to do so. Sometimes Philip Gabriel pops in on Wednesdays and brings me a cheeseburger from McDonald's. I don't need it but I love it when he does that. Just a nice chat over a cheap burger in my office.

So why do we struggle with this so much as we get older. We know that selfishness, in most areas (there are always exceptions), is improper, is counter to God's mission on this earth. And all I can figure is that it is the nature of our rebellion against God. We want to keep things for ourselves because things aren't permanent, they pass, so we exert control over things we really can't control, deceiving ourselves into believing that we have control.

God seems to constantly call His people away from control toward faith. And that faith is to help them grow in holiness, not to just get them to heaven one day or forgive them, but to earnestly help them grow to be more like Jesus. It's actually possible. We're not just dirty sinners who can't do anything but sin, we actually can grow in holiness and purity, giving our hearts and minds to God to restore and make new. And when we let go of those things over which we have no control we see how real our faith can become and how much joy there is in giving ourselves away to others. Whether it is helping someone in need, loving a friend, or getting married; giving ourselves to others means the possibility of pain or rejection but it also means the possibility of experiencing a deeper love and connection with our Creator.

I'd like to think that God still teaches us through the actions of children and Rebekah and Ethan are constant reminders to me that my life is not my own, but belongs to my Creator and Lord. I hope that I can grow in holiness, unselfishness, and grace so that I can help them do the same.

it's just policy

"We're really sorry but our church doesn't host outside groups". That refrain is growing more and more common these days as each year I try to set up our two week Choir Tour/Mission Trip. Typically on our way to and from our mission site, we perform our worship concert at local ministries in various cities and then sleep on the floor of a local church. For some strange reason, churches in general have begun to decide more and more frequently that they cannot host groups of mission minded youth and adults for one night; no meals, no real set up, just floors and bathrooms, heck we don't even ask for showers but usually use YMCA's.

Have we just totally missed the point when it comes to church? I really have to wonder sometimes. We're not talking about letting us crash for two weeks, use 10,000 gallons of water, trash your place; we're talking one night. One night. One night for kids who have spent the past couple of hours serving homeless folks, leading them in worship. How is there a "policy" pertaining to that? Who decided at some point in the building of multi-million dollar facilities that those very facilities should be a monument to ourselves, to our amazing ability to give ourselves money? It's really been difficult for me to swallow this because it just so seems, for lack of a better word, anti-church. It's the opposite of what I read about in Acts where the believers had "everything in common". They sold their stuff and gave it to the church to help people. Paul resided for months with other local Christians or Jews in the towns to which he traveled.

I realize that some groups can cause some destruction. We've done that a time or two though when it's happened we've made every effort to correct the situation and deal with the trouble makers. Does that mean though that no other group should have a chance? And why is it that this mentality comes typically from the wealthier churches more than any others, the very ones who it seems should be opening their doors to share the blessings God has given them? Not that they don't share in other ways but having done this for almost 10 years, sleeping on some floors requires next to nothing for a church; someone to let you in, tell you where to go, and some light clean up the next day (and any good group will clean up after themselves to minimize that labor).

It just seems like we are teaching our people the wrong mentality when it comes to hosting. We should jump at the chance to host groups that are coming through our communities, ministering to the lost in those communities, and need one mere night of sleep. That's why I've argued against any policy here of charging groups to stay. My church's budget is over 1 million dollars and we're going to quibble over the $100 in water and electricity a group of 40 people might use during a one or two day stay? Are you kidding? I have a friend who is hoping to bring some youth who are not Christians up to Jacksonville to take them to Kona skate park, a mecca of sorts for skateboarders. These are kids that he has developed a relationship with through his skate park ministry at his church and he wants to take them on their first retreat, first to the skate park and then to church the next morning. Wow, wouldn't that be amazing if some of these kids were willing to do it? And do I want their exposure to church to be, "by the way, here's a bill for $5 per person for the water you used in the showers before you came to our church service?" What message does that send? What message does enacting a policy of "outside groups aren't welcome here send?" What does that say about our relationship with God?

I hope that God keeps us from our selfishness. I know I don't need any help in being focused on me so it seems as if my church could help me overcome this by not doing the same thing, focusing on itself.

the latest

Some good stuff this past weekend through today (with one slightly frustrating thing).

Two weeks back I became aware that Rascall Flatts were coming to town for a concert. I'm not much on country music but I have grown to enjoy these guys; catchy songs and amazing harmonies. My wife however, is a huge fan, so it was a no brainer to try to get tickets. They were pricey so I went cheap as the difference between tickets was four rows by the time I bought them. Figured it put us in the building, we would probably have fun. We decided to tailgate, just the two of us, rather than go out to dinner. Got some Publix subs, snacks, stuff to drink, packed it in a cooler, borrowed Sheridan's dad's Durango, and drove on out to the arena. Weather was cool and breezy with a beautiful sunset over the baseball grounds. It was really nice. Reminded me of our early days of dating, and I have to say that my wife looked beautiful and I considered myself a lucky man to be with her that evening.

The concert was really amazing, even for someone who isn't a big country fan. The nice thing about live shows is that you have to ramp it up and that cuts through a little of the twangy nature of country, but what really sold it to me was that the guys just had fun and it showed. It was enjoyable to watch guys who just love what they do. Our seats were at the back of the third deck at this little bar like area with pub stools. Actually ended up being great as we were almost straight on looking at the stage and the stools were movable so we pulled them close together and sang along. Plenty of leg room as compared to the cruddy third deck seats in front of us. Worked out well. Great night, beautiful lady, I am blessed.

As for the frustrating part of the weekend, I saw that Saturday night more than 75,000 folks showed to watch large trucks destroy old cars in the Monster Truck Rally at Alltel Stadium (which I know isn't called that anymore, sue me). It's not the MTR that I object to, mostly that we can sell out that ridiculous show but 2 or 3 Jags games a year get blacked out and the ACC is probably going to move their championship game, both because of poor attendance. I love Jacksonville, but sometimes we just miss it. I know that the MTR is fun, but the NFL and ACC championship game are 1) FOOTBALL which is BETTER and 2) much more economically significant to our town.

On with the good stuff. Not sure if you saw the Academy Awards last night but "Falling Slowly" won for best original song in a feature film. Yup, awesome. Tivo'd the whole thing so I could see the live performance which was so cool because all four other entries (three from Enchantment and one from August Rush) were such big productions. "Falling Slowly" was just two people, two mics, an acoustic guitar, and a piano (and a beautiful song). It was so fun to see the genuine reactions of Glen Hansard and Markéta Irglová. They were so touched and poor Marketa got cut off by the music so John Stewart let her come back after the commercial break so she could say thanks. She was so sweet and genuine, and it was refreshing to see something unique, independent, and so heart felt win such a significant award. Way to go Glen and Marketa!

And finally, what started out bad, ended up good. Ethan, my 2 year old son, has been sick for the past few days with a bad cough. Today he had a fever as well so we called the doctor and my wife took him in for a check up. The doctor was pretty convinced that Ethan had pneumonia and told us to take him to the hospital right away to have him X-rayed. So we took off for Baptist Hospital around 5:30pm. We checked in and I have to say that 1) we were worried and 2) we realized how blessed we are with the general health of our children. That place was a mess and there were so many sick children, it just broke my heart. Sheridan and I spent some time praying for Ethan in the car (I kept my eyes open while driving) as we were very concerned about the possibility of pneumonia and infection.

During triage, Ethan had a 103 degree fever so they administered Motrin. What was weird is that up through the initial doctor visit, Ethan was really quiet, reserved, and tired. He just sat in Sheridan's lap. But upon entering the hospital he just came alive. He was eating, playing, and in quite a mood in spite of the 103 temp. Our pediatrician actually stopped by the hospital and helped get us inside relatively quickly (I think it took less than two hours). They brought Ethan back, took some X-rays, and checked him over. Well, no temperature, no pneumonia, no strep throat, only a viral infection. I am a firm believer that medicine is a modern miracle of God, but in this case I am convinced that God healed Ethan while we waited. The doctor was convinced that it was pneumonia and the hospital doc was pretty sure it would be strep if not pneumonia. Watching Ethan wake up and come to life and then to be given an all clear was amazing. I hated that we had to go to the hospital (but when your pediatrician says to go, you go) but it was pretty amazing. He's still coughing a bit as I write this, but we were home by 9:30pm and he went right to sleep.

I don't know why God doesn't heal everyone instantaneously, for some reason He sees fit not too. But I am convinced that He did do it in this case and I am humbled that He would do so.

follow up to previous post

Just realized that I never gave the name of that magnificent song I had in my last post.

"Falling Slowly". It's beautiful. Go put it on your IPod now.

Once

So another movie has come across my path that has just really moved me. And yet again this movie is rated R which is just how things are sometimes, in this case it's totally for language which while it's not exactly a good thing, really isn't that noticeable in this particular case. The movie is called Once and it stars Glen Hansard (of the Frames) and Markéta Irglová. Basically Glen's character is a street musician who had his heart broken by a woman sometime before. Marketa plays a young woman who becomes very interested in Glen's music and the two start to become friends, eventually uncovering a mutual interest in writing and performing music. What I found profoundly beautiful and romantic is that they (and this next part is kind of a spoiler) are really spurring each other beyond their respective heartaches (she has split up from her husband and moved to Dublin from the Czech Republic) to try to find love again, but not with each other, rather with those who have broken their hearts.

Early on Glen's character (I call him that because neither one of them is given a name in the film which is interesting in itself) mistakes her initial interest for romance and makes a pass at her but she rejects him. He quickly realizes that she is actually interested in being his friend and he feels the same. They never connect physically, they don't even so much as kiss, and yet you feel such a great sense of affection and love between them.

I loved this film because it showed something about love that is lost in film today, namely that love is best when it is pure and unimpeded by selfish ambition. And that's what these two have, a pure love, even though it doesn't end with them together but rather seeking to renew their lost relationships.

One moment stands out above all others for me though and it's early in the film when the two enter a music store and Glen shares a song he wrote while Marketa joins him on the piano. This is truly one of the most beautiful songs I have ever heard. I bought the soundtrack about an hour after watching the film and it is great. Here's the YouTube video from the movie.

Juno follow up

I wrote this recently for our youth newsletter and thought that since it pertained to another entry here, I would post it in this blog as well.

A couple of people have expressed some concern about what I wrote in my blog a little while back concerning the movie Juno. The concern came from the pretty positive review that I gave it without really discussing or commenting on the main area of the plot, namely teen pregnancy. And I think from that concern is an additional concern that I may perhaps be taking a lighter than necessary perspective on teen pregnancy, not taking it seriously enough. So first off, my apologies to anyone who took that from what I wrote. I mostly was commenting on what I believed to be an entertaining, funny, and touching story.

Now, that being said, I think most of you involved with the youth ministry here know that we believe sex is meant for marriage and should never be treated casually, not because God is some cosmic fun policeman, but because God created sex to be a wonderful, enjoyable, and fun thing and when we sell it short, when we abuse it, we wreck it. We create tragedy, heart brokenness, unwanted pregnancies, diseases, and hurt. But in marriage, sex finds its true place, its fullest expression, its greatest meaning. In marriage, sex becomes everything it was created to be and reveals that other expressions of it outside of marriage or in an abusive manner are shallow and even destructive.

That being said, all of us probably know or have known someone who has become pregnant and did not know what to do. You probably see some of these people at your schools. And the question then becomes, do I need to make sure that the person knows that I think she sinned or that I am willing to help them through this difficult time? And this is where I think a movie like Juno brings something good.

The main character, Juno, does several difficult and/or brave things:
1. She decides against abortion though she is told it will be easy and simple. She does this primarily because a somewhat bizarre Christian reminds her that the baby has fingernails and Juno realizes that she can’t kill her baby because the baby is human. A miracle I believe.
2. Juno faces many “friends” at school who call her slut, whore, and other names.
3. Juno faces her parents who, though disappointed greatly, support her and help her to make a good decision (even though they don’t always know what to do).
4. Juno chooses to give her baby up for adoption even though it will be difficult for her to do so. She chooses to bless someone else and realizes she cannot effectively raise her child.

I believe the movie presents some good perspectives (and some bad) namely how do we treat someone like this? How should we treat someone like this? Are we going to be like the religious zealots who want to stone the woman caught in adultery, or like Jesus who reminds her of her sin but loves her nonetheless, protecting her and loving her in spite of her wrongdoings?

I do not think that a ten year old should run out and see this movie. It’s mature, the language is a little rough, and the subject matter is not childish. But at the same time I do think it’s possible that the good writing of the story and the good direction of the movie can help us to have a good discussion on the nature of grace, sin, forgiveness, and mercy.