First, let me say a few things to set the stage for my concerns.

1. I enjoy Pastor Mark and am thankful for the role he plays in the Christian world.
2. I agree with Pastor Mark’s assessment that Na’avi of Avatar practice pantheism.
3. I agree with Pastor Mark’s assessment that pantheism is an incorrect worldview.
4. I agree with Pastor Mark that the film is promoting a worldview that does not jive with the Biblical worldview.
5. I agree with Pastor Mark that the film does not portray an exact representation of Jesus.
6. My guess is that Pastor Mark went down a rabbit trail in his sermon on this one and did not think it through.

I want to make it clear: I agree with much of what Pastor Mark says in the clip.

However, I do struggle with some of Pastor Mark’s comments.  I will briefly outline them here. First, I struggle with the way that Pastor Mark has chosen to set Christ against culture, the Reformed position is Christ transforms culture.  I think that he has made an inappropriate good/bad split.  Avatar in his mind is “all bad”.  I am not sure that this is true.  There are some helpful metaphors in the film.  One example is the character of Grace Augustine.  She promotes a gracious approach to the “fearsome” Na’avi as opposed to a law driven approach.  This seems awfully familiar to the grace that Augustine espoused. Coincidence? Maybe. A second example is one of the things that Pastor Mark argues against as a “false incarnation”. I thought the film did a nice job representing the incarnation.  Here we have an incarnated being learning and becoming part of a culture and community that is not his own after leaving the relative ease of his previous life. Is it perfect or ideal? No. It is not written from a Biblical worldview.  Is it a bridge to the subversive and radical life of Jesus? Yes.

I also struggle with the way that Pastor Mark portrays Genesis 1:27-28.  He says that the Biblical teaching is “progress” and that we are not to remain “primitive”.  The problem is that this is not nuanced enough.  The Biblical mandate requires us to steward, tend , and care for the creation of the Creator.  This means that we are not to support strip mining, clear cutting, and the destruction of the creation.  We are to care for it and tend it.  Are we to create culture and progress? Yes.  However, we are to do so in such a way that honors God’s creation which he deemed good as opposed to seeing the creation as a hindrance or an inconvenience to our way of life.

Jumping off this point, is another one.  Pastor Mark says that humanity does not have the “divine spark”.  That’s simply not true. We are created in the image of God.  All of us are image bearers.  We are radically and completely corrupted by sin from the start. None of us are innocent.  None of us are able to save ourselves. We need our sovereign God to graciously redeem us according to his plan. Yet every person in Hell is still a human created in the image of God.

At the beginning of the clip Pastor Mark is talking about consumerism and the world system. The funny thing is that Avatar agrees with him.  Consumerism is the driving force behind the humans destroying the Na’avi.  The consumerism drives them to destroy the creation and the culture of these beings. I am concerned that Pastor Mark is burning bridges to the gospel as opposed to building them.

Another struggle I have with Pastor Mark’s assessment is that he seems to be communicating from his politics as opposed to the Bible.  The charges that he levies against Avatar could be very easily levied against The Chronicles of Narnia or The Lord of the Rings.  But, we “know” that these author’s were Christians and so we are OK with their metaphors.  I mean seriously, Jesus is represented by a lion who lives out a false resurrection and a false incarnation. Narnia has witches and talking beasts.  But, we all know that these are metaphors, illustrations of something else.  Can we not build a bridge from the metaphors present in Avatar? I think we can and I think we should.

Avatar is not the most demonic movie ever (I would say the Exorcist is).  It is an opportunity for the Christian world to speak to a world that desperately needs Jesus with metaphors and images that will make sense to them.

The study found that the average college student has, “Exactly 87 email contacts, 146 cell phone contacts, and 438 “friends” on social networks.” What struck me was the cell phone contacts, 146.  My guess is that the people in the cell phone are those who are considered “meaningful” relationships.

In this article they add these numbers up to come up with an influence circle of 671.  However, I think that the real number is 146. These are the people who will actually respond to the student.  These are the people who will trust what they hear from the person.  My guess is that these 146 are duplicated in their social media and also in email.

146. That’s awful close to 150. More thoughts on this to come…

We come face to face with issues regarding global climate change which is in part due to world population growth.  Sustainability is also a buzz word that we hear on an almost daily basis.  We must find ways to use natural resources in such a way that we can sustain their use over the long term.  We are told that by living longer we are making this more difficult.  What if we are able to unnaturally extend the lives of people? What would this mean for our world?

I think that it is time for us to slow down and begin asking some questions about the effects of our endeavors.  Wendell Berry in his collection of essays called Sex, Economy, Freedom, and Community often says that as we seek to find solutions through science we will inevitably create even more problems.  I think that this is often true.  When it comes to any scientific and technological “breakthroughs” we must determine their value not only based on the immediate impact but also on the ramifications of the breakthrough.

What do you think? How do we answer the question of “should we?”

There are two articles floating around the internet that catch onto this reality. One was written recently by Jeff Jensen over at EW and the other was from Mikal Gilmore over at Rolling Stone. Both of these articles were sent to me by my friend Kristin. To me the greatest insight into this show comes from Carlton Cuse one of the producers:

“The focus on redemption,” says Cuse, “is something that is endlessly fascinating to both Damon and me — the fact that we are all sort of imperfect as people. Our characters are in extreme circumstances. They’ve confronted on the island various manifestations of the exact issues that they struggled with as people their whole lives. We feel there’s an incredible universality to that. It’s the human journey. Redemption is something that everyone seeks, and that’s something we try to hold out in the show. If we acknowledge our imperfection, and if we ask for forgiveness for our imperfection, are we able to actually reset the clock?”

This is what captures our imagination.  Can we find redemption? Is it possible? I think that Jensen is on to something when we hits on the theme of the book of Luke: Lost. He points out that the number sequence in Lost, 4, 8, 15, 16, 23 and 42 (the last chapter of Luke is 24 which is an inversion of 42) all correlate to passages in Luke’s narrative that hit on lostness. In particular I want to touch on Luke 15 which is the most popular of the Luke “lost” passages.

The lost theme in Luke 15 is counteracted by the searching theme.  The woman, the shepherd, and father all are in search for what it is that they lost.  These  people that we meet in Lost, these stories that we encounter all point to the brokenness of individuals which leads to a collective brokenness. They are all lost.  Not simply because they crashed on an island that nobody can find but they are lost because their lives are broken.  The crash seems arbitrary but those that begin to see that it was not begin to find this elusive redemption.  It is as if there is someone looking for them.

I think that we get the clearest hint of this in the story of Desmond and Penny.  The Luke 15 connections here are endless.  However, it is in the relationship that we have some closure.  We have a sense that Desmond has found his Penny.  He celebrates.  He rejoices.  He also realizes that he still has a role to play in helping others find their redemption. He does reluctantly but he helps even after his redemption is found.

Lost captures the imagination because it captures our longing for redemption.  Redemption. Have you found what you’re looking for?

There have been a large number of Abortion Rights groups speaking out against the commercial and CBS for airing it. What is interesting is that there is no flack coming from these groups regarding the commercials that put women on display as sexual objects. Which of these commercials is most hurtful to women? I would argue that one which objectifies women and uses them for nothing more than their physical attractiveness is more damning.

I am also saddened by the rhetoric that has come out of this.  I have many of my fellow Metro-Detroiters saying that Tebow should not be allowed to “shove his beliefs” down their throats. To my knowledge Focus on the Family paid for the ad time. Planned Parenthood, to my knowledge did not purchase any airtime. If an advocacy group wants to advertise let them pay for it. Is it possible to have the intellectual integrity to see that both sides of a coin have the freedom to speech? You as a television viewer have the freedom and ability to mute the commercial or pause the DVR and then hit the “live” button.

We live in a country where the freedom of speech is part of our Bill of Rights. If you do not like that there is an ad about being Pro-Life and you desire “balance” then pony up the 2.5 million and broadcast your take.  Until that time comes please, please, can you let sports talk go back to sports talk? Thanks.

via CBS to Air Tim Tebow Super Bowl Ad.

I think the reason for this is found in a comment by Wendell Berry in his essay, “A Few Words in Favor of Edward Abbey”.  He is discussing Abbey’s tendency to tip sacred cows. Berry’s says, “Any human product or activity that humans defend as a category becomes, by the very fact, a sacred cow – in need, by the same fact, of an occasional goosing (Berry, 42).”  In our current cultural milieu we struggle for meaning and for finger holds.  Therefore, we tend to categorize everything and everyone.  This categorizing leads to the development of multiple “consecrated bovines (Berry, 42).” As these cows begin to fill our world we are constantly bumping up against someone’s deeply personal category and they defend it with passion. When sacred cows are engaged the one protecting them flares the nostril and becomes a raging bull.

This kind of debate and conversation is wholly unhelpful.  If we are to engage with meaning and purpose with those of other perspectives and worldviews there must be a willingness on both parties to discuss rationally and with grace. What is the purpose of just being snarky? What is the point of just making fun of someone you believe to be wrong on an important issue?  Can you not bring to the table more than one liners designed to gain the smiling head nod of your supporters?

References:

Berry, Wendell. What are People For? North Point Press: San Francisco, 1990.

The legendary status of this generation is amazing. The only problem is that the stats do not bear it all out. Ed Stetzer over at LifeWay Research is doing some good work. The stat that is most profound is that yes these generations find the church hypocritical.  However, they are very, very open to the Bible. Nearly two thirds of the thousand surveyed said that they were open to having a friend study the Bible with them.

The Bible. It’s still relevant. Who knew?

On the Radio Talking about the Younger Unchurched… – EdStetzer.com

Tim Keller is the pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City. He is beginning to expand his ministry influence through writing over the last couple of years.  He hit the scene popularly with his book The Reason for God. He has recently published a new book entitled, The Prodigal God. This is a short read (I read it in about two and a half hours) but the substance is much weightier (I have pondering it for three days!).

In a nutshell Keller tells and teaches the parable of the “Lost Son” from Luke 15:11-32. However, this is not your typical flannel-graph retelling.  Keller takes the parable and flips it upside down, left, right, and under. The transformation of our understanding of the parable comes quickly when he challenges the typical understanding of the term “prodigal”.  We usually think about it as a negative term which has come to mean someone leaving or running away.  However, Keller redefines (or educates us about the true definition) as one who, “1 spending money or resources freely and recklessly; wastefully extravagant, 2 having or giving something on a lavish scale.” These definitions are often spun negatively and only applied to the younger son.  However, it is the father of the story who is truly living out this reality.

Our understanding of the parable of the “Lost Son” has always focused on the younger son who wasted all that the father has given him.  We shake our head at the older brother and his lack of grace. Keller wants us to see that the younger brother is the “tax-collector or the prostitute”, the older brother is the “religious person” and the father is “God”.  These are common enough.  However, the twist comes when he makes an excellent case for the fact that the key to the parable is the response of the father to the OLDER brother.  Read the passage again.  Notice, it is the OLDER brother that misses out on the banquet and grace of God.  He has lost his soul by obeying.  Keller spends most of his time driving this home.  The more insidious sin of the parable is the hard-hearted, legalistic, arrogant, obedient, heart of the older brother.

The exegesis of the passage is well done.  The target audience is broad so you won’t get the nuts and bolts of how Keller came to his conclusions.  I would love to see an exegetically driven text from Keller that helps us understand how he came to his conclusions.  That being said, this is a must read for anyone who is trying to understand the gospel and how it applies to their lives.

By means of application and conclusion, I will share with you what I am wrestling with. Friends, most of you reading this are of my ilk, the older brother.  The prideful, arrogant, do-it-yourself, know-it-all, obeying-in-all-things, hard-hearted older brother. What happens when the father comes to us and invites us insider to celebrate the grace he has bestowed on another? Will we celebrate? Or will we stand outside in righteous indignation?

You see, it’s not everyday that you see a snapshot of Detrtoit that points to the racial and the spiritual. But, here we do. I have worked in and around the city of Detroit for four years. My first three and a half took place on the college campuses and for the last six months I have been in the suburbs working at Grace Chapel, EPC.  In my time here I have been amazed by what is happening in and around our city.

Many people look at 8 Mile and Telegraph, those grand dividers as the keys to what’s going on here.  The reality is that they aren’t.  There is a movement growing of the emerging generation to re-engage in a real way the very real problems that our city faces.  They see the problems.  They live the problems.  Yet, when you go to Wayne State University or talk to people from Citadel (a multi-ethnic church in the heart of the city) you begin to glimpse a different picture: hope.

Whereas our parents generation was one “lost in space“, our generation is one that seeks to rectify those problems and change the future. Are we despairing? Yes. Are we frustrated with an institutional agenda that makes change difficult? Yes. Are we without hope? No.

As I think about what David Swanson says in his article I can’t help but think that this is the generation that will change the tide. We can only hope.

View Original Article