Score Card Christians

I find myself falling into a trap that I think most (if not all) Christians fall into on a regular basis. I try to evaluate my faith with a "score card" mentality. That is, on any given day/week/month/whatever I'll think, "Well, in terms of reading my Bible, A-. In terms of loving my neighbor, D-. In terms of worship, C+. In terms of seeking justice, F." And so forth.

This is an extremely legalistic way of looking at our faith, and it is very unhealthy. Not only does it evaluate our faith based on a comparison mentality, but it also misses the point.

Thinking about our faith in these terms simplifies it to a "if I do enough of the right things, I'm good" and "if I don't do enough of the right things (or do too many of the wrong things), I'm bad" mentality. And that misses the whole point of grace.

Grace tells us that we will never be able to do enough of the right things, and we will always do too many of the wrong things, but that God made a way for us to be made acceptable in his sight anyway. As such, our score card should only ever look like this:

Final Score:

Jesus: 1
Sin/Death: 0

End of story.

2014 Stanley Cup Finals Predictions

Rangers vs. Kings
My prediction: Kings in 5
RESULT: Kings in 5
Thoughts: I called this perfectly. I even called that the games would be close but the series wouldn't particularly be. The Rangers had gotten to this point with a whole lot of luck and mediocrity. The Kings, on the other hand, had fought for every goal/win they've gotten, and are clearly the more talented team. Interesting, the game the Rangers won wasn't even their best game (that was game 2, which they lost). Give them credit for pushing, but the Kings were just the better team and showed it throughout the series. Congratulations to the LA Kings...2014 Stanley Cup champions!

2014 Stanley Cup Playoff Predictions Round 3 (Conference Finals)

EASTERN CONFERENCE
Canadiens vs Rangers
My prediction: Canadiens in 6
RESULT: Rangers in 6
Thoughts: The Canadiens finally lived up to my low expectations of them. They were terrible in this series. New York was...again...consistently mediocre. But Montreal was just a no-show. Where was Subban in this series?


WESTERN CONFERENCE
Blackhawks vs. Kings
My prediction: Kings in 7
RESULT: Kings in 7
Thoughts: The Kings battled against so much these playoffs and deserved to win this series.

2014 Stanley Cup Playoff Predictions Round 2

EASTERN CONFERENCE
Bruins vs. Canadiens
My prediction: Bruins in 5
RESULT: Canadiens in 7
Thoughts: Wow. Just wow. This should never have happened. But, as I said, crazy things happen when Boston and Montreal play each other. 

Penguins vs. Rangers
My prediction: Rangers in 6
RESULT: Rangers in 7
Thoughts: The Rangers had trouble being consistent, but in the end, so did Malkin and Crysby. If those two had been able to bring it every game, they would have won this series easily. Many folks still talk about Crysby as if he's the best player in the world. They have to face up to the fact that he just doesn't bring the goods when it matters most. There are several players (notably, Giroux and Toews) that I'd take over Crysby.

WESTERN CONFERENCE
Blackhawks vs. Wild
My prediction: Blackhawks in 5
RESULT: Blackhawks in 6
Thoughts: The Wild played better than I expected. The two games they won in this series wasn't due to the Blackhawks making mistakes...they were outplayed by the Wild. They played smart and fast, and deserved to win those two. In the end, the 'Hawks' experience and superior skill won out, but kudos to the Wild for what they were able to do this year.

Ducks vs. Kings
My prediction: Kings in 7
RESULT: Kings in 7
Thoughts: Another series comeback for the Kings. Their experience in these kinds of series and the fact that they are coming off that historic series comeback gave them the edge. Their leaders stepped up when needed and had a huge game 7.

The Meaning of Life

I grasp the mysteries of the universe, for I know the Creator. I understand the meaning of life, for I know the Author. I know the source of endless hope and boundless love, for I know the Savior.

One Way Love

So I recently received a gift...a copy of One Way Love by Tullian Tchividjian, a leader, writer, and thinker for whom I have a lot of respect and admiration. I've been digging into it over the last few days and...WOW. Every Christian needs to read this book.

I've been processing why this book is so moving. It's not necessarily new. It's exactly what we find in the gospels. For those of us that spend a lot of time reading about and unpacking exactly what Jesus was all about, the concepts here are old hat. But it's no less revolutionary and transformative, and Tullian has a way with words; a way of framing things that make sense and are contextualized in terms of every day life.

This is moving, deep, and profound stuff. Go. Read it. Now. No joke...now. Trust me on this. You'll thank me later.

2014 Stanley Cup Playoff Predictions Round 1

EASTERN CONFERENCE
Bruins (1) vs. Red Wings (WC)
My prediction: Bruins in 5
RESULT: Bruins in 5
Thoughts: Bruins are the strongest team in the East. I figured Detroit would take one game from them, but didn't offer much resistance. Boston is the team to beat this year. While I suspect someone will upset them, it's not likely to be the Canadiens. Possibly the winner of the Penguins/Jackets vs. Rangers/Flyers series, but it won't surprise me at all to see the Bruins in the finals.

Penguins (1) vs. Blue Jackets (WC)
My prediction: Blue Jackets in 7
RESULT: Penguins in 6
Thoughts: I know this was a bit of a "hopeful" pick. I thought Columbus really had a chance to beat the Penguins. Unfortunately for them, the previously no-show Malkin decided to come alive at exactly the wrong time, sealing up the series. The Jackets should be proud, though, as they took it to the last minute. Great season. I look for more from this this young, solid team over the next few years.

Lightning (2) vs. Canadiens (3)
My prediction: Lightning in 6
RESULT: Canadiens in 4
Thoughts: I really didn't see this coming. The Canadiens aren't a very good team this year, so the Lightning really had to fall apart. Not sure what happened. They have the talent to beat Montreal. This one is a puzzler. Good for the Canadiens for pulling it together.

Rangers (2) vs. Flyers (3)
My prediction: Flyers in 7
RESULT: Rangers in 7
Thoughts: This was a heartbreaker. The Flyers had major identity issues. They proved all year that when they put in the work, they could skate with (and beat) anyone. But their work ethic was surprisingly inconsistent. When they worked hard, they dominated...literally...some of the best teams in the NHL. Other times (far too often), they just looked disinterested and lackadaisical and (as a result) struggled greatly. In game 7 they really only worked in period 3...and still almost took it. The one thing they can take from this, though, is that they finally have a true starting goalie. One of the  best goaltending playoff performances I've ever seen, loss or not. Seriously. Mason > Lundquist.


WESTERN CONFERENCE
Avalanche (1) vs. Wild (WC)
My prediction: Avalanche in 4
RESULT: Wild in 7
Thoughts: Color me surprised on this one too. On paper (and based on the season) the Avs should have taken this series easily. But give the Wild credit for a great series. When the right team gets hot at the right time, anything can happen.

Ducks (1) vs. Stars (WC)
My prediction: Ducks in 5
RESULT: Ducks in 6
Thoughts: The Stars put up more of a fight than I suspected, and not just because they won two games. The other games were pretty close and the Stars competed in all of them. These are two teams with great offense and shaky D/goaltending, so I expected this to be a high scoring series, and it was.

Blues (2) vs. Blackhawks (3)
My prediction: Blackhawks in 6
RESULT: Blackhawks in 6
Thoughts: Most people picked the Blues in this series because of their strong play down the stretch (excepting their slight falter at season's end), but I still believe the defending champion Blackhawks are the strongest team in the West. The Hawks have underachieved this year, while the Blues overachieved; such is usually exposed in the playoffs, and indeed it was. The Blues have limited talent but Hitchcock is great at making players play as a team, which covers a lot of deficit in pure ability...and with Miller in goal they really had a shot. On the other hand, the Hawks have way more talent than their regular season record would indicate, and they've stepped it up in the playoffs.

Sharks (2) vs. Kings (3)
My prediction: Kings in 7
RESULT: Kings in 7
Thoughts: This is what I expected: a long series with lots of scoring from two great offensive teams. I didn't quite expect that it would go down the way it did, but the Kings impressed with their resilience, becoming the latest team to rally from a 3-0 series deficit for just the 5th time (I believe) in NHL history. The Kings had several players from the Flyers team that did the same thing against Boston in 2010, so they knew what they were up against, and they pulled it out. Great job Kings!

3 • 30 Challenge

I've been overweight most of my adult life. I played football (high school) and tennis (high school and college) and was generally a fairly athletic teenager. In fact, I had the opportunity to play tennis professionally. Once I stopped playing and moved on to other things, I gained some weight that I've never taken off. Then I went through a particularly stressful period of time and gained a lot of weight. I tend to be a stress eater.

The last few years, though, I've been convicted about getting healthier, not so much for the sake of appearance (that too), but to be healthier...for all of the typical reasons and, particularly, so that I have the energy I need to keep up with ministry and to set an example for the people in my sphere of influence. I've always kept a fairly rigorous schedule, but I've found myself tiring much more easily.

So I joined the gym and ate better, and dropped over forty pounds from when we moved to Ohio in 2010, most of which during this past August, September and October. In November and December, I had a stretch of 6-8 weeks where I was working 60 to 70 hours a week in front of a computer. I knew I would be forced to be mostly sedentary during that time, so I expected to gain back about fifteen of the pounds I had lost. I gained back nine; less than I expected but still not what I want in the long run.

In the time since, I haven't gained a ton of weight back, but I've definitely hit a plateau. I've gotten out of the gym habit, and while I haven't been eating lots of junk food, I haven't been watching what I eat, paying attention to portions, etc, as much as I was.

That ends now. Starting tomorrow, I am starting a 3 • 30 Challenge (something I just made up): I am committing to lose 30 lbs in the next 3 months. My birthday is July 2, so by then, I will lose 30 lbs. This is not just about losing weight...though I definitely need to do so...but a lifestyle change. When I'm hitting the gym regularly and eating healthier, I feel better. It's that simple. When I'm not, I'm tired more often and more significantly, my long-term back injury acts up, and I'm generally cranky. And, most importantly for me, I need energy to leverage my time for God's kingdom most effectively.

I'm not really worried about motivation. I have a strong will and I finish what I start. But I'm posting it here so it's on "public record" and I have accountability to it. I can honestly say that my greatest desire in life is to honor God. For me, nothing else matters (or, rather, everything else that matters flows from that). I've spent too much of my life not honoring God (and, in fact, dishonoring God) with my physical health. So I'm getting back on track to rectify that. If anyone wants to join me, I'll be glad to have you along. 3 • 30: 3 months, 30 lbs. Book it.

Playing it Safe

The other day I was watching a hockey game with my son, who is six. I asked him, "Do you want to play hockey some day?" He said, "No...that doesn't look very safe."

Aside from being pretty funny, I told him that he's a kid - he's not supposed to be worried about what's safe. He's supposed to be worried about what's fun. But it got me thinking about how we adults often act this way in life. Especially those of us who are Jesus followers...how often do we avoid taking risks in ministry because "it doesn't look safe". I don't mean safe just like in avoiding bodily harm (though that too), but more in terms of not moving out of our comfort zone, not making the extra effort, not going beyond what we are used to. Just...playing it safe.

Here's the reality: over the course of history, very few things have been accomplished by playing it safe. How much life do you miss by playing it safe? How many of the opportunities God gives you do you neglect because you're playing it safe?

I hope my son plays hockey some day (or football, or guitar, or...whatever). But more than that, I hope he doesn't avoid taking risks for the sake of God's kingdom. For that matter, I hope I (and you) don't either.

Organizing the Bus

I am a big fan of Jim Collins, particularly Good to Great. This book came up in conversation with someone today, and it got me thinking about the impact it has had on me. One of the many things about it that has stuck with me is the two-part illustration of an organization being a bus. And, as Collins points out through the interpretation of his research, the first step in organizational development is to get the right people on the bus. Many organizations are good at this (many are not). But the second step is to get the right people in the right seats on the bus. Most organizations (even those good at the first step) are not nearly as good at this second step.

Many leaders understand this, in theory. They get the notion. They quote the notion. But they still don't put it into practice (at least, not well) in the organizations they lead. Because here's the thing I've discovered: many leaders have tunnel vision when it comes to defining what "the right seat" means. They think in terms of roles. That is, "What does the organization need...that's the role we need to fill." The problem with that approach is that very few people fit into that narrow of a definition of a seat. Most people have more than one area of expertise or skill or passion. And many people, in the "employment" process (both from those looking to hire and from those seeking a job), end up sitting in a seat that is either the wrong seat, or may only be the partially right seat (i.e., something at which they can do a decent job, but which may not be the best use of their gifts).

So the "right seat", as I understand it, is not necessarily matching the right person with a particular role (or, rather, not ONLY that), but, more holistically, it is matching up the person with the right opportunities to exercise their particular range of gifts and passions.

Because if we are truly pursuing step one, and getting the right people, then we want to use those people in the best ways possible, to allow them to thrive and to succeed. And when we're focused too much on roles, we miss a lot of potential for our people to flourish.

Obviously there are things at which certain people excel. But getting the right people means then finding opportunities for them to do what they are naturally gifted to do, and at which they will thrive.

I've read a lot about leadership, and one of the things that I see over and over again is the theory of strengths-based leadership...the idea that leaders need to play to their strengths and manage around their weaknesses. It doesn't make sense to spend a ton of time trying to turn a weakness into a strength. Most weaknesses will always be weaknesses. And most strengths are already the things people are good at. So those are the things we need to focus on. Yet many people end up in some nebulous middle ground; something at which they aren't terrible (or which they may even be good at)...but that is not necessarily the best match for their particular strengths or passions.

Strengths-based leadership and "getting the right people into the right seats on the bus" are really the same thing. They're focused on getting the right people regardless of the role, and then finding the areas in which they most excel (which most exercises their strengths and passions).

Where the problem comes is a natural consequence to getting this right: when you match people up with their strengths (and away from just filling a role), it leaves some things to fall through the cracks. The roles that they filled suddenly aren't being filled. I would say two things about this: one, this trade-off is always worth it. Letting a few things fall through the cracks, or finding temporary patches for some things, will always be worth the benefit gained from getting people into the right seats on the bus.

And two, maybe the things that fall through the cracks are not actually what the organization needs. Especially in Christian contexts, we often convince ourselves what is needed, when maybe what we really need are the things which God has already gifted the right people we've already identified. This speaks to something Collins says, which is that great organizations get the right people on the bus before they even know where the bus is going. That is, instead of identifying where the bus needs to go and then finding the people to make it happen (what good organizations do), great organizations get the right people on the bus and then let those right people and their gifts help define where the bus is going by getting them in the right seats. That's a scary thing, especially for organizations that have particularly strong or charismatic individual leaders. But I think Collins hits the nail on the head.

As Collins has identified, great leaders/organizations really get both of these steps, both in theory AND in practice...and getting this right is what separates great organizations from simply good ones.

Parenting Wisdom

Our small group has been talking about Christian marriage/relationships, and all that comes with that. In my years of marital counseling, I have often discussed some of the most commonly cited reasons for relational conflict and separation/divorce. These are the most frequently given answers:

1. Money
2. Child-rearing (and all that goes with it)
3. Sex and sexual issues
4. Roles and Expectations
5. Addictions
6. Conflict (the ways we handle conflict)
7. Communication

Each of these (but especially the last couple/few) can affect all of the others, but are often given as their own sources of conflict. Note that number one is WAY higher than any of the others. Money is easily the number one source of conflict. The others aren't even close. That said, the others are significant enough on their own, and can be just as common.

Each can be the subject of years of study and discussion, but this week our group is particularly talking about number 2: child rearing. One of the things that I often find is that we assume that parents of godly children must be great parents, and that parents of children who are far from God must be bad parents. This is folly. Children make their own choices. Obviously there can be correlations. But often we dismiss (or flat out ignore) insight from parents whose children may be far from God...and, in turn, they may be more reluctant to speak up and offer the often significant advice and insight they can have for other parents. On the contrary, we often give extra credence to insight from parents whose children are following God even when they aren't necessarily the best parents themselves.

I'll illustrate my point (and then explain it) with an example from hockey, the best sport on the planet. Often, the referees are guilty of what is commonly called "calling the result". What this means is that, if an official sees one player suddenly fall down, they will automatically call tripping on a nearby opposing player, even if that player had no contact with the one who fell. Or the official will see a player's head snap back and will call a high sticking penalty on an opposing player even if his stick never left the ice. On the contrary, one player can clearly and obviously be interfered with, but no penalty is called because the other player stayed on his feet. In other words, the referee makes the call based on the result...what the other player does or does not do...rather than on the actual action of the source (the guilty or innocent player).

Here's my point with this: we often do the same thing with parents/children. We judge based on the results, rather than on the source. We miss much sound advice from parents that have a lot of wisdom specifically because their kids are far from God, and listen to foolish insight from parents just because their kids may be following God (even though their kids may be wiser than they are!).

This is, of course, far more broad-reaching than just parenting. We do this in all kinds of ways. We judge the result, or judge based on our perceptions, on our preconceived notions of people rather than the reality. We foolishly allow our own issues to dictate our opinions of others, and thus what we can learn from them. We need to judge wisdom on its own merits...not on our perceptions of its source.

Playing With Fire

My six-year-old son has been on a Minecraft kick lately. He loves building things. Minecraft is like a digital version of Legos, allowing him to create things from scratch. For the last several days, he has been working on a house for himself and he even built one for his sister. Then he built a huge castle with all kinds of cool stuff.

Then, yesterday, he was trying to put a "lava river" next to his castle, and the lava caught it on fire and burned it all down. Understandably for a six-year-old, he freaked out. We finally got him calmed down and convinced him to rebuild, warning him of the danger of putting lava/fire too close to his castle.

He spent all of last night and most of this morning rebuilding his castle, making it "even better than before!" Then he decided he wanted a secret cave underneath his castle. This meant that he had to excavate blocks out from under his castle. In order to do that, he used lava to quickly burn the blocks out of the castle foundation. You can guess what happened. It caught his castle on fire...again...and burned it down. This time, it caught the rest of his village on fire and burned all of it to the ground; his house, his sisters house, the shed he had built, and the "pool" building, along with his castle, were all destroyed.

Of course, he freaked out again, then he had to go to school. But this whole saga got me thinking about sin in our lives. Too often we allow one little sin in, and it burns us. We get over it and start to rebuild, but all too often and all too soon, we start letting a little bit of lava back in, thinking we can handle it and that the same tragedy won't strike again. Of course, more often than not, it ends up making things even worse the second time around, and can destroy everything in our lives.

That's the danger of sin. It seems like we can handle little sins and they won't have too much of an adverse effect. But sins have a way of catching fire to anything and everything in their path. Even if we can successfully "put out the fire" in one instance, if we let the sin back into our lives, it can catch everything and destroy all of us.

The question is, where is the lava in our lives? In what ways are we playing with fire, hoping we won't get burned?

Integrity

I was hanging out with a group of people this past weekend - a bunch of musicians - rehearsing for a recording gig in a couple of months. It was mixed company; three of us that profess to be Christians, and four that make no such claim.

In between jamming, conversation got around to a variety of things. One of them was music and movies, and some of the guys started talking about copying CDs or movies. They talked about this as if it was just common practice and no big deal.

"Ripping" music and movies (or anything else) that you do not own and have not paid for is illegal. It's also just plain dishonest, stealing from the artists, actors, and companies to whom that property belongs. I've heard a lot of excuses that try to justify this. "Most actors are obscenely wealthy" or "A big company won't miss a few songs" or "It's not hurting anyone". That's not the point. The point is this: that product does not belong to you. It is illegal and just plain wrong to steal it. Just because it's a "small" item or something that "doesn't hurt anyone" is irrelevant.

The more frustrating thing is that the other Christians in the group went right along with the discussion, as if there was no conflict of interest. Two problems with that: First, Christians are called to live according to the laws of the land. Romans 13:1-7. Second, Christians are called to set a different example than that of the world. And if we exhibit the same sins the world does, we don't show them that we are different or stand for anything different.

Even if we don't participate in the public conversations about it, being a person of integrity means doing the right thing even when no one else knows about it. It's not just an issue of the appearance of doing right, for when others see or know about it. It's about doing right before God and before yourself, so you know your character is intact.

For what it's worth, I called this group of people out about this. All of them are, to some degree, professional (or at least semi-professional) musicians. They are themselves affected when other people pirate music. I believe I addressed the issue in a tactful and non-judgmental way. But here's the sad thing: the non-Christians took it better than the Christians. Both of the other Christians in the group got a bit upset that I was calling them out about their relaxed attitude about intellectual property theft. Almost all of the non-Christians took it well. I talked to two of them later (to make sure they didn't feel I was being judgmental) and they said they knew I was right and that I hadn't come off as superior or judge-y. They got that I was just sharing my view on it, and one of them said, "I like that you're different from what everyone else stands for."

I see that as a win. But it's very discouraging that the Christians in the group...the very ones that should know better...were the ones that got upset about it. That could be a guilty conscience, but whatever the reason, it's frustrating.

There are many situations where copying copyrighted works is acceptable under the law. For example, I give copies of songs/CDs to people on our worship team all the time. This is allowed under the CCLI (worship music copyright) license, when it's for the purpose of songs (or even possible songs) we might use in worship. I've copied clips from movies to use in a film class I've taught several times. This is allowed under the creative commons license, when it's for purposes of education. I'm not talking about these situations. I've also had people offer to burn CDs for me just to listen to, or movies for me to watch, and I've turned them down. Personal use is not allowed under copyright law. And since I'm called to live according to the laws of the land, I decline.

What kind of standards do you live by even when others aren't around? Are there some situations that you excuse or justify (for whatever reason) even though you know they're wrong? Finally, how do you react when someone calls you out if you don't live/act ethically?

Having strong character is very difficult. But consistency is essential if we want to be people of integrity...all the more true if we profess to follow Jesus. Not only are we called to be honest people of sound character, but we are called to set an example for the rest of the world - to set ourselves apart as people who have different values than the world, and live in a blameless way before man and God.

Lessons on Leadership

I've been thinking a lot about leadership, and one of the most key lessons I've learned is this: people tend to live up to our expectations of them. Not only that, but our expectations and perceptions of people tend to cause us to limit their ability to break out of those very expectations/perceptions.

Here's an example of what I mean: one of the guys that is in my circle of influence is a guy who I just did not expect to be a very good leader. I'm not sure if it's his personality or some bias of my own, but my perception has been that he's probably not a very good/strong leader. Note that I'm not talking about affinity; I like this person very much. But, for whatever reason, I've just had it in my head that he's probably not a very good leader.

As a result of that perception, I haven't given him the opportunities to lead (and, in the process, potentially prove my perceptions wrong). But recently I had occasion to give him just such an opportunity (mostly because I couldn't find anyone else available to do so, sadly). He knocked it out of the park. I was way wrong in my perception of him and his lack of leadership ability.

My initial instinct about this was something like, "Why hasn't he stepped up as a leader before now?" But, of course, my own perceptions prevented me from giving him any opportunities in which he could do so. So, my perceptions about him meant that he lived up to what I expected. That is, I expected him not to be a good leader, therefore what I saw was him not being a good leader. And, at the same time those perceptions prevented me from giving him the opportunities to either 1. prove my perceptions wrong (which he did), or 2. (if my perceptions had been right) grow into being a better leader.

This got me wondering how many other people I've done this with. Are there people that I'm holding back by not giving them the opportunities to lead or grow? Am I basing my perceptions of them on lack of evidence to the contrary, which is my fault in the first place for not giving them the opportunities to succeed or fail and provide just such evidence?

I guess what I'm saying is this: at least in this one case, I didn't even give this guy the chance to be a good leader because I was already convinced that he wasn't. I virtually guaranteed that he couldn't be a good leader by not giving him the opportunities to succeed or fail, and then justified it to myself by saying, "Well, if he really was a good leader, I would have seen evidence of it so far."

The ironic thing is that this obviously shows more of a deficit in my own leadership than in his. And I've been on the receiving end of being discounted as a leader without really being given the opportunity to lead. And often I haven't been given those opportunities based on people's perceptions of me that are often completely inaccurate. So I need to check myself that I'm not doing the very same thing to others in my area of influence (obviously I was, but I need to stop).

I need to make sure that I am developing leaders rather than stifling them or counting them out before they're even given a chance. I need to take chances and risks on people and get over my perceptions and biases in order to allow them to thrive. I hope this lesson might benefit other leaders as well.

How I Met Martin Luther King

One of the great privileges of my life is having Rev. Dr. Albert Paul Brinson as one of my mentors. Al was co-pastor with Martin Luther King, Jr at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, and grew up hanging around the King household. Al has told me many stories of "ML" over the years, but one stands out that has had particular significance for my life.

One day while I was in seminary, I confessed to Al that I was struggling with the idea of going into pastoral ministry. I had been feeling that I was nowhere near holy enough, or righteous enough, or good enough to be a pastor. In response, Al told me a story. He and ML had been sitting on the porch of the King house, and Al had been sharing his own struggles that had, several decades earlier, mirrored my own. He told ML that he didn't feel like he was good enough to be a pastor, and in response, ML said, "None of is good enough. None of us is ever ready. None of us is worthy to serve our Lord. But God calls us, in many ways, because of our brokenness and unworthiness, not in spite of it. The only difference between those God uses mightily and those He does not, is our willingness to say yes to Him."

These words have had a profound effect on me. I hear Al's voice when I think of these words. But every time we celebrate the life and memory of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., I think of those words of encouragement, stretching through the years to reach a life far removed from his. I am, of course, grateful for his influence on this world and the social changes he worked to bring about. But if it's possible, I am even more grateful for the way that "ML" influenced my life and ministry in a much more personal way.

"Therefore encourage one another and build up each other, as indeed you are doing." -1 Thessalonians 5:11

Fifteen Favorite Fantasy Books of All Time

I've taken to reading almost exclusively fantasy literature the last few years (why fantasy gets grouped in with science fiction is beyond me; they are vastly different). The lone exception is Lee Child - I read those as quickly as he can write them. Anyway, I thought I would post my list of my favorite fantasy books of all time. Note that these are MY choices for what are best, and I know that many, many people will disagree. There are also many fantasy books/series that I haven't read, and thus are not on the list. I'll update this list as I read more in the genre.

Wherever appropriate, I will list a series rather than one particular book in a series, though wherever possible I will note which book(s) in a series I enjoyed more than others.

So, without further ado:
1. Kingkiller Chronicles, Patrick Rothfuss. Planned three book trilogy, two are completed. The Name of the Wind (book 1) is my favorite book of all-time. Seriously. Book 2, Wise Man's Fear, is just as good, but it's basically part two of the same story. These books are filled with rich world-building, deep characterizations, intriguing plots, and fantasy tropes are turned on their heads. They don't go where you expect them to, and are all the better for it. Parts of book 1 are sort of an adult version of Harry Potter, though that kind of insults Rothfuss, as this is much deeper and better than Harry Potter (which are also great books, but very different). Read them. Read them now!

2. The Night Angel series, Brent Weeks. Completed trilogy. These are not the deepest books ever written in terms of complexity, but the world building is great, the characters are incredibly realistic and, even with faults, relatable and likable. He's also one of the best fantasy authors around for writing action sequences. Plots are tight and fast-moving, and these books are just plain fun. All three books are equally great. His new series, Lightbringer, is also fantastic. Two books are completed out of a planned four. In most ways, it's better than Night Angel, but I prefer the premise of Night Angel more (I like assassins).

3. Gentleman Bastard Sequence, Scott Lynch. These are super fun books, beginning with The Lies of Locke Lamora. About a crew that carry out a heist. Basically all you need to know. Kind of like Ocean's Eleven in a medieval setting with magic. Awesome. Planned Quadrilogy, of which books 1-3 have been released, with book 4 due some time in the future.

4. A Song of Ice and Fire series, George R.R. Martin. Seven books planned, five completed. Yes, there is a lot of hype around these. Yes, they are fantastic. The recent (incredible) HBO series has brought the popularity of this series to the fore, though they've always been popular. If you want richly detailed, extremely deep, morally ambiguous and complex characters, political machinations, and numerous intricate plotlines, you can't beat the world that Martin has created. Beware: these are not for the faint of heart. This is a dark, difficult world. But it's one worth exploring. All of the books are incredible.

5. Tigana, Guy Gavriel Kay. Absolutely beautiful, moving novel that stays with you after you read it. Kay has a gift for unpacking very real characters and investing you in their lives, their world, and their fate. This novel, a standalone, deals with some heavy themes or love and loss, nationhood and patriotism, and slavery. This is the book, along with Warbreaker (see #5), that really got me into fantasy fiction. Absolutely incredible, and I highly recommend it for anyone that wants something more than just the same old read. Truly, a work of art. Brilliant.

6. Warbreaker, Brandon Sanderson. This standalone book, along with Tigana (see #4), got me into reading fantasy. An incredible book. Really interesting magic system and world building, and a fascinating plot to boot. You care about the characters and this book was so good that it led me to immediately read all of Sanderson's other work, and he consequently has become one of my favorite authors. Read this book!

7. Unhewn Throne series, Brian Staveley. Just seriously great fantasy. Great overall, actually. Deep characters, interesting world, engaging plotlines. Read them!

8. Demon Cycle series, Peter V Brett. Another excellent fantasy series with well-drawn characters, lots of action, an interesting world, and great plotting. More akin to Brent Weeks than George RR Martin (meaning, more action and less deep political machinations), but also fantastic.

9. Vlad Taltos series, Steven Brust. OK these books are just downright fun. They aren't super deep like many of the choices, and they are quite a bit shorter than most fantasy books. But there are a lot of them, and they're all great fun. You just kind of have to read these to "get" them. But do it. You won't be disappointed.

10. Tales of the Kin series, Douglas Hulick. I found these by searching for series similar to The Gentleman Bastards or the Vlad Taltos series, and this series is a good mix between the two. The premise is closer to Brust's zany assassin, but the depth and writing style is closer to Lynch's work. I REALLY wish there were more of these books out (there are only 2 so far). Fantastic stuff.

11. First Law series, Joe Abercrombie. This is dark fantasy at its best. Logen Ninefingers is the best anti-hero around, and there is a vast crew of memorable and unique supporting characters in this deep and intriguing fantasy series. Lots of war, battles, gore, and so forth. Definitely not for the faint of heart, but fantastic books. Trilogy complete, but Abercrombie has other books in the same setting.

12. Kushiel series, Jacquelyn Carey. Many people have a hard time with this series because of its sexual content, and perhaps rightly so. It's not necessarily for the faint of heart. It's not overtly explicit, per se, but it deals with BDSM as a relatively significant aspect of the main character's persona. If this makes you uncomfortable, it's probably best to avoid. It did make me a bit uncomfortable, but the rest of the series...the world-building, the tight plotting, and the deep characters that you truly care about...make it worth pushing through (or skipping past) the uncomfortable bits. Recommended with that caveat. It truly does deserve a spot in my top ten based on how much I enjoyed it from a fantasy and a literature standpoint, despite my discomfort with some of the sexual themes. There are a total of nine books in the series, made up of three trilogies. Each trilogy follows a different set of characters in the story. The best are books 4-6, in my opinion, though 1-3 are also fantastic. Books 7-9 are still very good, but are quite different and a bit of a change of pace from the others.

13. Farseer series, Robin Hobb. This was one of the first fantasy series I read when I was getting into the genre (I read this trilogy following Tigana and Warbreaker...see above. I started with some of the best!). It's about an assassin (I love books about assassins; what does that say about me? Should I be worried?) and is still Hobb's best work to date, though many of her other series are also good. Liveship Traders is especially notable. The only series of hers that I didn't care for was Soldier Son, almost universally considered the only weak series in her vast body of work. But Farseer is also almost universally considered her best work, and rightly so. Give it a read!

14. Talion: Revenant, Michael A. Stackpole. This is the book I'm reading now, and it is absolutely fantastic. And unless something changes drastically, it will stay right here. Really interesting sort of coming-of-age story, but with a character a bit more mature than is typically involved in such stories. Very well-written as well.

15. Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, Susanna Clarke. Wow. This is a dense, intricate, involved, masterwork of literature. Truly. A rich tapestry of vivid imagination, steeped in history and incredibly well-realized. Rarely have authors created such a memorable and realistic world filled with believable characters. This is truly a fully immersive world. At no point do you ever question that what you are reading is a real place, with real characters...even with magic involved. Clarke writes with stunning, poetic beauty, and the story is interesting as well. It can be a bit of a slog for the first 1/4 to 1/3 of the book, but PLEASE take my advice and push through...it is absolutely, incalculably worth it. I prefer other books for specific reasons...characters I enjoy more, or worlds that I would enjoy living in more, or plotlines that intrigue me a bit more. But in terms of the pure quality of writing, this book is the only one that can hang with (if not best) The Name of the Wind and Tigana, two of the most well-written books I've ever read. In fact, I'd easily put Clarke alongside Mervyn Peake (whose Gormenghast is VERY dense, but beautiful and well worth a read) as being fantasy's true master of the English language.

There you have it...my choices for my fifteen favorite fantasy series of all-time. I could easily extend this list to more than ten (and some day I might), and as I read more I may add/remove choices. If I do that, I'll note below when the list was last updated. But at this point in time, this is how it stands.

Last updated: 4/6/17

Keeping the Faith

It's been...a long time...since I've posted. Almost exactly a year. I've gotten distracted with other things, I guess, and just haven't made the effort. But this has been on my mind and I figured I'd post it up here.

Life has a way of beating us down. Letting us down. And there are times when we go long periods of time being disappointed and discouraged and let down, over and over and over. I've been going through such a time for about three years now. Three years. And every time there seems to be a light at the end of the tunnel, there is just more disappointment. More doors closed, more chipping away at hope, little by little. It's a demoralizing, frustrating, saddening thing to experience.

What's funny is that, despite how the above might sound, things haven't been going particularly poorly in any major way. I have a solid group of friends, am part of a wonderful church where God is on the move, I have an amazing family, and God has been clearly at work in and through me. I'm talking about more of a big picture kind of idea. Three years of waiting to see what God might have for the next stage in my life and ministry, of constantly being let down...in some cases by people whose motivations are (mostly unintentionally) based on human values rather than on the things that matter to God.

It's hard not to lose faith during these times, especially when they drag on and on, with seemingly no end in sight. I sense that this current chapter of disappointment in my life is nearing an end. I can't explain why...spiritual intuition, maybe. But during the past three years, even when things have been going well (as they have for the last while), it would have been so easy to give up hope, to give up faith.

People respond differently to being beat down over and over and over. Some get angry with God, some turn to other things to dull the pain and the frustration. Some lose faith altogether. In some ways, we all go through all of these (to differing degrees) at different times. But for me, I have never questioned that God has a plan for me. I know that God has never left me or forgotten me. I can't see or understand His plan. At times I'm incredibly frustrated and disappointed because of that, and (more often) with the humans that purport to do His work and His will (and, intentionally or unintentionally, get caught up in worldly things instead), and at times I am discouraged that my faithfulness seems to be for naught.

But for me, when everything else is stripped away, when life disappoints you time and again, and when hope seems to be worn down to nothing, what's left is gratitude. This may seem strange or ironic, but when you 1. know that God is real and that He remains with you and that He has a plan, and, simultaneously, 2. life and people let you down and disappointment is all you get, you have to somehow reconcile the two extremes. And, for me, that leaves me with gratitude. Because I know that God has given me life and breath. And not only am I grateful for the life that God has given (and continues to give) me, but I'm grateful for Jesus...that God has provided a means of salvation and of grace for sinners like me. Even when the world takes everything else away, it can't take Jesus. And I'm grateful that I know Jesus personally and that he is the hope of the world. Even when our hope in this world is eroded, our hope in Jesus can remain steady because no matter what else life gives (or doesn't give) us, real hope is in Jesus who gives abundant life...here in this life and eternally.

Politics

Just a disclaimer right off the bat: this post is not intended to reflect my own political perspective. I believe that each Christian needs to determine how they should vote, and where they should stand politically, based on their values, their faith, and the leading of the Holy Spirit. My intent here is not to make a statement reflecting any particular platform or political ideology. Rather, my point is to share some reflection based on my observations as this year's presidential election draws near. *End disclaimer.*

Those who know me know that I'm not a big fan of politics. I think most politicians are at best panderers who cater to those that can serve their own ends, and at worst completely corrupt sleazeballs who are entirely out of touch with reality and with the people they are supposed to serve. But what particularly bothers me is when people confuse politics and religion...or, worse, use religion to justify or promote particular political agendas. So I try to generally avoid politics altogether. Yet with the 2012 presidential election drawing near, politics are everywhere - it's a little hard to avoid.

There's one thing, in particular, that strikes me about this year's election hullabaloo. I get that many Christians vote Republican because they believe that doing so affirms their biblical values. That's fine. But I have great concerns about Mitt Romney in the upcoming election, particularly because, not only is he not a Christian, he is a Mormon...the member of what is, by most historical definitions, a cult. The fact that he is a Mormon is fine - this country was founded on religious freedom. What concerns me is that many Christians don't seem to have any hesitation about supporting Romney, promoting him as if he is the "Christian" choice simply because he is Republican.

A vote for Romney means electing a Mormon to the highest office in our land. That means that we will have someone leading our country who has very different beliefs than Christians. Furthermore, there is the (secondary but also significant) reality that electing him would, in many ways, "legitimize" Mormonism in mainstream America (more so than it already is).

And, regardless of  whether we believe that Obama's policies reflect Christian values, he is a professing Christian (also regardless of whether we believe he actually IS a Christian, he does profess such). So I suspect that for many people it will boil down to "the lesser of two evils" (which is an awful way to vote anyway). Thus it boils down to this: is it worse (understanding that what is "better" or "worse" can be profoundly personal and subjective) to elect someone who shares our faith but may not seem to reflect all of our faith's values politically; or to elect someone who seems to share our faith's values politically, but does not share our faith itself - and not only does not share our faith, but actually affirms their membership in a cult and their faith in what is tantamount to a false god? For me, while I'm not keen on either candidate (or platform, for that matter), and I'm not sure I have an answer to the above question, the latter seems far more troubling than the former. What concerns me greatly is the breadth and depth of things that Christians seem willing to compromise in order to "fit" a political agenda.

I'm not pretending this issue is easy...nor is this a reflection on how I plan to vote, or on my own political beliefs (I suspect this post will appear to indicate a political leaning on my part that is not actually accurate). I also realize that there are Christians who support Romney, and that's fine. My intent is not to offend those folks. It's simply to share an observation that many Christians seem to be blindly pursuing a party candidate, often under the guise of Christian values, without considering the actual religious implications of such. And I find that very troubling indeed.

Top 15 Favorite Albums

OK, so I've been thinking about this a bit, and I think this is my list of top 15 favorite albums of all time. Not "best", necessarily (though that may not be too different), but my favorites. I didn't exclude compilations, as I prefer some of them to the original albums. Here it is:

1. Dream Theater, Images & Words - No single album has influenced, inspired, and challenged me as much as this one. Absolutely incredible stuff.
2. David Crowder, Illuminate - For me, there is pre-Illuminate and post-Illuminate. This was the first time I realized that Christian/worship music could actually be creative, well-written, and incredible. Profound, excellent stuff.
3. Pink Floyd, Pulse - This is a compilation, of sorts, but every single song is quality, and performed flawlessly. Some of the best audio quality of any album, ever (studio or live), and some of the best songs to boot.
4. SRV, Live at the Mann Music Center - Stevie's best playing, and some of the best guitar ever played. Mary Had A Little Lamb, in particular, is amazing. For his studio albums, FYI, I prefer In Step.
5. Phil Keaggy, Beyond Nature - By far the best acoustic guitar album ever created. Not because it's technically amazing (there is a lot of that too), but because it is some of the most poetic, lyrical, and profound music ever created on the guitar.
6. U2, Joshua Tree - Not much needs to be said about this iconic album. Where the Streets Have No Name, Still Haven't Found, and With or Without You form one of the best openings to any album ever.
7. PFR, Goldie’s Last Day - I kind of surprised myself that this one is so high. But the reality is that this is the best album from one of my favorite bands ever. I love every track on here. Infinitely sing-able, often profound, and some tracks are just fun (like the title track). But all are excellent. That Kind of Love and Wait for the Sun are two of my all-time favorite songs.
8. Rich Mullins, Songs - So. many. great. songs. Yes, there are a couple of cheesy ones. But this album also contains some of the most poetic, profound and challenging (and often haunting, and soul-stirring) lyrics ever written, and the music itself is beautiful too.
9. Dire Straits, Sultans of Swing: The Very Best of Dire Straits - Another one that needs little comment. So many great songs here from a legendary (yet somehow still underrated) band. This compilation truly does have their "very best" (unlike so many "best of" albums).
10. Allman Brothers, Peakin at the Beacon - Again, so many great songs by another underrated band. Some incredible songs here, performed amazingly. Maybe not their best album (Fillmore East and Eat a Peach are probably tied with this for my favorite), but this one is a lot of fun.
11. Bob Dylan, Blonde on Blonde - I contend this is Dylan's best album, out of SO MANY great ones. My other favorite is Infidels, one of his least loved and least appreciated albums. But Blonde gets the nod for me.
12. Goldfinger, Goldfinger - This album is true punk (before they turned into a ska band...ugh). It is laden with profanity, but some of the most well-crafted, melodic songs ever written. Infinitely singable, fun, and hooky.
13. Simon & Garfunkel, Sound of Silence - Most people wouldn't peg this as S&G's best album, but for me it always will be. I love every track on it. 
14. Smashing Pumpkins, Mellon Collie - Many folks will also argue for other Pumpkins albums over this one, but this is my favorite (Siamese is a very close 2nd), for both the depth and breadth of music it contains.
15. Bon Jovi, Slippery When Wet - This is back when Bon Jovi was good. He had a few other albums around this time period that were good, too, but this is one of the best pure rock albums ever.

Special mention for guitar: Jeff Beck, Blow by Blow/Wired (like them both equally) - The two most influential guitar albums of all-time (as voted on by professional guitar players worldwide...literally). No lyrics, just incredible guitar.

And I have to give two honorable mentions. First to Caedmon's Call, In the Company of Angels. The first two tracks are probably my favorite worship songs of all time. The entire album is good, just not quite up to the same standard as the first two tracks consistently throughout. The second goes to Steve Taylor's Squint. This guy was a largely unknown and underrated musician, but his music was super influential in many circles and this album shows why. Fantastic stuff throughout.

2012 Stanley Cup Finals Predictions

Kings vs. Devils
Kings in 5
RESULT: KINGS IN 6