Podcasts are down for a bit.  They’ll be back.

What I Walked Away With After Seeing Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland.”

Some friends and I saw “Alice in Wonderland” last night.  I’ll see just about anything in 3D right now.  But let me go on the record: I really have a hard time liking anything Tim Burton does.  Just not a fan.  The exceptions to the rule are “Big Fish” (which is one of my favorites) and “Beetlejuice” (for nostalgic reasons).  I detested his take on “Batman,” I think he completely tarnished the Willy Wonka franchise…. but others aren’t so bad.  Let’s say he has a 50/50 chance of making an enjoyable movie for yours truly.

As far as “Alice” goes, I thought it was a visually enjoyable movie.  It in no way left a lasting impression on me.

Let me put it this way: If this movie were on TBS, and I hadn’t seen it recently, I’d probably watch it.  But I would not again take the initiative to go to the theater to see it, or rent it, etc.

But I didn’t dislike it.  It was just … imaginatively neutral, meaning, about 10% on the good side of neutral.

But there were a couple of scenes and themes in the movie that I could really relate to as a Christian.  (Please keep in mind that, with all secular film analogies to the faith, they will be, as all analogies are, ultimately faulty. Take them as they are.)

SPOILERS AHEAD

1. The Red Queen is in control of Wonderland.  She has taken control of the kingdom from the White Queen (who is the rightful ruler).  This is the conflict in Wonderland, just as the conflict in reality involves a usurper and a rightful King.

2. If Alice can be loosely and metaphorically related to Jesus, if she can be the “Jesus” archetype of the film, then this scene works out well: There is a clip where she is confronted by a hound.  He says that the Mad Hatter has been kidnapped by the Red Queen.  She tells the hound she must go and rescue him, but the hound objects.  He says that to rescue the Mad Hatter would be to deviate from “the path.” And that she has to live up to a certain role.  Alice defies this view, and says, “This is my dream!”  She basically shatters the hound’s notion of who she should be.  Which, through Christian lenses, is exactly what Jesus did with our conceptions of who “The One” should be: he obviously did not live up to Jewish expectations of the Messiah, and to this day he is not living up to heroic conceptions of how the Chosen One should act.  Indeed, Jesus is the Savior who lost the battle, to all appearances, only to crush death and win in his way.  So this scene (watch for it if you haven’t seen it yet or are going to see it again) really resonated with me.  This is God’s reality.  He does things his way.

3. It turns out in the film that it has to be Alice who faces the Jabberwocky, the Red Queen’s undefeated beast.  The White Queen tells Alice that if she chooses this role (as the champion of good, fighter of the Jabberwocky), then she must be sure of it. Because once she steps out, she goes it alone.  This reminds me of Gethsemane, and the loneliness that Jesus must’ve felt in knowing that, although he had numerous followers and his inner circle of Twelve, ultimately, he went it alone.  Another very powerful scene for me.

There were a few more little things, and the theme overall resonated with me.  But I think this enough of an overview for you to pick up what I’m layin’ down, here.

Cheers.

Scot McKnight reviewed Brian Mclaren’s new book “A New Kind of Christianity” for Christianity Today.  You can find it here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2010/march/3.59.html?start=4

An excellent review.  (I haven’t read the book yet. Not sure if I will.)

I think McKnight’s last sentence or two were really cool.

I feel kinda bad, because every time there’s a big to-do about something, I usually come down on the end everyone else is attacking.  And I objectively assess the situation, to make sure I’m not just being antagonistic.  This is another one of those situations.

I’m not a big Driscoll fan. 

But I was also not a big fan of Avatar (if you see my previous blog about it on my site). 

Well, today I see a ton of people talking about what Mark Driscoll had to say regarding Avatar. And everyone is up in arms about it.

Here’s some of what he said (I’m putting in bold type the parts I really agree with):

The world tempts you to sin, to use people, to disobey God, to live for your own glory instead of his own, to be a consumer instead of generous, that’s the world system.

And if you don’t believe me, go see Avatar, the most demonic, satanic film I’ve ever seen. That any Christian could watch that without seeing the overt demonism is beyond me. I logged on to christianitytoday.com and the review was reflective of Christianity today, very disappointing. See, in that movie, it is a completely false ideology, it’s a sermon preached. It’s the most popular movie ever made, and it tells you that the creation mandate, the cultural mandate is bad, that we shouldn’t, we shouldn’t develop culture, that’s a bad thing. (I had a big problem with this in the film, too. – James)

Primitive is good and advanced is bad and that we’re not sinners, we’re just disconnected from the divine life force, just classic, classic, classic paganism, that human beings are to connect, literally, with trees and animals and beasts and birds and that there’s this spiritual connection that we’re all a part of, that we’re all a part of the divine.

It presents a false mediator with a witch. It presents false worship of created things rather than Creator God in absolute antithesis to Romans 1:25, which gives that as the essence of paganism. It has a false incarnation where a man comes in to be among a people group and to assume their identity. It’s a false Jesus. We have a false resurrection. We have a false savior. We have a false heaven. The whole thing is new age, satanic, demonic paganism, and people are just stunned by the visuals. Well, the visuals are amazing because Satan wants you to emotionally connect with a lie.

I’m pretty on-board with that quote.  I think the problem people have with what Driscoll is saying is that he, in typical Driscoll style, says it way too harshly.  I see in that quote that he really is going to turn off a lot of sincere Christians by talking about how he doesn’t understand any Christian who could watch the film and like it.

He’s a divisive guy.  I understand that.

But his critique was very similar to what I said about Avatar in my review of it.  He just used the words “demonic, satanic, new age,” etc.  I can’t blame him for that. 

I thought Avatar was a pretty crappy movie when it comes to story, substance, etc.  Way too preachy.  The visuals, were, indeed, amazing though.

I feel that Driscoll does need to watch how he says things… but then, that’s his style.  Would he be Driscoll if that wasn’t how he rolled?

However harshly he said it, I agree with him.  I think Avatar is a pretty spiritually off-base flick.

I admire him for saying something so firm, knowing that it’s the most popular movie, and most people who consider themselves Christians are okay with the film.

The man’s got balls.  And I bet they’ve got little barbed wire crosses on ‘em.

Ok.

This guy I don’t know and have never heard of has written a book I haven’t read and haven’t heard of till now. His name’s Joe Kovacs and the book is “Shocked by the Bible.”  I think.

So I find this link to an interview with him about his book.

Here’s the interview: http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn87/shocked-by-the-bible.htm

I don’t get it.  First off, this is the most biased interview I have ever read.  It’s like the interviewer is asking these set-up questions that reinforce this guys’ extremely literalist beliefs.

I couldn’t even stomach reading the whole interview in detail.  But from what I can gather: Christians who celebrate Christmas & Easter and worship on Sunday are misled by Satan.

I never understand people like this.

They write these books that are all about how the word Easter isn’t in the Bible, as if they’re uncovering some huge conspiracy.  I’m pretty sure that ever since  33 A.D.  Christians have known that the word “Easter” is not in the Bible.

Ever since I was a wee little lad, I’ve known that Christmas trees and ornaments and Easter eggs are traditions. 

Don’t these people ever stop to think that we Christians know all this…. it’s just that…. we’re ok with it?  I hate to break it to Joe, but…not all traditions are evil.

I’ve got a secret for Joe Kovacs: I, and most of us other Christians, know that Easter and Christmas have accumulated a lot of Northern European pre-Christian flavors.  We know that the Sabbath was a Saturday.

What if we just don’t care?  And what if we just don’t care because these are not detrimental elements to our faith in Christ?  What if we don’t care because we as Christians have redeemed these aspects?  We have taken the Christmas tree, the Easter egg, and we have redeemed them into the Christian life.

This guy is guilty of something that may shock you.  And it’s something I’m going to talk about a lot more in the future.

This guy is guilty of worshiping the Bible.

And people like this need to stop worshiping the Bible.

And I don’t know if “worshiping” has two p’s in it or one.

But you read this interview and you’ll see one theme that is recurrent in these books and other media by authors and teachers like this:

We Christians have got it wrong for millenia, and now Joe Kovacs has it right.

Bullocks.

There are way too many times in my life where I just don’t feel like a Christian.

I’ve noticed two different flavors of this feeling.  There’s the feeling that to follow Christ is just too hard a road: that his commands and what is expected of a Christian is just too much. (And let’s not pretend for even a minute that there isn’t such a thing as “Christian Living.” We all hear “saved by grace,” but that doesn’t mean that your life won’t look a certain way if you’re following Jesus.) So in these moments, I feel like I just can’t do it. I’m trying, but the hill’s too high, so to speak. 

Then there are those other moments where I just plain don’t feel like it. I know what it takes to follow Christ in these moments, and I may even feel “up to the challenge,” but I just don’t want to.  That’s the shadier side of my human condition.  But I gotta be honest about it.

I was in one of these moods the other day.  I was at the coffee house with my buddy Marcus, and I was trying to objectively approach the situation (because I’m well aware when I’m in these moods, and I know that something’s askew).  And Marcus knew where I was comin’ from.  And he said something like, “That’s why I’m convinced it’s all gotta come down to grace.”

And he was completely right.

I don’t care how good you are.  I don’t care how bad you are.  You being accepted by God has got to come down to grace.

Now this line of thought has a lot of complications with it.  Even Paul, in his letters found in the Bible, faced the same complications.  Because my immediate response to the phrase “It all comes down to grace” is “that means you don’t have to do anything, or improve your behavior, etc. and there goes the deterioration of society…. cats and dogs living together!!!”

You get the point.

But somehow it’s not like that.  Even Paul said it wasn’t.  Does that mean we can do what we want? By no means! 

So somehow it does all come down to grace, but you’ll also be changed into a new creation, perhaps by grace, and your life as a follower of Jesus will look drastically different.

But I take comfort in that truth, today.

It does all come down to grace.

It’s been a hell of a day.  I swear some planets must be aligned like crazy or something.  I’ve seen so many crazy things happen to my colleagues today, and I’ve had some really crazy and nasty confrontations that I’ve been a part of, and I’ve seen, today especially, how much of a muddle we’re all in. 

This mess we’re in, it can only be fixed by God.  And it will be.  This is our hope.

So until then,

It all comes down to grace.

I’ve decided, for fun, to paraphrase the Bible in a very rough, probably quite bad, iambic perameter (a la something like “Paradise Lost).  Leave a comment and tell me what you think (don’t be too harsh! it was just for fun and I’ve never written in the form before, and it’s first draft!):

Jay Bakker and I had an exchange on Twitter.  He talks about it here: http://www.revolutionnyc.com/god-crushed-in-haiti/

My response:

I mean, number 1, why get all outta sorts ’cause someone says “impactful?”  And, number 2, Pirate Christian gets the win, ’cause it certainly is a pot/kettle situation.

FTW.

Aside from how cool a band name that would make, gonna talk a bit about this new “Haiti’s earthquake is God’s judgment” deal going on w/ Pat Robertson.

First off, I think it’s utterly contemptible we even have to talk about it. There’s really only one reason I feel ok talking about it, but I’m not gonna disclose why that is.

Ok.

So, there’s this earthquake in Haiti. Then Pat Robertson, apparently, is like, “This is God’s judgment or wrath because the people of Haiti entered into a pact with Satan.”

I’m on Twitter @ work (because I can’t get on Facebook anymore, and I need some sort of social networking outlet), and I see tons of the emergent types posting about Haiti. Then, as this Pat Robertson stuff comes out, more and more of the trends go toward Robertson, and less is said about Haiti.

And eventually, folks like Tony Jones (infamous emergent author, speaker, production manager, etc.) are saying “let’s make this PatRobertsonDoesNotSpeakForGod thing a trend on Twitter!” And that quick, it all quickly takes the focus off the events in Haiti.

People started repeating slogans like: “Pat Robertson does not speak for God.” “Pat Robertson does not speak for Jesus.” “Jesus would have handled it differently!” etc.

And all that brought these points to mind, regarding the Robertson fiasco:

1. While it may be true that Pat Robertson does not speak for God, neither does Jay Bakker (who was one of the folks posting that Twitter trend). To me, Pat Robertson speaks for God at least as much as Jay Bakker or Tony Jones does. That’s what bothers me about these folks. They make equally shocking claims on the liberal theological side as Robertson and company do on the more “conservative” side, yet they get real rigid in responses to Robertson’s statements. So in the end you have: “Gays can be Christians!” (Jay Bakker doesn’t speak for God!) and “Haiti is God’s judgment!” (Pat Robertson doesn’t speak for God). It’s just a frighteningly funny circle of who does and who doesn’t speak for God. Not saying that some conclusion can’t be reached (perhaps neither speak for God?), it’s just a little funny.

2. “Jesus would’ve handled it differently!” That may be the case, but I’m still not sure he would’ve handled it in the way that Baker, Jones and crew would expect. In fact, we have an example in the gospels about Jesus’ reaction and response to a calamity. When Pilate kills Galileans and mingles their blood with the sacrifices, they ask Jesus what’s up with that, and his answer is noticeable: first, he doesn’t address the disaster at all, but instead turns the question back on them and says, “Unless you repent, the same is gonna happen to you.” Wow. What if we said that in response to people asking us about the Haiti incident? “What do you think, as a Christian, about the Haiti earthquake?” “Well, unless you repent, the same may happen to you.” Isn’t that closer to Robertson’s statement than the emerging liberals?

3. Is the earthquake a judgment from God? This is what people are blasting Pat for right now. But my response is not instant repulsion. My only response is, that I doubt Pat Robertson has the authority to make such a certain claim. But, unless you deny the validity of the Bible, many times God uses other nations to chastise Israel (which resulted in the death and enslavement of many). This is the same God who was so repentant over the sinfulness of man that he flooded the earth, and saved only Noah and his family from the total destruction. So, unless you hold that these stories are symbols, metaphors, etc. and stop there, then we do serve a God who has at times used natural, earthly, physical things as judgments. So I’m not repulsed by Robertson’s statement. I’m not sure that he has the authority to say something like that, and you can’t just go around saying that about every disaster.

There’s just three random things that are going through my mind right now. Probably shoddily thrown together because I’m writing this and watching Dog Bounty Hunter at the same time.

Oh well.

Take it as it is

“I see myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being, with the soul of a clown, which forces me to blow it at the most important moments.” – Jim Morrison

I’ve always felt that this quote by Jim Morrison aptly described me. 

I’m a pot-stirrer.  I’ve tried to fix this in times past, but I’m not even so sure it’s something that should be fixed.  Maybe that’s just who I am.  But I’ve noticed that, although I may take my faith very seriously, I’m able to laugh about a whole lot that other folks can’t really laugh at, and often times I’ll say things just to stir the pot, or point out something that I think is inconsistent.

But I end up blowing it, a lot of the time. At the moment, the most important moment, as Morrison says, I’ll end up saying something or cracking a joke which “forces me to blow it.”

Do I sabotage myself?  I’m not sure. 

But sometimes it makes me look like a hypocrite.

Take this Pat Robertson business.  I could care less about what Pat Robertson has to say about something.  But it’s everywhere I look.  And everyone’s so disgusted and pissed that he could even think that an earthquake could be the result of a judgment of God.

But then I think, wasn’t a worldwide food in Genesis a result of a judgment of God?  To think that earthly calamities are above God’s realm of communication is kind of like the first step on a long road of biblical denial. 

But anyway, I make strong claims, and then folks assume I agree with Pat Robertson.  But when I say that I don’t agree with him, they must assume that I agree with his “opponents” on the issue.

And I don’t agree with them either. 

I don’t know.

I think I’m just going to keep making statements to which people reply “I don’t get what your saying.”

And I’ll blow it.