Positivist Christian vs the Faithful Christian

I was reading Jim Collins book 'From Good to Great'. He coins a phrase called 'Stockdale Paradox' which I think is a great analogy to explain Christian hope. The story is about an American Colnel Stockdale who was tortured as POW in Vietnam. He was one of the very few who made it through the brutal POW life. Below is the narrative of the meeting between Jim and Stockdale.

When Jim asked Stockdale what gave him the strength to make it through, Stockdale replied...
"I never lost faith in the end of the story, I never doubted not only that I would get out, but also that I would prevail in the end and turn the experience into the defining event of my life, which, in retrospect, I would not trade."

When Collins asked who didn't make it out of Vietnam, Stockdale replied:
"Oh, that's easy, the optimists."

Collins was confused. He thought Stockdale's statment about not losing faith make him sound like an optimist. Collins questions him on how optimists were different from him.

Stockdale replied...
"Oh, they were the ones who said, 'We're going to be out by Christmas.' And Christmas would come, and Christmas would go. Then they'd say, 'We're going to be out by Easter.' And Easter would come, and Easter would go. And then Thanksgiving, and then it would be Christmas again. And they died of a broken heart."

The POWs had two types of faith. One prevailed, the other did not.
1. One faith believed that circumstances would change. When that did not happen, the faith died along with that the person too.
2. The other faith believed that no matter what the circumstance, the self was powerful enough to make it through. The self remained powerful enough to make it through.

Among Christians too we have two kinds of people. The optimists believe that life will provide for them what they want at just the right time as long as they have the positive attitude and work hard enough. They expect they'll be married when they are 25, have a beautiful suburban house when they are 27, kids when they are 30, a great executive position when they are 40, become a Church Elder when you are 45, a director when you are 50 (if not a CEO) and have grand kids by 60. For whatever reason when that does not happen, they'll begin to grumble, they'll be angry at God, go in to a bout of self-pity or even depression or worse end up in mid-life crisis induced addictions from alcohol to drugs to illicit sex.

Then there are the Stockdale believers who don't quite expect that everything in life will turn out the way they expect it to. But no matter what happens, they TRUST God would work it all out for good (Rom 8:29). The Christian believer's faith has a better foundation than Stockdale's. Where Stockdale has faith in his self, the Christian's faith is based on the finished work of Jesus Christ. The Christian does not just say he'll make it through because he has a strong will. The Christian says he'll make it through because Christ has already secured a place for the Christian in Eternity.

Stockdale then added:
"This is a very important lesson. You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end—which you can never afford to lose—with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be."

This an important point we need to remember. We should not try to deny or trivialize the brutal realities of life. Instead, we should acknowledge that life is tough and that we live in a fallen world. We need to remember that NOTHING in this world can separate us from Christ.

Romans 8:35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 As it is written, “For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.

 The positivist Christian who expects external realities to turn for the good will be disappointed, because in a long enough timeline we will all die. On the other hand, the faithful Christian is more than a conqueror, not because he has a better attitude or luck or marriage or achievement or pleasure, but because even if life deals its worst cards, he has faith that he will not be separated from our Lord who has secured for us a place in Eternity by dying on the Cross for us.

Days of Heaven - A Story of a Family that Wasn't

I saw the movie 'Days of Heaven' last weekend. 'Days of Heaven' is made by the legendary of Terrence Malick, the director of the recent 'Tree of Life'. Like much of his other movies, it is a narration/thoughts of one person witnessing life.

The movie is about a few parent-less kids, a nomadic group of three and a lone guy who is a rich young farmer. The group of 3 nomads is a boy, Bill, and two girls the younger of which Linda, is the narrator. The elder girl Abby and Bill are sort of in love, but they behave as brother/sister to the outside world. During the narration little Linda says they are sort of family, but not quite.

During their nomadic journey, they work at the farm of the rich young farmer in Texas. The rich young farmer finds Abby attractive. Bill learns that rich young farmer is terminally ill and may die soon. The rich farmer wants to marry Abby. The shrewd Bill concocts a plan. If Abby would marry the rich young lonely farmer and then he dies soon, the money would all be theirs.

He cajoles Abby into marrying the rich farmer. Of course, there is a whole lot of confusion. The movie ends with gun fights and painful tears. Bill and the farmer are dead. Abby and Linda are separated. The last scene is that of Little Linda, along with another nomadic friend, walking along the railway track not quite sure where they are going. It is a sad ending.

As I sat back and wondered what was missing in the movie, I realized that the movie had no real family. There wasn't a man and woman who were fused into one body, there weren't kids taken care of by a family, everyone was restless and yearning for something real in life.

There is a poignant scene in the movie. On the night of the phony marriage, Abby is on the bed, her Groom walks in looks at her and says, "you look like an Angel". She looks troubled and says, "but I am not one". Then Abby tries to be the Angel and really falls in love with her husband. For a short while, they have a real family resulting in a brief interlude of peace and rest, which I believe is what Linda considers the few 'Days of Heaven'. But one day, the Abby's Angel goes to sleep and the devil shows up. All hell breaks loose. Little Linda observes later on, 'we are all half Angel, half Devil'.

God created the family for it to be a place of rest, peace and contentment. In as much as we do not value family life, we miss the God-given gift to rest, nest and enjoy our little 'days of heaven' on earth. The problem is, the Devil-half of us will ruin even the best of gifts that God gives us. So to be an Angel and enjoy the 'Days of Heaven' (on earth) one needs supernatural strength and thus, 'a family that prays together, stays together'.

December Facebook Status updates...

Isn't it incredible that the turn of time should be joy to so many people... Isn't there something deeply human about being able to enjoy the turn of time around the New Year? Who would you thank for this ability to enjoy the 'turn of time'??? Who would that be, if not the Creator of Time? Thanks be to God for creating Time!!! :)

‎'The Artist' is a new award winning 'silent' movie. Watching it made me wonder if we shouldn't go back to making silent movie again. In silent movies, you see more than you do with the talking version. The few important dialogues are displayed, because they are few, they carry more weight and you appreciate 'words' better.


To live, really LIVE... one has to see, really SEE which is why I think everyone should be an artist. :)


Be metaphor minded.


Well, the fact of the matter is that sometimes during chit-chat socializing I just feel bored to death. I guess most people feels this way too... I am just saying. :)


The reason why I like older movies is because they had better script. The reason why I like those scripts is because they belied a deep sense of Truth and meaning in life.


We live in a story, but the story is not about us neither are we the Author. In as much as we think the story is about us and we are the Author we are trying to usurp God's prerogatives.


A symptom of Whether one is a 'New Creation' in Christ is in how one SEEs and perceives life. This change in perception happens by 'having the eyes of your hearts enlightened' (Eph 1:18) by the Word of God. So one Fruit of the New Creation is a thirst for the Word of God. You shall know them by their Fruits.

‎
'My Week With Marilyn' shows the decrepit side of love with an ironic sense of lightness.


Well, actually I don't need Christmas lights or Christmas tree to get into the 'Christmas Spirit'. Christmas songs and hanging-out with the Christmas-minded would suffice. To each his own, I guess. :)


When the fear of God dies, man tries to be god. When there is nothing else worthy of worship, man worships himself. When there is nothing else worthy of love, man loves himself. Such is the state of the man 'without the chest'.


I wish my mind had been fertile on Saturday night as it is now. It is twirling with too many ideas that I can't sleep now. Well, I guess sleep will have to give way... somethings are more precious than others. :)


The answer to the question of where our identity lays in the source of our happiness. What do you do when you really want to be happy? What is it about that which you do that makes you happy? If you lose that one thing which makes you happy, what would the loss mean to you?


Sitting on wooden benches at 'Little Burgers' with the sun on my back and cool breeze about. Little burgers to bite into, slush smoothie to sip and a good book to read. Life is good! God has put 'enough' in the quotidian to make us happy and grateful. :)


Love is an end in itself, but knowledge is the basis of love. You can't love something/someone you don't know. Knowledge is important, but it can't be an end in itself. A pursuit of knowledge untethered from love can lead to tyranny, which was what happened with Karl Marx.


When the sense of entitlement is assumed at such a basic level that it becomes a lens through which life is perceived, it jacks-life-up. This is especially true when it comes to matters of pursuit of happYness. "Do 'whatever' makes you happy" is a dictum of modern age. The truth is, without 'norms' the pursuit of happiness becomes destructive...


I was feeling really sleepy and wanted to go to bed... but then I started writing the journal... :)


All discontentment is grumbling against God.


Journey is more important than the destination only as long as you do not believe in ultimate Truth. If you believe in ultimate Truth, then destination matters.


Oh, the sound of good rain! That will be the lullaby to which I'll fall asleep! :)


Anything worthy of admiration ought to be written about.


People talking to me on facebook makes me feel good, but the realization that I am depend on it makes me feel bad. Well, may be I need to take another sabbatical? Hmmmm...


Hey... it is December, how come there isn't any good movies yet???


‎'O, Holy Night' on full volume on the Sennheiser earphones.... over and over again... goosebumps..

In Joseph's shoes errrr sandals?

I wrote this as part of my other post 'Joseph, the Unsung Hero' /emmanuelreagan/2011/12/joseph-unsung-hero.html, but then realized that this was incongruous. To just delete it off would go against my principle that words are precious, the creativity almost of first order. I decided to make a post out of it. Besides, by making this as a separate post, this would be the 50th post of this year... a good rounded number to end 2011. :) In other words, this is a post for the sake of a post. If you, for some reason have been reading till now, this might be a good place to stop. :P
 

If you didn't,  you have only yourself to blame... Well, as I was writing my post on 'Joseph, the Unsung Hero', I tried an thought experiment of putting myself into Joseph's shoes. Just to see what it would mean to be the man that Joseph was. There are three points which I'll have trouble putting myself in Joseph's shoes, or should I say sandals...

Matt 1:18 Mary had been betrothed [that is, legally pledged to be married] to Joseph.

This sounds pretty much like an arranged marriage. Even though I come from a culture where arranged marriages do happen, it is on the decline. I would find it  tough to willingly accept an 'arranged marriage'. Living in the world of radical individualism, having someone else make decisions especially when it comes to matters so close to my person, would be a bridge too far to say the least.

Matt 1: 20 An angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit..."

Honestly, I would rather find it difficult to obey an Angel in my 'dream' suggesting that I marry a pregnant lady. Living in a post-Freudian world, I would find such a 'dream' rather confusing if not spooky. I would wonder if my 'subconscious' was venting out some repressed feelings in my dream. I might even have been tempted to argue with the Angel that he was asking me to something that did not seem very consistent with some parts of the revealed (Old Testament) word of God.

Matt 1:25 But 'knew' her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.

Not be able to have sexual intimacy with my wife for at least a year would be a tough sell to say the least. Having had to be abstinent until marriage and when one thinks one has finally arrived, to realize that one has to wait for one more year would not be an easy pill to swallow. 

The Man Joseph had no hesitation. He, with amazing speed agrees to marry Mary as per the Angel's command. (Matt 1:24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife...).

I think there are three problems why it is difficult for someone born in the modern age to put oneself into Joseph's shoes/sandals...

I think  in the modern age, our culture place a lot more premium on the 'attraction-factor' than any other time in history, which is one of the reasons why we find 'arranged marriages' impossible. We can't imagine getting married to someone we don't feel attracted to. If we look at human nature, for centuries attraction developed after marriage. In making 'attraction' a prerequisite to marriage, I wonder if we are putting the cart before the horse.

The second problem with modern age is that we don't believe that God intervenes in history to communicate to his children about His plan for their lives. When it comes to matters of marriage we listen more to our hearts promptings than to God's guidance. This reductionistic decision making process is akin to cutting off ones limb to fit the small cot.

The third problem is that we have made sexual intimacy a big part of marital life. I have read psychologists say that most problems in marriages can be traced by to sexual problems between the husband and wife. I don't know how this works... but I think if someone is truly in love, they'll be attracted to each other even if they don't have sex with each other. I think here too people in urbanized cultures, by giving too much importance to sex, are putting the cart before the horse.

I don't know that we can set the clock back... but we'll have to be true to human nature, else we cease to be human any more, and I think we are getting close. 

Joseph, the Unsung Hero

It is customary for me to write a post about Christmas before Christmas, but I got too busy this Christmas to write anything on my blog... so here is my post-Christmas, Christmas post. After all this is the 4th of the 12 day Christmas, so I am not late any ways.

Over the past few weeks and months I have been pondering what it is to truly be a strong man. I have been looking at most things in life through this lens. Christmas is no exception. I think the unsung hero of Christmas is Joseph, Jesus's foster father.

As per Old Testament law, if a woman were to get pregnant out of wedlock, she'll have to be stoned to death. Back in those times, if a woman were to be pledged a man and she is already pregnant, he'll probably be the guy to hurl the first stone at her. But Joseph being a good man (Matt 1:19) decides to quietly divorce her instead of brining shame upon her. It is noble for a man of that stiff-necked patriarchal culture to be so benevolent.

But then Joseph has a dream and the Angel wants him to go one step further and marry Mary. The Man Joseph had no hesitation. He, with amazing speed agrees to be given the shorter-end of the stick (Matt 1:24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife...). By agreeing to marry Mary, Joseph also forgoes the pleasure of sexual intimacy with his wife (Matt 1:25 But 'knew' her not until she had given birth to a son). By sacrificially accepting the shorter-end of the stick, Joseph shows true masculine strength.

Joseph gives Mary and the child the support and legitimacy that they need to live and thrive in a society.  In fact, when people are sarcastic of Jesus later on in his life, they still call him the Carpenter's son! But for the strong man Joseph...

There are two kinds of strong  people...
First, the high-achievers - the ones who change reality to get what they want.
Second, the high-sacrificers - those who shoulder the weight of reality to give to others the strength and the support they need, whilst sacrificing their personal prerogatives.

From Steve Jobs to Justin Beiber, the popular culture admires the high-achieving men, who make themselves look good by having great achievements under their belt. I submit that it is the second kind of high-sacrificing men that are seldom looked-up-to. From Bruce Oslon to William Carey, these people expend themselves sacrificing their personal well-being for the sake of others. These are are the ones that are truly strong.

Ironically, 'popular Christianity' is no different from popular culture in that it celebrates strong men of high-achieving kind over the stronger men of the high-sacrificing kind. David is the considered a hero in 'popular Christianity' because he slew Goliath. He is the strong man who'll won many battles. But 'popular Christianity' often fails to reckon that when it comes to taking responsibility for his kids and family, David was a TOTAL failure. Then there is the whole affair of his impregnating another man's wife and then trying to get the innocent man to take responsibility for it, failing which, getting him killed. Where David fails to take responsibility for what was his, Joseph does the opposite. He take responsibility for what wasn't his. That is where true high-sacrificing manliness is. Carpenter Joseph is a stronger man than Kind David.

With 2011 ending, one of the key obituaries people are reminiscing about is the demise of the legend Steve Jobs and how his life has affected billions around the world. What is seldom acknowledged is that Steve Jobs was a terrible father. He disowned the kid (Lisa Brennan Jobs) of the first lady he impregnated. On a court case on paternity, he went so far as to claim impotence. He tried to wriggle out of a second out-of-wed-lock impregnation too before finally agreeing to marry the lady. His daughter did not invite him for her graduation. All of this history of Steve being an irresponsible father is often glossed-over because in the eyes of 'popular opinion makers', his public achievements override his private failings.

Let alone popular opinion makers, the idea of celebrating strong high-sacrificing manhood is seldom appreciated even in the Church. The failure of the Church to preach this sort of manhood has had a detrimental impact on the society. I was reading an article by the sociologist/historian David Brooks in New York Times. He talks about the social plight of 40% of the children that are born today being out-of-wedlock kids. Single moms are having to step-up to give the kids a good chance at life. Most of the single moms are great in being momma grizzlies. They show great resilience. The society/government tries to do what it can to help such single moms. But what is missed in the dialogue is the root cause of this problem, which is the irresponsibility of the men that impregnate the women. David Brooks goes on to say that  we have lost the social norms from a 100 years ago which warranted that a man who impregnated a woman was expected to marry her.  If only we had more Josephs we'll have fewer out-of-wedlock kids.

We need to delve a little deeper into the psyche of modern men who refuse to take responsibility for impregnating a woman. I suspect that the impetus to be irresponsible is not so much about an aversion towards being a father, as much as it is about a craving for pleasure (of the illicit kind, to not be bound to one 'partner' in crime). This craving for pleasure is crudely epitomized by Christmas celebration in the Washington and Jefferson College in Pennsylvania where the Dean approved a Christmas tree decorated with condoms (http://nation.foxnews.com/christmas-tree/2011/12/09/condom-christmas-tree-sparks-outrage). Here too Joseph sets a great high-sacrificing example. It would have been legitimate for Joseph to have wanted to share sexual intimacy with his wife, but he refrains. He sacrifices pleasure in order to help and love Mary. Joseph's loving-kindness towards Mary in refraining even from legitimate pleasure is a great example to both men and women in today's world whose lives often seem to be defined more by craving for illegitimate pleasures than by virtues of love, kindness and sacrifice.

In contrast to the high-achieving heroes of our age from Steve Jobs to Justin Beiber (who I believe is currently battling a paternity claim), Joseph stands tall and timeless - a high-sacrificing man with a spine and a chest, shouldering the responsibility of protecting and loving the vulnerable. In as much as the likes of the Josephs remain the unsung heroes, today's society as G.K.Chesterton says, will continue producing 'men without a chest'. Eventually, such a civilization will disintegrate, not for the lack of high-achieving heroes of the Jobs kind, but of the lack of high-sacrificing heroes of the unsung kind of Joseph.

Christmas with the Van Zants - An Experience of Unconditional Love

I usually go to Church on Christmas Eve, and love singing Christmas songs, but sitting alone by myself, in the midst of families, I experience what is called the 'outsider archetype'. In an article 'Depression During Holidays', in Psychology Today the Dr. Elaine N. Aron explains the 'outsider archetype' this way...

"The shadow side of this period of light and hope is darkness and despair, and many people fall into darkness at this time of year. They feel left out. Deep depression, the kind that goes on day after day or leads to suicidal thoughts, is complex and needs to be treated carefully and from every angle. ... is the problem of becoming identified with the archetype of the 'Outsider'. There is nothing bleaker, or more dangerous to survival, than being alone in the cold, physically or emotionally hungry, left out, while others are gathered around the fire, sharing food and gifts and above all, love." 

Wanting to commit suicide is an extreme case of the outsider archetype, not every outsider feels that way. But  having spent the past 4 Christmases by myself sitting at my home alone on Christmas Day, I can see where Dr. Aron was coming from. In fact, as much as I love the Christmas season, owing to my self-identification with the 'outsider archetype', a part of me had also begun to dread it... of spending the 5th Christmas in a row alone by myself.

Thankfully, this Christmas wasn't to be that way because my buddy Matt Van Zant invited me to spend this Christmas as an 'insider' in his family. I couldn't thank him enough for having invited me and alleviated me the pain of having to spend another Christmas Day all alone. What I found very interesting was that having been the 'outsider' for so long, the transition from the 'outsider' archetype to the 'insider' archetype actually takes some effort. It takes a deep understanding and acceptance of unconditional love to be able to make the transition.

Here  is how the story goes... Matt picked me up from my place on Christmas Eve, we went to service with his Mom, Dad and two pretty sisters. Then we went to Benihanna, I was treated to a great dinner. We went to Matt's home and sat there talking and watching the program 'Christmas with the Mormon Tabernacles Choir'. Of course, we cracked a few jokes about Mormons, no offense, but who doesn't... As much as they are fodder for good jokes, Mormons are good singers. It is also one of the fastest growing religions, thanks to their procreative proclivities. Matt's Mom googled some theological differences between Mormonism and Christianity, and read it aloud. We talked about that for a while. It was a fun time. Then we called it a day.

I had a long sleep in the cozy guest bedroom. I woke up very late next morning had a great brunch with eggs and sausage and english biscuits and fruits and desert, prepared by Matt's Mom. Then it was time to open gifts under the tree. Back in India, we didn't have the opening of gifts tradition. Christmas there was very different (/emmanuelreagan/2009/12/christmas-in-india.html). So this opening gifts tradition, was new to me. It was great to see the love and affection with which each of them had gotten gifts for others. I was given a gift too. I was the only one there who did not have any any gift to give.

We chatted, played with the dogs... I went back to my bed to have a quick nap, which ended up becoming a 3 hour sleep. I woke up from the sleep and there was in my head, a nagging thought... From having great food, fellowship and gifts, I took so much from the table, but I nothing to 'bring to the table'. Being a 'works righteousness' guy, this was a bitter pill for me. I had been showered with so much love and affection, but I  didn't know why I deserved it when I had nothing to give in return. Deep within, it even made me feel a little bit guilty.

Being an 'outsider' has one sent of psychological bad problems. But being an 'insider' has another set of good psychological problems to be solved. I had to find a resolution to the feeling of not knowing what made me worthy of love and affection, when I have nothing to give in return. Being an introverted HSP (High Sensitive Person), I am a little too in touch with the nuances of my feelings to not be bothered by them.

The dinner prepared by Matt's Mom on Christmas day was one of the best meals I had recently had. For dinner on Christmas Day, two friends of Matt's sister came to join us. They too were guys who were away from home experiencing lonely Christmases. As we sat at the table, Matt's Dad asked Matt to pray. I found the answer to my nagging question in Matt's prayer. Matt's prayer went something like this...

"Thank you Lord for bringing us together as one family in this table. Christmas is not about traditions, it is about celebrating the salvation that you have provided for us so that we can love each other as a family..."

I didn't hear the rest of the prayer, because in those few words, I found the answer to the question that was nagging me. My question was, 'What did I do that makes me deserving of such unconditional love? What do I have to bring to the table to make myself worthy of such love?' The answer is, I did not have to do anything, Christ did all that needed to be done on the Cross. I was unconditionally loved by the Van Zants not because I did (or could do) something to deserve it, but because they believed in the unconditional love of Jesus Christ which made them love me unconditionally and invite me to be an 'insider' their family.

The basis for love is not what one has done to be worthy of love, but what Christ has done on the Cross. Only a love that is inspired by the love of Christ can be truly unconditional. The love I experienced with the Van Zants was this Christ-inspired-unconditional-love. So I could REST in what Christ has 'brought to the table' instead of being hung-up over what I couldn't bring to the table to be worthy of being the 'insider'.

In a sense THIS is what Christmas is about, we are ALL born 'outsiders' to God's family. Left to ourselves, we'll die. Christ had to show us conditional love to make us 'insiders' into His family. Making the transition from the 'outsider' to the 'insider' requires of us an acceptance this unconditional love of Christ. For some of us because of our life experiences this transition from the outsider archetype to the insider archetype takes some time, the likes of the Van Zants make such a transition easier.

As I noted earlier, I couldn't thank my buddy Matt enough for making this Christmas special by inviting me to be an 'insider' in his family. Christians will spend an Eternity thanking and worshiping God for making us all insiders in His Family. Everyday in Heaven would be such a Christmas day. Our Christmases here are just a foretaste of the overflowing experience of unconditional love that is to come! After 4 years of lonely Christmases, my Christmas with the Van Zants has been one such experience of unconditional love!

November Facebook Status Updates

A friend asked me what I did last weekend. I said, "Saw a good movie, read a good book has good conversations with people". We talked for sometime then he asked me again. "What did you do that was FUN???". I said, "Saw a good movie, read a good book has good conversations with people"... What more does one need to be FUN???

I was having lunch with a friend today, discussing the meaning of life. My friend said that discussing meaning of life might be futile... that we need to live in the present... I said I really want to know the Truth... Finally, we got the fortune cookie and mine said, "Enjoy life! It is better to be happy than to be wise". We had a good long laugh till we almost teared-up... :)

Since this morning, in conversations with the friends I have hung-out with I got at least 4 suggested readings... "How to read a Book", "The One and The Many", "Ego and Archetype" and "How Trinity Changes Everything"... I don't have the bandwidth to read all of these books now, but haven't I the MOST awesome friends???!!!

There couldn't be a more beautiful day than today to sit outside and read... cool, dark and melancholic. :)

Any system of life that is devoid theology which connects the idea of man with the idea of God, would end up dehumanizing man


I need to talk to someone who has read or seen 'Moneyball'. Some parts of it sort of went over my head...


The luckiest are the ones that were born in the early 80s... Like me. :P

Why does 'Adagio in G minor' make you feel the way it does?

J. Edgar is 2 hours and 40 minutes long, but leaves you wanting more. DiCaprio and Eastwood have tried to deal with Hoover's life in ALL of its complexity that they barely scratch the surface - leave much shrouded, intentionally I believe.

Grief is good as long as it does not lead to self-pity. Life is good as long as there is hope and faith that God would work it ALL for the ultimate good - Rom 9:28.

Well... to go or not to go and watch 'J. Edgar' DiCaprio's latest movie with Clint Eastwood at 00:01 hours tomorrow (actually tonight)... THAT is the question.

I think one thing that Facebook does well is it gives people a chance to be a tad bit more creative than they normally are. :)

Houston was beautiful today! There were clouds, then some rain, little snow flakes dancing about for a very short while, then pouring rain, then a mist, then some sun and then cloudy again. Classic Houston!

Strength in the midst of weakness is true strength, for if there is no weakness in a person, then 'strength' has no point to prove. If one hasn't had a chance to win a battle from within, one may not be able to overcome the battles from without. So, Cheer up! If you think you are weak, you have an opportunity to be strong. :)

In life, we expend ourselves, anyone who doesn't feel expended, probably isn't alive yet.

If you have a strong arm and a sharp knife, when you make one cut, you'll have two pieces of meat. Well, what I am saying is if you have strong principles in your life, you can be decisive. :)

Sojourn - A High Stakes Christian Covenant Community

(Disclaimer: What is stated below is my impression of what Sojourn Church Community stands for. My impressions may or may not reflect the Church's official stand on things)

'Covenant' is a very heavy word that has in recent times has lost the depth of its meaning. Before the modern idea of 'contract', became the norm for any transaction whether marriage or business, it was 'covenant' that bound people together. Covenant has a deep relationship aspect which the 'matter-of-fact' contract lacks. Where contract tries to define the boundaries of the liabilities, the covenant went ALL in. Where contract is signed in ink, covenant was signed in Blood.

When I realized that Sojourn had a 'Covenant Membership Class' to induct new members, my understanding of the weight of the word caused pause. I needed to really consider the stakes involved. Generally speaking, a Covenant answers three questions, what do I need to give? what do I get in return? who is the covenant enforcer? To me, the key question to which I wanted to find the answer to was the first one, 'what do I need to give?'. I wanted to know what was at stake before I could commit to be a member of this Church.

Because I was apprehensive, I made sure that I could decide not to become a member if I didn't want to, after attending the class. I was assured that I could. So I attended the class last week. The covenant class was taken by the passionate Pastor Joseph and facilitated by the able administrator, Drew.

Three points stood out to me from the class.
1. The need to create a Christian presence in urban enclaves.
2. The need to allow the Gospel to permeate everyday aspects/rythmns of ones life.
3. The need to commune, submit and be strengthened by each other.

In every culture, there is a part of the society that is fragmented and is in dire need of the gospel. The Christian has two options to deal with this. Either jump headlong into the decadent culture, open it up to the Good News by building a Shining City in the midst. Or retire to the Christian ghetto, assured that one has the 'ticket' to heaven and that one will 'make it' even if all hell breaks loose around them. It seemed to me that the Sojourn Christians are encouraged to be of the first kind of Christians. To be the Christian of the first kind, one has to venture outside of one's comfort zone. For example, Joe said that if you decide to live in urban enclaves (as against the suburbs), you may not be able to own a house until you are in your mid-thirties or early forties. Besides, you have to open your homes for neighbours to come and fellowship at. That is a sacrifice one has to consider making to be a high stakes Christian of the first kind.  This a not a low bar. But how could I not covenant with that?  Check!

A big problem with the urban progressives is a sense of entitlement. The urbanite believes he/she has a RIGHT to happiness, no matter what is at stake. In fact, I think, one could draw an almost straight line from the belief in right to happiness to the breakdown of marriages in the Western civilization. The only thing that can effectively work against this obsessive 'pursuit of happiness' is the Gospel permeating every aspect of our life. Gospel kills the discontentment that arises out of the sense of entitlement, by helping us SEE the crucified Lord. This Gospel-focus SHOULD fill us with the GREATEST sense of GRATITUDE that nothing else would matter so much so as to rob us of our 'joy' in the Lord.

Joe recounted how one of the Elders in the Church had to recite the Gospel to him when he was feeling discontentment over something. It is a great example to see pastors use a self-deprecating examples to glorify the Gospel. To make much of Christ and less of self is the fruit of the workings of the Gospel. It seemed to me that the Sojourn Christians are encouraged to be Gospel-focused to make much of Christ and less of self in their everyday aspects/rythmns of life.  This a not a low bar. But how could I not covenant with that? Check!

If  the urban progressives had real, healthy and cherished communities, the Starbucks business model would have bombed right at the start. After all, a good number of people that go to Starbucks for the pseudo-community experience than for the 'real' coffee. In contrast to the pseudo-communities around us, Christians are supposed to be the 'real' community builders. We are to find our identity in the community of those who love the Lord. While most pagan communities that look real are built upon principle of 'networking' driven by self-interest of some form, the Christian community is built upon virtues of mutual love, mutual submission and mutual exhortation. Unlike Communism (Marxism), the Christian community is not classless, there is a definite hierarchy. But the Christian community is a lot more radical than Communism in that Communism mandates that everyone be treated equally, whereas in the Christian community, one is expected to treat the other better than one self. This is where rubber meets the road. This a high bar. I'll need to covenant with that! Check!

It takes a lot of gospel-focus, prayer and mission mindedness to be able to fulfil my part of covenant deal. Truth be said, it will not be easy. But I have the 'Helper' (John 14:16), the Lord the Holy Spirit to help me through. Even if I fail, the covenant Enforcer is gracious (Romans 3:23 - 26: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood). The covenant is cut from His blood, not mine, which is why I can confidently go ALL-in into this high stakes Christian covenant community.

Elf - Lost & Loved!

I feel greatly encouraged by my buddies Kyle and Matt to continue writing posts about movies on my blog. Yesterday, when we were watching the cheesy Christmasy movie 'Elf' with friends from Church, Matt wondered if I would write a post on it. I took the challenge to write one. I don't think I have ever written a post on any cheesy movie. I enjoy watching funny movies, but a movie without depth does not inspire me to write. My challenge with this post is to find something deep about 'Elf' for a worthy write. But it is difficult task given that you have Will Ferrel staring in a movie... just saying. :) If this post is lame, don't blame me. :P

Anyways, for the sake of this post I have gleaned two profound ideas from the movie.
1. There is a connection between knowing who we are and finding a sense of belonging as someone's beloved son/daughter.
2. There is something divine about enjoying the 'spirit of Christmas' even when it is all about the Santa, and ubiquitously Christless.

In Elf, Will Ferrel is a man who gets 'lost' at birth and ends up growing among the Elves in the North Pole. As dumb as he is, when he is 30 years old, he realizes that he isn't an Elf but a Man. He realizes he does not 'belong' with the Elves and that the Elves don't quite love him. Will starts on a quest to 'find his true self'. Will finding his real Father in New York is what the movie is about.

This 'finding your true self' presupposes that one is 'lost'. None of us perfectly 'belong' in this world. We are all misfits in some ways. We don't love right, neither are we loved right. This causes a sense of alienation, insecurity and ultimately a sense of lostness.

Broadly speaking, modern human beings have two ways of dealing with the sense of lostness. One, try to escape the angst by becoming drunk or profligate or jump headlong into the rat-race for the 'American Dream' etc... Two, try to find a deeper purpose to override the gnawing sense of lostness by becoming Zen Buddhists or artists or activists etc... We forget that the ONLY thing that truly gives us a sense of 'belonging' is to be TRULY LOVED as Someone's most beloved Son/Daughter.

In the movie, Will wisely decides to find a sense of belonging by seeking his Father's love. When Will's Father gives up his 'dream job' to show Will how much he loves him, Will feels loved and finds a sense of belonging in life. From the Christian perspective, this is what Christ did on the cross. Christ gave His life up to show us how much He loved us.

Ephesians 1 4-6: In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace

Pay special attention to the first two words 'In love'. If God's adoption as His Son/Daughter does not give us a sense of being loved, NOTHING EVER will. If God's everlasting love doesn't make us feel loved, NONE ever can. We can try everything from being a drunk to becoming an activist. We'll just be a stone rolling about that gathers no mass, moving about from one place to another or one person to another.

Moving on to the second theme - the 'spirit of Christmas'... There is something really interesting about the way the idea of the 'spirit of Christmas' is presented in the movie. In the last scene of the movie the real Santa from the world of the Elves makes his appearance in NYC. It is witnessed by two groups of people - the true believers and the sophisticated skeptics. The true believers see the Santa, the sophisticated skeptics (the members of the media) just don't get it.

In the movie, the idea that the engine of Santa's sledge will work only by the 'Spirit of Christmas' in the hearts of the true believers is very ingenious. The first among the true believers is the 'tenderly beautiful' Zooey Deschanel. When Santa's sledge loses power, she feels it in her heart and starts singing the song 'Santa Claus is coming tonight'. Everyone joins in, even the ones watching on TV. Santas sledge gets the power it needs and zooms into the night skies.

It might appear that this is another show of commercialized Santa-celebrating Christmas. But we need to remember that even in this sort of Christless Christmas there still is something that can't help but glorify God. I almost teared-up when everyone sang 'Santa Claus is coming tonight'. There is something that makes a human being tear-up upon witnessing people share something profoundly simple. In this case, the 'spirit of Christmas' is shared by one and all. Why should this make one tear-up? It is because of the Image of God in man. Apes don't tear-up upon sining. Apes can't imagine myths about Santas or reindeers or gifts in stocking. Apes do not have the sense of wonder to enjoy the 'Spirit of Christmas'.

Only Human beings can connect to myths in a deep way. It is the Image of Christ in us that makes us true believers in myths. Myths are things that by themselves, do not have survival value. But they give value to survival. In and of itself, the 'Spirit of Christmas' has little survival value. But it gives value to survival. Without the image of God that makes man special, man cannot enjoy myths that give value to survival.

So, if one has to truly believe in the Santa's 'spirit of Christmas' (even when it is Christless), then one has to presuppose a Christian worldview - that man is made in the Image of God. Unless man feels loved as a son/daughter by the One in whose image he is made, he'll NEVER feel loved, no matter where he searches. He'll never belong anywhere. He'll feel totally lost. Thank God Christ came to save the lost! Merry Christmas!

The Lives Of Others

'The Lives Of Others' is an award winning Foreign language film that actually made me cry because the end of the movie is so evocative of how life works, for those of the Christian faith. I am glad my friend from Church, Luke, lent me his copy.

The movie is about a Captain of the East German secret police the Stasi who is true to his principles even at great personal peril. Some power-hungry officers in the Stasi decide that they need to bring destroy a famous Playwright in the communist East Germany. They wire his house and put Captain Weiler in charge of monitoring the wire taps. Captain Weiler is a principled man, totally devoted to the totalitarian principles of the Communistic state. 

Captain Weiler is promised rich rewards if Weiler can find incriminating evidence against the playwright. But during the surveillance, Captain Weiler realizes that the Playwright is a true artist and that his art needs to be protected against the regime. The Captain decides to not report some of the Playwright's work that is aimed at exposing the Communist regime. Weiler knows that if he is caught, he'll be dealt with the most severe form of punishment. Weiler bends over backwards to save the Playwright. The Stasi realize that Weiler had hidden some critical data. They don't have proof, so they demote him to a very menial position which Weiler does faithfully for many years. Eventually, the wall comes down and East Germany gets unified. 

The Stasi men are wealthy in the unified Germany too. They work the system. But Weiler 'falls through the cracks' and is a dejected man delivering mail from door to door. Throughout the movie, Weiler is an unhappy man. He is not successful. He never has his 'American Dream'. He stands for a principle and pays the cost for being the righteous man.

One day, the poor, inconsequential, despondent Weiler is walking the streets. He sees a huge poster of the Playwright with his new novel 'Sonata for a Good Man'. Curious, Weiler goes into the shop, opens the book. He realizes that the Playwright dedicated the book to Weiler. After unification of Germany, the Playwright gained access to the wire taps and realized how Weiler had saved his life. Weiler takes the book to the cash register. The clerk asks if if this book needed to be gift-wrapped. Weiler looks up, and for the first time in the movie has a beaming smile and says, "This is for me!". 

The Christian's life is akin to Weiler's. The Christian cannot conform to the ways of the world. Conforming to God's standard for righteousness, the Christian has to set himself apart. Others have a jolly good time 'working the system', whereas the Christian true to the principles of Truth gets the shorter end of the stick. From Elijah to David to Paul to Luther, people that follow God have struggled immensely with life. They are often disappointed and depressed. Yet unmindful of the present-day struggles, they run towards the ultimate reward of Heavenly life. The smile on poor Weiler's face when he says, "This is for me" is representative of the smile that would be the Christian's when he is rewarded in Heaven for all his hardships on earth.

Revelation 17

13 Then one of the elders asked me, “These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?”

14 And he said, “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

17 For the Lamb at the center of the throne 

  will be their shepherd; ‘he will lead them to springs of living water.’ 

  ‘And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.’

Sometimes the hardship we undergo as principled Christians can be overwhelming. We find ourselves as misfits in the world. But we shouldn't give up. We need to remember that we have a beautiful inheritance awaiting us in the Other shore in the form of a great relationship with God. He'll satisfy us for all the hardship we undergo for the sake of His Name. In this life, we should not conform to the standards of the pleasure and power mongering world. We should stand apart. We need to do our best to Serve God even when it comes at great personal peril, disappointment and despondency. We who end up as losers for the sake of righteousness, are actually in the good company of the ones in White Robes, washed in the blood of the Lamb. Our mourning shall be brief! Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted (by the King)! 

Another Blessed Lonely Christmas!

Owing to multiple reasons, I schedule my annual vacation round Feb/March. Consequently, this is the 5th Christmas, in a row, that I am going to be away from family. Actually, I have lost all memory of what made Christmas special when I was young. It is sort of sad.

The only thing that is Christmasy about my life these days is listening to Christmas songs. There are some songs that always bring a tear to my eye. One is 'The Little Drummer Boy' http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=Adg_JIQzdhs. The other is 'What Child is This' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz44GJlSPeo.

Little Drummer Boy is about this little boy standing by the manger Jesus is born at. He loves Jesus so much, but he has nothing to give Him. BIG people come and give Jesus BIG gifts. He is sad that he has noting to give the King. He thinks and thinks what he can give Jesus. Then he realizes that he can play the drum for Jesus. He sweetly asks Jesus, 'Shall I play for you?'. He plays the drum for Jesus. He plays his BEST for Jesus. His ULTIMATE joy is in seeing... 'Then Jesus smiles at me... Me and my drum...'. Even writing this makes me tear up, that the Lord is pleased with whatever little I can glorify Him with. He considers it precious. I think I try to put myself in his shoes a little too much. The GOAL of Christmas is not just to have a good time. But to make our Lord 'smile' at us and what we do thing Christmas.

'What Child is this' makes me tear-up not just because the tune evokes a depth of transcendence and awe and mystery, but because there is a philosophical depth to it too. The song deals with the whole Person of Jesus. His Kingship 'King of Kings', His mean estate 'among ox and lamb', His Love 'pleading for sinners', His crucifixion 'nail, spear shall pierce through him'. It also talks about ordinate human response 'Good Christian fear', 'Hail, hail the Word made flesh', 'Let loving hearts enthrone Him', 'Raise, raise a song on high'. The going back and forth between Christ's Greatness and Human Response brings tears of joy and admiration.

Christmas is BEST when Christ is made the Celebrity that is most admired over and over again... When people tear-up in Michael Jackson concerts, how much more should we tear-up when Christ is the Celebrity??? Well, this applies only to the sensitive mushy ones I guess... :P

I think lonely Christmases are blessed because being alone around Christmas has given me a greater appreciation for life. It has given me the ability to appreciate life in spite of life being reduced to the bare essentials. It is at such times that I gets to really enjoy God. Loneliness is a very small cost to pay for the opportunity to enjoy and be satisfied in Christ.

It was St. Francis of Assisi who said, "A man who has everything and Christ has everything. A man who has everything but Christ has nothing. A man who has nothing but Christ hasn't anything less than the man who has everything and Christ'. Understanding this quote of the great Saint at a philosophical level is one thing. Living it at an existential level is a whole another experience. Blessed lonely Christmases give me this priceless experience.

At the end of the day, Christmas is about glorifying God and share my Joy in Christ with people around me. I can always do this whichever part of the world I am at, for the WHOLE world is the Lord's and the WHOLE world CELEBRATES the King of Kings!

Ides of March - The Story of Uncaring Sexy Men

'Ides of March' is a classy movie. It is a story about political campaign machine trying to win the public over. The story that has multiple plots. The bigger story is that of one candidate's political machine trying to thwart another's. This battle in the public eye is being fought on the realm of big ideas and noble personalities that have perfected the public persona. Within this big story, there are smaller stories of human dynamics involving rivalry, loyalty and sex too. What 'Ides of March' does best is in showing how it is the smaller stories of human dynamics that really determines the big story.

There are many strands to the smaller stories. In this post, I would like to deal just with the story of sex, because this movie clearly depicts why sex is not a casual thing the present day 'hook-up' culture has made it to be. Sex has big implications in life. There are two reasons. One, sex has procreative powers. Two, God created sex as serious stuff in a way that creates a deep bonding between people that truly care for each other. God did not create sex to be casual stuff.

Ryan Goslin is the campaign manager for George Clooney's Presidential bid. The beautiful Evan Rachel Wood is an intern with the campaign team. Evan finds Ryan sexy and seductive. She tells him that they should have 'casual sex' as and when they find time. They do that. Thankfully, the movie doesn't have any explicit or yukky scenes that make you too uncomfortable.

Though a campaign manager getting caught having sex with an intern could be extremely damaging, Ryan is confident no trouble would befall them. He is right and wrong. One day Evan finds herself pregnant. The father is the Presidential candidate George Cloony himself. Geroge has an unsuspecting wife and kids, not to mention the carefully crafted public image of a good Father and Husband. 

Evan tells Ryan about her pregnancy. Ryan VERY UNCARINGLY tells her that in order to avoid a political scandal she'll have to abort the kid and then quit the campaign team. Evan does not like that option. She says she does not want to quit the team. That would be the end of her life's dreams. Ryan maintains that he wouldn't allow her to work in the campaign. If someone found out about the abortion, that would be the end of George's campaign. He gives Evan cash and drops her off at the hospital to have the procedure done. Evan is terribly sad. She doesn't speak much. You could see an inexplicable sadness in her eyes.   

After the procedure, Ryan discretely picks Evan up and leaves her in her room and tells her she'll have to leave as soon as she could. In the mean time, Ryan gets fired from his campaign on questions of loyalty to the campaign. Ryan comes back to see Evan. Finds her dead. Evan had committed suicide. The last text in Evan's cell phone is to George. NOW the Man in Ryan wakes up. He decides to take revenge on George and bring his campaign down, which is what the rest of the movie is about.

There are two questions here...
1. Initially, Ryan thinks the campaign is worth killing a child in the womb. But when a person outside the womb dies, he decides to bring the campaign down. Why this double standard?
2. Why does Evan commit suicide?

I think the answer to both points to the same - a strong sexy man's uncaring nature.

Ryan is a strong, slick and sexy. He competent enough to build or destroy a campaign, but he doesn't 'care' for a vulnerable life that needs help. Ryan prefers to lose a life (Evan's child in the womb) in order to save the campaign. But when Evan's life was lost, he decides that someone needs to pay for Evan's death. At the heart of this flip-flop is the idea that he doesn't have to 'care' for the baby in the womb. From a Christian perspective, this sort of not caring is TOTALLY wrong.

Jeremiah 1:5 - Before I formed you in the womb I knew (chose) you, before you were born I set you apart.

God created men to be strong and support the vulnerable. But Ryan doesn't 'care' enough to support the vulnerable. In this, he had lost his 'manishness'.

Now to the question of why the beautiful Evan ends her life at its prime best. Evans has been a happy-go-lucky girl for so long, having 'casual sex' in the hook-up culture. When she gets pregnant, she is forced to make serious choices. She realizes that there is more to life than meets the eye. She is vulnerable. She needs support, but there was none to stand by her. Her 'casual' sex partners don't quite 'care' for her. Both the men involved in her life George and Ryan are very powerful men. But they couldn't have loved her less. She feels totally abandoned by men with whom she shared something special - her sexual and romantic self. She had foolishly bargained something very special for something cheap - momentary titillation. To be at a place where one realizes that there is none that cares, is the worst place to be in. Perhaps, it is not terribly surprising that she snapped.

Ryan should have stepped-up to support her and her child when she was alive. He failed to do that. Then after her death he steps-up to have his vengeance. But what is the point? He is just sexy, seductive, strong uncaring man.

I was reading an article that talks about the American college experience. It says that for a college to make a lot of money and be successful, it has to have three things parking for faculty, football for alumni and sex for students. Kate Bolick in her incisive article on the Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/11/all-the-single-ladies/8654/) talks about how in the 1990s, the 'hook-up' culture became pervasive in College campuses and students began having 'casual' sex with multiple sex partners. She goes on to point that sometimes women do it not because they find it erotically or emotionally satisfying, but because it is just a part of 'social conformity'. Being sexually active is often taken as proof that one has it in oneself. She recounts an experience where she talks to some very sexually active college girls and they frankly acknowledge that they can't keep doing this for long.

What we do changes us. It defines us. When sex becomes casual and cheap, men tend to become uncaring.  When people have casual 'safe' sex by suppressing the 'bonding' part of it, it alters the psyche of people involved. Which is why psychologists says that sex in uncaring relationships can be very harmful to the human psyche. Unfortunately, liberal college campuses have become the breeding ground 'hook-up' culture where casual sex is the norm of the day.  God never meant sex to be shared casually. Sex is a serious thing which has serious implications in terms of procreation and in its ability to bond people. Sex was never supposed to be 'safe' either. Sex is dangerous, needs careful handling.

When we take something that God meant for one thing and use it for something else, it will twist our nature. Human nature will lose its humaneness. Which is what happens in 'Ides of March'. Ryan got free sex. He didn't want to say no. If it is free, why should he care about the person who is the gift-giver? He is a strong man that becomes uncaring. He is a creation of this 'hook-up' culture. Abortion is just a by-product of this problem. When men become uncaring, they lose their 'manishness'. They no longer are caring enough to stand by the vulnerable. A society with such men would eventually self-destruct. In fact, one of the causes of the decline of Roman empire was its 'casual' attitude towards sex. The men of that civilization accustomed to getting everything free from sex to food weren't disciplined or responsible or powerful enough to defend it when the Visgoths came down upon Rome.

The story of a civilization would be defined more by the story of uncaring men than by BIG political ideas of democracy or autocracy or capitalism or communism. Stepping outside of God's prerogatives for life will create foolish women and uncaring men. Consequently, a decadent civilization. Just like in 'Ides of March', the success and the failure of a Civilization depends not so much upon the BIG propagandized ideas, but on whether the little stories of the human dynamics is in obedience to God's written laws. It was in light of this that G.K.Chesterton said, "Civilization can stand in one angle. We are now testing angles."

The Christian hope and prayer should be that people realize the vacuousness of the hook-up culture and repent to honor God's cultural prerogatives, starting with matters of sex. Sex is special 1) it begets life, 2) it creates bonds. God created sex to be serious powerful stuff needing careful handling. 'Casual' sex would twist human nature, make people irresponsible and uncaring which would eventually lead to the toppling a civilization. With more than a third of today's children born in single-mom homes, the story of this civilization is likely to be defined by the story of uncaring 'sexy' men than by anything else. 

7 Brides for 7 Brother to Kim Kardashian to Twilight

(Disclaimer: In the write up below, I have tried to do something men generally do badly - analyze a woman thoughts/motives using her spoken words as a guide. The questions I raise in the post is not gender specific though, they are more about general culture. I don't claim to have the answers to the question I raise up on the post... I am just as confused as most millenials I think are. My long write-up below is my attempt to wrap my mind around something that is confounding - love between a man and his woman.)

Over the past few weeks, a few of my friends who love musicals told me that I should watch the 1954 musical "7 Brides for 7 Brothers". I did. It is a very funny romantic comedy. I have the habit of taking something that is funny, and making something 'dead' serious out of it. When I do this, I risk destroying the best part of silliness. Well, I guess you got to break some eggs to make some omelets, hopefully the omelets are worth it.  :)

"7 Brides for 7 Brothers" is a movie about how 7 brothers living in a farm out in the remote farm in Orgeon end up finding 7 brides for themselves from the city. Now, what does "7 Brides for 7 Brothers" have to do with, of all people, Kim Kardashian? We'll get there... soon. Hopefully, I can make the connection...

In the movie, the eldest of the 7 brothers, Adam, has a bright idea. He decides to marry a wife so that the house would be kept clean and his brothers will have better food and standard of living. He goes into town and looks for the most 'industrious' woman. He finds her, the beautiful Milley - a woman working in a tavern who does everything from cutting firewood to cooking to serving food to milking cows. Adam stalks her. He proposes that he wants to marry her, right away. He hasn't time like most people do, to call and court and and cuddle around - he has a farm to take care of.

Upon seeing Adam, Milley falls into a 'love at first-sight'. Milley's friends are very circumspect of the strange Adam. They advise Milley against marrying Adam. It is now upon Milley to justify her reason for wanting to marry him. Here are her words, "I have been proposed to by many men many times. Every time I said 'yes', I got an awful sinking ‘feeling’. But when I said 'yes' to Adam, I felt fine. I was waiting for the sinking feeling, I never got it. I feel so fine, I could cry." None of her friends say another word. Hey, who dares argue against a 'feeling', especially when one is just 'following one's heart'??? None objects and the preacher pronounces them man and wife.

It is Milley's 'following one's heart' into love part brings me to the Princess of Reality TV, Kim Kardisian. Kim married Kris, and then has decided to divorce him after 72 days. The speculation was that she married just to increase her show's ratings. In her interview to justify her marriage and then her decision to divorce she said, "First and foremost, I have to follow my heart". In our life, all of us have a Chief 'value' which we live by. To mother Teresa, her chief value was to see Christ in the other person and serve that person as she would Christ. To Hitler, his chief value was to work towards the ultimate supremacy of the Aryan race. Kim's chief value apparently is to 'follow her heart, no matter what'. She followed her heart into a marriage with Kris, and then followed her heart right out. Steve Jobs said in his famous Stanford Address, "As in all matters of the heart, you'll know it when you find it". From Steve Jobs to Kim Kardisian, from career advice to relationship advice the chief value that people espouse is 'following one's heart'. The Bible on the other hand says...

Jer 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

But then, we live in a Post-Christian culture where people think they know better than the Bible. When Milley saw Adam she thought her heart was right. But after marriage, Milley realizes how her heart had misled her. Adam doesn't quite love her. She works hard to please him, makes a home of his shack. She gives all she has and gets no affection in return. One evening, she overhears Adam advising his younger brother on finding a wife, "if you don't get this, another will come along. One woman is pretty much like the next". Milley realizes that she isn't any special to him than any woman that is a good caretaker. Hot tears stream down her cheeks. In spite of a loveless marriage, Milley tarries on because she feels bound by 'traditions'. Good for Adam, the jerk.

Milley is no Kim. Milley does not divorce Adam. Milley is a woman of the 50s. Kim is a woman of the 2010s. Yet, there is a similarity. They both 'assess' their love for a man based on 'feelings'. They decide to follow their hearts. The difference between Kim and Milley is that Kim decides to divorce, whereas Milley stays married. I submit that this difference is a difference that is only circumstantial, meaning if both of them had lived in the same society, given their 'feeling' based decision making rationale, they would probably have acted similarly... I'll try to substantiate my claim.

Marriage has two parts.

1. Start loving a person.

2. Continue loving the same person forever.

Kim and Milley use 'feelings' as a basis to start loving a person. Kim goes one step further and uses 'feelings' as a basis to continue (or discontinue) to love the person. Milley on the other hand, shifts her decision making rationale after marriage. After marriage, she uses 'traditions' as the basis to continue loving Adam, even though he acts like a jerk. 'Traditions' die hard, at least in the 50s, back when individualism didn't matter as much as it does today. Both Milley and Kim use 'feelings' as a basis to start to love. But because they were living in societies that differently value individual freedom, their post-marriage decision making has different manifestations. Milley, living in the age entrenched with traditions, 'sucks it up' and continues in the marital relationship, whereas Kim, living in an age of radical individualism and experimentation, decides she deserves to have a better life with someone else and decides to break-up.

Most of us, the millennials, can't imagine getting married to anyone we didn't have the 'right' feelings for. Kim is just taking it a step further and saying she can't continue in marriage with a person if she hasn't the 'right' feelings. The point here is that we the Millennials don't need to be so hard on Kim, we ALL live in an era where we assess love through the 'lens of feelings'. Whether it is the 1950s or the 2000s, we are all on the same slide of being driven by 'feeling' based decisions. It is just that as we get closer to the bottom, we feel the increasing acceleration. We sense something is dead wrong. Celebrities living out the 'feeling' based philosophy to its logical end in a rather public way confirm our belief that something is wrong. The problem is we don't know what to do about it. Feelings are important. Feeling good matters. But what to do marriages that fail left, right and center?

C.S.Lewis says in 'Four Loves' that in the middle ages people feared 'instinctive feelings' they were afraid that giving into to instincts would ruin the individual and the society. In fact this distrust of the human heart was the reason why the Founders of America wanted a very limited government with adequate check and balances. If we would move back a few centuries, marriages were mostly 'arranged'. 'Feelings' were not unimportant, but they did not get to be the decision making factor. Decisions were made based on morality, then feelings followed. As civilization 'evolved' from this 'overtly Christian' middle ages, we moved into the age of Enlightenment rationalism. When this rationalism broke down, unable to substantiate its claim that reason was powerful enough to transform human race, we moved through the age of Romanticism. Romanticism idealized 'feelings' as ultimate in life. People said, "Hey, if ‘thinking’ doesn't get us anywhere, let us at least enjoy the how life makes us 'feel'”. I was speaking with a friend about life, I asked him what he thought about life, He replied, “I don’t think about life anymore, thinking doesn’t get me anywhere. My philosophy of life is to enjoy life as we living the present”. This trend of making feelings as the ultimate value in life isn't new, in Ancient Greece, on the heels of breakdown of Platonic rationalism, the Epicurean philosophy of living for feelings of pleasure flourished.

Around the 19th century Romanticism and the exhalation of feelings, I think writers like Jane Austin played a pivotal role in the shift into 'feeling-based-love' marriage. The usual plot in Jane Austin novels goes like this… It is setup in a society where Social traditions acts as an innate match maker of predetermined marriages. But then, there is a woman and a man who have special 'feelings' for each other which goes against the grain of the society's match making tradition. The (high) society becomes the villian, the 'feelings' become the 'good force' that perseveres until the 'lovers' are united and then live 'happily ever after'! Emily Bronte's work too was deeply feelings based. Then there were Shelley, Lord Byron and their likes who made feelings as the basis for good poetry. What started with romanticism, had now reached its zenith with the Twilight series. In the Twilight world it takes more than a man to make the jaded sense of a girl in her teens to ‘feel’ loved and special. It takes someone strong, manly and exotically alluring as a vampire or a werewolf. Anything less wouldn't sweep her off her feet.

As the western civilization moved from Romanticism into present day Existentialism, 'feelings' have taken greater and greater roles in life decisions, which is most egregiously manifested in starting and ending marriages. 1950s used 'feelings' as the starting point of love but used traditions to hold love together. Men and women of 2000s have gone one step further to use 'feelings' not only as the starting point of love but for continuing to be in (or out of) love too.

The point of this post is not to make feelings as the villain and the root cause of all problems. Feelings are important. Feeling good matters. After all, God created feelings. God grants the desires of our heart Ps 37:4.  People who see 'feelings' as being ultimate have good reasons to do so. In fact, Paul uses their rationale to make a bigger point in the scriptures, "If there were no afterlife, then eat drink and be merry!". The point being that if this life is ALL there is, then 'feeling good' IS the chief value of life.

Going by Paul's rationale, every man has two options…

1.    1. Feeling good in this life

2.     2. Feeling good in the next life.

A person who denies the possibility of the next life has only this life to be happy in. People who do not believe in afterlife, will want to make sure that they ‘feel good’ in this life. If they can’t feel good in this life, then they have lost their ONLY chance to feel good. So to them, ‘to follow their hearts’ and feel good about this life is the chief value of life. What makes one feel good changes from person to person. In one episode of 2 ½ men, after Al and Judith divorce, Judith explains her reason for divorce to her son Jake, “Jake, Mom has a right to be happy”. To one person, marrying makes them feel good, to another depending on who they married separation may make them feel good, to one social service may make them feel good, to another taking a swig of beer and watching NFL would make them feel good.

On the other hand it is an irony that a person believing in the Truth of Next Life, may still be too preoccupied wanting to feel good in this life. How often have we heard people say, “I know I am going to hell, let me as well enjoy what I am doing now”. Illicit sex/romance may make some people feel good, at least for a little while. But it reduces the possibility of one ‘feeling good’ in next life. The Bible is clear that people who are sexually immoral have no place in Heaven. To say no to illicit sex/romance may not make one ‘feel good’ in this life. But it will make us feel good in the next life. Resisting temptation may not always be an easy pill to swallow, but one who sows with tears in this life will reap with joy in the next one. Proverbs 11:18 One who sows righteousness reaps rich rewards. There is nothing wrong in trying to be righteous with an expectation of future reward.

Hebrews 12:

1.     1. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, 2. fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Even Christ endured the cross for the ‘joy’ that was set before Him in Heaven. Feeling Good matters. Feeling Good is important. But the key question is whether we want to feel good in this life or the next. The wise choose to do things that make them ‘feel good’ in next life. The foolish choose to do stuff that make them ‘feel good’ about this life.

So, the point of this post is not to condemn our wanting to feeling good, but to question which life one should want to feel good in. In other words, the real question is about the ultimacy of this world. As Christians, meditating on the Word of God day and night is the only way to escape the allure of everything from novels to TV shows to Opinion makers, that imbibe a deep sense of ultimacy of this world and incite us to pursue the desire to feel good in this life. What we see and think about WILL define us. The only way to live this world with other worldly values is to have a regular quite time in which we commune with the Triune God.

Psalm 1

2 but whose delight is in the law of the LORD,

   and who meditates on his law day and night.

3 That person is like a tree planted by streams of water,

   which yields its fruit in season

and whose leaf does not wither—

   whatever they do prospers.

4 Not so the wicked!

   They are like chaff

   that the wind blows away.

Those who meditate on the Word of God will be rooted in timeless Truth. They will feel good in the Timeless world of Heaven. On the other hand, those who life by the Spirit of this age, whether it be Romanticism or Existentialism, they will be like chaff blown away into oblivion.

Just to summarize…

1.     1. A love that starts as feelings-based-love will continue as feelings based marriage that can break anytime unless those involved are willing to work hard to not allow feelings the driver’s seat.

2.    2. From Steve Jobs, to Kim Kardashian to the Twilight series, we live in a world entrenched with feeling based assessment and decision making.

3.    3. The best attitude to escape this cultural-conditioning is to look forward to the joys of the Heavenly life and wisely use that as an inspiration to forgo the petty ‘feel good now’ distractions of this life.

4.    4. The only way we can live this life with heavenly values is by having a regular quite time and meditating on God’s Word day and night.

From ‘7 Brides for 7 Brothers’ to Jane Austen to Twilight, I have broken a few eggs, perhaps even misrepresented some of them by over analyzing some specific parts. I will incur the wrath of the ardent fans. But in the process, we have life-giving omelets – the importance of the Word of God. The importance of being immersed in the Word of God cannot be stressed enough, even at the cost of breaking a few eggs.

October Facebook Status Updates

Will Beethoven's incomparable 'Symphony No 9 in D minor' outlast Lady Gaga's say 'Paparazzi'? Or will people 2 centuries into future, make a Beethoven of Lady Gaga?


For knowledge to be received, you got to make two assumptions 1) You exist 2) The Creator of Knowledge exists. Without these assumptions, there can be no study of knowledge.


Oh, Cold Houston! I don't like you! You make it difficult for me to ride my motorcycle. I don't like driving my car. :(


I am sure Heaven will have have 'golden sunsets'... the rays of the orange sun painting a golden lining round the glowing mass of floating moisture.


Well, actually the point of all questions that arise in the course of human existence is whether we want to be grateful or we want to grumble.


Isn't it an irony that the I-pod, I-phone, I-pad the hallmarks of modern materialism should be envisioned by a Zen Buddhist.


Well, time is precious. Time is where the essence of being is reckoned. In that sense 'time' limits our experience of the essence of our being. Heaven being truly 'timeless' is where we'll truly get to experience the essence of our being.


Well, the nights that are truly timeless... when I am trying to find an answer to a question I can't quite put in words. I wish this was a weekend night when I could and go have a 2:00 AM Starbucks coffee and think through the question, but alas! this isn't. Well, life is good! It is good to 'have time' to think. Not many have this luxury. Thanks be to God!


The man that has found the one thing that truly fills him with perpetual joy, eternally, has found himself. Until he finds it he is still 'looking for himself'


I would rather appear foolish than be a fool.


With the I-phone 4G having the AI enabled Personal Assistant 'Siri', you'll probably be talking more to the phone than using phone to talk to someone else. After all, we are evolving away from the long-talking Ents of the Lord of the Rings... Of course, it is all about efficiency!!!


Well, OWS would do better if they could articulate their policy positions without using the word 'greed', after all you can't expect to jail the entire human race, can you?


Oh, I don't like cold weather :( I miss the warm sunny hot Houston already!


True freedom is not just freedom from external tyranny, it is freedom from self. To be caught up in the cob web of the self is a subtle form of tyranny that is too ubiquitous to even be noticed, much less diagnosed let alone being mitigated.


Just finished filing my 2010 tax returns. Thanks to TaxAct Online! It is indeed exciting to pull things off close to the deadlines! It makes you feel free and strong. :)


What would life be without words... after all, didn't someone say words are the vehicle for meaning... If none said, I just did. I think it probably was C.S.Lewis.


Is this how people feel when they come down from a mountain top experience... overflowing with words that probably makes sense to none... Oh, well!


Actually, life is just as good even without facebook. Facebook isn't even icing on the cake. Facebook is just a lens through which you get to see the icing on the cake... There are many lenses, BTW. :)


I think I have decided to come out of my facebook hibernation. :)


Oh, if only emotions can be remembered like words... life would be a lot more enriching... Especially the emotions associated with pain and failure for they are the ones that bring a DEPTH to life besides making the emotions of joy and success, meaningful.


‎A man who isn't a tad bit 'mad' enough to risk some can't be a man, period.


'Fight Club' is a movie that is about so many things that I am at loss for words to describe it. It is the anti-thesis to the ultra-modern platitudes that are so ubiquitous and are seldom noticed anymore, the key platitude being, "Hey, you are special!"


Why am I not infatuated with facebook anymore? I never thought this day would come.


Anything with just a 7 inch screen cannot compete with I-pad, 'Kindle Fire' included.


Anything with just a 7 inch screen cannot compete with I-pad, 'Kindle Fire' included.

A Story of a Strong Father - Brings a Tear to My Eyes

I was reading an article on Vanity Fair about one of the most defining personalities of Great Britain, its only woman Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2011/12/margaret-thatcher-201112 I admire women that exhibit very strong masculine attributes. Below is an excerpt from that write-up.

Margaret Thatcher’s father was the single biggest influence on her life. Alfred Roberts was a grocer who ran two fairly successful shops in Grantham. He was also a Methodist lay preacher, well known for the quality of his sermons, and an alderman, a type of local politician now obsolete. Alderman Roberts had no sons and appears to have harbored for Margaret, the second of his two daughters, many of the ambitions which, had he been born to a higher level of society, he might have been able to fulfill for himself.


Roberts impressed upon young Margaret the importance of knowledge, duty, and hard work, the power of both the spoken and the written word, and the value of public service. The Roberts girls had to borrow and read two books from the library every week, at least one of them nonfiction. They attended church twice on Sundays (where Margaret sang notably well), and Margaret often accompanied her father to political meetings. Because the family lived above one of the shops, Alderman Roberts usually came home for meals with the girls. He and Margaret discussed public events, including the coming war with Germany. Of her mother, Beatrice, Margaret Thatcher said, “Oh, Mother. Mother was marvelous—she helped Father.”

When I read the excerpt above, my eyes were getting filled with tears, quite inexplicably. I think there is something wrong with a man who cries for himself. But here, I wasn't crying for myself. Being human beings, when we see something that signifies something that is exquisitely beautiful or deeply profound we feel 'moved' deep within and some of us that have sensitive souls easily get mushy. Something about the excerpt above 'moved' me very deeply. So I stopped to think through...

There are a few noteworthy points in the excerpt.
1. The father is an industrious man who is also deeply religious, obviously intelligent, capable of giving 'high quality' sermons.
2. He is a father who really understands his kids, tries to bring out the best in them and has BIG dreams for them.
3. Even though he is intelligent, industrious and gregarious, his not being from 'high society' put a glass ceiling above him. But that doesn't make him cynical. He INVESTS in making his Kid's life more fulfilling than his is.
4. The father INVESTS in nurturing his kids with good values, education and real life experiences.

I couldn't help but wonder how Alderman Roberts seems such an anti-thesis to much celebrated men of the likes of Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison. Steve Jobs made it BIG in life, but he was not in good terms with any of his daughters. In fact, one of the reasons he attributed to wanting to have an authorized biography was in his own words, 'to help his kids know who he really was'. Alderman Roberts on the other hand was someone who remained small in life, but he 'poured himself' out into the life of his kids.

There were two reasons I got mushy...
1. The article started off stating Thatcher's political accomplishments and suddenly took a dive in an moving account of a personal nature, it sort of took me by surprise, my emotional guard was down.
2. Alderman Roberts' life depicted a profound masculine strength which is not valued much in the society we live in. Robert's Strength is in not living his life for himself (to chase his 'American Dream', ought I say 'British Dream'??? :P), but in 'pouring himself' into the lives of his kids. The beauty of the relationship between him and his daughter and how it impacted the course of History of Western Europe, brought a tear to my eye. All because one man decided to really understand his kids and pour into their lives.

Contrary to what we are led by our cultural-conditioning to believe, a man's Strength is NOT in what he has achieved in his life, NOR is it in the legacy he leaves behind. A man's true Strength is in how he has been able to pour into other's life, especially those close to him. This sort of Strong man often pours himself out at the cost of losing his chance to prove to the world that he is somebody to be reckoned with. He is the true revolutionary.

Margret rightfully calls her father the greatest influence in her life. Her father poured into Her by being her TEACHER. As per the Biblical model, it is the duty of the Father (also) to be his kids' Teacher. God command Moses and other Prophets that they are to teach the commands and statues to their children and children's children....

Exodus 10:2 that you may tell your children and grandchildren how I dealt harshly with the Egyptians and how I performed my signs among them, and that you may know that I am the LORD.

Exodus 12:26 And when your children ask you, ‘What does this ceremony mean to you?’ 27 then tell them, ‘It is the Passover sacrifice to the LORD, who passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt and spared our homes when he struck down the Egyptians.’” Then the people bowed down and worshiped.

Any parent would know that teaching kids is not a easy job. It is a 24/7 'work'. Frank Schaeffer said, "the man who said that parents need to spend 'quality time' with kids is a fool. Parents need to spend LOTS of time with kids". Alderman Roberts did precisely this. In a world where the fathers are busy with work, else are occupied with their own recreation whether in the form of music or gym workouts or garage projects or watching NFL or hanging-out with buddies at the bar, Alderman Roberts depicts one important facet of true masculinity - that of being his kid's Teacher instead of outsourcing teaching to someone that wouldn't care less for his kid.

Being your kid's Teacher is a reflection of an aspect of God's relationship to man too. Christ was primarily called a TEACHER. He poured out his life in teaching and leading people to life transforming Truth. His work is continued by the Lord the Holy Spirit in our hearts as He counsels us and reminds us of the Truth. If a man is not inspired in his Spirit to be Christlike and be a good Teacher to his kids, his negligence will affect his generation and the next one and the next one.

Exodus 34:7 Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.

What Roberts did to his kids was the right thing for the father to do. In a world where more than a third of the kids are born to single-moms and irresponsible fathers, in a world that is so bereft of good models for true masculinity, reading Roberts story feels like coming across an oasis in a desert. It is a story of how one man, a Strong Father who lives not for himself but for his kids; and in reflecting Christ-likeness pours into them and nurtures a personality who impacts lives of millions. It is something that is beautiful and profound that it brings a tear to my eyes.

Anonymous - Words: Voices and Pictures!

'Anonymous' is a movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1521197/ about the theory that Shakespeare didn't write the plays which are attributed to his authorship. 'Anonymous' claims that the plays were written by the 17th Earl, Edward Oxford and because he wanted to avoid political repercussions of being a playwright he needed to use someone else, the someone else being Shakespeare. The movie doesn't do a great job of selling this theory, it is probably not worth anyone's money unless one ardently loves historical dramas with a conspiracy angle.

I saw something in the movie that I admired. The 17th Earl is a guy who loves words so much that he was willing to relinquish authorship just to see the words come to live. He is the true artist who had not vested interest, except to see the effect of his words on the 'mob'. He often mentions in the movie that words are powerful weapons. He even tries to use the power of his words to control succession plans of English monarchy.

He depicted a strength - strength to relinquish control for the sake of beauty - a strength to become lesser for a greater cause the cause of 'words coming to life'. He depicted a strength in being himself - an artist instead of being the Earl attending to his investments. In fact, he loses his great wealth and is close to bankruptcy. His exasperated wife, justifiably gets mad at him and asks him why he keeps writing.

The Earl replies, almost helplessly, but with a calm conviction that he hears 'voices in his head' - the cry of the soldier in the battle field, the thoughts of a prisoner in dungeons, the words of a lover to his maiden... and if he had to be sane, he had to write them down. I felt I got my money's worth and some more with that line. After all, don't we all hear 'voices in the head'.

Writing is sort of like painting, but the picture is not on canvas. The writer if he is good will be able to get the reader to paint the picture of the story in his/her mind, many many pictures... Words, are voices in the head of the writer, and pictures in the mind of the reader.  

Joe Frazier, the Papa Gorilla!

I admire men that are strong. That can put themselves in harm's way just to measure the strength of their will. In some ways, Professional boxers are such men. Boxing is a brutal sport. I don't usually watch it. But I like the idea that a man is willing to risk all he has got just to make a claim for raw brutal power. Strength in any sport is admirable.

Since the legendary Joe Frazier's death yesterday, I have been reading bits about him and his famous rivalry with Ali. Joe Frazier has the distinction of being the first boxer to ever defeat Ali. Joe wasn't charismatic as Ali. He was far from good looking. Joe hated Ali for the way Ali taunted him. Prior to the famous trilogy between Frazier and Ali, Ali had called Joe a 'gorilla' and then 'uncle tom' and then many other derogatory names. Apparently, Joe never got over it.

To Joe's credit, Joe helped Ali at one important juncture in his boxing career. When Ali was stripped off his title and banished from the boxing league for refusing military service, Joe helped him get back into the boxing league. Joe even met with President Nixon to further Ali's case. After going through all of this, it really hurt Joe to be taunted by Ali.

I understood where Joe was coming from... but still it seemed odd that a professional boxer should allow such taunts to bother him so much. After all, boxers do that to each other as a 'sales pitch' to get media attention and increase ticket sales. Joe should have been aware of this. Ali had a great sales acumen. It was common knowledge within boxing circles that Ali had a lot of respect for Joe as a boxer.

Given all of this, it was still lost on me why Joe hated Ali for the way he was taunted; until I read an article where a close friend who knew both Ali and Joe explains...

“I told Joe years later that Ali was just trying to sell the fight, but Joe said to me, ‘How do you think I feel when he calls me an Uncle Tom? My kids come home from school and tell me the other kids told them their Dad’s a gorilla.’ Joe just couldn’t get over it.”

Now, I understood Joe better... Joe didn't mind taking a punches Ali, he got loads of it to the point that he couldn't see with his left eye in the last match with Ali. But he DID mind his kids being affected by Ali's 'sales pitch'. He did not want to make his kids pawns in a sales pitch. He wanted to protect his kids from the taunts of other kids.

Joe Frazier was the 'Papa Gorilla'... We often speak highly of 'Mama Grizzlies' but we seldom speak much less understand the 'Papa Gorillas' - the ones that go out into the world with the sole purpose of creating for his kids, a better life - a life where his kids would be proud to have been his kids. Not to take the thunder away from Joe Frazier... Even the most narcissistic guy Steve Jobs, towards the end of his life, when he was asked by Brian Williams of MSNBC as to what Jobs considered the most valuable contribution of his life, he thought a bit and then answered with conviction, "his life with his wife and kids". Brian Williams was a bit surprised but he pressed on, "what about public contributions?". "Well, that is for others to decide" was his terse reply.

As I stated, I admire strong men. But I have a great adulation for strong men that have a soft, sensitive soul. Joe Frazier in spite of being the strong man willing to get punched in the gut and plummel the other guy with powerful jabs, seemsat his heart to be a man with a soft, sensitive soul. It is said that he lost his fortune by his generosity and naivety. When asked, what he did with all the millions he earned as the heavy weight champion, why he wasn't a millionaire as his peers Ali and Foreman, he replied, "In a sense I am rich... I have a family... I have a stack of a few 100 dollar bills". Joe built a close knit family, he trained two of his children to be boxers. He played the guitar. He loved his family.

A man that is a 'Papa Gorilla' will die a rich man, it doesn't matter how much money he has. Riches is in relationships, it takes hard work to build long lasting relationships. Strong relationships are by their very nature, an end in itself. The 'Papa Gorilla' needs nothing more than the satisfaction that he has done for his family what best he could do - he has fought a good fight, run a good race. In an era bereft of traditional values, at a time where most men tend to shun responsibility and commitment, 'Papa Gorillas', rock! They live forever!

Who are the Real X-Men?

Though I am not a fan of the X-men movies, I enjoyed the last one - 'X-men First Class'. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1270798/ It is a captivating prequel that delves into the origins of how the X-men club came into being. I would surmise that the X-Men movies as being about a bunch that says, "Hey, we are cool 'good' folk, there are some 'bad' people out there. Lets go destroy evil and make the world a better place". What makes 'X-men First Class' interesting is that, it goes one step further and shows the complexities of the battle between good vs evil.

Most movies depicting battle between good and evil are fantastic, in the sense that finally the good guys eliminate the bad guys. 'X-men First Class' is a real movie in that, in the end, after the good guys destroy the bad guys, the good guys actually become a new brand of bad guys. This accurately reflects some of the spectacular good vs evil battles in real life. When the 'good guys' who perpetuated the French Revolution destroyed the 'bad guys', the 'good guys' took power and became the new group of bad guys paving way for Napoleon's monarchy resulting in untold number of deaths. Same with the Russian Revolution, the 'good guys' overthrew the Tsars and created a regime of brutal communists who ended up killing millions. History repeats.

X-Men First Class is no different, Eric and Mystique start off being a part of the 'good guys' team. But after the bad guys are eliminated, they become the new villains. Eric, turns into the evil Magneto. A deep hurt from his childhood turns him into a vengeful megalomaniac unable to love anyone. Eric is a Jewish boy with X-men powers. His Nazi captors kill his Mom to experiment on Eric's savant capabilities. Eric woes revenge on the Nazis responsible for his family's death. Once he is done with them, he then directs his anger at anything that smacks of authority. He trusts none. Loves none. He inexorably becomes the evil Magneto.

Mystique realizes that people find her blue body unattractive. She craves for love, but none accepts her with her blue body. She has the ability to change appearance so she passes her off as a beautiful brunet. She becomes a 'poser' and the insecurity that she develops, defines her. When the evil Magneto finds her attractive in her blue body, she gives him her heart. Both Eric and Mystique are victims in the first place, but they end up becoming victimizers themselves.

This is the problem of the 'fallen' world. We get treated badly by other people, and in order to protect us or show ourselves strong or become more acceptable, we end up becoming a part of the same system which abused us. Every man is fallen and in the vast network of fallen beings. We end up hurting each other as broken people and it becomes a viscous cycle. The movie 'Black Snake Moan' too depicts the same pattern of victims becoming victimizers - the girl is abused by her step-dad and she in turn can't help but abuse her boyfriend. The problem of this viscous cycle of victims becoming victimizers has to do with the 'fallenness' of the world.

The redemption out of this vicious cycle has to come from Someone from outside this 'fallen system' who has enough 'capital' to pay for the hurt put an end to this viscous cycle of being victimized and then becoming victimizers. This Someone needs to be victimized by this 'fallen' world, but shouldn't become a victimizer, thus break this vicious cycle. Then He has to pave way for others to reflect His likeness. That is what Christ accomplished on the Cross. He entered the 'fallen' world from the outside, became the victim, but did not turn out to be a victimizer. He battled evil not by destroying it but by subjecting himself to it.

By setting the PERFECT example, He 'draws' to Himself those who will follow Him and emulate Him to break the vicous cycle of the fallen world. He will give these Followers of His a NEW heart and the help of the Holy Spirit to 'comfort' them when they are hurt by others and 'counsel' them in times of crisis. These new born persons will have the assurance of having been TOTALLY forgiven and will be able to forgive others too, thus making this fallen world into a better place than it currently is. The name of this group of followers is, Christians!!!

Graham Staines was an Australian missionary who was working with his family among lepers in Orissa in India. Graham and his sons were burnt to death by some religious fundamentals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Staines The Nation stood flabbergasted when Graham's wife Glady Staines made a public statement she had forgiven the killers. Below are her words to the commission setup to investiage the brutal killings.

"The Lord God is always with me to guide me and help me to try to accomplish the work of Graham, but I sometimes wonder why Graham was killed and also what made his assassins to behave in such a brutal manner on the night of 22nd/23rd January 1999. It is far from my mind to punish the persons who were responsible for the death of my husband Graham and my two children. But it is my desire and hope that they would repent and would be reformed."

It takes more than  'good' person to say this. It is impossible for a mother and a wife to say this without the 'comfort' and the 'counsel' of the Holy Spirit. A friend of mine who visited the place where the missionaries were burnt said that the villages around this place were transformed. The villagers were shocked at how forgiving Glady Staines was. They realized they had killed a man much better than themselves. The blood of martyrs brings change in the 'fallen world'. It brings and end to the vicious cycle of hurt and cruelty.

X-men is a movie about otherwise normal people having some extraordinary capabilities, which when put to good use would make the world a better place to be. In a sense, the Christians are the real X-men. We are the otherwise normal people with an Extraordinary Gift - the Holy Ghost living in us, who'll change the world through us. The question is whether we are intentional about our X-men Gift, or if like 'Mystique' we feel insecure and try to hide and pose, or if like Eric we make it all about ourselves and end up colluding and conforming to the patterns of the fallen world system.

Tree of life - The Reversed Meta-Narrative

The legendary Terrence Malcik's, latest movie 'The Tree of Life' (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_tree_of_life_2011/) is one of the most unique movies I have ever seen. Within 10 minutes of the start, there is a 20 minute visual depiction of creation of life through big bang and subsequent evolution, without a single spoken word. The visuals are so astoundingly beautiful that in spite of the lack of verbal content, I is absolutely engrossed. The 140 minute movie has very few words. Malick communicates a feeling rather than content. 


The movie is about the strained relationship between the father (Brad Pitt) and a son. The movie is sort of a 'dreamy narration' of the grown-up son (Sean Penn), which is probably why I think words are so few and the visuals so vivid. In the movie theatre... Some people loved it. Some hated it. Some slept through it. None laughed. Watching this movie... some may cry and sniffle, some may sigh, some may snore, but none will smile.


The meta-narrative (big story that serves as a backdrop for the main story) of the movie is 'Darwinism'. The resolution for all the pain and suffering in Sean's heart is found in Darwinism. 'God-ism' is made into a minor narrative within the Darwinian framework.


Sean Penn, struggles in reminiscence of his childhood trying to make sense of his cruel nature. He painfully remembers his 'Freudian-urge' to want to kill his father. As a kid, he even went down on his knees in prayer for God's help to kill his father. The other part of Sean Penn's guilt is the jealousy and, at times, even hatred the he harbored against his talented brother who  dies young. Towards the end of the movie, Sean finally seems to resolve his guilt in that his cruel nature can only be explained through the Darwinian 'struggle for survival', where man finds himself 'red in tooth and claw' - and that is the way of Mother Nature. The movie begins with the 20 minute wordless visual sequence elaborating Darwinian evolution. The movie ends with a sort of mystical union with Mother Nature on the 'sea' shore. After all, as per Darwinism the sea (of premodial slime) is the Mother of all life. 


Given the Darwinian meta-narrative, it is ironic that of the few spoken words in the movie, the word 'God' is generously bandied about. The movie starts with the profound verse Job 38:4 “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand." The movie ends with Sean's mother raising her hands and committing the fate of her dead son to 'god'. All along the dreamy narration, Sean questions God, why bad things happen. A dear Christian friend of mine said it seemed like a 'Godly' movie. I would beg to differ, not because Darwinism and God are incompatible, but because Terrence Malick does a brilliant reversal of the Christian idea of God. Malick makes Darwinism is the meta-narrative within which he subtly introduces 'god' as the smaller (imaginary) story giving comfort to people dealing with pain and suffering. 


On the surface, though the movie seems so profusely to depict the idea of God, it really talks about a 'mystical god' who is a 'figment of imagination' in the Darwinian human mind. It deals with human understanding of a silent god. The god that is depicted is not a God with a Personality whom one can talk to and get answers from. In the movie, Sean keeps questioning a god within his mind, but only hears silence. Finally, Sean sees meaning in Darwinism. Job 38:4 is brilliantly twisted into the Darwinian context. God of the 'Tree of Life', is no God, but a god-ism - a  'mystical god' who is a creation of the human mind that is going through pain and suffering. That is why even though the movie is so full of god, it is Godless. 


This sort of subtle reversal of the meta-narrative is not a new phenomenon, not among Christians at least. Our Pharisaical lives are so full of 'god-isms' like praying before dinner, seeking blessings, giving tithe, participating in ministries, attending Church, attending Bible Studies, going to marriages, baptisms and funerals... God is a figment in our imagination, we can't live without. But when it comes to dealing with real life issues, Christians, like Sean, hear a silent god. The problem is, sometimes Christians do not see God from within the Biblical meta-narrative. Rather, they see god from within the framework of their 'radical individualism', 'rampant materialism' and 'personal affluence'. Sometimes, Christians are led to believe God saved us to make use feel good. Such Christians worship and 'imaginary' God who supremely exists to bestow the 'Best Life Now' after 'Discovering the Champion in You' (plz. Google if the phrases in quotes don't ring a bell). 


We forget that the Patriarchs in our religion were a bunch of vagabonds who were 'called' to live ridiculously tough lives just to glorify the Name of God. Often it is lost upon Christians that God saves us for the glorification of His own Name. We have to SEE God in the meta-narrative of His glorification. If we don't SEE God in the story of His glorification, we'll end up living our lives in the wrong story - the story of our own personal glorification. In as much as we don't SEE God from within the Biblical framework, we won't know who we are. 


'Tree of life' asks deep questions about pain and suffering, but it does so from within the wrong meta-narrative. Consequently, Malick makes Darwinism the 'Tree of Life', and God as the creation of the human mind. The Christian Truth is the opposite. God is the creator of 'Tree of Life' and Darwinism is the creation of the human mind. The ultimate question  we need to ask ourselves, is whether we SEE ourselves in the meta-narrative that glorifies God, or if we reverse the meta-narrative, and SEE God from within the framework of our own self-aggrandized stories of 'radical individualism', 'rampant materialism' and 'personal affluence'.