greetings from cincinnati

And these are just a few of the great people I'll get to see over the next several days. My five-day vacation has begun! I left for Cincinnati straight from work, and I got to the Claypole House around 4:30. I saw a drug deal go down on the corner of the gas station where I filled up, and I knew I was home. Tony and I watched episodes of "Parks & Recreation" and Amos showed up from Tazza Mia in his pirate garb. He's kinda into pirates. And by "kinda" I mean he's a nut-job about it. He just got a giant octopus tattoo on his back that wraps around his shoulders, and it looks fantastic. This evening I went solo to The Anchor and worked on an outline for the second half of Chapter 11--"The Choice of Repentance"--and enjoyed chit-chat with the waitress who commented on how I never come anymore. I told her I moved to Dayton and was in town revisiting old haunts. I truly miss that place. I had two cups of coffee and twin eggs and some toast. I even smoked a cigarette, which is a weird feeling indoors. Tomorrow I am grabbing lunch with my friend Jobst, and then Amanda and I are car-pooling to the party at Rob and Mandy's (where I currently am). A Halloween party with great costumes and great music and great beer and a nonstop hookah and, of course, Rock Band. Everyone's gathering together. It should be great. Sunday I am hanging out with Sarah and some peeps, and then Monday I'll be seeing Mikaela, who I haven't seen in about a year. I'm really looking forward to this rest and relaxation. Hopefully amidst all of this I can finish the second third of "Re:framing Repentance," launching me into the final section: "The Practice of Repentance." It's gonna be a monster, and I keep writing outlines and then scratching them, rearranging and reorienting everything. So many different themes interlock that it's difficult to find a way to integrate them all without spawning mass confusion. Anyways, enough about that. I'm on vacation, I'm going to relax and have fun, and then Thursday it's back to the grindstone. 

the hermeneutic of humility

There is, I think, a certain humility that must be embraced when we read and study the scriptures and come to our own, albeit often shared, interpretations of them. By the nature of the thing itself, we’ll believe that our interpretation is the right one; if we didn’t believe that, then it wouldn’t be our interpretation. The truth of the matter is that no one agrees with anyone about everything; and another truth is that no one is right about everything. Humility, when it comes to our understanding of the scriptures and, thus, to our understanding of God, Christianity, and the world itself, should be embraced in lieu of several factors.

First, we must be aware that our interpretations do not come out of a vacuum. Some people will say, “Well, I just read the Bible for what it says.” Such people probably have never heard of those high-class terms “exegesis” and “eisegesis” and probably don’t think they matter too much. However, when it comes to reading the scriptures—and, really, reading anything informative—there should more than at least one cautionary step towards exegesis (reading out of the text) and eisegesis (reading into the text). The way that we read the Bible is laden with all sorts of preconceived notions and presuppositions. Our interpretations are influenced by our biases, education, experiences, social pressures and, at times, the need for rebellion or originality (and this originality for originality’s sake is really just conformity under a different name). When we read the Bible, we are constantly reading our own assumptions, presuppositions, and preconceived notions into the text; and these come from a variety of different influences, some which likely reside in the unconscious level, influences that we’ll never know and, thus, be able to guard against. Knowing this, we should strive to eradicate eisegesis as much as possible, employing the tools of exegesis; but all the while knowing that eisegesis will occur. The question is not, “Will I read into the text?” but “How much will I read into the text?” Being aware of eisegesis and all its trimmings, we should be cautionary when reading the scriptures and, at the same time, humble—even the most “clear” and “crisp” interpretations may be so only due to the eisegesis, be it seen or unseen, that we have performed in our studies.

Second, we must be aware of the difficulty of ascertaining truth. I’m a pretty modern, conservative person who isn’t into the whole postmodern thing with all its ins-and-outs. I believe in a thing called Truth, that is, something which refers to that Which Is and that Which Is Not. The problem, I think, is that when it comes to us discovering that truth, we find ourselves at a stand-still. We can employ all the techniques we want, but in the end we alone do not have the ability to ascertain truth for truth’s sake. We’re limited, finite creatures with low-capacity minds. We find puzzles when there are no puzzles to be found and we constantly misinterpret the world around us. Our worldviews, our meta-narratives, are a series of interpretations that overlap and intersect and even conflict at times. Amidst this morass of meta-narratives, I believe there is an ultimate meta-narrative, that which is Truth; but our meta-narratives swirl and collide and dance and go at war with each other below this. Not to say that the ultimate meta-narrative is so high that it cannot be touched. No doubt this swirling cesspool of limited meta-narratives often “reach into the heavens” and brush that ultimate meta-narrative. Certainly all of us have a conviction amidst our meta-narrative that runs parallel with the ultimate meta-narrative. The problem is that much of our meta-narrative is sub-par, in conflict with the ultimate meta-narrative, and we’re too limited and finite to tell which is which. Because of this, I think we should be humble in our perceptions of reality, open to change and re:thinking, constantly analyzing and scrutinizing, updating and revising our meta-narratives while knowing that what we think to be True now (if we didn’t think it to be true, we wouldn’t validate it in our minds) will, in some form or shape later, evolve and transform, too. Humility in our perceptions of Truth should be embraced, and, yes, I believe this is involved with our readings of the Bible. Do I believe that the Bible is inerrant in its original forms? Absolutely. But our interpretations of those original forms, 2000+ years later, are not going to be inerrant. Period. Anyone who says that they just “read the Bible” or “are led by the Holy Spirit” need to re:think reading the bible and the role of the Holy Spirit and just be honest with themselves. We’re not as smart as we think we are, and as dumb as we think we are, we’re probably dumber.

Third, we need to beware the poison of intellectual arrogance. There’s nothing as sickening and revolting as someone who says, “Here’s the Truth. I have it. Bow down to my perception of things.” I used to be that way, and thankfully I got slapped around a bit back in my day. Now I have much hostility towards this. Arrogant Christians who think they know the ins-and-outs to everything need to swallow the pill of humility and face themselves for what they are. Arrogant Atheists who think they’ve got this whole “religion” thing down to a “science” (literally) should not vaunt themselves up as gods, simply replacing monotheism with some sort of humanitarian polytheism. I don’t care what your intellectual persuasions are: if you’re on the high horse, get off. If you stay on, eventually you’ll get knocked off and break your teeth in the dust. Might as well save yourself some trouble—and some teeth—and carefully dismount now. Pride in our interpretations of the scripture erects divisions between us and other Christians—divisions that we erect ourselves—and is a great hindrance to the advance of the gospel in our own lives and in the lives of those around us. Pretty soon a cold intellectualism will take root and we’ll become bitter, calloused creatures who see the world in black-and-white and can’t appreciate the beauty of the flowers in spring-time.

All of these three points (and I could name others, but I don’t want this post to be too long), bring me to my proposal. Out of all the hermeneutical tools out there, I think the best is the hermeneutic of humility. We must interpret with humility. We must acknowledge that, at least, 20% of what we believe is wrong. Our prayer ought not be, “God, show me by your Spirit what this verse really means…” (because that just breeds cold intellectualism and the automatic mental validation of whatever interpretation we come to) but, rather, “God, don’t make me perfect in my understanding of your world. Rather, keep me from straying too close to heresy.” 

lethargy

Today has been unproductive. Something's wrong with my left eye. It's pink eye, but the question is what kind of pink eye. I considered going to the doctor but did some at-home research and found out that unless it's an awful infection, all the medicines prescribed are over-the-counter drugs. So I decided just to opt out of the co-pay and run straight to C.V.S., where I bought a plethora of different treatments. I've found one that is working, thank God: the pain is gone, for the most part, my eye is getting less red, and I can see without blurred vision (for the most part). My speculation is that my contact got dry and instead of watering it I just kept rubbing it around, a stupid thing to do, of course, because it just made my eyes redder. Anyways. All day I've been taking care of my eye. On top of the eye problems, I came down with a bit of nausea and an awful headache--probably due to working with the blurred vision and the pain--and so I opted out of teaching a bible study tonight. Instead I've been watching "Law & Order: S.V.U." and "Psyche." Both great shows. I'm going to work out if I feel better later. I hoped to get halfway through Chapter 11 of "Re:framing Repentance" this afternoon, but it looks like that'll have to wait till tomorrow. I'm lethargic and have no energy. 

I can't wait for Friday. After my 6:30-3:00 shift, I'm going down to Cincinnati. I'll be staying at my sister's apartment. I'll be there at least through Monday. I have a Halloween Party Saturday night, House Church Sunday evening, and then I'm visiting some old college friends Monday. It'll be a good vacation. Lots of good food, good conversation, good drinks, much laughter and enjoyment away from home. It'll be a nice hiatus from my run-of-the-mill life here in Centerville. Now I'm going to fix some dinner and watch some more tv and maybe read, unless my eye starts acting up again. A pointless post, to be sure. But hopefully some good ones will be on the way. I have some sketches laid down.

she still haunts me

There's a tornado watch and the wind is howling and my left eye is swollen and irritated. Last night I dreamt about her. I hardly do anymore. It's been years since it all happened. She's married now, and happy, and I'm happy for that. At one time I wished she would've married me, but my feelings for her are entirely gone, replaced with a sense of cynicism regarding romanticism in all its shapes and colors. At church Sunday I remembered her. I remembered how we had a dream of getting married, having a family, working side-by-side. At the time I wanted to be a youth minister. Oh, how clear everything was, and how filled with hope! I miss those days. Our whole lives were laid out before us, ready to be grasped and embraced. It all fell apart, though, within a series of months, and for two years I nursed the accumulated wounds and battled demons I'd never known to exist. On Sunday I thought about her a lot. I thought about how she has everything she's wanted--a loving husband, a good job, a nice house--and how my dreams crumbled in my hands like oxidized parchment. I'm living at home, working a minimum-wage job (a job I enjoy, but not the job I want), surrounded by disappointment and disillusionment, falling into complacency (a better word may be resignation) while trying to keep my head above water. A certain numbness has befallen me, a numbness that intoxicates every thought and movement. Complacency, resignation, sterility. Coldness, cynicism, a calloused heart. Nouns and adjectives that serve as efficient signposts into my current state-of-affairs. I want more, I really do, but I feel powerless, weak, disabled. 

I don't want to make Starbucks a career. I want to advance God's kingdom. I want to preach, I want to teach, I want to write. I want to make a difference in the kingdom (not that I would be making the difference, but the Spirit would be making a difference through me; not that I would be a puppet, more-so a catalyst). I have applied at churches, I have sought to get my name out there, but all my queries and interviews return null and void. And amidst all that, I see those whom I went to college with doing what they've always felt called to do. Senior ministry, worship ministry, youth ministry, church directing, music directing... They got their degrees, their passion intensified, and they found, at least for the moment, their "niche" within the advancement of God's kingdom. It all fell together for them, the pieces coming together as if by divine intervention, and for all my struggling, I am met with blank stares and unopened hands. My passion is bridled by the inability to connect. And I know that there are other issues involved here, that nothing is as simple as it seems, there's complexity and paradox in the nature of everything. But amidst all the rejections and let-downs, amidst the disappointments and burnt-out hopes, my strength and resolve and determination is weakening. 

I want to get married. I want to have kids. It's my greatest dream, and I believe it is the greatest possible ministry. The back-stabbing, the cheating, the abandonment... All of this has turned my hope into a wasteland. I find myself terrified of commitment for fear of what lies down the road. It's not just that I've been broken-hearted; it's the betrayal, again and again, that has made me terrified of love and cynical of it all at the same time. I've dated girls since her, but I find that I always measure them up against her. Not in the sense of "Are they as funny as she was?" or "Are they as beautiful as she was?" but in the sense of "Do I feel as alive with them as I did with her?" Having been so close to my dream, having tasted it in the air, I remember day-in and day-out how I felt, finally, alive. I know, logically, that the feeling itself is not rooted so much in her, but more the circumstances and the fruition of the hopes and all that. She is not a goddess no matter the height of the pedestal upon which she sits in my mind. She's just a regular girl, and in the end she back-stabbed and betrayed me, ran off with another guy while we were together and ended up marrying him. She never apologized, and I don't hold it against her. Once I found out, our relationship was one of being bitter acquaintances at best. My anger and bitterness got the best of me every time we ran into one another and let chit-chat ensue. She's a good girl, she really is, and while I've dated girls who have been cheaters and whores, despite her cheating on me, I don't classify her as either. She did something out-of-character. It was a one-time incident and I happened to be on the dirty end of the stick. All of that aside, I don't think of her anymore, except for those rare moments (like Sunday), and sometimes she is there in my dreams, and in those dreams she haunts me: my mind doesn't just go back to those memories (which by now have been twisted and skewed into mere caricatures and shadows of the real events) but to the prophecies that I had made about "us": marriage, having a family, loving life and one another, our dreams coming true before our eyes. Now I am more cynical about all of this, and I'd like to think wiser, but that I'm not sure of. She--or at least what transpired between us--has become a thorn in my dream's flesh, has become a toxin which has corroded and distorted my romantic aspirations. I used to be a romantic guy, and now I'm cynical of everything romantic. Hopefully one day a girl will come along, perhaps after I have dealt with these issues (if these issues can indeed be dealt with), who will make me perspective on these things change. I really do hope so

the dayton days [39]

Monday. Jessica, Carly, Kyle, and Danny from work grabbed Flavor's Eatery with me and Ams. I was pretty quiet, as usual in large groups. By the time we left, a cold front was moving in: lots of wind, leaves blowing everywhere, gray skies & scattered winds. I told both Jessica and Carly about my depression, the bipolar swings, yadda yadda. Carly said she already knew: "My dad's the same way, I've seen it all my life, I know what it looks like. Much love to you, and I'm proud of you."

Tuesday. I have a stalker at work: a cracked-out junkie from the apartments down the road. I always try to avoid her weird looks and never-ending stares. Wade said, "Don't give her anything free. My heart goes out to her, but we're a business, not a charity." Dewenter came over in the evening. We had some Trappist beers. He and Lauren broke up because he refused to have sex with her. He's pretty upset about it. Ams returned to Cincinnati after a few days with the family. Sarah said she's completely cut things off with Keith. I guess she chose us over him? We'll see: you can't trust her for shit. We'll see how long it takes for her cover to be blown.

Wednesday. Mom had her bible study at one of the girls' house so Dylan, Tyler & I had the place to ourselves. We went to DQ for ice cream, smoked on the stoop, played Wii, shared lots of laughs. We lit a fire in the driveway with an Axe spray bottle. Dylan may be joining the Peace Corps.

Thursday. Joe G. and I got dinner at Outback Steakhouse. I ate good: medium-rare steak, a baked potato, vegetables, and let's not forget their AMAZING bread. We talked about all sorts of things: Starbucks, Southwest, Sarah & what happened last week, theology. 

Friday. I had an easy day: writing, 3-9:00 shift at work, and I polished off the night watching SVU and demolishing sunflower seeds.

Saturday. I met up with Jessica and her friend Jeremy at Starbucks and we went to Southbrook. The message was on utilizing our Spirit-given gifts for the advancement of God's kingdom. Quite an ironic message given my prayers regardng what to do in my writing, which I know to be a gift from God. And I may have the gift of prophecy, in the biblical sense of the word in Ephesians 4; so I'll be praying about that. We visited Carly & Devyn, who're dating now. 

Sunday. Dad & I went to Waffle House for breakfast: eggs, toast, coffee. He went to 1st Service and I worked out and then helped him teach the 2nd Service 5th Grade class at Southwest. Pat D. and I went to the park, walked around and took pictures. It's warm today. We accidentally trespassed and guns were going off and we heard shouting so we hurried the fuck out of there. Mom's back from Kentucky with Grandma at her side (and, of course, Tanner).

"The Climax of the Covenant"

This afternoon I finished the latest book on my parade through N.T. Wright: "Climax of the Covenant." It was a great book, a collection of essays on various subjects, most within the realm of Pauline studies regarding Christ and the Jewish law. In all honesty I didn't read all of the essays (some just didn't pique my interest), but those that I read were pretty informative. Detailed, almost to a humdrum point, but informative nonetheless. I find that I enjoy studying the meta-narratives of Christianity rather than the intricate details, and sometimes I find myself burdened--perhaps a better word would be bored?--by the intricacies. Quite frankly, I'm not knowledgeable enough or determined enough to study the minute details of various Greek words in their various forms and how they relate to the overall whole of the passage. It's important, yes, but I leave that to men and women more schooled than I am. Some of the more interesting points made (in the essays I read) are as follows:

The Curse of the Law. The essay on Galatians 3.10-14 took the interpretation in a route I had only heard of but never studied, namely the idea that the curse spoken of is the curse of exile, and building on various Old Testament covenantal echoes (Deuteronomy 27-30, Leviticus 18, Habakkuk 2 and, most importantly, Genesis 15) Paul sketches a picture of exile reaching a climax on the cross and thus restoration the other side of exile being inaugurated, "proven" in a sense by the inclusion of Gentiles in the Abrahamic promise as God always envisaged and the arrival of the Spirit. 

Adam: The True Humanity. I'm going to be looking into this further, but N.T. Wright makes the claim that "Adam" signified, at least in Jewish thought from the redaction of Genesis to the days of Jesus, as evidenced in intertestamental literature, humanity. Israel was viewed as the "last Adam" in the sense that she was God's true humanity. Jesus is comparable to Adam in the sense that he was and is what Adam failed to be, namely, God's true Man. And the church, if my speculation runs the right direction, ought to be viewed as God's true humanity, albeit imperfect and failing, and that glorification--as I've suspected--involves the restoration of human beings to their true and intended place as flourishing image-bearers (true, restored human beings).

Romans 9-11. Needless to say, N.T. Wright does an excellent exegesis of Romans 9-11. I wrote about this in an earlier post, so I won't go into depth. Wright mostly tackles head-on the idea popular within some Christian theologies that Jews are saved by virtue of their ethnicity and being the people of God. Wright argues a hotheaded "NO!" and shows through Romans 9-11, with the backing-up of the rest of the New Testament, how this thought is flawed.

The Burden of the Law. One of the reasons the Law couldn't "save" was because the Law was intended to guard Israel as a child as she was on her way to the fulfillment of God's Abrahamic promises. God gave the Law to keep Israel from assimilating into the pagan nations all around her. It was given to keep her solidified up to the point where the Law would reach its climax (the Messiah). The Jews, however, embraced this law as their national charter in the sense that it was their pride: it distinguished them from all the Gentile sinners. And in this pride in the law came about the inability for the Abrahamic promises to be fulfilled; that which enclosed the Jews also kept out the Gentiles. The Messiah deals with this on the cross, and he is the "climax of the covenant," "the end of the law." He is what the Law pointed to all along and his work on the cross and subsequent resurrection is the first stage of God's fulfillment to Abraham back in Genesis 12, 15, and 18.

Now I'm going to finish "After You Believe" (I was halfway through it when I engaged in "Climax of the Covenant", and from there who knows). 

waffle house sunrise

Late last night I finished the rough draft of Chapter Ten in my book on repentance. It's by far the longest chapter yet, clocking in at 42 pages. I wanted to go deeper but knew to do so would be to risk losing the reader amidst the haze of the subject. I have one (maybe two) more chapters to finish before reaching the third and final section of the book, which is all about the practice of repentance in light of (a) eschatology and (b) identity. I'm doing lots and lots of studying for this section, as there are still some ambiguities I wish to clear up. It's nice to have Chapter Ten done, and the next chapter--"The Choice of Repentance"--could be a doozy, too. Not only do I have to tackle the Calvinism/Arminian question--not because I think the issue is a big deal (I don't) but because many of my supposed readers will probably find themselves on either side of the fence and may be upset if I don't at least give a head nod to the debate--but I also need to make the point that no one repents because they love God. It sounds heretical, of course, which is why I need to do a good job of making that point (though it shouldn't be hard, because I've already established the key points throughout the book which just need to be drawn together to make a statement on the subject).