Thy rod and thy staff shall stay at the gate

I saw this sign while doing some driving for a temporary job. I'm still not sure what the problem was that necessitated this sign. It's not like there are a lot of shepherds in Milford, Ohio. Actually, shepherd rods are devices used to hang flowers over a grave marker. So it does make sense; it just took me about three weeks to figure it out.

Book Review: 90 Minutes in Heaven (Part Two)

(Note: this part won't make as much sense unless you read part one below)

Theological Accuracy: 20/40 Why the low score? The question ought to be this: why the high score? The score is not lower because, for once, the low number of pages actually dealing with heaven helps him here. Surely he cannot err too many times in 16 pages?

Here's what makes grading this so difficult: how do you say to someone, "your experience was wrong"? You really can't. You can say, "Your experience is different from the experience of other, more trustworthy, people who claim the same thing you have." And that's what I'm doing here. The "other, more trustworthy" person in this case is the apostle John. But we can say Piper is wrong because when you say something different from what the Bible says (for example, the Bible is the Word of God, but so is the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, etc.), that is wrong. The Bible is the standard against which we measure our experiences. Scripture is the filter for experience; experience is not the filter for Scripture. In other words, the Bible tells us what our experiences in life mean. It is not "our experiences tell us what the Bible means," as is the mistake of so many.

Back to Piper. Here are my biggest peeves with his experience of heaven.

1) He believes there is no sense of time in Heaven. Apart from some philosophical objections to finite creatures living in a timeless existence, my concern is biblical. He writes, "I'm not sure if they actually said the words or not, but I knew they had been waiting and expecting me, yet I also knew that in heaven there is no sense of time passing" (25). Here he's speaking about loved ones who came to greet him in Heaven. Piper betrays his own conclusion about there not being a sense of time when he "knew" they had been waiting and expecting him, things no one can do without a sense of time. If we look in Revelation, we see more than once a sense of time: Rev. 6:10-11: the martyrs (in Heaven!) "called out in a loud voice, 'How long, Sovereign Lord, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?' Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed." See also Rev. 8:1 and every reference containing the word "then" (about 53 times in Revelation).

2) Piper believes there are no songs in Heaven about Jesus' death. "As I stood before the gate, I didn't think of it, but later I realized that I didn't hear such songs as 'The Old Rugged Cross' or 'The Nail-Scarred Hand.' None of the hymns that filled the air were about Jesus' sacrifice or death. I heard no sad songs and instinctively knew that there are no sad songs in heaven. Why would there be? All were praises about Christ's reign as King of Kings and our joyful worship for all he has done for us and how wonderful he is" (31). This has to be one of the most mind-boggling contentions in the whole book. A few notes here:

1. There are indeed songs about Jesus' death in Heaven (Rev. 5:9-14). According to the song in Rev. 5, the reason Jesus is worthy to open the scrolls is "because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation" (5:9)!
   
2. Every mention of Jesus appearing as a Lamb is a reference to his death (5:6, 8, 12, 13; 6:3, 5, 7, 16; 7:9, 10, 14, 17; 12:11; 13:8; 15:3; 21:9 to name a few). Even if these are not songs, Jesus being the slain Lamb is a central theme in Revelation. Apart from the OT imagery of sacrificing lambs to atone for sins, this metaphor would not make any sense.
   
3. How could there be songs about "all he has done for us" if those songs did not include his death for our sins? The greatest work of Jesus was done on the cross; "all he has done for us" is almost meaningless apart from the cross.
4. Are songs about Jesus' death really sad? I would submit that songs about Jesus' death are some of the happiest, most joyful songs we sing. His death and resurrection is the good news!
   

3. Piper did not see Jesus in Heaven. In the 16 pages describing his experience, he makes no mention of seeing Jesus there. Friends and family come out to meet him, he mentions hearing songs praising God, but nothing about Jesus. This does not necessarily disprove his experience, but it does seem strange. What makes Heaven Heaven is that Jesus is there! Otherwise it's just a really nice place. I can't wait to meet family and friends who have gone before, let alone the apostles and other giants of church history. But the one I most want to see is Jesus (Rev. 22:4).

Persuasion: 10/25 I am not persuaded because of two factors: 1) the glaring theological errors, and 2) the self-centered nature of the entire book. Yes, it's autobiographical. Yes, it's about experience. But at times it goes beyond "telling my story" to "promoting my story." Take this excerpt for example: "I'm writing about what happened because my story seems to mean so much to people for many different reasons. For example, when I speak to any large crowd, at least one person will be present who has recently lost a loved one and needs assurance of that person's destination. When I finish speaking, it still amazes me to see how quickly the line forms of those who want to talk to me. They come with tears in their eyes and grief written all over their faces. I feel so grateful that I can offer them peace and assurance" (128-129). Me, me, me, me, me, me. Forget the Bible, I'm just glad my story can help people. How arrogant! Mr. Piper, you can't truly give assurance of anyone's destination; how do you know?

There are other things about this book I just don't like, little statements here and there that get me bent out of shape. He says that "I've changed the way I do funerals. Now I can speak authoritatively about heaven from firsthand knowledge" (129). To me, this says, "I trust my experience more than I trust Scripture. I could never speak authoritatively just using the Bible." Doesn't that sound crazy? Later he talks about knowing that heaven is real because he's been there (195). Pardon me, but I know heaven is real because Jesus said it was. I knew it without having to go there first! Does Piper need to go to hell to know that it, too, exists?

Conclusion: I don't recommend this book to help people cope with death or uncertainty about Heaven. I recommend Scripture for that. It's a somewhat interesting read, but I grew weary of reading about how much pain he suffered in his leg and how depressed he was. I really grew weary of him describing how much he (not God) has helped people with his story.
Something happened to Don Piper that day, but I don't think it was a trip to heaven.

Book Review: 90 Minutes in Heaven (Part One)

I read Don Piper's 90 Minutes in Heaven as part of my research for a series of lessons I taught on Heaven to my Sunday School class at church. After reading it, I must say I had mixed feelings. On the one hand, I don't think he's lying; I think he had some sort of experience, and as far as we know, he really was dead at the scene of the accident. On the other hand, his experience is not consistent with what the Bible says about Heaven. But we'll get to that in a little bit.

Since this is my first book review, I am devising an arbitrary grading matrix for book reviews. I will give the book up to 100 points, split up into the categories of Readability (15 points), Theological Accuracy (40 points), Accomplishment of Thesis (20 points), and Persuasion (25 points). If I don't like this setup, I'll change it for the next book review.

Here's the basic story of the book: Don Piper, a Baptist minister, was driving home from a convention in Texas on January 18, 1989. While crossing a bridge, a large supply truck from a prison lost control and hit him head-on, crushing his little Ford Escort and killing him instantly. He was declared dead by EMTs at 11:45 am and was left in the car until the coroner arrived. Meanwhile, a fellow Baptist minister and convention attendee came up on the scene and felt a strong burden to pray for the then-unknown man in the car. After persuading the EMTs to let him pray for the dead man, he climbed inside the car and laid a hand on Piper's good shoulder (the left was barely still there) and prayed for quite a while, intermittently singing hymns. At 1:15 pm, during a song, the dead man began to sing along with the minister. Piper was rushed to the hospital and the rest of the book details his time in Heaven, his recovery, and his subsequent ministry.

So here we go. Readability: 10/15. Piper and co-author Cecil Murphy are not the best writers I've read. They're not bad, either. At times, you can sense them struggling for the right words to express what Piper experienced, and sometimes it just ends up summarizing overwhelming experiences with somewhat cliche wording: "I still didn't know why, but the joyousness of the place wiped away any questions. Everything felt blissful. Perfect" (23).

Accomplishment of Thesis: 10/20. The reason for the low score is because when I bought this book, I expected it to be a book about Don Piper's 90 minutes in Heaven. Only 16 out of 205 pages actually describe his time in Heaven, a major bait-and-switch. The book should be called Back From the Dead: One Man's Painful Journey of Recovery After a Fatal Car Accident. Nearly 170 pages chronicle his physical and emotional recovery.

Stay tuned for part two.

On Becoming a Father, Part One

Assuming our little guy waits until the week of his due date, we have three and a half weeks left until we become parents. This is one of life's milestones that sticks with you and cannot be undone (even if your child dies, you are still a parent to that child, or at least you would say you have been a parent. But let's not be too picky). And it cultivates the kind of love inside you that you did not think you have: complete love for a total stranger. We've never actually met face-to-face, yet I would give my life for him. This love comes bursting out in certain moments, like when I imagine his sleeping on my chest, so small, so innocent, so fragile, so beautiful, so trusting, so lovable - I often cry for joy and love at such thoughts. There are such intense emotions connected to becoming and being parents. One minute I cannot wait to meet him and hold him and hear his coos and touch his face, and the next minute I am terrified that he is completely our responsibility for the next 18 years or so. But I'm sure it will all be just fine.

Responding to Chain Emails #1: Can Muslims Be Good Americans?

Here is the text of a recent chain email I received, after which I offer the response I gave to the person who sent it to me.

----------------------------------

CAN MUSLIMS BE GOOD AMERICANS?

This is very interesting and we all need to read it from start to Finish and send it on to anyone who will read it. Maybe this is why our American Muslims are so quiet and not speaking out about any atrocities. Can a good Muslim be a good American? This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply:

Theologically - no. . . . Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon God of Arabia .

Religiously - no. . . Because no other religion is accepted by His Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)(Koran)

Scripturally - no. . . Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran.

Geographically - no . Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially - no. . . Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews .

Politically - no. . . Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America , the great Satan.

Domestically - no. . . Because he is instructed to marry four Women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34)

Intellectually - no. . Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically - no. . . Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran does not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually - no. . . Because when we declare 'one nation under God,' the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names.

Therefore, after much study and deliberation....

Perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. - - - They obviously cannot be both 'good' Muslims and good Americans.

Call it what you wish it's still the truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. The religious war is bigger than we know or understand. . ...

And Barack Hussein Obama, a Muslim, wants to be our President? You have GOT to be kidding! Wake up America !

--------------------------------------

Barak is a member of the United Church of Christ, a Christian denomination. Obviously there are many Muslims who love America and function well in society. Remember: not all Islam is radical Islam! The description below only applies to the Al-Quaeda types, the freakishly radical.

Geographically, I'm not a good American either because I look to Heaven, not Washington, D.C., for my inspiration. And frankly, who says America is a Christian nation? Yes it was founded on Christian principles, but have we forgotten one of the key principles, the first amendment of the Bill of Rights: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I do not recall the Constitution or the Bill of Rights specifically saying that America is a Christian nation. Perhaps I'm wrong. The first amendment gives freedom for Muslims (and Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, atheists, pagans, Wiccans, etc.) to live here, be citizens AND worship however they like. For there to be a law preventing their theological allegiance to Mecca would contradict the first amendment. So the first four items on his list are irrelevant. Most of the others are based on comparing Osama bin Laden with GI Joe and represent a version of Islam that NOT ALL MUSLIMS ACCEPT.
-----------------------------------

I must admit, I often cringe at the emails sent my way that are supposed to inspire patriotism and attempt to flaunt Christianity as THE religion of America. It often comes across as blind embracing of all Republican policy and a confused hybrid of Christianity and patriotism which accuses you of heresy or treason should you question either. This doesn't make me a liberal (either politically or theologically); generally, I support the war and think it is actually working (to see why I refer you to my capable friend Jared). However, I do think there are people in this world who love Jesus and hate the war, who read their Bibles and yet disagree with President Bush. It's possible, so deal with it.

W. Oregon Sara Tucholsky first HR - ultimate sportsmanship

Grab some Kleenex for this one. It's great.

New Balance LOVE/Hate Anthem

A thoughtful friend flabbergastedly states the same thing every time I talk about running in an upcoming race: "I don't see why anyone would pay money to run on streets my tax dollars pay for" or something like that. It's a good question, and I've been thinking about why I run and why I actually pay money (the half marathon was not cheap, by the way) to run in a race when I can run anywhere and anytime I want to for FREE. Here are some of my reasons mixed with some of my followup questions for those who can't understand why:


1. Signing up for a race (which includes paying money) keeps me accountable: I had better train since I paid for the race.
2. It's motivating: I want to finish the race strongly, not wheezing and crawling on my hands and knees.
3. Having a deadline helps me to train on a schedule in a focused way that not having a deadline cannot accomplish. If there's no deadline, no distance goal, no time goal, then what am I running for?
4. Running for purely health reasons isn't enough for me. I would probably quit running if there were no other reason to run. Entering and paying to race is another reason to stick with it.
5. Why pay money to go to a gym when you can exercise (including resistance training) for FREE? Because it's a place to meet other lifters. Because you gain access to experts in the field. Because it keeps you accountable. Because it is encouraging to you as a lifter. Because it is helpful to know that other people are interested in the same thing as you. Because it is invigorating to go to a place where others are cheering for you and are interested in you doing your best. Now, substitute "runner" for "lifter."
6. Anything that's worth anything in life will cost you something. Running is worth a lot: there are many health benefits, it has a calming effect on your mind and body (after the run, that is), it's a place to achieve more than you thought possible. It costs you time, money (shoes and stuff), sweat, occasional pain, energy, and commitment, but it pays you back in joy, sense of accomplishment, visible results (more muscular legs and a thinner waist for starters), measurable results, and a new component to your identity, that of "runner."
7. When else do police block off streets just for you?
8. Because of the pre-race expo, where you can find all things running and meet and speak with experts in shoes, apparel, nutrition, injury prevention and treatment, etc. You don't meet these people on the street.
9. Because always training and never showcasing is boring.
10. How can you criticize it if you've never done it?
I mean these points in all gentleness and respect to my friend and anyone else who don't see running like runners do. Like many things in life, to experience it is much better than to simply witness it. Pro football is much more exciting at the stadium than on TV (this is especially true for baseball). Either way, the same thing happens; it's the experiencing of it in person that makes the difference. When you walk into the stadium, you think Wow, this place is incredible. I can feel the energy. It's like that at a race: you feel an energy, a sense of awe at the magnitude of the event, and a little bit of fear about the race itself that you just don't get running sidewalks by yourself.


For me personally (as you can see from the reasons above) it boils down to the intangibles. Yes, the health benefits are the same whether you run by yourself at the park or run in a race, but the emotional and experiential benefits cannot even be touched by always running by yourself in training mode.
I really like New Balance's new ad campaign for their running shoes. They have tapped into the mind of the runner and their relationship metaphor is spot on. The video posted here is one example.