The New Windows

I suppose we ought to get something straight: Microsoft is coming back. (If only we could keep them from taking 8.5 billion dollars and throwing it into the trash)

Today, they talked about their new version of Windows: Windows 8 (code name, not final product name). If you care, and you should, take a look at this video:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p92QfWOw88I&]

It is nice work through and through. Finally, they have a consistent graphic design paradigm, an interesting view of apps and how they function, and a well designed user interface for how a person might navigate all of these things. It appears that you'll be able to run the new touch enabled Windows on a laptop or tablet device and the user interface is much like the new Windows Phone interface on the new phones. Finally, they're doing something different, relatively clever, and they're innovating.

Apple will announce how they intend to take their app and OS concepts on the iPad back to Mac OSX next week. They gave a preview a few months back, but next week we should see more of a final product. As an example, they're incorporating the organization of apps like they do on iOS, on the Mac platform. I haven't used the new Mac OS (Lion) but initial reports on the betas speak highly of it.

What seems strange to me, both in Apple's offering and even in this new Windows offering is the distinction of user interaction. It is my current belief that the mouse and keyboard aren't going anywhere soon. It is also my belief that gesture interactions with an operating system are great on mobile devices, but feel odd with a mouse and a computer. I think Apple thought this too, as they have designed the Magic Trackpad which brings some of their gestures of a MacBook Pro to the iMac and Mac Pro series. But still, it's not great. You can only do so much without touching the screen.

[It is also worth noting that Apple discussed touch-enabled desktop machines (think iMacs with touch screens) and spoke about how they demo well and look cool, but extended use fatigues a user's arm, etc. No one wants to lift their hand to interact with a screen all day long, especially to do things like typing, etc.]

It seems as if Microsoft is going to use the same Windows OS on the tablets as they do on their traditional computers. The user interface will have a lot to do with the phone interface, but seems to be designed to be different. This is remarkably different than Apple's approach: they took the phone software and blew it up to tablet size. Because the Mac still requires a different input method, they're taking the traditional approach for the future of that operating system.

It'll be interesting to see how each pans out.

Whatever the case, Microsoft is back, and it is so good to see.

Now, to get rid of Ballmer...

UPDATE: When watching the Microsoft people explain it at the All Things D conference today, Walt Mossberg asked a great question. If you watch the video above, you'll see that apps like Microsoft Office (which have kept Microsoft afloat when Windows went downhill) still run in the old Windows 7 interface. You effectively leave one interface to enter the other. Mossberg asked why they didn't redesign the app to work in the new interface. The lady's response: "We don't think people should have to leave what they love just to change to a touch interface"

She's wrong. You do have to. You may not think it is perfect, but touch interfaces use different size buttons, different menu systems and other things. Having the old user interface for this new Windows is a cop out. Apple's system is better. Everything is redesigned and reworked for each screen size AND interaction method.

Perhaps they're coming back, but they need some help.

UPDATE 2: My favorite Apple commentator makes the same argument about how this isn't a great response to the iPad. You can read it here.

-B

1966 Predicts the iPhone

A video published in 1966 that not only predicts, but demonstrates what the computer world will be like in 1999. They were darn close, they just didn't think big enough. The part they missed: by ten years later(meaning 2009), people would be able to do it on a device that fit in the palm of their hand, and easily in their pocket. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC5sbdvnvQM&]

It occurs to me that they didn't see the "computer" as something that would mold and shape and change, but rather as some sort of static device that did a few key tasks. And, if that statement is true, why would the first thing they picked to demonstrate be home shopping? Interesting choice to say the least. People were doing that on television before they were doing it on a computer.

It must have been hard to conceive of the idea of the open Internet in those days. Sure, networked computers were thought of (how else would this have worked?) but the idea of an open Internet where anyone can set up anything and display it for the world to see must have been hard to conceive of. It wasn't just a few things here and there, it was literally everything...online. The system of the Internet is obviously what made this possible, and has made so many other things possible as well.

The question is, what is the NEXT system? What it is that we can't conceive of now that will completely change how we go about our daily activities and routines? How do companies think outside of the box enough to stay ahead of competition and innovate their way to success?

My guess: artificial intelligence. The race is on.

I'll give the first company to bring it fully to markets everywhere a dollar.

Then I'll run for the hills because...our hubris will be our undoing.

-B

FREE Rocket Summer (His Instruments and Your Voices)

Attention all Bryce Avary fans: The Rocket Summer is giving away his(their?) new acoustic live album for free. You can download it here. This reminds me of the first time I heard of The Rocket Summer.

I think it was Kaitlyn Baldwin's dance group at camp dancing to "Around the Clock" on the chapel pews. Changed my life forever.

The Rocket Summer is made up of one guy: Bryce Avary. He sings, writes, and plays every instrument you hear on the recordings. I remember when I first heard his music, I wondered how he did it all live. I've seen him twice (maybe three times?) and he's played with a band each time.

BOTH times, the best part of the show was when he played the acoustic guitar (once in the midst of the crowd) by himself.

In the days of overproduced music, acoustic music performed by the main artist alone is an incredible experience. It's something that harkens back to the original days of vocal recitals.

There is a purity inside of the crowd knowing every lyric, every meaning, and hearing nothing but the artist's own musings. Rock concerts have brought something to the purity of classical vocal recitals: audience participation.

On the new TRS album, you can hear the crowd just as much as Bryce. So much so that he named it, "Bryce Avary, His Instruments and Your Voices"

It's really, really good.

-B

Also interesting, is this whole "giving away albums" common trend happening these days. If you can produce an album relatively cheaply and distribute it digitally, why not give it away? Artists don't make money from album sales anyway. IF you give it away, you can drum up enough of a following to make more money at live shows. Seems like eliminating the middle man of the record company may be closer and closer than ever.

If I Were To End The World...

I look forward to seeing you all on Sunday. We'll meet for church, catch up for a few minutes, laugh and joke, maybe go out to lunch, and then we'll celebrate that the world hasn't ended. Or, we'll cry because we haven't been included in the rapture. These peeps that have been saying that the rapture will occur on the May 21 and then the end of the world will be on October 21 aren't reading the same Bible I am.

It has got me thinking though, what would I do if I were these people?

I'd be so convinced that the end of the world is coming that I'd want to tell people. I'd plan out an awesome Saturday lunch with friends and then retreat to my home. I'd probably lie down in bed and hope to be taken in my sleep.

But...what would happen when the stroke of midnight struck? Would I get worried? Would I call my fellow church members? Would I call my adversaries? Would I try to figure out if I had just missed the mark, or would I think I had been left behind? How would I show my face in public again?

I'd see two ways out:

  • Mass suicide with all who think the way I do.
  • Go in to hiding.

(I struggle deeply with the concept of suicide. It's a rough thing that has plagued our world for all of time. It's extremely sad and unfortunate.)

So, I think I'd have to go with hiding. After all, Osama hid in plain sight for ten years.

I think I'd take my church members and go into hiding. I'd secure some random island that no one knew about, figure out a way to get myself, my family, and all my friends there. Then I'd live there until people forgot that I had proclaimed the end of the world and judged them prematurely.

Yeah, hiding would be the only way to keep the news cameras and late night talk shows from taunting and stalking me.

After it had all been planned, I'd probably read over the plans.

I'd think about it, pray about it, and then decide that it sounded like a lot of work.

I'd probably just go ahead and on May 20th tell the world that I'd been making it all up.

Then, I'd go back to the Bible, read it, and decide that the world was actually going to end at a time unknown to man. I'd probably decide that Jesus's message needed to be spread more than ever. But not for the sake of the souls of the "saved."

I'd decide that Jesus's message needed to be spread in a way that eradicated poverty.

I'd decide that Jesus's message needed to be spread in a way that accepted those who has never been accepted.

I'd decide that Jesus's message needed to be spread in a way that showed the world the beauty of the resurrection.

I'd decide that Jesus's message was not modernity's "heaven" but rather, Jesus's "salvation."

Yeah, I think that if I was to decide that the world was going to end, that'd probably be how it'd play out.

We've got to rid the world of the Christianity that is so convinced that it is all about us.

I hope the world ends, because when it does, the pains of the world will no longer be, pain.

Maybe then, the beatitudes will finally come to life in a way that our Church could not accomplish.

-B

"Obama Thinks Jesus Is Nuts."

Bill Maher talks about how  he is a non-Christian, just like most Christians. Beware of the foul language, it is Bill Maher.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giVXvveef8Y]

While his rhetoric makes logical sense, I think he is targeting the part of the Christian body that won't watch his show and might never agree with him.  The "hippy" Christians already agree with him and...probably aren't watching his show either.

His point about Obama I thought was most interesting, as Obama has to be a politician first and foremost, probably above his faith.  He has to get Scripture to his phone every morning so that the Right will continue to tolerate him while he also has to go after America's enemies...because, well, he is the President.

But really, who is Bill Maher to talk about accountability of Christians?

Oh, yeah, that's right...this isn't accountability, it is just more of his campaign against faith.

-B

Thanks to Chad Holtz for sharing.

Apple is Evil (or, The New iMac)

It's never a boring day in Cupertino. Last week(ish?) Apple released a new model of their popular (yet waning in popularity) desktop PC, iMac.

If you aren't familiar with iMac, shame on you.  It's an all-in-one desktop PC that currently comes in two sizes: 21.5 inch widescreen or 27 inch widescreen.  You can order them online at apple.com or buy one in store and customize all kinds of things on it (though, I imagine that most people just buy the standard option).

In their latest release (which didn't even make the front page of apple.com--that was reserved for the elusive iPhone 4 in white) they upgraded the speed of the processors, the quality of the "FaceTime" camera, and a few other things here and there.  Like many of their computer products, they didn't overhaul much of it, just a gradual upgrade.  If you are considering an Apple product, the time right around when it gets upgraded is ALWAYS the best time to buy.

However, they evidently altered something else inside this iMac that wasn't advertised. Since the report first came out, the blogosphere has been on high alert.

Turns out, that the startup hard drive inside of the iMac has a bit of proprietary firmware installed on it.  This firmware communicates to the fans about how hot the hard drive is running. So, if one were to replace the startup drive with another drive (not Apple -branded) their iMac, once put back together, the computer will fail the Apple Hardware Test. In short, Apple disables your iMac. You can read a little more about it here, and while this explanation leaves ALOT out, the general effect remains the same.

Evil, right?

Not so fast.

OWC (a company that sells unauthorized replacement parts for Macs) wrote on their blog about the issue and railed against Apple's closed-door policy when it comes to things like this.  Something of less significance  happened with the iPhone 4 screws a ways back and iFixIt (a company much like OWC) filmed a YouTube video against it. You can see MJ from iFixIt's take here. (The video is called "Apple's Diabolical Plan to Screw Your iPhone")

Apple commentators like John Gruber and Marco Arment have commented about this.  Both seem to be on Apple's side.  John says that a user knows that this is an all-in-one device and that the convenience of using and buying a machine like this comes with tradeoffs. Marco basically said the same thing. (I think John read Marco's piece first)

I think the answer lies in support.

If you buy an iMac and take it home, it will work beautifully. But, if something does go wrong (they're not perfect) you can take it back to an Apple Store (or call online) and get it fixed or replaced for free. (When was the last time you got your Windows PC fixed at a Toshiba store?) As long as you've backed up your stuff (if you're not backing up, shame on you), you're good to go.

But, if you decide that you'll install your own hard drive once you get home, it's not an easy task to take apart an iMac.  The process is documented by iFixIt here and it involves removing the glass display with suction cups, unscrewing countless screws, not getting any dust in the machine, not shocking yourself or the computer, and putting it all back together. Now that my warranty has run out, I've taken my MacBook Pro apart twice and I can tell you I don't think I'd ever attempt to take that glass off without breaking it. I'd rather be trained by the people who built it first.

The problem with support is that if you do something wrong, and then try to take it back to Apple, they have to deal with it. Not only will they know that you took it apart, but they can't be sure of what you did to it.

The same thing happened with the batteries in the iPhone and new MacBooks. They built them in because they had some major advantages when it came to battery life and slim design. If they know that you haven't tampered with it, they can fix it much easier.

I think it comes down to this: Apple wants to fix your product.  They want you to be happy. And I would be willing to bet that they are willing to sacrifice the 10% of hackers in order to make a pleasing and seamless experience for the other 90%.

I think Marco and John are right, it's a tradeoff. If you don't want that experience, Apple probably doesn't need your sale.

I don't, in any way, think that makes them evil.

-B

The Gospel of GaGa

This morning, I watched Lady GaGa's Monster Ball Tour on HBO. I missed it the first time around and thought quickly enough to TiVo it for the second time.  Thank God HBO shows specials like MTV shows reality shows. If you are a fan of creative use of costumes, lighting, dancing, video, and curse words...you'll enjoy the show.  It is well done.

I feel like my feelings toward her "Judas," however, are more real than I might have expected.

As far as I can tell, GaGa exists for one purpose: to let everyone know that they should be who they are (and be proud of it) because God made them who they are and it's ok to be who you are because people told her she was nothing and then she went and became a star, and Superstardom should be the key to all good things so people should want to be like her and follow her.

Throughout the show (in which she constantly encourages the audience in regards to the aforementioned point of her existence), other than GaGa, one figure remains constant on stage.  It's a shirtless, long-haired electric guitar player who she readily refers to as Jesus, Jesus Christ, or Jesus Christo. To be fair, he kind of looks like what we typically think Jesus looked like (throwing away the notion that Jesus might have looked a lot like Osama bin Laden). In fact, at first I thought that that was why she called him Jesus.

But...it seemed to move from being a joke to being real.

I've heard many people discuss whether or not GaGa's message of "love all" is really the message of the Gospel or not.  I've heard people advocate that GaGa is spreading her own Gospel. I've expressed before how much I think the sexuality of her performances and videos depletes the value of her message.

I think one thing is clear: I think GaGa senses a sense of calling to be the voice for those who have been afraid to be themselves in this world.  I think she feels a need to speak up for those who have felt "oppressed." I think she thinks she is spreading the Gospel (however we are to define that word).

The problem for me, though, still lies in her follow through.

Everyone should appreciate who they are and who God made them to be: awesome.  People who feel attracted to members of the same sex should be able to live lives that aren't based in hiding those feelings: great. People should want to make something of themselves, especially when they've been told over and over that they will never be anything: fantastic.

But, why the crotch grabs? Why the F words? Why the suggestive nudity?  Why the mocking of religious attire and practice?

There's no doubt in my mind that Lady GaGa is extremely talented.  If it's not in her singing, then her dancing, If not in her dancing, then in her writing.  If not in her writing, then in her work ethic.  If not in her work ethic, then in her creativity.  If not in her creativity, then in her sense of "call."

She's got what it takes to make it.

But she's one of those rare artists that come along and gains rare stardom...and tries to use that fame and voice to speak a message. So her potential is not just for fame, her potential is for change. Imagine a world in which this potential is used in a proper way!

If her message were based in love and life, she'd have something. But it isn't.

She wants to be a voice for those disrespected by culture...but she cares more about those people following her than the purpose of the message. It's a fake-out, to the highest degree.

She has a voice that many in the church wish they had.  She even speaks some of the same language that they'd like to. But she's doing it in the wrong way. The potential for change is lost, ruined, and destroyed. Instead...she doesn't influence culture in the way that the Gospel is supposed to. She influences culture in the way that she wants to.

And because of that, I'd ask her to stop calling that guitar player, "Jesus."

-B

She's good, but she used to be better. Just watch:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NM51qOpwcIM]

Might I Ask...What's the Point?

This stuuuuuuuuuupid picture circulated on Facebook today. Its unbelievably bad photoshopping is unbelievably evident immediately.

So...if you're going to fake this out....might I ask....what's the point?

Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.

Fake/Photoshop'd Waste of Time:

The Originals:

A quick image search of Google answered my question.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

-B

Mothers' Day

20110508-121220.jpg

Today is Mothers' Day. Despite the iPad deciding that it ought to be "Mother's Day", I think that that spelling and punctuation personalizes it too much. Today is not just a day for your mother, but for all mothers, everywhere. Today, specifically, I reflect on my grandmother.

I was one of those fortunate people in life who got four grandmothers. Better yet, I got to actually meet three of them.

My mom's mother passed away when my mom and her sister were young. Because of that, I was able to have my grandfather's new wife (whom he married prior to my birth) as a grandmother, plus my dad's mother, plus my original grandmother, plus my great-aunt who I call "Nana" who has been just like a grandmother to me through these 24 years of my life.

I choose, today, to reflect on the grandmother that I never met.

One of the neat things about human history is that the incredible teachers throughout the ages are sometimes not even known for their personal work, instead...they are known for their teachings, passed down from person to person. If you are familiar with Rob Bell, you'll be familiar with his "dust of the Rabbi" nooma video. This concept has helped progress in our world since the beginning. The goal: become like your teacher.

Therefore, I can only see the grandmother I never met through the lens of others. I see my grandmother through her children. I see her through her family members. I see her through her husband. I see her through the legacy that she left. Though I remember hearing stories time and again about her, I remember her through those people that she left behind.

Cancer is a cruel thing that has taken lives of loved ones of every reader of this reflection. We can't really defeat it (although we are getting better) and treatment often leaves those forced to live with it with a weak immune system and a shorter lifespan. Cancer took the life of my grandmother, before I ever got to meet her.

Fortunately, she left people around. Se left people who carried the love and affection for the world that she did. She left people who were willing to tell story after story about her and the impact that she made on their lives.

I am so grateful for those she left behind.

Humans leave tracks in other humans. Humans make an impact on others and that impact is lived out in the lives of those that person ones in contact with.

If that statement is true, then perhaps my best way to see and experience my grandmother is through her daughter, my mom.

I've seen the love and affection of my grandmother through my mom throughout the years. My mom has always been quick to right me in my wrongs, but always have the loving hand to hold me when I needed it. My mom has been a moral voice in my life, and encouraged me to stay on the right path, even when the other path was "cooler" or seemed more fun. My mom was there to help bail me out of science projects that would have been a visual disaster. My mom was there to help me talk through my opinions before I passed judgment on anyone. My mom was there to suggest the right things, while not forcing me one way or another. My mom was always there to smile. Especially in the times that I needed it.

One of the greatest influences in my life has been my mom.

Love is a gift from God. And, thankfully, God has a remarkable way of passing down that love through generations. I see more clearly now why my mother misses her mother.

She got all of that from her.

What a blessing I have been given, to simply to have witnessed love manifested in this way.

-B

Still In Love With Judas

Gaga released her Judas Video (or at least the first one). It won't embed, but you can watch it here.

I've now watched it four times. Admittedly, I still don't really get it. Some of the online sources claim that she is playing Mary Magdalene. If she is, I'm not quite sure which Gospel she is reading.

I now think that her purpose in the video/song is to have an honest approach to being involved/in love with sin and evil while trying to follow the proper way. I get that, although I don't really.

Most interesting, the end of the video. I'm interpreting it as a statement about what society does to someone who is in love with evil. Strange representation of it, but I do think it is a strong statement.

I think, maybe, that if I saw Judas as the root of all evil, I'd understand the whole world and their stance on this song and the history of Jesus in a different way. But, I don't. I see Judas as a human being who made a mistake (but a mistake they may not have been in his control, because of it's foretelling in the prophets).

I think the world has equated Judas with evil, and GaGa is continuing this effort. In fact, she begins from this premise.

The problem for me is that the history of Christianity's relationship to Judaism (and especially events like the Holocaust) is sometimes attributed to Judas and his betrayal of Jesus. That outlook does nothing but tear down our world and the relations that people of other faiths have with each other.

For that reason, I choose not view Judas as the source of evil within the Passion narrative...and I think that adds to my inability to fully understand GaGa's "message." Stay tuned, this could get interesting.

-B

May 1st, 2011 - Life Wins

It was May 1st, 2011 at 10:50 pm.

I was on my way back from Durham, having just gotten off the phone with my dad, when Allison called me.  "Did you hear the news?" she asked. "No." "Osama bin Laden is dead. It's all over twitter and the President is going to make an announcement."

I have to admit, my first response was to...smile.

I think I even said something like, "that's great!"

Because, you see, I remember sitting in 2nd period band when a school administrator came in and told us that our nation was under attack and that two planes had hit the World Trade Center in New York. I remember watching the Today Show, and I remember watching people jump to their death from the buildings.  I remember watching both buildings fall, live, on television.

And I remember thinking, "who would do that?"

Before 9/11, I didn't know anything about Osama bin Laden.  I didn't know a thing about al Qaeda.  But later that week, al Qaeda became the center of all our lives.

And I will admit that when I watch that clip of President Bush standing on that rubble saying, "I can hear you! And the people who knocked down these buildings will hear all of us soon!" I get goosebumps every time.
Every single time.

Because to me, a man who sent in OTHER people to kill 3,000 innocent Americans ought to be "brought to justice."

I once watched an episode of Oprah where she was talking about Timothy McVeigh.  I remember the story going that after he dropped that van off in the basement, he ran from the building. He got down the block before the explosion.  When it finally hit, he kept running. After it was over, he looked behind him and I'm almost positive that his quote was, "Damn, I didn't get all of it."

When I heard that Timothy McVeigh was arrested and sentenced to death, I smiled inside. Evil had been "brought to justice."

You can call me an evil person. You can call me unChristian.  You can call me a hypocrite. But, I'd rather refer to myself as "honest."

These people did horrible things to our world. And now they can't anymore. That gives me some sense of joy.

But immediately, I started questioning whether this sense of joy was proper or not.  Joy is not true joy unless it comes from the right source.  When I got home, I looked at the news and the first thing I saw was people flooding the White House with American flags wrapped around their backs screaming "USA! USA! USA!" I immediately had a flashback to all of those videos I've seen of Middle Easterners burning our flag.

I got on Facebook (which took awhile, I had deactivated it until finals were over) and all of a sudden, I saw thinks like "F&$@ you Osama!" and "WE GOT HIM!" and "Proud to be an American!" and "Rot in Hell!"

But, of course, I'm a Divinity student, so I also had interspersed within the news feed things like "Love your Enemies" and "Why do we celebrate the death of a human?"

And I was back to being torn.  Do I act as an American? Do I celebrate one more embodiment of evil finally being gone? Do I mourn that my fellow countrymen are celebrating in the death of someone? Do I remember Jesus' line about a giving him the other cheek? Do I try to reconcile some of the emotions I am feeling with the almost unbelievable message of the Gospel?

See, we were confused about the details at first.  We didn't know exactly if the mission was to kill or to capture (although most signs point to kill). We didn't know that night if Osama had shot back (although we know now that he was unarmed). We didn't know how all of it had gone down (although we know more almost every second now).

Sam Wells, of Duke Chapel, raised the point that Osama wasn't given a fair trial before his death. And my first thought is that I don't remember those on 9/11 getting a fair trial before their death. In fact, Osama seems to have been unarmed and unaware of what was going on when they shot him. In that sense, he has something in common with the people he killed on 9/11.

But I return to Jesus' command not only to love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, but also to the idea of fighting this concept of "an eye for an eye." To Jesus, I think the concept of returning a bad deed with a bad deed seemed stupid...because it did nothing but return violence with more violence (though Jewish law really seemed to have laid it out as a fair and balanced system). In Jesus' mind, I am confident, violence returning violence only escalates.

When I said as a child, "Isn't it wrong to kill someone by the death penalty?" I remember being asked, "Well, if someone takes someone else's life, do they deserve to keep theirs?"

And, daily, I struggle with this question.

How is justice defined? Do Americans get to decide what is just? Is justice the same thing as fairness? Does the fact that "life's not fair" play into this? Is governmental justice different than vigilante justice?

And I continue to return to one fundamental concept. For Christians, none of us deserve to keep our lives. But because of the death and resurrection, God has given us the gift of eternal life, one that goes beyond the one that we currently inhabit. And, if we learn anything from the resurrection, it is that life defeats death...in each and every sense. It's not just Jesus' death that was defeated. Death...has been defeated.

Because of that, I choose not to condemn the US for killing bin Laden. I choose not to preach to my fellow Americans who are simply acting according to their emotions. I also choose not to celebrate a murder.

Instead, I choose to focus on life eternal. I choose to focus on salvation.  I choose to focus on resurrection, because I know that the way that we sometimes view life and death here on earth is wrong.

If resurrection lives in us, which I believe that it does, then we celebrate the new life that God has given our country and world because an active doer of harm is gone. We also celebrate those who were under his leadership who didn't know what life really was, and now do. We celebrate the lives of the marginalized that are now able to think and act for themselves because there isn't a ruler over them who has extremist views and glorifies violence.

Sam Wells said we shouldn't celebrate. If we define "celebration" in the same sense that those who flooded the White House gates defined it, then I  agree.  But if we define celebration as taking comfort and joy in some form of new life here on earth, then I think the resurrection still lives within us and with that, the Word of God is still present.

Murder is wrong.

Life is good.

What a world we live in.

-B

Sam Wells Comments on "Celebration"

Great memo from Sam Wells of Duke Chapel regarding the death of Osama bin Laden. Well stated and thought provoking. You can read it here. I encourage you to read it more than once. While I agree with his statements almost whole-heartedly, I wonder about the mix of church and state and the influence a letter like this might have on civilization at large. Is it appropriate for pastors to comment on the ongoings of civilization? I would say, yes (given the virtue based content). But, the moment a pastor is interpreted as criticizing (and I'm not sure that he is, directly) the government (their decision to kill rather than to arrest and try), we have to think about how we are to interact with the world, as the Church.

Many pastors might preach about this, in some way, this coming Sunday. It would be unfortunate for them to use the opportunity to preach freedom, instead of life. I thought Revd. Dr. Wells did a phenomenal job of speaking the values of true justice and life (shown through his comments on justice and the setting of a trial) into a stern warning to our nation and our faith.

-B

UPDATE: Fred Phelps doesn't think we should celebrate either, but really for another insane, illogical, incomprehensible reason completely. Are you surprised?

Look Where Technology Has Brought Us

They watched it all unfold, halfway across the globe, in real time.Wow. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeA33hE8XfE&]

20110502-105138.jpg

20110502-105158.jpg

20110502-105212.jpg

"There was quite a bit of silence."

I think all in the room understood the gravity of what they had asked those SEALs to do.

-B

Throwing Stones

I knew I said I wouldn't do this but, I had to. Please read below regarding an incident with the Duke Chapel. Well handled by administration and staff, I thought.

Dear Members of the Divinity School Community,
Please see the message below, from Sam Wells, Dean of Duke Chapel, concerning an act of vandalism that occurred Wednesday evening.  We in the Divinity School join with the larger university in lamenting this violent and destructive act, and in praying for whoever is responsible for it. 
Richard Hays
Dean, the Divinity School

Message to the Duke Chapel and Religious Life Community

You may have heard that three of the Chapel’s stained glass windows were broken on the night of Wednesday 27 April 2011, during the campus Last Day of Classes celebrations. The holes in the windows are 5-10” in diameter. The windows are all on the lectern side of the main aisle, representing, respectively, the Wise Men on their way to Bethlehem, Jesus upon a pinnacle, and the Transfiguration.

It is too early to speculate about who might have wanted to do this, and about what they would wish others to infer as to the meaning of their actions. For example there were many people on the Duke campus on Wednesday night – students, staff, faculty, and visitors. The Chapel is a symbol of the university as a whole, but also a building with religious and specifically Christian resonances. We can’t know whether the action was simply reckless, or had more sinister intent; whether the target of this gesture was the university as a whole, Christianity in particular, or simply a beautiful and relatively unprotected building.

What we can be a little more sure of is that the rocks used were perhaps 10” wide, and thus heavy; that they must have been brought some distance, since no materials of the kind are available nearby; and that to make three holes, at the same height, at equally-spaced windows, from a distance of perhaps 40 yards, must have required significant strength and notable accuracy of aim. It does not bear the signs of a spontaneous act of vandalism.

In the season of Easter Christians celebrate the way the church came into being in response to Jesus’ resurrection. One of the church’s first ministers was Stephen. His joy in his faith was so effervescent and outspoken that it led to his being stoned to death. One of those who stood by and condoned those events was Saul – who soon afterwards became the apostle Paul, and came to see things very differently.

I believe it’s right to express concern about the directing of stones at the Chapel because there can be a connection between throwing stones at precious buildings and throwing stones at even more precious people. But I also wish to express hope. My prayer is that, just as Paul’s transformation began with his condoning a violent act of stone-throwing, so those who recently saw fit to throw stones at Duke Chapel may soon come to see their actions in a different light – and thus that this sad moment be transformed into the beginning of something beautiful, for them, and for us all.

Sam Wells

Dean of Duke Chapel

-B

The Best American Idol

I got an email advertising this clip from YouTube tonight. Let's clear up a few things first: she sings the heck out of this. While she may be criticized for where she chooses to take breaths, it is beautifully and masterfully sung.

Watch the clip (it really is very good):

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLLMzr3PFgk&]

However, along with this clip, within the email...was this proposition:

"PLEASE watch and listen to the attachment of Carrie Underwood singing her heart out on "How Great Thou Art", I first saw it on T.V. last Friday night and she brought tears to my eye's and the audience to there feet, and I'll bettcha God heard her in Heaven cause if you watch her closely as she sings, she was singing to Him........."

The thing is, the song is great. Carrie is great. It is well done by both her and Vince.

But I wonder if this song, in this context, is being performed as a hymn or simply as a spiritual song. Is there a difference?

I don't doubt that she was singing to "Him" but I wonder if the applause from that crowd was for God, or Carrie, or both.

An honest question, I'm not sure how I feel about it.

No matter who the applause and praise was for..."I bettcha God heard her in Heaven." I'm pretty sure God hears everything. Especially words sung in praise to God.

-B