Plans & Palindromes

A man, a plan, a canal, Panama!

is one of my favorite phrases because it is a Palindrome (it's the exact same phrase right to left). Here's another funny I picked up from a previous job when my company was talking about developing corporate vision (also funny in itself):

Purposefulness, n: The quality of having a purpose of aim.

Great philosophers have always pondered the question, "What is the meaning of life?" with little success. The much under-appreciated philosopher, system safety expert, super genius and Jedi master, Wile E. Coyote, provides another approach. He reframed the question: "What gives my life meaning?"

By having a vision, possibly unachievable, a mission connected to that vision, and a value system that provides a map to get there, life has meaning.

Example:
Vision: Tasty and succulent roasted roadrunner.
Mission: Catch the roadrunner.
Core Values: Innovation. Persistence. Good medical plan.

I've been thinking about the aspect of planning recently. I could blog a long time on vision and mission, but lately I've been really contemplating planning. Do I expect my vision and mission will simply happen as I live my life? Is it realistic to think that the roadrunner will fall into my cooking pot one day? If I claim to have a vision, but I'm not implementing a plan day by day to make that vision happen, am I really trying to make that vision happen? Or am I just daydream, saying "It would be nice if X fell into my lap."

I've been thinking about a quote of Paul's where he is talking about his mission and the way he lives his life as a result.

Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever. Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air. No, I beat my body and make it my slave...

Or my own paraphrase emphasizing what I've been thinking about "In the Olympics, any qualifying athlete has implemented strict training habits. Alan, in the same way, live out God's vision as though competing to win a gold medal. Good training habits include a plan: short term goals, long term goals, actions to take, and such."

A few questions I'm thinking about this week relating to the above:
- Can I articulately verbalize my vision and mission? Am I more committed to God or to my vision? (Will I alter my vision/mission cheerfully and willingly as God leads?)
- Am I using my time and money in a way that reflects my mission?
- Do I have short term (3-12 month) goals and steps for achieving these goals?
- Do I have long term (1-10 year) goals and starting steps for these goals?
- Are my plans realistic for my personality, my life situation, and my limitations? (Have I gotten advice from others?)
- Are my plans balanced? Do they include the aspects of life that I tend to ignore such as sleep/relaxation and serving others?

A Little Bit of This, A Little Bit of That

So today's lesson from work is this: A wrong bit can bring down one's entire system. (A bit is a '0' or '1'; eight bits make a byte, and a typical program is many kilobytes. Our system is over 15 megabytes.) Just one bit in 120 million wrong, and the entire system would not start.

Cooking, I'm told, is the opposite. Many of the chefs I know simple say "add a pinch of this" or "a handful of that". It drives me crazy that the measurements are so imprecise, but I think cooking is that way because food is flexible: Different amounts produce different but tasty results. A fraction of a cup too much flour rarely spoils the whole dish.

On many issues, I view theology like programs: Precision matters. Matters a lot. There's a right answer, and the wrong answers lead to a lot of grief. But perhaps theology is more like cooking, where good dishes come out regardless of the exact beliefs involved. More importantly, perhaps: Which issues are like programming and which ones are like cooking?

Oh Yes

I was cleaning out my e-mail folder today and came across an e-mail from a friend. One of those typical 'tell us about yourself' with questions like...

WHAT COLOR PANTS ARE YOU WEARING?
WHAT ARE YOU LISTENING TO RIGHT NOW?
SOUPS OR SALAD?
WHAT WAS THE LAST THING YOU ATE ?
IF YOU WERE A CRAYON; WHAT COLOR WOULD YOU BE?
FAVORITE FOOD?

I'm feeling a bit guilty for not filling one out, but then I realized that I rarely feel like the surveys give much information about who someone is. So I guess my goal should be to write one of my own. And then send it out to one group of my friends and define success if another (mutually exclusive) group of friends sends it back to me.

Friendship & Fellowship

So this a theme idea for this week has been fellowship. I've been contemplating what I think the differences between fellowship and friendship are. Is fellowship just a fancy religious (Christian?) word for friendship?

First definition of fellowship from Merriam:

1 : COMPANIONSHIP, COMPANY
2 a : community of interest, activity, feeling, or experience; b : the state of being a fellow or associate
3 : a company of equals or friends : ASSOCIATION
4 : the quality or state of being comradely

Friend is less informative:

1 a : one attached to another by affection or esteem b : ACQUAINTANCE

Anyway, I went back and dug up my teaching notes on a sermon I heard many many moons ago (June 22nd, 1999). The sermon was on fellowship as a discipline, and many of his points have stuck with me over the years; I'm surprised, though, how much I jotted down that I don't normally articulate. He started by talking about fellowship as a discipline: Amazing abilities require hours of training, and that spiritual maturity is similar in that Jesus does not short cut us into maturity. He then goes on to draw the parallel that fellowship takes consistent work to achieve and is not a intrinsic aspect of being Christian (or human).

A few other points: Fellowship is a command (as well as a blessing) - it leads to challenge and encouragement of one another.

Fellowship is deeper than friendship.It is about interdependence - common lives, common material, common experiences. It is warmer - people who share their lives, crying and rejoicing together. It is wider, spanning generations, dress, education, cultures, and such.

The concluding application still gets me. The pastor quoted Acts 20:36-21:1

When he had said this, he knelt down with all of them and prayed. They all wept as they embraced him and kissed him. What grieved them most was his statement that they would never see his face again. Then they accompanied him to the ship. After we had torn ourselves away from them, we put out to sea and sailed straight to Cos.

and left us with the following questions:
- Who would leave your fellowship and you would weep?
- If you left your fellowship, would you feel like you are "tearing yourself away?"
and one comment: This is the Bible's description of the living church. A brave but soft people, full of passion for each other.

Those parting questions still get to me. How much do I care about the presence of others? How much does their absence grieve me? How consumed am I in my own little world?

In The Image of God

I had a conversation with a friend - let's call him Frank - recently about how he's trying to build a friend's (say Beth) self-esteem.

The conversation got me thinking. I'm not terribly comfortable with the whole "if Beth just had more self-esteem, she would be happier" line of thought. I'm uneasy with the self-focus, and it's tendency to white-wash very real issues going on in our lives. For example, I'm doubtful that Beth's alcoholic escapism from loneliness will truly be solved by more esteem. Glancing around, it's painfully obvious (I hope) that people both have many evils committed against them and perpetrate many evils upon others...some evils are more obvious than others. Thinking highly of ourselves when we commit so much evil seems idiotic.

On the flip side, I think we easily loose sight of the gifts and talents that God has given us - that we are created it God's image. I think it's appropriate to recognize that God has given us gifts and we can have a certain confidence in ourselves as a result. When I use a Craftsmen wrench, I don't gingerly test it against the bolt for fear the wrench will shatter; I confidently twist. Why? Because Craftsmen tools are quality. Likewise, the people who are, say, talented writers can recognize that gift and not be constantly worrying about the quality of their writing. (It's interesting Biblically how much the concept of respecting people goes hand in hand with our being made in God's image.)

Self-esteem discussions make me nervous because I'm uncertain what I'm doing: Am I'm expressing confidence and respect in people that reflects itself in a humble confidence, or further inspiring an arrogant independence? What am I accomplishing with my treatment of people, and is it what I want to be communicating?

P.S. I'm experimenting with an idea that a favorite author of mine uses in writing stories. He modifies the details (names, age, problems) so that the person one envisions is not the one he is thinking about. Most of the details above are purely arbitrary to illustrate my points.

I Got It!

I finally figured what's been bugging me about the last couple posts. I've been feeling like I've been missing an aspect of the issue. I think the aspect that really gets me is the level of assumption and ignorance. I generally see a lack of dialog in America about the beliefs behind the religious language. And so I often feel presumed upon by ecumenical viewpoints because I often feel told "we all agree" without my beliefs being known, and it bugs me when I'm told I agree by someone who doesn't know me. Or at least, who I don't perceive as knowing me.

How's that for shortening a long series of posts into something concise?

Case in Point

Came across this article: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/15/adoption.church.ap/index.html. Lots of interesting implications.

The following quote was particularly thought provoking (as it relates to receiving money and expectations):

Sandy Steadman said she was hurt and disappointed that Bethany received funds from the Choose Life car license plates. "I know of a lot of Catholics who get those tags," she said.

She added: "If it's OK to accept our money, it should be OK to open your home to us as a family."

Oh, Bethany's belief statement is here: http://www.bethany.org/A55798/bethanyWWW.nsf/0/FAF8F0A9A73CA87D85256E3C006815D9

Division and Multiplication, err, Unions

So a theme word of this last week has been ecumenical. About the unity of the church, how all (or at least most) Christian faiths are truly Christian, about all Christian paths being equally good.

It's strange: I think many of my friends have a fundamental attraction to the concept of unity in a way that I don't quite resonate with. Partly, I suppose, I don't feel terribly disunited with the people who have different practices in their faith. Partly I suspect I'm a bit jaded on the verses about unity.

Partly I don't think as many churches or 'Christian' faiths are truly Christ's followers as we would like to think. Despite the similarities in language and concepts, I think people have very different answers to two questions:
1. Who is God, and what is his relationship with Jesus?
2. How are we made acceptable to God that we may freely approach his presence?
I would guess many don't consider question 2 as an essential part of the definition of Christianity, which makes it much easier to see most churches as being Christian (since I think it's on question 2 that most of the differences occur).
I also think about one of Jesus' teachings:

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

Somehow simply claiming Jesus as Lord is not sufficient for Jesus to accept us, and thus I'm uneasy with simply answering question 1 with "Jesus is God" and ignoring #2. It probably doesn't help that I think the Bible answers #2 pretty clearly either.

On the more practical side of unity, here's a few questions:

- Would charismatics be willing to give up the public practice of tongues and healing to be at the same churches as those who don't have the same view of the Spirit?
- Would Catholics be willing to change their views on communion and the Pope to join Protestant churches?
- Would conservatives follow women pastors to promote unity?
- What beliefs would we sacrifice to be part of a church? When we would consider leaving that church? What does this say about how our priorities?

Inflation and Other Matters of the Heart

So I walked out of my apartment bright and early yesterday. I was up early, for once. I was going to make work by 8. And I was wearing my nice new blue button shirt. My front right tire was flat. Not just mildly deflated, but completely flat. My thoughts flashed to the beer bottle that was tossed out in front of my car on the highway the night before. Yes, the bottle made a nice crunching sound on the pavement under my tires. And I remembered that the last time I had changed my tire, there was no handle to the jack so the tire iron had to be used, which was incredibly slow and inefficient.

So now I'm nicely dressed, no longer running early for work, looking at a highly inefficient tire change probably due to litterer. Then the rain drops start falling.

It occurred to me that it is at moments like this, when no one else is around, that an aspect of one's character is truly revealed. Does one curse and get angry? Does one shrug and fix the tire? Does one moan and go ask one's roommate if he can borrow the other car? Does one fall to one's knees and thank God? (Ok, I'm not really sure that reveals strong character, but it is a response.)

Where does the strength - and the desire - to respond well to those situations when there is no social pressure? No praise for a job well done. No rebuke for slipping. Just the stillness of the morning.

We make a lot of these decisions every day, I think. Whether to take the trash out or not. Decisions on whether to call a friend or not. On whether to ask how they've been doing spiritually. Whether to try and know someone better or simply assume we understand them.

A friend of mine loves the expression "God sees". And it's true. But many times I don't see how God is glorified in the small invisible choices we make. I see much clearer how God is glorified when others see our lives and respond to what they see, not to what is unseen. That's the end of where my musings on a flat tire go.

(Incidentally, the flat tire had a slow leak for a year or so that I just kept putting air in monthly. I'd also needed to get the tires rotated. I got it all done for free. And oh, the tire guy said that the tire had a nail in it - nothing about glass shreds. But littering glass bottles in the freeway is still a bad idea.)

P.S. No, I'm not going to share how I reacted to the flat tire. It wouldn't be much of a secret test if I did that, now would it? Slicing my tires and camping out to see how I respond next time isn't fair either.

Top Down or Bottom Up?

Why are we hospitable? For some of us, it is because we're desperately lonely and having others around makes us feel better. Sometimes, we're trained like Pavlov's dog to feel guilty about anyone feeling unwelcome.

I've had two notable conversations recently. Well, more than that, but two apply here. The first dealt with whether or not we take seriously what we read online. Do we actually change our views as a result of what is written?

The second dealt with hospitality and how often people seem set in their social circles, uninterested in helping others become friends. My freshman year, all the students were dumped in a foreign setting in a dorm and people were naturally looking for friends. But as time went on, people made their friends. And their sophomore year they weren't nearly as friendly. And by their junior year, they were just about set. Now they lost friends here and there - drop outs, big fights, breakups, and the like, but they still had a core. And by their senior year, they had a few friends and were looking to get out.

While I think what we read online can change our views (I am blogging, after all), I think it's influence is directly related to our respect for the author, how much we already agree with it, and, to a lesser extent, how persuasively written a piece is. I do think we change our views when strangers present their case well. But I think it is rare.

In contrast, I think we take input from those we know well and respect much more seriously. But one of the primary ways we learn about people enough to know whether or not we respect them is through spending time with them. And that requires that someone to be hospitable. Either I need to invite this respectable person to know me, or he needs to invite me to know him.

There are two good types of hospitality that come to mind. The first is a specific "I know Kim, I value Kim, I want good specifically for Kim." type. It's when we know someone and care about them. We like them, we empathize with them, and so we try and do good to them. I think of Paul when he wrote of the Thessalonians "We loved you so much that we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well, because you had become so dear to us." Paul individually knew these people, and delighted in sharing his life and the gospel with them.

But this type of love/hospitality doesn't lead us to welcome strangers into our circles, to seek people out. It merely cares for those we already know. And this is very good. But there's a second type of love/hospitality, the kind that led Paul to Thessalonica in the first place. When Paul set out on his missionary trip, he didn't know specific people in the cities he ended up. But he knew the situation of people in general and this love led him to go and meet people. It's a healthy hospitality based not on guilt or loneliness, but based on love.

So I've been thinking a lot about how hospitality is a essential ingredient (or condition, for you math majors) to influence. Other ingredients are required too (it's not a necessary condition), but my appreciation for genuine hospitality and the role it plays in influence has been growing a great deal over the last few days.

(And yes, I know this post is written in sweeping generalities. It's not intended to be a comprehensive thesis on communication, influence, and persuasion.)

(Oh, and why Kim? Because I actually don't know any Kim's at the moment so it's a great neutral name.)

(Oh, and yes, I've been thinking that the "Repent or Perish" line from a recent post could use a lot more expansion. But that will be some other post, me thinks.)

Ok, I'm Back (or, Drive Carefully)

So somehow it's been three days since I blogged. I think last time was followed by a night of horrible sleep while I had weird half-awake dreams while a (real) mosquito bit me. By the end of the night, the count was mosquito 5 bites, Alan 0.

Since the bombing of London seems to be everywhere, I'll throw a couple thoughts out. The running figure Google has for car accident deaths is over 40,000 a year in the US. (Forbes, for example.)

Loosely speaking, that means 110+ people day every day from highway deaths. About 16,000 a year (44/day) from vehicle-on-vehicle crashes. I'm sure the UK numbers are vastly smaller, as they have a smaller population. Loosely speaking, what happened in London (50+ dead, ~1,000 injured) a couple days ago is a partial snapshot of what happens every day in America on our roads. It's just that instead of being spread out over 50 states and thousands of miles, it's concentrated in one city at one moment of time.

I'm not a big fan of terrorism. I'm all for realistic security. But it's a little strange to me that if we fiddled with vehicle safety, I might be much safer. Of course, the automotive lobby is probably more powerful in Washington than Al Queda. (I don't mean to be callous or unsympathetic to those affected by the attacks; for those who lost friends and family, it's a tragic time.)

One other thought: I often think of Jesus' words when discussing those who dead as a result of a tower's collapse:

Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them - —do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.

I wonder what terrorism (and car deaths) do with our introspection. Do we take the time to seriously ponder our standing with God? Do we take the time to consider the standings of those around us? I find myself easily rushed along by the "need" to fight off terrorists, rally for the best new justice, deal with the latest emergency that I loose sight of the issues that remain consistently most important.

And yet given the chance to make a social commentary on injustice, acts of God, or philosophical musing, Jesus brought people back to a simple point: Repent or perish.

Horrible Timing

Okay, so I was looking for Bible discussion posts and came across this link. It's actually something I've been wrestling with. I'd love to see honest discussion of the topic in church. I'm just a tad concerned that I come across it something like 48 hours after my church's short term mission group returned from abroad. Oh well, let's see how many of them actually follow my blog. :)

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/127/22.0.html

Who knew I was only 38% Fundamentalist??

I don't really buy it, but it's ironic, I think, given my strong modernist leanings. I'm also an idealist (or not?)...and tend to assume I'd come across as a fundamentalist. I suspect a flawed quiz.

Final result: "Cultural Creatives are probably the newest group to enter this realm. You are a modern thinker who tends to shy away from organized religion but still feels as if there is something greater than ourselves. You are very spiritual, even if you are not religious. Life has a meaning outside of the rational." (Final scores: Cultural Creative: 69%, Fundamentalist: 38%, Postmodernist: 19%, Modernist: 13%.)

What is Your World View? (updated)

Moldy Hamburger Buns

Okay, so this story isn't for the squeamish. Wait, who am I kidding? Anyway, was eating hamburgers tonight and half way through the middle of the second one, I look down at my bun and realize the blue-white spot near my thumb with a bite on either side isn't wheat dust from the bun, but moldy bread. What can I say? I'm a bit slow. (Note to self, check food from friends regularly for signs of mold before they play many pranks.)

Two other thoughts (don't worry, I will relate these) I was contemplating. First, I tend to be really nervous about loosing my watch when I'm driving in a car with my arm out the window. I don't know why. I've never lost my watch - or anything similar - out a window. My watch doesn't regularly fall off, if ever. And it's only worth $20 or $30.

I'm also very nervous around heights - somewhat because of vertigo, but mostly because I'm very acutely aware that a single misstep could send me lunging over the railing. It's not like railings have ever broken around me. Nor do I tend to just randomly step off into space. But somehow I'm very aware of the potential.

It's strange, though, how much potential danger I don't really care about. I'm often probably one mistake - or less - from electrocuting myself. I'm about one brake failure away from a major car crash. And while I'm aware intellectually of these issues, they don't really bother me the way that heights or loosing my watch do. It vaguely reminds me of those rich people who are so afraid of death that they live in a completely sterile environment, away from every possible danger they can imagine.

The flip side of all this is how many dangers I really don't care about. In so many ways, I'm more attuned to my physical and financial wellbeing than I am my spiritual wellbeing. I worry about loosing my watch, but do I give serious consideration to how I spend my time? To what movies I watch? To how I'm interacting with my roommate?

(Incidentally, I did finish the hamburger after removing the moldy piece of bread. It was delicious. If it makes me sick, there will be another witty piece here as soon as I recover.)

Catch 22 (& humor)

Well, I found a humorous website. It's funnier (probably) if one is at all aware of the groups being satirized, but probably funny anyway. Here was a personal favorite: http://larknews.com/april_2005/secondary.php?page=3.

Elsewhere, the following discussion on transparency caught my attention: http://blogs.salon.com/0001772/2005/06/22.html#a516. It reminded me of a couple other quotes. I don't remember the authors of either, so the following are rough paraphrases. The first was something like "I'm often glad that people are hypocrites and succumb to societal pressure. When my neighbor walks into my garage and covets my power drill, I'm glad he doesn't take off with it at the earliest opportunity. When I start a fight with my wife, I'm glad she doesn't shoot me even though she might wish me dead at that particular moment...much of the time, we want people to be hypocrites because otherwise life is far too chaotic."

The other quote (by Larry Crabb, perhaps?) was on how we want partial authenticity in pastors/speakers/etc... "There's a "cool" level of vulnerability where speakers seem "real". But when speakers go beyond showing that the apple might be a bit bruised and is downright rotten and worm infested, people dive for cover."

While much of the above is written in the context of speakers and presentations, I've been pondering how it applies to less public interactions. How much transparency is a good thing? Do I really want people to be fully authentic, or am I appreciative that people's actions and thoughts don't line up?