[I have] never liked the medal-count obsession of Olympics coverage. Why do we care what nation finishes in which place? The Olympics are supposed to celebrate individual achievement and international cooperation; country-based medal counting violates both principles. During the Cold War, the relative United States-Soviet Union medal count was closely watched. Now it’s the United States-China standings, with the Huffington Post last week running the banner headline, “CHINA 22, AMERICA 10,” referring to gold, as if this was supposed to be shocking. Medal counts don’t have any meaning — they don’t tell us anything about the relative strengths, virtues or prospects of different societies. Is Australia a significantly better place than Sweden? Going into Monday, Australia had 33 medals, Sweden three. Those numbers reveal nothing about Australian or Swedish society.  Gregg Easterbrook at ESPN.com

In my opinion, the gold medal count (and its bastard cousin the total medal count) is absurd.  The only real reason we, and I mean Americans here, care about this is so we can feel good about ourselves.  We have more medals than China, so that proves freedom is better than tyranny.  Of course, if China happens to get more gold medals it proves they cheated.  The only real thing it proves is that that nations with a lot of people and money dedicated to sport are going to better than those without (or am I being too Marxist?).

We are all searching for authentic community in our lives.  While we recognize the church should be the center of this community, we have all (in some way or another) experienced quite the opposite in a church.  Seeking what the church does not give leads us to all sorts of groups that may or may provide us what we truly need.

Randy Frazee, in his book The Connecting Church, identifies three major obstacles to authentic community that the Church must overcome.

Individualism
Christians were once a part of a close knit group that a part of a larger worldwide movement, with a set of shared values and beliefs.  Individualism is the opposite of this, with each member having a me-first (and perhaps me-only) attitude.  A common mission, as well as mutual submission, tradition, and a recognition of our interdependence, is the break in this obstacle.

Isolation
Our modern lives can often be lived in complete isolation from each other.  I come home from work, pull my car into the garage, go into my suburban home with no front porch, and maybe play with the kids in our fenced in back yard.  We live with little to no connection to our streets, neighborhoods, and larger communities.  Front porches have been replaced by massive back yard decks and block parties by individual barbecues.

The solution to this, says Frazee, is in rekindling the neighborhood.  The community church is important, where people are not driving long distances to church meetings, but are worshiping close to their homes with their very neighbors.  (Sounds interesting, doesn’t it?)

Consumerism
The final obstacle to authentic community is consumerism.  I’ve written about this elsewhere, but it bears repeating: the amount of stuff we are accumulating is damaging to us both spiritually and psychologically.  We are quick to point out our private property and to set the limits of availability to our brothers and sisters, even while we gain as others suffer.  This is tragic, as we are called to support each other, and not to continue to heap our gains upon our lusts.  The lesson remains, even if we don’t practice it, that it is more blessed to give than to receive.

So, these are Pastor Frazee’s obstacles to true community, along with some of his suggestions to remedy them (as well as my own thoughts).  Do you agree with his assessment?  Is it too simplistic?  Too critical?  My thoughts run along his, as I question whether the modern church can provide the solutions without being radically reformed (which is what the missional movement is seeking to do).

Since Todd Bentley has decided to leave Lakeland, thus ending the so-called Lakeland Revival, J. Lee Grady of Chrasima magazine is asking a few questions.  These are good questions that should have been asked from the beginning by all, not just outsiders who were uneasy with the whole deal.  (And no, I don’t care about his divorce.)  Here is the money quote:

From the first week of the Lakeland revival, many discerning Christians raised questions about Bentley’s beliefs and practices. … But among those who jumped on the Lakeland bandwagon, discernment was discouraged. They were expected to swallow and follow. The message was clear: “This is God. Don’t question.” So before we could all say, “Sheeka Boomba” (as Bentley often prayed from his pulpit), many people went home, prayed for people and shoved them to the floor with reckless abandon, Bentley-style. (emphasis mine)

I should note that in the portion I removed, Mr. Grady points out a few critiques that most serious commentors did not make.  Sure, some may have been disturbed over t-shirts, tatoos, and piercings, but that wasn’t what was important.

I still have more to say about this, specifically about Bentley’s (and God TV’s) practices in general, but I see this as a good step forward.

It seems to me that bandwidth metering and/or limiting is going to be a thing of the future for most ISPs.  The older model of unlimited usage made sense when we all were connecting at 28k and couldn’t download anything above 1MB, but doesn’t seem sustainable in this day and age.  With downloadable HD videos, limitless music and podcasts, VOIP, and online backup (to just name a few), our current networks just can’t handle the load.

One of the numbers I hear bandied about as a cap is 5GB.  So, your cheapest plan would give you high speeds, but only up to 5GB; after that, you would either pay more per GB or your speeds would drop considerably.  For the average user, this would probably be more than enough for what they do on the internet, and it may even result in cheaper rates for those customers (although I’ve yet to be entirely convinced).  For the heavier user, and especially the bandwidth hogs, you would pay for what you actually consume.

Now, I’m not a typical internet user (or a bittorrent hog), but I thought it would be a good experiment to find

Surplus Meter's UI

out how much bandwidth I actually use, and whether I would get screwed if bandwidth were metered.  Per Bob Rudis at The Apple Blog, I downloaded and started running Surplus Meter, metering software for OS X.

Setting up Surplus Meter is easy, you just put in what day the month begins on and what your download limit is.  In my case, I put 25GB because I knew I would blow past 5GB in little time.  It’s also important to select the right connection type; if I didn’t select AirPort, my connection wouldn’t be monitored.

You also need to make sure Surplus Meter is always running and opens up at login.  You can always hide it (CMD+H) to get it out of your way.

Surplus Meter does exactly what it promises to do: monitors how much you download and upload (which I previously lamented that iStat Menu doesn’t do).  It does so with a nice graphical UI, telling you how much you’ve down/up-loaded, what your daily allowance is, and how much usage you have left.

Surplus Meter's Log File

The results of my experience weren’t too eye-opening, I used about as much bandwidth as I expected I would.  As you can see, the log file to the left indicated that over the month of July I downloaded about 21.5 GB and uploaded 71 MB.  Of my 25 GB I had about 2.5 left over.

As I said, this isn’t terribly surprising, but now I know that if my ISP were to limit usage, I would be paying more than the average user.  This may or may not work out to my advantage (although Ihave the feeling I would end up paying more).

The Past Five Months

Thanks to everyone who visited the blog this month.  I don’t usually talk (or even care) about stats, but this month was the most visited in this blog’s almost three year history.  I know it’s nothing compared to the big blogs, but it’s enough for me.  (Well, actually since I’m the target audience, one reader is good enough.)

Here’s an update on Tom Ascol who has struck by lightning a few weeks back.  Pray for him.

I'm not sure if I would go to this church.

In honor of post #XXX, I present to you the Undies Service at the Episcopal church.  Photo by Church Sign Generator.

(About church signs)

Over the past few weeks I’ve overheard a number of discussions about the emerging church. The people involved in these discussions are intelligent and godly people, but the discussion bothered me because of their lack of charity, accuracy, and honesty. Because of that, I’ve come up with a few ideas to consider when critiquing any movement, although in this case it’s the emerging church movement.  (And keep in mind, I write this as someone who is not “emerging” and has no stake in the debate; all I want is honest dialogue by all involved.)

Diversity
One of the things you hear a lot is “The emerging church believes…” as if everyone who remotely identifies themselves as emerging believes the same thing.  You can say “they” don’t believe in absolute truth, but you can’t possibly mean everyone believes that.  It’s like saying “Baptists believe drinking alcohol is a sin.”  Really?  Every Baptist does?  Understand there is diversity in the emerging church just as there is in Protestantism, evangelicalism, and Reformed Christianity.

Honesty
In critiquing any movement, make sure you’ve actually read at least something by someone representing that movement.  It never ceases to amaze me how Calvinists on the one hand get so angry at Arminians who have only read Dave Hunt’s critique of the doctrines of grace while on the other hand critique the emerging church having only read John MacArthur.  Read some of their stuff and engage with that, don’t take someone else’s word for it, even if you respect that person completely. 

Along the same lines, if you read a critique of the emerging church by someone who has not actually conversed with the people he is calling out, be suspicious.  It’s all about being honest when you make a critique, something I hope people would be towards me.

Charity
One of the things I’ve observed is people making the worst possible assumptions when an emerging church does something or a leader says something.  Imagine if everything you said was taken to an extreme end, making you seem as if you’re a nutball (assuming of course that aren’t a nutball).  Extend some charity to those with whom you disagree, the same charity you would extend to someone like John Piper, who has been known to say some pretty outrageous things.  It does not mean you have to agree with them, only that you don’t have to assume the worst until you are certain.

As I said before, I have no stake in this.  I’m not emerging, and I really don’t know anyone who is (in real life), so I don’t have a need to defend anyone.  What bothers me is when people I love, people who are my family, people who are godly Christians behave in a way that is unseemly towards other Christians.  This bothers me because in it I see the way I have treated other traditions and how un-Christlike I have been toward other members of the family of God.

I’ve been blogging about vitae simplex (a simple life idea I’ve been running in my head for a while now) at a new blog I created here.  There are only about 10 posts as of now, but more are on the way.  This is why I haven’t posted here in a while.

..but only because I’m 65% pacifist.

1. Grown men who say “buh-bye” in any context that does not involve small children.
2. Any vehicle owner with a faux-Calvin-urinating-on-something sticker.
3. People who insist on men wearing ties.
4. The producers of automatically flushing toilets.
5. The men and women of Springfield, MO who sport non-ironic mullets (white men with soul patches will also be considered).

When the revolution comes, these people will be some of the first to go (assuming it isn’t a robot revolution, which I fear).  I’ll generally be a benevolent dictator, but in these cases I can’t make any exceptions.  Any suggestions would be welcome.

BibleXpress

A while ago I wrote about the possibility of Bible apps on the iPhone/iPod Touch, and now they’re becoming a reality.  While I haven’t had a chance to check them all out (plus, I don’t think I have that much money), the one right now that seems to rise to the top is BibleXpress.

While the price point seems steep ($29.99) with so few versions available (4 in 1.01, 2 additional versions are in Spanish), it’s actually not that bad of a price.  First of all, whenever new versions are added they will be pushed to existing users at no cost.  Until at least 80% of the net price is being paid as royalties the app will be updated.

Second, as of today there is only 1 free Bible app and it’s in Chinese.  The other apps range from $2.99 for the KJV to $17.99 for the ESV.  BibleXpress not only offers more versions than others, but the price per version (including the Spanish ones) is only $4.99.  In the future, it’ll probably be lower.

While I count vouch for all of the features, BibleXpress seems to be the best Bible app in the first round.  I’m sure more are to come, including ones that’ll be better, but BibleXpress is going to stick around in my phone for a while.

Edit: No word yet on a Greek text for the iPhone, but it can’t too far away.

Pretty funny list from Topless Robot (some may consider it a bit offensive). I won’t spoil it for you, but #1 involves a pregnant Snape.

I lift my soul to God,
My trust is in His Name:
Let not my foes that seek my blood
Still triumph in my shame.

Sin, and the powers of hell,
Persuade me to despair:
Lord, make me know Thy covenant well,
That I may ’scape the snare.

From the first dawning light
Till the dark evening rise,
For Thy salvation, Lord, I wait
With ever longing eyes.

Remember all Thy grace,
And lead me in Thy truth;
Forgive the sins of riper days,
And follies of my youth.

The Lord is just and kind,
The meek shall learn His ways,
And every humble sinner find
The methods of His grace.

For His own goodness’ sake
He saves my soul from shame:
He pardons, though my guilt be great,
Through my Redeemer’s Name.

by Isaac Watts

These are the kinds of things I think about pretty much all day long.  Oh, and I agree with the commenter who said that Dr. Strange’s Sanctorum is clearly an illusion.

N.T. Wright, in his commentary on Colossians, says the following about evangelism:

The task of evangelism is therefore best understood as the proclamation that Jesus is already Lord, that in him God’s new creation has broken into history, and that all people are therefore summoned to submit to him in love, worship and obedience. The logic of this message requires that those who announce it should be seeking to bring Christ’s Lordship to bear on every area of human and worldly existence. (79-80)

HT: Euangelion