A recent post of mine entitled The Question of Homosexuality is the Wrong Question has received quite a bit of feedback, both positive and negative. One church in the city has even read from my post in a sermon this past Sunday on the lies that the church should not believe. There are a number of outraged people and a number of people who are glad I wrote a post like this.

I will admit, where the post went in the comments was far from where I was intending to go with the original post. Nevertheless, I thought I would take the opportunity to explain myself, this site a bit and further clarify my views on homosexuality and the church.

• This site has always been my way of wrestling through issues that are important to me and the larger church. Anything I say doesn’t necessarily reflect the opinions of my past self or my future self. I have taken the liberty of being able to change my mind whenever I want about whatever I want on this site. Sometimes I say things I don’t mean at all to pull out reactions or to help bring perspective from the other side. There are many people who don’t understand the blogging world and what it is good for, but I find it useful to rant and wrestle with issues in a public sphere. If it was my statement of faith, well then no one would really have a clue what I believe.


• For some reason people care way too much about what people believe and not nearly enough about the lives people live. I can write a post about approving or disproving homosexuality and I’ll have 50+comments of people excited or pissed off at me for whatever words I am stating. If I write a post about a story where someone was taking care of the orphans and the windows, I’d get a few comments saying nice things and then it would never be read again. What is our obsession with what we believe? If we go back to James then we all know that whatever we believe is dead if there isn’t action tied to it. It doesn’t bother me nearly as much if someone is a heretic with their mouths but is living a life that is striving to be like Christ.


• I am extremely glad that I wrote the post the way I did. The reactions I got both in the comment section, but more specifically in person, only served to prove the very point I was making in the post. Homosexuality for some reason has become the epitome of sin in the church. Homosexuals are used constantly has examples to make poor theological statements about the sinfulness of our country. They are also used as examples about how the church is lowering its standards. The very fact that so many people are so repulsed by the idea that someone would approve of such a “sin” proves my post entirely. The question of whether or not homosexuality is wrong or not is not the only question the church should be asking. The question is a fine one to ask (like Tom and I discussed in the comments section of the last post) but only with a mutual understanding that wherever people end up on the issue, it is not grounds for divorce. We should also be asking different questions, like John pointed out in the comments. Maybe the question should be how do we treat all sinners? What types of roles can any sinner, repentant or not, have in the church? Why are we more inclined to hate some sins and not others? Should sexual identity really come before faith identity?


• This is an extremely difficult question for me. I find myself defending both sides at times. I can’t really accept the militant way of either side. When people attack the church and say the church should open their arms up completely to homosexual couples, bless and affirm them and hate those churches that do not, I find myself defending the church. The church has a long way to go to truly embody the Kingdom of God, but give them a break. Their founding story is based on the idea of one women and one man. Churches and large institutions need time to formulate and wrestle with issues like this and there is nothing wrong with that. The Church eventually or at least certain sects of the church, like in Acts 15 will come to find what is good for this time. As long as someone’s humanity is recognized and people are truly loved then it’s probably not worth getting that upset over. On the other side, when people make homosexuality to be the worst deviance known to man and refuse to give homosexual people a rightful voice and treat them like humans, well then I will fight pretty hard on their side and hopefully give them a voice. There is no easy answer right now to this question and we need to be aware that we are dealing with questions that are at the core of who people are, and black and white regimented laws don’t work well with real people.


• Sin will always be an issue no matter what. Which is why I think we need to figure out what we are going to do with sinners, more than what is a specific sin or not. We all have sins that we don’t think is sin that we willingly take part in every day. Whether it be our bad eating habits, are over-consumption, gossip, our bad attitude, our supporting of sweat shops by what we purchase and the list goes on. The fact is that we are all sinners and we all fall short of the glory of God. Whether you think homosexuality is wrong or not has little to do with the final equation. The church is compromised of people who want to be the hands and feet of Jesus. People who sin, people who intentionally sin and people who refuse to repent at all for things that you think are sin can still be attempting to follow Jesus. We are all on our journey somewhere and trying to figure this out, and that’s the beauty of grace. Grace makes room for our intentional sins too. So whether or not someone is a homosexual, really does not have much to do with if grace is coming their way or not. Whether or not someone agrees with homosexuality or not, also doesn’t have much to do with the grace that is coming their way. So if it’s going to turn into that big of a deal, then it’s worth downplaying the importance of the question all together and focusing on better ones.


• So really, anyone can take what you want about my opinions of homosexuality that became a little clearer in the comments section. I do believe the church has the freedom to decide where to take this issue. Some respected denominations have decided to marry and ordain homosexuals and others have decided not too. Any side that you land on should not equally land you in expulsion from your faith community. Any side that you land on should not make it out to seem like you are for or against Christ. There are beautifully passionate Christ followers on both sides of the fence.


• At this point in my life, with the biblical evidence before me, I don’t think the Bible says a whole lot about two same gendered people coming into a life-long commitment with each other. There are verses throughout the Old Testament that reference homosexuality as an abomination, but there are also some that say misbehaving children and those that work on the Sabbath should be killed. There are verses in the New Testament that say that it’s unnatural to be homosexual, but there are also verses that say women should not teach in a church. I wrestle with the interpretations of these verses and struggle with where to land with them. Somehow we were able to understand the context of the time that these were written for these other laws, and I think it’s only a matter of time before we make room to understand the context of which Paul speaks about homosexuality. I agree that if we are speaking of a purely sexual and physical act, then homosexuality doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me. However, I’m also aware that homosexuality runs a lot deeper than physical attraction and I don’t want to come against the good in a relationship in fear of the unknown or what I believe to be unnatural. So if my true beliefs were to be really known, I’m truly stuck in the middle. No side fully convinces me right now. So I’ll sit in the middle and play both sides when the time is right and keep praying and seeking.

My challenge isn’t to those who hold different views than me on the topic of homosexuality. My challenge is to those on either side of the equation that refuse to be in community with those on the other side. If the church can’t uphold and make room for both perspectives then we are failing to be the church. Both sides need to understand both sides. If we want to kick someone out of the church because of their views on homosexuality (right or wrong), then I feel like we have completely missed the heart of Jesus. Jesus on one of his beautiful rants leaves his listeners with this in John 5

You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

The Pharisees didn’t get it. They thought salvation came through following laws and that unless Israel was holy enough then their Messiah wouldn’t come and save them. They spent all their time seeing if Jesus matched up to their laws that they missed Jesus. I don’t want to miss Jesus. Frankly, I’m willing to say the same thing to the church today. We try so hard to study the scriptures and make sure we have everything right because we think that we find salvation in them. When Jesus is just standing there and the only way to truly find salvation is through him.

I spent some time over the last week reading all the 60 or so posts for the Synchro blog. All these bloggers came together to share their thoughts on how to bridge the gap between people of all sexual orientations and the church. You can check out the other blogs by clicking below. My Post | Blog List | Twitter Feed

Here were a few posts that stood out to me from the pack that I really enjoyed.

Deeper Moments
Sharing the Gospel in the Gay Village
Grace Unfolding
What I Learned from Kim and Luane
Confessing Assumptions About Sexual Identity :: Moving Away From Drawing Lines to Starting Dialogue
Befriending our Gay Neighbours
Sexuality Issues
Christianity and Homophobia
Paradoxy
Some Stats That are Interesting

Update: The exposure for this post has created quite a stir, both positive and negative, so I have written a bit more on the subject here to help clarify and explain some of this post and what was written in the comments.

My post today is part of a larger initiative of more than 60 bloggers all coming together to share their thoughts on how to bridge the gap between people of all sexual orientations and the church. You can check out the other blogs by clicking below. Blog List | Twitter Feed

I still remember one day during Grade 11 English class, when my teacher was at the back of the room wiping tears from her eyes. She wanted us to write a response to the situation when a Catholic high school student wanted to bring his same-gendered partner to prom. Instead of writing a response, I put up my hand and explained how crazy I thought she was that she would even make us respond to such a situation. I was convinced it was clearly wrong and I shouldn’t be subjected to her ideologies.

Then an argument broke out between us, right there in the middle of class. Most of the other students kept quiet. I don’t think homosexuality was on the forefront of any of their minds at the time so they didn't say much. Perhaps many were apathetic and hadn’t allowed this controversial topic much personal thought. Or maybe they just decided to keep their views to themselves in spite of the present circumstances. However, as a result of my indoctrination by a charismatic church, I had already made up my mind on the subject. Like any good Christian, unashamed of his faith, I told her exactly how I felt: that it was sin. Within a few minutes, she was holding back the tears because of how insensitive I was.

Through tears, she told us that in university she took a class titled ‘Homosexuality in Shakespeare’ and that she was the only heterosexual student in the class. She went on to say that it was her favourite class not because of the subject matter, but because she was able to see beyond stereotypes and recognize a group of marginalized humans as people, no different than anyone else. Some of her best friends came from this class and she loved them dearly. I was indifferent. I was a sixteen year old, know-it-all who just had to make sure that she, and the entire class, knew what was right and what was wrong. It was a black and white issue for me.

That was seven years ago and I feel like I’ve come a long way since then. In fact, many friends think I’ve gone far too far in the opposite direction. I find myself way more empathetic with those who are gay and those pastors who would marry gay couples than I do with the majority of the church population that looks down upon it. Plenty of factors have gone into forming my new worldview.

For starters, the way I read the Scriptures now, and the way I understand the church and its role in the world has released me to not be so driven by what I think is right and wrong. When I stopped viewing the Bible as a moral code for my life and started seeing it as a story of a God who is passionately in love with his creation, everything looked different. Grace is becoming my language rather than rules, and this has changed the way I see sin and the spiritual condition of everyone around me. Humans are not a sum of their sins and the death and resurrection of Christ made sure of that. People are humans in need of grace and loved by God first. We can tack on whatever adjectives we want after but they don’t really help us define someone. My part in anyone’s journey is to love them and proclaim the Good News, not to explain to them where they fall out of line.

For me, sin is no longer reduced to individual acts of good or bad. We are all sinful beings. Furthermore, to reduce sin to a single personal action is to negate Christ’s death and focus on an individual pursuit of holiness by simply attempting to refrain from personal sinful acts. I think we do ourselves a disservice by identifying homosexuality as a specific sin. Personally, I’d rather just say we are all sinners, all of humanity, and leave it at that. Why do we insist on splitting up every individual action into categories and placing people into them?

As I begin to understand sex more, I have more grace for those who do not share the same sexual orientation of the majority. Most thoughts and actions in my own heterosexual relationships are full of selfishness, lust and improper desires. My wife and I have very different needs and desires that result in a daily struggle to understand each other’s point of view. When relationships disappoint, it is a natural reaction to look elsewhere, even outside societal norms, to fulfill these longings.

There is plenty of good in a relationship between two people of the same gender. No one would think twice if I had life-long committed relationships to the church or to another guy if we were strictly friends. But since there are reproductive parts involved we all of sudden deem this kind of commitment unthinkable. I fear that insecurity with our own sexuality has caused this uneasiness toward the homosexual lifestyle. Just because we hate the idea of homosexual sex, doesn’t mean we can toss out all the good parts of the relationship.

My relationship with my wife runs very deep and there are plenty of factors that play into it. If my relationship was all about sex, it would not be much of a relationship. We know though, that a part of marriage and relationships runs a lot deeper than just what happens with our bodies. One of the more beautiful parts of a marriage is the commitment and covenant to each other no matter what life brings. We should be affirming and blessing mutual covenants of love between any person and not denying them of a basic human need. We need to focus on what we affirm rather than what we want to get rid of. Why are we so bent on taking away all the good in a relationship? Is it just to prove our theology? Is it just to satisfy our own desires for holiness to be met around us?

What we really want to know is if God frowns upon homosexuality? Is it a sin? If you are coming from a Biblical perspective, it’s an easy response to point out that God intentionally created one man and one woman and the few verses here and there that reference it. May I offer a perspective that I think may be helpful?

Jesus reminds us over and over again that kingdom relationships look differently than the ones we have right now. If Jesus was serious in Matthew 22 that at the resurrection people won’t marry or be given in marriage, then this tells me that the future is a little out of the ordinary compared to where we are right now. The Sadducees tried to trap Jesus into questions about the rules and laws surrounding marriage. The Sadducees were using this woman as an example for their theological ideologies. Jesus threw out the entire question and told them that they were in error. How can you be in error by asking a question? Jesus seemed to have thought that the question was so flawed, that it wasn’t the question that was in error, but the actual people asking the question.

That’s what I am more inclined to do when it comes to the question of whether or not homosexuality is wrong and especially the question of how we are supposed to treat those who are homosexual. Throw out the questions entirely. It doesn’t really get us anywhere and only hurts the people we are talking about. We end up using homosexuality as a pedestal to spout off our ideas about the ways we think the world should be. In the meantime, we’ve hurt the people we are supposed to love in the pursuit of trying to force righteousness, something we know we can’t do anyway.

Instead, we could jump into the next few verses after this section when the Pharisees jumped in and asked Jesus what the greatest law was. The answer is obvious; blatantly obvious: Love God and love others. Our mandate as Christians is to bring God’s love, justice and mercy to the world; not the majority of the world, or one country of the world, or one race of the world. We are called to love our neighbour; all of humanity, regardless of sexual orientation.

Twitter for the most part is annoying. The last thing I want to do all day is sit in front of my computer and use one of the eight million or so add-ons/programs/features of Twitter to follow my friends and what they are thinking/doing every last minute of their lives. E-mail works fine for communication, at least meaningful conversation. There are good uses for Twitter though. I thought it was a great tool for the conference. It was cool to see all the thoughts throughout the day be compiled real-time. The most useful thing I find for Twitter though is how it keeps track of my online activity. When I put up a new post it would auto-post to my Twitter account, and I saw the benefit of it instantly.

Then I stumbled across FriendFeed. FriendFeed is by far the type of aggregation tool that I would rather use. It compiles my Evernote Quotes, Google Shared Items, Tweets, Delicious Bookmarks, Flickr Images, Youtube Uploads, Facebook updated, LibraryThing Books etc. I love it because I don't have to add yet another item to the list of things to do and update, it just knows and does it for me. Twitter is extra work, work that I don't really care about doing. FriendFeed does the work for me and compiles what I want for me, and I don't have to think about. Conveniently it auto-posts to my Twitter Account (which auto-posts to my Facebook Account) for me anyway.

This is really what I needed. Twitter in no way helps me sort anything, communicate anything worthwhile or adds anything to my life. Evernote sorts my quotes and keeps them organized and easily accessible, Library thing my books, Flickr my images, Youtube my videos, Delicious my bookmarks, Google posts and resources. Twitter didn't really do anything for me besides give me yet another way to tell everyone about everything I'm doing but didn't really add anything new to my online experience.

So I guess I'll keep my twitter account only because it is grabbing my feed from FriendFeed anyway.

Doubt is kind of a terrifying thing, or at least I was told it should be. When you start to doubt things you start to relinquish control over whatever you are doubting. If you give up control then naturally we start to think that something else is controlling you. We don’t like to be controlled so we push hard against anything that opens up the doors for that to happen.

I’ve seen this happen plenty of times within the circles that I hang with. I’ve had a number of friends that begun doubting their faith. What exactly they doubted varied from the belief in a God at all, to their view on the Bible, the Church and plenty of other heretical perspectives. What would generally happen is these friends would stop hanging out with us, stop attending Sunday services, stop living their lives like they used to and take time to themselves to figure out what they believed. This usually included spending time with new friends, plenty of drinking, pot, sleeping around and a few other creative vices. I can't help but think this is partially my fault because I didn't know how to stay friends with someone when they questioned my core beliefs. At the same time though, I don't think they knew how to be my friend while they questioned either.

Some of my friends have come back to their faith, and others haven’t. One thing still confuses me. I wonder why they have to leave the system that they are questioning why they figure out if they believe in it or not? Why do you have to leave the church to figure out if you believe in the church or not? The only real reason I can think of that makes sense of why people leave is that of shame. From my experience, the church has done a very poor job of allowing room for questions and doubt so the only option for people that are doubting and questioning is to leave and question from the outside. This usually leaves them with a skewed view of their faith and they never actually get to face into the questions that they have.

I wonder if my friends who left, doubting their faith, would have eventually found what they were looking for if they decided to stay within the system that they were doubting. Do you have to leave to have an objective view or can you do it from the inside? I want to think that you can have a more objective, or at least a more hands on perspective if you decide to stay and question from the inside of whatever you are questioning. I’m wondering if we can do that as communities following Christ? Can we actually embrace the Thomas’ in our mist or will we just get frustrated and push people away with our fear of someone questioning what we believe? It won’t be easy. Some of the things that we hold dear to our faith will be out in the open begging for answers.

I’m starting to think the only way to truly test faith or a belief is to jump blindly into it and see how it goes. How long can we pick apart things from the outside claiming that it’s not for us or that we are just waiting to see? It’s the only way I know how to explain my faith nowadays it seems. "Just try it" I’ll say. "If you don’t like it then leave, but I’m not going to try to convince you with arguments anymore, just join me as I try to figure this out also."

What do you think? Do you think it’s better to step out of the craziness for a while to get a better perspective? Or is it better to jump head first in and battle out your questions inside the system that you are questioning?

I’ve been finding myself getting more and more frustrated lately with how people spend their money. When I hear stories of 2 million dollar church building projects, 50 thousand dollar pothole fundraising campaigns, the 40 billion or so Americans spends on their pets or just watching the local Wal Mart parking lot fill up with people before the sun has crawled its way to our side of the hemisphere I cringe. The typical responses are evoked from me like there are people in third world countries that would be much better off if only you weren’t so selfish. The local homeless shelter needs food before your potholes need to be filled and the list goes on.

The stories are endless. The outrage we all felt when we found out about the AIG bonuses spread quickly and we couldn’t believe anyone would do such a horrendous thing. We all feel ripped off when the government is bailing out major corporations. How dare they waste such a sacred, spiritual, valuable and important part of our lives. And in saying that previous sentence, is where I got the hint that we may have a problem.

If I truely want to hold the view that money cannot impart true and eternal value then how did money all of sudden earn titles such as valuable, sacred, spiritual and important? In our world, money is nothing more than a number on your screen or paper. There is no real value whatsoever in money. We give it all it's value in how we treat it, how we use it and how we look at it. In looking at it that way, I'm fascinated that money holds such a power in our lives. Somehow all of our value and security comes from numbers and paper.

If this isn't where our value comes from, if this shouldn't be where our security, purpose and love comes from then why do I get so angry when its spent improperly? I am learning not to care about the numbers and paper like I used to. By getting angry and vocal about how poorly someone spends their money, I feel like I am only perpetuating a system that puts money on a pedestal as something that should be held with utmost respect and honour. Something I don't think money deserves.

I have a feeling that this story and this story of Jesus pulling the coin from the fish's mouth and him talking about paying taxes has a lot to do with how our theology around money should be shaped. Jesus is asked if it is right to pay taxes to Caesar or not and he said to give to Caesar what is Caesar's and give to God what is God's. My understanding of this statement is that he could care less about what you do with your money, it's just inanimate objects that's only value is the value that we impart to it. However, what you do with yourself is what he is concerned with. Give it to God who cares about all these loose coins and what happens to them.

So I've decided (at least for now) that all the injustices that I cry out about over the bad spending of money aren't as important as I always thought they were. My cry for injustice is more sounding like cries against disrespecting the God of money, a cry I can't allow be muttered from my lips anymore. If anything, maybe I'll just be concerned with how we are giving to God's what is God's and allow what is Caesars to hang out in the world of Caesar. It sounds better to me than trying to give what is Ceasar's to God, cause apparently God doesn't care all that much with what happens to it.

Giving, therefore--dumb, no-reason-for-it unloading of money--remains the only hope of a cure for the disease of money.
Robert Farrar Capon

Geez Magazine this month was brilliant. It has hit me where I feel stuck in my faith as of late. I feel stuck because "standing up for what you believe in is awkward, especially when you yourself are part of the problem" as Will Braun puts it. I have been asked to stop being so vocal in my local paper because it makes me and my local community look hypocritical because we aren't really living out all that well the words that I am speaking. I can't stop. So I guess I'll have to risk being a hypocrite while I strive to actually live out the kingdom that I believe in.

Go buy a subscription.

A few excellent quotes from a few excellent articles.

Violent means to peaceful ends: Computing Congo’s mineral war
by Dan Leonard
We need to own up to the fact that we are in the ironic situation of hugging our global partners with one arm and punching them with the other. It’s good that the British doctor was able to save a life via text message, but that doesn’t change the fact that for all the lives saved by cellular technology in eastern Congo, the extractive industry that cell phones require has played a role in killing millions of others. And the fossil fuels we are burning to get ourselves to these places to offer a helping hand may one day put the homes of the very people we want to assist either in parched land or under water. In many cases, we do-gooders use exploitation to work against exploitation.

So how can we do good in the world without fueling the same systems of exploitation we are trying to work against? Maybe the first step is to embrace the awkward silence created when we admit that our responses to the world’s problems are not adequate. We have no viable plan to make poverty history, stop climate change, end homelessness, or solve any of the other issues we privileged progressives speak so confidently about. The solutions we do offer are almost always tangled in problems.

Uneasy pause
So maybe what’s needed is the uneasy pause that often follows an apology, the silence of repentant people, tired of being on the wrong side of exploitation but not sure how to avoid it. We are trapped in riches every bit as much as others are trapped in poverty, and our collective liberation may just start by sharing an awkward silence. In this case it would be the uncomfortable hush of us privileged people admitting that after years of good intentions gone terribly wrong, we’re shit out of ideas.

I suspect that this quiet paralysis would create space in which the silenced and marginalized people, the ones who have been waiting so patiently and graciously in the midst of the endless noise of their oppressors, to finally speak a new word of liberation.

Dan Leonard works for an international non-profit organization and has traveled extensively in sub-Saharan Africa. He is a member of the Geez board.

Not one of those
by Brenda Melles
The troubling truth is that Christianity is the only religious language I know. And I am fluent. It is my mother tongue, seeped into me like warm spring rain in black earth. I can win a “sword drill” against the fastest Bible-verse-finding fingers in the country. Sit me down and ask me to tell you the big story, from Genesis to Revelation, and I will. Quote me the red letters, and I will say amen. But throw me into Buddhism, black magic or Islam and I would be a traveller without a map.

Like it or not, Jesus is the best way I know to understand who God might be and how God might have us live. Sure, I’ve tried some alternative terms to position me in this camp – person of faith, believer, even church-goer – but they seem so esoteric, so distant from this person of Jesus who I confess, has captivated me. And what does the term “Christian” mean if not one who acknowledges the reality of Christ?

So, Jesus, I’m with you. I’ll keep wearing your label. For now. And as for the rest of you folks that call yourselves Christians – all ye fundamentalists and liberals, emergents and evangelicals, backsliders and legalists, all ye gays and homophobes, wife-beaters and feminists, trickle-downers and socialists, the whole contradictory lot of you – I begrudgingly, painfully, hesitantly, humbly, hope-fully admit . . . we’re in this together.

Brenda Melles is a freelance writer and international development consultant based in Kingston, Ontario.

And of course, a quote we've used often.

Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for – in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it.
Ellen Goodman

Update: I really do not want this post to become a central topic surrounding the death of Jim Stokley. Jim was an important part of this city, and I hope that we can see him for that. Here is a great article printed in the Observer about Jim and his love for his family and the kind of person he was.

Update: Since writing this the Sarnia Skeptic has taken down his post (which is sort of ridiculous). This is the problem with anonymous identity on the Internet. There is no responsibility for your actions. You can say what you want with no backlash for the type of person you are. So I'm taking the liberty of quoting his entire post here which I conveniently found cached in Google. So you can read his post and then read my response.

There Is No God
Well, for those who know me, I lost one of my best friends yesterday. Jim Stokley - at 50 - organizer of the world-class Bayfest festival in Sarnia, died on June 5, 2009.

For those that knew the real Jim know that he did what was right for the right reasons - he didn't do it for a reward in an afterlife - he did it because it was the right thing to do. He touched and enhanced the lives of hundreds - no - thousands of people and, possibly, no one more than my wife and I.

Jim's loss is proof enough that there is no God. Any God willing to take the life of a devoted husband and father of two young children who did nothing but for the betterment of our community and others is a God hardly worth worshipping.

No matter how you wanted to coat it, Jim always wanted the truth. He also gave nothing but the truth, as far as he could be sure, to anyone who asked. In doing so, he has provided priceless advice and support to countless business persons and individuals in our community and abroad. He is a man unlike most - a man of virtues and values, a man of caring and compassion and - especially unlike most others - couldn't care less about being recognized for it. He has donated hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars in his lifetime - most of it anonymously - for no personal promotion or public recognition - he did it because he could and because it was the right thing to do. Jim had a heart of gold and cared more than anyone will know.

I love you Jim and I will miss you. You are more alive to us today than a God ever has been and we look forward to keeping your name, mission and goals alive. We will help and support your family and we will do, as you would, whatever is necessary to keep alive the hopes and dreams of others.

If God existed today, I'd crucify him myself for such a horrid act towards one of the greatest people who has ever lived.

The Sarnia Skeptic wrote the post above about Jim Stokley, a Sarnia businessman who has made quite a dent in the city over the past number of years and who has recently passed away. He disabled his comments, so I decided to write my comment on my site instead.

Dear Sarnia Skeptic.

I lament the loss of Jim Stokely, he did some great things in Sarnia, and while I didn't know him that well personally besides a few transactions, I respected him as a business guy and a local Sarnia man. I remember him giving us a good deal on the Industry one night because he really appreciated some of the stuff that went on at Temple when I was involved in their day camp setup because his kids attended there. It sucks he is gone, and Sarnia will have a hole without him here.

With that being said, I find it odd that you would take such a personal situation and turn it into more "proof" for the non-existence of God. It seems after reading your blog for the past little while that it is mostly full of the same attitude, certitude and "religion" that I tend to stray away from within my own faith circles. I'm annoyed when someone doesn't care to meet someone and they would rather just hit them on the side of the head with a few phrases (via bumper sticker, or faith tracks, and now blogs) about what they believe. It never sat right with me to take a eulogy at someone's funeral and turn it into a turn or burn sentiment for the Christian faith. It frustrates me when someone forgets about the person and makes them into a token example for some proof of something they've been saying all along.

Christians do that shit all the time and for a long time I thought it was just Christians. Then I realized that it's not just Christians, but its humans. For some reason we tend to take things that are just meant to be mysterious (ie. death) and turn it into a formula as to why or why not God does or does not exist or act a specific way. You unfortunately don't sit any more right with me than the right winged, evangelical, turn or burn Christians that you and I despise so much. Your approach seems to come from a place of bitterness and resentment, not a place of love. Call it what you will, it appears that your blog is similar to all the things inside the church that bothers me, but instead of it being wrapped with the Jesus brand, it is wrapped with your Atheist one.

Please don't turn the death of one human into (anti)religious propaganda. Mourn a death, don't use it as a pedestal to spout of more of the same stuff that you've been saying all along. Stokley dying is no more proof God doesn't exist than when Mother Theresa died, or when you will die someday.

Darryl's been doing some writing lately. He's written a few parables and one we thought was a perfect fit to end our 8 months series on the parables at theStory. So Joe and I took his two paragraphs and turned it into 15, shook it up a bit, added some Hollywood and made it interesting and detailed (you know, like every parable is).

We read the parable all at once, and then went through it in 7 stages. Each stage representing a different month we did in the parables. We quickly overviewed the 8 months, tossing in great quotes here and there. For a complete list of those quotes and a few other things from the month, Joe has put together a compilation of the month here.

I wanted to post just the parable we did though cause I thought it was great.


The One About the Building

In an attempt to position itself for successful ministry, a certain church consulted a renown architect who hailed from outside their town to help design a building that would both meet their needs and propel their efforts forward.

All the usual types that are invited to preside over such decisions were there: The pastor; the rich guy; the general contractor; the visible minority and the token woman.

During the first consultation, the pastor began to explain to the architect what they had in mind. "We need a great building in a great location. It needs to be fresh and unprecedented. It must have landmark qualities and be a safe distance from both the sketchy part of town and the business district to avoid any sort of negative influence. Does that make sense?"

The architect began to furiously scribble down the details then took a moment to sort through his notes and said: "Sounds like you're looking for something that will separate you from the rest. Something that will render your competitors obsolete, an edifice that unmistakably makes a statement."

The committee inched to the edges of their seats and with giddy anticipation awaited the architect's insight.

"Sounds like you're looking for a skyscraper" he announced.

The committee, now shifting uncomfortably back into their seats, looked to the pastor who verbalized what he had quickly gleaned from his team's body language.

"Uh...well...er...I'm not sure if we've explained ourselves very well. What we are trying to say is that we want to serve the public - clean people up and show them the error of their ways. We need to create opportunities for our members to safely and efficiently spread the gospel because after all, this is what we believe God demands."

Feeling confident about their pastor's re-explanation, the team was now at ease. Glancing over the top of his glasses, the architect flipped the page of his notepad and started fresh.

After an extended pause, he smiled, and presented his idea.

"What about some sort of 9-5 drive-thru facility? Your goods and services could be neatly packaged and administered in a speedy fashion. For your protection, and to avoid potentially dangerous or compromising situations, we could outfit the space with state of the art automatic sliding windows, surveillance cameras..."

Before he could finish, and totally out of turn, the rich guy blurted out "No, no. You're not hearing us. You've got us all wrong."

The meeting was not going as smoothly has the pastor had hoped. He began to nervously fiddle with cell phone, flipping it open and closed, open and closed.

"Then help me understand your clientele. Describe your target audience, then perhaps we could bring our ideas closer together" the architect suggested.

"Our community" continued the rich guy, "is primarily comprised of good people that come from good stock. On average our parishioners have a minimum 4 year undergraduate degree, they vote conservative, they've worked hard and earned all they have and our records indicate that the majority live on or near the beach."

"So you want a members only country club?" smirked the architect.

An uncomfortable chuckle swept the room followed quickly by whispering and shaking heads. The pastor sensed that he may be losing control of the meeting. In hopes of re-establishing focus, he called all to attention then re-booted the discussion in a calm and peaceful manner.

"Friends, let's not get off track here. In order for the architect to help us, we need to be very clear with our purpose, mission, vision and values. He can't help us unless we can clearly articulate who we are."

The conversation seemed to suddenly dry up.

Uncomfortable with the awkward moment, the architect spoke up in an effort to jumpstart the conversation and ultimately earn his keep.

"What sort of thing do you people do?" he asked.

Matter-of-factly, the general contractor attempted to paint an accurate picture of their day to day operations.

"Well," he said, "we have staff members with various responsibilities that require rooms and offices to do their jobs. And we obviously hold a church service, so we'll need a space that will accommodate everyone showing up all at once for about two hours once a week. In addition, we're going to need a facility that will be able to track all of our assets to ensure that nothing ever gets misplaced or lost."

The tension was just beginning to ease until the architect suggested that perhaps all they really needed was an office building outfitted with various sized meeting rooms and work spaces.

"We could even install a swipe card system for everything from people to props...you'll never have to worry about losing anyone or anything ever again! We could design a perfectly controlled environment that is organized, professional and task oriented."

The suggestion went over like a lead balloon. The team stared back blankly.

Thoughtfully, the visible minority broke the silence: "Perhaps you misunderstood. We're not just ‘all-business' here. It's not about programs, or services here, what we really want is for people to go to heaven."

Looking around for affirmation from his team, he continued: "I mean, that's it right? Jesus is coming back soon, and we want to be ready. The scriptures say we'll be caught up in the sky with him, so we need something help us help people get to heaven."

The architect took that thought and ran with it. This time, instead of writing he drew up a quick sketch. Then, with best intentions and in all seriousness,
turned the sheet over and proudly offered this idea: "What you all need is a sports stadium with a retractable roof. You'll have more than enough space to play in your Christian sport leagues, have your Christian concerts, and hold your Christian conventions, then, in the event that your saviour returns, you pull the roof back, and have easy access to the sky."

He grimaced. But a quick scan of the room revealed that he was alone in his sense of accomplishment.

Back to the note pad.

Again he sketched.

"Well how about this?" he said touching up the drawing as he spoke. "You previously mentioned that you need something distinct yet secure. Something edgy, but respectable. Something to meet the various needs of the individual. And if I'm reading accurately between the lines you need something that is easily accessible yet keeps the right people in and the wrong people out."

He paused to temporarily enjoy what appeared to be the verge of a breakthrough. He'd felt this vibe many times before. The chin holding nods were a dead giveaway.

This time he proudly stood and presented his thoughts and sketch: "I give to you a gated community! The walls will be high enough to keep out the riff raff, but low enough for people to be able to see the individual towers and temples that house and keep track of your people, property and programs. The moat, of course, would be optional."

After a few seconds of silence, the token woman took one last attempt to steer things in a better direction.

"Sir, we don't mean to waste your time, but I don't think you understand where we're coming from. We want to be a community that is known by our love. Grace, forgiveness, mercy are the things that help us understand our God, and we want to embody those very attributes. In essence, we are God's temple."

Confused and obviously disappointed, the architect collected his papers, and proceeded to snap his briefcase shut. Moving towards the pastor, he extended his right hand in closure. The shake was firm yet brief.

Stunned, the team watched as the architect headed straight for the door. Just before stepping out, he paused, turned, and addressed the room:

"I cannot help you."

Then I wrote this prayer to end the series.

Father,

Help us understand your kingdom
That when we fall asleep, it keeps on going
That, for a time, good and evil inevitably co-exist
Where we think it's small, it's how you like it
When we think it's not there, it's everywhere
That it has more value than our eyes can see

Give us grace to understand your grace
That we receive your grace not based on who we are
but because of who you are
When we think we have arrived and have it all together
Humble us quickly, for we are sinners

Give us courage to follow in Jesus' footsteps
Point us to the better ground to build
Help us see truth inside of ugliness
Help us see love inside of foolishness
Remind us that we are equal
No better than our fellow man
Remind us of our value as your sons and daughters
Remind us of the cost of following you fully

We can't find ourselves
We can't make it easier to find us
We are just lost, waiting for you to find us
When you find us, we will party
We will party because you have brought us home

Even though your net of grace gathers up everything in its path
We still want to do the sorting for you
We have our own standards in what we think is good
May we quit our book-keeping
Your scales are different, and nothing like ours
Your timing is different, we like to rush
Eventually the bad will be sorted out
Sorted by grace, not revenge

So many things get in our way
Money is the worst
We think it gives us security and hope for our future
But it doesn't
Money is to give, not to receive
Money doesn't have value, and the lack of it doesn't remove value
Help us not to be controlled by what we have or don't have
Help us love, rather than control

Thank-you for forgiving us
For our multitude of sins
Let us wear your clothing of forgiveness
Into every relationship we have
May we forgive others, as you have forgiven us

May your stories sit in our minds
Expressed through our hands
Spoken from our mouths
May we follow you to the end of the line
May we follow you to the losers
May we follow you to your death
So you can give us true and beautiful life

Amen.

I went out with Troy Shantz (who is my newest friend here renting space from theStory) and Nikki Gould on a trash the dress shoot. We ended up at the old Holmes Foundry and exploring. The location was so dirty and trashy that we didn't do much trashing of the dress and more just really got what we could out of the location. Next time we'll move it to some dirt or water to really make it exciting. This is the first time I've ever done anything like this, so it was pretty fun. Elegance Bridal donated a few dresses and Louise Cook and Sam Scimmi were our models and we shot away for a few hours. It was awesome. The pressure of having to have the right shots for a real wedding was off and we just got to have fun. Check out 41 of the photos here, and here is a few of my favourites below. I don't know what it was, but I was loving the one setup of Sam in the half open door with the light shining in the back.

I’m tired of big monster churches, leaders and organizations not caring about the small and insignificant.

It’s everywhere. This conference has been going on in the States for the last few years. It’s called Q. It’s a play off the TED conferences, and generally I think it’s a good idea (we may or may not have something up our sleeve that is in similar taste). Except, I’m annoyed because it is invite only. I’m annoyed because from what I can tell it costs $625 to attend (Last year was $825 after early bird deadline). I’m annoyed because only the “remarkable leaders” will be there. There is so many things that annoy me about this type of idea that I want to get out of conference organizing all together.

When will we remember Jesus’ words that it’s the unremarkable that inherit the kingdom of God? Why are we so obsessed with these seemingly Christianity gurus who we have entrusted to “collaborate around the biggest questions facing the church today.” Give me a break. I hope they can save us and figure out what we are doing wrong.
Here is another reason I’m annoyed.

A few friends I know, who really truly care about the church, can barely pay the bills because they would rather be the church that they believe in than work for a church they sort of care about. To make matters worse. Big churches have no problem swooping in and preying on them while they make small steps with their communities to pluck them up into a more corporate, bigger expression. Why is it that those that actually care about being the church can’t afford to be and those that care more about their own livelihood end up hogging it all to themselves? Where are the folks that are blessed with good pay cheques to step up and give some of it away to those that need it? Where is the pastor who makes over $70k a year who is willing to give some of his salary to a struggling pastor of a smaller community in the same city?

For once I would love to see a big church that sacrifices itself for the small church. For once I’d love to see a powerful pastor sacrifice himself for a no-name one. For once I’d love to see a big church who is concerned with more than just spreading their brand.
I’m also annoyed because a man, easily over 70, told me to get off the fuckin sidewalk on Saturday when I was riding up on the sidewalk to park my e-bike. Him being annoyed at me, made me annoyed at him and we got in a little yelling match. I really didn’t do my part to break the cycle of being pissed off, I just got more pissed off at him and we had our words back and forth. Looks like I ruined his entire day because I used the sidewalk to get to my parking spot, and he ruined mine because I couldn’t be patient enough to not get pissed off at him. So I guess I’m more annoyed at myself. Dumb old cranky people.

I enjoyed this parable.

I’m done being annoyed now. I’m over it all. Just needed to get that out.

The title says it all really. I’ve been wrestling with this, publicly even, for a while now. I’m just realizing that no matter how hard I try to create a name for myself, my friendships stay the same. I can have a few thousand friends on facebook, even more followers on twitter, thousands of hits a day on my website, run conferences that hundreds of people come to, write books, star in movies, be a radio voice or protest loudly and when its all over, I still only really have a few meaningful connections.

It doesn’t matter how much influence you have over people or how many people know your name or like what you produce. As a human you can only have a limited amount of close, meaningful connections. They will usually consist of family and a few close friends, a number of acquaintances and that is about it. Do you really know anyone with a hundred best friends?

So this leaves me wondering what the big deal is about being a big deal? Why do we constantly strive to be noticed, important and respected? Is it because we don’t really find a lot of security in the relationships we currently have? Are they not deep enough? Maybe we are prideful and we love the attention. If we know we can’t really handle any more relationships, there has got to be a good reason why we are tricking ourselves and trying to trick everyone around us. It feels good. Friend lists stroke our ego. Acknowledgment reminds us of why we work so hard. We don’t really care if we have a few meaningful connections, as long as we can give off the impression that we have plenty.

I want to know that my range of influence goes well beyond my close circle of friends. More importantly, I want people to know that my influence is wide and far beyond circle. Quickly though, this desire turns into a task-driven, relationally starved pursuit that leaves me empty. I’ve always wondered what it is like for a celebrity to go home. Do their kids, wives and friends stare at them in awe and snap pictures of them the entire time? Probably not. Rather, this is where celebrities go to be with their meaningful connections. Friend’s make jokes about their new haircut, their children screaming that they want more dessert and cuddling up next to their spouse after a long day. Finally they can let their guard down, and just be themselves. These are the relationships that we all have, that need all of our attention.

With the digital age upon us. It is too easy to pour way too much time, energy and resources into our online image. We spend quite a bit of time editing our bios, posting pictures, updating twitter and putting the right order of words in the about us page on our websites that we forget what is happening right in front of us. Churches spend more money on their websites than ever before. They probably spend more time meeting about their websites than they do to meet about individual needs in the community. Why? So the outside world knows who they are, knows what they stand for and knows how awesome their church is.

I hope we can start to see our relationships, that are right in front of us, as the thing that motivates us. May we remember that we can go big and have a few meaningful connections, or we can stay small and have a few meaningful connections. Why would we ever choose to go big rather than to boost our own ego? Both sides are realities that only happen by intention, but may we follow the path of Jesus and make ourselves nothing. Focus in on what is right in front of you. Love your neighbour. Pay attention to the subtleties of life. Forget about your world-wide audience and pour your energy into your local one. Either way you are only going to have a few meaningful connections. So make them count. Don’t spend all your time trying to convince those few that you are greater than you really are.

This is one of my favourite parables. I’ve brought it up over and over again here on Sunday mornings and because I think in it lies truths that we all need to hear over and over again and not just having sitting on the back burner. Let's read from Luke 7:36-50

Now one of the Pharisees invited Jesus to have dinner with him, so he went to the Pharisee's house and reclined at the table. When a woman who had lived a sinful life in that town learned that Jesus was eating at the Pharisee's house, she brought an alabaster jar of perfume, and as she stood behind him at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears. Then she wiped them with her hair, kissed them and poured perfume on them.

The setup for this story is most likely a banquet which is setup to honour Jesus. The way it would have worked is that normally traveling teachers would have been invited, after they had preached, to the Sabbath meal. When Luke tells us that they reclined at the table, it would have hinted to a formal occasion. Women did not usually eat with men at banquets. In the Middle East banquets would tend to be a little less private than what we have now. The houses would be open and uninvited people could come in and observe from the sidelines among the servants. Women and slaves would have stood outside the circle of tables and near the feet of the guests.

Then this woman walks into the scene with tears flowing, hair flowing and expensive perfume flowing. We are not told the reason for this woman’s tears, and so we should probably leave it undecided. All we know is that there is lots of gratitude because to kiss and person’s feet is a sign of the most heartfelt gratitude, such as a man might show to one who had saved his life. She also unconsciously took off her head covering and unbound her hair in the presence of men. Which according to some rabbis of this time, this was enough reason for divorce. To anoint Jesus’ feet and to kiss them repeatedly, and dry them with her hair would have been considered an erotic and shameful act. She was evidently so grateful at having smothered Jesus with her tears, that she completely forgot her surroundings.

Anointing with oil would have been a pretty regular thing to do. What was not normal was anointing with expensive perfume. What was also strange was anointing feet with perfume and most certainly offensive. If the woman was a prostitute, which we aren’t certain of, the perfumed ointment would have been used in her profession. We have to understand again where the Pharisees are coming from. These people were extremely concerned about ritual purity. One rabbi (T. Yoma) argues that uncleanness is worse than bloodshed. This helps us see the gravity of the situation, defilement was a much more serious matter among ancient Jews than we can imagine.

The beginning of this parable is loaded with hints to let us know that this woman is in the wrong place at the wrong time doing the wrong thing. It would be the equivalent of a stripper walking into this room right now and doing a lap dance for Ron over here, but she would be crying out of gratitude for whatever reason. What would be the thoughts that would be flying through our head?

When the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, "If this man were a prophet, he would know who is touching him and what kind of woman she is—that she is a sinner."

Luke has a specific agenda in his gospel. Luke has a very special concern for sinners. This story is a very clear example of Jesus’ association with and reception by sinners. If you read straight through Luke tonight and pay special attention to all the time where he points out the division between the religious authorities and the sinful people attracted to Jesus you will find verse after verse of Luke making this distinction for us. Here we have the division not even being brought on by Luke, but by the Pharisee himself.

The Pharisees had a concern for purity at meals that we can hardly appreciate. With such purity concerns, Simon, the host, was convinced that Jesus’ tolerance of contact with this known sinner proved that eh could be neither righteous nor a prophet. Two passages from Sirach help to understand the Pharisee’s conclusion: 12:14, “So no one pities a person who associates with a sinner and becomes involved in the other’s sins”; and 13:17, “What does a wolf have in common with a lamb? No more than a sinner with the devout.” One of the most certain facts about Jesus is he associates with the wrong people, people others thought caused defilement, but Jesus did not fear becoming unclean by contact with the unholy. He thought holiness was stronger and more contagious than defilement, and he accepted the woman’s actions as righteous and loving.
--Klyne Snodgrass

This Pharisee allowed for the possibility that Jesus may be a prophet and now because of the entire situation his mind has been made up.

Jesus answered him, "Simon, I have something to tell you."
"Tell me, teacher," he said.

"Two men owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii , and the other fifty. Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he cancelled the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?"

Simon replied, "I suppose the one who had the bigger debt cancelled."
"You have judged correctly," Jesus said.

In typical Jesus style, the text said that the Pharisee said to himself, and then Jesus speaks to his thoughts and gives us his name. Teacher is a highly respected term and you wouldn’t throw it around lightly, but Simon is still able to give him this kind of respect.

Then Jesus jumps into the story. It is a very simple one. It is only two verses long. We’ve got this money lender, who obviously doesn’t care about money at all. He has two guys who owe him a large amount and a smaller amount and then based on nothing at all, he just cancels the debts. Hearers in this time would have been familiar with this idea of canceling debts. In Deuteronomy 15 and Leviticus 25 we find out about the year of Jubilee, where everyone’s debts are canceled. So it may have been a subversive idea to some, but it would not have been to Jews, because this idea of canceling debts was already ingrained into their belief system.

And like many parables, this one ends with a question requiring that the hearer passes a judgment. The answer to the question is extremely obvious but as Simon answers the question, he doesn’t realize he opened up a back door for Jesus to come in and pull out some karate moves.

Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little."

Then Jesus said to her, "Your sins are forgiven."

The other guests began to say among themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?"

Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Jesus is brilliant. Once Simon answers the question, the answer we all would have given the conclusion cannot be evaded. Obviously the person forgiven the greater debt should love more or possibly be more grateful. Jeremias, one of the authors we are reading for this series, argues that no word for thank or thankfulness existed in Aramaic, and therefore the Greek word for love (agapan) was used in the sense of gratitude or grateful love. So it’s not so much love that we are looking at here but it is the idea of grateful love.

Jesus then takes this opportunity to show that Simon hasn’t done anything to express any care at all. Where the women was over the top in her love expressed. The extravagance it seems Jesus took as either evidence of or grounds for forgiveness. The contrast places the woman in a much more honourable position than Simon and marks Simon as the one who loves little.

Underneath this story are questions of identity of everyone that is part of the story. To the Pharisee, Jesus could not be a prophet since he did not understand what kind of women touched him, but with some irony in the narrative, Jesus shows that he is a prophet because he knows what is in the Pharisees heart, and more than a prophet because he announces forgiveness.

The identity of the women is at issue. The Pharisee is sure she is a sinner, Jesus is sure she is a forgiven sinner.

The Pharisees identity is also in question. Is he as pure and right before God as he thinks? Directly related to issues of identity are issues of value and honour. Jesus’ understanding of the value and honour of people is at direct odds with that of Simon.

The sinner woman is better off than the Pharisee.

This parable is about identity and understanding our true identity. It is difficult to be gracious and generous people if we don’t understand our true identity.

I want to show a clip of a movie called Ordinary Radicals. I will leave a copy of the movie here in case anyone wants to borrow it, it’s a beautiful film. This clip helps exemplify what I’m trying to say about understanding our identity and who we are supposed to be.

Question: Could you have had the same position as the Amish? How did this clip make you feel?

I wanted to show this clip because I think it relates back to the forgiveness that we talked about last week. Forgiveness becomes part of a lifestyle that we decide upon ahead of time. After studying these parables I think we should have done this one first because I think it sets us up for last week’s parable. We all know that forgiveness is a good thing but to leave us with a parable like last week in that it basically says forgive or you won’t be forgiven, it’s sort of intimidating and it doesn’t leave us with a whole lot of answers to the question ok so what do we do now? In fact we sort of admitted to ourselves, at least some of us did, that we don’t want to forgive, or at least we don’t forgive everyone especially when they do something that hurts our kids.

I think if we were honest with ourselves we would see ourselves as the Simon of this story. We’ve somehow managed to elevate ourselves above those who are troubled and as we deem less than us. So when that stripper walks into the room (or that guy who drinks too much, or that marriage that barely works, or those crappy parents) we instantly have judged them and put them in their place in our minds. We don’t really think about it all that much. We don’t see it as a big deal. But then Jesus tells this story, and he leaves it just hanging there. He once again reminds us that the people we judge, the ones we think we are better than are the ones who he came to save. They are the ones who understand the kingdom. They are the ones that are blessed. So the question isn’t how can we be like Simon in all of our religious pride, but how can we be like the women who interrupts the dinner to express gratitude?

The difference between the women and Simon was their understanding of who they were. The difference between the two of them is their understanding of their debt that had been forgiven. The woman knew her place. She was desolate in the presence of Jesus. Her entire existence was in gratitude towards Jesus and who he was. She knew the kind of person she was and how much in need she was of Jesus and his forgiveness. Simon on the other hand was more like us. He kind of stood back and silently judged. He had spent his entire life making sure he was better than this woman and now look at this gross display of disrespect and her parading of her sin. How could Jesus even stand to be in the same room as this girl?

And wham. Jesus lays it on him. He flips his world upside down. Everything that Simon thought meant honour and righteousness was now working against him. Simon was so caught up in his own righteousness that he could no longer see the great debt that he had that was wiped away. Simon’s problem wasn’t that he hadn’t sinned enough; it was that he didn’t realize how much of a sinner he really was. Simon had reduced sin and sinfulness to an equation that made him greater and the woman less.

Q: Do we do this? Do we have scales of how bad something or someone is? Should we? Should we hold the view that all sin is equal or is some sin worse?

While I realize that there needs to be a strong stance against specific types of sin in our life. I’m not convinced God has reduced all of our actions down to sinful ones or righteous ones. If we truly believe in what Paul was saying that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, then I don’t know why we insist so much on labeling every action has a sinful one or righteous one. What if instead we looked at our entire lives and saw it as in need of God’s grace and slowly being transformed by it? If we did, then we wouldn’t end up in the same boat as the Pharisee thinking that there are actually two types of debts. This parable is an analogy, not a picture of reality. Jesus didn’t tell us this story trying to show us that there is two different kinds of people out there each having being forgiven a specific amount. He told this story to trap Simon in his own game. There is no greater debt and smaller debt in this life. We all have the greater debt. What there is though, is people who think they have a smaller debt and those that have a larger debt. We are all in the same boat. We all owe the 500 denari, none of us are in the position to say well I only owe the 50 so I guess I can’t love more.

This narrative is left open. It just sits there again, like most do. Challenging us to reconsider our stance and identity, as it challenges Simon to reconsider his. Then, once we can truly see our own stance and where we stand with God and each other, forgiveness will be easy. No one will have earned their forgiveness or their place with God. We will be no better off than the stripper that walks in here. The story of the Amish community all of sudden starts to make sense now. They have their roots founded in a place where they understand who they are.

Forgiveness really isn’t about the wrong doing that was done. Forgiveness is about us and our security in which we are. If we find our security in ourselves and our own works and what we’ve accomplished then we will not be able to forgive others, it just won’t happen. If we can see the truth though, in that God has forgiven me, us, the massive debt and see ourselves as sinners in need of grace, well then forgiveness and gratitude becomes natural.

I think we can leave this parable with the same challenge that Simon was given. If we can’t see ourselves as needing as much forgiveness as the person who we can’t stand the most, then we don’t understand our own depravity. Simon didn’t get it. He had the hierarchy already set up in his head, and he found his security in his own pursuit of righteousness, not in God.

Well Rachel and I crossed yet another item of her Things Before I Die (or what some call Bucket List). We went skydiving today. We found a place that let us free fall for 30 seconds by ourselves (without having to go tandem) on our first jump. Two instructors jump out behind you and fall beside you and bull your parachute for you after 25 seconds or so. It was amazing. You get up to speeds of 120 miles per hour and you have the beautiful Pinery and the shoreline of Lake Huron as your backdrop. You really can't beat it. Then you have to parachute by yourself to the landing zone with listening to your instructors voice over radio. He lands you right on target. Overall it was an amazing experience and I'm sure we'll be doing it again since it's so close (in Grand Bend). Here are some pictures. You can see a bunch more here.

I've stopped doing links on my site and moved over to Google Reader, Delicious and Twitter as a better way to share things I'm doing, reading and watching online. It's much less time-consuming and less in your face if you aren't interested. I've shared these videos via Google Reader, but I just think they are all great interviews that need to be more watched. So watch them.

Peter Rollins is obviously a gifted storyteller with great analogies and examples to help grasp what the church is called to do. This is an amazing interview.

Explaining Emergent Churches - Inner Compass from Calvin College on Vimeo.

A helpful interview to understand the difference between me and my parents, and me and most people I interact with in Sarnia all day long.

A movie that I hope to watch soon

And a movie I watched at the Justice Film Festival here in Sarnia last weekend. It was called We Feed the World, it's mostly done in subtitles, so you don't know what they are saying in the trailer but it is brilliant.