Preparing Christmas

Decorating gingerbread
































The size of the decoratés set the some limitation to the spread of decorations on the tree. (the boys fixed the balls.)




















Shopping the biggest Pooh's ever

Out on Ice

The pond near by froze and the boys and I slid around, checked the holes and had a good time.

Exploring Sign Language

I ended up sitting with the deaf in our church's Christmas celebration on Sunday. I had a great time singing along in the sign language and following the interpretation for the performed songs and the sermon. Singing along wasn't that hard for the most part, and anyway, many of the words are actually very straight forward and some so simple that you could guess them - on a good day at least. Like word fine (like "a fine shirt")

A couple of curiosities that sparked my thinking (true at least in Finnish Sign language)

Christmas: like undressing a fake beard.
The fact that this idea is seen as nearest to Christmas, certainly reveals that the language is not very old, and apparently not very idealistic to attempt linking Christmas with the Christian theme of the birth of Jesus. Sort of unfortunate but honest, I guess. I suppose it's up to the person themselves to make the connotations they like.

Messiah/Christ: sort of "gimme" sign with both hands.
The sign is equal "to expect/expected" which is different to the Hebrew/Greek "anointed one" and changes the whole idea of the word. But I suppose, it works in New Testament perspective. In a way it's also true that the words are not real Finnish or English either, and the way they are used sometimes stretches the meaning much further from the Biblical ideas than the "expected one" does.

I'm sure I'll do this again sometime soon, and perhaps catch up some more to be better able to contact the deaf. (I did learn some more than these three :) ) And I surely recommend it to you too, its fun at least.




T A K E C A R E

Gore Text Guitar Strings

I run into something weird the other day. I've been cutting the D string in my guitar constantly, and I thought to - just to elevate the self-esteem - blame it on the string. I thought that would be the pro's way. So I went to the store once again and asked him to sell me something better, because perhaps they've got a bad batch from the brand I've previously used (D'addario, the cheapest)

The guy in the store was a little suspicious towards my doubts about the bad batch, but happy to sell me a double priced Elixir Strings, and I thought to give them a go. The package states promisingly "great tone - long life" and I hope the long life refers to the endurance of the string, not the tone, not the least because of the price.

The secret of the strings is polymer coating (Gore, from the company behind the outdoor jacket's lining, too). They say it keeps the string from dirt and rust, providing a fresh tone for a longer time. All I noticed is that they don't feel steel-cold like strings normally do, but warm like plastic.

So, I now have a gore-tex rocking strings. And, to afford to rock like pro for a couple of plays longer I also bought a thinner pick.

Get It Straight =)

One of the toughest topics the church is currently facing is it's stance on homosexuality. Not the least because it has become a public dispute, reaching weight value beyond the question itself. It's presented as a demonstration of larger issues such as equally shared love and grace, modernity of faith, church's ability/willingness to focus on people rather than letter of law - to name a few. Some of them are justified connotations, some not, but that's where the public circulates.

The Bible - building on the millennial foundation of Old Testament faith - has a stand on the issue. The stand is extremely clear, as any reader of the Bible can see it - homosexuality is pronounced as misbehavior, sin, shame, and the list goes on. New Testament picked up it unchanged. It is viewed as unnatural human behavior and thus wrong before God.

However, the discussion today is not about what does the Bible say about it, but rather what would it say about it today. The presented questions are: has homosexuality changed between then and now; if yes, can we relate to it through the respective passages, or should it be looked at in the light a larger theological system. Namely, are love, equality and the humane tint of western-Christian worldview weightier than simple pronouncements of various verses. My still-being-processed-answers to these three are - changed?: probably yes - based on passage/theology?: interactively both in respect to the first "yes" - humane tint?: it should not be avoided, however shouldn't either overrun other angles.

All these questions are really hard to handle in public media - which generally attempts to shorten, simplify and exaggerate the answers. Despite that, it is important to notice that the questions themselves are valid, and deserve a thoughtful answer.

The summarized and simplified stand of the church - as I have it - has been "love the person, hate the sin." And that's a good one - generally applicable to anybody's life, but I think it's far from enough to answer the related questions. In addition to the questions above, we should also ask ourselves: in the light of the consistency of our faith - do we view all sins alike (or should we), do we relate to sinners of every area alike (or should we). This all is besides the practical question on whatever our stand is how can we express it understandably. (I strongly believe that it is the responsibility of a communicator of anything to do the best to provide the audience with a change to understand. It appears that some communicators do not share this.)

It's not going to be possible for very long to simply neglect the issue (as has been done at some churches) or just offer a punch-line without being able to back it up - consistently with other issues, as unfortunately has also been done.

A couple of miserable attempts to have a say in the discussion has lately been the intercessory prayer gathering held publicly on the stairs of the Finnish Parliament house during the parliament was deciding the law on registering same-sex relationships. Miserable so, because the slogan - love sinner, hate sin - became a hollow cry, their actions seem to shout too loud the hate part. Another - a punch-line type - was the case of the Swedish pastor's sermon that brought the man up in the law court accused of agitation against a minority. He was pronounced not guilty, but again it became useless to the church to elaborate more deeply on the issue. (I assume that he would stand behind the previous slogan, too.)

I'm hoping the churches that will stand up first in public will see what's the real issue at hand. It might be different to the question asked, but an inaccurate answer will taint all the future statements too. It should also realize and consider the backpack we've inherited from the previous spokesmen.

I think the conclusion stated so far are far from final and I'm expecting the discussion only to heat up in the next years.

What a Glorious Day

I just found out that wikipedia has a lists of historical events to every day of a specific year. A look at the 11th of April reveals that my birthday has been remarkable in:

1775 when the last execution for witchcraft took place in Germany.
1921 First sports broadcast was out on the radio
1970 Apollo 13 was launched

for some reason I couldn't find anything about me, but there are other interesting personalities that share the grace of the very day.

146 Septimus Severus, Roman Emperor
1755 James Parkinson, English physician who lent the name to the P. disease
1930 Anton LaVey (I whish not)

But the day has also taken away a couple of whom I don't know any, but one of them is my colleague

1612 Edward Wightman, English Baptist preacher who was burnt at the stake.


What a glorious day!

Stars don't move around

It's not a new thing, but there are studies out to solve e.g. the problem of the famous star in the Christmas Story. One that has got more publicity is suggesting that the star moved really on the astrological chart instead of horizon.

Many of the studies themselves are serious science, and I'm not capable of commenting this either, but it's funny how things like that wiggle into church. Almost like a long expected relief, ...finally someone gets some sense to this... It may end up even as a sermon topic.

An average westerner - like a Finn - has an underlying sense that trustworthiness of any issue is measured by the percentage it carries scientifically proven elements (of all it's ingredients). Far from where anyman would really be able to scientifically judge things, but there's a sort of subconscious attraction to materialistic layouts. (there might be a real name to that 'subconscious attraction' that a scientist of that area would call it with.)

However, this attraction sometimes plays fool on us, especially when it comes to things we need to take as facts - as hard as they might be to prove by science, such as Christmas Story with the star as highlight. (although I'm not saying that the star is the must-believe part of the story) But, there are things in it that a believing Christian has to believe or else he ends up in troubles with this overall consistency of his worldview. One way out from the tough spot is to reduce the faithbased elements to the minimum and so make the rest more easy to believe.

I don't consider myself a literalist in the Bible reading, and I don't have a general problem against critical analyses of dominant readings of the Bible passages, but I find it funny, if the motif behind the re-arrangement is to make it easier to believe.

In short, if we are speaking of God being born as a man from a virgin - what's the problem of a star moving around.

The Lord's Supper and Apologetic Approach to BTh

I was listening to a sermon on the Lord's Supper this Sunday. I won't go discuss that here, but sitting there I built up the topic to another issue.

Theology overall is always a child-of-its-time -– carrying the historical legacy, of course. There is a huge reality being witnessed in the living faith of a believing individual as well in the community of them; however, the way it is revealed, and especially the form it is communicated onward takes shape in respect to people involved.

Perhaps the Lord's Supper can illustrate the thought. In the middle ages where the world of the people was filled with mysticism and magical elements, the now-known-as-Catholic explanation of the Lord's Supper with the doctrine of the trans-substantiation -– wine and bread transforming into actual blood and flesh, maintained credible and served well to the purpose. Reformation brought a shade of doubt to the practice: not just the authority issues of the people serving it, but also on how come the blood taste so much like the wine we poured to the cup. They formulated a thought that instead of actual transformation of the elements, the true blood and flesh were present in, on, and under them. (I'm sure I'm over-simplifying the issues, but bear with me -– and correct me if I'’m totally over the board)

As the enlightenment reached down to the crowds, theology too had to find a new emphasis to maintain credibility. Experimentalism that stressed the feel of faith showed up as a respond to the modern questions. E.g. the emphasis on conversion with elements of sense of guilt-repentance-sense of relief followed by an observable newness of life. (one can read the history of the great revivals to see how the theology touched the crowds)

Rational materialism became the pop worldview, and the confessing Christian struggled to fit in the faith issues. (This is what end up with the religious and historical facts' schizophrenic divorce.) One goal was to strip off to minimum all superficial elements of faith (how bizarre it might be) and perhaps within these cycles the Lord's Supper became a mere memorial miniature meal, as we now have it in Pentecostal churches.

As such I believe it has maintained the credibility and served well the purpose, but it is child-of-its-time because it is shaped in mold of the day. I think it's already taking a new forms and emphases that will only be strengthened in decades to come. Perhaps a mere intellectual remembrance won't be enough.

There's more to it

A couple of posts ago I linked to a proposal that asserts Santa to be dead. However, we all know there's more to it than that. Every year the man with his peer appear at every mall, city square, and homes even. If Mr. Santa himself is dead indeed, all of us has to ask the question, where do these men come from.

IFILM has a documentary short film titled Rare Export that reviels a lot. Watch it here, but be prepared to live on with a deeper knowledge to Santas' personalities.

Aging B

Benjamin hit two on the 1st of December and he's headed to conquer the world.

Blowing the candles appeared problematic for a while, but he solved it and managed to blow out both (25 blows)

Even greater challenge was to keep it cool and maintain the mood to keep going, when all the folks around appeared so excited.

Congratulations, Benjamin!

You'd Better Watch Out When the Music's on You

The form of the church service is very personal matter. One likes one kind, someone else prefers another. Most of us have a some expectations as what we expect to happen in the service and way it happens. Some of it deals with doctrinal issues, but much of it is just cultural, or even personality things. Running a service yourself may bring you face to face with this fact.

There is - said to be genuine - a feedback that was recorded in a pastor's voicemail by a church visitor concerned of something what went beyond the limits. Not to belittle the conscience of the caller, but the dance-remix is hilarious.

listen to the feedback here
and the remix here.

Thanks to Vintage Faith for the laugh of the day.