God is Left of Jesus?

Once, a Lutheran pastor went up to an author (who's also an ex-monk who spent many hours in monastic choir and Latin chant) and asked, how could one have a personal relationship with God in prayer when all was set and programmed, all was ritual, formal, and liturgical?? This author later wrote in his memoirs:

"I have never, ever, thought that Latin chant opposes personal prayer. It is simply personal prayer as part of a total community at prayer. It helps you to distinguish, in prayer, between human echo and divine response, between your own will set to sound and the divine will that allegedly transcends it. As a simple analogy: Does singing the national anthem communally enlarge or diminish personal and individual patriotism??"

It's amazing how much you can learn from people who've been deemed outcasts, super-deviants and heretics from your community. I suspect there are Christians who wouldn't touch the works of John Dominic Crossan with a 10-foot pole.

But after reading A Long Way From Tipperary: What A Former Irish Monk Discovered In His Search For The Truth, whilst I'm nowhere near agreeing with his views on the historical Jesus, I can identify with his struggles, his doubts, his pain (I can almost weep with him over the loss of his first wife).

I see a man who needs the love of Jesus Christ, yet also one I can learn from tremendously (even N.T. Wright has celebrated Crossan's genius; see the opening remarks in his chapter on Crossan in Jesus & The Victory of God). If nothing else, Crossan's wit-filled prose brings literary delight which one finds rare in evangelical works. For example:

"If, in fact, you want a parent metaphor for God, I think father is much more appropriate than mother. It is the mother who is publicly knowable, visibly provable, and legally certifiable. You do not need faith to know a mother. You need faith to know a father, because he is known only on the mother's word and sometimes not even then.?" (p.37)

Whilst evangelicals rightly ought to warn the community of the problems in Crossan's writings, we would do well to humble ourselves and learn from our enemies? (wouldn't we want them to learn from us, too?). Try this sharp observation on the Catholic-Protestant schism:

"It is the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, during which Catholicism and Protestantism forced each other into opposite extremes (faith or works, Bible or tradition, individual or community, real or symbolic, etc. or etc.)in that separation within Christianity, Catholicism lost any internal but loyal opposition, any sternly self-critical voice from within. In that separation, Protestantism lost anything to protest against save itself and has continued to fracture into every increasing diversity.?" (p.72, emphasis mine)

Perhaps we need (or God has allowed? or predestined?? [grin]) writers like Crossan, the quintessential postmodern Biblical scholar, drawing his inspiration from, among others, the work of Jacques Derrida, to shake us into seeing our own problems, to look closer at our sacred cows.

And one day Crossan was at a book-signing event, someone came up to him and said, "My pastor told me not to come here tonight because you are even to the left of Marcus Borg.? Crossan replied,

"Give your pastor my best regards and tell him that is the good news. The bad news is that both Borg and me are to the right of Jesus. And worse still, if he will recall Psalm 110, Jesus is to the right of God. This means that God is Left of Jesus."

Pattern Recognition

Like (probably) most folks reading Gibson the first time, I had to stop, swear, restart, stop and swear again (at the lack of progress and enjoyment in a book which 'everybody' said was great), go back and restart all over again. When I (finally) read the first pages sloooooowly, then it began to dawn on me that here was a unique author who couldn't help but obsessed with every line that he wrote, the full appreciation of which demanded that the novel be read on Gibson's terms, not the reader's. 

One simply cannot 'skim through' a Gibson novel. The beauty is in the micro-descriptions, the layers and layers of psychological minutae (applied to anything from coffee to curtains to airplane seats). The impatient reader raised on a diet of, say, Dan Brown or Jeffrey Archer who just wants to get the 'thrill of the plot' will all but HATE Gibson's work. On the other hand, Gibson is no Rushdie and thus won't offer you surprising tale-twists every other 10 pages or so. That said, no plot doesn't equal no suspense. PR keeps you guessing about almost everything: who created the video footage and why? who's Parkaboy? who's the 'real' bad guy here? what happened to the missing dad? and how does it all cohere? 

Gibson disturbingly yet irresistibly mind-cuffs you to his protagonist (in a way which only Ian McEwan betters, IMO) till you think and act and fear like, in PR's case, Cayce Pollard the key protagonist - 'coolhunter', obsessive, logo-phobic, single yet craving relationship from the strangest people in strange places (e.g. a softie who keeps a gun under his bed, a documentary creator who excavates graves in Russia, a monogamously challenged network executive who can't decide whether to lie or be truthful and an anonymous Web surfer who doesn't sleep, talks funny and spends hours researching mysterious online video footages). 

Along the way we get an express tutorial in upcoming technology, emerging Web trends (or the peculiar habits of selected Web communities), marketing tactics (one character has a full-time job of going to pubs to say how she liked a certain product or idea!) and even jobs we'd have trouble believing were/could be real, e.g. designing the hats worn by characters in video games. 

What was the book 'about'? It was about perceiving geo-techno-politics and the Web through the eyes of Cayce Pollard and two weeks of her already unusual world made even more volatile with new questions, new challenges, new people. 

PR isn't exactly the greatest novel in the genre (of Sci-Fi or Contemporary Thrillers), but this could be due to its categorical misfit. It's fresh (in a maladjusted yet delightful kind of way), its themes are more than relevant (without going 'over-the-top' Michael Crichton style) and it mitigates against traditional narratives structures i.e. there's a Start and there was an End, but I can't classify everything else in between. There's anything but a recognizable pattern here. 

Gibson could be Murakami with a hard-edged cyber-attitude, just as confusing but no less lovable for being so.

Difficult books

Some books don't read easily, though you feel you should be reading them.

You can't sustain the interest, but you realise many people are talking about it. The subject-matter's too dense, though you appreciate the substance. The writing's too academic, or could that mean a lack of intellectual grit on our part?

Whatever. There'll be good books, bad books and books you appreciate for every reason other than reading them. For me it's usually the science stuff (e.g. Damasio, Pinker, etc.) and some theo-philosophical writers (e.g. Wolterstorff, Meier, etc.).

Ideas to overcome this problem:

• Park the book for a while and come back when the 'pain' neurons have stopped firing
• Read ahead (and hopefully get into a great chapter which motivates you to read what came before)
• Read more of what others say
• Read slower
• Blog on the difficult parts; the act of reflection might create previously non-existent interest

And none of the above works, give the book away to somebody who will enjoy it!

12 Brain Rules

John Medina's latest book, Brain Rules, has some intriguing points (esp. about sleep). The website has more than enough info; no harm getting the book, though.

Are you a Post-Conservative Evangelical?

Do you believe that Scripture's primary purpose is to ignite transformation over and above providing information? Do you believe the Bible is more about performing speech-acts (to be performed over and over again) than communicating truth-sets (to be defended against heresy)? Would you still accept someone into the Christian family based primarily on his/her Spirit-inspired relationship with God (as opposed to his/her adherence to selected creeds)? 

Do you find something wrong with equating the essence of Christianity in timeless doctrines and propositions? Would you agree that orthodoxy (right thinking) is important without becoming a litmus test of true faith and not as important as orthopraxy (right living) and orthopathy (right experience)?

Do you believe that the traditional creeds deserve a vote, but not a veto in theology? Would you be willing to accept corrections to the creeds if these corrections can be shown to be Scriptural? Do you feel there's something not very right if the creeds are treated as immutable, unchangeable, all-authoritative and almost on a par with Scripture itself?

Do you believe the task of theological reconstruction is an never-ending process and that it ought never to be complete once and for all? Do you generally favour and welcome theological innovation/creativity, as long as it's done with Scripture as the 'norming norm'? Does theology as 'pilgrimage' and 'faithful dramatic performance' resonate with you? Do you work well with ambiguity and believe it represents an opportunity to learn and construct more?

Do you believe that evangelicalism is a centered-set movement, as opposed to a boundary-set organisation? Do you believe that being an 'evangelical' is more like being an 'Asian' (with fuzz boundaries) than like being a 'Malaysian' (where a national ID card will suffice as a definition)? Do you believe that a pre-occupation with who's "In" or "Out" is unhealthy?

Are you open to and appreciative of the works of Clark Pinnock, Stanley Grenz, Kevin Vanhoozer, LeRon Shultz, Gregory Boyd, Brian McLaren, etc. trusting that they have important value to add to the theological task?

If you can answer Yes to even a third of the questions here, then you'll probably like Olson's book because you'll fit well into the category of post-conservative evangelical theology and theologians he's promoting.

But if you've been shaking your head (and clicking your tongue) throughout this post, you'll find Olson's book distasteful, not least because it implies that you (and those who inspire your way of thinking, e.g. D.A. Carson, John Piper, D.H. Williams, Millard Erickson, etc.) have missed the point about the Christian faith and story and have, in fact, done some harm by continually attacking anyone and everyone who doesn't agree that evangelicalism (let alone Christianity) should be characterised by an absolute fixed set of doctrinal propositions.

For those who feel that theological thinking is synonymous with heresy-hunting and restating traditional propositions, this book would be prepped for the trash heap, because to appreciate this book requires you to enter the mindset of theological innovators and narrative-thinkers who sees greater value in construction as opposed to criticism.

This is surely too heavy a price to be always reforming. Remaining Reformed would, in this case, be a no-brainer.

O'Connor's Five

I love Justin O'Connor's five characteristics of the 'new modes of cultural production and consumption among the young (18-35)' concentrated in cities, and wish it for everyone:

• making money and making culture are one and the same activity
• there is an antipathy to distinguishing between 'work time' and 'leisure time'
• there is a heavy reliance on informal networks for information and ideas
• there is an emphasis on intuition, emotional involvement, immersion in the field, and an 'enthusiasts' knowledge of the market
• cultural producers desire to 'work for themselves' and outside the 9-to-5 routine

Predictably Irrational

Better researched than Gladwell's Blink, filled with surprises the way Hartfod's The Undercover Economist couldn't be, thoroughly down-to-earth (and less cyber-esoterical) than Weinberger's Everything Is Miscellaneous and more easily applicable in a way that even Gilbert's amazing Stumbling On Happiness can't match, Dan Ariely's Predictably Irrational refreshingly raises the bar on pop-(social)-science writing.

Ariely surprises us even as he exposes the myriad of strange/wonderful programming which impacts our decisions. Whilst some of these were 'common sense' (e.g. feeling more attached to that which we owned as compared to that which we didn't possess), Ariely's numerous experiments drive home the realisation deeper than previously perceived.

Here's a quick part-summary of what the book reveals about us:

1. We are more likely to cheat when dealing with non-monetary items (e.g. we would almost unhesitatingly smooch a $2 pen from office, but when it comes to stealing $1 from the petty cash it's often a no-no)

2. We tend to enjoy our food if we can order 'in private' i.e. by, say, ticking on a menu-form which is eventually passed to the waiter, as oppposed to 'declaring' out loud what we'd like

3. We are predisposed to selecting an option with an obviously poorer close parallel i.e. if given Luxury Watch A which costs $50, Normal Watch B at $10 and Marginally Above-Average Watch C at $48, on average we'd go for Cup A. Why? Because in comparison with Watch C it's a better choice.

4. We determine what prices are acceptable based on initial purchases. Jack's cost of Chinese food for $20 and Jill's (for the same dishes) at $40 will decide their future valuations of said cuisine i.e. we 'anchor' ourselves to our initial price-experiences of goods, and these anchors can be completely arbitrary.

5. We are inexplicably attracted to "FREE!", often making purchases we wouldn't have on this basis. Somehow $0 creates purchase-waves where even $0.20 (a 'virtually free' price) fail.

6. We're obsessed with options and keeping them open, at the price of losing much needed focus and attention.

7. We 'believe in' goods that are priced higher, even when the substance of these goods do not differ much from lower-priced items (e.g. aspirin, bottled water, professionals, etc.).

8. We're suckers for presentation and form, and would generally feel a moderately prepared roast beef served on attractive china tasted better than excellently cooked beef on a plastic plate. Hence, our easy succumbing to branding which creates expectations which improves perception about the products we're getting.

9. When horny or angry, our propensity to do things we'd normally deny ever being capable of doing rises by a significant factor. In a word, we have a Mr. Hyde lying semi-dormant inside us.

The next step is to apply these to our work, our communities and our families. This is the exciting part as I feel there's so much that behavioural economics can contribute (another sign that this is great book, when the reader is inspired towards further exploration).

What I also like about the book is how Ariely reflects a deep passion towards the betterment of our society, e.g. when he proposed to banks to have a credit card which would stop a spender from charging above a predetermined limit.

Part self-help, part life-commentary, part research-report, all social-innovation(!), Dan Ariely's first book is one of those I'd tip for the "if you're only going to read one book this year" awards. Then again, I'd recommend you buy it - you're more likely to believe you've had a good read thus.

Palmer's 23 Rejects

There's Richard Foster, Dallas Willard, Max Lucado, Eugene Peterson and other great spiritual writers out there. There's only one writer, however, who's managed to push me to the edge of sobbing more times than I bothered to keep track of, and that's Jim Palmer.

His book, Divine Nobodies, is the perfect blade for the heart frozen (and thus shrunken) in metaphysical theology, Christian 'systems' and relationally problematic ideas of God. The stories are totally fresh (because they're true) and the mapping to theological ideas is sublime. Best of all, they leave you holding back the tears - or just letting them flow.

His second book, Wide Open Spaces, was less touching but introduces radical theology minus any scholarly snobbishness or must-read-thrice paragraphs.

Here he is with 28 religious rules he's broken:

1. Whatever it is you believe, it must pass the mind’s test of logic and reason.

2. Don’t trust or follow what you feel deep inside.

3. Don’t try this apart from institutional structures and programs.

4. If it has anything to do with God, ultimate reality, and the deepest longings of your soul, count on it being near impossible for someone like you to figure it out.

5. Don’t fraternize with non-believers or people of different religious or spiritual beliefs.

6. Just assume that what others say the Bible says is actually what the Bible says, especially if the person saying it is someone who is supposed to know that sort of thing.

7. That deep feeling of love, peace, freedom, joy and contentment can’t be God. Instead, you should probably start feeling guilty about where you are falling short with God.

8. Reduce your life only to those things that you can fit into the “God” category. If necessary, justify other things by creatively establishing some remote correlation.

9. When you become progressive or more enlightened, look down your nose (in compassion of course) upon those poor souls who have yet to reach your level.

10. Assume that everything you’ve been told or currently know is all there is to truth and anything refuting it must be wrong. In other words, you’ve arrived with virtually nothing left to learn except for trying harder with what you already know.

11. If you keep applying the same formula or beliefs and it doesn’t produce the result it promised, assume the problem is you.

12. Don’t waste your time with the small stuff, do something big or join something big.

13. Have a social justice persona. Remember that the image can suffice even if you don’t really have the time or inclination to respond to people in need along the everyday paths of life.

14. Make sure a majority if not all of your conversations are overtly connected somehow to “God.” Unless the word is actually used or some closely associated word, the conversation doesn’t really count in terms of eternal value.

15. Be at least slightly skeptical and conflicted about truly enjoying very ordinary moments in your life…feeling of the warm sunshine on your face, playing a board game with your daughter, walking your dog, taking photographs, enjoying the quiet, lounging around with your family - that kind of meaningless stuff.

16. Proceed as if figuring out truth is a matter of your intellect.

17. Make sure at all times there is some burning question you have to answer or some enlightening understanding you must attain before you can rest.

18. Don’t take personal responsibility for the insanity of your beliefs and practices that were damaging and destructive. Blame and resent others.

19. Measure and judge others based on where you are. Just assume if it’s a place where you currently are, everyone else should be there. If it’s something you now believe, everyone else should believe it. If it works for you, it should work for everyone.

20. Draw your conclusions from the data gathered through your physical senses. For example, come to a determination about others based on their appearance, attitude, and actions.

21. Just accept at the outset that your humanity is your enemy.

22. Equate God’s blessing with improved circumstances or existing in a constant state of “good feelings.”

23. Don’t ever let yourself fully give into love and freedom.

Message from my book

I ordered a book from BetterWorld. They shipped it and together with the "It's coming" note, they included the below email.

Seth Godin talked about doing remarkable things. The below is, to say the very least, quite remarkable.

(Your book(s) asked to write you a personal note - it seemed unusual, but who are we to say no?)

Holy canasta! It's me... it's me! I can't believe it is actually me! You could have picked any of over 2 million books but you picked me! I've got to get packed! How is the weather where you live? Will I need a dust jacket? I can't believe I'm leaving Mishawaka, Indiana already - the friendly people, the Hummer plant, the Linebacker Lounge - so many memories. I don't have much time to say goodbye to everyone, but it's time to see the world!

I can't wait to meet you! You sound like such a well read person. Although, I have to say, it sure has taken you a while! I don't mean to sound ungrateful, but how would you like to spend five months sandwiched between Hamlet (bipolar) and Fundamentals of Thermodynamics (pyromaniac)? At least Hamlet was an upgrade from that stupid book on brewing beer. How many times did the ol' brewmaster have one too many and topple off our shelf at 2am?

I know the trip to meet you will be long and fraught with peril, but after the close calls I've had, I'm ready for anything (besides, some of my best friends are suspense novels). Just five months ago, I thought I was a goner. My owner was moving and couldn't take me with her. I was sure I was landfill bait until I ended up in a Better World Books book drive bin. Thanks to your socially conscious book shopping, I've found a new home. Even better, your book buying dollars are helping kids read from Brazil to Botswana.

But hey, enough about me, I've been asked to brief you on a few things:You chose International shipping.We shipped it via Brokers Worldwide who will then hand it off to your local postal service. Delivery time for shipments is usually 7-14 business days, but some may take a bit longer depending on destination.

If you have any questions or concerns, please email my friend Jesse and his team at help@betterworld.com. If you could please include your order number (8161805) that would be very helpful.

Eagerly awaiting our meeting,

Cities of God: The Real Story of How Christianity Became an Urban Movement and Conquered Rome

Rushdie's Children

It was 1998, my first year after graduation. I remember crouching to examine one of the books on the bottom rung of the shelf titled 'Matured Readers' in a bookshop with a strange name, Bookazine (long since closed) in Section 14 next to Jaya SuperMart, also closed earlier this year.

My saturation with theology and apologetics made me want to read something new, something 'thick', something which would 'come at me' from an angle I'd have completely no reason to anticipate.

I only knew Salman Rushdie's name from the famous fatwa associated with Satanic Verses, a book whose thirtieth page I could barely reach without giving up (at the time - I've since read and talked about both the book and the controversy to many friends and students).

But here was a book with a strange name and sufficiently intimidating thickness, Midnight's Children. I must've turned it around a few times, contemplated exchanging with another book, felt the smoothness of its cover and imagine what it would be like to actually finish a book like this. It would be my second attempt at Rushdie. And besides, the book cover included a line about it winning the Booker Prize (in 1983). It also won the Booker of Bookers in 1993.

Now, 27 years after its publication, 25 years after it won its first Booker, 15 years after it established itself as a 'best of the best' and 10 years after my buying it in Bookazine, Midnight's Children has won yet another Booker of Bookers. Its shortlist rivals were:

• The Ghost Road by Pat Barker (1995) - never heard of the author nor the book...


• Oscar and Lucinda by Peter Carey (1988) - bought the book yesterday...how about THAT for a coincidence?


• Disgrace by JM Coetzee (1999) - a little too disturbing for my taste...


• The Conservationist by Nadine Gordimer (1974) - heard of the author, not the book.


• The Siege of Krishnapur by JG Farrell (1973) - never heard of either

What's Next on the Wall?

I've heard so much about Spencer Johnson's book, but have only now read it. I felt it deserved its popularity from the creative cramming of more than half a dozen principles into a cute, metaphor-filled storyline.

Usually it's just one lesson per story (e.g. parables?) or too many lessons forced out of a simple episode (e.g. the Titanic?).

I can imagine hundreds of corporate trainers telling the story in parts and asking, "What do you think Haw wrote on the wall after this?"

The one piece of wall-writing which stood out for me was: "Noticing Small Changes Early Helps Adapt You To The Bigger Changes That Are To Come."

Now that's a thought.

But another one comes to mind: Haw the LittlePeople was learning really fast! I know I'd hire such a dude.

Likewise, what have we been jotting down on our maze walls recently?

Sticking and Quitting

This book may initially look like your average typical "Never Give Up" material. But Seth Godin, in his better-than-average ways, has written something which is both original and worthy of serious attention (especially in a world obsessed with success and never-quitting).

Firstly, says Godin, one must never give up, yes. But this attitude is critical only for those skills/ideas/products you have which make you the best in the world (the 'world' meaning which community/market you're a part of and necessarily all the continents if you know what I mean).

Secondly, for anyone who wishes to achieve anything spectacular, there will always be a period of dryness, lethargy, costs exceeding benefits, (apparent) failure which one has to go through i.e. there will be a Dip.

Push through this and you'll come on the other 'end' of the loop a winner. What's important - and thank God(in) for the reminder - is that we must ANTICIPATE and PLAN for the Dip.

Another famous speaker who mentioned something which sounds like a Dip is Randy Pausch who said that,

"The brick walls are there for a reason. The brick walls are not there to keep us out; the brick walls are there to give us a chance to show how badly we want something. The brick walls are there to stop the people who don't want it badly enough. They are there to stop the other people!"

Where Godin differs would be in two things:

1. The brick walls can be overcome if you're the best at what you do (this is when you must STICK)

2. The brick walls should be accepted and left behind if not (this is when you must QUIT)

Which brings us to his third point, the one that raises the most eyebrows surely: You must recognise there are times one must stop or, better yet, not even start a project.

Why? Because if you're not the best and there's no chance you will be, pushing through the Dip only creates discouragement and takes away time you should be putting into that which you can be world-class in.

To stick? Or to quit? That he even raises the second question puts Godin, IMO, in the top 1% of the world's best thinkers and advisers. That it's okay and even commendable to quit is an almost-never-asked question which is more than way overdue.

This is not a how-to book. It's a why-not manual, a look-here work, an always-remember guide. It's also one the best (if somewhat subversive) "motivational" books around, one which nobody who's ever thought long and hard about irreversible (or hard-to-reverse) decisions related to careers and business can afford to miss.

Best thing is: It's a short book. No way you'll quit on this one.