My cousin Mark quotes Martyn Lloyd-Jones on emotion, which I’ve written about too (longer quote at his site):

Many of us are afraid of emotions. Our whole training and upbringing, the whole attitude to life, is one that curbs the emotions. We feel that it is not quite respectable, it is not nice. We are steeling our emotions, curbing this God-given thing… This is not a plea for emotionalism, which I have denounced, it is a plea for emotion.

Even better, his entry on differences between conservative and charismatic evangelicals (which I’ve also written about) contains a fantastic John Owen quote. But as Mark writes:

Alas, because he’s John Owen and obtuse (and because he’s living in 17th century England) in explaining all this he doesn’t make the obvious analogy; Charismatic Evangelicalism is biscuits, Reformed Evangelicalism is cake.

The whole thing should be read!

Finally, the event: the Co-Mission Media Forum has been announced, which sounds like just the kind of thing anyone with any creative thought or inclination should do their best to get to! Looking forward to Matthew Mason on music, having heard him speak on Song of Songs at a church houseparty.

Freshers arrive tomorrow. Crazy. This summer has been very peculiar in different ways (being properly unemployed for the first time, as well as living in Bristol, not with my parents) and while it feels like years since I was last working towards my degree, the term has sneaked up too quickly.

For me, the highlight of Forum was the family feel of it all – and I mean far more than just homeliness! I’m sitting with my Bristol family, but in the rest of the marquee there are near a thousand of my relatives, all united with the same love of God, the same passion, the same mission. It was exciting! I can only imagine what that must have felt like for those from a small CU with just a few members.

I loved spending time with the Bristol guys; getting to know the small group leaders whom I didn’t know so well in particular. My understanding is that in the past, our small groups have felt quite separate from the rest of the CU, so I loved that so many of their leaders were there with the committee.

After the World Service on the Wednesday night, we had conversations about long-term cross-cultural mission, as well as short-term trips. Having been encouraged to all study Mark’s gospel with our friends, we then prayed that this might be the case. At every step, all of us, from different churches in Bristol, studying different things, with all sorts of different views on everything, felt a unity beyond words. This is what Christ died for – to bring together a people to worship God for ever – and here and now it’s wonderful to see.

Going back to Bristol we’re not going to spend this amount of time together – we’re going to be meeting once a week centrally, as well as a prayer meeting and small group meetings in halls. The temptation is to band together in a clique and become inward-looking when we meet. This mustn’t happen. When we meet, it should be like a mini-Forum: we meet to encourage each other to live and speak for Jesus the rest of the week; we sing because the gospel is worth singing about, and God made music excite emotions for a reason; we hear about what’s going on because we want to be involved, at the very least by our prayers; we spend time together so that our lives lived in the university are changed ones, in which we’re supported, encouraged and prayed for by each other.

Back in Bristol, too, the temptation might be to get irritated over little issues, and start dividing, even in small ways (for example, whether we refer to the CU by saying “we” or “they”). This mustn’t happen either. We still believe the same gospel, and still want it to go out to our university, so when issues come up we all (and that means me too, even if I’m convinced I’m right!) put aside secondary issues and love each other enough to give up our ideas sometimes.

Forum is great because it’s our own CU meetings done right, writ large. The challenge now is to keep the focus and get out into the university as a united witness! May the Lord let it happen.

Currently listening to Jon Foreman – The Cure For Pain

• Naomi’s thoughts of the future are darkened by depression about her situation, so that she doesn’t spot her hope for the future in Boaz, a close relative. So often we can let discouraging circumstances discourage us completely. God is still sovereign though, and is working through the circumstances. If we can’t see light at the end of the tunnel, we need to be reminded of this; that’s one reason why we need Christians around us, and in a CU this is particularly relevant. In the face of opposition, or apathy from our friends, or even doubts about whether it’s worthwhile, we need others in the CU to encourage us to keep going.

• Ruth’s example of initiative, humility and industry from Ruth 2:1-7 are great examples of Christian living. Take risks (chapter 3), take the initiative, be humble about it and work at it! For CUs, this should be a great thing for us to aspire to.

Just two of the things John Piper mentioned, and this is before any of the stuff on Jesus, our own kinsman-redeemer! (For those unfamiliar with Ruth, hopefully more on this some other time.)

I’ve also made it to a track on worship, which deserves more in-depth writing another time. As my fifteen minutes are up, I’ll leave it here. Maybe more soon…

Forum is great because, like New Word Alive is shaping up to be, it’s a mix of those across the Christian spectrum meeting with the same purpose. The CUs across the country are groups of Christian students who want to “live and speak for Jesus”, and regardless of church background, public speaking ability, public or state school education, or anything else, they’re all at Forum to be better equipped to do just that. By Christ’s death we become a family, a family that’s always looking to include others, and Forum is there to help and encourage us to do that better. Above all, Forum exists to excite us about Jesus, the one who died so that we could know God, the one who will return to bring justice to a world crying for it. We’re often lukewarm, not sure whether we want to tell people about him, but at Forum our prayers is that as we get into his word, his Spirit will work in us to change us, encourage and excite us, so that we return to homes across the country better able to be his ambassadors.

For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.

So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. (2 Corinthians 5:14-21, NIV.)

Firstly, praise God that these problems are by no means universal! It’s years since my first encounters with the charismatic movement, and since then I’ve read and listened to many, many charismatic speakers who have all helped instil in me a deeper love and a better understanding of God, a greater day-to-day experience of God, and a greater love of the Bible, but more importantly, Christ. It’s brilliant to hear that those in the movement are as concerned about parts of it as I am, as there’s no way I’m ever going to be listened to! It’s also brilliant that those in the charismatic movement are effectively shaking up many conservative Christians and getting them excited once more about God’s sovereign plan for the world. Conservative authors and speakers like Jim Packer have been calling for deep relationships with God for years; in my case, at least, it took the charismatics I know to get through to me! Recently, it’s mostly through charismatic writers and bloggers that I’ve grown to love God more and love Scripture more, and learnt to be more discerning, more loving and more accepting of those different from me.

Secondly, the striking thing is that each of Dan’s points has to do with a loss of focus on Jesus and his importance. This particularly hit home because I recognise that I can do exactly the same things. Very easily can I slip into a pattern of life that sidelines Jesus, or make the things I read all about abstract issues and not about Jesus. Rather than over-emphasise the Spirit, I can over-emphasise the Bible as an end in itself, and theology as a pursuit for its own sake, rather than both as a way to know and love Jesus better. I may not make the mistakes as publicly as some in the charismatic movement, but I make them all the same, in my own, quiet, conservative evangelical way.

In summary, these problems are by no means universal in the charismatic movement, and they’re not specific to it either. So let’s all throw out dry and boring theology and teaching; let’s recover passionate preaching about Christ from his Word, and let’s live whole lives for God’s glory, enjoying his presence with us, through good times and bad. Let’s not expect things to be easy; let’s not forget our flesh is sinful; but let’s remember that God has given us new hearts, and he gives us the grace we need for each day. Let’s keep our eyes on Jesus, and remember that both the Spirit and the Bible point to him and help us to know him and love him more.

Let us know; let us press on to know the LORD;
his going out is sure as the dawn;
he will come to us as the showers,
as the spring rains that water the earth. (Hosea 6:3, ESV)

If your conscience constantly keeps you in bondage to petty rules and regulations, then you’ve not yet grasped the grace of the gospel.

He has a wonderful quote from Calvin on Christian freedom, and some common myths to challenge. Go read!

Once the film had started, we didn’t notice any more, because it’s one of those films that doesn’t let up the pace throughout the (almost three hours long) film. In terms of reviewing the film, I’ve not much to say; I enjoyed it a lot, Heath Ledger is as good as the reviewers say he is, and there’s lots of action, good dialogue and fun set-pieces. As before, though, one of the best parts of the film was some of the moral questions it raises. (Spoilers follow.)

The most interesting one came towards the end, with the introduction of Two-Face, the corrupted district attorney (read “chief prosecuting lawyer”) Harvey Dent. Dent is driven mad by the death of his girlfriend at the hands of the Joker; the concept of what is “fair” emerges, and Dent’s conclusion is that the only thing that’s fair is to leave things up to chance:

You thought we could be decent men in an indecent world. But you were wrong; the world is cruel, and the only morality in a cruel world is chance. Unbiased. Unprejudiced. Fair.

Morality is only determined by chance; in the end, we don’t make the moral decision, but chance decides. That is the only way to be fair.

Now, this isn’t the morality the film portrays, but as a result Tom and I got discussing where morality comes from.

In the world of the film, Batman is portrayed as morally good, despite being a violent, law-breaking vigilante. Why? He wants to save people from pain, fear and death, and in his view the end justifies his means. Here, the highest good is to improve life for humans, in some sense whatever the cost. Batman’s moral philosophy, then, is a form of humanism. When thinking about this I was struck with a similarity to the Operative from the Firefly universe:

The Operative: I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin.
Mal Reynolds: So me and mine gotta lay down and die… so you can live in your better world?
The Operative: I’m not going to live there. There’s no place for me there… any more than there is for you. Malcolm… I’m a monster. What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done.

Both the Operative and Batman do what might be considered morally wrong (the Operative more so), in order that a better society might emerge – a society that, ironically, they can have no part in given what they do. It’s not quite the same with Batman, who can merely leave the cape behind and return to a normal life, but the parallel struck me nevertheless.

So Batman is a humanist, who sees a greater morality than individual actions – the long-term good justifies the short-term wrong. I guess in this situation we have to ask: who decides that this is right? Who decides whether this long-term good is the right one, if it’s at the expense of (even minor) short-term wrong?

I’m going on for far longer than I’ve planned, so I’ll not go into the humanist understanding of where morality comes from. I don’t find it convincing, however, to think that humans can logically deduce what is right and wrong; I can’t see how the concepts of good and evil make any sense in an atheistic worldview. This quotation by Richard Dawkins is probably the most commonly used by Christians, but it fits here:

In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.

If this is the case, then Two-Face might just be right that chance is the only morality. If that leaves an unpleasant taste, that’s because it’s not true. Not only does morality come from a loving, perfect God, this loving, perfect God is sovereign over everything – and so a pragmatism in morality like Batman’s is unnecessary. We’re called to live morally in whatever situation; God will sort out the outcome. We can trust him that in the end, all will be well.

So how, then, to figure out whether to go into a “new creation” job – or, to use another term, “set apart ministry”? By “set apart”, I’m referring to those who are supported financially (and in prayer) by a group (usually a congregation) to spend their working week on new creation tasks. In other words, a full-time pastor, missionary, youth worker, or other person whom until recently have been referred to as “Christian workers”. Not wanting to use that term (all Christians who work are Christian workers!) as it implies working for a church is perhaps the more “Christian” thing to do, I’ve gone with set apart ministry. There’s probably something wrong with this term too, but it’ll do for now.

After all that introduction, now for what I actually want to say. Following on from a conversation with a friend, he talked of three things you should be sure of before going into this kind of ministry. (He credited Don Carson with the ideas, though I’m pretty sure Carson would credit Scripture if indeed it was him my friend heard this off.)

Firstly, desire. You’ve got to want to do it! If you don’t, it’s probably not for you. (1 Timothy 3:1 seems to suggest this, and it makes sense: God gives us our desires as we submit to him – and if we didn’t feel like we might want to do it, it probably wouldn’t have occurred to us in the first place…)

Secondly, gifting and maturity. Can we do it? It’s all very well wanting to be a youth worker, but if you can’t engage with teenagers then don’t do it! On the other hand, if you’re interested in apologetics, great at explaining things to non-Christians and can give a pretty good talk for an evangelistic barbecue, maybe you should consider becoming an itinerant evangelist. However you might still feel you need to grow up a bit, or get more experience. Maturity (or good character, to say it another way) is also necessary.

Thirdly, other people. Does your pastor think you could do it? Do your friends? Do your parents? Do others in the church?

All that’s left now is figuring out if you want to do it, and whether you have the gifts to do it, whether you feel you’re mature enough to do it, and find out if others think you should do it. How do you do that? Just get on and do it! If you want to be a youth worker, then get involved in youth work; if music’s your thing, then start playing music in church; if opportunities in universities excite you, then get involved with a CU or do Relay. If you’re becoming even more certain, then maybe do an apprenticeship. Doing something like that gives you an opportunity to test out your gifts, your desires, and have older Christians mentor you and tell you if they think you should do it long-term. In other words, they give you a perfect way of seeing if you fit the three points above.

I wrote back in April:

So what constitutes a calling? Does it mean a pastor or other leader taking you aside and saying “you should consider this work”? Does it mean you feel like you could do it and would quite like to do it? Does it mean trying it out in an apprenticeship scheme and seeing by doing whether it’s for you?

To answer my own question, I think the answer to the above questions is “yes”, though perhaps “calling” isn’t the right term.

User 1: Shouldn’t it be “Wood in poplar culture”?
User 2: It should, but we’ll just have to be content with the fact that there’s now a protection log for the article.

This not only says something about the popular culture of the internet, but also something about me, given that I read the comic and assumed that this exact sequence of events would happen, so headed over to Wikipedia hoping to make a blog entry out of what I found on the Talk page…

(In other news, I have a job, but still no laptop. Also, I’m cooking prawns for supper. It turns out raw prawns aren’t pink. It occurs to me this should have been my assumption.)

Radiohead were amazing in concert last night, playing Everything In Its Right Place, Idioteque, Planet Telex, Pyramid Song, How To Disappear Completely and Cymbal Rush (!) amongst other amazing tracks (The Gloaming had never sounded so good!), and we managed to make it home shortly after two despite having to walk from Oxford city centre.

Currently reading: The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas, and The Shadow and Night by Chris Walley (in preparation for The Infinite Day).

Currently listening: Cymbal Rush by Thom Yorke (played on piano at the gig last night!) has finished; now Aaron Copland’s Appalachian Spring; earlier, our own covers of Disney songs, jazz standards, Muse and Coldplay.

Currently watching:

The Count of Monte Cristo is so far an amazing book; I’ve been reading it for three days now (it’s quite long) and it’s still gripping (despite knowing overall what happens, having seen the film) and generally fascinating. I may write more once I’ve finished it. It’s taken me a long time to start on these kind of books*, and now I’ve started I plan to continue.

* As to what I mean by “these kind of books”, I’m not really sure. Great novels of the past? Works that require use of a dictionary, or a passing knowledge of Latin? Books likely to contain a scholarly forward and possibly historical notes in an appendix? (Books likely to be known only as a modern film to the majority of the populace, who probably won’t even have heard of the author? Books that, once you’ve read, you end up feeling superior to those who haven’t? Hopefully not the latter, but already the temptation is there…)

UPDATE: I use the word amazing far too much.

In lieu of further entries now I’m at home for the week and still haven’t unpacked, here’s a scribble I found on a scrap of paper while packing up my room two days ago.

Do we have too low a view of God’s sovereignty that says “people need to hear the Gospel, therefore I must give up everything and go, otherwise I’m thwarting his purposes”?

I can’t remember writing it, and have thought through these things a lot more since, but it’s an interesting thought nonetheless.

Have a read of Genesis 2:9-10, Psalms 1, 2 and 46, and Revelation 22:1-5 (convenient link).

Dan quotes an old hymn which picks up on some of these biblical ideas, but merely reading the passages I was struck by the beautiful images, and the wonderful truth expressed. It’s worth dwelling on for yourself – I’m not going to try and say anything more!

Humans are obviously unique. But it’s surprisingly hard to say why. (New Scientist, 24 May 2008.)

Then God said, “Let us make human beings in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

So God created human beings in his own image,
   in the image of God he created them;
   male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:26-27, NIV.)

When God is no longer in the picture, we’re left with the blind, pitiless indifference of the Selfish Gene. Without God, we can never be clear on what it means to be truly human. Because of Jesus, we can see clearly what humanity is like! We’re more sinful than we ever imagined (the necessity of the cross shows us that, and we stand in stark contrast to the way Jesus lived), but we’re more loved than we ever dreamed (the fact that Jesus died that death for us shows us that!). In Jesus we see a picture of true humanity, worshipping God with our whole lives, as we were intended to be.

We find the eternal joy we were made for in the eternal God who made us. We find what it means to be human.

“During the flight I saw for the first time with my own eyes the earth’s spherical shape” – Major Yuri Gagarin: 13th April 1961

See her then swing through space, another moon
  Wrapped in a shining singleness, an Earth
That no division knows nor count of time,
  Nor name for war and peace, dying and birth:

See her with mountains, but no barriers,
  Countries, but countries by no owner claimed,
Continents linked in passionless embrace
  Neither by greeds nor loyalties inflamed.

If such the bright impersonal wanderer –
  No guarded frontiers, no jealous dates –
Such too the unknown Earth on which we walk,
  Hid by our map of human loves and hates.

George Rostrevor Hamilton

Terra incognita, a setting of the above poem, was my final project for studio composition this year. The brief merely stated that some form of live electronics be used; I used a vocoder to process the (spoken) voice with a synthesiser. It’s not perfect: the copy of the poem I used to record the text had an extra “d” after “an” in the second line (so yes, I do say “and Earth” by mistake), and the drum parts start off pretty bland and really should have had more work done on them. Apart from those minor points, I was reasonably pleased with this – particularly as the majority of it was done within 24 hours! It’s quite stereotypical of a particular genre – nothing groundbreaking, but at least it’s listenable to (I think).

Now I’m back with supposedly nothing to do (other than find a job, organise music for the CU, read the books I’ve been trying to do for weeks etc.) I’ve got a few entries planned that will hopefully be forthcoming…

Oh, and you can have a listen to my final coursework project for the year, but I’ll post that separately.