Archives For Jonathan’s Thoughts

Hypocrite

November 11, 2011 — Leave a comment

We are over half way through term here in Oxford, with only 4 weeks left before the Christmas break. It has been a whirlwind of lectures, meetings, essays, church events, rowing (look for a post next week on this!) and the like so far. Yet already Christmas is on the horizon and heading towards us at great pace.

We are the point in the cycle of settling in where the novelty of the new is perhaps wearing off. At any rate, I know that for myself the excitement of the unknown has given way to the rhythm of the increasingly familiar. All it takes at this point is a careless word, a sleepless night and I can become easily flustered.

Perhaps that is why Michael Ramsden’s lecture on Monday hit home with such weight.

‘Divorce From Reality’ sounds interesting and starts well. A little bit of economics, throw in some philosophy, talk about how to fix the world’s condition etc. etc.. It’s interesting; it’s safe; it’s abstract.

But then a question cuts through the lesson and explodes in my cortex, bursting my heart at the same time.

What Would Jesus Ask?

In a moment, Michael moves from explaining the big ideas shaping our world to doing that unnerving thing that Jesus would do – turning the spotlight on me.

It is quite comfortable to talk about worldviews, theology, philosophy. It’s even pretty comfortable to write a paper. What’s not comfortable is that introspective moment when it all gets real. Sure, the big financial institutions have been playing a game with reality. A game with a finite timer where the goal is to get rich and get out before the buzzer goes off. So we shout at them, call for reform, demonise bankers and everything they do.

But what about my heart? What games am I playing? What do I hope I can get away with in this life before time is up?

The word hypocrite means to ‘play a part’. Sometimes it feels that Christian culture is theatrical training – we’re all given our parts to play, now just make sure you don’t fluff your lines. In this regard Shakespeare may be proven true when he wrote that, “All the world’s a stage.”

It is so incredibly easy to focus our energy outward, spending our time to fix the world, when at first we should be letting God fix us.

Hypocrisy isn’t healthy. As Michael said,

“What does it say about the church that many people instinctively feel that they are the last people we can tell about sin?”

Take a look at this little video. It’s funny, because it’s true.

A Typical Day in Oxford

October 30, 2011 — 2 Comments

I thought I would provide a snap shot of what a day in my life looks like right now. Take for example, Thursday:

  • 5:45 Off and at ‘em
  • 6:30 On the water for river session with Queen’s College Boat Club
  • 8:30 Coffee
  • 9:00 Chapel
  • 10:00 Morning Lecture
  • 12:30 Lunch
  • 13:30 Afternoon Lecture
  • 16:00 Research and writing time
  • 19:00 Co-lead Alpha Course
  • 22:00 Drink in the pub
I’ve noticed an amazing surge in energy since starting this course. With vision and purpose a lot can be achieved. Without either, apathy can creep in and sap motivation. This is a reminder to motivate myself and others around me on a daily basis.

Critical Thinking

September 12, 2011 — 2 Comments

An Oregon man who traveled to England by boat because of his apparent placement on the no-fly list was detained Monday upon his arrival in Great Britain, according to his family and lawyer.

Michael Migliore, a 23-year-old Muslim convert and dual citizen of the U.S. and Italy, had been trying unsuccessfully for months to fly to Italy to live with his mother.

So starts the story from Huffington Post, Fox News and other media outlets.

Migliore says he was told earlier this year that he is on the no-fly list, though U.S. officials refuse to confirm it publicly. He believes he is on the list because he refused to be interviewed without a lawyer by FBI agents after an acquaintance was charged last year in a plot to bomb a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon.

He ended up traveling by Amtrak from Portland to New York, where he took a trans-Atlantic cruise that arrived in England on Monday. The trip took more than a week.

Upon arrival, though, he was apparently detained by British authorities.

We then hear the thoughts of Migilore’s mother before his lawyer, Gadeir Abbas - Council on American-Islamic Relations, chimes in.

“We don’t know where he is,” Abbas said in a phone interview. Because of his placement on the list, Migliore “was forced to travel like he was living in the 19th century. What was waiting for him on the other side of the Atlantic was more oppression.”

19th Century Travel, Mr. Abbas?

Hang on a moment. I’ve lost interest (for now) in Migilore’s plight. What turgid twist of happenings are we sold by Mr. Abbas? “19th Century Travel?” I checked the arrivals into England from New York today (12th September) and the one Cruise Liner arriving into England (Southampton) from New York (departure info here) is the Queen Mary II.

The current Cunard flagship, Queen Mary II – QM2 – is quite possibly the most luxurious form of travel, ever. The newest, largest ship of the Cunard fleet, the list of indulgences on offer beggars belief.

But then Mr. Abbas is not concerned for his client’s travel arrangements. No, he has a case to win and a sympathy vote from the public to obtain.

What in the end could be a very stupid line that damages rather than helps his client’s cause turns out to be a nice little reminder about that importance about the employment of critical thinking skills when reading, well, anything.

What Is Apologetics?

September 3, 2011 — 6 Comments

Later this month I start my studies with the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics. I am excited about this and in my enthusiasm I share with my friends what I am doing. From time to time I am met with that blank-yet-friendly look only a Englishman can give, “Yes, I have no real understanding of what you are saying but if you continue I will either comprehend eventually or forget what you said.”

They mutter a comment to the tune of, “Isn’t that what you were doing in Hawaii, or something?” Aside from this small revelation (I spent five years in Hawaii and clearly failed to explain what I was doing) and accompanying mental note (keep explaining, keep explaining) I murmur my assent to the correspondence and then frankly ask, “Do you know what Apologetics is?”

“Erm, no – not really. Can you explain?”

Some would say that Apologetics has an unfortunate name in that it’s easy to falsely assume that it is a discipline that has something to do with some kind of apology. Perhaps it’s apologising for the Crusades, or some other tragedy ascribed to the followers of Jesus?

But no, whilst the root is common the derived meaning is very different. An apology can be one of two things. One, an expression of regret. Two, a defence of one’s actions. The first is the more oft used meaning whilst the latter lies alongside the discipline of Christian Apologetics.

The root word here is apologia. This is a Greek word and it means, “to give a defence.” It is a legal term that would be used to describe the explanation a defendant offers in a court of law.

Peter uses it in the Bible. In 1 Peter 3:15 he urges us to, “Always be prepared to give a defence to those that ask for a reason for the hope that is within you.” Being a Christian produces evidence. People change. Hope replaces hopelessness. Meaning shines through pain and both protects and enhances pleasure. This observable transformation naturally provokes curiosity and inevitably questions follow. It is these questions that Apologetics seeks to address.

Questions such as: Aren’t all religions equal? Hasn’t science disproved religion? Where was God on September 11th 2001? Isn’t the Bible just a collection of myths? Isn’t it arrogant to believe that you have the truth?

All these questions and many, many more are the realm of Apologetics. It is an art of persuasion that uses reason to defend ideas. Ideas frame the conversation but the real interest is always the person. Behind every question is a questioner and the skilful Apologist will rejoice not in successful debate but the clear presentation of Jesus Christ and His truth to the person asking.

After Jesus’ death, resurrection and ascension His disciples and the growing number of believers lived Apologetics. They gave a defence of the hope that they had come to know, that others would see and also believe. Today, our charge remains the same.

Related Links

Will Self asks ‘Is the internet inherently psychotic?’ on YouTube (HT Tom Price)

Some recent bloggers I’ve come across with an Apologetics theme (in no particular order):

In the mood for more? Take a look at this Apologetics Blog Directory

Burning Cane Fields

June 13, 2011 — 1 Comment

The island of Maui (where I am for the Reformation Generation programme this summer) has two main economic components: tourism and agriculture.

A large proportion of the agricultural component is the production of sugar from sugar cane. Before the cane is harvested the fields are burnt … No problem unless you live next to a field, drive past a field etc. This is what it looks like when they’re burning. You can imagine what this does to a house that is mostly windows that don’t really close …

It’s The Small Things

June 10, 2011 — 4 Comments

Green for Diesel - Black for Petrol ... Right?

It has been said that the United States and Great Britain are two nations separated by a common language. I believe that this is just half of the truth that explains why our differences amount to chasms in to which many unwitting people fall.

In my adventures across the pond over the years I have encountered the wild, the wonderful and the down right confusing.

I submit to you, Difference #197 – the Petrol (Gas) Pump.

Perhaps I could lobby the UN to draft a resolution for the promotion of a code unifying petrol pump colours? Why, oh why, would you pick the two same colours and reverse them?!

Yes, in this picture Diesel is from the green pump and Petrol from the black pump.

Never mind that the Americans drive on the French side of the road (yes, that’s right, you heard me) and that conservative politics are draped in red hues whilst the liberals sport blue (is it just a case of reversing anything the Old Empire does?) this almost beggars belief. It’s hard not to conjour up elaborate conspiracy theories of men in horn-rimmed glasses, suits and black ties scheming up plots to trick us.

What is your experience of the clash of our two great cultures? Are you a Colonial with stories from your time in the Old Motherland or perhaps you like me have ventured out West following the grand expeditions of years before? Share your thoughts – I know there’s a vast resource of stories to pool from!

Trevor and I went surfing at the weekend. Well, you would, wouldn’t you, on an island in the middle of the Pacific … ?

Today my back is red despite the application (in haste, might I add) of sunscreen before hitting the waves. I blame Trevor. He blames England and the lack of sun preparing my virgin skin for the might of the Hawaiian rays. Mind you, his malt-coloured epidermis is a shade pink today too.

This has brought about that age old concern amongst men. Under what circumstances and observing which rules is OK for a man to apply sunscreen to the body of another man?

If ever there was a need for a rule book, it is now. And in that great spirit of the Founding Fathers and declare a draft Constitution to govern the application of sunscreen between men.

  1. No eye contact
  2. Communication, if absolutely necessary, must be kept to such topics as the condition of the surf or sports involving violence
    1. Singing, humming, whistling or sounds of another nature to relieve stress are definitely frowned upon. Especially songs by Judy Garland …
  3. No ‘Budgy Smugglers’

  4. No tanning oil, ever. Sunscreen only.
  5. The application of sunscreen must be restricted to that area of the back between the shoulders and small of the back that a man cannot reach with his own hands.
    1. Self-application should always come first and utilise whatever means a man may have to hand, including spray-on sunscreen and loofahs.
  6. The person receiving the application should keep a strong, upright back at all times. No bending.
  7. The person applying the sunscreen should apply in a good measure but not too much so that excessive ‘rubbing-in’ is needed.
  8. A man should never treat this as a massage.
  9. A man may never comment on the condition of the skin of the man that he is applying sunscreen too.
  10. At no times is the comment, “That’s not how my wife does it” ever allowed.
  11. A man may not ask another man to apply sunscreen. Simply picking up the bottle and a small nod towards your friend will suffice.
    1. When doubt over the nature of a ‘sunscreen nod’ is expressed sentances with a maximum of 5 words are permitted to avoid confusion.

In keeping with the spirit of democracy this list may be added to or clarified upon by consensus majority, most especially when the original document is found to be too vague or ambiguous to govern this matter effectively.

What has been missed out? What laws must we add to this most important of Rule Books?

This sign from a Gymnastics School in Maui makes a lot more sense after seeing my friends’ kids around dogs.