How would Jesus wield the sword of the Spirit?

Ephesians 6:17 tell us to engage in spiritual combat with the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. What I think is assumed in this passage from Paul though, is that the sword of the Spirit is a weapon, and that weapons don't fight the enemy themselves. It is the soldier who has to learn how to wield the weapon in order to make use of it to attack the enemy. A gun won't fire by itself unless someone pulls the trigger. A cannon won't shoot unless someone lights it up. And contrary to Kim Jon Il, bombs on the North Korean/South Korea don't just "go off" themselves.

The same can be said of the sword of the Spirit. Merely possessing it will not defeat the enemy. Merely holding it in front of you between you and the enemy will not defeat the enemy. One has to learn, experientially grasping first hand, how to wield it like Zorro (or Cloud from FF7).



Then it will be of significant supernatural help in supernatural warfare.

I would like to share 2 principles of "wielding the sword of the Spirit" based on my own experience and research.



Principle #1: The never-changing content of the Word of God must be continually contextualized in a manner that is relevant to some aspect of the Christian's first-person experience, even if it is the Christian's vicarious first-person experience at best.



When we look at how Jesus wielded the sword of the Spirit, we see that he exercised principle #1 all the time. He never used culturally irrelevant analogies to his audience. He always adapted the content of the word of God with some aspect of his audience's first-person/everyday experience. In his Matthew 6:25-34 exhortation to not worry about the things of life, he used fitting farming analogies to an agrarian society (e.g. mention of birds feeding, barns, grass growing in the field and regularly being disposed of and thrown into a fire. Jesus used these culturally relevant examples to strike a dynamic chord with his audience, because he knew that making references to things of his audience's everyday/mundane environment would deeply resonate with their heart on a level that overflows to the intricate implications of their everyday life. Using mere emotion to passionately preach abstract doctrines were not the primary methods of wielding the word of God that Jesus used (although Jesus did believe objectively true abstract doctrines). Jesus was known for his culturally relevant parables that were custom-tailored to various ears of various audiences.

We should not only teach the same content of what Jesus taught. We should teach it in the same manner/style which he taught. That means avoiding culturally irrelevant analogies to recipients of the word, or just mere abstract doctrines without any references to people's first-person experience (as important as solid/sound doctrines are in themselves, they don't enable one to wield the sword of God in combat in any way that's of use [e.g. if one is being tempted to hate someone, be impatient, lust, be greedy, or covet, merely reminding oneself of abstractly true doctrines is pretty useless]). We should be able to adapt non-changing Kingdom of God principles to ever-changing environments/contexts in a way that is natural, smooth, non-forced, and fitting. It is my opinion that Jesus didn't rehearse his sermons in advance every time when he gave people spontaneous exhortations about the word of God. I think that he so deeply internalized the principles of the word of God and that he was so well versed in it that he could easily take any random object in his sight and say profound kingdom principles with them. That is, in his day, he easily took random everyday objects in his environment and expounded about profound spiritual realities by casually referring to them. Some of these include:


-fishing nets
-olive oil for virgins at a wedding
-mustard seeds, vines, branches
-wineskins
-bread/leavening


I am 99% sure that if Jesus were physically living in the 21st Century West, he would not use those culturally irrelevant analogies to us if he were on our modern day universities, urbanized shopping malls, downtown festivals etc. He might choose random cultural objects or symbols in our environment such as:


-ipods, iphones, ipads
-the subway
-facebook
-the current economic crises
-hollywood movies


He would use these to tell us profound spiritual truths about the nature of the Kingdom of God.

I think we should aim to do the same if we are to wield the sword of the Spirit just like our master swordsman Jesus did.

So to recap on principle#1 of divine sword wielding, we should aim to conceptually embody non-changing spiritual principles of the Kingdom of God in ever-changing culturally relevant symbols with constant relevant contextualization.

Here is where Shanghai noon illustrates this well.

The rope dart is a cool ancient Chinese weapon of warfare. Ideally, the warrior should personally master and internalize the principles of how to use it.



Jackie Chan's character in Shanghai noon has personally mastered and internalized the principles of how to use the rope dart (a piece of metal tied to a rope) in combat. He possesses the skill, or the skill possesses him to such an extent that he can look around in his foreign environment, find culturally similar tools (in this case a horseshoe and a cowboy rope) and use them for the same function of a rope dart in order to combat his enemies. In this sense, we can see that he is like Jesus.

(watch from 7:50-end)



Let us look at an example of principle #1 for the modern western Christian in action when he is faced in spiritual warfare with a lie/illusion of the enemy (for the enemy always speaks in lies) and uses culturally relevant parables that adequately embody Kingdom principles in order to combat the enemy. Let's say he is engaged in ministry, and things go haywire, chaotic, and seem to go down the drain. People are walking away from the faith, there is church politics/disunity, loyal disciples are really struggling in their walks, and no new people are being added into God's Kingdom. It is easy for him to get discouraged with lies from the enemy such as "God's ways don't seem to work, God's laws aren't true, God's promises aren't reliable". He can then take the culturally relevant analogy of Western magicians performing magic to audiences to "meditate" on the word of God in his situation. He can take the parallel of a magician "seeming to defy the law of gravity, but only using illusions to fool the minds of the audience" and match that up with Satan being an evil magician that does tricks to make things "seem to defy God's laws/ways/promises and get away with it but only using spiritual illusions to fool the minds of the Christian". The Christian can then further meditate on this culturally relevant parable of the Kingdom of God and know that just as how scientific laws (such as the law of gravity) don't stop being true if a magician temporarily fools the audience through tricks and sleights of hand, Satan the master liar/spiritual trickster cannot annul/negate/defy the spiritual laws, ways, and promises of God and his Kingdom even if he temporarily fools Christians with his spiritual tricks and slights of hand that they "seem like they can be violated without consequence".


"He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."
-John 8:44



I would find that the above example in combating the lies of the enemy in spiritual warfare is far more effective than merely reminding oneself abstract theological doctrines (e.g. "God is always right and good while Satan is always wrong and bad") as true as those abstract theological doctrines are.

Even if culturally relevant examples from one's first-person experience cannot be related to Kingdom principles to construct a contemporary parable, one can still accomplish a similar effect by drawing parallels with one's vicarious experience, that is, mainly through stories and movies that one has read or watched.

For example, there is a difference between merely reminding oneself of the abstract theological doctrine that "the spiritual armour of God in Ephesians 6 helps us to fight the forces of spiritual darkness" and meditating on G.I. Joe body suits that enable a soldier to jump higher, run faster, dodge weapons, and take/withstand hits better than the soldier can without it.



The same goes with spiritual armour, where we can accomplish so much more being equipped with it than what we can on our own without it.



Principle #2: The words of Scripture need to come alive, leap off of the pages of the Bible, and with fresh and invigorating dynamic become organically spoken to us through a live voice from lips of the living, breathing personhood of the Divine Author.



There is a world of a difference between reading the words of a letter that a person has written in the past to you, and that living/breathing person himself/herself speaking those exact same words to you in a live conversation that is currently taking place.

I can illustrate this with an example with my girlfriend.

(By the way, the cliche is true, I am learning so much about my relationship with God through my relationship with my girlfriend it is insane. My understanding of how I relate to God has broadened and expanded a lot due to drawing parallels between my relationship with my wonderful, beautiful, irreplaceable, sweet, and godly girlfriend =P)

Sometimes I get insecure about my relationship with my wonderful, beautiful, irreplaceable, sweet, and godly girlfriend, where I feel that there are so many other guys out there who can offer her stuff that I can't offer. I can't promise her an economically stable, financially comfortable lifestyle due to a secured and well-paid job that I don't have. I can't promise her spiritual, physical, emotional safety if she remains with me due to receiving future attacks from the enemy in labouring for city-wide revival in Toronto. She'll probably get attacked more because she's most important to me and the devil will try to take me down by taking her down. So I get insecure sometimes when I overthink things, all the "what ifs", like all the other guys out there who can (at least in human estimation) offer her an economically stable, financially comfortable lifestyle, with relative safety and comfort and minimal risk. When I think about this, as well as the added cultural pressure to "get a good job" (in asian standards), I sometimes get insecure, thinking that she'll leave me someday, or that even if she does stay with me, she'd rather be with someone else who can better offer her those materialistic benefits in our materialistic society.

So, what I do a lot of the time to "combat" this is that I try to remind myself of the times where she has genuinely affirmed to me that:


-she won't pin my identity down to whatever job I have
-that she doesn't care about materialistic comfort/luxury, "success" in worldly standards
-that she'll support me and believe in me, and respect me no matter what job God ends up giving to me
-it doesn't matter what other people think, she'll still care for me and look upon me with positive regard


Replaying these words in my mind that she has repeatedly told me in the past helps a little bit. But they are still words spoken in the past, that have lost their aroma of "freshly heard words in a live conversation".

But, when we meet up again, and she looks me in the eye and tells me the exact same words that reassure me, there is something different that happens within me compared to me just merely reminding myself of the same reassuring words that have been genuinely spoken to me in the past. There is a dynamic freshness to her words spoken currently that have this feel of aliveness to them that cuts off any lies that are "picnicking" in my mind. Those freshly words spoken live just slices all these lies in my mind like a sword splitting a kitchen cloth.

This first-person experience of this process helps me understand a bit more of the nature of Hebrews 4:12.


"For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart."


To be completely honest, I thought that a lot of this verse that was oftly quoted in Christian circles was mere rhetoric. I thought that the author of Hebrews probably meant what he said, but tried to "Obama-ly" size things up like a western politician. Now, with the deeper understanding gained from the aforementioned experience with my girlfriend, I have come more and more to realize that the writer of Hebrews was not just using flamboyant rhetoric to describe the awesomeness of the word of God. He was speaking for real, and probably from his first-hand experience of the word of God coming alive off of the pages of Scripture, and slicing the lies of the enemy with that aura of freshly spoken words from a living, breathing, and consciously personal Author "looking him in the eye" and powerfully speaking to him his words in a live conversation.

There is a "catch" to this principle #2 though. It is not something we can completely control (just like how we can't completely control the timing and content of words that our friends speak to us in a live conversation with them). We can only create the conditions/opportunities, and the rest is out of our hands and in the hands of the friends that we're talking to. So with respect to our relationship with God, it is up to him when he does this, and sometimes he remains temporarily silent for our growth. But when God does show up and speak those live words to us, the rest is history. Attacks of fear, doubt, discouragement, anxiety just get thoroughly and definitively sliced by the double-edged sword coming out of the mouth of Jesus (Revelation 1:16)

To be honest, the words of the Bible can seem "wooden" and non-dynamic at times. Although they are always true, they don't always seem to have that "alive vigour/aura" in and of themselves. However, the Holy Spirit can give living breath to those seemingly "wooden words" and bring them to life when he speaks them to us in a current/live conversation we have with him.



Since the Holy Spirit is a live, conscious person, he can take the seemingly "wooden" words that we meditate on in the "cupboard" of our minds, and turn them into dynamic, living, moving, and breathing words. Just like how the indian in the cupboard turned from a wooden/static figure into a live indian at the turn of the cupboard's key. The Holy Spirit is the key to turning the words of Scripture into supernaturally alive words.





In my own life recently, I have been experiencing some rough "spiritual deserts", where the lies of Satan were just harassing me and assaulting me like there was no tomorrow. However, a friend of mine, directly prompted by the Holy Spirit to share specific biblical passages with me, shared some passages with me and the effect was dynamically supernatural. Throughout different weeks, she gave me different verses of Scripture and each time, it had the effect of turning the loving words of God that were genuinely spoken yet seemingly "wooden" to me into "live words" in a "live conversation" with a living God.

The Holy Spirit prompted her to share to me on different weeks:
-Zechariah 4:6
-Joshua 1:7-9
-Psalm 37:23
-Isaiah 40:28-31

I know this friend of mine wasn't just sharing randomly picked passages and glibly saying that they were "from the Lord". I know that it had to be the Holy Spirit speaking through her to speak to me live because immedately, there was spiritual intuition that resonated with my spirit when these words were spoken to me (the effect was on a spiritual level as opposed to an "intellectual click" on the intellectual level or mere "emotional fuzziness" on the emotional level [hard to explain unless one has experienced the distinction first-hand]). I immediately knew, without any outside help, how these verses were so relevant to my life specifically. These verses also were consistent with other charismatic prophecies spoken into my life independently. To my knowledge, these people speaking specifically consistent things in my life don't know each other. That's confirmation. Unless they're all in some conspiracy of tapping into my phones/emails. But I trust in a supernatural God. And I believe in that charismatic stuff

Let us wield the sword of the Spirit well in this supernatural spiritual warfare. For our spiritual life and vitality depends on it.

Knowledge of the outer world can contribute to change of one's inner world

13 Furious with rage, Nebuchadnezzar summoned Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. So these men were brought before the king, 14 and Nebuchadnezzar said to them, “Is it true, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, that you do not serve my gods or worship the image of gold I have set up? 15 Now when you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe and all kinds of music, if you are ready to fall down and worship the image I made, very good. But if you do not worship it, you will be thrown immediately into a blazing furnace. Then what god will be able to rescue you from my hand?”

16 Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to him, “King Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. 17 If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he will deliver us[c] from Your Majesty’s hand. 18 But even if he does not, we want you to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.”

19 Then Nebuchadnezzar was furious with Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, and his attitude toward them changed. He ordered the furnace heated seven times hotter than usual 20 and commanded some of the strongest soldiers in his army to tie up Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego and throw them into the blazing furnace. 21 So these men, wearing their robes, trousers, turbans and other clothes, were bound and thrown into the blazing furnace. 22 The king’s command was so urgent and the furnace so hot that the flames of the fire killed the soldiers who took up Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, 23 and these three men, firmly tied, fell into the blazing furnace.

24 Then King Nebuchadnezzar leaped to his feet in amazement and asked his advisers, “Weren’t there three men that we tied up and threw into the fire?”

They replied, “Certainly, Your Majesty.”

25 He said, “Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods.”

26 Nebuchadnezzar then approached the opening of the blazing furnace and shouted, “Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, servants of the Most High God, come out! Come here!”

So Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego came out of the fire, 27 and the satraps, prefects, governors and royal advisers crowded around them. They saw that the fire had not harmed their bodies, nor was a hair of their heads singed; their robes were not scorched, and there was no smell of fire on them.

Daniel 3:13-27






I used to think that mere knowledge itself could not change (or at least contribute to the change of) one's character. I used to think that people with "puffed up heads" full of head knowledge were useless in terms of helping themselves change how they instinctively react to pressing and stressful situations in life. Now I am modifying my view. I still do think that knowledge about specific facts (Bible verses, the latest news from the press, the stock market's latest values) doesn't change how one reacts to stressful circumstances in life with strong/virtuous/moral character. However, I think, knowledge about the nature of reality in and of itself at the grand/worldview level can potentially contribute to the change of one's inner character, and how it reacts to pressing predicaments and impending disasters on one's life.

Let's take an everyday illustration. Let's say that you're a bank teller and one day a couple robbers point a couple guns at you and tell you to open up the bank safe and give them all the money. If you had knowledge that their guns were real, then your inner character (with all things being equal) would cooperate with them under a real threat (with the fear of death lingering over you every single moment of the hold up). You would probably act without courage, be timid, and not dare to defy to do what those bankers told you to do.

Now let's imagine a modified scenario. Except that this time, when the 2 robbers each point a gun at you, you just know that although they look real, they are just toy-water-guns that they bought at the dollar store across the street (because you recognize them as you pass by everyday) although a quick cursory glance at them would convince the average person the guns were more or less real. The difference this time would be that you had knowledge that these were toy water guns that these 2 robbers were using to try to rob your bank with. What would you do if you were absolutely sure you had this knowledge (coupled with faith based on knowledge)? You would probably calmly call the cops, ignore their threats as if they're speaking a foreign language while saying them, be courageous, peaceful, and wait for the cops to come while the robbers continue to bluff-threat you (if they choose to stay).

What would the difference be in these 2 situations? Knowledge of the outside world. And that knowledge would affect the inner character of the person being threatened to do something against his/her will.

One of the recurring themes of the Bible is the fact that all of reality is under God's control, and that nothing happens without him allowing it, ultimately for his good purposes. This is not to say that there's no suffering, hardships, difficulties, trials etc. Those are all real. But the threats from the enemy (e.g. that followers of Christ are "missing out" on the pleasant sin they are rejecting, or if they do not submit to their knowledge of God's reality and are therefore "forced" to compromise and go against their knowledge of God's reality because unfortunate circumstances have made it "necessary" to do so) are ultimately bluffs with toy-water-gun pistols. This is not to say that there is an element of truth in persecutions (e.g. you'll lose your job, friends, reputation, and even life). The lie is not necessarily in these things we might realistically lose in the trials and tribulations of following Christ. But the lie is denying the fact that even if we were to lose our job, friends, reputation, and even life due to following Christ, ultimately we are not being deprived of anything good and all will work out in the end for God's glory and our joy, and that God will ultimately "have our backs" in terms of our eternal destiny. That's the lie. Knowledge of God's reality and his greatness and goodness throughout every situation in life not only helps change our our mind, it helps change our character too.

I do recognize there are qualifications for this. It has to be experiential knowledge and not just abstract knowledge without personal interaction with the facts. For example, if one has studied scientific research on parachuting for decades but has never parachuted out of a plane before, that "knowledge" is still abstract and one will probably be scared out of one's wits when one jumps out of a plane with a parachute the first time. But after one has jumped out of a plane with a parachute hundreds of times, that experiential knowledge of scientific reality will change one's inner character as well as spontaneous reactions after one immediately steps outside of a plane with a parachute. Also, in the spiritual life, one also has to train one's physical body and social relationships through spiritual disciplines too. All that to say that inner change has to be holistic with different dimensions of our being. With that being said, interactive/experiential knowledge of God's reality of the "outside world" can definitely contribute to change in the "inner world".

I believe that one of the reasons why Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego had such strong and courageous character in the midst of life threats from the most politically powerful person in their day (Nebuchadnezzar) was because they had experiential knowledge of God's reality and his pragmatic protection over his people. They weren't even afraid of death because they knew that even if God allowed them to die, it would not negatively affect their eternal destiny with God a bit.

I am far from where Daniel (in the lions den), Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego are in terms of being completely calm in terms of life-threats, but I think God has been growing me in the past few months in terms of my faith (based on knowledge of facts) in the "matrix" of the Kingdom of God. To me, I am experientially growing in the knowledge that the physical reality of the 5 senses is not all there is to life. There are invisible realities and a spiritual realm that are always in action that are completely undetected by my 5 senses most of the time. And ultimately, I believe, the spiritual realm guides the physical, although they are interconnected with the result of the physical realm being able to affect the spiritual realm as well.

But I am also learning to change the way I perceive reality to the way God perceives reality. "Taking things in my own hands" to secure the job, love life, economic stability, social life that I personally want and desire is starting to become more and more of a realized illusion in my mind (although not completely, I am not perfect). And threats from the enemy that "if I don't take these things into my own hands, I'll lose something good" are starting to more and more to appear as toy-water-guns as opposed to real pistols ready to kill my soul.

Knowledge of the "matrix" of the Kingdom of God that it is alive and in action whether or not I sense it at any given time contributes to the change of my inner character. The good news for me is that the "matrix" of the Kingdom of God will take care of me, so although I do my part, I know ultimately God will look out for me so I don't have to stressfully look after myself. The result is that my character is changed as this interactive/experiential knowledge is increased. The result of that is that my actions and behaviour are changed as a by-product

The type of art that one would die for

I had a conversation with a friend about a month or two ago. We were talking about the movie the Dark Knight at the time. We were talking about Heath Ledger's acting of the role "the Joker". My friend (who is into acting more than myself) said a really thought provoking comment. He said something along the lines of "[Heath Ledger] dying to play the acting role of the joker, now that's good/worthy art". The essence of what he said stuck with me. While I don't think that actors should die for their acting roles, the lingering comment in my head started to make some parallels in my spiritual life.

Christ calls us to "deny ourselves" and "lose our lives" to follow him (Luke 9:23-24). Now Jesus is clearly not telling his followers to commit suicide, or annihilate themselves. He is telling his followers (aka his "imitators") to die to their own selfish will and life for God's will, or in Dallas Willard's words, to "no longer live to get one's own way, but live for God's way".

Think about actors engaging in the art of acting. These professional actors who specialize in imitating characters of different roles are engaging in something that is more than mere behaviour modification. They really have to "become" the character from the inside in a way. The don't just enter the world of the character. You can say that the world of the character also enters them.

http://submittedforyourperusal.com/2008/03/01/did-the-joker-kill-heath-ledger

Notice the excerpts from the Rolling Stones obituary of Heath Ledger commenting on him "entering the role" of the Joker:

1. “He couldn’t seem to disengage; the inexactness bothered him.”
2. “Ledger had no formal training, and there’s this to be said for acting school: it teaches you to approach a role as foreign, as a language you’ll temporarily speak. Ledger didn’t appear to have that. He needed to dig for (and inhabit) the part of himself that was the character. ‘Performance comes from absolutely believing what you’re doing,’ he said. ‘You convince yourself, and believe in the story with all your heart.’ It didn’t always shut off when a production did, and I think it ground him.”
3. “As The Joker in next summer’s The Dark Knight, he will appear as a man severed from all connection. A ‘psychopathic, mass-murdering clown with zero empathy,’ is how he described it to the New York Times. On set, Michael Caine said the performance sometimes turned so frightening he forgot his own lines.”

I also heard that Heath Ledger locked himself up in a room for month(s) to really enter into the character to play his role as crisp, natural, and authentic as possible. One can say that he not only became the Joker. The Joker became him.

I am reminded by an excerpt from a book called "I told me so" by Gregg Elshof (a book primarily about self-deception). He is very insightful when he talks about us "imitating" Jesus:



Jesus was down on hypocrisy - he didn't seem to have much room for it at all. As followers of Jesus, we're called to live lives of authenticity and candor. At the same time, though, we're called to a lifestyle of imitation. We are imitators of Jesus.

Think about imitation.

When I imitate something or someone, I adopt patterns of being that are external to me, foreign, and unnatural. The presumption of the New Testament is that I do not presently have the character of Christ. Instead, I am twisted and broken. My present opportunity is to play at having the heart of Christ - to imitate him - in an attempt to cooperate with the Holy Spirit as Christ is realized in me. With the help of God's Spirit, I put off the old self, that which is authentically me at present, and put on the new self, that which is authentically Christ. Over time, that which was at first artificial, foreign, and unnatural takes root, and I am transformed. I begin by blessing those who curse me, even though everything in me is pushing a curse through my lips. I'm playing. I'm imitating the one for whom the blessing comes naturally. Over time, with the help of the Holy Spirit, that which was once forced and unnatural becomes the reflex response I begin by deciding to give when my heart is selfish. I'm playing. I'm imitating the one for whom generosity is instinctive. Over time, with the help of the Holy Spirit, that which was once opposed to my nature becomes natural for me - as it was and is for Jesus. We play at being Christ's followers in order to become his followers.

But this whole process of transformation through imitation is unavailable to the hyper-authentic. They will bless only when they feel a genuine desire for the well-being of the other. They will give only when they feel generous. Hyper-authenticity rules out the possibility of imitating anyone other than yourself - and so it rules out the possibility of cooperating with the Holy Spirit in your own spiritual re-formation by imitating the Master.

When I was in college, I picked up the guitar. I played for years without formal instruction before I finally decided to get some lessons. By that time I had settled into some pretty bad habits. At my first lesson, my teacher positioned my thumb differently on the back of the neck of the guitar. Suddenly, I was completely incapable of playing even the simple things I had played before. I felt awkward and unnatural. But the teacher assured me that if I stuck with it, I'd get used to it and, in time, this new position would free me to reach chords I could never have reached using my old method.

Insofar as I am not yet perfectly like Christ, the imitation of Christ will, at times, feel false, unnatural, and insincere. But if we trust the Master, we'll obey even when obedience isn't what comes naturally - even when obedience runs contrary to what we're feeling at the moment. This isn't hypocrisy; we don't act contrary to our impulses in an attempt to fake anybody out. We act contrary to our impulses because we wish to be re-trained. We wish to be something other than what we are today. We wish to be putting off the old self and putting on the new.

Imitation, then, can be perfectly authentic. It can be the outworking of an authentic intention to take on the heart and character of Christ. But imitation precludes hyper-authenticity. So if you want to be a student of Jesus, beware of hyper-authenticity.



I think us Jesus followers can learn a lot in a modified channeling of Heath Ledger's death due to his engagement (at least partially) with his assigned acting role as the Joker.

If secular actors can physically die due to turning into the characters that they wish to imitate through art, us Christians can and should spiritually die to ourselves in our pursuit the "art" of imitating Jesus and becoming like him.

I should imitate Jesus in the attitude of a professional actor so much to the extent that not only I enter the role of Jesus, but Jesus enters the role of me, and in some mysterious way, becomes me as I aspire to become like him.

Dostoevsky said something along the lines of "First art would imitate life. Then life would imitate art. Then life would find its very meaning for existence from the arts."

Oh Jesus, allow me to devote my entire life to "acting" and entering the role of a 21st Century North American incarnation of you as I try to imitate how you would literally walk, speak, sleep, eat, interact with others, serve others, and relate to the Father through the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. So much to the extent that my old self is dead, remains dead, and the world sees you alive through my dead self.

Shanghai Noon illustrating new wineskins

"No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the tear worse. And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins."
-Mark 2:21-22

There is a time when an old "system" of doing things has to go. There was a time when the old system of doing things had a relevant place, was an honourable and God-glorifying ritual, and brought people closer to God under specific conditions. However, times keep changing, and and therefore methods and means need to keep changing as well. The substance of Christianity ought to never change. But the the vehicle/methods/vessels/containers or "wineskins" must change from generation to generation. If we look across biblical history and extrabiblical church history, we will see the Holy Spirit always changing things up, finding new ways of doing things, all the while retaining the non-changing substance of the Kingdom of God.


I like how Shanghai Noon illustrates this. We can learn a lot from it.

In the parable of Shanghai Noon:

Being Chinese represents being Christian. An ongoing question in this parable is: What does it mean to be Chinese in the current generation? Is it only a matter of following preexisting rules, regulations, and rituals that were relevant for the last generation? Or is there more to being Chinese than only the cultural roots? While the cultural roots and traditions of the Chinese culture should be valued, commemorated, and respected, is being Chinese merely following these roots and traditions? What does it mean to be Chinese in contemporary times?

Similarly, what does it mean to be a genuine Christian in the current generation? Is it only a matter of following preexisting rules, regulations, and rituals that have previously blessed the previous generations of the Church? Or is there more to merely following the traditions and cultural roots of Christianity? While the cultural roots and traditions of the Christian culture should be valued, commemorated, and respected, is being Christian merely following these roots and traditions? What does it mean to be a Jesus follower in the 21st Century?

The traditional Chinese Imperial guards represent the previous generation of Christianity (20th century North American Christianity let's say). There is a rich culture and tradition of practices, values, and customs in it. It worked in a certain time and place, and many people benefited and were blessed by it.

Similarly there is a rich culture and heritage of previous generations of Christianity. There was a certain time and place for it and many people were blessed by it. Hence it is tempting to universally prescribe these relative cultural traditions to all future generations while confusing the substance (what does it mean to be Christian?) with the forms (how did previous generations live out the Christian life in their culture?)

The Princess (Lucy Liu) represents a daughter of the Emperor of the Universe (God), who has nevertheless strayed from the Kingdom of God although once walking in it. She has been disillusioned with the traditional North American 20th century Church. While it had a time and a place, and she previously was blessed by it, there was also hypocrisy, rigid rituals, inflexibility, and a lack of creative/dynamic/organic freshness in it. Therefore she has strayed from the Kingdom, because the "system" of outdated wineskins of Christianity has left her disillusioned. Lucy Liu wants to stay in the West, not because she hates China. She respects her cultural heritage and does not want to cut it off, but prefers to stay in the West and explore what it means to "be Chinese" in the West. (Because "being Chinese" is not a matter of where you live and what you do. It is a state of being that finds novel expressions in new settings. [e.g. CBCs and ABCs])

The bad guy Chinese guy in black represents Satan, who holds the wayward Children of God hostage. Certain children of the Emperor of the Universe have been wayward and strayed from the faith over the years and Satan has tried to take them prisoner again.

The gold represents Jesus' blood that has ransomed the wayward Child of God.

Owen Wilson represents "the neutral culture". There are some things that are neutral in the culture which have the potential to benefit the Kingdom. Some stuff in the West include individualism, free/creative expression, cultural diversity and tolerance of different traditions and viewpoints, Western music genres, democracy etc. These examples and more are neutral cultural characteristics of the West which should not be "shunned" by Christianity, but embraced openly with the potential to even enrich the Christian experience particular to one's time and place in the West.

The bad guy Cowboy represents the evil things in the culture. Some things in any culture are just plainly evil. In the West, this includes but is not limited to: adultery, "gang" murders, vanity, blatant narcisissm, lack of respect and submission to authorities, lack of respect to elders/the older generation etc. These things are plainly evil and should be shunned by Christianity. While we should love those who practice this stuff, we should avoid the practices ourselves.

Jackie Chan represents a genuine spiritual journeyer who, for a limited time, "stepped outside the system" of cultural Christianity. He has explored a foreign culture that has allowed him to understand his own cultural bias as well as strengths by temporarily getting an objective bird's eye view of it. He respects and cherishes his roots and heritage, but he does not think that his roots and heritage is "all" it means to live Chinesely/Christianly. Exposure to a foreign culture via Owen Wilson has helped him to do this. He discovers the deep "essence" of things. After stripping away all the extraneous cultural, geographical, temporal garb/fashion of what it means to be Chinese/Christian, he is on a journey to discovering what is the essence/core of what it means to be Chinese/Christian.



A couple comments on the clip:

1)When Jackie Chan tries to keep the princess in the West (because the princess herself desires to), he is confronted by one of the imperial guards reading the official "decree"/document of the Chinese culture. He has been so used to not questioning this traditional decree over the years and just unhesitatingly submitting to it because that's what he was taught. But then he has changed this time. This time, he realizes that being Chinese is not ultimately what that decree/document says. It is a state of being, open to new expressions in new cultures, environments, and generations. Therefore, although he doesn't disown/disinherit the decree, he is not controlled by it.

Satan: "Do you see? He will always be a slave."

Jackie Chan: "This is the West. Not the East. And the sun may rise where we come from. But here is where it sets."

In the same way, I see more and more of generation of Jackie Chans in the North American church who are really searching and are on a journey. What is the essence of Christianity? Surely it has to be more than just how our parents specifically expressed their Christianity in their time and their age. Christianity is more than the mere customs and rituals of going to Church on Sunday, doing inductive Bible Study, tithing, singing Western worship songs, going to Friday fellowship etc. What is the essence of Christianity? While I don't want to disrespect and disown my previous generation's roots, Christianity is a state of being, not ultimately a matter of doing things my mom and dad did.

The attitude of some (but not all) previous generations of North American Christians consciously (or subconsciously) believe that: "If a practice, belief, or way of thinking is not in the Bible, throw it out. it is unbiblical and has nothing to do with Christianity."

A lot of modern day Jackie Chans are learning not to be enslaved to the previously generation's way of thinking and doing things. Slowly rising up from the ground. Respectfully but firmly saying in response: "This is the 21st Century. Not the 20th. If a practice, belief, or way of thinking is not prohibited in the Bible, we remain open to it, for all truth, goodness, and beauty is God's truth, goodness, and beauty and can be used to glorify Him."


2)Both the Imperial Guards and Jackie Chan are ultimately on the same side. They ultimately have the same goals of "rescuing the princess" and ensuring her wellbeing. Although they have disagreements on the best way of what that looks like ultimately they are fighting for the same purpose and would sacrifice themselves for her. Immediately, this means saving her from Satan destroying her at all costs.


3)There is one part of the clip where one of the Imperial Guards fights Jackie Chan with "tools" that China has used for centuries. These include the spear, sword, and special nunchucks. In their disagreement of how to save the princess and ensure her wellbeing, they engage in battle with these tools. In the Christian world, these 3 tools of spear, sword, and nunchucks represent the biblical tools of "exegesis", "hermeneutics", and "application". The Imperial Guard tries to use these tools to defeat Jackie Chan's new beliefs and way of thinking. In the same way, the traditional Christian may use exegesis, hermeneutics, and application to try to defeat the new wineskin Christian, using the tools to conclude things such as:

-the Bible says that when we pray, we should be respectful. Therefore it should be formal
-the Bible lays out a model of Acts, Confession, Thanksgiving, and Supplication. We should always follow that model in prayer
-the Bible never talked about modern psychological concepts. Therefore there is no room for taking modern psychological concepts in prayer.

The modern day Jackie Chan will use the same tools of exegesis, hermeneutics, and application to defend himself and counter the attacks with ideas such as:

-the Bible says that we should be respectful, but being respectful does not mean being formal. One can be respectful and casual/informal at the same time. One can use slang/colloqialisms/and talk about "small things" with God the way a friend does while remaining respectful.
-the Bible lays out the ACTS model of prayer, but it does not prohibit any other methods and means of prayer. Therefore, if the Bible doesn't prohibit it, we have freedom to use it. Therefore, we can pray while implementing the various dimensions of our being including our physical body movements (i.e. "feeling God in our legs" when we walk), our sense of humour (i.e. sharing inside jokes with God), and our will in addition to just using our mind in the ACTS model.
-all truth is God's truth. Therefore if modern day psychological discoveries help us concentrate and focus on God better throughout the day, let us use it. One way to help oneself get into another person's imagination is to try to "imagine your consciousness" in the geographical location of another person's head since the body and the mind are connected, and how the state of one's mind is interconnected with one's physical environment and one's sensory information with the 5 senses in it. Therefore to imagine our own consciousness in the first-person consciousness of Jesus inside us helps us interact with him better. Also, using our imagination to "pray" with Jesus while taking into new accounts of psychological phenomena is effective. Therefore, sometimes I will creatively pretend that I have "divine multiple personality disorder" where sometimes it's my consciousness inside of myself, and where a few moments later, it's Jesus inside my consciousness, and it's a back and forth feedback loop because Christ does not call me to annihilate my personality, but doesn't cause me to worship myself as well. Therefore, since the Bible talks about "me being in Christ" and "Christ being in me" there is room for both, and creatively implementing the knowledge of modern day psychological discoveries can help me engage with Jesus through prayer.

4)The evil part of the culture saying "Nice to see we're all churchgoers".

LOL

the "Matrix" of the Kingdom of God

For the last month of my life, there has been a recurring theme repeatedly going on in my mind as to how life in the Kingdom of God relates to the nature of the Matrix movie.

One line always repeats itself in my mind. "Living from another world that has extraordinary effects on this one". This is a slightly modified phrase that I stole from one of Dallas Willard articles. It keeps going through my mind periodically as I go throughout my day. Whether this is from the Holy Spirit, my own mind, or a mixture of the both I do not know. I think that line clearly makes sense in a plain/simple no-nonsense reading of the New Testament. The early Apostles/Acts Church were really normal human beings that were living from another world that has extraordinary effects on this one. That is the only rational explanation for what the heck actually took place in the book of Acts.

Once again, I do feel like I need to give a reminder to those reading this that I am aware that the comparison between the Matrix and the Kingdom of God is not a completely flawless one (as with all analogies). There are flaws/shortcomings/incongruities with the Matrix and the Kingdom of God definitely, and some sketchy/New Age-ish implications that come from the Matrix too. Nevertheless, I believe that although the movie is over a decade old, it captures more of the essence/nature of the invisible Kingdom of God that we read about from the New Testament than mere technical propositions can. Technical propositions can only go so far to communicate the essence of something (e.g. a textbook definition of sacrificial love). It takes a narrative-like framework to more fully express the essence of a concept sometimes (e.g. a movie about sacrificial love).

(with certain qualifications) The Kingdom of God as outlined in the New Testament is so like the Matrix.



There are so many references to the Kingdom of God in the Gospels and Acts that I don't have room to refer to every single one here, but just a few. The topic that Jesus talked about most was about the Kingdom of God. Now what exactly is this Kingdom? I like Dallas Willard's interpretation, because it just makes so much sense when it is applied to the contexts in Scripture where the term is used. Dallas Willard says that it is the "range of God's effective will, where what God wants done is done". Because on earth right now, in a ton of places God's will is not done, and we ask for God's will to come into effect in more and more places, especially in our own hearts.


Now to the references:

Jesus said in John 18:36 that “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.” From here, we know that his Kingdom right now is not in the physical realm where it is advanced through physical means (i.e. political/military force). The same goes with the Matrix and the "kingdom" that Morpheus, Neo, and Trinity are fighting to advance, they do not expand the "kingdom" of the Matrix ("unplug" people from the Matrix) through physical/political/military ends (although sometimes they do have specific missions for other purposes that encompass this stuff like the famous lobby scene), but by living from "another world" that has extraordinary effects on this one.

In Romans 14:17, Paul says that "the Kingdom is not of physical eating and drinking, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit". Those 3 things in the Holy Spirit are non-physical/invisible, yet real things. You can't describe the colour, weight, location, height, width or any physical characteristics of righteousness, peace, and joy, although they can have physiological effects on the physical body. The same with the Matrix. One cannot say to Neo "Hey Neo, where is the Matrix?". Neo cannot "show" the Matrix to the person to experience only with his/her five senses while he/she remains in the physical world. In Luke 17:20-21, Jesus says "The Kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you." The same goes with Neo.

I believe that at certain times in the New Testament when the term "the Kingdom of God" is used, sometimes it is referring to something in the future. But sometimes it is referring to the present moment. Like right now. One piece of biblical evidence (on top of the entire book of Acts) is Acts 14:22 when Paul and Barnabas said to the churches in Lystra, Iconium and Antioch that “We must go through many hardships to enter the Kingdom of God." Clearly Paul and Barnabas are not saying we have to suffer in order to attain salvation in the next life. That would clearly go against the "justified by grace alone" theme that Paul writes about all over the place in his Epistles. But I believe that what Paul and Barnabas said here only makes sense if the Kingdom of God here is understood as "actively being involved in fulfilling God's story on earth right now and being a part of what he's presently doing now on earth while being in interactive relationship with him." If that definition is inserted into the phrase "enter the Kingdom of God" in Acts 14:22, then it makes sense, because it is something that we enter into and are a actively a part of now. The same thing goes with Neo. After Neo "converts", he is actively involved in the expansion of "Zion" through the Matrix.

In 1 Corinthians 4:20, Paul says "For the kingdom of God is not a matter of talk but of power". Power can be defined as the ability to produce the effects what you want to effect, effectively. The Kingdom of God is not escapism where one escapes into another reality that is remotely unattached and unrelated to "normal" everyday life. It is a matter of living from another world that POWERFULLY produces extraordinary effects in the "normal" everyday world as evidenced in the Gospels and the book of Acts. Similarly, Neo did not just enter a form of escapism where he stops living in the "normal" everyday life. On the contrary, he entered a reality that had powerful effects on the "everyday" one.


1 Corinthians 2:6-14 says:

We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. However, as it is written:

“What no eye has seen,
what no ear has heard,
and what no human mind has conceived”—
the things God has prepared for those who love him—

these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.

The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit


If Morpheus tried to explain this to another person who has never experienced the Matrix before, it would sound like utter folly. It would sound ridiculous. It would sound retarded. Until the person experienced it him/herself. After Neo got thoroughly/holistically/irreversibly converted he was able to understand not the "wisdom of the world" or of physical reality, but he was able to understand the "secret"/"hidden" wisdom of the Kingdom of God, that tells us that we were previously of "the world" aka "The Kingdom of darkness", but then we were delivered from it (Ephesians 2:1-5, Colossians 1:13). The same goes when the student of Jesus tries to communicate spiritual truths to someone who has never stepped into the Kingdom. It sounds absolutely ridiculous. But for that student of Jesus to try to communicate spiritual truths for someone who has just thoroughly/holistically/irreversibly experienced the "new birth" (truly being born-again) it is true/priceless/treasured wisdom.


I think these parallels are extremely important for us modern day Protestants to understand. I cannot stress this enough. How far we have strayed from norm of New Testament Christian experience is very saddening to one who has started to actually experience the Matrix of the Kingdom of God. I see it like this. Imagine Neo, after experiencing the Matrix himself, writes letters to his children, so that his children can one day pass them down to their children and so on. So he writes letters describing the Matrix, it's nature, how to navigate through it, what to expect from it, how to train oneself to cosntantly remain in it, "agents" to watch out for and how to deal with them, how to live from it in order to have extraordinary effects in the physical world etc. Then, imagine several generations later, Neo's grandchildren's grandchildren read these letters and try to imitate Neo and experience the kind of life Neo experienced, but just imitate the surface by-products/physical effects of Neo's typical life in the Matrix with a monkey-see-monkey-do sort of legalistic carbon copy of his descriptions accompanied by merely "parotting" his sayings all the while never learning to really live from this invisible, yet parallel reality. But they are very technical in their understanding of the Matrix, debate amongst one another about the small technicalities in his letters, and feel guilty about not being able to live the life that Neo was able to live. They remain living in and from the physical world and try to produce the extraordinary effects they see without living from the parallel world, the Matrix. But they keep studying these left-behind letters of Neo and build seminaries to understand its meaning better. Ladies and Gentlemen, that's kind of the picture we have today in the North American Church.

In order for someone to imitate Neo, he has to operate from the same alternate reality that Neo operated from. One cannot imitate Neo by putting the emphasis on trying to conform his external behaviour to Neo's external behaviour. One imitates Neo by living from the same alternate world that he lived in that has extraordinary effects on this one.

One does not dodge bullets from the enemy by trying to dodge bullets.



Although this guy's imitation of Neo is impressive to the public (it really is), if he tried that while terrorist was shooting bullets at him, he'd die in a moment.



One dodges bullets from the enemy by living from another world that has extraordinary effects on this one.


The same goes with the student of Jesus wanting to learn how to bless those who curse him, not fear man but fear God, or learn to not worry in all types of situations that are stressful for the nondisciple. These things can be learned by following Jesus. They are not just unrealistic expectations that Jesus tells us to do but where we constantly have to fail and ask for forgiveness after inevitably failing without improvement. By the grace of God they can be learned and Jesus expects us to learn them, master them, and teach others (in the Great Commission). Teaching people to do something is not just merely telling them WHAT they should do (e.g. a basketball coach teaching a basketball player how to master fadeaway shots by saying "just make them!") but teaching them exactly HOW they can master it (e.g. a basketball coach teaching a basketball player how to master fadeaway shots by "breaking his shot down" and going through each ineffective part of his shot with him and encouraging him). But we must remember that it is basically impossible to fulfill the commandments of Jesus if we remain in this physical world only. We must learn to live from another world that has extraordinary effects on this one in order to experience those effects. And that comes from learning from the "Morpheus"es that have experienced it themselves and who can likewise personally train those with less or no experience in it.

I am so grateful for my "Morpheus"es who have experienced the Matrix of the Kingdom of God first-hand and who have, after mastering things themselves, have taught me how to steadily master things in the Matrix myself. Dallas Willard, Jan Johnson, Richard Foster, and Frank Laubach have been my Morpheus"es, with the first and the last being the most helpful with my personality. Dallas Willard is truly like no other. You won't find too many people like him. He teaches you (with more practical help from Jan Johnson) how to live from all 5 dimensions of your being (thoughts, feelings, will, body, and social relationships) in the Kingdom of God, how to submit and grow in all these areas, and in turn, to produce visible effects in the physical world from the invisible Kingdom of God. The Matrix of the Kingdom of God is so awesome.

These Morpheuses have taught me how to practically remain in the world while not being of it, especially in a 21st century context (since advice would have to be modified somewhat to apply it to "the world" which takes different forms in different centuries [I'm sure Morpheus' tutorial to Neo would be somewhat different if Neo lived in China rather than America]). It is important to know how distractions can lure us right into the trap of the barrel of an agent's (demon's) gun.

As Dallas Willard writes in Renovation of the Heart about emotions:

"By contrast [to the person who is mastered by emotions/feelings], the person who happily lets God be God does have a place to stand in dealing with feelings - even in extreme cases such as despair over loved ones or excruciating pain or voluptuous pleasure. They have the resources to do what they don't want to do and to not do what they want. They know and deeply accept the fact that their feelings, of whatever kind, do not have to be fulfilled. They spend little time grieving over non-fulfillment. And with respect to feelings that are inherently injurious and wrong, their strategy is not one of resisting them in the moment of choice but of living in such a way that they do not have such feelings at all, or at least do not have them in a degree that makes it hard to decide against them when appropriate.

Those who let God be God get off the conveyor belt of emotion and desire when it first starts to move toward the buzz saw of sin. They do not wait until it is moving so fast they cannot get off of it. Their aim is not to avoid sin, but to avoid temptation - the inclination to sin. They plan their path accordingly."

Moving on, we continue with John 3:1-8:

Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.” Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.” “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!” Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”

In this scene, Neo experiences a "rebirth", but this is not a physical rebirth, just like how Jesus said that in order to enter the Kingdom of God you must be born of "water and spirit". When Neo falls into the water after he gets "unplugged", I think that signifies baptism somewhat. Speaking from my own experience of living from the Matrix of the Kingdom of God (It's been roughly 2 and a half years), the "rebirth" hasn't always been a pleasant/happy ride. There are times where it's rough. But then I am being transformed to the point where life doesn't necessarily always have to be pleasant/happy. I mean, it's the Matrix! The adventure of all the ups and downs of fighting for Zion vastly outweighs the comforts of an ignorant life of friends revolving around "central perk" (I have nothing against the show friends, although "central perk" here illustrates what "the world" is like in North America).

I also think the narrative-framework of the Matrix helps me understand Luke 9:23-24 better.

Then he said to them all: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will save it.

Before, I understood the content of what Jesus said, but not necessarily what he meant. It didn't really make sense to me and I couldn't comprehensively understand the heart of what he was getting at. But the movie the Matrix helped me understand it a bit more (and also experiencing it first-hand myself). Before Neo entered the Matrix, he was a computer programmer living a "normal" earthly existence. He had to give up that lifestyle and "deny it" in order to enter into the Matrix. If he were to "save" that "normal" lifestyle, he would never be able to experience a truly fulfilling/abundant life. Whereas if he gave up and "denied" that "normal" lifestyle in the physical world, he would be able to experience a truly fulfilling/abundant life.

Morpheus is not saying to Neo that "I'm going to be mean and won't let you into the Matrix unless you impress me by giving up your life 100% that would subjectively give me good feelings about you". He is basically describing the decision objectively. It's logically impossible to simultaneously fully live the life he lived before while fully living life in the Matrix at the same time. Morpheus is not being a jerk. He is just an intersection sign that shows two roads going in opposite directions that follow from it. One cannot be 50% "rebirthed" in the way that Neo experienced "rebirth" after taking the red pill. It's 0% or 100%. Jesus was not being a jerk too. He, like Morpheus, was just plainly laying out the options with their consequences.

Jesus always had the truth of God in his mind to interpret reality. The truths of the Kingdom of God were saturating his human mind 24-7. That's why he could always pick up a random everyday object in the middle-eastern culture that he was in and casually give illustrations about the Kingdom of God from them. Just like how if a young guy/girl likes another young guy/girl, whatever they see, they will somehow relate it to the target guy/girl that he/she likes. This is how Jesus was with the Kingdom. He constantly meditated on Scripture in his human mind. How was that like? I think it was like 1:03-1:06 of this youtube clip.

Metaphorically speaking that is. His interpretation of reality was always an interpretation using the paradigm of the invisible Kingdom of God upon the visible physical kingdom.

That enabled him to casually stop the attacks from the demons (agents), and even cause them to run away from him.

Oh yea, and he also resurrected from the dead just like how Neo did in the end of the movie. By the way, happy Easter everyone. The Good news of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God is not only the mere forgiveness of sins. Jesus coming to earth, dying on the cross, and resurrecting from the dead is good news because it allows us to get unplugged from the Matrix! The Good news is that we get unplugged from the Matrix not only after we die, but even right now in this present moment. As Dallas Willard said, "if you want to get into heaven, don't wait t'il you die, start now".

Living from another world that has extraordinary effects on this one. Thanks for helping me understand the Kingdom of God Wachowski Brothers (directors of the Matrix).

thoughts on the election debate of April 12, 2011

I just saw the debate on youtube this afternoon. I thought I might post some of my thoughts.

For those who have not seen it yet, you can see it here



I'll say first of all that I'm not the biggest Canadian political junkie. I'm not the most avid follower of Canadian politics. I prefer to follow the politics of America, China (and around East Asia), and the middle east. I think that in relative comparison, Canadian politics is not that interesting. Nevertheless since I am a citizen of this great country (not sarcasm) I figure I ought to do my share of following in this 2011 federal election.

I'll admit right off the bat that crazily reading up on what each party stands for is not my utter most priority. I have other reading priorities(reading about Christian spirituality, the wisdom of different Christian denominations, psychology, biographies, history etc.). I do read the (very liberal) Toronto Star at work though, mostly because it's free haha. Man, the Star is so unabashedly liberal it doesn't even try to put up a veneer of surface-level neutrality. It's just blatantly left without apology. I read blow after blow against Harper. I don't know, something about Harper makes me like him. I don't know why. I think I'd like to meet him personally one day too. It's kind of mysterious too because I only read anti-Harper articles on politics haha.

All that to say, my personal take on what I weigh heavily in who I'm going to put my trust in is significantly swayed by assessing the character of each leader in each party. I realize a lot of things in this. I can't see their character behind closed doors when the cameras are off. I can't fully know what they honestly think about a lot of things. I can't judge the deepest depths of their heart (I have trouble judging the deepest depths of my own heart sometimes). But nevertheless, I do believe Jesus' words that whatever is stored up in people's hearts just flows out, or in the arena of politics, it "leaks" out in people. Superficial "social cosmetics" can only do so much, sooner or later the natural contents of what's in people's hearts leak out of people's word choice, speaking pitch, microexpressions on their face, and subconscious body language. I see this fact in myself, in my family, in my close friends, and in my acquaintances. I think Anthony Bloom (an eastern orthodox dude) has a lot of wisdom when he says that the human body is a barometer of the person's state of mind. While it doesn't have 100% correspondence to a person's state of mind, it nevertheless somewhat reflects what's going on inside of someone.

I sometimes read newspaper articles on political leaders, and hear tidbits of headlines of "drama" that occurred with the party leaders (i.e. Harper "rejecting" a girl in one of his rallies because she had a picture with Michael Ignatieff on Facebook), but I figure at the end of the day, the media a lot of the time puts such a spin on "facts" that it's so hard sometimes to filter through what's exaggeration, what's a lie, and what REALLY took place. And the media has it's own agenda a lot of the times. I don't need others to tell me the motives of actions of politicians. I just need to know the facts of what objectively occurred, then I can decide about motives myself (which I'll be cautious about anyway, because I know I know very little and can know very little if I've never met them personally).

I've also learned (when I led a team of 5 Canadians in East Asia last year) all the heavy responsibility of leadership. It's so easy to point fingers and blame someone if something bad happened. Very simple. It takes less than 10 calories (I'm completely guessing haha). But I've learned that when one's in leadership, one just has to naturally take responsibility of all the negative things that happen under one's team. Sometimes it is one's own fault, but sometimes it's not, but nevertheless, the leader has to shoulder the responsibility and take the blame. For an outsider that does not know what really goes on in the team, frankly speaking, most of the time they don't really know what's going on. I'm not saying that people and leaders shouldn't be held accountable, I'm just saying that unless one has truly reliable inside information, it's nearly impossible to accurately assess the root of issues by looking at the superficial symptons. Since I've only tasted a little bit of this "leader shouldering responsibility and covering for blame within his team" phenomena, I can hardly imagine what political leaders go through when something goes wrong in their team. Like all the "scandals" that happened in each party recently. It's so easy to point the finger, and come up with a make-shift blame-inviting-framework to make sense of the "facts" when frankly speaking, a lot of people don't know what the heck is actually going on. I'll say frankly that I have no idea, for the most part, what the character of the middle east dictators are like. I'm not saying that the revolutions aren't justified at all, or that governments shouldn't be held accountable, but I'm just saying that I've never been an "insider" to fully understand what the heck is going on. There are personality factors, cultural factors, subcultural factors, historical factors, personal history factors, interpersonal-history-within-the-team factors, social dynamics/chemistry within the team factors, psychological factors, biological pressure/physiological fluctuation factors(different moods during different times of the day that affect social dynamics), spiritual factors, amount and type of education received factors, best-friend-influence factors, personal habits/lifestyle factors, self-deception factors. If I don't 100% fully understand all of these factors influencing my own life, how the heck can I fully understand what goes on inside of Mubarak, or Gadhafi? Am I just going to fully rely on what a foreign reporter, who has probably never spoken to them personally, thinks? Same thing to a lot of Canadian reporters writing condemning articles bashing certain party leaders when they've never even had a substantial conversation with the leader themselves.

All that to say, I'm not going to fully trust the media when I try to assess each leader. I want to hear from the leaders themselves. No leader is going to say "I am for the destruction of Canada" or "I want Canada to continue regressing economically". All leaders are going to say something positive along the lines of "I believe my party can competently lead in power for the next few years" and "I believe our policies and proposed plans/bills are capable of making Canada a better place". One of the keys for me is how they say it. What is the tone of their voice? what is their word choice in their message? What are the microexpressions on their faces like? Does their body language below the neck show calm-confidence in what they say? Of course I can only learn so much about them in a public debate, but I think I can learn more about them by observing them directly rather than having a newspaper reporter ascribe a biased pre-committed/interpretive framework on the politicians for me. It is like a father trying to find out if his son lied to him about something. If the father wants to find out the truth, he should not rely on what other third-party-people report about what the son said. The father should ask his son about the truth and not exclusively focus on the contents of what the son says, but how he says it. Any son can say "I didn't steal from the cookie jar" or "I didn't steal money from your wallet". The father would be wise to analyze how the son says the contents rather than rely on 3rd party information that relays the exact same contents of what the son suspected of lying said. The father should not focus exclusively on the contents that comes out of the son's mouth, but see whether his overall behaviour is in natural congruence in the flow of the son's speech, to see if there's any on-the-spot behavioural inconsistencies that lead him to believe that his son is lying. A roughly similar attitude takes place in how I want to assess the characters of the politicians. And for me, the characters of the politicians matters a lot, not just their "brilliant" political plans on paper. Their characters will trickle downwards to each sector/level of society and have a profound influence. Laws and legislation can change behaviour, but not character. It takes character to change character. Character is contagious. Not only on a social level, but I believe on a spiritual level one's character somehow mysteriously affects those in his circle of influence in ways we won't fully understand in this life.

With all that said, I have to say that I was impressed by Harper's overall character throughout the whole debate. By seeing his response to things as well as his lack of response to things, I was very impressed by how he remained calm and composed in the midst of all the verbal cross-fire going on. All the other leaders were angry and letting their emotions fuel their refinely coated venom. Harper was an exception. The other 3 were mudslinging. Ignatieff and Duceppe, especially, got pretty angry. Layton seemed somewhat angry and viewed the other leaders with contempt. I think that Harper remained respectful and refused to join the mudslinging session. I have to say, his lack-of-emotional-response with his consistent "emotionless stare" towards his accusing opponents when they each taunted him made me laugh out loud literally repeatedly. hahaha. I can't get enough of that. Once again, I reiterate that I have tasted a bit of the burden of leadership in leading only a team of 5 for a year. Harper has had to lead a team that has been in power for the past few years of an entire country. Even though I only led a team of 5, I felt the crushing burden of both justified and unjustified accusations aimed at myself as well as those I was responsible for looking after. After receiving just a dose of criticism from outside the team (other church leaders in EA, the school, dissatisfied people within the spiritual movement in our EA city) I can see how much of a good character is needed to withstand negative/critical accusations without responding back critically and sinking down to the accuser's level. It truly takes strength to not only turn the other cheek on the outside, but on the inside. And in this debate Harper had to take simultaneous heat from all 3 party leaders aggressively triple-teaming him nonstop. And although he wasn't perfect, he for the most part did not sink low to the level of mudslinging, name-calling, personal insults, and fuel the antagonistic fire of interpersonal enmity in the debate. I truly have respect for Harper in this regard. I am not a political expert, and admit that I don't have the political background to comprehensively assess whether or not his proposed plans/promises are wise for the country long-term, but I have to say that I'm really impressed by his character. He's either a really good actor, or a man with a solid character. His body language and microexpressions on his face show that he didn't seem bothered to a significant degree, or respond with fire against fire, or in this case respond with arrogance against arrogance.

I have to say that the closing remark of one other political leader truly gave away his lack of confidence in his party. Of course political leaders are highly trained to modify their macro-facial expressions, so that is the last place to look when assessing a politician's confidence. But man! This politician's body language really gave away his lack of confidence in either his party, himself, or his arguments in the debate! I don't know exactly what his lack of confidence was attributed towards or what caused it, but I did see it present in his final speech in the debate.

Also, from a purely a political standpoint, I was impressed by the skill of conceptual framing from the leaders. Over these years, I have learned more and more about the skill of framing an issue in debates for political reasons. This is different from purely philosophical debates (for example about the existence of God), where the debaters (at least ideally) have arguments with identical definitions of terms that enables their arguments to "run on the same tracks and collide". In politics, it seems different. It seems that a lot of the times the "tracks" of an argument are shifted (intentionally) to make it seem that the arguments are running on "parallel tracks" that don't meet. This is not done unintentionally a lot of the time, but intentionally to impose another interpretive framework on the issue at hand. This is an art and it takes skill. I think 3 of the debaters (excluding Duceppe) were excellent at imposing an alternative interpretive framework on the issue at hand that allowed them to escape or counter uncomfortable "cornering" in arguments. This truly takes skill, and all 3 are brilliant at it (this is expected since all 3 climbed the political ladder so high).

My purpose for watching the debate was for several reasons. Learning about each party's policies/plans were only one of them. I was more interested in assessing the character of each party leader in what they did (and what they didn't do) on a moral level. I also wanted to see their great political skill of thinking on the spot to change an interpretive framework on the issue at hand to get out of tight spots. I was surprised that the leaders didn't use more imagery to coat their arguments, because I know how powerful imagery can be in persuasion.

What do others think of the debate?

A duel of fear. Another lesson from Batman Begins

I've been watching Batman Begins clips on average once every week. I find them so inspirational, and they keep me going in this uphill climb. There also just seems to be new insight that comes every once in a while about the spiritual life. I find it pretty cool.

I was watching yesterday when a new parallel came to mind. A duel of fear.

The bats in batman can represent a number of things. As for yesterday, a new parallel came to mind. They represent uncertainty, and the terrorizing of the imagination that naturally accompanies it.

Bruce Wayne used to be afraid of bats when he was young. They haunted him. The sight of them terrorized his heart. The bats can represent uncertainty. By our very nature, us humans fear uncertainty about things in the future, whether or not the outcome we value will be secured or not. Bruce Wayne had to face his fear of bats in order to become Batman and make a difference in Gotham city. He had to not fear uncertainty anymore, and just simply face it. For me, I face the "bats" of uncertainty a lot as a Christian journeyer. A lot of the times, I worry about my future job, marriage, ministry etc. It seems as if the enemy terrorizes my imagination with a lot of "what ifs" that fly chaotically like bats in the batcave of my soul. I was prophecied on a couple months ago that in this season of life, God would really build and stretch my faith in him. It definitely is becoming so true right now. But I sense change already. I am learning to existentially trust in God. Not necessarily to trust in God to secure my personal wishes, but to just trust in God amidst the uncertainty, to do what's best for his Kingdom in fighting the enemy of mankind. I feel that in this season, I have learned to simply confront the bats of "terrorizing uncertainty" in the batcave of my heart, and obey Jesus' commands to "not be afraid".

I feel like Bruce Wayne in this scene in this season of my life

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL_DDvgE0nU&feature=related

By God's grace, I slowly stepping out of the boat of security, and walking on the water of God's invisible path that Magneto-ly forms itself only for the next step that one walks. I am learning that the only way to deal with my fear of uncertainty is not to avoid circumstances that seem uncertain, but to face them square on, and change my inner reaction's ability to trust Jesus while the bats fly all around myself.

A surprisingly quote by N.T. Wright is interesting:

What instruction, what order, is given, again and again, by God, by angels, by Jesus, by prophets and apostles? What do you think - "Be good"? "Be holy"? Or, negatively, "Don't sin"? "Don't be immoral"? No. The most frequent command in the Bible is: "Don't be afraid." "Fear not."

Interesting eh? I am convinced that we can't learn to improve in obeying this commandment by burying ourselves in theological books all day, but we only improve in obeying it by squarely facing those bats right in their face and courageously having faith in God amidst temptations of doubt flying right in front of thy face.

There are many valid angles one can take when analyzing spiritual warfare. With the help of Batman Begins, I have discovered the new angle of "a duel of fear" where soldiers of Christ and demons of Satan have a battle of inflicting fear into the other party.

In the Gospels, we see demons inflicting fear in people either indirectly (causing people to doubt the goodness and sovereignty of God in ordinary circumstances and about the future) or directly (possessing humans and harassing them physically). But interestingly, we also see instances where demons "submit" to the disciples in the name of Jesus (Luke 10:17), where demons "shudder or tremble" before God (James 2:19), and where the devil "flees" from us (James 4:7). The only time someone "flees" from someone or something is when they're scared out of their sane (or not so sane) mind, hence it is reasonable to assume that Satan reacts to the presence of God like a zebra reacting to a lion. I think part of the reason why Satan and his demons react with terror in the presence of Jesus is because he threatens the security of their operations, schemes, livelihood, and well-being. That's why they "shudder/tremble/flee". Shuddering, trembling, and fleeing are not merely external actions, they are external actions caused by internal states of terror. And terror is caused by imagining all the horrifying "what ifs" that could happen to you. This is what Jesus does to his enemies. This should really come as no surprise since Satan and his demons see Jesus as he really is (Revelations 1:12-16). I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want to be on that person's wrong side. Jesus has the power to throw his enemies into hell, and he can also torture them (Matthew 8:29, Luke 8:28). Of course he won't if you're on his side, and if you're on the side of the one described in Revelations 19:11-16, there is absolutely nothing to fear. I feel bad for the demons.

Batman went through a journey of facing and conquering his fear of bats, and in turn, striking terror into emotions and imaginations of his enemies

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WjQt_jIN-M&feature=related.

We have the same ability to do that when we walk in the power and name of Jesus. Demons fear the crap out of Jesus. They don't fear jack about us though. While we shouldn't take pride in the demons submitting to us (Luke 10:20), we should expect to terrorize them when we take the presence of God with us in spiritual warfare. A commonality between us humans and the demons is that we both are susceptible to the fear of uncertainty. Only one person isn't, and that's the person in charge of the universe, Jesus. So I've learned that us humans don't fight the fear of uncertainty by being certain of outcomes, but fight the fear of uncertainty by trusting in the unpredictable yet faithful One in charge of uncertainty. For the demons, it's not so fortunate. Uncertainty is not on their side because the universe is not ultimately governed by someone on their side. For us soldiers of Christ however, uncertainty is on our side if we trust the King of the universe who unpredictably, yet faithfully controls everything.

Bruce Wayne decided not to fight crime with his own identity, but with the identity of a symbol that represented something greater than just a mere human

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J6J5BcHFCs&feature=related

Bruce Wayne: People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy and I can't do that as Bruce Wayne. As a man, I'm flesh and blood, I can be ignored, destroyed. But as a symbol, as a symbol, I can be incorruptible, I can be everlasting

Alfred: What symbol?

Bruce Wayne: Something elemental, something terrifying


Similarly, Paul didn't fight God's enemies merely "as a man" and with mere "flesh and blood". But he did them in the "symbol" or name of Jesus, which represented the presence of God (Acts 19:11-12) and caused evil spirits to leave the humans being harassed by them. But as for those who did not carry the "symbol" or name of Jesus (which represented the presence of God with them), they were actually terrified themselves when they tried to do battle with the demons (Acts 19:13-16). They were "ignored" and "destroyed" because they tried to fight demons merely as men/flesh and blood.

I am indebted to Batman Begins for new insight into spiritual warfare. For it is not merely a duel that sheds spiritual blood on both sides. It is a duel of fear and inflicting terror on one's enemy.

Thanks for lesson # 80794325265972045 Bruce Wayne

living from another world that has extraordinary effects on this one

"Living from another world that has extraordinary effects on this one" has been the theme of my life for the past couple of weeks.

I wrote an email TC coaches a few days ago. I'll just copy and paste (after editing)it here for those who are interested:




Ladies and Gentlemen, we live in epic times. Of course "epicness" can only be fully "epicly" experienced through a first-hand episode that contains the subjective textures of first-person experience within an epic context itself. Illustration. The LA Lakers playing in the fourth quarter of the NBA play-off finals in game 7. Sure, a psychology professor can give an objective/technical description of what Kobe Bryant and other LA Laker players go through in the psychological experience of playing in the fourth quarter of game 7 in the NBA finals to his psychology students in a lecture. But if Kobe Bryant attended that lecture, his experience would be totally different than him actually playing on the court and having a first-person experience of the fourth quarter in game 7 of the NBA finals with all the subjective textures of first-person consciousness on that NBA court that millions of NBA fans around the world are watching during the moment when it actually happens.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I dare to say that the end times are approaching closer and closer with the passing of every year. I forgot whether it was Bernard or Nathan telling me that the increase in the frequency of these large-scale events in the world that have dramatic proportions (i.e. "Jasmine revolution" in middle east/Japan's disasters last week), shows signs of maturing birth pangs of the world, labouring more and more until the end times are fully conceived. Although we don't know for sure when Jesus will come again, we all know it's one day less every day. I personally feel that we're in the "third period" (although I'm not a dispensationalist haha [I go to TC, how can I be a dispensationalist?]), the "ninth inning", the "fourth quarter" so to speak of God's story on earth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjW_GLOPmj0

This "background music" reflects a bit of the "epicness" of what I feel of the times that we're in. Of course this "epicness" is hidden to the average person's eye that is distracted by the trends and programs of the world. This "epicness" of the Kingdom is like treasure hidden in a field. Little does the world know the "Grand Program/Drama" that daily escapes their awareness. But it is not only the fact that non-Christians are oblivious to this epic "hidden storyline of the universe". A lot of Christians, having access to the "HDTV signals" of this divine drama fail to tune into it and instead tune into the "2D-black and white cartoons" that "typical/non-hidden cable channels" enable them to tune into. However, for the earnest/relentless seeker, there are the "HDTV signals" of the "hidden storyline of the universe" that one can constantly tune into and experience. Even for those who know that this "hidden drama of the universe (the Great Commission)" theoretically exists, a lot of the times for various reasons, one only receives technical/abstract/detached descriptions of it, similar to a technical/abstract/detached university lecture. It is an inexpressible joy (1 Peter 1:8) to be transformed and tune into the Kingdom of God just like how Neo was transformed and tuned into the Matrix. A technical/abstract/detached definition of the matrix would not give Neo the experience that Neo experienced first-hand with all the rich subjective textures of first-person experience. He lived from another reality first-hand that had extraordinary effects on "normal" reality (he did not dodge bullets by operating within "normal"/everyday reality, but he was able to dodge them because he was operating from another one that had effects on the "normal" one). Likewise, when we read the New Testament, we see that these disciples of Jesus did not saturate themselves with technical/abstract/detached descriptions of the Kingdom of God (as important as they are), but experienced it first hand with all the rich subjective textures of first-person experience, and as a result, if one just reads the book of Acts, one can see that it is as if they really lived rooted in another reality (the Kingdom of God) that has extraordinary effects on "normal" reality.

Ladies and Gentlemen, if we just look at church history, minus all the abominations/dark blotches, we see that God instigated supernatural revivals in every single century since Christ physically came and left. This century is no different. If God instigated a supernatural revival with supernatural results that were exponentially more than the mere sum of human effort alone in every single century with no exception, he can do it in this century no doubt about it. The secular media never reports this stuff because [fill in the blank].

Ladies and Gentlemen, we live in epic times, if we can tune into God's HDTV drama (with surround sound [if one engages in Christian mysticism]). The Kingdom of God "portal" to this "other world that has extraordinary effects on this one" has not closed along with the canon of the Bible. It has been open ever since, but few find it. I have read about these saints in church history who have experienced it first-hand. In the beginning, I was vicariously experiencing it through their biographies. Now, by the grace of God, it is not merely a second-hand experience. It has started to become first-hand.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I think God is up to something big in Toronto. I think he wants to do the kind of stuff we see in the book of Acts right here in Toronto (of course not replicas of exactly what he did back them, but categorically similar things with a comparable magnitude). Maybe I'm idealistic. Maybe I'm retarded. But I know that God has brought revivals in the western world within the past 3 centuries in separate movements. In the 18th century, God moved through the Wesleyans (headed up by friggin wicked John Wesley) to revive England (I actually heard that due to God working in the Methodists lead by John Wesley, the negative effects of the French Revolution in France were blocked from negatively impacting England [how sick is that?]). In the 19th Century, God moved through Charles Finney and the movement God started through him to revive America. In the 20th century, God used the early pentecostal movements to revive America. Dude, God can totally do something crazy of epic proportions in Toronto in the 21st century. Let us tune into this "hidden story of the universe" right where we are. Let us do it ladies and gentlemen.

For those who study revivals throughout the centuries, they will realize that supernatural revivals that occur with epic proportions begin with a small group of people regularly praying together. A couple weeks ago, in the middle of an extremely stimulating conversation with 3 other brothers that I met recently, one of them spontaneously said with passion "yo man, let's just start praying for city-wide revival in Toronto every single week together!". So it is set. It has started. And we invite any other like-minded brothers who want to tune into the "hidden story of the universe" right here in Toronto to come. The point of these meetings is not to merely chill while refraining from performing blatant sinful acts explicitly outlined in the Bible not to do (lie, cheat, steal) and enjoy each other's company and entertain each other without "doing the wrong things as Christians". Instead, the point will be very focused. To labour in prayer for all-out-city-wide-no-nonsense-supernatural revival for Toronto. And also to discuss some practical strategy of where to go from here (the present state of things), to the destination (city-wide revival). The more brothers from different perspectives/backgrounds who have the same-united passion, the merrier. Of course it is understood that not everyone is specifically called to this specific prayer meeting with us. By all means, if you form your own city-wide revival prayer meeting and regularly pray with other saints, or join an already existing one, that is cool too. If you don't respond, you will not be judged lol. But for those who want to become part of a "prayer platoon" for city-wide revival in Toronto but don't currently know of any, feel free to message me.

Now that's the Gospel. Not merely the forgiveness of sins (as crucial as that is) without actively participating in the "divine drama" of God's story. This Gospel is the Good News of an invitation to active first-person participation in the "matrix" of the Kingdom of God that allows its citizens to be caught up in the "story"/"program"/"will" of God and what he's up to right now, and in addition to knowing truthful/correct abstract doctrine, experiencing the "subjective textures of a first-person journey" of these truths embedded in a story that is more epic than any bestselling blockbuster that has ever been produced. I think that's good news. It's good news to know that I don't have to buy a PS3 to enjoy an RPG. I'm in one already. It's good news to know that I don't have to purchase "rogers on demand" (although I think my dad did) in order to enjoy an epic movie. I'm in one. And co-labouring with the storywriter to help unfold his story (i.e. letting his will be done) is not only an after-life heaven, but heaven (the presence of God) is now. As Dallas Willard said, "the Good News is that if you want to go to heaven, don't wait t'il you die, enter it now!". Anything short of that is plain boring. I have learned that a worldly lifestyle not only gets more and more sinful, it gets more and more boring. The opening credits of sin are captivating and alluring. But right after the opening credits, the rest of the program is more uninteresting than Canadian politics.



If we learn to live, function, and operate from the "matrix" of the Kingdom of God, we will be gradually enabled to "dodge bullets" not by operating on this world, but by operating in another world that has extraordinary effects on this one.

Unless the Lord... it's over

Unless the Lord orchestrates city-wide revival in Toronto... it's over.

Unless the Lord unites followers of Christ from different denominations not for the sake of unity itself, but to accomplish a greater purpose - to expand his Kingdom by reviving the entire city of Toronto... it's over.

Unless the Lord prevents even well-intentioned followers of Christ from getting caught up in miscommunication with each other with respect to reviving the city of Toronto... it's over.

Unless the Lord ignires a supernatural passion in each and every labourer involved in city-wide revival for Toronto... it's over.

Unless the Lord protects endeavours for city-wide revival for Toronto from attacks from the enemy... it's over.

Unless the Lord convinces various followers of Christ the need for all 3 points of the Kingdom Triangle in proportional balance for Toronto city-wide revival... it's over.

Unless the Lord humbles each labourer to rely on his power and not man's power in endeavouring to revive the city of Toronto... it's over.

Unless the Lord shows up, arranges all the dominoes of cause-and-effect to sweep this city just like how he did at Pentecost 2 millenia ago, and "engineers" the whole process... it's over.



Unless the LORD builds the house,
the builders labor in vain.
Unless the LORD watches over the city,
the guards stand watch in vain.
-Psalm 127:1

random scribbles

I am so impressed by the TV show Smallville. It is the first TV show on cable (in my knowledge) to portray pride as something sinful/evil/destructive. No other TV show I've watched has ever done that. Yes Smallville does have premartial sex scenes N stuff, but still, I can't believe they portrayed pride as being something distasteful, harmful, to be avoided!

If you're stickin' with Jesus it's all-chill
If you thinkin' that you'll leave him then I think you've never met someone who's more super than that dude from Smallville

-Phanatik from Cross Movement







***







I was browsing pics of Dallas Willard on the "Dallas Willard is my homeboy" facebook group. There is something about this guy. Just looking at pictures of this great apprentice of Jesus makes me really see Jesus in him. His face is just full of sublime joy, peace, and love. I want that. Paul said "Follow me as I follow Christ" in 1 Corinthians 11:1. I dare say that Dallas Willard is a modern day Timothy (It's risky saying someone is a modern day Paul) that I'm willing to follow as he follows Jesus so well. Thanks Jesus, for such an awesome role model to follow in this age!







***







I watched the first 10 seconds of this clip over 10 times just now. Man. It is so wicked how Batman just swings into the subway window, hops and grabs those ceiling bars, and lands with a "this is it" glare in ras al gul's face. That glare in 0:07-0:08 is so inspirational! I wanna metaphorically look God's enemy in the eye with a glare like that.