Christianity/Theology

What is Faith? (a call to Atheism)

/ Paul Burkhart / 3 Comments

art by Amy Roberts

art by Amy Roberts (see bottom for link)

My good friend Monica sent me an email with a link to this New York Times blog that had a little weekend competition:

define “Faith”

The post gave the Bible’s definition of faith, a few quotes from others on what faith is and then told other “co-vocabularists” to offer their definitions (the pithier the better).

In a display ad absurdem and ad nauseam of the make-up of NYTimes readers, the vast majority of “definitions” are atheistic rants about how faith is just believing things that are so plainly and clearly not true.  It’s the opiate of the masses.  It’s the crutch that helps weak-minded people get through life.  So on and so forth.

I understand the sentiment.  I do.  And I also see why they think that.  It was just comical seeing post after post after post of people that were so clearly speaking from such bitterness, hurt, and pain that went well beyond “calm, collected reason”.  Even the atheist puts some level of faith in things, even though they feel like this faith is justified by their logical deductions.  Faith isn’t a bad word.  It doesn’t have to be religious at all.  My mac dictionary’s first definition for it is “complete trust or confidence in someone or something.”  The second definition is the religious one!  But in spite of this, that word, for some reason, touches such a deep nerve within those hostile to Christianity that they must do more than simply display a disagreement with a prevailing notion.  It’s not good enough being a-theistic, they must be anti-theistic.

And that, I find, is very interesting.  It implies that atheism is more than a lack of belief.  It can’t stay at that merely reasoned philosophical place.  It is at its core a most outward expression of the rebellion of the heart, and the antagonism of that rebellion must and will come out.

Don’t get me wrong, I love atheists! I do!  But it looks like Atheism is becoming the new radical fundamentalism of the urban United States.  Now I know how absurd all us Christians probably looked for the past 50+ years with all of our political activism, ad hominem attacks on dissenters, made-up “culture wars” to agitate our base, over-excessive vitriol against “opponents” of our system, a circling of the wagons to maintain a false sense of security for “us” and ease of insult towards “them”, and a childish fanatical assent to a few tired (fundamental) tenets with a few tired (apologetic) defenses made by a few tired (hyperbolic, caricatured) leaders that are already irrelevant.

I guess its Atheism’s turn to take the wheel.  Try not to mess up the country in the same ways we did.  Neither you guys nor us have history on our side when it comes to our particular systems reigning supreme.  Things just don’t seem to go well.  Have fun.

As far as my contribution to the discussion?  Here was the little definition I gave:

FAITH: trusting that another has accomplished on your behalf what you ought to have done but can’t.

Grace and peace.

and Faith.

[more artwork by Amy Roberts can be found here]

“Let’s Get it On” – Song of Solomon blog

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

READ THIS FIRST:

I have a new post up on my Song of Solomon Bible Study blog.

It was written a few days ago and since then it has been brought to my attention how weird it might be that I concern myself even somewhat with the sexuality of married couples.  The thought process is: you’re single.  Therefore, you have no business telling couples how the Bible says to have good sex.  It’s inappropriate and “shameful”.

My favorite metaphor for my relationship with Christ is the Bride/Bridegroom metaphor and the subsequent parallels between the sexuality and spirituality.  I love it.  But is it weird for me to think this way before I’m married?  I’ve thought and talked like this for several years now and no one has ever told me it’s awkward or inappropriate, but now a couple of people have, so I’m wondering:

Is it inappropriate, awkward, or weird for me to write the kind of post I just did on the Song of Solomon Bible Study site?

I’d really like feedback from everyone.  WARNING: the post is potentially sort of sexually graphic.  No more than Song of Solomon itself, but still – Jewish boys weren’t allowed to read the book until they were twelve for a reason.  So if you are drawn into temptation particularly through text and words, you probably shouldn’t read.

But for everyone else, please read and let me know.  I really am ready to change my perspective on this if I need to, I just need some feedback from my brothers and sisters.  So, here it is.  Read and let me know what you’re thinking.

http://solomonssong.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/41-51-lets-get-it-on/

I hope everyone has a good weekend.  I’ll be back on Monday with some posts I’m pretty excited about including posts on Christian cursing and the Southern Baptist Convention.

Philosophy & Theology {II} | “Christian” Existentialism [2]

/ Paul Burkhart / Leave a comment

A couple of days ago, I laid out some reasons why “Christian” Existentialism was not the end-all-be-all philosophical orientation for the Christian. But, as I explained in my first post in this series, Philosophy is not the enemy of theology. Rather, it can help us understand other finer points of theology by giving us new categories to think in. So, I proceeded to give three ways that Existentialism can inform our theology. The first way was that it helps us see sin in regard to our personal orientation to God. This post continues with two more ways:

Secondly, a big discussion in Existentialism the relationship between our “existence” and our “essence”.  I pointed out in the previous post that when god was asked by Moses “what’s your essence?” God answered “I exist”. This is the way it is with God. His nature and being are equated with His existence. He simply “is”. The big question concerning these two things in Existentialism is “which comes first?”. Classic Existentialism holds that our existence comes first and our essence is formed and shaped by our existence. This brings up some problems for the Christian. The Bible talks about our essences being known by God before we ever existed, but it also says that there’s something of our essence that is corrupt at its core. When God “knows” us before we exist, does he know our corrupted selves? Does God create us depraved? The Bible seems fairly clear in its representation of the nature of God that He doesn’t create and form our essences as corrupt, so it look likes the question is a bit more complicated than just “which comes first”.

Best I can figure, it looks like both essence and existence have narrative frameworks and are seen as whole things that are shaped through eternity past and future. In short, the story goes like this: God knows and forms our essence-1 (S1), which is pure and good in his sight. He then creates the world of existence-1 (X1) which is made good but then falls and gives way to a different realm of existence, existence-2 (X2).  At the moment this essence-1 enters into existence-1 (X1), it comes into the fallen world and becomes essence-2 (S2) which is corrupt. Christians, then, at conversion are changed at the very level of their essence such that they then become pure in essence (essence-3) living in a corrupt existence (existence-1 still). The rest of the life of the Christian is a slow work by God and others to bring more and more of this Christian’s life and existence in line with their now pure essence-3 (s3), to prepare them for existence-3 (X3). Existence-3 is when this created world/realm within which we exist is restored and glorified and finally our pure essences-3 are able to live in freedom and peace in pure existence-2 in glorified eternity.  Here’s what it looks like graphically:

__________

screen-capture

__________

Lastly, there is a very important service that Existentialism lends to the spirituality of the Christian life. In Existentialism, there is a loss of the objectivity of knowledge. All we know is our existence, and that is a very small sphere of knowledge indeed. What this tenet of the philosophy does is create a very strong sense of angst. Existentialists carry the reputation for being very depressed people, seeing as they can know nothing more than (1) they exist, and (2) they can’t know more than that. We can be sure of no other knowledge. This makes you feel very small in a world of chaos that you can do nothing to change. This sort of worldview should make people very despairing, and it has for people such as Samuel Beckett and Albert Camus. But for others, like Jean-Paul Sarte and Soren Kierkegaard, Existentialism seemed to create a humble sobriety that actually allowed these men to enjoy life in a way many Christians could learn to do.

The Christian life is angst. It’s messy. It’s sloppy. That’s why it’s lived by faith – i.e. “trust”. Reality is such that we will be forced to have to trust our Creator to save us, because there really are no objective grounds (that we can know) upon which His salvation is based. This is because God knows He is the greatest of all things and our tendency is to drift from Him. It’s His love that makes us need to draw near. But, when we do, it shows us even more where we fall short and we cry out to God more. He draws even nearer and we are able to experience that One for whom our soul was made. Faith is not neat. Faith is not tidy. Faith is not naive. Faith is not imbecilic. Faith is having the courage to admit your finitude and inadequacy in order to be joined to and in communion with the Joy of joys, Peace of peaces, King of kings, and Lord of lords.

As one friend put it: “I will not resolve to embody that kind of [naive] faith ever again. So, I will read Scripture, asking God to communicate to me what in me is broken, what is unreconciled, what needs restoration, liberation, salvation. And I will sit at the foot of the cross, in the pain of who I am. And I will ask God for reconciliation, restoration, liberation, salvation. On the other side of it all, I will trust Christ more deeply. This is sanctification. This is working out my salvation in fear and trembling. And then, hopefully I will have caught my breath, and it will all begin again.”

Existentialism helps us recapture the “fear and trembling” part of working out our salvation (hence the title of Kierkegaard’s famous work).

I’ll end with perhaps my favorite set of quotes I have ever read. These have had such a profound impact on me and so reflect how I understand these things to be. These words are from the poet Joe Weil in an interview with Patrol Magazine. I leave you with these words that could have been written by the most quintessential existentialist:

“I once described faith as something I got on my shoe and can’t kick or wash off. I’m stuck with it. My poems are the trespasses and blasphemies of a malpracticing Christian, one who can’t stop ogling an attractive leg, or wanting to be first, who is venial, foolish, seldom at peace, horny and lonely, and so far from the kingdom of God that his whole life becomes the theme of that distance, someone knowing he is in deep shit. It’s the perfect place to be, where you can’t fool yourself into thinking you’re on the right track…The only thing I have to offer God is my sins. I am interested in mercy when it appears in places where you would never expect it. I am interested in love that shovels shit against the tide. I am interested in grace…It is better to be annihilated and crushed by God, if you are in love with God, then it is to have no relationship at all. Better God smite you then merely be absent. God does not ‘tolerate’ me. God loves me.”

Philosophy & Theology {II} | “Christian” Existentialism [1]

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

In the past few days, the idea of Christian Existentialism has been brought up to me as some sort of viable marriage between philosophy and theology. As I said in my previous post, I think this is a bit misguided.

I think there is a slight danger in the concept of Christian Existentialism. The entire point of Existentialism is that we look inside ourselves for ultimate truth and meaning for existence. Starting at this place causes a lot of problems. I’ll mention three here: sin and Scripture (briefly), and the nature of Christianity itself. “Christian” Existentialism has to define sin in two incorrect ways. First, it would have to say that what makes a sin a sin is the action itself evaluated in light of its consequences. This flies in the face of the Bible which screams that it is in the heart where sin dwells and shows itself, not the actions; and, most sins committed by humans never reach the will anyway, much less have evaluative “consequences”. Second and more Existentially unique, is the idea that sin is anything done that results in the losing of the “true authentic self” of Existentialism (I’ll say the fault in this shortly). And lastly, when it comes to the Bible, Scripture is seen more as something to submit to our experiences rather than to submit our experiences to.

The ultimate fallacy (and what I see to be the most frustrating) in all this is the idea that all things pertaining to God find their meaning, purpose, truth, righteousness, and value in how they relate to us humans. Existentialism would say that we only know anything by seeing where it lies relative to us. I’m sorry, but this whole Christianity thing is not about us. It never has been, nor will it be. It is about Christ and His glory. The more we dive inside of ourselves, all we will see is our depravity and darkness. Any other finding is due to inauthentic searching and subsequent blindness to the true state of one’s soul. Self esteem and self knowledge is not the root of mental health, soul value, and practical empowerment, in spite of what the gurus of our age tell us. It is by looking to Christ, not ourselves, and esteeming and delighting in Him alone that we are made into His likeness at every level, and find meaning, purpose, value, and insight into how this whole thing is supposed to be worked out.

But yet . . .

as I said in my previous post, Philosophies can help provide us with answers to theological dilemmas and categories. Existentialism helps us in questions of sin (in spite of what I said earlier, ironically enough), the relationship between ontology and the Sovereignty of God (our nature vs. God’s providence), and the nature of Christian spirituality.

The most famous “Christian Existentialist” is probably Soren Kierkegaard. But more precisely, though, he probably laid the foundation for what later became full blown Existentialism. Nevertheless, his fingerprints are all over Existentialist though, Christian or otherwise. In his work, “The Sickness Unto Death”, Kierkegaard defines sin as primarily about one’s position in relation to God. This is the difference between “error” and “sin”. Sin is against God and affects our relation to him. He argues against the view of Socrates that sin is merely an act stemming from ignorance. Kierkegaard vehemently denies this because this turns “sin” into a negation – merely a lack. Kierkegaard points out that sin isn’t just negation but it’s a position and posture towards God. How is this still Existentialism? Well, sin is still defined in terms of our position before God – it’s necessarily tied to and defined in terms of our existence before Him. But what makes this Orthodox is that it is not an existence divorced from the backdrop of God Himself. It is intricately linked and fused together as one. Our existence is only existence insofar God Himself is exists. As Paul would say (quoting Greek poets): “in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28)

I wrote out the other two points, and they made this article far too long. I really think these next two points are of utmost importance for the Christian to understand, so rather than just putting them at the end of a post and people not really reading it, I’m going to make them their own post tomorrow. In the last two points, I try and use existentialism to help come up with a Christian answer to the age-old question of Existentialism: which comes first: your essence or existence? You’ll see that because of the Fall, these things become quote complicated. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, Existentialism helps the Christian see that all of life (especially the Christian life) is anything but neat, orderly, nice, and naive. It is full of uncertainty, angst, frustration, and doubt. But, more on those tomorrow.

Philosophy & Theology {1} | The Basics

/ Paul Burkhart / 2 Comments

Photo 56bOver the next few posts, I want to share some brief elementary thoughts and philosophy and theology. In this post, I just want to flesh out a basic worldview I have concerning philosophies and how they fit into a Christian perspective. All posts in this series will then be various applications of these ideas. Looking at things this way has certainly helped me wade through the waters of philosophies that all seem to be right in some respect and the confusion that follows. I hope this helps others out there.

My basic thought is this: as humans made in the image of God, the true parts of any “worldview” or “philosophy” will resonate with us. We are made to resonate with the truth of the Gospel, therefore any worldview we construct tat is appealing to us in any way must touch on some thing we know to be true and long for. I just don’t think that humans are able to come up with a worldview that in some point isn’t actually true. We can only work with what there actually is in the world. Sure we can pervert and distort true things, but they will still be based on true things.

Anyway, what this means is that any particular philosophy can help us recast the Gospel and talk of it in different terms that may increase our worship. For example, with existentialism (where the big question is what comes first, essence or existence?), when Moses is talking to God at the burning bush, Moses pretty much asks Him “what’s your essence?” God answers “I exist” (“I AM”). Existentialism can give us new categories to plum even more depths within this one encounter and ultimately lead to more worship of God. The Bible helps answer the questions of philosophy and philosophy can help us see greater truths in Scripture.

[More on existentialism in an upcoming post . . .]

Orthodox Christianity does not hold (and never has) that the Bible is the sole source of knowledge about God. It says that the Bible is the ultimate and authoritative source of knowledge about God under which all other sources are submitted. The brief example above (hopefully) showed a benefit of bringing existentialism under the authority and clarity of the Bible in order to help us answer (or better understand) questions that the Bible is silent about. Problems in this area arise when people try to submit the Bible to existentialism. It just doesn’t work. The Bible just isn’t the Bible apart from it being the authority and rule of faith in all theology.

I have found the study of secular philosophy very helpful to birthing in me greater worship of our God. But (going back to my first point), though that is the case, I don’t think any one philosophy has the market cornered on theology. All philosophies (from Platonism to Aristotelianism to Humanism to Atheism) have some bit of truth in them. Lower things really are corrupt versions of purer forms; we really do understand history by looking at its final purpose; God really does love humans such that he acts for their benefit; and there really is a freedom and autonomy that man enjoys when they give way fully to their innate rebellion and deny the very existence of God. That’s why I don’t find it helpful (or biblical) to say that “I’m a Christian _________” (fill in the blank with whatever philosophy or worldview you like). To me it’s like saying “I’m a Christian chocolate cake eater”. Uh, okay. I just don’t think that says much and it forces me to ask “Really? That’s how you ultimately define your worldview?” Don’t get me wrong, a good chocolate cake can make me worship God (in all seriousness), but that’s not a useful designation.

In summary: Philosophy is the study of all that is most fundamental about us. Therefore, those that have been thought to have great wisdom in this area should be studied and read because they may in fact be whispering insights to us from within the mind of God that is in seed form within His image in us. C.S. Lewis once said that it is impossible to contemplate and enjoy at the same time. We go first the the Bible to get the material for our contemplation. But then we must look up from the text to the world and reality around us and enjoy the God that has revealed Himself in those Scriptures. A fruitful place I have experienced this is in my brief, elementary study of Philosophy. Hopefully you can see it as well. Enjoy the ride.

Some thoughts on our “Christian” Nation

/ Paul Burkhart / 5 Comments

I recently received a facebook request to join the cause: “Tell Obama America is a Christian Nation”.  Coming from the Bible-belt, this was certainly a worldview that I am very familiar with and one that I’ve thought through extensively ever since I was old enough to vote.   I think I have come to a few conclusions concerning the matter.  Please leave feedback.

America isn’t a christian nation.

First, “Christian” is never used as an adjective in the Bible.  There’s no such thing as a “Christian” anything, except for a person.  Sure, for most of its history most people living in America have been Christians, but if you have mostly Christians living in a certain apartment complex, would it suddenly be called a “Christian” apartment complex?  Most all of America’s founders were Universalists (John Adams), Unitarians (Thomas Jefferson), Masons (Ben Franklin), and Deists (pretty much all the rest).  Hardly any were Orthodox Christians in any recognizable sense of the word other than the fact that they used the words “God” and “Creator”, but so do a lot of other groups that clearly aren’t Christians.

Second, there’s a big difference between checking off “Christian” on a poll and actually being a Christian.  Sure most people still check that off, but I would say that the percentage of people that are actually saved, born-again, living-the-life, actually loving Jesus Christians out there is less than half.  It certainly feels that way living in the city, at least.

Thirdly, at the very least, even if America was “founded on Christian ideals”, the nature of a democracy/republic is that it changes with the public beliefs.  Even if it used to be a Christian nation, the basic worldview of the citizenry has changed, so “what” the nation “is” has changed.  The “public” define the nature of a democracy/republic, not its past.

Lastly, every time in history that Christianity has been used to describe a country, it’s never gone well (see: Constantine, the Inquisition, the Crusades, etc.).  I pray America becomes a nation of Christians, but for the vast majority of its history, Christianity has done a lot better when it was in the minority (China, anyone?).  We don’t fight for numbers of people or a percentage of a population or an office in politics.

We fight for the Glory of Christ.

Any thoughts?

Here’s a very balanced and helpful article from Patrol Mag, and here are some lyrics from a favorite Derek Webb Song of mine, “In God we Trust”:

In God we trust
and the government is on His shoulders
in God we trust
through democracy and tyranny alike
in God we trust
He uses both good and evil men

in God we trust
so we fight for peace and He fights for us
in God we trust
even when He fights us for someone else
in God we trust
even when He looks like the enemy

in God we trust
even though our hearts are bankrupt
in God we trust
for more than just the value of our dollar bills
in God we trust
but there’s no gold behind these notes of reserve

in God we trust
even through our great presumption
in God we trust
even though He favors no nation-state
in God we trust
even when the blessing is a curse

The Big News II (I’m not leaving Philly, it seems)

/ Paul Burkhart / 5 Comments

I, Paul Burkhart, now have a real job.

Like, a real real one.

Yesterday, I was accepted for a position at a program called Project Transition as a “Psychiatric Rehabilitation Counselor” (assuming that my background checks clear, of course. Until then, I can’t actually say I’m “hired” per se, I’m still a “candidate”). In short, this is my dream job. I will have a case load of about 5 individuals recovering from various mental disorders who I will pour into their lives trying to help them reintegrate into society. I will teach classes to everyone in the program on various parts of living life healthily. I will be doing assessments and creating treatment plans for my case load. The people I will work with seem amazing. Benefits kick in after only a month. It’s really good pay (at least for an entry level job). I will even have my own office space (and desk!).

The philosophy of the organization is right in line with mine: that people are not defined by their disease. They are fundamentally healthy individuals struggling with a disorder, rather than the view that would treat them as primarily disordered individuals struggling for health. It was so exciting sitting there as they told me everything about the organization. That reminds me, the interview itself was strange too. It was one of those weird circumstances that seems to surreal and – for lack of a better word – supernatural. In the entire interview I didn’t say more than a couple of sentences. They didn’t really ask me many questions. It was more like “hey, this is who we are. Wanna join us?”. It was so strange. I have the weakest resume one could imagine. I have waiting tables at Applebee’s and tutoring elementary school students on there and that’s it. Hardly the resume to get someone a professional counseling job. But nevertheless, I walked in, and the founder of the organization had made one of his monthly visits to this particular site just to interview me. When I got there, everyone already knew my name and who I was. When the founder had to leave the interview early and leave me with the site coordinators, he had the secretary send down paperwork to hire me, even before the interview was actually over! (Running the risk of sounding overly charismatic or Osteen-ish) I felt like I was walking in “supernatural favor”. Or something like that.

So what does all this mean? Well firstly, even though I loved and adored my time in Richmond the past few weeks and really wanted to move back there, it seems that God has intended for me to have longer-term plans for Philly. This job really is something I’m going to want to stay at for awhile. The people I will be around, the experiences I’ll get, and the real-word education I’ll receive (all while still taking WTS counseling classes) will be invaluable to me. So I’m here to stay, it seems. This would probably have been a problem a couple months ago, but recently Philadelphia has opened up to me (specifically South Philly) and I have met so many people I really want to live life deeply with for a while longer before moving on (not to mention my biggest bromances are here and here. Don’t worry, I haven’t forgotten you, you, and you).

So here’s to God for blessing me far more than I could ever imagine. I pray this drives me further to Him and doesn’t make me feel like I don’t need him now. Because I do. I’ve definitely been seeing that greatly the past few weeks, and this has been the first little ray of light to burst out from the haze I’ve been in.

Philly, here I stay.

Derek Webb’s “Stockholm Syndrome” {“Freddie, Please” pt. II}

/ Paul Burkhart / 11 Comments

derekwebb.jpg

[TO ANYONE THAT COMES ACROSS THIS POST: there is updated information and another song on a later post.  All the songs found here are also there, in addition to the much anticipated song off the new record “What Matters More?”  Here’s the link for that post.]

It has been brought to my attention that yesterday’s post is already out of date. Apparently, there was a 12-hour window to download the song. I’ve received a couple of requests to make the music file available for download here. After much thought about the ethics of it all, I’m thinking that since Derek Webb did post it up for free, and he didn’t include any statement prohibiting this, I’ll go ahead and post a link to download it. If any representatives of Webb see this and want me to take this down, I’ll be glad to do so. I really want to support Derek in any way.

[UPDATE: Thanks to Shane Bertou for posting these other audio files up. In the article, he also has the so far assembled audio from the currently released “stems” that form Webb’s song that apparently is being referred to as “Stockholm Syndrome” for the time being.]

So on that note, here’s a link to download the new song “Freddie, Please” off of Derek Webb’s upcoming album “Stockholm Syndrome”, along with the other full songs that have been released so far:

“Freddie, Please” by Derek Webb

from Shane’s site:

“Heaven”

“The Spirit vs. the Kick-Drum”

Thanks to Angina Pectoris for bringing these other recordings to my attention.

Here are other sites concerning Webb and the album. Please visit these as well to support the artist and his craft.

Grace and peace.

Derek Webb’s new free song about Fred Phelps

/ Paul Burkhart / 6 Comments

Untitled[EDITOR’S NOTE:  there was apparently a 12- hour window in which to download this song.  That window having passed, I have made the song available on another post on this site.  Continue reading if you want the story behind the song. Click here for the article.]

If you don’t care about background, story, or mystery, and just want free music and lyrics, you can skip down to the asterisks.

Okay, for everyone else, there are two things you should know about that would really help you enjoy this post.  The first thing is who Fred Phelps is.  He’s the “pastor” of Westboro Baptist Church. This is the church that protests dead soldiers’ funerals with the signs reading “God hates fags.” Most of us Christians don’t like Fred Phelps at all.

Including Derek Webb.

Which brings me to the second thing you might want to know about. It is Derek Webb‘s recent “Lost-style” mystery/game/scavenger hunt/fake-controversy thing.  Long story-short: email’s went out to fans from Webb saying “my new album’s controversial, my label doesn’t like it, I’ll figure something out.”  These emails had a code in them which led to the discovery of a website, twitter account, and other strange things (type “kickdrum”, then look right under his left eye, go to the site, type “youneverknow”. This is what use to pop up.). The unofficial hub of speculation has become the comments section of this article on Patrol Magazine.

Anyway, through his site and twitter account, Webb puts out “instructions” (i.e. “scavenger hunt clues”) for various cities in the the country.  People find the clue, email the code to him, and he releases a zip file of small 1 or 2 second sound clips.  No one has any clue what these sound clips are for.  Supposedly you’ll be able to put them together, but with how long they’ve been so far, there won’t be enough audio for even one full song, much less an entire album.  This has been going on for a couple of weeks with people finding these parts and no major updates happening.

***Until today.***

About 45 minutes prior to me writing this post, Derek Webb posted on the Twitter account a couple of messages that when decoded read “redownload stem 2”.  When you do that on this site, inside the zip file is the first song released off of Derek’s new album “Stockholm Syndrome”.  [NOTE: The song can now be found here] It’s called “Freddie, Please” and it is all about Fred Phelps.  It’s a really good song and it makes me really excited about the rest of the album.  It’s not the now-infamous “sh*t” song that will be on the album, but it’s one of the other anticipated songs.  Every one of Webb’s albums has been a completely different style and it looks like he’s taking a more ambient/drum machine/lounge-techno/postal service-style approach to this album.

Anyway, the song pretty much justifiably kicks Fred Phelps in the face.  Best I can tell, it’s from the perspective  of Jesus asking Phelps “How could you tell them you love me when you hate me?”  In the song, Jesus affirms his love for those despised in the world and says that when Phelp’s is picketing these funerals he is in essence “picketing my grave for loving the things you hate.”

Good for you, Derek.  So go download stem 2 at www.ParadiseIsAParkingLot.com and listen to this great song.  [NOTE: the song is no longer there. Instead, go here to download the song] Here are the lyrics:

Freddie, Please

Freddie, please
how could you do this to me?
How could you tell them you love me
when you hate me,
Freddie, please?

You know I’ll love you honey,
and i’ll bleed you dry with money
I’ll talk where I know you can hear.
Cause Freddie can’t you see,
brother, you’re the one who’s queer?

And the stone’s been rolled away
but you’re picketing my grave
for loving the things you hate.

Then why do you seek the living among the dead?

Freddie?

For all who watch “Lost”

/ Paul Burkhart / Leave a comment

I admit: I thought the season finale of “Lost” was a bit anti-climactic.  Of course, I must also admit that I was watching it online as it played in the background while I was focusing on other work on my computer.  This caused me not to engage with the episode with all the faculties that it deserved.  My dear “long lost” friend Mark Traphagen passed this article along to me that changed the way I look at the entire show.  It really is quite incredible and is worth the read for anyone who at least saw the finale.  Though beware:  If you haven’t seen the finale yet, don’t read this.  It is full of plenty of spoilers.  Thanks Mark.

Here’s the article: “What Happens Next on ‘Lost’?” by Ben Shapiro

Enjoy.

Tim Sinclair’s First Sermon Ever | (a too little, too late wedding gift)

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

One of my best friends, favorite guys, and men of God I respect the most, Tim Sinclair, preached his first sermon a few weeks back at Aletheia Church in Richmond.  He also just got married last Saturday.  I must admit that knowing Tim, I never saw him as a preacher or church planter.  I saw him as a great one-on-one ministry or small group kind of guy, but not necessarily as a preacher-behind-a-podium (or music stand) kind of guy.  Well, in short, this sermon blew me away.  I called him immediately after finishing the sermon to express my great joy in the gifting he had been hiding from us all along.  Really, it’s amazing.

So I encourage you all: download this sermon, listen to it, and leave a comment of encouragement for Tim, his budding ministry, and his budding marriage.

itunes_7

Click for Audio: Tim Sinclair: Rest.mp3

Faithful Forgiveness.pdf

Click for Manuscript: Tim Sinclair: Rest.pdf

The big news . . .

/ Paul Burkhart / 5 Comments

Nope, not engaged.

Several people here in Philadelphia know this, but I realize hardly anyone in Richmond does, so here I am writing this now.

I won’t be coming back to Westminster next year.

Long story short, my undergraduate loan payments have been steadily increasing and are now getting to a place where my parents can’t handle it alone – nor should they (before you all ask: no, this isn’t the kind of loan that waits until I’m done to require payments; no, my parents can’t consolidate it; yes, we’ve thought through it all).  I’ve decided to take at least a year off from graduate studies to get a full time job somewhere and help pay some things off.I’m focusing in Philadelphia, and trying to stay here, but I’m also looking at jobs in other places (especially Richmond).

Academically, what does this mean?Well, so far I’m still signed up for one counseling class next semester in the evenings, but I’m going to start applying to various Ph.D. programs and seeing what happens.There’s a program at Princeton I’ve fallen in love with in “Psychology and Social Policy”.I’ve realized that I was seeing seminary somewhat as a potential aid in getting into a Ph.D. program, but frankly, it’s seems to only be hurting my chances (on many levels).So, I’ll see if I can get in without it and then go back to Westminster afterwards if I want.

Practically, this means a lot more time and freedom to read what I want, write what I want, minister in different ways, and just generally feel like an actual member of society.I’ve already started writing a little bit more, doing more web stuff (Reform & Revive has been amazing recently!), and (I can’t believe I’m admitting this now), I’ve started a podcast which I’ll write on more later.

Spiritually speaking, what does this mean?Well, the answer to that question deserves a whole post in its self.I’ve been encouraged that as the workload lightens and I seem to be leaving seminary in a sense, I find myself driven more to prayer and the Word of God than while I was in seminary.They don’t tell you that seminary is not a secluded spiritual resort, but rather the darkest front lines of battle.This has been the most intense spiritual year of my life.I’ve had some of my darkest nights and moments this past year.I’ve gone my longest stints ever without drawing near to my Lord in any way.In short, it’s been rough.In short, it’s been painful.In short, I think I came to seminary too soon.I came too young.I wasn’t ready to handle the weight that this institution would hold.I have not developed the maturity and cultivation necessary to have an anchor in my soul beyond my sheer white-knuckled will.

Now, don’t get me wrong, this past year has been amazing.It’s also been the best year of my life, I think.That’s generally how God works.Very Dickensian: the best of times, the worst of times . . ..I wouldn’t give this past year back for anything.My love, affection, and knowledge of my Lord have grown exponentially.If I never go back to seminary I will forever be grateful to the Providence of God for giving me these two semesters.

God has always dealt with me in such a way that I had a very good sense of what the future held for me.This is the first time in my life that he has allowed everything to really fall apart all around me in a matter of weeks.And this is his mercy to me.This is his love for me.It is his commitment to make me need him, because he himself is what I need the most.He is my anchor.He is my certainty.He is my Lord, and my God, and I love him.

So, we’ll see what life holds.God has still been gracious to me in this time. I have great friends and my church (though still going through so much turmoil) has still been healthy and amazing.  I’ve even realized that my life as it was wasn’t very financially sustainable.  I couldn’t continue into my mid- and later-20s still asking my parents for rent money while working 15-hour work weeks at various low hourly rates.  I should have decided to so this regardless of money.

I feel it’s appropriate I’ve written this entire post while I sit in what may be my last seminary class ever, Medieval Church.Which is a appropriate, I suppose.Just like this strange period in history, and more specifically where we are in this last class, I sit here with my Rome having fallen, some dark ages having passed, standing on the cusp of my Reformation, waiting to rediscover the nearness of my Lord.

Feel free to ask any questions you may have.

My First Sermon Ever

/ Paul Burkhart / Leave a comment

For my first homiletics class at Westminster, called “Gospel Communication,” we were all put in different groups, each dealing with a certain type of text.  Everyone was to write up a sermon on their text and one person from each group actually preached their sermon to the class.

Well, I preached my first real sermon ever this past Thursday.  It was recorded, so I’ve decided to share it along with the manuscript.  It’s on “The Parable of the Unforgiving Servant” in Matthew 18 and deals with forgiveness.  It’s about 30 minutes long.  Personally, being my own worst critic, I see many flaws in it (the structure was somewhat muddled, I talked too fast, and I somewhat went against the traditional interpretation of the text), but overall I was pretty happy with it.  It seemed like the class was as well.

If you don’t have 30 minutes to spare, just listen to the last 8 minutes or so.  I think that’s the point I hit my most significant “flow.”

Two more personal notes: first, I know I haven’t blogging much recently.  Things have been nuts and Seminary’s been kicking the trash out of me.  As the semester gets closer and closer to finishing, you’ll see more posts again.  Secondly, I have no idea how the pictures below will look on facebook.  They will either not show up, be really big, or be fine.  I don’t know, so I apologize for any formatting issues.

Here’s the audio and manuscript:

itunes_7

Click for Audio: Faithful Forgiveness.mp3

Faithful Forgiveness.pdf

Click for Manuscript: Faithful Forgiveness.pdf

Is it okay to laugh at Church signs?

/ Paul Burkhart / 1 Comment

Slate magazine has a great article and accompanying slideshow featuring their favorite church signs from around the country.  Some make it because of their phraseology, some their ghetto-ness, , and some because of their simple sincerity and devotion to our Lord, even though resources were obviously tight.  Below is my favorite.  You can find the pictures here.

16jpg

Also check out their other Easter and Religio-centric articles.  There’s at least something of interest to everyone.  And don’t worry, there’s even some stuff in there for all you atheists and agnostics out there!  Let me know what you think of any articles you read: