A friend recently objected to our desire to avoid "children's bibles" for our baby. I can't stand them. Everything about them winds me up, and yet, as my friend pointed out, possibly having made sure that their christening present is an interlinear Bible (one that shows the Hebrew, Greek and English translation) might be going to far. The thing is – for me, that’s the whole point – I don’t want to present something watered down – but I do want to tell the great stories – to bring them to life, and I think sometimes we try very hard to avoid doing that with children; the Bible is full of blood and gore, and so we steer clear of certain passages.
For me, I can't think of a more exciting story – I want to tell my child the stories of our ancestors, the story of the people of God. I want to paint pictures in the air of the King who ran naked down the street, and the man who set lions on yobs, and the God who walked upon the earth. I want it vivid and vibrant and full of life, but, in that, I don’t want the point to get lost, I don’t want it dumbed down. I want it told as the sages of old told tales.
And so...while a story needs speaking not writing, I am going to write as a starting point. Saturday has been my traditional day for theology on this blog, and so I am going to stick with it, using Saturdays on here to tell each week a different story – a taste of the bible. If I manage it I will get them together with time, and bind them together, but, more importantly, I will try my best to let them loose - to let them sing, dance, twist and turn through the air; stories of selfish brothers, of wicked uncles, of love and romance, and yes even lust! Stories of peeping toms, and murders, of tent pegs through the head, and a God who screams out from creation "I love you", and then whispers it in our ear on the darkest night as a crown of thorns is pressed onto our God.
Yours as ever
The Broken Man
Showing posts with label Bible. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bible. Show all posts
Monday, 22 September 2008
Monday, 15 September 2008
It's A Man Thing
Men don’t talk. We don’t, not really. Not since the tribal councils of centuries ago. Men might compare notes on football but that seems to be about it. You sometimes see a few of them scurrying about after church service struggling to find anything to say to each other or anyone else; and so it was in an attempt to provide a forum for communication, that a year ago, I set up the Men's Breakfasts at my church. We now have a turn-out of about 20 men aged from 12-85 once every six weeks who get together for a fry up and chat on the topic of the day. So it was, on Saturday morning, that the alarm clock went off at 5 past stupid o’clock and I crawled out of bed.
I need to make this very, very clear – I do not like mornings. Hate them. I am not someone who wakes up with a spring in my step – I wake up wanting to go back to sleep. Why, oh why, did the idea of Men's Breakfasts seem so sensible? I thought of it on an afternoon. Not first thing in the morning. That was part of the problem.
It should be noted that I had been to only one such thing before – many years previousy..and hated it..so why I thought I would enjoy it by running it I don’t know. Despite the ridiculous hour though, I really do. I tend to speak for a few mins on a topic and then throw it open for discussion, and with a clear topic to discuss we find ourselves talking, challenging each other, revealing our past to each other, and then on Sunday, there seems to be less scuttling; we seem to, at last, recognise each other.
So the next topic is... "Is God a Man?" (I want to call it "Has God got a Penis", but may have to tone it down a little!!)
So many books, articles, writers – talk about demascalising God – or rather showing the feminine of God, and yet although it's an issue that I have discussed with lots of women, I have never discussed with men. So much of the Bible is written by men for men (I can hear the cries already – "INSPIRED BY GOD!!! INSPIRED BY GOD!!") but when it comes down to it – whenever we describe God, we limit God – God is the great I AM. Anything more we say; any description we find is to small to contain God.
So we will see..but here and now, at midday, it seems worth getting up early in the morning to sit around with menfolk and put the world to rights…
I need to make this very, very clear – I do not like mornings. Hate them. I am not someone who wakes up with a spring in my step – I wake up wanting to go back to sleep. Why, oh why, did the idea of Men's Breakfasts seem so sensible? I thought of it on an afternoon. Not first thing in the morning. That was part of the problem.
It should be noted that I had been to only one such thing before – many years previousy..and hated it..so why I thought I would enjoy it by running it I don’t know. Despite the ridiculous hour though, I really do. I tend to speak for a few mins on a topic and then throw it open for discussion, and with a clear topic to discuss we find ourselves talking, challenging each other, revealing our past to each other, and then on Sunday, there seems to be less scuttling; we seem to, at last, recognise each other.
So the next topic is... "Is God a Man?" (I want to call it "Has God got a Penis", but may have to tone it down a little!!)
So many books, articles, writers – talk about demascalising God – or rather showing the feminine of God, and yet although it's an issue that I have discussed with lots of women, I have never discussed with men. So much of the Bible is written by men for men (I can hear the cries already – "INSPIRED BY GOD!!! INSPIRED BY GOD!!") but when it comes down to it – whenever we describe God, we limit God – God is the great I AM. Anything more we say; any description we find is to small to contain God.
So we will see..but here and now, at midday, it seems worth getting up early in the morning to sit around with menfolk and put the world to rights…
Wednesday, 3 September 2008
Sarah Palin and her Situation
I have seen lots of posts on people's blogs over the last couple of days regarding Sarah Palin (the American Republican Vice-President nominee) and the situation she and her daughter have found themselves in. For those who don't know, her 17 year old daughter has found herself pregnant, and is planning on marrying the father of her child. Lots of the blogs have asked people to comment on the situation, and whenever I tried my comments were so long that I have given up, and decided to post on it myself!
My take on the situation is this:
I hope that the young people concerned are of the mature variety (and no, getting pregnant doesn't preclude that) and that their marriage and family life will be happy. I think that it is a personal and private decision and one which only this young woman and her partner (with the help and support of her family) can make.
I don't think that having a pregnant daughter is always a reflection on the parent - actually *most* teenagers end up having sex, however much we hope they won't, and many of them have unprotected sex - often because they are "good kids" and didn't intend to have sex outside marriage, so when the emotions and desires overtook them they were unprepared. Most parents are lucky that their kids don't come home pregnant. It sounds like this mum was one of the unlucky ones.
I realise that by even discussing this at all, I am fueling the belief that there is a right to discuss other people's lives in this way – and I really don’t think there is. My main feeling about this story is moral outrage – how dare people publish details relating to the daughter of someone standing for public office?
I am aware that at this stage that some people might want to bring up the Bible passage that talks about church leaders being people who have well-ordered families. Just as a point of clarifaction, this specifically refers to children under the age of 12/13, as this was the age at which the Israelites reached adulthood. It was also written about a situation in which a parent had the right to put their child to death for disobedience! When such sanctions were possible (I note, *possible*, not desirable!) having unruly children was seen in a very negative manner. I don’t see that this law can be applied to this situation.
So I ask myself – will my child lie to me? Will they always be honest with me – always respect me? I doubt it... I suspect there will be times when my child will behave in ways that they know I wouldn’t approve of, and so will try to hide this behaviour from me. I hope that they won't...I hope they will always feel they can come and talk to me...but experience of youth work has shown me that no parent knows everything their child gets up to. As a parent, our task is to equip our children to make the choices they need to, to be able to deal with the situations they face and, above all, to know that they are loved unconditionally.
If this story tells me anything at all – it's that a lass has got pregnant before she intended – probably to the “surprise” of her parents – and they are supporting her. Whatever your political affliation (and believe me, I have none when it comes to American Elections!) surely that is a positive outcome and the parents should be commended for it?
On a lighter note, I let my memory card reader at work last night, so won't be able to post the latest pics of the bump until this evening. Apologies if you tuned in just for that!
Yours Outrageously,
The Broken Man
My take on the situation is this:
I hope that the young people concerned are of the mature variety (and no, getting pregnant doesn't preclude that) and that their marriage and family life will be happy. I think that it is a personal and private decision and one which only this young woman and her partner (with the help and support of her family) can make.
I don't think that having a pregnant daughter is always a reflection on the parent - actually *most* teenagers end up having sex, however much we hope they won't, and many of them have unprotected sex - often because they are "good kids" and didn't intend to have sex outside marriage, so when the emotions and desires overtook them they were unprepared. Most parents are lucky that their kids don't come home pregnant. It sounds like this mum was one of the unlucky ones.
I realise that by even discussing this at all, I am fueling the belief that there is a right to discuss other people's lives in this way – and I really don’t think there is. My main feeling about this story is moral outrage – how dare people publish details relating to the daughter of someone standing for public office?
I am aware that at this stage that some people might want to bring up the Bible passage that talks about church leaders being people who have well-ordered families. Just as a point of clarifaction, this specifically refers to children under the age of 12/13, as this was the age at which the Israelites reached adulthood. It was also written about a situation in which a parent had the right to put their child to death for disobedience! When such sanctions were possible (I note, *possible*, not desirable!) having unruly children was seen in a very negative manner. I don’t see that this law can be applied to this situation.
So I ask myself – will my child lie to me? Will they always be honest with me – always respect me? I doubt it... I suspect there will be times when my child will behave in ways that they know I wouldn’t approve of, and so will try to hide this behaviour from me. I hope that they won't...I hope they will always feel they can come and talk to me...but experience of youth work has shown me that no parent knows everything their child gets up to. As a parent, our task is to equip our children to make the choices they need to, to be able to deal with the situations they face and, above all, to know that they are loved unconditionally.
If this story tells me anything at all – it's that a lass has got pregnant before she intended – probably to the “surprise” of her parents – and they are supporting her. Whatever your political affliation (and believe me, I have none when it comes to American Elections!) surely that is a positive outcome and the parents should be commended for it?
On a lighter note, I let my memory card reader at work last night, so won't be able to post the latest pics of the bump until this evening. Apologies if you tuned in just for that!
Yours Outrageously,
The Broken Man
Friday, 29 August 2008
Gd n da hse – God in the House
As part of my studies I have been directed to the Ship of Fools website – let me say early on – I like these guys – a lot. You and I both know there is a but coming….ready for it?
I have been asked to comment on the use of text message language used to translate the Bible, or bits of the Bible; apparently something which the Ships of Fools guys have done. I have been asked to consider how the text speak translation compares to my translation of the Bible.
My observations are as follows:
The Bibles I use attempt to translate from the Hebrew and Greek text trying as best they can to convey the full meaning of the text in its original language while maintaining readability. This is a balancing act which is never completely satisfactorily achieved by any translation.
The “text” translate takes this translation, and attempts to reduce it to its most simplified reduced form in an attempt to be “cool” and communicate with young people. In doing so, they lose not just a little of the context and meaning, but reduce it to almost complete insignificance. Even if we were to believe, which I don’t, that this reduced message, this "Bible lite", was still of value if it connected with young people, we face a further difficulty; it *doesn’t* connect with young people.
Anyone who has ever actually asked young people what they think of this kind of thing will know the reactions are far from positive. In the same way that nothing is more embarrassing to a child than a parent who attempts to use “cool” phrases or dress in teenage clothes, the same is true of middle age people attempting to adopt “text” language. Each generation creates or reclaims certain phrases and ways of communication to distinguish them from the generations that have gone before, the desire is not that others adopt this method of communication; in fact, if people do it ruins the whole point.
On a positive front it has made me think about one phrase that is in current usage “Oh My God” shorted to “OMG” as an explitive in texts. I think that a youth discussion group called OMG would be a great reclaiming of the phrase! Beyond that I am afraid I find the whole thing rather cringe worthy.
There is a middle ground. "The Street Bible” or “word on the Street” (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Word-Street-Rob-Lacey/dp/0310932254) by Rob Lacey (of blessed memory) is fantastic. It does not claim to be “The Bible”, hence Rob Lacey renamed it from "The Street Bible" to "word on the street" to avoid confusion. It is the author's own retelling of the bible in a contempary manner. It was not written initially with the plan of publication and so was written as a meditation on the texts using the terms the author felt most comfortable with, not attempting to second guess what anyone else would find “cool”. It’s a book for reading, not studying, but at the same time by using contempory languge it brings to life the richness and meaning of much of the Bible texts, and is a book I have recommended to many people – young and old – as a bedside read.
Urs as evr
da Brkn mn
I have been asked to comment on the use of text message language used to translate the Bible, or bits of the Bible; apparently something which the Ships of Fools guys have done. I have been asked to consider how the text speak translation compares to my translation of the Bible.
My observations are as follows:
The Bibles I use attempt to translate from the Hebrew and Greek text trying as best they can to convey the full meaning of the text in its original language while maintaining readability. This is a balancing act which is never completely satisfactorily achieved by any translation.
The “text” translate takes this translation, and attempts to reduce it to its most simplified reduced form in an attempt to be “cool” and communicate with young people. In doing so, they lose not just a little of the context and meaning, but reduce it to almost complete insignificance. Even if we were to believe, which I don’t, that this reduced message, this "Bible lite", was still of value if it connected with young people, we face a further difficulty; it *doesn’t* connect with young people.
Anyone who has ever actually asked young people what they think of this kind of thing will know the reactions are far from positive. In the same way that nothing is more embarrassing to a child than a parent who attempts to use “cool” phrases or dress in teenage clothes, the same is true of middle age people attempting to adopt “text” language. Each generation creates or reclaims certain phrases and ways of communication to distinguish them from the generations that have gone before, the desire is not that others adopt this method of communication; in fact, if people do it ruins the whole point.
On a positive front it has made me think about one phrase that is in current usage “Oh My God” shorted to “OMG” as an explitive in texts. I think that a youth discussion group called OMG would be a great reclaiming of the phrase! Beyond that I am afraid I find the whole thing rather cringe worthy.
There is a middle ground. "The Street Bible” or “word on the Street” (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Word-Street-Rob-Lacey/dp/0310932254) by Rob Lacey (of blessed memory) is fantastic. It does not claim to be “The Bible”, hence Rob Lacey renamed it from "The Street Bible" to "word on the street" to avoid confusion. It is the author's own retelling of the bible in a contempary manner. It was not written initially with the plan of publication and so was written as a meditation on the texts using the terms the author felt most comfortable with, not attempting to second guess what anyone else would find “cool”. It’s a book for reading, not studying, but at the same time by using contempory languge it brings to life the richness and meaning of much of the Bible texts, and is a book I have recommended to many people – young and old – as a bedside read.
Urs as evr
da Brkn mn
Monday, 18 August 2008
Make Me A Christian
A new “reality” tv show has just started in the UK, called “Make Me a Christian”.
The premises of the show is that a group of people interested in finding out more about the Christian faith spend three weeks “living like Christians” under the guidance of three mentors headed up by the Rev George Hargreaves.
This sounds brilliant; it sounds like the type of programme I would really like to be involved in.
Before it was on I started to think about how I would approach it. What would be my starting point in showing people what its like to live as a Christian?
Fairly early on, I think I would include a trip to an interactive prayer room with bits of paper on the wall for people to draw on, with sand pits, with water; lots of interactive prayer activities.
I would start off by talking with the group about the way we communicate with God and that there is no single way to do this, but that if we want to get to know God, if we want to find out about life as a Christian, our starting point must be communication as we have a God who wants desperately to communicate with us, who knows us inside out and loves and cares for us.
I would make sure there were chances for the group to study the Bible in the round, to discuss and debate and ask their questions, and I would make sure that the people I had as speakers were people who brought the Bible to life; who spoke with excitement and passion and love.
This programme's starting point was to go into the participants' houses and tell them all the things that they couldn’t have in their lives whilst trying to live as Christians; that they needed to clear out the rubbish. The Christianity they are preaching is the God of “YOU SHALL NOT” and that includes questioning.
Its not a God I know.
I believe in a God who invites us into the ring and tells us that its okay to try wrestling; I believe in a God who says "come on, give me your best shot, I can take it! If you are angry with me, shout at me, if you don’t believe in me, tell me, if you think the world is turning to rot, if you are hurting, if you are broken, then come on, give it all to me. I can take it. I love you."
This show – this piece of TV – seems to preach and teach a God which I wouldn’t want to know, and this fills me with an overwhelming desire to beat the “mentors” with sticks. The only thing that restrains me from hunting them down, is that I know they would see this as persecution for their faith and so clear evidence that they are doing the right thing and the devil is afraid of them. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Yours as ever,
The Broken Man
The premises of the show is that a group of people interested in finding out more about the Christian faith spend three weeks “living like Christians” under the guidance of three mentors headed up by the Rev George Hargreaves.
This sounds brilliant; it sounds like the type of programme I would really like to be involved in.
Before it was on I started to think about how I would approach it. What would be my starting point in showing people what its like to live as a Christian?
Fairly early on, I think I would include a trip to an interactive prayer room with bits of paper on the wall for people to draw on, with sand pits, with water; lots of interactive prayer activities.
I would start off by talking with the group about the way we communicate with God and that there is no single way to do this, but that if we want to get to know God, if we want to find out about life as a Christian, our starting point must be communication as we have a God who wants desperately to communicate with us, who knows us inside out and loves and cares for us.
I would make sure there were chances for the group to study the Bible in the round, to discuss and debate and ask their questions, and I would make sure that the people I had as speakers were people who brought the Bible to life; who spoke with excitement and passion and love.
This programme's starting point was to go into the participants' houses and tell them all the things that they couldn’t have in their lives whilst trying to live as Christians; that they needed to clear out the rubbish. The Christianity they are preaching is the God of “YOU SHALL NOT” and that includes questioning.
Its not a God I know.
I believe in a God who invites us into the ring and tells us that its okay to try wrestling; I believe in a God who says "come on, give me your best shot, I can take it! If you are angry with me, shout at me, if you don’t believe in me, tell me, if you think the world is turning to rot, if you are hurting, if you are broken, then come on, give it all to me. I can take it. I love you."
This show – this piece of TV – seems to preach and teach a God which I wouldn’t want to know, and this fills me with an overwhelming desire to beat the “mentors” with sticks. The only thing that restrains me from hunting them down, is that I know they would see this as persecution for their faith and so clear evidence that they are doing the right thing and the devil is afraid of them. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Yours as ever,
The Broken Man
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
