beware the sound of one hand clapping: intelligent design

this will be the first of a 3 part series of posts titled, beware the sound of one hand clapping. the title comes from a line in the 2007 documentary, expelled: no intelligence allowed. what i'd like to do is offer a very quick intro to the series, present a brief review of the movie and then get into the brunt of the topic.

this series spawns from a quote by stephen c. meyer, director and senior fellow of the center for science and culture at the discovery institute in seattle. of all the intelligent design advocates interviewed in the movie, meyer, to me, was the most credible. his background is as a geophysicist and he received his ph.d. in the philosophy of science from cambridge university (if you don't know, this means this guy is a freaking genius...). the quote—beware the sound of one hand clapping—was a warning from one of his professors at cambridge. the idea is that one hand clapping is an impossibility. it cannot occur. there must be two opposing forces to complete the task. there is an inherent complementarianism to clapping.

for me, the quote was the biggest thing that stood out from the movie. i thought it was so interesting and insightful and vastly applicable far beyond the intelligent design conversation. so, in this series, i want to explore areas in life—be it in culture, politics or religion—where this quote is apparent. this series is a call to dialogue, to conversation, to cordial investigation into another way.

now, onto the movie...

if you don't know anything about the movie, expelled is a documentary that features ben stein. for several years, stein (who's most notable for this) has been outspoken in his defense of intelligent design. so, in the movie, stein interviews a cast of scientists and professors who are advocates of intelligent design and because of their role as advocate, he claims, they have either lost their jobs, been rejected by their colleagues or faced industry shame. in addition, stein interviews leading evolutionary proponents in attempt to be "fair." ultimately, stein claims, he simply wants to see intelligent design be accepted as a respected alternative to evolution-based principles of world origination.

the first thing about this documentary, like many others, is that it puts forth very little effort to not let you know what its fundamental beliefs and assumptions are. now, i'm not necessarily claiming that this is an inherently bad thing. obviously, the film makers believe that intelligent design is an acceptable worldview and they have set forth a series of interviews and investigations to back their claim. the only reason i point this out is that it isn't a "fair and balanced" kind of documentary that investigates both sides and then allows the viewer to make their mind up. much like michael moore's documentaries, the film makers have drawn their conclusion long before examining the evidence. again, i'm not necessarily saying that this is a bad thing, but it's just the nature of the documentary.

the one beef i did have is, like, again, michael moore's documentaries (of which i should pause and say that bowling for columbine and sicko are two of my favorite movies—not just documentaries—in the past several years...so this isn't to dog out michael moore), expelled does the most basic of argumentation tactics: paints those who agree as heroes and "good guys" and those who disagree as crazy and silly and villainous. i would rather see a realistic and fair depiction of all sides and then make an informed decision. i certainly don't think everyone of the "good guys" are completely credible and i don't believe that all the "bad guys" are evil and out to destroy christianity.

alright, enough of the movie...onto the issue at hand...

i think it's important to clarify a few things to let you know where i'm coming from and to align myself with certain viewpoints and disalign myself from others. i think this is important because there tends to be a lot of "theological and ideological lumping" with the issue of intelligent design. it seems that when someone is either for or against intelligent design acceptance, people automatically paint a very broad picture of a person, of which i would like to dispel before moving forward (which this could easily be a whole other blog post...).

1. i'm not one of these conservative fundamentalists who demand christianity be interjected into every facet of public life. examples:

a. i'm against prayer in school (in the teacher-led sense). i prayed about a million times growing up in public school. it was to myself and i didn't demand that others be forced to engage in my expression of faith. the reason i'm against it is because i first want to know who decides the religion that will be featured in the prayer? i'm gonna go out on a limb and say that the fundamentalists who want students and teachers to get up and lead prayer wouldn't be too happy if the teacher whipped out her prayer rug and started praying to allah in front of their frightened little sunday school susie. :)

b. i don't get all bent out of shape about people wanting to take down the ten commandments or symbols of christianity from courts or public buildings. now, truth be told, i don't have a problem with those things being displayed, but at the same time, if you're going to display christian symbols, no one should get upset if every other religion wants equal representation. if we truly have a separation between church and state, then, at the very least, the government should be sensitive to not sanction one single religion (which is the true essence of separation of church and state).

2. the bible is my fundamental starting point for interpreting the world around me. now, what this doesn't mean is that i wholly reject science or see science as the enemy. only when we lock ourselves into one single way of reading and interpreting scripture are we forced to do so. i think science works in harmony with the bible when we choose to engage in the story of god as seen in scripture and not just the fact book of god. that doesn't mean i think the bible is a bunch of made-up stories or moralistic fairy tales—far from it. it simply means that i read scripture in a way that honors its poetic and beautiful and literary way of communicating the ongoing story of god throughout history, written to communicate to people in various cultures with various ways of interpreting and processing messages.

3. i am not a republican. (or a democrat.) the point i'm making here is that the issue of intelligent design—much like christianity, unfortunately—has become a republican platform plank. i don't vote for parties, i vote for people. accordingly, i don't vote straight down a party platform. i agree with republicans on some things and democrats on others. for some things, i agree with neither.

4. i'm not a scientist. in fact, i'm far from it. my argument here is not from the point-of-view of someone who has finely combed through the theory of evolution and all the impending scientific and theological implications. i'm a blogger, for crying out loud. i'm writing an opinion piece here, not a  research piece for a science journal. so, before you want to start telling me that i've botched my explanation of evolution or that i'm spouting off faulty information, just remember that i'm ryan byrd, the lowly blogger, not ryan byrd, the nerdy geeky biophysicist (i mean, i'm sure i even misused the word biophysicist...).

alright, now that the preface is out of the way, it seems very clear to me that the issue of the origination of life is the aforementioned and proverbial sound of one hand clapping. by this, i specifically mean the acceptance of evolution in its classic form (in regard to the origination of life). i won't get into all the fine details of the theory of evolution, but, in essence, it spawns (no pun intended) from the idea that everything came, ultimately, from single cell organisms that mutated and over billions of years, became everything we see around us today. people came from monkeys, blah blah blah.

i think the complementary "clapping hand" to this widely accepted theory of origination is intelligent design. simply put, i believe that the origination of life is an almighty creator, as described in the story of genesis (which, if you didn't know, actually means "origins"...how convenient...).

let me pause and clarify my view of the creation story in genesis. while i've been working through this for several years (literally), i now feel confident in saying that i don't hold a "classic view" of the interpretation of the creation account. in other words, i don't see the "6 days" as a literal six 24-hour time intervals. there are a number of reasons, spawning mainly from a somewhat basic-ish (but fascinating) language study of the account. (i would love to get into all the details here, but you don't even want to know how long this post would be if i went into all of that...) there is nothing in the first couple chapters (which clearly tells the story in two different ways, which is also a very interesting study) that leads me to believe that it must have gone down in a literal 6 days. so, the point here is that, further, there is nothing that leads me to believe that there is a scientific conflict in the biblical creation account which "classicly" suggests that the earth cannot be millions or billions of years old. i believe, based on scripture, that the world could very well be compatible with scientific claims that the earth is billions of years old.

certainly, we don't know how old the earth is. ultimately, scientists will have to tell you that the age of the earth is just a theory. we don't have concrete evidence, but a large community is in general agreeance. further, scientists will ultimately tell you (as we saw in expelled) that the specific origins of the earth cannot be understood or fully known. there are plenty of theories, but, in the end, the deficiency of all of them is that something couldn't have come from absolutely nothing. something must have been present prior to the originating moment or series of moments.

this is where i believe intelligent design comes into play. before there was anything, there was god. i can't understand that. i can't visualize that. but, the faith it takes to believe that is no more than what it takes to believe in some sort of big bang or deep sea vent theory or whatever other kind of dead end theory is accepted. the key here, though, is that i don't know how god created. maybe he created through some sort of big bang? maybe he created with some sort of simple cell organisms? maybe he created through dirt and mud? we don't know. many literalists would argue that it was from "the dust of the ground" and that that must be literal because people had to somehow get here. again, interpreting the creation account as a process that took, theoretically, much much longer than a mere 6 days, the possibilities for the origins of human life, specifically, are limitless. it could have been instantaneous human creation from a little mud, but i'm open to other possibilities.

to wrap up (you're welcome...), the point i'm making is not to replace evolution with intelligent design, but to uphold intelligent design theories as probable and a respected alternative—not the red-headed stepchild of origin theory.

the sound of one clapping is deafening in regard to theories of origination and i think it's time to offer the inherent opposing force that is intelligent design.

alright, i hope to be back soon with the 2nd post in this series called beware the sound of one hand clapping. (and i'm thinking it's gonna be a wee bit shorter...). :)

religion roundup

today there seemed to be several interesting religious stories that caught my attention, so i thought i would do a bit of a roundup here.

1. obama's interview on muslim tv: i'm sure you've probably seen this in the news by now, but if not, obama's first formal tv interview as president wasn't with katie couric or brian williams or one of the usual suspects. instead, it was with al-arabiya, a dubai-based arabic language channel that primarily serves the muslim world in the middle east, asia and beyond.

the emails were right all along! he IS a muslim!

ok, not really, sorry to get you all excited like that, but the story is, unfortunately for you all, a good one about obama. in the interview, obama was very clear and straight forward when he made statements such as, "the americans are not your enemy" and, in regards to his presidency, "you'll see...somebody who is listening, who is respectful, and who is trying to promote the interests not just of the united states, but also ordinary people who right now are suffering from poverty and a lack of opportunity." we're talking diplomacy here, people. weird thing for our government, huh?

that's a great message of reconciliation and redemption that we need to be hearing not only from our president, but from christian people within the church. we've really screwed it up in our relations to our muslim friends and we need to ask for repentance and seek understanding. it's ok to have major theological differences, but jesus disagreed with a lot of people who he hung out with and broke bread with regularly. we need to do the same.

2. first baptist church of smith & wesson: ok, i can't make this stuff up. this is at the same time hilarious and sad and bizarre. today, representative beverly pyle of cedarville filed a bill that would allow people to carry concealed weapons to church.

you can go to church all strapped up! (well, at least, that's what she's trying to make possible.)

i'm not even going to get into my feelings about gun control issues, but you may not be surprised to know that i'm a big proponent of increased (to say the least) gun control. thanks to representative pyle, though, we might have yet another place that you can shoot it out at the drop of a hat without anyone seeing it coming.

don't like the sermon? wax him. music sucks? spray 'em all down. ticked they aren't reading out of the king james and king james only? rat-a-tat-tat.

3. name that legislator's church!: on a related note to the above, as i was seeking more information about rep. pyle, i came across something that was so telling about the way our state government (and government, in general) works. if you go to the arkansas state legislature website and go to the list of legislators (which you can do here), you'll notice that listed in their bio is their contact info, committees and a couple other bits of information.

what caught my attention is that on each legislators' page, listed alongside their basic contact information, you will find his or her "church affiliation." not the names of their spouse and children. not their interests. not their favorite quote or life mantra. but their church affiliation.

so, you can find out that gilbert baker is affiliated with a "bible church" or that steve faris is "baptist" or that dan greenberg is (gasp!) "jewish."

am i the only one that thinks making a special point to state church affiliation is a strange thing? i mean, obviously, i'm a christian and a pastor and a person who loves the church and thinks faith is a huge factor in one's political viewpoints, but to list that as a part of their profile without the context of other pertinent biographical information?

seems like the good ol' baptist boy network is in full swing...but you can draw your own conclusions.

4. tony campolo billy graham tribute: there's not a lot that hasn't already been said about billy graham, but in tony campolo's latest podcast from his british radio show, across the pond, he shares some really great and insightful stories about billy graham's life and ministry. as i've talked about on the blog before, i'm a huge fan of campolo and the way he tells stories is so interesting and engaging.

i know sitting down and listening to a entire radio program is a lot to ask, but i think it's such an interesting viewpoint into the life of one of the greatest followers of christ that we've ever known. so, you can either download the podcast on itunes by clicking here of you can listen to it right here on my blog.

tony campolo: billy graham tribute

stockholm syndrome

just a quick note to offer a recommendation to hop over to the eikon blog. a new post just went up called "stockholm syndrome." it's an interesting read about this psychological phenomenon and how it offers an insightful analogy for the current state of the church (and how eikon hopes to be an alternative or reversal of this phenomenon).

so, go check it out by clicking here or by clicking on the link/banner above.

where there's smoke, there's fire

before getting into the matter at hand, let me first state that i enjoy like love cigars. they are one of my great carnal pleasures in life. seriously, one of my favorite activities is sitting down with a good cigar and getting into a good, long theological conversation with friends (yeah, this is what you get when you mix theology nerds with hand-rolled leaves of honduran goodness...). the reason i preface the post with this is that i'm not coming at the issue of tobacco without my own dog in this fight, so to speak. (of course, i will touch on the glaring difference between cigar and cigarette/other tobacco use in a moment.)

you may (or may not) be aware that today, legislators filed gov. mike beebe's plan to implement at 56 cent hike in the state cigarette tax. currently, the average price of a pack of cigarettes is about$3.81, so the tax hike would increase it to well above $4. first, let me say that i am 100% on board with this proposal. in fact, i think it could be even higher than that and i would be fine with it. the more out-of-reach we make cigarettes (and other tobacco products, because smokeless tobacco is also facing tax increases), the better.

i don't think the sole solution to getting people to quit smoking is to increase the price of cigarettes, but it certainly doesn't hurt. i think it's clear that people aren't primarily deterred from smoking or anything else because of the price. i mean, people pay ridiculous prices for a lot of things (the average price for a super bowl ticket is $3,100...). BUT, when you smoke a couple packs a day and you're staring at over $8/day—$56/week, $240/month, $2,920/year—you're going to think long and hard about if you really can't live without your precious cancer sticks.

primarily, i think the biggest deterrence to cigarette use/addiction is shifting cultural perception. for many, many years (decades, really), all you needed to do was go spend an hour or so on a college campus to see the cultural perception of smoking: it's cool and adult-like and shows one's sense of freedom & independence. by all means, i'm not one to blame media (in fact, very far from it), but it's very clear that smoking, particularly in movies, has been a part of character development that denotes the "cool guy" or the "sophisticated woman" or the "rebel" or the "independent spirit." fortunately, hollywood agrees (by and large) with my assessment and there's been a concerted effort to lessen those depictions (which has been pretty much voluntary by producers/writers/directors).

with that said, though, i think increase in pricing is an important piece in the larger affront on tobacco use. there are several reasons i think this increase is a good thing and can be a success.

1. the convenience factor. this, really, is a response to some of the criticism. while most people—it's fair to assume—have a jaded perspective of our elected officials and distrust their ability to be frank and forthcoming with the public, i think there are some who are changing those perceptions (chiefly president obama...but that's a whole other blog...). :) admittedly, i know very little about speaker of the house robbie wills, but if one of his latest blog posts is any indication of his values and transparent leadership style, i like him. he wrote (here) that one of the arguments is that people will go across the border to buy cigarettes where they're cheaper. i'll let you read his remarks (which are rather candid and slightly snarky, which is great), but he basically argues that people, ultimately, choose convenience over price. if you're living in little rock, i'm gonna go out on a limb and say that you aren't gonna make a special trip to missouri or tennessee to buy a couple packs of smokes. you're going to buy local and you're going to pay more than $4 to do it.

2. smokers are a drain on our economy. our health care system—according to this really interesting article (which i highly encourage you to read)—takes a hit of over $816 million annually. all in all, arkansas takes a $2 billion hit each year total because of tobacco. the increased tax revenue is going to raise $88 million for statewide health care.

in all fairness, obesity causes a great burden on the health care system as well and as someone who is overweight, i need to fess up to that and take responsibility. in fact, i've been sick a lot more in the past year or so than what i've been in the past and i think some of it is directly related to my poor eating habits and weight, in general. we need to address obesity as well in our state. BUT, the thing i've always argued is that, at very least, obesity is a product of something our body musthave: food. obviously, it's created by an abuse of food, but still, we can't escape eating. cigarettes, on the other hand, is something we could completely cut out and have only positive effects.

3. i simply support an increase in taxes, not a complete prohibition. as our country's history knows full well, prohibition simply doesn't work. further, i would say that, as adults, we should have the choice to put things into our bodies that are harmful, even deadly, if we so choose. but, if one so chooses, they should have to pay dearly to do it.

to bring it back to my preface about cigars, if i so choose to smoke cigars (which i do maybe one or twice a year...although i wish it were more...), i will gladly dish out the cash necessary. of course, cigars cost substantially more than cigarettes already (i have paid as much as $15 for a single cigar before and many aficionados consider that on the very low and cheap end of cigars...). the other difference, of course, is that cigar smoking, for most and myself, is not an addictive habit like cigarette smoking. now, many people are just as addicted to cigars as cigarettes, but that's not the kind of cigar usage that i'm referring to here.

i know this has been a lengthy discussion about this issue, so if you need to go relax and rest your eyes, i suggest going out, buying a pack of camel reds and smoking one down in the name of taxes...

happy birthday macgyver!

that' right everybody...today richard dean anderson macgyver turns 59. happy birthday macgyver!

it seems like only yesterday, my feathery mullety friend, that you were breaking out of bunkers with floss and gum, blowing up poachers' planes with a battery and some toenail clippers and saving the world with one brush of your sweet, sweet mississippi mudflaps.

on a related note, i also want to give a shout-out to that dude at our old church in lexington who legally changed his name to macgyver. you've earned a special place in heaven with that classy move and we all commend your daring originality and boldness. stay classy, dude-from-lexington-now-named-macgyver...

music you should know: fiction family

this is my attempt to create a new, ongoing series of posts which will be called music you should know. this is a chance for me to talk about some of the music i've discovered that may not be that well known, but is definitely worth being made well known. now, i'm not claiming all this music will be obscure, as i'm sure many of you might possibly know this stuff, but it's stuff that isn't hyped all the time in the mainstream and known by the average music listener.

in this series, i hope to keep it brief by showing the album cover (or interesting photo, like in this one) and giving three reasons you'll like it. short and sweet (in theory...). ok, so here's the first one.

fiction family is an album/band that i've been looking forward to for quite some time because of the parties involved. fiction family is a joining together of jon foreman (most well known for his leadership of switchfoot) and sean watkins (most well known for his role as 1/3 of the nickel creek triumvirate). while i'm more of a late-90's switchfoot fan, i'm still a fan, and even more so a fan of foreman's solo albums (which are amazing). i'm a HUGE fan of nickel creek, so this pairing has been highly anticipated.

here's the reasons you should know this music:

1. this is truly a great musical partnership. a lot of times in these kinds of deals (like, unfortunately, the blend of nickel creek and glenn phillips as the mutual admiration society), you lose so much of both that it becomes this weird "other thing." in this case, though, this is the perfect union of the two artists. it's exactly what you would think it would sound like if you combined jon foreman and sean watkins.

2. the music is so honest and true. both artists' songwriting has always been characterized by raw and authentic portrayals of real life. you don't get some kind of hyper-reality or surreal love experience. it's life as it happens—both the beautifully poetic and the painfully real.

3. if you've somehow found yourself in a musical cave and haven't heard switchfoot or, specifically, jon foreman, you're missing something. i can think of no one who sounds like jon foreman. his voice is so unique and captivating. it demands your attention. for some, it could be an acquired taste, but i really love the uniqueness of his voice.

so, take a listen. my favorite track so far is called mostly prove me wrong. it's really layered and shows the authenticity i was talking about.

mostly prove me wrong

and, since it's so good and fun, here's the video for their lead single, when she's near.

big, big love

there are a handful of t.v. shows that i watch regularly and are can't-miss shows for me. survivor, the office, desperate housewives (yeah, that's right...i said it...you gotta problem with it...), to name a few. all in all, i really don't watch an exorbitant amount of t.v. further, i'm not really the type to get invested emotionally into shows or movies. i tend to be a somewhat distant viewer. in other words, i have a hard time overlooking the non-reality of t.v. and movies.

there is a very distinct exception to this rule, though.

big love.

if you don't know, big love is an hbo drama about a mormon (sorta) polygamous family, the henricksons, living in sandy, utah. it centers around the husband bill and his three wives—barb, nikki, and margene—and their 7 children. i won't go into great detail trying to explain everything because it will just sound weird, so you have to just see it yourself to get it.

as stated, big love—which is hands down my favorite show of all-time—is the only show in which i really get emotionally involved. i live in the show while i'm watching it (and, to an extent, when i'm not watching it). there's such a complexity to the characters and the plot that your emotions become a part of the arc of the story.

the problem with t.v., in general, is that it's so shallow and cliché. i honestly cannot sit through any t.v. sitcom currently on t.v. (i don't consider the office a sitcom in the classic sense). t.v. is just generally bad. by and large, the writing is bland and the characters are so shallow that you aren't able to connect with any more than one layer of the character and plot. most comedies rely on a string of cheesy one-liners and dramas rely on stereotypes and over-dramatization.

big love, on the other hand, is so layered and complex in a fascinating way. it draws you in in a way that makes you question your rising blood pressure as you engage with the characters. i literally want to step through my t.v. and tell bill all the things that nikki is doing that he doesn't know about. after stepping away and questioning my personal sanity, you get a sense that this is what a great show should do.

the third season began sunday night, so if you want to jump on board, it's not necessarily too late. this is a show that you probably really need to go back and watch, at least, the second season, but you could probably jump right into the new season and still enjoy it.

so, go and get some big love.

inaugural jesus

unfortunately, i wasn't able to steal any time away yesterday to offer some thoughts on the historic magnitude of the day. if you've followed my blog for long, you will know that yesterday was an emotional and proud day for me, having been an obama supporter from literally day one of his candidacy. far beyond people's political affiliations and preferences and loyalties, yesterday was a moment that few could deny its power and significance.

i would love to offer a sweeping review of the day and its events, but i simply don't have time for that. one thing, though, that did particularly stand out to me—as others have pointed out—was the prominence of expressions of faith, particularly, of course, christianity. while some have offered criticism, i view it as an expression of the personhood of barack obama. quite frankly, if we elected a muslim (of course, some email-sending crazies still believe that's what we have now...), i would expect—as an expression of his/her faith and character—muslim prayers and expressions of faith to be prominent.

i thought the diversity was really beautiful and the main people who delivered prayers offered beautiful and unique expressions of what it means to communicate with god. i thought i would put both links to video of the prayers as well as the transcripts. so, this will be a little lengthy, but i think they're worth reading through.

the "headliner": rick warren.

warren, of course, stirred up a lot of controversy, which was really unfair and unfortunate (not that i'm necessarily a rick warren apologist), but in the end, he delivered a beautiful prayer. click here to see the (hi-res) video.

Almighty God, our Father, everything we see and everything we can’t see exists because of you alone. It all comes from you. It all belongs to you. It all exists for your glory.

History is your story.

The Scripture tells us, “Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God. The Lord is One.” And you are the compassionate and merciful one. And you are loving to everyone you have made.

Now, today, we rejoice not only in America’s peaceful transfer of power for the 44th time. We celebrate a hingepoint of history with the inauguration of our first African American president of the United States. We are so grateful to live in this land, a land of unequaled possibility, where the son of an African immigrant can rise to the highest level of our leadership. And we know today that Dr. King and a great cloud of witnesses are shouting in heaven.

Give to our new President, Barack Obama, the wisdom to lead us with humility, the courage to lead us with integrity, the compassion to lead us with generosity. Bless and protect him, his family, Vice President Biden, the cabinet, and every one of our freely elected leaders.

Help us, O God, to remember that we are Americans, united not by race, or religion, or blood, but to our commitment to freedom and justice for all. When we focus on ourselves, when we fight each other, when we forget you, forgive us. When we presume that our greatness and our prosperity is ours alone, forgive us. When we fail to treat our fellow human beings and all the earth with the respect that they deserve, forgive us. And as we face these difficult days ahead, may we have a new birth of clarity in our aims, responsibility in our actions, humility in our approaches, and civility in our attitudes, even when we differ.

Help us to share, to serve and to seek the common good of all. May all people of goodwill today join together to work for a more just, a more healthy and a more prosperous nation and a peaceful planet. And may we never forget that one day all nations and all people will stand accountable before you. We now commit our new president and his wife, Michelle and his daughters, Malia and Sasha, into your loving care.

I humbly ask this in the name of the one who changed my life, Yeshua, Isa, Jesus [Spanish pronunciation], Jesus, who taught us to pray:

“Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever.

Amen.

the "civil rights guy": joseph lowery

lowery provided the most unique prayer and brought a sense of the significance of a black man being elected president (lowery was a civil rights pioneer with martin luther king). of course, already, nutjob glenn beck is criticizing his prayer and obama himself for this being a "racist" prayer. here's the video.

God of our weary years, God of our silent tears, thou who has brought us thus far along the way, thou who has by thy might led us into the light, keep us forever in the path, we pray, lest our feet stray from the places, our God, where we met thee, lest our hearts, drunk with the wine of the world, we forget thee. Shadowed beneath thy hand may we forever stand -- true to thee, O God, and true to our native land.

We truly give thanks for the glorious experience we've shared this day. We pray now, O Lord, for your blessing upon thy servant, Barack Obama, the 44th president of these United States, his family and his administration. He has come to this high office at a low moment in the national and, indeed, the global fiscal climate. But because we know you got the whole world in your hand, we pray for not only our nation, but for the community of nations. Our faith does not shrink, though pressed by the flood of mortal ills.

For we know that, Lord, you're able and you're willing to work through faithful leadership to restore stability, mend our brokenness, heal our wounds and deliver us from the exploitation of the poor or the least of these and from favoritism toward the rich, the elite of these.

We thank you for the empowering of thy servant, our 44th president, to inspire our nation to believe that, yes, we can work together to achieve a more perfect union. And while we have sown the seeds of greed -- the wind of greed and corruption, and even as we reap the whirlwind of social and economic disruption, we seek forgiveness and we come in a spirit of unity and solidarity to commit our support to our president by our willingness to make sacrifices, to respect your creation, to turn to each other and not on each other.

And now, Lord, in the complex arena of human relations, help us to make choices on the side of love, not hate; on the side of inclusion, not exclusion; tolerance, not intolerance.

And as we leave this mountaintop, help us to hold on to the spirit of fellowship and the oneness of our family. Let us take that power back to our homes, our workplaces, our churches, our temples, our mosques, or wherever we seek your will.

Bless President Barack, First Lady Michelle. Look over our little, angelic Sasha and Malia.

We go now to walk together, children, pledging that we won't get weary in the difficult days ahead. We know you will not leave us alone, with your hands of power and your heart of love.

Help us then, now, Lord, to work for that day when nation shall not lift up sword against nation, when tanks will be beaten into tractors, when every man and every woman shall sit under his or her own vine and fig tree, and none shall be afraid; when justice will roll down like waters and righteousness as a mighty stream.

Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around—when yellow will be mellow—when the red man can get ahead, man—and when white will embrace what is right.

Let all those who do justice and love mercy say amen.

the "gay guy": gene robinson

robinson wasn't a part of the inauguration ceremony, but he's worth mentioning because of the inclusive nature of the choice to include a gay pastor and the fact that his prayer was just as poignant as warren and lowery. i particularly liked the line, "our new president is a human being, not a messiah." so true. here's the video.

O God of our many understandings, we pray that you will…

Bless us with tears – for a world in which over a billion people exist on less than a dollar a day, where young women from many lands are beaten and raped for wanting an education, and thousands die daily from malnutrition, malaria, and AIDS.

Bless us with anger – at discrimination, at home and abroad, against refugees and immigrants, women, people of color, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

Bless us with discomfort – at the easy, simplistic “answers” we’ve preferred to hear from our politicians, instead of the truth, about ourselves and the world, which we need to face if we are going to rise to the challenges of the future.

Bless us with patience – and the knowledge that none of what ails us will be “fixed” anytime soon, and the understanding that our new president is a human being, not a messiah.

Bless us with humility – open to understanding that our own needs must always be balanced with those of the world.

Bless us with freedom from mere tolerance – replacing it with a genuine respect and warm embrace of our differences, and an understanding that in our diversity, we are stronger.

Bless us with compassion and generosity – remembering that every religion’s God judges us by the way we care for the most vulnerable in the human community, whether across town or across the world.

And God, we give you thanks for your child Barack, as he assumes the office of President of the United States.

Give him wisdom beyond his years, and inspire him with Lincoln’s reconciling leadership style, President Kennedy’s ability to enlist our best efforts, and Dr. King’s dream of a nation for ALL the people.

Give him a quiet heart, for our Ship of State needs a steady, calm captain in these times.

Give him stirring words, for we will need to be inspired and motivated to make the personal and common sacrifices necessary to facing the challenges ahead.

Make him color-blind, reminding him of his own words that under his leadership, there will be neither red nor blue states, but the United States.

Help him remember his own oppression as a minority, drawing on that experience of discrimination, that he might seek to change the lives of those who are still its victims.

Give him the strength to find family time and privacy, and help him remember that even though he is president, a father only gets one shot at his daughters’ childhoods.

And please, God, keep him safe. We know we ask too much of our presidents, and we’re asking FAR too much of this one. We know the risk he and his wife are taking for all of us, and we implore you, O good and great God, to keep him safe. Hold him in the palm of your hand – that he might do the work we have called him to do, that he might find joy in this impossible calling, and that in the end, he might lead us as a nation to a place of integrity, prosperity and peace.

AMEN.

quote of the day

unfortunately, i can't cite the source of this great quote because i saw it on twitter at some point and now i can't locate it. it was retweeted and it wasn't from a person i follow, hence the inability to find the source.

one of my guiding life theologies is the implications of incarnational living, modeled after the life of christ. so, i thought this was a really great and beautiful way of talking about the incarnation.

anyway, here it is:

"part of incarnational living is leaning into the rhythms of culture."

good stuff.

introducing eikon church.

in late 2007, our family packed our bags and moved to little rock. our extended family is here. our friends are here. but, ultimately, that isn't why we came.

well over two years ago, a small nudge to move back to little rock unexpectedly became an overwhelming and life-changing dream to start a church in the downtown little rock area. knowing the church makeup in little rock, we knew there was a large segment of young, creative, emerging people who may have some desire to engage in a community of faith, but found their options lacking, to say the least. that is where our dream began.

after quite a bit of hinting on the blog for the last several months, i'm excited to announce that eikon church is now officially taking shape here in little rock.

we envision eikon as a new kind of community that refocuses and redefines what it means to be the church and to do church. we certainly aren't reinventing the wheel, but we do believe that we're offering an alternative for those who are seeking something a little different.

eikon places value on grace and mercy and humility and beauty and creativity and truth. it's a community where doubt is honored and honest dialogue is valued and encouraged. it's a place where the life, words and mission of jesus are lifted up and used as a guide. it's a community where we understand that a lot of people have negative or disaffected feelings about the church, but have an interest in engaging with the jesus found in scripture and not the christian subculture version of jesus that that has, by and large, co-opted the church.

we hope to be a community where the arts—visual arts, music, film, writing, etc.—are at the forefront of the life of the church and a place where creativity and outside-the-box thinking aren't looked at with suspicion. we believe that every person—no matter what their life may look like—is created in the image of god and that god, being a creator, has made us to be creative and inventive people.

eikon will be a community that is welcoming to every person, regardless of color, age, past history, social status or religious beliefs. we strive to be a community that can foster friendships and mutual understanding despite disagreements or differing viewpoints. at eikon, you don't have to agree with everyone else to be valued and accepted. we won't rely on the status quo to set the standard for truth and the way we lead the church.

i could go on and on, but i'll save that for later. needless to say, though, our dream for eikon church is that we, indeed, do something different, not just for different's sake, but to reconnect with the jesus and the church that is actually found in scripture. so, as the days and weeks and months go by, i want to keep you informed about some of the different and possibly not-so-different things at eikon such as our core values, our plan to grow, gathering times and ways to get connected.

the bottom line is that we can't very well be a community if there's no community. we need you! along with this announcement of the church, i also issue a very open invitation to get on board. if you've connected with anything i've said or even if you just want more information in hopes to find something of which to connect, let me know!

a temporary website for eikon is up and running (find the link above or click here). while it's actually just another link here on my website, it has a completely different look and feel and is a wholly separate blog. on it, there will be very regular updates, so it will be the (temporary) lifeline to all things eikon. it will be the place to stay informed and learn more (until the full fledge website arrives).

so, there you have it. i'm very excited to announce the beginning public phases of eikon church. this announcement has been a long time coming, so i can't wait to hear some feedback and some initial response.

welcome to eikon.

how to lose a blog in 10 days, er, seconds...

quick editorial note: about 30 minutes ago, because of a series of events that you would have no interest in hearing about, i lost every single blog post from 2008... yes... i was freaking out. to say the very least.

BUT...

thanks to a backup from literally 10 minutes earlier (which was the first one i've done in at least 6 months...), i was able to salvage the posts. so, i didn't have to self mutilate or breathe into a bag or anything...

at this point, everything seems to be functioning properly, but i'm unsure if all the permalinks are the same as before. it's hard to pinpoint all this stuff right now...especially being in the final stages of shock... let me know if you run into anything weird.

alright, as you were.

mute math on jay leno

as many long time blog readers may know, i'm a huge mute math fan. they have an incomparable sound and an unparalleled live show (alternative press named them the "#1 band you must see live before you die"...pretty sufficient endorsement, i'd say...). i saw them a couple years ago in san diego opening for mae and while mae is an incredible live act as well, i think everyone in attendance knew who the headliner was that night.

well, the other night mute math was on leno and while they're great no matter what, their hand full of late night performances do them little justice. nevertheless, it's still mute math. some kind soul uploaded their performance in hd to youtube (thank god we're moving away from those embarrassingly crappy lo-res videos...which is a whole other blog post...) and i thought i would share it here.

enjoy.

bebo, britney and the cult of celebrity

in our society, we have a very deep fascination with celebrity. we have tv shows about celebrities. we have "mainstream" news that features stories about celebrities. we celebrate people who are famous for just being famous. we lift celebrities up on godlike pedestals. we all, in big or small ways, at times, drink from the cult of celebrity kool-aid.

at the same time that we lift up celebrities to the highest heights, we love nothing more than to see them come crashing down. when celebrity-x falls off the wagon or has an embarrassing public moment or gets caught on camera in a compromising situation, we all tend to enjoy making that the topic of office conversation or a funny blog post or a joke with friends. i'm as guilty as the next person.

sometimes the word guilty, though, has very little to do with our feelings. part of the prevailing thought is that if these people want to be movie stars and make millions of dollars, that's part of the price they have to pay. if they want to eat at the finest restaurants or shop at the most upscale boutiques, popular thought suggests, there are certain privacies and aspects of their lives that they must forfeit.

of all the celebrities of which these things are applicable, the #1 person on this list is britney spears. we can all think of a hundred times that we've rolled our eyes by something she's done that's ended her up on the news or the million times we've inserted some ridiculous thing she's done as the butt of a joke. her shooting star went up so amazingly fast and she quickly became the celebrity we both love and loathe.

while, as i've already stated, i can be as guilty as the next person, i have often looked at scenes of britney spears and other celebrities of like kind and had moments of genuine sympathy and sadness. for every few times i've joined in with jokes and stated how ridiculous this or that celebrity looks, i've also had times when i realize that these people are just humans and how i can't imagine a life under that sharp of a microscope of scrutiny. having above average talent and making millions of dollars doesn't deny a person the right to being treated like a human being with feelings and the need for dignity and respect.

with that said...

a few months ago, bebo norman (for those who don't know him, yes...his name is seriously bebo...) released a new, self-titled album. i'm not a huge fan of bebo norman—or at least like i was about 10 or so years ago. his first major release, ten thousand days, was one of the most beautiful and emotive "christian" albums that came out in the late 90's (this isn't my favorite song on the album, but just take a listen to the hammer holds to hear how pure and beautiful it is). since that time, though, much like other artists who've gotten sucked into the ccm machine, bebo has tended to put out stuff that was sort of cliché and overproduced and made for radio.

his latest album was briefly released as a free download, so i thought i would give it a shot. by and large, it wasn't too different from his other albums of late, but there were some good tracks. one that stood out was the inspiration for my thoughts in this post about our obsession with the rise and fall of celebrities. specifically, the obsession with britney spears was explored in his track, aptly titled britney. when i first learned that he wrote a track to britney spears, i thought it was a really corny idea. i thought it would be too literal and play into some clichés. i was wrong, though. the track is thoughtful and very poignant. it's really a model of how people—especially those who claim to follow christ—should view celebrities and what, ultimately, their thinking should be towards those in the media frenzy spotlight.

so, have a listen for yourself. here's the track.

bebo norman: britney

funniest person on planet earth: tracy morgan. period.

and just for kicks and giggles while we're at it:

blog FAIL

i haven't done it in quite awhile, but i decided to peruse the FAIL blog today. if you haven't checked it out, go there now and have fun wasting away way too much time seeing the power of failure. i thought i would share a few that were particularly funny to me.

left: text FAIL: you know, the way the iphone text messaging home screen is, it's easy to text the wrong person...but come on, you gotta double check this one...

right: linguistic FAIL: the picture is hilarious on its own, but notice the license plate...stay classy, arkansas...

grammar FAIL: i'll be the first to admit that i can be the grammar and spelling police, but at least i don't do this...



exercise FAIL: for whatever reason, this one made me laugh out loud...

evangelicalism smackdown: the battle for the bible belt

there's always those cliché types of comments that people make that lay claim to various assertions. for instance, you'll hear something to the effect of, "oh my gosh, i saw the most hilarious thing last night!" really? it was the most hilarious thing that exists in the pantheon of hilarious things? or, you'll hear people lay claim to such things as, "things have never been this bad, so we must be living in the end times. jesus is returning soon." could you please quantify that statement, because i'm sure that joe blow hell-fire-and-brimstone preacher make that exact claim about their time or decade every few years for the last however many hundred years.

not to over-analyze clichés, but it seems that everyone has the need or desire to make their experience the quintessential model of the cliché. it's as if the cliché originated with their experience. it's the funniest. or the worst. or the this or the that.

one of my favorite clichés is one i tend to hear a lot when i go to conferences (or the like) with multiple speakers, particularly ones in the south or with speakers from southern states. it never fails that at least one of those speakers, while giving their brief bio, is going to say that they live in the "buckle of the bible belt." they're trying to express the fact that there's a church "on every corner" and that people seem to be particularly religious. not too long ago, at a conference, i heard 3 speakers use this line. one of them was from the atlanta area. one was from the dallas area and one was from somewhere in southern indiana. either the proverbial buckle is freaking huge or one of these guys is confused. or, maybe, for whatever reason, people tend to assume that their experience, as suggested, is the most quintessential form of the cliché. we tend to be very short-sighted.

well, whenever i need some kind of life clarification, naturally, i turn to our friends at wikipedia. :) how does wikipedia define the concept of the bible belt?

Bible Belt is an informal term for an area of the United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a dominant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is extremely high.

so, the common traits are 1.) dominantly socially conservative evangelical protestantism and, 2.) christian church attendance is extremely high.

i stumbled across a quick post over on the arkansas blog, where munford miller asked readers to "draw your own conclusions" about some statistics given at the back of the new book, how barack obama won (seems like i remember a similar blog post title that i recently wrote...). the main statistic that stood out to me was that arkansas is number 1! well...i'm not so sure this is the best category to be #1 in (not that i'm saying that this is terrible either...that's a whole other blog post and discussion...). anyway, we're #1 in the percentage of white evangelicals (56%). so, we have more (percentage-wise) white evangelicals here in arkansas than any other state in the union.

further, i took a look at the percentage of church attendance in the u.s. (which represents people who attend church at least once a week) and found that arkansas was 5th at 56% (the national average is 42%, so i really don't have to argue the point much more...). now, even though we were 5th, we can automatically (more or less) throw out 2 of them: utah (57%) & louisiana (58%). first, utah is mormon church attendance, which has nothing to do with "christian" or "dominant evangelical protestantism." second, louisiana is less automatic, but still, southern louisiana catholics have to make up at least 2 or 3% (probably much more) of those stats, which is certainly christian, but certainly not protestant or evangelical. the only other ones above us are south carolina and alabama. while they could make a claim for the "buckle of the bible belt" smackdown, they're lagging in white evangelicals (which is the most essential part of the bible belt equation).

so, i'm here to definitively state that when i speak at events and am introducing myself as a resident of arkansas, i can safely say that i live in the buckle of the bible belt. (and then, after i speak, you can go blog about how your state is actually the buckle and not arkansas...)

good copy bad copy and the great confession, pt.2

just in case you didn't read my last post, you probably want to back up and give it a quick once-over. this is part 2, so it will assume that you've read the previous post.

in my unfolding discovery of girl talk's feed the animals (along with the jaydiohead album), i came across a 2007 documentary called good copy bad copy. the film takes a look at the very issues that i prefaced in part 1 of this post: copyright laws, illegal file sharing, sampling and, generally speaking, the "free" culture that has represented the growing majority of music consumption over the last 10 years. (by the way, in the spirit of the movie, you can watch the entire thing on their website or you can download the torrent. worth your watch.)

while there were certainly things about the documentary that could have been better (editing, for example), overall, it was a really good and interesting look at the culture i've described from several angles. now, let me pause and say that, much like many documentaries, there is a distinct angle, in my opinion. it seemed clear that the filmmakers are coming at this from the point of view that "illegal" file sharing is a viable and acceptable model of music consumption and that copyright laws largely serve to curb creativity and the availability of cultural beauty and enrichment.

the film opens with the aforementioned gregg gillis (girl talk), in his sparse and diminutive apartment living room, putting together samples on his tiny little laptop. two things instantly strike you as somewhat hilarious. first, this guy is just a music tech nerd who has a lot of time on his hands. of course, it helps to know that gillis, a resident of pittsburgh, was a biomedical engineer before quitting his job to focus on his music full time less than 2 years ago. basically, he's just a flannel-wearing dude who knows how to use pro tools (or acid pro...or whatever he uses) and enjoys the art of sampling (of which you can tell he is enthralled and passionate).

the second thing that is just crazy is that it's just him sitting there (the image to the left is a still from the movie) with this tiny little crappy looking pc laptop. i mean, at least give me a mac running garageband. :) it just seems so bizarre that this guy who is putting out this incredible music is putting it together by copying and pasting snippets of music on this little laptop with crappy little speakers. of course, this would have been shot a few years ago, so i'm sure he's moved up in the world, but it just strikes you as bizarre.

he begins the film by setting the stage as an advocate for artists like himself to have the freedom to use copyrighted music in whatever way they see fit. his argument is primarily based on the idea that art like he and others (like danger mouse of the producer of jaydiohead) wouldn't be able to produce this art form with the current copyright structures because the licensing of all 322 songs would cost literally millions of dollars. even for the most successful artists in the industry, that kind of licensing expenditure isn't possible. further, he makes a broad argument for the idea of fair use. he only samples segments of the music, so he claims (like other rap pioneers, as portrayed in the film) that he should be able to use them in limited forms without licensing fees.

as the film moves on, we see other artists and advocates for gillis' assertion, as well as those who are directly opposed to their point-of-view. one of the chief voices of dissent is the ceo of the mpaa, dan glickman. he argues from a constitutional point-of-view and, generally, along the lines of protecting the content creators. he argues, like others, that if artists and content creators can't rest assured that they will be protected, it will stifle creativity and, in effect, kill the very content that people are stealing.

to me, the greatest voice of reason in the film was lawrence lessig, a law professor at stanford and one of the founders of the creative commons licensing structure (which is basically a licensing model that isn't free, but allows artists to employ licensing that tells consumers that it's ok to use their work in a non-commercial way at their own discretion). lessig's primary argument isn't completely focused on advocating a free-for-all music culture, but he certainly advocates the music industry waking up and realizing that the current copyright laws and licensing models do nothing but stifle creativity and the impede the flow of cultural forms of art and enrichment. most compelling, though, is lessig's very brief history lesson in "content sharing."

he suggests that long ago, in the fledgling phases of printing presses and the book industry, a fervor arose over people sharing and reprinting books. from this cultural and technological debate came the library system. (when he brought up this argument, i laughed because i fairly recently blogged about a quote from doug pagitt where he said that "the library is the napster of book selling." hilarious.) anyway, in essence, lessig suggests that if we were to rewind time to the dawn of public libraries, many people would have, as paggitt suggested, viewed the library system as undermining people who make a living from writing, printing and selling books. when a library singularly buys a book and then starts dishing it out to people for free, you stifle the creative industry of writing and book-making. now, far removed from a society without libraries, that idea seems absurd to us, but it wouldn't have been so absurd at that time—especially if you were an author who needed to pay his or her bills with the revenue from book sales.

what we certainly know and believe, though, is that a society that fosters and makes available forms of art and content that stimulate people's minds and fosters creativity and an inquisitive spirit, we are a much better society. the government spends millions of dollars every year in funding libraries and making people aware of all the free books that are available at their local library.

has sharing books stifled the will and creativity of content creators? absolutely not. there were more books released last year than any other year before. and so was the same in 2007 and 2006 and 2005. there are more authors than ever who released more books than ever. no doubt the print industry, in general, has suffered a little in the last few years, but it isn't because of a lack of content creators.

what's different about an author who writes a book and a musician who creates a song? very little, lessig (and i) would respond. so, the point he is making is that, like the publishing industry, the music industry needs to embrace a new model of distribution and consumption that takes into account the consumer and the technological advances that are never-ceasing.

ok, enough with the analysis of the film and onto the part of the post title that promises my "great confession." i think we all know where i'm headed here, so this climactic moment will be a little anti-climactic.

i download music.

a lot.

oh, i don't mean from itunes or amazon or whatever.

i mean torrents (bit torrent, etc.). torrent being the key word. as in torrential.

now, let me pause and say, for whatever it's worth, that i do actually buy quite a bit of music. i'm not a "only download it for free" kind of person. in fact, i've tried to actually cut down on how much music i buy just because we don't have a lot of discretionary income.

over the years, i've thought a lot about the ramifications of my decision and i've had mixed feelings. now, though, i have fairly solid feelings about it. i've come to the point, for several reasons, that i have no qualms about downloading music. let me list a couple of them.

1. for me, downloading music is a discovery tool and a gateway to becoming a fan. being a person that is constantly on the search for new music, it inherently means consuming a lot of music (be it on blogs or social networks or where ever). i listen to a lot of music. generally speaking, if i hear a song on a blog and it seems ok, i go straight to the artist's myspace page (or comparable site) to hear a little more. if the music further strikes me as something i may like, i will then download their album. it's a discovery process.

what then happens is one of two things. either i am thankful i didn't waste my money on buying an album i didn't like, OR, i am then converted into a fan. the very thing that makes me such an adamant fan of music and a lifelong music consumer is the ability to download music. let me offer a few examples of the impact of downloading and fan conversion by listing a handful of my favorite artists of all time.

ray lamontagne: knowing very little about him, i downloaded his first album, trouble. since that time, i have purchased 4 of his albums, including, in retrospect, trouble.

jenny lewis: after hearing some buzz about a band called rilo kiley, i downloaded their album, more adventurous. since that time, not only have i bought their next album, under the blacklight, but their lead singer, jenny lewis, is one of my favorite artists and have bought both her solo albums.

damien rice: much like lamontagne, i heard a little buzz about this new artists and decided to download his first album, o. since that time, i've become mega-fan and bought 3 of his albums (again, like lamontagne) including o.

brandi carlile: i downloaded her album, the story, knowing virtually nothing about her music (except a clip i heard on a blog). i now eagerly await the follow-up album, which i will buy the morning it comes out.

sheryl crow: here's a little bit of a different scenario, but illustrates another facet to this argument. long before that napster dude ever dreamed about electronic file sharing, sheryl crow was an artist that i had absolutely no interest in. my older brother, though, really liked her. somewhere along the way, i decided to give her another try and burned a copy of her album, tuesday night music club. after hearing more than just the singles, i fell in love and now sheryl crow is an artist who i eagerly anticipate her album releases and typically pre-order them upon their announcement.

these are just a very few examples. i could easily name probably 25 or 30 more artists who "converted" me into being a paying fan through the ability to "obtain" their music from "friends" online.

2. the second primary reason has less to do with me specifically and more to do with the greater society and the culture therein. i won't spend a lot of time explaining it because it's basically the same argument that lawrence lessig laid out in the documentary.

again, it's not the idea that it should just be a free-for-all, but it's that the availability and accessibility of cultural forms of art and thought is necessary for current and future creative innovation and civil progression. now, certainly, "current and future creative innovation and civil progression" isn't completely dependent upon being able to download britney spears albums on bit torrent, but it does certainly mean that when we have a model that encourages creative discovery, we "even the playing field" of creativity and innovative progression. when a cd that cost a couple bucks to produce is being sold for $17, it becomes an exclusive art form. one of the main things that the music industry has done to create this free culture is too effectively say that music is only for people with readily available discretionary income. it becomes a class-dependent commodity—not a form of art that enriches everyone.

now, let me, as i wrap this up (finally) say that there are certainly glaring holes in my reasoning and could be easily argued against. with that said, though, i feel strongly about these issues and have spent a lot of time thinking about them.

so, we'll see where this whole music industry debate goes. my prediction is that in 5 to 10 years, we'll look back at this debate and laugh because music distribution and consumption will look much more like what good copy bad copy and artists like girl talk advocates. i guess we'll see.

good copy bad copy and the great confession, pt.1

(editorial note: i didn't intend for this to be multiple parts, but when my introduction to what i was going to actually blog about became 5 long paragraphs, i thought it might be a good idea to chop this thing up. this first post will set the stage for the second post, which will more adequately fulfill the promise of the post title, good copy bad copy and the great confession.)

a couple weeks ago, an artist who calls himself girl talk (gregg gillis) came onto my radar. since the time of that discovery, i've been listening to his latest album, feed the animals, nonstop. many of you probably have no clue who he is, so let me describe the concept of his music. in essence, it's an album with nothing but samples. in other words, of the 14 tracks on the album, there is absolutely zero original music. every bit of it is an amalgamation of precisely 322 samples. (if you want to see the liner notes where he credits the sampled artists click here. if you want to see a more readable list of the samples, click here. if you want to see a user-compiled list on wikipedia that includes time references to each sample, click here.)

to paint a picture, it could be described as really creative and forward-thinking cheerleader mix music. (please forgive me gregg gillis if you ever read this...) that really dumbs it down, but it gives you an idea of the sound why don't you just listen to a track. it's hard to pick one (because this was all created as one long track and then chopped into individual songs), but here's a particularly good one called what it's all about (which contains samples of phil collins' in the air tonight, the cure's close to me, faith no more's epic, paula cole's i don't wanna wait, wu-tang clan's c.r.e.a.m., and vanilla ice's havin' a roni, to name just a very, very few).

coincidentally, a few days later, a production unit called minty beats released their new mash-up called jaydiohead. as you might be able to guess, it's jay-z meets radiohead. they, much like others producers doing this kind of thing, released it for free on a makeshift website they threw up, which you can find here. a lot of these producers who are following in the footsteps of danger mouse (who i'll get o in a minute) assume that this is just a small undertaking and are putting out some real crap. jaydiohead is not one of these crappy projects. it's really good. i think the key, beyond production quality, is finding two artist that fit together, but yet are still a little ironic to make it interesting. jay-z and radiohead is just that. it just fits. go download it and you can hear it for yourself.

as referenced, danger mouse (of recent gnarls barkley fame) is really the artist who kicked off this whole thing and serves as the inspiration for artists like girl talk and minty beats (and many others). in 2004, as an art project of sorts, he decided to mash-up jay-z's black album (lyrics) with the beatles' white album (music). within a matter of weeks, hundreds of thousands of people downloaded it and it put danger mouse on the map as a producer. it was an incredible musical experience and showed everyone that "repurposed" music was an artform all to itself that is a valuable contribution to music culture.

with the grey album, a music industry firestorm was set off regarding issues of copyright, specifically in terms of repurposing/sampling of music and peer-to-peer file sharing. grey was solely formed from those two albums (no original music) and while it was never sold, it was shared in mass via such networks as limewire, kazaa and bit torrent. emi, who owns the rights to the beatles catalogue, very famously tried to halt the further distribution of the album. with their injunction, it caused web-based file sharing developers to come together and stage "grey tuesday." on that day, in spite of emi's legal threats, this group led the first ever "electronic civil disobedience" and simultaneously posted the album for download for 24 hours. because of this and other complaints, emi retracted their cease-and-desist letter and the album has been able to live on through various websites and peer-to-peer programs.

in my next post, i'll get into some of the implications of the rise of these types of artists, the shifting (or shifted, however you view it) culture of music consumption and then i'll fess up to my role in this file sharing conversation. primarily, i'll be giving my thoughts on a documentary i watched called good copy bad copy that deals with all these very issues. so, check back. i hope to either post part 2 tonight or tomorrow at some point.

2008 in review: it's in the numbers

ok, i know it's more than a week into 2009, but i've been meaning to post this blog since the first couple days of the new year. so, just humor me here people. (by the way, the idea of this post came from rob and you can check his 2008 in numbers here.)

family
5: years of marriage

5: years to further confirm how much i love christen
1: year old is how old lucy turned in may (wow...)
1: kid to start the year
2: kids to end the year
5: days before her due date that olive arrived

3: inches away from lucy being inducted into the 2-foot head club (circumference)...

web
224: blog posts
1.004: posts per day (started may 20)
1: time i edited a post
10: blogs about barack obama
10: times i put off a certain segment of my readership
53: posts under the category of "music" (most of any)
17: unique visitors in may
1,000: (on the dot) unique visitors in december
226: twitter updates
5.79: tweets a day (started dec. 1)

media
170: new (to me) albums
3.26: albums per week
75: % of the albums i listened to maybe once or never
855: albums in itunes library
26.4: days of continuous music in itunes
18: days before getting an iphone

18: days spent in the technological wilderness waiting to get an iphone
171: apps downloaded onto my iphone

3.28: apps per day

112: apps currently on my iphone

9: apps i actually regularly use
18: shows on season pass on tivo
60: movies watched from blockbuster
1.5: movies per week

other
25: pounds lost during tonsillectomy recovery
30: pounds gained after recovery
30: days (give or take) i spent at track before quitting
2: years in a row without a wreck (there's my official jinx...)
10: year high school reunion
0: people who have changed whatsoever from high school
5: western shirts purchased

5: times christen rolled her eyes after purchasing said western shirts
3: (maybe 4) days i've not worn sandals

five songs that will turn you grey...

i had a strange series of events tonight that led me to sharing this equally strange blog. i had been doing a little reading in the book of lamentations which is something i haven't done in quite a while. if you're not familiar with the book, basically, as the name indicates, it's a series of beautiful poems that were written by the prophet jeremiah (scholars believe) in which he laments over the destruction of the first temple.

while the poetry is beautiful, it is also deeply painful and saddening. it's almost as if you get bloodied reading it. it spills out on the pages and brings you into his sorrow and mourning. that's just what poetry does. it shares its heart with those who hear its words.

music spawns from the same space as poetry. often, music's heart is even more raw than poetry because of the addition of instrumentation. i'm a sucker for strings. lyrically, even if a song isn't overtly cry-inducing, if you throw strings in, i'm tearing up before i'm even aware what the artist is saying.

so, with all that said, the strange thing occurred right after reading from lamentations. i got in the car, plugged in my iphone (fm transmitter) and fired up my songs on shuffle. up came 3 of the saddest songs on my iphone—one right after another. in that short drive, i was struck with a thought about sadness.

often, in the church and in "church" music, we relegate our thinking about god to joyous and happy thoughts. it plays into the myth that a life with jesus is a life without sorrow. but, as the book of lamentations so sharply illustrates, we find people in great sorrow and sadness all throughout scripture. people cry out—very poetically—to god in times of darkness and sadness and doubt and anger and pain.

there's something very real and honest about expressions of sadness. when jeremiah exposed his heart, he exposed a truth. music (or poetry or any art form) that only focuses on brightness and happiness lacks truth. sometimes the most raw and ugly things represents the truest sense of beauty.

by all means, i'm not advocating depression as a lifestyle choice or that wallowing in our sadness is a positive thing. much to the contrary. what i'm saying is that when we express our sadness and pain, we are connecting to a great series of saints and prophets and people throughout the biblical narrative. even jesus is included in this list. we find him presented as the "suffering servant" and a "man of sorrows." we find the famous verse in john where we see the empathetic jesus who wept. expressions of sorrow and sadness are truly biblical.

so, let me cut to the chase here. i thought i would share those 3 songs that came up on shuffle (and a couple more for good measure). these are 5 of my favorite sad songs.

**i'm employing a new media player (specifically, yahoo's media player), so i'm testing to see how it works. i think it's pretty cool. just click on the song name to play the track. once it begins, you can pause, adjust the volume, collapse the pop-out player and some other things. let me know if you have any problems.**

5. brandi carlile: cannonball

4. fiona apple: never is a promise

3. damien rice: grey room

2. ray lamontagne: burn

1. don chaffer: leave me alone

a quick note about this song and why it's #1 (beyond the obvious). don chaffer, in the liner notes for the album (which is incredible) says that he wrote this album between the deaths of both his parents (which were about 6 months apart and both from cancer). on top of that mourning, 9/11 occurred, which only added to the sorrow. so, that was the place he was in when he was writing as a form of catharsis. in this song, you can feel his desperation and cold withdrawal. (as one final note, chaffer, since that time, has looked back and said that this was one of the times in his life when he felt god most closely because he says that's all he had at that time—much like the prophets who lamented in the books of the hebrew scriptures.)

ok...now go back to your happy place... :)

doesn't revel when others grovel...

let me first say that i don't have many/any rules for my blog. i try not to censor myself and i try to let it be a free-flowing thought stream, of sorts. other than that, really, i don't have any "rules." as close to a rule as i get, though, is a decision to not talk about work-related matters too much. it's no big deal to talk about general work issues, but i make it a rule to never talk about advertisers (being that i'm an advertising art director at a publishing company) and never talk about co-workers in a way that is denigrating or harmful to work/personal relationships. (as a humorous/not-so-humorous sidenote, there's actually a quasi-term for people who get fired for what they say on their blog. several years ago, heather armstrong coined the term dooced after experiencing just that. so...i shall not do things that lead to my subsequent doocing....) :)

with that said, let me very generically relay a conversation i overheard today at work that really bothered me. basically, i heard a coworker excitedly tell another coworker that one of our competitors was going out of business. with great, arm-waving giddyness—which is far from normal for this person—this coworker told of the demise of this company and how he/she had been waiting for this for a long time.

i couldn't hear the entire conversation (and i thought it might be in my best interest to not be a total jerk of an eavesdropper...), but i believe that was the basic gist of the exchange and that i've been fair in relaying the story.

before i say anything more, let me offer a few a clarifiers. first of all, the person who initiated this exchange is a good person. an honest person. an ethical person. quite possibly, a christian person. i don't know this person extremely well, but i think it's fair to assume this person isn't a vengeful person. where i might go out on a limb, though, is that i believe this person is motivated by something of which i cannot identify (by and large...but i'll get to this in a moment...).

another thing worth mentioning is that i work for a great company full of great people. i am very thankful for my job and the people who i work with. i work with hard working people who are dedicated and talented and, for the most part, people i now consider friends above coworkers. while i've certainly struggled at times with the world of advertising which is so consumeristic and so, when i say these things, they certainly aren't meant to call out the great coworkers by which i am surrounded every day.

ok...there are the caveats...here's the deal...

what greatly disturbed me about the conversation was the value and motivation that seemed to be at play. what seemed to be true in that moment and in the business world in general is the extreme desire to beat others. to enjoy success at the defeat of others. trust me, i'm one of the most competitive people you'll ever meet (which can be to my detriment), but competitiveness is (generally) ok when it comes to playing a game of h.o.r.s.e. or ping pong or trivial pursuit. when it's people's careers and livelihoods and life's work, that's a whole other matter.

scripture speaks to this exchange and this issue.

the very famous 13th chapter of 1 corinthians speaks to an ethic of love that is the ultimate reality. the message beautifully states that

Love never gives up. 

Love cares more for others than for self. 

Love doesn't want what it doesn't have. 

Love doesn't strut, 

Doesn't have a swelled head, 

Doesn't force itself on others, 

Isn't always "me first," 

Doesn't fly off the handle, 

Doesn't keep score of the sins of others, 

Doesn't revel when others grovel...

the last line is a beautiful ethic of empathy and love and mercy. when others fail, we shouldn't rejoice—even if they are our "competitor" or our "enemy." as the songwriting prophet derek webb sings, my enemies are men like me... such powerful and true words.

when i hear that one of our competitors has folded, all i can think is, "when's it our turn?" truly, if our enemies are just like us, then that means our day is coming. it may not be next week or next year or even in my lifetime, but everything has a life cycle. when we become prideful and brash, it only worsens the pain of the inevitable fall.

now, let me just take a moment to point out the fact that, much like others issues i may bring to light here on the blog or any other areas of life, when i point a finger at others, i have 3 pointing back at me. i try not to "revel when others grovel," but i can be the first to take pleasure in others' suffering and lash out when "enemies" enjoy success. now, i would like to think that i don't do it in vindictive ways or in truly important matters in life, but i can certainly identify in certain areas—whether it be as trivial as sports or as grave as the success/failure of other pastors.

the point of all this mad banter is just to say that when we apply an ethic of love and humility and empathy, we certainly don't "revel when others grovel." there is something greater in life than making an extra dollar or winning or being king. be it life or business or relationships, there is something much greater and much more beautiful.

finally, let me just re-emphasize that this isn't to "pick on" or call out my incredible place of employment or my wonderful coworkers. this conversation, like others, was just the launching point for my ever-simmering brain stew of theological ponderings. :)

emergent jesus

as i've pointed out before on here, i'm very thankful to have a wide array of readers. probably half of you enjoy (and look forward to) reading my blogs that focus on theology, whereas probably the other half of you scroll past those long, theological forays. i'm very thankful for the readership diversity.

so, this and what i hope is a series of posts, will probably have very little interest to you all in category 1 who are not really connected to the church, or, more particularly, have no idea what emergent village or the emerging church is. for those of you who do know, though, i hope you will find this as hysterical as i find it.

on twitter, i follow "EmergentJesus." basically, it's a twitter account by someone who claims to be jesus—well, that is, the "emergent" jesus. this is hilarious stuff to someone who identifies and connects with those engaged in the emerging conversation and emergent village, specifically. you know, if you can't laugh at yourself, then you probably need to come down from your self-important pedestal.

i thought i would share some of his latest tweets and i hope to start regularly re-tweeting some of his stuff here on the blog in the future. (if you twitter, you can add him here.)

dec 26: The first command is this: read Rob Bell. The second is to say you are into social justice. In these lie all the Torah and prophets.

dec 31: New Year's resolution #4: read 'The Irresistable Revolution' and then go to Starbucks and tell Suburbanites that they aren't real Christians

dec 31: Getting ready to turn some water into champagne for NYE, although I'd much rather turn it into a local microbrew for my emergent friends!

hilarious stuff. more to come.

in review: the curious case of benjamin button

amazing. incredible. beautiful. moving. fascinating. enrapturing.

what other big and flowery words would you like for me to use?

the list of words could continue, because—if you haven't figured it out yet—this is one of the best movies i've seen in years. my expectations were as high for this movie as any other in a very long time (probably on the same level as the dark knight), so my glowing review says a lot.

it's hard to know where to begin with this movie, but the first thing that comes to mind is the blatant and uncontrollable man-crying that occurred last night. yes people, as i've admitted before on the blog, i'm a cryer. unashamedly, i might add. this movie brought out the waterworks in epic proportions. i won't give away too much of the plot, but let's just say that at this stage of my life—being the father of two beautiful girls under the age of 2—that whenever there's a plot line involving a father and a daughter, i just know that the tear ducts are going to get cleansed at any moment. in this case, with maybe 45 to 30 minutes left in the movie, there was a baby girl introduced and from that point on, i was a sobbing mess.

all joking aside, though, the main point i'm making is that this movie drew in your emotions in a very real and uncontrived way. you fell in love with the characters, but more importantly, you related to the characters in a way that made you live their lives and feel their emotions and care about their cares.

one of the things that i'm always a sucker for (and i've talked about before in other movie reviews) is good cinematography. this movie is a great example of how to beautifully shoot a movie. there was a warmth in just watching it that made you "feel" the visuals. as with other good cinematography, it became another important character in the plot.

one other thing i'll point out is the fact that if these make-up people don't win an oscar or some major award, it will be a crime against film. it goes without saying that making brad pitt and other characters look old was a masterpiece in itself, but i was most impressed by how young they made the characters. being that it was a movie that spanned the entire lifetimes of the main characters, i wondered how they would pull off their young versions. obviously, when they are kids, child actors play the roles. what is so special, though, is that by the time they are teenagers, they aren't played by child actors, but rather, by brad pitt and cate blanchett themselves. we first see cate blanchett portray her character, daisy, at the age of 17 or 18! cate blanchett, who is almost 40 years old, plays an 18 year old and does it very convincingly. brad pitt, in the later years of his life, has the physical features of a teenager. i couldn't believe what brad pitt looked like when we saw him as a teenager. no doubt about it, if we dug up some pictures of brad pitt when he was a teenager, he probably looked like he did in the movie. it was truly amazing.

finally, let me make a note about the main comparison that has been thrown around quite a bit in regard to this movie. the movie forrest gump has been referenced half a million times in the context of reviews of this movie. first, let me say that forrest gump, in an unparalleled fashion, is my favorite movie of all time. i've literally seen it 30 something times and it never gets old to me. so, that made me particularly leery of the comparisons. so when i say that the comparisons are fair and warranted, that should mean something. let me offer some points of contrast, though.

first, whereas the comparisons are warranted, these movies are cut from two different pieces of cloth. forrest gump was primarily a comedy (with obvious dramatic themes) that showed the absurdity of one man's life. forrest told the president he needed to pee, he taught elvis how to dance, he struck it rich in the shrimpin' business. while all these things could be true, they were meant to be almost absurd to show a grander narrative. benjamin button, on the other hand, is based fairly firmly in reality (take away the reverse aging thing). benjamin doesn't do "absurd" things. he does things that were somewhat "normal" (worked on a boat, had relationships with various women, traveled the world), but employed a cast of unique characters (like forrest gump, but, again, with more "realistic" character development).

also, benjamin button, along the same lines as my first contrast, was much more gritty than gump. benjamin slept with a prostitute, he got drunk with worldly seamen and he was very much aware of the "ways of the world." forrest, on the other hand, had an innocent and simple view of the world. whereas forrest had a relationship, it was always based on something utopian and much more simple (not to strip it of all depth, by any means).

finally, whereas button was based in a very real set of historical circumstances and times, that wasn't the point. it isn't to suggest that the "point" of forrest gump was to wallow in time references, the time in which forrest lived was much more of a "character." in button the 50's were simply a reference point for benjamin's story. for gump the 50's told you the story. they set the stage for what forrest was doing and discovering. in gump, you are engaged in a fun and inviting history lesson that takes you and forrest on a journey. in button, you are certainly enthralled with the nuance of the particular decade, but it's much less important that in gump.

so, there's my two cents. i couldn't recommend this movie any more. it's beautiful and moving in such a deep and fulfilling way. go. see. it.

**by the way, in my list of top 10 movies of 2008, i made a disclaimer about movies i haven't had a chance to see. was on that list. easily, this movie goes to #2 on that list. easily. whereas i'm not prepared to put it past the dark knight, i can safely say that it's a very close #2.**

finally! beingryanbyrd.com gets a redesign

after 7 months, i've finally found time (somehow) to redesign my website. in the beginning, i never intended to leave the old design up for any more than maybe a week or two. i just needed to slap something up there, but, as it normally goes, it lived on for 7 months.

**if you're scratching your head, looking around at the old design, then you probably  need to clear your browser's cache. if you don't know how to do that, click here (courtesy of indiana university's website...??...just so happened to pop up in google near the top of the search...) to see a basic guide on how to do it (don't worry...it's ridiculously simple and painless).**

you'll quickly notice a lot of new stuff, but let me point some of them out:

1. sidebar: this will help you to use my website in a more functional way

2. search bar: thanks to our friends at google, you can now search my site. want to find if i've ever used the words "your" of "face" or maybe "your face"...well, now you can do that.

3. family pics/bio: want to know what i look like or want to know a little bit more about my incredibly beautiful family. well, now you can.

4. twitter: wanna see my 6 latest posts to twitter? you can now do that in the sidebar.

5. current albums: see what 2 albums are in current heavy rotation in my itunes. i hope to change these out often...but i'm trying to be realistic about it...

6. categories: want to know everything i've written about lucy or read my reviews or want to know my thoughts on the iphone? you can now do that easily.

7. archives: see what i was writing about in june or november or any month you so choose.

8. contact page: it has been simplified and is much more functional

9. readability: i've changed the font and font color so that it's easier to read. 8 point gray century gothic isn't too friendly on the eyeballs. this should be better.

10. load time: ok, this may or may not be good. i'm going to have to see how it goes. it probably loads a little slower because of more content, BUT, i've limited the # of posts on a page to 10 instead of 15, so that should help.

alright, as with any new website or redesign, there's going to be some kinks to work out. i've tried to do thorough testing, but i know i missed some stuff. let me know if you run into any problems.

don't forget: reset your browser's cache!!