the view from her

If you're one of those people (and I am) who attempts to read the Bible through each year, right now you're dragging yourself through Leviticus or Numbers. But you may also be relieved to be past all the enemy-smiting, and putting to death of men, women and children, and punitive judgements demanded by an angry God. (Who is that guy?) It reminds me of an episode of Friends, where Phoebe explains the Bible something like this: "In the Old Testament God's really pissed, and the New Testament is love everybody."

It doesn't seem like we hear much about the angry God. Or why, exactly He might be "pissed." Churches don't seem to teach from the Old Testament very often. We don't talk much about God's immutable quality of Holiness. We are far more comfortable with Jesus, who taught about love. Jesus Himself said He would call us friends (John 15:15). Being friends with God is cool (not to mention way easier to live with). But what kind of friendship do you have with someone you don't really know?

My friend Elizabeth and I have lunch once a month or so. Not a big deal. Now what if I told you this was Elizabeth, the Queen of England? Her effort at friendship would have an entirely different meaning because of who she is. (It's really not a great example, because we all understand that as a human, she's pretty much the same as you and I.) What makes Jesus' offer of friendship so stunningly jaw-dropping is recognizing what it really means. It means the angry, punitive Old Testament God who is perfect and Holy (not like us at all, really) has changed all the rules so we can be friends with Him. You have to understand the "Old Testament" God to fully appreciate the new relationship established with Him through Jesus.

As you're probably already aware, Dan Brown's best-selling novel The DaVinci Code will be coming to theaters in March. The book made a lot of Christians uncomfortable, because as historical fiction, the historic context seems to give a sort of credibility to its fiction. But my question is, why don't more Christians know the difference?

I'm not going to beat around the bush. I think church leadership is responsible. Where else would the average Christian learn the difference between fact and fiction if not at their local church? The pastor, or pastors are generally educated at a Bible school or seminary, where they learn about church history and authenticity of the Bible - two vital elements of faith. Yet very little of this information ever gets transmitted to the church body.

It may be because the local church is so busy trying to be "relevant." We focus on bringing in non-believers with clever sermon series, and hip media. We rarely stop to consider that in aiming only for non-believers with the Gospel, we set the bar at the lowest common denominator, and provide a steady diet of milk for everyone. Perhaps it's time to raise the bar, to start providing meat for dinner and challenge believers to actively learn about their faith. That would require a church to shift its focus to discipling. (A much harder number to quantify, by the way.) Devoted disciples who are equipped and educated can and should share the Gospel, and will not be afraid to have a conversation about the latest best-seller or Hollywood movie.

Sony pictures has faced the controversy head-on by creating a website for discussion called the Davinci Dialogue. The site features articles from prominent writers and scholars from both sides of the controversy.

A little church in southern California is also leaning in and equipping its body for the controversy. A three-ring binder with pre-printed notes for the entire series is provided. This pastor has obviously done his homework. But what I appreciated most were his comments the first week. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, "I'm not here to arm you...we're not going to war over a movie. I'm equipping you with what you need to know to have a conversation about fact and fiction." You have to know your Bible and why you believe. Then you'll be ready to give an answer - with gentleness and respect (1 Peter 3:15).

I'm not a big fan of online dating, although I'm not opposed to it. I tried it for over a year, and for me it was a little bit like learning to golf: far too much time, mental effort, energy, and expense expended for very little reward. Still, I try to keep track of new developments and information that might be valuable to singles. Or at least provide some entertainment.

The first obstacle you have to overcome is how to choose a dating service. Different sites have very different "personalities," so of course you want to make sure you register with one that promotes opportunities to get to know each other, and not just "hook up." Websites like Dating Web Review provide information about various online dating sites.

Conveniently, a whole host of new websites are bringing accountability to men who might, well...lie about who they are. It's like "a dating credit report for women." And don't despair gentlemen, there's at least one site that also reports women who "misrepresent" themselves. So now you can google your prospective date, run a background check, credit check, and previous internet dating history check. I thought technology was supposed to make our lives easier.

I'll leave you with an article from Relevant Magazine. While shopping online supposedly makes it easier to find a soul mate...um, wait. Where exactly is the concept of a soul mate in the Bible? I think that is nowhere. In fact, the writer argues that with online dating fees, we may actually be Selling Our Soul Mate. He says, "...I’m not buying the soul mate theory, and...I’ve never paid an internet site that knows nothing about me $49.95 to find my soul mate from a list of women that have also paid $49.95...'The one' we should be looking for is Jesus, and then He’ll help us change so that we could make a marriage work with whomever."

As a blog dedicated to issues relevant to women, singles, and evangelicals, (not necessarily in that order) I frequently post about the topic of sex. Last week, I wrote about a campaign called Pure Sex. My friend Bonnie, somewhere in the arctic hinterlands of New York, was kind enough to link to it. And the reason I'm telling you, (aside from the fact that she calls me "the wonderful Jan") is this - and singles must take note! She seems to imply that married people do not have perfect sex. Apparently, that is simply a myth. So be encouraged! Marriage alone does not automatically assure the fulfillment of Hollywood's romance fantasies. (To which I must say - thank God!)

Now if you're a single living alone, you may suspect that even bad sex may be better than no sex. Thank you for transitioning to today's topic: Smart sex. Which of course implies there might be such a thing as dumb sex. Which we all know does exist, either from personal experience (what was I thinking?) or because we've observed a friend (what was he/she thinking?).

The National Review Online posts an interview with Jennifer Roback Morse, author of Smart Sex: Finding Life-long Love in a Hook-up World. (HT: Impacted Wisdom Truth) Ms. Morse taught economics at Yale and George Mason University, and takes a refreshingly practical look at today's views of sex and marriage. I don't know her personal religious beliefs, but when asked if her views sounded "conservative" she replied, "Is it 'conservative' to want marriage to last? I actually think that most people want life-long married love. If you ask divorced people, 'gee, was that fun? Would you like to do that again?' I doubt you'd have many takers."

She succinctly summarizes the problem with casual sex.

"I think the key is that everyone wants to matter, especially to their sex partners. We have created a world in which we treat sex as a private recreational activity, with no moral or social significance. But when sex is a recreational activity, my partner becomes a consumer good. And we all know what we do with consumer goods that cease to satisfy: We get rid of them. In this world of consumer sex, it is socially acceptable to use other people. But no one really wants to be used."

And it follows us into marriage:

"The hook-up mentality that treats people as objects is hard to overcome. We enter into our married lives with someone we hope and believe is very special and views us as special. But often, we've been practicing having sex as if it didn't matter. Sex is a toy and the other person is an object. It takes some time, and I think, some deliberate thought, to overcome the habits we create in that environment."

I encourage you to read the entire article. We can all be encouraged by her conclusion: "Married sex is smart sex."

As many people do on a holiday weekend, I decided to see a movie on Monday. My nephew, recently returned from Iraq and staying with me temporarily, went with me. We decided to see 8 Below, a Disney adventure movie. Which unfortunately was sold out. My nephew gallantly suggested we just see the next available movie, which turned out to be Nanny McPhee.

Well. If you're a kid, you probably would love the wild, cartoon colors, the animals dressed up in clothes, and outrageous antics. If you're an adult, there's at least one scene in the movie that's just for you. (It involves Colin Firth in very close proximity to a woman, and an electric shock.) If you're an adult who's also a writer, you may wonder how such a talented writer as Emma Thompson can start at Point A, head towards logical conclusion Point B, and end up somewhere random like Point L.

Warning: the following article "is rated PG-13, for adult situations, mild sexual content and lusty spiritual metaphors." The Chicago Sun-Times writes about the Bible's Song of Songs, also known as the Song of Solomon. It also refers to a CD which sets some of this, well...sexy prose to music, titled "The Original Love Songs: Guidelines for Passion from the Song of Solomon." I realize it's too late for Valentine's Day, so think of its potential as an excellent May Day or Memorial Day gift.

Guy Bickel, of Tampa, Florida, says he "had no idea the Bible could be so sexy," and put music to the famous verses to create the perfect anniversary gift for his wife. The CD includes a pamphlet titled "Rules for Men and Suggestions for Women," written by David Clarke, a psychologist. Clarke says bringing God "into the bedroom" will "ignite the flame of passion and keep it burning forever."

The Sun-Times writer seems as nonplussed as I was by the notion of bringing God into the bedroom. This is the surprise of Solomon's famous song. I mean, think about it. Reading through the Bible, you plow through biblical stories of plagues, plunder, and judgement. Then you hit "God it would be better if I'd never been born" Job, then the Psalms - poetry about everything from personal remorse to enemy-smiting. Then a few hundred wise sayings. Then "life is completely meaningless and we all just die anyway" Ecclesiastes. And THEN, just before the prophets start raging about whores and judgement, comes this little, rather explicit book about (shhh!)...sex! What was God thinking? Well He was, of course, giving us a reminder - all these thousands of years later when sex is tired and cheap and mechanical and meaningless - of the celebration that sex was meant to be. And that is a surprise to those who consider the Bible an outdated fun-buster of rules and "thou shalt nots." God really does love surprises.

My favorite quote: "…from the fourth chapter of the Song of Solomon:
Awake, O north wind, and come, O south wind!
Blow upon my garden that its fragrance may be wafted abroad.
Let my beloved come to his garden and eat its choicest fruits.
Oh, behave!"

I was explaining to a friend of mine all the new technology that has sprung up to service the relatively new world of blogs. Or the Blogosphere, as we now call it. And I got to thinking about all the new words we now use regularly that didn't even exist a few years ago.

iPod. Podcasting. MP3. Instant Messaging (formerly known as Morse Code, via the Telegraph, which is, by the way, now literally history). It's also used as a verb: "Just IM me.") Phishing. Google. (also a verb: "I googled it.") Uploading and downloading. And of course the word "blog" itself, short for Weblog. Root of Blogosphere.

And, there are some old words which have been given entirely new meanings. Streaming. Broadband. Wireless, Wi-Fi, and airports. (We all know what an airport is, right?) Search engines. SPAM. (Don't you love Monty Python!?) Spiders and cookies. (um...yuck.) Blackberries. Spyware, firewalls and virus protection. My mother used to rub Vics Vapo-Rub on my chest and called it virus protection back in the day.

I didn't even attempt acronyms (DSL, USB). Nevertheless, I'm quite sure this list is incomplete, so feel free to improve it.

Finally. A church that can talk about sex in a frank, open, normal ("seemed like a good idea at the time") sort of way. Granger Community Church in Indiana starts a new series titled "Pure Sex." Watch the promo at My Lame Sex Life.com.

As a blog concerned with issues relevant to singles and believers, the topic of sex comes up here rather frequently. Or, to be more accurate, the ever-unpopular and rather embarrassing-to-admit philosophy of not having it - sex - as a single. This belief I hold can create a chasm between me and my non-believing friends that seems uncrossable. Inviting them to church doesn't help, when the explanation is generally along the lines of "Sex is a beautiful thing, created to be good, BUT ONLY in the confines of marriage AND ONLY between a man and a woman!!" You often detect a distinct note of alarm that somebody, somewhere is having unauthorized sex.

The "because the Bible says," and "it's just not good for you" arguments can come across as empty and irrelevant. We all do things that aren't good for us. The casual wording of "my lame sex life" pulls the shiny wrapping paper off the "sex is fun, meaningless and required to live" marketing. It acknowledges that many people are unhappy with their sex life but they can't figure out why. It puts us on the same side - people who want loving relationships that work and meaningful sex. It comes alongside, understanding, not condemning. And that is a more comfortable place for a non-believer to be, when considering some of life's most important issues.

Read more from Granger's Communications pastor, Tony Morgan - who blogs!

I've written before about the trend towards celebrating trash - clothing, drinking, lifestyle - in our culture. Civil people with manners and any degree of modesty or discipline are simply ignored or laughed off the stage. The world is upside down.

I came across a Maclean's article called "Girls Gone Raunch." In it, they review a book by Ariel Levy titled Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture. They wonder "how, in the past decade, the culture has become infused with what Levy describes as porn or red-light aesthetics and values, which used to be confined to the tawdry outer limits of girlie mags, adult films and strip clubs but have now become part of everyday life." Watch any television show that involves dancing to see every woman moving in the same, identical, hip-grinding, strip-club pole-dancing style. You have to wonder why, after years of feminism and so much professional progress, women are willingly conforming to such a narrow, unoriginal definition of sexuality. "Sex is one of the most interesting things we as human beings have to play with," writes Levy, "and we've reduced it to polyester underpants and implants. We are selling ourselves unbelievably short." That is an unbelievable understatement.

And yet, when asked what her solution is to a culture that is both hyper-sexualized and hyper-commercialized, she says "Ultimately it is...instilling in young women a sense of the value of their humanity." Which made me think of the new Dove ad, which debuted on the Superbowl this year. If it were so easy to infuse females of any age with the value of knowing how beautiful we really are, frankly we'd all do it. But a double-standard never works. Little girls watch TV, they see the Victoria's Secret ads, they watch sitcoms that snicker at porn. This is where they learn what our culture values. It is up to the adults, as always, to model what's really important. Do we want children to know they can be trashy and proud of it? Or perhaps they should know they are fearfully and wonderfully made - that every day of their precious life was written in detail before the first day even started.

Here it is: Valentine's Day. Known as Black Tuesday to some of my single friends. Also known as "National Singles Awareness Day" over at Solo Femininity, who helpfully provides some survival tips. My two favorites are "Watch only action films or documentaries until late February," and "Repeat after me, 'Chocolate is NOT the solution to all my problems.'"

A list of survival tips is exactly what you need to successfully pass the final holiday in the Singles' holiday Trifecta, according to Coloring Outside the Lines. She has some great, simple perspective on spending the day solo.

And finally, Joe Carter at Evangelical Outpost writes boldly in the interest of single women everywhere by encouraging and explaining to single men how to write a love letter. I wonder if we should thank Mrs. Carter, who may have had a small part in explaining the relative value of Valentines' gifts: flowers, chocolate - okay, but not much effort required; hand-written letter - an obvious metaphor for the effort one is willing to put into the relationship.

But whatever you end up doing today, remember that you are lavished with love. And it is higher than expensive perfume, longer than long-stemmed roses, and deeper than dark chocolate.

I'm done with Valentine's Day. Not in the sense that I've given up on it, but more along the lines of - been there, celebrated that, nothing left but the blogging. Every year for the last four or five years, I've celebrated a Valentine's Day that is the envy of all - single or married - who hear of it. I'll tell you about it, and perhaps it will give you some ideas for next year.

It starts with Daniel and Teresa, a married couple without children, gifted in hospitality. They spend an entire day painstakingly preparing a five or six-course gourmet meal. They carefully match champagne or a particular wine with each course. Eight priviledged guests - singles only - are invited to join them for a California version of Babette's Feast. It's an extravagant gift. We linger over each course, savoring every bite, each subtle flavor. The dinner can last from three to four hours. Guest ages range from 25 to 50 - and that is of no consequence, as we talk, laugh hilariously, interact, enjoy being together.

And somewhere between courses, Daniel casually passes a basked of homemade poppyseed rolls, and says that it was a dinner just like this, on the night that Jesus was betrayed, when He said, "this is my body - broken for you." Among friends, warm and comfortable, with the echo of laughter still lingering in the air, we celebrate communion.

I wonder when we decided Communion had to be a somber, introspective experience? The last supper happened during the Passover celebration. I imagine there was food and wine and laughter and story-telling. Just being together. Joy. The first communion.

And so, during a Valentine's dinner party, we celebrated Communion - a Noun, the sacrament symbolizing the spiritual union we share with Christ. We also celebrated communion - a Verb, relating and interacting with each other on a level rarely achieved in today's hectic, interrupted world. And it seems to me good to have both, in honoring a day dedicated to love.

It's a fairly common assumption that television is bad for us. And I guess there may be some truth to that...

Married people should take note of the adverse affects of television.

A man in the UK turned his TV off for five years. When he finally switched it back on, he was shocked that "So much of it seemed not just vulgar and obsessed with sex but altogether more confrontational than I had remembered." (This in just the last five years.) He was concerned about the "mind-numbing, witless vulgarity" of reality shows. And, he pointed out, "This is not just bad television in the sense that it is mediocre, pointless, puerile even," he said. "It is bad because it is damaging. It erodes the distinction between the public and the private...it turns human beings into freaks for us to gawp at." Yes, but there's just so much money to be made from gawping at witless, vulgar freaks.

And finally, the ultimate proof that watching too much television really is bad for you.

Conundrum: noun. 1. a problem that is difficult or confusing to deal with.

I have one. And it has to do with respect for church leadership. Here's my conundrum: God places the leaders in our church. God also uses complete screw-ups to lead (Abraham lied, Jacob lied, David had an affair and murdered the woman's husband). In today's church, we generally have systems in place to deal with such blatant types of sin. But what about less blatant sin? What about just plain selfishness? Meanness? Disregard for feelings and gifts and callings? Do the ends justify the means? Since I happen to know that at least one pastor, some seminary students and assorted wise thinkers visit this blog, I'm counting on all of you to help me figure this out.

I believe God calls me to respect the leaders of my church. But riddle me this, Batman: how do I reconcile this call for respect with leadership that, while of course fallible and human, also seems willfull in compromising values to have its own way? The blessing and curse of the megachurch is its single charismatic and visionary leader.

Meanwhile, I found refuge at a peaceful little planet orbiting the blogosphere. Tempus Fugate writes a wise post about the real role of leadership. You should read all of it. He says, "…Jesus warned His disciples that in God’s reality leadership serves a vastly different function than it does in the world. The crux of this difference is because spiritual leadership is not based on management…Those who have been called to effective leadership know there is an inherent conflict between spiritual authority and institutional power…The Gospel portrait of leadership doesn’t portray leadership as the power to command, but instead it is the passion to serve others." I can respect that.

There's been a lot of discussion about Bono's speech at the National Prayer Breakfast last week. Christians are, I think, understandably suspicious when the celebrities of this world declare allegiance to the Kingdom of God. But it seems to me we tend to take up one of two positions. Either we gushingly accept them as if they were, well...rock stars, or we suspiciously critique their every word and deed against a strict standard of discipleship. Most recently Ann Rice comes to mind. A bit further back, Jane Fonda. I wonder if there might be a more moderate approach to judging the veracity of the celebrity spiritual experience.

The majority of Christian bloggers seem to take a positive view of Bono and his recent speech. For the record, I am one. If you haven't read the speech yet, you should. It is a beautiful piece of writing, and an inspiring challenge to be about God's business.

There are some bloggers who thoughtfully disagree. Randy Bohlender thinks both the President and Bono are wrong. Slice of Laodicea says, "I guess this is as good as the Evangelical church can do now. A vulgarity spewing rock star of a prophet who doesn't believe that only Christians will make it to heaven."

The Bible gives a clear measurement for testing a true believer. They'll know us by our love. And by our fruit. This easily eliminates promiscuous rock stars and rappers buried in bling who, upon receiving awards, thank their lordandsaviorjesuschrist. Personally, on technicality alone I think it may eliminate Pat Robertson, who while meeting our strict standards of discipleship, spends more time of late using his celebrity to besmirch Christianity than effecting any real impact on the world.

This is still, two thousand years later, the same debate between Pharisees and the law versus Jesus and His message of radical love. I consider the fruit of Bono's life (what little I know of it). He is throwing the full weight of his celebrity into the cause of the poor and needy. He courageously used the forum of the prayer breakfast to radically challenge leaders with a spiritual message. Do you and I take such advantage of opportunities we may have to speak to challenge people for God's work? Bono may not perfectly live the Christian life, but do any of us? And I wonder how your Christian life or mine would look to others if we had to live it under a constant spotlight? Bono seems to me to be a believer who is wonderfully human, wrestling with faith, struggling with undeserved grace, and living in this world for the purpose of another.

The A.P. story begins, "They are the Pentagon's new "rules of engagement" _ the diamond ring kind." The U.S. Army has implemented a new program aimed at helping troops choose the right spouse. Issues such as lengthy deployments and life-altering injuries place a huge strain on relationships. Apparently a generation of free love and no responsibility has left many young people unequipped to deal with these strains.

According to the AP article, the lovestruck are encouraged not to let sexual involvement exceed the level of commitment or level of knowledge about the other person. And, those considering marriage are advised to study a potential partner's F.A.C.E.S. - family background, attitudes, compatibility, experiences in other relationships, and skills he or she brings to the current relationship. That is dating 101, right there. Well done, Army.

It appears we are finally acknowledging what our grandparents knew. Life can be hard, and emotions don't get you very far. You must exercise care in choosing a marriage partner. And you better have your mind made up about what's important, and how you intend to approach life with another person because hard things will happen.

In a generation where truth is relative, and the optimal goal for a relationship is an effortless "soul mate" and the whole thing works only as long as "it's right for us," reality is finally creeping back in. Newsflash: relationships take work. More importantly, some of that work can be mitigated by making a substantial effort in the beginning to actually get to know a person. I salute the Army for coming up with Relationship Basic Training. Now all we need is a sort of Relationship Boot Camp to really prepare couples for marriage.