New Kid in Town

I've been vaguely following the story about a game called Bully. This game is produced by Rockstar Games, the infamous creators of the Grand Theft Auto series. Simply the title and the producers seems to be enough to set off the ire of people, as the revered Jack Thompson, personal litigator for the families to bent on actually raising their kids to take the time to raise and outcry, has began prosecuting Rockstar to have it banned based on a Florida law.

Now the issue to me seems that none of the people objecting seem to know much about the game. They hear 1)Rockstar and 2)game called Bully and start screaming like a bunch of rabid howler monkeys fighting over the last banana. Add that there's actually fisticuffs and you got a near riot on your hands. Now, I haven't played it, and I really won't have a chance, not having any gaming systems it's not that surprsing that I don't play ANY video games anymore. But I have read some stuff about the game, and it seems to me that Bully is an ironic title, as the premise seems to be closer to the movie My Bodyguard. The big thug kid who, though not an angel, isn't a bully so much as he faces down the real bullies who are picking on the geeks and the girls.

I don't know, maybe I'm mistaken, but this doesn't seem to be a game like GTA: San Andreas, of which I can understand the objections, or even Doom, rather it's a rather mild, action, beat 'em up style game with a unique twist of actually accomplishing worthwhile. Who knows though, I could be wrong.

This is the body of Christ?

This story has me pretty irritated. This group, it seems, just likes making Christianity look awful. Really really awful. You know, I thought the point of Chirstianity was spreading the love of Christ to all the world. Apparently this group thinks it's better suited to offend people and ruin a healing process.

Don't get me wrong, their entitled to their views of why people are dying. They may even have something. But ruining a families moment is probably the worst way to make that point. Instead of winning people to their point of view, their alienating everyone who hears about them as they are being offensive. It's just awful. It's got me so irritated I can't even say anything more about it. Ugh

A small task

I lead a session in a middle school youth retreat a week ago. It was really good, we talked about the top 10 lies and cop-outs in dating and relationships. I think it went well, I think the youth listened, learned, all that stuff. It was fun.

What's a little more scary is in a couple of weeks I'm leading again at the high school retreat. But this time I'm doing two sessions, and the first is on what it means to be a man. Geeze, I'm supposed to cover in a 45 to 60 minute session something grown men in their 80s never figure out sometimes. I'm supposed to cover in an hour a subject that has huge numbers of books devoted to it.

And of course, any session on men, has to have a bit on women. After all, the whole session is true love waits. And to understand any of it you have to understand first what it means to be a man, then what it means to be a woman, then everything that goes on between them. That's the basic approach the whole session takes, but it's kind of dautning to think I'm going to have to tell these guys where they need to grow, what it really means to be a man.

So I've been praying. Praying and reading. It's no secret that I really think a lot of the book Wild at Heart by John Eldredge. I recently reread that and am near the end of the women's book Captivating by John and Stasi Eldredge. This has been a good source for organizing my thoughts, but the problem still is that it's so much to fit in. How am I supposed to exlain in an hour the three things a man craves, that we have a question about success, and that we are all wounded, that we must over come this woundedness, that we must offer our strength, real strength, to our women. How am I supposed to explain the wondrous mystery of woman hood? It's all a bit much, but I hope ti will work out well, with the Father's help.

It's all about the attitude

I've been thinking a lot about attitude and reaction. One of mybiggest conclusions has been that I am responsible for them. I know most of you are saying "Well duh," but hear me out. How many of you are like me and have felt offended? Or bored? Or disinterested? Those are what I'm talking about.

It all comes down to choice. I choose to be offended. I choosed to be disinterested. Granted, somethings are easier to take offense at, but in the end it's my choice. This means that being offended can even be a sin. Man have I failed if that's true. This means being aloof is a sin, again, guilty. Geez, this is a nasty train of thought, really. But it's only logical. If I am responsible for me, despite all the influences and temptations, then I am responsible for my emotions. God has called me to love, therefore anything other than that such as anger, offense, resentment, disgust, are lack of love. Not obeying God, i.e. loving those around me, is sin, so those poor attitudes are sin. Makes my whole teenage years look like a cesspool, doesn't it? And it's not like I'm doing super well at the moment either.

What it all boils down to is I'm responsible more and more for myself. The deeper my spiritual walk gets, the more I realize how awful I am. Funny isn't it? The closer to God I get, the more astute my sense of just how screwed up I am gets?

We are His people and the sheep of His pasture.

It seems I'm married. It is simultaneously a simple change and an enormous addition. It barely seems my life has changed, and yet it's so profound. My mind says simply "Of course I'm married, what else would I have done?" and yet there's so much more. No one told me it was so pleasant to wake up with her there beside me. My mind is simultaneously serene and chaotic. It's a sort of blissful dream I'm in, and I hope to never awake.

However, a trip back to Russia awaits us at the end of the week, and shortly thereafter "real life" renews. I'm excited, but also a bit disappointed. The honeymoon was/is great (technically I say we're still not in Russia, so we're on our honeymoon), and it's kind of disappointing to leave it behind. Yet God has called us on. We've rejoiced in the newness of one another, and we'll continue to rejoice in it. But there is work to be done. He has called us to do His work, and we're not about to get in His way. In fact it is the honor of serving him that inspires us, that is the central part that has made our relationship work so far. It is God and his provision that has taken us to the seemingly impossible point of being Husband and Wife. So how can we not serve the One who has brought us so far?

Up up and away!

I saw superman the other day. It was pretty good, but at the same time disappointing. I guess I remember the originals to much, and think to much of the original ideals of superman. Truth, Justice, The American Way. A person of the highest moral standards. Well not this superman! Warning: SPOILER AHEAD. Don't get me wrong, he still always tells the truth. He puts his life on the line for everyone. Yet...he has a kid. That's right, apparently Lois Lane had the son of Kalel. Oh, she plays it off as the son of her fiance (who she lives with) but by the end everyone (except maybe the fiance and the boy himself) knows it's Superman's. Okay, it DOES follow Chirstopher Reeves' Superman timeline, it is a continuation. So theoretically they WERE married in Superman II, but then again, that would be one tremendous gestation period. Or, more likely, the engaged in extra-marital relations. Sad, just sad. There's also the lack of "The American Way" in the movie. There's no tribute to America. No US flag anywhere, which there WERE in the first four at least once in the movie, if I recall correctly. I just wish Hollywood could get it RIGHT. Superman is a hero for the world, but USA is his home. There's nothing bad about that, it just is true. Then there was the rating, PG-13. How many 6 year olds missed the show their parents really wanted the to see because they weren't allowed to see such a strong rating?

Now, really, I did enjoy the film. And it had some great Christ analogies, but it was lacking in areas that were really sad to miss out on as they are the core, to, of who superman is.

Superproblems

Parallels between the US and Russia are amusing to me. Not the social ones, those are just interesting. No it's the politics.

Both nations seem to find themselves suddenly at a loss in the international political realm. U.S. has lost a lot of its support not from 'Criminal Wars' like Iraq (as some would suggest) or 'being a bully' but because Communism fell. Communism is nothing more than a couple of dictatorships. That's what they really are now, China isn't communist, it's a dictatorship with semi-control over it's economy. So, the U.S. finds that it can't just say jump and see whole continents flying up in the air.

Similarly, Russia finds itself in an awkward place. After the fall of communism, Russia had a pretty little economic decline (read recession/collapse/currency explosion). Now they managed to right themselves with the help of soaring oil prices. Now they feel tough, and are trying to reassert their muscles against the west. The problem is, the ones they use to hold under their protective wing are now telling them to kiss off and mind their own business. They had a decade or two without to much russian oversight, and they're doing just fine thank you. But Russia doesn't like that, so they're using their new found economic and energy power to be a bully. Which is, of course, endearing their neighbors and the rest of the world to Russia.

Now throw things like Iran, terrorist-Islam, the EU as an almost coherent socio-economic entity, Iraq, rising oil prices, and Michael Moore* into the mix and you have a mess. The line isn't as simple anymore. There's less us versus them to clearly show the path, the waters are now muddy...and most of it's mud you'll sink waist deep into if you take a wrong step. Isn't life fun?

*I added the Michael Moore comment just for fun, he's not really more than an annoyance, no where near being a real problem.