A phrase never good to utter—
“I would have made that catch thirty years ago.”

Some of our guys who are in their 20s have started a church softball team. They invited/allowed me to play on the team. Our first game is not until June 15; however, we have already had a couple of practices.

I must confess, I began this endeavor with some trepidation. I have not played softball since 1998. So, I did not know what to expect. Nonetheless, it has not been so bad trying to get the hang of it again. I have been pleasantly surprised.

Still, I have noticed a few things that have changed. Last Sunday, we were taking batting practice and the defenders out in the field would take whatever position they wanted. I moved around quite a bit, including spending some time in the outfield. I've always enjoyed the outfield.
It was a hot Sunday afternoon and somebody sent a screeching line drive over my head. I gave it a halfhearted effort and let it go.

Then I had a flashback. My mind traveled back to the summer of 1979. I had just graduated from high school. Some of the guys from church and I went out to the softball field and played softball. And, I can remember the joy I felt as I tried to go after every ball in the field, the more impossible to catch, the better. Let me tell you, I made some GREAT catches that day.

I no longer have that motivation. Thus, as I let the ball go over my head, with minimum effort to catch it, I uttered the remark, "I would've made that catch 30 years ago." One our twenty-somethings replied, "The woman who gave birth to me was 10 years old 30 years ago." Smart Aleck! I won't be surprised if I show up to our first ballgame and find a rocking chair with my name on it.

You Might Sing That

Let it never be said that we don't have worship services on Sundays that are not inspirational. I overheard my youngest daughter singing last Sunday afternoon one of the songs that she heard during the public assembly. She sang this refrain, "I exhaust thee.” I think she meant to sing, "I exalt thee." However, I think it is possible that what she was singing would at times be descriptive.

Frost/Nixon

I got to see Frost Nixon at last. While I cannot recommend the movie since it is rated R for occasional, really bad, words (which were words these men involved definitely spoke in real life), I can say I’ve found it very interesting. It was definitely an embellishment as these types of movies typically are. Anytime you compress into two hours an ongoing drama, you are bound to have a synthesis not totally reflective of the truth. Moreover, you will often find composite characters. Still, I found this movie much better than many.

The worst I have ever seen, when it comes to historical accuracy, is the movie Inherit the Wind—all three versions. Inherit the Wind is a thinly disguised retelling of the story of the Scopes Monkey Trial, which took place in Dayton, Tennessee in 1925. The screenwriters of Frost /Nixon are like biblical writers full of the Holy Spirit compared to those who wrote Inherit the Wind. (Incidentally, Summer for the Gods by Edward Larson is the best resource I have ever found on the Scopes Monkey Trial. It won the Pulitzer Prize for History in 1998.)

As for Frost/Nixon, I found David Frost’s own account of this—I Gave Them a Sword—to even be interesting. While the movie seems more in line with Frost’s version of the story, as Hollywood goes, I thought the movie was pretty even-handed in its telling.

Preaching in the 21st Century

When I am preaching, the current of church culture drags me along the channel of only one of our five senses. Guess which one it is? The sense of hearing. There is a problem with this, however. It is an open secret not everybody learns best by hearing. Some people are visual learners (sense of sight), while others are primarily experiential learners (any or all of the five senses.) As we discussed last week, in Scripture, God demonstrated that He knew this fact better than any human.

This week, I want to focus on a different tact. I want to demonstrate how God demonstrates his understanding of learning styles just in the way he encouraged His biblical writers to write scripture. A quick glance of Scripture reveals a remarkable variety of literature styles.

Take the book of Exodus. You start out with a story in chapter one, or what some call narrative. In chapter six, you have factual information with the census. For us, that may seem boring; however, to the Jew, it was an important source of data. The writer in chapter 15 shares with us a song. In chapter 20 and following, you have laws and legal issues, which is a distinct style of writing. Now, I have just shared four styles of literature with you, and that’s just from the book of Exodus.

Consider the book of Psalms. You find there beautiful and challenging poetry. Look at the book of Proverbs. There you have, well, proverbs. Move over to Jeremiah. You have prophetic preaching, you have oracles, and you have narrative.

What about the New Testament? First, you’ve got the Gospels. Even within them, you will find portions of poetry, riddles and parables. You have letters such as those of the Apostle Paul. Maybe the most famous style of biblical writing is called apocalyptic.

In both the Old Testament and new, you will find a genre of literature that emphasis symbols. This style is found in portions of books such as Ezekiel, Daniel, the gospels, and Acts. It is especially found in a book of the New Testament. As a matter of fact, the Spanish name for this book is a derivative of the word “apocalyptic.” The book is called—Revelation.

Note the diversity of literature styles. Why did God inspire these? Because he knows that humanity is diverse. I love narrative. As a book, Psalms is not nearly so appealing to me. Others love the Psalms. We’re different!

I have been sensing for years that we should not appeal to only one learning style in our preaching. Moreover, I shared with you one who shares in my views, Rick Blackwood, who wrote the book, THE POWER OF MULTI-SENSORY PREACHING AND TEACHING. One point he emphasizes in his book is multisensory preaching and teaching is our best hope to cultivate a love for scripture in the younger generations. I completely agree. The key to preaching in the twenty-first century is not to jettison scripture. Rather, we must present God’s Word in a way that is best understood by more people. People are not rejecting Scripture; people are rejecting lectures.

For what it is worth, a few weeks ago, I wrote a memo to myself on Blackwood’s book. I have copied and pasted it here in its entirety:

Memo to Self on:
THE POWER OF MULTI-SENSORY PREACHING AND TEACHING

1. Book has a high view of the Word of God.

2. We cannot escape the fact that a major source of our evangelism is the assembly.

3. God made us with five senses.

4. The “lecture” style of preaching as typical is recent: only the past 400 years. came with the Protestant Reformation and the printing press.

5. God consistently moved his men to address the different learning styles of the people.

6. Goal of preaching in the congregation is to equip Christians to mature in Jesus, not to preach the “perfect” sermon.

Boredom Alley

I cannot help but wonder what role quantum mechanics has played in postmodernism. Here is one reason why. Diarmuid O’Murchu, in his book Quantum Theology, writes about “Schrödinger's Cat.” I must confess to you, I had not even heard of it until recently when Patrick Leech sent me a reference to it. I have since seen several mentions of it in various writings.

Here is the story. Erwin Schrödinger took a cat into his laboratory. He built a box that was opaque. He installed a mechanism that was structured in such a way it had a 50-50 chance of releasing poisonous gas. He then placed a live cat inside the box and closed the door. Hence, the cat had a 50-50 chance of surviving.

After closing the box’s door, Schrödinger activated his device. Something occurred, and he did not know what it was. Either the cat had breathed the poisonous gas and died, or the poisonous gas had not been activated and the cat was still alive. However, since the box was opaque, Schrödinger did not know whether or not the cat was alive or dead.

Here is where things changed. According to classical science, Schrödinger would have opened the box and noted the results. However, Schrödinger leaves the door closed. Now, he wonders whether or not the cat is dead. In other words, there is no outcome until the measurement is made.

According to a number of quantum theorists, this experiment demonstrated one’s observation determined outcome. That is to say, whether the experiment caused the cat to be alive or dead was dependent upon one's observation. (This was called the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory).

You are probably thinking, if I have not already lost you, “The deed is done! Open the box and see what happened!” I would agree. And, in all fairness, I need to state that many scientists did not find Schrödinger’s experiment beneficial. Stephen Hawking famously said, “Every time I hear about Schrödinger’s cat, I want to reach for my gun." Moreover, even some scientists who believe in quantum mechanics do not find Schrödinger’s experiment helpful. However, a number of scientists did and still do.

I side with those scientists who did not consider the experiment helpful. While I reserve the right to grow, my personal opinion is, this was another important event that paved the way to the postmodern view that reality is in the eye of the beholder. “If I believe it, it is true.”

“Schrödinger’s cat” further inserted faith and/or philosophy into a scientific discipline (physics); moreover, it moved this discipline further away from its regimented adherence to recording data. Turn on the History Channel today and you will hear what you will likely consider to be outlandish claims by quantum physicists--claims such as the existence of alternative universes and alternative realities. “Schrödinger’s cat” assisted in creating the environment that made this view of reality possible.

On to ACU

This Saturday, I leave for Abilene. Next week I am auditing a short course in the DMiN program at ACU. The course is called Spiritual Formation. I took it four years ago and it absolutely changed my life. I thought it was time for a tune-up, so I am experiencing it again and looking forward to it very much.

Sunday morning, I'm hoping to visit my old haunts in Winters, Texas, especially the congregation where I formerly preached. I love those people there and have the deepest appreciation for their ministry to that community.

However, it is always hard to leave my family. It is something I don't enjoy. I prefer my leaving though, to my family leaving me to travel. At least when I travel, I am so much out of my element, the concentration required to meet the demands of travel succeed in distracting me somewhat from the pain of being away from my family. If I am home alone, I am in my element. All cues point toward routine, but with my family away, the routine is destroyed.

I return Friday week. It will be good to see my family again. Shortly thereafter, I have something else to look forward to--my sister and her family will visit us from Washington state.

Five things I think I think (a tip of the hat to Peter King for this idea)

1. Haleigh, Abby and I saw Night at the Museum II last Friday night. Not as good as the first, but not bad.

2. I’ve got to watch this TV program, Mythbusters, that I keep hearing about.

3. Saw Vertigo this week with Judy and the two oldest. Third time Judy and I have seen it. Loved it every time. The girls enjoyed it too. It is funny how it was overlooked for so many years and now considered one of the greatest movies of all time.

4. Sorry to see that David Carradine hung himself this week. I still think of him in that old TV series Kung Fu. That was part of my inspiration to study martial arts in Argentina. No, I am not kidding, I really did.

5. It was neat to have H. L. Shirey kick off our Wednesday night speaking series here at Shiloh this week. H. L. baptized me and was the first person to work with me on preaching and being a leader in the congregation. He is now ministering in R.A.A.W.—Reclaiming Addicted and Abused Women. He is has asked me to serve on his board and I am honored to comply. H. L. did a great job in his “sermon.” He had his audience spellbound.

Have a great weekend!