Quick Hit- the Silence of the Candidates

Working in a news organization, I have the privilege of having TV's around my office. Frequently Bush & Kerry are featured on at least one screen. Unless something monumental is going on, we typically leave the sound down. Today, I was watching speeches of both Bush & Kerry and, since there was no sound, my entire perception was based on body language. Here is what I noticed:

Bush- he carries himself with the body language of a Gordon Gekko. There is a corporate swagger about him, as if he were pleading his case to a room full of shareholders. His hands are often held palms-upward, as if to ask, 'what's the problem?' His focus is also frequently upward as if, similar to Gekko, he was recounting his past successes so that he might be able to sway the shareholders of Teldar Paper to allow him to take over.

Kerry- he walks around the stage like a TV evangelist. His focus is frequently at eye level or down at the floor, as if he were overwhelmed by the shames of the world. He points downward, as if to convict people about their past choices. He even looks like a televangelist, with that silver hair helmet-like quaff and elongated posture. Add to that the fact that he looks like he took a bath in Orange-Glo, you can entirely see him throwing down fire & brimstone to get the congregation to repent and follow him into the promised land.

Moss is Maturing

Randy Moss has taken more than his fare share of criticism in his six years in the league. Some has been just criticism of a young man growing up, other backlash is highly due to his perceived persona. I personally think he's the most talented WR in the NFL, due to a combination of speed, size, and sticky hands.

I thought he really turned a corner maturity-wise last year, and this year he has continued it. He doesn't seem to be griping anymore for working the short routes while his teammates are getting the deep passes for the TD's. Most of his TD catches come from inside the 10 yard line. The attitude and excessive comments have been toned down considerably, as has his celebratory me-me-me persona. I'd like to think that he's maturing into a really good guy.

I think that Moss, deep down, beneath the bravado, is a genuinely tender & caring guy. This was first brought to my attention a few years ago when his teammate and friend Korey Stringer died of heat stroke. When it came time for him to address the media, his thoughts toward his fallen friend and Stringer's children was too much to bear, and he simply broke down. It was a rare display of raw emotion completely unchecked by concern for appearance. Then, this past Sunday, Moss caught two TD's in his game against the Bears. In each case, instead of celebrating, he took the ball, ran over to the sidelines, and deposited the TD ball in the hands of a quadriplegic man. I don't know if it was staged or premeditated. All I know is that, even though replay cameras didn't linger on the image long, the image of the man's face is etched in my mind. It was an expression of pure excitement, joy, and elation. Maybe Moss did it to bring attention to himself, but I hope and tend to think otherwise. He saw an opportunity to bring joy to another man's life, and that was more important to Moss than his own glory. That, to me, is a humble sign of understanding pure love of the game, and I applaud him for it.

Beginning Well

I recently read Gordon Smith’s analysis of salvation in his book called, "Beginning Well." Understanding the nature of true conversion has long been a struggle for me. I was raised in the church and grew up knowing many of the basic fundamental aspects about Christianity. Later, I worked within the parameters of YoungLife, a high school outreach ministry. I went to camps, conventions, seminars, and group gatherings. Many times I saw alter calls, invitations, and even some fire and brimstone sermons about the need to repent, turn to Christ, and experience everlasting life. To my amazement and joy, multitudes did just that. Hundreds of people, even thousands, came to accept Christ as their Lord and Savior at these events. Yet many of those that I knew who made a commitment on those days fell away from the faith shortly thereafter. What was once so real to them that caused them to weep for joy, sing hymns to heaven, and loudly proclaim their salvation drifted by the wayside and they reverted back to the same people they had always been.

The character arc frustrates me- if conversion truly is being reborn of the spirit, and if salvation is complete and irrevocable, then why do so many people fall away from the faith? Smith is able to provide some answer to this quandary by explaining the challenge of understanding salvation within the modern day Christian evangelical movement. By his definition, salvation actually has two distinct but intertwined components- conversion (justification) and transformation (sanctification). Smith says, “the doctrine of salvation assumes two things: the depth and complexity of the human predicament and the provision of a resolution in and through Jesus Christ.” Evangelicals, while thriving in the aspect of winning the convert, struggle mightily in embracing the doctrine of transformation. Catholics, by contrast, embrace the sanctification component well, but often fall short in grasping the nature of the justification experience. Thinking from my own Protestant orientation, I think that the evangelical understands the ‘depth’ of the human predicament and the ‘resolution in…Christ’ but does not do a good job with the ‘complexity of’ and 'the provision…through Jesus Christ.’ We know that Christ is the only way because of our sin, but we fall short in understanding how complex is the sinful fleshly nature that still clings to us like soot, and how it is through Christ’s lifelong sanctification that the soot is finally wiped clean.

Part of the problem stems from the term we frequently use for conversion- 'saved.' That word is distinct and punctiliar and past tense. Smith argues that this word is often used out of context with regard to the conversion experience, and by looking at King David's Psalms, it is easy to understand why. David speaks of his salvation in a past, present, and future tense. Past- "...the LORD has become my salvation" (Ps. 118:14) Present- "God most high is my salvation" (Ps. 62:7) Future- "I long for your salvation, oh LORD" (Ps. 119:174) The past, present, and future nature of salvation are reflective of God's eternality. Salvation isn't meant to be a one time occurence-while it has a definite beginning point, it plays itself out in the same progressive form that is depicted in the way God's salvation for his people is demonstrated from Genesis to Revelation.

The key, as Smith says, is that conversion is not an end unto itself, but a beginning that points toward sanctification. The end is to exist in the likeness of Christ. I think that evangelicals, especially in western society, struggle with temporality vs. eternality. Since we are surrounded by things that provide instant gratification, we expect salvation to be the same way. ‘Behold, I am saved; I get to go to heaven. That happens now, right?’ When it doesn’t, the new Christian is frustrated because life has not materially changed. Nobody is there at the outset to tell them that being reborn in the Spirit is both symbolic AND literal- you have to start life over again. “Like newborn babies [we] crave spiritual milk.” However, seldom do people tell us that we “then must grow up in our salvation.” (1 Peter 2:2)

Like many things in life, Christianity gets old because people don’t perceive anything better after the conversion aspect is finished. Conversion is truly like birth. It is indeed a miracle, but how many of us would like to do it again? In the same way, the moment we accept Christ as our savior is a great moment; but the challenge is to not look back on those emotions and be satisfied; sanctification is in believing that the subsequent steps in learning to walk (again) are always better.

Curious About The Benefactor

In waiting for the Monday Night Football matchup between the Panthers (yikes, what's up with your O-line?) and the Packers, I came across Mark Cuban's debut onto prime time TV. Cuban of course is starring as a young confident billionaire who toys with his subordinates on any whim he feels fit. Of course it's a reality show, The Benefactor. Here is what I liked/disliked:

(Disclaimer- I am an avid Mark Cuban fan. I know he is loud, obnoxious at times, arrogant, and occasionally hurts his effort due to his strong personality. That said, I think he represents a prototype on what a true business entrepreneur should be. He is fair, regardless of whether it hurts his own cause. He believes in doing things the right way and adhering to business ethics, even if it costs him. He accepts the fact that there is such a thing as human error, but believes in accountability for everyone, including himself. He believes that risks should be taken if they are calculated. And above all, he believes in enjoying life to the fullest and helping the people around him enjoy it as well. You may disagree with these attributes, but I believe they are good ones and are consistent with what I've seen from him as owner of the Dallas Mavericks for the past 5 years.)

Liked:

1. He likes to screw with peoples' heads, as evidenced with his questioning of everyone's words and actions. He demonstrated that confidence is good, arrogance is bad, and performance is supreme.
2. Cuban's personality is out there for all to see. Love it or hate it, it isn't intentionally crafted like Donald Trump's. He is just a goofy computer guy who has learned to be a savvy business man.
3. Consistent with his business acumen, he told each participant personally that they would be part of his show. He believes in personal connection, whether it is about his show, his businesses, or his thousands of Mavericks fans.
4. He cut 3 people right off the bat, and he did it using reasonable methods. For the first dude who got caught saying that he was worried that Cuban's games would be stupid, that may seem nitpicky, but Cuban knows how to smell a rat. If he was going to complain that early on, he was only going to get worse as the game went on. For Laurel, the 2nd to get cut, my wife thought Cuban was being mean, but he clearly stated that it was because she represented herself one way in the interview screening, and then was totally opposite in the face to face Q&A. Cuban's mantra is always 'performance dictates reward.' And for Grayson, she didn't project any confidence and then lost in her second chance competition. I didn't like the arrogant guy who beat her, but at least he backed up his actions.
5. Casting is always key, and he's got a good collection of prima donnas, hard workers, attractive people AND normal looking people, and contestants committed to winning at all costs (with the exception of one...See below).

Disliked:

1. He likes to screw with peoples' heads. Some is good, too much is bad, as it devolves into a massive ego trip. Power doesn't need to be flaunted to be demonstrated.
2. His incessant use of the phrase ONE MILLION DOLLARS. We know, we get it. The prize is ONE MILLION DOLLARS. You can now use the phrase 'the prize' or 'the money.' Repeating it ad nauseum actually cheapens it, in my opinion, especially since it's not an inordinate amount of cash. Sure, it's nothing to scoff at, but after tax, you're looking at around $600K, which in my neck of the woods, buys you a middle of the road house.
3. The constant dramatic pauses and cutaways- some are good and necessary to build tension; too much, and it becomes contrived and manipulative. The show needs to be edited a little bit better.
4. Cuban's "if I ask you to do something, you had better do it," attitude. It's a competition, not a fiefdom. Tone it down a bit. If the show degenerates into a popularity contest and not a demonstration of work ethic, risk taking, strategy, and integrity, I don't think it will have much staying power and will be very disappointing.

And a word about Shawn the 2nd grade school teacher...she frightens me, and not in an entertaining TV kind of way. She initially said that she would give her money to her school kids, who are mostly low-income inner city children. Noble cause. However, the personality that comes out after she says that is both contradictory and downright scary. She is totally self-consumed, admits that she's quite the b*tch, will do whatever it takes to win, and has no qualms about stepping on people to get what she wants. Add on top of that the fact that she's into witchcraft (palmistry, numerology, tarot cards)...If my kid is a student in her class, I'm extracting my kid pronto, and if I'm her superintendent, how in the world can you employ this woman?

Trifle Not With the Football Gods

So I'm watching the NFL's season opener, featuring the defending Superbowl champs against the team they knocked off in the AFC championship game. The rematch was by all accounts an exceptional game, with multiple lead changes and the marquee players doing their thing. The game comes down to the final drive, as the Colts are trying to redeem themselves from last year's loss to the Patriots. As the Colts near the end zone down 27-24 with 40 seconds remaining, their move is clear- go for the TD, and if it's not there, kick the FG and take it into overtime. Well, Peyton Manning (my fantasy football QB) tries for one more play and then makes the egregious error of committing a rookie mistake (yep, MY fantasy QB!) and takes a sack with no time outs left, pushing the ball back another 20 yards. This is not good, but hey, they've still got Mike Vanderjagt, he the owner of a 41 consecutive made FG's streak, and the all time highest kicking % in NFL history. He'll push it through the uprights, and overtime will be on its way. Except...

...Running through my mind is a quote made by one of my favorite football writers, the Tuesday Morning QB Gregg Easterbrook. Since the end of last year, TMQ has said,

You'll rue the day you didn't miss. He will take his record streak of 41 straight field goals into 2004. My advice remains -- Vanderjagt should honk an unimportant kick early to get the streak over with, or by the football gods, is sure to miss a game-winner.

And this is running over and over through my mind, and even though Al Michaels does the typical "He hasn't missed in 41 attempts" covering that normal sports commentator jinx, it is the TMQ's prediction that unsettles me most.

When Vanderjagt finally lines up and boots it, there was no doubt in my mind he would push it wide.

Too freaky.