I decided that it doesn't make sense to say "Happy Memorial Day." A friend and I agreed that something like "Day of Remembering Be Unto You" was a better greeting.

Memorial Day was originally called Decoration Day, and began to be observed in the 19th Century to honor those who were killed in the Civil War. Later it expanded to include everyone who died in combat.

I asked several people over this holiday weekend, and none of us could say we personally know someone who has died in combat.

So while I made an effort to "remember" and appreciate those who have sacrificed their lives for the sake of our country, it was a somewhat removed remembrance, a few degrees of separation away from those who have died in battle while serving the nation of my birth.

I thought about the almost 2,500 American soldiers who have died in Iraq, men and women for whose service and sacrifice I am grateful, but who have been engaged by their leaders in a venture that I strongly disagree with and believe was a mistake.

These are mixed feelings.

Some would disagree but I think it's possible to have appreciation for loyal service and sacrifice of those in our military, and simultaneously be critical about the course of a premature, preemptive war that unnecessarily led to costly loss of life on both sides.

It's possible to support our troops but not our oops.

I also thought this weekend about spiritual battles and casualties thereof. I'm not one to overly quickly ascribe every adversity to spiritual battle, but I do believe there are daily spiritual battles with high stakes.

The good news is that these casualties -- people who are martyred for their faith in Christ or who sacrifice so much in order to live lives of other-centered service -- these are wins, not losses. The death of the body is not the end of the story, it's the start of a better much longer chapter.

Paul's words in Philippians 1:21 are profound: "To live is Christ and to die is gain." Just a few verses later, in a context of dangerous days for those who were following Christ in the first century church, there's more: "Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ."

While we remember, with perhaps mixed feelings, those who have died in traditional and spiritual battles, we are also called to live up to and live into the calling of Christ.

For a follower of Jesus, the ultimate Remembering of course is the broken body and poured-out blood of Christ, sacraments by which we remember God's initiative to offer us a way of peace and reconciliation with our creator.

Day of Remembering Be Unto You.

("Do this in remembrance of me.")

One in three people in the world live in two countries: India and China. The world's largest democracy, and the world's largest communist country. The two most populous nations on the planet.

Here's one report (BBC) that is worth 10 minutes of your time to ponder.

We have two common household sayings about these two countries. My daughters like to remark, after confirming the label on many products, "EVERYTHING is made in China!" And we like to put things in perspective when thinking about what we might feel is perhaps not enough space, or food, or resources, with the phrase (mimicked Indian accent is optional), "But if we were in India..."

For example... do we need another room in our home? Well if we were in India (or Indonesia or any one of dozens of countries with many who live in extreme poverty) this would likely not be an option and we'd probably get by, just extremely poor, as billions of people today eke out their existence. Our need can quite easily pale by comparison.

The poverty that exists in much of the world, including India, puts our relative wealth in perspective. (Sorry if I overemphasize this point, but if you are reading this blog, you are in the top 10% most wealthy people in the world. You might feel poor, but the feeling is relative.)

That's not to say that there isn't wealth and middle class in India, because there is.

And India's population growth (unhindered by the one child policy that China adheres to) has it on target to surpass China as the most populous nation by 2030.

Rapid migration to the cities is bringing major changes to these societies. China's recent migration of 150 million (sorry, I forget over what timeframe - from a recent NPR podcast I listened to) has been "the largest peaceful migration in history." These millions of people in cities who have moved away from their family's traditional homestead to find work and opportunity are accelerating the already overwhelming changes in society over just a few years time.

One projection indicates that China's purchasing power could overtake the US by 2020. In a sense, you'd think that could happen even sooner, given that the population of China is four times that of the US.

I think one of the huge challenges we face is this: the US has (probably unknowingly) set an unrealistic and unsustainable bar for the standard of living that much of the world thinks is "the good life" to be sought after.

As the world's two biggest countries develop a middle class that largely wants to pursue the lifestyle that has been modeled by the wealthiest half of the US (and a longing thereof propogated nicely via global media), what's going to happen to the planet? Lighting a fire under global warming. Exponential growth in the gap between rich and poor. A faster approaching day when some non-renewable resources will run out. Not just oil, but clean water and sufficient food production from finite real estate. And ripe conditions for the fast pace of globalization to blur political borders and the traditional isolation of distinct societies, even remote ones.

There's the socio-economic side of all this, but there's also the spiritual side. (I don't mean to imply that these perspectives are unrelated. Much of what Jesus taught about social justice was really about morality and spirituality.)

What do these huge populations in India and China mean for the global church? How will God's spirit work through the millions who now follow Jesus in these places? What about the new millions a few years from now? What about international collaboration in the church? Is the global church capable, by and large, of healthy symbiotic partnership? I have my optimistic days, and some days are less so.

Can a blog writer get away with making some of his main points in the form of questions? What do you think? ;-)

I remember a line (more or less...) from a previous Urbana:  "God's world began in a garden, but it ends in a city." (Incidentally, this theme will be visited again this December at Urbana, and Ray Baake who made this point,  will be speaking again at Urbana 06.) Revelation tells us that the new city, the "New Jerusalem" will come down from the heavens, the ultimate culmination of God "making all things new."

And as that day approaches, we find growing populations on this planet, and more of them moving to urban centers away from traditional rural life. This is a huge change for any society to undergo.

Life's biggest changes (including migration, exodus, flight, journeys, and cross cultural experiences) are a time when God is able to get our attention and do things that we're not usually as receptive to when everything is "normal."

So my encouragement is to pray for God to work in big and small ways as the world changes and people move and populations grow. Pray for Jesus' words to be true of the church this day, "They will know you are my disciples by your love for one another."

This is easier said than done! It's not something that the church will conjure up by human effort. It is something that is only accomplished by each person abdicating life's throne to the one who offers to be Lord of our life if we will step aside.

"The first page is terrible. It is so badly written, it couldn't be read by anyone who respects the English language."
- Novelist John Mortimer

"As a literary work it's good for nothing. He is not a good writer, it's not been properly edited, but he has a wonderful gift. It is in a way an airport novel. The literati like myself wouldn't normally read it. But I find it a page turner and an exciting thriller. It was full of ideas of interest even though I didn't agree with them. At the heart of it there's no historical basis for that view but it is extremely interesting and provocative."
- Professor Michael Wheeler

"It's almost that we'd prefer to believe something like this instead of the prosaic reality."
- Archbishop of Canturbury


Goad? Why the weird title of this entry? Well for one thing, it does rhyme with "code."

Goad = a verbal encouragement to attempt something.

Da Vinci = artist of note and a household name which now also conjures up the association for most people of Dan Brown's book and forthcoming movie.

Juicy "true" secrets get squelched by religious institutions. Hidden truth comes to light. A founder of one of the world's primary religions is debunked, and has a wife and a kid. Secret sects. Pentagrams, mysterious riddles and country-hopping across Europe.

All of this is novel fodder for a successful book of fiction.

As someone said, The Da Vinci Code has become "one of those books that you don't want to be caught having not read." Not because it is something that can't be missed, but because of how much it is being discussed.

There's even a new term that has been coined for all the new books that have appeared, endorsing or debunking The Da Vinci Code: "Brownsploitation."

The Bible continues to be the best selling book of all time by a long shot. But notably, The Da Vinci Code has sold over 40 million copies worldwide, more than any other fiction novel. The movie comes out this weekend.

There is room for all kinds of personalities in God's kingdom. Maybe that's why there are all kinds of responses to what this book of fiction has to say and imply.

Dan's earlier book is Deception Point, and maybe people didn't know this was the sequel? Just kidding. But seriously, "all statements in this blog entry about historical inaccuracies, literary liberties, and subjective biases of The Da Vinci Code are factual." :-)

I read The Da Vinci Code about a year ago and found it an interesting read. I enjoyed it as a fairly good thriller/mystery, although it was a little too easy to guess the pivotal clue, maybe I just got lucky.

I had no idea the book would rise to this level of controversy. As I read it, and in subsequent conversations with many folks, I was disappointed with the author's sloppy and blurred lines of fact vs. fiction, which he (deliberately or carelessly or both?) sets up in the prologue. I found this to be deceptive, and I had the feeling that either the author was so convinced of his own conclusions that he is blinded to this, or perhaps that he is quite aware of the deception. Which, I don't know.

If he was a marketing genius, the blurring might have been intentional, and if so, quite successful. If he was just a skeptic, writing fiction, the blurring was at best a sloppy disclaimer of how his own disbelief fails to intersect with the consensus of most Biblical historians and literary experts.

Two weeks before I read The Da Vinci Code, a friend who is an agnostic ran through an articulate litany of a half dozen points about how Christians for two thousand years have been duped into believing Christ's divinity and the gospel writers, and why it's all wrong, and how other suppressed gnostic gospels got it right. After I read TDVC I thought, wow, my friend MUST have recently read this book because he spouted its presuppositions almost in the same order and wording as Dan Brown, the man.

And that's my discomfort, both with this book and with how many people are reading it -- as if the author's setup (prologue) ensures that what is said in the fictional story is really based on some objective summary of the facts. If it was against the law for fiction to be misleading, Mr. Brown would do time. Just read a few articles about the many inaccuracies in the areas that claim accuracy. But hey, "it's just fiction." And it's disingenuous. But a "good" novel, and probably will be a "good" movie too.

So it comes down to this: As Christians, how do we handle any and all kinds of opportunities to communicate with people of all kinds of faith persuasions, about our careful journey of faith and our relationship to Jesus Christ?

"In your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander."
- I Peter 3:15-16

A lot of people in the world don't believe in the message and person of Jesus. They don't agree with Christians who believe that what Jesus taught was "truth" or that he was divine ("came from the Father") as the canonized gospel writers tell us he claimed.

What could be worse than the truth of Jesus' teaching and example not being believed? Well, at least one thing could be worse: wasting the opportunity to offer a reasonable, loving, considerate, gracious response with confidence and integrity to messages (or messengers) that might contradict the person and work of Jesus.

Don't forget that it comes down to faith, and if someone doesn't have faith they don't share the same assumptions that make something "true" for a person who believes. This is equally true for a person who believes Jesus is the son of God, as for the one who believes a few 4th century church leaders might have "invented" his divinity and cleverly destroyed any evidence to the contrary.

Last year I also read Elain Pagels' book, "Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas", and found a parallel dynamic. She wrote with a discernable bias and bitterness which I was surprised to find even in the early pages of her book, from someone who claims to be a scholar. It was interesting, but its subjectivity was disappointing.

Her beef with the basic Christian understanding about Jesus was personal, and she had a chosen vantage point that felt sometimes like she was grinding an axe because she had discarded the sword.

One thing that I believe strongly is that there is far too little teaching in most churches about some core essentials of the history of the Christian faith, including the canonization of scripture. I suspect that most Christians can't explain how the 66 books that are found between the front and back cover of the Bible made the cut; what got included and excluded, and when, and on what basis.

Not everyone who quotes something about "the reliability, divine inspiration, and authority of scripture" can explain the foundations of that faith statement before they proceed to base almost ALL of their subsequent faith assumptions on this one.

That is more the church's fault (internationally) than the fault of individuals. But it is a responsibility to be shouldered by all of us who would follow Jesus in this 21st century.

So, what would I "goad" (verbal encouragement to attempt something) any readers of this blog to do about all of this?

Seven things:

1. Expect cynics and false prophets. Don't scorn them or hate them, but rather love and pray for them. Pray for miracles (stuff that ain't natural and only God can do). Pray for revelation and the power of God to visit. Pray for the "baggage" that every person brings with them -- including false prophets -- to be overcome.
2. Don't believe everything you hear (or read). Listen to everything you believe. Test it. Sift it. Be humble. Seek. Knock. Think. Ask. Follow. Mimic (Jesus). Do this in community and learn from the insights of others. (Sneaky, eh? -- how I included all 12 of these things in "thing number two?")
3. Don't buy the lie that "truth is relative" with an option to have your personal initials embossed in it for an extra $4.99. Truth is is not different for each person. That doesn't make it easy to discern. And that doesn't make Truth easy to stomach, in a fallen world with many generations of messed up choices and consequences. Truth is something that Jesus said will set us free, not bind us. Truth is more about "do" than "don't."
4. Expect disbelief from disbelievers and skeptics. Don't discard their skepticism. Treat it like God treats it -- you know, the creator of every thing and person that exists (granted: a faith assumption that not all people share) who happens to give an insanely wide latitude for individual humans to believe whatever they choose. Treat peoples' faith choices like God treats them, with love and servanthood and patience.
5. Love everyone who God puts in your path with the sacrificial love that Jesus modeled. Cross boundaries and cultural taboos and lines of segregation. This is the simplest and hardest thing.
6. Make wise consumer choices (if seemingly small) that don't unnecessarily equip or reward the messenger of these unsifted and even careless messages: things like borrowing the book (TDVC) rather than buying it; waiting a week or two to see the movie rather than on opening weekend.
7. Ask with honesty: What do I believe because I have opened myself to God's spirit and to Jesus? What do I believe because someone else told me I should believe it? On what basis do I believe what I believe? As for me (Barry) I believe :-) that the honest pursuit of these questions will lead to belief in Jesus far more than they will lead to disbelief.

"Since, then, we know what it is to fear the Lord, we try to persuade others. What we are is plain to God, and I hope it is also plain to your conscience."
- II Cor. 5:11

Take advantage of every opportunity to give the reason for the hope that you have. This is no small task, but it is a part of our worship and obedience to the one who made us.

It is interesting that many Christian groups in Asia are protesting The Davinci Code film these last few days before its global release.

Note that in India, even Muslim clerics are backing a boycott called by Catholics in Mumbai.

Thai censors want to cut the last 10 minutes of the film on the grounds that they are "blasphemous."

A group in Korea has unsuccessfully tried to ban the film.

I've heard a range of opinions, from welcoming the heightened opportunities for dialog, to claims that this is not a forum for genuine dialog, it is an outright attack.

More thoughts later this week about this issue...