Dynamic Yet Consistent

One of the hallmarks of evangelical theology is the concept of penal substitution.  Basically this is a form of substitutionary atonement theory which states Jesus died on the cross in place of sinners in order to satisfy the penalty of their sin.  In other words, the death of Christ is substituted for the punishment sinners should receive (which is generally understood to be “death” and separation from God.)  Christ takes our punishment so we can be forgiven.  When you hear a pastor say “Christ died for my/your sins” what you are hearing is an articulation of substitutionary atonement.

Crucifixion, D. Velázque, 17th c.

This idea of atonement has origins going back to the early church fathers, but its formal outline is generally attributed to the 11th century monk Anselm of Canterbury who preferred to talk of “satisfaction” rather than of “substitution”  (Christ’s death was a satisfactory sacrifice for our sins rather than a substitution for the penalties of our sins).  It was further developed and brought to wide spread acceptance by John Calvin and the reformers.  It should be noted that while penal substitution is certainly favored by evangelical (especially reformed) Christians/churches/theologians, it is not the only theory of atonement. Two of the other major atonement theories are: Moral influence (Christ’s death show perfect obedience and love), and Ransom / Christus Victor (Christ was the ransom for humanity’s debt to Satan.)   Other theories often combine / tweak concepts found in these approaches.

Penal substitution is based on a few premises.

• God requires punishment for our sins to be forgiven.  (If you go with Anselm’s satisfaction concept, you would say God requires sacrifice for our sins to be forgiven).
• The death of Christ covers the punishment / sacrifice for all sinners.

It is with this second point that things get tricky.  First, we must ask, “who is covered by this.”  Those in the reformed camp will say it is only for the elect — that is, those whom God has predestined to be saved.  Those in the free will camp will say it available for all, but only effective for those who trust in Jesus.  Finally, those in the universalist camp will say all people are covered regardless of status.   When we begin to ask who is covered by the sacrificial act of the cross, we begin to get into the fuzzy math of substitutionary atonement theory.

This leads me to a question I have pondered for years and have yet to hear a satisfactory answer:

How can the death of one person be the acceptable substitute for the sins of all humanity?

Let’s walk through the court room imagery upon which this theory is based.  So I die and stand before my creator.  God says to me, “It looks like you have sinned and thus you must be punished.”  At that point Jesus comes in and says, “I don’t want him to be punished, since I have lived a sinless life, let me stand in his place.”  Jesus is then led to the cross and crucified.

Okay, that works out great, until the next sinner comes before the throne of judgment.  Presumably Jesus is allowed to stand in my place because he lived a sin free life and is the only person in the history of the world who does not deserve punishment / judgment for sin.  His life for mine – its a fair trade.  But now that Jesus’ perfect life has been traded for my life, what is left to be traded (substituted)?

The problems don’t stop there.  If we are truly talking about the substitution of a penalty, we must examine the trade closer.   In the way this theory is generally taught, we avoid damnation (judgment) because Christ voluntarily died on the cross.  But, we must admit this is not a fair trade.  Christ experienced physical death that lasted 3 days.  Sinners on the other hand would experience eternal damnation (in addition to physical death) if it was not for the work of Christ.  Again… this does not seem to be a fair trade.

So at the end of the day, the equation looks like this:

3 Days of physical death by sinless man = eternal damnation for countless people and their lifetimes of sin

I am sorry, but that math just doesn’t work out.

The books are obviously being cooked in some way.  I have heard people claim that this equation still works because it was not just a man who died, but it was God himself.  That seems logical, but then at the end of the day we still run into problems.  How can it be a trade if God in fact did not die and did not experience damnation.  The need for judgment still has not been satisfied.  And, if we assume that this equation meets God’s standards so God can still be just, we must ask why it had to happen at all.  If God can determine what meets the standards of a fair trade, it can be assumed that he could also waive the need for a penalty.

Now lets get back to another question: who is covered by this act?  Even if somehow the math works out, and the death of one god-man can cover infinite sinful lives, then why wouldn’t this lead to universal salvation?  Why must people individually accept this sacrifice?  If it has the power to cover the sins of all, then why would it not be extended to all, especially if we believe God desires none to perish. (There are certainly some people who think that God does in fact desire some to perish, but that is an entirely different conversation into the nature of a loving God.)

The problem is not alleviated if you take Anselm’s view of satisfaction over substitution.  It does answer a few more questions because the Old Testament does teach of a sacrafice that covers an entire group of people (i.e. on the Day of Atonement)  but at the end of the day you run into the same problems concerning who is covered by this act (along with some new problems: Does God allow for, and indeed propagate, human sacrifice?).

I will be the first to admit, these are not easy questions and I do not profess to have the answers.  The things we are dealing with here are of the utmost theological importance.  We are talking about the very nature of Christ, his mission, and its effect on our relationship with God.  When we talk about atonement, we are talking about how God interacts with and responds to humanity and vice versa.  This is no minor matter.

But at the same time, I fear we have all to often assumed the only orthodox understanding of atonement is that of penal substitution without first examining the workings of such a theory.  Its not that I reject this approach, its that I don’t understand it.  This post is a sincere effort to work through my questions and I invite all my friends who take this approach to help me understand it.

A while back Beth and I subscribed to Netflix.  I originally signed up because I wanted to be able to watch a documentary recommended to me by a friend.  After going through the trial period, Beth realized it was an excellent resource for getting TV series (she is currently watching season 4 of Gilmore Girls) so she can keep herself entertained during late night feedings.  Since we became members, I have fell in love with the online streaming.  Netflix has a great selection of documentaries you can watch instantly from your computer.  This has been a great for me as I often watch these while feeding Mikayla or cleaning the house.

I just went through my viewing history to review the documentaries I have watched in the past few months.  You will notice a clear trend towards science / tech related films.  I have many social justice type films in my que waiting to be watched, but I find I prefer shows about the history and future of science.

I have included a brief description and rating for each documentary I have watched in the past few months:

• Sick Around the World – Frontline program on the health care systems of various developed countries.  While obviously in universal health care, the host speaks to several critics and explores many of the difficulties of such a system. (7/10)
• The Medicated Child – Frontline program on the increase of medication in children for various mood disorders.  It is eye-opening see the levels of medication some children are on to “be normal” and worrying when you realize how little research there is into many of these medicines. (8/10)
• Car of the Future – Nova program on alternative automobile technologies with the hosts of Car Talk.  I love automotive technology and “green design” but what seals the deal for me is having Tom and Ray along for their witty insights.(9/10)
• Beavers – Imax movie on… you guessed it… beavers.  Helped pass the time while cooking dinner one night, but not very insightful or captivating. (6/10)
• The Manhattan Project – short Modern Marvels documentary on the making of the atomic bomb.  I have done quite a bit of reading on the subject and this was a great survey of the process.  (7/10)
• Rat Attack – Nova program on the 48 year cycle of bamboo fruit and the subsequent rat explosion in south central Asia. The lead scientist on this program was a bit of a goof ball, but the coorolation between rat populations and the food supply was fascinating. (8/10)
• The Spy Factory – Nova Program on the NSA and their role in responding to the September 11th attacks.  The title is a bit misleading, this documentary really had nothing to do with spies and everything to do with how the NSA has used technology to track terrorists (and citizens).  (8/10)
• Blue Planet – Multi-part documentary on oceans and ocean life. I have only watched a few parts off and on, but the footage is incredible and the story lines are excellent. (9/10)
• The Natural History of the Chicken – Documentary on the roll chickens play in American life. Watched this with Dad when he was here.  Entertaining, but a bit scattered in scope. (7/10)
• King Corn – Documentary on American’s reliance on corn and the dangers of it. I became interested in this after watching the director on The Daily Show.  I haven’t finished it yet, but have enjoyed what I have seen. (7/10)
• The Great Robot Race – Nova program on the quest to produce fully automated off road vehicles and the competition surrounding it.  I love shows on emerging technology and this program did a great job of covering the science / tech while providing a captivating story line.  (9/10)
• Man on Wire – A documentary on one man’s covert attempt to tight rope walk between the twin towers. First heard about this documentary from Patrick Schreiner.  I was not familiar with the story so it was fun to watch it unfold.  The interviewees were so excited to tell their story that it really pulled you in. (8/10)
• Extreme Ice – Nova Program on the changing landscape of the polar ice caps.  Originally watched this on TV when it aired on KET, but rewatched it later.  Interesting to see the physical changes of such desolate places.  To make it even better, one of the helicopters shown in the film is one of the first helicopter I ever rappelled out of: N193EH.  (8/10)
• Born into Brothels – Documentary from a photographer on her time with children of prostitutes.  The message of the film is strong enough to get you through the slow sections. (8/10)
• Helvetica – Documentary on the history of modern type design and the place the ubiquitous font Helvetica.  I first became aware of Helvetica through a friend of mine Jon Merklin.  The documentary is actually quite fast moving and interesting despite the seemingly mundane topic.  I even wrote a blog post about it earlier: Evolution of type design and the quest for Christian truth (9/10)
• Stealth Technology – Modern Marvels program on the history and development of stealth technology. Yet another technology type documentary that is entertaining and enlightening. (8/10)
• Nobelity – A series of interviews with Nobel laureates about the future of the world and challenges we face.  I watched this at the recomendation of a friend.  A bit slow moving, but the final interview with Desmond Tutu makes it worth watching the whole thing. (8/10)

Who would ever have guessed that we would be looking back at the presidential campaign of 2008 as a time of relative tranquillity and good fellowship?

Bob Greene made the above observation in his article Commentary: America on a collision course on cnn.com.  Greene examines and laments the current political tension that is miring our country.  It is an article well worth reading.

Henry David Thoreau

Henry David Thoreau is a personal hero of mine because he authentically lived his life and was willing to call into question the status quo.    His writing span a wide swath of topics from nature to civil disobedience to truth.  He is considered a transcendentalist and was significant in influencing people like Ghandi, JFK, MLK, Tolstoy, Hemingway, George Bernard Shaw and Ralph Waldo Emerson.  Here are a few of my favorite quotes from Thoreau:

If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law.

A man is rich in proportion tothe number of things which he can afford to let alone.

Do not be too moral. You may cheat yourself out of much life. Aim above morality. Be not simply good; be good for something.

Live each season as it passes; breathe the air, drink the drink, taste the fruit, and resign yourself to the influences of each.

I have learned, that if one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is in prison.

Our houses are such unwieldy property that we are often imprisoned rather than housed in them.

As you simplify your life, the laws of the universe will be simpler; solitude will not be solitude, poverty will not be poverty, nor weakness weakness.

Being is the great explainer.

Do not worry if you have built your castles in the air. They are where they should be. Now put the foundations under them.

Faith keeps many doubts in her pay. If I could not doubt, I should not believe.

It is never too late to give up our prejudices.

The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation

Walden Pond

Mikayla is now 4 months old and Beth and I have learned a lot.  I remember just a few months ago walking through Target with the price gun to do our baby registry and getting frustrated because I had no clue what we needed.  (This could be my version of hell.  I hate feeling like I don’t know what is going on and I really hate shopping.  To make it worse we weren’t even shopping — at least with shopping you get to get open up something new and read the instruction manual).

Nursery prior to Mikayla's arrival

Now that we have a feel for what it is like to raise a new baby, I feel like I can make a list of the things you really need (at least the things we did).  We certainly don’t have things figured out, but if we had to start over, these are things I would make sure we have.

Dealing with poop

• 15-25 cloth diapers.  We chose fuzzi bunz.  I have written an entire post on our cloth diaper decision.
• Enough NB/1 disposal diapers to get through the cord falling off and for emergencies — we also used them at night the first month or so, but later learned that was unnecessary.
• 2-3 wet bags
• 5 gallon wet/dry pail
• Diaper detergent (see this post for more insights)
• Changing pad (we put this on an old dresser and skipped the formal changing table)
• Diaper bag
• Travel changing pad (we slip a few disposable diapers and our wipes in this for simplicity)
• Wipes

Feeding

• 6-8 4 oz bottles (we used these initially and now use them for storage)
• 6-8 8 oz bottles (we use Dr. Brown’s for all our bottles – they are compatible with Medela pumps and seem to work.  See here.)
• Beth’s stuff (obviously I don’t use this stuff)
  • Medela breast pump
  • Nursing wrap
  • Lansinol nipple cream
  • Breast shells (not shields) – we never used these b/c we could not find them in time, but I think they would have really helped the first 2 weeks)
  • nursing pads
  • 3-4 nursing bras
• Bottle warmer
• Bottle drying rack
• Bottle brush
• Milk storage bags

Entertaining

• Bouncy chair
• Some sort of stand-up exerciser
• Wrap / chest carrier / sling
• play mat
• Swing (this has not been used as much as we thought it would, but when we use it, it was golden and irreplaceable)
• A few tactile toys

Sleeping

• Crib
• pack and play
• 2 swaddling blanket / wrap (kidopotamus makes an awesome one we used for the first 2 months)
• 2 sleep sacks
• gowns (don’t even try to use footed pajamas the first few months)
• a few stocking caps
• monitor
• every pacifier imaginable to find out which the baby prefers and then at least 4 of the “winner”
• Bedding set (no need for a fancy one)

Clothes

• you will need some of these, but you will find it has less to do with practicality and more with “cuteness” and personal taste.  My only recommendation is to avoid anything that requires more than 2 steps to get to poop-production-plant.  I personally gravitate towards the onsies.
• Dressers / cabinets / drawers / etc.

Bathing / Medicine

• Bath tub (I was opposed to getting one of these because I thought it was unnecessary, but it has proven very useful).
• Children’s Tylenol
• gas drops
• baby wash
• baby shampoo
• wash cloths
• snot sucker (We also use an aerosol saline to help make this more effective)
• Baby towel
• hair brush
• temperature checker
• rectal thermometer
• nail clippers (we used nail files the first month)

Other

• Stroller
• Car seat (we have a nice travel system where the seat has a base and fits on the stroller)

I am sure I have left a few things off, but I certainly wish I had this list going into the whole process.  Of course Beth could add things, especially as they relate to pregnancy and post-natal care.  I also have listed the things I am sure we will need when Mikayla “goes mobile” such as outlet plugs, cabinet locks and hallway gates, but I figure this is a good start.

Mikayla and me at 4 months at Jackson's Orchard. She has reason to be concerned.

Grandpa and Grandma with their 3 great-grandchildren: Mikayla, Luke and Chase

Today has been an odd day for me.  Despite the fact it has been quite mundane, it has been emotionally draining.  My grandfather was just moved to hospice and the doctors think we are talking days instead of weeks or months.  Grandpa was diagnosed with leukemia 17 years ago and has gone through many other life threatening illnesses, yet has always been a fighter.  Even though we have been called up to make our “last visits” several times, this time really seems different.  At the same time, my father is in town and has been immensely enjoying his time with Mikayla (he was planning on going to backpacking, but given the recent news has decided to divert to Chicago).

Dad and I had a pretty lazy day today.  We cooked some soup for a friend who just had a baby and we watched a few documentaries.  We actually spent most of the day just sitting around talking about memories and entertaining the most alert and cheerful 4 month old in the world.

It is this juxtaposition of new life and possible death that has me a bit melancholy and pensive.  I am spending time with my dad as he thinks about the possible loss of his.  He is spending time being energized by the life of his grand-daughter while I am contemplating the loss of my own grand-father.  We talked expectantly about what Mikayla’s life will hold for her as we reflect on the meaning and significance of grandpa’s life.  Every song on the radio seems to have the power to call up painful realities, or hopeful possibilities.

I could wax on about the frailty of life and the interconnectedness of all people. I could go into detail about my love for my daughter and my love for my grandfather and how each stage of life refines and expands that love.  I could focus on one and ignore the other.  But, instead, I am content to reflect on the words of Solomon:

There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under heaven:

a time to be born and a time to die,

a time to plant and a time to uproot,

a time to kill and a time to heal,

a time to tear down and a time to build,

a time to weep and a time to laugh,

a time to mourn and a time to dance,

a time to scatter stones and a time to gather themm

a time to embrace and a time to refrain,

a time to search and a time to give up,

a time to keep and a time to throw away,

a time to tear and a time to mend,

a time to be silent and a time to speak,

a time to love and a time to hate,

a time for war and a time for peace.

~Ecclesiastes 3:1-8

This passage is often used when we are looking for reassurance in a single circumstance: why is there death, why is there pain, why is there sorrow.  We want to know that even the worst circumstances have a purpose.  For me, that is not the most significant or reassuring truth in this passage.  Instead of letting us know that there is room for even the painful things in the grand scheme of life, this passage lets us know that all things happen as part of a larger system that is always on-going.  There is always death, but there is also always life.  There is always pain, but there is also always hope.  There is always sorrow, but there is also always celebration.

For me, today has been the realization of that very truth.

I shopped at Wal-Mart the other day.  It is not something I am proud of, nor is it something that happens very frequently, but it happens.  After reading Nickel and Dimed by Barbra Ehrenreich and watching the documentary The High Cost of Low Prices I become convinced that the ideals of the Wal-Mart corporation are not the same as my ideals and thus largely quit shopping there.  I admit, since my objection with Wal-Mart largely centered around their treatment of low-wage workers and their effect on Mom and Pop type stores, I considered my boycott to be taking the moral high ground.

During my quick visit to “The Superstore” I noticed something: Things here are dirt cheap!  Raspberries for $2! A gigantic bag of Doritos for $2.50!  That is like 30% cheaper than what I am used to paying.

Realizing this brought my mind back to a blog post by an urban pastor I the utmost respect for: Aaron Mansfield.  (If you are looking for a guy who shoots straight, and constantly acts on his love for Jesus and people, then you need to read his blog Apostolic Obsession).  After a trip to Estonia, Aaron wrote a post about the luxury of the higher moral road when it comes to shopping (read the whole post here: Thinking About Estonia).

Aaron challenges the “elitist” (my word, not his) view of Wal-mart:

I like Wal-Mart. As I have said before, given my ministry and given my economic situation, a store that focuses on families making 30k or less is very helpful. Much as I might like to buy organic produce at a pachouli co-op, or buy my hemp clothes from a fair-trade boutique, I can’t. Artur asked me why some people from America told him he should not shop at Wal-Mart when he came to America? How to explain it, this luxury of pointless opinions? He only said he could not get clothes that cheap anywhere, and when you don’t have much money… I guess I just reiterate my point: part of the attack on Wal-Mart becomes an attack on the lower classes.

He takes it further by discussing the concepts of buying local and organic.  He poignantly asks:

Is eating local really an ethical choice, one that is moral in a universal way? Or is it just another cool thing?

Now, I know (and I am pretty sure Aaron knows) there are very good reasons to eat local and support the local stores over the multi-national corporations:  It does not contribute to the widening gap between rich and poor; you know where your food comes from and what goes into it; it decreases the likelihood that oppressive systems were used in producing things; it cuts pollution from production and transportation; the money goes directly to the people who work the hardest; even though Wal-mart and similar stores are cheap, they often cut costs by taking advantage of lower skilled workers .

I don’t shop at Wal-mart (much) because I don’t want to contribute to the system of production it relies on.  However, Aaron makes some very good points.  Because of places like Wal-mart, people can get more for less.  As such, we should never critisize people who shop there by choice, necessity or ignorance.  At the same time, we must realize that the same system that provides these low costs often contributes to the problem.  Large  corporations epitomize the growing divide between rich and poor as executives sin in far off plush offices make mbillions (4 of the 15 richest people in the world have amassed their wealth through Wal-mart with a total net worth of 70+ Billion dollars) while an army of minimum wage workers (who are often uninsured) keep the machine running.  When you work 40 hours a week for minimum wage, you have to shop at places like Wal-mart.

I don’t think there is a “right” answer here, but it is obvious our discussion must account for the individuals on both side of the equation.  We must understand individual situations as well as the larger system.  Personally I am thrilled when people are willing to asks about the ethics of their individual decisions rather than just sticking their head in the sand and living without thinking.

A few days ago I wrote a post on the The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act and how it would effectively ban clove cigarettes on September 22 (along with all other flavored cigarettes except menthols.)  Apparently I am not the only one who finds this particular provision of the bill to be backward.  In fact, since making that post, traffic to this blog has more than tripled (and to think, I thought everyone came to read my ponderings on how the Babylonian exile contributed to the concept of an afterlife.)

Earlier I made a few comments on how ludicrous it was to assume that banning flavored cigarettes would decrease smoking among minors.  Sure kids like sweet flavors, but guess what… adults do too.  I mean seriously, how many kids do you know rolling up a pack of Djarum Blacks in their shirt sleeves? If we extend this line of thinking, it is scary to think what else might be banned.  What about sweet liquors?  I know lots of underage youth who like flavored vodka and Jagermeister and schnapps.  Aren’t these possibly contributing to underage drinking?  Probably a lot more than clove cigarettes are contributing to underage smoking — and really, which one is more harmful?  I would say the drinking.  At least you can die a lot quicker with alcohol than you can with smoke.

Does this ban really affect me that much?  No, not really me personally.  But does it irk me?  Absolutely.

Some people are always bashing big government and think any law is infringing on their rights.  I am not part of that crowd, but at the same time I do get frustrated when laws don’t make sense and unfairly limit choice.  What is most frustrating is to see the inconsistencies are that are obviously present because of some major lobbying dollars from Big Tobacco.

I am not the only one who thinks this.  Here are a few comments from others:

I don’t know of any “kids” that smoke clove cigarettes. They are just too expensive for a young adult’s budget. The teenagers and college students that I see smoking use menthol “FLAVORED” cigarettes or Marlboros. What is happening here is a ban on the freedom of choice on what to smoke. Why not eliminate ALL tobacco products? Why not eliminate beer, as that seems to be the alcoholic “beverage of choice” with the local college kids (I live across the street from a large university in Coral Gables, FL.) – Lisa DeTournay

I am extremely disappointed by this legislative move because it is statistically unsound and most of all I would almost consider the ban illegal. If certain types of alcohol (honestly nearly as harmful whether to the persons body or in the damage they cause as a result of being drunk), say for instance any that is over 35%, were banned, the uproar would be as equally widespread. This law is ludicrous and it, in my opinion, is removing a high volume of taxable commodity that the damn US government could be getting revenue from to get its ass out of the economic pig crap were in. Instead of banning them, make the import tax higher. Its really that simple. -Jennifer

In related news, it looks like a few of the major cigarette companies are trying to stop part of the law before it takes affect.  They contend the requirements for packaging and marketing infringe on their free speech.  What is interesting is that this major lawsuit is being filed here in my home town of Bowling Green, KY.  You can read the whole story in the New York Times: Tobacco Companies Sue to Loosen New Limits.

Let’s keep our kids safe, and let’s try to limit underage smoking; but for the love of God, let’s be reasonable and not destroy freedom of choice with asinine laws and regulations.

The following is from John Donne’s Thoughts on Emergent Occasions.  The common phrases “for whom the bell tolls” and “no man is an island” come from this piece.  In its entirety  it is a refreshing read.  It is my hope it continues to aid in our discussion of human worth, human rights and the way we should view humanity.  Points of emphasis are mine.

XVII. MEDITATION
Now, this bell tolling softly for another, says to me: Thou must die.

Perchance he for whom this bell tolls may be so ill, as that he knows not it tolls for him; and perchance I may think myself so much better than I am, as that they who are about me, and see my state, may have caused it to toll for me, and I know not that.

The church is Catholic, universal, so are all her actions; all that she does belongs to all.

When she baptizes a child, that action concerns me; for that child is thereby connected to that body which is my head too, and ingrafted into that body whereof I am a member.

And when she buries a man, that action concerns me: all mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated.

God employs several translators; some pieces are translated by age, some by sickness, some by war, some by justice; but God’s hand is in every translation, and his hand shall bind up all our scattered leaves again for that library where every book shall lie open to one another.

As therefore the bell that rings to a sermon calls not upon the preacher only, but upon the congregation to come, so this bell calls us all; but how much more me, who am brought so near the door by this sickness.

There was a contention as far as a suit (in which both piety and dignity, religion and estimation, were mingled), which of the religious orders should ring to prayers first in the morning; and it was determined, that they should ring first that rose earliest.

If we understand aright the dignity of this bell that tolls for our evening prayer, we would be glad to make it ours by rising early, in that application, that it might be ours as well as his, whose indeed it is.

The bell doth toll for him that thinks it doth; and though it intermit again, yet from that minute that that occasion wrought upon him, he is united to God.

Who casts not up his eye to the sun when it rises? but who takes off his eye from a comet when that breaks out?

Who bends not his ear to any bell which upon any occasion rings? but who can remove it from that bell which is passing a piece of himself out of this world?

No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main.

If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were.

Any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.

Neither can we call this a begging of misery, or a borrowing of misery, as though we were not miserable enough of ourselves, but must fetch in more from the next house, in taking upon us the misery of our neighbours.

Truly it were an excusable covetousness if we did, for affliction is a treasure, and scarce any man hath enough of it.

No man hath affliction enough that is not matured and ripened by it, and made fit for God by that affliction.

If a man carry treasure in bullion, or in a wedge of gold, and have none coined into current money, his treasure will not defray him as he travels.

Tribulation is treasure in the nature of it, but it is not current money in the use of it, except we get nearer and nearer our home, heaven, by it.

Another man may be sick too, and sick to death, and this affliction may lie in his bowels, as gold in a mine, and be of no use to him; but this bell, that tells me of his affliction, digs out and applies that gold to me: if by this consideration of another’s danger I take mine own into contemplation, and so secure myself, by making my recourse to my God, who is our only security.

I used to worry about what was true.  Now I spend more time trying to figure out what truth is.

At this stage of the game I find if I strongly disagree with someone, especially on theological matters, is often isn’t because we have come to different conclusions, but rather because we are asking different questions.

This tension has been made all the  more clear as I have wandered into the world of post-modern epistemology (if there is such a thing).  Many of my close friends fear that doing so has driven me to a place where any concept of truth is discarded; yet for me, I have made no judgments on truth itself, only on our own ability to comprehend truth.

So what does this have to do with type design?

Helvetica Documentary

The other day I watched a 1.5 hour documentary about the Helvetica typeface. Despite the seemingly mundane subject manner, the movie was quite interesting as it followed the rise of this Swiss font from the 1950’s to its ubiquitous status as the work horse of graphic design in the modernistic era.  You see Helvitca is an extremely “clean” font that supposedly could be used to convey pure meaning without getting in the way.  Rather than using hype and idealism, modernistic design (and the Helvetica font) could simply tell things as they were.

To put it visually, just look at these two coke ads:

1950s: Idealistic, life is beautiful. You drink Coke because it will make everything great.

1970: Direct, unassuming, to the point. You drink Coke because it is authentic.

For a while people soaked up this simple, direct style where everything had its place.  But eventually people began to realize that not everything in life fits into clear categories–in fact, life is hectic and chaotic and to ignore these aspects is not to be authentic.  This led to post-modernism where all the rules were thrown out and meaning was understood to be more in the experience than the text itself.   Unfortunately this way of thinking (and designing) eventually spiraled downward into a subjective mess of jumbled words and ideas.

Postmodern poster design with multiple fonts, jumbled information and chatoic layout. Credit: Dustin Parker

In this way modernism was a response to the idealism of the 1950’s and then postmodern design emerged in contrast to the orderliness of modernism.  While each stage developed as a way to be “more authentic” in the end, each failed because it refused to take in the whole picture.  Life is not perfect, life is not always orderly, but at the end of the day it is not complete chaos either.

I have found many approaches to Christianity mimic these stages of design.  Some people preach a Christianity where once you are “saved” all your problems go away.  This is just n0t true and breaks down under the smallest amount of scrutinizing.  Some people think that Christianity is very clear cut and if you study Scripture close enough, you will be able to categorize all things into right and wrong / black and white / in and out.  This too is niave as it fails to take into account the complexities of the world and the ambiguity of scripture.  Finally, some people approach Christianity in their own way and refuse to acknowledge the coherence and direction it does provide.  These people are willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater leaving a religion stripped of its power and uniqueness.

In design, the best pieces are those that can open a window to a better world, clearly convey information and emotion, and at the end of the day, strike a personal chord that is rooted in authenticity.

Clean, powerful, authentic. See other great posters that combine these attributes here.

Our approach to Christianity needs to be similar.  We need to believe the faith we follow is moving us to a better place, yet acknowledge the pain and suffering of this current world.  In fact, the vision we have of the ways things can be is what should drive us to make it so.  When it comes to scripture and truth, we need to trust in the power of the narrative of scripture, yet also be willing to acknowledge its short comings and the holes in our own understanding of it.

I believe scripture does paint a clear picture of what it means to be the people of God and participate in the will of God.  At the same time, am not willing to assert simply believing in God will solve all the world’s ills, nor am I confident in saying we can distill pure truth from the Word of God.  Instead, I think Christianity is messy, yet follows a clear direction.  I don’t have all the specifics, but I feel I am wandering the right way.