Here is some humor to brighten your mid-week. With all the recent talk about airlines cutting back on expenses, this bit of classic TV becomes relevant again.

In all the salacious news reporting about the scandal surrounding Tiger Woods, I recall hearing a sports lover bemoan the consequences that Tiger’s fall would have on golf. For many golf fans, Tiger is golf. Even those who do not watch golf on TV recognize and appreciate that Tiger is a very gifted athlete.

But what will happen to golf if Tiger does not return? How will Tiger’s adultery affect golf fans in the U.S.?

I fear the effects will be long-lasting. Tiger’s unwillingness to deprive himself of fleeting passions will unintentionally deprive his fans of the joy that comes from watching him play.

Pop superstar Whitney Houston has recently restarted a career that was on hold through most of the past decade due to years of drug abuse. A few months ago, she was interviewed by Oprah Winfrey.

Oprah called Houston’s voice “a national treasure” and asked her if she feared she had lost the gift. Oprah’s question implied that God had entrusted to Whitney “the voice,” and that drug abuse may have stolen that treasure from the nation.

In her response, Whitney seemed oblivious to the thought that her voice was given to her for others. And unfortunately, despite her recent sales comeback, Houston’s voice is nothing compared to what it was in the early 1990′s. Years of drug abuse have left her with a mere echo of her earlier talent.

These two examples remind us that sin leads to the squandering of God’s gifts.

The parable of the prodigal son emphasizes this idea of squandering in great detail. When the younger son asks for his inheritance, the father surprisingly obliges. The prodigal received his share of cattle, land, and food. “Not many days later,” the text says he “gathered everything together,” implying that he sold off all his father’s stuff at cheap prices so that he could hightail it out of town.

Sin always leads to the squandering of the Father’s good gifts.

The Evil One is not content merely to hold people in spiritual bondage and lead them to hell. He wants to diminish even the contributions they make to the common grace we benefit from in society.

In Satan’s world of darkness, it’s not enough to destroy Houston’s soul or expose Tiger’s lust. He wants to rob Tiger’s fans of their joy in watching him play golf, or rob the nation of Whitney Houston’s voice.

Sin always affects more than the individual who commits the offense. Whenever we sin, we are consciously or unconsciously affecting those around us. We are robbing those around us of the particular gifts that God has given to us. The pastor who commits adultery not only affects his family by losing his ministry. He squanders his gifts and deprives future generations of what could have been a legacy of faithful preaching and teaching.

Satan not only wants our heart; he wants our hands. He wants to limit our contributions to the world by killing and destroying us, while also stealing from those who might benefit from our lives.

The good news is… there is a prodigal God who lavishes grace at a rate faster than we can squander his gifts. When we come home empty-handed, we are ushered into loving arms.

My wife and I rarely get to watch movies in the theater. We live in a town with just one small theater (two screens) that only has matinees on weekends. Life with two small children doesn’t afford us much time for the cinema. If I remember correctly, we only watched three movies this year.

But in between Christmas shopping and celebrating our anniversary a couple weeks ago, we made time for The Blind Side.

I had heard about this film from critics who labeled the film “schmaltzy” and “sentimental”. I had also heard from evangelical Christians who were excited about the film’s portrayal of a Christian family as decent and respectable. Knowing the storyline included a cross-racial adoption, I couldn’t wait to see the film for myself.

Most of the elite movie critics hated The Blind Side. Some called it “curiously devoid of drama or suspense” (as if real life is always action packed). Others said it was “an uninspired sports story” (even though the sports aspect is not the central theme).

Expected to be a holiday season “sleeper,” The Blind Side defied box office expectations, ignored the critics, and slowly rose to #1. It’s a family-friendly, feel-good film – the kind that usually does well this time of year.

Here are some of my thoughts about the film. (Caution: a few spoilers follow!)

First, I was pleasantly surprised at the respectful portrayal of the Touhy family. I’m used to seeing Christians portrayed as self-righteous and hypocritical, so it was refreshing to see a family that prays together and tries to live according to their Christian convictions.

The Touhys take seriously the idea of “Christian duty.” They also expect other Christians to live up to their name. My favorite part of the film was when one of Leigh Anne Touhy’s friends was interrogating her about having a “black boy” sleeping in the same house as her daughter. Leigh Anne’s response was to look her square in the eyes and say calmly, “Shame on you.”

Secondly, the movie makes a case for adoption that avoids the cynical worldview of many Hollywood films. When investigators charge the Touhys with taking in Michael Oher in order to groom him to play football for their alma mater, the accusation is intended to anger movie goers, who have already come to see the Touhys’ charity as coming from a sincere heart.

In many films, directors and writers explore the selfishness of the main characters. The Blind Side, on the other hand, shows Christians doing hard things because of their religious convictions. The nonchalance of the family in taking in this teenager is what most stands out in this film. The Touhy kids have no trouble calling Michael “brother” and treating him like one of the family. In this story, we see a picture of God’s grace in adoption.

But some evangelicals, in our zeal to embrace a movie that treats us respectably, have given this movie too much credit. I have heard a few rumblings about how “the gospel shines through in this movie.” Actually, no. You won’t find any mention here of Jesus dying for our sin and rising again. This is a movie that portrays Christian family values and makes a positive case for adoption. It should be appreciated as such. But family values are not the gospel.

Also missing is the church. We see the family with Christian school friends, but when it comes to portraying the community of faith, the Touhys seem to be on their own.

Finally, the family dynamic may be accurately portrayed, but it is not always worthy of emulation. The family doesn’t decide together to take in Michael Oher. Leigh Anne does. Tim McGraw does a good job portraying the likeable husband, but there is little for him to do except nod in agreement to the spiritual leadership of his wife. Leigh Anne wears the pants. Mr. Touhy is just an accessory.

In the end, The Blind Side is a pro-adoption, pro-family movie. We don’t need to say that it is a Christian movie, or that it’s a picture of the gospel, or anything else, in order to appreciate its pro-family message for what it is. My wife and I enjoyed the movie and we hope that it continues to do well at the box office.

Do you remember the Columbine shootings ten years ago? Do you recall how amazed we were that the students were using cell phones to call their parents from inside the school? The proliferation of cell phones was a new development, and we were stunned at the capability of communications during a hostage situation.

Looking back, our previous astonishment seems quaint now. The leaps and bounds of technology in the past ten years are unprecedented. Here are nine examples of how the communication available through the internet is changing our world.

1. A middle-aged frumpy Susan Boyle auditions for Britain’s Got Talent, wows the judges, and then becomes a sensation on YouTube. This Fall, her debut album sold more copies (700K) its first week than the new releases of Whitney Houston (305K) and Mariah Carey (168K) combined.

2. An unusual wedding entrance becomes a YouTube sensation. Weeks later, the nation’s top-rated comedy, The Office, incorporates the idea into the wedding for main characters, Jim and Pam.

3. A young woman in New York named Julie Powell decides to spend a year cooking every recipe in Julia Child’s famous book, Mastering the Art of French Cooking. She starts a blog as a journal. The popularity of her blog leads to a book deal and eventually a popular movie that tells the story of her life and Julia Child’s in parallel.

4. Jason Sadler wears a different T-shirt every day and blogs about it. Companies pay him for the publicity. He makes 83K a year. Who said you couldn’t make money using social media?

5. More and more companies are cutting back on travel and starting to use Skype for conference calls and job interviews. Skype is also changing the way immigrants think about their new country. The USA and EU are no longer “melting pots,” but more like “mosaics” as people from other cultures move in and maintain close ties and frequent video communication with friends and family at home.

6. Politicians are utilizing Twitter as a way of keeping lines of communication with their constituents (and fans). Sarah Palin has more than 35,000, Karl Rove 95,000, and Barack Obama 2,800,000. The prevalence of social media has caused the Gridiron Club to lift the “off-the-record” rule for its annual dinners. There is no stopping the flow of information!

7. Disgruntled church members are utilizing the internet as a way of stating their discontent. Bellevue Baptist in Memphis, Two Rivers in Nashville, and Coral Ridge Presbyterian in Florida have all had to deal with situations in which dissenting members aired their concerns on public websites. Church leaders claim the sites perpetuate gossip and do harm to the Body of Christ (I agree).

8. Vast amounts of religious materials are now available online. What used to be hard to find (early Christian writings, ancient sermons, commentaries) are now easily accessible and helpfully categorized.

9. Thousands of sermons – audio, video, manuscripts – from pastors are available for free. The upside? Prominent pastor-theologians like John Piper, W.A. Criswell, John MacArthur and others whose materials are a gift to the church. The downside? Rants from people like Steven Anderson (of YouTube fame) who pray for the president’s death.

We are living in the midst of a communications revolution. The only comparison that can be made is the invention of the printing press. Last time there was a communications revolution, a Reformation of the church took place. Will we see the new technology harnessed for the glory of God this time around?

Russell Moore’s review of David Michaelis’ book, Schulz and Peanuts: A Biography (Harper Collins, 2007) is one of the best book reviews I’ve read in a long time. His recommendation is what initially prompted me to pick up a copy of this book. So let me point you to Moore’s excellent review first, and then to a few thoughts of my own about this fascinating biography of Charles Schulz, the creator of Charlie Brown and the Peanuts gang.

According to Michaelis, Charles Schulz was ambitious from his childhood. Not only was he artistically gifted, Schulz was aware of his gifts. Growing up, he longed for a way to use his gifts, but his family did not support his artistic endeavors. 

Later in life, Charles Schulz repeated the mistakes he saw in his own parents. His parents were distant and somewhat cold to him. But instead of growing close to his own children, Schulz showered his fatherly affection on his comic strip characters. At one point, his abdication of parental responsibility leads him to help his daughter travel to a different country in order to obtain an abortion.

Despite the fact that Schulz’s life story turns out to be sad, this book is fascinating. Michaelis believes that Schulz wrote his life story into the Peanuts comic strips. So throughout this biography, readers are treated to various Peanuts strips inserted into the narrative at crucial moments. These strips help us see what was going on in Charles Schulz’s mind at any given stage in his life.

For example, consider the fascinating example of Peanuts character Lucy Van Pelt before Schulz’s divorce and her subsequent personality after Schulz’s remarriage. Before the divorce, Lucy is a loud-mouthed selfish girl. After the divorce and in the later years of the strip, Lucy mellows out. Michaelis believes that the early Lucy was patterned after Schulz’s first wife. The later Lucy reflected his second wife.

Michaelis also exposes Schulz’s insecurity, even after his stunning success. Schulz felt threatened by the creator of Garfield and worried that Garfield might somehow usurp Peanuts. Even as Schulz is at the top of his game he is still insecure.

The saddest aspect of this book for Christians is watching Charles Schulz, who at one time embraced the Christian faith, slowly abandon his Christian convictions. By the time he dies, he seems to have lost all hope.

Schulz and Peanuts is a brilliant book. The childhood sections might be too long, and the narrative could have used a bit more editing. But overall, this is a terrific biography for anyone who is interested in the life of the man behind the comic strip that is still cherished by readers all throughout the world.

Whenever Simon Cowell gives a brutally honest assessment of an American Idol performance, all of America watches the response of the contestant.

What will they say?

Will they take the criticism in stride?

Will they incorporate the truth and become better?

Or will they lash out against Simon (who is usually right)?

For years, we have heard the common refrain from contestants: “Well, Simon… That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.” Perhaps this reply showcases our culture’s resistance to seeing anything as objectively good or bad. Is beauty only in the eye of the beholder? Or are there transcendent standards of beauty and goodness?

This year, contestants have been more apt to admit that they might have performed badly. But they have often sought to justify themselves by saying: “But at least I had a good time.” Or: “Well, I was having fun up there.”

In other words: “It doesn’t matter whether or not I sounded terrible. It doesn’t matter if the arrangement stunk or if America and the judges thought the performance was lacking. What matters is that I had ‘fun’.”

It has been funny to watch Simon and the other judges respond politely, saying “Good for you” while probably thinking, America doesn’t care if you were having fun. Are you good enough to go on to the next round or not?

I wonder how many people in our society respond to the consequences of their bad decisions in the same way. “At least I had fun.”

I lost my job because I was looking at pornography at work, but at least I had a “good time.”

My wife left me because I was committing adultery, but at least the “affair” was “fun.”

My kids are rebelling because I have been an absent and distant parent, but at least I have had “fun” in all the extracurricular activities I was involved in.

However, people never really look back on their failures and think of how fun it was at the time. Equipped with 20/20 vision into their past, they see the whole picture and regret their failings. Sadly, those without Christ will race forward blindly lacking wisdom, discernment and direction and inevitably slam into more walls of failure and regret.

Our society believes that enjoyment of this life is the primary purpose of life. We are Epicureans now. Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. Negative consequences may come to us because of negative choices, but we can justify those consequences by appealing to “fun” and “pleasure.”

It is sad to watch people who appeal to the “good time” get voted off the next week. Real life comes crashing down. We face judgment for our choices. Perform badly for the judges on American Idol and the American public who is watching at home on TV and you will be sent packing, whether you had a good time or not.

The judgment of God is similar. Our performance before a holy and righteous God is sadly lacking. We have not reflected him rightly. We have not fulfilled the human vocation he gave us in the Garden. We have rebelled against his rule.

How many people will face the judgment of God in the same way? When those who refuse to bow the knee to Christ (the only one to offer God a perfect performance) will stand before his throne and hear the chilling words, “I never knew you,” how will they respond?

“Well, at least I had a good time…” could be the sad, last words of the sinner doomed to destruction.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

The second book of C.S. Lewis’ Narnia series, like many sequels, does not deliver the magic of the first. The movie version, however, is every bit as good, if not better than the first, perhaps because the filmmakers took a certain measure of creative license in order to make Lewis’ good book better.

Prince Caspian is a strong movie with relatively few flaws. I will list some of the film’s strengths and then speak to some of its weaknesses.

• The actors playing the four Pevensie children have aged gracefully over the past three years and it is good to see the cast back in fine fettle.
• The new characters are well-done, especially Reepicheep, whom I was glad to see portrayed as valiant and not merely “cute.”
• Trumpkin the dwarf provided some needed comic relief.
• The filmmakers were smart to begin the story with Caspian’s flight into the woods (an idea I was hesitant about at first).
• When Lucy first glimpses Aslan, the filmmakers choose not to reveal him, increasing our sympathy with the older Pevensie children’s unbelief. Good move.
• The castle attack in which a minotaur, while being shot with arrows, holds up the gate so the Narnians can escape is terrific – providing another powerful example of self-sacrifice.
• Keeping Aslan off screen until the latter part of the movie was another smart move. When he reappears, he is more majestic and mighty than in the first movie.

Even a good movie has its weaknesses. Here are a few.

• The budding romance between Susan and Caspian was completely unnecessary.
• Peter and Caspian almost succumb to the temptation of the White Witch, and yet neither character exhibits repentance for this treasonous action.
• I have no problem with the filmmakers making Peter a flawed hero whose first decision leads to destruction. Yet it would have been nice to see Peter demonstrate repentance for his pride and not merely remorse for the consequences of his actions.
• The filmmakers substituted character development (especially Trufflehunter and Trumpkin) for elongated battle scenes.
• As I worried, the terrific celebration scenes from the first book are all but absent here. In the novel, the celebrations keep Caspian from being all about battle. More importantly, the Narnian joy provides the motivation for the battles. Without the celebratory dances and songs, the moviegoer is left wondering why the battle is necessary. So the Telmarines are bad and the Narnians are good. But why is Narnia worth fighting for? Lewis wisely incorporated scenes that were filled with mirth and happiness and freedom. The filmmakers left them out.

Minor quibbles aside, Prince Caspian deserves to do well at the box office. It is true that this series is becoming a junior version of Lord of the Rings, but the movie is still immensely satisfying on many levels. I am looking forward to The Voyage of the Dawn Treader in 2010.

Related Posts:
My Hopes for Prince Caspian
Easter: The Epic
Book Review: Inside Narnia

On April 9, at the end of the American Idol charity special “Idol Gives Back,” the Top 8 Finalists closed the show by singing “Shout to the Lord.”

What are we to make of this?

Why did they change “my Jesus” to “my Shepherd” at the beginning of the song, especially when other artists had no qualms about singing songs that explicitly mentioned Jesus?

Has “Shout to the Lord” arrived in the collective consciousness of our civil religion, much like “Amazing Grace” and other well-known hymns?

Are there Christians behind the scenes of American Idol who are promoting Christian songs?

What does it say to see Christians singing this song together with a Mormon as one of the contestants?

[Update: On April 10, the Top 8 sang "Shout to the Lord" again. This time, they sang Jesus' name. Watch below...]

Let the discussion begin! Comments are open.

With the premiere of the next Narnia movie just over a month away, I decided it would be a good time to re-read one of my favorite Narnia books – Prince Caspian. Though I am excited about seeing the film version, I cannot help but feel a tinge of sadness as I read the book again, knowing that once I’ve seen the film, I will never be able to read Prince Caspian quite the same way. Once you see the film version of a favorite book, your imagination is held captive to the images of the filmmaker and you can never quite imagine it the way you did the first time.

This time, I read Prince Caspian chapter by chapter with Devin Brown’s terrific commentary Inside Prince Caspian. Last year, I picked up Brown’s first Narnia companion (see my review for Inside Narnia here) and enjoyed it thoroughly. Inside Prince Caspian is even better. Brown does what few authors have done before, offering a literary commentary on C.S. Lewis’ work that delves into spiritual interpretations only when necessary. Brown also weaves the Narnia storylines together, showing how Caspian is interpreted against the backdrop of the other six books.

I look forward to seeing the film version of Prince Caspian, but I confess to having rather high expectations. The film version of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe did not disappoint me, although there were several areas that could have been improved. Here are a few hopes I have for Prince Caspian – the movie:

• Make Aslan bigger. Lucy’s perception of Aslan is that he is much bigger in Prince Caspian. According to the trailer, it seems that Aslan is about the same size.
• Foreshadow Susan’s future. In Prince Caspian, Susan becomes a character that is harder to like, preparing the way for her exit and the fact that she will not return to Narnia again.
• Give film time to the celebrations. Prince Caspian is a book about reclaiming celebration. I hope that the movie will not devote so much time to the battles that it leaves too little time for the joyfulness of the parties.
• Start with the four children. It is rumored that the film version will begin with Caspian’s backstory and lead up to the arrival of the Pevensie children later. I hope this is not the case. Much of the book’s drama comes from the discovery of the backstory as the main narrative progresses.
• Make Reepicheep valiant, not merely cute. I fear that the tendency of a filmmaker associated with Disney will be to make Reepicheep the comic relief of the film. That’s okay so far as it goes, as he provides some comic relief in the book as well. But I hope that the humor of Reepicheep will not overshadow his valiant nature.

If you are a fan of the Narnia series and are planning on seeing Prince Caspian in May, I encourage you to read the book once more before walking into that theater. And if you have time, pick up Devin Brown’s Inside Prince Caspian. You won’t be disappointed.

written by Trevin Wax. copyright © 2008 Kingdom People Blog.

Dear Dad and Mom,

I’d like to use this space to publicly thank you for being parents that were willing to take the hard road instead of the easy road.

Thank you limiting my access to computer games and Nintendo when we were growing up.

I realize it would have been much easier for you to let the Nintendo babysit us four kids. But you put our well-being ahead of your own comfort and taught us to read, write, make music, create radio shows, play in the backyard, and make movies. We’re the better for it today.

Thanks for not giving in to our whiny pleas for the newest video games that our neighbors had. Thanks for insisting that we would be better, happier, more well-rounded children by causing us to entertain ourselves instead of sit like zombies in front of Mario and Luigi.

Thanks for not being legalistic about Nintendo. We appreciate the rainy days in which you brought down the Nintendo from the closet top shelf and let us play our hearts out. But thanks even more for putting the Nintendo back up when the sun returned.

Thanks for allowing us to play educational computer games. But thanks also for the thirty-minute timer you set for us each time we played.

Thanks most of all for being involved, for caring about what we were putting into our minds. Thanks for giving us a childhood that some of our friends missed out on – the backyard romps in the clubhouse, the creek Kingdom, all the cassette tapes we made as we created our own sitcoms.

Thanks for the parameters and guidelines you set up for us. We didn’t understand or like them then, but they look like good parameters we want to set for our own kids now.

Love,

Trevin

written by Trevin Wax © 2008 Kingdom People blog