Our church family is considering 1 Peter together on Sunday mornings. This past week, we began chapter two and considered verses 1-3, where Peter says:

So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander. Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation—if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.

As I was thinking and praying over these verses last week, I was struck by the fact that the way we read and apply these verses are probably not actually in line with Peter’s intention. That may or may not be OK.

When modern readers approach these words, the first thing we think is possibly that Peter is slighting his audience by comparing them to “newborn infants.” Many understand this to mean that Peter is telling his audience that they should be more mature than they are. But that doesn’t seem to be Peter’s point at all. “Like newborn infants” describes the way we should “long for the pure spiritual milk” rather than the audience.

What’s more, the command, the imperative section which actually opens this section: “put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander” is subordinate to the longing for “the pure spiritual milk.” In other words, our progress in putting away malice, deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander are directly proportionate to how we long to be spiritually nourished.

And that brings me to an interesting consideration. I have heard this section and ones like it applied along the following lines: “If you don’t read your Bible everyday, you don’t love Jesus.” Yet, as Scot McKnight points out in his NIVAC Commentary on 1 Peter:

“To think, however, of personal Bible study is anachronistic; these Christians did not have copies fo the Bible and had to rely on sermons and the local archives for such things. It makes best sense to see here the spiritual nourishment that comes to Christians in various ways. If my view fo the recipients of this letter is correct in that they were socially disenfranchised, then they were likely illiterate as well.”

Now, don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that just because the early Christians didn’t have Bibles, we shouldn’t read ours. We live in a day of unprecedented luxury when it comes to the availability Scripture. Many of us have multiple copies. What is interesting here is that we often view reading the Bible as an obligation rather than a luxury. The early Christians didn’t read it because they didn’t have it. What’s our excuse?

Something to think about is that we hear Peter’s admonition to “ long for the pure spiritual milk” “Like newborn infants” as a command to individuals to have “personal” Bible study. We maximize a meaning Peter probably did not intend while we minimize exactly what he did mean. McKnight suggests that Peter’s use of “pure spiritual milk:”

“refers to the very things that nourish the Christian community in its growth: knowledge of God, prayer, instruction in the gospel, faithful obedience, and hearing God’s preached word.”

Peter seems to assume community as the primary context for his admonitions while we assume individuality. We must understand that our individualistic mindset actually removes us from the blessings and challenges presented by much of Scripture. Peter wanted the community to crave spiritual nourishment so that they could put away the things of the old self together. We isolate ourselves and our struggles and then feel pressure to present a facade to the community. We are quick to believe that the Christians who know the most about God are the ones we should listen to. But these are not necessarily the same individuals who know God the best. Knowing that honey tastes sweet is not the same thing as tasting honey.

We must be careful of any approach to Scripture that reads it through an individualistic lens and understand that community is always the assumed context and the implication/application is rarely “just spend more time studying.” It’s telling that we so readily assume that our reading of Scripture is the intended meaning. Peter probably did not have personal Bible study in mind while we do. Peter probably assumed a community context for spiritual growth while we do not.

May we form communities that long to be nourished together so that, together, we can leave the old ways behind.

I love year-end lists. Not only because it asks us to reflect on media intake but because it’s a great way to discover what we might have missed in any given year. It’s a chance, not to gloat in your own preferences but learn from others.

As many of you know, I partner with my great friend Mark Whiten in something called the Habañero Collective. We used to do a music/interview podcast exploring/challenging notions surrounding “Christian” music but we don’t do that anymore. Somewhere along the way, it morphed into hosting house shows. Future plans include world domination but I’m getting ahead of myself. For now, here are some of our favorite picks of 2011 in various categories:

• Browse Mark’s 2011 picks
• Browse my picks for my favorite concerts of the year
• Browse my some of my favorite songs of the year
• Browse my favorite albums of 2011
• Browse my 2010 picks
• Browse my 2009 picks

Dave Cruver recently posted these videos put together by David Murray trying to simplify and explain the main eschatological (studies of the ‘end-times’) positions and I wanted to pass them along:

Historic Premillennialism:

Dispensational Premillennialism:

Postmillennialism:

Amillennialism:

One of the questions I find myself asking quite a bit, to myself and others is: Do you have joy? I ask this question because we are commanded in Philippians 4:4 to rejoice always. Always. In all circumstances. I know it’s a bit cheesy, but I always think of “rejoicing” in terms of re-joying, returning to joy.

But it doesn’t take long for most of us to realize that there’s a problem here. Paul commands us to rejoice always. Always. In all circumstances. But I’m certainly not happy in all circumstances. In fact, my happiness is often dependent on my circumstances. My circumstances often direct my emotions. When something bad happens, I get sad or angry. When something good happens, I get happy. My emotions can seem to be blown about by the wind in every direction. But Paul commands that we rejoice always. Always. In all circumstances. Is it possible that joy is more than happiness? More than emotion?

I think that we oftentimes struggle with the concept of joy precisely because we have reduced joy to an emotion. But if Paul can command that we rejoice always. Always. In all circumstances, then certainly joy must somehow transcend our circumstances. In fact, Paul challenges our notions of joy as an emotion when he goes so far as to say that he rejoices in suffering (Romans 5:3; Colossians 1:24)! While it’s possible that he is saying that we should be happy about suffering, it seems as though he’s saying more; something deeper, something like what James says when he says that we should consider our trials with joy (James 1:2-4).

So what is joy if it is not exactly happiness? Surely happiness can be encompassed in joy, but they cannot be equated. I’m often left wondering, is it possible to be sad and joyful at the same time? Yes, it is. It is not natural, but it is certainly possible. Think about if you’ve lost a loved one whom you know to have been redeemed by Jesus. You are sad that they are no longer with us, but you are filled with joy that they now meet their Savior face-to-face, and that, if they suffered, they have been relieved. You have joy stirring about with your sadness and no one can truly explain it.

Joy seems to be a state of being, a mixture of gratitude, love and peace and it transcends human emotion. It is deeper. It is larger, it is brighter. Joy is our response to who Jesus is and what He has done. That in spite of us, He died for us, paying sin’s penalty. He rose from the grave, breaking sin’s power over us and now intercedes on our behalf. Joy is being gripped by the reality of our union with Christ, that what is true of the Savior is true and is becoming true of His people; that, despite our circumstances, we are now seated with Christ in the heavenly places (Ephesians 2:6) and transferred us from the domain of darkness into the kingdom of Christ, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins (Colossians 1:13-14).

These realities are not dependent on our circumstances. In fact, there is a paradox here: suffering often brings us closer to Jesus. So, though we might be sad in the midst of trials, we can be filled with joy because we realize that the dross of our sin is being removed so that we will shine more like Jesus. We have a different perspective. Only then can we consider the sufferings of this life as “slight momentary affliction” (2 Corinthians 4:17).

I wonder if we don’t fully understand joy because we don’t fully dwell at the Cross. For many of us, salvation is simply about getting into heaven when we die. It is not a continual state of being, of leaving independence behind and becoming more dependent on Jesus, of being enthralled by God and enchanted with the Cross. We minimize both God’s holiness and our sinfulness and salvation becomes cheap. But when we dwell deeply at the cross, what Jesus did for us and our response to it becomes the filter through which we see everything and, though our emotions my be blown about, they become set firmly on the foundation of joy and we persevere.

By now, many of you have watched the series finale of LOST and many have developed sharp perspectives of the ending. Some of you like it, some of you don’t and many of you were, in fact, quite frustrated by it, whether you felt that you were owed more answers, or you didn’t like the answers you were given.

I personally ove that many of us were so frustrated by the ending of LOST. Sure, it ultimately undermined a Christian worldview, but at the same time, it also, (perhaps unwittingly) supported many Christian beliefs. Many of us were left unsatisfied because we wanted clear-cut answers. Answers, which, I’m not so sure we ever should have expected in the first place. Walt was not the point so why does it matter where he went? The Man in Black didn’t need a name. The “flash-sideways” perspective was the result of the bomb, what do you need beyond that?

In the end, LOST owed no one any clear answers because life gives us no clear answers. God often gives us no clear answers (at least from our perspective). Why should we expect a piece of fiction to do what life does not? Is that part of the role of fiction? Do we expect fiction to do what life does not and we’re upset when it somehow doesn’t? Isn’t part of the role of art actually to hold up a mirror to life? If LOST got us, even for a moment, wrapped up in a story greater than ourselves and thinking of deeper things, isn’t that enough? You may not like the way it ended, but it owed us no more answers that it gave. It was never about the answers but about the questions.

And yet, the show did provide many more answers than we may initially realize: There are rules. There is good and there is evil. We cannot live without faith. We are each called individually to a purpose that is best fulfilled in community. Community thrives best, as Alan Hirsch might say, when it becomes communitas. Sometimes we need to ask for help. There is a purpose greater than us. We are each called to lay down a piece of ourselves for the benefit of others and there is one who not only shows us how but does it for us. “Free Will” is rarely as free as we think it is. Truth will set you free. Purposes beyond ourselves often require sacrifice. Our choices have consequences. Everyone needs redemption and we cannot earn ultimate redemption (perhaps the “Shephard” lays down his life?). Deep down, we are all lost and long to be found. And, love wins.

That’s a lot of answers. Beyond that, why aren’t we comfortable with tension? Why aren’t we comfortable with unresolved issues? Whether or not it meant to, LOST reminds us that there is an ultimate resolution that is beyond us and we all have a lot of questions about that ultimate resolution. We all long for that resolution even if we don’t fully understand what it means or how to get it. It lies beyond us and yet ultimately and intimately involves us. We are part of something greater than ourselves.

Beyond that, what did you expect?

Ok folks, here are my picks for the tops of 2009. By way of explanation: I went with songs rather than albums because, well, I think the album format is almost dead.

Television:

• Community. For those of us who liked Joel McHale on E’s Talk Soup, this is a perfect venue for his humor. Good to see Chevy Chase on his game.
• The Office. Yes, I think the dual-manager plot is tiring. However, these characters are so darn loveable that I keep looking forward to Thursday nights.
• Curb Your Enthusiasm. Ok, so I have to watch these on video since I don’t have HBO. But, without a doubt, this is brilliant television.

Songs:

• Something Is Squeezing My Skull by Morrissey:

Moz is over 50 and still rocking. Jesse Tobias (briefly with Red Hot Chili Peppers and formerly with Alanis Morissette) provides some deafening guitar, and the songs frank discussion about the mind-numbing effect of anti-depressant drugs is powerful, culminating in the refrain “don’t give me anymore, please don’t give me anymore.” Also, Morrissey believes in miracles!

• I Am Weary With My Sighing by Doug Burr:

Denton’s own Doug Burr is the real deal. “Weary” is on Shawl, Burr’s 2009 album of Psalms. Yes, Psalms as in the Bible. What do you get when you add Burr’s twang, Bible verses, slide guitar, and great backing vocals? Brilliance.

• Wrong by Depeche Mode:

Ok, so Depeche Mode has been putting out mediocre albums for over a decade. Each album has 1 or 2 good songs, and thanks to iTunes, fans are no longer subjugated to the crap. 2009’s Sound of the Universe is no exception. It is mostly forgettable, except for this catchy song

• Crown on the Ground by Sleigh Bells:

A must-here song. It is loud and obnoxious but singer Alexis Krauss has an irresistible voice. This song has such a monstrous riff!

• Always Like This by The Bombay Bicycle Club:

This is a song that has grown on me. Lead singer Jack Steadman’s wobbling voice is intriguing and the song has a great hook.

• Island Is by Volcano Choir:

Justin Vernon gives us another great offering from his side project, Volcano Choir. Island, IS is an interesting combination of Vernon’s earthy tone and tripnotic beats.

Videos:

• I Love You Better by the Maccabees.

It’s a good song and the freeze frames are pretty cool:

Websites:

• Facebook, of course. There is no better social networking site. It is an internet party for the masses. But beware, new social site are first for the masses but quickly become elitist. We saw this with blogs. Remember when *everyone* had a blog? Well, I bet most of us did have now consolidated or stopped altogether. There is no way to monitor ALL those blogs. The same is true with Facebook friends, so be looking for some elitist level or jump to somehow distinguish popular face bookers with lollygaggers. It will be the internet version of Lettermen’s jackets.
• Urbanspoon. Where to eat!?! Wonder no longer. Urbanspoon will help find the right joint and save you from wasting your money on less-than-stellar meals. Why is it great? Customer reviews, neighborhood searches, connectivity with facebook and MySpace, and search-ability (you want Indian food in Gary, Indiana? Just go to Urbanspoon and vuala!) make this the end-all site for dining out.