Sunday, August 31, 2008

Song of the Week #2


After the resounding success of last weeks Song of the Week, where I managed to receive an actual comment on the post (never mind that it was from my sister...and that she was making fun of my musical tastes - the point is, I got a comment), I've decided to continue on with another song this week.

Moving into slightly more upbeat tones and such, I've gone for Just Stay by Kevin Devine. It's one of the many great songs that feature on his latest and most wonderful of albums, Put Your Ghost To Rest.

I saw him play live in Chicago last year, and he was excellent - eclipsing even a personal favourite of mine in Owen. He actually played in Dublin last May, but it was on a Tuesday night and for some unknown reason I was actually working at the time, so I couldn't go.

Anyway, give this song a listen and let me know what you think...or don't, as the case may be.


Saturday, August 30, 2008

Something Different

Some of you may be aware that I like to dabble in the music recording business every so often. I used to use a free recording program called Audacity to do my dirty work, but a few months ago when I was earning money and putting it to good use (read: squandering it on expensive things like laptops and such) I decided to go all professional and buy a Yamaha AW1600 Digital Recorder. It's an incredible piece of equipment, and as of yet, one which I am still very unfamiliar with. Every time I go to read the manual I just get lost in a sea of 'buses' and 'stereo tracks' and 'mixdowns' and 'loop samplers' etc etc.

However, I have figured out the extreme basics of the machine. I can play my guitar and get the recorder to, well, record it. I can also play several tracks on top of each other, and I can even add in some effects. Armed with this exact knowledge a few months back, I decided to go about recording a version of 'When I Survey The Wondrous Cross'.

Taking a Christian song and recording my rendition of it was something I did a lot of with Audacity, so I decided to continue that on in the new, more expensive era of my home recording. With this particular song, I first of came up with the idea of an almost Braveheart-esque drum beat going right through it, and building up at the end for a rousing finale. Everything else kind of just spawned from that. The drums and bass were both recorded from my keyboard, hence their poor quality. The acoustic guitar and vocals were done through a very nifty condenser microphone, and the electric guitar was picked up with a Maplin-bought dynamic microphone (what was I thinking?) placed in front of my very tiny amp.

The result is quite rough, because I pretty much just played everything once and kept it, unless I just went horribly off time or something. I didn't really spend any time properly mixing the song either, so to say it doesn't sound very professional would be a massive understatement. Given more knowledge and more time, I'd pan certain things and increase the overall volume too. But since I'm too lazy to aquire more knowledge, and since I'd like to think I have better things to do with my time, I've just kind of left it unproduced.

The reason I post this now, having actually done the recording back in March, is that I just learned how to record the song onto a cd this morning, and therefore transfer it to my laptop. Listening back to it now, I'd of course change some things in terms of structure, but over all I'm reasonbly happy with the outcome given the rawness of what went into it. Anyway, have a listen below (best to do so with headphones) and feel free to tell me what you think - with both honesty and dishonesty more than welcome.

PS - This isn't the song of the week.


Friday, August 29, 2008

Humbug


The following is a question and answer thing I just completed for our church newsletter. It's about my experiences at Encounter earlier this summer, and since I love sharing those with anyone who'll listen (and many who won't), I thought I'd post it on the blog for my loyal reader(s) to see.


What is Encounter and why did you decide to go?

Encounter is a 4 week Christian program where young people from Ireland and America come together to grow in their walks with God and get a taste for the mission field through teaching, training and outreach. You spend 2 weeks doing a 'Sonship Course' and 2 weeks on an outreach team.

I decided to go at the 11th hour, which if you know anything about me, shouldn't be very surprising. My brother had done the program a few years ago, and one of my friends was doing it for the third time this year, so the suggestion was made that I go. After a few weeks of non-stop prayer [?], and after devising a way so that all the good games from Euro 2008 would be recorded for me, I decided to go - not necessarily because I really wanted to go, but because I just knew that this is where God wanted me to go.

First Impression?

As usual for my first day in a strange environment, I wandered around like a boy lost in a supermarket looking for his mommy to rescue him. I got over that phase surprisingly quickly though, and found everyone there to be most friendly and just really good fun. I just clicked with people so quick, and it was almost like some of us had known each other for a really long time. That was truly a blessing from God, and it's what made the whole experience so much more enjoyable.

Best Memory?

I have a lot of fun little memories, but I guess you want to read about something profound and Christiany. So with that in mind, I think my best memory was talking to my discipler Keith for a good 2 hours or so. Without feeling emotionally manipulated or anything of the sort, I was able to be open and honest with this strange Northerner, and just have a life-changing conversation without even realising it at the time. I certainly won't be forgetting it quickly because I still carry the fruits of it with me today.

What you learned/What will you take with you?

I learned a lot about both the heart of God and my own heart. In looking at my own heart, I was able to see it for what it really is, and as the Bible tells us, it’s not the most pretty of things to say the least. But your learning at Encounter doesn't just stop there. There is great hope after all, and for me the biggest thing was both learning and experiencing what it means for God to turn our hearts of stone into hearts of flesh. It's an on going process of course, and you don't become perfect in a lifetime on earth, not to mention 4 weeks at Encounter, but through God's Holy Spirit we are adopted as His sons, and we become increasingly transformed into His image, which really is a thing of true beauty

Do you recommend the experience?

Nah, not really. No, I'm just kidding. I would recommend this experience without hesitation. Though I think it's for 18's and up, I would probably say it's more for people in their 20's. We did have at least one teenager there, but it was mainly 21/22 year olds, with some mid to late 20's thrown in there too. Age aside, I found it a great way to develop good friendships, and a sure way to be forced into relying on the grace of God alone, and not my own feeble strength. Encounter was a time where I could raise an Ebenezer and look back and say 'This is where God moved', and that will always stand to me as I progress in life.

* If, like me pre-Encounter, you don't know what an Ebenezer is, then I suggest you look it up, otherwise the second verse of 'Come Thou Fount' will just be lost on you!

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

The Third Adam


I've been told by my agent that I need to do more short posts in order to mix things up and keep my readers guessing, so that's what I've decided to do. (Read here for an embarrassingly similar statement from one of the many unintelligent (English) footballers plying their trade today.)

Anyway, in reading 'The Divine Conspiracy' by Dallas Willard (every time I hear that name I imagine someone not unlike this man), I came across this quote he used from Adam Clarke. Clarke wrote many years ago that God is

the eternal, independent, and self-existent Being; the Being whose purposes and actions spring from Himself, without foreign motive or influence; He who is absolute in dominion; the most pure, the most simple, the most spiritual of all essences; infinitely perfect; and eternally self-sufficient, needing nothing that He has made; illimitable in His immensity, inconceivable in His mode of existence, and indescribable in His essence; known fully only by Himself, because an infinite mind can only be fully comprehended by itself. In a word, a Being who, from His infinite wisdom, cannot err or be deceived, and from His infinite goodness, can do nothing but what is eternally just and right and kind.

This got me thinking about how small and unpowerful the God I've created for myself really is in comparison to the God of the Bible;* the God Clarke attempts to describe here. Do I truly believe that God can part seas, calm storms, command things to be just my His word, heal the sick, and do all manner of supernatural things here on the earth, His footstool? Do you?

We would do well to meditate more on who God is and what He is about, as told to us in His Word. Because when the storms of life come, we would be much quicker to put our faith and trust in the God the Bible (and Clarke) describes, than we would if we only have faith in a God who forgives us our sins or removes our guilt, but does little else here and now**.

***************************************

* those semi-colons really are quite infectious, even if they aren't punctuationally correct (by the way, is 'punctuationally' a word, or am I spellingly challenged?)

** this is not me belittling forgiveness, just for the record.

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Become A Moussier You


I got a forward a couple of weeks ago asking me to sign a petition to prevent, among others, Joel Osteen from being taken off some radio channel or something. My first thought was of course, 'Prevent!?' I was severely tempted to write back to everyone on the mailing list and let my thoughts on Joel Osteen be known, but I didn't think that would be right.

So instead, I'm going to take a little interview with Joel in which he discusses the finer points of his *gulp* bestseller 'Becoming a Better You', and examine it thoroughly. Here's the link for the video:

Joel Osteen - Become a Greasier You

The interview is done by Borders, a massive bookstore chain in America, with apprantly very low standards. The name of the actual person conducting the interview is not revealed, so I'm going to call him Kyle. He looks like a Kyle.

Anyway, Kyle opens the interview up by saying 'We're here today with Pastor Joel Osteen...'. The madness begins, and we're only 2 seconds into the interview. Joel Osteen may be a lot of things, none of which I shall utter here, but a pastor is not one of them, simply because his gatherings in that ridiculously large arena no more constitute a church than a taping of Dr Phil does. I mean who makes these guys pastors? I say what the Evangelical Church needs to do is appoint one man to be the head of the Church, declare him to be infallible, and leave all the big decisions to him. And that man should be Charles Price. What could possibly go wrong? It's not like this kind of church hierarchy has caused problems or divisions in the past...[?].

We're told the title of Osteen's book is 'Becoming a Better You: 7 Keys to Improving Your Life Everyday'. Does he think that having it be 7 keys makes it more Christian? Probably. I could stop right here and go on for lengths about the folly of such a title, but all in good time my friends.

Osteen's first words are "Oh I took playsher in appreciatin' whut you guys are doin' for us, an I'm jus enjoyin' the tam", having been thanked for appearing in this in-no-way-contrived interview. What Joel means by this is anyone's guess, but he says it with shiny white teeth on display and a southern accent in full swing, so it must be something friendly, warm, and heartfelt.

Kyle says that Osteen's first book (I know I know - He's written two books? But then so has Jordan! I mean even Jaap Stam has a book out there people!), 'Your Best Life Now', was 'um, a phenomenal bestseller'. I like the way he paused as if he was about to say it was a great book, but then realised that he just couldn't say that with a straight face, so he decided to stick with the facts. The facts in this case being that 'Your Best Life Now' has sold over 4 million copies, which means roughly half the people in Osteen's church now own it.

Kyle then asks a valid question - one that is probably on your mind right now. If Osteen has already released a book entitled 'Your Best Life Now', then what the heck does he need to release a second book for? Hasn't he already given his gullible audience the solution to their 'best life' dilemma? Kyle doesn't quite phrase it like this, but that's the gist of it.

Osteen's answer is simple - "I wanned the money". Oh wait. Sorry. I'm quoting what Osteen was thinking. My bad. (I'm a horrible cynic I know, but I'm confident God will sanctify me one of these days.)

What he says is...deep breath..."Well...it...it...basically...I wanned ta...I filt lak payple needed ta keep growin'; we all should keep growin', and thet's whut the book is abowet...'

He says that 'Your Best Life Now' was 'a lot about enlargin' your veeeeshun, and thangs like thet, but this book is abowet whut can we do evry dye to become better...'

So in other words, his first book really didn't help anyone to live their 'best life now', and was thus a complete waste of money (and to think I was so close to buying it). However, Joel has corrected that slight error in the first book by releasing this new book that does actually tell us how to live our best life now. Do we have any reason to believe him? Is Joel Osteen's hair natural? The answer to both those questions, is no.

Joel actually addresses the contradiction in book titles by jokingly asking 'Once you've leeuved your best laf, whut can you do?' Well he answers his own question by saying 'In the book (that's the new book) we talk abowet how you do thet - through better habits, better relytionsheeups, better thinking'. Oh good, because I thought he was gonna be vague about this.

What he more or less openly says is that his first book doesn't tell you how to live your best life, which kind of makes it a bit useless if you ask me. I guess he just figures that any idiot who would possibly buy his first book has done so already, so there's no financial harm in rubbishing it and telling people they need to go out and buy the second installment. In fact there's only financial gain to be had by making such a claim, but I'm sure Joel wasn't thinking of that at the time [?].

Kyle then loses my support, as he compliments some aspects of this book (which obviously means he read it - a major no no, Kyle), specifically the stories Joel tells and the way he can communicate on the level of the common man, by including self-deprecating anecdotes which reveal that Joel himself is still learning. Oh that's Joel Osteen alright - the man with the common touch.

"I think that's part of whut Gods blessed us weeuth, is that I don't know it all -- I said it out there todye..." This is where Joel and I agree. God has indeed blessed us all by not making Joel Osteen the source of all knowledge; the one whom we should emulate. Could you imagine if He had? It would certainly be a lucrative time to be a purveyor of hair mousse and fake tan, that's for sure.

Joel then begins to...um...well...the line 'Red, I do believe you're talking out of your ass' comes to mind. After taking a few nice words like 'practical', 'growing' and 'relate' and meshing them together to form a largely incoherent sentence, we finally get to the meat and veg of this book. The part that explains the solid foundations on which this book is built. The part where Joel gives us an incite into what lies beneath.

"It's not some fancy doctrine or sumthin'; thase are thangs we cen do evry dye."

In other words, what Joel is telling us is that this isn't a book based on Biblical doctrine and sound teaching from the Word of God. Those 'fancy doctrines' don't really have any practical application to our daily lives didn't you know. However what Joel doesn't appear to realise is that he himself is presenting doctrine in this book. He's giving his readers a set ot teachings to adhere to if they want to become better Jesus' people. It may not be 'fancy' doctrine or truthful doctrine, but it's doctrine nonetheless. And what's more, it's the kind of doctrine that 4 million people will pay money to read about, sadly. (Only in America, eh?)

Joel adds that some people give him some grief over the simplicity of his unfancy doctrine. They say 'Well I already knew that'. Oh dear. If the kind of people who read these books already know what you're teaching, then calling it 'simple' is a massive understatement. The words 'obvious', 'common sense', and 'duh' come to mind. In my head, 'Becoming a Better You' contains things like this:

"Key #3 - Relationships. If you want better relytionsheeups, then you should tra talkin' to people more. Whin I don't talk to people as much as I should, I don't have good relytionsheeups. But when I talk more, I have better relytionsheeups, and I become a better may.

Key #4 - Habits. If you want better habits, then you nade to stop practicin' your bad habits, and start practicin' some good ones. I used to park ma SUV on the far sad of the road, but now I park it on the near sad, makin' thangs easier for may and ma waf, and makin' may a better person as a result."

(Notice the way this is both practical, self-depracating, Bible-free, and when you read it you go 'Duh', thus ticking all 4 boxes.)

There's so much more I could comment on from this 7 minute clip, but since the fact that it is complete nonsense is so obvious, I think I'd be wasting my time, and your time too. Plus, it's just too painful to have to listen to Joel talk, not to mention write it all down, so I'm going to spare my own sanity.

Joel Osteen personifies the word 'magoo'. There's no better word to describe him or his kind. I don't even know if I'd call him a heretic, because he's so far removed from the gospel that it would almost be like calling Dr Phil or Tony Robinson heretics. Then again, Joel does operate under the guise of a pastor, and he brings God into the equation whenever he feels the need (which really isn't that often, thankfully), so there has to be at least something heretical about him.

Then again, maybe there's a place for Joel in the Church Of Jesus Christ. Real pastors can take care of all that 'fancy doctrine', and Osteen can take care of the practical applications. Think of a tag-team consisting of R.C. Sproul and Joel Osteen:

Sproul - "The Holy Spirit indwells the believer, working to bring about a more righteous life and heart. We must be careful, however, not to confuse the indwelling Spirit with any deification of the individual. The Spirit is in the believer and works with the believer, but does not become the believer."

Osteen - "Thenk you R.C.. Whut thet manes in practical tuuurms is that way nade to become better payple by having better habits, better relytionsheeups, and better thinking. For example, this one tam, ma waf and I..."

If I know R.C. Sproul like I think I do, he'd definitely be up for that.

Sunday, August 24, 2008

Song of the Week #1


In a gimmicky effort to spice up some interest in this blog (I've been reduced to leaving myself comments at this stage, which is not a good sign), I've decided to add a new feature called 'Song of the Week'. It's pretty self explanatory, but just in case you're still not getting it, I'll explain it to you simply by saying it will involve me posting a song once a week (I bet you're just kicking yourself right now, aren't you?). I'll try not to be too self-indulgent, but no promises.

Since Blogger doesn't yet allow you to post mp3 files, but does allow you to upload videos, I'll be adding these songs in movie form by taking a picture and putting some music to it, thus making it possible for me to upload my songs of choice. Pretty clever, eh?

Without further delay, this weeks song is by a band I've mentioned already in this blog - Sun Kil Moon. I mention them again because they are still playing in Dublin on September 20, and I'd still like people to join me (though I may have recruited a certain bearded American, which pleases me).

The song is called Harper Road and it's taken from their latest album 'April', scorer of 81% on Metacritic, which is no mean feat. If you like to hear people picking guitar strings, or if you like songs where the first verse deals with people picking blackberries, then this one is definitely for you. I love it anyway, and maybe you will too.

PS - The picture used was taken in the aftermath of an overnight hike in the Connemmara Mountains from a few months back - the experiences of which will be spoken about when men gather for many a year to come.


Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Mahwidge

There have been a lot of divorce-related statistics floating around for quite some time now. The general consensus regarding these statistics is that the divorce rate amongst Christians is more or less equivalent to that of non-Christians. This is find very troubling, as a single, male Christian (who enjoys long walks on the beach and good, wholesome conversation).

I don't, however, doubt the validity of the statistic. I do believe that 35% (or whatever the figure may be) of people who say they are Christians and entered into a marriage have suffered divorce. However, what I don't believe is that all of this 35% are in fact Christian. I'm sure there are Christians who for very unfortunate circumstances (i.e. sexual impurity) have had to end their marriage, but my guess (and this is just a guess since I don't have facts and figures and all that) is that most of these failed marriages were anything but Christian, entered into by people who may have been Christian by name, but knew nothing about being Christian by character.

Take the Catholic Church here in Ireland. Now I have a number of theological issues with the Catholic Church in general (none of which I'll discuss here and now), but I have major problems with the way the Catholic Church operates in Ireland. One of those problems is the way the sacrament of marriage is treated so cheaply.

To my understanding (and please correct me if I'm wrong), so long as you've been baptized into the Catholic Church and have gone through the various other membership processes, you're good-to-go in terms of marriage. What a misconception that really is.
Going through a series of motions no more makes someone Catholic than if I were to call myself Australian by going surfing and putting another shrimp on the barbie.

That is not how true Christianity works. All you're doing is taking external actions and proclaiming them as internal truths, which is just not right.


Paul deals with this in relation to the Galatians by saying
,


For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.

You can replace the term 'circumcision' with any number of things. The point is, being a Christian has nothing to do with outward actions or signs - it has to do with an inward transformation.

The Catholic Church in Ireland seems more than willing to marry any Joe and Mary, provided they've gone through the external rigmarole. Forget about the fact that Joe and Mary have been living together for the past 2 years; forget about the fact that Joe and Mary don't really buy into that whole 'no sex before marriage' thing; forget about the fact that Joe and Mary only attend Mass twice a year; forget about the fact that they don't read their Bibles, don't pray, don't have any living faith in Jesus. Provided they say they're Catholics and have the relevant documentation to prove it, then what God has joined together let no man put asunder. What a joke, and what a mockery of what the Bible considers marriage.


The Catholic Church in Ireland has a lot to answer for when it comes to marriage, because they are marrying people under the name of God, when in reality some of these people have no more interest in God than an atheist. That's nothing short of taking the Lord's name in vain, which is no trivial thing.


Of course this isn't just restricted to the Catholic Church, and I don't mean to sound like I'm singling it out (which I kind of am I guess). Living in Ireland, I can't help but use it as an example. If you take a trip across the Atlantic, I have no doubt that a similar modus operandi takes place in the 'born-again' circles of America.


Christians are constantly campaigning against homosexual marriages, a topic which I won't go into right now. However, I think that Christians need to start looking at heterosexual marriages taking place within the Church, and putting a stop to some of those. That's right - down with heterosexual marriages!


Okay allow me to qualify that. What I mean is that if a couple is to get married in a Church and be 'joined together by God', then whoever is marrying them better be as sure as possible that this couple are new creations, to use some Pauline language (by that I mean the language of the apostle Paul, not the language of my mother who is called Pauline).


I mean take a Christian kids camp for instance (I'm going somewhere with this - trust me). When I've had to apply as a leader for one of these camps, whoever is organising it doesn't just accept me on the basis that I say I'm a Christian. That would be absurd. No. They ask me questions about my faith, they ask me about previous experience working with kids, they ask me for references from my local church. Basically, they want to know that I'm living out the Christian life, and therefore whether I'm suitable or not for the task at hand. Surely a more thorough approach should be taken for something as important and sacred as marriage, right?

Joe and Mary walk into a church. They say to the priest or reverend or pastor 'So, would you be able to marry us?' The priest/reverend/pastor says ,"Let me ask you a straight up question first: Are you having sex?" Joe and Mary reply 'Well...um...yes'. The priest says 'Do you think that's wrong?' Joe and Mary say 'Err...no' and the priest says 'Well come back to me when you do'.

That's kind of a strange example I know, but I think it illustrates my point...kind of [?].

If 'Christian' marriages actually involved two people actively living out their faith, how much less would this divorce rate be? No two people should be said to be joined
together by God when they haven't even been joined with God individually, and yet this is happening all around us.

A concrete solution to this I can't really offer, though I can categorically say I'm not talking about something along the lines of License to Wed, which is not a funny movie in case you ever wondered (Oh Robin, where did it all go wrong?). But surely the Church Of Jesus Christ has to have standards. Any couple that is joined together by God must then live under the lordship of God. To proclaim the former while knowing that the latter to be a sham is, as I've said, to take the Lord's name in vain. This must avoided at all costs.

There are of course numerous other reasons as to why Christian marriages are failing, even amonst Christians who do have faith in Jesus and who are regular Church goers etc etc. In his
sermon based on Colossians 3:15-17, Charles price says
,

Now I am fully aware of course, and fully sympathetic to the fact that there are issues which cause a marriage not to continue. But somewhere along the line it would seem to me that the way we conduct our marriages is not out of a rich indwelling of the Word of God, but out of a pragmatism and personal preference and a self-indulgence which permits us, when it's inconvenient, to jettison the Word of God in favour of our preferences.

This depreciation of the Word of God is another huge issue in the church, but not one I'll talk about now (consider it added to the list containing 'Catholicism' and 'Homosexuality').

The point is, if the divorce rate amongst Christians is similar to that of non-Christians, then something is severely wrong with our definitions of both 'Christian' and 'marriage'. Maybe it's time Christians stopped focusing so much energy on stopping gay marriage, and started focusing more on cultivating God-centred, Christ-empowered heterosexual marriages.

Monday, August 18, 2008

Cross-Centred Music


"For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." - 1 Cor. 1:18

It was at a CU meeting about 6 months ago that I heard this song first. We were having a special resurrection meeting (by that I mean we were talking about the resurrection, not actually performing one. Best leave that to Todd Bentley. I hear he's well into double figures now).

Alice, our CU president, decided to open the meeting with a song before one Dr Arden Autry spoke (that was the 'Our story became His story so His story could become our story' talk, for anyone who was there). Now of course don't get me wrong - Alice didn't play or sing the song, though I'm sure she could have (she's a closet pianist, or at least was until I just outed her about 3 seconds ago). She merely put in a CD, located the song, and pressed play. I don't believe I had ever heard the song in question until that moment, but I certainly don't believe I'll be forgetting it. Not until I'm old and crazy anyway.

The song is called 'The Power of the Cross', and it's written by Keith Getty and Stuart Townend - the same duo who've given us the transcendent 'In Christ Alone' and other instant classics. This one might just be my favourite of them all, though it's still too early to tell.

There is just so much to love about it, but I'll mention 3 stand-out things that grab me:

  • It's cross-centred to it's very core. There aren't a huge number of cross-centred songs that I like, both in terms of lyrical content and melody. 'When I Survey' and this one are two of them. It's hard -- nay, impossible -- to encapsulate the impact and significance of the cross into a song, but 'The Power of the Cross' does this ever so well. It's a 'hair standing up on the back of your neck' song if ever there was one.
  • I like the way it shifts between third person and second person in relation to Christ. The first and third verses almost tell the story, whereas the second and fourth verses get more personal - 'Christ' becomes 'You'. It's great writing, and it really gives a wonderful incite into both the objective and subjective power of the cross.
  • Thirdly, I love the change in lyrics for the very last chorus. When you hear it for the first time it really catches you off guard, but in the best possible sense.
We've only done this song once in our church, but I'm hopeful that that will be the first of many times. Songs of this caliber are few and far between, so it's vital we embrace them when they come around. I've sang 'In Christ Alone' scores of times, yet it still remains fresh to this day. I'm confident 'The Power of the Cross' will have a similar fate.

Anyway, if you're interested, here are the words and a nice Youtube video to watch as well:

Oh, to see the dawn Of the darkest day:
Christ on the road to Calvary.
Tried by sinful men,
Torn and beaten, then
Nailed to a cross of wood.

Chorus:

This, the pow'r of the cross:

Christ became sin for us;
Took the blame, bore the wrath—

We stand forgiven at the cross.


Oh, to see the pain
Written on Your face,
Bearing the awesome weight of sin.

Ev'ry bitter thought, Ev'ry evil deed
Crowning Your bloodstained brow.


(Repeat Chrous)


Now the daylight flees;
Now the ground beneath
Quakes as its Maker bows His head.

Curtain torn in two,
Dead are raised to life;
"Finished!" the vict'ry cry.

(Repeat Chrous)

Oh, to see my name Written in the wounds,
For through Your suffering I am free.

Death is crushed to death;
Life is mine to live,
Won through Your selfless love.


Final Chrous:
This, the pow'r of the cross:

Son of God—slain for us.

What a love! What a cost!

We stand forgiven at the cross.


Stuart Townend - The Power of the Cross

Friday, August 15, 2008

The Ring of Ends

The following is the slideshow presentation that our O-team produced after our 2 weeks in Ringsend. There are a few jokes you may or may not get, but even so it's still a decent video, with one of my all time favourite songs in the background.

Between you and me, it was hands down the best slideshow on display at our debrief in Rathdrum. But to put that bold statement into perspective, Team Wexford (whom, for the record, I love very, very much) lumped every last photo they took into one folder, clicked 'play as slideshow', and then opened up Windows Media Player and ran some random tunes from there.

In Keith's own words,

"It was the worst presentation I've ever been a part of, and quite frankly I'm embarrassed to stand here and have you guys watch it."

And what's more, if the photo ratio's are to be believed, then apparently Team Wexford spent most of their time in a local playground. 'Maybe they were evangelising to street kids' you might say. Well, I think this photo and others like it prove otherwise.

Team Wexford know I love them though (see above statement), and that this is just the jealous rant of a man who's still bitter about the fact that they got to sleep in king-sized beds while he slept on top of three strategically placed cushions, all the while trying to fend off advances from his roommate Ryan, who just wouldn't take no for an answer! As Cindy Hylton might say, I was living 'missionar...'. Actually you know what - maybe it's best if I don't repeat that little faux pas.