Be a Ben–Really Bad Metaphor (part 3)

Today has been a glorious day…kind of. My gnarly ear infection, while rendering me rather deaf, has not caused the same pain that it was causing for the previous week. But even beyond the pain reprieve I was also blessed to spend some time with my sister and my bro-in-law Ben.

Ok, if I were to be totally honest, Ben is forcing me to write a blog about him. His self-esteem is quite precarious and I fear that if I do not write about him he might crumple in such a way that may be detrimental to my nieces and nephew’s health. So for the sake of the family I’m choosing to write about him. Remember, it’s for the kids.

Though, this does remind me of an important lesson that we should probably be made aware of. For a period of time I tried to make a series of quality metaphors that sought to transform not only the way we live but virtually everything about how we understand the world.

So with that in mind, here is today’s–Ben inspired–important metaphor:

Ben himself is a metaphor. Yes he’s human–but aren’t we all? Yes, he’s a man–but aren’t we all? No, literally we are not ALL men, but illustratively we are because we all want what all men want: satisfaction. And in this satisfaction we strive to become better men. Better humans. Better Bens. If we are able, if we achieve such a noble goal so to become better Ben’s then we’ll achieve something even more extraordinary–we’ll achieve ultimate manhood. Not a manhood as Braveheart might invite us to define it, but manhood as Ben would have us define it. Doing dishes, respecting our neighbors, eating strawberries, folding napkins, and even (if we’re lucky) downing a beer or two with friends while frolicking in the snow wearing nothing but our childhood snowbibs adorned with rainbows and old cigarette burn marks. So live, be free, frolic. Be a man, be alive, be a Ben. But don’t destroy what we’ve all been working for: equality. Equality between all peoples regardless of race, sex, ethnicity, language, nationality, economic status, place of birth, or citizenship. Equality. That’s what it means to be a Ben. That’s why today has been so wonderful– Ben invites me to a way of life marked by equality, manliness, and-above all-satisfaction. So be satisfied and drink of the sweet nectar known as Ben.

Glasses

$3.99. For $3.99 you too can look like a cool hipster church planter. They’ve done studies you know. Anyone. Literally anyone who puts on these glasses is instantly transformed into something wholly new–something wholly beautiful–something…well…something simply amazing.

Hipster?

Church planter?

Clark Kent?

Fred Armisten?

Trust me.

Feel free to borrow them. These glasses don’t belong to me. They’re too powerful to belong to just one person. No, these glasses belong to you, to me, to the community. They are we and we are us and we are all together…

(sorry for this post. Too much coffee this morning?)

An Epic Chortling War

There’s been a long standing debate in our home concerning who is funnier between the wife and I. You probably think that I’m joking (and understandably so considering that I’m pretty funny…maybe even the funnies person in my house), but I’m not…joking, that is.

Jess seems to think that she’s funnier than I. I seem to think that I’m funnier than she. Don’t get me wrong, Jess is incredibly funny. But lets be honest, I’ve been making people laugh since I nicknamed myself “Jokey” when I was three. Again, I don’t want to diminish my wife’s humor, nor do I want to discourage her from her continued attempts to make the world laugh…but have you been around me? I’m a riot! No seriously, I’m pretty sure that I’m pretty flippin’ funny…right?

Right?

Please tell me I’m right.

I need this right now.

I don’t know if you realize that I have cancer. Would you really look a guy in his virtual eyes who has cancer in his back and tell him he’s not the funniest in his own home? That’s like against the moral code isn’t it?

Right?

Please tell me I’m right.

Okay, okay, I get it! My wife is hilarious. It’s true. Go ahead and steal her phone, look at her text dialogs with people and you’ll see that she’s about the funniest person since Martin Short (bad example?). At night we often sit in bed and seriously laugh for like an hour straight….and it’s mostly because she’s so flippin’ funny. She literally caused me to chortle a few minutes ago. Chortle. Chortle! I chortled! My wife made me chortle and I’m not ashamed one bit!

I’d tell you about some of the funny things she says and does but if I did then it would most definitely seal the deal on the fact that she’s funnier than I. No, it would not seal the deal because you’d see how funny her jokes were but it’d seal the deal because no funny person ever repeats said jokes again (especially in this type of context). That would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am in no way funny…something I’m not willing to accept…yet.

So I’d like to take this moment to honor my wife and to tell the world that Jessica Woods is the funniest woman I’ve ever met (I’ve never met Tina Fey). Not only is she incredibly gorgeous but she’s also the female version of Will Ferrell. And that’s no lie. In fact, it’s quite high praise.

Why Adam and Eve are Ruining my Children

I think I’ve written this blog before but I’m constantly amazed at what I’ve determined is some kind of naturally born, innate, passed-through-our-genetic-makeup set of behaviors that every kid knows. I tend to credit nurture over nature for most of my children’s habits. But there are some that I know I never taught them and I’m certain that they are not teaching them in school.

I mean seriously when do kids get taught “neener neener neener” or some variation of the same? “Nah, nah, nah, nah, na na”…sticks and stones…I know you are but what am I…

It’s got to be that they’re born with it ’cause I watch my kids on the playground vigilantly and while they learn bad habits from other kids (and also graciously pass them on to even more) I’ve never heard them learn those ones. Even still, even if they did hear some of those classic childhood phrases it’s not as if they’re all sitting down together listening, reciting, and repeating together. If I know anything it’s that children do not teach children these idiotic phrases. And that’s a scientific fact! Yet here I am in life listening to my kids use them to appropriately taunt others. No, there’s got to be a better answer…and I think I’ve found it.

It’s got to be that when God created Adam and Eve he gave them two gifts that they had not eared: belly buttons and a set of childish phrases to use toward each other and their animal friends. I’m fairly certain that when Eve ate the apple from the serpent she was like “Hey Adam check out this apple I just ate from this talking snake.” And Adam was like “No thanks. I’m on the Atkins diet and I only eat our animal friends.” and Eve was like “seriously Adam? Riiiight….neener neener neener I bet you can’t eat one! Nah nah nah nah poo poo I ate more apple than you” and Adam was like “Whatever Eve. I know you are but what am I?” and Eve was like “Oh, good one Adam. I’m rubber you’re glue” and Adam was like “Rubber? Glue? Those don’t even exist in our garden utopia…hmm…maybe there is something to those whole apple thing” and Eve was like “Yeah, that’s what I’ve been trying to tell you” and Adam was like “Hmm…fruit, talking serpent, naked lady, childhood taunting…how could I say no?”

and the rest is history.

Does Hope Live Paycheck to Paycheck? Seriously? Does it?

If you watch Hulu at all you’ve probably seen this video. I don’t want to say anything negative about Rethink Church ’cause I know absolutely nothing about them and I don’t really have a practice of talking bad about churches–even churches that I might disagree with, it just does not seem very productive to speak poorly about my family (Right? Even if your family sucks you still don’t shame them publicly)

But in the video one of their big questions is “Does hope live paycheck to paycheck?

Umm…what?

What does that mean?

Does it really live paycheck to paycheck?

…I’m not reasking the question rhetorically, I’m seriously wondering if it does. I don’t know?  Does compassion live paycheck to paycheck? How about kindness? Does kindness put more money in savings? How can we help hope stop its overspending?

Or maybe the idea is that those with hope literally stop living paycheck to paycheck–once they find hope they start making better decisions and start saving more money. Is that the idea?

Or is it a metaphor for how we live our lives when we have no hope. If you’re someone who has little hope in your life do you find that you “live paycheck to paycheck”? Or, in other words, do you find that you’re living moment to moment, expending everything you have as and leaving little legacy behind?

Hmmm…neither of those two options really resonate with me. One would suggest that once you give your life to Jesus you’ll save more. But the reality is that following Jesus invites you to give more and to put your hope in relationship and resurrection not in savings (not that I’m against saving). The other ‘metaphorical’ option doesn’t really resonate with me either simply because it’s tedious and not very clear.

From my perspective here’s what hope can bring (this is by no means an exhaustive list!) Hope:

  • Gives us meaning because it gives us a larger identity that we can find ourselves in
  • Gives us energy because it helps remove that feeling of “what’s the point?”
  • Disappoints. It does. To hope is to raise your expectations and to believe that something beautiful will happen. But on this side of life that isn’t always the case.
  • Is bigger than today. Hope on this side of life disappoints–that’s why those from the Jesus way of life place their hope primarily in resurrection, new life, and a restored creation.
So I still have not solved the mystery before us: what the hell does the question “does hope live paycheck to paycheck” mean! I like hope. I like paychecks. I like that this church is trying to engage in a hope-dialog. I like Hulu. I don’t like commercials. Therefore vis-à-vis, quid pro quo, using the properties of transsubordination, etc. etc. we must deduce that the definitive answer is yes.
done.