my other blog

If you subscribed to this blog, you will find more from me these days on geoffwestlake.com.  It is more my work site. It’s also a wordpress blog, so you can subscribe to that as well.

This site will be used for more of my more difficult, edgier comments, which may upset some Christians, but hopefully will be of help to ordinary people trying to make their way forward.

Cheers.
g

Tattoo

I have been wearing the colors for 10 years now, so I thought I’d make ‘em permanent.

- Primarily it’s about Aboriginal protocol and their just call for treaties. In lieu of a message stick, wearing the colors (Aboriginal flag, of earth, sun, and sky/skin) is a way for me to declare that I am with their basic cause. I have observed protocol as best I can and have the blessing of the Whadjuk elders to be here, and I listen for their wisdom.
- But also, the colors are woven into a Celtic braid, which shows I can bring my heritage to this and find a lot of common ground.
- the three strands can symbolize a lot! The Trinity; cultures brought together by Christ’s blood (Ephesians 3); God’s glory flowing through our cultures…

All this has an aroma of “Shalom” – that’s the Hebrew word inked there. It’s a huge, holistic, sense of all levels of reality finally being right with each other. And I’ve experienced enough of it to think it’s worth identifying myself with the pursuit of it.

.

Creation comments

Let there be...

This is probably not the wisest post, but I thought I’d put myself further out there for the sake of those who may struggle to uphold both science and Scripture, especially in a time when the science is shifting so much. Since I’m already a heretic due to comments about The Shack, I guess I may as well put this out there.

A much respected elder wrote to me recently:

PS  Since I was about 16 years of age I have read, and read, material on the question of origins. Squaring creation or evolution with Genesis has never happened for me. I know the three main schools of thought among Christians but have large problems with them all. My lack of knowledge is the reason for dissatisfaction no doubt, though I have read a ton of books including the latest. But I know what I don’t or can’t believe.

Question. Do you have any settled ideas on this?

Here’s my reply:

Mmmm – not exactly “settled.” But I’m comfortable with where I sit currently.

Back in theological college, as we grappled with the mysteries and paradoxes of our faith (pre-destination / freewill, love / suffering, three / one, etc) I realized in some cases one needs to make peace with the tensions. Creation methodology may be another example. Oh I’m already a heretic for saying that much. But I feel you understand what I mean.

I too find it difficult to settle on what may be true, but not because of the tennis match between Creationists and Evolutionists trading reports and studies. That’s fascinating to watch, but who can sift all the available data? Is that data the only way to know if there’s a God anyway? No. There’s history and experience too. One has to account for all the data including history and experience, not just modern science. I find it difficult to settle simply because I can see more than one way to interpret the data, that would not rock my faith.

I see a continuum, the extremes of which are not helpful:

- The CreationISTS extreme says “if it wasn’t a literal seven days, then the Bible is wrong, and the whole of our faith is in doubt.” That seems a brittle faith to me, and a massive leap of illogic to make! My faith is grounded in the historicity of the resurrection, and historical experience. The specific method of creation is not such a big deal to me as the Creator Himself.

- The EvolutionISTS extreme says that “evolution must be true, and therefore God is ruled out.” That also makes an illogical leap, and is way too dismissive of the historicity of the resurrection, and the validity of spiritual and other-dimensional phenomena.

So ruling out the extreme positions, I guess that somewhere between them we may have a bit of both. How much of either, is the question: how do science and Scripture work together? This is my cosmological question.

Working along the continuum, then, here are my main thoughts.

1. God could have made it all in six days, like Jesus made superb wine in an instant: aged but new.

The earth is made aged for stability, as the wine is made aged for flavor. Therefore science would be tracking the stability processes required to get what we’ve got, and piecing together apparent timelines, rather than tracking actual time. Scientists may say this is a convoluted argument to wriggle out of the evidence, but the quantum conundrums we’ve encountered so far may make this more plausible in time – that’s a long way off though, and not necessary to make this theoretical point. It is possible.

2. How we interpret Genesis is a key, and more than one interpretation is possible.

Genesis creation accounts are not about science. They are theological. Therefore scientific discoveries need not have a bearing on the theological accounts. God’s creation is recorded first poetically, then again as a story, to be orally passed on. When Paul refers to creation (eg Romans 5) he can be referring to it theologically to sufficiently make his own theological point. (Paul wasn’t working in a scientific paradigm either. His case was based on the theological premise provided by Genesis.)

3. Evolution has some merit but not in the mainstream understanding. I don’t buy random selection.

Perry Marshall is a fascinating read. He has a take on evolution that is incredible, about how DNA strands “make choices” about the specific segments to change when threatened. This suggests the finger of God in the choosing (like Mindful quantum behavior) and / or the miraculous design of the molecular “choice” processes in the first place.

The Fall becomes a theological difficulty if we accept some form of evolutionary process. If we evolved under God’s hand, then death would be part of creation from the beginning of its evolution, but Scripture says death wasn’t part of the world until the Fall.
- We might resolve this by saying that God didn’t “breathe his Spirit” into us until we were evolved enough to be in His image.
- Or we might resolve it by using the same old-new argument as in point 1.
- Or we may resolve it by saying that as theological records, Genesis isn’t perturbed by scientific findings about processes: the process of creation may be evolutionary but experienced from a higher, other-dimensional viewpoint, which disarmed death. But death-in-respect-to-God came with our conscious choice to sin, and the out-of-Eden experience reduced us to the dimensions of time and space, giving death its frightening sting.

My current position is a short creation, made old-so-as-to-be-stable. This is my simple way of trying to integrate (with integrity) evolutionary evidence somehow. But I’m still sympathetic with those who try long-earth ways to integrate all the evidence.
Whilst I can’t go with sloppy pop evolutionism (that random mutation is responsible for it all: there just isn’t enough time even in a long-earth evolution) there are alternatives (like the afore-mentioned Perry Marshall.) But still,  the most difficult issue for long-age Christian evolutionists is that of death before the Fall, and how to integrate that without downgrading Scripture’s historicity across the board.

However it could be possible. For example:
- the space-time earth grows over a long-time as part of “Eden” which is the spiritual, more-than-space-time reality.
- seen from that viewpoint of all-dimensions, death might merely be a transformation from one form to another, and thus no problem in Eden.
- But when The Fall occurs and we become restricted to space-time, the viewpoint shifts to space-time, out-of-Eden.
- Now death is final, has a sting, is the consequence of sin for us.
- Perhaps this happens at a late point in a long-earth time-span of the space-time dimension of creation.

This approach then interprets the Creation stories as explanations of other-dimensional realities, just like Jesus’ descriptions of Heaven and Hell: descriptions in our terms, of spiritual other-dimensional realities we simply can’t imagine.
I’m sympathetic to such an approach, though it takes a lot more work for Westerners to grasp, due to cultural reluctance to accept evidences for spiritual dimensions.

Admittedly there is much conjecture here, but I maintain there are  ways to interpret and inter-connect the theological and scientific material.

More info is yet to come in. So perhaps it is appropriate that I don’t settle on one explanation until then (which isn’t likely this side of eternity.) As long as I can see a way to make sense of the science (including the other data about God’s presence and action in history and experience) within the theological framework of Scripture, then I’m happy for the Creation method to remain a bit of a mystery to me.

I don’t think I hold this position out of ignorance.

Cheers,
Geoff

I sure hope this helps someone!

At home in The Shack

For all those who asked me what I thought of The Shack, here you are, and I’m sorry I took so long to read it.

So many people asked me about William P Young’s book, The Shack, that I thought it must be just another one of those latest-greatest fads you see around Christian bookshops from time to time. But now that I’ve read it, I realize you were asking me because you thought I might personally resonate with it – and I do. Come to think of it, I have not been asked about other fad books in years. So I’m sorry I didn’t cotton-on sooner.

I felt quite at home in The Shack. So many ideas that may seem alarming to some, seem quite sound to me.

For example, the most controversial image was God’s appearance as a woman for the sake of the father-damaged Mack. God later appears as a man when a reconciliation and father-healing has happened. To me these elements of the story express the wonders of the incarnation and redemption: that Jesus is God made flesh and reveals himself to us gently & in a way we can relate to; and that God then redeems our brokenness to take us to a more whole relationship.)

And I loved how these insights were explored within the context of profound suffering. It was no easy approach.

Some of my favorite quotes:

• “Does that mean,” said Mack, “that all roads will lead to you?”
  “Not at all.” Jesus smiled as he reached for the dorr handle to the shop. Most roads don’t lead anywhere. What it does mean is that I will travel any road to find you.”
• “You will learn to hear my thoughts in yours, Mackenzie.” – Sarayu assuring Mack of her presence and interaction with him whether he senses it or not. This turn of phrase describes beautifully how I experience God most often.
• Re: The Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.”When something happens, how do you determine whether it is good or evil?” …All of this sounds quite self-serving and self-centered … “Then it is you who determines good and evil. You become the Judge… So when your good and evil clash with your neighbor’s, fights and arguments ensue and even wars break out.”
• “You might see me in a piece of art, or music, or silence, or through people, or in creation, or in your joy and sorrow. My ability to communicate is limitless, living and transforming, and it will always be tuned to Papa’s goodness and love. And you will hear me and see me in the Bible in fresh ways. just don’t look for rules and principles; look for relationship – a way of coming to be with us.” – Sarayu again, the personification of God’s wisdom / Spirit.

The emphasis on God as a Being-to-relate-to made far more sense of the historical data we have, and the experiences of myself and many others. This makes it a far more complete book that The Celestine Prophecy which I reviewed recently. I couldn’t help comparing them, since they both try to overview their spiritual insights through the medium of story.

For content, I also could not help comparing The Shack to my book, Treading On God’s Heels. If I had read The Shack beforehand, I may not have written my book. The Shack covers the topics in a much better story than I could weave. As it stands, however, readers of Treading On God’s Heels, will find straight talk about the same insights canvassed so skillfully in William P Young’s story.

Sure, if you lifted quotes out of the context of the whole book, you might have to ask some theological questions to determine Young’s views. For example he doesn’t deal much with hell in the way Jesus does. But the things he does say are fresh and helpful (and Biblical): about suffering and rights, law and relationship, freedom and love, forgiveness, and redemption.

Yep, Sally and I both felt quite at home in The Shack.

communion

“How old to kids have to be before they can have communion?”

Here’s my reply to this viewer’s question – including bonus thoughts on Passover.

Hi

Glad you’re enjoying the Core Stuff. Thanks for your question.

My thoughts on communion – yes, sure, I think as long as they know what they’re doing, it’s fine.

Mind you, because I hold a symbolic view, it’s easier for me to say that than a traditionally Catholic person who holds a “sacramental” view and the idea of “trans-substantiation.” They’d say that the bread and wine literally turns into the literal body and blood of Jesus, and that the act of communion seals a person into the Catholic Church, and so has to be ministered by a priest. Lots of traditional attachments. I don’t see any of that in the Bible. It’s Catholic Church tradition.

What I do see is a symbolic celebration of Jesus’ death and resurrection. If a person understands this, is grateful for it, they may participate in it. No matter what age. So my kids participate, including my 6 year old son. Understand, he’s a boy’s boy, lots of rough edges. But he understands what the symbols mean, and what Jesus’ death on the cross has done for us, and he’s grateful. That’s what its about.

One more bonus idea:

The Lord’s Supper happened during the Passover meal. So when it says, “whenever you do this, remember me,” the “this” could well be “Passover,” not merely “break bread and drink wine.” So every year we have Passover, celebrating how Jesus fulfills the whole Passover story & all the elements of the meal. In fact Jesus fulfills the details of the Passover meal better than the Exodus story (which foreshadows Jesus’ liberation of us all)! That’s a great time of year for us. And you know what? – The youngest person not only participates fully in the meal, but gets to ask all the questions in the Passover feast. So for me, that confirms their legitimate participation in communion too.

Hope that’s not too much information.

Cheers,

Geoff

www.geoffwestlake.com

0411 324245

In fact this mum of 5 wanted FURTHER information,
about how we teach our kids.

So here’s more:

Yes, before we let them have it, we make sure their head’s in the right space on the day.

Our two older ones we no longer have to check, but the two younger ones, its still a teaching or review moment. If their heads not in the right space, we say no you can’t have it. On the few times that happened they were too young to be deeply affected by that. Now they know that this is what its about and not to take it lightly – its not just a snack.

No we don’t home school, but I chair the school council, so yes I’m still hands on with their education, but in a way that connects with hundreds of other families in the area.

But when it comes to their faith development we’re very hands on - every fortnight we do Cheers 24, which is Bible-based learning for all ages. Everyone, including kids, brings a contribution about the topic or passage, for “show n tell.”

Plus every night around dinner, it’s “what do you have to thank God for today?” and they tell us their day’s highlights.

And as and when concerns arise, we pray about it together.

One of my daughters likes reading a chapter of the Gospels with me each night, and sometimes others join in.

So there’s a definite natural spiritual openness that we’re purposefully fostering in our kids, and so the issue of communion is just part of that flow.

In fact, sometimes, when we have bread and wine at the dinner table, we do a very short communion.

- I say, “charge your glasses.” They grin & get ready with bread and cup.

- Then I ask, “what’s the bread remind us of?”

- then “what’s the cup remind us of?”

- Then I hold up the glass and toast, “Let’s remember him, until He comes.” and they all reply, “Until He comes.”

And that’s literally it.

So we be open, natural, and all-of-life about Jesus, so when it happens in a church, its no biggie.

Cheers

Geoff

Thanks Geoff,

Maybe communion is not as much of a biggie as I thought!

Intentionality is HUGE!, so it’s exciting to hear that you’re making a big effort with their spiritual growth.

To be honest, I don’t think I know anyone with children at school who is deliberate about discipling them.  The parents seem to abdicate most authority to the teachers and get too busy with their lives outside of their kids.

Well, I’d better get to work with what we’re going to be doing in the next few days/week.

Thanks and blessings,

Celestine Prophecy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Celestine_Prophecy

I finally got around to reading The Celestine Prophecy, James Redfield’s attempt to trace the “mechanics” of the spiritual Relationship we can have. He describes similar phenomena that I see as a follower of Jesus, but then tries to pursue that spirituality in merely functional ways.

The spiritual experiences are a valid way of approaching the core stuff, but I can’t help thinking he really needs to grasp another way as well – especially the relational way. I think his schema is actually  a backwards step from Christianity, into a new legalism, whereas Jesus said we should start with, “Abba.” The simplest and most profound of ‘operating systems’ – a relationship.

How the “Nine Insights” equate to my experience as a follower of Jesus:

First Insight: personal awakening to spiritual dimensions. Yep, that’s basic to Christian experience. Learning to ‘see’ God at work in your life. Other dimensions are real.

Second Insight: Western Culture is rediscovering spiritual sensitivities. Yep, modernist science took Western culture overboard by reducing reality to merely the physics of space & time. Post-modern movements named the issue: that a holistic approach to life must include other, spiritual dimensions as a part of reality too.

But the history Redfield gives is grossly simplistic, and equates Christian concepts like a relational God, with the power-abusing Churchmen of the Dark Ages. From this he casts God as an immature, even manipulative misconception. He then reduces spirituality to merely ‘evolutionary energy,’ which is the big flaw in the book.

Third Insight: The Universe is a system of energy. Yes, and we don’t have to visibly see the energy to know that, although sometimes one can sense a stronger spiritual presence or liveliness. And yes, I agree that the physical universe is fundamentally “organized energy.”

But I also think there’s more than energy, that the dynamic that organizes that energy is spiritual (remember, there’re more dimensions beyond space, time & physics.) A Mind is at work through the energy (which I call God.) And prophets & seers are especially attuned to these spiritual dynamics.

Fourth Insight: Conflicts are attempts to gain energy from people. To me this is about the basic craving for love, acceptance, affirmation, approval. Yep, craving people want to “win over” others to affirm themselves. And that’ll produce conflict.

But that’s less about energy, and more about relationship needs: when we don’t get the affirmation, it’s not that we feel depleted, it’s that we feel rejected, ashamed, sad, or scared – relationship dynamics. We don’t just feel tired, we feel lack of love.

Fifth Insight: Receive energy from a higher source, rather than gain it from people. Yep, trying to get other people to make us feel beloved, is doomed to fail: they cannot do it – only God can infinitely, spiritually, fill our ‘cup’ of love, and God’s perspective counts most. This is key to really loving others without grasping for them. Hang out with God long enough to realise you are Beloved, then you can love without grasping.

Sixth Insight: clear out old dramas (learned manipulative patterns), and discover your real purpose (which will be based your family of origin.) Well, yes, we all should get to a point where we have to name and overcome our childhood manipulative strategies, and take responsibility for our decisions & lives. God can help us do exactly that, by making us a new creation, giving us new identity, a purpose, and a calling. The heritage our parents create for us is very significant, but our calling may reach way beyond our parents’ influences.

Seventh Insight: Engaging the flow. Question /intuition /answer. Yep, this is like keeping in step with the Spirit. At times this is the background, the reality in which I live, move & have my being. Other times I need to tune in very consciously – prayer, for guidance with a question, listening for an answer, and acting on that answer in faith. But I don’t treat God like an ATM.

Eighth Insight: Relating to others to bring out their best – focus the loving energy their way, defuse their old dramas by naming & not playing into them. Yep, but again this love is relational, energizing, but not merely energy. Love them, defuse by naming and not playing their manipulative games, be generous, and pay attention to what the Spirit is doing in the moment, in and through them and me.

Ninth Insight: The overall aim of the evolution, is harmony with nature, technology, spirituality, economy. And ultimately disappearing into higher energetic vibrations. Well, the harmony sounds like Isaiah 65’s vision of how this world can be. And as for disappearing to the spiritual plane, yes, it sounds like Hebrew 12’s “great cloud of witnesses” cheering us on. But I’d include other dimensions beyond energy.

So good. Redfield is trying to describe spiritual phenomena, and so I’m cheering that he sees those phenomena. But he’s doing so without reference to God, because he has made an a priori assertion that “God” is an immature concept.

So, rather than his view being an advance on mine, it’s a reduction, limiting and omitting significant information:

1. Retreating from seeing God in relational terms, seems quite unnecessary. We know that relationship is perhaps our highest way of knowing. So why couldn’t higher, spiritual Beings be capable of relationship. If it’s true that God, being other dimensional, is far beyond our limited capacity to grasp, doesn’t it make sense that God would choose to become relationally knowable? Indeed relationally is the only way we can know God to be love. Like a child can know and trust Daddy, even though the child may not have the slightest appreciation of the fullness of who daddy is! This relational spirituality makes grace possible, in a way that Redfield’s mechanistic view can’t.
2. We can know whatever God chooses to reveal to us. That includes the phenomena Redfield observes, but so much more than that…
3. Redfield wants to name love, but can’t do it consistently, because of his line of impersonal, evolutionary energy, ebbing and flowing. But I see that Love is about relationship between two or more relational beings. (Which is why it makes sense that God is a Trinity, that the essence of God is love, which God eternally expresses relationally among the Three of the Godhead.)
4. Why omit these teachings of Jesus about spirituality? They are primarily relational in nature. This is not primitive, but beautifully fulfilling. Instead of trying to learn techniques, Jesus teaches us to simply, “ask Daddy.”
5. Why omit spiritual revelations through the Bible? It does make sense when read as that progressive revelation. Plus the record of prophetic fulfilments is both extensive, and unique (nothing else has even one specific fulfilment).
6. Why omit Jesus’ resurrection, when the evidence is so strong? Plus there are the implications that must domino from the resurrection, including Jesus divinity, and his work on the Cross.
7. Redfield is exclusively optimistic about the evolutionary energy theory. His optimism gives no real room for premature death, suffering, hellish experiences, or relational sins. Except to say, oh well that was unevolved. There’s no justice here. Plus, I can see that the end-times re-entry into higher spiritual dimensions, can happen the easy way (rapture), or the hard way (apocalypse.)

Redfield omits these specifically Christian elements, yet these are valid and important elements of basic Christianity, embodied by Jesus and the whole movement. Yes in the mid 4^th century Rome began to corrupt the movement with power-positions, but this basic faith continued to be embodied by the Desert Fathers and by the Celtic church beyond. Yes the Churchmen of the Dark Ages had certainly lost the pure, Christlike relationship, as had those in power, abusing their power. But that makes it all the more important to include the relational essence of the faith. Despite the bad parts, the robust, living Way of Jesus continued, and continues today.

It is Redfield’s fundamental error to cast God as a puppet from the Dark Ages, and therefore an immature concept to be left behind. It moves away from Christ’s relational, spiritual foundations (like grace, mercy, forgiveness, love, and yes judgement) and it moves backwards to a new kind of legalism. I’ve seen too many people becoming virtually obsessive-compulsive over the plethora of activities they have do to ‘release the energies.’ When all they had to do, was simply, “ask Daddy.”

In sum, Redfield does seem to identify legitimate spiritual experiences, but he’s still fearful of giving himself to an actual relationship with the Divine – the very phenomena he is tracing. That why his schema is limited, and omits important revelations that contribute to our perception of, and relationship with, spiritual reality.

The problem’s with the model

Believe me, I know this sounds arrogant. But this is so important, I have to say it. Most of the problems that professional church starters & leaders face – we don’t have those problems in Cheers! Conclusion: these problems are inherrent in the model they’re using, not the mission itself. The problem is with the model! 

I was in a ‘church planters conference recently. — Well, yes, we are ‘sort of’ planting a church – well, at least if you bend the definition of church a bit: it’s not a building, not an institution, not a church service. But it is certainly an ecclesia – which is the word often translated as church. In the conference, they asked us to write a definition of church.  

Definition of ecclesia:

A Christian gathering to encourage core beliefs* and practices,* to transform their local community* (according to the “Kingdom of God.”)*

*- beliefs: God, Bible, Sin, Incarnation, Cross, Resurrection, Holy Spirit, Obey KofG teachings
*- practices: God-stuff, Pray. Learn, Love, Serve, Explain, (in the world)
*- Kingdom of God (all Christ’s teachings, eg. Sermon on Mt, Great Commandment, Great Commission.)
*- local community – further afield: see traveling bands (below)

PS. There are also Apostolic bands: sent by ecclesias, to go further afield, to spark, plant &/or develop new ecclesias. Note: Apostolic bands should be used especially by church plants!

Anyway, back to the conference.

They were talking about planting a church – as in train your leaders, get a venue, market yourselves, practice your service,  start a service, draw-a-wage, “church.” 

And they were saying – “let’s list the challenges we face in church planting.” Here’s the list:

X finances (wage & overheads, viability)
X time away from the family
Y different visions 
X children losing church friends 
X boundaries – to keep church people from overwhelming you / your family
X use of the family home (good to keep a church room separate from the home)
X you have to fill all the gaps: admin, ushering, speaker, leader, carer 
Y Spiritual warfare
X isolation
X pressure on family (goldfish bowl – the professional Christian’s family)
Y Blindspots (I added this one.)

The ones marked “Y” are the only ones we really face. The rest are really only problems faced by those using that kind of model. 

So you have to ask: why keep doing that model???

Seven Deadly Sins: “me and my shadow”

We all have blind spots, where we find ourselves in destructive patterns before we know it… I’ve noticed that by the time I do eventually recognize what’s happening and start to get cleaned up in one area, another sin is already in my blindspot!

So I started thinking through the seven deadly sins to see what might be next!

 The sins: Listed in the same order used by both Pope Gregory the Great in the 6th century, and later by Dante Alighieri in his epic poem The Divine Comedy, the seven deadly sins are as follows: luxuria (extravagance, later lust), gula (gluttony), avaritia (greed), acedia (sloth), ira (wrath), invidia (envy), and superbia (pride). Each of the seven deadly sins has an opposite among the corresponding seven holy virtues (sometimes also referred to as the contrary virtues). In parallel order to the sins they oppose, the seven holy virtues are chastity, temperance, charity, diligence, patience, kindness, and humility.  - (Wikipedia)

The Seven Deadly Sins: “me and my shadow”

When I was a young man, I assumed everyone suffered with lust as the un-beatable sin. Then I heard an older man say, “not everyone,” and I began to imagine what it might be like to live without enslavement to lust. I started using www.xxxchurch.com. And in “Blue Like Jazz,” Don Miller describes the naked female as a sight beyond any vista he’d ever seen, and likewise I began to imagine what it might be like to behold feminine beauty without sinning. As years went by, and I married & take in the vista, lust became less of a problem to me.

With some thoughtfulness, Sal & I bought a house. I work for a Christian agency on ‘staff support’ – meaning people donate to my salary – so it’s not much. After a few years and blessings we had a few investments. We chose to do that so we could make some money for Opportunity International Trust Banks (which generate micro-finance in poverty stricken areas) and to other workers and global needs. If we had not made those investments we’d have nothing to give – we’d still be simply living hand to mouth. But one day I turned around and saw greed, right there in the mirror! Well we made sure we figured out when enough was enough, and cashed out when the investments had fruited enough! Plus we had a bushfire in 2002 – we could see the flames towering over the trees next to the house as we drove away with everything that mattered in the car – the rest could burn. It was a very liberating experience to feel and know that we were detached from all that ‘stuff’.

Meanwhile, we had some kids, and they needed bathing and daddy time, and so footy training was impractical for me. No more footy. This sacrifice of my health was a conscious decision on my part for the sake of the needs of my kids. But as the years went by energy level decreased, and some nights it was all I could do to keep my eyes open in front of the TV. I run a neighbors’ network called Cheers. It runs on being intentional about getting off our butts and meeting the neighbors, and getting involved. And yet I began to realize sloth was in me too. I still have relaxing nights, but I make sure I go to the meetings I’ve organized, and ring mates to catch up, and make myself do the things I said I’d do. I put it in my diary. And I’ve also started to exercise again, even if it is only for 7 minutes a day… and the energy is returning.

Meanwhile, I have always enjoyed flavours – I’ve often joked that if I had to lose all but one of the five senses, then I’d choose to retain “taste.” Particularly the big aromatic flavours – olives, anchovies, pepperoni, shiraz, guiness – my coffee has to be strong black with a dark brown crème. I savour flavours, like the mouse in the movie Ratatouille. But in 2007/8 I started to catch myself going for seconds of the really tastiest stuff. And then thirds. One time I took a whole bowl of leftovers which I suddenly realized was supposed to be a side-dish for many. Could this be gluttony? While I was thinking about this, I turned 40, and noticed a little middle-age spread. Maybe it could be justified, but I visited the doctor in Nov 2008, and he said my cholesterol was too high at 6.4. And I learned that fat around my organs was stressing them. So I started the Every Other Day Diet, and 7 Minute Muscle programs.

So what’s next?

I already have an ongoing struggle with pride. I work hard at what I’m doing, and do what I do because I think it’s the right thing to do – integrity is a big deal to me, living an integrated / wholistic life, that is right under God, heart, mind, soul and strength. And so the down side is that I think I’m right – which means I can appear arrogant, as if I have ‘the’ right way. Of course I know there’s not one single right way to think about things, but the way I’m thinking about it at any given point is the right-est I can do for now, and so I can do no other than live that way. But it means I can be slow to realize when someone else has a better way, or is more right than me. And that looks a lot like pride! Add to that, that some people react to the alpha-male traits I have, as if that’s arrogant anyway. Add to that, that I am in a job that requires me to ‘tell’ people some things they may not know, things that I think are right. Add to that, that sometimes I have offended people by an insensitive comment or gesture, and you’ve got a cocktail of arrogance there. (Sorry if you’ve been on the receiving end.) So I do try to listen and learn from everyone. My father-in-law is my great model for me. He seems to assume that because he is “just a lowly farmer” that he must not know that much, and everyone else must have more insight than he. So he listens carefully to everyone, and asks for their wisdom on everything. And over the years that enquiry and reflection has made him a very wise man indeed – if only he would trust that a bit more.

I also have my battles with wrath: I suffer from an inherited form of depression, that made my granddad a mean drunk when he tried to self-medicate back in his day. Thankfully effexor is available now, but I know what it is to be enraged. Plus, I don’t take it very well when people in power treat me like an imbecile. try to write off what I’m saying with lame one-liners that really make no sense, or caricature what I’m saying as silly. It’s disrespectful, it treats me like an idiot, and I see red – the blood rushes to my brain so fast it makes my eyes rattle. The sense of shaming is the worst thing for me. (I’m sure a psyc with a little knowledge could have a field day with that.)

That only leaves envy. I suppose I don’t think in envious terms because I feel I’ve been blessed with so much – I have a meaningful job, a great wife who is truly my partner, 4 beautiful kids, more ‘stuff’ than we need, a fulfilling relationship with God, a very rich education (formally and informally), varied life experiences. And I’m very grateful for it all, knowing there’s no reason I was blessed with it, and aware that to whom much is given much is expected. So – maybe envy is my blind spot! Envy is “wanting to see someone else suffer so that I can have what they have.” I can’t see that exactly – at Cheers we work hard for others to be empowered, so when they take over something we once did, we’re grateful! Not envious. We think its great that they can do it now, because we can get on with something else. But then at work, sometimes I see a group get to do a job we should do, & I think, “my organization are sidelined when I know we could do it a lot better.” That’d be envy…  

Even more troubling is this: I’m concerned at the size of my ecological footprint, and the system I’m attached to and complicit in, because I know it means that someone suffers so that I gain. I want to do something about it, but we need to do that together, so how? I am looking for answers as we speak. Bring back the electric car, bring on the air car, bring on green power, bring back trees everywhere and a renewed discovery of the pharmacy that is the native bush. Bring on the word ‘enough’ in economies and politics. End slavery and exploitation, stop oil-dependency, start new industries that are sustainable, bring on ocean reserves, give some land or land-rights away, let the UN do its job to broker equity in a pluralist world… and so I struggle with someone else having to suffer for my gain.

Classically the antidotes are as follows:
chastity, beats lust;
temperance, beats gluttony,
charity, beats greed,
diligence, beats sloth,
humility, beats pride.
patience, beats wrath, (and asking “why am I angry: am I sad, scared, or shamed?”).
And kindness, beats envy.

But here is what I have learned so far:
- Life is better without the vices!!!
- We all have blind spots, and that’s where the vices sneak in.
- A man’s got to know his limitations (Know thyself.) Be vigilant on myself.
- Christ’s in-spir-ation helps me beat the vices.
- Everyone battles with something, so cut us some slack.

Geoff

Geoff’s diet & exercise

I now diet every other day, and exercise for just 7 minutes.

Don’t laugh – I lost 10kg in the first month, and now continue to lose fat and gain muscle. Of course you have to do it the right way...  

Lots of my friends are interested, so here’s the summary FYI.

Nov 2008: Age – 42. Cholesterol too high (6.4), too much gut fat. So I researched (didn’t want to waste my time.) 
Dec 2008: Start diet and exercise – lost 10kg. 
Feb 2009: weight stable, but continue to lose fat and gain muscle. Feel fitter. Visible difference.

Thanks to www.JonBenson.com  The detail is online at  www.EODD.com,  www.7mm.com, – you pay for the ebook, but it contains the research & recipes etc. (He’s a good Christian guy, used to be a youth minister, is 40-something – we’d be mates in other circumstances.) 

Every Other Day Diet

Jon calls them Feed days and Burn days.

Feed days - Eat normally – yes pizza, burgers, whatever. (But don’t binge!) Keeps your metabolic rate high!

Burn days – every other day, rabbit food (see SNAPP below). Because your metabolism is still up at the rate for handling Feed days, you will burn fat on the Burn days. 

If you only have rabbit food all the time, your metabolism will eventually adjust down to preserve fat reserves. No further fat is burned. Then when you get sick of the diet, you Feed, and because of the low metabolic rate, you will gain lots of fat quickly. So keep general metabolic rate up, but burn fat via burn days. That’s the key.

 On “Feed” days: keeping your metabolism up: 
- high level of calories
- coffee & exercise in the morning (I often go without breaky to keep burning fat till I eat at lunch)
- eat what you want 

On “Burn” days: high metabolism + low intake = fat burning
- low level of calories: the SNAPP food.

SNAPP

S – Shake: (I eat just an egg & coffee) start the day with protein & exercise to rev up the metabolism

N – Nuts: first snack (eg. peanuts). Nut oils are healthy. Pumpkin seeds are esp good for men’s health. (BTW, a good intake of omega 3 oils means you need much less animal fats, which are bad for cholesterol.) 

A – Apples: Jon says, “Pectin slows the digestion of sugar and also creates a feeling of fullness. Obviously apples are healthy. Everyone knows the old saying about keeping the doctor away. The pectin in apples, along with the wonderful phytonutrients, both go a long way to keeping the doctors at bay.” Use as a lunch replacement, altho some days I have lettuce mix, with can of salmon, olive oil, olives, pepper, etc = tastey rabbit food. 

P – Protein: at dinner time. A little lean meat – lots of green veg – not starch or carbs.

P – Produce: – also any non-carb veges, esp. raw green veges.
And if you snack before bed, only raw green veg, or nothing (better to go to bed slightly hungry: “It’s the time the body is either told by the brain to store fat or to burn it during your sleep.”  

So on Burn days – no fat, carbs, sugar (including sweet fruits – except Apples). 

Drink water – half the time you feel like a snack, you’re actually just thirsty. Keep water handy. It also helps organ and cell function.

 

7MM – 7 Minute Muscle

To make the most of the diet, add 7 minutes exercise a day! Exercising (the right way) will release fat-burning hormones, keep metabolic rate up, and add muscle (which also burns fat.) And yes this is key for women too – adding muscle does not mean bulk, but rather it reduces and shapes in all the right places. 

 The trick here is to work the muscles close to fatigue, as soon as you can, yet still being able to maintain exercise for 7 minutes — long enough for the hormones to be released. Sure you can exercise for longer, but by getting the reaction going, you’ve already achieved the goal. (It’s the 80:20 rule – the first 80% of benefit takes 20% of the effort, the last 20% takes the next 80% of effort. The extra 20% benefit is necessary for elite or competitive athletes to get ‘the edge,’ but not for those of us who just want to be generally healthy.) 

Working larger muscle groups that affect most of the body is a great idea, as it ‘wakes up’ more muscle that need the chemical reactions. Vince Delmonte says, “I focused on compound exercises that positioned me to lift the heaviest weights possible and maximize the most muscle in the shortest period of time.  The list for this is short – bench presses, bent over rows, over head presses, deadlifts, squats, dips, chin ups and hanging leg raises.  Those were the core 8 exercises and each workout I would do a slight variation on those movements for variety.” 

I recently bought a “Total Gym 1000″ from the Quokka – for $25. A sneakily painful machine! 

 In the first 5 minutes, you want to lift as much total weight as possible – mix up the weight, repetitions, and rest period, to find the way to lift the most in the time available.

Clue: start with 80% of your maximum single lift. do reps of 5, with a 15 second gap between reps. Record it. You should start to really feel it in your third minute. If it’s too much, next time reduce the weight or reps, or increase the rest between reps. If its too easy, increase the weight or reps, or decrease the rest. Your muscles should just about be worn out by end of 5 mins. 

In the 2 minutes remaining, reduce the weight, and keep doing the exercise. You’re prolonging the benefit of the exercise by keeping the muscle close to fatigue for longer. And now you’re releasing a different fat-burning hormone. The last few lifts should be really hard for you – the money lifts! And adjust next time as you need to , to keep the exercise near redline. 

Keep a record of your lifting, so you can accurately compare how you’re going, and make the necessary adjustments. Also you’ll see how you gain over the weeks. 

And that’s it!

Really! It’s called “interval resistence training.” You should be puffing a bit by the end. Your heart rate should be up. This could be all you need cardio-vascularwise (although this has not been fully proven yet). If you don’t think you’ve had enough cardio, do another 7 minutes on another muscle group, and you will certainly have had enough for your heart. Or you can do a 30 minute walk. Or a high-rate burst of skipping or jogging or boxing.

But just the 7MM worked for me. 

Note: if after a while you feel flat / burned out, just take 2 days off, and let your nervous system recover. Then do the next day or 2 at 50% to ease back in. Then after that you’ll see your numbers increase again. 

Remember: For fat-burning
Diet is King! 
Exercise is second 
- esp. Interval, resistence /anabolic exercise (achieves some cardio any way) 
Cardio is last (but still of benefit)

This is a sustainable lifestyle for me. I started this because my cholesterol was high, and I had too much gut-fat around my internal organs. I’m visibly better now. There’s no real reason I can’t just keep on doing it. I intend to, so next time you see me, ask me if I am. 

Cheers
Geoff

 

 

Support Hope (AVAAZ commercial)

Support Hope – AVAAZ

I like this commercial - https://secure.avaaz.org/en/obama_hope_over_fear/?cl=175356403&v=2743