Though some moments loom large on life’s horizon, other defining moments sometimes sneak up on us. Someone asks us a question we continue to ponder. We read a profound quote in a book. We are presented with a challenging project. We witness an act of generosity, or cruelty. We are inspired by someone’s life story. We learn a haunting truth. All of these situations seem to demand a response of some sort on our part. This is what makes a moment a defining moment. How will we respond? What choices will we make? Who will we become?

Care to share a defining moment story from your life in the comments here or on my facebook? Thanks!

1. Accrue wealth, power, and prestige. Then lose it.
2. Spend as much of your life in prison as you possibly can.
3. Make someone else really, really rich.
4. Never ever join The Beatles.

Interested in more? Check the video below. It runs about 21 minutes.

For Christians (and everyone else for that matter), I think the research that Gilbert presents here is important. He presents two kinds of happiness: “synthesized happiness” and “natural happiness.” Synthesized happiness is happiness that we create in our minds when we don’t get or can’t have what we want. Natural happiness is happiness we have when we get what we want. And we think that natural happiness is far superior to synthesized happiness. Gilbert points out that our consumption-driven economy depends greatly on our continuing to think that way. But in reality, synthesized happiness is at least as powerful and true, if not more so. This is the sort of happiness possessed by people who have been through tragedy, suffering, and hardship but remain happy.

The apostle Paul seems to relate this sort of happiness throughout his difficulties. A couple of examples are in 2 Corinthians 4:8-10 and in 6:3-10 where he refers to himself and his companions as continuing in aliveness and joy despite having to survive incredible obstacles and hardships. His most astute reflection on this is in 12:6-10, in which he refers to a “thorn in my flesh.” He pleads with Christ to take this affliction away (what it was exactly we don’t know, scholars continue to debate it). That prayer being answered would be the “natural happiness” of thinking getting what we want will make us happy. But Jesus does not take it away, instead teaching Paul a lesson that enables him to achieve “synthesized happiness”: “But he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’”

Happiness grows in the soil of constraint—having to find the happiness in where you are, who you’re with, and what you’ve got. Misery grows in the soil of too much freedom to get what you want—searching for happiness in what and who and where you think you want. Paul was constrained by Christ and the mission Christ set before him, but discovered that was where happiness was truly to be found.

Where have you and I found true happiness? When will we give up demanding “natural happiness” and embrace the reality of “synthesized happiness” that comes from things like faith, discipleship, morality, mission, and covenant?

Here’s a sample:

• Don’t eat anything your great-grandmother would recognize as food.
• If it came from a plant, eat it; if it was made in a plant, don’t.
• It’s not food if it arrived through the window of your car.

This is my favorite: “Avoid foods that are pretending to be something they are not.”

In John 6:35, Jesus says, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.” John’s Gospel does not narrate the Last Supper, in which Jesus institutes what we celebrate as Holy Communion, the Lord’s Supper, or the Eucharist, depending on what sort of church you’re involved with. Even though John does not narrate a Last Supper, we should have little trouble seeing that John addresses the sacred meal in the way he brings out Jesus’ teaching on being the bread of life here in these verses (John 6:25-59).

With Jesus, we may also assert: “Avoid things that are pretending to be something they are not.” Jesus is the bread of life; he is our true nourishment, so we are to avoid things that are pretending to be something they are not—our Savior, or our Lord.

When it comes to who or what to center our life, our identity, and our worth on, there are plenty of possibilities. Of course there are outright bad things to center our life on. Most of those are represented by and addiction and/or an -ism. And some people do make those choices. But for many of us, that is not as big of a problem as our preoccupation with making good things into ultimate things.

In his short novel on one man’s vision of heaven, C.S. Lewis has his narrator witness a woman unable to understand why her son is so happy and content in God’s heavenly presence. She is jealous for his full attention because she had made her son the complete focus of her life. The narrator asks his guide (each character newly experiencing heaven has a guide) to help him understand the tension here. His guide responds that bronze is more often mistaken for gold than clay is. Translation: It is simpler to distinguish what is bad from what is ultimate than it is to distinguish what is very good from what is ultimate.

Think about that. The great things in life—family, health, success, work we love—these are the very things that are more likely to become substitutes for Jesus Christ in our lives. Why? Because they are so good. The saying, “avoid things that are pretending to be something they are not” is helpful here. Some things (addictions, -isms) pretend outright to be our Savior and/or our Lord. The truth is that regarding the best things, we do the pretending. And when we do we place a burden on things like family, health, success, and work, that they are not capable of carrying. But when we stop our pretending and center ourselves on Christ alone for our identity and worth, we are able to receive those good things for what they are—gifts from him.

“I am the bread of life… Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.” (John 6:35a, 54-56 TNIV)

We’re hoping for more. Something inside us desires unconditional and unlimited love. And one thing we discover in life is that we do not find the unconditional, unlimited love we are searching for. On top of this, we also find that we fail to perfectly offer the unconditional and unlimited love that we desire to receive. We encounter this reality in our relationship with our parents at some point, with friends, with mentors, with social circles… The list could go on.

And yet, we feel like an unconditional, unlimited love is “out there” somewhere. It continues to be our standard.

Now, entering John 10:11-18 with this in mind, let’s look at five characters in Jesus’ teaching here and their relationship to what we should know about what it means to experience Jesus as “The Good Shepherd.”

First, the thief. He is trying to gain access to the sheep by illegitimate means — by sneaking in some other way than the gate. And his job description is pretty simply stated in verse 10: “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy.” So, he engages the sheep, but only in order to live off of them.

Second, the stranger. The stranger, mentioned in vs 5, is not necessarily adversarial toward the sheep. The stranger’s distinguishing feature is that he is unknown to the sheep. He has no credibility. He does not seem to have poor intent, but he has no relational foundation from which to call the sheep.

Third, the hired hand. Like the thief, but unlike the stranger, the hired hand engages the sheep and even has some measure of responsibility for them. But his sense of obligation has limits. When danger threatens, he disappears.

Fourth, the Good Shepherd. The Good Shepherd is loving, caring, and self-giving. He knows the sheep and cares for them deeply and strongly. And the sheep know him too. They recognize him and can pick out his voice.

So what character remains to be fifth? I suggest it is the sheep themselves. And since the sheep represent us, they’re an important character to note. They are passive in Jesus’ teaching. Interestingly, their relationship is the one in focus for each of the other characters in the passage: thief, stranger, hired hand, shepherd. All of these characters respond differently to the sheep, but it is the same sheep all along.

So what explains the difference in how the sheep are treated?

It seems to be none other than the personal character of the various persons. The thief is devious, the stranger is indifferent, the hired hand is self-interested. The Good Shepherd is self-sacrificially loving. He seems to love not because these are such lovable sheep but rather because love is who he is. Are they excellent sheep? Are they terrible sheep? Jesus offers no commentary to this effect because it is irrelevant. They are just sheep. No characteristics to recommend them for the best shepherd available. No, they are just ordinary sheep, nothing special in and of themselves that the Good Shepherd would care for them so much.

We are the sheep; Jesus is the Good Shepherd. Does he love us because we are special, wonderful, exceptional, A-plus, first-team, first-chair, rising star, super-qualified sheep? Far be it from me to contradict your mother (or mine) and say you’re not special, but our qualities or lack of them has absolutely no bearing on the love of the Good Shepherd toward us. Are we excellent sheep? Are we terrible sheep? It is irrelevant — the Good Shepherd loves and cares for us regardless.

C.S. Lewis sums it up well: “God loves us not because we’re lovable, but because he is love.” Why not trust a Good Shepherd like that?

I recommend The Reason for God, but your thinking cap must be worn throughout. I found it filling the role of a modern Mere Christianity, by CS Lewis. And no wonder. Keller quotes Lewis frequently and even calls him one of the three greatest influences on his faith. Perhaps that’s one reason I like Keller so much. I like Lewis and find myself nourished by his writing. So it’s only a small jump to appreciate what Keller has done. That said, while Lewis offered his thoughts in Mere Christianity as a “layman of the Church of England,” he did so with such excellence that his book has been a treasure to millions ever since. But Keller adds a pastoral touch. He has studied at the feet of Lewis, but he clearly comes from the vantage point of a working pastor. His mission field in Manhattan among the highly educated, high achieving, and high ambition younger adults has demanded the union of the sharp intellect of the professor and the spiritual concern of the pastor. In my view, Keller brings them together well.

This is a good book if you are either skeptical about faith or looking to gain more confidence in your understanding of Christian faith. If you are willing to think along with him during some of the challenging parts, The Reason for God (Barnes&Noble.com, Amazon.com) will be a rewarding read.

Here’s a nice feature article from the June 2009 issue of Christianity Today profiling Keller and Redeemer’s ministry in Manhattan. And below is a short selection from a college outreach event at which he spoke.

Since it’s one of my primary filters, I couldn’t help but wonder how this might inform both our understanding of conversion and therefore our evangelistic efforts, and our Christian formation as disciples of Jesus.

In turns out, extrinsic motivation has a ceiling, and a surprising one at that. So, a shift is needed. To live into this newly discovered truth about human motivation, we need to understand and apply the power of intrinsic motivation, which Pink calls “Motivation 3.0.” The extrinsic motivations were the simple positive/negative of reward/punishment that I’ve mentioned already. If you stop to boil extrinsic motivation down to this basic level, it is clear how much it is like training a dog, or worse, conducting experiments on lab rats. Yes, we need a paycheck. We like getting bonuses and accountability is helpful. But these may need to be understood and used differently if they are to be aligned with what is true about the way we are wired.

The intrinsic motivations are more powerful and more productive. They are: Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose. I should let Dan Pink take it from here. The first video is just under 11 minutes long, but hardly feels it. A presentation of his has been edited and tightened for time, then animated with a whiteboard drawing as he talks. Check it out. If you’d like to hear a slightly extended version, check out the TED conference video below, which is just under 19 minutes.

I don’t have answers yet, but here are some questions that come to my mind from my context as a pastor.

• How might this relate to our spiritual growth, our discipleship?
• What part of our human story does this explain and/or account for? What does it fail to explain and/or account for?
• How could this inform the way I lead the staff at my church?
• How could this inform the way I lead the membership (read: volunteers) at my church?

What questions or applications occur to you?

You can check out the book Drive, plus his blog, and anything else from Daniel Pink on his website.

• The Source, by James Michener – Started this epic archealogical tale just before the Israel trip. It’s really long, but it’s good too. Having seen several sites, including ones the novel is based on, I hope to finish it out this summer.
• Jesus, the Apostles, and the Early Church, by Pope Benedict XVI – I’m reading Benedict’s reflections collected here as part of my devotional time.
• Run With the Horses, by Eugene Peterson – Plan to follow the pope with Peterson’s study of Jeremiah.
• Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, by Stephen Covey – Read this years ago and am now rereading.
• Switch, by the Heath brothers – Made to Stick was great. I’ve been looking forward to their next.
• Orthodoxy, by GK Chesterton – Another “in the middle of it, want to finish it” book.
• The Chosen, by Chaim Potok – A favorite novel, haven’t read it in a few years, but like to pull back off the shelf from time to time.
• Something mindless from John Grisham – well, because it’s summer. Probably do this one on vacation!

I’ve overly ambitious as a rule, so who knows if I’ll read all of these, but that’s what’s on my radar and I’ll enjoy myself either way.

So, what’s on your summer reading list?

In the first half of John 10, Jesus is speaking the Pharisees and using the image of a shepherd, sheep, the sheep pen, and the threats to the sheep. The majority of the passage (John 10:1-21) is dominated by the comparison of Jesus to the shepherd of the sheep. We’ll talk about Jesus’ saying, “I AM the Good Shepherd,” from parable next week. For now, let’s look at a brief caveat in the passage, John 10:7-10, in which Jesus uses the metaphor of a gate for the sheep pen: “I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved… The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” (10:9-10 TNIV)

It seems from this teaching of Jesus that the fullest life we can live is one within the sheep-pen called God’s kingdom, entered into by a gate called Jesus. In other words, to live life “to the full,” we must first limit ourselves to life in God, which excludes certain things from our life.

I once met a woman who had been recently released from prison and was beginning life with her young children again. She had gotten too close to a man involved in using and dealing drugs. She was spiritually alive, hungry for God’s Word, and attentive to the work of God’s grace in her life. Part of her life had been stolen from her because she, at one time, had not had the right boundaries around her life. “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy…”

An example from the other direction also illustrates the point. While in seminary I was introduced to the music of Christopher Parkening, one of the world’s leading classical guitarists. While a young boy he so fell in love with classical guitar music that he committed himself to practice two hours before school and two hours after school everyday. This no doubt limited him in life experiences, yet it released his passion and ability as a classical guitarist. Having seen him in concert, I’m thankful for the fruit of the boundaries and limits he accepted in order to become great.

Now, this seems like a generic life principle and it may be to a degree. But I think it shows up in the rest of life because it is first true spiritually. Living life to the full means accepting the boundaries of God’s sheep-pen, entered by a gate called Jesus.

And here’s another part to this. There are many gates beckoning. There are many manifestations of the thief who comes only to steal and kill and destroy. They promise to release us from boundaries, but ensnare and enslave us instead. Why not entrust ourselves to the one person who truly was unlimited, but who limited himself by love for our sake? He limited himself in order to become the Gate through which we enter into the fullest life possible. Limiting ourselves to life in God is the only way truly to “have life, and have it to the full.”

Enter religion professor Stephen Prothero. He first signaled a warning about the impoverishment of our understanding of world affairs and western civilization with his book, Religious Illiteracy, lamenting how dreadfully little we knew about major religions in general and Judaism and Christianity in particular, as influential as they have been and are in the West. Now he takes an additional step, pointing out not only our collective ignorance of basic doctrine, history, and practice of various religions but also our mental laziness and disrespect in proclaiming them “all basically the same.” The book is God Is Not One: The Eight Rival Religions That Run the World and Why Their Differences Matter.

Check out the promo video below. This entertaining appearance on The Colbert Report offered the usual off-beat opportunity to promote the book afforded to Colbert guests.