CWoznicki Think Out Loud

Jurassic World Comes Really Close to Capturing the Magic of Jurassic Park…

For millennials like me Jurassic Park holds a special place in our hearts. The first movie was mind-blowing – for the first time ever Dinosaurs really came to life. Yes there were dinosaurs in movies before but there was nothing like it – they were living breathing dinosaurs on our screens – it was literally awesome – as in “awe-inspiring.” I think that was the appeal of the first movie – these creatures – those shots – were awe inspiring. The first time you saw the brachiosaurs you couldn’t help but have your jaw drop – it was your first glimpse a dinosaur – it was a taste of what Jurassic Park (the park, not the movie) was all about.

Then there was going through the gates of the park – a true woah moment.

And of course – there was the T-Rex. The tension of seeing the water ripple, the terror of it smashing through the glass of the Ford Explorer, and the raw power of its roar.

Rarely has a movie made the audience feel like they were facing something truly beyond us. All these feelings I’m describing are what made Jurassic Park – and they are feelings that haven’t been present in any of the other two movies (except for maybe the RV scene in Lost World). The point is, none of those movies have been able to capture the awe factor which made the movie what it was. Jurassic World however comes really close to recapturing the magic of Jurassic Park.

Jurassic World comes awfully close to re-capturing the awe factor of Jurassic Park.

I won’t go into details about the movie too much – but let me just say that I think Jurassic World is a home run. I give it a solid A rating. Sure the plot is typical of a dino-disaster movie (Dinosaurs are on the lose killing people), sure the movie self-satarizes product placement (I have never seen so many ads in a movie in my whole life), and sure the characters are super archetypal (the billionaire, the mad scientist, the kids with divorcing parents, the hero, the man eating dinosaurs), but I honestly believe you can set aside all those minor issues and say “DANG, this is Jurassic Park!”

What I Loved about the Movie…

Getting introduced to the park – and seeing all the attractions. The movie does a great job of setting up the park. And it makes you think – man, I would love to go there! For a Jurassic Park buff like me it was like a dream come true seeing a functional park.
The Dinosaurs – part of the magic of the first Jurassic park was that it didn’t use too much CGI, it was mostly really well made puppets. That’s why it didn’t feel “fake.” The dinosaurs in this movie feel real. But most importantly, when you see the dinosaurs there is that awe-factor present. There is that numinous feeling present in this movie once again. And, oh, there are some really cute baby dinosaurs too. Your heart will melt when you see the babies!
The Visuals – visually it’s a stunning film. Remember how you felt when they landed the helicopter? Or when you saw the lake scene near the beginning of the first one? Or the shot of the pterodactyls flying next to the helicopter? Yea – its that kind of beutiful. And the cinematography is spot on. The locations are beautiful. The whole thing is just beautiful. That is probably because they filmed it on real film instead of digital.
The Homages to the original Jurassic Park – attractions named after John Hammond, a book by Ian Malcolm, a guy wearing an original Jurassic Park T-shirt, the banner, the original gates to the park, even one character making a come back; all these things have a nostalgia factor built in that remind you of how much you loved the first one. But what I really loved – and don’t worry I won’t spoil anything – are the homages to certain shots and angles from the first movie that were iconic. The Ford Explorer scene, the sick triceratops, the galloping gallamiumuses, the T-Rex chasing the flare, the T-Rex vs. raptor fight are all re-worked (not in a copying the original type way) but in new ways which pay honor to the first movie.
The most epic ending EVER – let me just say – WOW. *MINDBLOWN*

All this to say, movie was a ton of fun, I will probably see it a few more times (and definitely in IMAX 3D). In a post-Jurassic Park world – it’s the only dinosaur movie that has come close to capturing the awe-factor of the first movie. And in a world where every movie is trying to blow their audience’s minds with epicness – to say that my mind was genuinely blow throughout and I had my jaw drop many times throughout the movie.

But more importantly – At the end of the day, it made me feel like a kid again. I felt like the wide-eyed 6 year old watching Jurassic Park for the first time. And to say that this movie can create those sorts of feelings – that is saying a lot.

Rating – 9.3/10

Grace Is…

What is Grace?

Grace is more than being lucky to be on God’s side.

Grace is God’s goodness showered on people who have failed.

Grace is God’s love on those who think they are unlovable.

Grace is God knowing what we are designed to be.

Grace is God believing in us when we have given up.

Grace is God unleashing his transforming power.

Grace realigns and reroutes a life and a community.

Grace is when you turn your worst enemy into your best friends.

Grace takes people as they are and makes them what they can be.

Grace ennobles; grace empowers.

Grace forgives; grace frees.

Grace transcends, and grace transforms.

Grace turns God-fighters into God-defenders.

Grace turns Jesus-haters into Jesus-lovers.

Grace turns Spirit-resisters into Spirit-listeners.

-Scot McKnight (From A Fellowship of Differents, p.38-39)

Legalism and Law-Keeping

J.I. Packer on Legalism and keeping biblical law:

No doubt ever appears about the universal applicability and authority of laws commanding and forbidding particular things… and John tell us ‘this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” In 1957… John Murray wrote: ‘It is symptomatic of a pattern of thought current in many evangelical circles that the idea of keeping the commandments of God is not consonatn with the liberty and spontaneity of the Christian man, that keeping the law has affinities with legalism…’ He then quotes the passages referred to above, beginning with John 14:15, ‘If you love me, you will keep my commandments’ and ending with 14:21, ‘He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me, and concludes ‘When there is a persistent animosity to the notion of keeping commandments the only conclusion is that there is either gross ignorance or malignant opposition to the testimony of Jesus.'”

-Situations and Principles, J.I. Packer

Some Will Seek Forgiveness, Others Escape

This week during sermon prep I have been listening to an old Tooth & Nail playlist – and I came across this classic. I haven’t heard it in years – but its so good! It honestly gets me every time (in a good way).

Calvin’s Thorns

“Now though sinful desires exert their power on the hearts of men, before the word of the Lord springs up into the blade, yet, at first, their influence is not perceived, and it is only when the corn has grown up, and given promise of fruit, that they gradually make their appearance. Each of us ought to endeavor to tear the thorns out of his heart, if we do not choose that the word of God should be choked; for there is not one of us whose heart is not filled with a vast quantity, and, as I may say, a thick forest, of thorns.” – From Calvin’s Commentary on the Parable of the Sower

Thorns hurt. But not doing the heard work of clearing them out is even more harmful.

The Centrality of Christ

Torrance recalls H.R. Mackintosh’s emphasis on the centrality of Christ:

H.R Mackintosh used to press home to us again and again the perfect oneoness of Jesus Christ with the innermost being of the Father. He used to refer with great awe to “one of the best accredited parts of the tradition Jesus is recorded to have said “no one knoweth the Son, save the Father; neither doth anyone know the Father save the Son, and he to whomsever the Son willeth to reveal Him” (Matthew 11.27). I have never been able to forget Mackintosh’s aphorisms which he varied again and again, “When I look into the Face of Jesus, and see there the very face of God, I know that I have not seen that face elsewhere and cannot see that face elsehow.” ‘And secretly in the hour of meditation, when we try to look into God’s face, still it is the face of Christ that comes up before us.” “What Jesus was on earth God is forever.” Mackintosh felt very strongly that what is ultimately at stake for us today as it was in Nicene times, is the cardinal truth of the Deity of Chris, the incarnate son of God.”

-in T.F. Torrance an Intellectual Biography, McGrath 31

What Should Preachers Be Reading?

What would you say to a preacher who feels intimidated by all he feels he needs to read in order to “speak to the culture”? Where should he start?

He needs to start noticing the cultural water he swims in every day. You don’t need to start with heavy tomes. Look at the music videos on YouTube getting tens or hundreds of millions of views. They’re almost always about cultural narratives of identity, freedom, and so on that shape us at our roots. Make them visible by reflecting on them. James K. A. Smith’s How (Not) to Be Secular [review | interview], which is a guide to reading Charles Taylor’s A Secular Age, is a good starting point.

(HT: Tim Keller)

Summer – The Pursuit & Presence…

Summer is such a chill time, sleeping in – beach days – lazy nights, and in a few months – the fall rush will start all over again.

The reality however is that we only get 20-25 years of our life when we get a “summer off” – the rest of life is fast paced, stressful, hectic and frenzied.

But life hasn’t just become hectic and frenzied. Its always been like that. In fact… Luke tells us this story. Basically Jesus is hanging out at his friend Martha’s house. And they are getting ready for a big party or something. So Martha is running around trying to get stuff done. And her sister Mary is “being lazy” she is sitting down listening to Jesus. Both loved Jesus. Martha wanted to serve him. But Mary wanted to catch his every word and just be in his presence. Because she knew that in the Lord’s presence there is refreshment, encouragement, power….

You see, for most of us summer doesn’t have to be a crazy – frenzied – stressful time. We won’t have to be like Martha – running around trying to get tasks done. But will you make it into that? Or will you choose to be like Mary? Will you choose to sit at the feet of Jesus?

It might seem simple, but the choices you make regarding this season of your life will have eternal implications. Implications that go far beyond yourself. Will this be a season of your life where you grow in the Lord like never before? Are you going to learn to hear his voice now – so that later in life it won’t ever be a challenge? Will you put to death certain sins that you have been fighting? Will you get yourself spiritually ready to be on mission on campus in the fall? Will you grow your faith – so that when you go on mission trips you will be able to step out in boldness? Will you learn to walk in this Spirit? All of that can happen this summer…

So this summer are you going to cultivate a heart that is desperately in love with God? Are you going to run hard after Him? Are you going to set aside the stuff that gets in the way and run after him? I challenge you to do that – or as 1 Chronicles says:

Now set your heart and your soul to seek the LORD your God

The – Not So Tempting – Temptations of St. Anthony

No one in the entirety of Europe from the years 1200-1750 had any idea what temptation, or torsos, were.

I just came across this hilarious piece of religious-art history. You NEED to look at the whole thing, but here are a few highlights…

Just to get this out of the way, I am aware that the general vibe of most paintings of the Temptation of St. Anthony is like, DECADENT HORROR to denote the ultimate BAD END of temptations; all the horned pig-ferrets are more like a representation of “the wages of sin is DEATH” than like, an actual medieval desire to hang out with pig-ferrets. THAT SAID, literally everyone who has ever painted the Temptation of St. Anthony has actually no idea what temptation looks like.

Let us begin….

“Kiss me, Fuzzy Lobster Devil.” This is the worst temptation of them ALL. It’s just evil Care Bears and a furry crawdad? No one is tempted by this, not even the most committed of perverts.

This looks more like the island Pinocchio’s friends all get turned into donkeys on? Mr. Shellface playing the recorder, some weird Italian guy trying to read over his shoulder? WHAT ABOUT THIS SAYS TEMPTATION TO YOU? Everyone looks pinched and crowded and uncomfortable. The expression on St. Anthony’s face is “leave me alone with my books, you crab-falcon-beasts,” not “hmm, this might be worth abandoning eternal salvation for.”

YOU’RE JUST POKING HIM NOW

This one comes close on first glance but is UTTERLY HOPELESS. There are two naked babes, yes, but they’re hiding behind him and they’re joined for some reason by a tiny helmeted scuba diver. There’s half a donkey by his feet and someone else is running away with like…a book that has feet? Someone he’s trapped in a too-small coffin? And St. Anthony isn’t looking at any of them. You cannot tempt someone who straight up ignoring you!

You can read the rest of the hilarious commentary with some fascinating paintings here.

You can be a complementarian but..

You can be a complementarian but, you can’t get there through the doctrine of the trinity.

That’s the conclusion those who hold to complementarianism but want to be theologically and intellectually honest (as well as in line with the historic teachings of the church) should come to after reading Steve Holmes’ (Prof. at St. Andrews) recent review of Crossway’s book edited by Bruce A. Ware and John B. Starke, One God in Three Persons: Unity of Essence, Distinction of Persons, Implications for Life.

I recently picked up a new book arguing in more detail than I have seen before the thesis that the doctrine of the Trinity, specifically the Father-Son relationship, gives warrant for what tends to get called a ‘complementarian’ understanding of gender relations – the idea that there is something inherent in human nature and intended by God in male authority and female submission. The book is: Bruce A. Ware and John B. Starke (eds), One God in Three Persons: Unity of Essence, Distinction of Persons, Implications for Life (Wheaton: Crossway, 2015).

I did not expect to agree with the various authors: not only have I taken a fairly straightforward stand against ‘complementarianism’, I have argued even more forcefully that analogies from the triune relations to human interpersonal relations are always poor; a set of essays using the latter form of argument to defend the former conclusion is, well, not something I would have written a commendation for, even if they had been foolish enough to ask me… That said, reading books with which you disagree is much more important than reading books with which you agree; if they are well-argued and adequately researched, they sharpen you and force you to refine your thoughts; sometimes they even contribute to a change of mind, and, as I often tell students, the only way to prove you have a mind is to change it occasionally…

* * *

It is an edited volume; inevitably the essays vary in quality. The worst are genuinely bad. Unfortunately, the nadir is the opening essay, by Wayne Grudem, which in part lists a series of fairly central points in classical Trinitarian dogma (most egregiously, inseparable operations), and then claims each must be wrong by gesturing towards a few unexamined proof-texts. Now, of course, I accept the theoretical possibility of challenging the ecumenically-received doctrine on the basis of serious and careful exegesis; I am Baptist, evangelical, and Reformed, and hold to sola scriptura tenaciously. That said, ‘serious and careful exegesis’ involves rather more than quoting an English translation of a verse and asserting its meaning is obvious; further, I have the view, perhaps old-fashioned, that one ought to understand the faith before trying to overthrow it.

Although I disagree with Holmes regarding his conclusions about complementarianism in general (and it should be noted that I hold to a different sort of complementarianism than most), I completely agree with Holmes conclusion regarding this project – that you can’t get to complementarianism through the doctrine of the Trinity. Holmes says that you might be able to get to it some other way – he waves at Ephesians 5 – though he thinks that ultimately doesn’t stand. Either way, Holmes is right – this type of Trinitarian argument should be avoided.

You can read the whole review on Steve’s blog.