“Guys, who are we?” My reflections on 6 years of LOST.
May 31st
Charlie’s Unanswered Question
It seems not that long ago that we saw Charlie Pace, with his awe-struck, red eyes looking up at his companions atop a hill on the Island say (as we watched in anticipation) “Guys, where are we?”
And we were hooked. LOST began. The show that captivated millions of viewers, created addicts, brought together families, spun infinite theories and storylines, and brought timeless mysteries began. And it worked. It pulled people in. We came to care about these people; what their pasts were, their wellbeing, and what they were going to do in the future. These people became our people. Somehow, some way, the show worked.
LOST had a curious fanbase near its end. Most that became frustrated with the mysteries, the presence of polar bears, the expanse of Richard Alpert’s years, the smoke monster, and many of the unresolved mythology elements stopped watching the show. So while those that watched through Seasons 5 and 6 might have hoped for a big answer reveal or a resolution to the deep mythologies, I think there was really something else that held us in and kept us fueled. That something is what the creators resolved in the series finale. The question “Where are we?” become ultimately abandoned as the producers answered the question “Who are we?” This question became the ultimate ends of the finale, of the season, and of the series.
I for one am slightly disappointed. Yes, I know the finale was beautiful. Yes, I know that the show ended up not being about the island and its mythologies. But what we were led to believe from the pilot clear up until we watched the series finale was that the island was the ultimate ends and its mysteries were the ultimate reveal, so to speak. My disappointment is not so much with the fact that the question the series answered was “Guys, who are we?” but that the show really, honestly led us to believe that it would, conversely, answer Charlie’s question instead. This was not the case. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for character stories. I’m all for the fact that the stories were the ultimate ends. But that was definitely not the nuance we got from most of the entirety of the show. That’s my problem. I still love LOST. But the finale did not resolve the LOST we saw in the pilot episode. It just didn’t. In the pilot we heard the smoke monster and saw its destruction, we heard Rousseau and heard Charlie’s great question, and we began to realize that there was something more at work on this island than just normal people on a pancake of land. But the show didn’t end up proving that. Instead, it proved that there was something more to these characters than there was to the island. And somehow, some way, I think that’s okay.
Who Needed Whom – the Island as a Vehicle
It was okay because in the end, while the island and its powers needed the Losties, it was ultimately the Losties that needed the Losties. The island and its mythology were vehicles used to develop dynamic qualities in characters that we came to love.

This is what was so confusing and initially dissatisfying for me about the series finale. In a period of just a couple of hours, the series finale ultimately negated the mythologies of the show. The polar bears, the hatch, the Dharma Initiative, Jacob, MIB/Smokey, their mom, the Light, electromagnetism…. all of it became not only unanswered but conclusively unimportant. Rather, not unimportant, but only important relative to the Losties. These mysteries were important because they happened to Jack. And happened to Kate. And Sawyer. And the others. That’s what made them important. Sadly to us science nerds, the island and its mysteries had no intrinsic necessary importance. It was all to tell a story about a group of people who desperately needed each other to gain redemption and peace. I strain to accept the fact that this negates much of what I fell in love with the show for (being a mystery-loving man myself), but I have to say that watching the finale and watching these people I came to realize how much they meant to me.
Why Was Walt Wet? – The Perpetuating Mystery and the Conclusive Emotion of LOST
Ultimately that’s what the show was about. It was about a journey and it was about the emotional strings that were woven between people on the screen, their stories, and our hearts. Call it cheesy, but that’s why they wanted us to watch.

People will theorize for a while over what all the technical implications of the mythologies were; what was behind the concrete in the Hatch, why the pallet drops continued, why Walt was walking around dripping wet and talking backwards in Season 1, ad nauseum. Ultimately, we won’t know. In this manner LOST will be successful in its own way. LOST told us a story, a story that captivated us in its mysteries and in the end satisfied us with its emotional finality.
I have but one interesting caveat: for the life of me I can’t seem to figure out why this model worked. Maybe it’s because it has never truly been done before, maybe it’s because we were duped, I really don’t know. But LOST really built its own genre. And for 5+ years, as far as my interpretation is concerned, it wore a mask genre that kept people like me watching. People who were in it for the mystery.
Emotive Mythology: The Island was King. (Why people like me first loved the show)
I remember my first time watching LOST. Kyle Clarkson, a friend of mine, had Season 1 and Season 2 on DVD and they seemed to be in the process of being passed around the church student community as people became enthralled in the enigma of the show. Skeptical, I brought home the DVDs and popped the first one into my computer. Needless to say, for the next week or so I blazed through both seasons faster than a hungry Hurley to a Mr. Clucks. I loved the pilot and felt captivated when Charlie asked the aforementioned question. “Where are we?” It was at that point I knew I had a long journey ahead of me, a journey where I knew that after many adventures, many journeys, many trials, many mysteries, our Losties would be able to answer that question. Instead, that question was hidden in the shadow of the larger character narrative that became the essence (and the end) of LOST.
“I’ve done everything you wanted me to do.. so WHY did you do this TO ME?” 
The episode I saw Locke standing over the Hatch with that epic music playing completely rocked my world. In fact, that’s an understatement. If you don’t remember the scene, or even if you do, go watch it again right now here. If I remember correctly, somewhere not too far away Jack is trying to heal Boone, who’s recently been pwned by a tree and a plane and some other stuff. That seems to be the main ending storyline, then suddenly we’re transported to a lone Locke, englufed in an epic orchestral build and standing over the mysterious Hatch. Locke, always the Island man, beats on the metal door and seems to cry foul on the Island. It’s toying with him. It’s messing with his mind. He’s defeated. At this point either the Island really isn’t a force or it’s completely ignoring him. Then suddenly, the soft yellow glow shines on his face accompanied by a slow, pulsing hum. He looks at it, confused, not sure how to react. Then the screen goes black. LOST.
Ladies and gentlemen, say what you want about the show being about the characters. Say what you want about it not really in the end being about the Smoke Monster or Jacob or the real island mythology. But at this point, folks, when I saw this scene in the first season, at THIS moment was the first time I said to myself “I will follow this show to the end.” It was the quickness of my heartbeat, the silence in my mind, the thrill of the unknown that made me promise to myself, smiling, that I would stay with the show through thick and thin. And whatever your thoughts about the finale were, or Season 6, or the end of the show, or whatever, I think that emotion that they gave me in this episode and in Seasons 1 and 2 as a whole was purely mythological. Sure, I cared about Locke’s story and how it affected his reaction to the Hatch. Sure, I cared about his relationship with Susan and his failed walkabout and his cured paralysis. But somehow, these seemed just ways that the characters contributed to the mythology. To me, the Island was King. It was King in the pilot episode when Charlie asked the question that seemed like it was going to be the main question of the show. It was King when it brought Locke light from the Hatch in what is still my favorite scene of LOST. It was King when the Others would kill, kidnapp, and scare people for its greater purpose. It was King when Jacob seemed to be the God-figure of the Island, protecting its greater good. It was King when Charles Widmore and Ben Linus and many others battled over control of its Light. It was King.
In the series finale, despite what all the other people say, I think that the Island became an afterthought.
It was only important because it was part of the characters’ stories. It had no true, over-arching, controlling, intrinsic, necessary, ultimate and authoritative value or worth. It was a means. As mentioned earlier, a vehicle. The island was truly a plot element. Frankly, in that arena, I feel somewhat cheated. Not only
I know I care too much about the mythology. You don’t have to tell me that. I know I was setting myself up to be disappointed. But look at the show. Look at how much emphasis was put on the mystery of the mythology. The Island truly was King! It pulled us in with its many questions. It was out of time. It was out of the world. It was ethereally beautiful. It was the ultimate question.
Except, not.
The End – How LOST Went Out With a Pfft. *fizzle sound*
When Jack met his dad in the multi-religious church, somehow I knew it was over. My heart gradually began to sink. “This is going to end right now,” I said. To me, the whole island bathtub plug storyline seemed somewhat rushed and haphazard. The whole mythological storyline ultimately rested on an easy Smokey gun kill by Kate and an Island bathtub plug. An ineffective way to throw the mythology nerds like me a bone at the end of the series. Despite my fears that the show really was ending like this, I still had nope that somehow the alternate reality was some sort of shifted universe and the Island storyline would become some sort of cosmic time warp. When Jack laid down in the bamboo patch, my heart began to race. Like some sort of idiot kid looking inside the window of a toy store and seeing the newest toy, I shouted out (to the room of people I was watching the finale with), “It’s all a time loop!” I was almost convinced that somehow they were stuck in some sort of loop that would have Jack ending up back where he started and the show would start over again (and not just poetically like it did, but really, truly, be a loop). Obviously, this isn’t possible since he wasn’t wearing a suit. And for more reasons.
Then his eye closed. *soft piano note* LOST.
It was over.
I wasn’t sure how to react. The whole room of about 12 went silent. It remained silent for about 4-5 minutes, with only mild comments being made. It was really, truly over. There was no more LOST. No more mystery, no more Island, no more stories.
Initially, I accepted it with mild dissatisfaction. “It was beautiful,” I said to those in the room. And really, it was. When I saw Jack lying in the bamboo forest, smiling, almost laughing, despite blood running from his ears and side, I really did tear up. It was so poetically beautiful that Jack would sacrifice himself for the Island his friends. Readers of this blog, take note, I really did like the finale. And as a whole, the show was incredible and I did NOT waste my time. I didn’t waste my time because in that finale, I really did care what was going to happen. And that’s enough proof that the show was effective. 6 years of caring. For a TV show with that much mystery, to have us glued to the edge of our seats after 6 years is really astounding. The other action/mystery shows I’ve watched i.e. Heroes (who even watches that anymore), V (which is still in its 1st season but is terrible), even Fringe (which is fizzling out in its second season), they all couldn’t do it. They just couldn’t cut it. So I will say I think the show was perhaps the best TV I will watch in a LONG time.
That being said, the show really didn’t have much direction through those 6 years. Perhaps that’s what made the characters’ stories the obvious contender for the purpose of the show at the end (when the mythologies were revealed to not be the purpose). I honestly, really, truly believe the show was created by J.J. Abrams to be a mystery show rooted in how its characters interacted with an ultimate mythology and discovered the true essence of the Island. What it became though is how a group of people interacted with the Island and ultimately discovered themselves, although this is even a stretch because some of the purgatory matchups and follow-ups seemed highly sketch (Sayid and Nadia, anyone?).
Again, and I know I’ve repeated this over and over again, but Charlie’s question in the pilot I really believe was meant to be the over-arching reveal of the show. I believe that with all of my polar-bear-like will. I think that was what J.J. Abrams had in mind. He’s that kind of guy. I really think that that was Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse (the executive producers, and Damon a co-creator. The guys who essentially made the show from start to finish) had that in mind as well. If you ever listened to the LOST podcast, played the lost Alternate Reality Games with the Hanso corporation, then you knew that the heart of everything was the island’s mystery. The answered questions weekly about mythological elements of the show. They created a game where we went on wild goose chases looking for answers. They captivated the mystery nerd in all of us.
Whether intentionally or unintentionally, that theme of the show was, in the words of Sawyer, a Long Con.
Ultimately, if the Island wasn’t the main plot, then Jack could not have died for it in the end. Since Jacob, MIB, and the Island were plot elements to tell character stories, Jack could not have sacrificed himself for it. At least I don’t think so. But he did. He did die for the Island. He died because he thought he had to and thought he fit in somehow to the collage of puzzle pieces. It was the purgatory/middle reality that I had a problem with. “Everyone dies, Jack,” said Christian (or something like that). What was the purgatory reality? According to Christian, it was how people were able to ‘move on’ from their past experiences. So move on from the Island? Move on from the Light? If they were the main mysteries and worth sacrificing everything for (i.e. Jack), then why are people ‘moving on’ from them? Are they moving on to a new reality where there is no Light? No Island? No Protector? Who knows. But I think that the whole ‘move on’ concept really diminishes the importance of the Island and the whole show. Instead of being timelessly significant, the Island story is just a stepping stone in the larger storyline of the Losties. Frankly, that kind of ticks me off. It makes everything we cared so much about.. the storylines, the mythologies, the mysteries, everything on the Island so much less significant. I can imagine scenario where our Losties are in the next reality, sitting around a game of Scrabble, and suddenly Kate says “Hey remember that one time we were on that island and the whole universe was going to explode if we didn’t protect it?” Then Jack says “Yeah, Kate, that was pretty fun.”
AH. That really does tick me off. The Island was not the whole story. It was a timeline piece. So if MIB had escaped and the universe would have exploded, would the Losties have moved on to another reality still? Or would all existence have been erased? It really didn’t matter whether the Island was saved or not. If it would have been saved, then good. It gives our Losties about another 40 years to live before they move on to another awesome world where all their past worries are gone. If they hadn’t have saved the Island, it would have exploded with the Universe or something, then our Losties would have gone ahead to the better world. What the heck? It lessens the importance of everything.
Alright, so I’m just rambling now. But I hope you see what I’m saying. The Island didn’t matter at all if it’s part of an eternal storyline where our characters can get reincarnated as themselves in other like worlds that are better than the past ones. Maybe one will have a giant walrus that needs to constantly be listening to old Vanilla Ice tapes, and if the Losties don’t keep the tape player running for him, he will eat America. I don’t know. Then in the next one they all have to do the hokey pokey or the universe turns into Barbieland. I don’t know. Whatever the case, the Island doesn’t matter anymore. (Notice what they remembered from the past reality was not polar bears and hatches and smoke monsters but the relationships that were kindled).
Final Thoughts
In the end, it was an amazing show. And I’d do it again. I will probably get the Blu-Ray set and a Blu-Ray player and go through it again someday. I also plan on buying the LOST encyclopedia that Damon and Carlton are putting out. But really I just need to give up the fact that I’ll ever know anything about the Island. Or on a more universal scale, that I’ll ever know anything about the Walrus or the hokey pokey. All that matters is that I feel my heart tugged for those characters.
And the ultimate irony: I did feel it. It worked.
LOST, you may confuse me and frustrate me with the lack of direction and resolve in your mythologies and the loose ends in your character stories, but somehow, you worked.
And that’s why LOST was a success. It just worked, and worked with outstanding effectiveness.
LOST, I suppose this is goodbye. Goodbye to all the significance the show offered to all of us. Well, unless of course our next reality has a different show, and the next reality a different show….
-Riley
Glory and Grace: Romans 2
Apr 29th
So we continue with Romans 2 in the Glory and Grace series.
This chapter is divided up essentially into two sections. Paul continunes to develop his expositional gospel by describing God’s righteous judgment and requirement to fulfill the law, but then begins to unveil the law-shattering truth of Christ’s grace.
God’s Righteousness – He is a Just God.
“He will render to each one according to his works” (Romans 2:6). Scary, right? Without Christ, a verse like this should make us shake and shiver with guilt and fear of imminent condemnation. God is just. Because of his righteousness, he must render to each of us according to our righteousness.
There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek.
-Romans 2:9 (ESV)
Doesn’t meditating on that make the depth of redemption in Christ so much more deep? God didn’t save us just from a lackluster life or a wandering existence. God saved us from hell-bound, wrath-inducing, righteousness-lacking sin. A sin that poisoned our whole existence. For God to be God, he MUST render to each of us for the righteousness we wear. For the sin-sick soul, God’s righteousness burns hot against unholiness. And as gentiles, without Jesus we would not even have the law to make us think we had it all together. We had no religious hope, and without Christ, definitely no true eternal hope.
Under the Law and Not Under the Law = both need Jesus
If God will “render to each one according to his works” and we know that “there will be tribulation… for every human being who does evil,” where does redemption fit in? And what about the Jews? They had it together, right? They could just follow the law and please God. Surely they could do that, right? Wrong. We begin to see that as Paul unfolds the latter half of Romans 2.
For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law.
-Romans 2:12 (ESV)
Paul said that “it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified” (Romans 2:13 ESV). So that pretty much excludes all of us gentiles, right? What about the religious leaders of the day? They had it all together, right? Look what Paul says about them (the strict law-keepers):
you then who teach others, do you teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that one must commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law. For, as it is written, ‘The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.’
-Romans 2:21-24 (ESV)
Even the law-followers didn’t fully keep the law. So now we have the gentiles, who do not even have the law. They can only be justified by completely following the law. Then you have the strict Jews. Even when they try to follow the law to the letter, they are hypocrites and fall short in some area.
This is what I love about Paul’s expositional gospel: he presents all of the dilemmas presented by sin. They are real, they are relevant, they are only redeemed by Jesus. The gentile has the dilemma of not trying to follow the law. The Jew has the dilemma of trying to follow the law and failing. This is the state of two sin-sick souls in need of Jesus.
For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.
-Romans 2:28-29 (ESV)
This is the strange soteriology that begins to characterize Paul’s theology in Romans, and it starts by laying out the true dilemmas of sin. I imagine a frustrated Jew of the day reading Paul’s writing and being thoroughly confused, even offended, but wanting to continue reading. “So, Paul, you’re saying I can’t follow the law, and of course the gentile can’t follow the law, but now you’re saying that circumcision isn’t of the outside at all! What’s going on here?”
This is incredibly offensive and challenging because it effectively puts the Jew and the gentile in the same boat, an obvious truth because “God shows no partiality” (Romans 2:11 ESV). The funny thing is, or rather, the more immediately troubling thing is, is that as much as the verse gets taken out of context, God’s partiality here refers to his righteous judgment, and not exactly yet his undeserved, unmerited, scandalous grace. This brings Romans 2 to a troubling close with both Jews and gentiles in the same boat: sin-sick with no righteousness and the implication that when God judges me, I will not ‘pass,’ so to speak. This is (I think) exactly where Paul wants to put the church at Rome at the beginning of the book. By putting their desperation in perspective, it puts their salvation in perspective.
Paul will continue to elaborate on this and then take an amazing turn when he begins to discuss ‘faith’ in Romans 3.
Until then
-Riley
Sonic Drinks
Apr 28th
So often after school I fancy me some Sonic beverages during the half-price happy hour that lasts from 2-4. Over the years I’ve had one special drink I kind of attached to as my “soul syrup” if you will.
Here are generally the drinks I have bought in the past:
1. Cherry Vanilla Strawberry Dr. Pepper – there’s a story behind this one. When I interned for Clint Collins during the summer after my freshman year, this was what he got all the time. Actually, if I remember correctly, I think it elevated every time. One day it was Dr. Pepper. Then Cherry Dr. Pepper. Then Cherry Vanilla Dr. Pepper. Then things got “cr8zee” with strawberries in there! Naturally, as any suck-up would, I began to buy the drinks he did. I continued to buy them. I haven’t had one in a few years, but if you love blasts of random flavors coming together, go for it.
2. Sweet Tea – there might not be a better cold beverage under the southern sun. Albeit, Sonic’s sweet tea tastes more like tea-flavored sugar water, but it still doesn’t hinder me from reaching for the dollar to pop on this bad boy. 44 oz of rock solid sweet, leafy (?) flavor. One time they took extra long because they said they were “brewing the tea.” Alrighty then…
3. Flavored Teas - these confuse me and I have mixed feelings about them. I tried a ‘peach’ tea once, and I think another kind as well. I just didn’t enjoy it. Peaches and tea are just not very good friends. As far as I’m concerned, tea only comes in one flavor: sweet. For some reason though I’ve had a handful of these over the past year or so. I guess I think I’ll learn to like them?
4. Cherry Limeade – I don’t remember how I first tried one of these, but I did. It’s just a rock-solid beverage. The best part are the succulent cherries at the bottom of the cup.
5. Assorted Limeades – as an extension of number three, I’l generally get anything in a limeade. I recently tried a pineapple limeade and a cranberry limeade. I have mixed feelings about the latter and beautiful accolades for the former. Little pineapple chunks were swimming up my straw to be squished of their sweet juices in my mouth. It is truly a taste to behold.
6. Chillers – they have a few flavors, but to be honest, I don’t remember which one’s I’ve had. Essentially it’s a limeade blended with soft-serve. Sound simple and uninteresting? I thought so too. If you can imagine for a moment if a dreamsicle’s pizazz was ported over to different citrus fruits, namely the lime, then you would understand the concept of this treat. It’s creamy and acidic and sweet at the same time.
7. Premium Roast Coffees – what’s up with all fast food restaurants taking their shot at cold coffee drinks? This is like some sort of illegal ice cream chocolate coffee explosion. It’s delicious, don’t get me wrong, but on the richter scale of sweets, it easily scores a “whaaatt?” for taste and sugar content.
My favorite would have to be either the classic sweet tea or the cherry limeade. I’m a classical man.
Those have been some of my choices over the years.. what have been yours? What’s your favorite and what are your least favorite? What’s something you’ve always wanted to try?
Glory and Grace: Romans 1
Apr 28th
I imagine Paul to be kind of a pretty intense guy. That’s the picture I get of him. Strange beard, quirky mannerisms, but a good heart. Oh, and wordy. Very wordy.
That’s the impression he gives throughout Romans and much of his epistles. Paul’s understanding of the gospel is rich and deep, and God uses the rhetoric He invested in Paul with the Holy Spirit’s inspiration to scribe a hard-packing, fire-blazing, hand-clapping, mind-throbbing, heart-singing manifesto of Gospel-itarianism into his letter to the Romans.
My goal is to tackle this manifesto with my two scrawny little hands and my scrawny little mind and my scrawny little heart. Oh, and my scrawny little grammar too.
Paul’s Mission – Gospel Proclamation
Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared by the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Christ Jesus our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ.
Romans 1:1-6
Paul’s mission is clear: he has been set apart by the grace of God to proclaim the gospel of the glory of God and the grace of salvation to the nations. This so well captures Paul’s deep, intricate passion for his writing and his mission.
Paul’s Evident Love for the church and the Church.
If you’ve ever read through any of the epistles, you know that Paul, amidst his gospel-centric and often hard-hitting messages to the early churches, made clear that he had a deep yearning for them and for their sanctification.
…without ceasing I mention you always in my prayers, asking that somehow by God’s will I may not at least succeed in coming to you. For I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you– that is, that we may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith, both yours and mine.
-Romans 1:9-12
Paul is clearly concerned with this church, and desires to encourage and exhort them when he sees them. Easy to miss here, perhaps, is a secret gem about the beauty of how the Capital-C-Church works with the concept of mutual edification. Paul longs to be with the Romans, not only because he wants to encourage them, but wants to be encouraged himself. It is this mutual edification that makes his longing so passionate and makes his desire to be with the Roman church so clear. If Paul only desired to be encouraged and exhorted himself, he would be a self-centered, travelling church moocher. If he only desired to exhort and encourage, the bounties of his heart would run dry. The edification that Paul longs for has two lanes.
God’s Holiness vs. Unrighteousness = Nottachance.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
-Romans 1:18
By nature, we are enemies of God. This is due to our unrighteousness, which brings the full wrath of God and the doom of impending judgment. Because the unrighteous “did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave tem up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done” (Romans 1:28). This kind of outright disobedience, perverse passion, and blatant sin has one resounding penalty: death. And although we know through the revelation of God’s power in nature and in the Word, we continue to “practice such things [and] deserve to die, [and] not only do them but give approval to those who practice them” (Romans 1:32).
Man’s outright disobedience characterizes Paul’s intoduction to the Gospel. That’s the beauty of how he unfolds it and (in my opinion) perhaps the best way to unfold it, by contrasting the depth of man’s sin but the riches of God’s love. Man is portrayed as self-destroying, even self-damning. “God gave them up” is repeated and implies that the sinful ambitions of man were not desired by God for his creation, but definitely were elements of his sovereign authority.
If Romans is a deep, rich treasure of the unfolding of the Gospel to the Roman church, then Romans 1 is its exhortation and reminder of the nature of ungodliness and unrighteousness. It keeps the Gospel in true perspective: that man, in his disobedience and ungodliness, easily damns himself when left to his own devices. It is a sobering reminder of the true depth of the curse of sin and a dark space where the piercing light of scandalous redemption will shine through later. For now, however, we reflect on the depth of sin.
More to come.
-Riley
Coming Soon
Jan 6th
Just ordered a personalized self-inking stamp using this image. It’s coming in the mail.

I feel so legit.
-Riley
Reading List
Dec 30th
My current reading list is getting kind of overwhelming. The books I’m actually currently “reading” (although some I haven’t opened in weeks):
- The Reason for God - Timothy Keller
- Just started it. Looks like it will be interesting.
- Celebration of Discipline - Richard J. Foster
- This is a really ‘inspirational’ book. The guy has a passion for bringing the beautiful devotion back into common Christianity. The theology isn’t exactly strong enough in my personal opinion in some areas, but the sense of devotion is incredibly challenging and inspiring.
- Institutes of the Christian Religion – John Calvin
- Nothing like the classics to whet the appetite and thoroughly pain-induce the head. I actually am looking really forward for digging deeper into this theological masterpiece.
- Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview – J. P. Moreland & William Lane Craig
- This is actually a really cool discourse on philosophy with a Christian view. It is right up my alley. I’m already soaking it up.
- Your Jesus is Too Safe – Jared Wilson.
- Thoroughly challenging and thoroughly entertaining. In typical Wilson fashion, the book is lighthearted enoguh to make you chuckle at its cultural references at times, and in-your-face enough to make you choke on your own religious complacency at times.
- Religion Saves – Mark Driscoll
- The actual title for this one has like a “and nine other misconceptions” tagged on, but only on the front. So it looks kind of awkward sitting on my bedside table when I have people over. That legalist fodder I’ve gotten into!!
- C.S. Lewis Signature Classics – C.S. Lewis
- Man, I really need to finish these. Enough said there.
- Letters to Doubting Thomas: A Case for the Existence of God – Layman
- Only a couple of pages left on this one. A really great read that argues on pretty high philosophical levels for theism. Kudos to Andrew for recommending it to me.
- Jesus Among Other Gods – Ravi Zacharias
- This is a great book from a guy that I have mad respect for. Honestly though, I haven’t picked it up in a while.
- Desiring God – John Piper
- A more intense Don’t Waste Your Life. Hard to read though. Typical Piper fashion: great philosophical ideas, but greatly, greatly extended. Haha.
- Abstract of Systematic Theology – James P. Boyce
- One of the Baptist fathers. This is essentially ‘the book’ that the Baptist theology was built on. It’s old, very old. But great. Really great. Haha. I recommend it.
- A Million Miles in a Thousand Years – Donald Miller
- Recommended to me by Zach and Molly. Haven’t read it yet, but looking forward to getting into it.
- Confessions – St. Augustine
- Just got this in the mail recently. Looking forward to it so much!
I would ask for recommendations but I’m a little afraid since I have so much to do! Although I will go ahead and ask for recommendations and comments. Bring em!
-Riley


