Danny’s March 21 update:

“Another amazing day in Iwaki City (18 miles from Nuclear reactor) Still no detection of serious radiation. The only real radiation is the love of Christ burning into this community with a ferocity that only be explained by the power of the Holy Spirit moving through the people of God. As we labor besides our bothers and sisters here in Iwaki, the joy of Jesus abounds and is so apparent. The laughter and positive attitude is contagious and even though I am tired and still jet-lagged I find myself full of a deep joy and worshipful spirit. The Church is always moving, always either in worship, fellowship, mercy and distribution to the needy or prayer. People from all over are streaming into the city to help, coming from different denominations, cities and even other countries. The Church is so united and full of love for each other… minor doctrinal differences fall away and are replaced by humility, love and respect for each other… each person desiring to learn and receive and bless each other. It is so neat to see God at work in Japan and here in Iwaki in particular.”

Jonathan and Noah, she said, are very good about working their way to agreement if they will stop acting/reacting and talk with each other about the issue. But she wonders, sometimes, if they have really reached a good compromise, or if Jonathan has simply browbeaten Noah into agreement

One of the problems that comes with wealth is that it is hard for a rich man to know when someone is truly his friend, and when that friendship is motivated by money. Similarly, people with wealth in the form of high verbal and debating skills need to be alert that what looks like agreement may be true unity, or it may be that the other person (1) loves you and doesn’t want to hurt/be hurt by you, or (2) wants to be a peacemaker, or (3) feels he can’t out-argue you but is nonetheless not persuaded by your argument, or (4) is simply tired of debating and wants to move on with life.

vegetarian: hadn’t thought about that one. I think it isn’t that a big of a deal to either of us.

Jon, if your main answer to most of the problems of the world is taking more time to listen to each other, why I am “wrong” to take a little more time in my speech to honor social conventions of consideration toward the person I’m talking to? I’m not quite sure I understand.

After all, even John and Jon don’t agree all the time, but through give and take (admitted or not) come to a solid, satisfactory solution (and eventual agreement).

Maybe that’s the best definition of unity we should have. Even though Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one, they are also distinct persons who are not exactly the same as each other (the Son is not the Father is one we have discussed recently.)

So then, as we strive to become one in the body, that doesn’t mean we need to be exactly the same person as everyone else in the body. (Hey, maybe that’s what Paul meant by eyes, ears, and feet…)

Well, I’m sitting here thinking about this and not typing, so I’ll go ahead and post this and then come back if I have more coherent thoughts.

Some would consider vegetarian vs. omnivore a major doctrinal issue, but even when it’s not, it’s certainly a major tactical issue, and you’ve made it work out for your family very nicely. To me, that’s a more important demonstration of what makes for the unity of a body than if one of you had changed the other, or if you had never disagreed in the first place.

Though I liken it to a friend I was talking to last night who (we haven’t talked in a long time) kept hesitating and apologizing and saying things like, “I don’t know what you’ll think of this”, or “I can’t figure out how to phrase it”, and I told her multiple times to stop saying that, that she didn’t need to worry about what I thought of her or offending me, etc. After the conversation she emailed to say that too often she is a chameleon, and so it was good to have someone “force” her to stand on her own, than trying to say stuff that pleased me.

I don’t know if that is clear, of why I thought of that with you, but what I mean is that once we’ve established that you aren’t physcially capable of intruding into my life (based on both of our personalities) then it does seem “wrong” to continue to ask that question, where “wrong” is at least defined as “taking unnecessary time”, if not a more conventional definition of “wrong”.