Mom and I sat talking the other day. While we talked, we both spent some time working on a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle. Talk a little, look a little, poke around with our finger a little, look at the box. It was a thoughtful process.
In the short time we had, we never got into an argument about the puzzle. We could have. Some were blue. Some were green. Some were edge pieces. It would have been very easy to argue about which was the right piece for this spot. This piece is the wrong piece for this spot, but that’s because it fits perfectly over there. And this section of the picture makes sense as a collection of five pieces, but without being connected to the whole it is useless.
It is difficult to get me into a political conversation. There are two significant reasons.
One is spiritual. I have a really hard time being political political follower before I am a follower of Jesus. I have a really hard time thinking that my allegiance to a particular political position could keep someone from paying attention to what I am wanting to explain about what Jesus says.
The second is scholarly. I am, by training, a communication scholar. When I listen to most political conversations, I find people putting on a pair of glasses with a frame that has a label. They then pick up a piece of the puzzle and argue for how well this piece fits and how poorly that piece fits. The statements, technically, are true. The statements, technically, are false.
We argue this way about many things. We pick which piece we want to use to prove our point. We constantly say, “yes, but.” We constantly alienate each other by passionate advocacy of partial puzzles.
There are many promises made in this season. And here is another: you can read this blog without fear or confidence of finding a political soulmate.