Check Your Theology At The Door

Have you ever wondered whether or not you should take the whole Bible literally? There are many schools of thought. I can't tell you which is correct (though I'm sure some of you think you could), but I can give you something to think about. 

Long after Charlton Heston told Yul Brynner to "let my people go", God gave the people (through Moses) what has been titled "The Ten Commandments" (NOW do you get the joke?). Another name for The Ten Commandments is "The Great Shalt Nots":

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image . . . Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain . . . Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy . . . Honour thy father and thy mother . . . Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness . . . Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's (stuff) . . ." (Exodus 20:3-17 [KJV])

Now, Jesus came along and gave us a more positive spin on the list: "'Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?' Jesus said to him, '"You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind." This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.'" (Matthew 22:36-40 [NKJV])

Being that the religious are never satisfied, He was asked, "'. . . And who is my neighbor?' Then Jesus answered and said: 'A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, who stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a certain priest came down that road. And when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite, when he arrived at the place, came and looked, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion on him, and went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; and he set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said to him, "Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I come again, I will repay you." So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among thieves?' And he said, 'He who showed mercy on him.' Then Jesus said to him, 'Go and do likewise.'" (Luke 10:29b-37 [NKJV])

Sounds pretty simple, doesn't it? The Samaritan (a person who was despised by the Jews) showed compassion on what appears to be a Jew (being the person was travelling FROM Jerusalem at the time), where other Jews, even a priest and a Levite (one of the 12 tribes of Israel - who happen to be the line of the priesthood) didn't want to become "unclean" by becoming involved.

What does Jesus say? "Go and do likewise." Be the neighbor. Realize, this follows the whole, "What is the greatest commandment?" conversation. Or, more accurately, it ties directly into the "What is the greatest commandment?" conversation.

Now I ask you: what if the man who fell among thieves was a known homosexual?

"But, J.P., he wasn't."

Wasn't he? There is no information about the man outside of where he was travelling from and travelling to. Was he an outstanding member of his church? Did he tithe? Was he homosexual? We don't know. Why? Because, apparently to Jesus, it didn't matter. 

Now, I know many who will say that homosexuality is an abomination, and they will quote the Bible to prove it. Here is where the theological rubber meets the road: How do those verses line up with what Jesus HIMSELF told us were the two greatest commandments?

Okay, I lied. I CAN tell you whether or not you can take the whole Bible literally. Ready? 

Whenever you read something that lines up with the two greatest commandments, that is big "B" Bible. If it doesn't, it is small "b" bible. 

"What about what Paul wrote in the epistles regarding homosexuality being an abomination?"

Small "b" bible. 

Nowhere in the two greatest commandments or the "Ten Shalt Nots" do you read anything about homosexuality. For God, it is simply not an issue. For (religious, hyper-controlling) people? You get the idea.

©Emittravel 2020

Knowing Another

Knowing Another

May I be graced by God to know the love of one,
To opportune the chance to love;
Experience the joy
and intense sorrow
That comes from a lifetime,
though cut far too short;
A "soul-mate" to share life's burdens
(to fortune to carry that of the other).
To sing
  cry
shout
whisper
weep
scream
pass on to another,
The meaning of life that God may bestow,
by knowing another in such a manner as this.

J.P. Wiegand

©Emittravel 2004

Back in 2004, a lady I worked with showed me part of a poem that described the love she had for her late husband. This wonderful lady, aged in body only, shared with me a part of her heart; a love that transcends "till death do us part". It was from this inspiration that the above came to be. Now, you have a part of my heart. -j.p.

©Emittravel 2018

To Know the Known

To Know the Known

Who is this God that I follow?

Who am I to follow Him?

To inspire song.

To comfort in sorrow.

To cradle the face of a child.

To wipe the tears from eyes

strained towards heaven.

In somber solitude I seek to abandon,

to achieve what I am unable to grasp.

To let go of the here,

to obtain the Now.

I am awed in Your presence.

Totally at peace in my frustration

for that of which eludes me.

When I think I’ve come to an understanding,

You turn and I am struck dumb.

I glimpse at Your glory and collapse.

Unable to behold Your beauty.

Your splendor.

Sinful.

Arrogant.

I claim to hold a stallion by the reins;

to find I hold an ass.

The reins in my hand

steer the bit in my own mouth.

I long to know the Known.

To hold a piece of eternity.

Fallen man I am.

I discard the pride of reason

to become the fool of God.

To let go of achievement

for the brokenness of the humble.

Who is this God that I follow?

And who am I to follow Him?

 

J.P. Wiegand

© Emittravel 1999

It’s been awhile since I’ve written anything about my spiritual journey. Many of you who have been reading my blog know that I was a very involved member of a church for YEARS. I took a sabbatical from October 2014 until about May of 2015. You’ll find much of my experience leading up to and during expressed here.

I returned to that church after the end of my sabbatical until the end of September. Since then I’ve been “churchless”. I’ve had the wonderful opportunity to join with friends at their church to play in their worship team since then, but at this point I’ve no “desire” to become a regular church goer. What does the future hold? I’m not sure. This is still a journey, and I’m still a traveler on it.

The above poem was initially published to www.renderosity.com in January of 2007. The comment below accompanied it. I think it is still relevant:

Religion: from the word "religare" meaning "to tie back" or "strangle". The balancing act of faith in God, and mindless obedience to a religion. For me this is a lifelong struggle; the desire to know God, versus the arrogance of my own humanity. Do you seek to love someone JUST for what they can do for you? That's manipulation. If it doesn't work that way on Earth, why would we think it would work in the heavenlies? Just a thought. -j.p.

© Emittravel 2017

Shabbat Shalom

On Saturday, my wife and I had the wonderful opportunity to join in the celebration of a Bar Mitzvah. For those not in the know, a Bar Mitzvah, or "Son of Commandments" is a celebration of a young man being welcomed as an adult in the Jewish faith, responsible for his own actions, and ready to fulfill the 613 commandments in the Torah (a continuous rolled scroll upon which the five books of Moses are written in Biblical Hebrew). This young man is the son of a close friend of my wife's, and it was an honor to be invited.

In a way similar to the Catholic church, most celebrations include a normal mass (or "service" in non-Catholic traditions). So, included in the Bar Mitzvah was a traditional morning service including prayers, blessings, and songs.

The reason for this particular writing was a short segment that we all recited as part of the service. I'm going to include it here:

"The Meaning of Shabbat is to celebrate time rather than space. Six days a week we live under the tyranny of things of space; on Shabbat we try to become attuned to holiness in time. It is a day on which we are called upon to share in what is eternal in time, to turn from the results of creation to the mystery of creation, from the world of creation to the creation of the world."

If you are anything like me, you'll want to take a moment to pause and reread that.

(Note: Shabbat is also known as the Sabbath [which most Christians celebrate on Sundays]; defined as the time from Friday sunset to Saturday evening when three stars appear in the sky. Though, with the multitude of cloudy days we have here in Ohio, I'm not sure when they DO conclude Shabbat, as you can't see the stars!)

"…we try to become attuned to holiness in time."

I've written quite a bit concerning my views on time and my understanding of God within such boundaries. So, you know that the above statement would "stop my clock" (pun intended).

As I've written in the past, God lives in eternity, or in other words, without time. He is not bound by cause and effect. He sees the end from the beginning because He is outside of time where the beginning and end reside.

The most impactful name He chose to use to describe Himself was given to Moses: "And God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM.' And He said, 'Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, "I AM has sent me to you."'" (Exodus 3:14) (NKJV)

The most precious name God chose to use concerning Himself was one that said, "I have stepped INTO time to be with you." Holiness stepped into the world of time.

That's why that statement struck me so. Shabbat is a time where we focus on becoming attuned to holiness (God's very presence) IN TIME (in our NOW). We set aside the busyness of life in time, to focus on the One who is not limited by time, in order for us to become more attuned (more receptive and aware) of the holiness that we will eventually find ourselves once we step out of time - into eternity.

There is something special about setting aside life and its business, to share with one another on "what is eternal in time". Whether or not you are one who believes in the existence and presence of God, taking such time will bring more focus on our finitude, and hopefully help us realize the wonders of our now.

Shabbat Shalom

©Emittravel 2016

The Science is Settled

No, the title of this blog is not intended as "click bait". In January of 2014, our own President Obama declared that the debate over climate change was settled: "Climate change is a fact."

The purpose of this particular post is not to argue for or against man-made climate change. I've done that before. What I'm hoping to convey is how important mankind may or may not be, and the impact - or lack thereof - mankind has upon the world around him.

(I follow the old-school grammar of using "he" and "him" when referencing humankind in general. I don't mean to come off as sexist. Women fit in the generalizations I will be addressing just as much.)

I was reading an article recently that was discussing man-made earthquakes. What? Really? Yes. Really. The article referenced such things as the Hoover Dam (the water pressure), years of oil and natural gas extraction, and the recent hot topic of fracking, as being influential if not directly the cause of earthquakes. Various studies have taken place over decades, with mounds and mounds of data collected concerning seismic activity. And you know what? With all of the data, with all of the experts, the decision was made: Actually, there has been no decision. There are those on both sides using the same data to make their argument. The science is NOT settled.

Of course, with climate change, with much more data from many more sources, the science is settled. At least that is what Climatologist Barack Obama said. And he's not alone. In the recent Paris Climate Summit, a bunch of climatologists (a.k.a. "politicians") got together and said that man-made climate change was settled science, and made an agreement that hopes to aggressively curb the hotbed that the earth has become (sarcasm font).

What do earthquakes and climate have in common? Man's impact - or lack thereof.

On one hand Friedrich Nietzsche stated that "God is Dead". On the other Shirley MacLaine stated that "I am God." Right there is the rub: we want a world without God, so we can sit on the throne AS God. But is that possible?

My fear is not necessarily that we create earthquakes or climate change by our actions. My fear is that our actions to fix things cause more harm because unlike God, our vision is very short-sighted and we miss the long-term impact of the things we do.

I could talk about windmills and their impact upon birds, or solar panels and the amount of reflected light/heat that may be warming the atmosphere, but I'm not. I'm going to give you a little story from my home state of Ohio:

We have a lot of deer here. A lot. I've heard that it is because of all the housing and business development that the deer have been driven from their areas and now are all over the place. That may have something to do with it, but not entirely. The other reason for the deer population growth is deer population growth. For example: for two years in a row we had two fawns in either our yard or our next-door neighbor's yard. Below are pictures of three of them:

That's four additional deer in two years. My neighbor, who (along with one of his kids) is a hunter, has bagged around one a year. That means there are two more deer running around here than originally (not including the parents still running around). I know there are other hunters, but with the limits on where you can hunt (my neighborhood is off-limits, and the deer apparently KNOW that!) and the number you can actually kill, the population is exploding.

So what did the wise leaders in Ohio do? They changed the hunting laws? Nope! Not humane enough. They brought in a natural predator: coyotes.

Let's see how well that worked out.

The coyotes have NO natural predator in Ohio thinning them out. So, we are now overrun with coyotes (see my blog). But at least the deer have been thinned out, right? Nope! The coyotes would rather go after cats and small dogs than after big deer that run too fast. So now we have both: deer AND coyotes.

When it comes to man-made climate change, the thing that scares me more than the loss of oceanfront property is the damage that man MAY do by trying to fix it.

Well, at least one thing removes my fear: the science is settled.

© Emittravel 2015

And You're Praying Why?!?

Part of the hoopla in the wake of last week's horrible shooting in San Bernardino, CA, surrounded the front page of the New York Daily News on December 3:

Along with the headline are Twitter posts from various politicians, calling for - or acknowledging self - prayer for the victims and their families. This has caused quite a stir on both sides of the religious / non-religious aisle.

Does God answer prayer?

Where IS God when tragedies occur?

How can God allow a person to kill so many innocents - even in the name of religion?

Do I believe God answers prayer? Yes, yes I do. Does He answer ALL prayers? No, no He doesn’t. And to be honest, I'm thrilled that He doesn't!

Several years ago I gave a talk to a men's breakfast group at church (give a man bacon, and he'll listen to anything!) where I covered such topics as time, eternity, finite and infinite, free will versus predestination, and where we and God stand on such things.  If you are interested, you can read it here, but be aware - it's a bit long. I gave an example by asking if someone had a swimming pool. I then asked that person to go home, cup his hands, and have someone pour the contents of that pool into his hands. That is an example of Finite trying to grasp Infinite. Oh, we get little droplets, but even as we think we grasp them, they simply wash away as we try to grasp more.

I bring that up, because it would be pretty awful for an infinitely omniscient (all knowing) God to have to cow-tow to the wishes and whims of finite man. I, for one, don't want a God who sits waiting for me to tell Him what to do. And if you are a man who believes God should, I want to know one thing: How is it possible for you to walk with cajones that big? (I'm talking to you, Word and Faith charismatics!)

My question is, HOW should God be "fixing this"? What, exactly, do you want God to do? (Before you answer that, read the last two paragraph above again!)

There is only one thing that I can think of for God to do, that will prevent people from killing other people. But I have to warn you: you won't like it. The only thing God can do is to eliminate your free will. Again, feel free to take (several) moments to read that post-bacon talk I gave mentioned above to understand free will and predestination.

Now, notice I didn't say for God to eliminate THEIR free will. If God were to forcibly stop ANYONE from functioning in free will, the ability for anyone to function in free will would immediately cease. You have trouble with predestination now, wait until God stops allowing even one person to function of their own accord.

In order for God to prevent people from committing such heinous crimes, He would need to eliminate free will from mankind. That means you would NO LONGER be able to function of your own volition. Like a remote-controlled car, you would only move via the DIRECT control of someone else (in this case, God.) Only then would people no longer be able to commit crimes. Or do good deeds. Or take care of their children. Or watch the Cleveland Browns win multiple Super Bowls.

Or even one . . .

One of the prayers God DOES answer is provide wisdom to those who seek it (see James 1:5 in the bible). And wisdom is something we all need.

The ability to ACT on that wisdom is another thing. Known as "free will".

© Emittravel 2015

No, No; Thank YOU!!

After writing my last post, "Yeah, But What's In It For Me?", I got to thinking about the hazards of that mentality. If you didn't read that one, you may want to take a moment. I'll wait.

If someone is always looking at what they can get FROM God, the very nature of their faith needs to be examined. They need to assess what kind, if any, of a relationship they have with God.

One of the main differences touted between Christianity and other faiths is of relationship. In Christianity, relationship with God is not based on you DOING anything to get approval from God. It is based on the acceptance of what God has done. You don't have to go anywhere, recite certain prayers at certain times of the day, or get your karma in line for God to love you. He simply does. "For God so loved the world, that He gave . . . "

That there is enough to love Him in return.

But, if your relationship with God is based on what you can get FROM Him, then you are in for a lot of heartache and struggle.

As I said, I became a Charismatic in the early 1990s. And during that time since, I've seen many movements roll through the Charismatic church. Prosperity and Healing seem to be two of the majors.

The problem is, if Prosperity is your focus, what happens to your relationship with God if things aren't so prosperous? If your job disappears, or your business collapses, or your retirement investments take a hit?

Or if Healing is your thing, what happens when you find yourself battling a three-week long cold, or cancer, or the death of a loved one - too young / too soon?

I'll tell you what happens. You will either beat yourself up over your lack of faith, or, if things are bad enough, you will question the validity of faith in God itself. Many a "born-again atheist" started as a church goer who found faith in God to be wanting. "I prayed and He didn't answer my prayer."

How would you feel if the only reason your spouse loved you was for what you provided? From the weddings I've been to, it's been "for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health". I have never heard, "for the paycheck you bring home", or, "the mind-bending orgasms you give me".

Sometimes it feels like the Christianity we sell is a bill of goods. I've heard it so many times that a person had found themselves at such a low point in their life, that the only direction to look was up. It was then that they "found Jesus". Then all of a sudden, they found they no longer needed the cigarettes, or the drugs, or the alcohol, or the whatever. God delivered them from the crap in their life and now they are walking in joy, health, and (being a tither) prosperity. This is called having a good testimony. But what if life just happens? What if you still struggle with your addictions after becoming a Christian? What if your employment (or lack thereof) situation doesn't improve? Guilt. Or you simply find yourself doubting your conversion experience.

What should one do? Focus on loving God for the who, not the what. That way, in spite of the "richer or poorer" or "sickness or health", you will enjoy a lifetime of "marital bliss".

© Emittravel 2015

Yeah, But What's In It For Me?

When my wife and I got together, we came from two different Christian backgrounds. She, a practicing Roman Catholic, and me, a Charismatic Protestant (a.k.a. "Non-Denominational"). Over the years, and many breakfast conversations, the differences have become more and more apparent. Now I grew up Catholic, so I knew where she was coming from. She, on the other hand, had minimal Charismatic experience, especially of the Protestant variety. Since the Charismatic movement had much development in the Catholic church though, she wasn't completely lost.

A notable difference between Catholic and Charismatic churches is their view of community and growth. If you look around, you will notice that there are Catholic churches around, but none too close to each other. There are usually only one or two in a specific geographic area. Charismatic churches, on the other hand, can be found practically across the street from each other. Again, the difference is based on their view of community and growth.

When a Catholic church has become too large for its current location to support, they will either move to a location with more property, or more likely, the diocese will start another Catholic church in a nearby, but different, neighborhood. The reason for this is that each Catholic church is designed to meet the needs of that particular community. If and when that church reaches a point where it is unable to effectively meet those needs, another church is required - usually close enough to assist with those needs, but far enough away to reach a separate community as well.

Charismatic churches, on the other hand, tend to be more growth focused. They go from one program to the next, always looking for what brings in the most people. And to assist with this, "successful" Charismatic churches hold seminars and publish books on what they have done to reach such phenomenal growth. So, they are always trying the "newest thing", and usually, at the expense of reaching the needs of the community in which they are located.

Understand, the reason for the difference is that charismatics, by definition, are "What's in it for me?" people. The word "charismatic" comes from the word "charis", meaning "gifts". Unlike their neighbors, the Pentecostals, whose focus tends to be the Holy Spirit (see "Pentecost" in the beginning of the book of Acts in the bible), Charismatics focus on the gifts of the Holy Spirit. In other words, what can they get from the Holy Spirit.

Through the years, charismatics have danced with different "movements": Word & Faith, Prosperity, Healing, etc. All of which have been focused on getting FROM God. Along with this hunger for what they can get, comes the nickname "Cruise-a-matics"; as they jump from church to church, seminar to seminar, event to event, always looking for where the Spirit is "moving". They stand in long lines at the altar with hopes that the minister with the "gift" can bestow it on them by laying their hands upon them.

Before you get upset with me, understand that I've been in the Charismatic movement since the early 1990s. I know of what I speak.

Because of this, Charismatic churches struggle with attendance, as they find people come in the front and leave out the side; going to where the worship is better, or the pastor is more gifted, or they "preach the word". Also, the congregations are made up of people from all over; many driving many miles to attend a particular church. This results in a disconnect between the church and the local community, as the attendees have very little to connect them once the service ends.

If you don't believe me, take a look at the church bulletins of your local Catholic and Charismatic churches. The Catholic one tends to be pages long, with staples holding it together, filled with community needs, reflections, names of the sick to pray for, births, weddings, funerals, and social opportunities. The Charismatic one tends to be one sheet of paper, folded a few times, with one whole section to take notes during the sermon.

What's the solution? The only thing that comes to mind is for people to stop looking at what they can get FROM God. A way to do that is to not spend so much time thanking God for what He has given, but instead thanking God for WHO He is.
God loves us without condition. I'm sure that's the kind of love He would like in return.

© Emittravel 2015

Stuff My Brain Says #75

Flip Wilson is famous for the line, "The Devil made me do it". Many Christians also believe the devil talks to them. I believe God speaks to us via His Holy Spirit. The devil, not having a similar representation of himself, does not speak to us in the same manner. The devil is neither omniscient, omnipotent, nor omnipresent. Most of those "negative" voices we hear are our own, influenced by our fallen nature and sin. Others are memories of things spoken to us by people from our past.

Christians need to stop giving the devil more power than he already has. That may be useful to fire up a congregation to throw more in the offering plate, but it's not valid.

© Emittravel 2015

If the Stiletto Fits . . .

A few weeks prior to this writing, Bruce Jenner "came out" publicly as Caitlyn Jenner.

First off, I think it interesting that we still use the expression "came out", as it is directly reminiscent of when those outside the socially-accepted "norm" were IN the so-called closet, and, when going public with the truth concerning themselves, would come OUT of said closet.

Secondly, I think it interesting that the term "closet" is used to describe both the place for those outside of the socially-accepted "norm", AND as the place Christians are encouraged to enter when praying (Matthew 6:6 - KJV). Curious. Ever think that for some people, the very "closet" one spends time in prayer becomes the very place they discover their true selves?

(Yeah, that last thing may upset a few folks . . . )

As I mentioned in my last blog post, one of the difficulties I have with the Christian church is the focus on the depravity of the world, and how those in the church have "overcome" and are separate from, even superior to, it. I was part of that belief structure for many years, and I know how entrenched that attitude can be in one's life. And it is sometimes given from the pulpit with sly humor, all the while reinforcing an intolerance for the very people the church is supposed to be reaching out to.

If you, as a person with such an attitude, find that you have difficulty with folks like Caitlyn Jenner, I want to know something: Is God the author of birth defects?

Think about that for a minute. And no, I'm not calling Caitlyn Jenner someone with a birth defect. Though, in a sense, maybe I am.

We Christians like to say that God doesn't make junk. For example, using the (re)creation account in Genesis chapter one, everything God made was "good". The bible also says that sickness and disease are from the Devil. So, where do birth defects come from? I've already argued that children aren't born with them because of their sins or the sins of their parents (see "Hey Babe: Take a Walk on the Quiet Side"), so where do they come from?

(One way I understand it is, the longer we have been here, reproducing and reproducing, errors in our genetic make-up keep getting passed down, and even transfigured, from one generation to the next. I was born, for instance, without a sense of smell. For me each breath is the same. My mom's sense of smell is normal. My dad's is beyond normal: he's smelled an underground gas leak that the technician couldn't detect with his meter until he had dug two-feet below ground! Yet, MY shnoz is basically useless. With sinus issues, it is sometimes beyond useless! Radiation is known to be a source of some cancers, because of the way it affects cells. I believe that in some cases, cancer can be a genetic disorder.)

Now, if someone is born with a birth defect, and science has come to the point where they can "fix" it, should the person with the defect take advantage of that technology? Or, since God made them that way, should they embrace the way they are and not seek "wholeness"? If one is born without arms or legs, prosthetics today have come a long way to providing someone a higher level of independence than they would have ever experienced otherwise. Would it be wrong to embrace such technology? What about corrective lenses (glasses or contacts), or even LASIC surgery? Would those be abominations because they go to "fix" what God had deemed "good"? Of course not.

Okay, let's not limit birth defects. Since sex is only determined by a couple of X's and Y's (and no, I'm not getting into the whole sex vs. gender argument), what if what one is born with is NOT what they, inside, determine themselves to be? Isn't that a form of birth defect too? And since science has come to the point where they can "fix" that as well, is it wrong for a person to embrace that either?

You have to think, if all wisdom and inventiveness ultimately comes from God, is it so wrong for medical technology to give people a way to live a more "normal" life?

As the title says, "If the stiletto fits . . . "

© Emittravel 2015

Me, Myself, and I

I wanted to follow up on a comment I made on my last blog ("You Don't Say!"). It was rather in passing, and was actually added during the final read through. "NOTHING like worshipping with live music." Even though I was there in spite of my sabbatical, I didn't want to miss the opportunity to worship with the music team I was so fond of playing (harmonica, percussion, and vocals) with - even if was not "with" them, but in the congregation.

Worshipping God at home has two disadvantages: the songs on the recordings are usually pitched in a way that my harmonicas seem out of tune, and, more importantly to me, there are no words projected on the screen. Ours is a church without hymnals. We use PowerPoint projected on the wall/screen at the back of the platform for the congregation. There is a duplicate projection on the back wall (for the singers on the music team, and so the preacher can see where he/she is at during the sermon by which slide is being projected). Since I am normally adding harmonica (can't sing while playing) or percussion (can't sing while playing - I come from a predominantly Caucasian family, and we all know white guys have no rhythm. How many people you know COUNT while playing a tambourine?!?), I really don't know the words to the songs. So, singing them at home I find myself mumbling my way through them.

One of the things I've been noticing during my sabbatical is that a lot of the music we use for praise and worship is "I" focused. "My God, is an awesome God. He reigns, from heaven above." "Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me. I once was lost, and now am found. Was blind, but now I see."

During my visit we sang one where I found myself changing the lyrics part of the way through. Here is the original:

"Awesome" by Charles Jenkins

"My God is awesome, He can move mountains
Keep me in the valley, hide me from the rain
My God is awesome, heals me when I'm broken
Strength where I've been weakened, forever He will reign
(repeat)

My God is awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome
My God is awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome

My God is awesome, Savior of the whole world
Giver of salvation, by His stripes I am healed
My God is awesome, today I am forgiven
His grace is why I'm living, praise His holy name

My God is awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome
My God is awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome

He's mighty, He's mighty, He's mighty, He's mighty
Awesome, Awesome

He's Holy, He's Holy, He's Holy, He's Holy
Awesome, Awesome

He's Great, He's Great, He's Great, He's Great
Awesome, Awesome

Deliverer, Deliverer, Deliverer, Deliverer
Awesome, Awesome

Provider, Provider, Provider, Provider
Awesome, Awesome

Protector, Protector, Protector, Protector
Awesome, Awesome

My God is awesome, He can move mountains
Keep me in the valley, hide me from the rain
My God is awesome, heal me when I'm broken
Strength where I've been weakened,
Praise His holy name"

First off, I want to say that is a wonderful song. I add a bass harmony at church, some simple cabasa percussion, and find I can't keep my feet still. I'm not dissing it. But I want you to go back and look at the pronouns. God is referenced as the third party "He", whereas the focus of the song is in actuality in the possessive "My". "I want to tell you that it is MY God that is awesome. MY God moves mountains. MY God heals ME when I'M broken. You should praise His holy name."

Is that the focus of worship? It's one thing to sing a song like this in front of an audience, but when you are leading the congregation in worship, the focus should be on God, not on my telling you about Him. The desire is to have the congregation sing WITH you in worship, not listen to you.

Next time you are worshipping, try changing the pronouns and give Him the honor He deserves.

Oh God You're awesome, You can move mountains
You keep me in the valley, hide me from the rain
Oh God You're awesome, You heal me when I'm broken
Strength where I've been weakened, forever You will reign

(repeat)

Oh God You're awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome
Oh God You're awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome

Oh God You're awesome, Savior of the whole world
Giver of salvation, by Your stripes I am healed
Oh God You're awesome, today I am forgiven
Your grace is why I'm living, praise Your holy name

Oh God You're awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome
Oh God You're awesome, awesome, awesome, awesome

You're mighty, You're mighty, You're mighty, You're mighty
Awesome, Awesome

You're Holy, You're Holy, You're Holy, You're Holy
Awesome, Awesome

You're Great, You're Great, You're Great, You're Great
Awesome, Awesome

Deliverer, Deliverer, Deliverer, Deliverer
Awesome, Awesome

Provider, Provider, Provider, Provider
Awesome, Awesome

Protector, Protector, Protector, Protector
Awesome, Awesome

Oh God You're awesome, You can move mountains
You keep me in the valley, hide me from the rain
Oh God You're awesome, You heal me when I'm broken
Strength where I've been weakened,
Praise You're holy name

Change the focus and make the worship conversational. After all, you are worshipping Him. And He IS awesome.

© Emittravel 2014

Oh to be Ignorant

There is probably nothing more irritating to an old Christian, than a new Christian. They are so excited. It's Jesus this, and Jesus that. Every prayer seems to be answered without delay. And they are simply oozing with sticky, sweet, joy. You know what I mean, don't you? Better yet, you remember BEING that, don't you? Now you are in the group that tells them to calm down. Not to be so obnoxiously evangelical. You're already a Christian - you don't need to hear them singing every new Christian song, and don't want to see them wearing all of those obnoxious t-shirts covered with clichés and slogans. You've matured. You've grown. You've become stale.

How do I know this? Because I'm stale.

What happened? How did I get this way? My story from when I first became a Christian to now is rather long and detailed, so I won't go into it too much here. Let's just say that the saying is true: the more you learn, the less you know. Let me explain.

Have you ever tried Google Earth? You start off looking at the Earth, and start zooming in. Click, by click, by click you get closer and closer to the Earth's surface, and see more and more details. Pretty soon you went from a big ball of blue to your driveway. That's so cool. Tell that to the crew of the Apollo 8 mission. As they orbited the moon, they watched the Earth "rise" and quoted the first ten verses of Genesis: "In the beginning, God … " The beauty and majesty of the Earth from space has had similar impacts upon those fortunate enough to "… have danced the streets of heaven, and touched the face of God." (Cuthbert Hicks) It's not the minute details of the streets, it's the overall beauty of the Earth seen from 100 miles above it.

(I have used the phrase "Five thousand foot level" several times in previous posts in reference to viewing the Bible. It sounded good, but in retrospect I should have used something more akin to 528,000 feet. But to be consistent, I'm going to continue using five thousand.)

Christianity, at least in the varieties I'm familiar with, starts off looking at God from such that low Earth orbit (100 miles). As you read the Bible, expose yourself to sermons, books, and other sources of knowledge, you get "closer and closer" to God. Soon you find you've broken through the clouds and gotten right down to your driveway. Some would say that is a good thing. At one point in my life I would have agreed. Today? Oh to be ignorant.

Let's look at it with another example. Have you ever looked at a painting? Not a print of a painting. Not a picture of a painting on the internet. A real, honest-to-goodness painting? Gotten so close to it you could see the individual brush strokes? That is where I am in my Christianity. I've heard so many sermons, read so many books (including the Bible, over and over), that I've gotten right up close to the brush strokes of God. The problem? I've forgotten what the overall picture looked like. I forgot the beauty and awe of God that I first saw when I first saw Him. I've spent so much time getting to know about Him, that I've forgotten Him. And what's worse, without my reading glasses, I can't even enjoy the individual brush strokes!

I want to be ignorant again. I want to wipe out all of those years of study and go back to that simple joy of meeting Him. If you had asked me what made going to church such an impactful part of my life, I would have told you it was the sermons - the powerful preaching. Not today. Today I would soon as much leave before the sermon starts. Go from worship to the offering to the car. I don't even mind the offering - to me it's an extension of the worship.

I'm a little biased: I happen to be on the worship team of our church. I sing, and play blues harmonica and a little percussion. For me, I find it "easier" to worship God from the platform than from the congregation. I find I worship God through the instruments. There was a Sunday a few weeks ago that the worship leader (who happened to be sitting at the piano) had tears running down his cheeks while he played. He was worshipping God through his playing. If the church asked me to step down from the worship team, I'd find I'd have very little reason to keep coming.

To be honest (if that above wasn't honest enough), if it wasn't for the fact that I'd end up leaving my instruments still on the platform, I'd leave right after the offering anyway. Its not that the sermons are no longer good - they are still phenomenal. I just find that I'm so empty sitting there. I am no longer interested in one more "nugget". One more Greek translation of some amazing truth of the Bible.

Jesus said to "Come unto me like little children." (Matthew 18:3). Some believe that that means that you come to Jesus as a little child and grow up from there. What is the most "popular" prayer in the Bible? It's called the Lord's Prayer. It starts off with "Our Father, Who art in Heaven. Blessed by Thy name." Do you know what that really says? "My Daddy, Who lives in Heaven. Blessed is Your name." Daddy, not Father. It's a word of endearment. Those who have translated it "Father" have done a great disservice. We are to come to Jesus, and continually come to Him, as a little child.

When I was a child I would reach up my arms to my daddy. He would pick me up and place me on his lap, and hold me. Today? We go out to breakfast and talk man-to-man. The thought of him picking me up and holding me on his lap is absurd.

I want to go back to climbing into God's lap. I want to be a child again. Oh to be ignorant.

© Emittravel 2014

Middle East Peace - An Oxymoron?

First off, a statement of the obvious: the Middle East is one messed up place. I think we can all agree upon that. And no matter what anyone has done, peace in that region has been a fairy tale dream at best; a major catastrophe of "biblical" proportions at worst.

I keep wondering why we are so heavily invested in trying to barter peace there. The Left says that it is all about oil. The Right says we need so support our allies there. In one sense, they are both right. In another, I think they are standing on flimsy arguments. Let's take a look at the Left's side of it first.

Oil. Black gold. Texas "T". (Wait, did I just alienate some of my readers? Sorry 'bout that. Guess I'll have to go dunk my head in the ol' "cement pond".) No matter what Earth Day advocates have said, oil is still this nation's blood. No other energy source even comes close to the power and convenience of oil. We, in the United States, used to produce most of what we needed ourselves. Thus the "Texas 'T'" reference. But costs to produce it here have become so astronomical that it became cheaper to import it. That's where the Middle East comes in. That area of the world is one of the areas we get it. It's not the only place, but any drop in production there has a significant enough impact upon our nation that we will do anything to keep it flowing. Even poke our heads in wars of solely religious significance to those who live there.

Now, the Right says that we are there to support our allies. You know, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the on-again-off-again love affair with Iraq and Iran.

When we went into Iraq under President G.W. Bush, we were going in based on "supposed" Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). Saddam Hussein even used them on his neighbor (Kuwait). We had "Intelligence" reports (I put that in quotation marks to signify that I question the validity of the existence of governmental "intelligence") that said he had them. After much feet dragging with the useless entity known as the United Nations, we finally went in to find that no, he didn't have any. "Bush lied / People died" became the chant of the left. But did he really lie?

Saddam DID indeed have WMDs. I'm not going to argue what happened to them during the foot dragging. That's not the issue. He DID have them. How do I know? Let me ask you a question: Where do you think he got them? Saddam was put in power by the U.S. as an "ally". We supplied him with the weapons to protect him from his neighbors. Do you honestly believe that Iraq had the technical knowledge to actually create and store such weapons? Really? Hell, even Iran - the country most-likely-to-get-a-nuke relies heavily on Russia for weapons. Most of the weapons these countries use are stamped "Made in" some other country than their own.

Which brings me to the whole "ally" argument of the Right. Why do we consider those religious nut jobs our allies in the first place? If we, the U.S., were to be invaded by a hostile nation, do you think any of those nations are going to send troops over here to support us?!? Yet, we send our troops there to protect them. Why? I'll tell you why: those nations are not our allies - they are our vendors. Our suppliers. I'd like to see the cost analysis comparing the cost of producing our own oil, or obtaining from non-hostile environments, versus the cost in weapons, aid, and the lives of our troops (yeah, place a dollar amount on THAT) currently spent.

"But J.P., Israel is not a source of oil. They ARE our ally." Israel "needs" our support. Is it really supporting them that when they are attacked we help barter a TEMPORARY cease fire that their enemies have CONSISTENTLY broken? You want to support Israel? Let them take care of themselves. They are fully capable of doing it on their own. Sure, that means those attacking them will have civilian casualties. In war they are called "collateral damage". If those civilians are in support of their government attacking Israel, they cannot be considered innocent civilians. If those civilians are not in support of their government attacking Israel, they have the responsibility to do something about that government.

I've read that the worst kind of call to respond to for the police is a domestic dispute. There's something to that.

As I mentioned above, those in the Middle East are fighting over religious differences. Do you realize, that before the Islamic takeover of those nations (think: sharia law), Muslims in that area were the leaders in technological and scientific advancements? Not so much any more. Their religious system has stifled any growth in those nations. And they want to force everyone else to follow suit. According to them, Israel has no right to exist. I've read the bible. It's hard to make the argument whether they have the right to that land or not. But they've been there for years. Should they now be kicked out because it belonged to someone else years ago? Let me ask my fellow Americans specifically: Would you move out of your house freely and hand your land over to the Native Americans/Indians/whatever-is-PC who lived there before? Do you think Alaska needs to go back to Russia? Heck, it was their land before it was our land.

This is a religious war. I say leave them alone and let the best God win.

© Emittravel 2014

Sometimes a Cigar is Just a Cigar

I remember being in Mrs. Taylor’s English class back in the tenth grade. One of the things we covered in the class was a read through/study of Nathaniel Hawthorne’s “Scarlet Letter”. 

When I was a kid, I was an avid reader. I read far more back then than I do now – I’m ashamed to admit. One thing I’ve never been good at: read more than one book at a time. Today I do read blogs, magazines, and the bible, and have no issue reading all of them at the same time. But I only read one book at a time. I think this falls more so into fiction than nonfiction reading. I can only really grasp one STORY at a time. 

When I started Mrs. Taylor’s class, I asked her if she would give me a week or two notice before we were to start “The Scarlet Letter”, to give me time to finish the current book and hold off on the next one. And that she did. She was a good teacher. 

The issue I found when we got into “The Scarlet Letter”, was something that has since framed how I look at a lot of literature – and that includes such things as the bible. During the class, Mrs. Taylor kept trying to get us to understand what Nathaniel Hawthorne MEANT when he wrote certain passages. The overall book was full of nuanced social and political issues that he apparently was trying to address.

My opinion of “The Scarlet Letter”? Nathaniel Hawthorne was trying to make a buck! That’s it. Nothing more. Sure, there were cultural things around him that affected how/what he wrote, but how in the world could we understand what he MEANT? He didn’t leave us a commentary track on the DVD (or whatever).

When I read devotionals and listen to various preachers talk about certain passages, sometimes their idea is to pull out some nugget of information that has never been addressed before, and help you see more of what God MEANT when a passage was written. They take a verse from this book of the bible and connect it to that book of the bible and try to convey something about something.

You know what? The bible is a giant story of the relationship of God to mankind, and mankind to God. That’s pretty much it. Sure there are cool things like prophecies that we see fulfilled (AFTER the fact – nobody caught the meaning of the prophecies WHEN they were given), but most of it is a collection of stories showing how mankind – full of flaws – is loved by a God without any.

Sometimes a story is just a story. Yes, there are lessons to be gained, but sometimes a story is just a story. And that’s okay.

© Emittravel 2014

Cliché Christianity

Philippians 4:6 - "Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God…" (New King James Version)

Ever quote only half a verse? You know, the part you LIKE? I call that "Cliché Christianity". Whenever someone is hurting we spout off these partial verses, sometimes even out of context, and pat ourselves on the back for being a fount of grace and wisdom to a needy brother or sister. Now, I'm not saying that it is wrong to encourage someone, but by grabbing only a part of a verse we can lose some great gifts from God.

The above verse is a good example of this. I purposely only gave you half the verse, because it is (actually more often than not) quoted as such. There is great truth that we miss when you don't bring the second portion into it:

Philippians 4:6 - "Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." (New King James Version)

I was "breaking bread" with a dear friend one evening (okay, it was steak, not bread - but I AM writing about clichés here), and he was sharing with me some difficult times he was having. But even in the midst of his torment, he had peace. He didn't really understand why, but he did. Other people were judging him; rubbing salt in his wounds (ANOTHER cliché! They just keep coming!). Yet, he KNEW that God wasn't. He knew the situation he was in was not the ideal - the perfect - but he was honest with God, and he KNEW that God was okay with it. Not saying that God was condoning or approving, but that, like a truly loving and empathic God, He cared. And by empathic I mean that God, by His Son Jesus, experienced the joys and pains of humanity and therefore feels WITH (empathy) us, not just FOR (sympathy) us.

Let's look at the above situation in relation to the verse - in total. Did my friend have reason to be anxious? Sure he did. And if he couldn't come up with a reason, I'm sure many of those other people would have given him substantial reasons to. But what does the verse say? "Be anxious for nothing…" I'm thinking of another cliché when I read that: "Be the ball". But the verse does not say to BE anxious, it says to be anxious for NOTHING. Remember, this is not the elimination of anxiousness - you can still be experiencing it in the midst of peace - just not BE it.

What did my friend do? He prayed. With thanksgiving. He made his requests known to God. He poured out his heart. THEN what happened? The peace of God. Now, I was having a little difficulty in phrasing that last sentence. I wanted to say something like "The peace of God was bestowed upon him like a gift." But that didn't fit the verse. The verse said that the peace of God will GUARD your heart and mind. The peace of God is not like a locked door, but more like a sentry. The first is an inactive barrier. The second is ACTIVELY keeping you secure. That means the peace is a presence. The Holy Spirit? A guardian angel? Perhaps. Sure fits.

One thing more: the peace of God "surpasses understanding". That means you will not be able to grasp it. Like finite trying to grasp infinite. You don't have to understand everything. Heck, where do you think the concept of "dark matter" came from? A math formula wouldn't work out to explain something in the universe, so "dark matter" was devised to make the formula work. And since the formula works, then it has been determined that "dark matter" MUST exist. Talk about mental gymnastics! But see? Wanting to understand is part of our nature. But you don't HAVE to. Sometimes it is best to just "let go and let God" (sorry, couldn't resist at least one more cliché!)

So remember: clichés sound good, but are rarely what is needed. Take time to be with someone in their hurt. A little empathy goes a lot farther to comfort someone. Remember: don’t judge until you've walked a mile in someone's shoes . . .

© Emittravel 2013

Stuff My Brain Says #58

Politicians, and many who worship at the altar of the "Mainstream Media", believe that the solution to the violence committed using guns would be more, and stricter, gun laws. You know, I honestly wish they were right. A few laws are passed and suddenly such violence is all but a forgotten memory. But you want to know the truth? That is a false hope.

There are already more gun laws on the books than can be counted, and since there is STILL violence committed with guns, more laws can't be the fix. Yet, the cry for more laws has become almost deafening. Obviously, more laws is not the solution - or places like Chicago would already be the safest places on the planet. It is already against the law to commit murder - with any type of weapon - and that has not stopped it from happening.

What is the solution? Some say putting God back in the front of our lives. Others say focus on strengthening the ties of traditional marriage and family. Do I have the answer? No. But I CAN tell you that if something does NOT work, more of it won't either.

© Emittravel 2013

The Big Empty

I'm reading an interesting book by Paul Davies called About Time - Einstein's Unfinished Revolution. One of the topics mentioned is that the universe has been expanding since the "big bang". My question is, what is considered "the universe"? Is it just the material that was formed during that "bang" and is propelling away from the other material formed at the same time? Or is the universe itself the "big empty" BETWEEN the material formed during that "bang"? Is the universe a finite area that is expanding, much like a balloon being filled with air? Or is the universe ALREADY an endless expanse of "nothingness", with the material formed during that "bang" moving ever out into that "nothingness"? And if the universe is expanding like a balloon, what is beyond it? A balloon expands into something, but what of the universe?

And if everything started at the "big bang", where did that endless expanse of "nothingness" come from?

I posted a tweet that said, "Questions for God: What is the stuff of Space? How does gravity work? Why put the meat on the back of the leg, when we bang it on the front?" It was meant as sort of a grand joke - the three questions I want to ask God when I meet Him in heaven. But the first two are serious. Scientists throw terms around all the time, but do a lousy job of explaining the "why" behind them. Opposite poles attract (minus/plus) and the same poles repel (minus/minus or plus/plus). Why? What CAUSES those reactions. Just because we observed them, and gave them a clever name/law (Magnetism), doesn't answer the WHY. Same with gravity and the "stuff of space".

Another point in the book (which I am really enjoying, by the way) is that if the universe were to stop expanding (the amount of matter in the universe being enough that the amount of gravity overcomes the speed of expansion) and fall back into a "big crunch", that time itself would flow backwards. Understand, this is not something that the author is coming up with himself - many physicists and mathematicians have embraced it. Why? Just because stars and planets and "stuff" change direction, why should time as well? If I throw a ball really hard straight up, at one point, since the gravitational pull of the earth is greater than the speed of the ball, the ball would stop, change direction, and fall back to earth. Does that mean TIME goes backwards as well? Just because a star changes direction, does that mean time reverses and light from that star goes back TO it?

I guess some things are beyond our finite understanding. It takes One who is infinite to provide the answer. The One who is perhaps OUTSIDE of the universe - holding it in His hands.

© Emittravel 2013