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

A Rest Stop on the Journey

Peace. Spiritually, I’m at peace.

Not much has changed for me concerning my post-sabbatical journey. I no longer attend the church I had been a member of for more years than I can count off the top of my head. That’s not new. I read the bible a lot less than I did, mainly due to its standing in my life. That’s not new either. And I try to take religion a whole lot less seriously than I did before. And that’s not new either.

I guess what has changed is that I’ve grown comfortable. I don’t feel that my “radical” beliefs are all that radical anymore, and that I can and do “fellowship” with other Christians in a straightforward, honest, and still loving manner. I don’t have the nagging feeling that the other shoe is going to drop and I’m going to find myself in a spiritual tailspin (I know I’m mixing metaphors, but bear with me.)

Part of that is most likely due to the generous acceptance of some friends who have welcomed me into their group (worship team). You see, the one thing I never lost before, during, and after my sabbatical is my desire to worship God. Even though I don’t believe the bible to be a co-equal member of the Godhead anymore, I still desire to give honor and praise unto the One who holds all of existence in His hands. For many years I’ve played harmonica, percussion, and provided bass harmonies in a worship environment. Leaving that former church left me without the avenue to express my love for God with those “gifts”. And again, thanks to the generous acceptance of some friends, I have again the ability to do just that.

Does that mean I am once again in full attendance at a church? No. These friends have accepted me where I am and allow me to join them whenever I can. At the moment that is about once a month. Sometimes more, but pretty much just that. I don’t think it will ever become a weekly thing again. And to be honest, I really don’t think I could go back to a weekly thing anymore.

And that’s okay.

Did I mention I was at peace?

© Emittravel 2019

Let's Talk About You - What Do YOU Think of Me?

"You know, if they ever find life on other planets you can throw away your Bible."

That was a comment once made by my brother during a conversation years ago. And, according to a lot of what I hear, his opinion (was) is a common one. Here is why:

Humanity has had this God complex for most of its recorded history. (And to keep grammar simple, I'm going to use male references, though this is not limited to the less-fairer sex.) Man has believed that God is here to fight his battles, give him special favor, or that he himself IS - in a sense - God. He has been so wrapped up in HIMSELF that he believes that God not only created the world, but that He created the ENTIRE vast universe JUST for him!

Talk about hutzpah!

One of the Bible verses used to support this is John 3:16 - "For God so loved the WORLD that He gave His only begotten Son . . . " (emphasis mine). You see it? God so loved THIS world that He gave His Son. That must mean that there cannot be any other life in the ENTIRE universe, or God would have had to give His Son to THAT world as well (because, of course life there would have had to sin and need a savior too!). And, since Jesus came to earth as a man, and not an aardvark, man MUST be the most important life on earth. And since man is only on earth . . .

You have to understand the importance of man in the grand scheme of things. You see, Adam and Eve sinned, and not only cursed themselves, but the whole of creation:

"For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now." (Romans 8:19-23 NKJV)

So, creation eagerly waits for the sons of God (redeemed man) to be revealed. Creation will then be delivered from the bondage of corruption that man's sin put it in. And since man's sin took place on the world that God so loved, there cannot be life outside of earth.

So, if only MAN wouldn't have sinned, creation itself would be fine.

You know, the more I write, the more ludicrous that sounds.

If you are one who has this man superiority complex, may I direct you to my blog "Ptolemy Syndrome"!

I guess all I can say, if there IS life out there in the great expanse of the universe, and there very well could be, is that that life is far more intelligent, and far less full of itself, than what we have here.

(Inspired by the movie "Contact" and the podcast FilmSack! of the same movie.)

©Emittravel 2016

Point Me to the Buffet

There is an interesting story in the bible that I found pretty descriptive of where my life has come. In the book of Acts (see chapter 10), Peter is tanning on the roof of the house of a guy named Simon, when he gets hit by heat stroke and starts to hallucinate.

Okay, Peter is staying with a guy named Simon who is a tanner, when he goes up on the roof of the house to pray. He gets really hungry and falls into a trance. Happy?

Anywho, he sees a vision of a sheet being let down from the sky, with all kinds of different animals on it. A voice tells him, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat." Apparently, some of the animals were of the types that the Mosaic law forbid him to eat, because he replied, "Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean." (And apparently, Peter believed the voice to be of God, and he had no problem telling God no.) The voice replied, "What God has cleansed you must not call common." And, since Peter is stubborn, the vision was repeated two more times.

Later in the chapter, Peter goes to the house of a guy named Cornelius who was a "devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms (money to the poor) generously to the people, and prayed to God always." During this visit Peter comes to an understanding of the vision. Cornelius was not a Jew, and up to that point, Peter believed that the good news of Jesus' death and resurrection for the forgiveness of sins was ONLY for Jews. What Peter finally understood was God meant that he was not to call ANYONE common or unclean. That what Jesus did was for all mankind, and not for Peter's particular brand of religion.

My wife and I went out to dinner this weekend and I ordered the Lobster Garlic Noodles (I'm a sucker for seafood), which contained shrimp, crab, lobster, shiitake mushrooms, spinach, and parmesan cheese. As I was reveling in the taste sensation before me, I was struck by a thought: There are religions who would frown (a really, serious frown) at the idea of eating such items. Others forbid pork (which we always have on New Year's Day), and others would freak out over eating anything but fish on Fridays (at least during Lent - oops! Did I give that one away?!?)

You see, my wife and I are "foodies". We even shape vacations on what is available to eat. We absolutely love eating. You want to spend quality time with us? Guarantee food will have something to do with it!

Now, let me connect the story at the beginning with the thought I had over dinner.

For starters, I have formally departed ways with the church I had belonged to for many years. I am officially "church" homeless. And the clincher? I have no "want" to look for another.

I have found myself with a distaste for anything "religious" (which comes from an old word meaning "to strangle"). Oh, I'm still a Christian. The good news that Peter was sharing with Cornelius is still truth. I just believe that one does not have to hold to the manmade tenants of any particular religion in order to hold to that truth. And there lies the reason I have no "want" to look for another church.

In the bible it says that no scripture is for anyone's personal interpretation. But, what is happening within the different religions that cause such separation (and for the sake of simplification, I'm referring to different Christian religious "sects"), is exactly that: personal interpretations of the bible. And for me, I find that the bible was never meant to be taken to be an equal in the Godhead, based on the very writings it contains. Of course, that's just MY personal interpretation. If only I was a licensed or ordained minister (or televangelist). THEN my interpretations would be right! (sarcasm font)

What this means is that I find in every church things I agree with and things I disagree with. Of course, some would say the idea is to find one where what I agree with outweighs what I don't agree with. I can tell you, at this point in my journey, I'm not looking to settle. Nor, do I think I will find a church that believes 100% with me. And you want to know what? I'm okay with that.

I will still be loving God. I will still be worshipping God. And if you are looking for me, I'll be at the buffet.

© Emittravel 2016

Simply a Collection of Figurines?

I had the opportunity to attend a bat mitzvah. A truly wonderful ceremony. Similar to a bar mitzvah (Jewish "coming of age" for boys), a bat mitzvah (for girls) celebrates a person's fully becoming a member of the Jewish community. If you have never had the opportunity to attend one, I encourage you to.

One thing I noticed during the ceremony is that the Jewish faith has three major focuses: (in order of their presentation) Tradition, the Torah, and God. Unlike my Protestant-type experiences, which tend to elevate the whole bible as the "Word" and an object of worship, the Jewish faith focuses on the traditions of the past and the Torah - the first five books of the bible (a.k.a. "The Law"). At one point in the ceremony, the doors in the back of the main platform are opened and the Torah is presented. They take it out and carry it up and down the aisles, where people will reach forth and touch it with their books, and then touch the books to their lips in adoration. It is not done solemnly, but with great joy. In their readings and prayers (mostly in Hebrew), you hear the word "Torah" about as often as "Adonai" (God).

Do you like to collect things? I think it's a pretty common affair. I, for one, collect books (fiction and nonfiction) and movies that focus on time and time travel. My wife collects movies she thinks will make me cry. Some folks collect stamps. Others collect comics. Some even go as far as collect figurines (or, as some like to call them, "action figures" - though, since they don't move, I don't comprehend the "action" part.)

We, as humans, like to collect things. As George Carlin once said (not a quote - this is from memory): "A house is a place to store your stuff. The bigger the house, the more the stuff. The more the stuff, the bigger the house." And boy do we like our stuff. We find comfort in our stuff. We find security in our stuff. Don't believe me? Go on vacation and forget to pack something.

It's not easy to get rid of our stuff either. We find comfort in the tangible. I am in the process of ripping (AGAIN - higher bitrate) my entire collection of CDs and then GETTING RID OF THEM! Okay, not all of them. I'm keeping box sets. And live albums. And those autographed by the artist. And special local ones you won't find on eBay or Amazon. But aside from those, I'm getting rid of them! Okay, it's not easy. I know I'll have them in a digital format on my local hard drive, and on a backup hard drive in a fire-proof safe, and on a server somewhere in the cloud, but it feels odd to let go of the physical CDs. Why? Because we, as humans, find comfort and security in our physical stuff.

And we always have. Go back far enough in history and you'll find people with little statues of wood or stone that represented their gods, and they worshipped them! Then one day a guy named Moses is out looking for a killer way to roast his bag of marshmallows, and meets a God (who ironically is talking to him out of said "killer marshmallow roaster") who tells him not to make similar statues to represent Him. He said He is the God who created heaven and earth, and cannot be represented by insignificant objects of man's hands.

So what do we have today? Statues and rosaries and crosses and altars and prayer shawls and bibles and the Torah and grilled cheese sandwiches that look like Jesus that we consider as "holy", and we worship them.

I wonder what God thinks about us, when we focus on objects to represent Him. It's not like He ever said anything about that (check out numero uno on His Top Ten list [Exodus 20:3-5]).

So, like Gollum, what do you consider "my precious"?

© Emittravel 2015

B.I.B.L.E.

Occasionally, there is a knock on the door - usually the front - and my wife answers it. Standing before her are usually two nicely-dressed individuals, with the purpose of introducing her to the ways of their religion. She smiles politely and says, "I'm sorry, but my husband is a minister at our church and we are happy in our faith." That is usually enough for the two nicely-dressed individuals to turn and head for the next-door neighbor's front door.

"A minister at our church." The reason she would say that is that, because I am on the worship team - in the "music ministry" - I am therefore a "minister". I'm neither licensed nor ordained, yet, I AM a minister by association. I like that.

As I've mentioned in a previous blog, I believe I am coming to the end of my sabbatical. The question remains: where do I go from here?

During this time of separation, I've visited a friend's church where I've had the opportunity to join in on their worship team, and have visited my "home" church a few times (worshipped from in the congregation and departed prior to the sermon). I have continued to read the bible (not as intensely as before) and assorted devotionals, so I haven't gone "cold-turkey Christianity".

Here is my conundrum: Can one be involved in a church ministry, when one disagrees with a major belief of that church?

I don't know when it started, but at one point the pastor of my church started praying the following when praying with those who wanted to become Christians: ". . . and I will attend Your church, and I will read Your book." That statement may indeed have been the proverbial straw for me. Taking it from the viewpoint of the person standing before him, "Your church" sounds an awful lot like THIS particular church is Your church - and that is bad enough. The part that hit me the most was the "I will  read Your book" part. My church, like many Protestant style churches, teaches that the bible is the Word of God. As I've stated previously, I've come to the conclusion (and fervent belief) that the bible CONTAINS the Word of God, but is NOT, in and of itself, THE Word of God.

(You can go back and read some of my recent blogs and see some of the details of that statement, so I'm not going to take up too much space here.)

There used to be this cute acronym made from the letters of "bible": Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth. You'd see it on bumper stickers, t-shirts, and, of course, bible covers (gotta protect that faux-leather cover). The first I heard of it was back in 1998. It was a song by a Christian band called Burlap to Cashmere. I don't know if they were the ones to coin it, but they were the source to my ears. Being one who also believed that the bible was part of the "Holy Quartet", I reveled in the cleverness.

During a breakfast conversation about this with my wife, I got to thinking: It's called "Basic Instructions". Not "Critical Instructions", or "Intricate Instructions", or "Complete Instructions". "Basic Instructions". My Jeep has an owner's manual. Every time I read it (no really, I DO read it), I get some good tips on how to make my Jeep experience more efficient and enjoyable. It does NOT contain the complete details of every aspect of the Jeep experience. You have to "experience" it (and, if you haven't, do yourself a favor and DRIVE one!! Oh wow!) Yet, there is this "doctrine" that the bible contains the complete, inerrant word of God, and there is nothing else needed. You can find all the answers to this life in it. As Colonel Potter used to say, "Horse hockey!" It's a guide. In it you can find the stories of a lot of other people's experiences in their walk (a.k.a. "relationship") with God, and those things can help you as well. But it is a guide.

So, is it even possible to go back into the music ministry of the church that I disagree with on this? I still love God. I'm a Christian. I just won't put the "Basic Instructions" over that experiential relationship. I guess the question is, what does it take to be a Christian? Belief in Jesus the Christ, or belief in the bible?

© Emittravel 2015

The Holy Quartet

I fall into the Trinitarian viewpoint concerning God. Discussions of the Trinity have a tendency to either create deep conversations, or a glazed panic to fall over an individual's eyes. Not surprising, as the idea of a triune Godhead fills some folks with complete bewilderment.

Putting it simply, the basic viewpoint of the Trinity is one God represented in three separate and distinct individuals. Not three separate gods. One God, but three representations. You have the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (or Holy Ghost), all functioning in three different roles, but as one entity.

I think the best explanation I've ever heard was the simplest, and it came from a comedian named Mike Warnke. He said that understanding the Trinity was as simple as cherry pie. Now, a good cherry pie is runny in the middle, with a light and flaky crust on top. If you have ever had such a pie, you know that if you try to remove a slice, you have to WHIP the piece from the pie pan to your plate, or the filling falls out. Now, take a freshly-made cherry pie, take a knife, and make three slices - or, slice the pie into three pieces. When you look at the crust, you can see three separate pieces of pie, but the runny filling inside moves back and becomes essentially one pie inside. Three pieces - one pie. Same with the Godhead. One God, in three separate "pieces". Why? Mike's reasoning was that we finite individuals couldn't swallow that pie whole, so we have to take Him in slices. Simple as cherry pie.

(I love that analogy, though I have to admit: I really don't like cherry pie! Not enough ice cream in the world . . . )

Some Christians have gone beyond the Trinity to the worship of the "Holy Quartet": the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Bible. They have placed the bible on equal footing as God. I've even heard people take "The bible says it, I believe it, and that settles it," to the extreme of "The bible says it, and that settles it whether I believe it or not," and that is dangerous. It's "the word of God" this, and "the word of God" that. They put so much emphasis on "the word" that they miss the meaning of it. The "word" is not the bible. The bible does not refer to itself as "the word".

There are two commonly used Greek words for "word" in the New Testament (you know, the part written in Greek): logos - the sum total of God, and rhema - the word of God expressed. Many Christians take the word "logos" to mean the bible. Unfortunately, that is a bit off base.

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was WITH God and the Word WAS God. HE was in the beginning WITH God." (John 1:1 NKJV - emphasis mine)

"And the Word became FLESH and dwelt among us, and we beheld HIS glory, the glory as of the ONLY BEGOTTEN of the Father, full of grace and truth." (John 1:14 NKJV - emphasis mine)

Seems pretty straight forward to me that John was referring to Jesus as "the word", and not the yet-to-be-written-and-compiled-into-a-leather-bound-book known as the bible. The word "word" used is logos. What was the definition? The sum total of God. Jesus is the sum total of God according to John, not the bible. As an exercise, look up the Greek word for "word" when you come across it in the bible. If it is the word logos, substitute it with "Jesus". But be prepared for your bible-worship theology to be shaken.

As I sense my sabbatical drawing to a close, I felt it worthwhile to get at least one more blog written concerning bible worship. I've grappled with "intellectual Christianity" - the impetus for the sabbatical (why I couldn't sit through anymore sermons, for instance) - and have come to the conclusion that it is not necessarily discussions of Christianity or religion, but misplaced worship of the bible in Christianity that has pushed me away. Now I need to determine if I am ready to once again attend church on a regular basis. I've gone back to my "home church" several times as of late, but have left after the worship has taken place (at the beginning our services). I've visited the church of some long-time friends and played with their music team - and have NOT left afterwards (I'm a guest - that would be RUDE!) I find I'm not squirming in my seat as much, but do find I have to focus. I also am trying to not get so disturbed when I hear references made as to the bible's importance. You know, being more "tolerant" of other people's beliefs (even if I disagree with them).

As I have written before, I believe the bible CONTAINS the words of God, but is not of itself THE word of God. That honor belongs to THE word of God: Jesus.

Remember: The Godhead is a trinity. If you want a quartet, go to a barbershop.

© Emittravel 2015

Be Careful WHAT You Worship

Today I went to church. Being a Sunday (the day I'm writing this blog), I'm sure that comes as no surprise to a lot of my readers. But if you have been reading for a while, you know that I've been on a sabbatical for the last several months. I had a lady ask me this morning what church I've been going to, since I haven't been around, and I told her "None. I'm on a sabbatical." That, of course produced a puzzled look, but that's expected. More on the sabbatical later.

I got to the church early. As I was walking from my Jeep to the building, I could hear the music team rehearsing. I found a seat in front, stage right (as a former theater person, "stage right" is the right side of the stage, from the perspective of the actors ON the stage looking out at the audience. Since the stage directions are normally for those ON the stage, this makes sense.). I wanted to be there early enough to be there for the rehearsal. I didn't think I'd have the opportunity to actually join the team; I just wanted to be there and "absorb" as much of the praise and worship as possible.

Outside of a few interruptions of people stopping to say hello and ask where I've been - both during the rehearsal and during the actual music portion of the service - I was able to focus on praising and worshipping God.

For the non-Christian, the terms "praise" and "worship" may be a bit confusing. Simplified, "praise" is the jump/shout/dance/run-about portion of the music. It is usually the part where you are expressing your joy of the one you are praising. "Worship", on the other hand, is usually quieter, more tender, and is an expression of adoration. There are times during worship when one may experience an almost tangible feeling of "presence". Usually, it takes "praise" to shed the stresses of the week, and allow one to open oneself to the possibility of getting close to God.

After the music portion, the minister welcomes newcomers, and then there is a period of fellowship, which I like to call the "meet and greet". This is where everybody goes around hugging and shaking hands. I took this as a good time to make my exit.

The sabbatical started initially as my taking a break from "intellectual Christianity". The church I've belonged to for many years refers to itself as a "Family Church, Charismatic Teaching Center, and a World Outreach". I wanted to make my next sentence "There is a heavy emphasis on the 'Teaching Center'," but that would be in error. The church does do a pretty good job of balancing the three, it's just that the sermons, by default, tend to fall heavy into the teaching portion. And that's where I've had to step away, for the health of my Christianity.

I said "started initially" above. What has happened during these few months is that it has become more defined as an intellectual/spiritual crossroads with what I call "bible worship". This is the practice of holding up the bible as something of EQUAL standing with God. I say this because I did exactly that. When I became a Christian, all those years ago, I not only read the bible, I carried around (and used) a Strong's Concordance (a dictionary containing every word in the bible, its English/Hebrew or Greek definition, and every location in the bible it is used). This sucker is bigger than the New York City Yellow Pages (ask your parents). I followed the Finis Dake philosophy of bible reading: "Take the Bible literally wherein it is at all possible; if symbolic, figurative or typical language is used, then look for the literal truth it intends to convey." (Dake's Annotated Reference Bible, Preface, © Copyright 1963 by Finis Jennings Dake)

And I wasn't alone. Most of the Christians I hung around with followed this same "adoration" of the bible. Since it was considered "The Word of God", it was equal to God.

As I've stated in a previous blog, I have come to believe that the bible CONTAINS the Word of God, but is NOT in and of itself THE Word of God. And I don't think I'm alone. Even St. John (the writer of the Gospel of John, 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John) stated "I had many things to write, but I will not with ink and pen write unto thee: But I trust I shall shortly see thee, and we shall speak face to face." (3 John 13). If John, who was called "the one Jesus loved" in the Gospel of John, and the only one of the twelve at the cross (who got protective guardianship of Jesus' mother) didn't think it valuable enough to WRITE down what he wanted to say (scriptures that are considered holy and inerrant), does it not reason that the bible is not the complete "Word of God"? I mean, weren't those things he did NOT write have equal value to what he DID write?

"And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen." (Gospel of John 21:25)

Be careful of what you worship.

© Emittravel 2015

Ain't It Prophetic?

Back in 2011, I wrote a blog entitled "Why Muslims Should be America's Biggest Supporters", where I give three possibilities as to why the United States does not show up in the "end times" scriptures of the bible. Those three are The Rapture takes place, economic collapse, and massive terrorist attacks beyond the scope of 9/11. For details, please refer to that blog.

There is one other possibility, that previous to my current sabbatical, I didn't even consider: the bible is written entirely concerning a smallish and specific region of the world. This means that the writers did not even consider the possibility of other lands across the oceans that could be inhabited - especially inhabited with people who would be of major impact upon world events.

Why is this significant? IF the bible is without error, containing what has been called "God-breathed" words, how did these prophetic writings, that apparently reflect so much detail of future events, completely miss the existence of the United States? This means either these writings are not as inspired as many Christians (those I would term "bible worshippers") claim, or that they are being given far more weight than intended when written.

Maybe this is due to the elevation of the bible, and other religious books, beyond their initial intentions. As I've stated before, the bible is NOT the Word of God, but it does CONTAIN the Word of God. I find it funny that many Christians elevate the bible to something so inerrant, that it is practically worshipped, but when faced with statements that are difficult to swallow (like women needing to keep silent in church [1 Corinthians 14:34]) they quickly point out that those focus on the "culture of the times" and that they are not relevant for today.

I guess the bible is true and inerrant, except when it is not.

Or, just maybe, the book was not designed to have every little thing made into a doctrine (I'm talking to you, Faith, Word, Healing, and Prosperity preachers).

I am personally appalled at the atrocities against human life that have taken place over slights to the Koran and its content. I say this as a human being. I cannot say that hiding behind my Christianity. I cannot because Christians have used the bible in order to commit similar atrocities in the church's history (e.g., The Spanish Inquisition). Sometimes religion (of any stripe) goes so far away from its inception, to the point where its followers become an embarrassment to the God they claim to follow. Sometimes I think that Islam is simply going through its "Inquisition" stage - not all those following Islam plan on strapping a bomb to themselves . . .

I really wonder what God thinks of us sometimes.

© Emittravel 2015

Walkin' the Line

Years ago, a minister named Kenneth Hagin made a comment that the Christian church goes to such extremes that it finds itself in either one ditch or the other, never seeming to stay in the middle of the road very long. Even though he was the leading voice of the Name-it-claim-it faith movement (clearly nestled in one of the ditches), I have to say that he was on to something there.

Extremes. That seems to sum up us humans pretty well. We go all in on the things that we are drawn to. Some are simply more culturally acceptable than others. For instance, thanks to recent Marvel movies, being a comic book geek is not such a weird thing anymore. Those people have moved out of their parents' basements and now are filling convention centers to beyond capacity. Are they extremists? In a sense, yes. But they are acceptable extremists.

As a person on a sabbatical from "intellectual Christianity", I find myself reflecting on what brought me to where I am. I also find I'm hypersensitive to the extremes. Maybe it's my fear of finding myself in one of the ditches again.

I used to be in one ditch as a youth. I was, what I considered, a devout Catholic. I was an altar boy. I read my father's prayer book (including the Latin - which was indecipherable to me) over and over. As I grew older, I joined the music team at the church - making up tenor harmonies as a 14-year old in a then-contemporary guitar group. Even after becoming a born-again Christian (which could be considered an extreme by some), I still attended the Catholic church for awhile.

As I mentioned above, I was what I considered a devout Catholic. Recently, my wife and I had an experience with a REALLY devout Catholic that ended up spawning this particular post.

Since I started this sabbatical, my wife has chosen to go to a local Catholic church. In their bulletin was a blurb asking for donations of gently-used Catholic items. There is a Catholic book/gift store that was accepting these donations. My wife had some that travelled from her condo to our house that never really got out of the boxes. We gathered them up and went to drop them off. There we met a lady on staff who believed every person who walked in was straight from the Vatican in their devotion to Catholicism. We certainly didn't fit the description, but she didn't know that. She talked about Saint This and Sister So-and-So, and showed us books from authors I've never heard of. They might as well have been bloggers! (Oh, wait.)

As we were trying to leave, she kept bringing up more and more things that might interest. The last was to point out the state banner of Mary (apparently, every state has one for their individual state). If we wanted to, we were encouraged to bring in our rosaries so that we could touch them to the banner and receive a special blessing.

It was a bit muddy in that ditch.

On the Protestant side, as I've made known in previous blogs, we have the worship of the bible. Just because you put the word "Holy" on the cover, does not automatically make it an object of worship. I believe that the bible CONTAINS the word of God, but it is NOT the word of God. There are many things in there that are clearly historical in nature, and statements made by the writers that tell you what you are reading is their opinion and not that of the Lord. (For example, the tradition of dedicating children instead of baptizing them is based on something Paul said, and not the Lord - 1 Corinthians 7:12-14 NKJV)

There is a passage in the epistles (2 Timothy) that says all scripture is given by inspiration of God. This is one of those passages that I hear quoted to prove that the whole bible is inspired of God, and therefore worthy of the title of "Holy". I like to point out that when Paul wrote that letter to Timothy, he was not referring to the letter he was writing as scripture! That's a lot of hutzpah! In actuality, whenever "scripture" is referenced in the New Testament, what is referred to is the OLD Testament. That was all they had! They had no idea that what they were writing was going to be compiled into a book.

So, on one side you have the worship of the bible - that everything in it is pure, inerrant, and holy, and on the other you have touching rosaries to pictures of Mary to get blessings - which is found NOWHERE in the bible.

Extremism is found on both sides of the aisle, for sure. It's easy to go from one side to the other. If man says it, most likely it has an agenda and is full of error. Think of the extreme sides when it comes to climate change, evolution, religious beliefs, politics, and whether or not coffee (chocolate, or eggs) is good for you.

So in closing, consider taking a spiritual Breathalyzer, try to walk the line, and stay out of the ditches!

(The title is inspired from Johnny Cash's "I Walk the Line" - "I keep a close watch on this heart of mine. I keep my eyes wide open all the time. … I walk the line.")

© Emittravel 2014

Stuck in Beta?

I just recently made the jump and installed the Developer Preview version of Windows Phone 8.1 (WP8.1) on my Lumia Icon phone.

(For those of you "non-tech-geeks" still reading this, don't worry - this isn't necessarily a "tech article", so you can keep reading.)

One of my co-workers was installing it on his phone and, through a chat, I decided to do the same thing. Only took about two hours in total (if that). There were multiple downloads and reboots that took place. Again, this is the Developer Preview version. When the "official" version gets rolled out via the cell phone carriers (I'm a Verizon customer), it should be the "complete" version (including updates and patches) and consist of only one download.

One of the neat features that came with WP8.1 is Cortana - a Siri / Google Now type interface. Previously, when you touched the search button on the phone, Bing search would launch and you would type your search (or, select the microphone icon and speak your search). Bing always provided textual results - like searching with Google on your desktop. Cortana replaces Bing (Bing is incorporated into Cortana), so Cortana launches when you click the search button. You can either type or speak your search. If you type, you get a textual result like before. If you speak, Cortana will respond verbally (and/or give you textual results if warranted.)

I noticed in the top right corner of the screen when Cortana is "running" the word "Beta". This is one of those terms that floats around that belong to the inner world of geeks and techies. I looked up a Wikipedia article on the Software Release Cycle that has a simple graph showing the testing and development periods of software. They are as follows:

Pre-alpha (a.k.a. development releases nightly builds)
Alpha
Beta
Release Candidate (a.k.a. Gamma Delta)
RTM (Release to Manufacturing) (a.k.a. Release to Marketing)
GA (General Availability)
Production or Live Release (a.k.a. Gold)

WP8.1 is either in RTM, GA, or Production - being that it is in the hands of carriers. As of this writing, AT&T has started rolling out 8.1, whereas Verizon still shows as "under testing". There is a firmware (software that directly affects the hardware - like drivers and such) update called "Cyan" that is due to be available at the same time as WP8.1, which was not available to download with the Developer Preview. When Verizon releases 8.1, it will include Cyan. But back to the Beta of Cortana.

One of the reasons I've read for how long Cortana will remain in Beta concerned the ever-evolving nature of the software. As more people use it, and it's database grows (and the software is tweaked with more features), Cortana will continue to become "more". At what point will Cortana leave the Beta stage is difficult to determine, mainly because of this type of growth.

Like I said in the second sentence of this article, the focus here is not "tech".

My question to you is, are you still in Beta? And if so, for how long?

Like Cortana, are you ever evolving? Are you constantly growing? Do you look for new experiences (and people) to facilitate this growth?

The bible makes reference to three basic salvations (being born again, born anew, or born from above - Greek shtuff). It says you've been saved (Ephesians 2:8), you are being saved (2 Corinthians 2:15), and you will be saved (Acts 15:11). It says you are saved by faith (or acceptance of…), not of works (you can't please your way to God - salvation is a gift, freely given, from God alone) (Ephesians 2:9). It also tells us to "work out your own salvation" (Philippians 2:12). Of course, this kind of "confusion" helps provide one of the reasons for all of the different denominations in Christianity. And yet, I don't think this is what the 5,000 foot view meant. And how does this connect with Beta? Continue!!

The bible considers that we are triune beings, made of Spirit (the part that is "like God"), the Soul (your will, intellect, emotions), and the Body (the physical part of you). When a person accepts Jesus as Lord and Savior, his Spirit is saved - or made new. That is the "been saved" (since the above references are from the letters written to Christians). When the rapture occurs (rapture is a word not in the bible - it is referred to in 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 17) the person receives a new body like the kind the risen Jesus has). This is the "will be saved". What about the "being saved"? This is where we get the "work out your own salvation" part. This is your Beta state. This is where you develop your Soul (your character, your intellect, your emotions, etc.).

You see, the Spirit part of you is pure - like God. You become "separated" from God by an act of your will (known as the age of "understanding"). When you are too young to understand the gospel (good news), your Spirit is still "connected" to God. Have you ever heard someone speaking in tongues? Sounds just like baby talk. Ever wonder why?

The Soul part is the part that communicates between the Spirit and the Body. We really see the connection with the Body. When any of the three parts is out of balance, there are problems. Mental illness, for the most part, is both a problem of the Soul AND the Body (issues with the brain that are often "adjusted" via medication).

This is why you and I are still in Beta - and will be for the rest of our lives. The only other way to get out of Beta is to stop updating. But, would you really like to consider yourself "perfect" at this point and stop experiencing new things in life?

I wouldn't.

© Emittravel 2014

Too Much of a Good Thing?

"Everything in moderation" is a piece of wisdom we've all heard many times. If you haven't, welcome to the wisdom club. Too much of anything is bad for you. Too little as well. Take oxygen for example: too much and you get cell damage, problems with the lungs, and seizures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity). Too little and … well … you die.

Most commonly that piece of wisdom focuses on not having "too much" of something. Don't believe that too much of something is hazardous? Outside of the oxygen reference above, have too much prune juice and see what happens. Or, have too much cheese and see what doesn't!

This wisdom is found across cultures, countries, and even religions. The bible makes reference to moderation in many areas. Actually, most things considered "sin" in the bible are just taking things to an unhealthy extreme. What is lust? Natural attraction on steroids.

There is one area I want to focus on in this article: alcohol. It is a topic of much discussion in the church, and there are people on both sides of it. In America, there is a serious problem with alcoholism. When it comes to discussions concerning legalizing marijuana, the harmful effects are often compared with the harmful effects of alcohol.

What are some of the things the bible says about alcohol?

"The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard …" (Isaiah 24:20a NKJV)

"Thus says the Lord God: 'You shall drink of your sister's cup. The deep and wide one; You shall be laughed to scorn and held in derision; it contains much. You will be filled with drunkenness and sorrow, the cup of horror and desolation, the cup of your sister Samaria. You shall drink and drain it, you shall break its shards, and tear at your own breasts; for I have spoken,' says the Lord God." (Ezekiel 23:33,34 NKJV)

"But take heed to yourselves, lest your hearts be weighed down with carousing, drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that Day come on you unexpectedly." (Luke 21:34 NKJV)

"Let us walk properly, as in the day, not in revelry and drunkenness …" (Romans 13:13a NKJV)

"But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard …" (1 Corinthians 5:11a NKJV)

"And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit," (Ephesians 5:18 NKJV)

"For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk are drunk at night. But let us who are of the day be sober, …" (1 Thessalonians 5:7,8a NKJV)

"For we have spent enough of our past lifetime in doing the will of the Gentiles - when we walked in licentiousness, lusts, drunkenness, revelries, drinking parties, and abominable idolatries." (1 Peter 4:3 NKJV)

Apparently, quite a lot. It is such verses as the above, and the affects of alcoholism on families and individuals touted in the media, that the church uses to condemn ANY drinking whatsoever. But is the condemnation of alcohol biblical?

I have a great pastor. One of the great things about him is that he puts up with the likes of me! As I've mentioned previously, I like to poke a stick at things. One time he was mentioning in part of a sermon that, according to science, we all had a little bit of Neanderthal in us. I texted him after that sermon asking him, "Does that mean Adam and Eve were Neanderthals?" (He never responded.) He is a fastidious teacher/preacher. He has often said that you must look at scripture in the context in which it was written, and to not add meaning that the writer did not intend. He is also not afraid to condemn alcohol from the pulpit based on the destructive qualities it has on families (his family in particular). I say those two ideas are in conflict with each other.

Alcoholism is a destructive thing in our society to be sure. But you can't use the bible to condemn it. The bible does not condemn drinking: it condemns drunkenness. And what is drunkenness? Drinking that is not in "moderation". Excessive.

"And put a knife to your throat if you are a man given to appetite." (Proverbs 23,2 NKJV)

"Do not mix with winebibbers, or with gluttonous eaters of meat; for the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, and drowsiness will clothe a man with rags." (Proverbs 23:20,21 NKJV)

"Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had pride, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness …" (Ezekiel 16:49a NKJV)

"The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, 'Look, a glutton and a winebibber, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'" (Luke 7:34 NKJV)

As is shown in the above verses, gluttony, or overeating, is also a sin. In fact, in the bible it is on the same footing as drunkenness. Yet I've never seen a church who shunned pot luck dinners.

Once, at a men's advance (or "retreat"), a group of us went out to dinner at a local steakhouse. We had a rather long table with guys on both sides. I sat at the end. As the waiter went down one side of the table taking drink orders, he was told, "Coke", "Coke", "Diet Coke", "Pepsi. No Pepsi? Okay, Coke", "Iced tea", "water", "water", etc. He got to the guy across from me who ordered in a similar manner. He then started up the side I was on with me. I said, "I'll have a 'Corona'." The guy across from me asked me, "You're ordering a beer?!?" I said, "Yes. Beer and steak go well together." He turned to the waiter and said, "Can I change my order?"

Culture has a major impact on how the church handles itself. In places where the water isn't the greatest, wine and beer are preferred due to the sterilization that occurs during processing. We in America don't have that concern. But the church shouldn't add to scripture what wasn't intended. You can preach against alcohol in light of drunkenness, but don't condemn.

Like I like to say, if you consider one beer drunkenness, than you have to consider that small order of fries gluttony.

Moderation is the key to everything.

© Emittravel 2014

The Bible Paul Uses

Many years ago I held a part-time job at a Christian bookstore. Back then I would wear t-shirts with phrases best left to bible tracts people would hand out on busy streets. I had one that had a picture of Jesus on the cross with the words "If I'm okay, and you're okay, explain this" on the front. On the back it said "The righteousness that He requires is the righteousness His righteousness requires Him to require". Yeah. I know. But that was me back then.

Back to the bookstore. A common item looked for in this type of store, besides Precious Moments figurines, is the bible. One day a lady came in shopping for a bible and I took her over to where they were located. There was practically an entire wall of them, with many, many translations you could choose from. So I asked her what translation she was looking for and she replied, "The original. The King James Version (KJV), of course." So I reached over and grabbed the only copy of the 1611 KJV we had in the store, opened it randomly, and handed it to her:

"For God so loued þe world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life." (John 3:16)

She took one look at that and said, "Maybe not THAT original." I said, "Oh, you want and updated translation," and handed her a modern KJV bible.

(And as a side note, the KJV has received updates periodically over the years. Unless it is the 1611 version, it is NOT the original KJV.)

I tell that story to make a point (outside of the fact that I like to "poke things" with a stick): Unless you can read, and comprehend, the original TEXT of the bible, EVERY bible you pick up will be an interpretation of the text. And, since all translations are the work of people, bias is included. That is why I keep switching the translation I'm reading.

My pastor makes the joke that he reads the KJV because that's the bible Paul used (the apostle Paul - who is credited with writing the majority of the New Testament epistles). A lot of people say the KJV is the only authorized translation and should be the only one used. Maybe because it says it's "the authorized translation" as part of the title page. But authorized by whom? It was authorized by King James. I don't think there was a burning bush moment here.

One thing I've noticed, after all the years of listening to sermons, is that the KJV is not the best translation to use. Here is an example:

"Suffer the little children to come unto me." vs. "Permit the little children to come to me." Every time I hear a minister read that verse he follows it with the "Permit" version. If the KJV was so perfect, why do we need the minister to re-interpret it into modern-day language? Once the minister starts to dissect a verse, he/she IS giving you a "new" translation. A translation based on his/her interpretation of the scripture - just by putting it into a language the listener would understand.

I use the above example because it is so blatantly obvious. When we hear the word "suffer" we don't think "allow or permit". So to have the word updated to use a term that is more in line with our language should be welcomed. Do we have the same issue with a bible translated into Spanish, or German, or Swahili? Of course not.

So, not only do Christians argue about what the bible says, and how it applies to the world around us, they argue about what version of bible they should use to beat one over the head with.

Me? I prefer to use a soft-bound edition - less damaging than a hard-bound.

© Emittravel 2014

Ashamed to Be a Christian

I've come to the point in my life where I have to declare that I'm ashamed to be a Christian.

I was listening to a podcast where a well-known astrophysicist was talking about Copernicus, and how he had moved the sun into the center of the universe, and how this was heresy, because the Bible declares that the earth is the center of the universe. Now, he wasn't considering Copernicus' viewpoint as heresy, the Church was. Since this astrophysicist is well known, a lot of people who listen to him will go away with the same viewpoint: the Bible is an archaic book that is scientifically flawed, and Christians who claim the Bible to be without error are flawed as well.

I've read the Bible through a number of times. I've read the King James Version (more times than I can remember), The Living Bible, The New King James Version, Youngs Literal Translation, the Douay-Rheims Version, the Modern King James Version, the Revised Standard Version, the Weymouth New Testament, the Voice in the Wilderness Bible, the Amplified Bible, and am currently reading the Darby translation. I've been a devout Catholic, been in the Charismatic movement, the Word and Faith movement, and the Prosperity movement. All that and I've come to the realization that I'm ashamed to be a Christian. Am I ashamed of Jesus the Christ? No! I'm ashamed of Christians.

Christians have done more to push the world away from Jesus than anything the world can come up with on its own. Christians have taken the Bible to be this inerrant book that has ALL of the answers to life within its pages, and have trumpeted it to the world. Really? All you need to do is watch the recent "debate" between Bill Nye (the Science Guy) and Ken Ham (young-earth Creationist), and to read about current "trends" in Christianity (like "Grave Sucking"), to find yourself trying to remove the fish from the back of your car.

I will go into a lot more detail in an upcoming post called "Science is the Answer. What's Your Question?", but to touch on at least one point:

The Bible is best viewed from the 5,000 foot level. When looked at from this vantage point, you see what the overarching topic of the Bible is: God's relationship to Man, and Man's relationship to God. The problems come when we find ourselves dissecting every verse and creating doctrines out of them.

Let's take the "creation" account in Genesis. Again, I will go into much greater detail in "Science is the Answer … ". Do you really think God was trying to get across a detailed description of how everything started so we would understand the intricacies of the universe? Go up to the 5,000 foot level. From that vantage point you see that the "creation" account is to give Man a starting point to the relationship - a rough synopsis, if you will.

Look at this example: "Then God said, 'Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth'; and it was so. Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also.' - Genesis 1:14-17 (NKJV) Let me ask you: what was the greater and lesser lights? Think about it. Take your time. I'll wait. I've been taught that the greater light was the sun (to light the day) and that the lesser light was the moon (to light the night) - and the stars are referenced separately.  Think about this: The sun is the greater light for the day. The sun actually PRODUCES light. The moon is the lesser light for the night. The moon DOES NOT PRODUCE light - it only REFLECTS that from the sun. And besides that, when the moon is in the New Moon phase, there is NO light reflected - there is NO light for the night. So, either God was wrong, or the Bible was not trying to lay down scientific explanations.

The passage above does reference time and seasons, but no details are given. Why? "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter,  But the glory of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2 (NKJV) God WANTS us to explore and understand. He gave us the very intellects, and hunger to know, to search out His creation. The Bible says that all creation shows forth the glory of God. That is ALL creation: from the micro to the macro. God does not give details concerning the speed of light, neutrinos, the atom, or the cell in the Bible. He DID give us the tools (brains) to seek those things out. Like a parent watching their child open a gift at Christmas, the joy for the parent is not the gift, but it is in the discovery FOR their child.

The Bible is NOT a scientific treatise with detailed information on the universe. It is a relational book first and foremost. If you parse it too much, guarantee you will find yourself in grave-sucking error!

I've heard it said that you should always look at scripture in the context in which it was written. Again, look at the scripture from the 5,000 foot view and see if it lines up with the overarching story. If it doesn't, you may not be lined up with what God is trying to tell us.

So, please, if you are a Christian, STOP giving the world excuses. I, for one, do not want to be the reason someone does not get to know Him.

© 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

You Break It ...

There is a verse in the bible that, for years, has been presented as a justification for the concept of women being the "weaker sex". I admit, for years, I too had thought the same. Let's take a look at the verse:

 

"Husbands, likewise, dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered." 1 Peter 3:7 (NKJV)

 

In my article "Cliché Christianity", I talk about looking at the value of the entire verse over pulling parts out of it. For the sake of this particular article, I'm going to focus on just a specific portion - or the length of this article may get out of hand! Keep in mind, that the parts that I do not focus on will become even more clear after I'm done - so make sure you go back and look at the rest of the verse in light of this.

 

When I was a kid, and had first heard the "weaker vessel" concept, I had this image in mind of a woman being like a china doll. What do you do with a china doll? You place it high on a shelf and admire it - preferably from a distance. Looking at the "vessel" that way, what purpose, or function, can be derived? A woman is something to look at and admire - but DO nothing.

 

Now, that idea does  fit the concept of "honoring", but something doesn't jive when you look at the "being heirs together (or 'joint heirs' [KJV]) of the grace of life". When you match that up with Galatians 3:28 ("… there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" [NKJV]), it's difficult to give the china doll vision much credence.

 

What if it isn't "china doll", but more like "chinaware"?

 

Remember when you were a kid, and your mom or grandma would tell you to set the table? So, you pulled out the dishes and glasses …

 

Side story: I was home from the Navy when we had a surprise party to celebrate my parents' 25th wedding anniversary. One of the gifts was a set of glasses - similar to the kind you would get from a bank for opening a checking account. I remember my dad proclaiming, "Twenty-five years of marriage and finally a set of glasses that match. Honey, throw out the jelly jars!"

 

… and started to set the table, when she would say, "Not those. We have company coming. Set out the fine china." Did you do anything differently? Did you handle the dishes any differently? Sure you did. You GENTLY placed the plates on the table. The crystal glasses were positioned just so. The good silverware polished and set out according to size (or whatever!) When the meal was over, did you just stack them up and stick them in the dishwasher? Heck no! Each dish was handled individually: hand washed and dried, and carefully put away - most likely in a china cabinet with glass doors to show them off.

 

Now wait a minute! Don't they do the same thing as the regular dishes? Don't the china plates hold food like the regular ones? Can you drink the liquid out of crystal the same as "jelly jars"? Of course! So why the difference? The VALUE of the china is higher than the regular plates, and thus should be treated appropriately. You  know: honored.

 

Men and women are equal in function and purpose, but not in value. Therefore, husbands are to HONOR their wives as such.

 

Women are fine china. Men are CorningWare®.

 

© Emittravel 2013

Martha, Martha

"Now it happened as they went that He entered a certain village; and a certain woman named Martha welcomed Him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary, who also sat at Jesus’ feet and heard His word. But Martha was distracted with much serving, and she approached Him and said, 'Lord, do You not care that my sister has left me to serve alone? Therefore tell her to help me.'

And Jesus answered and said to her, 'Martha, Martha, you are worried and troubled about many things. But one thing is needed, and Mary has chosen that good part, which will not be taken away from her.'” Luke 10:38-42 (NKJV)

The above passage from the Gospel of Luke is well-known as a reminder to keep one's focus on Jesus and to not let oneself become overburdened with lesser things. Well, at least it's been taught as such.

My wife and I belong to a small group in our church for married folk. As a lot of these groups go, there is usually a book that is used as a tool to guide the group along a topic or special concern for the group. In the book we are using, the passage from Luke was used. The questions asked were, "What kinds of avoidable pressures was Jesus trying to get Martha to release? How did He help her get a more accurate perspective?" My answers? "The business of trying to be the hostess with the mostess (intentional misspelling). He pointed to the one she was complaining about and told Martha that Mary was actually right. And I'm sure Martha 'appreciated' THAT!"

Apparently, I'm not as spiritually intuitive as others, and failed to see the wisdom that so many previous teachers had come up with concerning it. One of the people in the group was honest enough to admit that he wasn't really sure either what the passage meant, so he took some time to do some research and stated what some commentators of the passage had said. Things like, in that time, a meal was multi-coursed and it was socially expected to produce such a meal when entertaining. That was why Martha was so busy - it was expected! Now, I'm sure such commentators are learned individuals with many initials following their names, but I think they are full of hooey!

If you take a moment to look at the passage, you will notice that it stands alone. There really aren't any previous details in the verses before it to give you context. The verses following it shoot off in a different direction as well. So, when looking at the passage, you only have what you have to work with. And it gives me trouble.

Here is a bit of what we know, and don't know, looking at the passage (and I will be using the New King James Version as quoted above - if you look at other translations, you really won't read too much different):

In verse 38 we have "they went", "He entered", and "welcomed Him". In verse 40 we have "she approached Him and said". The "they" refer to Jesus AND His twelve disciples. "They" were traveling together. Did that mean that Jesus entered the village alone, or was His disciples traveling with Him? It's kind of like saying that "we put in a new driveway", but really mean, "we paid someone to put in new driveway".  Since Jesus is the main person, it can either be assumed that He went alone because Martha "welcomed Him", or that the disciples where there as well because "she approached Him and said" - which communicates she stepped through a GROUP to specifically talk directly to Him.

"… Martha welcomed Him into her house. And she had a sister called Mary …" (verses 38 and 39) Who's house? It says "Martha". Really? This is WAY before the ERA. I'm not saying it's possible or not. Just that we really don't know the makeup of the household. Was Martha married? Did Mary live in the house? We read in other passages that they have a brother named Lazarus. Did he live there as well? If Martha wasn't married, was this the family home? Were there parents? The reason for the questions is this: How many people was Martha serving? From the passage we can count three to be certain (Martha, Mary, and Jesus). But that number could be fifteen (Martha, Mary, Jesus, and His twelve disciples) - or greater with Lazarus, parents, and friends and neighbors. We don't know.

Now, we can make an assumption that Martha had servants (see "new driveway" comment above), but the pronouns and the comment from Martha pretty much convey that she was alone doing all of the preparation. If Mary, Martha's sister, lived there in the house (again, we don't know from the passage), Martha's annoyance with her would be more than reasonable.

What about the preparation? I really don't think Martha had ovens with timers, microwaves, or even gas grills to use as tools. Not having a lot of biblical references to meal preparation, we do know it took longer to cook something then than today. Regardless of the number of courses. I direct you to Genesis 18:1-8 where Abraham receives three visitors and they agree to a meal. I wonder how long it took to prepare a calf - without modern-day cooking equipment?

Now, let's add time to get ready for the meal to the mix. Do you think Jesus emailed Martha a couple of weeks in advance of His arrival? Probably not. In the passage concerning a tax collector named Zacchaeus, a man of minimal stature who climbs a tree to see Jesus' parade float, finds himself host when Jesus says to him, "Zacchaeus, make haste and come down, for today I must stay at your house." (Luke 19:5b NKJV) Jesus seemed fond of inviting himself over for meals.

So now you know why I have trouble when Jesus basically scolds Martha and tells her that Mary was right to stay out of the kitchen (verses 41 and 42). I fail to see the "lesson".

What IS the lesson of this passage? In the small group my wife made a comment that I think really captures the essence (and being a "time" junkie, it really spoke to me): Live in the now. It is more important to focus on who you are with, than what you are doing. I think that's a lesson we all can take to heart.

© Emittravel 2013