Sermon Series..."Living in the Mess"

I just listened to a very moving sermon on the church of the resurrection website…not by Adam Hamilton but by a woman named Penny Ellwood. I looked for the GPS (Grow, Pray and Study guide)…but there wasn't one for this sermon series. I loved what she had to say about how to “live in the mess.”

She talked about different life events, some hypothetical, some from her own life and some from the lives of people she knows. Her most moving story was the story of a young seminary student she worked with at one of the satellite campuses. While he was dating the woman he is now married to, her mother died. He went to the funeral out of state where he met her family for the first time. 

Her dad became distraught at the gravesite….so distraught he actually jumped into the open grave; on his knees, crying hysterically. Nobody knew what to do. The grave was deep and nobody could physically reach him. The young man....Joe....didn't know what to do either but he did the only thing he could think of; he jumped down into the muddy grave, in his new suit and simply embraced her father, wept with him and provided a shoulder to cry on. Like Job’s friends (before they became miserable comforters) Joe sat in the ashes with his girlfriend's father. 

When the grieving man finally calmed down, they were so deep in the muddy grave Joe wondered how they would ever get out….and then he looked up and saw many hands reaching down to help pull them out. The analogy is touching, poignant and inspiring.

It seems like an interesting series because we all….ALL….end up in the pit of despair at times in our lives. Although throughout the Bible we are assured that God is with us always…even in the “pits,” we are comforted when another human meets us in our pain, sits with us in our ashes and extends a hand up when we are ready to climb out.

I've Never Been Politically Involved But Feeling the Bern....

There are 59 posts on this blog that are tagged "Politics." Even though I have often written about current politically charged events relating to gun control, racism, gay rights, immigration etc, I have not been very involved in the actual political process. Confession....I have never voted.

I was born into a family that was only marginally interested in politics. On my mom’s side, they were conservative and republican. My dad used to say Grandpap would vote for a french poodle if it was the Republican candidate. That was probably an accurate assessment….but I suspect that 50 years ago, Republicans were kinder, gentler people. My mom couldn't care less. She has never voted in 80 years and I think she kind of passed that apathetic behavior on to me.

On my dad’s side, there was a mix of political opinions and support...probably leaning toward the Democrats. Nobody on that side of the family seemed to be overly concerned with who occupied the white house. Since they were all text book versions of dysfunctional, things other than politics occupied their thoughts and filled their time. My dad is, more or less, bipartisan and votes for the candidate who he thinks will do the best job/least harm to the country.

Then for twenty plus years I was married to a DEMOCRAT. He has never in his life voted Republican. Most of his family is democrat. Very Democrat. I was just really not all that interested in any of it.

And now, for the past 13 years, I have been married to a Canadian who moved here to the US to marry me. When he came here, he was a conservative Canadian but he has solidified his political views and moved much farther to the right. There is a big difference between the views of a conservative Canadian and a conservative American.

He is very politically inclined and voices his opinions frequently in both verbal and written form. That, in part, was the catalyst that moved me from political apathy to actually taking notice of what is going on in our political process here in the US. And what an awful time to finally wake up...this season of the 2016 presidential election.

Whoa!!!

I took a test a couple weeks ago….and I urge everyone to take the test….on a site called “isidewith.com.” There are 40ish questions on all kinds of issues. You can simply select “agree” or “disagree” but if you select “other” a whole range of agree/disagree nuances appear. You can, and should, opt to answer more questions. This will give you the most accurate, in depth results. If you are not sure about the issue, click the question mark and it gives you a brief synopsis. 

It is a bipartisan site, by the way. Even the Blaze urged its readers to take the test way back in June of 2015.

According to my test results, my political views tend to be centrist but leaning to the left. This does not come as a surprise to me. I’ve said many times that I don’t think the truth lies in the polar opposite ditches people get stuck in, but rather lie somewhere closer to the center. One of my favorite books is “Seeing Gray in a Black and White World” by Adam Hamilton. I see things in shades of gray.

As far as political candidates, I sided the closest with Bernie Sanders. Apparently, I side with 85% of his views. Prior to taking the test, I didn’t know much about him other than Keith’s ominous warnings about socialism. I had heard some of the criticisms about “free stuff” and “taxing the rich at 90%” but other than that and the fact that he is Jewish and talks with a east coast accent, I didn’t know much.

But now I've done some reading and some listening and I know a lot more now. I have to admit I am feeling the Bern. Bernie is a nice guy with morals and integrity. He describes himself as a secular Jew…but as a recent column in the USA Today written by Stephen Prothero, entitled WWJD? Maybe Vote For Bernie states

As a scholar of American religion, I know I am supposed to take Sanders at his word, slot him as a secular Jew who is, as he put it, “not particularly religious” and leave it at that. Even so, I cannot shake the sneaking suspicion that he is the most Christian candidate in the race.

Jesus told us that we will know them by their fruits. When I watch excerpts of the Republican debates, I do not see much "fruit" being displayed. There are obvious red flags that pop up with even a cursory look at the Republican contenders…..more on this whole distressing topic to come…..

Love is a tenet of the Christian Faith

The other day, I listened to a sermon by Adam Hamilton entitled, Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin. He used an illustration about an encounter between Billy Graham and the Clinton’s that took place at a public event during the firestorm of the Monica Lewinsky/”I did not have sex with that woman” debacle….

My father is so accepting, so nonjudgmental," says eldest daughter, Gigi Graham Tchividjian. During the height of the Clinton scandal, she was her father's date at the 75th anniversary celebration for Time magazine. The Clintons were also in attendance.

"Daddy sat with the Clintons and was so warm and gracious," Tchividjian told Charisma. "In the limousine going back to the hotel, Daddy and I were talking about how difficult it must be for the Clintons with so many people gossiping and judging them. His comment was: "It's the Holy Spirit's job to convict; it's God's job to judge; and it's our job to love."

The excerpt above is from a Charisma article

I love that exchange…

I never really paid that much attention to Billy Graham in my BC - before Christ life. Oh sure, my grandmother used to watch his crusades on her little black and white TV when I spent my summers with her. She would cry during his altar calls when folks came forward in droves. I didn't pay much attention to him after I became a Christian. He was getting old. His crusades were fewer and farther between.

A few years ago, I came upon an article on one of those cult watcher blogs about a conversation between Billy Graham and Robert Schuller that smacks of universalism. It resonated so I wrote about it in a post called A Vortex with a Different Name.

I remember other here and there reading about Billy Graham; his reaction to a close call on an airplane (he was very afraid but trusted God with the outcome). And I’ve been reading snippets this morning, my curiosity piqued by this story of his encounter with the Clintons. He had/has his critics. Many criticized his seemingly lukewarm commitment to integration. Others point out that he was either too involved or too UNinvolved with politics. I’ve read some quotes, perhaps taken out of context, that are questionable. Sometimes he seemed to waffle back and forth on some issues.

But the encounter above illustrates a key component of Christianity. As Billy Graham points out, a Christian’s job is to love. You know, the greatest commandment...the command that sums up all the law….love God, love your neighbor as yourself.

Greg Boyd repeats this same sentiment in a video from 2012 during the time a vote on a gay marriage amendment was taking place in Minnesota. Greg Boyd is not one to back away from controversial issues (as he is accused of in the comments) and has taken infinite slack about his opinions and beliefs.

(Probably) More of this rambling, somewhat disjointed discourse to come…..

Equal and Opposite Reactions....

From my last post:

……..because of the enlightenment and several subsequent movements that have “dissed” scripture, fundamentalists pushed back in a Newtons Law kind of way…...for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Now that is a really interesting thought….this push back thing. When I first heard it (in the sermon by Adam Hamilton) the light bulb lit up. Isn’t that the truth! Yes, indeed, I have witnessed this, both at large in the whole wide world and specifically, in my own little corner.

At large, I have seen people take on a do or die attitude when an idea questions, threatens, or discredits one of their sacred cow beliefs. Ideas and beliefs that might not have seemed all that important become hills to die on or at least issues that merit taking a firm stand on. And of course, I have seen this same law at work up close and personal in my relationships, my job and within myself....

The birth of the Five Points of Calvinism, TULIP, comes to mind. What a great example of this push back.

The controversy between Arminianism and Calvinism arose in Holland in the early 1600’s. The founder of the Arminian party was Jacob Arminius (1560–1609). He studied under the strict Calvinist Theodore Beza at Geneva and became a professor of theology at the University of Leyden in 1603.  Gradually Arminius came to reject certain Calvinist teachings. The controversy spread all over Holland, where the Reformed Church was the overwhelming majority. The Arminians drew up their creed in Five Articles (written by Uytenbogaert), and laid them before the state authorities of Holland in 1610 under the name Remonstrance, signed by forty-six ministers.
The Calvinists responded with a Counter-Remonstrance. But the official Calvinistic response came from the Synod of Dort which was held to consider the Five Articles from November 13, 1618 to May 9, 1619. There were eighty-four members and eighteen secular commissioners. The Synod wrote what has come to be known as the Canons of Dort. These are still part of the church confession of the Reformed Church in America and the Christian Reformed Church. They state the Five Points of Calvinism in response to the Five Articles of the Arminian Remonstrants. (See Schaff, vol. 3, pp. 581–596).  

That rather longish quote above is from John Piper’s website, Desiring God….and hey, if anyone knows Calvinist doctrine and history, it is John Piper!!

The so-called Five Points were not coined by the Calvinists to clarify their beliefs for their own benefit and edification. They emerged as a response to the Arminians who chose five points of reformed doctrine to oppose.

Isn’t that interesting? The beliefs of Arminius were birthed, very likely, as a response to his ultra-calvinistic education. That led to the 5 point Remonstrance…..that initiated a response, the Counter-Remonstrance.

I’ve seen this “law” of Newton’s played out in real life….my own life and the lives of those around me. There are many things that affect and form our beliefs and behaviors. This is just one of many subtle, often unconscious, factors. Nature/nurture, cognitive biases, prejudice, cultural influences, maternal instinct, mimesis…..and so on and so forth....

Obviously, the formation of our opinions and beliefs cannot be oversimplified or “boiled down” to a theory of physics or to any ONE theory, bias or influencing factor. However, thinking outside our own personal box of beliefs can lead to introspection that can lead to a startling clarity also known as a wtf moment. Sometimes it can even lead to a change of mind/heart. But not necessarily because we tend to be very comfortable in our own state of "belief inertia."

I came upon that term while looking for interesting quotes from people wiser than me to beef up this blog post. I found two new to me blogs that struck my fancy.

Eric Raymond’s blog Armed and Dangerous and Less Wrong, a Community Blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality.

On Less Wrong, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote -

The temptation is always to claim the most points with the least effort. The temptation is to carefully integrate all incoming news in a way that lets us change our beliefs, and above all our actions, as little as possible. John Kenneth Galbraith said: "Faced with the choice of changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof." And the greater the inconvenience of changing one's mind, the more effort people will expend on the proof.

The effort people expend on the proof is the "equal and opposite reaction" part of Newton's Law.

In response, Eric Raymond opined that belief inertia (which happens to relate to another one of Newton’s Laws, the law of inertia) is also due to the fact that:

Changing beliefs is not costless, and may commit you to a decision procedure that is too heavyweight to be worth some very marginal gain in utility.

This post is getting long so I am going to end with another quote I found and continue with this same topic in my next post.

 If we watch ourselves honestly we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated. Wilfred Trotter

Picking and Choosing Scripture - Err on the Side of Love.....

At the beginning of the year, in an effort to get my web meanderings in some kind of order, I decided (among other things) to focus on several “preacher-teachers” whose sermons resonate with where I am on my spiritual/human journey. Adam Hamilton was one of them. (also Nadia Bolz-Weber)  I know I’ve mentioned Adam Hamilton numerous times here on this blog.

At the Church of the Resurrection website, there are archives of all his sermons from the present to yesteryear, along with sermon resources etc. At the gym yesterday, I used a version of the “eenie, meenie, miney, moe” method to choose which sermon to listen to. It was entitled “Making Sense of the Bible.” That is also the title of his newest book. He has gotten some slack about it because it takes a good hard “look-see” at what evangelicals hold near and dear; perhaps nearest and dearest….the inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture.

In his opinion, because of the enlightenment and several subsequent movements that have “dissed” scripture, fundamentalists pushed back in a Newtons Law kind of way…...for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. As a result, many evangelical denominations have moved scripture up to the top slot on their faith statements. I googled some well known evangelical churches and found that the Church of God, the Free Methodists and the Baptists all mention scripture FIRST in their faith statements. They mention it before they mention God. They mention it before they mention Jesus. They mention it before they mention the Holy Spirit. I’m sure there are other churches who stick to this hierarchy.

The Bible is not the word of God. Jesus is the Word of God. (In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1) The Bible CONTAINS the word of God and when we read it, listen to it, pray it and sing it, God speaks to us through it. When we pay attention, God uses the Bible as an instrument of his speaking.

Hamilton suggested using three “buckets”or categories to sort scripture.

The first, and by far the largest, bucket holds the sections of the Bible we read and know beyond a doubt “fit God.” They fit the image of God revealed to us in Jesus. There is no clearer image...no closer representation, no truer benchmark than Jesus. This bucket is easy to fill and the verses contained within console, convict, comfort, caution and clarify. They edify, enlighten and educate. These verses, stories and instructions are timeless. They reveal the heart of the Father that is exactly the same heart Jesus showed us.

The second bucket holds the scriptures that are clearly for another time, culture or situation. Keith had shrimp last night at Red Lobster. Uh-oh….abomination. My blouse was a polyester cotton blend. Uh-oh...abomination. He was sporting a haircut (He does have a beard but he often trims it) A lot of the abominations had to do with cleanliness. There was no Purell water-less hand sanitizer. No antibiotics. No thermometers to make sure food reached a safe temperature to kill bacteria and other nasties. Some of the abominations were to set Israel apart from other nations. Some abominations and OT directives have spiritual implications.

The third bucket is the sticking point for many “God said it, I believe it, That settles it” Christians. It is for scriptures you just don’t know what to do with. Oh, some folks try to explain them away, spiritualize them, justify them. Others ignore them. They are verses that don’t match the character and nature of God revealed in Jesus. They do not match up to any of the Gospel stories….nor to the “summation of the law” that Jesus gave us about loving our God and loving our neighbor. The passages that no how, no way fit the “golden rule” verse in the Bible….

“So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. Matthew 7:12.

Genocide, war, violence, stonings, beheadings, trickery. Everyone is familiar with those verses that just don’t make sense.  

Aaaaaaaah….but that is picking and choosing scripture, no? But we all pick and choose. Even those who deny picking and choosing do, in fact, pick and choose. We don’t stone our rebellious teenagers. We don’t stone the folks who commit adultery.  We allow remarried people to worship in our churches. We RE-marry couples in our churches that clearly do not fit the “biblical criteria” for divorce and remarriage. We cut our hair. We don’t cover our heads. Some of us get tattoos. We allow women to speak in church….some churches allow women to preach in church. We eat pork. We don’t banish menstruating women to the shed in the back yard. We all pick and choose.

I like this quote from Carl Gregg's blog

Second, we should not be surprised that everyone engages in “picking and choosing” because if you survey what the Bible has to say about, for example, anger, wealth, adultery, disobedient wives and children, marriage, and divorce it becomes clear that the Bible is simultaneously both contradictory and enormously demanding. In other words, it is essentially impossible to obey all that the Bible literally says because some parts of the Bible are mutually exclusive of other parts. Does this mean that we are free to choose willy-nilly which parts of the Bible to follow? To quote the apostle Paul’s repeated refrain from the epistle to the Romans, “By no means!” However, from the perspective of progressive Christianity, Jack Black as Jesus is right when he says, “If you pick and choose, why not choose love?”

Indeed….why not err on the side of love?

The Question That Never Goes Away.....

My mother has a problem with religion. She has a problem with God. She was raised in a very strict denomination, by very strict parents who worshiped a very strict God. You were never sure about your salvation because you could lose it just like that. Movies were out, any games that had dice, no jewelry, pants on women, purchases on Sunday etc. etc. etc.

Her biggest issue with God is the Problem of Evil...the Problem of Pain. Theodicy. We talk about it sometimes during our twice a week phone calls.

I tell her I don’t have the answer why bad things happen..that nobody really has the answer. It has been talked about and written about and argued about for thousands of years. Perhaps, it is a mystery that we may not understand until we are “on the other side.”

This doesn't satisfy her, of course. I understand that. It didn't satisfy me during the several year stint when I was too mad at God to talk to him very much. I was mad about all those starving children and the rampant, overwhelming, seemingly unstoppable evil in the world. Except that I was convinced he COULD stop it, if he wanted to. I read many articles that looked at the question from different perspectives.  I discussed it on message boards and yahoo groups. I talked it over with Keith (time and time again)

I found little dollops of salve here and there that took the sting out of the anger but I never really found an acceptable answer that explained why God allows this stuff to happen.

I read several books that helped a little.. “Why” by Adam Hamilton and Phillip Yancey’s twin volumes (written decades apart)  Where is God When It Hurts and The Question That Never Goes Away.

Following are two quotes I happened upon recently. One, I found just this morning on Ann Voskamp’s FaceBook wall. The other quote, that says practically the same thing, is from Rob Bell.

No matter how we don't understand the why of suffering, we know that the God who went to the Cross, He *knows* suffering & *He suffers with us.* *We never suffer alone.* The whole suffering world rings with the comfort of it, how Your nailed scarred hands cup our faces, hold our hurting hearts & You whisper: "I know... *I know.* Me too. *Me too*." Anne Voskamp

“Our tendency in the midst of suffering is to turn on God. To get angry and bitter and shake our fist at the sky and say, "God, you don't know what it's like! You don't understand! You have no idea what I'm going through. You don't have a clue how much this hurts." The cross is God's way of taking away all of our accusations, excuses, and arguments. The cross is God taking on flesh and blood and saying, "Me too.” ― Rob Bell

I still don’t understand it but I know he saves our tears in a bottle and the Bible promises in three separate places that he will wipe all our tears from our faces.

Behold, he makes all things new.

Who Do You Say I Am?

A hat tip to Adam Hamilton and the sermon series I've been posting about. And another hat tip to PixTeller, a free site with tools that allowed me to put the quote on a background and share it here. What a great quote. A question we must all answer for ourselves.

Matthew 16:12-16 Living Bible (TLB)

12 Then at last they understood that by yeast he meant the wrong teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. 13 When Jesus came to Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who are the people saying am?”14 “Well,” they replied, “some say John the Baptist; some, Elijah; some, Jeremiah or one of the other prophets.”15 Then he asked them, “Who do you think I am?”16 Simon Peter answered, “The Christ, the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Did He or Didn't He?

Here on Mercy, I’ve written posts based on thoughts and topics piqued by Adam Hamilton. I’ve  thought about/meant to write many more posts based on things I’ve read that he authored (Why?) and sermons that he preached. On the Church of the Resurrection website, where he is senior pastor, there is a vast collection of sermon archives dating back to 1999.

This new year, as part of my goal of getting more structured in my “devotions”, I decided I would listen to sermons (by Adam Hamilton, Nadia Bolz-Weber and Greg Boyd) AND read the Bible (Book of Common Prayer reading plan) while exercising at the gym. Talk about multitasking. So far, so good. Well….so far, pretty good. Not a failure, not a raging success. Still plugging along.

So, I randomly picked a sermon series from last January called Jesus: Myth, Madman or Messiah and listened to the first sermon in the series, “Searching for the Historical Jesus.” I listened to it twice. Learned a thing or two and picked up a different perspective about the historical Jesus. From the sermon notes available on the website:

Let’s begin with an easy question, as there is great consensus even among secular scholars,agnostics and atheists that Jesus actually lived. He was a real, historical person. Dr. Louise Antony, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Massachusetts and a noted atheist stated,“I don't personally know a single atheist who would deny that Jesus existed.” Bart Ehrman, a popular agnostic writer and professor at the University of North Carolina recently wrote a book called, Did Jesus Exist? in which he offers an emphatic yes....

Well, isn’t that cool? And if you want to read a short writing by Bart Ehrman on Huffington Post discussing why he is sure Jesus existed, click HERE.

More from the sermon:

I finished reading Zealot last week. Aslan lays out the premise of the book,

writing: “In the end, there are only two hard historical facts about Jesus of Nazareth upon which we can confidently rely: the first is that Jesus was a Jew who led a popular Jewish movement in Palestine...the second is that Rome crucified him for doing so.”

To watch a 27 minute Huffington post video of Aslan discussing his views about Jesus, click HERE.

Another New Year’s goal...to post more frequently on this blog. In order to do that (and also fit in living my life/exercising/and working at a challenging and full time plus some job) I’ve got to be less picky. This post feels a bit unfinished and unpolished. In the past, I would save it in draft form and plan a series…..which most of the time never actually came to fruition.  

So here it is...as it is. There is fodder for those who might want to read/listen to a bit more. I have intentions to write more about the sermon because it piqued many thoughts and insights. We’ll see if that happens.  For now...I’ve gotta’ get moving and get ready for work.

Colorado Shootings, Where Were You God?

Lots of people around the internet are talking about the Colorado shooting. About the victims...about acts of heroism...about the coincidences that brought some to the theater and the coincidences that kept some away.

And they are talking about the shooter, his history, his friends and family, his mom's comments, (that Keith tells me were taken totally out of context by some over zealous reporter) About the "I'm a crazy man" look in his tortured eyes.

And of course there is ongoing, heated debate about guns and gun control. For the record, I loathe guns...but if my neighbor, or my dad, or my boss wants to own a gun and is responsible with the use and storage of the weapon...I am content to "myob." However, I see no feasible reason ( or how it could be construed as a threat to the 2nd Amendment) to not do whatever it takes to keep weapons that can fire dozens of bullets without reloading...out of the hands of crazy men. Out of the hands of EVERYBODY for that matter. But I digress. That is the subject of another post....someday. Back to the Colorado shooting.

So the conversation goes round and round. Everybody has an opinion. Everybody has questions. Ultimately, the discussion turns to God....and most everyone, in one way or another wonders the same thing..and (consciously or subconsciously)asks the same question of God. "Where the hell were you??!! when these victims were being gunned down??? And why didn't you do something??"

That question is the crux of the age old mystery of theodicy. The immortal question, "If there is a good, all powerful God, how can evil exist?"

The conclusion many come to is that there is no God. "Sorry folks, you're on your own."

Others (like Harold Kushner of the "When Bad Things Happen To Good People " fame) settle on the belief that God is not all powerful. He would like to do more to help but, sadly, his hands are tied.

Others settle on the belief that he is not all good...because as far as they’re concerned not stopping atrocities like the shooting is as bad as actually causing them.

And some folks...the total determinist/absolute sovereignty believers believe just that….that he actually causes these things to come down. They believe he is all powerful, all good and the first cause of all causes. In other words, he directly ordains these things(for our own good, of course) There is a case to be made for that viewpoint.

Some folks believe man's free will is the ultimate deciding factor and that God never...or rarely, intervenes. There is a case to be made for that viewpoint, too.

Although diehard believers on both sides of the “free will/sovereignty” line will disagree that a case can be made for the opposite side.

I see so many things in shades of gray, along the lines of Adam Hamilton's book "Seeing Gray In a Black and White World.” I suspect that the truth about most things is somewhere smack dab in the middle, or at least not totally to the far left or the far right.

This question haunted me for years. I read, I pondered, I obsessed. I was totally pissed off at God for the way he set things up...starving children in Africa, death, disease and pestilence everywhere. I couldn't just write him off as an imaginary friend because I've felt his touch and know he exists as surely as I know I do. Non belief was not an option. Pouting at him was. But in my heart, I knew that whatever evidence gets stacked against him, he is good, he is love and his mercy endures forever.

I've stopped pouting. I've even stopped asking the "where were you" kinds of questions. And I'm not dead set sure what I think about his involvement in world events but I suspect sometimes he causes, sometimes he prevents and sometimes he intervenes in very mysterious ways.

A Facebook friend posted a link shortly after the shooting. It leads to blog post written by a pastor in Colorado. He told the story of a young woman in his congregation. Petra Anderson. She is in her early twenties (22, I think) and she was in the theater that night. She was shot multiple times. One of the shotgun blasts sent a pellet through her brain....front to back. The prognosis was bleak but when the neurosurgeons operated, they discovered Petra had a brain anomaly that had been present since birth. It caused no symptoms. She had no idea it was there. Nobody did except, of course, her Maker.

It was a tiny channel that ran from front to back. Just big enough for a shotgun pellet. The bullet entered her nose at that exact spot and made its way to the back of her brain, via the channel, causing next to no damage. The blog author said that the tiniest variation in the entry point would have caused the pellet to bypass the channel, ripping through and damaging/destroying vital brain tissue.

No matter what your theology or opinion about the POE (problem of evil), sovereignty and free will, this story (that has also been mentioned on the news and other sources) gives one cause to pause and ponder. An old hymn and two Bible verses come to mind.

The Bible verses...

Isaiah 43: 7"...everyone who is called by my name, whom I created for my glory, whom I formed and made.”

and

Psalm 139:14 You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body and knit me together in my mother's womb. NLT

The blog post about Petra went viral and received hundreds of comments, many that expressed disdain for the idea that God was responsible for this anomaly/ miracle yet didn't come through for the other victims.

Which brings me to the words of the old hymn by William Cowper -

'God moves in a mysterious way His wonders to perform"

There is another thing about the Anderson family that seems to deepen the mysteries of God's ways.  Petra's mother is battling a reoccurrence of (terminable) breast cancer...her prognosis is not good...and she is not expected to survive. 

Since this is getting long, I'll finish up in another post (really, I will)

Francis Chan’s Erasing Hell….

Everyday I check the kindle freebies.  I’ve downloaded quite a few books that way…totally free of charge…all neatly stored on my kindle.  I probably tote around close to 500 books in my purse every day.  500 and counting. 

And sometimes the free books are written by popular mainstream spiritual authors. I have books by Gary Smalley, Deepak Chopra, Beverly Lewis, Adam Hamilton, Brennan Manning, Lee Strobel, Paramhansa Yogananda….free Bibles (love the HCSB) and devotionals….and a couple Qurans.  All free.

Last week there were three free books by Francis Chan.  All on the same day. I know he’s had several books on the New York Times Bestseller List….and is a well known pastor.  A while back, I happened upon a You Tube video of him promoting his latest book…Erasing Hell: What God Said about Eternity, and the Things We've Made Up. The book is written as a rebuttal to Rob Bell’s very popular, very controversial book, Love Wins. I watched a few of Chan’s other short videos. Not bad…interesting…witty.  But that was it…the extent of my exposure to Francis Chan. And that probably would have been it….but then I saw his three free books on amazon. 

I read most of Erasing Hell at the gym.  On the treadmill.  Walking fast.  Even forgetting to keep an eye on the timer.  30 minutes came and went. I lost track of time.  So many “yes, buts” to so many of his points.  And I am no scholar…and I am certainly not a well known Christian pastor/author….but I can (and will) shoot holes in many of his arguments. Or at least present another possible explanation to so much of his theology.  The book pretty much…ahhhhh… pissed me off.

It wasn’t so much that he believes in hell. Some of my favorite preacher/teachers believe in hell (or lean in that direction) It was his “buddy buddy, I know how you feel….and oh, man, I don’t want to believe in hell either.  Who does!!??”  It felt like he was trying to schmooze his readers.  Pull the wool over our eyes by leaving out important facts and information.  Manipulative is the word that keeps popping into my head. He said he was approaching the whole thing with an open mind and really taking a look at the scriptures….but his mind was anything but open.

To set the tone he cites the following experience early on in the book.  First chapter….first few pages. 

For some, this discussion will open up old wounds. It certainly does for me. The saddest day of my life was the day I watched my grandmother die. When that EKG monitor flatlined, I freaked out. I absolutely lost it! According to what I knew of the Bible, she was headed for a life of never-ending suffering. I thought I would go crazy. I have never cried harder, and I don’t ever want to feel like that again. Since that day, I have tried not to think about it. It has been over twenty years. Even as I write that paragraph, I feel sick. I would love to erase hell from the pages of Scripture.

Good news Francis….you don’t have to erase it because it’s not there….not the way you envision it….or explain it….or encourage your readers to embrace it.  Your grandmother knows the truth….and someday…you are gonna’ know the truth too. 

More to follow….

Sticks and Stones - 2

And Adam Hamilton has this to say:

How can we actually avoid speaking ill of others?  Here's what I do when I am at my best and exercising restraint:

First, I remember the call of Christ to avoid judging and to avoid calling names (Matthew 5:21-22)  My aim is to do Christ's will.  Speaking ill of others does not accomplish that aim. 

Second, I try to search my own heart to see what is behind my need to speak ill of the person.  Usually the motivation will be fear, jealousy, insecurity, or revenge.  I remind myself of the words of Mark Twain, "Among human beings jealousy ranks distinctly as a weakness; a trademark of small minds." 

Third, I make it a point to look for the good in the other and to focus on lifting that up rather than pointing out the person's weaknesses. 

Fourth, I remember the biblical call to humility and remind myself that I may not be seeing the other person the way God sees him or her.  I may not know all the facts.  And I remember the many ways in which I fall short of God's plans.

By the time I've walked through this mental exercise, I find it easier to practice what my mother taught me growing up: If you can't find anything good to say about someone, don't say anything at all. 

Sounds like good advice...

I used to have the following saying taped to my computer monitor.

 

               

      Plaque can be found at Tumbleweed Pottery

Sticks and Stones...

The other day, following a link on my AOL welcome page...which is sometimes very similar to a rumor mill/gossip rag...I came across a video of Sharon Osbourne, along with a couple Sirius radio announcers, trashing Susan Boyle.  It was all good fun...in the tradition of Howard Stern. They all had a big laugh...thought it was a hoot to say nasty, mean spirited, hurtful things.  It made me shudder.  It stayed with me a lot of the day.

I always thought that even though Sharon is married to Ozzie...a guy who has gnawed the head off of a live bat...that she was quite classy.  She also seemed...from the little I've watched of America's Got Talent...to be kind. The things she says on the video are the polar opposite of kind. 

So while I mulled this around in my head a lot of the day, I realized, no doubt due to the gentle, convicting illumination of the Holy Spirit, that I am sometimes...often...guilty of the same crime. I've made fun of people.  Usually in my head, but sometimes out loud..

Many times I have not behaved all that differently than Sharon and her cohorts...finding humor at the expense of someone else's shortcomings.  Didn't Jesus address that?  General idea being that if we harbor something in our heart (hate for our brother...lust)  we are guilty to the same degree as if we acted upon it.  Whether we blurt it out or quietly snicker to ourselves, the root is the same.  Although restraint (and clenched lips) are preferable because it spares others pain, we need to take a good hard look at the root of what causes these thoughts and emotions.  Where does the meanness come from? 

All this mulling around made me think of some stuff I've stored in the archives of my brain (and somewhere in the archives on my computer) Two separate writings from Christian men I admire...Max Lucado and Adam Hamilton about some guidelines to govern our big mouths.  

First the advice from Max....

The Defeat of the Tongue

Insensitivity makes a wound that heals slowly. If someone hurts your feelings intentionally you know how to react. You know the source of the pain. But if someone accidentally bruises your soul, it’s difficult to know how to respond.

Someone at work criticizes the new boss who also happens to be your dear friend. “Oh, I’m sorry—I forgot the two of you were so close.”

A joke is told at a party about overweight people. You’re overweight. You hear the joke. You smile politely while your heart sinks.

What was intended to be a reprimand for a decision or action becomes a personal attack. “You have a history of poor decisions, John.”

Someone chooses to wash your dirty laundry in public. “Sue, is it true that you and Jim are separated?”

Insensitive comments. Thoughts that should have remained thoughts. Feelings which had no business being expressed. Opinions carelessly tossed like a grenade into a crowd.

And if you were to tell the one who threw these thoughtless darts about the pain they caused, his response would be “Oh, but I had no intention…I didn’t realize you were so sensitive!” or “I forgot you were here.”

Listed under the title of subterfuge is the poison of insensitivity. It’s called subterfuge because it’s so subtle. Just a slip of the tongue. Just a blank of memory. No one is at fault. No harm done.

Perhaps. And, perhaps not. For as the innocent attackers go on their way excusing themselves for things done without hurtful intention, a wounded soul is left in the dust, utterly confused. “If no one intended to hurt me, then why do I hurt so badly?”

God’s Word has strong medicine for those who carelessly wag their tongues.

The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.

He who guards his mouth and his tongue keeps himself from calamity.

He who guards his lips guards his life, but he who speaks rashly will come to ruin.

When words are many, sin is not absent, but he who holds his tongue is wise.

The message is clear: He who dares to call himself God’s ambassador is not afforded the luxury of idle words. Excuses such as “I didn’t know you were here” or “I didn’t realize this was so touchy” are shallow when they come from those who claim to be followers and imitators of the Great Physician. We have an added responsibility to guard our tongues.

These practical steps will purge careless words from your talk:
1. Never tell jokes that slander.
2. Never criticize in public unless you: have already expressed your disappointment with the other person in private, have already taken someone with you to discuss the grievance with the person, and are absolutely convinced that public reprimand is necessary and will be helpful.
3. Never say anything about anyone in their absence that you wouldn’t say in their presence.

More tomorrow....

The Chapter about Spirituality...

Last Sunday, in my Seeing Gray Sunday School class, based on the book by Adam Hamilton, we talked about the chapter on "The Messy Truth About Spirituality."  The bottom line of the chapter...we are all sinners saved by grace.  From those considered the "greatest" to those considered the "least"...the icons of the faith...the heroes of the Bible...we are all basically in the same boat.

We talked about authors who have impacted us the most.  Max Lucado came to mind first for me.  Max has helped me understand some very vexing spiritual issues...using simple word pictures a child could understand.  Although there are points of theology where I vehemently disagree with him (an eternal hell for example) he has impacted my spiritual life greatly.  Phillip Yancey is another author we talked about.  In Reaching for the Invisible God he says:

As one who writes and speaks publicly about my faith, I have also learned to accept that I am a "clay vessel" whom God may use at a time when I feel unworthy or hypocritical.  I can give a speech or preach a sermon that was authentic and alive to me when I composed it, even though as I deliver it my mind is replaying an argument I just had or nurturing an injury I received from a friend.  I can write what I believe to be true even while painfully aware of my own inability to attain what I urge others toward.

I came across a related thought on a blog called Ethereal Existentialism in a post called One Person's Trash:

I wrote that people (which would include me) continue to write about the same 5 or 8 things over and over because someone may happen along who needs to hear or read exactly what we happen to be writing about. While that's true, I certainly didn't mean to imply that I was a wisdom-dispensing guru who has it all together passing out tidbits for the poor slobs who are completely lost.

I write about what I learn because God told me to. This is stuff I'm learning...today, every day...constantly.

I can relate to what he is saying.  I write about what I learn.  I can't not write about it which is why I think "God told me to."  My hope is that every once in a while, what I write might be exactly what someone needs to hear.

As a side note...I ran across Adam Hamilton's blog this morning.  There are quite a few of his sermons there...dating back to 2007. 

The Chapter about Judging...

No..I am not done with the series on homosexuality.  Just like I am not done with the series on everyday mystics, Christ in you, the Third Eye, and probably a half dozen or so other series that I started but then got distracted.  I am coming back to all of them eventually.  I am a hopeless, perpetual digresser. 

I read Chapter 5 in Adam Hamilton's book, Seeing Gray last night before I went to sleep.  Finding the Sweet Spot. It is the chapter du jour today in Sunday School class. 

Okay...it WAS the chapter we talked about in today's Sunday School class.  The first two paragraphs of this post were written early this morning.  This is now late afternoon...headed toward evening and hopefully I can finish it before all the to-ing and fro-ing of the next few hours. 

One of the original couples showed up today!  I was glad to see them there.  Jeff was out of town and the two college students (Josh and Brandy) who were absent last week were there this morning.  Matt was not.  So there were 6 of us.  Every couple of classes there is a video to watch.  Today was video day. 

I really like what Adam Hamilton has to say about this topic.  According to Hamilton, the sweet spot "spiritually speaking" is somewhere about midway between legalism and anything goes.  Keith and I sort of had this same discussion yesterday at Denny's.  How does one determine was is permissible...what is ethical...what is pleasing to God.  Not everything is okay, is it?  Keith quoted Paul...all things are lawful but not everything is expedient.  True.  So how do you decide what is okay?

Well...Keith told me long ago that he viewed the 10 Commandments more as the 10 Promises.  When Christ has been fully formed in you, there will be no need of a commandment that tells you not to steal from your neighbor, kill him, commit adultry with his wife because you will love him as you love yourself.  It will not be in your heart to do such things.  And will we need a commandment to tell us have no other Gods before us if we love God with all our heart, soul and strength?  When we reach the point where we love God with all our heart and we love our neighbor as we love ourselves, that is a pretty good backdrop from which to judge right and wrong etc.

In the video today, Hamilton listed the following four points to consider when we try to determine what is right in the situations we encounter in our day to day lives.  Some very serious...some not so serious. 

• The first point is directly related to the love God part of the condensed version of the commandments ...from the lips of Jesus.  What would honor God in this situation?
• The second point is a question I have heard phrased in various ways...What is the loving thing to do?
• The third point is to consider the golden rule.  Sounds trite I know but putting ourselves in another's shoes can help us determine the right thing to do. 
• The fourth point to consider is another tried and true cliche'...although a bit more modern than the Golden Rule.  WWJD.  What would Jesus do? 

He talked a bit about the Parable of the Good Samaritan.  Interesting perspective that I will perhaps discuss another day...

The book mentions the verses in Jeremiah 31...

I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.  No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord....

After Sunday School, during the praise and worship portion of the church service, the praise team sang a Hillsong tune...Till I See You.  One of the lines in the song captured my attention...

You are the whisper my heart that speaks to me

Perhaps, when trying to figure out cases of "situational ethics," right and wrong, how to handle the many circumstances we encounter every day that defy black and white solutions, we should strain our ears to hear the heart whisper...the still, small voice in which he speaks to each of us. 

The Chapter about Homosexuality- 2

Sunday's class ended up being very small.  Three of us.  Robin, one of the teachers was away and only one of the college students showed up. Matt. The other two....Josh and Brandy weren't there.  Hopefully they have not thrown in the towel like the "adults" have. After abortion, homosexuality is probably the hottest button topic of the "culture wars." I probably had the most liberal position of the three of us, but the views of the other two guys were pretty balanced and not at all condemning. 

Following are some excerpts and observations from the chapter on homosexuality in the book "Seeing Gray."

Adam Hamilton begins the chapter by saying:

In the spring of 2000, I was a reserve delegate to The United Methodist Church's General Conference, held once every four years.  I was sitting in the balcony when the issue of homosexuality was being debated by the church. 

He goes on to tell of how demonstrators who sought to end the UMC ban on ordination for self avowed, practicing homosexuals, and who hoped the church would remove language critical of homosexual practice from its discipline entered the Convention Center during the vote.  They (peacefully) surrounded the delegates by standing on the perimeter of the room and the balcony to watch as the delegates voted on the issue.  The Church voted to maintain their current stance and the pro gay demonstrators started to file onto the convention floor.  Others came to the balcony and stood in a ring around the balcony.

A woman came and stood at the end of the aisle in my section, directly in front of me, looking down upon the delegates twenty five feet below.  She was shaking and visibly distraught.  Soon she climbed up onto the edge of the balcony and she stood there, looking over the floor at the conference, looking at the people who had just voted once again to exclude her from full participation in the church, and she began to shout at them.  I could not understand what she was saying, but I sensed that she might be planning to jump.  I stepped out of my seat, along with another, and quickly reached for the woman just as she began to leap.  We pulled her back down into our laps, and held her as she lay shaking.  We held her in our arms until a few moments later, when a friend arrived to care for her and walk her out.  The entire incident took place in a matter of seconds, but the impact upon me, and others at the conference still lingers. 

In the spring of 2004...right before the next UMC conference, Adam decided to preach on the topic of homosexuality so his congregation would hear the issues surrounding the debate from him.  He said he was not prepared for the inner turmoil or confusion he experienced as he tried to prepare his sermon.  He includes the sermon in its entirety in the book.

Hundreds of people gradually left the church over the course of the following year because they did not feel he took a strong enough stand against homosexuality.  However during that same period of time about 1,000 people joined the church. 

In the sermon, he does a good job of explaining both sides of the issue...pro gay and anti gay.  His personal beliefs are somewhere in the middle.  In preparation for the sermon he asked members of the congregation to email him their personal stories and opinions.  Many responded.  

One mother wrote, "I've known for four years that my son is a homosexual.  This doesn't make me love him any less than I did.  In fact, I love him more since I know the struggle he has gone through his whole life." 

Adam comments on this by saying:

It struck me, when I read her words, that the love of a mother for her son may very well be a picture of the love of our heavenly Father for his children who are gay. 

He ends the chapter with a post script written several years after the sermon....and he still doesn't have the answers. He is disturbed that the church has devoted so much time and energy in leading efforts against certain rights for homosexuals.  He believes that Jesus would reach out to them but at the same time he does not believe that Jesus would set aside monogamous heterosexual marriage as the ideal.   He ends the chapter thusly....

....I've brought some resolution to my inner struggle over the two sides of this issue by thinking of my own daughters.  I try to imagine if one of my daughters felt she was homosexual.  How would I respond to her?  I would love her.  I would want her to be welcome in our church.  Would I welcome her if she wanted to bring her partner to church?  Would I be able to love the person she loved?  I think I would.