Grace

One aspect of Christianity we are reminded of quite often is Grace, that ultimate act of forgiveness by the Almighty for whatever indiscretions in which we may have been involved. So many preachers tell us we do not have to be perfect to approach the Heavenly Father, Grace is extended even to the most egregious of sinners.

Grace. The Gift to Us All from the Father who art in Heaven.

What a pleasant thought.

But then, usually in the next breath, many will say “but you must first take Jesus as personal Savior and Redeemer.”

And some even go further and say you must also tithe, refrain from working on Sunday, partake of communion, not walk under ladders, step on sidewalk cracks, or sneezing without covering your mouth.

So, which is it?

Is Grace something given freely by the Almighty to everyone or does He have a team of lawyers to nit-pick the fine points of your adherence to a bunch of details?

Actually, it is unconditional and applies to people of any race, nation, age, or religion.

It is freely given so that we might, in turn, give forgiveness unconditionally to everyone by whom we might feel slighted or maligned. Forgiveness is not conditional or it is not true forgiveness.

And Grace is not really Grace with any conditions. Especially not something as minor as deciding which idol you want to interpose between yourself and God.

Jesus said repeatedly that you can easily keep in touch with God, the Father. He did not mention using any mouthpiece, go-between, or secret password.

That little notion was thought up by the early Christian lawyers.

How Inhuman

Recently, an Italian artist, Maurizio Cattelan, put up a statue in the Warsaw ghetto that caused a bit of a stir. Titled only “HIM”, it shows a young Adolf Hitler kneeling in prayer.

Poland’s chief rabbi, Michael Schudrich, was consulted on the proposed placement of the art and said he saw value in the artist’s attempt to try to increase moral awareness in the viewers.

Many people who saw it were moved by it, some calling it provocative. Of course, there were detractors as is usually the case. The Jewish advocacy group, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, called it “a senseless provocation which insults the memory of the Nazis’ Jewish victims.”

Cattelan’s series of works called “Amen”, of which this piece is but a part, explores our understanding of life and death, good and evil.

What this seems to be touching on is forgiveness.

It seems we normally isolate things that we conceive as “very bad” and term it evil. This has been done traditionally with Hitler and practically everywhere you see mention of him, it is as evil incarnate.

And we do this, quite naturally, to distance ourselves from him, and the evil. Well, we remark, he was not really human so we cannot be related to that sort of thing. He was evil, a devil, not a man.

Unfortunately, he was all too human, as are we, and that should be remembered. Otherwise the same trap may find another victim. All that was evil in Hitler can be found in each of us as well, that darker side, the demons within, that most of us can keep control over and keep from slipping into that “madness”.

If we can re-humanize the man, we might actually learn to forgive him – a lesson repeated quite often in that tome used by Jews and Christians alike – and move beyond the pain.

And perhaps we can all learn a lesson from that exercise.

There are parts good and evil in all people. Jesus, a very good person, some say “the son of God”, others call him God in the flesh.

Believe it or not, that is the same thing people have done with Hitler: dehumanization. Hitler was so bad that he could not have been human… and we do not take ownership, or responsibility. But we claim Jesus was so perfect that he could not have been human… and we do not take ownership, or responsibility.

We can never be as bad as Hitler because we are human, nor can we ever aspire to be as good as Jesus because we have made him more than we can ever attain.

How different it would be if we remembered Hitler was just a man – and guard ourselves by that example – and that Jesus was just a man, and realize that we can be everything that he was.

Yes, just as the Master said we could.

One Day at the Pearly Gates

This is a scene I could imagine…

A line of people stand waiting at the gate and God himself (not Saint Peter) opens the gate, steps forward and embraces the woman at the front of the line. “Welcome home, daughter!”

She looks nervously around. “I never expected to be here. I mean, my life has not been very good… I sold my body on the streets to get drugs… you know, that sort of thing.”

God smiles. “I’m sure you did the best you could. Come on in!”

Behind her a man steps forward, back straight as God hugs him. “I have dedicated my life to your service. I pastored a church for forty years.”

God smiles. “I’m sure you did the best you could. Come on in!”

The next woman steps forward for her hug and greeting. “I’m so glad to get here.” Tears come. “I’ve waited so long.”

God smiles. “I’m sure you did the best you could. Come on in!”

A man steps up next, trying to step back again to avoid the hug, but is unsuccessful. He shakes his head ruefully. “I never believed in you… this… I always figured you were some sort of myth.” He hung his head. “I don’t deserve to be here.”

God smiles. “I’m sure you did the best you could. Come on in!”

****

The Heavenly Father, as most people refer to Him, is just that: a parent. To think that He would refuse entrance to any of His children for any past behaviors, is denying “grace”. There is no hell, no Satan, only the loving Father of us all.

Why then do so many Christians prefer to believe that the wicked, the evil, the grossly sinful, will not make it back into paradise? Why believe that this physical plane should in any way take precedence over the higher spiritual planes when it runs divergent to rational thinking?

Probably because that is what some religion wants you to think: that you can only get to the Father through their intervention. Only they have the ear of God.

It’s a nice fairy tale.

For them.

I suppose they need some reason to feel they are important, making a difference. We all need that sort of thing. It is a very human need.

And this is not to say that the world’s religions have not done good works. To many people, it is the only way they feel they can touch the Divine. That it makes no logical sense, matters not. Logic is an earthly thing, not based in the spiritual.

But we are all children of God, regardless of mindset, health, race, or religious conviction.

And we all get to go home.

Seeing the Really Big Picture

There is a Brandon Heath song, “Gimme Your Eyes”, that repeats an age-old prayer for us to be able to see the world as through the eyes of the Almighty.

It is really not that difficult to do.

First you have to set aside all your preconceptions about what is right or wrong, good or bad, and all the learning you’ve done about how things in the universe work (science) and how people are (psychology).

Then you silence the thoughts in your own head… on all the various levels and sub-levels of your thinking.

And then, you make yourself completely open, willing, vulnerable, accepting, and all that without the slightest hint of judging anything you see or hear, or attempting to “analyze” the data… realizing that nothing has any real value to express or compare to anything else.

Finally, you actively love everything you see. Not the passive attitude that “everything’s okay” but the full-fledged admiration for everything, loving it just the way it is. And most important of this is yourself. Jesus said to love your neighbors as you love yourself and most people forget that loving yourself is the beginning of that process. Until your cup is filled, you can’t pour it out over anyone or anything.

And that’s really all there is to it.

It pretty well sums up what Jesus was talking about and everything we learn about God in the Old Testament… the real God, not that Yahweh character.

a Gift of Pain

When tragedy and heartache strike, it is easy for many people to turn to God for comfort.

And here in the west, our first plea is to have the pain/heartache/suffering removed. It happens so often that it is probably the most common prayer He receives. That and the prayer for something we want from Him, quite like the child that goes away to college and only calls when they need money. I’m sure God is used to His children doing such.

A recent author on books about prayer said that in other areas of the world – peopled by those less fortunate than us – petitioners normally pray for the strength to get through the hard times. Here we merely pray for those times to end.

It is very telling.

So many people seem to blame the dark forces of evil or Satan himself for the troubles that plague them, regardless of the scale of devastation.

What is being forgotten here is that the Almighty Himself is in control of the world. There is no input from Satan’s small corner (even if the fellow actually existed!). So who do you think brings the events that cause such pain? If the Creator of the universe is truly in control, we do not need to look further for someone to “blame”.

Praying to be rid of the pain, the suffering, is to ignore the need for those very things. We are made stronger by the troubles we confront and overcome, signaled by the degree and depth of grace and forgiveness we can give to others even under such duress.

If there was never any hardships for us, we could never have any growth. And calling out our lawmakers to try and remove all possible causes for such pain/heartache/suffering is trying to deny God the chance to work His changes in you.

Rather than try to find the quickest and easiest fix for our suffering, would it not be better to face our demons and grow through our struggle?

Yes, the pain is hard, but by doing the hard work now, the next hardship may not be so hard on us.

That is His gift of pain to us, and why we suffer such.

It is confusing that He should bring the message against so many young innocents but – like many have often said – He works in mysterious ways. But, rest assured, Satan did not bring this to pass (if he exists) without the permission of the One who is really in control.

Knowing

Nicholas Cage starred in an apocalyptic film a few years back by that name about a character who had foreseen the end of the world.

He has to sort through the clues to make the discovery for himself and the knowledge makes fundamental changes in his psyche.

And, of course, he can do nothing to avert the destruction of planet Earth.

But what his character learned was that there are things more important…

Coming out of Connecticut are a few stories that should truly awe everyone.

Apparently, some of the victims seem to have known in advance that their time was almost over.

Some things they did, things they said, and even messages written in their journals seem to indicate they knew the end was near.

Perhaps being as young as they were, they could not fully articulate what they felt on the horizon.

Or perhaps, like Cage’s character, they understood that existence on this plane is really so fleeting, for all of us.

I would like to think of all of them as “old souls”.

The question that remains is what can we take away from this?

If nothing more than bitterness, regrets and recriminations, I am afraid the lesson was lost.

And must more than likely be repeated.

How sad.

a Time of Testing

In the aftermath of the tragedy in Connecticut, we have the much anticipated mouthings of those with political leanings about what legislation can be passed to end such events.

And though religion has been removed from school many years ago, I was gratified to hear it was not absent from the scene when the gunfire was erupting. Several of the teachers gathered their children into a corner and prayed over them, even though one said she figured they were going to be killed anyway.

She had not immediately thought of contacting her lawmaker to demand some “proper action” be taken. She behaved as a Christian should have behaved in such a position, turning to God for help. Only God can get a person through such tragedy unscathed, and the bullets are not the only things inflicting wounds in such cases. The media – given their appropriated license to edify – show scenes of the death and panic, soul-searching images that evoke emotion and scar the psyches of us and our children for ages to come.

One news report said the community can never be the same. Why not? The Amish schoolhouse shooting is pretty much forgotten in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. We met, by accident, one of the mothers of a child taken in that tragedy. She was holding a new baby, laughing with friends. She has moved on from the tragedy, like Christians are supposed to do.

Why would the Connecticut community not be able to do the same?

Perhaps God should be allowed back into the schools, back into the community, and back into the daily lives of all Americans. When we turn to Man (i.e. Congress) in times of trouble, we cannot find any lasting solace.

As a Christian nation, shouldn’t we start behaving more like Christians?

Forgive… and move on with our lives, in faith.

a Rationalistic View

I mentioned before that for most of my life I have been content to let people think I was an atheist.

That is a word that will immediately conjure up the pictures of hell-fire and eternal damnation in most Christians but I believe such a destination is really far from the case.

Most atheists I know – including two sons – are not strictly atheists by definition. They are most definitely anti-religionists and that should not surprise anyone as there are even a large number of theologians who have noticed the trend even among the faithful to stand apart from organized religion.

Being against organized religion is not the same as atheism as most “atheists” are actually still looking, still searching for answers, still… hoping. That they have not embraced the answers offered by the Christian faith does not make them “lost”.

A case in point is Uta Ranke-Heinemann. She was born a Protestant, converted to Catholicism, educated in the same class as the current Pope and the two studied together and discussed doctrinal issues for years. She graduated to become a university professor at a prestigious university in Germany.

Everything went fine until she had what some people called a “crisis of faith”. She contends there was no crisis. It was more like an epiphany. Still, she lost the Catholic Chair at the university.

She came to the rational conclusion that there was no actual “virgin birth”.

The article of faith, she said, was just that: an article of faith, and not a physical truth.

She has issued what she calls a “negative creed” and it is very rationalistic in its view. It includes seven points and I include my own meager commentary to each:

1 – The Bible is not the word of God but the word of men. This is really a “no brainer”. Anyone who can understand several words strung together can see fairly quickly that there are not only a few “discrepancies” in the text but one heckuva lot of definite contradictions. The purported “word of God” sounds as if He is confused, regardless of the conviction coming from the pulpits. And if God is not good enough to keep the story straight from one end of such a small work as the Bible, I doubt He could be trusted with anything as massive as the whole universe. But as He is in charge of the whole shebang, the book has to have been written by fallible Man. And even by those who claim doctrinal infallibility.

2 – That God does exist in three persons is imagination of men. This whole Trinity thing has always perplexed me. Where did we get that idea from? Well, from Paul, of course! You remember him? Saul of Tarsus, who stoned Stephen and troubled the earlier disciples before he “found religion” got converted and announced he knew more about Jesus than anyone else. What a heck of a guy he was, huh? But did it come from Jesus? Or from God, perhaps? Not a chance.

3 – Jesus is man and not God. When asked repeatedly – and he was, of course – Jesus denied being either God or “the Son of God”. He said he was “Son of Man”. Of course, theologians now say that the phrase means “Son of God”. Then why didn’t Jesus just come out and say so? Was he being – ahem – duplicitous, circumspect, lying? I don’t think so. As for him being God, why would he keep talking about God as someone other than himself? Why wouldn’t he have prayed “Me, who art in heaven, hallowed be my name…”?

4 – Mary is the mother of Jesus and not the mother of God. See above. And as Uta had already renounced the virgin birth, it is included in this as a given. If Mary was the mother of a man, she would no longer have been a virgin at the birth and the birth would have been the same as for any other human being.

5 – God created heaven and earth, hell is a product of human fantasy. The “hell” mentioned by the ancient Jews was a desolate valley outside of Jerusalem… not the thing we consider today as being “under the ground”. Although there is a very healthy mythology built up over the subject it is just that: mythology.

6 – The devil and original sin do not exist. And, as I have said before concerning Satan, God – by the very definition of the concept – can have no “equal” who could be contesting against Him for the human race. The very idea is ludicrous. Original sin is a concept created by Paul and his Catholic Church. It implies that God created defective merchandise. It is nothing more than a control mechanism used by the Church to control Europe for quite a few centuries. (And, you know what? It worked for a long, long time.) And the idea that it was the fault of a woman seems a rather transparent attempt to degrade half the human race. Unfortunately, that seems to have worked too damned well. Shame!

7 – A bloody redemption at the Cross is a pagan sacrificial slaughtering of a human being, based on a model from the religious Stone Age. This may require a little more study for the casual reader but it is also correct.

Now that the rationalist view has been set forth, both Uta and I have a disclaimer.

There is nothing wrong with believing any or all these things to be correct even if any rationalist could argue otherwise.

In the final scheme of things – church rules notwithstanding – the exact and precise definition of any of these tenets is really up to you. If it has more meaning for you to think that Jesus is one and the same with God Almighty, go for it. If you think he was only the son of God in the flesh, more power to you. If it is more meaningful for you to know that he was nothing more than a very wise and miraculous human being, that’s all right too.

Uta is still a follower of Christ even if not a Catholic. I am very much the same. Jesus had some very interesting viewpoints to share with us while he was here. And one of my favorites is that the journey is really about your connection with God.

He mentioned nothing about requiring the intercession of a priesthood or a hierarchy of theological professionals, or even the ear of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

How could he even go there when he had already said that each of our bodies is the temple of God? And why would we need an organization to contact God when He is already in each of us? To deny either of those facts – in other words, to justify the existence of the church as the only way to God – is denying what Jesus said. And if you deny this part of his teachings, why bother with complaining that other people are wrong with their beliefs?

Regardless of the ideology they ascribe to.

God made us all different.

The path to salvation is wide enough to encompass every difference.

And what you believe will not hamper your advancement along the road.

So allow others their own separate beliefs and assist them in whatever way you can to help them along on their way.

Divisiveness never has and never will achieve much of anything, here or in heaven.

What If, indeed!

There is a popular Christian song played frequently on the radio and many people have played it for their more logical thinking friends and it has had an impact.

The song is “What If” by Nichole Nordeman. The song was written by Sofie Livebrant, a Swedish folk artist.

It is a very interesting song and perfect in all but one line.

“What if you dig way down, deeper than your simple-minded friends…”

Does anyone see something wrong with that line? I mean, other than me?

In a religious philosophy based on the principle of being non-judgmental – recall the story about casting the first stone? – where does anyone get the idea that calling someone’s friends “simple-minded” is a proper Christian response to anything?

Some may think, “Well, yeah but those people are simple-minded…” Sigh! Perhaps you need to spend more time reading scripture than interacting with others who hold to differing belief systems.

As you should have noticed by now, the Creator seems to have delighted in making a wide variety in all things. There are many varieties of different fruits, vegetables, birds, dogs, plants, insects, fish… and a wide variety of differences in people as well.

Christians proclaim that the only way to the Father is through Christ. It is a fundamental belief in the Christian faith but how does that fit into the rich diversity the Almighty has put before us?

If we were all created to be so different, should there not be some reason for it?

Besides, if the only way to the Father is through Jesus, I guess we can just write off all the people that came before Jesus, huh?

What if Christians dug a little deeper? Imagine what might be discovered about the plan of the Almighty!

On the Celebration of Christmas

I recently came across a blog by Stephen E. Jones called “Jesus Is Jehovah!”

He has some very interesting views on the celebration of Christmas and the stance of the Watchtower’s false teachings on the matter. He seems to be very upset about it and takes them to task for their beliefs, though admitting that everyone is free to have their own beliefs.

(And one commenter said “the truth will set you free” and Mr. Jones said he was misquoting scripture and included a link to the correct quote, Jn 8:32, which happened to be identical.)

He also has another interesting blog all about Creationism vs Darwinism, but that topic is so deep that I will not enter those waters here.

The celebration of Christmas is quite old and he offers arguments from early church fathers about the holiday.

Many people assume Christmas was set on December 25th to coincide with the ancient pagan holiday called Yule. Mr. Jones states that is patently false as the Christians were trying to distance themselves from all pagan religions. But I have seen far too many articles and books on that issue to brush it off so casually.

And that the early church (circa 200 A.D.) chose to use December 25th is not hard evidence of much either. Sure, some may have been celebrating it at the time but it may have been for any number of reasons, including pagan holidays.

The twelve days of Christmas, he says, went from Christmas through the 6th of January, the date of Jesus’ baptism. That confuses me a little… I had no idea they baptized infants in Judea at that time.

I had heard some years ago that early Christians had celebrated His birth on the 6th of January (or the 15th of June, in some reports, and even some other days as well) but translating the celebration to coincide with Yule allowed them to celebrate a twelve day feast (25 Dec – 6 Jan) and as the twelve days encompassed the New Year (Jan. 1st – when it was traditional to exchange gifts), the gift-giving became attached to the Christmas celebration when the festival was reduced to the 25th of December only.

Regardless of the “correctness” of whichever date people used, or all the scholarship in support of any and all theories, we have celebrated it on the present date for so long, the question has become academic.

Just as in Britain, they celebrate the Queen’s birthday in the month of June, even though her real birth date was April 21st.

So, the real date should not matter, regardless of the scholarship used (or political motivations used, if any) to determine the date. As in all such things, it is the thought that counts.

Many people may celebrate the birth of Jesus on another day of the year – using a method they determine to be correct – and still enjoy the traditional celebrations on the date the rest of us use.

I don’t really think it matters which day we honor Him, though the honoring should be a little more often than just once a year.

But that’s just my opinion.