RANDOM THOUGHTS ON "THE SLAP"

 Let's talk about "the Slap."

Of course, I'm referring to the recent Academy Awards show in which comedian Chris Rock told a joke about Jada Pinkett Smith's hair loss, prompting husband Will Smith to march up to the stage and slap Rock in the face. 

Based on what I've seen and heard, celebrities and news makers--with a few exceptions--are condemning Smith, characterizing his action as "violence" and "assault." The Academy has banned Smith for ten years and some are wondering if he should be stripped of his "Best Actor" Oscar, exiled for life from Academy programs, or even arrested for his "crime."

Since everyone else is weighing in, here are a few brief, off-the-top-of-my-head observations:

1. Will Smith should not have slapped Chris Rock. Smith has said as much in an apology to the Academy and to Rock. Will the Academy and/or Chris Rock formally accept the apology? 
Why, back in my day (putting on old man voice), the acceptance of an apology was a pathway to putting an unpleasant incident behind us. Nowadays, accepting an apology is tantamount to surrendering your soul and worldview to whatever enemy offended you. 

2. If comedians or parodists can be attacked for their comedy, it will have a chilling effect on the art. That is not to defend some so-called "comedy," much of which, in my humble opinion, consists of cheap shots, crude language, and pointless ad hominems. But if a critic can punch out a bad comic, then what is to stop him from punching out a good comic with whom he takes exception? Hey, if I don't like a comedian, I express my displeasure by changing the channel and voicing my opinion to others. 

3.  Many folks are rushing to Chris Rock's side for his dignity and composure in light of a public, humiliating incident. I too commend Mr. Rock for the way he has handled this. Things could have gotten ugly real fast, but sometimes, all it takes is for someone to walk away.

4. On the other hand, Rock's joke about Jada Pinkett Smith was tasteless and uncalled for. Comedians, pundits, actors, commentators, and stars have been "cancelled" for far less. The near silence of commentary about the joke speaks proverbially louder than the slap itself.

5. Back to a previous point: Will Smith should not have slapped Chris Rock. But does not motive matter here? Is no one standing beside Will Smith and at least attempting to understand his anger? Smith took action in defense of his wife. Back in the old days (there I go again), this was--dare I say--normal.  I cannot or will not defend the slap. It was a poor choice in a public venue that upset a lot of people. But, even so, I do see a certain chivalrous nobility here. Smith was not some wild-eyed thug seeking to beat up a helpless host, but a husband defending his wife's honor. That's got to count for something. Call me naive ("you're naive!"), call me old-fashioned ("you're old fashioned!"), but I don't see a lot of "Hollywood" holding to values of honor and chivalry these days. 

6. Whenever I see people profess faith at one moment and yell angry profanity the next, it causes a huge disconnect in my brain.  Celebrities who are Christians are particularly susceptible to this. Everyone is watching for the slip up, the slur, or the slap in order to brand the star as a hypocrite or even laugh off Christian faith as irrelevant.  I'm not sure what my point is here, just that if Will Smith is a genuine believer, his fame is going to mean an extraordinary amount of scrutiny and pressure on him. A lesson for all of us to guard our hearts.

'

CHURCH REPORT FOR OCTOBER 10 2021: Hosea, can you see? (groan!)

Disclaimer (because someone will say something): although I am actively involved in my church, all opinions and observations are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the leadership, staff, or congregation.

CHURCH REPORT FOR October 10, 2021

Those who are familiar with the books of the Bible, or who did "Bible drills" in Sunday School, or even those who have access to the table of contents in their Bible know that after the book of Daniel comes the book of Hosea. And since our series on Daniel wrapped up last week (I know, I know, I didn't do a church report post!), it was time to start this brand new series.

Mike Bull was our speaker this Sunday. He handled the overview of Hosea, titled, appropriately enough, "Overview of Hosea."  For those who haven't read Hosea in a while, it is the account of a prophet of God who is told to marry a prostitute as a living object lesson of Israel's unfaithfulness to God. I won't give any spoilers, but the book develops a beautiful theme of God's love and redemption in spite of the wife's sin--indeed, in spite of OUR sin--indeed, in spite of MY sin. 

Practically speaking, the overview was concise and to the point and about half as long as last week's wrap up of Daniel, which was also to the point--seriously, Mike addressed some very timely and instructional things last week--but not quite as concise. 

Also launching this week was our annual foray into "Operation Christmas Child," a ministry of Samaritan's Purse, which seeks to fill shoe boxes with small gifts  and send it to children around the world. It's fun to be a part of this ministry each year, knowing how these boxes will be used. 

Adult Bible Study went well. Lately, we've been able to finish complete sections of our outline. While nobody minds having to stop in the middle of a verse, I really enjoy being able to finish the parts of whatever segment we are exploring. Hoping this trend continues.

So, how was your church service this weekend?

9 (JUST FOR FUN) OBSERVATIONS ABOUT NCIS

 

Like many tv viewers, I enjoy the program NCIS. Originally launched as a two-part episode of the series JAG, NCIS chronicles the activity of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service's Major Case Response Team, led by Leroy Jethro Gibbs and his squad of highly skilled agents. 

I spent several months of semi-binge watching the series from the beginning (by "semi-binge watching", I mean one, maybe two episodes a night), as well as full scale binging while recovering from surgeries. So as I watched these shows one after another, I began to notice things. Mostly minor things. Things that made me go, "hmmm." So I'd like to share them with you.

Three quick disclaimers before we start:

• NCIS is a very entertaining show. I enjoy it. So nothing I say in this post should be interpreted as nit-picking or griping or complaining about the show. 
• No major plot points in this list, but if I accidentally say something that you may have preferred to find out on your own, then just put this list in the category of spoilers.
• Super fans of the show have no doubt addressed most, if not all, of these items. Plus some things may have been touched on in an episode. I have avoided the fan boards and chat rooms for that very reason. I'm just a normal guy with a casual enjoyment of NCIS. If you want to weigh in on the comments after you've read the piece, that's fine, but be nice about it. 

And now , without further ado, here are nine observations about the series NCIS.

1.Who are these people? During a typical episode, there are people who are working at other stations, people carrying papers, and people simply walking around. Who are these people and what do they do at NCIS? One episode arc had a female agent whose team was on the other side of a divider. Why don't we hear more about these other teams?

2. Is it connected to the Navy or Marines? Is it just me, or does it seem like the Navy connection for a given case is sometimes a stretch?

• "Got a dead sailor in Norfolk. Grab your gear!"
• "Got a dead Marine in Arlington. Grab your gear!"
• "Got a dead janitor at a Marine Base. Grab your gear!"
• "Got a dead window washer at Quantico . Wait a second. Oh, okay, uncle is a reservist. Grab your gear!"
• "Got a dead body at the park. Ummm, he was wearing a navy blue suit. Close enough. Grab your gear!"

3. Who gets a hall pass? How does someone get admission to the "bull pen" level? At times, we see agents escorting guests (and while we're here, those agents nod, but rarely speak).  But there have been times when people seemingly have come up on their own. In fact, there have been times when "nefarious ne'er-do-wells" have stepped off the elevator, much to the surprise of Gibbs and his team (but not always the other people, who continue to walk around). 

4. Who does what? I used to watch JAG, in which the Navy lawyers would investigate Navy crimes, even going undercover at times to nab the bad guys. So what exactly is the relationship between JAG and NCIS (the fictional series, that is, not the real-life agencies)?

5. Down time? Does Gibbs and his team  work more than one case at a time? What do they do while waiting for the phone to ring or for Gibbs to stride into the room and announce that they found the leg of a biologist whose lab was next door to a Marine recruiting station, so "grab your gear!"?

6. How do you get to the Director's office? Does it not seem unusual for NCIS Director Leon Vance, the head of a major federal law enforcement agency with world wide contacts, to have his office just upstairs from where the agents are working? I'm not saying it's impossible, but isn't that like a local school district superintendent having her office at the elementary school?

7. Is one expert enough? For the amount of cases that NCIS tackles from Gibbs' team and (I assume) from other teams, is just one Forensic Scientist and one Medical Examiner enough? While some episodes have addressed the workload, most of them have Abby (and later Kasie) and Ducky (and Jimmy) perform in-depth analysis and detailed autopsies fast enough to give the results to Gibbs in a timely fashion.  I wish I had that mojo of energy and productivity.

8. The biggest small agency in DC? In early episodes, NCIS was portrayed as an undervalued, little known federal agency. One of the running jokes was when the agents would identify themselves, they would be met with confused stares and questions of "who?" or "what's that?" Since then, at least in the tv universe, NCIS appears to have field offices and major operations in several locations in the U.S. and around the world. It regularly takes the lead role in investigating and stopping global terrorism and high crimes. And its technological brilliance would be the envy of most spy agencies. So just how amazingly awesome is NCIS?

9. How many clicks does it take to get to the center of a file? I'm not a computer expert by any means, but it seems like the agents tap a LOT of keys in order to bring up a picture or document on their monitors. I can usually access a picture with a few clicks of my mouse. Come to think of it, do they even use a mouse? They must use a mouse....I just never paid attention. Or maybe it's the high-tech sophisticated systems they have. Either way, the clickety-clickety-clickety seems excessive to me. 

So that's it: nine fun observations about NCIS. Like I said, I really do like the show, so nothing takes away from the entertainment value. These questions make me think, research, have fun, and draw conclusions based on what I see. I'd love to hear your thoughts and maybe even some of your observations in the comments below. Again, keep it nice and respectful

A REFLECTION ON THE 4TH

 Happy Independence Day!

When I was a kid, someone asked me, "do they have a 4th of July in other countries?" Of course, the answer is "yes, they have a 4th, and 2nd, and 3rd, and 5th, and all the other days of the month."

But as I often do, I started picking apart the reasons for the joke. The basic premise behind the joke is that we have, in practice, used "4th of July" as a stand-in for "Independence Day." This, in and of itself is fascinating to me. I cannot think of any other holiday that has adopted its calendar day as a designation. I have not heard anybody say, "Merry 25th of December.!" or "would you like to come to my October 31st party?" or "Happy 4th Thursday of November!"

(Okay, someone is going to write me and say, "What about Sinco de Mayo?" Well, as far as I have found in my research, that's its actual name. No substitution of the actual name for a date. Those who are far more knowledgeable can leave a comment about this, but that's what I've found.)

So the idea behind the joke is that, duh, "4th of July" is a date on the calendar, so naturally it's everywhere. As an innocent kid, I got caught up in the whole, "gotcha!" aspect of the joke. It was a fun way for the questioner to demonstrate their superior reasoning skills. And at 10 years old, it's pretty impressive to be intellectually superior to one's peers. Of course, it can also get one bullied, but that's another subject for another time.

So why this analysis of a childhood joke?

As I write this, it is Independence Day. 245 years ago, a document known as the "Declaration of Independence" set this fledgling nation on its course through the channels of history. But even in the last few days, I have read opinion pieces from those who would think of themselves as "intellectually superior" who question the very documents and institutions of this country. Like the kid who snarkily asks, "do they have a 4th of July in England?", these experts ask, "did you know what the flag really symbolizes?" Or "do you know the real meaning behind the National Anthem?" Or "do you know how unbelievably repressive our form of government is?" And they ask these questions with such earnestness, such depth, and not a little amount of celebrity appeal, that if you give the wrong answer, they are more than willing to correct you. "Gotcha!"

Don't worry, I'm not going to launch into an explanation of our national heritage in order to answer the latest social media influencers. There are many resources out there by truly intellectually superior writers who do a far better, far more thorough job than I could ever do. But what I would ask you to do, when these opinions drift over the internet, is to ask, "what is the motive behind the joke?" The kids on the 4th of July are saying, "We're smart and you're not!" The adults today may be giving more sophisticated reasons, but it still boils down to the same thing: "you're dumb and we're not."

And that's no joke.

Happy 4th of July and God bless the United States of America.

CONFESSIONS FROM A CRANKY OBSERVER

In today's entry, I'm going to jump into the proverbial waters of blogdom, discretely typing this missive six feet from the nearest human being, hitting the keys (which I have judicially sprayed with disinfectant) with my lizard-textured hands brought on by repeated washings to the tune of "Twinkle Twinkle, Little Star" and/or generous application of hand sanitizer (and as usual, I need to remind everyone that these opinions and observations are mine alone--don't go protesting my work place or demand my head).

Overall, I consider myself  a positive person. I think that's a fair thing to say. So it may surprise you to hear when it comes to the COVID-19 pandemic, I've had moments of, well, crankiness.

I've reached the enviable age of "having to visit doctors a lot more" (no worries, I'm fine). I remember my first week of my regular visit. Fought for a parking place in the hospital parking lot. Entered the front door, passed dozens of people going in and out, found the elevator, went up to the section, stood at check-in desk and, well, checked in. Signed twice with electronic pen and pad. They slapped a wristband ID on me (I assume so they didn't accidentally mix me up with another patient). I thought, in the words of friend of mine from church, "this gettin' old isn't for sissies."

A couple of more weeks, a couple of more visits (yeah, it's a weekly thing, but no worries, I'm fine. Honest). I've noticed it is gradually getting easier to find a parking spot. The people coming in and out are fewer. But as I walk through the front entrance, I am greeted  by a smiling, happy young lady who asked where I was going, was I feeling okay, did I travel anywhere, and would I please help myself to a squirt of sanitizer. I replied 'yes, no, of course" to the last three and proceeded to the elevator. Signed in and got my wristband ID (whew).

The next week, parking was a breeze (I'm almost by the front door!). I was greeted by another smiling, happy young lady who happened to wear a mask. She asked me the same questions-- where was I going, health, travels, and invitation to the squirt. Up the elevator, but this time, the check in desk had me stand back before signing the pad. And no wrist ID (but what if they mistake me for another patient?). 

Yet another week, with piece of cake parking, and maybe one or two people going in or out. The greeter sounded like she was smiling and happy and maybe young, but I couldn't tell, because she was covered head to toe in what looked like an oversized surgical gown, gloves, and a mask. Questions. Squirt. And at the check in desk, the pad was situated on a cart, well away from the check-in desk. And no ID, which I was actually okay with, because I figured they knew me by now. After all, I'm the only one ON THE ENTIRE FLOOR WITHOUT A  MASK AND GLOVES!

So, why do I suffer from bouts of crankiness? I think it's this "new normal." I dislike that phrase because this is not normal.

Don't get me wrong. It is heartwarming to see our neighbors--or at least their eyes (because, you know, masks) and their compassion to one another. I can't remember a time when people have been so nice to each other, so understanding, so comforting and helpful. Well, there was 9-11, where we pulled together in an incredibly strong way, holding one another and....ummm, but we can't do any holding right now. No hugs, handshakes, or high-fives. Just kind words. At a distance. Maybe do a chore or run an errand. But don't get too close.

I'm thrilled that the church is stepping up and stepping out (within social distancing guidelines) to help others. And we have taken advantage of a plethora of technology to hold services and meetings. It is good to keep people connected with the Word. I applaud it--I really do. But I'm sorry, it's just not the same. Yeah, it's the (cough) "new normal." But the fact that some of you are more concerned about that cough just now instead of the fact that a public health crisis has forced us to sit apart and watch a service on our computer screens illustrates the point that none of this is "normal" (for the record, the cough was fake. I'm fine, really. After all, I visit the doctor. A lot).

I'm watching split screen newscasts with half the anchors and reporters coming to us live from their webcams in their living rooms with the breaking news of the day. And what is the breaking news of the day? Coronavirus is not only worse than we thought, but it will last longer than we thought. And we hear it. Every. Single. Day. But then comes the fun part, in which they do human interest stories about happy people happily adjusting to their happy restrictions during the "new normal."

But it's not "normal."

Yes, I like the stories. I like the creativity. As I mentioned, I like the human kindness. I think one of the best things that has come out of this shutdown has been the memes. And generally being a positive person, I do my best to walk on the proverbial sunny side of the street.

But I want "normal" back. Improved normal, fine. But "new normal?" Not so much.

As I left the hospital after my last visit, I passed the greeter. I thanked her for her work and wished her wellness and safety. I assumed she was smiling and happy and young (I couldn't tell for sure because of her gear), but the way her eyes crinkled up, I think her smile may have grown a little more. I helped myself to another squirt of hand sanitizer.

That should be normal. 

At least the kind words. 


______________________________________
In all seriousness, the current epidemic is serious. And while there is a lot we do not know, it helps to practice what we do know. So please, stay home if you can, respect space between people, don't touch your face, wash your hands often and frequently, and let's get through this together.


 

HERE'S TO THE QUIET MINISTRIES

Do you have any "quiet" ministries in your church?

Whether it is the quaint "sewing circle" that laughs and prays by needlepoint in the back room or the group that gets together to sing the "old hymns" for an hour, there seems to be groups that do not draw a lot of attention; indeed, many in the congregation may not even be aware of their existence. While a church's major Bible studies or children's ministries draw a lot of attention, the "quiet" groups faithfully meet week by week, year after year, contributing to the Body for the glory of God.

Last week, I conducted a memorial service for a lady who passed away around the holidays. I did not know her, but I knew she regularly attended our church's weekly "Ladies' Prayer Breakfast" at a local restaurant. Now while the Breakfast is listed in our church schedule and is hardly a "secret," it is not the most visible of ministries in our church. I've heard more than one of our leaders confess to not being aware of this group or what they did. The "Ladies' Prayer Breakfast" is one of those "quiet" ministries.

In preparing for the service, I learned a lot about this woman, but I also learned a lot about the Ladies' Prayer Breakfast. Family and friends testified about how important the Breakfast was to this woman and how thankful they were that she had a group of friends around her. She was not able to get out much, but someone always picked her up for the Breakfast, where she enjoyed her weekly helping of biscuits and gravy. It is safe to say the ladies at the Breakfast ministered to her--and she to them.

The catchword in many churches these days is "doing life together," growing in mutual faith and accountability to one another. Forgive the description, but it's a very "Millennial" thing to do. But as I listened to woman after woman talk about their relationship between this woman and the Breakfast, it occurred to me that this quiet ministry was already "doing life together." The group has lost three of its members in the last year. They have experienced family members go through crises. Their lives and struggles and hopes are linked in a "koinonia"--a living assembly. It is not manufactured, but very organic and real. The Ladies Prayer Breakfast does not get the attention or the focus or the promotion that other ministries get, but it is part of "church."

So what "quiet" groups are in your church? You don't have to join every group you

discover, but maybe a give a word of affirmation and an offer of prayer to its members. You may be surprised at how much these little known ministries are  "doing life together."

WHO KNEW WHAT MARY KNEW (Another Look at a Popular Holiday Song)

With all the hubbub over the classic holiday song, Baby, It's Cold Outside, it's easy to forget another Christmas offering that has been the subject of derision in recent years.

We're speaking, of course, about the iconic Mary, Did You Know? This hauntingly beautiful song, written by Mark Lowry, has been covered by dozens of artists over the years such as Kenny Rogers, Cee Lo Greene, and Pentatonix. It has become a staple of most modern holiday albums. It is a poignant song about the fact that Jesus was not just an ordinary baby, but none other but the great I AM. At its core, it highlights the deity of Christ, a central doctrine of the historic Christian faith.
Why do some feel it is their life mission to snipe and point out the flaws in such a moving tune?

Yet, snipes come. And surprisingly, most of the vehemence comes from Christian circles. Theologians smugly smile and point out that Mary did indeed know how special Jesus was. Most trot out doctrinal distinctives the same way they point out how silly it is to have three wise men at the manger when every knowledgeable believer knows that there were more than three wise men and they did not show up until two years later at Joseph's house. Others are a little more blunt, saying, "I hate this song--of course, Mary knew!" There's even a post that questionably changes the lyrics to read, "Mary freaking knew. . .that her baby boy. . .would someday walk on water . . ."

Yes, Mary knew. Maybe not every specific detail of Jesus' life and ministry (since they had not happened yet), but yeah, she knew that Jesus was not just a baby in the manger. Nobody disputes that.

What the "Christmas critics" don't seem to get is that the question, "Mary, did you know. . ." is a rhetorical one. Like an interviewer who asks a marathon winner, "who got to the finish line first?", the singer of this song is not fishing for information, but reinforcing what is already known. He or she is not interrogating Mary, but reminiscing with her.

And really, most importantly: the song isn't for Mary. It's not about her or what she knows or knew or anything. It's not actually asking Mary if she knew.

It's asking us if we know.

Did we know that the Baby in the manger that we so casually reference every December is none other than God in human flesh? That He came for a purpose, a reason, a terrible, tragic, exciting, blessed mission to save mankind from sin?

And does knowing this make a difference in our lives? In your life?

The problem is, a lot of people don't know. And a lot of people who do know, don't really believe it.
As we prepare for Christmas, may we realize that the little baby in the manger is indeed Lord of all creation and that He is the great I AM: God in human flesh.

Do you know?

YEAH, I HEARD THAT (A Christmas Meditation)

I love Christmas. I like the festivity and the fun and the warmth and the music and so on.

And obviously, I believe that Christmas is a time to celebrate the birth of my Savior. That's the big reason for the season, the thing that puts the "holy" into this holiday. As many have observed, you can't have CHRISTmas without CHRIST.

So quit trying to pour cold porridge on my celebration.

Yes, I know Jesus was not born on December 25. I am aware of modern research that places the manger in a cave, or a roof, or a tent. I know the three kings weren't kings, there weren't three of them, and they arrived much later. I know there was no innkeeper, lowing cattle, or little drummer boy.

Furthermore, I know about the history of how December 25 was originally a pagan holiday and that many of the customs and traditions and symbols of Christmas were actually borrowed from these pagan practices.

And don't even start telling me about Santa Claus.

The critiques come from many sources:

• The guy who comes to my door and recites all this stuff in hopes of causing me to forsake my un-biblical traditions and embrace his system.
• The atheist/agnostic/liberal skeptic who smugly expounds on these things so that I will awkwardly admit that my faith is silly.
• The otherwise Christian expert whose mission in life is to make sure every single jot and tittle are precisely lined up according to their own infallible scholarship.
• Sincere people of every stripe who traditionally resist anything that is traditional.

The fact is, I can knowledgeably expound on most of the Christmas objections. Most believers who attend Bible believing churches can respond to these observations. It's not "new." Facebook posts announcing "13 Startling Things You Didn't Know About Christmas" are usually rehashed content from years gone by.

So why, in spite of everything, do I really, really like Christmas?

Christmas is a recognition that God the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, became a human being. He lived a sinless life, He died to pay the price for my sins, He was buried, and He rose again three days later so that, by trusting Him as my Lord and Savior, I can have a brand new life and day-to-day relationship with Him.

No, there is nothing in Scripture that calls upon us to recognize the birth of Jesus. But the importance of the Incarnation is stressed. For example, 1 John 4:2-3 says, "By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,  and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God." Do we need to hold a Western world style "birthday party for Jesus" to celebrate His coming? No. Do we need to recognize that He came? Oh yes!

So yes: I'm celebrating. All the festivities and fun and warmth and music are ultimately in recognition of the First Coming. The world may celebrate in ignorance, but like Paul in Acts 17, we can show them Who and why we are throwing the party.

If you have serious problems with Christmas, I would be the last to talk you out of your convictions. Richest blessings on you. But I want you to know why I'm celebrating.

And if you're just cranky and you want to unload your Christmas critique, I would ask you to quit trying to dampen my joy.

Because it's safe to say, I've probably heard it all before.

RANDOM THOUGHTS ON THE EVE OF DECEMBER

It's about 11:20 p.m. on the last day of November. Tomorrow (or perhaps today, depending on when you are reading this) is December 1. Thirty one days until the end of another trip around the sun for me and the start of a new journey (cryptic, enigmatic way of saying December 31 is my birthday). I've had a good night of study and I've listened to some Christmas music ("Santa's Sequel Sellouts", a volume from the annual revered Tanner's 25 Days of Christmas Music).

Since I'm not quite ready for bed yet, I thought I'd just string together a few random thoughts and observations. No sparkling prose here, folks, just good old fashioned "thinking through my keyboard."

It's been four years since I've written about the "War on Christmas." I think I'm due for another edition. But to summarize my position in as few words as possible, I think the expression "Happy Holidays" is silly, not sinister. Honestly, retailers, when you've got your store decked out in Christmas decorations, is anybody really fooled when you use "Happy Holidays?" Seriously? But on the other hand, the poor clerk who follows orders and says "Happy Holidays" is not the emissary of Satan out to destroy the Christian faith. All we have to do is smile, say "thanks," and maybe wish them a "Merry Christmas."

You'll have to read it to understand this, but Ezekiel 7 is pretty clear and understandable. And that's what makes it so unsettling. 

Old blog with new makeover: Telegrams From My Own Mind Field, written by O. Dean Neal. Agree or disagree, he has some interesting insights.

Grateful for the church's computer tech, who fixed an unsettling problem at my station with just a few keystrokes. Too bad all our challenges couldn't be corrected that quickly.

A little touch of melancholy: another year is passing by without being able to visit my home state of Colorado. Money and time always seem to be a factor. I'm not totally depressed, nor do I obsess over it to the point of distraction. I know the time will come. I have a list of things I want to do when I'm there, so the anticipation is good. So if you're family or friend from there, watch out! If I don't know when I'm showing up, then you sure don't know either!

One of my personal traditions when I drive home after Thanksgiving dinner is to put on Mannheim Steamroller's "Hallelujah Chorus", crank the volume up higher than usual, and, frankly, rock out as I'm driving. During the Christmas season, I also make it a point to listen to The Young Messiah, The New Young Messiah, and, of course, the traditional Messiah--yes, the whole thing.

Although this seemed like a short read, it has taken enough time to write that I now feel comfortable heading to bed. Good night one and all.

PAYBACK TIME AND SEVERED HEADS

I was about to swear off political posts, but thoughts began to flood my mind late into last night and I figured I ought to write something. I did this in a hurry, so if you notice some spelling, grammatical, or other mechanical irregularities, please forgive me. And, as always, I welcome your comments, but be nice and respectful. We're all friends here.

Kathy Griffin held up what looked like the severed head of the President. An amazing backlash ensued from across the political spectrum, with pundits and pollsters, liberals and conservatives, in rare agreement that this crossed the line. CNN severed ties with Ms. Griffin and there's even talk of a Secret Service investigation. Kathy Griffin even publically apologized for the incident.

But it really did not come as a big surprise that "counter memes" began appearing, showing pictures of President Obama being lynched, hung, stabbed, and mutilated and the posters wondering why "conservatives" weren't that upset at those acts of disrespect.

I can't speak for all conservatives, but as a conservative, yes, I was upset at the disrespectful way President Obama was treated. As I've written before, I have a personal code about respecting the highest office of the land. This includes being careful to use the title President (or alternatively, Mister) when referring to the POTUS, avoiding the use of derogatory nicknames, giving the man the benefit of the doubt and not pouncing on every rumor or allegation, and certainly, not supporting anything suggesting harm or violence against the President.

But one of the myths that "my side" has propagated is that conservatives sat nobly on the sidelines in stoic, respectful silence during the last eight years of Mr. Obama's presidency. Ummm, no. we. did. not. Smarting over the trashing that President Bush received by liberals, we jumped at Mr. Obama and jumped hard. Derogatory nicknames, pushing rumors, and joking about shooting or hanging the President were common place. Some of my conservative friends even went as far as to declare that Obama was "not my President." Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

And now it's payback time, with the liberal left out for revenge. And while we can all agree that Kathy Griffin's horrifying display was, well, horrifying and that it crossed the proverbial line and that it was uncalled for, the fact is, it didn't stop her from doing it in the first place.

The severed head picture is only a visual representation of the overwhelming disrespect accorded to Mr. Trump since before the election. Barely past the first 100 days of the Trump presidency, the liberal left has vowed to resist, counter, stand against, and fight tooth and nail against anything and everything the President does or says. Instead of allowing us to weigh all the evidence and draw our own conclusions, many news outlets declare Mr. Trump's statements false in the headline itself! I mean, why bother reading the article when the reporter has already reached the conclusion for me?

So does Ms. Griffin's stunt sadden and anger me? Yes.

Does it surprise me? No.

We live in a wonderful country, where we are free to disagree with our leaders. And just as I could list the areas in which I disagreed with the politics, policies, and philosophies of President Obama, I could start a list for President Trump.  I can almost guarantee that I will make both sides mad at me to some degree.That's America, people.

But as long as every negative word, every disagreement, every counter-proposal is characterized as "hate speech," we will grow insensitive to truly hateful speech and actions and we will create a climate that seeks to "dish it out" in the same or greater measure. "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." (feel free to supply your own cliché at this point).

My prediction is that, before long, Kathy Griffin will attempt to defend her photo shoot by saying that Mr. Trump provokes that reaction in her. Bit by bit, her fans and celebrity friends will come to her aid, maybe invoking the first amendment, but most certainly saying that Ms. Griffin is only responding to the same heat unleashed on President Obama by the right.

And the cycle will continue.

NOVEMBER MUSINGS: EPILOGUE: THE MORNING AFTER

Yeah, I know: I said "November Musings" would be over with my last post. Consider this post a postscript, an epilogue, a sequel.

Donald Trump is now the President-elect. After watching the news coverage, seeing the victory speech of Mr. Trump, the concession speech of Mrs. Clinton, and checking out social media commentary, I feel compelled to offer my own observations, warnings, and exhortations. These are "raw" thoughts, so if they lack a certain subtlety and refinement, well, that's the nature of politics.

1. One of the consistent themes in the news coverage was the sense of surprise."Nobody expected this." "How could the polls be so wrong?" With all due respect to our professional pundits, they began Mr. Trump's candidacy with dismissal. They continued it with the narrative that Mr. Trump only had a small, narrow minded bunch of supporters. But in my decidedly un-scientific observation, Mr. Trump's base was a lot larger and more diverse than the pros admitted.

2. I appreciated the gracious words of Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton in their respective speeches. I especially want to commend Mrs. Clinton for "practicing what she preached" in accepting the results of the election with class and dignity.

3.The popular vote shows a razor thin support for Hillary Clinton. Take note: roughly half of the citizens of our country voted for Mrs. Clinton! I strongly dislike the demonizing of the voter. Intelligent, passionate, patriotic citizens supported Hillary Clinton and they cannot be casually dismissed or ignored. We may disagree on issues, but now is the time to address the concerns in a way that unites us.

4.Take note: roughly half the citizens in our country voted for Mr. Trump! I strongly dislike the demonizing of the voter. Intelligent, passionate, patriotic citizens supported Donald Trump and they cannot be casually dismissed or ignored. We may disagree on issues, but now is the time to address the concerns in a way that unites us.

5. (Yes, the previous two points were identical).

6. I'm already seeing opinions around Facebook, particularly from these political opinion "papers," that are heralding the doom of our country. As I mentioned in a previous post in this series, the disaster scenarios that are often predicted by opponents rarely come to pass. Relax folks. Don't leave the country, don't hang your heads in closeted anger, and, whatever you do, don't take a page from the opposition and start digging up conspiracies and voter fraud.

7. Several conservative Republican sites are already gloating. Even Mrs. Clinton's delay in giving her concession speech has been characterized as "cowardly!" Good grief. It's over. Even athletes shake hands after a hard-fought match.  Not to overuse an Anchorman line, but, please, for the good of the country, "Stay classy, conservatives." As I've already pointed out, half the country chose Hillary Clinton. That's a whole lot of people to be against.

8. Finally, a personal note: someone recently said that I was trying to be "politically correct." Them's fightin' words! If you knew me, I mean really knew me, you know that I have very strong political opinions. And I'm not ashamed to tell you that most of my opinions are right (well, I meant as in "correct", but yes, on the political spectrum as well). But as I think I've mentioned in previous entries, I believe how we argue our position is also important. No longer do I feel the need to blow up my opponents when they are wrong. Do you really want to listen to or work with someone who calls you a "cotton headed ninnymuggin?" or characterizes your views as so much "feldercarb?"

9. (on the other hand, I wouldn't mind engaging in dialogue with anyone who can tell me the source of "cotton headed ninnymuggin" and "feldercarb.")

Well, there it is. The real conclusion to my "November Musings" series. And guess what? Jesus is still King of kings and Lord of Lords! Pray for the President-elect and pray for our country. Let's turn now to lighter things. . .

#

NOVEMBER MUSINGS #5 LAST THOUGHTS: MY CODE

As I write this, our country (USA) will be electing a new President in a little more than 48 hours. The two leading contenders are Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump. And to hear supporters of both candidates say it, this will be one of the most important elections in our history.

But regardless of who wins (and trust me, barring a third party upset of epic proportions, one of them will win), one thing that will not change is my code. I don't remember when I came up with this, but a few administrations back, after carefully considering what the Bible had to say about my attitudes toward the government, I came up with some principles that would govern how I speak to and about our elected officials (it references the President specifically, but can apply to any kind of leader).

Word of warning: it's easy to follow this code when the President in office is "good" (read, "a President I support"). The challenge is with the President of a different party, or one that makes unpopular decisions, or that gives evidence of doing things that may not be good for the country. But as I study the Bible, I find the principles are not labeled with a D or an R. If Paul can pray for the cruel, pagan tyrant named Nero, do I have a reason not to pray for a President for whom I did not vote?

A couple of quick disclaimers: 1) I am not perfect and at any given time, I have slipped and violated my own code. I don't offer this as judgment, merely as aspiration.  2) We're still friends, whether you agree with me or not.

This will be split between "My Code" and "Guiding Scripture

My Code
1. I will refer to the President as "President Name" or "the President." I will avoid using just the last name unless the context of the reference calls for it.

2. I will avoid the use of pejorative nicknames for the President. While well done political satire and humor has its place in our history, I will continue to disapprove of proverbial "cheap shots."

3. As much as possible, I will give the President the benefit of the doubt.

4. I will not automatically believe every bad report about the President, unless there is clear and compelling evidence to support it. I will not entertain news of failure unless it can be objectively verified.

5. I will celebrate the victories and wins of the President that are for the good of the country (not just for the good of the President's party).

6. I will exercise my right as an American citizen to "speak truth to power," to speak against policies and practices that violate my convictions or that I feel are contrary to the best ideas of this country.

7. But when speaking in disagreement, I will always temper my comments with respect and consideration to the man or woman holding the office.

8. I will pray for the President, for his or her success, health, safety, protection, and that he or she would seek and heed the wisdom of God.

Guiding Scriptures:

1 Peter 2:13-17 Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, ¹⁴ or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. ¹⁵ For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men— ¹⁶ as free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bondservants of God. ¹⁷ Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.

1 Timothy 2:1-2 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, ² for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence.

Romans 13:1-7 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. ² Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. ³ For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. ⁴ For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. ⁵ Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. ⁶ For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. ⁷ Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.

Acts 23:1-5 Then Paul, looking earnestly at the council, said, “Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.” ² And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth. ³ Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?”⁴ And those who stood by said, “Do you revile God’s high priest?”⁵ Then Paul said, “I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’"

Also see 1 Samuel 24, in which David, presented with an opportunity to kill Saul, refuses to harm the Lord's anointed.

Thanks for reading the "November Musings" series, one of my rare forays into politics. If you have not already done so, make sure you vote and pray. And remember, on Wednesday, November 9, I predict that Jesus will still be King of Kings and Lord of Lords!

#

NOVEMBER MUSINGS #4: QUICK THOUGHTS BEFORE NEXT TUESDAY

As I type this, there is only one weekend between me and Election Day. So I want to use this post to share four quick thoughts about what could and should happen on Tuesday and beyond. No major theme here, no in-depth analysis, just shooting through my keyboard. As always, whether you agree or disagree, be nice.

1. No candidate is going to "save" America. There are dozens of reasons why the grand promises of the would-be POTUS fail to materialize, most of them out of the control of the candidate. When Secretary Clinton or Mr. Trump make these sweeping pronouncements about what the next four to eight years will be like under their watch, I just smile.

2. The horrible things we think the opposing candidate will do to America will likely not happen either. Again, there are dozens of reasons for this, but gloom and doom predictions rarely persuade me as to my voting preferences. Nuclear war has never happened, guns have not been confiscated, and, as of this date, I am still free to worship in the church of my choice. Please understand, I am not blind to the issues or concerns that face our country. It's just that, if I had a proverbial nickel for every celebrity that threatened to leave the country if (fill in the name of candidate) won the White House, I'd be able to buy a nice dinner for my wife. Maybe things won't be spectacularly rosy under one administration, but I doubt it will be a total disaster under another.

3. Whoever is elected is my President, whether they got my vote or not.  I've actually had people get mad at me for saying this. "He's not my President," they announce.  Ummm, yes he is. Defiantly proclaiming that the new President is "not my President" or refusing to accept his or her position in the Oval Office is really no different than threatening to leave the country if the opposition is elected. It solves nothing, it changes nothing.

4. I'm a bit of an idealist, so I think this is a good time to remember that we are one nation, under God. If we let this election continue to negatively divide us, we've lost something far greater than our guy or gal being in the White House.  One of the most disturbing elements of this election is the candidates declaring their contempt for the voters that are for the opposition. That's not cool. If, as the experts are predicting, this election is close, then theoretically half of the voting population will be on the "other side." That's when we realize that we are still American citizens and the President has the responsibility to work with all of us, not just the ones that voted for him or her.


In my next (and possibly last) installment of "November Musings," I will share my personal philosophy of how we should treat the President--any President. I've used this "code" for several administrations and it has served me well.

Until next time, remember that on November 9, Jesus is still King of kings and Lord of lords!

#

NOVEMBER MUSINGS #3: WRESTLING MEMORIES

Why do I seem to have such a problem with this election? I think it has to do with professional wrestling.

I better explain.

When I was a lad, pro wrestling was a staple of our Saturday afternoons. Wrestlers would travel to a city, put on their show, and then head off to the next one. In our area, the local channel had a show called "Championship Wrestling," which featured these contests. The wrestlers would be interviewed between matches and promote their next battle to be held at the fairgrounds or gymnasium. Championship Wrestling was "must see TV" for our family over the weekends.

I kind of suspected the made-up nature of the contests (could a human body really get pummeled into near unconsciousness, then get up a minute later and fight some more?), but I didn't really care. As a young comic-book geek, these were real life superheroes battling it out. There were the good guys (faces) and bad guys (heels). The faces would be good sportsmen, fighting hard, but following the rules. The heels, naturally, cheated and were arrogant, mean, and nasty.

A typical scenario was during a tag team match. The good guys being pummelled by the bad guy as he desperately reaches out his arm to tag his partner, who was also reaching out. Just inches away from deliverance, but they can't make contact. But then something happens and the face outside the ring unintentionally commits a minor infraction (it has to be minor, because,as a good guy, he follows the rules). The ref rushes over to him, turning his back to the wrestlers in the ring, and begins lecturing the guy about the rules. Meanwhile, the other heel enters the ring and joins his partner in beating the tar out of the good guy. The face outside the ring desperately tries to explain to the ref what's happening, the crowd is yelling and screaming for the ref to stop the carnage, the announcers are shouting into their microphones atop the card table set up at the side, while the ref continues to chew out the good guy outside the ring.

Oh the humanity!

Face vs. face matches were good to watch. Though no less choreographed, they tended to focus more on technique then annihilation. And after the match, the good guys would shake hands with each other. You could feel the mutual respect oozing out of them as they spoke to the interviewer afterward. Face vs. heel matches, on the other hand, usually ended with the good guy offering a handshake to the bad guy, only to have the bad guy respond with a sucker punch or kick in the stomach.

(Tim, what does this have to do with the election?) Stay with me....

As professional wrestling got bigger and more popular, I noticed things changing. In today's matches, I'm just as likely to see the good guys double team a bad guy as the other way around. There's still the arm straining moment of the tag, but if they can't make contact, and if they can get away with it, the face is more than willing to infract a rule or two to help his partner. Faces are just as rude and arrogant as their heel counterparts, and if I had children as young as I was "in the day," I would be embarrassed to hear the language they use in the pre- and post- match interviews.

Yes, there are still faces and heels, good guys and bad guys. But since their is no real distinction in technique or persona, the only way we know who's who is, well...marketing. Since the face cheats, uses foul language, and does not show respect to his opponents, all that's left is to promote him as a face (which the big pro wrestling organizations do quite well). And in the world of professional wrestling, even that can change, with good guys becoming bad guys and vice verse.

Which brings me to my election point: I honestly cannot tell the face from the heel. Yes, I know that issues are important and there is much at stake, so we should ignore the personality of each candidate and focus on what is truly important. After all, if we elect him or her, then untold disaster will befall us, so isn't it worth putting up with less than graceful conduct in order to ensure a victory?

When I was in my teen years, I gleaned a piece of wisdom from (believe it or not) a comic book. I don't remember the title or issue number, but I remember the dialogue. The young sidekick seemed to support a move against the villain that would have helped the cause, but was rather underhanded. He reasoned, "But if it stops the bad guy, isn't it worth it?" The hero replies, "I believe it's important to win. But we still need to be the good guys when we do it."

Marketing and political campaigns do not persuade me. Promises don't sway me. Lofty vows of grand change if elected or ominous warnings if the other person is elected don't carry any weight with me. As long as the candidates do the same stuff in the same way, I have a problem.

I guess what I'm looking for is a face.


#

NOVEMBER MUSINGS #2: THAT TAPE

In this valiant attempt to bring clarity to the November presidential election, I struggle with a lot of things. I've already shared in a previous post about my overall struggle regarding the real potential to tick everyone off. But the other challenge is that there are so many elements on which to shine a light, which one do I tackle first? Let's go to the tape. . . .

The tape, of course, is the revelation that Donald Trump bragged to (then) entertainment reporter Billy Bush about his ability to "have his way" with women (yes, I'm being diplomatic about something that at best was a rude, crude description and, at worst, an admission of possible assault). The exchange was caught on tape and recently released. Mr. Trump has characterized it as "locker room talk" and apologized. Many GOP lawmakers, evangelical leaders, and a host of others have repudiated the candidate. And, of course, in late breaking news, a few women have said that Mr. Trump's statements were not words only, but actions. To be fair, their accusations have not been substantiated, and Mr. Trump denies them, but they are certainly a cause of concern.

Three trains of thought come to mind:

We can't easily dismiss the claims against Donald Trump
So why did this 11 year old tape take so long to surface and why did these women wait until now to reveal Mr. Trump's treatment of them? First of all, regarding the women, it is not uncommon for a victim to remain silent. Some of it is born out of fear, some of it is embarrassment, some of it is a certain amount of self-doubt (did I somehow encourage this? was it my fault?). I would hope we've come far enough of our understanding sexual assault that we not dismiss these accusers out of hand. And I have to admit (with my limited knowledge), nothing the women have said so far sounds in-credible. It all sounds very consistent with Donald Trump's public personality and, yes, with his "locker room talk."

Which leads us back to the tape. What was on the tape was disgusting. Deplorable. Degrading. We can dismiss it as "locker room talk," but let's face it: the behavior it describes and even the language that is used is unacceptable.  But some of my conservative, Christian friends have said, "it's not that big a deal. Why are we condemning him for something he did  eleven years ago? He has apologized, so we should forgive him and move on."

Yes, I agree whole heartily we should forgive Donald Trump. But "moving on" might be a little more complicated. I can forgive the drug addict who steals my electronics to feed his habit. But I won't leave him unsupervised in my house. I will look for signs of continued drug use. I will love him and encourage him and rejoice in his victories. But unconditional forgiveness is not blindness. Or naivety. Yes, I forgive Donald Trump. But it took him eleven years to "confess" his sin (and only because the tape surfaced) and there have been no indications that he is a different man than before. Maybe he is. But we only have his public personality to evaluate and they suggest (not prove) he may have the same attitudes toward women as he had eleven years ago. Moving on is not so simple.

This could be a set up
But let's take a look at the other side of the coin. Aside from his "locker room" tape, there is no solid evidence to substantiate the claims of Mr. Trump's accusers. And while I prefer to give victims the benefit of the doubt, yes, some women do lie. We cannot blindly reject the idea that this could very well be a set up. NBC has had the "locker room" tape for eleven years, but during the entire run of the hit series The Apprentice, it never saw the proverbial light of day. While there are certainly legitimate reasons why the alleged victims may not have spoken out for eleven years, the fact is, they are only speaking out now, during a critical election season. The timing is more than convenient. Saturday Night Live brilliantly nailed this in a sketch portraying the Clinton campaign celebrating, with Hillary Clinton unable to contain her delight over this damaging revelation.  So there exists at least the possibility that these allegations are unfounded. Until more substantial proof surfaces, the question will remain unanswered.

What all this says about media and society
However, another troubling part of this whole thing  is the sudden focus on morality in our society.  Hey, I'm a stuck-in-the-mud, old fashioned values, Bible-believing Christian, but I get a little distressed when I hear representatives of the liberal left pontificate about the terribleness of Donald Trump's tape. Whenever Christians speak out against sexual situations or obscenity on television or movies, they are widely condemned as prudes, Puritans, or Pollyannas who want to destroy our civilization by imposing their narrow view of what is right or wrong in society. Meanwhile, we are treated to all types of  depictions of immorality, a great deal of which involves the degradation of women. It seems more than a little, I don't know, uhhh--hypocritical?

And then there are the athletes and celebrities who make fun of Donald Trump by saying that he's probably never been in a locker room, because men don't really talk that way in locker rooms. I beg to differ. The expression "locker room talk" existed before Donald Trump's apology and has always meant the kind of crude, bragging conversations that usually center on women. In some cases, it's little more than tall tales, but regardless, some men really do talk that way.  Let's tone down the feigned shock. If every newscaster or celebrity had tapes of their off-camera words and deeds, it would be quite a revelation to a lot of admirers.

And yes, NBC fired Billy Bush for his role in the "locker room" tape, but I noticed it did not prevent them from putting him on the Today Show in the first place. Only when they were stuck between exposing the "terrible immorality" of Donald Trump and showing their own media personality involved in the same thing did they take action. What else could they do?

Suddenly, prominent people who have never regarded the Bible as anything special are pulling out quotes to inform us all what "good Christians" should think about all this. While I'm glad to see anyone reading the Bible for guidance, I fear that many of these folks don't really give a flying care about what the Bible says; rather, their main goal is to maybe point out what they perceive as hypocrisy among Trump supporters. Where is the tolerance? Where is the very Biblical and Christian virtue of forgiveness? And that is an ongoing irritation, not only in this campaign, but in society overall: people who don't believe the Bible trying to convince the faithful about what the Bible says. Just something to think about.

Please do not take my comments as a rejection or endorsement of either candidate. Like many Americans, I'm struggling with this election. These posts represent what one of my teachers called, "thinking through my keyboard." I welcome your comments, but name calling, foul language, or general mean-spiritedness will not be allowed. Good points made logically and consistently (with maybe a dash of humor) goes a long way, even if you disagree.

And remember: no matter what happens in November, Jesus is still King of Kings and Lord of Lords!

#

NOVEMBER MUSINGS #1: WHY AM I CONFUSED?

I did not want to chime in to the rumblings of the 2016 Presidential race.  For one thing, I have some very well defined convictions about politics and Presidents in general that would most certainly irk people on both sides of the political spectrum. For another thing, this contest in particular is so explosive that I feel like anything I say will provoke the ire of the devoted of both parties. And finally, I make it personal mission to avoid irritating people, even if I profoundly disagree with them. I would prefer to engage in intelligent dialogue with someone who disagrees with me and depart as friends than have someone call me names, then stomp off.

So there you have it: irksomeness, ire, and irritation. You've been warned. I think this will take a few posts, since I don't want to overwhelm you with everything at once.  And now is probably a good time to remind you that the opinions are mine alone and do not always reflect the views of my church, its leadership, its staff, my friends, family, the dog, my daughter's cats (who live with us and about whom I am tempted to fire off a blog or two), or any political party. I'd also like to remind you that your comments are welcome, but rudeness, crudeness, foul language, name calling, etc. might get you deleted. My blog, my rules.

And now that we have the disclaimers out of the way. . .

I've been asked how a "good Christian" could possibly support Donald Trump. The question has been asked by liberals, conservatives, non-Christians, and atheists. It's a frequent subject on social media, with some writers going so far as to indict the whole of evangelicalism and even Christianity as a whole. The outrage over the so-called "religious right's" backing of Mr. Trump was happening long before the revelation this week of a crude recording, but it certainly intensified with the tape. "How can you, a 'good Christian,' possibly vote for this man?" the pundits cried.

In an upcoming blog, I will address the recording and what it says about our society, but for now, let me establish that I have not thrown my support to Mr. Trump. People ask me who I'm voting for and I just shrug and say, "I honestly don't know." I think framing the debate in terms of what a "good Christian" should do or think is misleading. Saying someone should reject Donald Trump because a "good Christian" would reject him carries about as much weight as saying a "good Christian" should reject Hillary Clinton. I've heard both. And, to be blunt, it's just so much noise.

Donald Trump speaks to many issues with which I agree. Secretary Clinton speaks to many issues with which I disagree. Oh that the choice would be that simple. Mr. Trump verbally expresses his support for my faith, while Mrs. Clinton has verbally denigrated the things in which I believe. I wish the decision rested solely between the candidate who says, "I'm for you, Bible-believing Christian," and the candidate who says, "I'm against you." Simple. Easy peasy.

Except, from what I've observed, Mr. Trump is the kind of person my dad warned me about. My dad and I did not see eye to eye on Christianity and he was pretty sure that this young teenager was turning into a wild-eyed fanatic. And he would warn me about how I'd be walking in a strange area and somebody would come up to me and start talking about the Bible or Jesus and, like a man in a trance, I would follow him, whereupon I would be robbed, beaten up, or worse. My dad's opinion of my naivety notwithstanding, I got the point. People will say or do almost anything to ingratiate themselves. I've seen candidates for local offices suddenly become active church members, only to vanish after the election. I've been invited to pray at secular gatherings, just because the host wanted "the Big Guy upstairs" to smile down on the proceedings (which often involved alcohol).

The tipping point to me was the speech at Liberty University, when Mr. Trump referred to "Two Corinthians." Yeah, it's a minor point. And yes, I've heard some preachers use that terminology. It's not like the original Greek designates the correct usage of the name of a book. It's not really that big a deal. Except, well, it was a large, evangelical student body. Most Bible-believing Christians would use the designation, "Second Corinthians." Unless they were not that familiar with the Book they were quoting or the audience to whom they were speaking. At that moment, I felt like Mr. Trump had asked someone on his staff to find a Bible verse he could use for his speech. But contrary to my dad's assessment of my ability to spot a con artist, I felt like he was trying to win me over. It didn't work. And adding that to the rest that was said and the rest that would be said, I have to say I cannot whole-heartedly support Donald Trump.

But that doesn't mean I'm voting for Hillary Clinton either. I don't have time to list everything, but her social/political stands alone often run contrary to my own beliefs. Nor is she attempting to spin those positions to assuage my concerns. With Mrs. Clinton, I feel as though I am a non-entity, a throw back to the dark ages. Bible-believing Christians will be tolerated, unless they get in the way. I have a problem throwing my hat in the ring with someone who, to put it simply, is against most of my convictions.

So what's a "good Christian" supposed to do? I don't know if "good Christian" always applies to me, or even if it should apply to me at all. While I am not ambivalent about the Bible and the Christian faith. I'm not as certain on the instersection of faith and politics. Yeah, if they violate the Scripture, it's easy, but if both go against it, then what? Hopefully, I'll be addressing some of these questions in future posts.

And one final word: no matter what happens in November, Jesus is still King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

#

HISTORIC BUILDINGS, HISTORIC MINISTRIES, AND RIVER ROCK

(the following post was written late at night and is more personal than most. Fair warning.)

Today was a big day for our church. A historic section of the church building was torn down in spectacular fashion by some heavy equipment. More on this later. . .

One of the ministries to children at our church is "Bible Story Time." This is based on the "release time" state law that allows elementary children (with parental permission) to be dismissed from class in order to participate in "religious instruction." In our case, a group of walkers goes over to the elementary school up the street, collects nearly 100 children, and escorts them to the church,where they sing and hear a Bible lesson. Then they are walked back to school.

We've been doing this for 60 plus years!

Today at Bible Story Time, our story teller did Joshua 4. If you are familiar with the Bible, chapter 3 is where Joshua, the new, dynamic leader of the next generation of Israelites, leads the people across the Jordan River, into the Promised Land.  It had to have been a time of mixed emotions. The previous generation, along with their leader Moses, was dead. With anticipation and excitement and courage and maybe a little apprehension and fear, the children of Israel were ready to take the land. Joshua sticks his big toe in the river, the river miraculously stops flowing, and the people march across while the priests hold the Ark of the Covenant in the middle. And then things get interesting. . .
As chapter 4 begins and before the priests can move, Joshua says, "One more thing: Each tribe needs to go back and get a river rock." So while the priests are standing there, holding this ark (I can imagine what's going on in their minds!), a representative from each tribe goes back to the middle of the dried up Jordan, picks a big rock, and carries it back to shore. They take these rocks and build an memorial to the Lord, so that succeeding generations will be taught how God helped the Israelites get across the river).

The river rocks would serve as a reminder to the future generations about God's faithfulness to the previous ones. 

Now about our building demo. . .

It only took two hours for the old office wing to be knocked down. The original church building was built in 1906 and some time in the next 35 years, the office wing was added (we're still researching the date). We will be building a new sanctuary in the coming months (a project called ARISE. . . and how God brought all this about is a story for another time!), which meant the old office wing had to be come down. It's exciting, but for some, it's also sobering and sad and bittersweet. The previous generations had built and faithfully served in this section of the building. A lot of memories rose to the surface, even as sections of roof, timber, and rock crashed to the ground. Two hours and this historic wing lay in a heap of rubble. The rest of the day was spent hauling the debris away.

And then, things get interesting again. . .

With the empty basement staring up like a drained swimming pool, our pastor noticed that he could see portions of the old foundation for the church building. And what was the main material in that foundation?

River rocks!

I speak to my dear friends and church family at EPCBC, but also to anyone who might be struggling with crossing the Jordan, fearing the previous generations might be left behind:  Don't forget the river rocks!  The river rocks aren't there to stop the new generation from moving ahead, but to provide a base upon which to march forward. We honor those who have gone before and we will look at the river rocks with fond memories of God's faithfulness to us and to our local church. And we will go forward. Just like the new generation of God's children. Just like Bible Story Time for over half a century. And just like EPCBC.

.

OF EASTER AND EGGS

He is risen!

He is risen indeed!

Yes, it's Easter time, a glorious season to remember and celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ. What a great thought: Jesus, Who is God the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, died to pay the price for your sins and mine, then three days later, He rose again, so that by trusting Him as Lord and Savior, we can have eternal life and a day to day relationship with Him.  What's not to celebrate?

Not so fast, there, Skippy!

About this time every year, I start getting emails, seeing Facebook posts, and reading blog entries that try to dump cold water over my Easter enthusiasm. I'm not referring to skeptics or cultists who either try to deny the literal, bodily resurrection of Christ or who try to show that historic Christianity has it all wrong, but they alone have the truth. No, I'm talking about those self-professed paganism professors who not only know the detailed sinister origins of Easter, but can show you the insidiously evil function of every symbol traditionally associated with the holiday (and if they seem eerily familiar, it's because they also come out in December to let the air out of Christmas).

These folks, to various degrees, feel it is their duty to point out that eggs and rabbits were used in ancient fertility cults and therefore, should not be used by Christians. Even the holiday known as "Easter" is named after Ishtar (or variations thereof) and has nothing to do with Jesus, so churches that celebrate Easter are, in essence, denying the faith.

I don't have the time or patience in this blog to specifically address the specific arguments against Easter eggs or anything else connected with it. I just want to leave a couple of thoughts (with the usual stipulations that the views expressed here are mine alone):

1. How is the hard-boiled egg that sat in my fridge the night before suddenly transformed into an instrument of paganism when I put some food-coloring on it? Doesn't that seem like an inordinate amount of power to give to something that will eventually be chopped up and put in a salad?  Using an egg does not mean I'm engaging in pagan rituals any more than saying, "It's Thursday" means I'm revering Thor, the god of thunder for whom the day is named (sorry Chris Hemsworth fans).

2. I know this stuff. I know about the eggs, Ishtar, bunnies, and the spring rituals. I'd venture a guess that most educated Christians have heard about all this. But when I get to the end of a rich, full Sunday of remembering and rejoicing in the resurrection of Christ and celebrating the life He gives, I'm not thinking about what ancient pagans did. It's not even on my radar. And while the unbeliever may not be contemplating the truth of Scripture while engaging in egg hunts or gathering with family for dinner, he is likely not thinking of paganism either.

I'm not trying to argue for or against Easter celebrations by Christians. . .or anyone else. I commemorate Jesus' triumph over death because He saved me and I love Him.  You can argue all you want about whether or not the organized Church should have "Christianized" a pagan festival, but the fact that, for millions of believers, Easter means the resurrection of Christ, I'd say the process was successful.

Agree or disagree, I welcome your comments, but be nice. If you want to "egg" me on, I might just delete your comment and that's no yolk!

.