First Questions

My friend Wendy is working on some guest posts for this site.
Something I love about Wendy is that she is not afraid

to ask the hard questions,
and she's also not afraid to send me her really rough draf
in the middle of the night
that is more consumed with questions than answers.
There are too many people in the world who claim to have blind faith.
Blind faith is not what it's cracked up to be.
In case you haven't noticed
Jesus does a lot of healing in the pages of Scripture,
and that healing often comes in the form of giving sigh
to those who cannot see.
If we have questions, we should ask them.
If we know people who have questions, we should allow them to ask.
We can't learn anything unless we wonder...
And so, here's a list to start
courtesy of my dear, sweet friend who isn't afraid to put it out there...

*****

Has God made us and left us?  Has God decided we are just messing things up so badly even he can't help us?  Seriously? Is this about free will?  Do you want to live in a world where a deity forces you to worship him?  What would be the point, and would it be genuine?

Sometimes when you pray, doesn't it seem like God is ignoring you?  Waiting for you to take that first step?  Waiting for you to take that leap of faith? 

Why does God let bad things happen?  Why does a two year old get cancer?  Is that free will?  How did the child choose this?  If nothing is beyond God, did he choose this?  Or does he not care?  And when the mother prays and cries with all her heart and her child still dies, is God there?

Does it go back to sin?  Have we been separated from God from the first sin? When sin has nothing to do with something, what is going on?  Can God intervene?  Why doesn't God intervene?  Why does God intervene sometimes?  Are some people's prayers more worthy?  Is it random?

Does it all boil down to a chain reaction?  What if someone else exercises free will that takes mine away?  Are our free wills intertwined?

Are you frustrated?  Furious?  Confused?

Having faith is not knowing the answer.  Not being okay with it.  Searching.  Seeking knowledge.  Understanding you may never have the answers.  But ... it's okay to ask the questions.  And ... it's okay to be confused and angry.  It's OK.

You Don't Know Me

So, I saved this material, because I had planned to blog this story while I was actually at the happiest place on Earth.  As it turned out, I didn't blog at all, while I was there, which is completely outside of my normal life patterns, but whatever.  I am referring to it as a four day sabbatical...

I love to travel.  When I use the word, "travel," I'm talking about the continental United States, because I don't have a passport... yet.  Someday I am going to expand my love of travel to encompass the world.  For years, our family joked about my love language being vacations.  Then we stopped joking, because we realized it wasn't funny.  It was true.  Want to show me that you love me?  Take me on a vacation.  Or... you know... even send me on a vacation.  Either way will do.

I am mostly not a sit at the beach and sip lemonade kind of vacationer, although I did spend a day at the ocean, alone, last fall, and this helped me to appreciate people who vacation like that a little bit more.  Minus the part when I was sitting on a rock formation as the tide came in... which resulted in me no longer sitting on the rock formation...  I would do this again.  Generally speaking, though, I like my trips to be action packed.  This lends itself well to three different types of planning.  I love vacations that land us in a city that we don't know well and allow us to explore museums, zoos, sports stadiums, restaurants, historical sites, and amusement parks.  To date, my favorite vacation like this was St. Louis in 2010.  I also love road trips.  They are fantastic whether planned or spontaneous.  Road trips allow you to cover a ton of ground, seeing and learning new things.  I even made a person on a road trip, once, so that was a huge added bonus.  And then, or course, there's Disney.  I like to binge vacation at Disney.  Actually, I would like to live at Disney... in my flip flops... covered in glitter... at the Kingdom... or Epcot, because at least I can pretend I have a passport when I'm there...

That's sort of a long intro to make it clear that vacationing is a big deal to me, and I have my favorite places, but I'm pretty diverse.  I will probably never say no to vacationing... anywhere...

The other day, I was talking about Disney.  Of course, I was having a great time doing the kinds of things that most people don't do... answering questions... giving tips... sharing trivia... taking over the vacation planning of other families...  People were chatting and laughing and then a woman got all up in my face and explained to me that her children chose to go to the ocean, even when Disney was an option.  This is, of course, completely acceptable (the going to the ocean, not the getting in my face).  Remember, I like to vacation everywhere.  However, the way she snapped at me... without allowing me to speak... led me to believe that she thought her family was somehow better than mine for consistently having a holier vacation preference.  Really, I had no idea!

Some of you may recall that I have a moderate fear of water, because I can't swim.  This fear is not so pervasive that it inhibits me from choosing the ocean... or a waterpark... or accommodations with a hot tub... but it is real.  When I vacation with my family, near water, I spend the vast majority of the minutes we are there counting heads and locating lifeguard stands.  As this stranger continued to forcefully "suggest" that we expand our horizons and visit a place where you can walk for miles out into the ocean with your kids; I was starting to feel a little bit sick.  Miles into the ocean?  Um... what about when the tide comes in?  See: that rock I was sitting on just disappeared...

Eventually she left.  It occurred to me that I had gone silent, because even in my horror over these moments during which I was berated for my lousy vacationing (and parenting) choices, it didn't really seem like one of those battles worth fighting.  I mean, she can't make me walk out into the middle of the ocean with my five children who also range from non-swimmer to maybe I could dog paddle long enough to save myself in a kiddie pool...  I had to take a few minutes to gather my thoughts.  I considered the fact that she doesn't know me.  Then I went on with my day.

But I kept thinking...

This must be what it's like when, as Christians, we get up in the faces of people we don't know and demean their regular rhythms of life, because we think what we have is better.  They are blindsided!  May I reiterate that I had no idea that Disney World was an evil childhood vacation choice?

I think it is extremely important for us to take a step back to consider into whose lives we have the right to speak truth.  I'm just going to admit, right now, that sometimes I mess this up.  There have been times when I have thought that someone was inviting me into his or her life as a credible voice to encourage discipleship, when that actually was not the case.  With that in mind, I don't expect us to be perfect.  But I think there are some reasonable guidelines we might follow. 

For example...  It is almost always inadvisable to forcefully explain to a complete stranger why you are right and they are wrong.  I feel as if this should be fairly obvious, but apparently it is not.  There are things that are more subtle, too, though.  Perhaps the principle that guides me, most, is that we should be listening.  I have found that the vast majority of people who want my advice or opinion will ask for it. 

Sometimes this happens in the form of a blunt question.  "L, can you tell me what you think about how my neighbor's second cousin is treating his goldfish?"  "L, just hypothetically speaking, what would you do if your teenager came home with a tattoo?"  "L, how do we get free dining at Disney?"  "L, why do you think it's OK to interpret Paul's words about women being silent in the church as, 'women don't have to be silent in the church'?"  These are easy.

Sometimes, though, we have to read between the lines a little bit, and we are the ones who have to do the asking of ourselves.  "Self, did this person really give you permission to speak into her life?"  "Self, if you say that, is it going to create more peace or more division?"  "Self, if you offer that opinion, right now, will you have another opportunity, or will these words sever relationship?"  "Self, is it urgent?  Is it necessary?  Does it matter?  Is he listening?"

It's true that there are some things about which we should never be quiet, but I would be willing to bet there are fewer things that fall into this category than we might think.  I would love to hear from you.  Are there deal breakers that make it appropriate to confront others, regardless of the relationship you have with them?  When is conflict OK?  What are the essentials?

L.

Scripture - Is It True?

Below I have pasted part of Debby's comment from my June 4th post, "Let's Talk About Article of Faith #4":

"Until I hit about 37 years old I never really thought about whether God’s word was literally true or not. No one ever really talks about this in church circles, do they? So, I have had a child’s faith in believing all scripture was literally factual, which has always been very mind blowing; but I chalked it up to, 'With God anything is possible.'  So, I understand that the Bible is inspired by God and written by men and each person has their own style of writing; but how does one determine what is factual and what is for learning purposes? For example, is Jonah just a big fish tale or is it literally true?"

These are important questions.  Perhaps the one that stood out to me, most prominently, was, "No one ever really talks about this in church circles, do they?"  This stood out to me, first, because having been blessed to spend so much time in the world of academia, I am always talking about this!  Sometimes I forget that not everyone (or maybe not anyone) is having these kinds of conversations.  But second, it caused me to consider the reactions I have had from others when I begin to talk like this in non-academic circles.  No wonder people sometimes react so vehemently.  This is new material to them.  This requires change.  How did I miss that?

Before I even begin to dive in and answer some of the other questions, I think we have to agree to make a distinction between "literal" and "true", because (as I mentioned in the earlier post) these words are not synonymous.  I think Debby also added another layer of depth to this discussion by using the word "factual".  Interestingly enough, I would also not accept "factual" as a synonym for "literal" or "true".

Let me reiterate, I believe that all Scripture is true.  But I understand that you're asking, "What does that mean?"  Let me also make it clear that it's OK if this post is frustrating to you, and let me share a brief story about myself that might make you feel better about that...

I recently took an Old Testament Interpretation class.  As much as I love school... and theology... and philosophy... Can I admit to you that Bible classes scare me to death?  I'm not sure exactly why, but I think it has something to do with this vague notion in my head that if I mess up a philosophical principle the world will go on, but if I mess up Scripture it could be devastating to... well... someone...  At any rate, I am not especially conservative when it comes to Biblical Interpretation, and sometimes I probably even scare the people in my cohort a little bit, so I am sure it was super funny to them when we started discussing the patriarchs, and whether or not they were literal people who actually walked the earth and lived these particular stories, and apparently it was more of a deal breaker for me than I realized, because I was sitting in a synchronous chat and just about freaking out over the notion that the patriarchs might not be "real".  And, of course, I was also trying to defend myself, "I'm not a fundamentalist, I'm not a literalist, really, I'm kind of liberal, even..."  Cue cohort members trying desperately not to laugh in my face, because they know all of these things about me, but something about needing Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to be very real raised some enormous red flags for me.  I say all of this, really, to say that it's OK if something here raises some red flags.  We can work through this. 

The question, "How does one determine what is factual and what is for learning purposes?" is valid.  I could go a lot of different ways with this.  There are several methods of biblical interpretation that could be employed here.  But before I give you a list of things to do in order to discern factual information from Scripture, I'd like to say that the more important issue is that Scripture is all for orthodoxy (right beliefs, perhaps "learning purposes")... and orthopraxy (right conduct)... and orthopathy (right heart).  At its core, Scripture should be transformative.

Are facts transformative?  Maybe some of them.  As an example, I think we have to accept the resurrection as fact.  Of course, the resurrection narrative is written in the gospels, two (maybe three) of which are widely accepted as firsthand accounts of the life of Christ.  I really can't find a compelling reason to question the historical authenticity of this event, which, let's face it, is central to our understanding of salvation. 

With that said, I think that a "plain reading" of Scripture is often the best place to start.  As we read Scripture, we should allow the Holy Spirit to work in and through us in such a way that we begin to think theologically, we begin to look for various meanings in the text, we allow Scripture to speak to us.  And, sometimes, I think we find that what is written is, simply, what is written.

However, it always serves us well to dig deep.  Exploring various translations of Scripture can be helpful to determining what particular passages mean.  If you are fluent in biblical languages, which I am not, it is certainly worthwhile to read the earliest possible translations.  Even if you are not fluent in biblical languages, a good lexicon can help to guide you through word studies and the understanding of specific terms.  It's worthwhile to grasp what was actually written in light of the polished versions we most commonly possess today.

Context certainly matters, as well.  A good question to ask might be, "Why was this originally written?"  Whether or not a portion of Scripture contains historical facts, it was certainly written at some historical time, so there are naturally going to be significant truths found in these words that were important enough to write down and pass on during an age when it wasn't nearly so easy to do so as it is now. 

You might ask, "Who wrote this?"  Often people become very distressed over things that are seemingly contradictory in Scripture, but we need to remember that differing narratives can often be accounted for by differing perspectives.  You and I could experience the same event, and our stories will be different based on all kinds of things.  Does this make one account true and the other false?  Absolutely not! 

This bleeds over into the interpretation process, itself.  It's a regular occurrence for multiple people to glean multiple meanings from the same passage of Scripture.  In fact, the same person might come away with something different when reading the same passage at various times.  To borrow from Richard Kearney, in his book, The God Who May Be, he talks about the potential for an unlimited number of interpretations of Scripture.  Are some interpretations more true than others?  Undoubtedly.  But that does not negate the truth of Scripture, itself.

To specifically answer the question about facts, I don't think it's really all that difficult to do some research that leads to the understanding that there are certainly people, events, and dates within Scripture that line up with what we might find in a history textbook.  A task such as this one is undoubtedly easier to undertake in regard to biblical literature that is historical in nature to begin with.  Many of the biblical texts are not.  What about poetry, metaphors, and parables?  Can't truth be found even in fiction?  These are difficult questions, because the natural tendency is to push back against this, but I might suggest that we stop doing that!

An example from my life that is quickly becoming a favorite is a conversation that my daughter, Grace, and I had on a long car ride a few months ago.  We were talking about how important (or not) it is for every word of Scripture to be literal, and I asked her, "Grace, is God a rock?" (see Psalm 18:2).  And then, we laughed and laughed.  Even the most literal of interpreters I have met don't actually hold to a completely literal view of Scripture.  I think this is evidenced by the fact that I know absolutely no one who has cut off a hand or gouged out an eye (see Matthew 5:29-30).  Perhaps we should start asking, "What is the best interpretation," because I'm pretty sure none of us are really literalists.

L.

What If Marriage Was A Sacrament?

Oh, wait...  How ironic is that?

Now, let me be clear, so as not to cause any confusion.  In the Church of the Nazarene, as an official position, we recognize two sacraments, baptism and the Eucharist.  To be a Nazarene, you do not have to recognize marriage as a sacrament, but I'd like to make a case for why we should.

Let's take a look at Matthew 19:4-6.  These are the words of Jesus when asked specifically about divorce, and I don't want to take them out of context, but I think there are some relatively important points about marriage, in general, that can be discerned from these words:

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’?  So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate” (NIV).

I think, in our current culture, that a lot of people get really wrapped up in what people are doing in this passage, and, perhaps a lot of people get wrapped up in what people are doing something in this passage.  These are important details to work through, but I'm not sure they are nearly as important as what God is doing here, particularly if we actually believe that God does something when we practice the sacraments.

In marriage, God joins two people and makes them one.  And, come on, this is not even figurative language here, friends.  I'm pretty sure if you're old enough to be reading my blog, you know how this works.  Jesus uses the word  flesh, or the Greek, sarka, in this passage.  It is the same word used for flesh in John 6 when Jesus instructs the disciples that they must eat his flesh and drink his blood, which, sounds somewhat like a foreshadowing of the first Eucharist, if you ask me.  It's the same word used for various negative references to living according to the flesh, living according to human nature or living according to what the body wants.  There are a lot of beautiful literary references in Scripture that walk us through metaphors and hyperbole and narrative, but any way I look at this one, it means flesh.  I can't seem to get around it.  With the consummation of marriage, God literally fuses the flesh of two people together.

But here's where it gets a little bit dicey.  This is not temporary!  Scripture doesn't say, "So they are no longer two, but one flesh, and then a little while later they're two again, and it's kind of a cycle that you just have to get used to."  No, Scripture says that once these two people become one flesh, joined by God, no one is supposed to mess with that.  There is no going back.  This is a permanent deal.

But, oh my goodness, have we ever messed it up!

Homosexuality is a hot button issue right now, and in a comment from my May 28th post entitled, "With Much Wisdom," Bryan said, "The Church of Jesus Christ has shunned and condemned the gay community for far too long. All sexual sin needs to be addressed, not just homosexuality. How many divorces are happening in the church because of a variety of sexual sins by those sitting in the pews every week?"  (Bryan also asked some more excellent, specific questions, but in order to give them all ample thought and time I am breaking it down a little bit.) 

Wow.  This is a comment that needs to be addressed.  Let me share something personal, because people like stories, right?

My family is pretty special.  I used to be more legalistically leaning, though, and my definition of special has changed over the years.  Let me explain what I mean.  I used to think that one of the defining things that made us special was our family make-up.  Phil and I were both virgins on our wedding night.  For crying out loud, I was 17!  Is it really that hard to get to 17?  But I digress...  We have been married for almost 18 years, and we have five children.  All of our children are ours, together.  There are no step children.  There are no previous spouses.  There are no children born outside of marriage.  Neither of us has ever had sex with anyone else, ever.  Aren't we awesome?  By pretty much everyone's standards of sexual purity, we're it! 

Let's say I found myself in a room filled with a randomly selected cross section of adults.  As sexual sins were listed, people were asked to sit down if they had ever participated in these sins that are destroying the "institution of marriage" (I'm sorry, but I hate that.  Institution?  Really?).  You could run down a pretty good sized list.  Homosexual acts, premarital sex, extra marital sex.  I just shared my story!  You know I'm going to be the last one standing!          

But then, here comes Jesus, again, turning the whole thing on its head.

Matthew 5:28 "But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman (or man) lustfully has already committed adultery with her (or him) in his heart" (NIV, parenthesis mine).

Oh, crap.  I just sat down.

How perfect can we get it, friends?  Who gets to make the judgment call?  For a long time I thought it was me, but as you can see that's not the case, and I think, maybe, we've got the whole issue wrong.

Bryan also asked, "How should the Church respond to the impending ruling from the Supreme Court on gay 'marriage'?"

Marriage is a covenant relationship, but as a church we have given it to the government and connected it with civil rights.  I'm not sure marriage has anything, at all, to do with civil rights, but I am sure that we, as the church, have absolutely no business taking civil rights away from anyone.

I'm all about semantics, and so I'd like to suggest that maybe we need a new word.

If marriage is a legally binding piece of paper that says that two people have decided to love each other for as long as it is convenient, and most ideally forever, and that they can share benefits, raise their kids together, have full privacy and visitation rights in the case of illness, file taxes jointly, and have a wedding, and a reception, with a cake, then I can't really find a reason to stand vehemently in the way of anyone looking for this kind of contract.  People are looking for equal rights (which we have established in this country on a political, not religious, basis, which is not really a good topic of conversation for this particular blog, because I'm not a very good patriot).

If the church would like to reclaim marriage as a sacramental covenant, then I think we have to recognize that we will have to change our language.  Think this through, please.  When does the government ever get involved in the administration of baptism or the Eucharist?  If the church wants to adhere to Scriptural requirements for the sacramental covenant of marriage, we can do that, and no one is going to get upset over it any more than I get upset when I can't partake in the Eucharist at a local Catholic church, because I'm not a member (OK, this kind of makes me upset, but I'm not going to create a scene or anything). 

But let's still be careful...  Returning to my earlier words, who really has it all together?  Can any of us create the perfect scenario in which our own marriages are safeguarded from every potential evil?  I don't know.  Maybe those of you reading this are actually much better people than I am.  That is certainly well within the realm of possibility.  But I can't do it on my own.  I need God to do something in marriage.  I need marriage to be sacramental, and I need it to be ongoing, too.  Let's not confuse marriage with the wedding.

L.