Podcasts are down for a bit.  They’ll be back.

I find it ironic how so many folks jump on board when it comes to caring about a natural disaster (i.e. the situation in Haiti, right now), and then get so enormously distracted.  First, I see on my Twitter about how everyone has these links and blogs and ideas about ways to send money to Haiti to help out, or to do something else in order to pitch in.

Then Pat Robertson says something about God being responsible for it, and all of a sudden, Haiti and the earthquake are lost among Christians stepping up to make sure we’re not mistaken for the likes of Pat Robertson.

We Christians are so damn concerned about our image….our image… that we care more about Twitter trending topics like #PatRobertsonDoesntSpeakForMe than we are about helping out in the situation.

Do you think the countless dust-covered, bloody people in Haiti care right now about what Pat Robertson’s saying?  C’mon, this guy’s been spouting this kind of stuff for years: every time something bad happens, folks like him are gonna chime in. Have you not noticed the pattern yet?

Just laugh it at, or whatever you want to do, and then go about your way.

If you really care about all those suffering people, my dear, emerging, caring Christian, stop fussing over how you look in the moral mirror, shut up about Pat Robertson, and do something.

When folks asked Jesus about a recent disaster, his only reply was “Unless you change your way of life, you’ll all end up like that!” You’ll likewise perish.

So, his response wasn’t so compassionate as you may like it to be, either.

Consider these things.  And shut up about Pat Robertson.

Saw Avatar a few weeks ago.  A visually enjoyable movie, and a pretty on par story.  By “on par,” I mean “average.”  It’s not stellar.

I didn’t want to see the film, initially. I thought there was too much Eastern influence (I hate, hate, hate anime and manga, and all things like that, so blue people with pointy ears just don’t size up, in my book). But when I found out it was in 3D I decided to check it out.  And it was somewhat enjoyable.  The marine in charge, the old guy: I’ve liked him since “Gods and Generals” and “Gettysburg.”  So it wasn’t all bad.

Here’s my thing, though: When are we going to stop glorifying primitive stick throwing cultures just because they’re primitive stick-throwing cultures, and when are we going to stop demonizing industrial cultures just because they’re industrial cultures?  On one level, even though I did enjoy the movie, I was sick of seeing yet another movie with traditional “Industry Bad, Loincloths Good” themes.

Just because this culture worships trees and doesn’t have spaceships, they’re seen as inherently better, and more wholesome than more advanced civilizations.  Just because you wear a leather loincloth and have a bow instead of a gun does not make you inherently more “in tune” with nature. 

I read a news piece where the Vatican was saying some of the same things, especially that the movie seemed to glorify some kind of environmental neo-paganism, which I can see.  There’s a scene in the movie where they’re swaying back and forth before a big tree to try and bring some woman back to life.  Extreme example of pagan nature religions.  2 things:  1. people who really do worship trees in real life, aren’t as glamorous as they are in 3D on an alien planet, and 2. when these people worship trees in real life, nothing happens.

I read in a report that some people were even depressed and (gasp! really?!) suicidal after watching Avatar, because the images were so beautiful that folks are feeling a lack in their lives after seeing it.  I think that’s glorifying creation a little too much.  What I don’t understand is, there’s a LOT of beautiful things on this earth: I’m sure you’ve seen pretty pictures on slide shows at work of waterfalls and islands and such. 

Well, right now, we’re all way too lazy to take advantage of what we do have.  What if the folks who are depressed about this fantasy land actually did have floating mountains and tame flying birds and trees that lit up – - would they actually go out and see them? I mean, you do understand that when Blue Guy climbs to the top of the floating mountains, he was really out of breath, right? So, unless you’re marine-fit, I doubt you’d take advantage of those floating mountains…. You’d be too out of shape. 

So if you’re down about how we don’t have memory-trees and floating mountains, I suggest you go, I don’t know, see a waterfall or something.  Or you can just trash our planet on a forum somewhere and finish your Cheetos and lament that we’re not blue-skinned, 8 foot tall savages.

But yeah, those themes are questionable.

Here’s what I would’ve liked to have seen:  some kind of redemption of the industrial folks.  The human protagonist getting his own legs back and living as a full, whole, human being.  Some kind of spirituality beyond oneness-trees.

My wife and I are going through the Bible together, starting at the beginning.  As we’re doing this, I thought it would be interesting to post any questions or reflections here.  I started doing this a while back, but here I’ll be including both mine and my wife’s reflections. 

We don’t hold back: if we find something striking, beautiful, ugly, senseless, etc.  no matter what, we let ourselves reflect and ask questions.

Sunday we read the first 11 chapters of Genesis together.

Right off the bat, we felt like the tone of the Creation stories vary from the initial 7-day creation to the more specific creation of mankind and the placing of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden.  I do know that most folks maintain today that these are two separate Creation myths, and you can clearly see the distinction. 

–

Is the serpent really a talking snake? Did the original authors and tellers of the story of Eden see it completely as metaphor?  I don’t think so, because part of the curse after the eating of the fruit is that the snake will crawl around on its belly.  Now I think we can glean some metaphorical images out of the whole scenario, but I think that, at its original conception, the story treated the snake as a real, live, talking snake.

–

We were struck at the imagery of God regretting he had made mankind and deciding to flood the earth and kill every living creature.  First off, we’re so flooded today (no pun intended) with images of God’s temporal omnipotence that we cannot see any sensible way where he would regret something.  Now we can say that this is just a human view imposed on God for our own understanding. But again, like the deal with the snake, I think at the time, God’s omnipotence may have been less of a concept than it is today: I think the people of that time really thought God got mad and regretted creating mankind.

Is this possible? Can God really regret something? I think that if God truly, truly regrets, and feels things like regret and remorse in the way that we do, then it opens up new doors onto the nature of who God is. But, being that we Christians usually hold that God knows and even ordains the future, such a God couldn’t really be taken by surprise in order to experience regret, could He?

I do think there may have been a flood in the geographical area of the Bible at that time.  It’s possible.  It’s even possible that there was an extremely large, perhaps, earth-covering flood.  I really don’t know.

But I what I surmise happened is, there was a disastrous flood, that stamped itself into the minds of the people at that time, and various stories cropped up, the story of Noah being one of them.  And then folks started trying to figure out why the flood happened.  And they came up with: God was angry about something.

Happens often enough.

That’s my take on the Noah Story right now.

The same kind of retro-active story telling (creating stories to talk about events that have happened) is also present, I think, in the story of Noah’s sons and their father’s nakedness.

I don’t think any kind of nakedness today can amount to cursing your child and all of his descendants, no matter what he walked in, and walked out, on.

Instead, I think that at the time of the story, the Canaanites, or Caananites, however you spell it, were viewed by the Hebrews as low-lifes.  So they create this story about how and why these people are so worthless.

Another Retro-Story.

Alright.  I believe I can see the Tower of Babel in the distance.

Until next time.

First off, I think Deepak Chopra gives me my Wendy’s breakfast order every morning. 

Well.  Probably not THE Deepak Chopra.  But this guy looks just like him. 

*  *   *

The myriad disagreements between Christians struck me this morning during my drive through the cold drizzle of this gray Saturday.  

This was probably because I passed my old Lutheran church.  They’ve been going through some drama because of the “gay issue” in their denomination.  Apparently the ELCA has approved the ordination of gay bishops.  Although I’m not too sure.  I’m no longer in the loop on such things, so that’s not gospel truth.  But at any rate, there has been some controversy in that denomination over the “gay question.” 

The church that I belonged to was in complete and total opposition to its denomination’s choice to favor gay ordination or whatnot.  So the huge sign for the church outside received a wide black box right over the word “Lutheran,” so that when you drove by, you’d see “St. Timothy [BLACK BOX] Church.”  

After a while, they removed the black box, and instead, put a little banner under the word “Lutheran” that said “Reclaiming the Name!” 

Now, even that banner is gone.  So they’re just back to plain old Lutheran.  I’m sure their positions on the matter are the same, but they’ve, for whatever reason, decided to remove the banner and black box. 

As I passed that church on the way to work today, I thought about how many things there are that Christians disagree on, and how that disagreement, on each and every side, is firmly rooted in that side’s view of Christ.

We’re all so convinced about what Jesus was all about. 

You say you follow Jesus. 

Which one? 

There are so many.

There’s Orthodox Jesus, Catholic Jesus, Calvinist Jesus, Emergent Jesus, Bono Jesus, Che Jesus, Obama Jesus, Bush Jesus, TBN Jesus, Christian Identity Jesus, Black Baptist Jesus, Anglican Jesus…

Each Jesus has so many points of agreement with another.  But there’s also a lot of disagreement.

There’s a Jesus today who extends not only open arms, but fully affirming and accepting arms, to practicing homosexuals today.  The Jesus who does this has very sincere and authentic followers.

There’s also a Jesus who is quite convinced that homosexuals are hell-bound and are walking displays of the reality of sin in this world. 

There’s even a Jesus who disapproves of consuming any amount of alcohol, even a glass of wine with dinner. 

And then there’s a Jesus who is an avid beer afficianado, who whole-heartedly approves of a good German brew.

Without ignoring what all these Jesus’ have in common, you can’t deny the differences. 

You can’t deny that the church as a whole may be hopelessly shattered, divided by very important doctrinal differences.

Which Jesus do you follow?

“The one from the Bible,” you say.

Well, funny thing about that….

There are just as many Bibles as there are Jesus’.  And each one is backed up by tradition and the commentary of that tradition’s scholars or elders.

I don’t really see where the Christian church has ever had much agreement or unity.  It probably began seeing divisions right after the time of Paul (if not during). 

And I have no idea which Jesus it is that I follow.

I love to write.  And I love to discuss.  I love to learn, to read, to listen to new ideas and old ideas.

But I really, really hate the eg0-fluffing that’s going on in these social networking sites.   This medium. . . the “blogosphere,” as they say, is an awesome way to exchange ideas and learn from each other, argue, etc.

But it also engages our pride, and makes us extremely puffed up.  We tweet all of our newest blogs.  We talk about advancing the kingdom, and spreading the gospel, and doing ministry, but really, all we want is for people to come and read our blogs, hopefully comment, check our stats, and enjoy the tingling sensation of a growing ego.

We make friends with all the big names on Facebook and Twitter.  We comment on everyone’s status’.

“John Johnson just ate a sandwich.”  -  7,000 comments: “I like sandwiches.”

There is a very, very, very fine line between sharing ideas, having a conversation, talking with someone, etc. and pridefully seeking the inflation of one’s ego.

Thus it will appear that I’m angrily attacking anyone who has a blog, or who comments on peoples’ status’, etc.

But that’s obviously not the case, or I wouldn’t even have a blog.

So there’s some steps I want to take, to make sure my ego doesn’t get inflated, but also to not rule out the joy of writing:

I’m going to stop twittering repeatedly about new blogs.  I’m going to stop commenting on peoples’ status’ unless I deem it absolutely necessary (no more “I like sandwiches” comments on peoples’ status updates that I don’t know personally.)  You know, things like that.

Having a blog does not mean shameless, incessant, self-promotion.

I hope I remember that.

I am completely unschooled when it comes to medical care and the current healthcare debacle.   I am somewhat neutral amid the propogation and opposition of Obama’s healthcare plan.   His plan, inasmuch as it’s portrayed in mainstream media (and who can trust mainstream media about anything anymore?) makes it sound largely like socialized medicine.  You have your camps that say that’s a good thing: “Canada’s a paradise!” a la folks like Michael Moore, and then you have your folks that say the socialized medicine approach that Obama is taking is a bad thing: “Canada is terrible! That’s why tons of ‘em flock down to the US for surgery!”  a la my good friend Mark.

We talk about the waiting lines, the killing off of elderly folks, etc.

Well, I don’t know about all that.  Like I said, I’m neutral, right now.  And I don’t really see myself getting too deep into the game.  All I know is: our current medical system is off the charts in how messed up it is.  I’ve lived the majority of my life uninsured.  And this stuff’s expensive.  And it is not getting cheaper.

Pharmaceutical companies are selling their products like pills are the equivalent of fast food burgers, with flashy advertising and promotion of smiley outdoor events.

Something’s wrong with this picture.

But, I’m saying all this to sort of lay the groundwork on a topic that’s *not* about the healthcare system.

I’ve been hearing an argument in this larger debate on healthcare, that goes something like this:

“If healthcare is socialized (or any other buzzword you want to put there), then the doctors will quit (or protest, etc.), because they paid so much money to get through medical school.  They *have* to repay their loans somehow.”

It’s an odd argument:  SINCE medical school costs are absurd and outrageous, THEN healthcare should cost a lot of money and doctors should MAKE a lot of money.

I’ve heard that argument a lot in my social circles and on the news.

Then I applied this argument to the religious sphere:

“SINCE seminary costs so much money, and really only trains pastors for one job, leaving them without many options, THEN they will keep promoting the same old institution and system, even though they may KNOW that some things about the religious system need serious reforming.”

But since such serious reforming would cost dearly (in the short term) in the area of church rosters and membership, the paid pastors keep towing the party line, so to speak, because it’s the only way they can 1. provide for their family and 2. pay for the ridiculously expensive and tediously redundant education they had to receive in order for the community to recognize their calling to preach the Gospel.

What kind of reform am I talking about?  I’ll save that for a later day.

What I’m saying now is, there are preachers in pulpits who do not believe what they preach, whose experience of God is not reflected in the way they live, act, or speak.  And that the reason for this is to maintain their employment.

Not all of them can be successful authors or speakers.  Some are at the mercy of their congregation, and can only go so far into their own relationship with God as the expectations and prejudices of their flock allows.

What is in the heart, however, is another matter entirely

1. “The Lord your God gave me success.”  Jacob is lying to Isaac, his father,     and he brings God into it?  He’s already lied to   his father about being Esau, he’s put goatskins on him to make up for his wonderfully exfoliated, smooth skin (from being a mama’s boy, right?), and now he brings God into it? “How did you get back from hunting so quickly?” Isaac says.  “God gave me success.”   If that were me, I’d be a bit edgy about already lying to my father to get the better blessing, then bringing God into it.  But yet, God’s favor was with Jacob.  Unmerited favor is almost incomprehensible to us, isn’t it?
2. It seems like the nature of blessing someone was very strict.  Jacob got Isaac’s blessing by deceit, but once given, Isaac couldn’t take it back.  Seems like he could’ve just said, “That wasn’t Esau, before?!  Ok, I’ll just take that back and give it to the real Esau.”
3. I’m at the point where Jacob is sleeping with four women, all in a rat-race to see who can have the most kids.  This is the stuff daytime talk show hosts dream about:  “You mean you traded a night of sex for some mandrakes?!”  “But they were good mandrakes!!” And Jacob’s in the chair to the side goin’, “Man, I didn’t do nothin’.”
4. Why did Jacob and God wrestle?  This is a serious question, and an event I’ve never understood.  I mean, I’ve understood it “metaphorically,” but not in the historical context of what’s going on at the time.  Any thoughts on this?
5. What a family.  After years of feuding, and not seeing each other, and treachery, Jacob and Esau bury their father together.

1. lot made the wisest choice he thought possible; ended up living in sodom. abram went where lot chose not to go, and god gave him all – abram made the first (and humble) move, and graciously gave lot first pickin’s. a lot can happen when you do the simple, gracious, giving thing.

2. so sarai tells abram, “sleep w/ hagar.” hagar gets pregnant, hates sarai.  so sarai says “this is all your fault, abram.”  yeah.  that makes sense.   (women…..)

3. I bet abraham wished for a more simple sign of covenant than circumcision. maybe a certain hairstyle, or a special cape. but no.  god went with circumcision

4. there’s a LOT of christological and soteriological metaphors in the sodom and gamorrah stories. (lot of christ imagery, and salvation stuff.)

a lot more stuck out, today.  some of it even a little racy.  but this is all i could really muster for the short blog post.

A great video about the love of God and our religious (mis)conceptions.