If you ever get one of these letters then..uh-oh…

Dear Floyd;

This message has been sent to you by a friend or a relative who has recently disappeared along with millions and millions of people around the world. The reason they chose to send you this letter is because they cared about you and would like you to know the truth about where they went. This may come as a shock to you, but the one who sent you this has been taken up to heaven.

I f you read a Bible, you will see that after chapter three in the book of Revelation, the church is no longer mentioned as being on earth. (The church are the believers in Jesus Christ, not the buildings in which people meet.)

In the Bible, 1 Thessalonians Chapter 4 verses 16 and 17 tell how Jesus came to take away His church. But, you have to believe the Bible is the Word of God in order to believe this.

I am sure that there will be a lot of speculation as to what happened to all these people. The theories of some scientists and world leaders will have so much credibility that most of the world will believe them.It will sound like the truth!

But, there is only one truth. And, that truth is that Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, came back to earth and took with Him to Heaven all who believed in Him and made Him their Lord.

If you would like to give your life to Jesus Christ and be born again, it is not too late. First you must pray to God saying“Father I admit I am a sinner, and I will turn from my sin and do good. I believe that Jesus was your son and that He came here to die for me so that my sins would be forgiven. I ask you to forgive me and I will repent of my sins. In Jesus name I pray.”

If you just prayed that prayer and meant it with all your heart, then God will know you as one of His own. You should now seek out others who have also given their lives to Christ, read a Bible daily, and do your best to bring others to Christ.

God bless you,

Aunt Bea

Yep. That’s right. There is a website called Raptureletters.com where people can sign up to have an e-mail sent to their ‘left behind’ friends explaining where they are and what the hell heck just happened:

And if you decide to ignore this heartfelt warning? This is what the Prince of Peace has in store for you:

Men and women soldiers and horses seemed to explode where they stood. It was as if the very words of the Lord had superheated their blood, causing it to burst through their veins and skin…Their innards and entrails gushed to the desert floor, and as those around them turned to run, they too were slain, their blood pooling and rising in the unforgiving brightness of the glory of Christ. (“Glorious Appearing”, Jenkins and LaHaye)

Great stuff, huh.  I can’t wait.  But if I’m raptured, won’t I miss out on all the fun? (I know what you’re thinking:“If I were you I wouldn’t worry”.) Will the raptured have good seats for all the action?  Since we’ll still have our bodies, will popcorn be available? Will we be naked and if so will we all be issued Grace Goggles?  For answers to more questions like these check out: Rapture Ready.Com It’s got the answers to all your Pre-Trib concerns AND it’s full of  fun facts like these:

The Bible predicts that the Jewish Temple will be rebuilt in Jerusalem. Ever since the 70 AD destruction, one major roadblock barring the reconstruction of the Temple is the fact that the Temple Mount area has been defiled by warfare. In order to cleanse the tribulation Temple Mount for worship, the Jews will need the ashes of a pure red heifer. Numbers chapter 19 describes how King Solomon cleansed the first Temple with the ashes of a specially prepared Red Heifer.
(Numbers 19:2-9)

(Israeli scientists have been working for years to genetically engineer a red calf. But why would they want to kick-off the Tribulation?)

Replacement theology is the view that Israel, having failed God, has been replaced by the Church around 70 AD. The Church is now seen as spiritual Israel and spiritual Jerusalem. This teaching claims that all the promises and blessings, in fact Israel’s entire inheritance, now belongs to the Church. However, all is not lost for Israel; it gets to keep all the curses.

Lucky them.

During the latter part of the tribulation an Oriental army of some 200 million strong, will move into the Middle East, crossing over the dried up Euphrates River. This army, guided by four demonic angels, will kill one third of mankind.

You certainly don’t want to be hanging around for that.  Reminds me of an old joke; 200 million Chinese guys walk into a bar and order a drink…..uh, I forget the rest.

I know a lot of good folks who waste a lot of good time with all this hooey. I wonder what they would think if they knew that these cherished ‘biblical truths’ have only been around for about 100 years or so and are mostly the result of a ne’er-do-well-cum-Evangelical-huckster’s popularization of an imaginative Anglo-Irish minister’s ruminations.

Ah. It just struck me this evening. There IS  such a thing as a Trinity that is supported by church doctrine, tradition and history. But it is none too holy.

The four Gospel narratives are filled with examples of Jesus performing miraculous acts.  According to Matthew’s version, even his life began supernaturally, in that his conception was not the result of a sexual union.

For most Christians, the picture of Jesus working miracles seems to be exactly what one would expect of a divine being -the Son of God. These supernatural acts “prove” that Jesus was no mere man. For many others, though, these miracle accounts are not easily swallowed and deter them from accepting much, if not all, of the Gospels as truth.  Probably the most famous of these skeptics was Thomas Jefferson, who went through the bible with scissors and glue, removing all the supernatural accounts. His truncated version, the “Jefferson Bible” is more like a collections of Jesus’ sayings than the story of his life, death and resurrection.

I talked with a friend not long ago, an ex-Roman Catholic, now an Evangelical Protestant, who said that the idea of the ‘virgin birth’ was very important to him, as this underscored the idea of Jesus as God.  Without the virgin birth Jesus would be just another man.  But is that a fair assumption to make? Do we need miracles to sell ourselves on the idea that Jesus is in some way ‘other’ than us – that he is divine?

If miracles are the (super)natural by-product of divinity, then Jesus’ life must have been full of them.  This is suggested in the various apocryphal Infancy Gospels. There the boy Jesus is said to have made clay birds fly and he magically kills a naughty playmate (who he later brings back to life).  No serious scholars give these folk stories much credence, although bestselling horror writer Ann Rice has written a novel based upon them.  There is something appealing as well as appalling to these tales. (I have a theory that they were the inspiration for  that old Twilight Zone episode where the young Billy Mumy uses his awesome supernatural powers to terrorize his family and neighbors.)

Recently our church considered the story in Mark’s Gospel where Jesus stilled the stormy Sea of Galilee.  While asleep in the boat, a squall rose up and his disciples, who were for the most part experienced fisherman, began to panic and they awakened Jesus.  But why?  Did they expect Jesus to provide them with nautical advice?  He may have been a carpenter, but Jesus was certainly no sailor.  Did they expect him to magically calm the storm, as he does before scolding them for their hysteria? Their reaction to this event would seem to suggest otherwise.

Was it the purpose of this miracle account to prove that Jesus was God, or at least in touch with supernatural power? Is that the purpose of all of Jesus’ miracles? Because if we look at them in that way, adding them to the pile of evidence needed to make a “case for Christ”, then we may risk losing other, deeper meanings hidden within the stories.

Perhaps, as our pastor suggested, the main thrust of this story is to portray Jesus as a powerful presence that can calm the storms that rage within us.  Rather than joining us in our stress and hysteria (which we have invited others to do) Jesus projects calmness upon what we often perceive to be the ‘perfect storm’.

Isn’t this usually what happens when we call upon Jesus for help? Really, how often is it the case where he has literally changed our circumstances, fixed our external problems or calmed the storms we are caught in? Isn’t it more likely that he help will help us to find the strength we need to deal with our crises? Jesus gives us a glimpse of things from his infinite perspective, a glimpse that tends to diminish our own earthly struggles.

Do we need to believe in miracles in order to be in communion with God?  Are miracles necessary proof that there is a God?  Conversely, does a disbelief in miracles, an ‘inability’ to see them, indicate a lack of faith? When we question the historicity of Jesus’ miracles, are we diminishing his divinity?  What kind of faith is it that must depend upon evidence of miracles in order to survive?

I don’t know.  Personally, I don’t think it is necessary for me to believe that the  miracles actually  occurred to hear what God is telling me,  something that when put into practice, underscores the divinity of Jesus.  Something that Thomas Jefferson might have missed.

In her sermon last Sunday, Heather addressed the different ways in which people approach scriptures, especially those parts that we tend to find disturbing. The scripture in question that day was John 3:18, the often overlooked verse that follows the famous John 3:16-17.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life. Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”

I don’t want to enter into a discussion about what these verses actually mean but suffice to say that many people find them to be troubling. As Heather pointed out, there are those on one side, the more ‘liberal’ side, of the spectrum who cannot in any way accept the ‘obvious’ import of that verse so they decide that it should be ignored. Those on the other, more ‘conservative’, side will accept it’s ‘obvious’ meaning, no matter how troubling, because if it is in the Bible then it must be accepted.

Some of us, though, reside somewhere in the theological middle. Which means that we do not have the luxury of blindly accepting all that is written, especially if it creates cognitive dissonance.

We also are not willing to discard any Biblical teaching that we find troublesome. It must be in there for a reason, so if we seriously consider the Bible to be an important tool in a our search for spiritual meaning, then we owe it some serious consideration.  Which means that we will often question what the conventional scriptural wisdom is.

Our conservative critics point out that this philosophy likely represents a lack of faith on our parts – a lack of obedience to the will of God.  But, as Heather said, in reality  we do this is for precisely the opposite reason they suggest. It is our understanding of the Gospel, our devotion to the teachings of Jesus and our obedience to Christ as lord that compels us –no,demands – that we question those scriptures that seem to undermine the loving mercy of God.

Coincidentally(?), I read something later this week, in Gerald Schroeder’s newest book,”God According to God”, that echoed Heather’s message:

Schroeder shared some midrash teachings that suggest God’s relationship with Abraham cooled after the aborted attempt to sacrifice his son Isaac. Although Abraham passed the test of dutiful obedience to God, he may have failed another part of the test, a part that was to measure Isaac’s compassion and desire for justice. (Remember, the practice of child sacrifice was something which God abhorred among the gentile tribes.)There is also evidence that Sarah may have been traumatized by Abraham’s actions, as the Bible says that she died soon after.

“This discussion of the binding of Isaac and its aftermath is not intended to teach us how Abraham, the founder of the people of Israel, “should have” acted. In his time child sacrifice was what was done, although Sarah, it seems, might have thought otherwise, had she been consulted. Rather, the episode brings the message of what God wants of us, how we are to act and react when challenged by life’s vicissitudes.

We have the right, in fact the Divinely granted duty, to dissent when life presents us with demands deemed unjust and undeserved. (italics mine) Anything less than that betrays a misunderstanding on our part of God’s interactive role with Its creation. In proportion to the relationship that we have established with God during times of joy, we can demand Divine redress in times of trouble. As we would do in any loving relationship, we can argue with God. That in itself can lessen the burden.”  [Gerald L. Schroeder, God According to God]

Can an authentic, dynamic, relationship ever be built on blind obedience?

The most popular post I’ve ever written has been “The Black Jesus”.  I don’t think it’s because it’s particularly  well written or even that controversial, per se, but it gets a tremendous amount of hits (for me), probably just because of the title.

I was amazed to find that, as of 5:30 pm EST , this posting has had over 6,000 hits just for today, something that this blog has never even come close to experiencing. On top of this were a a couple of cryptic comments on the post that I couldn’t really understand.  Then I heard the awful news and it began to make sense.

There was a shooting today at the Holocaust museum and the gunman has been identified as the white supremacist James von Brunn. The reports are not very clear yet but it seems that anywhere from one to three people were shot before the police shot von Brunn, who is apparently alive and hospitalized.

What kind of deranged man does something like this? Well, we got a little bit of an idea on March 11, 2008 when Mr. von Brunn left us with this lovely thought:

Jesus Christs tells us to love our enemies, forgive them, turn the other cheek, give them our cloak and coat; give away our personal belongings and follow Him. Have you done this?
Do you know any alleged Christians that have ?

Nietzsche said, “The last Christian died on the cross.”

One cannot love your neighbors and segregate them. Therefore. Multi-cukturalism is a prerequisite to being Christian. It is for that reason the POPE advocates open borders with Mexico. The word CATHOLIC means “UNIVERSAL” The Churdh ALWAYS has sought a united World under CHRIST. The ILLUMINATI too seeks One World Government – which may be why Henry Kissinger, ZIONIST, visits the Vatican so frequently.

James von Brunn-88

The sad thing is, that although these kinds of words are obviously the product of a deranged and hate filled mind, they are by no means very rare. I’ve had plenty of others  visit this site who have expressed similar ideas.  Some I’ve let stand, others were too violent or obscene, so I deleted them.

How can anyone claim that racism in this country is dead, when terrible things like this are still being done? We all know damn well that there are more people out there than we would like to believe who are cheering and applauding murderous nut cases like von Brunn (although perhaps not always in public).

No? Heard any good Jewish jokes lately?

In the Robert Wise’s classic sci-fi movie, “The Day the Earth Stood Still”, an alien visits Washington DC with an important message for the world: repent of your evil ways or face annihilation from above.

Which sort of reminded me of the story of Jonah and his warning to Ninevah.  In the movie we never are told what the outcome was; did Earth learn it’s lesson or was it destroyed? But the Bible tells us that Ninevah did get its act together so God decided to spare it.

Now, Jonah couldn’t have been more disappointed. Cheated out of the excitement of another Sodom and Gomorrah fireworks display, he began to sulk.  Annoyed with his behavior, God points out that Ninevah was definitely worth saving.

And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than six score thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?

Although these 120,000 Ninevites had sloppy handwriting and a poor sense of direction they had something that really made them special in God’s eyes: much cattle.

Once again, God shows that steak plays a major part in his divine plan.

We all know the story of Moses’ encounter with God through the burning bush, where God first tells Moses who he is:

Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?”

God said to Moses, “I am who I am . This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ “

Exodus 3: 13-14 / NIV

A footnote to this scripture verse says that an alternative rendering of “I am who I am” is “I will be who I will be”. This is actually not an alternative title for God but according to Jewish scholars , is precisely the one he gave us.  It  is a much more accurate translation of the the original Hebrew:  Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh.   Answering Moses’s question of “Who are you?”,  God essentially responds with;  “You’ll see!”.

Is this just a case of splitting hairs over a minor difference? Don’t these phrases mean pretty much the same thing?  Well, no, especially not when you realize that this translational deviation was no accident. In nearby verses the same Hebrew wording is translated into Greek and English as “will be” and not “am”.  The translators’s wording was quite deliberate.  But why?

Perhaps the original Hebrew left too much to speculation. At least with the common (mis)translation we can be assured of the ‘immutability’ of God – a God who never changes is more predictable,  easier to describe and easier to limit.  But a God who will be whatever he will be? A God who suggests that he is more flexible, more dynamic and more open to change may not jive with how we prefer to see God.

The possibilities are endless (not too surprising when we consider the  infinite qualities of God).  This understanding of God means that the ways in which we relate to him today and tomorrow need not be the same way in which we did so yesterday. In fact, we may feel comfortable knowing that our personal relationship with God should never be static, but based upon growth and change.

Though this dynamic vision of God is revealed throughout scripture, we seem to prefer a God that we can describe definitively;  a logical  God who follows a set plan – no surprises.  Anything else is just a little too uncertain – and uncertainty is one thing we cannot long tolerate.

^{In Isaiah 46 the author talks of two of the ancient Babylonian Gods, Bel and Nebo:}

¹ Bel bows down, Nebo stoops low;
their idols are borne by beasts of burden.
The images that are carried about are burdensome,
a burden for the weary.

² They stoop and bow down together;
unable to rescue the burden,
they themselves go off into captivity.

I was curious about what all  this meant and found an informative article written by Dr. Allen Ross on Bible.org.  This line was of particular interest:

“Bel” is belu, which is the equivalent of ba’al in Western Semitic. Bel is the Semitic title for the ancient Sumerian god Enlil, Lord of the Air.

The Lord of the Air? Where had I heard that before?

According to the Lord’s own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words.

1 Thessalonians 4:15-18

OK, close, but not quite. Anyway, this is one of the two or three scripture verses that those who are anxiously awaiting the End Times serve up as evidence for the impending Rapture. Personally, I’ve always felt that it’s a pretty long stretch of the imagination to take these verses literally. Even so,  what if Paul wasn’t talking about Jesus being the Lord in the Air? In Ephesians 2 he specifically refers to Satan as the lord of the air:

As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient

What if Jesus takes only those who are “dead in Christ” and then leaves the rest of us – those who are still alive – not to the Lord IN the Air but the Lord OF the Air?

Jeesh! That’s not too encouraging.

“A spirituality revolution is taking place in Western and Eastern societies as politics fails as a vessel of hope and meaning. This revolution is not to be confused with the rising tide of religious fundamentalism, although the two are caught up in the same phenomenon: the emergence of the sacred as a leading force in contemporary society. Spirituality and fundamentalism are at opposite ends of the cultural spectrum.

Spirituality seeks a sensitive, contemplative, transformative relationship with the sacred and is able to sustain levels of uncertainty in its quest because respect for mystery is paramount. Fundamentalism seeks certainty, fixed answers and absolutism, as a fearful response to the complexity of the world and to our vulnerability as creatures in a mysterious universe.

Spirituality arises from love of and intimacy with the sacred and fundamentalism arises from fear of and possession of the sacred. The choice between spirituality and fundamentalism is a choice between conscious intimacy and unconscious possession.”

David Tacey

Not for the first time have I been perplexed by the Church’s long affair with torture. Is this just a case in which  flawed and sinful men, having taken control of the Church, used brutal and violent means to achieve their own ends? Or is there some warped thread woven into the very fabric of Christian doctrine that twists the Church’s understanding of the Gospel?

Heather Kirk-Davidoff,  pastor and writer, raises this question in her blog article entitled “Why Do Christians Love Torture” :

Rosa and I were in the car yesterday when the top-of-the-hour news came on with clips from President Obama and Vice President Cheney’s speeches about torture.  Rosa started paying attention when Cheney’s said:

“I was and remain a strong proponent of our enhanced interrogation program. The interrogations were used on hardened terrorists after other efforts failed. They were legal, essential, justified, successful, and the right thing to do. The intelligence officers who questioned the terrorists can be proud of their work…”

At which point Rosa broke in and said with total incredulity, “Who said THAT??”  At ten, Rosa still has a sense of how ridiculous it is to say that anyone would be proud of torturing anyone else.  I know that some would argue that torture could be justified, but to say that it’s praiseworthy?  How have we come to that?

Rosa’s comment stayed on my mind because, like her, there is part of our nation’s conversation about torture (or “enhanced interrogation techniques” as Cheney likes to call them) which I just don’t get.  It’s not just that I disagree–I simply can’t figure out how anyone could agree with the use of torture.  I can’t empathize with the proponents of torture which makes me pretty useless in public conversation on the topic.  My opposition to torture is based on two things that are utterly essential to my morality:  the importance of the rule of law and the sacredness of human life.  (Plus, everything I’ve read leads me to be opposed on pragmatic grounds as well.  I just am not convinced that torture leads to any useful information.)

But a couple of weeks ago, a study by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life came out that really disturbed me.  You can go to the link to see the actual survey results, but in summary, the more often a person goes to church, the more likely they are to support the use of torture (and they used that word–not “enhanced interrogation techniques”).  The Americans most likely to support torture are white evangelicals (62%) and those unaffiliated with a religious group are the least likely to support torture.

As I was ranting to Dan about this, he pointed out that the study showed that party affiliation is a MUCH stronger determinant of support of torture than religious affiliation is.  Basically, Republicans are likely to support torture, and the survey just showed where the Republicans are.  And while his point is correct, I don’t think it’s the whole story.

Here’s the thing:  Jesus was tortured.  This is one of the reasons while it blows my mind that any Christian could support torture since we all know that at least one innocent person has been tortured under false accusations by the state.  But what if our religious teachings tell us that while it was unfortunate that Jesus was tortured, it did, in fact, serve a good purpose.  It had a good outcome because (in the words of Isaiah 53:5):

…he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

Could it be that by talking so much about what we’ve gained by way of Jesus’ torture we’ve actually taught ourselves that torture can actually be a good thing?  A useful and important thing?

This is serious, people.  Obama and his people have their work to do rooting torture out from the practice of our government.  But I think Christian churches and Christian leaders have our work to do too.  We need a better theology of suffering, a better understanding of Jesus’ suffering, if we’re ever going to clearly oppose it’s use by our government.

-by Heather Kirk-Davidoff, “Grounded and Rooted in Love”

American Goat Hicks

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the goats on his right and the sheep on his left.

Then the King will say to the goats, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you fed me with holy words, I was thirsty and you took away my strong drink. I was a stranger and you set high standards for friendship, I needed clothes and you shamed me in my nakedness then gave me  your castoffs, I was sick and you told me to pray for healing, I was in prison and you said it was what I deserved.’

Damn Hippy Sheep

The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whenever you admonished the least of these brothers of mine, you made my job easier.’

Then he will say to the sheep, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you only gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing but drink, I was a stranger and you  only invited me in, I needed clothes and you took me shopping, I was sick and in prison and all  you did was visit with me.’

‘I tell you the truth, whenever you spent your worldly efforts on one of the least of these you pushed them even farther away from salvation.’

Then the weak and soft sheep will go away to eternal punishment, but the strong and righteous goats to eternal life.