Open Letter to an Atheist/Reposted

Open Letter to an Atheist

God Is Love.
Take any argument that uses God as a subject and replace it with the word love. Love cannot be proven. Love is responsible for passions in men that go beyond logic. I would argue that love is not the reason for wars , and other atrocities, but then again self love-ie pride-is. That results from considering our selves, God.
So why God? Order! You see, everything has order. Even the randomness of chaos appears to operate in a playing field of order. Who says that God had to provide this order? He did, for one. Many brilliant and educated minds have sought out truth and come to the same conclusion. It appears so easy to label those who have come to conclusion that there is some form of intelligence behind the order in the universe as brainwashed morons believing in superstition (or please insert any derogatory statement that reduces the debate to namecalling) and those who hold a different opinion as “freethinkers(etc,), that it's difficult to wish to enter the discussion. But having done so I will put forth a few points to “freely think” about.
Why Order? What is it that makes any of it work? I became convinced of the existence of God during my 9th grade biology class. We were studying skin cells. And the complexity of how a single cell manages to operate is spectacular. Now I can agree that we have come to understand how these things operate, but not why. At every level we find a complexity of order that is beyond our ability to create.
But we create all kinds of stuff, you say. I would put forth that we assemble/rearrange/build a great deal, but that man has yet to create a single thing. All matter that was, is. Even the birth process of our own people is a series of seemingly near impossible events that must take place in perfect sequence for a new person to emerge. We can manipulate it, but we cannot create it. Do you really believe that random chaos is is conducive to life? It works for destruction(something we are pretty good at), but not so good in creation.
Why morality? What leads us to believe that there is any truth whatsoever? I mean if truth is relative, than my truth is your false, and Hitler or Dalmer was no more right or wrong than Ghandi or Mother Theresa. An easy one to shout out a “yes, that's right”, to, but think about it. If there is no right and wrong( universal truth) than the whole argument is moot. There is no logic. No ability to discern, we break down into randomness and chaos. A=B will not work because I can assert that my truth is to counter yours and we are left with namecalling and chaos. So we simply agree that killing small children to make tacos is socially unacceptable, at this time( some would call this a social contract). I don't know about you, but I have a real sense that killing small children is wrong. I also get a strong conviction that helping someone who is in an auto accident is right. I call it morality, but I suspect it borders on truth. Why do we have any sense of right and wrong if we are nothing but evolved monkeys? What is it about us that even let's us develop the ability to codify Logic(which oddly enough is based on the concept that things are true or false)?
Why Beauty? While I recognize that this is a largely subjective concept, I do put forth that the mere concept of beauty is in contradiction to the “evolved monkey” concept. We are the only creature that even appears to have any concept of appreciating beauty. We sing about it, write about it, focus on the search for it, and yes, we find it. Although our individual definitions vary we all find beauty in the things in our world, even if that beauty is something like a well executed play on a football field or a well finessed debate in the boardroom, instead of a painting by Da Vinci, a symphony by Mozart, or the smile on your childs face. Or even a sunset, a flower or a single skin cell. Beauty is all around us, and though you can coldly say it is only in the eye of the beholder, it does exist, despite insisting that it really doesn't. A world without beauty would be a pretty bleak place, one without order, one without truth, one without love, one without God.
But we don't live in that world...Do we???
Remember, God is Love

"Boundary of the Known" or "Friends pt.2"

I met someone on Facebook today and enjoyed a brief back-and-forth conversation on like-minded subjects. After a bit, I sent a friend request and got back a reply that thy only become Facebook friends with those they know face-to-face. I relied that this was NP(no problem). I put it out of my mind(so I thought). Later, while surfing around, it came back to me, with questions(as is usually the case, with "curious thoughts"). It went something like this:

I couldn't help my wandering mind and I was thinking about your "boundary" of only facebooking with known friends. It stuck me first, that, "doesn't that basically defeat the purpose of it?" I mean, we already know how to connect with people we know. Ok, so then it's like a glorified communication system (i.e. New Phone). Frankly, I must admit that I have mostly connected with "people I know in person", too. Except for a couple of notable exceptions.

My first real on-line friend is a girl from Latvia named Anastasia. She has known me through my drug addicted, sexually charged late night ramblings, when I first met her on-line. She always composed herself as a lady, and a friend despite some of my less-appropriate postings. We have remained friends-t-a-distance through many life changes. She is now a nurse in England and travels extensively.

Next, I have made friendships with people like Anne Rice, whom I never would have known otherwise. We may never meet vis-a-vis, but I consider her my friend and have communicated with her.

Also, I have made a few "friends" through fellow commentors at a known-friends postings. There is something about seeing another acquaintance of a friend share thoughts that you either embrace or you reject and then enjoy a dialog on these and other issues. It's like seeing someone at a house party and being drawn to meet them.

I can truly say that I look forward to making new friends on on-line. I don't know that I'll jump up and befriend a group of random profiles, but I will make an effort to look for new friends where I can. I mean, everyone is a stranger until they become a friend. And anyway, I can use all the friends I can get! Who knows, I might even meet them in person one day, but by then we won't be strangers anymore. Just old friends who get their first embrace.

Thank you to all those around the world who "Boldly Go" into Cyberspace to make connections and establish friendships. Love thy Neighbor! YEAH!!!!!!

Peace, Jonny

A day in a class of Apologetics

I was recently perusing the comment stream of a friend of mine who has embarked on a journey away from organized Christianity while still claiming to embrace Christ. I have followed her musings and posts with interest, as there are many things that she has rallied against that also strike a chord with me and my own journey. Recently she posted a comment that while sounding smart seemed to overly simplistic. The post was as follows:

Jan Darlene Hastings posted this quote below: "Morality is doing what is right no matter what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told no matter what is right. "

I read the comment stream with interest and found that the majority of the posters, including my friend who posted it, felt that it was brilliant and on the mark. I felt the need to counter with the following:

Do we have a sin nature? Do we need a Savior? If we are so capable of "Choosing the Right/Moral" why do so many "honorable" people so often get exposed for their secret moral flaws? Oh and those that say "no" to the above questions: are tra...its such as Hubris, Denial of flaws, superiority complex, etc. moral?
Relative truth is not truth, just as relative morality is not truly moral, for in some tribes it's moral to eat your captives, and yet to honor that morality would be to sanction murder.
Lastly, If we just "know" the difference between right and wrong, who gave us this knowledge? In this sense I could reconstruct the statement to be "religion is doing what is morally right, no matter what you are told", but that too would fall short, as religion is mans attempt to understand God. Yet in the attempt we gain wisdom and perspective and move closer to an absolute that teaches us to be moral. Without it we are blind men struggling in the dark to describe the elephant before us.
(apologetics borrowed from C.S. Lewis-Mere Christianity) Peace

Today, someone "liked" my response and then proceeded to post the following three comments. I felt that they were so "Brilliant" and "On the Mark", that I felt the need to post them here on my blog for others to consider. I contacted the poster and was informed that the "School" posts were from a forwarded email. The other thoughts are her own. Thank you Angela Adams for these "pearls". Here they are:

Subject: God VS Science

'Let me explain the problem science has with religion. 'The atheist professor of philosophy pause...s before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.
'You're a Christian, aren't you, son?'
'Yes sir, 'the student says.
'So you believe in God?'
'Absolutely.'
Is God good?'
'Sure! God's good.'
'Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?'
'Yes'
'Are you good or evil?'
'The Bible says I'm evil.'
The professor grins knowingly. 'Aha! The Bible!’ He considers for a moment. 'Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?'
'Yes sir, I would.'
'So you're good...!'
'I wouldn't say that.'
'But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't.'
The student does not answer, so the professor continues. 'He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Can you answer that one?'
The student remains silent. 'No, you can't, can you?' the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. 'Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?'

'Er..yes,' the student says.

'Is Satan good?'

The student doesn't hesitate on this one. 'No.'

'Then where does Satan come from?'
The student falters. 'From God'

'That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?'

'Yes, sir..'

'Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?'

'Yes'

'So who created evil?' The professor continued, 'If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.'

Again, the student has no answer. 'Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?'

The student squirms on his feet. 'Yes.'

'So who created them?'

The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. 'Who created them?' There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. 'Tell me,' he continues onto another student. 'Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?'

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. 'Yes, professor, I do.'

The old man stops pacing. 'Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?'

'No sir. I've never seen Him.'

'Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?'

'No, sir, I have not..'

'Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?'

'No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't.'

'Yet you still believe in him?'

'Yes'
'According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist... What do you say to that, son?'

'Nothing,' the student replies.. 'I only have my faith.'

'Yes, faith,' the professor repeats. 'And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.'

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. 'Professor, is there such thing as heat?'

'Yes. ’

'And is there such a thing as cold?'
'Yes, son, there's cold too.'
'No sir, there isn't.'

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. 'You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit down to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.'

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.

'What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?'

'Yes,' the professor replies without hesitation.. 'What is night if it isn't darkness?'

'You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?'

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. 'So what point are you making, young man?'

'Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.'

The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. 'Flawed? Can you explain how?'

'You are working on the premise of duality,' the student explains... 'You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought.' 'It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.' '

Now tell me, professor.. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?'

 
'If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.' 

'Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?' 

Th...e professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed. 

'Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?'

The class is in uproar. 

The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided. 

'To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean..' The student looks around the room. 'Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?' 

The class breaks out into laughter.

 

'Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.' 'So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?'

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable. 

Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. 'I Guess you'll have to take them on faith.'

'Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,' the student continues. 'Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?' 

Now uncertain, the professor responds, 'Of course, there is. We see it Everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in The multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.'

To this the student replied, 'Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.'

The professor sat down. ..

(Forwarded email posted on Facebook.Author unknown)

What a great dialogue. I love good apologetics. And finally the post from Angela Adams that offers her own insights. Here it is:

Thought for the day: "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. "

It's scripture, and I learned it because my church taught me that it was good to "hide the word in my heart", as scripture teaches. I continue to be a Chris...tian, and could validly convert to Catholicism not so much because of the charisma of its own members, but because of the rich, profound way that believers over the centuries have strived (Striven?!?!?!) to incorporate scriptural principals into religious practices. I believe that the religious practices may be cultural in some instances, yes, but remain useful when they lead others to the truth of the Word of God. To reject outright the good which that leads others to is to deny others of the same opportunity of access to God's goodness, which, being infinite, no human will fully comprehend until the end of time.

Thank you Angela for your posts. May God continue to show you Love while giving you Wisdom. I guess that's my prayer for me and all of you as well.

Peace, Jon

PEACE

Lately I've resumed an old Hippie tradition of saying "Peace" as I exit. Whether it's as I finish a conversation or I am leaving work, This has become my closing remark. I seem to have a greater emphasis in my life to the concept of peace in all my affairs. This is not to say that I've mastered the art of Peace, only that I have a greater focus on the concept and practice of Peace.

Today, during Worship at one of the several churches I attend, the medley of songs brought forth one that had the repeating line of,"Make my ax ready for war", or something like that. I glitched and looked around as I saw all the smiling faces singing along. I had to stop and question these lyrics. I just couldn't get on board. The other songs were of the, "let me shine my light" variety, but this imagery of "ax for war" didn't jibe well for me. I serve the Prince of Peace. The call on my life lately has been to show love to all of God's children. I simply couldn't(wouldn't) sing the "ax" song. I struggled with trying to find the positive meaning here. Now I understand that there are numerous scriptures that speak of war-type themes. Even Jesus is quoted as saying, " Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Mat 10:34". Then again He is quoted later saying, " Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword shall perish by a sword. Mat 26:52". This confuses me.
It brings to mind a conversation I had with a dear friend of mine where he belittled kindness in the effort to be men of God ready to take the world by fierceness in the name of God. I had to object. I have always looked upon Kindness as a virtue worth preserving. We agreed to disagree.
I also have another friend who left organised religion to pursue the concept of Peace to the extreme. He felt that we should NEVER engage a conflict with anything other than a peaceful response. I remember getting into a comment debate with him and a friend where I used examples such as, "Your child is being beaten and raped. Would you simply stand by praying they stop, or raise your hand to stop them?" Simplistic, I agree, but I still believe that there is a time to oppose bullies. Obviously, I am still working out these issues.
During my reflection of the "ax" song, I got the image of the medic in combat. I mean, first I got the, "We all have different callings" message, and I was reminded that what I am called to do is not what other people are called to do. I need to not be too concerned about those who attach a "ax-readiness" perception to their role for Christ, just because I don't share their view. Anyway, back to my medic image. What i perceived was that even in the midst of combat, there are those who operate as healers. Giving aid to those whom the axes have injured. Perhaps that is what I am trying to be.
Peace is my calling. Love is my banner. Christ is my King. May I grow in understanding as I wrestle with the things on my soul.
"Build Bridges, not Walls"

PEACE,
Jonny    

Christian Nation or Nation of Christians?

Semantics!

Lately I seem to be all over the map. I have played ball for both teams(liberal & conservative), but lately I seem to be coming full circle to where I started (philosophically speaking...). You see, I was raised in a small town, in a small community church that believed in Christ's message of Grace and Love. My early development was influenced by older siblings who experienced the latter days of the Hippie movement. I also took strongly to the lessons I learned of America and the Constitution/Bill of Rights. Then I went out, so equipt, to find my way.

 I loved debate classes, especially the ability to argue both sides of an arguement. I mean, if someone failed to show up on the day of a scheduled debate, I would step-up and fill-in, even if I had just argued the other side. I also recall really enjoying Formal Logic class. My College days we in pursuit of a Liberal Arts Degree( I 'm sure you can guess my political leanings during this time). It wasn't that I didn't believe in Jesus, just that I felt the world was more diverse than Black and White. My liberal undertaking led me in pursuit of more-and-more excess with less-and-less responsibility. I ended up a meth addict/cook with deep debt and no compass.

Upon running into Jesus again(he was never far away) I asked for(and got)relief from my liberal excesses. I switched teams, grabbed my Bible, and prepared to make war upon "the world". I, once again was in possession of my faculties and Absolute Moral Truth. Nothing like giving a control-freak Absolute Moral Truth. I was like Hitler with the A-Bomb. Oh sure, I can smile and act nice, but inside I know that I'm right and your wrong, and I can wield sarcasm and pity for the lost like a surgeon. You may never even know that I'm looking down upon you from my ivory tower, but I'll keep cutting in little ways until you get the message; "I know God and you don't, na na na na naa na". What a jerk I can be!  

 So, what does all this have to do with my topic?

Well, lately I've found myself playing loose with my allegiances. I mean, I'm a disciple of Jesus Christ who believes fully that He is my Hope, my King, and my Savior. And yet, I am siding with Anne Rice in her indictment of organized religion. I love being in America and I believe in our Christian Heritage. And yet, I am firmly in support of the Mosque in Manhatten on the grounds of Religious Freedom. I seem to be playing both teams. Am I?

I guess I need to explain a bit of the "Why". Around December of 2008 our church did a 4-week segment called "Please Forgive JAMES". it was sort of a mystery, until JAMES was revealed not to be a "Who", but rather a "What". JAMES was an acronym for the perception many people have of Christians. It stands for: Judgemental, Arrogant, Mean-spirited, Egotistical, and Self-righteous. I was outed/busted/exposed. Even in my best Sunday disguise, I knew that these qualities were at the core of my being. I struggled with them, hid them, and bargained with them, but they were there. It was then that Jesus started me on my current journey. I have been mandated to LOVE. I have tossed the law, or rather left it to others who perhaps can do a better job of it than me. God told me to love everybody, RIGHT WHERE THEY ARE. I'm not to judge, not to condemn, not to proclaim my superior relationship to God. I am to LOVE ALL His children.

I'm not great at this, but I'm getting better. I still struggle with "Me" and my desire to be "right". I do bear witness to the wonders of God and my belief in Christ, but now I'm willing to accept that you are"_______"(fill in the blank). It's OK God believes in you, even if you don't(yet?)believe in Him.

OK, So what does any of this have to do with "are we a Christian Nation or a Nation of Christians?"

Well, I feel that to call ourselves a Christian Nation(meaning that the USofA is a Christian Nation) is to say that it is our piece of ground, and at best, we will tolerate you(barely). But a Nation of Christians is a place where anyone, of any faith or creed, can come and be shown love by a people who follow a King that promotes loving one's neighbor, and even his enemies.."They will Know We Are Christians By Our Love"

I mean, Jesus Christ's Kingdom is established in the hearts of those whom he has called, more-so than in the political offices of those who need to run the operations of Government. And certainly those who do follow Jesus should strive to public office, but they should not eliminate others from participating in this great experiment in democracy.
 
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
 
So I ask you: Christian Nation or Nation of Christians(and friends)?
 
Then again, it might just be Semantics

Old Friend, New Friend, Red Friend, Blue Friend

Friends


"Those People"
This phrase echos in my mind and soul. I most often heard it during my misspent youth coming from my mom whenever i got into trouble. It was always, "If you didn't hang around those people you wouldn't get in trouble". I always wanted to explain that it was more often me leading them astry than the other way around. Maybe that's simplistic. They were certainly involved in the same life choices I was, but I always bristled at the notion that it was their fault that I was doing what I chose to do.
I remember how I came to know "those people" in the first place. I was an outsider in school. The Jocks didn't accept me. The Preps didn't accept me. The Popular People said I didn't fit in. I ran to those who accepted anyone, the Stoners. They said they had room for anyone, especially anyone who was an outcast. Funny, but that's what Jesus says too.

The next time I really remember the phrase being implied was as I entered into recovery. It was that I needed to stay away from "those people" if I was to have any chance at changing my patterns and behaviors. I have to say that this remains good advice for those entering recovery. I think that it is neccessary to have a clean slate to work with when you are changing things about yourself in major ways. My major concern comes from the concept that, again it is somehow "those  people" who are to blame. The choices were mine.

Now comes my beef:
Upon entering into these new fellowships I was assured that they would replace "those people" with a "new, improved, better class of people". Five years into my new life, I'm not so sure.
I currently find myself lonely, isolated and, disillusioned. Sure I've had some close interactions. I attended some events, belonged to some study groups, even hosted weekly gatherings in my home, but I have come to find that these interactions have been fleeting. They pass and leave me feeling as if I have not truly developed the kind of relationships that have depth, beyond the time that they occured. And this makes me feel like they are more akin to the interactions I had with "those people"; there for a time, then gone.
I just wish I felt the more warmth from His people. I mean sometime I do, but lately I feel like an outsider again.
 
I have since returned to interacting with some of "those people"(friends from my hometown, friends in Sandpoint, etc), and I have found that, (unlike what I was assured) they remember me, like me, enjoy me, yes, even love me, despite(or because of) my changes and my dedication to Christ. They weren't just my friends because we were mutually messed up. They actually love me for me (just as Christ does). I do wonder often about my "new" friends though. Lately it seems as if those who most loudly professed that they were truly my friends, don't even seem to know me. It's as if they have discovered that because I am willing to look outside the carefully constructed clubhouse and I am no longer worthy. I miss those close times, but my trust in their assurances of "true" friendship is shaken.


At the end of the day, you only deal with the moment right in front of you. You fill it, alone or with friends, being "those people" or "these people". It may not depend so much on how they behave than how "I" behave. Am I being kind, loving, supportive, and genuine. Or am I being self-focused, shallow, and absorbed in what I want. Whether the friendships last beyond today or not seems to be beyond my control.
Jesus is always right here, but he assures me that he was often lonely in the crowd. Still, it's nice to have friends that last beyond the moment. I have some. Hopefully you do too. Maybe I can be one. As they say, "It takes being a friend, to have a friend", no matter which type of "people" you may be considered to be.
 
 
Bright light almost blinding,
Black night still there shining.
I can't stop keep on climbing,
Looking for what I knew.

Had a friend she once told me,
"You got a love, you ain't lonely."
Now she's gone and left me only,
Looking for what I knew.


I'm telling you now,
The greatest thing you ever can do now,
Is trade a smile with someone who's blue now,
It's very easy just.


Met a man on the roadside crying,
Without a friend there's no denying.
You're incomplete there'll be no finding,
Looking for what you knew.

So anytime somebody needs you,
Don't let them down although it grieves you,
Someday you'll need someone like they do,
Looking for what you knew.


I'm telling you now,
The greatest thing you ever can do now,
Is trade a smile with someone who's blue now,
It's very easy.
It's very easy.
It's very easy.

(Friends-Led Zeppelin)


Peace & Love, 
Jon

The Diary of Anne "Frankly-Speaking" Rice

My association with Anne Rice began innocently enough. I recall seeing "Interview with a Vampire" many years ago. I enjoyed the film, but don't recall being overly influenced by it. I can't say that I read all of her books or was inclined to become Goth. While incarcerated I read several of her novels because they were available. They were a bit dark for me but I remember being impressed with her ability to paint detailed pictures of other time periods. I was more of an observer from a distance. I actually became more interested in her when I had heard of her return to Catholicism. I looked up her website and read with interest her desire to devote her writing skills to fictional accounts of Christ in His early years prior to any recorded history. I still recal how she used Ava Maria as her music on the webpage.
I was greatly impressed with her book "Christ The Lord: Out of Egypt". I recommended it to my mother and several friends. I even sent her an e-mail welcoming her into the fold of Christiandom. To my surprise, she wrote me back. I guess it was then that I came to think of Anne Rice as a friend of mine.
Recently, she denounced her involvement with Christianity, while retaining her belief in Christ.

"I quit being a Christian. I’m out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.”

I left a comment on her page after she made these declarations stating that I loved her for stating what was in my heart. I also have come to feel that the message of "love thy neighbor" was being lost in the mandates to remove myself from humanity and to hold myself somehow better than the rest of my fellow humans, because I knew God and they didn't. I have since followed the multitude of discussions and comments that have arisen out of her declaration. They run the gamut from those who are grateful to hear this message from so prominent a figure, to those who declare that she never has known Christ, and that her salvation was never genuine. In the darker comments I hear the echoes of the very thing she is rallying against.
And yes, she has written me back and thanked me for my comments.
Anne posts criticism and interviews,comments, both good and bad,and a variety of other things including her favorite TV shows and actors, or pieces of music that had struck her fancy that day. In all of these thing, she shows herself to be a thoughtful, warm, and genuine human being, who is seeking to understand her place in this wonderful creation of God's.In all things, she attempts to be frank and honest.
I am honored to call her my friend. I believe Jesus Christ smiles upon her and loves her, as he loves us all. And I thank her for being the lightning rod that has brought the issues that I have struggled with in my heart to the point of public discourse.
Whether you agree with her or disagree with her, it is well worth looking her up on Facebook, and following her journey. I am certain that one day, we will sit down and share a joke and a smile. Even if that day is on the other side of eternity in the presence of our Lord Jesus.

To Mosque or not to Mosque

Into The MosquePit?

Well, here we go with the limited , emotion-based, understanding of the freedoms that this country is founded on. To Mosque or not to Mosque. I understand emotions run high in a country or state that has experienced actual violence from a particular group of people, but to deny all Muslims a place to express their religious freedom in Manhatten because of the act or actions of a select few is the very essence of what our founding fathers attempted to stop with the First Amendment. Surely, it may seem to be in bad taste, but if we begin to make special examples of  groups of people we're excluded from the very basic freedoms that we all enjoy in America, do not be surprised when some other group feels that it is your group or your select few people that also are doing something that is just not quite acceptable.

I believe it's important for us to make sure that we protect the rights of those who we disagree with, as feverantly as we protect our own rights. I apologize for not having my quote book handy, but one of my favorite statements of the early American Fathers, is that, and I paraphrase, "I may disagree with you entirely, but I will fight to the death for your right to say what you believe ".  Certainly easier in theory than in practice. Anyway the point is that if we start making exceptions to our basic freedoms for groups that we have some claim against, that gun is likely to be pointed at our own heads eventually. Love our enemies is more than just a bumper sticker. It has practical application like letting people build their church in downtown Manhattan. And showing them that we are more tolerant and accepting than some of their more extreme counterparts.

Lazy Justice

Once again yesterday. I came face-to-face with my human weakness. Despite being a felon I was chosen for jury duty. And I was allowed to sit in judgment of one of my fellow Americans. I desperately wanted to the task. I was even chosen as the foreman.
The problem came not because I don't believe the man was likely guilty, but rather that the prosecution made such a poor showing of its case. They had the opportunity of two witnesses, but chose to just present one. The police had the opportunity to administer up to three test to get their valid proof, but opted to use just one, the cheapest. And that one malfunctioned. But truly justice showed her weakness in the resolve of her jury foreman, namely me. For, it seems that I was the only one concerned about these shortcomings. I profess to believe that you should provide two witnesses and not just one. Even if the one is an upstanding officer and the other is just an ordinary citizen. And yet arguments from fellow jurors to the effect of, "well they couldn't bring two officers, because the other one might be needed at a bank robbery", persuaded me to not stand my ground. Or allowing the justification that the other tests weren't offered, because they're only "required" to offer one. Even if it is insufficient. Or maybe it was the fact that I was supposed to be at dinner at 5:30 and it was fairly obvious that I was unlikely to sway anyone to my side of thinking that, "if all the ducks weren't all in a row", maybe this man should be cut free. Either way, I gave in and chose to believe that there was reasonable suspicion that he was guilty. Instead of letting him go because there was reasonable doubt that he wasn't.
I believe our verdict was just. I believe six good people found him guilty. And I guess I can only speak for myself when I say that at least one of them, compromised his principles for the sake of expediency and conformity and just plain laziness.

Time to Launch...Musings on Creationfest NW 2010

I just returned from my 5th Creationfest. and I come back with both and old and a new gripe.
The old one: Why is it that Christians are so standoffish? Granted that I would have more interaction if I pursued it better, but i use the worldly concert festival
as my contrast. If I was at a GreatfulDead type concert, I would meet many new friends(i.e. people would embrace me, invite me to their camps, eat with me, smoke with me, converse with me) even if I was shy. This doesn't seem to be the norm at Creationfest NW. I have only met a handful of people and that was by deliberate effort. I am amazed at how poorly the "they will know us by our love" people do at spontaneous community. Now I'm not saying they are not friendly, just clannish. Perhaps it's the lack of "social lubricants"
The new ones is more severe: The female speaker whos topic was sex/abstinence used questionable facts to sell her point. Now I understand the desire to curb/eliminate teen sex, but I felt that she went beyond slanting facts to outright lying, especially when speaking about condom effectiveness at limiting transmission of STD's. Her statements basically said that they were completely ineffective to protect against STD's, and this is patently untrue. Now I don't mean to condone premarital/promiscuous sex,but if we as Christians lie in our attempt to persuade teens out of sexual activity, we are more likely to have the whole message discarded when the lie is revealed.
Thanx for letting me vent.