Fear

I've heard many sermons, and read many Christian writings, about fear.  There are lots of good quotes about fear.  And I've been thinking a lot about fear.

Why all the focus on fear?  Well, fear is a dangerous thing.  A very dangerous thing.  Much of the bad that goes on in the world is rooted in fear.

I think way too much of my life has been driven by fear.  And I think it's done a lot of damage to me. 

I've been thinking about this - and it definitely rings true.  Much of the impact has been in stopping me from doing things - often it stopped me from living.  Probably the best example is with dating.  I did very little dating, but it wasn't because I didn't want to.  It was because I was always afraid.  The very little dating I did do was almost always with women who were socially aggressive - they almost always made it very clear that I should ask them out (or, more often, they just flat out asked me out first).  Off the top of my head, I can only think of one woman that I dated - sort of - who didn't - and that was only sort of dating (a couple movies - a couple dinners - but it almost seemed more like friends hanging out)

Fear is, I think, the root of most if not all anger.  I think most of the fights (by which I mean angry verbal exchanges) that I've had with Kara, at least those I've participated in (we both occasionally actually somehow don't let the other bait us - and one of will be fighting and the other not! :) -- but that doesn't happen often enough) -- most of those angry words from me have been rooted in fear.  Most often, fear that I might lose her.  I wonder what the root of her anger has been?   

Perhaps more damaging to me, though, was the impact of fear on life actions - rather than on arguments with my wife or on stopping actions.  Specifically, I've been thinking a lot about my career decisions.  I spent a lot of time in jobs that seemed to have the sole purpose of toughening me up.  But, the problem with that, is that I'm not a tough guy.  I don't think I was ever supposed to be a tough guy.  Whenever I put on the tough guy suit I've never felt comfortable - and often I've actually felt pretty horrible.

But growing up I remember the worst feeling I had - and I had it a lot - was feeling weak.  I hated feeling weak.  And so I've spent most of my life trying to feel strong.  But I think I've done it all the wrong ways.  I've done it by trying to be something I'm not.  One doesn't have to be a tough guy with a tough guy job to feel strong.  In fact, since those jobs never really fit me well, they tended to just make me feel all that more weaker - but I could still hide behind the role and kind of convince myself that I was strong.

And, although I've abandoned the tough-guy jobs, I really haven't stopped seeking strength.  I was a Union shop steward for awhile - in part because I wanted to help people (which I think is more in line with the real me) - but also in part because it's a strong guy role.  You get to beat up on management (figuratively of course).  That did have the advantage of being at least a little in line with the real me - since I was helping people (compared to the Army, for example, where while you are protecting the nation, that's a pretty theoretical fact - whereas in the day to day reality the job is about killing people - or in my case helping others kill people -- a good job for some types of people, maybe, but probably not me being true to myself).

I've wondered a lot about why I had that overwhelming desire to be baptized.  I note it was definitely during a period when I was feeling very weak and fearful.  And I now thinking on all this, I suspect that I wanted to be baptized because I wanted to feel strong.  I hoped it would make me feel less weak.  And it did.  But, it wasn't an absolute.  It didn't take away the struggle.  I still feel far to weak.  I'm hoping that if I keep reading the Bible and keep listening to religious audio books and keep going to church and keep hanging out with godly people - I'm hoping that I'll find some of God's strength - and I'm hoping that I'll find this to be the kind of strength that does fit me well.

Ok - so that was quick thoughts on this - I'll have to work on it some more later. 

  
     

Children of God

I've seen many references to children of God - but haven't been noting them.  But then a reference I just read in my mind seemed possibly tied to early OT things - and it got me wondering.  But not enough time just now to discuss - plus I want to go through again and see what those other references were. 

But here's what I saw this morning:

John 11:51-52

Caiphais prophesied that "...Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one." 

In my mind this morning - and maybe it's just the early hour - but I'm seeing "scattered children of God" connected to Cain being made to wander.  I also think about how some scientists think maybe humans cross bred with Neanderthals - which could arguably be a mistake in the science from when humans actually cross bred with a superior being such as the Nephelim (or, are the Nephelim the children of that cross breeding??) --   

Also interesting is that fact that periodically throughout history there have been extraordinary men who seemed just beyond human in their thinking and influence.  I'm thinking of DaVinci - but also Einstein

---


Robert Browning
Grow old along with me! The best is yet to be, The last of life, for which the first was made; Our times are in his hand who saith, "A whole I planned, Youth shows but half; trust God: See all, nor be afraid!

Living in the Age of Vampires

I believe we are moving into a new Romantic Age.  People are focusing more and more on feelings and less on logic and rationality.  People are becoming more and more interested in things beyond work - money is less and less important.  People are demanding something more comfortable than the "cold hard facts" -- why did anyone ever want to sit upon something cold and hard to begin with?  And even so-called traditional church is becoming less attractive to people.  But this does not mean the end of religion.  In fact, I suspect the Age of Reason was a much bigger threat to religion.  But churches have spent so much time and effort trying to make religion fit into the straight jacket of reason that there is going to be quite a lot of adjusting to do.  And we aren't going to throw out logic and reason - we are just going to push it back from it's recent attempts to take over all aspects of our lives.  Since we're not throwing logic and reason out, churches will have to find ways to speak to our romantic inclinations while not abandoning logic and reason.

I believe a good example of this might be the blossoming interest in vampires.  And more importantly, how vampires are being portrayed.  My first real introduction to vampires in any big sense was the Ann Rice books.  But note how her books are really an in depth exploration of the psychology of what to us would in the Rational Age be simply deemed purely evil creatures.  And in the Rational Age we wouldn't really go all that deep in our analysis of vampires.  They would simply be painted as evil albeit somewhat intelligent animals - really they were more a vehicle for a story about a hero who triumphs over nature.  But then came along the Ann Rice books.  And I've never seen vampires the same way since.

Then, Kara really pushed me into watching the Buffy series.  Given how campy and low budget the show was, it is amazing how popular the show was. I was really put off at first by the low budget campy portrayal of vampires.   But I quickly learned that there were two sets of vampires in the show.  There were the weak nondescript vampires who were simply something for our hero to fight.  But then there were the fleshed out vampires - with personalities and histories - whose stories we were allowed to learn.  So we had both the Age of Reason vampires, and the Romantic Age vampires, all in one show.             

More recently, for example the Twilight take on vampires.  (Kara wanted to go - so we went to the first two movies - I never read the books but I think Kara might have.  So that's the extent of my understanding of Twilight - I'm no expert - but ...).  In Twilight - vampires are not nearly as easy to kill as they are in many earlier portrayals.  They don't, most notably, need to avoid all sun light.  In fact, they (mostly?) avoid sun light to avoid standing out.  They shimmer in the light.  I find the Twilight take on vampires (my superficial understanding of it) to be interesting as it opens up a lot of possibilities - and it really is more believable.  If vampires are evil and not just misunderstood "others" - or for that matter even if they are just misunderstood "others" who are very powerful but only exist in limited numbers - then it doesn't seem likely that sunlight would be deadly to them.  That seems more like a perspective of the Age of Reason - more like a metaphor for knowledge (light) overcoming all ignorance (darkness) - so much so that even a small light beam can instantly kill an otherwise nearly indestructible creature.  (funny that i've now read Exodus 34:29-35 -- where Moses' face become radiant from speaking with God -- not that I think Moses is supposed to be a vampire of course -- but an interesting coincidence ) 

So, what does this all have to do with church?  Well, if they want to be relevant, churches have to introduce church goers to vampires.  Ok - not literally - but I have to say as I'm reading through the Bible I'm finding all kinds of romantic things that churches seem to just ignore or gloss over.

Take the Nephilim for example.  I've mentioned them to a few people - and I think every time I do they just think I'm joking or that I'm focusing on the wrong thing.  But I think those who just dismiss the Nephilim are the ones not focusing on the right thing.  If you want to hook people today - you need to talk about the supernatural - you need to talk about the miraculous - you need to explain why the Nephilim are in there.  And don't explain it by saying God is mysterious - that's a dismissal not an explanation.  Why did Jesus just say "Is it not written in your Law, "I have said you are gods"?  If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came - and Scripture cannot be set aside..."  (John 10:34-35)  Who did he call gods?!?!  And more importantly, why are no churches talking about this???  And if they do decide to talk about it, I highly recommend not simply dismissing it all with some rational logical argument that in effect actually throws it out.  It is not only in the OT, but Christ himself is citing it and using it to support his position.  So there must be something to it.

But the big big question, remember the end of my first paragraph! -- the really big question will be how to reconcile the mystical with the rational?  I believe that is the age we are moving into.  I believe we will not simply fall back into a dark age - but rather we are moving forward into an age where logic and rationality are married to magic and mysticism.  

Apropos of this being election day -- I just realized that the difference between conservatives and liberals is often due to a difference in their approach to the romantic.  I've often heard liberals complain about conservatives having an uninformed attachment to the past.  They often complain that conservatives want to live in a yesterday that never was.  Conservatives, however, often complain that liberals have a pie-in-the sky desire for a utopia that will never come.  Both, it seems, are using similar logical arguments to fight against the particular brand of romanticism of the other.  Maybe that's why politics seems so personal these days - it reflects the transition to romanticism - but everyone is holding onto some of their logical approach while embracing just some of romanticism.  Maybe as we progress further on the road to romanticism we'll be able to reconcile the love with the past and the love of the future and thus make politics less viscerally frightening.  (Remember - whenever we see anger - look for the fear - it is always there somewhere).     

   

On lies

I overheard something that has been bouncing around in my head.  A woman was talking to a couple of her friends, and I overheard her say, "I don't care, I'll lie if I have to."  I didn't hear anything leading up to this statement, and I didn't hear the words of her friends' reply.  I could hear the tone of her friends, however, and they sounded agreeable - not like they were correcting her.

To me, this is an example of the evil that we in our society in this time in history are the most likely to encounter.  I'm not saying the woman is evil - not at all - I think everyone has ways in which they are good and everyone has ways in which they are not so good.

And, I don't really think that a lie told in the heat of the moment is the best example of evil.  Evil is scarey.  Lying when caught with your hand in the cookie jar is not all that scarey.  It's more an example of our everyday fallen state.  It's the kind of lie that, if you're given some time to think about things, you are apt to confess.  It's the kind of lie that we're all prone to do, and so we understand that a statement made by someone just caught doing something they shouldn't be doing might well bring about a lie.  Since we expect it and understand it, it isn't all that damaging, and so it isn't all that scarey. 

But, to actually plan to lie, and to proudly announce it to your friends, and for your friends to be supportive of that decision, that is for me the scarey kind of lie.

So, what if there is a good reason to lie?  What if Hitler had been caught instead of killing himself, and what if you were told your testimony was needed to convict him, and he will go free if you don't lie?  Would that be ok?  Actually, I think that would be the absolute worst time to lie.  First, although God can take bad actions and do good things with them, that doesn't justify doing bad things, even if you think the reasons are good.  Second, lying with the intent to bring about pain and suffering to someone is completely different than lying to protect yourself.  Third, note that the reason given for lying is that there isn't enough evidence to convict unless you do.  If that were not the case, then you wouldn't even be thinking about lying.  But, if your testimony is needed to convict, ie if you have a reason to lie, then you are in effect replacing the entire judicial proceeding with your own judgment.

We're told to not judge others, which is a very problematic command in many ways.  But not in this scenario.  Of all the ways of interpreting the command to not judge others, surely putting ourselves in the position of being the final say on another person's guilt or innocence - and using a lie as the means of doing that - that must surely fall smack in the middle of the prohibition against judging others.  [Exodus 20:16, 23:1-7]

But, the woman I heard most surely wasn't going after Hitler.  Hitler did exist, so don't take this the wrong way, but for almost all of us, almost all the time, there are no Hitlers in our lives.  Most likely the woman was afraid that she was going to get in trouble for something and she was saying she would lie if she had to in order to get out of it.

If that is the case, then note how this differs from getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar.  In this case, she isn't caught in the heat of the moment.  She instead she is actually planning on lying in the future.  That to me is not as bad as lying to harm another (that is, for example, lying in order to convict Hitler).  I was going to say it was the second worst kind of lying, but then I thought of other types that are worse - such as lying to promote yourself, or lying as gossip.  Gossip is probably the worse kind of lying that we run into on a daily basis - and this particular woman is a big gossip.  I often hear her changing the facts in her gossip just a little here or there in order to make it more interesting - and by making it more interesting she's making it more damaging to the person being gossiped about.  Hopefully, though, she wasn't proudly announcing to her friends that she was planning on lying in her gossip.            [perhaps a separate entry about gossip?]

Nonetheless, she was actually planning on lying, and she had the support of her friends.  So, why was she planning on lying?  I don't know, but it seems likely she was trying to protect herself.  If so, I have to wonder why it would be worth it. She might get in trouble with the boss about something.  But when you're in that situation you own up and take your thumps.  I've found bosses usually actually respect you more in the long run if you do that.  And, if caught in the lie, you're apt to do more harm to yourself than if you just took your punishment. 

She might well not actually lie when push comes to shove.  I might actually have caught her in the heat of the moment - not of being caught but of anticipating the possibility of being caught.  She might have just figured out that she was about to get into trouble for something and so she was, in her mind, in the scenario of being caught with her hand in the cookie jar.

Ok - that would take her statement into the category of not so scarey lies.  But it still leaves her friends.  They should be advising that she not lie.  Or if they're not brave enough to do that, then they at least should remain silent.  But to actually be making sounds of encouragement?  Now that is perhaps the scariest part of the whole exchange.  That is the seed of the mob - of the witch trials - of the Red Scare - of so much of the great evil we see in the world.