What bothers me most about modern day religious leaders

I think I figured it out… I think I can begin to put into words what bothers me the most about modern day religious leaders —you know who I am talking about —pastors, preachers, evangelists, Religion professors, Sunday School teachers, Priests, Rabbis, the whole lot of them.

I remember back pretty clearly the moment that caused me to first become frustrated. I was in my mid to late twenties and I was totally immersed in the whole religious scene. I was in one of those meetings with others who were deeply immersed in the religious scene — you know, or if you have always been a lay person maybe you don’t. Sometimes the preacher types get together and act ministerial.

Well this was a small meeting of those types, and one of my close friends was giving the devotional. During his little devotion he spoke of Mother Teresa. It was quite interesting to me because Mother Teresa received absolutely no respect from the crowd that I associated with at that time. The big moment was right after he gave the devotional, the leader of our little group spoke up and asked him in an extremely condescending way, “You do realize that Mother Teresa is most likely in hell right now don’t you.” Now before you get too offended understand that the person who said this was someone that I looked up to and respected tons, but that statement broke something in me. I too wondered if Mother Teresa knew Christ, I too wondered how she could live like she did and still associate with the Catholic church, I too thought about her belief system and wondered what was the real answer, but the certainty with which he rebuked my friend shocked me and caused me to question things again. By the way, I know me calling someone condescending is just as bad as me calling someone fat — pot / kettle / black — I get it, but this made me think.

Ok, now let me make my point. The thing that bothers me the most is that so many of us religious type professionals talk like we have it all figured out. We speak about doctrinal things like we are the only ones who really understand. Ask us a question about the Bible and we give you the answer. We pretend we know and understand it all. For most of my life I thought that I just hadn’t read the Bible enough to understand it, but now I think I realize that I just hadn’t read it enough to realize and admit that it is full of things that I don’t understand!

Let me give you a taste — simply a taste of stuff that I don’t understand from the first 3 days of One Year Bible reading — oh, yes I have read this stuff before, but it is different when you aren’t trying to make the world think that you know it all….

· 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings. 8 They heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 Then the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?" 10 He said, "I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself."

o Why did God say where are you, if He knows everything? (I do still believe He is all powerful and all knowing – did He limit Himself for Adam and Eve?)

o Most religious people would say that God asked a question not because He didn’t know the answer, but because he wanted to teach Adam and Eve something, maybe that is exactly right, but today I admit that I don’t know. There is a tiny bit of me that thinks that God wouldn’t have asked a question that He knew the answer to because it seems like backhanded deceit — tiny bit of me.

o How could God be in the presence of sin? (I think I was taught that He can’t let our sin into heaven because it would damage His holiness.)

· 13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" And the woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." 14 The LORD God said to the serpent, " Because you have done this, Cursed are you more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you will go, And dust you will eat All the days of your life; 15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."

o I am still wondering why someone didn’t put this chick in a padded room since she was talking to snakes!

o But in the next sentence God talks to a snake and even curses a snake — go figure!

o Unless you are talking to snakes and hearing responses, I think it is time that we all admit that we don’t understand it all.

· 2 Again, she gave birth to his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of flocks, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. 3 So it came about in the course of time that Cain brought an offering to the LORD of the fruit of the ground. 4 Abel, on his part also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat portions. And the LORD had regard for Abel and for his offering; 5 but for Cain and for his offering He had no regard. So Cain became very angry and his countenance fell. 6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? 7 "If you do well, will not {your countenance} be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it."

o Why again was Cain’s offering not accepted and Abel’s was? I know that we say it was about the blood — Abel’s had blood and Cain’s didn’t but is that it?

o Others say that Cain’s offering represented his work and Abel’s represented God’s creation, but didn’t God create the plants just like He did the animals?

Well, I hope you get my point — there are tons of things that I don’t understand and I think it is time that we admit that we don’t really get it all.

What I do get and know beyond any doubt is that God wants to walk and talk with me and you, while I may not understand all of the Bible, and I certainly don’t understand all of God, I do understand that He was willing to do anything to get my sin and my shame out of the way so that I would quit hiding from Him just like Adam and Eve did in the garden.

One Year Bible and Talking Snakes

Well after two years off I have decided to attempt to read through the Bible in one year again. I am using a system where you read Old Testament, New Testament, and a taste of Psalms and Proverbs each day. You too should consider this. I have used the One Year Bibles in the past and I highly recommend them, but this year I am reading from the Message and using the bookmarks you can find at One Year Bible Online.

Well I am not going to take a ton of time to blog, but I just wanted to share what is on my mind. Over the past three years my inability to see through any lens other than my old fashion Baptist paradigm has begun to crumble. Now it seems that every time I read the Bible I see something differently than I had believed all my life, but I didn’t expect it to happen in early parts of Genesis.

Genesis 3:1 (The Message) says — The serpent was clever, more clever than any wild animal God had made. He spoke to the Woman: "Do I understand that God told you not to eat from any tree in the garden?" I read it again and again. Then I searched before and after that sentence for additional information that clarifies that verse, but I didn’t find what I was searching for.

Next I looked up the same passage in another translation. My good old standby is the NAS and there I read — “Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?"

Do you see what I am reading? Every time I have read that passage before I am sure that there was somewhere that Moses made it clear to everyone that this wasn’t just a snake, but it was a snake controlled by Satan himself. I remember as a kid thinking, “Why did God punish the snakes, they were just a victim of Satan?” I must have been taught that Satan appeared to Eve as a serpent, but I certainly can’t tell why from reading this passage.

For those of you who can’t watch or read Narnia stuff because of talking animals — throw away your Bibles, because animals talk and I am not just talking about an ass this time!

Well it is 1:19am so it is very likely that I am totally missing something. Maybe it is clear somewhere else in scripture that Satan was using the serpent as a puppet like I was taught growing up, but at this moment I am going to bed thinking about mankind being damaged and filled with shame because Eve and Adam chose to listen to a serpent instead of their creator! That serpent, better have had wings and a Mohawk or something cool!

Obama’s Election may Lead to the Overturning of Roe versus Wade

I am a huge fan of a terrible television show. Yes, I do have a one eyed devil (in the religious world I grew up in, I remember quite a few preachers calling the TV the “one eyed devil”) in my house—well actually I have a few. Tonight I watched Boston Legal, well actually I started watching a few minutes after it started because I was on the phone with my mother and I totally forgot that it was on. But I think Boston Legal has produced its best show ever, in this its final season.
Boston Legal is one of those shows that is always very politically motivated, and I would call it a very left wing minded show. In fact just a week ago I felt like the episode was another infomercial for President Elect Obama. Tonight was different. Tonight the writers of Boston Legal took on the subject of abortion and they debated this
subject as well and as clearly as I have ever heard it debated.
The shows primary character, Allen Shore (James Spader), is typically as liberal as any person you’ll ever meet. His counterpart Denny Crane (William Shatner), is a gun toting, conservative, right wing republican who was swayed at the last minute to vote for a democrat presidential nominee for the first time ever. Both of the show’s primary characters are blatantly immoral. The immorality seemed, to me, to be a knock on the republican, but it just now dawned on me that both characters are immoral so I can’t really say that the writers are painting the republican as immoral as a knock on the right because the liberal democrat is immoral as well.
Anyway, in tonight’s episode of Boston Legal the main subject at hand was abortion and the liberal
characters admitted that they believed they needed Roe versus Wade to mend their conscience about abortion. Two of the blatantly liberal attorneys each admitted that they had never quit regretting the abortions that they had been involved in earlier in their lives. Allen Shore seemed to admit that he had been the father of two aborted pregnancy, and Shirley Schmidt (Candice Bergen) admitted that she never got over the guilt of her abortion.
In what seemed dramatic to me, Allen Shore admitted that he had a little trouble actually believing that a fetus wasn’t an actual human child or that life didn’t start at conception. Personally I believe that most pro-choice advocates, if they were totally honest would admit that they too have trouble pretending that a fetus isn’t actually a human being.
Let me end my little advertisement for an immoral television show by making this shocking and possibly
naïve statement—Obama’s Election may Lead to the Overturning of Roe versus Wade. I know, I know—most of your think I am nuts, maybe I have mad cow disease, but hear me out if you have read this far.
Have you ever been in a good fight? Now this doesn’t seem to be the case with girls, but in my experience— sometimes when two guys getting into a good fight they come out of the fight as friends. Another thing that happens in some fights, fights of the words nature as opposed to fists—is each side runs intellectually to their poles. In other words the conservatives run to the furthest right pole and the liberals run to the left as far as possible. But once the fight is over, there is some seepage or sliding back to where each person actually lives or thinks. This I believe is especially true when you win the fight or debate, and even more so when you convincingly win the debate.
What if, since the liberal democrats won so convincingly they have a new found confidence and they are able to be more honest than ever? What if, as they become honest one of the things that they no longer feel compelled to hold on to as one of their pole issues (by pole issue I mean pole as in polar opposite—or as far apart as the north and south poles) is the issue of abortion?
Well, although I didn’t vote for Obama his election as President of the United States has excited me. I maybe naive and even stupid to even allow this thought from my mind to my fingertips, but it sure would be cool if Obama and other liberal democrats felt confident enough about their party and their platform to reconsider abortion. It seems odd to me that a party so concerned about the environment isn’t equally concerned about human life—see I do believe that life begins at conception.