Written on Passion Week 2016

Passion week. The beauty of union of Jesus the man and Jesus the Divine. Going from the glory of the donkey ride through the streets of Jerusalem to the resurrection. He rode into town on a donkey – a sign of peace – rather than a horse – a sign of military might and war.

Why did Jesus have to die?  The longer I’m a Christian, the more reasons I see why his death was necessary. The entry door into traditional Christianity is Jesus died for our sins. I agree. I don’t accept the full penal substitutionary theory of atonement; but I do accept Jesus died for my sins. You know. Sin. Those misdemeanors, naughties, boo-boos, poor choices that I made before I became a Christian and keep on making even after 39-1/2 years of being a Christ follower. Those things that my logic said a holy God could not allow himself to see and would have to punish.

God knew when he created us we weren’t Deity, so we wouldn’t do life right. We’d mess up, be egocentric and bumble around for our decades on the planet before we returned to dust. Yet, I find the most serious sin – the one Jesus had to die for – is that without somebody dying we couldn’t believe God could accept us and be in union with us.

But God was standing there like the Prodigal’s Father, with arms open, looking and watching and waiting to see us on the horizon so He could run to us and embrace us (sign of love and acceptance) and put a ring on our finger (sign of belonging) and coat on our back (sign of dignity) and kill the fatted calf (sign of nurturing and provision). God is love and He was always willing; it was our own wrong thinking that required a sacrificial lamb.  It’s the only thing that makes sense.

If Jesus had to die to “pay off” God for our messing up – then God was cruel and offered child sacrifice and was not the express image of his Son.  If Jesus had to die to “pay off” Satan for our messing up – then God was so weak and ineffective that He would not be the Almighty. Neither of those work for me; but if Jesus had to die to “pay off” my screwed up thinking about who God is, then God was a benevolent, loving, powerful and loving Deity who truly wanted a relationship with me – and I was too caught up in my own mess to realize it.

Fr. Anthony de Mello Quote

“I was neurotic for years. I was anxious and depressed and selfish. Everyone kept telling me to change. I resented them and I agreed with them, and I wanted to change, but simply couldn’t, no matter how hard I tried. Then one day someone said to me, Don’t change. I love you just as you are. Those words were music to my ears: Don’t change, Don’t change. Don’t change . . . I love you as you are. I relaxed. I came alive. And suddenly I changed!” — Anthony De Mello

Love Has No Limits

I wrote this last Easter, but wanted to put it on this blog, I don't recall if I had posted it or not:

John 13:34  So now I am giving you a new commandment: Love each other. Just as I have loved you, you should love each other.  (New Living Translation)

Today’s scriptures were about Jesus going where the disciples could not go and to Love each other like Jesus loved us. The part of the reading that was not read told more details about Jesus and Judas Iscariot’s final parting. Jesus knew Judas would betray him to death; yet Jesus still offered him love and dignity. The priest pointed out that giving a person a special piece of food was a way to offer dignity and honor in a public setting; a custom that remained until the 15th century when a Lord would favor a subject with a choice bit of food from their plate. Jesus gave that to Judas…. knowing full well of his soon-coming betrayal and that the betrayer was Judas.  That certainly means I have a long way to go to offer that same kind of compassion and dignity to others.  To me it speaks not only of living in an attitude of forgiveness and restitution, but living with boldness and trust that I, with God’s help, can live in the now and realize I can and probably will have disappointment and hurts; but can live above that knowledge. I’m not saying live in denial; but live in recognition without letting it affect me.

Where's My Faith Now?

The Santa Clause God who rewards and punishes and sees all and knows all and judges all. Bah Humbug. I like the God my Dad presented who was encouraging, loving, humble… was like 1 Corinthians 13. After my conversion at 3:30 AM on Saturday, October 13, 1975, I feared and tried to obey (at least not make angry) the God I was later presented with for decades; I very much wanted to be good enough to be accepted by that harsh taskmaster God. I couldn’t love him because he was too terrifying. But I lied to myself and others that I did love him because it was the proper thing to say.  


One of my favorite quotes is by A. W. Tozer (an evangelical pastor of 40+ years) who wrote “The Knowledge of the Holy”, “What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us.” Why is it important about us?  Because we become what we perceive about God.  We’re children and we want to grow up to be just like our Father.  By the way, that book is about the attributes of God can be found free online. I read it about 12 years ago and loved it and the language was beautiful and required thought and wasn’t like reading a 6^th grade primer but challenged me after having read Christian books for decades that had lowered my vocabulary to that level.

My 12-step sponsor was a powerful woman of God. Her ministry was to handicapped children. Even as a spinster in her 60s, she had adopted many children who were dying from AIDS, were Down’s syndrome, had physical deformities and had buried many when their disease and conditions took their life. She also had several foster children. She said going to church faithfully (She was Assembly of God), was a challenge as she had 1 blind child, 3 in wheelchairs, 1 on crutches and the Downs children would easily wander off if not watched closely. Yet, she found time to daily read my journal, make comments and suggestions. One suggestion she made was that my God was too stern. To find a chapter in the Psalms about a loving, caring, nurturing God and memorize it. I started with Psalms 23. Before I started finding my thoughts embracing the possibility of a loving God who was on my side as a generous, validating Father, I’d had to memorize over 40 chapters of the Bible. Only a few are still semi-memorized, but memorizing them got them deeper so they could erase the damage the presentation of the cruel God had done. As my perception of God changed, so did my personality  and I found myself being more generous and validating to others – loving them in ways that didn’t exalt me and minimize them; or minimize me and exalt them. I kicked down the ladders and all people stand on level ground with God lifted higher.

I consider myself spiritual. Since most evangelical, fundamentalist or Pentecostal Christians would consider me a heretic; and I'm okay with that. It's not their opinion about me, but God's opinion about me that matter. I’m not much into labels, as labels not only define, they limit. I  don’t want to limit God and I don’t want to limit my experience of God-in-me and me-in-God.  (John 14:20)  


Before joining Anglican, I was in Assembly of God or in churches pastored by graduates of Rhema Bible Training Center of Tulsa (my children’s dad was a Rhema grad). When God called me to the Anglican fellowship, I was quite sure He was directing me wrong. I’d walked knowing the Spirit’s movement in me for decades and knew I was being obedient. Next I thought maybe He was using me as a bridge between the right and left wing of modern Christianity. Then I discovered I was there because God was working on me and in me. The fellowship I attend, has no posted doctrines or rules as they trust God to direct us. The only unwritten “rule” is to walk lovingly supportive of others whether we agree with where they are in their walk or not – that God is in charge of their journey. So there are people who are everywhere from Fundamental to very liberal and we wash dishes together, eat together, talk together, question together. It sometimes makes me wonder if that’s why Judaism uses the debate and then changing sides and debate the other position as part of their learning style. It gives me a chance to walk in their shoes - or respectfully listen to their stories and better understand them, and better know myself.

Although a voting “member” of that Anglican community, my thoughts about my faith walk would be more in line with unstructured, liberal Quakerism. There is no active Quaker church in this area, so I feel lead to stay Anglican. In case you wonder what I currently believe, I won’t reinvent the wheel (or the words), where this very long article defines both the similarities and differences of Christian Fundamentalism and unstructured, liberal Quakerism.
https://universalistfriends.org/library/a-quaker-s-response-to-christian-fundamentalism
I found the article very informative – just found it today. I like how it validates each side and gives people dignity.

Since I have a living faith, it means it grows, changes, adapts, sheds, expands, shrinks and is not static. The only thing that remains static is God-in-me and me-in-God and my ministry scripture of 2 Corinthians 1:4:  “God comes along side us when we go through hard times, and before you know it, He brings someone along side so we can be there for that person just like God was there for you.”  (paraphrase of the Message Bible – since I was too lazy to look it up to make sure it was exact.) I had self-debated if I was called to pulpit ministry. I’ve spent years behind a piano and microphone leading praise and worship and I still fill-in as alternate at my current church (where we have a praise band and use modern choruses and a few old-time gospel songs). When God lead me to 2 Cor. 1-4 about 15 years ago, it was like coming home to my true calling.... being there for others, like God is there for me.

I don’t see that age is an issue of finding our calling and following it. As long as we can still suck air, God isn’t done with us.

What can bring us closer to God then experiencing Him?  Nature was the first Bible (1 Cor 15:46). For me, when I can’t experience God in nature, then I’m not experiencing God in anything but I’m back in my ego-ism (sin) and living for me – often intellectualizing God in my head instead of enjoying my relationship with Him.

Still Around

I'm still around, still growing spiritually and loving my God and my life.  Just haven't had much I wanted to write publicly about.

"Institutional Christianity will die of boredom long before it dies of controversy. Controversy is indeed a sign of life."  - Bishop John Shelby Spong

Extra-Marital and Non-Marital Sexual Love

This was written over a year ago after my parish priest mentioned non-marital sex was not a sin. I studied my Bible and talked to friends who were interested in the topic, but I had not published it because it could be misconstrued; however, I am finally at the place to publish it.  Please read my post on Sex, Celibacy and Hebrew Words to better understand more of my thoughts on Christian sexuality.
My home church is in a liberal parish in a liberal diocese (my opinion) where living together without marriage doesn't prohibit people from becoming ordained clergy including the priesthood. My parish priest brought up positives of living together prior to marriage in his Maundy Thursday homily. He did not give scriptures or Biblical word histories in coming to that conclusion; but I had arrived at that conclusion several months ago after doing a Bible study and discussing the topic with friends interested in this topic from a Biblical and moral standpoint. This is from that study.

Modern dictionaries define words as they are currently used. In using a modern dictionary to define an old or ancient word can lead to error or confusion. Examples in the King James Bible. the word amazement meant terror; bowels meant heart or emotions; and careful meant anxious. Today's meaning is quite different for those words and many others. The Bible seems to be very specific in the use of adultery and fornication. I wanted to delve deeper into the definitions and determine if they are or are not interchangeable.

In the Old Testament, the word "adultery" comes from the Hebrew word "niaph" and my Bible dictionaries gave several meanings: a person who had (a) sex with a married woman; (b) a married woman who had sex with a man other than her husband, (c) idolatrous worship or (d) to apostatize.

The New Testament Greek words "pornea"  is often translated "fornication;" and akatharsia is often translated "uncleanness."  According to B. A. Robinson, " By simply defining the words in a narrow or wide sense, religious liberals and conservatives can totally change the meaning of the Bible."  Whoa!  That's a weighty thought as I want to properly understand the Word of God without making it too wide or too narrow but accurate.

Although the Victorians told us fornication means premarital sex, it does NOT specifically or exclusively mean that. According to several Bible dictionaries, the  Greek word, "pornea" can be translated to mean (a) pornography, (b) fornication, (c) idolatry, (d) whoredom; (e) harlotry and comes from the root word "pernaō," that means to "sell off" something. It can also mean having sex with a temple prostitute. (1 Cor. 10.8)

Originally, the term fornication was derived from the Indo-European word gwher.  It means "To heat, warm." Derivatives include brand, brandy, forceps, furnace and fornicate. I was curious how forceps made it into the list; the simple answer is forceps were originally  used to carry hot coals. In Roman times, brothels were called "fornices." In 1303 the word came to mean a person who paid a prostitute for sexual services; the prostitute was not a fornicator but a prostitute.

Now that we know a bit of the word history, let's dig back into the Bible and see what it says about sexual immorality. Leviticus 18 gives a long list of what is considered sexually immoral. Premarital sex is not on the list. That chapter might be worth reading in case you're curious. The word nakedness comes from the word "pudendum."  The medical term pudendum is defined as "elating to, occurring in, or lying in the region of the external genital organ."  

In the Old Testament (Leviticus 20:10), adultery (sex between two people where one or both were married or engaged to another) was treated as a capital crime - a stoning to death offense. Since God often compares faithfulness to Him with faithfulness to a mate; and compares loving God with loving our partner - it's not surprising that adultery is considered a sin with capital punishment. God's law makes strong boundaries to help people see how important faithfulness to Him and to a marital partner is.

Pre-marital sex on the other hand, required the male lover to give the father the "bride price" since he had robbed the father of the value of a virgin and shamed the family; plus, at the father's choice, was required to irrevocably marry the girl. (Exodus 22.16-17) While the man in this situation, could not divorce the woman, the Old Testament law allowed her to divorce him if he did not provide adequate, pleasurable lovemaking, clothing or food. (Exodus 21.7-11) Thus, non-marital sex (neither partner was married) was treated as a civil matter based on devaluing the father's "property", NOT as a criminal offense.

Thus, am I stating that promiscuity is Biblical?  Absolutely not!  To follow Jesus's Great Commandment of Loving God and Loving Others (Matthew 22.36-38); sharing a loving, sexual bond is not a sin.  A Biblical test for a loving relationship follows 1 Corinthians 13:4-8a: "Love is patient. Love is kind. Love isn't jealous. It doesn't sing its own praises. It isn't arrogant. It isn't rude. It doesn't think about itself. It isn't irritable. It doesn't keep track of wrongs. It isn't happy when injustice is done, but it is happy with the truth. Love never stops being patient, never stops believing, never stops hoping, never gives up. Love never comes to an end."  If an unmarried couple can have an intimate relationship that is based on that loving scripture, then I don't see it as anti-Biblical.

In summary, Adultery was treated as a "sin" resulting in death by stoning. The Bible didn't state "Yes, non-marital sex is okay" but the law treated it as a human situation, not as a crime. Rather surprising since the law was given about 3,400 years ago! Comments by other Bible writers about fornication can't change the fact of what God said.

In the Bible, God comes as a fire or is compared to a fire that burns away the chaff. Since the root word for fornication has many derivates meaning fire or burn. And since Paul says it is better to marry than to burn. Could that be interpreted that a couple who has pre-marital or non-marital sex, rather than just satisfying their sexual desire should marry or at least live together so their intimate relationship causes them to burn away some of the chaff in their life and learn to be less egocentric and more giving and compassionate and to be more like Jesus. That would fit with what my priest alluded to on the Maundy Thursday sermon.

I interpret the Bible as explaining non-marital sex is permissible and holy when shared in a loving, committed relationship with the goal of being more Christlike; however, sex to "scratch an itch" without love, commitment or a goal for greater holiness could be emotionally or spiritually damaging to the individuals. Persons who still hold the sex until marriage is the only Biblical way to enjoy the delights of sexual intimacy, would do best to follow Paul's teaching in 1 Timothy 1:19 " Cling to your faith in Christ, and keep your conscience clear. For some people have deliberately violated their consciences; as a result, their faith has been shipwrecked."