Dennis On: "They Come...They Go"

They come....They Go

Having been a 26 year pastor in 13 congregations in 5 states, and after having gone through the theological slaughter of the 90's perpetuated upon the membership by "leadership," of the WCG, I have to ask the question, where did all the friends go?


I found myself in an odd situation. I loved the people in my congregations and had many wonderful friendships and friends, I thought.  This final congregation in South Carolina was the toughest by far, even if everything was going well.  They were used to being rewarded by the minister for their loyalty and friends became deacons and included in the lives of all the brethren. There were always three or four waiting and chaffing at the chance to be the real minister.  Ugh!  I didn't work that way so quickly fell afoul of their system. I didn't take deacons on visits to  know and hear the problems of others.  That was not their business and people aren't honest when they feel they are being grilled.  One on one worked for me, because someday I'd be moving on.  At any rate, Church Picnics went from really fun to drama events. We stopped having them.


Some would tell me what the church was really up to at HQ and that this or that really was going to change. Dumb me would call Joe Tkach and simply ask him if A/B or C was true or not.  It was never true according to Joe.  It was ALWAYS true according to what actually came to be. As a result , I'd come back and tell the church all was well and then end up looking like a fool caught between the Administration that lied to me and the members who thought I was stupid and naive.  Of course I was..ha.   Thus, as the baloney in the middle of the sandwich, neither side kept much in touch.  That was my experience with friends.


The only time those who have either stayed with the new and improved version of the Church, which has changed it's name to distance itself from it's own past, or those that have left it for splinter groups that profess to keep the old ways intact, or those that have moved on to greener and more stable pastures, or the disillusioned meet is at funerals or in the final days of some former church friend. Sad isn't it? One has to be dying or dead to find out you had friends after all. But then unless you were having an out of body experience attending your own funeral, you'd not know. It is more comfortable being friends to the dying than the living. And I am sure after I am dead, thousands will once again say that we were friends. Dealing with a dead Diehl is easier than dealing with the real Diehl. :)


When churches implode, as they do, friendships explode. I can count on one hand the friendships that have stayed in tact since my being labeled a minister who "knew a lot about Jesus, but did not know Jesus" and then being terminated.  Don't misunderstand. I was outgrowing the literalism of any church but was in a transtion.  And...I have fingers left over!
It is reckless change and administration of policy that tears friendships apart when associated with churches and the hope the promote in their teachings. Local ministers, who can have their own dictatorial ways, can tear friendships apart as well by causing "friends" to make choices and take sides in endless and stupid disputes or personality cults.


In my own case, I have had more than one former member, whose children I had married and whose husbands I had buried, pass by me at the lobby desk in a hospital where work to make ends meet. I simply do not exist to them because I am no longer one of them, whatever that might mean. I have known minister friends who have drank themselves to death after reckless change confused them and their friends marginalized them for being hurt and confused. One minister even jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge if you can imagine that. That takes planning and a total lack of friends left to help you through. Suicide seems often the mistaken idea that the death of an old idea mistranslates into we think we have to die  It's a permanent solution to a short term problem. . Very sad but I understand it.


So when your church implodes, why do your friendships explode? There are several types of friendships built when we become a part of a church and their dynamics are all a bit different.
First of all, everyone in any particular believes that "we all have to be friends," because, well, we are in the Church. The common bond of similar or same beliefs is what constitutes the friendship. In any other setting, we would not be friends with most of these people as we would really have nothing else in common to hold it together. Thus, when the church implodes, the friendships explode, fall apart and are not salvageable. They are based on being in the common church with a common belief. When that falls apart, that is generally the end of your friendships.


If you leave the church in discouragement, anger or theology fatigue, you are now a seed fallen on bad ground. Those who you leave behind will read about you in Matthew as one of the seeds that fell on hard ground and when trials came alone etc, did not have the ability to survive. Of course, it will be a bullshit explanation, but it makes them feel good to see that they are off the friendship hook with you for being disillusioned, hurt, marginalized or just worn out by controversy. Without the church work, doctrine or goals, you have no friendship. These people will disappear quickly should you ever begin to wake up to the fact that NO church knows all it needs to know about the Bible to be THE one true church. Of course, since no one attends the one false church, you will be labeled, disfellowshipped, avoided and generally cast into the Lake of Fire, Hell or other imagined bad places for the wicked person you are. These are mere not friends that stick closer than brothers, or at least not unless you live in the same house. Since you moved out, you are no brother of theirs.


The second kind of church friends you will cultivate are genuine friends that are friends in spite of church. You have the church in common. You met at church, but you also have kids, ideas and needs in common and develop a friendship outside of just church stuff. Your kids grow up together, make fun of the church and minister together, as do you from time to time and it's just normal. But if you leave the Church or the Church leaves you, they have agonizing decisions to make. If they stay, they might sneak your friendship but if the Church was still the main draw, they eventually will leave you alone, high and dry. They might even leave the church themselves, but if they move on to an even more righteous church than the one they left, and you just became disillusioned and non-committal, they will spend some time getting you to follow them into the truer church, or drop you in time as well. They don't mean it. You're not being theologically tied to any belief and even willing to step outside boxes that lead to different conclusions about religion will leave you without these friends in time. They will feel sorry for you for not moving on to even an more true church in their quest for the one true one. These friends will make you feel icky if you insist on staying around them just because they are all you have left. They will make you feel inferior for your beliefs or lack of them compared to their now new and improved ones, which is always a sign you might need to just forget the friendship. It's not real.

Another group are those that may be somewhat like you in your skepticism and having learned more than the church would have wished you to learn from the whole experience. You'll have all the bitching in common about the past. You will have quality time living in, mulling over and analyzing the past, but when you tire of that and realize that your life is not going forward in the past, these friends will also dry up and blow away.

You may outgrow them and bring your life up into the present while they wallow in the past and you grow tired of it, or you may stay stuck and they move on. Either way, the friendship will dissolve in time, as friendship based on sharing only a bad experience is doomed in the long run. You'll know the "friendship" is over when they keep sending you updates on the goings on the past Church and you don't care. In the world of blogging and email, you may have attracted these types of friends because of your common disastrous experience, but you have never even met these people in real time and would not know them if they sat next to you. But you were friends, until you weren't.


I am writing this while listening to the great hymns of the Church. Me...Mr. Skeptical, listening to the old hymns. I get teary because it provokes the chemistry of a more simple time, when I was younger and didn't know I was going to learn and experience all I was going to with regards to Church, ministers, theology, politics, behavior, humans and reality.
Wait a sec, It is Well With My Soul is playing...gotta get teary...ok, back.


Seems a shame church friends who have suffered through the ridiculous and reckless folly of those who are determined to not think change through, have to meet only at funerals of the wounded and now dead friends of the past. Maybe if someone had been a real friend, in spite of Church, they would still be alive.


Well, I guess that answers in part, where did they all go? People who hop from truer church to truer church in pursuit of the TRUE Church build friendships based on being a member of that particular church or set of beliefs. That is one kind of friendship but they also tend to dissolve quickly when conditions in that church change. That has been my experience in spades.
While the Bible says "a friend loves at all times", that has proven elusive to say the least among the survivors of the WCG debacle.



In reality, I  find that many who say they love you or are you best friend don't tell you it's conditional.

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com

Dennis On "A Monkey Named Ubastard"

A Monkey Named Ubastard

I have a monkey. His name is Ubastard. I named him that because that's what he calls me when I let him. He lives in my head and is the monkey on my own back. I suspect I have befriended him by now and give him a comfy place to live in there, but I wish he would go away.

Ubastard has an amazing ability to bridge the gap between my mind and my emotions. Once he starts his dialogue with me, I can literally feel him connect the two. Since emotions are the body's reaction to the spinning of the mind, the little booger seems to have the amazing ability to start the processes of anxiety or a bit of depression at will. Ubastard!

I believe UB has live there since I was a kid but spent most of my own childhood just growing up himself. I don't remember all that many discussions with him when I was kid. I didn't even know his name was Ubastard until I went to Bible College. It wasn't really a seminary. The way the Bible was studied was to simply read it and weave it together in one complete incoherent whole. There was no study of the who, what, where, when, why and how's of scripture. I have had to do ALL that during my time as a Pastor and since.

 Let's face it, when you go to a denominational school, you get the denominational spin. I would have done better at Harvard Divinity School where one no doubt can freely admit to other perspectives on the topic. As a life long liberal Dutchman, I am sure I could have been persuaded to let go of guilt, shame and fear aspects of religion and enjoy the philosophical study of theology. But oh no, I had to affiliate with the literalists who feed Ubastard and inserted him in my mind when I was either deep in prayer or sleeping.

Anyway, at Bible College, one gets molded, shaped and eventually cloned into the very image of God, even though you don't. I remember sitting in first year Bible class which was a survey of the harmonious Gospels which later I came to see aren't. We heard a lot about the life and times of Jesus and his merry men, but a lot about sex as well. Ubastoring young people on the topic of sex in Bible College is a must. While I was wondering how the 12 could go so long without intimacy or sex, I was being assured that they had become Eunuch's for the Kingdom of God's sake. Ewwww.

I did read where Peter had a mother-in-law, and thus a wife, but then she faded quickly out of the picture. For either one year, or three or ten, depending, these guys must have been serial killers at heart walking around in the desert and saying "behold" all the time. Guys who don't experience intimacy and sex do this I believe...and are very angry inside. I get curious when a pastor dwells on the evils of sex. But I spare you.

The should not's and must nots were endless. We were entertained with the professor prancing around the stage acting "queer" as that was the in word then and we all were supposed to laugh and be men about it all. We tried to talk in deep masculine voices and not wear pink so as not to be confused with the enemy. Once, he counted slowly to four to illustrate to the women in the class just how quickly a man could aroused over their not dressing discretely. My buddies and I estimated he was more than two seconds off on the slow side and that what a girl wore had little to do with it. Add to all this weekly in class meme programming, weekends of Bible Study and Sermons, and Ubastard has acquired an endless supply of criticism to throw at me when I left him out of the picture and fell short of the expectations of others or the Book they thought knew how we all should and must be.

Of course, we had to become perfect in all things. We had to think like Jesus thought and Act like God in all things. I once called someone a fool just as Jesus did from time to time, but got reamed out for being in danger of hell fire as Jesus taught would be the fate of those that called people fools. I'm confused!

I could have come up with the "What would Jesus do" thing years ago, but I was too busy feeling inadequate, fearful, guilty and shameful as was expected to think I could do what Jesus would do. Years later I came to wonder just what exactly Jesus was doing with Mary Magdalene who it seems ended up on the right hand of him in DaVinci's Last Supper. I can see where the part in the Gospel of Thomas with Peter chiding Jesus for kissing her too often on the lips, didn't make the NT cut of acceptable books. I believe he also asked Jesus why Jesus loved Mary more than the guys, but Jesus is said to have replied, "Why does she love me more than you do?" Whoa...nice comeback!

I remember the couple that found themselves the first semester and got kicked out by the second. They married and I spent the next three years wondering how their sex lives were going. All the rest of us were in limbo over this and Ubastard was in full swing by now. "ONE, TWO...doh" I tried all I could to get to FOUR, but I was evidently a particularly perverted Dutchman. I found out later that the only ones allowed to break the rules of God, as laid down by the professor, were the kids of the Evangelists, faculty kids and those that grew up in the denomination and were only allowed to go to this particular school being programmed from their youth to do so. Actually they didn't have a Ubastard from all I can tell. There is no freedom like the freedom church kids have when they grew up soaking in something they had no intention of doing.

Ubastard thrives on the sincere.

At any rate, Ubastard still lives and chatters too much in my mind. Some believe this is good as his purpose it to direct me to the straight, narrow, righteous and true. Some say God put Ubastard there as my monkey on my own back guide. But personally Ubastard, the Monkey on My Own Back is a creation of my mind to keep me less than authentic, under the control of the powers that be and kept in line with guilt, shame and fear, which a the trinity of worthless emotions if ever there was one.

Guilt, shame and fear are all imposed upon one in some way as a way to keep one weak, compliant and pliable, to the will of others...to the tribe or church if you will. They all assume there is just one way to be as a human being and any stepping outside of the the organizational box produces these emotions to get you back in. Maybe back in is not where one really needs to go.

There are several ways to defeat Ubastard. One is to breathe through when his fear, shame and quilt shatter provokes anxiety which is projected fear into the future or the fear of future consequences for not getting back into Ubastards camp. Just breathe...slowly, from the tummy and breathe. I don't know why he does not like that, but he doesn't seem to thrive in deep slow breathing. Ubastard is more of an upper chest breather and does it quickly. Maybe opposites defang him. Maybe his way of making my body breathe sends my brain the chemicals he loves to bathe in, which of course is fear, quilt and shame. Slow breathing might send the message to my mind that all is well and that it can keep the fear, quilt and shame juice but feel free to send the love, joy and acceptance juice on down! I think that's how it works. That's one of the few times Ubastard calls me Ubastard, and leaves me alone for a time.

Of course meds can be helpful. Whoever created Ativan must work directly on the right hand of God. On occasions breathing won't cut it and Ubastard has the upper hand. So as not to have a completely worthless and anxiety ridden morning, I take it. I don't like to, but I do and it's my decision. I know when Ubastard is on the offensive, I need some keymasters to help out. It runs right to the favorite cell receptors for Ubastard's mix but blocks them so his keys are worthless and he can't get into my breathing, tummy or thought spinning cells. Ha! Locked out! Take that Ubastard! I'd like to think, in time and with skills of thought that this amazing biosuit I wear to transport my spirit and experience my world in a limited five sensed way, could take over and simply remove Ubastards keys once and for all.

There are hundreds of sites with wonderful information on defeating Ubastard the Monkey on your own back. I think I tolerate him because I am supposed to keep him around for my good, but he doesn't feel good and in both the short and long haul, doesn't serve me much good. I have watched thousands apply the rules of Bible School to themselves all my life. Some do nicely but admit to a certain duplicity behind the scenes. Some claim no duplicity, but seem sad and unfulfilled. Some seem happy and and bouncy and I consider these the most dangerous of all. I always want to know what's really going on with them. Me thinks you gush too much in Jesus. I am often proved right down the road. Many are stuck in relationships that feel more like brother-sister stuff. Nothing much to look forward to. Nothing much left to say. And no creative intimacy or talk about how one really feels down deep inside. Certainly they are not going to explore anything the church would disapprove of, even if the minister was doing that himself.

Ubastard seems to govern just how much one allows themselves to speak about as well. Let's face it, it is no fun sharing when, in fact, one is supplying the one spoken to the bullets with which to shoot back at you. As a result, there are many quietly desperate human beings who neither speak their heart nor share their thoughts out of anxious fear , guilt for doing so or shame over what they feel they need in life, before it goes away. Human stuff really and Ubastard, the Monkey on One's Own Back, seems bent on keeping the human in line with a thousand soul sucking organizations, churches and denominations , that feed him endless shoulds, musts, should nots and must nots, but never free to find no need for them and seek an authentic self.

This is why "Born Right the First Time" is quite a dose of poison for Ubastard and I am pretty sure he simply can't handle the thought. It would take away his power of control and his litany of reasons one has qualified today as Ubastard. All I know is that it does not help and does not serve me personally in any meaningful way to strive for a perfection the book says we must and yet not know one single person on the planet to point to as having done well in that. Perfect people are scary people and duplistic beyond measure behind the scenes. Perfect people, with the perfect understanding of the perfect on set of perfect truths are perfectly scary and often make a big splat when they fall and join the human race. Ted Haggard, former head of the National Association of Evangelicals comes to mind as an example of struggling with Ubastard all one's life and never just being authentic. Of course being authentic often means you lose your job and high position in the minds of others who know Ubastard only too well themselves. 

Sometimes a church congregation is content to let a pastor be the sacrificial life of goodness and light, while they can tell Ubastard to go to hell anytime they wish. As long as the pastor type proves it can be done as expected, all is well. Let the pastor prove himself way too often in open conflict with Ubastard, and out you go. Scares the people that they might get caught next.

One hint to me is that all Ubastard seems to say to me is that you really aren't good enough as is. You need to be more like someone else, who I am not sure is who I really ought to be like or even need to go to the trouble of being like. I haven't found another human on the planet , save maybe the Dali Lama, who appeals to me as the kind of person I'd rather be. And I am also not so naive to think that wanting anyone else's dirty laundry is a good swap.

So here we are. A little piece of consciousness contained in our limited five sensed carbon based wetsuit for a short time of experiencing this world as best we can. It's all a wonder and I believe benevolent more than malevolent, though some people let Ubastard take over and loose themselves completely in becoming the sharped fanged nasty Monkey personified. No longer is UBastard the monkey on the back of a person...he is the person. The monkey ate the man.

I'm not advocating exterminating Ubastard completely. But I think there need to be some rules of engagement.

1. Ubastard shall not endlessly repeat one topic over and over. He will understand that I am usually way ahead of him and don't need to keep hearing it over and over.

2. Ubastard will not use fear of eternal punishment when a human life is less than a hair width's experience in the arena of billions of years of galactic, star and planetary evolution.

3. Ubastard will acknowledge that "born right the first time" has merit and never being good enough is a tool of control and results the unhelpful experiences of anxiety and depression in which nothing good gets done.

4. Ubastard is not allowed to only quote ancient texts of Taliban perspectives in his onslaught but is now assigned to read and understand Conversations with God by Neil Donald Walsch, The Power of Now by Eckart Tolle, The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz and The Tao of Pooh by Benjamin Hoff. No bananas if he refuses to read and apply these books.

5. Ubastard is not allowed to disturb sleep time.

6. Ubastard is not allowed to quote only from the King James, New International, and the Bible for Modern Dudes in promoting guilt fear and shame.

7. If Mebastard finds Ubastard not to have done and understood the above mentioned assignments, let him be banished to the forest of guilt, shame and fear where he seems to thrive better anyhow and there are millions backs he can easily jump on....just not mine anymore

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com

Dennis On: "Well, That Was Stupid..."

buy your own shirt here:

Well, That Was Stupid...

Last week I broke my own rule.  "Whenever  you have a choice between the thinking in your head about something and the feeling in your stomach about it, your stomach is telling you the truth."

It was just minutes before a couples massage session with another therapist. This was the chocolate covered strawberries, champagne and cozy fireplace kind of session.  Actually it's not all that cozy as four people and a burning fireplace (Kerosene) sucks up most of the oxygen in a few minutes and I don't remember much about the session!  Anyway, it looks nice.

The fireplace was out of kerosene so in a room that only lights up so much, I  filled it.  Actually, I must have overfilled it unknown to myself.  Something told me, as I pointed the igniter at the grate not to pull the trigger.  I had no reason not save for the reasoning’s in my head and the feeling in my stomach.  I pulled the trigger.....

Poof!   Now the floor is on fire. The wall is on fire. The decorative Christmas tree on the bench is on fire.  And i am on fire.  Funny how you can block out stuff for the sake of the great good.  I grabbed the tree to get it out of the room and the faster I went the more the flames came back on my hands. 

The tree went out. The smothering of the fire worked. And my hands were really really red, but it seemed ok.   We moved the clients to another room (they didn't see what happened) and did the massage session. 

As the hour went by my hands really were hurting more and more.  Trapping them between the client's back and the table made it much worse as the heat from my hands was trapped.  I got through it and went home.

Over the week my fingers went numb on the ends and turned white in places.  No blisters meant I avoided 2nd degree burns but alas, now the blistering starts. It just took some time.  But they are healing and I did everything I knew to do to get through the process.  Well not everything.  I  skipped the doctor part because I have no insurance so I asked myself, "What would Tecumseh do?  And just took care of business myself.  But it is healing and it is interesting to see that in every disappointment, accident, mistake, trial, goof up, misunderstanding, stupid idea and stuff that makes up our own story along the way, healing does occur.  Sometimes shortly and sometimes over much more time, but it does come for most.

I lost the love of my life partly because of "you're stuck in the past."  I can't deny that but have chosen not so much to be stuck but to help others, including myself get unstuck by taking a good look at the whole experience.  It was taking too long. 

I believe some have been helped by my not just walking away as if it never happened.  But I mourn the personal loss which has left me learning another lesson I still have trouble going into.  Now I am somewhat stuck in another kind of past.  I wonder if it ever ends?  I have learned that alone and me do not get along. I have the kind of heart that seems to need to share it with someone who half understands me, but I digress.

The stages of loss and trauma are well known. 

7 Stages of Grief...

1. SHOCK & DENIAL-
2. PAIN & GUILT-
3. ANGER & BARGAINING-
4. "DEPRESSION", REFLECTION, LONELINESS-
5. THE UPWARD TURN
6. RECONSTRUCTION & WORKING THROUGH-
7. ACCEPTANCE & HOPE-

Recover-From-Grief.com

First we go into denial that what is or has happened , has really happened.  When I saw the fire spread, I went blank for a second or two and heard myself call myself a name.  That didn't last long because i had to move and solve the immediate problem.  But denial is not so easy.  I was in denial for years over all the WCG drama.  My prayer was simply,  "May God bless and keep the Administration and Most ministers far away from me."  And for the most part it worked...until it didn't. 

Many Christians are in denial of many things.  The  delay of or non- existence of the Second Coming, their own mortality, that tithing does not come back to you as advertised, that ministers really do get whacky and their getting to give the sermons does not mean they speak the truth etc.  Those older in the faith and having lived a life of "we who are alive and remain," simply can't imagine they simply will die like billions before them.  It's not easy to face these things. 

Next comes the pain and guilt.   Plenty of that to go around for sure and if anyone can be the monkey on one's own back, it is me.  Pain you can't help.  Guilt is useless (I did a bad thing,) as is shame, (I am a bad person).  Bells can be unrung.  However, this does not mean they will easily let you go.  I still have an issue or two that are so painful and guilt producing, I want to scream.  So scream, see if it helps!

A simple and heartfelt "please forgive me" will not fix anything because the answer is "no" or "I forgive you, but...."   That but is a big but.

Anger and Bargaining.  Oh, plenty of that to go around.  Anger keeps us stuck until somehow we feel we have experienced all we can stand and see it does not really serve us.  Bargaining is the , "if I do this and never do that, we can fix this right?"  Wrong most of the time.  People or the gods aren't that easily swayed. It never seems to cross their minds they need to be forgiven for a few things as well.  I find the solution to the enigma of forgiveness not feeling all that helpful is simply giving up the need to forgive.  I don't need to forgive anyone anymore and perhaps they don't have to forgive me either.

Depression, Reflection and Loneliness.  Ugh...this is a tough one. Some days are diamonds and some days are stone when it comes to these topics.  Medication is not the answer to issues not faced.  I forbid myself from buying a gun "to protect myself in case society collapses," knowing full well I had my moments where I no longer cared about many things or couldn't "figure out," how things could work out. Who can?   The reflection part is why I write and the loneliness part is what I suffer as if you could not tell.  It's what everyone feels depending on their story

The last three are the "you're on your way stage" and what take time to get to. It would be nice if we could just will ourselves into healing but these burns are going to heal in their own time and in the proper order for such things. 

It's all a process and there are times where you can even fall back from one to the last one you thought you had seen enough of.  But let this well known process work it's miracle.  Where are you stuck in all this?  What part can't you get past?  It's ok. It's just how it works and time does heal not that you won't have some scarring.

Whatever 2012 has in store I'm pretty sure it will be nuts.  Life does what it does with or without us so relax if you can.  It's all just a story. We all have one.  

Burns heal. Skin grows. Nerves feel again.  The wisdom of the body should show us how to view the wisdom in our hearts. 

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com

Dennis On: Jesus' Birth Narratives, Depends Who You Ask

Jesus' Birth Narratives

Depends Who You Ask

Answers to Biblical questions are rather relative to the background and the perspectives of the one asked the question. There are answers of course. Often, many different answers given to the same questions. Obviously, a priest may answer much differently than a Baptist minister and a Lutheran pastor differently from an Adventist. A closed mind will answer differently from an open one. Many of the answers that one would hear are listed above. These are questions that have no easy answer along denominational lines. These are questions that ask not so much what does the story mean, but rather, why does it contradict what is said over in another gospel? Why is this here and nowhere else? How can this be in our real world of time and space? These are questions that usually leave the minister or priest wishing he had never gone to seminary and was not sitting at his desk with YOU knowing enough about the book to ask the question in the first place.

 An apologist will talk of the contradictions in as supplemental and not contradictory, but that is what they have to say because the book has to be flawless and perfectly accurate word of God. It would never do to think the accounts are written by people who had human perspectives, made mistakes in transmission of the alleged facts and even a few political reasons for tweeking the story.

There are more serious answers to these questions as well. Some might be that the story is Midrash or Pesher which are terms that few in the pews and far too often in the pulpit have ever heard. Simply put, it is a way to mine the scriptures of the past for meaning in the present. The author of Matthew was very good at this. It doesn't mean the proof text was literally pointing to something in the future, but can be used to tell a story in a way that one wants the story to be told and with the meaning it needs to have for the present time. It is what Matthew as doing over and over when he looked back into the Old Testament to find scriptures to tell his and only his story of Jesus. He found scriptures that never meant in reality what he made them to mean, but it was a way to tell his story. Whoever Matthew was, or Luke for that matter, they knew nothing about the real birth circumstances of Jesus.  They only came up with a story, which if snipped from your Bible, still leaves the Gospel intact as if the narrative was never t here.  Well there was a time when it wasn't until it was needed and each contradicts the other.

So let's take a quick look at some of the more obvious contradictions and anomolies in the two accounts of Jesus birth.  We won't examine Paul's view, as he had none other than Jesus was born of a woman of the tribe of David.  Nothing special there.

So picture little Johnny sitting with his pastor, asking the following questions that came to his weak mind when reading the stories of Jesus birth.

Question. Pastor...What difference does it make for Matthew and Luke to show us Jesus family connections from Mary and Joseph back to King David and Adam, when God was his real Father? Aren't geneologies meaningless since Joseph was a step father, and all coming before him would be step ancestors to Jesus. So Jesus can't be connected back to King David as the line breaks between Jesus and Joseph. Right?

Question. Pastor... If the Holy Spirit, which I think you said was a person in the Trinity, begot Mary, isn't the Holy Spirit really Jesus literal father?" Would this not then make God Jesus uncle of sorts, or Jesus his own Father, since they are three in one, coequal and co...oh you understand. This is a mystery isn't it?

Question. Father... Why do I have to call you Father, when Jesus said to call no man "Father" except his?

Question. Pastor... Matthew 1: 17 says that Jacob was Joseph's father, but Luke 3:23 says that Heli was Joseph's father. Was Joseph's father Jacob Heli Rubinstein or something?

Question. Pastor...Why does it always seem that women in the Bible who give birth to important men, like Elizabeth being John the Baptist's mom, are always barren and really old. (Luke 1:7). But then, women who give birth to gods are never barren but always pure virgin, and really young like her relative Mary. Is a savior born from an old barrej woman less credible than one born of a young underage virgin?

Question. Pastor... Why in Luke 1:18-20 does the Angel make the old husband of Elizabeth unable to speak for not believing that he would have a son? Seems like a normal thing not to believe at his age. And yet, in Luke 1: 34 Mary tells the Angel she can't believe that she will have Jesus the King because she doesn't even have a husband. At least Zechariah had an old wife. Yet, the angel doesn't make her mute for not believing him. Do you think the Angel had a quota on how many people a day he could make blind and mute?

Question. Pastor... In the same story, in verse 41, old Elizabeth praises Mary for being the mother of her Lord. How did she find out that Mary was going to give birth to a god? Is that the kind of story you think the family passed on to her prior to Mary coming for a visit? And pastor, do you think it is strange that an old woman who is just now in life having her first son would instinctively praise a young virgin for being pregnant? Just a thought.

Question. Pastor... In that same account in Luke 1:46, "and Mary said, 'My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden,'" sound more like something that Elizabeth would say since she was doing all the talking up to that point? And don't you think it amazing that this bursting into song of Mary is so much the same as the story of Hannah, an old barren woman in I Samuel 1, who gave birth to Samuel? And isn't it interesting that a razor was not to come on Samuel just like Elizabeth's baby John? And how about that part where Hanna can't speak either, just like Elizabeth's husband Zechariah? Oh and how about when Elizabeth said in verse 18, "Let your maidservant find favor in your eyes." Wow, sounds a lot like what Mary just said about herself in Luke. Could it be that Luke is using the Hannah story to tell the Mary and Elizabeth story. And could it be that it was really Elizabeth, the old barren woman, still speaking in Luke and not Mary at all about her joy like the old barren Hannah, but someone later attributed what Elizabeth had to say to Mary? Know what I'm sayin?

Question. Pastor... Why do you think that no other Gospel or really anyone in the New Testament ever mentions this story again? Do you think it is here to be sure that everyone understood John was second to Jesus no matter what anyone else might think?

Question. Ok, these birth stories are great, but I have a lot of questions about them. Are you up for this? Great!

Question. Pastor... Since Matthew and Luke read just as well without the birth stories of Jesus, do you think they might have been added much later to the books? I mean really we don't go to the hospital to see a famous person born and the exciting special birth stories aren't usually written until after the baby grows up and becomes famous right? Like Yassir Arafat always saying he was born in Jerusalem, because that's the great place to be born, but in fact he was born in Cairo. Or like politicians who are born somewhere else, but need to be from a certain place to run for office. Just a thought.

Question. Pastor... Why doesn't Mark know anything about Jesus birth stories?

Question. Pastor... Why , in the Gospel of John , in chapters 7 and 8 is there this big argument of how Jesus is a born of fornication and doesn't know a physical father (8:41) and Jesus tells a story about a woman taken in adultery and forgiven (8:1) which lies right between a big argument over knowing that Jesus is from Galilee and not Bethlehem as the scripture says? (7:41) The we have Jesus exploding and telling them they are all sons of the devil. Wow, seems not everyone knew anything about what Matthew and Luke had to say about Jesus birth!  The guys in John knew wherever he was from, it WASN'T Bethlehem.

Question. Pastor... Why does Matthew say that Isaiah 7:14 predicts the Virgin birth of Jesus when the story of Isaiah has absolutely nothing to do with a virgin giving birth to a son that was really God? "Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, 'Behold a virgin shall be with child and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.'" ( Matthew 1:22-23). Isn't Isaiah talking about a baby born as a sign to Ahab, king of Israel, that some northern invasion back then would not be the end of them? And what's with that same story in Isaiah saying, that the boy baby would eat butter and honey and BEFORE he knew to refuse the evil and choose the good, the bad guy would be beaten? (Isaiah 7:15-16) Does this mean that Jesus did evil too before he was prophecied to do good? What parts of this are prophecy and what parts are just history that has nothing to do with Jesus? And no one ever called him Emmanuel. They called him Jesus. I can see where the Israelites might call him "God with us," meaning "God was with us in the defeat of our enemy," but I can't see it meant the baby of Isaiah was God in the flesh. Any comments?

Question. Pastor... In Matthew 1:1-4 it says that the Wisemen came asking about where Jesus was because they had seen his star in the East. First of all, if they came from Persia, which is East of Jerusalem, how do you see a literal star in the East and then follow it West where it turns south and stops over a house in Bethlehem? I mean if they saw his star in the East, why go West, why not East? Maybe it's just me.

Question. Pastor... In the same place it says Herod seems not to know anything about this Jesus or his star. Could he not see it and if he could, could he not follow it himself? Then it says Herod got together all the helpers on such topics and I wonder, could they not see it either?

Question. Pastor... In reading the story of this star, it also says that it reappeared to the Wise men to continue to show them the way. Was this a star that only they could see and could stop and go until the Wisemen were reading to keep moving?

Question. Pastor...How does a moving star, stop over a specific house?

Question. Pastor...While we are at it, how come Matthew tells us Jesus was born in a house that Mary and Joseph seemed to already own in Bethlehem (Matthew 1:11). I thought they lived in Nazareth and came had to have Jesus in a manger in Bethlehem? You know, no room at the Inn and all. Well, at least that is what Luke 2 says where he doesn't mention the home in Bethlehem, just as Matthew doesn't mention the worldwide tax that brings Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem to begin with from their home in Nazareth. So which is it...home in Bethlehem as Matthew says, or in Nazareth as Luke says and moving from manger to home won't cut it.

Question. Pastor...Matthew 1:12-16 says that an Angel warned Joseph to flee to Egypt from Herod who was going to kill all the babies under two years old to get at Jesus. Wow, lots of questions here! Does this mean that in order for Jesus to die for us, the babies in Bethlehem had to die for Jesus?

Question. Pastor...Do you think Mary, being a typical mother left town in a hurry telling her friends, "I know something you don't know. I wish you and your babies a good Sabbath?" I don't think mothers really think that way.

Question. Pastor...Matthew 1:17-18 fulfills Rachel weeping for her children in Rama, but from what I can tell, again Matthew is making this up. That story in Jeremiah 31:15 has nothing to do with the women weeping for their dead babies. I believe the Jeremiah story took place during the trek into captivity as they passed through Rama, not Bethlehem. Kinda stretching the point isn't it?

Question. Pastor...After Herod dies, the family comes back from Egypt and Matthew says this fulfills Hosea 11:1. But I looked at that, and "Out of Egypt I have called my son," is talking about the exodus story, not Jesus. Is it just me again misunderstanding? How comes Matthew gets to make things mean in the Old Testament what they never meant?

Question. Pastor...In Matthew 1:19-22 an Angel gives the all clear to go back home, to Bethlehem and the house, I assume. But then Joseph finds an even more evil bastard lives there so has another dream to head to Nazareth where it was evidently safer. Did the Angel screw up and send them into harms way and God had to give Joseph a dream to save them from the Angel not knowing what was going on in Judea? Don't they have briefings for Angels for stuff like this?

Question. Pastor...In Matthew 1:23 we see that Matthew says since they went to Nazareth, there is some place that says this fulfills "He shall be called a Nazarene." But no one seems to know where the Bible says that. I know it means "branch" such as in Isaiah 11:1, but again, those are not stories or prophecies about Jesus. So isn't Matthew reaching again? Did Matthew think a Nazarite, was the same as a Nazarene maybe? You know, no razor, no haircuts, no wine. Kinda like Hippie Baptists. But then Jesus wasn't that way either. Oh well. Any thoughts?

Question. Pastor...How come only Matthew mentions Wisemen, wandering stars, killing the babies and fleeing to Egypt when Luke, in his account, mentions none of this. In fact, Luke just says that after eight days Jesus was calmly, well i don't know about calmly, circumcised and then Mary did the 40 days of purification after the birth while meeting Simeon and Anna who blessed Jesus in the Temple, and then calmly walked back home to Nazareth. No run for your life from Herod story here, and right where you 'd expect it. Did Luke never hear about Matthew's "thus it was fulfilleds," and simply have the family go back home to Nazareth? Can't both be true, right?

Question. Pastor...As long as I am at it, can you tell me why the Apostle Paul only knows that Jesus was born of a woman in Galatians 4:4. Nothing special really. Did Paul not know that Jesus, Mary and Joseph had all these wonderful birth adventures? Maybe he didn't care.

Question. Pastor...I guess what I am asking here is how come history knows of no tax and certainly no tax where all had to leave home and move around the empire to be taxed in that way for Luke to get Mary and Joseph down to Bethlehem? I won't even ask if you knew Cyrenius, depending on how you spell it, was not Governor of Syria until ten years later than the events of Herod in Matthew. Seems like Luke may have not gotten the history right here.

Question. Pastor...Do you think it was responsible and necessary for Joseph, who seems to already had the property in Bethlehem,  to take a very pregnant Mary on a hundred mile donkey ride through the wilderness of Judea? Was that necessary. And if he had a house there, why did they not live there to begin with. Well actually Matthew said they did, but in Luke it says no. I'm confused.

Question. Pastor...Why would all the Angels and Heavenly hosts go out and sing this "glory to God in the highest and peace on earth, goodwill to men," to a few shepherds in the field. How about a bigger audience, like Jerusalem or at least the whole town of Bethlehem?

Question. Pastor...How come Luke says Mary kept all these wonderful things and pondered them in her heart, and yet in Mark, she and Jesus brothers come down to Jerusalem to take Jesus home as an adult because they thought he was insane? (Mark 3:21). Did Mary forget all the things that the Angels had said and all the miracles of Matthew and Luke at Jesus birth? And why was this one lone account in Mark edited out of Matthew and Luke. Was it embarassing? It seems Mary knew Jesus was special at least to age 12 (Luke 2:51) when he wandered and was found debating in the temple. Hey, and what's with that? It even says his parents "sought him sorrowing," so they were pretty afraid for him. Did Jesus not think to honor his parents with telling them he was at the temple and not to worry? Or did he just think they'd say "no you can't go," and he'd have to not obey them and break another commandment?

"Excuse me?  What do you mean I'm not welcome in the kids group any longer?  Hey, where you going?   You're going to have a talk with my parents about what?  

Oh well...Merry Christmass.   

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com

Science...Falsely Called "Falsely So Called"

Science...Falsely Called "Falsely So Called"

 

We all have our stories of how we got here and who we are in the universe. Most stories told by every culture point out the unique origins of that culture, like as not, springing directly from that particular cave or mountain in distant and mysterious times in the past. When the National Geographic Genographic research team gently informed aboriginal Australians of their African origins, according to the DNA evidence, the Elders reacted with a simple "no, we originated here and maybe they came from us." Comforting and upholding of ancient aboriginal beliefs, but not scientifically true. You could feel the tension this new information brought into the cultural beliefs that for so long had encouraged and sustained them. I doubt they will change their understanding of themselves with this bit of scientific information.

 

A similar reaction occurred when the team informed the Navajo in the Americas of their DNA origins linking them to a still existant people in Siberia. The immediate reaction was understandably defensive for Navajo origin stories which had them always living in the Four Corners area of the now United States. In time, I believe they agreed that there was room for both the science and the tradition and, in this case, both maintained their truths on tribal origins. But the science was more literally correct. The uneasiness was palpable.

 

And now the Indigenous People's Council on Biocolonialism, the IPCB is raising even more concerns about the effect this knowledge will have on belief systems of indigenous peoples. For better or worse, "Indigenous peoples have consistently voiced their opposition to this type of research because it breaches cultural values, bioethical standards and human rights law. The IPCB believes the project is being undertaken at the expense of indigenous peoples. Debra Harry, the organization's executive director, writes on their website, "It is quite likely this project will advance new theories of our origins that may contradict our own knowledge of ourselves. There can be no claim as to which understanding is correct, and will result in a clash of knowledge systems. Moreover, there could be serious political implications that result from a so-called "scientific" assertion that indigenous peoples are not "indigenous" to their territories, but instead are recent migrants from some other place. This cuts at the heart of the rights of indigenous peoples, which are based upon our collective, inherent right of self-determination as peoples, under international human rights law." A standard ethical requirement in human research is that the benefits must equal the risk. The IPCB believes that in this type of research, there will be no benefit to indigenous peoples, yet the research creates substantial risk for the individuals and peoples affected."

 

It is this advancement of "new theories of our origins that may contradict our own knowlege of ourselves," that seems to be so difficult for humans to handle. Truth is still true though denied by all. In such defensiveness science always get's called "science so called" and even does in the Bible as "Science, falsely so called" (I Tim. 6:20). This phrase is always used when the science is really not false, but it is threatening to sincerely held beliefs. I don't like someone knocking the nose off my idols any more than the next guy, but that's progress, painful and ever moving forward. The Bible makes fun of learning at times in this nervousness over knowledge when it mocks those who are "ever learning, but never able to come the knowledge of the truth" (II Tim. 3:7), to which I say, at least they keep trying and even Jesus is reported to have said, "seek and ye shall find." Of course he meant spiritually but it's good advice in all endeavors too.

 

 

 

We all have our origin stories that, in time, will probably prove to not be true, at lest not literally. We live in an age where even most Christians realize that the origin stories of mankind in the Garden of Eden, through a first set of parents, Adam and Eve, are not literally true. The problem with believing that is that much of the doctrine in the New Testament requires the story of the first Adam and Eve to be literally true as they lead to such literally true doctrines as the role of women in the church, why women have babies painfully, Jesus being the "Second Adam" and the Doctrine of Original Sin. All of these beliefs and teachings are destroyed by the Genesis story not being literally true.

 

If there was no real Eve, or Adam whose fault this wasn't, who caused all of mankind to fall into original sin, for which we all must repent etc, then there is no need of repenting of that which never happened or of needing a Savior in the way portrayed in the New Testament. Stories and ideas have implications to say the least. Many Christians think it is ok NOT to believe in things being literally true. But that has incredible implications for other things they think they believe but dont' realize the connection and contradictions their position causes theologically. Plainly, if there was no literal Genesis like creation of mankind and fall into sin, and it is shown to not be true by good science, the implications are staggering in how we will have to change our views. Frankly most won't but will, as always, attack the messenger and burn the message, or just burn both.

 

 

 

Actually, a simple cheek swab was all it took for me to find out my own amazing DNA trip out of Africa 70,000 years ago. Perhaps this is done for some reason somewhere, but for the Genome project, this fear is very unfounded. Our genetic history is easily taken from the inside of our mouths. Every cell contains the whole. We are like a hologram where, even if broken, each piece reflects the entire picture when a laser light is passed through it.  Amazing!

 

Simply speaking, it appears that ALL modern humans originated in and then spread out from Africa within the last 100,000 years or less. What a great story to read at Clan meetings! All the "differences" we see in humans are adaptations we made along the way in our trek from there to Europe, Asia and the Americas. Good science gives us good explanations, always subject to new information about this process.  Those humans who migrated north out of Africa had to give up some of their melenin, which darkens the skin to protect it from overexposure to the sun, to get more sun and vitimin D so their bones would not fail them.  That's it.

 

Indeed, we do need to insure the privacy of the individual if they wish it and we need to be sensitive to the process that others go through when they are faced with the implications of such information and research. It takes time to accept change and as stated, many won't, but rather will just become angry and defensive. We see this all the time in the attacks Christian literalists launch into from their pulpits when new knowledge threatens old ideas. I want to be in church the day we confirm life outside of our own solar system, or even in it. The Universe teems with life including intelligent life.  How do I know this?  It just seems so knowing what we do about the insignificance of our little planet in the whole big uni or  multiverse.

 

It's funny, in my previous church affiliation there was a belief that always annoyed me scientifically. It was the belief, now long discredited, that the Lost Tribes of Israel turned up as the powerful nations of Europe, The British Empire and of course, America. I was Dutch, so that clearly put me in the Tribe of Zebulun, according to the theory. I never gave a sermon on this topic! However, my DNA shows I made no such trip through the middle east to become an Israelite and go on into Europe. Rather it shows a long trip through Iran, Iraq the various "Beckastans" on out onto the steppes of Asia and then one big swing into Europe as Cro-Magnon and then into France, Holland and England in much more recent times. That British-Israelism idea is bunk and DNA testing will show it to be so. That particular idea is racist if ever there was one.  The Mormons also have yet to deal with the implications of DNA realities.   Naive Americans are not related to Israelites.  They come from Siberia which, as of this writing, has not been found to be a hangout for the 12 Tribes. I predict that , in time, the Book of Mormon will be claimed to be "Spiritual" and not literally true in order to keep the story going.  

 

Presidential candidates, as intelligent as they are, cringe when asked about their beliefs in God or Evolution. Their answers reflect not so much truth as expediency and take into account what the voters need them to believe.  However,  those who  believe absurdities can lead others into autrocities if need be.

 

So good science is not "science, falsely so called" or "so called science." Yes, it has implications for theologians and Christians but believing something is true never makes it really true and we need to always have a love of discovery. Sorry to say, it is usually the reactions to new information by those most threatened by it that plunges our world into chaos and still get the messenger in trouble for the message. 

 

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com