RAHAB OF JERICHO

Here's a poem about Rahab:

Rahab was a prostitute, but she had a heart of gold
She could see beyond the walls of her city - Jericho, Jericho

She heard of that mighty nation, made mighty by their God
She heard it thru the grapevine; She knew He weren't no fraud

She rescued the spies from the king's fearful search
Her peoples' hearts were all melting for fear,
After hearing that the jew-God
parted the Red sea,
and destroyed Pharoah's army
and killed kings Og and Sihon

Jericho folk were gasping for air
gripping their chest
darting about, pulling out hair

Perhaps in their heart of hearts
They all knew Jericho was going down, down

But Rahab was the one
She had the opportunity
She could have gone either way
She could have remained blind
and stopped those jew guys
stopped those jew spies
She could have turned them in

But she knew,
She could see
And she declared!
"For Yahweh your God is God in heaven above
and on the earth below."
She became a jew right then and there!
Hallelu !

LET'S GIVE THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES SOME CREDIT

I haven't written here in so long that I know I must write something, in case someone's passing by.

First, it was by the means of some old J.W. literature that the Holy Spirit convicted me of my sin; and I came to have a saving relationship with Jesus- or at least I came to understand my need for a "savior" and to accept Jesus' and God's gift of Jesus' sacrifice be the punishment for my sins. (I talked to God from time before that. I really do think I had some kind of relationship with Him based on that.)

It happened thus: I was raised in a Christian home; but if my parents or my church ever spoke of an need for a savior, it did not sink in for me. I had an estimation of myself as "ok" and even a goodie-two-shoes. And since I thought I was "ok", there was no need for a savior.

When I say "ok" , I was pretty uncritical of myself, really. There were lots of ways in which I went against God's way.

Well, this J.W. literature was about the LORD'S PRAYER. IN explaining and teaching on "Thy kingdom come" the anonymous writer(s) made note of the fact that the governments of the world-yes, even the old U, S of A- were not the same thing as the kingdom of God. The laws of the land are not the same as God's laws. One can obey every law of the land and still sin against God. Wow!

WOW!

I had something on my conscience at that timethat was not against the law. That teaching nailed me. I was convicted. Then, I understood why we all need Jesus to take the punishment for all our sins. And I was filled with love for Jesus for doing that.

YE

In sunday school last sunday, we studied JOHN 4:19 and 20 as well as most of JOHN 4.
In this exchange between Jesus and the Samaritan woman, she speaks to him personally
("you") and speaks about the jews as a national group ("you"). In all moderns translations that I know of , the distinction between you singular and you plural is not made, although I believe that the bible greek as well as the old testament hebrew do have those distinctions.
This may be a little thing; but it seems when new english translations are made with frantic frequency, trying to squeeze every drop of meaning out of these texts, it is a little blind to ignore a meaning clue which is so easy to include, the you vs. "you-all" differentiation.
We, at least english speakers, have become so used to using "you" for all of those meanings. We think of "thou", and related words quaint relics of the past, not additional meaning.
I sure would like to change that mind-set. What can I do about this narrowness?

The reason that I am sensitive to this loss of meaning in translation, is that I, because of my own shortcomings and experiences, have come to wonder if "being christians together" is an essential part of God's plan for individual believers, His Church and the world. For example, one passage says , "Be ye perfect as your father in heaven is perfect." (That is either Paul or James talking.) That could mean simply that he was giving that admonition to a group of people. I posit that the passage could also mean :
Together, become whole, complete and perfect as you-all's father is whole and complete (and perfect.) Could it also mean : "By being an organism together-the Body of Christ, the Church-you-all CAN become perfect. " ? Maybe that's too much interpolation.

WHAT IS THE RIGHT QUESTION?

As I listened to a panel of Christian experts on the radio today talking about "Is Christ the only way to God?", my mind went back to Sunday afternoon when some friends and I were visiting with some muslims who were open and interested in talking about spiritual things and some of whom had visited Christian churches. The radio people quoted the words of Jesus (from John 13 or 14?), "Whoever comes to the Father must come through me." The radio experts pulled up the reasoning that whoever does not believe in Jesus as the way to God, must think of Jesus as either liar, lunatic.

As these radio people were talking, I could not reconcile the strong words of distinguishing believer from unbeliever with the open-ness of the muslims I had met. I believe Christ is the way. I know that I will eventually have to tell these muslims that that is what I believe. But, I did not think that was the way to draw them to Christ initially.

My reaction to the radio experts' discussion became : That is the wrong question when believers and unbelievers meet. The question is : Is the Church and are individual Christians representing Christ and the Gospel adequately to where these unbelievers can be said to have HEARD the Gospel? I believe that the answer is often no. Let me tell you why. If a person or organization explains the Gospel and the evidence for Jesus' claims out of the Bible and does a perfect job of it, but does not show forth love to the hearer, the hearer may not be able to receive the message because of the lack of the love of the speaker. The message may not seem authentic because the speaker doesn't show love.( I do believe Jesus and others spoke about this.) For example, the Spanish conquerors who tried to convert the natives of South America did not show forth love- they gave the conquered ones the choice of death or "conversion". Some of the conquered ones were able, I think, to receive the message, though it was harshly given, but I believe God, in His mercy, judges those who reject the message under such circumstances accordingly. (Also, I believe that God doth judge those who offend the "little ones" -that is, anyone who does not yet know God, and has the possibility of receiving Him.)

The answer to above question is further complicated in that the hearers have made an evaluation of Christianity and therefore on the Gospel based on the expresssion of love or otherwise of perhaps many individuals or organizations whom these unbelievers have encountered before you came along.

So, a FIRST TASK in talking to unbelievers is, I believe to help the hearer to separate the message of God, the Gospel, from the messangers that have spoken the Gospel down through time in imperfect manner.

This reminds me of Phillip Yancey's book, SOUL SURVIVORS, about individuals who could be said to be "open" and "seekers" and some of whom had troubled relationships with organized Christianity due the less-than-stellar lives and attitudes of the nominal christians that they had encountered.

(Gandhi's observations of Christians is one example.)

A second topic for discussion that might be helpful with seekers is: Did Jesus indicate that He knew that the Church and the telling of Gospel were going to imperfect things or did all this (mess) take Him by surprise?

I know that for myself, when I learned that Jesus did prophesy that the Church was going to be an imperfect thing, filled with people with clay feet as well as people who have no interest in God and Jesus at all and as well as some people led astray by unscriptural doctrine some more some less, I felt much more sure of Jesus being all-knowing. The place that I first learned about Jesus' prophecy was MATTHEW 13, which I wrote about earlier.

ONE SILLY LITTLE PREPOSITION

coming soon: discussion of the new testament scripture " IN CHRIST, there is neither slave nor free, greek nor jew, male nor female."

BEWARE WHAT STAR YOU HITCH YOUR WAGON TO

BEWARE WHAT STAR YOU HITCH YOUR WAGON TO
or
EARLY WARNING FOR THE STRATEGIES OF THE ANTICHRIST

When I had heard about the PBS FRONTLINE program on the Jonestown tragedy and Jim Jones, I knew I must watch it, because I want to know how nominally Christian organizations go wrong and be able to tell others how such an organization can stray from Jesus' teachings and allow such tragedy to occur.

The program was heartrending. The people who followed this fox (Jones) were mainly earnest people who knew that the racist biases of those days were not right. They joined and supported the church because they saw something there that was good. They stayed because of the love and joy they felt in worshipping God (they thought) in a blessed way and partaking of the fellowship experienced during the worship service.

It was not until Jones saw that he had a grip on his flock that he boldly, from the pulpit, proclaimed "articles of faith" that were in direct opposition to the Bible. But proclaim he did. The statements Jones made (shown on the PBS show) that stand out in my mind were 1)that there was no heaven or hell and that they, that church, must make heaven on earth and 2)that Jones could be their friend, father, or even their god. Did you see this program? Or did you see this story another time? Jones dramatically pauses and says (something like) "If I'm wrong, where is the lightning bolt out of the sky to strike me dead?
Let's just see how much power the Bible has," with which he hauled off and threw the Bible across the room where it fell to the floor.

This PBS FRONTLINE program demonstrated by means of interviews of former members, that Jones was a hypocrite whose morals were far from the Bible's standards even early in the history of his cult. Some members expressed that they were shocked when they found out about Jones' sexual practices that were perverted, but the ones interviewed had put him on such a pedestal by the time that they heard of these things, that they gave Jones the benfit of the doubt, thinking (I guess) that if he did it, it was OK.

The purpose of my writing here is not to recount what that program showed or what Jones did or said, but rather to give you and me some markers, some guidelines that God gave in the Bible, to keep us from error.

(I grieve that there many places that we Christians have gone away from God's will on things. I wonder if we can get back to Him before . . .)

John said in 1JOHN 4:1 "Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God. Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God."

The first verse of this passage has been an anchor for me. I interpret it as saying that God will not speak anything that is against His nature meaning that if a spirit or a teacher who claims to be Christian says something against what is in the Bible, THAT IS NOT FROM GOD. In order for us to have the protection that this verse could give, though, we must familiarize ourselves with what the Bible does say. Also, we must not shrug off our reservations about what someone is teaching.

The second verse, I do have difficulty with. It seems that someone could pretend to embrace Jesus as savior, and sway other into heresy. Is God saying that eventually, one will not be able to lie and say he believes in Jesus if he doesn't? That is a real question to me. (If you stumble upon my writing here and have anything to share, please feel free to say it.)

In MATTHEW 7:15-23, Jesus gives teaching that is the most helpful to me concerning the false teachers that arise in Christianity. "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. (He continues in similar vein.)
So Jesus is telling us to look beyond the words of one coming in His name, to the life and actions that that one displays.

[Just as an aside here, I see where Jesus in many places tries to get the people to put more weight in the unseen things of the world than in the seen. The 'seen' are the surface, what others see of us and what we see of them. The 'unseen' is what God sees. (Look at JOHN 5:44). I can't think of others right now.]

This leads me into another passage where Jesus, in my opinion, prophesies that there will be those who will see the opportunity that the established Christian faith and churches can give to an opportunist, and will 'feed' on the unsuspecting church members. Jesus says in MATTHEW 13:31-32, (in a parable), "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. Though it is the smallest of all your seed, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becames a tree, so that the birds of the air come and perch in its branches."

Peter said in 2PETER 2:1-2 "But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them-- bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many wil follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute."

One really powerful principle that Jesus gave is:
"But you are not to be called Rabbi, for you have only one
Master and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone
on earth 'father' for you have one Father, and he is in
heaven. Nor are you to be called 'teacher', for you have
one Teacher, the Christ. The greatest among you will be
your servant. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled,
and whoever humbles himself will be exalted."
(MATTHEW 23:8-12)

This passage has come to my mind when I think of the young people who have been molested by priests in the Catholic church. I thought "If only the Catholic church had abided by that commandment of Jesus, those young people would perhaps have been spared that trauma. My thinking is that calling the priests 'father' instill a sense of awe in the church-people. But, as you can see, Jesus said 'no' not just to 'father', but also to 'rabbi', and 'teacher', and by extention, pastor, reverend and doctor. I'm having a hard time with this. It is so ingrained in our church culture to use those terms of respect. But seeing where this giving of respect to certain ones has led to some really bad stuff, I'm going to keep trying to change that in myself. (Should I also try to get this truth out?)

Of course, a balancing scripture is the one where Paul says prefer one another. You don't want to be selfish and rude to one another. Only, follow God first.

THE FLYING IRON

I first started "rethinking 1776" a little bit back when I was in 8th or 9th grade. I wondered why some wars are called revolutions and others, revolts or rebellions. My little middle-school reasoning led me to the conclusion that uprisings were called the latter two unless they were successful, in which case they were given the classier name of "revolution".

Later, in the mid 1980's, I came to have even more misgivings about "1776". It happened thus: My best friend's mother died during that time; and my friend and her sister told me about how their father was rather passive and permissive, and that their mother would sometimes demonstrate her frustration and resentment and unhappiness by bitchy behavior. The sisters told how one morning the mom was so frustrated, mad and unhappy that she the threw the iron that she had in her hand at that moment. Thank the Lord she missed the father.

That and other stories made me really sad, because the woman had always been sweet and kind to me and happy that her daughter had a friend. Also, the mom went to church regularly when she could and had even moved from one church to an 2nd denomination during her life indicating to me that she was trying to do right/was searching for the help she knew the church or God should be to her.

Then I wondered how a woman is supposed to deal with a husband who, in her viewpoint, is failing her. Somehow it became clear then that our American history of embracing the decision of the colonists to revolt against the tyranny of the British at that long ago time (1776) somehow has molded our culture, specifically the dynamics of the relationships of husbands, wives, church leaders, children in a specific way (that I judge to be unhelpful).

Specifically thinking of this example I just gave, how could that family- the frustrated mom, the passive dad and the three daughters- be helped? What could the Church (either her local church or God's world-wide church) have done? Part of their problem was, I think the problem of many of us: they didn't ask for help. Or if they did, it was perhaps in a timid way. The surrounding community couldn't receive the transmission. ARGGGGG!!!!! WE ARE SO INDIVIDUAL, ISOLATED, WITH CONTINUING EXPECTION THAT EACH ONE WOULD HELP HER- OR HIMSELF (OR EACH FAMILY WOULD HELP THEMSELVES, etc.!!!!!!!!!!

Actually, my friend did ask for help later, by attempting suicide ("self-killing"). (Later, unfortunately, she did success in killing herself.)

I think the Church is changing getting better at being the church together. Let's keep praying for us and reaching out.


So that is the story of the flying iron.

I hope we can talk later.

Your sister in Christ's love, Joan

I'm still wavering between two blogs. Do I need to grit my teeth and delete one?
I just posted something I planned to put here on APOLOGIA (or vice versa).

OFF COURSE? (originally published 3-20-2009)

I wrote this below article in 2009. That is 8 years ago now. Much has happened in eight years. I'll address that in a separate post. Here I am only republishing the edited post from 2009:
               * * * * * * * *
I am blessed to be able to attend a discussion class at church, WestburyUMC in Houston, Texas on Wednesdays, where we are studying CHASING DAYLIGHT by Erwin McManus. Our preacher asked us, the congregation to read this.

I've liked this book muchly. I think that between reading the book and listening to the preacher preach and exhort based on the book and talking with my brother and sisters in class about our lives and experiences and how this book is pushing us to change in good ways, this book is having a good effect on me and others in class and in the church.

Today we were talking on the subject of "impact"- that pioneers in pushing out the boundaries of God's kingdom in new and untamed areas are going to experience buffetting and some kind of injury, probably. (why do I feel the need to step back from speaking in absolute terms?)

McManus has been using Jonathan's story (of 1 Samuel 14:1-15) to learn, teach and illustrate the principles of his book.Also, McManus reminded us of Elijah 1) demanding a demonstration comparing God's might and glory to the nothingness of the false gods that were the focus of Israelites who were drifted away from God, 2) raining down revenge on the 850 baal and other pagan priests (I still wonder if that part- the killing of the pagan priests- was God's will.), 3) running from Jezebel, 4) getting worn out and depressed, 5) being the blessed recipient of God's miraculous provision, encouragement and correction  while on the run and 6) finally hearing from God in a quiet voice. (1 Kings 18 and 19).

My wondering about whether Elijah was in God's will when he orchestrated the killing of the pagan priests reminded me of what my main focus will be in my other blog, APOLOGIA. I plan to explore and discuss in the APOLOGIA blog the many times in history where believers, whether Christians, or, in the Old Testament times, believing jews (or others?) have gotten off course, out of God's will.
Andrew Wommack has taught me so much about the Bible and truths that are there if we will dig below the first few inches of topsoil. Bro. Wommack was the one who pointed out, comparing actual numbers in two places in the Exodus story, that Moses caused the Israelites time in Egypt to be 10 years longer than God had wanted, presumably because Moses (rashly) killed a man. (The man he killed was a cruel slave driver.) That vigilante act turned Moses from a prince of Egypt with great influence into an outlaw who had to run. (I would also interpolate that the manner in which the jewish nation left Egypt and the relationship between Israel and Egypt would have been much different if Moses had been among the ruling family before the events of the Israelites leaving occurred.)
Andrew Wommack calls it "Andyology" when he makes these jumps of logic mixed with intuition on non-principle ideas. But I think he is right with this. AND, I am beginning to think that these mistakes have had devastating consequences on the flow of history. But not anything God can't cure. I further believe that addressing these missteps by believers (including the Church) is a necessary step in bringing about God's ending to this part of the story of mankind.

I don't want this writing to be too dry. So:Today was a beautiful spring day, March 18, 2009. It started out foggy and mild. Later, it was sunny, bright, clear. I went and brought son, John, home from U of Houston, across town. There were seven of us in class today: Donna, Evelyn, Roy, Melissa, Janet, Mary Lou and me. Carol and Brenda couldn't be there for some reason.
I so much am nourished by being with these brothers and sisters in Christ, hearing what they think about what we are studying and stories from their lives, whether from today or twenty years ago. Tom cooked. That was good.

STREET PREACHER

When I was in college, I would sometimes ride the bus home. I enjoyed these mini-adventures. I remember one time, or maybe more than once, seeing a young black man (in his 20's or 30's) preaching to the people passing by or maybe just to the air. I remember I was so proud of that young man that he was representing God, reminding people that God and His words are important.

Later I would ponder the special place that street preachers have, in contrast to ministers who preach from the pulpit.

Whereas ministers who are ordained and are representatives of church organizations must consider their words and maybe even censor them, street preachers , I would think , would be more willing to express "politically incorrect" ideas.

As I admired that street preacher, I also want to follow his example.
I feel that my job here is to express ideas that are not presently expressed or accepted. Of course I ask and encourage any readers to decide for themselves if what I am "putting out there" is valid or not valid.

One person that I admire is John Lienhard. In his daily radio spots on KUHF, he often points out that pioneers (in various areas of science and technology) are sometimes dismissed as crackpots or at least misguided only to be proved right by later developments.

In CHASING DAYLIGHT, which I recommend, author Erwin McManus encourages Christians to follow God even when they are scared of the response of others (among many possible troubles.)

Jefferson Hillel and Jesus, part 2

I noticed Hillel's omission, leaving God and relationship to God out of his summary of the Torah, when I was reading an article by Karen Armstrong (who also wrote THE HISTORY OF GOD) in AARP magazine MODERN MATURITY 5 to 10 years ago. Her topic was compassion (and that pure compassion, devoid of rhetoric and dogma should be our goal. Maybe I don't remember it quite right. I may be biased against Karen's viewpoint.)

Anyway, Karen refered to Hillel, and the simple way he distilled down what was needed to live a good life. Maybe I was studying Jesus' words that were similar at that time. I think I had taught 3 or 4 year olds at vacation Bible school recently, and our theme for that week of VBS was Jesus giving the TWO great commandments: 'the first one is you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind and with all your strength'. And the second is like it: you shall love your neighbor as yourself. (I remember the preacher's wife was teaching the music to the children; and she was teaching them hand movements to go with the song. It was so sweet to see her working with the little ones.) So when I read Hillel's summary, I really felt the void.

I tried to research Hillel more-his theology. I haven't found a source yet that can give me a more complete picture of his teachings. I need to go ahead and ASK a rabbi, I guess. Anyway, am I wrong? Did Hillel leave God out of his summary of the Torah? I suppose you could say that honoring God, putting God first, not taking His name in vain COULD fall under the catagory of "not doing to others what you yourself find oppressive", but I think we need to put God above others.
When I was reading all the places that Jesus said something similar to Hillel's summary and the "golden rule", I noted:
MARK 12:30(THE TWO, WITH THE SH'MAH)
MATTHEW 22:35-40(THE TWO)--------------------------------
LUKE 10:27 is different. This is where the story (parable) of the "Good Samaritan" is. It is actually a jewish expert in the law that is questioning Jesus who gives the summary in this scene. I will put the whole story up to the beginning of the parable here.
MATTHEW 19:16-26(RICH YOUNG MAN)--------

DEUTERONOMY6:5 and LEVITICUS19:18 are the two Old Testament verses that are the basis of Jesus' summary of the Torah into two commandments.

When I was comparing Hillel's summary with Jesus' summary, and comparing them both to the Ten Commandments, I noted in the Matthew19:16-26 passage that Jesus left out all four of the commandments about God (as well as the commandment about honoring our parents). I had always thought that Jesus just listed a few of the ten as a time-saving thing. But since I was pondering the difference between what Jesus said and Hillel said, I wanted to find a reason for Jesus leaving out the first 5 of the Ten Commandments. I kept reading that passage and came to the place where the young man Had to say "No. I can't make that level of commitment." and walked away sad. Jesus said (something like) "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven."
Jesus' disciples asked "Who, then, can enter?" Jesus answered, "With man it is impossible. But with God all things are possible."

I think Jesus there was emphasizing that we need to make God the center, and that only by making God the center are we able to fulfill these other commandments.
I also think that Hillel's teachings of 100 years previously (or less) were still being discussed and He, Jesus, was pointing out that weakness or omission of Hillel's Torah summary.

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES: PART 2

There are two areas that I want to recognize this organization in.
First, they have tried to make sense of the whole Bible. Yes, I know that they have bent the meaning of some passages and ignored others. (Be truthful. Many denominations and part of the Christian Church have done that.) The particular belief that the J.W.s have brought out and tried to make sense of that others for many years ignored was what the Bible says about the 'end times'. The J.W.s speak of a new earth, a renewed earth which will be the paradise that God always wanted for mankind. The honest inquiry into the passages about God's plans for the Earth in the future, I believe, forced mainstream denominations to address this part of the Bible. The second thing I want to recognize this organization for is the reasoned way that they address congregation size and plan for growth. It is my understanding that when a congregation gets to a certain number, the rules of the organization require that the congregation split into two congregations. I studied the 'life cycle' of organizations in college and learned that there is a time (size) in the life of an org. when it is prone to split because of fighting factions or to lose steam. It seems that the Jehovah's Witnesses org. has at least tried to address this difficulty with organiztions.
That's all for now.
One more thing: Someone asked if I believe in the trinity, and the divinity of Jesus, and why.
(I guess they asked because I was recognizing the J.W.'s.) Yes, I do believe that Jesus is God.

THOMAS JEFFERSON, HILLEL AND JESUS

THOMAS JEFFERSON, HILLEL AND JESUS

this post will be a little topical.

Was this on my list?

Well, you know that Thomas Jefferson was one of the founding fathers of America, and of the concept of the noble striving for freedom. (Warning, I am not checking my facts, only relying on my memory and what I've read and heard. That will be the case here, unless I refer to a source. I will definitely give scripture references.) One piece of trivia I've heard about Jefferson is that he didn't like the miracles in the Bible-thought of them as myths, I guess. The story is that he snipped out of his Bible all the miracles that were mentioned.(Smithsonian Magazine had a picture of the Bible. It looked like swiss cheese.)

Also, the word "civil religion" is associated with him in my mind, meaning that he encouraged people to live fine, upstanding, moral lives, without making religious convictions an unpleasant, strife-causing divider of people. (Mind you, we are talking about Mr. Jefferson's ideals, not the way in which he actually conducted himself. I can testify to the difficulty of walking the talk that one wants to talk/ integrating ideals with practical integrity.)

You may not know that Hillel was a jewish scholar that lived and taught about 100 years before Jesus. Unfortunately, the only thing I know of Hillel's theology is that when he was asked by a heckler to give the substance of the Torah while standing on one foot, his response was "do not do to others what you yourself would find oppressive." I think Hillel left out a very important aspect of the Torah. I think Jesus was addressing that omission when he said similar things 100 years later.

Yours truly, Joan Mazzu

Getting the Gears Turning

POST DRAFT

Dear Friends,

I still haven't gotten into the meat of what I'm trying to tell you yet.
I'm really going to do it. For now I'm going to give you the titles of some of the upcoming posts I will be putting out here (in this quiet little room, so insulated from other people and from life, called my blog. I can practically hear the sound echoing off the walls!But it's OK. God is good.)

Upcoming titles of blog posts here at rethinking1776 are:
FLYING IRON
THOMAS JEFFERSON, HILLEL AND JESUS
STREET PREACHER
ONE SILLY LITTLE PREPOSITION
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES: LET'S GIVE THEM SOME CREDIT
MS. D'S STORY, CONTINUED
CONSTANTINE, OUR OWN FALSE PROPHET

That should keep me busy for a while.

I just want to let you know that I have been writing in notebooks and thinking of writing projects for a long time. It is interesting that sitting in front of a computer kind of gives me writers' block, so I am writing at home, putting on flashdrive and transferring the post to blog at the library.
I have bunches of material. Audience? Well, that's a different story.
We'll see what the future holds.

Yours truly, Joan M.

Romans 8:28

In my "little church" that I attend every Wednesday at noon right now in addition to regular Sunday school and worship services, we were talking about Romans 8:28. This story of my precious neighbor went through my mind; but I didn't tell it in class. I want to tell you now (you-hoo. You whoever.)

My neighbor , Ms. D, was born in New Orleans in 1900, the same year the Queen Mum of England was born. I met Ms. D in 1983, when my husband and I moved to Cottage Grove, next door to Ms. D. I only knew Ms. D for about a year, but I got to know her very well. She loved to talk. She was maybe even compusive in her talking. Also, she did not censor herself and her story, at least not to me.

She was taken to the orphanage when she was a baby or little girl, maybe because her parents couldn't afford to raise all of the children in the family. She remembered the orphanage as a place of suffering, not only because it meant abandonment by her parents, but also because the older girls abused the younger ones.

I'll tell you more about Ms. D later, but I'll tell about the Romans 8:28 part now. She was born on August 28, 1900. As she became a strong Christian, and learned Romans 8:28 ("All things work together for good, to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose."), she took that as her "life verse" which she spoke to herself and others and took comfort from at many time in her life. (And believe me, she had many times in her life when she needed comfort.) You see, 8-28 was her bithday.

When her husband was old and had a heart attack, the ambulance came, but was delayed in taking them to hospital by a train. She could only say that verse or the number of it over and over again as they were on their way. Her husband died that day. But she still drew comfort from those holy words of our Lord that she felt he spoke to her personally.

Coincidence

Dear Friends,

Thomas L. Pangle, I see, is on the U of Houston campus today and tomorrow, giving a lecture named "Debating the American Founding". The lecture is Tuesday, Feb.10, 2009 at 5pm, at the Honors College.

I cannot ignore this coincidence. I am trying to get this very blog started, in which I am trying to get people to consider whether the 1776 decision was a "Christian decision", and now comes a man who is opening up discussion on a related subject . Since I am wanting to get the word out about this blog and my ideas, I thought about giving out cards at this event or asking questions from my perspective to the speaker, Dr. Pangle, if questioning is offered.

I don't know if I will be able to go. However I hope to communicate with the man. I read (Wiki) that he admired the work/thoughts of Leo Strauss. I read (Wiki) about Strauss and his thoughts. I read (Wiki) about Paul Tillich, whom Strauss, who grew up as a jew, at one point had wanted to study with. (That did not work out. I wonder why. It makes me wonder if Strauss wanted to see if Tillich could convince him of Christianity's verity.)

Your Friend and fellow wonderer, Joan Mazzu

"Wachet Auff" by J. S. Bach

I've just listened to this music by Bach and wonder again if Bach was portraying with first the playful, light melody and then the somber, pious theme coming in - portraying our lives, where we go about our worldly activities like eating, talking with friends on lite subjects, TV, etc. and working; and then the Holy Spirit speaks to us about the things of God ("Echad "). 

Perhaps the Holy Spirit says, "Wake up sleepers! Let us get on with the things of God. Enough of sleeping your life away with those lite things."

Balance

Dear Friends,

In writing this blog exploring the "1776 decision", I am not advocating re-uniting with England, overthowing our current government or in any way undoing the physical-world events that have flowed from those 1776 decisions on the part of the colonists. I also remind you and myself of Joseph's attitude as spoken in Genesis 45:4-7 and Genesis 50:20: " . . .but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives." (What does God have in mind???)
Rather, I ask that we Christians look objectively at the direction Jesus and Paul gave by example and words, temporarily setting aside the weight we have historically given to the events surrounding the birth of our republic. (Have we American Christians equated the American Revolution with the will of God?)

God bless us, each and every one.

Rethinking 1776

My reason for choosing this name...

Dear friends,

In this blog, I will be "publishing" my beliefs, which I think are not expressed often, and are perhaps minority views.

I will write mainly on how western Christianity's (unspoken or unconscious) currently -accepted values differ from what (in my view) God and Jesus set forth or taught in the New and the Old Testaments.

The title of this blog invites readers to rethink how the decision of the "founding fathers" to fight the British in the American colonies in the late 1700's, to gain independence fits with Jesus' teachings. Some blog entries will be on that subject: some on other things that affect us.

My name is Joan. I'm a Methodist in my 50's, college-educated, Bible-knowledgeable, I think. My parents were born and raised in Canada and Trinidad, West Indies (which might account for my Tory views somewhat.) I lived in Jackson, Michigan (idyllic town of aprox. 60,000) 'til I was 14; and mainly in Houston, Texas from 1969 'til now.

I'm the youngest of 4 siblings, got my degree in agronomy from Texas A&M, but had started out at U of Houston in general studies (in a time when Texas public college education was less expensive and therefore more conducive to learning more about fields not related to one's degree area.)

I hope you will "tune in" for later installments.

Yours truly, Joan M.