Reflections on my 2020, part 0: a teaser

"Fast away the old year passes..."

A disclosure: I'm not particularly a fan of the song "Deck the Halls," from which the above line comes. But I've always been interested in that line, because that's how it always seems to me each December. "Where did the year go??"

But 2020 was no ordinary year. And I know that's boiling it down quite a bit. The pandemic changed everything. My job, Songs by Heart, could no longer do sessions live in memory care units or any other division within retirement communities. Church switched to meeting online only. So did all of my regular group meetings through the week. Gigs and rehearsals stopped happening, because, well, it's kind of impossible to play music through a video call without serious latency, which in a conversation is no issue but is everything when it comes to music, because of the requirement for precision of timing.

Of course, many people also were laid off, and there were copious amounts of protests and riots (I guess COVID-19 must've "taken a break" for those folks). And then an election that was at best suspicious.

I know of many people who are likely happy for 2020 to be over. (I say "likely" because I've only talked to a handful who have explicitly said as much. I'm simply guessing regarding the others.) I get it: for them and for many, 2020 was simply the worst year of their lives -- in some cases, by far.

So it comes with some awkwardness, out of respect for such persons, that I say that I had a good, nay, great 2020. And that's what this upcoming blog series is going to be about. On the one hand, I am sad that 2020 is leaving because of it, and also because I know not all years are created equal. (I've had my fair share of bad years following good ones.) But on the other hand, because of the type of wonderful things that have happened in my life over the last 12 months, I'm actually hopeful that 2021 will be a continuation of the such. Sure, I'm cautiously optimistic, a deeply-ingrained trait I learned from different adult figures growing up, but I am optimistic. What I am choosing to let help me this time around is holding on to Jesus and His Word. The world is getting crazier, anyway, which is completely out of my control but not out of His. As such:

"Hail the new, ye lads and lasses..."

One post at a time

This is only a one-post break from my re-hiatus from blogging. I'm in school part-time, working full-time, and dreaming up plans with a special someone. (I'm not yet making them, mind you. We're not there yet. But hopefully soon.) But I don't have time to blog. I'm still "off" Facebook, and while I am curious about it from time to time, I simply recall my last experiences of it before I "left." I'm planning to return briefly next month once this semester ends simply to check in for a bit. I'm actually pondering really leaving then.

I may yet post again sometime after today. But, to borrow from an AA mantra, "one post at a time." I barely have time for friends that are outside my current circle, i.e. friends I still haven't seen since March, when the pandemic shut everything down. So we'll see.

One new change since July is I've changed churches. I now attend Good News Christian Center in Des Plaines, and I'm enjoying it. I've let a couple people from the Vineyard know, one of whom is one of my best friends, and the other who is the worship pastor. Still waiting to hear back from the worship pastor. I heard he's going through an exceptionally busy time right now. I'm waiting back because I have no idea what the right way is to go about informing others, particularly other pastors on staff.

I'm writing today partly to update, and partly to pontificate. As you might have guessed, this is the longest an election process has ever taken (to my knowledge), particularly the election of the next President of the United States. I believe that no matter the outcome, this will truly be a major tipping point in our country's history, likely unseen since 1865. As of this post, the outcome is still undecided, a whole three days past Election Day. It feels surreal. I'm watching and praying, and that's probably part of why I'm so exhausted. (The other being I've been burning the candle at both ends for weeks now.)

I do have a rooting interest in this, which hasn't particularly been the case for about a decade. Among other thoughts and feelings, I say it's surreal because I never thought I would type and re-type "2020 election results" in my google search bar repeatedly. Last election, I went to bed at a reasonable hour, reasoning, "I'll find out who is president in the morning." And I did. Not this time. It's the kind of thing where we might know as soon as tonight, or we may not know for another week. I've browsed previous election maps from all sorts of eras (although primarily sticking with the 20th and 21st centuries), and each time I feel that strong sense of "these are the results. This is final." So to look at the map now, current as of November 6th, 2020, three whole days after Election Tuesday, and it's still not final. It's like everything is hanging in the balance. Because, well, it is.

I heard it said during the campaign trail that "the soul of this country is at stake." I believe it. It is. I've long, long, long had this sense that this country, due to many many different factors, will collapse or be irrelevant during my lifetime. Deep down, I've never really wanted to believe it. I live here. I don't want to be in it when it happens. But also part of it is this deep sadness, upon reflecting on the history of how the US got started. Regardless of what you believe ("this is a Christian nation" or "this is not a Christian nation"), I expect you would have to agree that there was, at least at first, something special about this place. The thought of that specialness being gone in the future is not something I want to believe. But deep down I can't escape it.

So what do I do? First off, I tune out most of the noise. I was never much of a news-watcher or a news-reader, and while I pay a little more attention than I used to, fundamentally I don't plan on changing that. Just see/hear the headlines. And then immediately turn that over to God. Because 1.) I can't control it, and 2.) thinking/obsessing about it will only cause me extra anxiety, stress, and fear. I get enough of that simply by being triggered by things in my own personal life. I don't need extra.

Secondly, I focus on what's in front of me. Today, as it is Friday, and I finished my workweek, the rest of my day is going to be homework, a phone call in a few minutes, a nap (because I am way behind on sleep), dinner, more studying, a video call, more sleep, and then it'll be Saturday, with a whole new schedule.

Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

Matthew 6:34, NIV

Thirdly, and finally, I look at what kind of future I want and hope for. I'm old enough now that I'm kind of understanding that most plans I make (that aren't already set) don't happen or get completely changed. So I already expect that certain aspects of my desired future will indeed be there, but other aspects will not. And that's hard. Because on the one hand, it discourages me from even trying to plan. But on the other, if I don't plan, then no aspect of my desired future happens. It's a Catch-22. And because of the balance upon which all things are hanging here on earth at this point in time, it is indeed fruitless to try to dictate every aspect of a plan.

But until that future comes, it's one day at a time.

And one post at a time.

Saying Goodbye Again: For Everything There Is A Season (2020)

My blog's URL, once I relaunched it back in February of last year, contained the phrase "for everything there is a season," followed by 2019. This was for two reasons: 1.) the phrase on its own, followed by "blogspot.com," was taken. So I had to add something else; 2.) I chose 2019 because it was not only the year I restarted it, but it was also in the spirit and time behind restarting it. My previous girlfriend encouraged me to use it to post faith-related stuff, and I had also had a dream in January 2019 that seemed to finally signal an "ok" to resuming, after taking many years off. As for my vision, you can click on the link here. I had no idea if I was going to meet my goals, let alone what the finished product would look like.

If you've been following the whole time, you might've surmised that I didn't exactly reach my big-picture goal. I don't have some other blog that this launched that earns me money, like I had originally planned. I did hit some smaller picture goals, like shifting what I post about and how I post, compared with when I blogged previously as a young man in my 20s.

Anyway, today's post title is in the same spirit as the URL title. 2020 is different from 2019, most certainly in a lot of ways, but for me it's different because I've concluded that it's time to once again say goodbye. I got my fix. Even though I successfully stayed away from blogging for almost six years, I also periodically had dreams during that time about blogging again. (I certainly had enough blog-worthy material in my life that I could have posted at any point in that time!)

I didn't post this in my first return post, but I wish to share a verse that I now realize formed my return last year, as well as my going at this time. From Ecclesiastes 3:7, NIV (second half)

"a time to be silent and a time to speak..."

I won't rule out returning perhaps sometime down the road, very likely at a reduced rate. But if I don't, I will happily say that I'm grateful for the opportunity to have gone on another adventure, to get the writing juices stirred again, even if only for a while.

Revisiting what-ifs

I saw on TV once (National Geographic Channel?) about a guy's harrowing brush with death in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Originally planning to kayak from one Hawaiian island to another, he found himself so far out in the ocean that he could see two (or even three) mountain peaks faintly in the distance, that themselves were far apart. In the end, he was rescued (and this point of reference that he radioed to the search and rescue team is what led them to find him). But what stands out from this story is the perspective. These mountains that he referenced (at this point, I don't remember which ones they were) could only be seen at the precise angles that he listed, from way far out.

As I continue to reflect, heal, grow, take one step forward and one step back, lather, rinse, repeat, etc., I'm starting to see some significant points of reference in my story like that. A thought reoccurred to me about various points in my life where I made a decision that created ripple effects, some of which are still present today.

For a few years after I graduated from college, I spent a lot of time thinking about how much of an impact my college experience had on me. In 2010 I posted on the question "if you could do it over again, would you?" If memory serves, I believe it came off a question a friend of mine had asked (more as an ice-breaker), likely on Facebook. I naturally thought it so profound that I reposted it, and received a few answers, one of which was this: "only if I could know what I know now."

This, in a nutshell, is why I don't like what-if questions. The thing is, if I were to go back to the past with the option of making a different decision, I would also lose the lessons I learned. The truth is, at any given time, I know what I know, and I don't know what I don't know. Now, in the case of deja vu, where I come across another choice point that is very similar to a previous one, I do have the option of reflecting on "what happened last time," and I have the option of choosing to apply what I've learned -- or not.

[To wit: I recently bought a new used car. This was the second time I've done this. The first time was a complete disaster, but also one I brought upon myself. I'd purchased a used vehicle from a dealership as-is with no warranty without getting it checked out. It turned out to be a lemon. This time, I test-drove a used vehicle from my mechanic's shop, had three other people test-drive it, had another mechanic inspect it thoroughly, and negotiated the price down a little bit. That said, I learned the lessons I learned precisely because of the experience I went through the first time.]

In the aforementioned post from 2010, I chose to focus on the question around my college choice. In retrospect -- yes, I can now see about three or four mountain peaks that are hundreds of miles apart, all in one perspective -- it's not the biggest "what-if" question I have about myself. That award goes to the decision I made to come back to Chicago for high school. In the same way, foresight is not 20/20. Plus, I was heck-bent on returning home. There were many negative surprises waiting for me, either upon my return or upon the advent of the new school year. But there was no way that I would've known any of that until I came home.

I suppose if I'd had a few more tangible experiences out in New York that might've simulated more of a "home" environment (not that it didn't, but not enough to sway my heart to stay, evidently), I might have stayed. In eighth grade, the time came for my classmates and me to apply for high schools. Many of them continued on to other boarding schools, some of them all-boys boarding schools, just like St. Thomas is. I remember a fair we went to one day halfway through the year sometime where all the big East Coast boarding schools had a table: Groton, St. Andrew's, Chatham, and so on. I had zero interest. I had made it known to my parents that I was coming back to Chicago for high school. To my mom's credit, she researched a whole bunch of private schools in the area and boiled it down to two: North Shore Country Day, and St. Ignatius College Prep.

Even though I've returned to New York a few times since I graduated, the question of possibly moving there didn't come up until I began dating someone I met online who lived there. Even though it didn't explicitly come out, I suspect that my deciding I didn't want to move to New York factored in its ending. And consequently, I have to wonder if how I felt about New York twenty years ago when I was living there was what led me to my decision just last year.

In addition to my college choice, other what-ifs include the choice to move to New York for the purpose of the relationship I was in at the time, at least one or two other relationship opportunities that I was actually ready for but either didn't realize it or did realize it but wasn't willing to change, as well as a key decision to leave a job because the company relocated. Even now, I'm thinking through going back to school, and I've been looking through what to study. Even though I understand that, as a Christian, nothing matters more than what God wants, even decisions that seem small to Him can still be huge for us.

Walking in faith is tricky in this way: in times when I've taken risks (good risks) in life with no foresight and no clue as to how what I'm doing will turn out, I will sometimes see signs or hear indications as I keep taking steps. Rarely will these indications tell me how it will all end. But often I will get a guidepost or a guideline. The scary part is choosing to trust that, when I do absolutely need a guidepost, it will appear, even though human rhyme or reason scream not to make a decision without having all the data in front of me. What I'm finding though as I get older (relatively speaking), is that situations and the lessons surrounding the what-ifs actually can provide some of that data.

When I first started going to the Evanston Vineyard, one of the messages I heard was that God can't steer the boat if I don't paddle. I get the impression that many churches preach about not steering (i.e. trying to take control) -- that's God's job. But I'm not sure how many churches also preach about the importance of walking the walk. How we build our faith in Jesus (I know, easy for me to say, a lot harder for me to do) is by walking that walk. When I walk wrong, I'll get corrected, painful as it is. When I walk right, I'll sometimes receive confirmation, but oftentimes I won't hear anything, which makes me nervous. But as long as I keep walking, I'll learn more things.

"Bone" Reflection: Part 4

Smith, Jeff, "Bone" Book 3, p. 102.

My strong reaction to Fone Bone’s decision at the end wasn’t a result of bottling up my thoughts and feelings along the way, only to let it out at the end. In fact, I’ve been reacting and feeling ever since I bought book 1 a few years back. But my reaction was to what I saw as the culmination of all my energies in the saga as I went along. After all the escapes, battles, near-death experiences, moments of bonding, moments of truth, moments of challenging one another and encouraging one another, along with every new wrinkle and new challenge along the way, and ultimately emerging victorious in the end…

Not to mention, everyone who survived to the end (which was most of the top fifteen or so characters that mattered) — grew. Fone grew up. Smiley grew up. Thorn grew up. Rose healed of several deep hurts and wounds. Even Phoney grew and changed some, if not entirely.

And Fone still chooses to return to Boneville over getting to spend the rest of his life near Thorn! (And I would also say, with Thorn.) I still say Thorn had come around. I was really rooting for them. And, the way that it ends up happening — well, I know what that’s like, all too well.

I’ll say this: it was obvious that she was crushed when Fone announced his decision. It was also obvious that it was hard for him to make that decision. He loves his cousins, Phoney and Smiley. It wasn’t just choosing Boneville over Atheia, but choosing his cousins over Thorn, Rose, and the others. And at the final goodbye, when the Bone cousins are about to leave the mountains bordering the valley to traverse the same desert they walked in on, we see Fone’s goodbyes with the others as rather informal and short, considering they spent the last year-and-a-half together. That was surprising. But Fone’s goodbye with Thorn was heart-rending.

I get it: Fone isn’t a human; he's a Bone creature. In Jeff Smith’s world, I’m not clear how things worked. It seemed obvious that Bones are different from humans. But, throughout the saga it also seemed possible — to me — that maybe they weren’t so different after all. Maybe physiologically it could’ve worked out. We will never know. I’m not even sure Jeff Smith himself knows.

But as someone who gets crowned ruler of the land, Thorn needs a partner with whom to have children and to continue the royal line. And, from what I’ve been learning over the years and about what makes a good partnership in marriage, who better than with Fone to make it work? (If it could have worked out physiologically, that is…)

They went through so many things together over that year-and-a-half (even though the war took up only nine months of that time), that the time they shared together uncovering truths, escaping from rat creatures, fighting wars, and making strategic military choices, it forged the template for a potential lifelong partnership.

Maybe Fone genuinely gave up. I doubt that, though. It’s just hard reading it, and then re-reading it all over again. What I was rooting for was not only for Fone to live in Atheia with Thorn (and Rose), but for Smiley and Phoney to stay in the valley as well. Why not have the best of both worlds? As far as I’m concerned, they’re all heroes. Besides, as the reader I don’t ever see Boneville at any point in the saga.

Other bullet points:

1. Reading through the “Bone” saga reminded me of "The Lord of the Rings."
2. The war in the “Bone” saga between good and evil is very much like the very real spiritual war that is ramping up in our world now.
3. Seeing Fone and Thorn together in jail — among other near-escape situations — reminded me of Apostle Paul and how he often was in prison, and how he also had several near-escape situations.

"Bone" Reflection: Part 3

Smith, Jeff, "Bone" Book 1, p. 114.

In the end, Fone Bone chooses to return to Boneville.

I had a very strong and very sad reaction to that.

You see, finishing up reading through the entire “Bone" saga was the culmination of something that began when I was a child. When I was nine years old, I first saw an excerpt of the first chapter of the first book in a kid’s magazine subscription that my mom had taken out for me for a year. Before that year’s subscription was up, I saw two more excerpts from that first chapter that followed in two subsequent issues. And then that was that, for a very long time.

I don’t recall when it was I bought the first book of the nine-book saga. I believe it was three or four years ago, and in the time since I accumulated the first four books out of the nine (all in full color, mind you). Each time I bought a new book in this graphic art saga it was the kind of thing where I couldn’t put it down. I couldn’t help but read it straight through.

Not only that, but it was the kind of thing where I had to read through it at least twice, if not three times, straight through each time, before I was even remotely satisfied with having absorbed the story. There are so many intricacies (if the first two posts in this series didn’t tell you already), so many plots and so many sub-plots. And each book ended with just enough of a cliffhanger that I had to find out where the plot was going. Hence Wikipedia. Even then, I realized that the articles wouldn’t do the storyline justice.

So I finally splurged and bought the entire saga in one large, thick volume. I saved quite a bit of money though by buying it in black-and-white. I sacrificed the color. (Mind you, this wasn’t the plan! I just thought I found a really good deal!)

The day it arrived in the mail (I’d ordered it off Amazon), I read the last five books — books five through nine — in two sittings. I was even up until 2 AM finishing it up! (Like I said, gripping.) The following day, I re-read books six and seven. The third day, I re-re-read books six and seven, and re-read book five. The fourth day, I re-read books eight and nine, and by this point was often cross-referencing key story points from earlier books.

I worked to answer the insatiable question: “how did we get from there to here?” over and over again, each chapter within each book I re-read (or re-re-read). I wanted to leave no stone unturned. And in doing so, I allowed myself to experience everything. I was in the story.

I rooted for Fone Bone and Thorn to enter into a relationship together. I rooted for the same thing with Rose and Lucius. I rooted for Smiley and the rat creature cub to become family. I rooted for reconciliation between Thorn and Rose. I rooted for all of the top ten characters on the good side to make it out alive, and for all of them to accomplish their goal. I found myself rooting for so much to go right, in part because my obsession allowed me to become part of the story, but also because the story spoke so much about my thoughts, my dreams, my life experiences, my losses, my pain, and my yearnings. And also because I was first introduced to, well, some of the characters when I was nine years old.

"Bone" Reflection: Part 2

Smith, Jeff, "Bone" Book 4, p. 60.

I led off the previous post with the word “tears." There’s just so much I identify with here. Thorn and the Bone cousins are orphans. Thorn and Fone Bone are called to great heights, great destinies. Rose and Lucius exemplify bravery and courage every minute of the saga, through repeated near-death experiences. They all, even Phoney Bone and Smiley Bone, overcome so many obstacles that both the powers that be, and other persons, continually throw at them.

On the one hand, Fone Bone overcomes such obstacles by standing tall, speaking truth, and challenging anyone that dares to pervert the truth or dares to hurt anyone that he cares about. I want to be that man.

On the other hand, Phoney Bone, someone I don’t want to be like, angers so many people that he has at least five separate incidents where he is very nearly strangled to death or strung up, saved only because someone powerful enough intervenes, like Thorn, or Rose, or Lucius. Or even Wendell, on one occasion.

Is it dumb luck that Phoney survives? Perhaps. Then again, a few of the times that Fone survives (and even Smiley survives) is because someone or something intervenes. To me, if this kind of storyline happens in real life, I would say that that’s God’s grace.

I identify with so much here: bravery; standing tall; overcoming obstacles; experiencing life throwing obstacles repeatedly, that, if not overcome, leads to death; God’s grace; people sticking together; friendship; loyalty…

I’ve skipped one storyline here. I don’t even know how to describe it, but here goes: unrequited love but tenderness reciprocated nonetheless. Halfway through, Fone completely resigns himself to the fact that Thorn won't return to him the feelings he has he for her.

Yet it doesn’t deter him from committing to the cause of peace in all the land. It also doesn’t deter him from sharing so many tangible experiences with her: numerous near-escapes from large numbers of rat creatures hunting them down; stepping in and out of ghost circles; facing Kingdok, a giant rat creature who commands all the rat creature armies and reports to the Hooded One; facing Roque Ja (a much-oversized mountain lion who only looks after himself); facing the Hooded One; pursuing the Crown of Horns.

Fone willingly faces this disappointing fact with Thorn. He not only supports her in her mission, but he also challenges her when he thinks she isn’t right in the head or in danger of making a bad decision, and he encourages her when things seem hopeless or she doesn’t know what to do. And for all the evidence that I certainly see in the first half of this long saga, from Phoney repeating it to Fone, to me reading about it in the plot lines on Wikipedia, I think that in the end, Thorn comes around.

[As a side note: when I bought each individual book at a time early on in the saga, I would go on to Wikipedia and read ahead where the storyline was going to go. I didn’t mind the spoilers.]

Thorn wants Fone to stay and help her rule the newly-reestablished kingdom. (Thorn becomes crowned queen when all the battles have finally been won.) Only at this time does the opportunity finally come for the Bone cousins to be able to go back home to Boneville. And she instead wants Fone to stay with her. She wants him to rule with her.

And Fone chooses to return to Boneville instead.

"Bone" Reflection: Part 1

Smith, Jeff, "Bone" Book 1, p. 7

Tears. The “Bone” comic saga by Jeff Smith. Nine volumes.

Bone creatures. Humans. Dragons. Rat creatures. Farmers. Stick-eaters. Locusts. The Hooded One. Even a kitty cat (a really large one — bigger than a house!).

War. Love. Friendships. Family. Makeshift family. Death. Orphanhood. Dreams. Ghost circles.

A farmhouse. A tavern. A town. An ancient temple. A city.

Mountains. Valleys. Caves. Deeps.

Destiny. History (albeit make-believe). Near-death experiences.

Oh, so many near-death experiences. None of the top fifteen characters go through the entire saga without experiencing it at least once. Two don’t make it out alive, and really several other minor characters are killed off by the end. And the top three characters — Fone Bone, Thorn, and Rose (Thorn's grandmother; aka Gran’ma Ben) — have more near-death experiences than I could even count, especially Fone Bone and Thorn. Twenty, perhaps?

Bravery. Folly, perhaps. Wisdom, too, though.

Cunning. Shrewdness. Some trickery. Karma. Alliances. Treaties. Broken alliances and broken treaties.

Promises made and promises broken, particularly between characters that love each other the most. (Fone Bone and Phoney Bone; Thorn and Fone Bone)

Lies told, revealed, and broken. (Rose and Thorn)

Heritages and destinies revealed. (Rose and Thorn again)

Relationships broken and mended. (Rose and Thorn, yet again; evidently Rose and Lucius (the local tavern-owner) a long time ago; Rose and the Great Red Dragon somewhat; Lucius and Briar, somewhat)

Three outsiders randomly enter the valley.

Even though they each want to leave, in various different ways they cannot. Forces beyond their control, as well as forces within their control, keep them there. Fone Bone unwittingly gets sucked into a second world that coexists with the world of the valley, a world of dreaming through which spirits and dragons and persons can intersect and communicate. He also develops a big crush on Thorn, the young woman in the valley whom he befriends. His cousin Phoney Bone tries at least twice to scam the locals so he can have a ton of money to bring with him back to Boneville. Their other cousin, Smiley Bone, adopts a baby rat creature, and the process of parenting forces him to grow up.

The humans in the valley are at the center of a burgeoning war to end all wars. The rat creatures and the Hooded One, along with the Lord of the Locust, are one side; the humans, including the former queen Rose (Gran’ma Ben), Thorn (the heir to the throne), and the dragons, are on the other. Except the dragons (including the Great Red Dragon) bail out halfway through the saga. And the Bones — these outsiders — play a crucial role.

"Bone" Reflection: Prologue

Smith, Jeff, "Bone" Book 1, p. 18.

In November 2019 I read through the entire graphic novel "Bone," by Jeff Smith. As a minor comics junkie, this saga gripped me. In the next four posts I'll share some raw thoughts from it, including my struggle to put words together at first as I was coming back to reality from this powerful story.

[At this point, I will caution you: there are spoilers ahead in the next four posts. I would recommend skipping reading the rest of this series if you would prefer to not know the plot until you've read it yourself. I will add one other disclaimer, though: because of the thickness of the plot, my reflections will not completely spoil the story, but they will hit some of the biggest plot points. Hence my caution.]

The posts that will follow I originally wrote as soon as I finished the saga for at least the third time... in a row. I then wrestled with whether to post these reflections. As much as I wrestle with trying not to make this blog about me (because that's the easy thing to do), I also am a natural storyteller, and believe that 1.) every person that has ever lived has a story worth telling, 2.) even stories that seem at first glance like repeats never really are, and 3.) the way this comic intersected my life last November also played a role in my relationship with God and my hopes for a future at all. (I was staring at some potentially bleak possibilities for my future.) I believe that Jesus did use this comic, as well as some other personal tangible moments, to speak hope into my life when I was uncertain at best and pessimistic at worst. Therefore, I've chosen to share my reflections.

Once I decided to post these, the question then became when. The timing wasn't right at first. (It rarely is, as I'm finding out more and more.) Then life got really busy. Then some other things happened, and then finally COVID-19, which ground everything to a halt. And I mean, everything. As the pandemic itself was unfolding in our country I also felt inspired to post a series of posts around an admittedly difficult Biblical topic, which I decided to officially run on the blog last month. And then, more recently, the murder of George Floyd as well as the ensuing national (and international) backlash took up my attention, as I felt a more immediate response was needed. As such, I've chosen, finally, after pushing the posting dates back twice more, the latter half of June for this series so as to have something lighter-hearted to follow up a couple serious but heavy topics.

Obviously, I haven't gone back to read through "Bone" since I put it away back in November. It's an undertaking. As I sit here, reflecting on the comic saga, without having read it for a while, the picture that keeps coming up is one of Fone Bone (the main character), holding a map, looking ahead and charting the next step.

Smith, Jeff, "Bone" Book 1, p. 16.

He is on an adventure. After I'd taken the Myers-Briggs test last fall (I also took it again this spring, getting the same results) and learned that my personality type is that of an adventurer, I found this photo to be inspiring and encouraging. This pic is at the beginning of the entire saga. Fone has no idea -- no idea -- what his life is going to look like over the next year and a half (the amount of time that goes by over the entirety of this saga).

Seven months after I finished reading the saga, a lot has changed in my life, and for the better. Because I actually wrote most of this post in April, and only mildly edited a section of it in June, I cannot really say as of yet what has happened. But a lot has changed. And while I much prefer a life that is safe and secure and in a consistent rhythm, my personality type evidently begs to differ. As much as I've tried to hang on to the idea of a life that is only safe and secure, it simply has not been the case. Following Jesus (or at least trying to) is an adventure by default. He promises both suffering and rewards as part of the journey. As you'll read over the next four posts, Fone's adventures, as well as that of everyone else in the saga, are nothing short of baptism by fire.

Maybe in a future post, after my reflections on "Bone" are posted, I'll post an "in-real-time" post about life updates. Time will tell.

Why I left Facebook again

I’ll start by saying that, for those of you who don’t know (which is probably most of you by this point), I’ve left Facebook before. I was a freshman in college in 2005 during its early days, when it was expanding as a social network across all colleges and universities across the United States. It was an addiction (not all too unlike now), but it was a different kind of addiction. As a very lonely young adult, Facebook gave me the illusion of connecting with all sorts of people that in real life I could only dream of being able to connect with. It got me through those dark years — sort of. I eventually hit a point — I was 26 — where I realized this was actually causing me constant pain. So I disconnected. Most people understood. I did have one friend text me on my phone and chew me out for doing so. But otherwise, most understood.

I rejoined two years later, upon the encouragement of my band, Ring Shout & Friends, as a way of staying connected, when I realized that I was going to have to stop committing to it on account of my schedule getting busier. A key part of that was also creating a page on Facebook for the band to advertise about gigs, as well as post videos and funny music-related memes. And I’ve stayed on since, finally able to successfully navigate Facebook largely without falling back into this unhealthy pattern that I was in the first time.

Over the last few years especially, Facebook has become more of a news source more so than a hangout place. And with COVID-19 causing us all to sequester, it meant also providing church for me. At least, until my church moved to a platform upon which I am to this day unable to live-stream their services. I grieve that. But it is what it is.

George Floyd’s murder, and the subsequent uproar, led me to leaving Facebook. As I was saying earlier, it had become more of a news source, as well as a source to share photos and videos and connect over that. I suppose it was also a marketplace of sorts, although I had neither bought nor sold anything.

Outside of a post the day after the murder, and a few other stray posts, I’ve largely stayed silent. A lot of it is, beyond what I had already said, I didn’t — and don’t — know what else to say or to do. But it’s not for lack of advice that so many people I know that for days and days and days afterward have provided. It’s actually the quality of advice (as well as the quantity) that overwhelmed me and pushed me silent.

The thing is, there’s plenty I fundamentally disagree with about the advice. But before I dive into it, I will first share the barebones of where I stand that is in agreement with what I've seen posted:

1.) George Floyd’s murder was 100% flat-out wrong and horrifying, and I fully support the justice that eventually came on the four officers, including Derek Chauvin, who had put his knee on George’s neck, as well as the other three officers who stood by without doing anything. [And I re-iterate, I wrote a post on Facebook expressing as much.]

2.) I do fully agree that police profiling of black people, as well as that of other colors, need to stop. This including “Driving While Black,” etc. 

3.) I have no problem with all the protests, and in fact support that they happened, not just in Minneapolis but all across the country (and apparently across the world). 

4.) I need to make clear (and from what I see, most people on both sides of the political aisle seem to understand and agree with this): those who were protesting and those who were rioting and looting are NOT the same group of people. Not that there may be a few who have participated in both. But they’re not the same. Protestors = good. Rioters and looters = bad. I stand firmly on that. As do I think most people I know. 

5.) Black lives DO matter. In 2014, when the previous wave of white police officers (or citizens) killing blacks were occurring (and being filmed), I bristled at the term “white privilege.” My immediate response was: “What privilege?” At that time I was also early in my own personal work, and still firmly believed that my life sucked, and that it really wouldn’t have made a difference whether I was white or black or whatever. And you bet I was a full proponent of “all lives matter.” Also, as a child I was the victim of some racism blowback, being objectified on two different occasions as a racist and a hater, as the result of misunderstanding and miscommunication. And at the time, my heart was still hard about those incidents. But, here’s the thing: while all lives do matter, the point about the “black lives matter” movement is to point out that black lives haven't mattered. Not to the police, and not to white citizens. There has been an incredible imbalance of standards that, even to this day, still hasn’t mattered, for reasons that just don’t hold water. And I agree that that has to change, across the board. While I cannot necessarily say the same thing about the official “Black Lives Matter” organization (I don’t know much about it, but I have heard things that seem to indicate that it is pushing for more than only the true spirit of the slogan). 

6.) And finally: have I been racist in my life? Yes. I have made generalizations and assumptions about people of color that have hindered my ability to see them as people, and people who matter. I repent of that, again. And I want anyone of color who’s reading this to know, I am committed to listening to your story, hearing your pain, and doing what I can to develop a friendship where I treat you the same way you would treat me, and also see your culture, your heritage, and your color. In other words, all that makes you you. It’s what I would want others to do for me. What would I gain if I were to choose to be selective about granting you the same, outside of the quality of your character?

Those things above I do agree with. Below are a few things I’ve seen that I flat-out disagree with:

1.) “It’s not enough.” I cannot begin to tell you how many posts and banners on Facebook I’ve seen that have either said those words, or conveyed those words through other words that were actually said. While I am pro-justice, I am against taking things too far. I’ve seen this also with the American feminist movement. Simply put, it’s this idea that to really make things right with those who’ve been oppressed, I need to simply lay down and let them oppress me back, for the rest of my life, as a way of getting their revenge. I cannot even begin to tell you how much I disagree with this, with every [expletive] fiber of my being. While I deserve accountability, just like everyone else, I'm not willing to let others beat on me their rage, simply because I'm white and a man. And my fear is that, for some people, it will not be enough, not until I'm beaten to a pulp for 400 years of what people who look like me has done to people who look like them. For some people, it will not be enough until we defund and eliminate the police force (more on that later). And for some people, it will not be enough until we get rid of the Constitution. On these grounds, I cannot stand with them. 

2.) “It's a requirement that you be ashamed to be white.” I've not seen this in posts posted by friends of color, but I have seen this in posts by other whites: this idea of being ashamed to be white. (Cleverly disguised as "white guilt.") While I fully agree that no person of color should ever have to be ashamed of being the ethnicity and color they were born into, I think that should apply to me as well. Where I've made mistakes or done someone wrong, I agree to be fully accountable for my actions. But I do not agree to be accountable for another white person's racist actions, simply on the account of being the same race. In the same way that I recognize it is wrong for me to make generalizations about people of color based on stereotypes, I stand firmly that that accountability needs to hold for all, not just for white people. 

3.) “It's wrong to be silent.” OK. This point I get, to a point. There was a quote that I saw circulating around that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr said, which is this: “I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.”  I agree insofar that to get justice, one has to speak and speak and keep speaking. If I'm silent about something, anything, the thing I don't want to continue will continue until I speak up. I understand it and agree with it to this point. But, I hate to say it, but because of the furor that I've seen in so many people's posts, it has also exactly done the opposite for me of what was intended, which is it has kept me quiet even more, and ultimately led me to leave Facebook altogether. And my truth about it is this: while I've survived many moments of helplessness and relative oppression in my life, I've never actually been rescued from such moments, let alone had reparations for what may have happened to me. How can I truly be expected to speak up for someone else who's actively being oppressed, when I've never had anyone speak up for me when I was in that place? And here's the thing: if I were to dare to post such a response, I know I would have people that I'm connected to swarm over me and tell me how wrong I am. And the result of that would be me to pull back even more and even cut off some of these people from my life. There is no scenario here that I can envision that would lead to any kind of personal growth on my part, if growth is deemed necessary. 

4.) “You have to be politically active. You have to call your congressperson and your senator and your mayor and your governor.” The truth is, I've never been politically active. I vote. That's it. I recognize that a freedom and a right that I do still have as a citizen of the Untied States of America is that of writing or calling my local representatives. But a.) I hate making phone calls to people I don't know; b.) I hate, hate making phone calls where I have to take a stand on something, for example, fighting to get a bill deferred because of financial hardship, let alone telling a local representative that I don't like the job they're doing; and c.) where I live, all the local and state representatives that I could vote in or out of office are pro-choice, and if I'm going to complain about something, it's going to be that first. 

5.) “We must de-fund the police.” Seriously? While I am all for re-training across police departments, as well as giving existing police officers the option to step down if they cannot or will not change their m.o.'s toward black people, the truth of the matter is that de-funding the police force is an utterly idiotic idea. We need our police. Without them, there's lawlessness, anarchy, chaos, and disorder. One thing that I've seen from COVID-19 and subsequent sequestering orders, is that the mere redistribution of police forces to police the parks, beaches, and parking lots to ensure that people aren't violating the order, has left streets and expressways wide open for a lot more people to speed, to go 80, 85, 90 MPH, down a city expressway. And this is just the small stuff. Imagine what will happen if we force them to be privately funded. They won't be able to do as much to help us the citizens regarding order and safety.

Here is the truth of the matter: I also just don't have time to divest from my responsibilities toward this. I have a full-time job, which I need in order to pay the rent and still have a place to live. I'm going back to school this fall so I can invest in another career that will finally get me on my feet financially, not just for now but also for the future. And lastly, I have a wonderful woman in my life (who lives locally) with whom I'm planning a future. Between those three things alone, not to mention self-care, like eating, sleeping, cleaning my living space, chores, errands, looking at and planning my finances, as well as tasks that come up every now and then... I just don't have the energy to drop all this and spend a whole day and protest. Or call a local representative. As such, I may have the appearance of a "white moderate," but honestly, what am I supposed to do? Set aside the path I'm on -- not only so, but a path I believe that God has put me on -- and invest the requisite emotional energy just to make other people happy? To shame myself for being white because of all the horrible things that others been done over the centuries?

Here is what I can do for now, given my limitations. I can repent. And I can keep repenting, to God, and to others as God Himself directs. I'm a sinner, just like everyone else. Lately, one form of repentance has been working on a cover of "O Holy Night," which, sure, seems unusual for this time of year. But check out this verse, which, in my recording, is the second and final verse:

Truly He taught us to love one another;
His law is love and His gospel is peace.
Chains shall He break for the slave is our brother;
And in His name all oppression shall cease.
Sweet hymns of joy in grateful chorus raise we,
Let all within us praise His holy name.
Christ is the Lord! O praise His Name forever,
His power and glory evermore proclaim.
His power and glory evermore proclaim.

Now, that is only the very-rough English-translation version. Given the time we are in, some people reading this will take objection to the use of the word "slave." Fine. To answer those objections, here is the transliterated version of the same verse, directly from French, which was the original language of this hymn:

The Redeemer has broken every bond
The Earth is free, and Heaven is open.
He sees a brother where there was only a slave,
Love unites those whom iron had chained.
Who will tell Him of our gratitude,
For all of us He is born, He suffers and dies.
People, stand up! Sing of your deliverance,
Christmas, Christmas, sing of the Redeemer,
Christmas, Christmas, sing of the Redeemer!

It's not talking about African-American slavery, people. The "slave" of which is spoken is our slavery to sin. It could also refer to people who were slaves at that time, whether in Europe, North America, or other parts of the world. But the point is that line: "Jesus sees a brother where there was only a slave." And ultimately this is my final disagreement with a lot of the posts I saw on Facebook: it wasn't just that these were pro-justice whites posting. No, these were people that went to my church, people who say they follow Jesus. And, in their posts and responses to others' posts, there was no Jesus. There was no mention of His name, and there was no sense of even temperance in their posts. No grace. No mercy. Sure, hard truth needs to be spoken, but the Bible says for us to speak our truth in love, and there was no love. None. Instead, it was all about condemnation, condemning those who might dare to even slightly disagree. Ironically, the posts of those who were of color, as well as those who were progressive but not Christian, there was more evidence of temperance. There was no lack of hard truth, but there was a lack (thankfully) of a tone of outright blanket condemnation.

I'll close this post with one final observation. A week after George Floyd's murder, and a week after protesting and rioting had been going on in Minneapolis (less than a week here in Chicago), I saw a post from an African-American woman my age who I do believe is a strong Christian, but is also very staunch on "no justice, no peace." She had this to say to her white friends: (and yes, I'm paraphrasing because I'm off Facebook and can't dig up her post) "We are tired. Please, don't bring your baggage to us. Work on yourselves. Educate yourselves. Support us, listen to us, and be there for us. But do your work on your own." I give her credit, because on this I agree. This is just one person, but the sense I get of what is enough for her is for me to do what I've already pledged to do. It's not to publicly self-flagellate myself for being a "bad person" because I'm white. It's simply to treat her (and other people of color) how they should've been treated all along, which is unique but equal. To listen, and to offer support. Which, where I have time (yes, a caveat), I will do.

State of our world

What a world we live in.

Just in the last few days, we've had the life of a black man aborted by a police officer, with three others idly standing by; we've had a white woman threaten to call the cops on a black man who simply told her she needed to put her dog on a leash; we've had a teen go missing for a day, much to the worry of his parents, friends, and church community (myself included); and while this last one is retroactive to Sunday, on the same evening that teen declared missing returned home, I learned that the mayor of Chicago attempted to forcibly shut down a church service meeting that at that point was meeting lawfully.

On Facebook I awoke out of my posting slumber to post on three of the four topics (the one I didn't was the incident with the white woman threatening to call the police on the black man holding her accountable). I've gotten pretty much either all supportive comments, or angry comments that were in agreement with what I had posted. But on one of the posting threads, two contacts of mine posted comments that disagreed with one another, with the second person directly addressing the first.

My thought when I first saw that was: "it has begun."

The thing is, "it began" a while ago. Where and when, I cannot pinpoint. I can try, and certainly many people I know will try their hand and declare a certain point or another where "it began."

Are we in the End Times now? Or are we nearing it? Or, are we just going through a phase that will lead to another number of years of relative peace (or lack of tension, anyway), which will sometime later give way to the End Times, like well after I live a full-length life (assuming I do, anyway) and then pass away?

Lest we forget, COVID-19 is still going on. Sure, sheltering-in-place restrictions are either easing or ceasing altogether, but the threat is not gone. 100 years ago, our country was shaken by the flu pandemic, and that lasted 2 or 3 years. It had a first wave, a second wave, and finally a third wave. It's summer now, but I've conditioned myself to expect that, come September, it will return with a vengeance. If not sooner. Maybe as soon as June.

I'm only 35. I'm not pregnant. As such, if I catch it, I'm unlikely to get very sick. (Praise God.) But, I spend time with people who are at risk. So I'm aware of my responsibility 1.) to not catch it, and 2.) to stay home and let the virus run its course so I can be well for those at risk that are my responsibility.

We've been in this reality for more than 2 months now. Suffice to say, we're kind of used to it. (I think.) Now, just this week, events have happened that have jolted us out of this newfound complacency that has come with becoming accustomed to staying home, wearing masks, and staying 6 feet (or more) away from others. And with injustices of different kinds happening, I am beginning to see more and more tension. It seems that it's not so much with those with differing beliefs who have been clashing all along. I think it's going to include people that maybe haven't opined as much, and all of a sudden discover contacts -- friends, family, whoever -- that weren't who they thought they were. And vice versa. It seems we're in this phase now where we're only going to become more divided.

My circles of people I care about have representatives from both sides of the political aisle. These days it seems "damned if you do, damned if you don't" regarding where I end up standing. I could stand anywhere, and someone I know (and potentially care about) will find a reason to hate me. I would be sad, 1.) that something about their character previously unseen would be now revealed to me; and 2.) that character might lead to a choice that they or I (more likely they) might make regarding the future of our connection.

Do people's hearts have to grow cold? Do brothers (or sisters) have to choose to be separated, and do parents and children have to choose to hate each other?

Does this really have to be the world we live in?

On Sexuality, Part 5: The Reward for Faithfulness, Sexually

I wanted to close this series on a positive note. Unlike my church, which spent two-and-a-half months (nine Sundays) on this topic, I'm only going five posts deep. Even if I haven't convinced you or changed your mind about sexuality, about homosexuality, or about marriage, I hope that I've at least broken down some of the lies that have separated us.

I wanted to share one of my favorite verses in the Bible:

If a man has recently married, he must not be sent to war or have any other duty laid on him. For one year he is to be free to stay at home and bring happiness to the wife he has married. 

Deuteronomy 24:5, NIV

It's mostly my human self that loves this verse, but my spiritual self also loves it because it's a reward for premarital faithfulness and celibacy. What's often happened across Bible-teaching churches across the US is they've done well teaching about the importance of not having sex outside of marriage, but I don't know that they (or secular society, for that matter) has done well at teaching about enjoying sex within marriage. Given where we as a society on the whole are with work and with money ... (basically a large majority of the people who are able to work, work all the time and don't get to have much in the way of time off. Even most vacations that companies allow are 2 weeks per year and unpaid) ... we just don't have dang time for this stuff. "It's just not important enough." I think that's a shame, because as a sex-crazed culture, it's clear that we have made enough time for sex. We just somehow choose not to engage in it in the way that God desires and has expressed as such many, many, many times (or so we've preached) in the Bible.

But there is a reward for doing it God's way. If we were to turn the tide, first by not falling victim to the thinking that "there's nothing we can do;" second, by telling people that if we obeyed God's commands (and more importantly, accept Jesus as Savior and Lord) we would be rewarded; and third, by expressly sharing about God's promises and rewards. Most people who reject Jesus do so under the guise that the Bible is full of terrible things. They know nothing, and I mean, nothing, about all the good stuff that is present. Like the above verse I just mentioned. I mean, seriously, if people actually knew about and bought in to Deuteronomy 24:5, how many of them would wait until marriage before having sex? Imagine the payoff of celibacy before marriage being doing nothing but having sex with your spouse and love of your life for an entire year! (OK, my description may be a tad extreme, but I'm doing it intentionally.) Just imagine it, though... wouldn't that be quite the reward for waiting? And the reward for committing? Not to mention, the experience would be more meaningful than a series of hookups in which it would be a different partner every time.

Depending on what happens, I still dream of even a slim version of this possibility for myself when I do marry. I already know the difficulties of staying celibate before marriage. (I was able to succeed in this in the one relationship I was in, but man was it hard!) That said, I also know that I would like for both me and my future wife to have some kind of reward for maintaining purity. Getting married and then having a one-week honeymoon before we go back to the rat race just doesn't seem to cut it.

I have in two previous (more recent) instances dreamed up what such a picture might look like. Instead of sharing details (even though the details of my thoughts more logistical and not really steamy at all), I thought I might share a few pictures of what such a season could look like or include. For starters, I would hope for there to be some travel:

There's also something to be said for the journey aspect of traveling, whether by car, by plane, by train, or even by boat:

And of course, some comforts...

"It's a honeymoon, for goodness' sake!" In all seriousness, though, I often think that we too easily limit ourselves when we dream. There's a very good possibility that a number of things I would hope for don't end up happening. Nonetheless, it's good to know that God wants to celebrate marriage and celebrate the taking of this big step. And to sum up this series, if we do things God's way -- if I do the things God wants, God's way -- then we can expect incredible good to come out of it. And the Bible is chock full of promises He makes:

For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just, so that the Lord will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.” 

Genesis 18:19, NIV

Now the Lord was gracious to Sarah as he had said, and the Lord did for Sarah what he had promised. Sarah became pregnant and bore a son to Abraham in his old age, at the very time God had promised him. 

Genesis 21:1-2, NIV

“‘The days are coming,’ declares the Lord, ‘when I will fulfill the good promise I made to the people of Israel and Judah. In those days and at that time I will make a righteous Branch sprout from David’s line; he will do what is just and right in the land. In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will live in safety. This is the name by which it will be called: The Lord Our Righteous Savior.’ 

Jeremiah 33:14-16, NIV

The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. 

2 Peter 3:9, NIV

On Sexuality, Part 4: The Larger Issue Around Sexuality (and Marriage)

In this post, I will attempt to cover the history of the breakdown of marriages and families in this country over the last 50 years.

To begin, I will share a common talking point among pro-gay marriage folks who have read the Bible, which is this: Jesus never talked about homosexuality.

This is absolutely true. He never did. However, He did talk about divorce, on two occasions in fact (and one of them unprompted). It is off this talking point that is important for understanding how we got from an era where marriages not only were one man and one woman, but they stayed together through the thick and the thin, to today, where marriage has become at best this rather flimsy thing that people can sign up for and then sign off when things don't go the way they expect, and at worst this thing that people think they can just skip altogether while enjoying the benefits of a "fake marriage" without the responsibilities that come only with it. In other words, divorce. Here’s what Jesus had to say about it:

Passage 1 [all citations NIV]

31 “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Matthew 5:31-32 (see also Mark 10:10-12, Luke 16:18)

Passage 2

3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”
4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”
8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

Matthew 19:3-9 (see also Mark 10:2-9)

The second passage I’ll give a pass for this moment. The short answer is the Pharisees (the equivalent of today’s legalistic “Christians”) were trying to corner Him. Jesus knew how to be shrewd. He even instructed His disciples as such: “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.” Matthew 10:16. However, the first passage was part of the Sermon on the Mount (or the Plain, in Luke’s transcript), and His admittedly hard comments on divorce were unprompted. Going off of Matthew’s transcript, immediately before addressing divorce, Jesus addressed adultery (see Matthew 5:27-30), and immediately after addressing divorce, He addressed of not making promises that you won’t follow through on (see Matthew 5:33-37). Again: unprompted. So for anyone who falls in the “curious about or likes Jesus but skeptical of the Bible or at least skeptical of Apostle Paul” category, here is ironclad evidence that Jesus Himself specifically addressed divorce. …even if it is indeed true that He didn’t address homosexuality.

Why is this important? To answer that, I now wish to delve into some lesser-known moments in 20th-century US history. In 1970, then-governor of California Ronald Reagan passed a law allowing no-fault divorce. Over time, other states followed suit, with the state of New York as the final one to pass such a law (they did so in 2010). Today, no-fault divorces are allowed nation-wide, although there is no unified national law for it. But what followed after the first domino fell was a fundamental shift over the next generation not only in perceptions of marriages but also specifically how children experienced “family.” As a disclosure, I was born into and grew up in this. And, so were many of my peers. Instead of being a covenant that was to be honored and treasured, marriage became limited to a legal document that could be overthrown for any reason. The only stipulation was, couples (or even individuals) wanting to divorce had to go through the legal process to do so.

What has since followed, especially with my generation (but also in older and younger generations), are dating couples moving in together before marriage, under the premise of “testing out” marriage to see if it were viable for them. Even though I have never done this myself, I understand that it includes things like living together, managing chores together, sleeping in the same bed, and yes, even having sex (and sometimes having kids together!). Basically, it’s not just “testing out” marriage, but living as if they were married, without actually being married. And, like the gradual acceptance of “no-fault divorce” in our culture, it has also taken time for the gradual acceptance (or “getting used to”) of heterosexual couples (again, “not just the gays”) living together, unmarried, but basically as if they were married. This is a significant part of not only the consequence, but the next-generation legacy of “no-fault” divorce.

As a result, I believe that being used to heterosexual couples living together but not married is what it’s taken to pave the way for gay marriage to eventually become universally “accepted" (i.e. legislated). For this to work, our perception (as a society) of marriage itself needed to be eroded first. If no-fault divorce changes marriage to where is no longer a covenant, i.e. for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, etc., until death do we part, then it also opens the door for the true validity marriage itself to be questioned. “What is marriage?” “If marriage is no longer a covenant, because couples have the freedom to come together and break apart at any time, then who says that it can only be between one man and one woman?” And because of this erosion, we’ve also eroded God out of the picture.

Obviously, as a Christian, I would care if and when God gets eroded out of the picture. But why does this matter in this context? Why is marriage the way God designed it so important, and why is the idea of anything related to God’s design so important? Marriage, after all, is held together, because of God’s explicit design as described in the Bible.

20 But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
23 The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.” 24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh. 

Genesis 2:20-24

To start, this passage, from shortly after the beginning of time… [Yes, you evolutionists, I hear you. I’m not going to address creationism vs evolutionism in this post. Sorry. Another day.] … describes not only marriage, but also the design aspect of man and woman, and why man and woman are a natural fit together. God created a woman out of the man’s rib. So the picture of marriage, of partnership, of union, is much more than just two consenting opposite-sex individuals who are attracted to each other.

OK — to appease the evolutionists who think the beginning of the book of Genesis is garbage, but somehow also like or are curious about Jesus, I will now repeat part of the passage from Matthew’s transcript of Jesus’ sayings and doings that I had posted earlier in this post:

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 

Matthew 19:4-6 (see also Mark 10:6-9)

So, Jesus actually cares about this. I previous gave this passage a pass, because He was responding to the Pharisees who were trying to trap him, and as such a possible reaction could very well have been; “well, He was backed into a corner so He had to say something!” Going back to the passage this time, even if Jesus was supposedly put in a trap, He still answered powerfully. He reiterated the truth that was said in the Book of Genesis. By doing so, He affirmed not the authority of the text in the first part of Genesis, but also the authority of God’s design for marriage.

Anytime we remove any aspect of God’s design, not only do we offend God, but we also begin to remove reminders of His presence and His influence in our culture. In other words, we begin shifting from a world where there is a God and the only true God is the God of the Bible, to a godless world where, if there is no God, then anything goes. This shift absolutely has applied to marriage in the US. Jesus very clearly stated that divorce is not ok, something that was recorded multiple times. Once we started passing the “no-fault divorce” law, we basically defied Jesus, and we also removed His truth, by law, from marriage. I wasn’t alive yet in 1970, but I can only imagine that it probably wasn’t something that was super-noticed. And the fact that it began in California, a state that was already known as “the Hollywood state,” people in other, more conservative parts of the country likely didn’t have any concern that this kind of thing would last, let alone spread, let alone spread to their neck of the woods. Either folks didn’t notice, or folks noticed but didn’t care enough, and certainly if anyone did care and try to stop the popularity of this law, it was by then too late.

So, while Jesus didn't explicitly talk about homosexuality, He did speak directly about divorce, and He also spoke directly about what God designed marriage to be. Since a key part of the pro-homosexuality platform is the idea that gay "marriage" is ok, it's important to point out that even Jesus Himself explicitly says that marriage is for one man and one woman. Anything outside of the boundaries of God's design, is counter to God's will and therefore considered a crime against God. As much as I'd like to try to soften the blow or to say something to reassure those that are angry, I can't. God didn't change His truth for me. But what I can say is He was kind and gentle and patient with me while I was raging and fuming over it, uttering things like: "love is love! Why can't You understand that?!" The funny thing is, His love toward me was love, but in a completely different way. God didn't agree with me, and He did correct me, and He still loved me through and through, even though it was hard. And through this process, I have full confidence that anyone out there who has same-sex attraction, considers themselves gay (or lesbian), and perhaps has a romantic partner or even a civil union partner, and is angry at God or at Christians over this topic, God can still reach that person and show them His love.

Jesus still loves each and every one of us, unconditionally. But we have to receive it, and in order to do so, we have to turn from our ways to follow His will, whether it's moving on from a homosexual relationship, or something completely different that gets in the way of us obeying Him.

On Sexuality, Part 3: Removing the Tunnel Vision

You might (or might not) be wondering why I titled this blog series “sexuality” and not “homosexuality.” If the first two posts in this series hasn’t explained enough, the simple reason is that it is important for both people who are “pro-gay marriage” and people who are “pro-Christian marriage” to get out of the tunnel vision we’ve created about homosexuality. (And for the record, I’m in the latter category.) What I see that has happened, having held one opinion about it before making a life choice to support the opposite opinion, is the particular polarization I’ve seen people on both sides of the issue. We’ve had marches with people holding signs supporting one side, and we’ve had marches with people holding signs supporting the other side. Sometimes we’ve even had them in the same space at the same time!

The point is, until I can sit down as a supporter of pro-Christian marriage with any of my pro-gay marriage friends and have an actual discussion about the topic itself, we have to come to some sort of agreement on the terms ("what is the definition of sexuality?’ "what is the definition of homo-sexuality?"), and we have to then be willing to lay down on the table our core beliefs, our stories, and how and why we’ve come to understand what we believe, in a judgment-free zone. That last part is the most difficult: to be open to hearing the story of someone else around this topic, and to hold our own personal energy, thoughts, opinions, feelings, and judgments, until they’ve finished their story; to ask the other person questions for further clarification, to give us opportunity to understand the other person better, on a human-to-fellow human basis; to then be able to expect the same respect from the other person that we are expected to give. The fact is, everyone who identifies as LGBTQ+, etc, has an accompanying story (a “testimony”, if you will) as for why they identify as such. And in the very same way, every person who identifies as a Christian and a Jesus-follower similarly has his or her own story (testimony) as for how God intervened in their lives to turn them away from their previous behaviors and patterns to live a life that not only follows Jesus but also His call on their lives. I know that in my case, I would coming in to the conversation as a Bible-believing, pro-Christian marriage Christian. The other person likely will not, although it is not for me to automatically assume, “oh, so you’re not a Christian.” Because, unless I’ve heard their story, I won’t know. And while I will remain staunch in my own belief that a story isn’t really a testimony if it doesn’t acknowledge God or Jesus as Lord, this is not the time and place for me to bring that card out. Not yet. Not until I have an idea how and why the other person thinks the way they do, can I really share Jesus in a way that’s specifically effective or meaningful for that person individually.

Back when I was pro-gay marriage and angry about what the Bible appeared to be saying, I still had some understanding of the realness of God and the things that Jesus did for us (like being born of a virgin in a manger, and dying on a cross for our sins). Even though I wouldn’t say I was saved, I would say that I did have conversation with God from time to time (when I wasn’t yelling at Him and telling Him how I think things should work), I would occasionally hear from Him. And in this case, for a while, I felt like what I heard from Him was to “let it go.” Basically, to not obsess about this, and not to let it boil my blood, which, honestly, it did then.

It wasn’t until I’d been a part of the Vineyard Church in Evanston for over a year, and befriended someone who had shared with me a couple books she had been reading, that I felt God use our friendship and our time together to teach me, gently, why He had the particular sexual boundaries He did. True, God will sometimes yell at a person if they’re really bothering Him with their sin (I did experience that personally a few years ago over a season, for very different reasons). But most of the time, He chooses to find ways to be gentle, to point out why the Bible is right and I am not. And with me He was very careful, very painstaking, very methodical. He wanted to reach my heart, which He knew (and knows) is fragile. I experienced Jesus not trying to merely win an argument with me (and again, He could if He wanted); but rather, in relationship, in real time, He wanted me to know that He saw me, as He was also correcting my thinking.

And so to this point, this is how I think I would minister (or at least, attempt to minister) to my pro-gay marriage friends. In the same way that I experienced Jesus do it for me, the best way for me to point out not only what the Bible is saying, but also why it’s right, is for me to also give space to someone who doesn’t agree, and let them know that they are heard and understood even if I don’t agree with the conclusion that they came up with. And this part is key for someone in my position: even the best-managed conversation, painstakingly planned to give the other person space to speak, still won't guarantee that that person will agree with me. Chances are, that person will still stay with the opinion they have. BUT, the point is, a door now has been opened, and they got to experience a Christian (who doesn’t compromise on his beliefs, mind you) still listen to them and give them respect.

Back in the fall I began a series on identity. Because of work and busy-ness, I aborted it after one post. I may someday bring it back. Nay, I hope to. But the reason why it came to mind now is the fact that a big part of the difficulty is the topic of identity. Someone who identifies as gay doesn’t see themselves simply as what they do. They see themselves as “this is who I am.” Any pro-Christian marriage person will need to understand that this is going to be a part of the conversation. Now, ultimately, my goal (and prayer) is to be able to steer the conversation of identity away from sex and attraction and around their unique personality and gifts, just like I would do for anyone else. And I would return to the question about whether there is a God or not, and whether that the only real God is the God of the Bible, with the hope that at some point the conversation around identity turns into the question of one’s identity in Christ.

The bottom line is that I don’t see sexuality as a critical identity piece. Sure, I’m a straight white man in his mid-30s. But I don’t know that I would consider “straight” as much of my identity today. It pales in comparison to my identity as a Bible-believing Christian, a pianist, a musician, an artist-at-large, a man, a leader, an empath, and so on. When I was younger, because of the world I was raised and came of age in, I did at one point determine that being straight was a key part of my identity. But I will say that even in my straightness, there were still some things that God wanted to heal and change. And as a result, my sexuality has changed, even though my “orientation” has remained straight the whole time. (That’ll be another story for another time.)

And so, back to my opening sentence — why I chose to title this series “sexuality” and not “homosexuality” — my hope, once we remove the tunnel vision around homosexuality, is that people on both sides of the issue would be able to see that the true issue around sex is really much larger than this.

I'll close this post with an interesting tidbit: the former senior pastor (now “founding pastor,” as he’s retired) at my church offered an interesting take on how he handles gay marriages. Mind you, this is his personal opinion, and not necessarily something you’ll find written explicitly in Scripture. To start, he makes it clear that, as a Bible-teaching Christian pastor, he will only officiate Christian marriages (so, a marriage between one man and one woman…). But he has also said that if he were invited as a guest to a gay wedding, he would go and support it. For him, just because he stands squarely with the Bible on what is appropriate sexually vs what is not appropriate, he doesn't believe it right to communicate hatred of any kind toward someone who chooses to "become one flesh" with another member of the same sex: no mean words, no ghosting, no condescending looks, none of it. Instead, my pastor chooses to be there as a friend to support the person because he believes God loves them, no matter what. I've never had the opportunity to be part of a gay marriage yet, but this pastor has given me a guideline that I could choose to follow (or not). Something to think upon.