Recent Thursday Thoughts have focused on "how one's freedom can limit
another's freedom." Freedom conflicts happen every day on an
interpersonal, small group level; siblings, roommates, spouses and
co-workers. If your neighbor has freedom to run the sprinkler every day
during a drought, it impacts the water source and makes everyone else's
lawn look awful! If one spouse has freedom to gamble away the family
income, the impact goes way beyond the individual. If a so-called friend
has freedom to place a humiliating picture of you on a blog, perhaps no
one will care. But if a teacher or perspective boss sees it, the impact
can be profound and long lasting.
With all the rain and flooding we have received lately, I thought of the
small, individual raindrops that fall. They make their way down into the
soil (rural) or storm drain (city), on down to the little creek, to the
small tributary that leads to the larger river or lake and finally on to
the oceans. Water always takes the path of least resistance and seeks
the lowest level possible. Multiply the impact of many rain drops
converging from multiple streams, spilling over river banks and levees to
flood large areas. To see one tiny rain drop no one would ever imagine
the potential of a flood.
Consider the recent devastation from the floods in many parts of the
United States. It does not take long to see how interconnected
communities, states, regions and even national economics really are.
Follow the impact of the drought followed by flood through the poor crop
yields for the farmer. First, if the crops can even be harvested, the
quality and quantity will be greatly diminished. The price to the farmer
will be low, which will impact the ability to buy seed to plant next
year, as well as more general living needs, which impacts the local
retail sales; which influences local employment in retail areas,
trucking, etc. and the ripple continues.
Now, follow the impact of the drought and flood through poor crop yields
for the grain industry. Because the quality and quantity is low, the
price will increase to make up for losses. Manufacturers who use the
crops for any purpose will notice the impact of higher prices. They will
either charge more for their product or make less of the product, letting
workers go, which impacts the local economy and beyond. Again the ripple
effect goes on and on. Whether it trickles down to the individual at the
local level or trickles up from the local to the national, the
interconnected domino effect cannot be ignored.
In the area of freedoms, this little trickle effect turning into a flood
can be seen at work. As multiple individual freedom issues begin to
converge onto the public stage, a flood of regulations intended to
protect and preserve freedom arise. Ironically, some regulations
actually result in limiting other more important freedoms. Church,
school, corporate business and government regulations are typically
formed when a minority takes freedom to excess.
Then limits are set for everyone, even those who never considered abusing
the freedom. Regulations also rise up after an accident in order to
prevent it from happening again or to protect against any "just in case"
scenario that once in a blue moon has a .01 % chance of happening. And
so we learn to live with an ongoing, ever changing set of regulations.
Regulations keep many conflicts from escalating or at least judge which
is right and which is in the wrong. Regulations serve the valuable
purpose of keeping our world civilized. Breaking regulations keep law
enforcement and lawyers employed. Finding win-win solutions where all
parties are able to retain most freedoms is rare. More likely than not,
allowing one group’s freedom will severely limit another group’s freedom.
So in fact there is not freedom for all.
Some might argue that there is freedom for all law-abiding citizens.
However, what if the law changes? What if a regulation is passed that
prohibits one of your activities? Or your religion? Or your
nationality? Who decides which freedoms to protect and which freedoms
can be limited for the greater good (life/death issues, safety, health,
security)? Whose freedoms are protected and whose are ignored?
Most everyone faces the consequences of smoking vs. non-smoking
regulations. Cartoonist, Al Scaduto in a “They’ll Do it Every Time”
piece shows the conflict starting with the discovery of fire itself.
Beside the frame, “The first man to discover fire was also the first air
polluter, right? Oh, yeah . . . just ask his next-cave neighbors.”
Neighbors inside the frame: Neighbor 1, “Koff, koff, every time we have a
lawn party they start with that stupid invention of his. . ., koff,
koff.” Neighbor 2, “Koff, koff. Fouling up the air! Somebody oughta do
something. Awk!” Neighbor 3, “Doesn’t he need a permit to do that?”
Sorry, cave people, but permits regulating what can be done on private
property and having some other higher power “doing something” about it
will be thousands of years away. No doubt there would be lively debate
on both sides of the smoking issue, “Are the restrictions too strict or
too lenient?” Perhaps a more far-reaching question would be, “Where will
it lead? Where will it end?"
"Your home is your castle, but when you live in a small community like
this and your actions start affecting those around you," defense attorney
Brian Martin said, "it prevents other people from their homes being their
castle, and something clearly needs to be done." A November 2005 court
case in Colorado determined whose home was the castle and whose was the
cell.
Neighbor, Penny Boyd, complained about smoke odor seeping into her unit.
Despite caulking, filters, insulation, painting and ventilation
adjustments, the smoke smell continued to bother Boyd, according to court
documents. The Condominium Owners Association amended its bylaws to ban
smoking in the four-unit building, "recognizing the dangers of secondhand
smoke and its obnoxious odor and were making their community a safer
place for everybody."
Rodger and Colleen Sauve filed suit, saying it was their right to smoke
in their own home. Believe it or not the judge said the Golden condo
complex could outlaw the smoke-or the smell of it as a “nuisance.” The
ruling requires the smokers to go outside their apartment several feet to
smoke, so second-hand smoke would not harm the neighbors. Judge Lily
Oeffler likened "smoke and/or smoke smell" to "extremely loud noise" that
is not contained to one area. The Sauves said they would like to appeal
the ruling but can't afford it after spending $6,500 on the lawsuit.
The Sauves no longer can exercise their freedom to smoke in their castle.
So is it even a castle for them anymore or more of a cell? As a
non-smoker, I can certainly understand not wanting smoke seeping into my
apartment. Whether we agree or disagree is not really the issue. What
other annoying behaviors could be ruled a "nuisance" and not allowed in
the privacy of your home? Perhaps the neighbors object to the extra cars
from the Bible study group that meets at your house? How would you
handle having your Bible study meeting outlawed? Most are grateful when
the authorities clamp down on those who have piles of trash and old cars
outside their house. But when do regulations to protect one group's
freedom (freedom to breathe, freedom to not look at junk), cross the
line. Are we ok with it as long it doesn't cross any of our lines?
© 2007 Lois E. F. Watkins
Learning to navigate and negotiate the rights and demands of freedom for
myself and others is a challenge from toddler-hood to adulthood. A
recent kid's show had twins who wanted to take their grandmother out to
eat. She nicely declined because the last time they were went out to eat
was an embarrassing disaster. A friend let them know why their
grandmother didn't want to go out with them and agreed to teach them
manners. Her first lesson was, "Think of others." What a novel idea!
Sounds a bit like the Golden Rule.
Successfully navigating the land mines of conflicting individual freedoms
is so crucial for continuing to live in a civilized society. As the
child grows into adulthood, options for demanding or defending freedom
become more sophisticated and potentially more dangerous. For example,
when I was a child I demanded my freedom to use our family tree swing.
Unfortunately, my older sister was exercising her freedom to swing.
Evidently, my solution involved another kind of swinging; swinging a
paint can toward her head as she was swinging. I don't remember doing it
or what punishment happened to me. On the other hand, my sister lived
for many years with her chipped tooth and now capped tooth, as an ongoing
reminder to her.
Today teens or adults, who don't get what they want, might grab a gun as
easily as a paint can. If the myriad of crime and legal shows are
anywhere close to accurate, it is not surprising to find a freedom
violations solved by a stabbing, shooting or any number of acts of
violence. Physical death or character assassination can occur for such
trivial infringements on freedom; wearing the wrong team jacket or
sneakers; talking about another person; not talking to or dating a lonely
person; suspending a delinquent student.
Siblings, college roommates, spouses and co-workers offer fertile ground
for practicing interdependent freedom. Sharing space opens an entire
menu of ways to cross the line into another person's space. Some solve
the problem of wanting what someone else has by simply getting two of
everything; two televisions, two cars, two computers, two food menus.
Others have solved problems by putting a literal line down the middle of
a room--yours and mine.
One person has the freedom to be a "neat freak," putting away everything
in sight and throwing away anything that is not nailed down. But a
"messy" also has the freedom to keep things piled instead of filed or
leave the dishes in the sink overnight. Have you ever noticed how often
opposites become roommates or spouses? So conflict is bound to happen
when "neat freak" throws away "messy's" important, sentimental
possessions. Likewise, "messy" will frustrate the stuffing out of "neat
freak" when a soap ring is left in the tub.
In the business world there may be the "chronically early" and the
"chronically late" people trying to work together. On the highway the
"slow poke" holds up traffic, perhaps looking for a specific exit, while
"speed demon" can't pass because one truck is trying to pass another
truck. However, the passing truck is going two miles per hour less than
the speed limit. Non-truck traffic gets slowed down by 5-10 miles per
hour less than the speed limit. Conditions are ripe for road rage, (or
at least for developing ulcers) as if the road was the personal property
of "speed demon."
Cyrano De Bergerac (1619-1655) is credited with the statement, "Your
freedom ends where my nose begins." Interestingly he is known to have
had a huge nose. As a result he was easily offended by jokes and
negative comments about his nose. More than one duel resulted from more
than one person defaming his nose. However, he did not die from any
nose-defending duel.
Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. adapted the famous
saying, "Your right to swing your fist ends where the other man’s nose
begins." A huge dilemma with freedom is some people have longer arms and
actually enjoy swinging it at another’s nose. Other people have such
long noses that they are constantly getting hit even by people with very
short arms. One feels the right to reach out into another’s space. The
other feels the right to stick that nose out there as far as possible.
Everyone will know where that nose begins and probably bump into it.
© 2007 Lois E. F. Watkins
Inter-dependent freedom (July 19, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Being convinced of an innate desire for independence is never stronger
than after a day of hearing our two- year-old granddaughter say, "I do
it! Let me do it!" No one had to teach her the concept of me, my and
mine! When we arrived at the city park, she eyed an exact style of Dora
the Explorer big wheel. Immediately she proclaimed, "Hannah’s bike.
Hannah’s bike" and started to get on it. With grandmotherly wisdom I
calmly agreed with her that it looked just like her bike, but some other
little girl had the same kind and brought hers to the park.
Playground equipment kept her busy for the most part. But every so often
she would look over at the bike and say, "Hannah’s bike!" Repeating the
explanation got her playing again. However, when a van pulled up and the
rightful owner’s family began loading up Dora and an adult bike, Hannah
freaked out. In her distress she cried out both a complaint and a
question, "Take Hannah’s bike!? Take Mommy’s bike!?" Another
explanation reassured her.
Facing the reality of inter-dependent freedom
Fortunately, the real owner of the bike was not around when Hannah sat on
it, nor when she kept insisting that the bike belonged to her. If that
were the case, Hannah would have learned that her freedom to ride that
bike would have been limited by the owner’s willingness to allow it.
Hannah did not have independence as she did at home with her own bike.
Rather, she would have had to work out an interdependent solution with
the girl who brought the bike.
Even if we pretend that the bike did belong to Hannah, she would still
have to know how to make interdependent decisions. (Usually a parent
makes these decisions early on and the child begins to learn boundaries.)
Would she let someone else use her bike? How should she determine who
can and who can’t use it; when they can and when they can’t? Why should
she have to think about another person anyway? After all isn’t she a
two-year old striving for independence and self-determination!?
It must be such a great disappointment for a toddler, who has struggled
so hard to achieve a sense of being a separate individual, making some
independent, though guided, choices and owning a few possessions, to face
life’s stark reality that parents, other adults and even bigger or meaner
kids have the ability to limit his or her freedom. Ah, freedom would be
pretty sweet if no one else was around to challenge it or take it away?
Just put together two or more freedom-seeking children in a playroom and
see how quickly someone’s freedom to play infringes on someone else’s
freedom to play.
Learning the ways of inter-dependent freedom
It may start out as simply pulling and yanking on the toy that each one
believes will prove independent freedom. However, humans begin to
develop and learn freedom-defending beliefs and patterns through play and
watching adults. Have you ever wondered how a child processes a thought?
No doubt it usually happens in an impulsive second, but here are ten
possibilities when faced with a threat to freedom.
A child thinks, "Oh no, my freedom is being threatened! Hmmm? How can I
get what I want?" (Adult interpretation: what goals will accomplish my
desired outcome?)
1. Throw a temper tantrum?
2. Show how might makes right--hit the other kid over the head with the toy?
3. Gather others who will support my right to the toy and take a vote?
4. Cry out to a greater authority? ("Mommy! Daddy! I want that toy,
now!").
5. Make rules about proper use of the toy, taking turns and hope the
other kids cooperate?
6. Stomp off, tell others how mean that kid is and vow never to play with
him or her again?
7. Let it go now, but hold resentment for years, even forever?
8. Divert the other kid’s attention and sneak it away?
9. Find something else interesting until that kid loses interest?
10. Find a way to share the toy and double the fun?
Most of us have seen more than one child use one or more option. To be
honest, we have seen one or more adults use one or more option. On a
recent reality show two twenty-something women came face to face after
ten years of not speaking with each other. In junior high they had been
best friends, but one either refused or forgot to pay back five dollars.
Choice number 6 and 7 were selected. To be brutally honest, we each have
used one or more of the less adult options.
The challenge of dueling freedoms grows as the child grows into
adulthood. The toys get bigger and more expensive; the stakes get
higher; the consequences get either more rewarding or more punishing. As
much as we might dislike it, freedom is not just doing what I want, when
I want. Our freedom must include responsibility or consequences.
If I am to have a basic right to life or a freedom to live, it is
dependent on you (and anyone else) giving up the right and freedom to
kill me. See how critical it is to learn and teach our children the ways
of interdependent freedom. Framers of the Constitution had no thought of
individuals being free to do anything under the sun with no regard for
the consequences to those around them. They imagined a balanced and
civilized freedom which did not sacrifice the freedom of one’s neighbor.
Civilized freedom is impossible without interdependence.
Todd Huffman, M.D. in "What Does Freedom Mean Anymore" at OpEdNews noted,
"Independent freedom does not rest upon or even consider freedom for
you." Classical historian Edith Hamilton offered a lesson from ancient
Greece, "When the freedom they wished for most was freedom from
responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again."
When people only care about personal freedoms to do as they wish, someone
will always be unhappy. One or the other will scream, "What about my
rights? What about my freedoms?" It becomes simply a win-lose situation
to be settled in the courts. If nothing else, we in the United States
have honed our freedom to litigate to fine science. We reserve the right
to blame, sue and exact revenge for our loss of freedom, whether real or
perceived.
Living historian John Lukacs defines freedom, "freedom, after all, is not
merely emancipation, meaning the relaxation of rules on people by
society, church or state, by the tyranny of a ruler, by a minority or by
a majority. Freedom means the capacity to know something about oneself,
and the desire to live according to limits imposed on oneself rather than
by external powers" (as quoted by Todd Huffman, M.D. in "What Does
Freedom Mean Anymore" at OpEdNews.)
True or false?
"Your freedom ends where my nose begins."
Feel free to comment via e-mail and check in next week.
© 2007 Lois E. F. Watkins
The irony of freedom (July 5 and 12, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
From last Thursday to this one, I've been working on thoughts about
freedom. On July 1 my thoughts were quite focused, but with more writing
and research the more conflicted, diverse and muddled my thoughts became.
One thought led to another and one Google search led to what could have
been nearly 1,700,000. Alas, it is now another Thursday with far too
many thoughts.
So my solution to the delay and muddle is twofold. First, make this
week's writing cover two weeks with events starting on Thursday, July 5.
Second, divide up the multiple thoughts on freedom into more than one
week. I have chosen to give myself freedom to skip and/or combine weeks.
As an American citizen, I celebrate that freedom to choose!
One person's fireworks in another person's fire
Trash day was a day late this week because of the Fourth of July
celebration. They say you can tell a lot about people by their trash.
As I drove Jim to the airport Thursday morning, July 5, a huge pile of
neatly stacked used fireworks and empty cardboard cartons of beer sat
side by side on the curb. Either this family is big into high-risk
behaviors or party central for the neighborhood. Evidently, this
dangerous celebration combination turned out well.
Another fireworks situation did not turn out as well. A large shooting
fireworks container fell over with sparks spraying horizontally rather
than vertically. No one could get close enough to set it upright and a
bush was ignited. Soon a twelve-unit apartment building was in an
inferno. Fortunately, a by-stander, who actually got hit with shooting
debris, ran into the building pulling the fire alarms and knocking on
doors. Everyone got out safely, even if without shoes, wallet or keys.
The one who lit the fireworks is not expected to face criminal charges,
as it was deemed an accident. A recent change in the Indiana fireworks
law made him well within his legal rights. Before people could only buy
such fireworks in Indiana, but had to sign a paper saying they would
light them out of state. That was a law asking to be broken and a law
which made a liar out of many an ordinarily, honest person!
Freedom covered not only the man's right to set off fireworks, but also
the freedom to be stupid enough not to secure such a huge firework or
lighting it so close to bushes and buildings. One person's freedom cost
the apartment owner or insurance company over a million dollars in
damages. That same freedom cost twelve households the loss of personal
possessions; having their sense of security go up in smoke; and being
enslaved with the memory of fire emblazed in their minds. Due to no
action of their own, they are no longer free to sleep in their own bed at
night, read their favorite books and magazines or look at their keepsake
photos.
Freedom to choose?
Most often we think of freedom in terms of individual freedom to "choose
what to do" when I want. During the time of the judges, the society of
ancient Israel was described as one in which, "everyone did what was
right in his own eyes" (Judges 21:25). When there is not a set of shared
values or a consensus of what is right, conditions are ripe for
fireworks. This verse is similar to attitudes of modern society with one
exception; rightness no longer is the fundamental basis for choices.
"Whatever makes me happy" has become the determining factor.
"I just want to be happy" seems to defuse any argument, justify any
action and disallow any value-based judgments. If my ability is hindered
to do what I want, then I do not feel fully free. However, we learn very
early that our freedoms are limited by a little obstacle called other
people's freedom. Unless I am a hermit in a desert cave, sooner or later
my choice to pursue "my" freedom is going to collide with "your" choice
to pursue "your" freedom. Thus the concept of freedom has an ironic
twist: your freedom can limit my freedom and my freedom can limit your
freedom.
In the fireworks story, the by-stander who got hit by a piece of hot
debris should have had the right not get injured standing in his
apartment parking lot. However, his freedom to choose safety was limited
by the freedom of the one who chose to light the fuse. From that moment
his choices changed, but he still had freedom to choose. He could choose
to get so angry at the man who caused his pain that he focused on beating
up the man. Or he could have ignored the growing fire and run away in
fear. Or he could choose to run into the building to warn others.
Those in their apartments had very limited freedom to choose. Due to the
fireworks malfunction, they could basically choose one of two things: 1.
run out of the building and watch their home burn 2. stay put in front of
the television and burn along with it. Not a hard decision for most
people, but also not a decision most would choose to have to make, if
their freedom to choose had not been limited by another's prior actions.
Freedom to choose freedom
While others certainly can and do limit our freedom, they cannot take it
away completely. Even in a totalitarian state, laws cannot take away a
person's beliefs, desires or thoughts. We can retain the freedom to
choose our response to others' actions or life circumstances. Often when
people are wronged, they will say, "You make me so mad." In reality, a
decision of the will has been made to choose to be mad. There are other
options.
When someone first said that to me, I got so mad. Of course, I wasn't
choosing to be mad. It was the other person's fault for doing things
that made me mad. Have you ever heard a parent say to a child, "Don't
make me spank you?" Do they mean their child is literally taking their
hand and forcing them against the parent's will to spank him or her? The
child may be ornery, obnoxious, disobedient, frustrating, irritating,
exasperating, etc. etc. Yet, the adult has freedom to choose an
appropriate response. If the parent chooses to spank the child's bottom,
then own that choice. But don't blame the child for causing the
spanking. Their actions may have prompted it, but not to the extent of
taking away the parent's freedom to choose an alternative response.
It was both empowering and freeing when I finally admitted and accepted
that I had the freedom to choose a different way to respond. I wish I
could say that making a positive choice after a negative action is always
my first reaction. Alas, I must confess that from time to time I
initially fuss and fume, whine and complain, rant and rave. Yet, now I
know that all those are choices I freely make, as is choosing kindness,
forgiveness, mercy and grace.
With freedom comes the responsibility to exercise that freedom wisely.
For a believer in Jesus Christ an added responsibility is reflecting
Christlike behavior and attitudes. One simple, yet powerful help in
choosing wisely is a high dosage of the Golden Rule, "Do unto others as
you would have them do to you" Matthew 7:12.
© 2007 Lois E. F. Watkins
Remember me? Remember me! (June 21, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
For years Jim and I traveled to churches and camps to do children and youth ministry. He continues to travel leading seminars at writer's conferences. From Alaska to New York, plus several foreign countries, we have met wonderful people and made lasting friendships. However, many we have only met once, which makes it embarrassing when we run into someone in a different setting and they say, "Hi, Jim and Lois, do you remember me?"
They may look familiar, but we can't quite place them. Of course, they only had two of us to remember and we have had hundreds. Recently I met a woman from our Sunday school class at a Christian bookstore. I have been with her most Sunday's for the past two years, even sat by her. Try as I might I could not remember her name. We chatted about mutual information.
On the one hand I enjoy being remembered by name; on the other hand I always feel badly when people call me by name and I can't respond with their name. One of the most honoring things you can do for a person is to remember and call them by name.
"Please remember me for a little while"
I seemed to remember a song entitled, "Remember Me," so I googled, "Remember Me" + song lyrics. I could not believe my eyes. There were one million, eight hundred-fifty, plus listings! Sure some were duplicates, but just on the first page, which is all I spent time checking, there were at least thirty different songs with all types of music: country western, folk, ballads, soft rock, progressive metal, heavy metal and Eminem even had a rap called, "Remember Me."
With so many songwriters sharing a similar theme, it seems to indicate just how important being remembered is to people. To be forgotten is like having your significance forgotten. Many of the lyrics had the theme of staying connected after breaking up from a relationship.
1. Do you remember me as I remember you?—Enrique Iglesias
2. "Say good-bye. Close your eyes. Remember me. Walk away. The song remains. Remember me. I'll live somewhere in your heart—Journey.
3. Remember me and love me always—Gackt
Some were more realistic and were ready to move on:
1. Please, remember me for a little while—Tim McGraw
2. I will remember you. Will you remember me? Don't let your life pass you by. Weep not for the memories—Sarah McLachlin.
3. She'll remember me until the day she forgets—Toby Keith
"Don't forget to remember me"
Some lyrics were sweet like, Diana Ross' "remember me as a summer day, remember me as a big balloon, remember me as the sound of laughter." A few were very sad like Aaron Nevill's song about a painful relationship, "When all our tears have reached the sea, a part of you will live in me, way down inside my heart. . . .you'll find better love, strong as it ever was . . . . Please remember me." Last chorus, "When I can't hurt you anymore, you'll find better love, strong as it ever was . . . . Please remember me."
Others were depressing, like "Remember me when I'm gone. I would have loved to die in your arms" by Para Para Paradice. "Remember Me," by British Sea Power is generally viewed as uplifting, but it realistically reminds us of the decline into old age and mental decay.
"Remember Me" lyrics deal with various kinds of leaving. "Farewell My Love and Remember Me"
tells the story of a sailor going off to sea. Carrie Underwood writes about a young adult leaving the nest, "Don't Forget to Remember Me." It starts with the mother's reminders to the daughter; then the daughter calls home with things she wants them to remember; finally, the daughter is praying to God, "Don't forget to remember me."
I Remember You! Do You Remember Me?—Jesus
God's memory is one thing we can count on every nano-second (that's one billionth of a second) and even more.
God made a covenant with Noah. "The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days, God remembered Noah and all the beasts and all the cattle that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind blow over the earth, and the waters subsided" (Genesis 8:1) and after the flood, "I will remember my covenant which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh" (Genesis 9:1).
God even remembers the seemingly little details of our lives, which in the end often have a huge impact, such as "Then God remembered Rachel, and God hearkened to her and opened her womb" (Genesis 30:22) and "Elkanah lay with Hannah his wife, and the Lord remembered her. So in the course of time Hannah conceived ad gave birth to a son. She named him Samuel, saying, "Because I asked the Lord for him" (I Samuel 1:19-20). The first remembrance expanded the nation of Israel to twelve tribes and the second remembrance resulted in a godly prophet to lead the nation of Israel.
God remembers his covenant and keeps his promises. "And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob" (Exodus 2:24). Multiple times God remembered his covenant with Israel and intervened. Remembering His covenant is one of the characteristics the Psalmist praises. "He remembers his covenant forever, the word he commanded, for a thousand generations" (1 Chronicles 16:15 and Psalm 105:8). "For their sake he remembered his covenant and out of his great love he relented" (Psalm 106:45).
Jesus, through his life, death and resurrection has become the high priest of a new covenant. "But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one and it is founded on better promises" (Hebrews 8:6). Since God was faithful throughout the generations to keep the old covenant promises, there is no doubt that God will continue to remember and keep the new covenant promises.
"Can a mother forget the baby at her beast and have no compassion o the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you! See, I have engraved you on the palms or my hands" (Isaiah 49:15-16a). "For the Lord your God goes with you; he will never leave you; he will never forsake you" (Deuteronomy 31:6b). The essence of this verse is repeated in the New Testament in Matthew 28:20b, "And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age" and Hebrews 13:5b, "Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you."
Don't forget to remember that God's promise of unfailing love, presence and faithfulness to Israel applies to us today. Don't forget to remember that God remembers you. Do you remember God?
© 2007 Lois E. F. Watkins
What's a father to think? (June 14, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Just looking at the origins of Father's Day compared to Mother's Day,
fathers must see the disparity. Mother's Day celebrations go all the way
back to the ancient Greeks honoring the Mother of gods. In the 1600's
England held a Mothering Sunday when servants were given the day off to
go home to their families. Later Mothering Sunday blended with a
Christian emphasis on the Mother Church.
In the United States Julia Ward Howe suggested a Mother's Day dedicated
to peace in 1872 and held annual celebrations in Boston, Massachusetts.
In 1907 a campaign to make it a national holiday began. By 1911 almost
all the states held a Mother's Day celebration with President Woodrow
Wilson proclaiming it a national holiday in 1914. That is 42 years from
the first one to being a national holiday.
Long road to national Father's Day
However, Father's Day took 58 years from the first one to national
holiday status. The first known celebration of Father's Day was on July
5, 1908 in Fairmont, West Virginia. Grace Golden Clayton is believed to
have suggested it to her pastor after a deadly explosion in nearby
Monongah in December, killing 361 men.
Sonora Dodd thought of the idea for Father's Day while listening to a
Mother's Day sermon in 1909. She wanted a special day to honor her
father, William Smart. Smart was widowed when his wife died while giving
birth to their sixth child. Mr. Smart was left to raise the newborn and
his other five children by himself on a rural farm in eastern Washington
state. As an adult Sonora realized the selflessness her father had shown
in raising his children as a single parent. It was her father that made
all the parental sacrifices and was, in the eyes of his daughter, a
courageous, selfless, and loving man. Since her father was born in June,
she chose to hold the first Father's Day celebration in Spokane,
Washington on June 19, 1910.
Not until 1924 did President Calvin Coolidge support the idea of a
national Father's Day. Then in 1966 President Lyndon Johnson signed a
presidential proclamation declaring the 3rd Sunday of June as Father's
Day. What happened to the idea of national holiday for 42 years is a
mystery. In 1972 President Richard Nixon signed the law which finally
made it permanent
Father's Day took 42 years from the idea of a nationalizing the day to
actual proclamation as a national holiday, while Mother's Day took just
seven years. What's a father to think? I can almost hear Rodney
Dangerfield saying, "No respect! No respect!"
Mixed message confuses fathers
It seems to be getting harder and harder to be a father because of the
sometimes confusing, even conflicting voices. One of the biggest
dilemmas for fathers relates to providing for the family, which takes
time or playing more with the family, which takes time. Both are
important, but there are only so many hours in a day? So what is a
father to think?
On one extreme we find men who do neither and barely deserve the dignity
of the title, Father. Popularly known as deadbeat dads, they sire one
baby after another, disown or abandon their children, refuse to pay child
support. Closely related are dysfunctional dads who don't physically
leave, but neither do they provide basic needs nor personal interaction
time. Instead they refuse to get a job or keep a job, often having
criminal or substance abuse problems. This leaves the mother virtually a
single parent working and parenting; leaving the children virtually
fatherless.
Almost opposite on the providing scale, but resulting in the same lack of
personal involvement are the absentee workaholic dads. Work, work and
more work, all with the purpose of providing well for the family. Every
complaint about the amount of time he spends at work is met with, "I am
doing it for you. We couldn't afford the lifestyle you enjoy, if I
didn't work overtime." Nearly all requests for special times together by
the children are met with, "I'll make the next game. This client is too
important to miss." Or, "Tape the show and I'll watch it with you when I
get home." But the child is fast asleep when dad gets home and dad is
gone again when the child wakes up.
While the latter dads provide, they still have little or no interpersonal
time with the children. An unknown author wrote, "Love is spelled
T-I-M-E." Billy Graham echoes that thought, "Enjoy one another and take
the time to enjoy family life together. Quality time is no substitute
for quantity time. Quantity time is quality time."
Is anyone saying, "That sounds nice, but who is going to pay the bills?"
Here's my suggestion for trying to find some balance: Learn to be
content with less and teach your children to be content with less. Less
cost for "needs" equals less work time to afford it and more family time
together. Unless you are one of the 159,000 married, intentional
stay-at-home dads in 2006, who actually parent while they are home with
the children, then please do provide financially and emotionally for your
children.
On the far end of the "play more with the family" spectrum, there are
dads who work on and off whenever they feel like it or go from one job to
another, chasing fantasies. Technically they are kids themselves. They
pretty much do as they want, when they want. These dads can be great
fun, if what they want to do is play with children. However, often in an
effort to be the children's buddy, they indulge them with every whim.
Children love the attention and freedom, but never learn responsibility,
setting them up to be the next generation of irresponsible fathers and
mothers.
Here is my suggestion for these dads: Grow up! Here are a couple
closing quotes: "If the new American father feels bewildered and even
defeated, let him take comfort from the fact that whatever he does in any
fathering situation has a fifty percent chance of being right." — Bill
Cosby. "Trust yourself. You know more than you think you do" Dr.
Benjamin Spock. I hope that gives you some encouragement! We all
appreciate and honor the fathers who are striving to find a balance in
providing and playing. Make Sunday a play day with the children! HAPPY
FATHER'S DAY!
© 2007 Lois E. F. Watkins
In honor preferring one another (May 31, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Any "Three Stooges" fans out there? Picture Moe and Curly walking toward
a door. They get there at the same time. Moe says, "After you." Curly
says, "No, after you." Moe, "No, after you." Curly, "No, after you."
Finally in exasperation they both say "Fine" and both try to go through
the door at the same time. They won't both fit, so they back out, brush
themselves off, go through the "After you," "No after you" bit several
times and again decide at the same time to go for the door. Stuck again.
Back out! "After you." "No, after you." Go for it again. Stuck
again.
This goes on until either the crowd gets bored with it or one of them
breaks through the door first. Then Moe pokes Curley in the eyes and
slaps his face back and forth. Obviously the Stooges are not examples of
common courtesy or civilized human behavior. They started out pretty
well, but Stooges never end up very well!
Typically, if two people are approaching the door, one stands back to let
the other one through first. In "olden days" if it were a man and a
woman, the man would always step back in honor of the woman. Nowadays it
may be a toss up as to whether the man or woman goes first. If it is two
women or two men approaching the door, it might depend on who's the
nicest, who's the oldest, who's the biggest, who's the richest or who
looks meanest. Or they may end up like Moe and Curly, stuck in the door.
What is the basis for honor?
Protocol almost seems to be a thing of the past. Now people do whatever
seems right in their own eyes. People do still stand when a bride comes
down the aisle. But more and more people do not stand for the "Star
Spangled Banner." Fewer put their hand over their heart. And fewer
still actually sing the song. Even when the Queen of England visited,
the colonists showed themselves to be right crude. On May 7 Mickey
Rooney had the audacity to kiss the back of Queen Elizabeth's hand, well
I never! Never touch the queen! Fortunately she lets minor protocol
faux pas slide by without demanding, "Off with your head!"
Funeral procession protocol is very confusing. When I have ridden in the
hearse to the cemetery for the graveside service, some on-coming cars
pull over and stop. Others don't. One funeral director said sometimes
the stopped cars actually are traffic hazards. Once while traveling on
the interstate in a hearse, one "hotdog" sped by the whole procession and
cut right in front of the hearse to get off at an exit. He swerved into
the grass along the exit and then got back up onto the exit road. He
wasn't about to honor any one—dead or alive.
I doubt if this person was as learned as a biblical scribe or expert in
Jewish law, but these words seem to fit his attitude, "Beware of the
scribes, who like to walk around in long robes, and love respectful
greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the synagogues and
places of honor at banquets, who devour widow's houses, and for
appearance's sake offer long prayers. These will receive greater
condemnation" (Luke 20:46-47).
Jesus actually had quite a bit to say about honor and banquets in Luke
14. Basically, wait to be invited to sit in the places of honor. Don't
sit there assuming it is your place and then get demoted when the true
guest of honor comes. How humiliating! In addition, don't even invite
your family and friends to your dinner. They will just invite you back
to their house and that's your reward. "But when you give a reception,
invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind and you will be
blessed, since they do not have the means to repay you for you will be
repaid at the resurrection of the righteous" (13-14). Ouch! Who of us
does that on a regular basis? At all? Who of us even invites friends
over anymore? But I digress.
Outdo one another in showing honor
This little instruction in Romans 12:10 was instilled in us when we
arrived in Zambia. Actually it was instilled before with the reading
assignments we were given to help us understand the culture. The first
morning after breakfast we were given a crash course on Zambian protocol
in greetings. It always makes a big impression when Westerners at least
try to speak the language. So we practiced saying a three-part
traditional greeting. I'll give it in English. One person says, "How
are you?" The response, "Fine or very good!" Then that person asks the
first person "How are you," who responds, "Fine or very good!" Then both
of them put their hand over their hearts and say, "Thank-you."
However, I think while we were having Tonga language lessons, our Zambian
brothers and sisters were having English lessons! As we stood in the
receiving lines, they were saying, "Welcome" or "How are you?" or "Glad
you are here." I don't think any of us got all three parts out, because
they were speaking English! While we were trying to honor them, they
were trying to honor us. We were trying to outdo each other in showing
honor.
A few other interesting things: hold your left hand under your right hand
when you shake hands (I think it is something to do with proving you
don't have a weapon in the left hand); women do a little bow when shaking
hands with men to make them shorter; sit in silence when you enter a
person's home and let the host begin and guide the conversation; spend a
little time in chit-chat about anything before you get to the business;
don't yell to get someone's attention across a room or even outside
(instead either send someone to get that person or you go to them). We
Americans are much too loud!
Doing such little things to try to adapt to another person's world speaks
volumes. Big grins came across people's faces when they heard us speak
Tonga. They also got some good laughs at our attempts. The funniest
thing was when our tall white men joined the conga-type line with the
women. I'm not sure if that was disrespectful or not, but they sure
laughed. One custom we had a bit of a problem with when the men guests
were told to go first in the food line, then women guests, then other
men, then children, then other women and the workers.
Trying to enter another person's world is a way of giving honoring. This
works not only in cross-cultural settings. It works in
cross-generational settings. In nursing homes a sure topic of interest
is asking about how they survived The Great Depression. One said, "My
dad was a plumber, so we got along better than most." Another mentioned,
"We ate a lot of soup and with eight kids, we had pretty thin soup."
There is hardly a person alive that doesn't enjoy taking about their
interests: family, job, music, school, church, health, travels etc.
"If one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it" (I
Corinthians 12:26b). So if you want to rejoice this week, honor someone
else! Don't wait to be honored. Outdo each other! "I'll honor you
first!" "No, I'll honor you first!" Don't get stuck in the door and no
poking eyes!
© 2007 Lois E. F. Watkins
Mission myths and misconceptions (May 24, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Jim just came in from mowing lawn between rain showers. Some of it was
very tall, which reminds me of the saying on his "Demotivators" calendar
for the month of May. "Underachievement: The tallest blade of grass is
the first to be cut by the lawnmower." Some other popular pessimistic
sayings include: "A day late and a dollar (kwatcha) short."
"If anything can go wrong, it will go wrong."
So often unbelievers only hear of the victories of the Christian life
because we want to make it attractive. The Gospel is definitely Good
News, but by never knowing the struggles many get the misconception that
Christians, especially missionaries, must never have things go wrong.
Their prayer requests must get "front of the Throne" priority. After
all, being a missionary comes with a special protective shield, doesn't
it?
During our January trip to Zambia even we were surprised, though we
shouldn't have been, at the number of things that did not go according to
plan. Then in addition to the unexpected, there were also challenges
that typically come with any mission trip. Here is a short list of
examples from our trip called, You might be a missionary if . . .
1. . . . you are served food and drink that you can't pronounce or
identify.
It is amazing how many foods around the world require acquiring a taste
(smell, sight and feel too). The challenge is being willing to
thankfully receive it, respectfully try it, while refraining from making
disgusting faces or sounds. Actually, only one thing was very
unpleasant. Fortunately, we had been warned ahead of time, "just make a
good try of it, but you don't need to drink/chew it all." I'll never
forget that chewable drink! However the fried chicken was fabulous.
When we asked about the seasonings, we were just given polite smiles.
Must be a secret recipe!
2. . . . your vehicle only breaks down on planned travel days.
On our first long day of travel from Lusaka to Choma, a back inside tire
went flat. Remarkably the rented mini-bus could hobble along a few miles
to a service station. However, in the small-middle-of-no-where village
there was no Tire Barn or Goodyear store. So someone had to bring out
the specific replacement tire from Lusaka. Eventually we were on our
way.
A few weeks ago in "Thursday Thoughts," I mentioned the hole in the
radiator caused by going through a huge, deep pothole. As a result we
spent an entire unplanned day at one place and were even discussing
sleeping arrangements there, when alternative travel was arranged. Our
host spent the morning of the next day, Sunday, getting it fixed and back
to the mission. The next day, while traveling with a smaller group not
including us, it broke down again. Gratefully, it was fixed enough to
continue our trip and get us to the airport.
On our last day we went to a game preserve near Victoria Falls. One of
the Safari jeeps even got a flat tire. Fortunately, no flesh-eating
animals are in that preserve as we stood around waiting.
3. . . . your vehicle gets stuck more than once in an hour.
Country roads go from paved to gravel, to dirt to two tire tracks, to
make your own road. City roads go from paved to gravel, to dirt to near
impassable one lane alleys. During the rainy season getting stuck is
just a matter of time. No wonder so many Zambians walk!
While we were making home visits on AIDS patients in a very poor section
of Choma, a taxi with part of our group got stuck. When the mission SUV
that we were riding in attached a chain to pull it out, one of our tires
just ground itself about 12-18 inches into the mud. With brute strength
and mud flying, both eventually got out. We went on to the next home,
but the taxi full of teammates did not arrive. We went ahead since the
home was too small for all of us to get in at once. When they finally
arrived, they had gotten stuck and unstuck again.
4. . . . your schedule has no specific times listed, just "morning,
afternoon and evening."
Many world cultures have a different view of time than Americans do.
Relationship is much more important than promptness. We were warned and
were prepared for "African" time. Any attempt to make a schedule is
normally approximate at best. But instead of us having to wait for the
Zambians, over and over groups waited patiently in the hot sun to welcome
us with their banners, dressed in their Sunday best. No matter when the
bus pulled into the driveway, the welcoming committee was there to greet
us with singing and dancing.
5. . . . you have to run for your life!
No lions or tigers or bears! No cannibals! No poison dart guns! But
beware of the stuck taxi gunning it to back out of a mud rut. During the
unsuccessful attempts to get the cars out I was standing way back behind
the taxi to stay out of the way. Not paying attention to what was going
on, I suddenly heard several team members yelling, "Lois, run! Run!" I
didn't even know why at first, but I did run!
After I realized a speeding car was backing up toward me, I ran even
faster. The road had a ditch of water on each side and muddy vegetable
gardens beyond the ditch. I guess I should have leaped over a ditch of
water, but I didn't want to embarrass myself by falling in. By avoiding
the ditch, I ended up splashing through a huge puddle at a T-intersection
of two alleys. But that was the least of my problems.
I stopped to make sure I was safe, assuming the car would stop at the
intersection. The car came barreling backward through the puddle and
around the corner toward me. I'm not sure why he chose to turn the way
I'd run instead of going the other way. Still trying to get out of the
way, I kept running into a short driveway. Wouldn't you know that car
followed me into that very driveway to turn around? I jumped into the
yard and escaped with my life, but not much dignity.
Several families were outside watching and laughing. We had learned
earlier that often the Zambian response to impending tragedy is to laugh.
For example, during skits portraying a person dying of AIDS we were told
not to be offended if people laughed. I guess I will never know whether
they were laughing because it was funny or dangerous.
Actually I was laughing too—release of tension. But the guys who had
first yelled for me to run were really shaken up. I guess it was closer
than I realized. I think they were shocked and relieved that I could run
so fast! It has been said that pastors and I assume missionaries too
need to be prepared to pray, preach or die at a moment's notice. I would
also add, "Run!" at a moment's notice.
You will have trouble
This short list demonstrates that missionaries and guests of missionaries
do have problems, frustrations, delays and scares. However, our hosts
did say that there seemed to be more troubles than normal. Perhaps
having all those pastors in one place made it a prime testing ground.
Jesus said to the disciples, including modern day missionaries, "In this
world you WILL (not might or probably will) have trouble. But take
heart, I have overcome the world!" That includes overcoming the troubles
of the world along with it.
Even those troubles are included in Romans 8:28, "And we know that in all
things God works for the good of those who love him, who and are called
according to his purpose."
© 2007 Lois E. F. Watkins
Comments
I just finished reading your devotional. I can identify!!!! Although I
have not been turned down by mission agencies, I have stepped off the
path of three [agencies] because what they wanted me to do was not what
God called me to do. . . . the language school I am applying to will
accept those who are not part of a sending organization. Either way, God
will get his way, even if once I am in California and it becomes
necessary to begin a new ministry start-up, I believe God will provide
the people for the team. Your writing spoke directly to my heart. Thank
you for sharing this single woman of God! NW
A dream becomes reality (May 17, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
What is the difference between a dream and reality? Being awake! Dreams
happen while we are asleep with no power to make them take shape in
reality. Dreams do not become reality by magic, by wishing upon a star,
simply thinking them into existence or any number of "keep your fingers
crossed" methods. But when we are awake and if we are willing, we can
begin to put brains, legs, feet, hands and heart into action. We can
expect to experience blood, sweat and tears. Add to all that a
determined "can do" attitude, an ability to overcome setbacks, a
willingness to break the mold and an unwillingness to take no for an
answer.
With huge doses of patience and perseverance, one would hope that any
dream would become reality. Even then, there is no guarantee. So what
does it take to make an impossible dream become reality? All of the
above, plus an affirmation that the dream is from God and the end reality
will bring glory to God. Last week the legacy of Zambian missionary,
Claudia Peyton (1894-1984) was highlighted. She was also a woman with a
calling and dream.
Courage to believe when only God says yes
Shortly after 17-year-old Claudia received Christ as her Savior in 1911,
she consecrated herself to do God's work. Going to Africa as a
missionary was not only a dream, but a deep conviction. Her confidence
was severely tested many times by her family, who were not supportive at
all. As the next to the youngest of twelve, the older married siblings
kept her busy looking after their children and helping out. They
affectionately called her Aunt Candy because of the molasses candy she
made on the wood-burning stove. With her many domestic skills such as
canning, washing and tending the sick, she was most criticized for not
even trying to find a husband. "Fiddlesticks!" was a common adult
reaction to her dream of going to Africa.
Her first real step in preparation was going to God's Bible School and
Missionary Training Home in Cincinnati, Ohio. Again though her family
objected, she declared her independence to follow her dream. What could
they do? Dreams were dreams. Talk was cheap. She would never go! When
her mother died suddenly, it appeared they were right. She left school
disappointed to go home and cheerfully "keep house" for her father.
Yet her calling found an outlet at home, even in Cyrus Creek, West
Virginia, where she helped establish a mission work, which is a church
yet today. Claudia continued to tell anyone who would listen, "Oh, I'll
go someday. When God calls a person to do a thing, you won't convince me
that He won't make a way for them to do it—but in His own good time.
There's a reason for the delay. It may be that He has many lessons for
me to learn now that will be of use to me when I finally get to Africa."
Courage not to take no for the final answer
When her father remarried, she was free to go and finish her schooling.
By the time she graduated she was 32 and more than ready to be sent to
Africa. Part of preparation was to have a thorough medical exam, which
she failed! The doctors sent a report to the mission board, "We have
given Miss Claudie a thorough medical examination and we find her to be
of frail constitution. It is our unanimous and considered opinion that
this woman could not possibly live more than a year in the African
climate."
Even professionals can get it wrong. No doubt by all human estimation
she wouldn't have survived. But nothing is impossible with God.
Somewhere along the fifty years she lived and served the Lord in Africa,
I am sure they changed their mind about her ability to live more than one
year in the African climate! Not only was her body stronger than people
thought, but also her mind, will and spirit. They were even stronger.
No amount of pleading and begging would change the mind of the "powers
that be" to let her go. She was advised to go home and forget the whole
thing. Was this the death of her dream after so many years and so much
work? No was not an acceptable answer. Rather than admit defeat, she
went to work at an orphanage at God's Bible School for four more years.
(It reminds me of Jacob who worked for seven years thinking he would be
able to marry Rachel. Instead he was given her sister, Leah, so he
willingly worked another seven years for Rachel too.)
It seemed all her life, so far, except for the years as school, was spent
caring for her nieces and nephews and then orphans. Is there any doubt
that God was preparing her during the years of delay? During the four
years she saved up money to pay for her own passage on the S.S. Majestic
from New York to Africa via England.
Courage to following God's calling
How many others would hold fast to a seemingly impossible dream for
nineteen years and more than one time of disappointment? How many other
single women would head off to Africa independently with no mission
organization sponsoring or supporting her? Some would call it
stubbornness or stupidity or worse. We cannot judge her heart, but we
can see God's blessing in the fruit of her labors.
In addition to the changed lives of the eighteen orphans that she
adopted, she gave many other children the gift of education at the Choma
Compound School. Reading and religion were part of the curriculum, but
so was hygiene and care for the body. Instead of witchcraft and
superstition, she helped them understand that sickness came from eating
bad food and germs.
During World War II the government wanted to fly her home, but she
refused for two reasons. First, she wouldn't leave those who needed her
in time of trouble. Second, she was afraid she wouldn't be able to get
back. In fact, she only took one six month furlough in fifty years, only
after the family agreed to get her a round trip ticket.
Here is a clipping she kept from a paper that shows how her dream became
a reality with God's help, "Pay as little attention to discouragement as
possible. Plough ahead as a steamer does, rough or smooth, rain or
shine. To carry your cargo and make your port is your point."
[Picture: three of Claudia's children; Quotes and details from a 1962
article in The Herald-Advertiser of
Huntington, WV by Dorothy Peyton—niece-in-law of Claudia Peyton]
© 2006 Lois E. F. Watkins
A mother's living legacy (May 10, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Telling or reading stories is one of the best parts of being a grandmother. Nothing quite compares to having a
little one snuggle up to look at and read a book. Here is a story that honors motherhood, through a woman who
technically was not a birth mother. Yet her qualities, which we will look at next week, are ones to be admired by
mothers and fathers alike.
However, the calling God gave her did not include a husband. She did go to Africa after nineteen years (more on those
years next week), but her family's last wish did come true. She had children by adopting eighteen Zambian orphans at
various ages and over several years. That was not her intent, nor her primary work, but it certainly is her greatest
legacy.
As we rode the bus into Siechetema settlement, a single well-kept gravesite surrounded by small trees and beautiful
flowers was pointed out: Claudie Peyton 1894-1984. This former mission station was her home for fifty-four years.
She originally went as an independent missionary, joined with an independent mission society, which merged with the
Pilgrim Holiness Church, which merged with The Wesleyan Methodist Church in 1968 becoming The Wesleyan Church. Now
under the control of the national Zambian Wesleyan Church, it has become the centralized location for the Siechetema
Community Trust for Orphans and Vulnerable Children.
As we were going about our activities, we kept seeing the bus driver under the bus. Not a good sign. Later we learned
that the radiator had broken when we had gone through a huge pothole on the way there. We remembered hearing a
crunching sound when we drove through it, so it was quite miraculous we even made it to our destination.
While we were stranded waiting for some other form of transportation, I sat on a bench where the people had gathered
to receive the food distribution from the trust. An older gentleman was speaking excellent English, so I asked him
where he had learned it so well. With a huge grin he began to tell me the story of how he had come to be adopted at
six weeks old by a United States missionary by the name of Claudia Peyton.
As was the case with many families, who brought their children to Miss Peyton, his parents had too many children to
support. Bobby had learned English through growing up in her home. We also met Stanley, who was six years old when
he came and the wife of David, who was the youngest and now tends her gravesite. Five are deceased and five of the
remaining thirteen still live at the mission station or nearby; six others live in other parts of Zambia and two in
neighboring Botswana. Nearly 100 grandchildren and innumerable great-grandchildren share in the Claudia Peyton legacy.
In 1940 she brought home her first orphan, Dorothy, quite by accident or "God-incident." While visiting the Choma
Hospital, she walked by a man who was trying to feed a tiny baby with a spoon. He asked her to take the baby because
his wife and children died when their grass hut burned. She had gotten the little one out and went back for the other,
but could not make it out.
Ill-equipped for caring for a baby, she put the little one in a large cardboard box under the wash stand. At first
she wondered if Satan had brought this time-consuming little one to distract her from her mission. God reassured her
that this was an important part of her mission: to be a mother to the motherless
(1962 article in The Herald-Advertiser
of Huntington, WV by Dorothy Peyton, niece-in-law of Claudia Peyton ).
Highlighting and advocating adoption, in no way diminishes the honor birth mothers deserve. Being mothers involves a deep love and willingness to sacrifice for their children. This coming Sunday is a special opportunity to celebrate all that mothers provide.
Legacy of God's care continues
God's great love is described by the prophet Isaiah, "Can a woman forget her nursing child and have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, but I will not forget you. Behold, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands" (49:15-16). While this is written to Zion, not to orphans, it certainly brings great assurance and comfort to all who may feel abandoned and rejected. Regardless of the circumstances of how a child is orphaned, these precious children need care, safety and nurture; loving human hands to work on God's behalf.
Modern orphans in Zambia are not abandoned because of lost love or lost income, but most often because of lost parents, who die from AIDS or related diseases. Well over 34 percent of the children younger than 15 have been orphaned and the numbers continue to rise. Zambia is a nation of over 10 million people with 1.6 million orphans.
While traditional orphanages have a place, they also displace children from their familiar surroundings. Not so with the genius of World Hope International's Community Trusts. Means of developing a self-sustaining community is brought on site. Caregivers, whether related or not, can keep the orphans in their home communities and schools to grow up among familiar people and culture. Bobby Chirwa Peyton was grateful for everything Miss Peyton did and even came to stay with her in her dying days. "She did what she could and did the best that was available. But this (sweeping his hand to indicate the trust program) is the right way."
Now the legacy continues to live on. Bobby, who is a retired pastor, had "quite a crew" of children of his own. He is now raising orphans who have lost parents. Some are his grandchildren and some are not. Of the others raised by Miss Peyton several became school teachers, some work in the medical profession or in service jobs such as mechanic, railroad, truck farmer and driver. So many are involved in helping the helpless, nurturing children and helping people in general.
What legacy are you and I leaving for the next generation?
© 2006 Lois E. F. Watkins
Like no other power (May 3, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Late afternoon on a Thursday is unusual to be finishing one of these
essays. I hope it is not an indication that my life-week is passing more
quickly than I thought (see original Thursday Thoughts in the archives.)
Usually they are done early morning. But it was not this time and the
rest of the day was filled with caring for our two-year old granddaughter
until Jim finished his work day on the computer. Speaking of
grandchildren (smooth transition!), we are pleased and excited to
announce that our family tree is growing this year. By the end of 2007
we will be double grandparents again! Micah will be joined by a brother
or sister in late September and Hannah will be joined by a brother or
sister in mid-December.
Babies may be helpless but they are definitely not powerless (another
smooth transition!). Even before birth babies have the power to turn
normal, rational adults into a puddle of gooey emotion, well beyond the
effects of morning sickness. Within seconds of birth a strong burly
man's heart can be wrapped around that new minute pinky finger by the
power of ownership. Baby owns Daddy and Mommy.
Cave man and woman got their first exposure to power through natural
forces like sun, wind, water and fire. Millennia later those powers have
not yet been completely controlled. These raw powers can so quickly
render the strongest to be powerless. These naturally occurring powers,
when harnessed have been used in an attempt to improve the quality of
life. Human ingenuity has also developed and used many other types of
power: mechanical, electrical, medical, nuclear and communication
technology. Who knows what is next?
In addition to the power of nature there is the power one person or group
over another. In 1960 French and Raven identified Five Forms of Power:
Coercive Power such as bullies and dictators who use physical or
political force; Reward Power such as exchanging or withholding benefits
in order to control behavior; Legitimate Power as in authority roles or
recognized leadership positions that breed trust or at least obligation;
Referent Power such as fame and charisma that draws and influences
people; and Expert Power based on skills and knowledge.
All powers—all powerful
As Christians we believe that the source of all power and ultimately the
control of all power rest in God alone. In both the Old and New
Testaments God's power is expressed in words and demonstrated in actions.
Consider the praise in Jeremiah 32:17-19 "Ah, Sovereign LORD, you have
made the heavens and the earth by your great power and outstretched arm.
Nothing is too hard for you. . . . O great and powerful God, whose name
is the LORD Almighty, great are your purposes and mighty are your deeds."
Those deeds include Creation, the miracles surrounding the Exodus and
forming the nation of Israel, as well as signs and wonders through the
prophets.
In the New Testament the power of God in Jesus Christ is described in
Colossians 1:15-20: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn
over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven
and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers
or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before
all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of
the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among
the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was
pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to
reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in
heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross."
Although the power of God may seem obvious, acknowledging it is a choice
each person must make. Human choice does not change the reality, but it
does change the relationship. Great power can cause great fear,
helplessness and a sense of obligation. Great power can cause rebellion
towards it or an uprising of prideful resistance. People can and have
chosen those responses to God's power. However, God's desired response
to this great power is willing trust and loving obedience.
What manner of power is this?
The Bible and Christian history are filled with examples of God's
miracles of nature, healings, blessings, wisdom, authority and dramatic
answers to prayer. For example, a raging river in Papua New Guinea was
literally parted like the Red Sea, when a church planter wanted to reach
a new people group with the gospel. Rather than turn back, he took a
stick like Moses and put it into the water. All the computers in the
world could not hold the large and small demonstrations of God's power.
But in Christ we see additional types of God's power. One is the power
of love demonstrated through surrender and sacrifice on the cross. In
Jesus, God made himself nothing, becoming a servant, humble and obedient,
even to death on a cross (Philippians 2:5-8). Yes, Jesus still
demonstrated the power of God through miracles, but often he expressed a
powerful compassion and desire to connect, dwell with and after his
resurrection, dwell in believers through the Holy Spirit. A second
additional power is resurrection power.
As hard as it is to comprehend what tremendous power is involved in
raising a person from the dead to a new state of never-ending life, it is
even harder to realize that same power is at work within you and I as
believers. "and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That
power is like the working of his mighty strength, which he exerted in
Christ when he raised him from the dead. . ." (Ephesians 1:19-20a). "Now
to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine,
according to his power that is at work within us. . ." (Ephesians 3:20)
No doubt it is like our brain power, we use such a small fraction of it
on a daily basis. Even greater than the power for tremendous miracles
and answers to prayer, is the power for lowly human believers to obey
God's commands to turn the other cheek, love their enemies, pray for
those who despitefully use them and forgive seventy times seven. When we
see it lived out or experience it ourselves, it is as awesome as any
miracle.
Living resurrection power
This power is not humanly natural, normal or possible. It is not gained
by grasping for it, but rather by surrendering to it. Oswald Chambers in
the April 12 "My Utmost for His Highest" reminds us, "Even the weakest
saint can experience the power of the deity of the Son of God, when he is
willing to ‘let go.'" But any effort to ‘hang on' to the least bit of
our own power will only diminish the life of Jesus in us."
Perhaps you have seen the movie "The End of the Spear" about the 1956
massacre of five Christian missionaries while making contact with the
Waodani tribe in the Equadorian rainforest. Members of some of the
families returned to demonstrate God's love and forgiveness. Steve Saint
was only five at the time his father was murdered, but he lived with the
tribe years later. His choice to forgive his father's killer and refusal
to commit a revenge killing demonstrated the power of both the cross and
resurrection life.
Now from time to time he does missions trips with Mincaye, the man who
once killed his father, but is now a believer in Jesus. In an interview
Nate was asked if it was true that he traveled and slept in the same room
with the man who had killed his father. First he said "yes" then he had
to reword it. "Yes, it is the same man, but it is not the same person!"
This man's life has been transformed by the power grace and mercy of God.
Now that's power beyond comprehension!
© 2006 Lois E. F. Watkins
Two-thousand-year-old records (April 26, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Who doesn't like to see records broken—other than the former record
holder? Who wouldn't like to participate in breaking a world record?
Guinness World Record Day gave thousands of people around the world that
opportunity on November 9, 2006. In Canada, The Hummingbird Centre,
Breakfast Television and the Radio City Music Hall Rockettes broke the
record for the "Longest Single Line of Dancers" when 1,681 people lined
up to take part in the dance. Parisians got their lips into action when
they set a new record for "The Most People Kissing Simultaneously."
Nearly 1,2000 participants puckered up to take part in the attempt at La
Defense. Now they need to go for "The Most People Kissing Simultaneously
While Forming the Longest Single Line of Dancers"! Any couples game?
The records range from the Insane—In New York, Jackie Bibby reset his
own record for "The Most Live Rattlesnakes Held In the Mouth," managing
to hold 10 snakes in his mouth for 10 seconds; to the Amazing—Liam
O'Connor became "The Fastest Accordion Player" performing "Tico Tico" at
an incredible speed of 11.67 notes per second; to the painful—Norwegian
Narve Laeret smashed his way into the record books by breaking 90
concrete blocks with his hand in one minute.
For 27th year the Flora London Marathon 2007 began at the Greenwich start
with a staggering 36,396 participants. Ian Sharman broke the record for
"The Fastest Marathon Dressed as Elvis" in only 2 hours 57 minutes! It
took a little longer for Oliver Holland and his 16 companions, who were
chained together as convicts. They finished in 5 hours 25 minutes as the
"Most Linked Runners to Complete a Marathon."
Some records were inspirational and beneficial such as Susie Hewer, who
raised money for dementia research and knit a scarf at the same time.
She set the record for "Longest Scarf Knitted Whilst Running a Marathon"
making her scarf an impressive 1m 20cm. Lesley Iles marked her 50th
birthday by running the marathon and breaking the record for the "Longest
Working Pacemaker" (25 years).
Nearly 2000-year-old records still stand
Several records set around 30 A.D. have yet to be broken, but don't hold
your breath! Here are some of the categories: "First Body Resurrected
from the Dead"—Jesus of Nazareth (Matthew 28:5-7); "First Person to See
and Talk with a Resurrected Body"—Mary Magdalene (John 20:10-18); "First
People to Eat with a Resurrected Body"—couple from Emmaus (Luke 24:30).
Some would argue intensely that the widow's son (Luke 7:11-15), Jairus'
daughter (Luke 8:49-56) or Lazarus (John 11:38-44) should hold the "First
Body Resurrected from the Dead" record. However, technically they were
raised from the dead, only to live and die again at a later date. They
were not resurrected to new life, but the same old life, with the same
limitations and frailties. No doubt they had a new outlook and passion
for life, but still it was regular human life.
Supporters of Moses and Elijah might argue that they were resurrected at
the Transfiguration and that Jesus talked to them and Peter, James and
John saw them. Although they were recognizable and talked with Jesus,
they were not resurrected bodies. Their bodies were glorified
bodies—spirit bodies, not flesh and blood bodies. Jesus' resurrected
body had substance, walked, talked, ate, had scars and cooked breakfast.
Some might argue that Jesus did not actually eat with the couple from
Emmaus. Rather he just gave thanks, broke the bread, gave it to them and
then disappeared. So if they lose the record on that technicality, the
prize would go to his disciples when Jesus showed his hands and feet. At
that same time he was given broiled fish and "he took it and ate it in
their presence" (Luke 24:36-43).
New resurrection life is divine life
When Jesus rose from the dead it was indeed a record of cosmic
proportions. His body was not just brought back to life, his body
contained new life, which would never see death. Jesus was brand new in
so many ways. Read the resurrection accounts again in all four gospels.
While this body could be physically held (Matthew 28:9), it could also
disappear into thin air (Luke 24:31); reappear in a room with locked
doors (John 20:19, 26); and ascend into thin air (Luke 24:50-53 and Acts
1:9).
This new life was divine life—eternal life for the believer both in this
life and in the life after death. Jesus told his disciples, "I have come
that you might have life and have it to the full" (John 10:10b). John's
gospel has more references to eternal life than the other gospels
combined: believing in Jesus to receive eternal life comes five times;
eternal life is compared to water welling up, harvest of a crop, a gift
from God; eternal life belongs to those who obey Scripture, eat Christ's
body and drink Christ's blood (remain in), loses life for Jesus sake.
New resurrection life is shared life
John shared his purpose in writing, "But these things are written that
you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by
believing you may have life in his name" (20:31). Jesus said, "This is
eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God and Jesus Christ,
whom you have sent" (17:3). This new resurrection life demonstrates
Jesus deity as nothing else does. All the human world record holders
want to prove they are superhuman in some way by their efforts. Maybe
not superhero status, but being able to do something that no one else can
do or has done. Jesus does something that no other human being could do,
because it is only something God can do; demonstrate resurrection life
and grant eternal life to all who believe.
Next week we'll look at resurrection power.
© 2006 Lois E. F. Watkins
'Come and see the place' (April 19, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Along with Thanksgiving, celebrating the resurrection on Easter seems to get short-changed among the holidays. For Christmas there are four Sundays set aside for Advent in the Church. Commercial Christmas promotion begins anywhere from July on. There seems to be an unwritten competition to see who can be the first to get out Christmas merchandise and get up Christmas decorations.
Halloween decorations are up around mid-September. Valentine's Day supplies come out the day after Christmas. Yes, the celebration of spring with the bunnies, duckies and decorated eggs starts right after Valentine's Day. And, yes, there are over six weeks of Lent, but that seems more like preparation for Good Friday than Easter. So including last week, we will honor the resurrection with four weeks of thoughts. The next three will focus on the Place, the Person and the Power.
What's the big deal?
When confronted with the information about The Lost Tomb of Jesus, one person said, "So what if they found the bones of Jesus. It won't shake my faith." Evidently in an attempt to demonstrate how strongly he held to his faith, he forgot the words of Apostle Paul. "If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that we are found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. . . . And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins" (1 Corinthians 15:14-15, 17).
Evidently simply dying on the cross was not sufficient to remove sins. Resurrection was necessary to make it more than just another blood sacrifice for sin; just another spotless lamb. While the salvation work was finished on the cross when Jesus breathed his last, the divine plan was not yet complete. God offers more than just forgiveness of sin. Resurrection proves Christ's power over the wages or consequences of sin—death. Rising from the dead demonstrates the effectiveness of Christ's human-divine blood to both cleanse sins and also the Father's acceptance of the Son's sacrificial death as payment in full. It initiates a new life and a new way of life. It positions Jesus Christ for a new identity and relationship with his Church.
Vernon C. Grounds contributed an article on the resurrection in "The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary" which gives many more benefits of the resurrection. "In sum, by virtue of His resurrection, Jesus is now perfected Man, seated at the right hand of the Majesty on high, victorious and vindicated, the Destroyer of death, a life-giving Spirit, the Savior, Head and Priest of His people, the world's future King and Judge" (page 716).
Now, that's a big deal!
'Where have you put Him?
When Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus were given permission to take Jesus body, the women followed to see where he was laid. The plan was to come back after the Sabbath to prepare his body with spices and perfumes for permanent burial Yet, when Mary Magdalene found the stone rolled away and the tomb empty, she said to the supposed gardener, "Tell me where you have put him and I will get him" (John 20:15b). Obviously resurrection was not on her mind. Grave robbery was more her first thought.
What does scripture tell us about that tomb that Mary found empty? First, it was a customary place of the dead. In Mark 15:42 Pilate confirms with the centurion that the body of Jesus was in fact dead. Jodi Magness, Professor of Early Judaism at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill described early Judean burial customs in an article called, "Has the Tomb of Jesus Been Discovered" for the Society of Biblical Literature newsletter.
Poor people were simply wrapped in a shroud, laid in individual trench graves and buried with dirt, much like today—minus the casket. Only rich people had rock-cut tombs prepared for families. Burial chambers were lined by single rows of burial niches about the length of a person's body. As the family chamber filled, the earlier remains were removed and placed in ossuary boxes to make room for the next generation.
Secondly, Jesus, who was earthly poor and never owned property or anything else, was buried in a rich man's borrowed, rock-hewn tomb that had never been used and was close by Golgatha. Joseph's primary concern was with following Jewish burial laws which required burial to take place within 24 hours of the death. No doubt he also wanted his Savior (he had been a secret disciple) to have a respectable burial.
Charles H. Spurgeon in an April 8, 1855 sermon called "The Tomb of Jesus" makes several other points about the importance of the tomb in light of the resurrection. It had never been used so no one could say it was another person who rose or that previously an old prophet had lain there and Jesus rose because he touched his bones. He felt it was significant that "the rock of Ages was buried in a rock—a Rock within a rock." In addition to a rock tomb making it nearly impossible for the body to be stolen, a rock tomb is permanent and stands yet today.
Where is the tomb today?
There are two very good choices with "evidence" for both. In 135 Roman Emperor Hadrian erected a large platform over the area where The Church of the Holy Sepulcher now stands to construct a temple to Venus. What better way to desecrate a Christian holy place than worshipping a pagan goddess on the spot?
The church was originally built there in 330 A.D. after Christianity had become the official Roman religion. It was built to commemorate the hill of crucifixion and the tomb of Christ's burial. It was destroyed by Persians in 614, rebuilt, destroyed by Egyptians in 1009 and rebuilt by the Crusaders. With the ornate church built over and around it, it is very hard to envision the original landscape.
Some have said the area was originally like a gravel pit. It is disputed as to whether this site was inside or outside the first century city gate. To be authentic, it needed to have been outside. The tomb site itself was destroyed by a Muslim ruler 1000 years ago, but this does remain the historically revered location. There are other first-century tombs still preserved inside the church, so it was a burial ground. Watching people kiss the rocks and show deep reverence, it is certain that people believe this is the true location of Jesus' empty tomb.
A second option was discovered in 1881 by General Christian Gordon. I am not sure why the quarry rock formation, which looks like a skull was not noticed and investigated before. The place of the crucifixion is referred to in Scripture as outside the city gate at "the place of the skull" (Golgotha in Greek and Calvary in Latin. John 19:41 indicates, "In the place where he was crucified there is a garden and in the garden a new tomb . . . since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there. Halley's Bible Handbook records Gordon's find, "under five feet of rubbish he found a tomb of Roman times, cut in a wall of solid rock, with a trench in front where the stone rolled to the door." (The trench and stone are not there today.)
This place was originally a garden area with an ancient cistern and winepress. It was owned by a rich man with a rich man's tomb on the property. This tomb has only one niche that has been used, which makes you wonder if Jesus wasn't buried in a tomb originally planned for Joseph of Arimathea's family and then he carved another one not wanting to desecrate Jesus' tomb. Perhaps that second tomb was where The Church of the Holy Sepulcher stands. People would logically associate Jesus' tomb with Joseph's family tomb.
The Garden Tomb more closely fits the scriptural description, perhaps because there is not a church built around it. However there are crosses inside which seems to indicate it was at one time viewed as a place of worship or at least a holy place.
It is hard to determine whether nearly 2000 years of tradition is right or this more newly found, more scripturally accurate place. While it really isn't a big deal to our faith which, if either, is genuine, just walking into the Garden Tomb gives a sense of reality. An even better reality is that it is empty! The best reality is the person and the power which explains why this place is empty.
Stay tuned for next Thursday.
© 2006 Lois E. F. Watkins
Weighing the evidence (April 12, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Eyewitness evidence is usually the clincher in proving a case beyond a shadow of a doubt. Witnesses who testify on the stand in court take an oath to "tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God. As strong as an eyewitness may be, we are also told that evidence does not lie. An eyewitness may intentionally lie or at the very least innocently misinterpret what has been seen. CSI shows live by the mantra, "Follow the evidence." However, evidence itself can be misinterpreted.
Although tampering with evidence, planting evidence or manufacturing evidence is itself a crime, people do it every day. How many innocent people are in prison because of false witnesses or falsified evidence, we will never know. Just this week the rape charges against three Duke lacrosse players have been dropped after a year of presumed guilt in the media courts. Some may still believe they are guilty and got off because of money, influence and political pressure, but with the witness recanting her story, there is no case.
2000-year-old conspiracy
Literally from day one a religious cover-up has been propagated and is still alive and well 2000 years later. From the very day disciples of Jesus claimed he rose from the dead and showed an empty tomb as proof, those who refused to believe have spun a different explanation. Note they do not argue that the tomb was not empty, just the explanation for it being empty is disputed.
Matthew 28:11-15 tells of those who guarded the tomb going back to the chief priest to report the empty tomb. After consulting with the elders and paying a large sum of money to the guards this was the plan, "You are to say, ‘His disciples cam by night and stole Him away while we were asleep'" (verse 13). They then promised political protection from the governor. "and this story was widely spread among the Jews and is to this day" (verse 15).
People often point to the fact that there is no secular history or documentation of the resurrection event. Duh, it was deliberately covered-up; hidden from the government authorities. Money was exchanged, lies were told and lies were believed, both in the arrest and trial of Jesus, as well as the resurrection. Jesus did not appear in secular paces, he appeared to believers who had followed him and would tell the story. Even most of them did not recognize him whenever they first saw him. It is likely the general public would not bat an eye if they had seen him. Evidently investigative reporting was not what it is today!
Throughout the centuries Christian believers have spread the good news of Jesus rising from the dead and non-believers have claimed either he did not die at all on the cross or that his body was stolen to fake the resurrection. Actually the chief priests anticipated this possibility when they asked Pilate to secure the tomb until the third day, "otherwise His disciples may come and steal Him away and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead' and the last deception will be worse than the first" (Matthew 27:62-66).
Now in 2007 Simcha Jacobovici and James Cameron of Titanic fame release a movie called Lost Tomb of Jesus. They claim a first century family burial cave with ten ossuary boxes (after a year the bones were retrieved and placed in these boxes), which was found in 1980 in the East Talpoit district of Jerusalem, have the names of Jesus and relatives. To them this is proof that Jesus' bones were buried just like a common "Joe," who had a family; parents, Mary and Joseph, a wife, Mary Magdalene, a son Judah and miscellaneous other relatives.
The core of this "discovery" is that the 2000-year-old conspiracy to cover-up is still believed. Or perhaps it is more of a case of wanting to believe it. Because to disbelieve the conspiracy theory is to have to openly consider the alternative "theory" of resurrection. "Proving" Jesus did not rise and his bones are here to prove it, is a more appealing option to unbelievers.
Suspension of disbelief
Good fiction writing often has the element of suspension of disbelief. For example, for the sake of the Back to the Future movie a person will choose to believe that a person can in fact travel backward in time, but if Marty McFly actually received a "Pepsi Free" from the diner, that would be unbelievable. If a person suspends disbelief on one major point they expect that all the other details to be accurate.
Ah, there's the rub! If a person chooses to disbelieve the resurrection story and believe these bone fragments at best are in fact Jesus' bones, all the other details better be accurate. In other words no leaps in logic or irrational assumptions. After all we are people of a scientific age, who are trained to suspend all critical thought in the face of "scientific fact." In this case it would have been well for those involved to have researched first century burial practices, first century Jewish names and social status practices, as well as simple well-known facts about Jesus' life.
Of course maybe the purpose was not so much to be accurate, but to make a lot of money and take a swipe at the very basis of Christianity. "If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith" (I Corinthians 15:14). One person from the East Talpoit area was excited, "House prices will go up, because Christians will want to live here." Why would a Christian want to live anywhere that casts doubt on the core belief of their faith?
However, don't lose faith so quickly! Here are some brief historical facts that would counter the "family plot" of Jesus theory:
Proof goes poof
Professor at Asbury Seminary in Wilmore, KY actually worked on the discredited claim of finding the ossuary box of James, the brother of Jesus, along with Simcha (on a first name basis). A couple things from his blog on February 26, 2007: "Jesus, son of Joseph" would be a term used by outsiders, not disciples trying to fake a resurrection. Remember, the whole virgin birth belief? No disciple would refer to Jesus as Joseph's son. Secondly, Jesus was from Galilee, not Judah. Why would Jesus and his family be buried in Jerusalem rather than Bethlehem, family of origin hometown or Nazareth, his hometown. Thirdly, any DNA samples found would not have a control sample to test against.
An April 10, 2007 article in The Jerusalem Post by David Horovitz reports that Israeli archaeologist and Par-Ilan professor, Amos Kloner, who oversaw the original investigation at the Talpiot site in 1980, puts no stock in the claim that it has anything to do with Jesus. "There is no likelihood that Jesus and his relatives had a family tomb," Kloner said. A big deal is made of finding all the names associated with Jesus in one burial cave. However Klomer countered that Jesus, Mary, Joseph etc were very common names. Twenty-one percent of women at that time had the name of Mary. Joseph is the second most common name and Jesus the sixth among first century Palestinian Jews. Having the name Jesus on a box (if even that is authentic), does not prove that it is our Jesus Christ.
Yet, some are clamoring for this spot to be opened to the public just like the other two places that hold claim to being the "empty" tomb of Jesus. Yes, there are two other places in Jerusalem. More on that next week.
As John Stott wisely notes, "Perhaps the transformation of the disciples of Jesus is the greatest evidence of all for the resurrection". The before and after picture is dramatic! Why would cowering disciples turn into willing martyrs to protect a lie? They wouldn't! Here is their eyewitness account, "What was from the beginning, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands concerning the Word of Life" (1 John 1:1). "Follow the evidence."
Remember this week you are also living proof of the resurrection. LIVE THE PROOF!
© 2006 Lois E. F. Watkins
Maundy Thursday thoughts (April 5, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Maundy Thursday begins the passion of Christ. Probably no four days have
had so much written about them; from the gospel records, to Pauline
letters, to early and modern church historians and theologians, to poets,
hymn writers and authors to modern day bloggers. So my mind has been
whirling trying to think of something to share that hasn't been covered
in thousands of creative, heart touching, life changing writings.
As with anything so familiar, it may be easy to assume we know all the
facts and deep meanings. We may skim over the scripture passages just to
refresh our memory, but not really live the story or real life
principles. Hopefully each year during Lent something different impacts
you in fresh, life changing way.
Here are a couple challenging, even disturbing observations that I have
been processing.
Evil may be closer than your think
1. Pastor Steve DeNeff in a recent sermon on the Lord's Supper
highlighted, "As soon as Judas took the bread from Jesus' hand, Satan
entered into him. . . . he went out. And it was night." (John 13:27,
30). Luke's account has Satan entering him before the meal (22:1-6). I
had not thought before how profound it is that Satan, indwelling Judas
and God incarnate, Jesus were in the same room at the same time, either
for the whole meal or even for just that moment from Judas taking the
bread to leaving,
Pastor Steve described the scene as a room divided down the middle
between good and evil; a cosmic stand-off of sorts. If human eyes could
see the spiritual realm, that divide probably was as wide as the Grand
Canyon. But through the human eyes around the table, everything that
night seemed so familiar and normal. No doubt they had shared two other
Passover meals together. Evidently, Judas did not seem any different to
the others that night, since they all were sad and surprised by Jesus
announcement of a betrayer among them.
Evidently Judas was not a glaring prime suspect. As Judas had followed
Jesus along with the other eleven, as he witnessed the miracles and
healings, and as he listened to the stories and the insider
interpretations, he did not stand out in the crowd. He did not have a
huge red letter "B" for betrayer on his chest. He was even trustworthy
enough to handle the finances.
They were quite sure it wasn't them, but still they asked just to be
sure. Each disciple asked, "Surely not I, Lord?" (Matthew 26:22).
Perhaps it was just to clear their name and make points with Jesus. But
as Pastor Steve noted, it is as if they were asking, "What do you know
about me that I don't know about myself? I don't think it's me, but
could it be?" Too many "good" people have fallen because they assumed,
"It can't happen to me." It is far better to acknowledge our own
potential for sin, then make it a decision of the will, "It won't happen
to me."
Beware! Evil or even the capacity for evil in others and ourselves may
not be as obvious and easy to detect as we might think. "The heart is
deceptive above all things and beyond cure. Who cajn understand it?"
(Jeremiah 17:9). Evil and good may at times occupy the same room, share
a meal together or appear so familiar and normal. Evil attitudes may
reside in the same body as righteous actions. Remember Jesus'
description of the Pharisees? "You clean the outside of the cup and
dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. . . . You
are like white-washed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on
the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean" (Matthew
23:25, 27).
Points to ponder: Since Lent is a time for reflection and repentance,
what better time to seriously check how near evil is right now? "Surely
not I, Lord" and listen for the response. Is evil at the door or
already inside? Is it too familiar to recognize? Is it lying in wait
for our moment of weakness or over-confidence? Can what we believe is
righteousness virtue actually be evil or become evil?
Jesus demonstrates loving your enemy
2. Focusing on Jesus' interaction with Judas demonstrates very plainly
what it means to love your enemies. By the time of the Passover meal,
Judas had already made his deal with the chief priests to betray Jesus.
So although he still held the title of disciple, he was actually in the
enemy camp. Yet, Jesus washed Judas' feet along with all the other
disciples as "he now showed them the full extent of his love" (John
13:1). He shared the Passover meal with him (Luke 22:20). Luke also
indicates that Judas was still present when Jesus initiated the new
significance of the bread being his body and the wine his blood (19-21).
Actions certainly speak louder than words, especially when the actions
embody words.
Point to ponder: Who are your enemies? Any friends who are betrayers?
Who would you walk across the street to avoid? Would you be willing to
be made willing to love that person? What would it take for you to love
that person? In what ways might you show love to them?
Living the passion
As we go through the hours leading up to Sunday morning, read the gospel
accounts again slowly. Enter the story emotionally. What does it feel
like to be alone in the garden carrying the weight of the world's sin
alone? How do you respond to friends who disappoint and abandon you?
What about a friend who betrays you and leads to a downward spiral of
events? How do you withstand false testimony, mockery, unjust
punishment, humiliation, or torture (physical, mental or emotional), and
being publicly denied by one of your closest friends?
Even though Jesus knew that all this was a necessary part of getting to
his final destination—the cross, he was still experiencing it as the Son
of Man. He was not divinely insulated from the pain. None of us will
ever know the full extent of what Jesus suffered. That is not our
calling, thank God. Jesus has already fulfilled that need. Yet, we can
be assured from his example leading up to the cross that He "has been
tempted in every way just as we are—yet without sin" (Hebrews 4:15).
We live out these four days with the full knowledge of the resurrection.
But try to put yourself in the place of the disciples after Jesus' death
and before the resurrection. Jesus tried to warn them, but they didn't
get it (so like us). What would you think was happening? Where would
your faith be? What would you be doing? Where would you be hiding?
What would happen to your dreams of being a ruler in Christ's Kingdom?
As we live through each scene and try to fully take one the despair and
fear of the disciples, we will more fully be able to celebrate the joy
and renewal of resurrection morning.
© 2006 Lois E. F. Watkins
Adoration by association (March 29, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
After traveling in Zambia with World Hope International Director, Jo Anne
Lyon, we know a bit of what celebrity groupies or roadies feel like.
These people surround the authentic celebrity and share in all the
whoopla. Hearing the joyous shouting and cries of welcome, can begin to
feel like the adoration and excitement is deserved by them too. Harsh
reality would remind them of their rightful place. They are not the
focus or even worthy of such celebration. Workers or support crew at
best are all they will ever be to the enamored crowd. In any other
setting they would not warrant a second look. Sharing in the attention
is only a reflection of the company they are with at the moment.
Zambian royal welcome
Zambians know how to celebrate and welcome their guests. At every trust
we visited the welcoming committee greeted us before we even got on the
property. Our bus was greeted with singing, dancing and Zambian shouts.
This joyous group continued to sing and dance along side of and ahead of
the bus on into the meeting area. Then they lined up and we lined up and
shook hands and gave greetings of "Muli buti" (How are you?) and
"Welcome" and "Hello" and "Twalumba" (Thank-you). We were each trying to
impress the other with speaking the other's language. The difference was
many of them did speak English because it is the official language.
As wonderful as all the celebration was for all of us, we really knew
that the overwhelming welcome was for Jo Anne. No doubt if we had come
without her, we would have received a special welcome, because it is the
Zambian way. But the true star was the "Queen Mother" as the Zambians
affectionately call her (no doubt because of having been a British
colony).
When you realize the scope of benefits the people have received from
World Hope Community Trusts, it is no wonder she was received as royalty.
In 2004 Jo Anne and some WHIZ (World Hope International—Zambia) staff
met with the first community where the concept of trusts was introduced
(see Archives February 22). Helping caretakers of AIDS orphans and
vulnerable children took on faces as she heard an 84-year-old man explain
that all of his children were gone (deceased) and he was responsible for
nine orphans. Even though they were his grandchildren, it was still an
overwhelming responsibility and cost. A young women shared that both of
her parents were gone and she was responsible for five younger siblings.
These are the very people the trusts were designed to help.
Now less than three years later this woman whose organization has brought
opportunity, dignity and hope to their community, had returned. A lavish
celebration was a fitting demonstration of gratitude. Many of the trusts
had never met the director, so meeting her was extra special. At each
place people gave us tours of their gardens, livestock, sewing rooms with
great excitement and pride. We were able to be a part of food
distribution, school supplies distribution and Mothers and Children under
5 weekly meeting, including a hot meal. These services are appreciated,
but of even greater importance is the sense of growing independence and
self-sufficiency as a community.
In addition to celebrating our arrival with singing and dancing, one
celebration included waving branches. How could I not think of the
Triumphal entry into Jerusalem? "On the next day the large crowd who had
come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem,
took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet him" (John
12:12). With Palm Sunday approaching, my thoughts went to the disciples
walking to Jerusalem along side of Jesus as he rode on a colt, a young
donkey to fulfill prophesy (Zechariah 9:9).
Responding when others are praise
The Twelve had been up close and personal with this celebrity, who was
catching the attention of the crowds. Throngs of people were
surrounding him, throwing down their coats as if he were royalty. People
ahead of him and behind him. I can see the disciples acting as body
guards, a tight circle around the donkey to keep the crowds from crushing
this one they greeted as a King and Messiah. These disciples were used
to being the inner circle.
No one else was privileged to hear the interpretations of parables or
know Jesus'deepest desires. Peter, James and John were the inner-inner
circle and got to see things that human eyes had never seen, such as
Jesus in his glorified body at the Transfiguration. They all had been a
part of the healings, witnessed raising from the dead and casting out
demons. They had seen the crowds grow along with their responsibilities
and authority.
Envisioning them in the midst of this joyous celebration, hearing
"Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Blessed is
the king of Israel!" (John12:13), I wonder what they were thinking. One
would hope they would be focused on Jesus. Perhaps they would be
pleased that Jesus was finally getting the recognition he deserved;
finally others were getting on the bandwagon and were praising him for
all the miracles they had seen (Luke 19:37). Hopefully they added their
own praise from a heart overflowing with gratitude and worship, not just
because of the miracles.
However, their record for maturity up to this point would indicate their
thoughts might not be so noble. Jesus often rebuked them for faulty
thinking. When others were working in Jesus name, John tried to stop it,
because they weren't from "our" group. When a Samaritan village refused
to let Jesus stay, James and John wanted to call down fire from heaven to
consume them (Luke 9:51-55). Remember James and John asking for special
positions of honor in Jesus Kingdom? One to sit on his right side and
other on his left (Mark 10:35-40). Then the other disciples got ticked
off with them for asking. No doubt because they thought of asking first!
They argued about who would be greatest (Luke 9:46-48).
Recognize anyone you know?
Jesus chosen disciples were very human like each of us. We might fault
their attitudes, but we had better look in the mirror for a long time
first. How would we react? What would we be thinking? In the following
possibilities substitute we for they to bring it to present day. It
might have been tempting to get caught up in the hosannas and thinking
they (we) deserved some of the attention for all they (we) had given up
to follow Jesus. Perhaps they (we) were awed by they size of the crowd,
thinking like little children, "Look at all these people. And we
helped!"
Perhaps they (we) felt protective of Jesus and wanted to keep the
strangers (those not of our group) away. Perhaps they (we) judged people
for only following Jesus because of what they might get out of it and not
really believing. Perhaps they (we) strutted around Jesus making sure
they (we) were seen and recognized as one of Jesus trusted disciples.
Perhaps they (we) shouted out, "We're with Him!" People are great at
name dropping!
Lent is a season of reflection, repentance and preparation for the death
of the sinful, old life and readiness for the new life of resurrection.
Think about the blunders the disciples made. So often they just didn't
get it. So often we just don't get it. With the Psalmist pray, "Search
me, O God, and know my heart . . . and see if there be any wicked way in
me" (139:23-24). "Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me
and I shall be whiter than snow" (51: 7).
Any praise we receive is merely a reflection of the praise that belongs
to Christ, who alone is worthy of glory, honor, and power (Revelation
4:11).
© 2006 Lois E. F. Watkins
Celebrate women's history month (March 22, 2007)
Lois E. F. Watkins
Basketball tournament time is called March Madness. In addition, March
is also Women's History Month. Our local newspaper listed some
interesting career firsts among women. Here are some:
1650: Anne Bradstreet published, The Tenth Muse Lately Sprung Up in
America making her the first published woman writer.
1707: Henrietta Johnston became the first known professional artist in
America in Charles Town (now Charleston), S.C.
1809: Mary Kies became the first woman to receive a patent for her method
of weaving straw with silk.
1849: Elizabeth Blackwell became the first woman in the U.S. with a
medical degree.
1887: Susanna Medora Salter became the first woman mayor in the
U.S.—Argonia, KS.
1921: Edith Wharton became the first woman to win a Pulitzer Prize for
fiction, for "The Age of Innocence."
1934: Lettie Pate Whitehead became the first woman tin the United States
to serve as director of a major corporation (Coca-Cola).
1967: Muriel "Mickey" Siebert became the first woman to own a seat on the
New York Stock Exchange.
1997: Madeleine Albright was sworn in as first woman U.S. Secretary of
State.
2007: Drew Gilpin Faust was named president of Harvard University—the
first woman in the school's 371-year history.
2007: Nancy Pelosi became the first woman U.S. Speaker of the House.
Source: www.infoplease.com
Celebrate Rev. Maxine L. Haines
In the next section are a few firsts specifically related to The Wesleyan
Church, of which I am grateful to be a member and ordained minister.
Because these firsts are hardly known by anyone outside of my
denomination and probably most people in it, I want to celebrate how I
came to know them (and how you can, too). Three of the "first" women
below and many more would have been lost and forgotten, if not for the
extensive five-year research and story writing of Rev. Maxine L. Haines.
Her research and two-thirds of the stories were compiled and the others
finished for publication by her husband, Dr. Lee M., after her death to
cancer in 2002. Their book, Celebrate our Daughters (Wesleyan Publishing
House, 2004), not only represents, but also is the capstone of their
lifelong ministry together from being ordained together in 1950.
She found nearly 2000 licensed and ordained women between 1841, when the
Michigan Conference (district) of the Wesleyan Methodist Connection
(Church) was organized (two years before the denomination was organized)
and 1968, when the Pilgrim Holiness Church with its many Missionary Bands
and Holiness groups merged to form The Wesleyan Church. To make the
writing of their stories manageable, she limited the scope to only
ordained women. Of the 2,000, nearly 1,000 were ordained with a few
others added, who had contributed significantly to the ministry of the
denomination in some way.
On a personal note, when I was attending Marion College (now Indiana
Wesleyan University) Maxine's was the first f
