Religion

Thanksgiving

I like the real story of Thanksgiving… as told by the right.

On August 1, 1620, the Mayflower set sail. It carried a total of 102 passengers, including forty Pilgrims led by William Bradford. On the journey, Bradford set up an agreement, a contract, that established just and equal laws for all members of the new community, irrespective of their religious beliefs. Where did the revolutionary ideas expressed in the Mayflower Compact come from? From the Bible. The Pilgrims were a people completely steeped in the lessons of the Old and New Testaments. They looked to the ancient Israelites for their example. And, because of the biblical precedents set forth in Scripture, they never doubted that their experiment would work.

“But this was no pleasure cruise, friends. The journey to the New World was a long and arduous one. And when the Pilgrims landed in New England in November, they found, according to Bradford’s detailed journal, a cold, barren, desolate wilderness,” destined to become the home of the Kennedy family. “There were no friends to greet them, he wrote. There were no houses to shelter them. There were no inns where they could refresh themselves. And the sacrifice they had made for freedom was just beginning. During the first winter, half the Pilgrims – including Bradford’s own wife – died of either starvation, sickness or exposure.

“When spring finally came, Indians taught the settlers how to plant corn, fish for cod and skin beavers for coats.” Yes, it was Indians that taught the white man how to skin beasts. “Life improved for the Pilgrims, but they did not yet prosper! This is important to understand because this is where modern American history lessons often end. “Thanksgiving is actually explained in some textbooks as a holiday for which the Pilgrims gave thanks to the Indians for saving their lives, rather than as a devout expression of gratitude grounded in the tradition of both the Old and New Testaments. Here is the part [of Thanksgiving] that has been omitted: The original contract the Pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, and each member of the community was entitled to one common share.

“All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belong to the community as well. They were going to distribute it equally. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well. Nobody owned anything. They just had a share in it. It was a commune, folks. It was the forerunner to the communes we saw in the ’60s and ’70s out in California – and it was complete with organic vegetables, by the way. Bradford, who had become the new governor of the colony, recognized that this form of collectivism was as costly and destructive to the Pilgrims as that first harsh winter, which had taken so many lives. He decided to take bold action. Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage, thus turning loose the power of the marketplace.

“That’s right. Long before Karl Marx was even born, the Pilgrims had discovered and experimented with what could only be described as socialism. And what happened? It didn’t work! Surprise, surprise, huh? What Bradford and his community found was that the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else, unless they could utilize the power of personal motivation! But while most of the rest of the world has been experimenting with socialism for well over a hundred years – trying to refine it, perfect it, and re-invent it – the Pilgrims decided early on to scrap it permanently. What Bradford wrote about this social experiment should be in every schoolchild’s history lesson. If it were, we might prevent much needless suffering in the future.
“‘The experience that we had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years…that by taking away property, and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing – as if they were wiser than God,’ Bradford wrote. ‘For this community [so far as it was] was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense…that was thought injustice.’ Why should you work for other people when you can’t work for yourself? What’s the point?

“Do you hear what he was saying, ladies and gentlemen? The Pilgrims found that people could not be expected to do their best work without incentive. So what did Bradford’s community try next? They unharnessed the power of good old free enterprise by invoking the undergirding capitalistic principle of private property. Every family was assigned its own plot of land to work and permitted to market its own crops and products. And what was the result? ‘This had very good success,’ wrote Bradford, ‘for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.’ Bradford doesn’t sound like much of a…” I wrote “Clintonite” then. He doesn’t sound much like a liberal Democrat, “does he? Is it possible that supply-side economics could have existed before the 1980s? Yes.

“Read the story of Joseph and Pharaoh in Genesis 41. Following Joseph’s suggestion (Gen 41:34), Pharaoh reduced the tax on Egyptians to 20% during the ’seven years of plenty’ and the ‘Earth brought forth in heaps.’ (Gen. 41:47) In no time, the Pilgrims found they had more food than they could eat themselves…. So they set up trading posts and exchanged goods with the Indians. The profits allowed them to pay off their debts to the merchants in London. And the success and prosperity of the Plymouth settlement attracted more Europeans and began what came to be known as the ‘Great Puritan Migration.’” Now, other than on this program every year, have you heard this story before? Is this lesson being taught to your kids today — and if it isn’t, why not? —  Rush Limbaugh

Sin and Choice

Where is the sin?  Man and man? Man and little boy? Man and dog? Man and premarital sex? Man and lust?

My thought is that the only biblically sanctioned sex is between and man that is married to a women.

So at what point do you get to say what a sin is or notm but I guess choice is where sin is found. So why is our society quick to look the other way, and change the rules? Why not just not call something what it is?

Death and Advertising

Our friend Aaron Finfrock passed away this week.  I and hundreds of people paid tribute to Aaron’s life.  I was moved by his family and friends’ show of love of his life.  I think that some things in life are truly sacred, one of them is death, because I believe that in death we all have a renewed life with God.

With that said, I am absolutely disgusted by out local paper, the Press Enterprise.  I found a nice obituary about Aaron on PE.com, which was disgustingly used as media for advertising space. I’m alright with banner ads and that sort of thing, but placing text ads links (flowers, gift shop, donate)  right in the body of the article, that’s wrong. Would I like to buy something when I’m reading a tribute to the life of a young man?  Who would want to buy something in an obiturary? How can death be used to directly make money?

I guess the Press Enterprise is exactly what its name is, Enterprise of the Press.  We know the “Press” isn’t much more than the presentation of some bias view of something, but rarely do we really see what the press is, the bias of money over ethics.

I will never, as long as I live subscribe to the Press Enterprise.

Anno Domini

Jeremy, here’s my response to your comment.

“Anno Domini (“In the Year of the Lord”), abbreviated as AD or A.D. defines an epoch based on the traditionally-reckoned year of the birth (or actually Incarnation) of Jesus of Nazareth.

This Christian era is currently dominant all around the world in both commercial and scientific use.

Presently, it is the common, international standard, recognised by international institutions such as the United Nations and the Universal Postal Union.
This is due both to the tradition and to the fact that the solar Gregorian calendar has long time been considered to be astronomically correct.

Further more, a monk invented the calendar, therefore, why should people strip the meaning out of the original work to suit their purpose? The original works include A.D. /B.C. If someone wants to rename it, they should make there own calendar.

The Anno Domini system was developed by a Scythian monk named Dionysius Exiguus in Rome in 525, as an outcome of his work on calculating the date of Easter. Byzantine chroniclers like Theophanes continued to date each year in their world chronicles on a different Judaeo-Christian basis — from the notional creation of the World as calculated by Christian scholars in the first five centuries of the Christian era. These eras, sometimes called Anno Mundi, “year of the world” (abbreviated AM), by modern scholars, had their own disagreements. No single Anno Mundi epoch was dominant. One popular formulation was that established by Eusebius of Caesarea, a historian at the time of Constantine I. The Latin translator Jerome helped popularize Eusebius’s AM count in the West. Another formulation, dominant in the East during the early centuries of the Byzantine Empire, was developed by the Alexandrian monk Anninus.

Becoming enlightened – Rumi

I’ll be beginning a series called “becoming enlightened”. It will document my own personal reflections on selected poetry and art. My goal is to have something new each Saturday and then have my personal response by the middle of the week.

Please join me in my quest for spiritual enlightenment. To subscribe to our feed click here.

The first is a poem entitled, “Be with those who help your being” by the Sufi poet Rumi. Rumi is the bestselling poet in America.

Be with those who help your being.
Don’t sit with indifferent people, whose breath
comes cold out of their mouths.
Not these visible forms, your work is deeper.

A chunk of dirt thrown in the air breaks to pieces.
If you don’t try to fly,
and so break yourself apart,
you will be broken open by death,
when it’s too late for all you could become.

Leaves get yellow. The tree puts out fresh roots
and makes them green.
Why are you so content with a love that turns you yellow?

-Rumi

A paper back copy of the Illustrated Rumi

A hardcover book of selected poetry with accompanied artwork

Jesus rejected the American dream

The American Dream isn’t anything better than a self-centered concept of prosperity. For many Americans, myself included, it’s not even a possibility. I’ll have acquired too much debt after my schooling to ever have my own house with a yard and a dog and a family. Not that I really want it, but I’m at least aware that it’s not financially feasable for me. That in itself isn’t really that bad though. It’s no different than a devout existentialism, which isn’t that bad. What’s bad about the American Dream is that it’s so forced on us from a young age, that any alternative lifestyle is seen as deviant. Communal living, Monastic life, Chastity, and Hermitages should be reverred as pious lifestyle choices, but instead are frowned upon by society at large. Don’t believe me? It’s near impossible to become Pastor of a church without a Family

As far as Christianity goes, The American Dream is particularly evil because it presents itself as a reasonable compromise. I mean, part of the American Dream means going to church on sunday morning. Unfortunately, Jesus never asked anyone to go to church. In reality, the American Dream in no way relates to the life of service Jesus encourages. Not only that, but the emphasis on poverty in the New Testament is particularly contrary to the financial security of the American Dream.

Blessed are you who are poor,
for yours is the kingdom of God.
Blessed are you who are hungry now,
for you will be filled.
But woe to you who are rich,
for you have received your consolation.
Woe to you who are full now,
for you will be hungry.
      Abbreviation of Luke 6

Prophet Muhammad

I have decided that most of this Middle East trouble is based in the fact that the Arabic tribes for millennium have been isolated and nomadic. I the last hundred years we have created cars and TVs. So all of a sudden, great wealth and world knowledge have been thrown at them. They have shown that they can’t handle either very well. They have created an extremely wealthy elite class while the masses are poor and with out help. And on the knowledge side, they take mass media as some sort of one way pulpit to preach from. The Middle East media bashes the world, while the world media gets bashed by the Middle East. So when you have a small insignificant European county post some cartoons of Muhammad, the whole Middle East riots (in there own countries)? What’s that all about? How many times have the Muslims threatened to kill all Jews and crush Israel, wiping them from the face of the earth? And they riot over some cartoons? I’m just tired of all of this chaos; I really think the Bible is right about the whole area being the end this world.

Stop Saying “Cult”!

The word cult is nothing but a term used by the media to create fear around, and isolate religious minorities. New Religions suffer a lot of persecution simply because they are new. The fact of the matter is that they have a right to believe whatever they want to believe regardless of how old it is. Jesus had a new message, and he was persecuted just like new religions are today (Branch Davidians). Let’s start to progress and stop oppressing religious minorities. If a group does something that infringes on the rights of others, then they should be stopped from doing whatever is illegal. Some Catholic priests molest little boys, no one questions the faith – let’s have the same respect for new religions that we do for Catholicism. No one calls Catholicism a cult. If they meet in a secret room of a locked building and only come out to get food, and if they live isolated from the rest of America…let them do it, it’s their right to practice freely. So what if you don’t understand it? Repetitive use of the word cult regarding a specific group does more to brainwash society than any religious leader has ever been capable of. The word cult makes me cringe; it’s so full of hatred and isolation that it’s like calling someone a n*****.

Liberate the term “Christian” from politics

There is no such thing as a “Christian Nation.” True Christianity can’t be delegated from a body of government. It is an internal transformation of the spirit. A government could be founded on “Christian” values but that is up for interpretation. Is justice a Christian value, or is forgiveness? And which would the government appeal to? The politics of Jesus looked very different than that of the Moral Majority, or liberal Christian ethics.

“The kingdom (empire) of heaven is like a mustard seed that someone took and sowed in his field; it is the smallest of all the seeds, but when it has grown it is the greatest of shrubs and becomes a tree…” – Matt 13:31-32

The word “kingdom” in Greek can also be translated as “empire”. With that in mind, this parable can be seen as a comparison between Christianity and the Roman Empire which had imperialized Jesus’ people (the Jews). In this parable, Jesus is the mustard seed. His message of love and humility spreads, and pretty soon it (Christianity) is the most powerful “empire” – not the Roman Empire. We have no records of Jesus disobeying Roman law, nor did he ever try to change the laws of the land, or do away with a corrupt system of taxation. Jesus changed people, not laws. It’s the ultimate in grass roots politics. Christianity is not liberal or conservative, it’s personal.