Thy Kingdom Come

When I used to teach in church I would regularly underscore the things that Jesus spoke about most. One of the biggies was “The Kingdom of God”, or the Kingdom of Heaven”. It seems this was the core of his message, he often began his teaching with “The Kingdom of God is like”......

Equally when his disciples asked him how they should pray he included the words, “Your Kingdom come.”

Ironically it seems that Jesus actually only gave examples of what the kingdom might be or might be like. It seems obvious to me then that the Kingdom of Heaven is not a place, not geographically at least. Is it possible then that heaven might indeed be a spiritual awareness or an enlightenment to the existence of God?

Does the Kingdom actually allow us into the supernatural presence of Big God and to his Almighty Power?

This has got me thinking about my blog and my personal ongoing journey into exploring my spirituality. My blog has been a coming out of sorts. A turning away from some of the confines of the organised religion I have encountered in church.

Some of my old churchy friends see my current direction as retrograde and they “fear” for my soul in that I am turning away from God. But I can say without any fear at all that I am certain that I am getting much closer to him since I left the bosom of a congregation and the control of an organisation. Believe it or not it can actually be quite tough stepping away from the instituation. My friend summed it up really well yesterday when he said “Navigating beyond the borders of the church is scary because support doesn't come from the church but from that which it doesn't endorse”. The world is indeed a scary place to expose yourself to.

I had a FaceAche conversation this week that probably should have been expanded more on my blog than on the public forum. To all intents it appeared that I was attacking church leaders for what I termed the Arseholier than thou attitude that many leaders of churches use to keep the flock in check. It's true. I know. I did it and I had some rather gross experiences on the other side of the argument too. All I was suggesting in fact is that pastors, vicars, priests etc should think VERY carefully before they speak. Something I need to do too. Something we all do. It's scriptural I believe: “Watch your tongue and keep your mouth shut, and you will stay out of trouble”. I'm still in training – obviously.

Now. In my virgin stages of blogging I've had a right good rant at christianity or more accurately churchianity. However, I have defended my rights to still believe 100% in Jesus as God (albeit for a few short years as a human example and as proof that God actually does exist). My drift away is from organisation and religion, not from God. Also, although I have challenged my belief in the authority of the Bible, I still maintain that it is an incredible book that has SO much to teach. Some of the gist of what Jesus said must be maintained in its pages methinks.

So. If Jesus spoke so much about The Kingdom of God / Heaven so fervently and passionately, I reckon he thought it rather important for us to grasp what it just might be. As I said, nowhere does Jesus actually define what he Kingdom of God IS.

• Certainly he proclaimed the Kingdom Come in himself, ergo if he / it had already arrived then we can't stop it.

• Certainly he taught that the Kingdom was for ALL. That it was all inclusive, welcoming the lowest of the low from every corner of the globe ; ergo all faiths, creeds and non believers. Everyone! Everyone is equal in Jesus eyes.

• Certainly Jesus went against the grain of the religion and the cultural laws of his communities. He brought a New Testament did he not? A new way of thinking and acting out your place in society.

• Certainly Jesus believed that The Kingdom of God is worth more than ANYTHING else we have – including life.

But here's the best bit; Jesus said that, the Kingdom of God is within us. We already have it! It's within us waiting to be discovered and released.

.

Released!

I've seen some pretty amazing shit when we called upon God in church meetings. “Come Holy Spirit” we would pray and on many occasions amazing things would happen that could only be put down to the supernatural or good drugs.

So when ever people pray “thy Kingdom Come” I reckon they should shut the hell up, step back and let God do something within them. It's Gods gig It's Gods Kingdom after all innit?

So if faithful people pray in faith for the things of God to become a reality in our world, for God’s Kingdom to Come and truly impact our lives and communities, then it will happen through us. 

We must allow God to Come into our own lives to allow him to change us in dramatic ways, miraculous ways. Then we might as the great Gandhi said, “become the change we want to see in the world”.

It's no good sitting around waiting for world peace and harmony. I applaud the “missionary work” many people in churches do. But it's no better than the work the non believers or the other faith groups do. It serves to bring God into the world. It releases Gods love and compassion through men and women whether the givers feel good about it or the recipients come to believe in the baby Jesus or not.

God will be God if only we release him from within.

The worst thing any of us can do is pray for The Kingdom to and not be willing to be part of the answer.

Yours in sincere love and ongoing hypocrisy.

Ray

Shalom folks and a Happy New Year

Belong Before You Believe

I'm not being critical, this is merely for prayer.........

It's been said recently to me that I am being critical of “The Church” (we're talking christian here, though I'm sure there is a blog out there by some disgruntled Muslem or Jew etc). Well to be frank, yes I am, but only in a broad sense of the organised, controlling and hypocritical body that it has come to represent to me over the past couple of years. At a “local” level I think most of the churches do have a true worship of god at the centre of their focus which is a pretty good place to start in terms of following Jesus in my opinion.

The flavour of one persons faith group i.e church, and their practice methods doesn't concern me at all. Some of my friends go to a very traditional high C of E gaff, some to what may be called more contemporary. Each has it's own merits. Maybe the traditionalists like the familiarity of their youth and seeing the Angels in the architecture as Paul Simon brilliantly put it. Maybe they really do cling to the fire and brimstone theology I have heard spouted there. Perhaps the trendy churches some of my mates go to help them to feel more connected to the real world in the way they dress, sing, preach and pray. It's not really my place to say what's good or bad in the main. I only know what floats me own boat (or sinks it). 

Freedom of self expression is very important to me.

What is also important to me though, is that all of the differing groups are allowed a freedom of conscience and conciousness in how they choose to interpret the stuff that happens in the gatherings they attend.

I'm really concerned that there needs to be a liberty of self interpretation, exploration and realisation to the stuff learned in church meetings. Equally of course, most of us will need some guidance to begin to understand the teachings in the first place. This though need not be dogmatic and absolute.

All to often there is an agenda for all members of a church gathering (congregation) to totally toe the party line and there is a resultant backlash against those who may not.

“Belong before you believe” was always a catchphrase that used to resonate with me when we used to encourage folk to come along to our church. 

Unfortunately I think it actually meant to say;

“Belong before you believe what we believe – and while you're about it don't leave it too long”!

The Testosterone Driven Life

Two Posts In One Night? - I'm all man I am!

A comment on my previous blogspot “religion or lifestyle”, got me thinking about an amusing thing I had filed away on my haunted fishtank. I can't remember where I found it so I appologise to the author, although I doubt they'll ever read this so on second thoughts...... stuff 'em.

I said : "So if indeed our faith should be a lifestyle, surely those wishing to promote a particular flavour e.g. christian should a) know how to “sell” their product to a 21^st century audience by using language and illustrations recognisable and relevant to them in their communities and a wider society (just as Jesus did) - and b) actually believe in the product and practice what they preach".

The following is not what I had in mind concerning Christian Marketing and Commercialism

Because somebody somewhere decided that it was OK to sell Jesus all over again...

The Ten commandments (revised):

1. Thou shalt wear no WWJD bracelets nor adopt other shitty acronyms (like FROG and PUSH)
   
   ... 2. Thou shalt not be in possession of stickers such as 'Eternity: smoking or non-smoking?' - a) it's idiotic and b) what an effective way to share God's love...
   
   3. Thou shalt not stick fish symbols on cars
   
   4.Thou shalt not touch anything by Rick Warren or bearing the words ' Purpose Driven Life' - except to burn it...
   
   5. Thou shalt abhor Christian celebrity and tele-evangelism and rebuke their lack of grammar e.g. Joyce Meyer's 'Start your day right'
   
   6. Thou shalt not partake of Christian self-help - what the feck is this? (masterbation?)
   
   7. Thou shalt not display nor admire posters with pictures of cute puppies and kittens with Bible verses
   
   
   8. Thou shalt not listen to nor recommend Christian 'rock' music
   
   9. Thou shalt not attempt to convince others that one is 'pure' through jewellery.
   
   10. Thou shalt not attempt to evangelise atheist friends with hideous Christian greeting cards.
   
   Rays additions:
   
   
   Neither shall ye ever vist The Holy Land (an amusement park in Florida). Purchase Holy Water (bottled water). Eat a Bible Bar (a snack bar)
   Thou mayest however buy a bobble head Jesus Buddy (from Dogma), but not a "Jesus is my homeboy" T-shirt. 
   
   
   
    
   Do not take on The Bible Diet, or suck, TestiMints (mints with Bible verses on it), nor wear shoe inserts with Bible verses on them, etc
   
   
   And finally I've been trying to think of a place to use the following Athiest Motivational Poster for ages:
   
   
   
   
   

Hitler, Mussolini & Spastic Fat Men Trying To Get To Heaven

CHRISTIANITY: "Religion or a Lifestyle?"

It's a cliché to ask such a question really. However, as with all clichés there is a element of seriousness and reality. Such a question is not the reserve of Christianity either. In fact most major faith groups would concur that their religion is indeed a lifestyle.

As a cheap and clichéd opener then, lets use the illustration of Hitler and Nazism. Few would argue that Hitler was a fervent follower of Nazism. Nazism being the ideology and the practice of an extremist form of fascism that Hitler promoted and dictated in Germany. It is a particularly evil belief system that incorporates biological racism and anti-Semitism. It is said that the Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini, said, “Fascism is a religion”. History has shown that many died under this religion. Many continue to do so in the name of other religions, including the one we call christianity. Hitler wrote in his book, Mein Kampf: ". . . I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's work."

As a child I grew up with the knowledge that christianity is a religion. Possibly if you ask most people both inside and particularly outside churches, they would say that a christian, a Jew, a Moslem, a Hindu etc is a religious person. I often get asked if I am religious; I usually answer “no”. Simply because for many the connotation of religious is negative and I can't be arsed to listen to the clichés of how “religion is the the cause etc, etc”. I do tell people though that I believe in God and primarily that I have have a faith that Jesus is God and that I try to follow Jesus teaching and example.

I suppose that people get pigeon holed as to their “religion” when we are often asked to fill a form, and there is this provision to state your religion; we are always tempted, and we write Christianity.

As I continue to study the life and the teachings of Jesus I have more and more come to the conclusion that he did not come to establish a religion; but to reveal a lifestyle.

Orthodox christian teaching tells us that Jesus message to all mankind is the mechanism by which they have to live to be saved. “Saved” is one of the cannon of words and phrases that I have come to cringe at. It's christianese at it's best. Patronising to those who don't believe as it puts forward a concept that few today can begin understand nor appreciate. “Saved!? Lost? I didn't know I was lost!”

So if indeed our faith should be a lifestyle, surely those wishing to promote a particular flavour e.g. christian should a) know how to “sell” their product to a 21^st century audience by using language and illustrations recognisable and relevant to them in their communities and a wider society (just as Jesus did) - and b) actually believe in the product and practice what they preach.

In promoting the brand “Christian” as opposed to the real thing “Jesus” (in my opinion) we have come to accept a religion and its rituals and set down dogmas that must be followed instead of personally accepting our responsibilities to follow the god we believe in and adhere to the lifestyle he suggested.

But unfortunately being human we have different opinions about the same thing and we have ended up dividing ourselves. We've ended up creating denominations. Different clubs who purport to believe in the same god but who in certain cases certainly don't follow the same God that I believe in. It's all too confusing to the non believer and the hypocrisy perceived by those whom non believers observe not to living the lifestyle of their “religion” is the smell that keeps folk away from churches.

I've no beef with different styles of churches, it's a horses for courses thing but until there is some radical agreement in the big issues of the doctrines and beliefs for example in The C Of E and The Roman Catholic Church (and many others) then it's really difficult for people to begin to explore their spirituality as opposed to their willingness to follow one set of rules and regulations compared to another.

So if my personal answer is that “Christianity is a Lifestyle” - how am I doing? Am I living that lifestyle?

The man who started the movement of churches that I used to belong to was a brilliant teacher. He was loved and hated in equal measure – a bit like Jesus eh? His name was John Wimber and you should check out his stuff. I love it's practicality. I love Wimber's realistic approach and his honesty. He once said “never trust a man who walks without a limp”.  A wonderful illustration to indicate that no one is perfect.  I try to follow Jesus in my own limited way but the reality and honesty in my case is that I am so ill equipped. I've spent years in churches thinking that I was following Jesus when I think I should have spent more time getting to know God better. If Jesus is God as I suspect he is, then instead of worshipping the man I should have been aiming higher and honing in on the big boss.

Once my God realisation is truly sharpened then I reckon I'll be able to walk in Jesus footsteps with a much more steady gait. Until then may I apologise to you in advance for anything I may say or do that is not in keeping with the stereotype you may expect of me and my chosen lifestyle.

Who's God : Who's gospel?

There Can Be Only One

Mikhail Gorbachev said:"Peace is not unity in similarity but unity in diversity, in the comparison and conciliation of differences"


I've recently bought and am thoroughly enjoying Rob Bells "Love Wins" book published earlier this year.


I often like to get some idea of folks reviews before reading stuff to give me an idea of the kind of ride I'm going to get when the reading begins. It's been interesting to look at these reviews as an "outsider", as a christian who no longer conforms to the norms of christian behaviour like going to church or believing in the plenary truth of the Bible.

Bell is something of a hot potato - some love him - some despise him and go as far as condemning him as an evil subversive. He gets the heretic label too. Such polar differences are nothing new in reviews whether it's a new book, play, film or record. You can't please everyone goes the saying.

However, one review that caused me to itch was titled "why does Rob Bell have such weird theology?" It was actually an old review and nothing to do with Bells new book. I think what the reviewer was saying is "why is Rob Bells theology different to the hermeneutic that I believe in"
Each to their own is another saying but the person who posted the critique didn't even have the nous to disguise his attack. His review was nasty and personal. Nothing more than a self righteous bigoted rant. No substance, no class. It exposed the failing in his own traditional theology and would stink of hypocrisy to any neutral exploring 2 sides to a discussion. To the outsider, Bell would win any argument by default regardless of his different opinions due to the crass arrogance of the reviewer. The arsehole by the way was called Todd Friels an American DJ on a now defunct god radio station- enough said.

One of the major concerns of the negative reviews was the probability as they see it that Rob Bell is professing Universalism or salvation for all regardless of your faith, flavour of that faith or indeed lack of it. Personally I don't have a problem with that concept. I don't necessarily embrace it either. The fact is that I just don't know where I stand on the argument as I reckon it's God's job to worry about judgement of believers and non believers, or good people and bad people not mine. It's certainly not the church's place to be judge and jury and certainly not theologians or big gobbed DJ's. What I do believe in is a Universal God of Love not a god of damnation. I'm hanging onto that.

I've recently acquired a new good friend. A Catholic Priest called John. He's got a great view of life and where his faith fits in. He tows the party line in terms of how he leads his catholic flock but he's got a wonderful certainty of a God of Love and his compassion for all. He turned me onto a book by the late Roman Catholic leader Cardinal Basil Hume - “One in Christ: Unity & Diversity in the Church Today”. I've looked through some of the stuff he's selling and above all there's a great quote: "Christian unity is a gift from God ... It is also a process of growth. I would distrust anybody who tries to indicate to me what the end of that process will be. One step at a time...".
That resonates with me because it contains a great honesty in admitting that his church is on a journey and although they have an ultimate destination, they don't have all the directions yet.

Will they or any of us ever get to the prize?


I used to criticise the catholic church a great deal, I'm embarrassed to admit. There's still loads I don't necessarily agree with (and one or two major issues that could bring the whole church crashing to their knees in my opinion),nor do I profess to understand much about their practices but that doesn't give me the right to crash their party. I do actually think that in terms of ecumenism and their desire to see christians unfied in diversity they should be applauded.


“There Can Be Only One” is the tag line from one of my all time favourite films “Highlander”.


I'm not going to give any clever illustrations on how it helps to support my faith as in the main I just love the story and the action, despite the terrible accents of Christopher Lambert and Sean Connery.

There can only be one God. Whether it is Jesus or Allah or who ever - There can only be One supreme “being” right?

If it is the God that I believe in as a Christian, then there can only be One Christian God – not a job lot of demi gods of Methodism or Anglican or Presbyterian.

One God – One Love

Criticism from one brand of christians to other kinds of christians gets on me tits – These people are spending too much time on the defence of their flavour of religion than in practising what they believe. There is far too much scaremongering, too much finger pointing too much hysteria , too much fear and pseudo do-gooding in warning the world against the heretics who dare to espouse something different to their own beliefs.

I believe that in Jesus there is Universalism, there is a universal gospel. It is practised in different ways by different types of believers but ultimately there is a Gospel that comes from and points to Him.

As an aside. The patron of my charity  Codia, Tony Campolo has often been attacked and critiqued for his "alternative take on the bible". He was even tried in a Christian court ( is there legally such a thing?) for being a heretic! He was cleared of "the crime" but people were warned that he is dangerous because he takes the Bible too literally. Bloody Hell! What's a lad to do? You are damned if you do you are damned if you don't.
A couple of years ago we were able to host an event for Tony and his lovely wife Peggy. I found them to be wonderfully normal. Wonderfully flawed (and aware of this), and totally inspirational as agents of the message of Jesus. I couldn't give a toss that many of their enemies criticise their crusade of Social Justice or their support of the rights of homosexuals to be part of the church family. I only trust what I saw and listened to first hand and in them I saw and heard Jesus.
My wife, a non christian also spent some time with them and although she didn't get off on the “god stuff”, she couldn't help be touched by their genuine spirituality. That meant a lot to me. You see, well meaning folk have been telling me for years that “God is on Audrey's case”. I clung to that with dreams of how we would make a great team in leading a church together one day. We had a lucky escape.

However, I do believe that Audrey is on a spiritual journey and that is possibly more important to me now than she believing in the same things that I currently do.

A spiritual awareness that God IS (and that if He or She IS), is far more important as a starting block to meeting with the creator than a shed load of doctrine, dogma and hypocritical arrogant rhetoric ie my God's bigger than your God.

It saddens me that we live in a society where our differences of opinion (even amongst professing believers of the same god) are seen as primary reasons to keep us apart. What happened to inclusiveness? What happened to tolerance? What happend to Love, Acceptability and Forgiveness - No strings attached.?

I suppose my question is; "do we have to be compatible? do we have to be all conforming to believe in God.

Another friend (the Naked Pastor) posted on his blog recently; "compatibility can be the counterfeit of unity". That's a great statement.
I'd love for us Jesus believers to be unified in our acceptance that There Can Only be One. But until we all realize that it doesn't have to be the one that I personally choose to follow (i.e. "I COULD be wrong" ) then we'll never convince non believers that we have even got have our own shit together never mind that we might have an amazing story to tell that might just change their lives!

Like Mikhail Gorbachev said "Peace is not unity in similarity but unity in diversity, in the comparison and conciliation of differences" - would that there was real peace between not only different faiths but peace between different christians. Then we might all learn to see the same Jesus who does not see the different badges we all wear.Shalom.  And Rave On Rob Bell.

Good Game, Good Game - For The Record

A Statement of my Non Faith in the infallible bible 

Following on from my confessions last week. I got to thinking how I used to encourage people in my church to read our Statement Of Faith. In fact it transpired that some had never read it. I found that quite shocking at the time. I wondered how people could attend and claim to belong to an organisation without finding out what it stood for. In truth there was nothing to hide, there wasn't any subversive encouragement to worship goats or attack infidels. It was a fairly standard declaration not too dissimilar to most christian faith groups, based around the Apostles Creed which was the West's adaptation of the Nicene Creed (loosely speaking). It's the “I believe” document that church organisations ask their “members” to sign up to.

Our church had actually a rather extended version and as such I thought it important to as I say encourage folk to read it. Not only that to then ask the question - “Do I Believe That”? When I handed over the pastoral care of our church I thought it very important for me to truly question my beliefs concerning my faith. It's a bit of a strange situation to find one self in actually – surly my faith should support my beliefs? No. I don't think that is so. My faith is an intangible thing. I can put my beliefs in out right facts easily enough. But my faith is a trust in things that there are no tangible facts or out right proofs. That is why some atheists and some scientists have trouble accepting that people honestly and truly believe in an invisible god. I'll spare you the apologetic answers and evangelical diatribes I've gathered and spouted over the years (many of which I still hold to be true) to support our faith.

Opposers of faith and in particular the christian faith hate the arrogance of the christian claims. Personally I don't have a problem with that arrogance I think it goes a long way to demonstrating that you actually DO believe in something. However, it's whether the arrogance is pious and dogmatic or humble and accepting that there may indeed be alternatives but “I've checked them out and they're not for me thank you, but I respect your right to differ”.

So where was I? Ah yes, my own personal statement of faith. I decided that after I “left” our church I really should compile my own manefesto. So I did. Maybe I'll dig it out and post it up here over the next few days.

However, back to the past couple of months and weeks when I've decided that I no longer believe in the god breathed status of scripture. I thought it important to clarify my position here on my blog to a few friends who are honestly and truly in fear for my soul. I love them and thank them for this and I want them to know that I am humbled and ask that you keep to your word and continue to pray for me and mine. I believe in prayer!

Here it is then. My new (current – I will change it I'm sure in the future – I will continue to question my beliefs thoughout my life) standpoint.

I do not have faith or trust that the christian bible is the infallible, inerrant, "god breathed", word of god. 

I do not (and will not) twist scripture to my own ends or those of others - 

I have no agenda other than to better understand god and to grow closer to him though my faith in Jesus - doing my best as one of his followers. This includes reading the bible. 

I have no intent to try to convince others nor lead them astray to my non belief in the authority or divinity of the written words in the bible - these are my personal thoughts. 

I have no doubts that the belief of some (possibly all) of the writers of the books in the bible (all books including the omitted "apocryphal"texts) were inspired by their faith in god to write of him and to him. 

I am convinced that it still goes on today and that many written works of many styles, authors and many eras have true godly inspiration . 

I am not convinced that this necessarily makes the writings divine or "god breathed". 

I am open to the possibly that some writings, ancient and modern could be of a genuine supernatural nature - both biblical / scriptural and non. 

I am not convinced that all the writers of the bible were commissioned by God to write of him and to him however. 

I concur that there is power in the texts of the bible. Power to change lives. Power to convince that Jesus as portrayed, represented and taught in the bible is God - that Jesus the man was executed for his claims, died and was resurrected - thus proving his divinity. 

I declare that God has spoken to me powerfully and supernaturally through the written words in the bible - he has also done so in non biblical texts - many different and diverse texts both fact and fiction. 

I have no problem in acknowledging that he uses this and many other methods to communicate himself to me. 

I uphold the belief that the various and different translations of the bible hold a common thread in their intent and each version is as potentially valid as the next. 

Equally I maintain that non of them are by my reasoning's above automatically divine nor worthy of an inerrant status or a controlling authority. 

I believe that the bible is a wonderful collection of texts, poems, songs and documents, that serve as an amazing library of literature that can point as a signpost towards the existence of god and to the incredible revelation that Jesus is God. 

I believe the bible is a conveyor belt but not the prize. 

Dangers, Toil, Snares & Richard Dawkins.

It's official. I no longer believe in the divinity of the bible. 

There I've said it.

I read this the other day;

"The Bible is like an elderly senile citizen who is usually incoherent and out of touch with reality, but because of the love of her children (the believers) and with their denial and ingenuity of support (apologetics), she is lovingly taken by the arm and theologically helped to shuffle along".

It both tickled me and struck a nerve. Whereas I don't necessarily concur entirely with it's rather (un)veiled sarcasm, I reckon it more or less states where I am in terms of The Good Book's status with me at the mo.

I've recently had a FaceAche conversation with a friend. I call him a friend not because we go out for a pint and share a history or jokes. No, I call him a friend because he acts like one. He's a pastor of a church some of my "real friends" go to. I got into conversation with him by high jacking a post he made on his personal wall space.

The post obviously sparked a response that had been brewing and niggling me.

So I started to ask some questions and come out of the closet re my denunciation of the 4th member of the Trinity - the bible.

The exchanges that took place were in the main placid on my part and very humble from my friend.

I received some council and warnings about my non belief in the bible as totally God Breathed, but unfortunately the "argument" against me was always via the use of scriptural quotation. Unfortunate, not because there wasn't wisdom in the references (there is - the Bible is a brilliant book - the best in terms of pointing towards God and I definitely believe in God. ).. It was unfortunate because I'd already gone naked and exposed my disbelief in the bibles authority over me. Ergo I not going to be swayed by bible references.

I have no beef with people teaching the bible.

However, my problem lies with how it's messages (not The Message) is used to manipulate and control congregations. Be that conscious or unconscious. 

My mistake I suppose was to get involved with something that was non of my business ( a pastors words of encouragement to his church).. I had no right really to evangelise my non belief in the bible. There is possibly a time and place for discussions of the nature I undertook and in future I'll keep my nose out of other peoples business.

My own misgivings led me towards paths that I know deep down I'm better than. They took me into Richard Dawkins territory in terms of a potential arrogant and bigoted attack.

I may officially be a divine bible disbeliever but Dawkins is officially A Twat.

Dawkins regards the intellect as the only accessor of information – and I nearly fell into that trap.

Its it too big? Is it too small?

Who Am I? What Am I?

It seems I'm going through a spiritual adolescence. The kind of self discovery gig you go through in your mid to late teens. “Do you like me - Why do you like me? - would you really care if I was to die tomorrow?” - That kind of stuff. Except this time it's accompanied by a balding head and a widening girth rather than zits and hormones and it's got more to do with self discovery rather than my self image.

The fact that I'm on a journey of discovery was highlighted for me a couple of times over the past few days. Firstly when I watched TV on Sat night heard again the now deceased American comedian Bill Hicks “It's just a Ride” speech:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMUiwTubYu0

It made me cry. On many levels.

It made me realise that certain parts of my “christian walk” have indeed been part of the bigger ride that is the church, theology, institutionalism, dogma. I've been a part of the “work a day church” (possibly I still am?) and at the moment I've chosen to get off of that ride. Not because it was too fast (I don't like fast rides) but because it was like the ghost train – too scary, too many dark corners with demons lurking in them. Demons with names like Control and Authority. But it's ok to get off the train because after all I paid to get on, so it's my prerogative to choose to dismount cos “it's just a ride”

Secondly, I reckon Jesus tried to tell us something different about the world through his philosophies – maybe not with the same theology as Hicks but he did try to make it clear through the language and culture of the day that “you don't have to swallow or follow this shit” - meaning the religious rhetoric and control of the priests and the Pharisees. They didn't like it did they. They had a lot invested on the ride. “Shut him up” was the order.

Lastly. The end part just tickled my hippy nerve a bit. “Here's what you can do to change the world, right now, to a better ride. Take all that money that we spend on weapons and defence each year, and instead spend it feeding, clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, for ever, in peace”. - Beautiful words Bill. Too political? Or worse mixing politics with religion? You bet your arse it is.

I might be wrong but I reckon Jesus (being God apart .....) was a bit of a political hippy. His message of The Kingdom of God being for the here and now and not some pie in the sky when you die deal was full of that last Hicks paragraph. Justice and equality for all. Don't take my word on this though. There are over 2000 bits in the Bible that tell christians that.

Check em out.

Also as I re read Jesus own mission statement ; “God’s spirit is upon me, He has sent me to bring good news to the poor, to bind up the broken hearted, to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed,.”

I can't help but reflect how literally this passage is taken in terms of it's Spiritual connotations. I've no doubt that it is a proclamation from Jesus that he is the “Chosen One”, that he is in fact God (no wonder the religious folk were pissed off. However, I think it it says so much more and I'm pretty sure Jesus meant it to. It's speaks of the spiritually poor and the literal poor. It speaks of the spiritually blind and also of the physically disadvantaged. I reckon the message Jesus was delivering was for the people of the day and for the people of today. I think he had a here and now justice and mercy agenda. It's definitely pertinent in England at this moment in the shadow of the recent riots. I'm not a great fan of ex prime minister Blair (even less so of the current leader and his puppy) but I agree with his recent statement on the riots when he said;

“I do think there are major issues underlying the anxieties reflected in disturbances and protests in many nations. One is the growing disparity of incomes not only between poor and rich but between those at the top and the aspiring middle class”.

I'm of the opinion that the splits in society are growing and that folk are frustrated by the concept of the haves and have nots whilst living in a must have society. Why? My thoughts at this time are down to the poverty of aspiration and lack of vision for how to get out of the social rut.

It's IS doable. It always has been. I did it and my best friend from my school days did it. We both grew up in poor working class families from a mining community. But we were allowed to dream, we were encouraged to have ambitions. I'm not sure that the same liberty to aspire to “better things” is encouraged either in family homes nor in broken communities.

Another thing that happened to make me realise my “teenage angst” was receiving an excellent thank you card from my friend Rachel which speaks for itself given my current position and state of mind: 

Finally for today, my friend Redhead encouraged me in a FaceAche post concerning my reluctance to spend time around god botherers that “There is hope beyond the cynical and disenfranchised phase”. My response was that I am very happy being cynical and disenfranchised. I honestly am.

It's about choices isn't it? “But it doesn't matter because: it's just a ride. And we can change it anytime we want. It's only a choice. No effort, no work, no job, no savings, and money. A choice, right now, between fear and love. The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your doors, buy guns, close yourselves off. The eyes of love, instead, see all of us as one”.

And right now I choose to grow me hair and explore space.

Who am I? What am I?   

Today I am that fearful creature – a existentialist – I am Zen Dog

The Holy Spiggot!

We all make misteaks

Based on my Blog "The Joy of Texts" earlier in the week can I add briefly:

Signed up christians of Orthodox faiths in the main would claim that the Bible is infallible. Or some "inerrant." "'Inerrant' means there are no errors; 'infallible' means there can be no errors." - no mistakes then. Hmmm. Well I disagree. The original ancient languages of Hebrew and Greek are still being translated, the new translations hold new meanings, sometimes dramatically so and as such I find Biblical texts / scripture very difficult to accept on an intellectual level, as Plenary – absolute truth – absolutely “God breathed”. God inspired no doubt but directly out of Gods gob? I think not. God I reckon wouldn't make mistakes as obvious as typo's and mispronunciations.

For many disillusioned god botherers and many many more atheists this has become a key stone to their fading faith or lack of it.

It needs far more discussion than the few lines I'm offering up now but as a thumbnail sketch of my current position I'd like to state for the record that it doesn't bother me a jot (in terms of my faith in Jesus) that there are questionable and contradictory elements to the holy book of christians. It is THE most incredible signpost to God in my opinion. It does bother me however, that even though this is common knowledge amongst theologians, ministers, priests, vicars, pastors etc that the text is treated as The Law and that questionable contents are used and abused to pressurise or control people. Surely, this wouldn't be a loving God's plan? And I do believe in a loving and compassionate God.

So why did bring this up again? Well actually it was so I could just lend a bit of support to my brother Dave. Dave's a stinking heathen of an atheist and I love him very much. He made a mistake reading an appointment date for some pretty important hospital tests that he thought he'd be having today. It's actually next week. So in making the mistake he's caused himself quite a bit of distress and I dare say anguish as he was waiting and now has to wait even longer. I'd just like to say Dave, we all make mistakes mate and at least your misunderstanding probably wont lead to any wars or persecution. Shalom.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh-eMuIVGgU

Shit Happens - Don't Blame God

Life, Death & Do-Do

My friend Redhead wrote a great piece on her blog this morning.  I suggest you check it out and read her story too.  
http://sallyanndyer.wordpress.com/2011/08/18/lucky-to-be-alive/

Tragedy makes my faith stronger too, but my response is less eloquent than hers -  Shit happens - Don't Blame God:

Close-to-complete Ideology and Religion Shit List

• Taoism: Shit happens.

• Confucianism: Confucius say, "Shit happens."

• Buddhism: If shit happens, it isn't really shit.

• Zen Buddhism: Shit is, and is not.

• Zen Buddhism #2: What is the sound of shit happening?

• Hinduism: This shit has happened before.

• Islam: If shit happens, it is the will of Allah.

• Islam #2: If shit happens, kill the person responsible.

• Islam #3: If shit happens, blame Israel.

• Catholicism: If shit happens, you deserve it.

• Protestantism: Let shit happen to someone else.

• Presbyterian: This shit was bound to happen.

• Episcopalian: It's not so bad if shit happens, as long as you serve the right wine with it.

• Methodist: It's not so bad if shit happens, as long as you serve grape juice with it.

• Congregationalist: Shit that happens to one person is just as good as shit that happens to another.

• Unitarian: Shit that happens to one person is just as bad as shit that happens to another.

• Lutheran: If shit happens, don't talk about it.

• Fundamentalism: If shit happens, you will go to hell, unless you are born again. (Amen!)

• Fundamentalism #2: If shit happens to a televangelist, it's okay.

• Fundamentalism #3: Shit must be born again.

• Judaism: Why does this shit always happen to us?

• Calvinism: Shit happens because you don't work.

• Seventh Day Adventism: No shit shall happen on Saturday.

• Creationism: God made all shit.

• Secular Humanism: Shit evolves.

• Christian Science: When shit happens, don't call a doctor - pray!

• Christian Science #2: Shit happening is all in your mind.

• Unitarianism: Come let us reason together about this shit.

• Quakers: Let us not fight over this shit.

• Utopianism: This shit does not stink.

• Darwinism: This shit was once food.

• Capitalism: That's MY shit.

• Communism: It's everybody's shit.

• Feminism: Men are shit.

• Chauvinism: We may be shit, but you can't live without us...

• Commercialism: Let's package this shit.

• Impressionism: From a distance, shit looks like a garden.

• Idolism: Let's bronze this shit.

• Existentialism: Shit doesn't happen; shit IS.

• Existentialism #2: What is shit, anyway?

• Stoicism: This shit is good for me.

• Hedonism: There is nothing like a good shit happening!

• Mormonism: God sent us this shit.

• Mormonism #2: This shit is going to happen again.

• Wiccan: An it harm none, let shit happen.

• Scientology: If shit happens, see "Dianetics", p.157.

• Jehovah's Witnesses: >Knock< >Knock< Shit happens.

• Jehovah's Witnesses #2: May we have a moment of your time to show you some of our shit?

• Jehovah's Witnesses #3: Shit has been prophesied and is imminent; only the righteous shall survive its happening.

• Moonies: Only really happy shit happens.

• Hare Krishna: Shit happens, rama rama.

• Rastafarianism: Let's smoke this shit!

• Zoroastrianism: Shit happens half on the time.

• Church of SubGenius: BoB shits.

• Practical: Deal with shit one day at a time.

• Agnostic: Shit might have happened; then again, maybe not.

• Agnostic #2: Did someone shit?

• Agnostic #3: What is this shit?

• Satanism: SNEPPAH TIHS.

• Atheism: What shit?

• Atheism #2: I can't believe this shit!

• Nihilism: No shit.

• Narcisism: I am the shit!

• And of course we must add...

• Alcoholics Anonymous: Shit happens-one day at a time!

               

- With thanks to Dan The JayWalker

The Joy of Texts

A Conversation on FaceAche Yesterday:

ORIGINAL POST: The Christ Paul met was not the historical Jesus in the flesh, but the risen and eternal Christ that had exploded into history for him—and for us. His most common single phrase in all his letters is “en Cristo,” his code word for a life and energy field that fills and surrounds everything. This cosmic Christ is a “knowing” that you only come to by personal experience. You cannot prove it to anybody who is not there herself. ( RR again)

·
REPLY: ‎"Life and energy field" is not a scriptural phrase or category. The New Testament says that only Christians are in Christ, and therefore the concept of being in Christ most definitely cannot refer to a life and energy field that fills and surrounds everything. This is a new age concept with no foundation in Scripture whatsoever.
ME - So what? - I believe 100% that Jesus is God - I have faith in Jesus, I follow Him, I worship Him. I don't believe in scripture - Do we worship the same or a different Jesus?
"REPLYER” If anyone is in Christ they are a new creation" (2 Corinthians 5:17). So How can in Christ mean a life and energy field surrounding everything, without the whole world having been saved and reborn? This is unscriptural and bogus: Ii don't care who RR is they are out of the New Testament here.
ME: I repeat so what? Can you only believe in Jesus if you follow (and quote) the New Testament as total truth. Would your faith in Jesus be worthless if you no longer used the guide book? Would Jesus still have faith in you?
ORIGINAL POSTER Oooh! A big discussion! You can all decide what you think for yourselves - I am not taking sides! Yes, good evangelical viewpoint, REPLYER. The RR is Richard Rohr, a Franciscan priest: he often says controversial things and uses worldly words to make his point, but he is a true follower of Jesus. His point about the 'Cosmic Christ' is what Phil says - Jesus fills everything. Yes, He is the only Saviour! Read some more Rohr and you'll get more where 'the dude' is coming from.
Ray - do you really not believe in Scripture at all? You are a worse case than I thought! ;-)
NEW POST: Can anyone else "hear" ORIGINAL's celebration of Jesus? Why not paint our glorious Jesus with all the colours from this awesome Universe's palette? I know ORIGINAL - she is not advocating a universalist pantheism. Her quote might borrow concepts from quantum physics; and perhaps the discontinuity between the historical Jesus of Nazareth and the post-Resurrection Christ of faith is a little too pronounced but, to be fair, it is impossible to contain all balanced truth in one sentence isnt it? Provided that the basic christology is correct then what's the problem? In fact her christology is so correct that when I look at her I see Jesus. And when I grow up I want to be like ORIGINAL and who knows, I might even become more like Jesus...
ORIGINAL POSTER: WHAAHH! “NEW POST”! You men are all so serious and heavy duty! And guess what - I love you all - Anglican vicar with wonderful wooden cross round neck, crazy poet and provocateur, sometime red-haired drummer aka Animal, slightly slipped questioning ex charismatic... You are ALL my brothers and Dad says 'Love one another' So there! ;-)
ME: I am in a bad way aren't I “ORIGINAL”! I'm just waiting for the thunderbolt and & my bits to explode ! I don't Believe in the Bible. I trust in it's wisdom, but I no longer accept it's inner rant ( spelling mine) and plenary status. I find it's constant use as a lever very controlling. I have used and abused it when I pastored, and I have had it used as a weapon against me. I have no problems with people who do believe the god breathed title it has acquired although I do get angry when scripture is dogmatically applied. Dogma dulls the wits. We can all get clever, clever and play theological scriptural tennis but in the end the ball will go out of play. Your application of the teachings of Richard Rohr fit perfectly into the conversation and your open and enquiring mind is to be applauded.
ORIGINAL POSTER then gave out my blog address: www.alwayspersonalneverprivate.blogspot.com They said - You might find a lot you agree with! They then said - Thanks for the kind words and support, guys. I love the Scriptures but they are of course written by men (no women?) and open to all sorts of interpretation... We have had some set interpretations and now they are being questioned more and more. Nothing to be scared of - God is bigger than that: God is LOVE xx

So there we are a conversation about differences in approach to worshipping the same God. Or is it the same God? The REPLYER never got back to us in answer to my questions. Maybe they couldn't be arsed or maybe they are too steeped in the religion and dogma as I suggested to risk mixing with we unclean sorts to carry on the discussion.

The Jesus I follow used to get pretty pissed off with the overtly religious sorts around him. They were known as Pharisees. Jesus accused them of hypocrisy and pretentiousness, and pronounced upon them a succession of “woes” - his exclamation of great sorrow and distress in their ways – at one point calling them a brood of vipers! Something tells me he wasn't enamoured with religiosity.

Neither am I that's why I said I get angry with closed minds which in my opinion leads to closed hearts and the kind of exclusivity that REPLYER suggests - “Christians Only”.

It was great that the “NEW POSTER came to support the ORIGINAL POSTER with which if simplified into plain English would be a great statement of faith. I whole heartedly agree on one point when they say “it is possible to contain all balanced truth in one sentence isnt it”? - I reckon you can ;

“God IS”

Still I could be wrong ( it has to happen one day) and if so maybe I need to say sorry and repent (my arse). The timing of my friend The Naked Pastor was excellent with his cartoon today which begins this blog.

Anyhow – Following this exchange I've some food for thought for a couple of other things I might want to share with you............... Catch you later Plebs.

PS Thanks Redhead for being the ORIGINATOR!

The Wisdom of Baba Billy

Baba Billy

"Before you judge a man, walk a mile in his shoes. After that, who cares? ...He's a mile away and you've got his shoes".

"I don't believe in angels and I have trouble with the whole God thing. I don't want to say I don't believe in God, but I don't think I do. But I believe in people who do".

"If Jesus was a Jew, how come he has a Mexican first name"?


"It seems to me that Islam and Christianity and Judaism all have the same god, and he's telling them all different things".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKMjmzkNfxs&feature=related