For the New Year-

Fun for the New Year- Barry McGuire sing Bullfrogs and Butterflies, and this is better than the "Eve of Destruction." Jesus changes everything

The Bhagavad-Gita, the Bible: grief and being human

My final religious studies class was World Religions. I have in the past written about my teacher who was a Wiccan and taught all religions from an eastern slant. She was not a religious studies teacher by profession but headed the Women’s Studies department. We did become friends as I endured her ‘blessed be’ at the end of every class and she endured my evangelical outlook. But realizing I was not going to really receive the teaching I needed on world religions I threw up my hands and spent the rest of my semester exploring, in papers, the difference between Christianity and other world religions.

One of the papers I wrote was entitled, “The Bhagavad-Gita, The New Testament: Grief and Being Human.”

Here is the paper slightly redone including a change in the title:

Both the Bhagavad-Gita and the Bible deal with grief. (1) An emotion that is common among humans. One sacred book affirms grief as an important part of being human, while the other book suggests that grief misleads and directs people away from reality. Exploring both the Bhagavad-Gita and the Bible allows the reader to understand which sacred text affirms people in their humanity.

The negative influence of grief in the Bhagavad-Gita is expressed by Arjuna who, while facing a huge battle, dialogues with Krishna, one of the manifestations of Vishnu and Arjuna’s charioteer. Arjuna expresses his desire not to fight. He is concerned that he will be killing “fathers, and grandfathers, teachers, uncles, sons, brothers, grandsons, father-in-law, dear friends, and many other familiar faces.” (31) Arjuna gives as his argument not only the pain of killing loved ones but also devastation, vice, mixing of caste, and broken families.

Krishna’s reply to him, which sets the basis for the philosophical foundations of the Bhagavad-Gita, is the Gita’s form of renunciation. The Bhagavad-Gita completely sets aside the human act of grief. Krishna says, “Your words are wise, Arjuna, but your sorrow is for nothing. The truly wise mourn neither for the living nor for the dead.” (38) And “Death is certain for the born. Rebirth [reincarnation] is certain for the dead. You should not grieve for what is unavoidable.” (38)

His statements are based on the viewpoint, “that which is non-existent can never come into being, and that which is can never cease to be. Those who have known the innermost Reality know also the nature of is and is not.” (36)Here ‘is not’ is the universe; ‘is’ is the one the only reality. The Atman is reality, the one, Brahman within the illusion of the universe including humanity.

According to the Bhagavad-Gita it doesn’t matter which path one takes to realize the Atman within; it may be the “yoga of right action” or contemplation. The important point is that the seeker understands the identity of the Atman as Brahman. Krishna emphasized the monistic world view when he stated “Who sees the separate/lives of all creatures/united in Brahman/brought forth from Brahman/Himself finds Brahman/not subject to change/Is the infinite Atman/without beginning/beyond the gunas [three material strands that define personality].” (105) In other words the Brahman is the same as the Atman, and the world that the Atman operates within is not real but illusion.

While Krishna is pictured as a personal deity, and the followers of Krishna are encouraged toward a more active devotional life (the Bhakti Marga tradition) there is still the view of the non-importance and non-reality of the material world which marks most of the variations of Eastern thought. This allows for a strong development of ethics for the sake of moksha, that is, the realization of Atman as Brahman. But it also destroys the personal emotions of the individual. If one is forgiving and contented, it is also because the individual has not been hurt by the other, nor has he hurt the other. All of that is simply an illusion.

For example, Krishna tells Arjuna, Dream not you do/ The deed of the killer/ Dream not the power/ Is yours to command it.” (37)

The New Testament letter written by Paul to the Thessalonians states, “But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who sleep, that you may not grieve, as do the rest who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. (1 Thess. 4:13-14)”

This was not a rebuke, but a word of comfort to those Paul knew had “received the word in much tribulation.” The early Christians had grief but not without hope, and that hope had a great deal to do with the resurrection of the body. In fact, Jesus wept as he stood at the tomb of his friend Lazarus, and then he called Lazarus from the tomb.

Paul also wrote to the Corinthian Church, “For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation; but the sorrow of the world produces death. (2 Corinthians 7: 10)” Because of a worldview that not only posits God as personal and loving, but also as a God who created the universe as a reality out of nothing, the material world has importance. Grief over sin and death is allowed since it is real sin and real loss. The grief only becomes useless when the person experiencing it refuses to turn toward God for gifts, that is, the gift of forgiveness and life. Humans experience grief and joy as reality.

The Bhagavad-Gita only affirms the one, Brahman. All else is illusion. It does not affirm the reality of the universe nor the relationships that promote shared emotions among people. It offers several Eastern ways of moksha, the most important being Bhaki Marga, the way of devotion. And devotion implies detachment from all human emotion. Yet, the goal of such devotion is a loss of distinction between the individual and the one. All but the one reality is erased including the individual.

On the other hand, the Bible affirms not only the personal and transcendent Lord, but the reality of the universe and the distinction of creature from creator. Grief is treated as an important human emotion and belongs not only to humanity but also to the incarnate Lord, Jesus Christ.

1.For this I have used, Bhagavad-Gita: The Song of God, Translated by Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood, Intro, Aldous Huxley, paperback edition(A Mentor Book, New American Library 1972)

Islam's connection to Christianity versus Judaism's connection

He turned his eyes about him; his mouth opened and his lips curled back over his teeth. Then he seemed to make an effort towards control, and began to mutter something to himself. ‘Not much yet, lord god!’ Richardson heard. ‘Slowly, lord, slowly! I’ll make sacrifice—the blood of the sacrifice,’ and at that a sudden impatient anger caught the young man.

‘Fool,’ he cried out, ‘there’s only one sacrifice, and the God of gods makes it, not you.’ (Charles Williams The Place of the Lion)

Many years ago, when I began college, I took some classes that would give me knowledge about some of my immediate experiences. For instance my husband and I, with our six children, often made trips to an orphanage in Baja so I took a class on Mexican history. The teacher was intrigued with the history of the Aztec period so we didn’t get very far into the modern history of Mexico. We stood far too long around the bloody altars of the Aztec’s human sacrifices.

To supplement my knowledge of the Hebrew Bible I took a wonderful class on Jewish history taught by Mrs. Gabriel. That class was one of my favorite classes even though the teacher used the book The Passover Plot to teach about the beginning of Christianity. Yes, I understand that Jewish people do not believe Mary was a virgin or that Jesus rose from the dead after being crucified.

So Walid Khalidi, the scholar who spoke at the UN this year (2009) on the "Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people" did not shock me when he inferred that Jewish scholars held some very poor views of Jesus and Mary.

But I was shocked while listening to the videos of Khalidi’s UN speech posted at the Israel/Palestine Mission Network of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Khalidi, who is speaking about his concern that Israel is trying to make Jerusalem a Jewish Capital, in the second video, attempts to make the case that Islam is closer to Christianity than Judaism because of the former’s high regard for Jesus and Mary.

But while Islam does hold Mary and Jesus in high regard one might ask, “Which Jesus and Mary would that be?” Or “Why is the Hebrew Bible Sacred to Christians but not the Qur’an?” And of great importance to those who love Jesus and love their brothers and sisters in Christ, “Why in light of Khalidi’s appeal to the relationship between Muslims and Christians do most Islamic countries persecute those Christians who evangelize Muslims?”

Khalidi believes it is wonderful that the Muslim God did not allow Jesus to suffer crucifixion and instead raised him to heaven to return at the end of time. And he also sees the Islamic belief that Mary was a virgin as a sign of Islam’s strong connection to Christianity. But Islam’s connection to Christianity falls and is broken on the person of Jesus Christ as do all other attempts at redefining the biblical Jesus.

To the Muslim, Jesus is not God and so, although Mary may have been a virgin, she was not carrying God in her womb, but merely a perfect human who was to be a prophet. And if Jesus was neither God nor died on the cross, and therefore was not raised from the dead, then as Paul stated, our Christian faith is worthless and our sins are not forgiven. (The sacrifice of Jesus on the cross for our sins is the holy Trinity’s great gift.) But this worthlessness of the Christian faith is doubly certain without the Hebrew Scriptures for then Christ for us would have no meaning at all.

John Calvin was quick to remind his readers that the Jewish sacrifices and their sacraments looked forward to Jesus Christ the perfect sacrifice. And when Jesus taught his disciples, it was always from the deep riches of the Hebrew text. When Jesus walked the road to Emmaus with two of his disciples after his resurrection, he explained his mission, suffering and resurrection from the Hebrew Scriptures, including the law, the prophets and the writings. His words, “Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into his glory?” It is from the Old Testament text that we know Jesus not from the Qur’an.

If Khalidi wants to prove there is a close connection between Christianity and Islam he must go to the biblical text and understand who Jesus Christ is within that text. He could then reframe his assertion offering a true understanding of who Christians believe Jesus is. Next he must understand the close connection between the Jewish and Christian community since they share the same sacred text, the Hebrew Bible. They also share the same biblical understanding about God and humanity. That is that humans are all sinful and in need of God’s forgiving grace. And God, for both peoples, is the one who provides the sacrifice:

“Then Abraham raised his eyes and looked and behold, behind him a ram caught in the thicket by his horns; and Abraham took the ram and offered him up for a burnt offering in the place of his son. Abraham called the name of that place The Lord Will Provide, as it is said to this day, ‘In the mount of the Lord it will be provided. (Genesis 22:13-14)”

Finally Khalidi must plead for his own faith leaders to stop persecuting Christian converts as well as those Christians whose communities have existed since the first centuries of Christendom.

A merry, holy Christmas to all of us

" But as for you Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity. Therefore He will give them up until the time when she who is in labor has borne a child. Then the remainder of his brethren will return to the sons of Israel. And He will arise and shepherd his flock in the strength of the Lord, in the majesty of the name of the Lord His God. And they will remain because at that time He will be great to the ends of the earth. This One will be our peace."(Micah 5:2-5a)

The goddess, Belhar & Accra at Stony Point

Two friends, who probably don’t know each other, sent me notices about a conference at Stony Point, “Confessing When Empire Trembles: Belhar and Accra Confessions in Conversation--
A Colloquium on North American & Caribbean Reformed Justice Theology.” I noticed immediately that the title of the conference does not say confessing Christ, but just confessing.

I am unfamiliar with most of the speakers, but one does stand out. That is Rebecca Todd Peters, Professor at Elon University and Editor and contributor to Justice in a Global Economy: Strategies for Home, Community, and World. Peters has also written a contributing chapter to the book Body and Soul” Rethinking Sexuality as Justice-Love. The chapter is entitled, “Embracing God as Goddess: Exploring Connections between Female Sexuality, Naming the Divine and Struggling for Justice.”

One announcement about the Conference suggests that the speakers are very good, and another that the Accra Confession is “non-doctrinal” in its critique. Both of these thoughts contribute to my own perceptions of the problems looming in the Church if Belhar is adopted into our Book of Confessions. The Accra Confession is about economics with a rather hazy socialist point of view. While it makes some good points about the needs of the marginalized and needy it gives economic definitions and interpretations that many in the Reformed churches would not agree with.

Probably Accra’s biggest problem is not the stance it is coming from, socialism versus capitalism, but rather the idea that a confession for the Church could be a confession about economics no matter from which position. A Confession must first confess Christ and then allow all Church problems to fall under his Lordship.

But that Peters is one of the speakers for this conference is telling. She has been very much involved in goddess theology as well as the Re-Imagining movement. Peters' contention is that we need a changing god for our changing times. She sees the idea of an unchanging God being in contradiction to the evil in the world. In Body and Soul Peters is also looking for an image of God that would allow for gay sex and sex without the boundaries of marriage. Beyond sexual issues Peters sees the idea of an unchanging God as obstructive towards the world’s poor.

She writes:

“Given that tragedy and pain are part of the human experience, a theology of an immovable God is woefully inadequate to help the majority of the world’s people make sense of their lives. For people who experience lives of relative comfort and privilege, this theological construct may sometimes suffice. For those with a steady paycheck, a healthy family, a decent education, and the comfort and power to secure a First World existence, the image of God as all good, all powerful, and unchangeable can contribute to a personal sense of ‘blessedness’ or well-being. It enables an interpretation of life circumstances as ‘blessings’ that God has bestowed. As long as one remains inside that world, this theology may remain adequate.”(164)

Peters sets up a straw person since most orthodox Christians find their comfort in Jesus Christ and his redemption. On the other hand if the Christian finds their comfort in material things they have failed to consider the unchanging God of the Bible who demands total discipleship. A changing god or goddess or even a changing universal force is no answer.

Peters goes on to suggest that women’s life changes make a good model for how God could be perceived. Stating that “If God is imaged as a divine being ‘in control,’ then control itself becomes a desirable moral norm,” Peters sees a model of non-control in such sexual reactions as orgasm and erection. She states:

“A God/ess open to change, vulnerability, and partnership exercises a nontraditional form of power rooted in relationality and reciprocity. These, then, can become the moral ground for ethical behavior in the world, including sexual behavior.” (168)

Notice in all of this there is no mention of Jesus Christ. And yet all of the problems Peters is grappling with are wrapped up in him. As the Christian faces evil in the world, including their own sinful nature, Jesus Christ is the Father’s answer. How can a Christian leave that out of the equation? And how can orthodox believers trust a conference about confessions when at least one of its speakers desires to change God’s revelation of himself. And how can we, in the midst of a denomination that allows leadership among those who reject biblical authority and in many cases the Lordship of Christ, trust these confessions when they do not have a strong focus on confessing Jesus Christ as Lord of the Church.

Fourth Sunday of Advent: The suffering servant King, who came and is coming

“Surely our grief’s He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed. All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; but the Lord has caused the iniquities of us all to fall on Him. (Isaiah 53:4-6)”

“I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven One like the Son of Man was coming, and He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him. And to Him was given dominion, glory and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations and men of every language might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which will not pass away; and His kingdom is one which will not be destroyed. (Daniel 7:13-14)”

Does that all sound like Easter rather than Advent and Christmas? And how is that all reconciled; how is the suffering reconciled with the ruling king? That is the Christmas/Advent story complete, that the Incarnate One, Jesus, fully God, fully human, took on our flesh and suffered for our sinfulness. But also that He is the King and his dominion is everlasting.

Before the text in Daniel speaks of the Son of Man it speaks of the Ancient of Days.(Daniel 7:9-10) John Calvin in his commentary speaks of the Ancient of Days ascending to sit on his throne writing that the meaning has to do with the whole Incarnation. Now at the birth of Christ the Glory of God is revealed in his person. And although Calvin does not say it, the Messiah Jesus reveals God as much in his compassionate suffering as in his power over all powers of evil. His death for our sins speaks to the graciousness of our God.

But Calvin goes on to write of the importance of Daniel's vision for the Church. The Church in her trouble and weakness must look to the suffering servant who now has the final right of dominion. Calvin writes:

“For by these words he teaches familiarly and openly, why Christ is the Supreme King, namely, for the perpetual government of his Church in this world. We ought to look up to heaven in very deed whenever the state of the Church is under consideration, since its happiness is neither earthly, nor perishable, nor temporary, though nothing sublunary is either firm or perpetual. But when the Prophet says Christ’s dominion is eternal, he doubtless signifies the constant endurance of his monarchy, even to the end of the world, when he shall gather his people together to a happy life and an eternal inheritance. Although, therefore, celestial immortality is comprehended under these words, yet in a former passage the Prophet pointed out the perpetual existence of the Church in this world, because Christ will defend it, although daily subject to numberless causes of destruction. And who would not assert the almost daily perishing of the Church, if God did not wonderfully preserve it by the hand of his only begotten Son? Hence it is correct to understand the phrase, His kingdom shall be the kingdom of an age. And thus we receive no common consolation, when we see the Church tossed about amidst various fluctuations, and almost buried and devoured by continual shipwrecks, yet Christ is ever stretching forth his hand to preserve it, and to save it from every sorrowful and horrible species of destruction.”

Advent is a promise to creation, but it is first a promise to the Church, to the Sons and Daughters of the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Romans 8:18-25)

Music and Jenny

My middle daughter Jenny McHenry, the one who has six children like I do, is graduating with a BA in geography this Saturday. A BIG party is happening Sunday afternoon at my house. So I will be very busy. So for Friday and Saturday here is some great music that will hopefully bring back memories to some and just give others pleasure.

The first is Rye Cooder with, as usual some other great musicians and singers.




The other is John Renbourn on the guitar. Every so often he sings a few lines that are wonderful words; so listen carefully.