The Gist Of It

The Gist of It

So...
I helped somebody out yesterday. I was sitting at home, relaxing with my family after a day of work, and a knock came at my door. We're not very accustomed to knocks at my house, because the person who comes over to our house the most is a 2 year old who usually announces herself by laying on the doorbell five or six times. It could have been just about anybody. Turns out it was my next-door neighbor, who introduced himself as Greg (we had the strange neighborly relationship that lies merely in nods and waves, so his name was previously unknown). He needed a car, he explained, and he had noticed that we had a least two hanging around. So, could he borrow one of ours?
Now, I have to admit that there are two parts of me (and I'm beginning to fear that there always will be). There was the piece of me that immediately recoiled at such a ludicrous idea, and questioned it, thinking I didn't even know this guy and he had been arrested just weeks ago right in the complex and, way deep inside, there was the selfish urge to say no simply because the car was mine. But there was another piece of me that spoke up, not clamoring and clawing for my attention like the previous thoughts, more like a gentle whisper. "Do it," it breathed simply, "do it." Even so, I poked my head back in the house to "double-check" with my wife (though I knew already what she was going to say, being the beautiful soul that she is) and I grabbed my keys and handed them over. "Thanks," was all he said, and that was all he needed to.
I don't know what your reactions are at this point in the story. I could be called an idiot, and justifiably so; a rube, a patsy. Or I could be called generous, or kind. I relay this story both to be funny (the whole thing was a bit unique) and to make a point that I've been itching to since our discussion below. In my posts, including the previous one, "Is Abortion Biblical?", I have strove to discuss issues as gently and with as much humility as possible. From the responses I received, it seems as if I have failed to attain that goal, to some respect. I have been called judgmental, uncaring, unloving, idiotic, etc...I have to admit, that I was truly surprised at some of these comments. I know that in discussing an emotional issue such as abortion I am bound to get some incensed feedback, and yet I was hoping, because I had limited the breadth of my treatment (i.e. I had chosen not to discuss whether abortion was wrong, but whether the Bible spoke positively about abortion) that I would receive constructive comments about my argumentation, the use of the hebrew, the lapses in logic I might have missed. Unfortunately, it came down to drawing lines in the sand and name calling. This simply should not be.

My point is this: what I did for this fellow last night, or what God did through me, is infinitely more important than any abortion discussion on this blog, or any other blog. I probably won't change the laws of the land by ranting about them over and over again in my blog. I doubt many people will "see the light" if I turn my blog into a crusade to rid my readers of villiany, sin, and bad logic. If abortion was ever to become illegal, I doubt the Supreme Court will begin their opinion with "you see, Simon said..." And yet what I did for this gentlemen last night will echo into eternity. I only hope that our genorosity gave him pause, and my greatest wish is that one day when he comes by again he will ask, "why are you so trusting and giving when the rest of this world folds in on itself like a selfish only child?" And I will have an answer for him; in fact, I'll tell him the greatest story ever told.


"The only thing we take with us is love and the things done in love." With my dying breath, this will be my plea. I remember when I heard that, from a man whose life and love for the Lord I someday hope to emulate. I remember thinking at the time, "I have to remember that." And I have, both in my mind and, though sometimes sporadically, in my life as well. May it be our goal as the universal church. I cannot make abortion illegal, but I can love someone I meet who is living in its aftershock or struggling with that choice. I cannot make Greg a better person, but I can love him in generosity and introduce him to the One who makes all men perfect. Someone commented that if I believe babies are being murdered, why am I not storming the white house or supreme court? Simply put, that is not my place. I have made up my mind to effect change in the small circle of my life, with the knowledge that our love for others will ripple outward, concentric circles with the ability to multiply beyond our small and seemingly insignificant circle.
This is the brilliant simplicity of the Christian life. Love the one you're with (Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young ring a bell?). Husbands, love your wives. Wives, love your husbands. Both of you, love your children. Christians, love your neighbors. Church, love the world. The rest will fall into place.
By the way, Greg showed up at about nine p.m., and asked if he could borrow the car for longer. I said of course, but I asked him to bring it back by eight in the morning. This morning, at 7:55, he knocked on the door with the keys to the car. I was shocked when he showed up on time. I say this because I don't want you to get the idea that I'm an incredibly generous and amazing person. Frankly, I had doubts he was going to return the car at all. He was moving out of next door. Why couldn't he just take the car wherever he was going? At the same time, even if he had taken the car, I would have had the most beautiful and inexplicable satisfaction that comes when you know you are in the midst of God's will. This is what makes me a Christian. Everything else is just words...

posted by Team Kerbel @ 4:08 PM 37 comments

Is Abortion Biblical?

All right, I have to do it. I have to be controversial again; but it's only because someone else's site incited me to action, not because I savor controversy. I visited a web site today that argues not only for the morality of abortion, but also attempts to show the bibical support for abortion. And that is what made me kind of distressed. I think that non-Christian's belief about abortion is typical and not at all surprising because it fits their worldview so well. I am not shocked, in other words, when a non-Christian tells me they're pro-choice. In fact I'm more shocked when they tell me that they're pro-life (by the way, through the course of this post, I will not use the anti-abortion or anti-life monikers in an effort of fairness). But when a Christian is not only pro-choice but also believes that the Bible teaches it, I prick up my ears. This will not be a case against abortion using psychological evidence, or medical evidence, or logical deduction (of course, these are evidences many use to support pro-life arguments, which I think is fair); that will be a post for another time. Instead I wish to focus on what the Bible says about abortion. Remember, this is not "is abortion wrong" but "is abortion biblical"? I will be as fair as I know how. I admit that many people do not focus on what the Bible teaches about abortion because of the paucity of passages for or against abortion. We opt to argue from this position: abortion equals murder, the bible says murder is wrong, therefore abortion is wrong. Let's put this argument aside for one moment and look at what the Bible says. I will be specifically responding to arguments made by a gentlemen over at "Fighting the Right" , which is a website that is good to study, but hard on the stomach.

"For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother's womb. I will give thanks to Thee, for Thou art fearfully wonderful (later texts were changed to read "for I am fearfully and wonderfully made"); wonderful are Thy works, and my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from Thee, when I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth. Thine eyes have seen my unformed substance; and in Thy book they were all written, the days that were ordained for me, when as yet there was not one of them." Psalm 139

This text is often used to support the fact that each one of us were knit intimately and lovingly by God himself as we were still gestating in the womb. A powerful support of a fetus being important and loved by God, and therefore to be protected by harm? Not so, says the detractor.
First of all, his note that "later texts were changed to read 'for I am fearfully and wonderfully made'" is indicative of his whole bias towards biblical belief and scholarship. Here's what really happened. There is a textual variance between ancient manuscripts as to what this text should read. The Septuaguint, the Syriac, and the Latin Vulgate translate the verse as above. The Masoretic Text and the Targum translate it as "fearfully and wonderfully made." So which one's right? There's arguments for both sides, but suffice it to say that all major translations other than the KJV (NIV, NKJV, NASB, NRSV, etc..) follow the Masoretic reading. But this is just an aside.
Here's his argument concerning this passage:
"Although this passage does make the point that God was involved in the creation of this particular human being, it does not state that during the creation the fetus is indeed a person. According to Genesis, God was involved in the creation of every living thing, and yet that doesn't make every living thing a full human person. In other words, just because God was involved in its creation, it does not mean terminating it is the same as murder. It's only murder if a full human person is destroyed."
This is called "begging the question", boys and girls. Notice his statement that "it's only murder if a full human person is destroyed." But isn't that what we are trying to gather? At what point a person is considered a person in the eyes of God? By using this passage what we are trying to prove is that God is intimately involved in the creation of a human being and that he knows and is familiar with who we are even before we are born into this world. In other words, who gets to define what a "full human person" is?
He then proceeds to prove that we are taking this verse out of context. He quotes many verses in the Psalms where David speaks of God forsaking him, and then asks "why do we apply Psalm 139 to our lives when we don't apply these other verses to our own lives?" He assumes there are only two ways to understand Bible verses: in context and out of context. This is an overly simple view, however. There are many different way we must interpret Scripture to understand it correctly, and it is with great care and humility that we should attempt to do so. I would argue that Psalm 139 is didactic, a teaching portion of Scripture, a reflection upon God's omniprescence, omniscience, and creative abilities, whose truth have specific meanings in David's life and in our own. There is truth here beyond David's particular circumstances. The other verses he quotes (e.g. "Why dost Thou stand afar off, O Lord? Why dost Thou hide Thyself in times of trouble?") are situational, where David is fleeing from Saul and alone, feeling rejected by God and hopeless. There are times where this verse can apply to us and speak to us, but there are times when it does not. It is situational.
Here's Luke 1:41 and his take on it:
And it happened, when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

"As much as the anti-abortion lobby would like this to mean that all fetuses are sentient persons because one is recorded as knowing Mary's words and then leapt inside the womb, the logic is as flawed as the Isaiah misquote. Again we have a miraculous event. Again we have a divine prophet whom God had ordained since before he was conceived. And this time it's even more miraculous, because the gestating John the Baptist is reacting to the approach of Mary, who at the time was pregnant with Jesus. Unless we believe all of us are chosen before birth to be the divine prophet ordained by God to herald the arrival of Christ on earth, then we cannot claim this passage refers to us. And indeed, it does not."

Over-reaction? Maybe a little. His obsession with context is very strange. Here's my simple point: the word for "babe" in the greek is the word brephos, which is the same word for child or infant. To the biblical writers, the fetus was a child. Maybe it's too simple for our detractor, I don't know.

Our detractor then goes on to prove his case for abortion using verses from Ecclesiastes and Job, who both state that at some point in their lives that they thought it would be better to not have been born at all. To which I say, keep in mind who's doing the talking. Does the Bible say, "There is no God"(Psalm 14:1)? Than what are we doing believing in a God? I'll let you think about that one for a while. Job was a godly man, but at many points in his dialogue he was saying things that weren't in agreement with the truth. Solomon was writing his memoirs of his past life of futility and the observations he had made during that time. Simply put, he was wrong in many of the things he believed. And neither of their words should be co-opted for doctrinal instruction.

The big verse that remains to be looked at is Exodus 21:22-25:

“If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."

This is the crux for people on both sides of the fence, and it's easy to see why. If God commanded a lighter sentence for someone who killed a fetus, than the fetus' status is that of less than human in God's sight. Here are the crucial questions:
1. What is the meaning of the phrase "give birth prematurely" (lit. her baby comes out)
2. Does the "no harm follows" apply to the mother and her baby or just her mother?
3. How does this verse apply to modern-day abortion?

The phrase translated "give birth prematurely" or "miscarry" is the hebrew word "yalad" , which is the verb for "to come out, give birth." Our detractor sees fit to give us a little hebrew lesson, which I'll reproduce here:
"The word yalad is a verb that describes the process of something coming out - the departing of the fetus. Since it is describing the process, and not the result, it could be used to describe either a live birth or a miscarriage. Shakol which shows up in Hosea 9:14, is also a verb, but its meaning is to make a woman barren. Now a barren woman certainly might miscarry, but with this understanding of the word, it's clear why the writer of Exodus would not have used it since this miscarriage was caused by an accident, not by barrenness."

"yalad could be used to describe a live birth or miscarriage"--maybe in your mind, but not in the mind of those who wrote and spoke Hebrew. Of the 498 occurrences in the Old Testament, not once it is used to describe a miscarriage. In fact, every time it speaks of the result of labor it is always referring to live birth.

"Shakol's meaning is to make a woman barren"--sorry, you must not have ever read Exodus 23:26: There shall be no one miscarrying (shakol) or barren (aqar) in your land...Hmm...why would God use the word "aqar" for barreness and "shakol" for miscarriage? Is he confused as to the true meaning of the Hebrew words? Sounds like God doesn't think "shakol" is to make barren.

The phrase "her baby comes out" means exactly that: "her baby comes out." However, since yalad is never used of a miscarriage but of live births, and since there is another word that God could have used to describe a miscarriage, it can be reasonably determined that the baby came out alive.

So if the baby came out alive, what is the meaning of "no harm/harm follows"? Well, it seems obvious. If no harm occurred to the baby or the mother, than the gentlemen shall be fined for putting the baby's and the mother's life in danger. If harm occurred to either the baby or the mother, so that the baby died after birth, or the mother died or was mutilated, then the man will be held responsible by the Mosaic Law of "eye for an eye."

Last, we should look at how this verse applies to modern-day abortion. Our detractor argues that this verse, out of all the verses in the Bible, speaks most specifically of abortion. I simply do not agree. Even if I agreed that this verse said what he wanted it to say, that the accidental death of a baby was not met with the same degree of punishment as would the death of the mother, this does not in any way imaginable give our society a license for the wholesale slaughter of hundreds of millions of children. There is so little correlation as to be none. What we do today is not accidental, nor is it extremely rare, nor is it punished in any way, not even by a fine.
So does God value an unborn life less than a born life according to this passage, if it is understood as in our detractor's mind? I don't know. In all honesty, and this might seem heretical or hateful, He might. All I know is that if I lost my daughter Abby (who is 2 years old) it would be considerably harder for me than if I lost my daughter Eden (who is a week old). Now don't get me wrong; I would be devastated if I lost either, completely wrecked, out of my mind, a shadow of who I am now. And I'm not God, so I have no idea how He feels about this. I know He does not allow the murder of any human, whether two days or twenty years old. And I know I am probably very wrong about it, and in no way do I feel strongly about this. I'm just being as honest as I can.
Our detractor, meanwhile, has forsaken reason for the sake of shoe-horning his minority opinion into the pages of Scripture. Regardless of abortion passages, we have forgotten the many passages that speak of children as a blessing, as a gift from the Lord. Those should not be absent in our minds when weighing this issue. The crux always comes down to "when does life begin?", and that involves deeper questions such as "what is life?" But that's another thought for another time.

posted by Team Kerbel @ 10:42 AM 31 comments

Tech Thursday on The Gist of It

As if there weren't enough nerds...

Giving a whole new meaning to the phrase "they're watching you," the coolest new application around is Google Earth. You can move to any location on earth with the click of a button, and see beautiful detail of the Eiffel Tower, or the Golden Gate Bridge, or your ex-girlfriend's house (not that I'm encouraging that). I had so much fun pinpointing all the locations I had lived at or visited in the last two years: Grangeville Idaho, McMinnville Oregon, Thunder Bay Ontario, Santa Rosa, and my present location in Grass Valley Ca. It's so cool! You enter in an address and shoot off to that location in an instant. You can even enter in two locations and have Google Earth "drive" you from one place to another. The best part: The basic version is absolutely free! Frankly, I scratch my head at Google's marketing techniques. Maybe I'm ignorant to the whole "making money" thing, but most, if not all, of their software creations are offered at no cost, which seems detrimental to "making money." Google Desktop Search, Blogger, Hello, Picasa 2, Google Earth, are all free, and they are all wonderful pieces of software. Why pay $100 for Microsoft Digital Imaging Suite when you can get Picasa, a similar or better application, absolutely free? And why does Google offer them all for free? Is it to spread brand recognition? Are these lost leaders? I just don't understand. Someone please enlighten me. And while you're at it, download Google Earth.

posted by Team Kerbel @ 10:04 AM 6 comments

Eden Glory Kerbel

"Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord; and the fruit of the womb is His reward. As arrows in the hands of a mighty man; so are the children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them; they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate." Psalms 127

So:
On 12:38 AM early friday morning, July 15th, I became a father of two. Alison had gone to the doctor on Thursday afternoon, and the doctor for the life of her could not figure out what was keeping the baby from coming out (I won't gore you with the details--no, I didn't misspell bore). Alison had been having regular contractions for the past week or so, but there was no indication that the baby was getting serious about escaping the womb. That evening, Alison had not really felt any different. When we talked to Jen and Suzanne (both of whom had very similar second labors) they warned us that if the contractions became in any way regular, that we should go to the hospital as soon as we could. So around 11 PM, Alison decided to go to bed in hopes that she would wake up in the middle of the night in labor. Well, she didn't get to sleep. She called me about two minutes after she lay down, and asked me to start packing the bags. In about five minutes, we had roused Abby out of bed and were on our way to the hospital
We got her in a wheelchair and up to the room, and within an hour she had given birth to Eden Glory Kerbel. She weighed 6 pounds and 14 ounces, and was 21 1/2 inches long. She was perfect.
Now, I'm not as good at describing a birth scene as Shannon over at Wind Scraps, but I can display pictures as well as anyone else in the blogosphere. So here's one analogy, and then some pictures: To me, birth is a lot like the Christian life. I hate seeing Alison in pain, and it's easy to lose sight of why she was in pain, why she was in such agony. When the baby comes out, though, and you are looking back on the labor, you realize that it was so incredibly worth it that you would do it again, over and over, if you could produce the same result. The suffering in our life is constructed to do the same: the Lord brings the fire, and the pain, and at many times in the clutch of anguish you lose sight of the goal, but when you have been delivered to the other side of that suffering, you realize that you would never be where you are without that fire, without achieving brokenness. I love the fact that, despite going through the most intense pain in her life, Alison is looking forward to do it again, all with an eye to the goal. May we reckon with Paul that "the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us." (Romans 8:18)

posted by Team Kerbel @ 2:18 PM 32 comments

Shout-Outs

Well the baby still isn't here. I'll have to come up with something else to talk about. So:
I think it's cool how a blog community comes into being. You find a blog because it's done by someone you know; you find it because you're surfing for people with the same interests; you join a bloggers group and check in on the others; you come upon a blog while simply surfing; and you become some strange, unrelated family, most of whom have never met each other and probably never will, bound only by the faith they share and the blogs they've so lovingly created. And the links in between. So here's a very short, incomplete list of people I know and people I've met in that big blogosphere:

Culture Zoo by Levi Nunnink
Did you ever know that you're my hero? That you're everything I would like to be? Are you a little nervous right now? Seriously, Levi is like an Uber-Simon. Everything I do he does better. I write a little; he wrote a book. I play guitar a little; he writes his own music. I want to learn how to program; he's a master. I want to work from home one day; he's well on his way to accomplishing that. You get the idea. But I'm not bitter.

Fish Bowl by Paul Legge

Always controversial, always thought provoking, always intelligently discoursed, Paul Legge's fish bowl is not for the mere guppies of the blogosphere. Be warned, o reader.

Wind Scraps by Shannon Woodward

Excellent writing, excellent insight into the still voice of God. She reminds us that He speaks to us everyday, even now. Awesome.

Save the Kittens by Crystal

Great blogging from a homeschool mother of three and devoted follower of Jesus. Check out the 31 biblical virtues to impart to your kids, going on right now!

Sister's Blog by Susan Prince

It's hard to get a picture of Susan alone. Why? Read her blog to find out.

Lastly, I must give a shout out to Tim Rosborough, whose post on July 11 made mention of my blog. The sneaky guy posted a comment on my very first post (sheaa, like I even remember my first post) and I had to seek it out. His site, the Pop Bottle God's Path (you have to read the blog for the explanation of that title) is very refreshing. Couldn't find a picture of him, though. But I'm sure he exists, notwithstanding.

Well, there you go. I know I might have missed a few of you, and I'm sorry if I did. If you react harshly and unpredictably enough in the comments page, who knows, I might have to do a Shout-Outs 2 to appease you. Which I don't mind doing. Cause that was fun.

Stay tuned for babytime!

posted by Team Kerbel @ 2:11 PM 16 comments

And the winner is...

This is it! After 106 votes for your favorite M. Night Shyamalan movie, the results have been tallied. If you think 106 votes is too small to dictate a proper majority...hey, I was getting anxious to put up another poll, OK?

According to the poll, everyone's favorite M. Night movie was:

1. The Sixth Sense (44 votes, 42%) To which I say, big surprise...

2. Unbreakable (23 votes, 22%) This was a bit of a surprise. Most girls I know hated this movies (forgive the blanket statement, but it's true), and most guys loved it. It's definitely the whole superhero thing.

3. Signs (22 votes, 21%) Thought this was a dead lock for second or first, and it might have ended that way had I left it alone.

4. The Village (9 votes, 8%) Well, it was my favorite. You can't account for taste.

5. Six voters (6%) said they were all so good they couldn't choose, and 2 voters said they liked one of his older ones. Older ones, you ask with a look of confusion on your face? Yes, it's true! He made two older movies that were put to the theaters, I believe: Wide Awake, which was about a young catholic boy struggling with questions of faith after a death in the family, which also cast Rosie O'Donnell as a catholic nun (go figure...), and Praying With Anger, which I could not locate on the web for the life of me.

There it is, webfans. Please vote on my new poll, which is sure to have some controversial results...Stay tuned.

posted by Team Kerbel @ 10:10 AM 11 comments

Still Waiting...

Well: We were pretty sure that Alison would have the baby by now, but Eden remains in utero up to this moment. Not anything to worry about--her due date is still ahead of us. She was having some pretty intense contractions this weekend, but Eden decided that she still wanted to remain in some contorted "bikram-yoga" like position for another few days. We just saw a picture this weekend of a baby in the womb at eight months. Man, there is no room in there!
Here's some revelations I had with my first baby (Share-time!):
1. I realized how much my parents love me. Seeing Alison in labor, experiencing the emotions I felt at the birth and have felt since, I felt a rush of newfound admiration and love for the people who had risked so much, who had felt as intensely as I, simply to bring me into this world.
2. I'll have to admit, there wasn't a particularly emotional love-at-first-sight moment with me and Abby in the hospital. It was the little things, slowly growing, that built my great love for my little girl:It was lying awake in bed the first week and worrying that she would smother herself in her blankets, quietly resisting the almost overwhelming urge to get up and check on her.It was her falling asleep in your arms as you walked back and forth with the lights turned off, knowing that even though it was 3 in the morning and you were dead tired, you would gladly do this forever.It was watching her falling in love with her mother, the woman you love more than the entire world.
3. Jesus said, "A women, when she is in labor, has sorrow because her hour has come; but as soon as she has given birth to the child, she no longer remembers the anguish, for joy that a human being has been born into this world."Watching the process of labor, I was so amazed that every human being comes into existence in the same manner. The good, the bad, the unloved, the loved, the weirdos, the ones that will change the world, even Jesus himself, come with struggle and pain and sweat and tears. To me, it fostered a new love for every person I know and will know(as cheesy as that may sound), because we all came from the same sorrow and distress, made tolerable by hope and love.I guess that's it for now...

posted by Team Kerbel @ 11:11 AM 12 comments

Blogjam (Copyright 2005, The Gist of It)

A funny coincidence? I think not...







Today's message is entitled, "dealing with blogger's block."
This is it. I have run the gamut of all my good blogging ideas, I am the proverbial old dog, devoid of any new tricks. I am in the throes of a particularly nasty case of "blogjam" (Copyright 2005, The Gist of It, may be reproduce with written permission). The name, she is very clever, no? Remember how you'd see a bunch of fallen trees in a river blocking the flow of water...well, you get it. The lack of posts on my site in the last few days cannot be explained by vomitous sickness (like a few others I know), nor a pulled groin muscle (which I suffered yesterday during softball practice; remember to stretch properly, kids). Pulled muscle or not, I can type as well as I used to. Can it be, that for the first time in quite a while, I don't have anything to say?

Well, I'm going to have a baby soon. (Could this be the flood that ends my blogjam?) Alison's due date is on July 14, which is extremely close. She's been having some pretty honest-to-goodness contractions. I am getting very excited to have another baby, but the labor is something I can't see myself enjoying. I am putting all my hope in the stories of those mothers whose second babies were so much easier to deliver than the first.
Little known fact: we had a midwife with our first baby, Abby, and had most of the labor at home. At the end, some irregularity in Abby's heartbeat prompted a 90-mph dash to the hospital (remember, it's not the letter but the spirit of the law that is important), but thankfully Abby was born about 15 minutes after we got there, before they could get most of their tools properly sharpened.
Little known fact: during Abby's birth, Alison squeezed my entire body so hard that I was sore for at least three days afterward. You know those stories that during times of great duress people can exhibit superhuman strength, like lifting a car that's trapped another person? I believe.
Little known fact: in our family, we have been completely overrun with little girls. We're going to have two. Alison's brother just had one, and her two cousins both have girls. Her other cousin has three girls. In fact, in the new generation there's only one boy that I can think of. Coincidence? You make the call.
The M. Night Shyamalan movie poll is almost completed. I figured I'd wait to get at least one hundred votes before I could give an official consensus. The results? Stay tuned.

posted by Team Kerbel @ 10:12 AM 19 comments

Reruns

Many paths to the same mountain top?

As a blogger, there's usually a time when you wish that the original insights you or others posted on the comments page were getting more exposure. Most of the time, unfortunately, that wish goes unfulfilled, and the sharp insights and wisdom trapped in the comments are soon choked and covered by the dust of their own inactivity. I have resolved not to let that happen. So, from time to time, I will post a few comments that were particularly well-written or insightful, so that all who stop by may see. Now, it might seem a bit heady of me to post a comment I have previously written, a bit egotistical, but I think the topic is important and timely enough for me to bear a few jeers for the sake of the discussion. It was prompted by somebody who commented on my "truth" blog with a simple question. I do hope they come back by and read it and comment again. And as always I welcome all comments, both from supporters and detractors. Here goes:

Penetrate into My Mind said...
I appreciate very much the strong belief in the faith on Jesus. But i think all religions say the same truth. What do you think?


Foolish Man said...
Thank you for your appreciation of my faith. About your question: I do not think that all religions say the same thing. There are numerous point of agreement between all the religions, to be true, and this has led most people to the same conclusion that you have reached: all religions say the same thing. However, religions disagree with each other on a number of very important topics:
1. Who/what is God?You can be an atheist Buddhist, or a Buddhist who believes in God. You can be a polytheistic Hindu (one who believes in many Gods) or a pantheistic Hindu (who believes everything is God, or that God is in all things). You can be a monotheistic Muslim, or you can be a Christian who believes in the trinity. You can be a deist, who believes that God wound up the world like a clock and then let it run on its own, or you can believe in a highly personal, highly involved God. All of these are extremely different beliefs of who or what God is, and are mutually exclusive of one another. You cannot, for example, believe that there are many Gods and only one God. In philosophy, there is a law: the law of non-contradiction. If two beliefs or events contradict each other they cannot both be true.
2. What is man?In Buddhism, the eight steps to enlightment involve inner reflection; the answer to fulfillment lies within. In Christianity, fulfillment lies outside of oneself in God. Most Christians believe man is innately sinful; not so in many other faiths.
3. Who is speaking for God?This point is very important, and this is where most of the tension lies. Christians obviously believe that Jesus was the most authoritative spokesperson for God, having been sent directly by God. Muslims believe Muhammad was Allah's penultimate and final prophet. Hindus believe that many holy men and books have spoken for God. Mormons believe Joseph Smith was the greatest prophet.
4. What can man do to please God?Another very important point of tension between the religions of the world. What does man have to do to be in right relationship with his Creator? Muslims believe in the five pillars of faith: you must believe that God is one and Muhammad is his prophet, you must pray five times a day facing Mecca, giving a percentage to the needy, observing the holy fast in the month of Ramadan, and making a pilgramage to the city of Mecca. Those five things are what please God according to Islamic belief. In Christian thought, the only thing you need to do to be justified in the sight of God is to have the faith that God sent Jesus to die for your sins. This restores the broken relationship between God and man. In Hinduism, you can make a pilgrimage to the holy river to cleanse your sins, and some perform acts of self-mortification to atone for past wrong-doing.
5. What happens when we die?To Christians and Muslims, there is a definite afterlife of bliss and joy with God preceeded by a final judgment. Of course, what we are judged by is different between the faiths. To Hindus, the law of karma is very important, as well as the foundational truth of reincarnation. This life will continue to cycle until you can achieve karmaic nirvana, and thus reach a sort of "heaven", if you will; but in reality it seems a lot like non-existence. All religions do not give the same answer in any of the above categories.
If religions cannot give the same answers to any of these questions, we may ask ourselves, in what way are they the same? Some of the prescriptions for behavior are similar: love your neighbor, be kind, give to the poor. But they are all done for different purposes and different goals depending on what religion you are a part of. Even in behavior, some of the beliefs are starkly contrasting: When Mother Theresa went to Calcutta to minister to the poor and the lepers, she was looked down upon by many Hindus. They claimed she was upsetting the karmaic cycle, that the lepers had their ailments for some wrong that they had done in past lives, and that if she ministered to them in this life they would have to be reincarnated again into a whole new life of misery to atone for their past wrong-doing. She was not dissuaded because she held to her Christian beliefs. This is a case where different religious beliefs led to different religious action. In what way, then, can we say that they are the same, or teach the same things?
I believe in the existence and exclusivity of truth. If I put four pennies on a table and ask you how many pennies there are, you can say "five," but you would be incorrect. Four is the true answer. Now, if four is the true answer, that rules out all other numbers. That's what I mean when I say truth is exclusive. If you say one thing is true, it rules out other options by nature of its truth. I believe Christianity is true, for many reasons. Now, if it is true, that automatically rules out the other religions as untrue. It's not just Christianity that claims exclusivity, however. If I was a Muslim and believed it was true, I would have to believe that Christianity and all the other religions were untrue. It is not close-mindedness, or bigotry; it is the nature of truth.
Whoa! Longwinded, aren't I? Well, I hope you come back and read this through. I'd love to hear your comments on this. Thanks for coming by!!!!

posted by Team Kerbel @ 10:26 AM 23 comments

The Sound of Inevitability

So, on Wednesday night Paul Legge invited me to go watch his softball game. Alison and I had nought else to do, so we agreed to come and root his team on. There was no hint of a conspiracy, nor a whisper of subterfuge. I still believe that Paul invited me in innocence, not knowing how the night would unfold. So we followed him to the game, and we watched Abby play with Autumn, and watched the previous game come to an end. I began to suspect something when the guys on the team began to huddle together and periodically glance my way. They seemed to be sizing me up for some reason, some task. My heart leapt in my throat. I knew my doom was inevitable when Dan walked up to me with a face as solemn as a doctor handing out terrible news. "Simon...would you want to maybe play on the team tonight?" Keep in mind I was in my trademark jeans and polo shirt, having not ever played a softball game in my life, 12 years removed from my last little league game, with my last experience of putting a bat to a ball involving a wiffle ball in a backyard. Hmm...would I play? This is when your Christian faith is really put to the test. When you really, really, really, don't want to do something, but for the sake of others you agree to the task. I can relate with the princess in "The Princess Bride" who said "I died that day." A bit too melodramatic? Maybe.
So I borrowed a shirt from Dan, which was about ten sizes too big for me, and I played catcher. I caught a few pop-ups that probably could have been caught by a three year old. I had one hit, got a double because the guy in the outfield dropped my fly ball, and flied out. I touched home plate a few times. Everyone seemed to be somewhat impressed by my performance (except for the outfielders on the opposing team; every time I got to bat they would move up. How embarassing!)
Inevitability. I knew that as a Christian male living in Grass Valley that I would eventually and inalterably play softball. Everyone succumbs after a time. The guys at my work are even on two softball teams. Paul, Dan, Eric, they all play. When I left that evening, I figured inevitability had won again; so I grabbed the summer schedule from Dan in a token of surrender. So when you go to the game, look for me, the small kid in jeans, with a florescent green shirt down to my knees, looking a little bit out of place out there on the field, scared of the ball, but having a great time knowing that inevitablity has called me to this place.

posted by Team Kerbel @ 9:09 AM 3 comments