Blogaround

1. Church Stories: "Forgive them, Father" (posted September 10) This is such a powerful story. Go read it. Seriously.

2. On Homosexuality: It's OK to Fight (posted August 31) "I am a testimony that homosexuality can be a choice." Wow... did not expect this. I thought, no, it's not supposed to work this way. But remember what I said about listening to other people's experiences, and believing them, instead of thinking I'm an expert on their life? Yeah, go read this.

3. Detroit Lions, Ford Field part of history as first female NFL referee Shannon Eastin draws positive reviews after first game (posted September 10) Shannon Eastin became the first woman to referee an NFL regular season game. Awesome! I wonder what her story is- did people tell her she was crazy to go through ref training, because obviously girls couldn't do that?

4. Ask a transgender Christian (Response) (posted September 11) Wow, this week's blogaround is full of really personal, eye-opening stories. Go read this.

flightradar24.com

5. Flightradar24 For the science nerds out there. A real-time map of planes in the sky all over the world. (Though there are some regions with no data.)

6. I am not a Puzzle Box (posted September 10) "Sex is not an item." Also her observation about "ideas that women don't actually want sex and just have to regulate men's access to it" is dead-on.

7. The List Of What You Must Do To Remain Saved (posted September 14)

How long should you pray before asking a girl out?

Dating is a big deal, they said. Because the purpose of dating is to find someone to marry, they said. It's a huge life decision, so God should definitely be part of it, they said.

So this brings us to the question: How much does one need to pray before asking a girl out? Or, since I am a straight woman and I would prefer the guy to be the one doing the "asking" (though I definitely don't believe that's a rule handed down by God), how much do I need to pray before I start purposely spending more time around this guy, observing him more closely, asking him specific questions to find out if we might be compatible, dropping little hints that I like him?

The Christian dating books talk about being fairly sure this is the person you want to marry, very early in the relationship, or even before the idea of dating has been discussed between the man and woman.

So, how's this work? You pray and pray and pray, and don't say a word to your potential soul mate until you get the go-ahead from God?

I once heard someone say they knew someone who knew a pastor who said (super-reliable source, I know) a guy should fast and pray for 6 months before asking a girl out.

And I'm here to tell you why this philosophy makes no sense.

You need to pray about marriage because it's a very big deal. It's a huge choice that affects your life perhaps more than any other choice. And don't you think, if you need to carefully think and pray because of how much it will change your life, perhaps your potential significant other should also be thinking and praying about it, because of how drastically it would affect his/her life?

If you and God are spending 6 months hammering out the pros and cons of your future life with another person, don't you think that other person should have some input?

"How dare you! All of you. Standing around deciding my future. I am not a prize to be won!" Image source.

I believe that Christians should pray about it when they're interested in a romantic relationship. It's important, so ask God for input. But if, when you first mention to this person your interest in dating, you and God have already decided that you and your "potential soul mate" will spend the rest of your lives together, where is the other person's choice?

Yes, pray about it. But if you are entering the relationship with any kind of certainty, you're doing it wrong. You're planning someone else's life for them.  

If you think you're going to pray about it until you are CERTAIN you will marry this person, and THEN you make the first move, I'm sorry but that's wrong. Yes, let's take dating seriously, let's not mess with someone's heart, but there needs to some middle ground between leading someone on and planning out their entire life without their input.

And someone might argue "but if you're praying about it, God will only tell you to go for it if the other person would be willing too." Still, where is the other person's choice? We can get into debates about free will, is it still a choice if God already knew what they would say... I don't know the answer.

But what I do know is this: If you and God are talking, without any input from the outside world to give you a reality check, isn't it going to be easy to get all wrapped up in your own little world, your own little fantasy about how your life is supposed to play out? What happens if you decide this is totally the person you want to marry, and then they reject you because they just honestly were never interested?

Then, of course, you get on the internet and complain about being "friendzoned." Image source.

Which of these is a better strategy to determine compatibility:

1. All by yourself, analyze everything and pray.
2. Think, pray, be a friend to your "potential soul mate", show some interest, start discussing dating with them, and then when (if!) you are dating, spend time together, discuss marriage, etc.

No amount of prayer is going to guarantee me that Incredibly-Hot-Guy-That-Doesn't-Know-I-Like-Him is going to be my husband. I have to take a risk. If it was certain, then where is his say in the direction his life is going?

(Oh, did I say "Incredibly Hot Guy"? I, of course, meant to say "godly." Yeah...)

All right everyone, tell me what you think. This is my attempt to figure out this dating stuff.

How does freerice.com work?

Freerice.com is a vocabulary/educational game which claims that "For each answer you get right, we donate 10 grains of rice through the World Food Programme to help end hunger."

It's worth playing; go ahead and give it a try. It starts out with really easy vocabulary:

and as you get them right, the difficulty increases:

For those of you who care, the correct answer was "binding."

and there are some other subjects too, besides vocabulary (though the other subjects don't seem to have as many levels of difficulty):

After playing for 10 minutes, I earned 1560 grains of rice.

So, is this legit? Are they really donating 10 grains of rice for each right answer?

Well, the short answer is no. No one is sitting there counting out 10 grains of rice as I click through the vocabulary questions. So the "You have now donated 1560 grains of rice" thing is not literally true.

Instead, Freerice donates the equivalent amount of money to the UN World Food Programme, which then uses it to buy rice and give it those who need it.

So even though it's not literally true, it is legit. Snopes confirms this.

What is the UN World Food Programme?

Check out their website. The World Food Programme is a huge organization that works in 73 countries to provide food for those who are without it- either because of some emergency situation (war, natural disasters) or in cases where there is ongoing need (providing school meals, providing food for those suffering from HIV/AIDS, etc).

Seriously, I recommend clicking around on their website. There's a lot of information there. This is important stuff to know- hunger affects 925 million of our brothers and sisters.

Where does the money come from? If Freerice has the money anyway, why do I have to play this game in order for them to donate?

The money comes from the companies who buy ad space on the website. They pay for pageviews and clicks- so no, Freerice does not have a pile of money just waiting. Freerice earns it from the advertisers as you click through the questions on the site.

Okay, so what difference am I making? How much rice is 1560 grains, anyway?

From some googling, I have determined that there are about 7000 grains of (uncooked) rice in a cup, and that it expands to maybe double or triple volume when cooked.

So my 1560 grains of rice translates into about 1/2 cup cooked.

According to this site, rice costs about $600 per metric ton (this is a much lower rate than what you pay for a 5-lb bag at the grocery store). Again, after some googling, I am finding that there are 15-50 grains of rice in 1 gram. We'll use 30 grains for the math here.

My 1560 grams of rice costs 3 cents.

I mean, when you get tons of people playing this free rice game, it adds up... but I'm really not making that much of a difference.

Does this mean I have a moral responsibility to spend all my free time playing free rice?

No one should go hungry. I can't imagine what that's like. Giving other people food is more important than whatever else I'm doing with my spare time, right? Eh, no, I don't think so.

As I just calculated, playing Freerice for 10 minutes donates 3 cents. So, that's $0.18/hour. What's minimum wage? Not that. If you want to help people, go get a real job and then donate from your salary. If your only goal is to get out there and change the world, then Freerice is a waste of time.

You should play Freerice if you like it. Personally I was entertained by it when I played- but not enough to come back and play every day. If it's a game you think is fun, hey, go for it. But if you think it's boring, then DUDE, don't play, and don't feel guilty about that. Donating a few cents is not worth sacrificing your spare time and doing something you hate.

I think this game is probably good for kids because it's educational. I could totally see this being used by middle school or high school teachers. The kids learn stuff (from a bunch of different subjects) and you have the added bonus of feeding the hungry. Freerice is a pretty good idea for this context.

So I'll leave my readers with this question: Anyone beat my 1560 grains of rice, playing JUST the English vocabulary game for 10 minutes?

The Wise Men Found Jesus In Another Religion

Convinced by their study of astrology, they packed up and traveled for months, on a quest to find a baby king. It's crazy, but the wise men found Jesus, while the people who knew the bible and had all the answers did not. Read it here: Matthew 2:1-12

Image source.

Who were the wise men?

Wise men, or Magi, or the 3 kings (although the bible definitely does not say there were 3)... who are they? What do we know about them?

They were "from the east." This is how Matthew describes them. So, where is "the east"? A lot of things are east of Jerusalem.

Basically, all of these things. Image source.

I've heard one theory that the wise men were from China. While that would be awesome, I think it's probably not true- too far away. However, we do have some other information that can narrow this down...

They had some knowledge of Jewish religion and culture. Definitely. We know this because they were specifically looking for "the king of the Jews." Perhaps they were descendants of people originally from Israel, who had been scattered due to war and exile. Perhaps their culture had been somehow influenced by Jewish culture.

They took their astrology pretty seriously. They saw a star, they determined that it must mean the "king of the Jews" had been born, and they NEEDED to go see him, and worship him. Why? I seriously do not understand the thought process behind this.

How long did it take to travel there? How long did they spend planning their trip, getting supplies together, deciding what gifts to give the baby king? Because of a star? Dude... the most I am going to do for a star is wake up at 4 am and look out the window for a few minutes when there's some once-in-a-hundred-years phenomenon going on in space.

Because Matthew later writes that King Herod killed the babies "who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi", I estimate it took 1-2 years for the wise men to plan their trip and travel all the way to Bethlehem.

They were rich and educated. We call them "wise men" or even "kings." They brought Jesus gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. They had enough money to finance a huge trip. They had enough spare time to spend studying the stars. These people were definitely upper-class.

What was this "star" anyway?

I've heard speculation about how it was Jupiter or something. Speculation is great and interesting- but it's just speculation. There's no way we'll ever be able to say with confidence that the "star" was this or that specific star/planet/comet/whatever.

What is going on with the priests? And other happenings in Jerusalem.

Did the star lead them to Jerusalem, or did it lead them to that general area and then they thought "well clearly the king must be in the capital city"? I don't know.

Also, from reading the text, it is not clear whether the wise men went straight to King Herod, or if they started asking around in Jerusalem, and Herod heard about it and got a little freaked out, so he called them in to talk to them.

But here's what Matthew does say: The Jewish priests and teachers were called in, and they were asked where the Christ was supposedly going to be born. They quoted a bible verse and said it's definitely Bethlehem. The wise men said "kthxbye" and went on their way.

Don't you think the priests should have like, cared, if the Christ had been born?

Seriously. This would be like if someone came and said "I heard the Mars rover is going to be landing in the parking lot at Wal-Mart today- can you give me directions to Wal-Mart?" and I said "sure, just go straight and then turn right after you see a Burger King and Rite Aid" when what I should be saying is "WHOA SERIOUSLY? The Mars rover??? BRB, going to Wal-Mart."

I am a master of photoshop. Image sources here and here.

So the Jewish priests knew all the answers. They knew the bible better than anyone else- and actually, they were 100% right. Bethlehem WAS the right answer. But they didn't care enough to actually put effort into following their "right answers." They didn't find Jesus.

The wise men worshiped Jesus.

They were "overjoyed." They found Mary and Baby Jesus, and bowed down. That must have been super-weird from Mary's point of view. A bunch of rich foreigners show up, and strangely enough, they're the only ones who recognize how important your baby is.

This is pretty awesome, because the gifts (gold, frankincense, and myrrh) were very expensive, and hopefully this really helped Mary and Joseph with their financial ability to raise a kid. Kind of weird, how God knew their needs and provided for them... by bringing in a bunch of upper-class astrologers from hundreds of miles away.

Whatever happened to them after that?

Jesus didn't start doing anything until 30 years later. Where were the wise men at that point? Were they still alive? Did they ever really understand who Jesus was? Did they become Christians?

What about the other characters? The priests, the officials working for Herod... did they ever find out who Jesus was? Did they ever realize that, way back when those weird astrology guys came around, the person they were looking for grew up to be Jesus of Nazareth?

I don't know what happened. In Matthew 2, the wise men are doing the right thing, seeking Jesus, but they only know the beginning of the story. I hope somehow they found out the ending.

Take-home message: The wise men found Jesus in another religion.

Whoa, whoa. Am I allowed to say that? No way- Christians believe that only Christianity is the true religion.

I'm just calling it like I see it. The wise men found Jesus in another religion. They found him because of their dedication to astrology.

Like I said above, they must have been influenced by Jewish religion and culture. Maybe their beliefs had some elements of "the right religion" and some other stuff mixed in. But the bible says very clearly that they found Jesus because of astrology.

Do any Christians think astrology is legit? I have never heard of any. Astrology is just silly superstition, right? But it told them where to find Jesus, and it was right.

How? Can God speak through astrology? Sure, why not? As Psalm 19:1-4 says,

"The heavens declare the glory of God;
     the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Day after day they pour forth speech;
     night after night they display knowledge.
There is no speech or language
     where their voice is not heard.
Their voice goes out into all the earth,
     their words to the ends of the world. ..."

God can speak through whatever he wants. And apparently he speaks through other religions besides Christianity.

I am not saying "all religions are right" or "all religions are the same" or "all religions follow the same God". God spoke to the wise men through the lens of their religion, but he used it to point them to Jesus. Yes, I believe Jesus is the one and only way to God. But you may find Jesus in some unexpected places.

The wise men were wrong about some things. They didn't know the biblical prophesy about Bethlehem. They had some pagan influences in their beliefs. But when God spoke to them and said where to find the Christ, they packed up and went. And they found Jesus.

The priests knew all the right answers. They knew the Christ would be born in Bethlehem. But they weren't interested in actually going to look for him. They knew all the facts in the bible, but they did not find Jesus.

Evidently, God doesn't care if you are right or wrong. God wants people who are willing to listen, willing to obey, willing to follow. THOSE are the people God speaks to. THOSE are the people who find Jesus.

Be like the wise men.

----------------

This post is part of a series on the gospel of Matthew.

Previous post: When a dream convinces you to marry your cheating girlfriend (Matthew 1:18-25)

Next post: God became man... and babies died for it (Matthew 2:13-23)

Click here to go to the beginning of the series.

Blogaround

1. Soul Mates (posted August 28) I love you, xkcd! This post asks "What if everyone actually had only one soul mate, a random person somewhere in the world?" and comes at it with logic and data on world population- to show how totally ridiculous that notion is. Yes!

However, I still have to deal with Christian version of this myth- "God will set you up with that one perfect person!" which is much tougher to address... See also my post on how the Christian version of this myth is a much stronger beast.

2. How child sponsorship through World Vision works (posted September 4) This is a very very informative post, by a blogger who visited Sri Lanka with a team from World Vision. The child sponsorship program sounds great- it helps the community as a whole, not just one child at a time.

3. The Incomplete Politics of Poverty (posted August 31) According to the bible, there are 3 causes of poverty. This makes a lot of sense.

4. This video: Jesus Wants the Rose.

The church's teaching on "purity" flies in the face of the gospel, and this video communicates that better than anything else I've seen.

5. The amazing speeches of women in the conventions makes the silence of women in the Church that much more deafening. (posted September 5) Yes. This.

6. Defriended Over a Wedding, a Straight Man Gains Perspective (posted September 3)

7. Dear Pro-Lifers: STOP ERASING WOMEN (posted September 6) "Because that's the problem, isn't it? If zygotes didn't live inside women's bodies, this wouldn't be an issue."

8. Seeing Faces, Not Statistics (posted September 6) "And what would it have hurt for me to hear it? Why, in all of those abstinence-only speeches, where they scared you on the failure of condoms and condemned Planned Parenthood, why did they not explain that some people need them?"

9. The myth of how the hijab protects women against sexual assault (posted September 6)

10. Please Don't Tell Me I'm Beautiful (posted September 7) "I can tell you from over 35 years of first-hand experience, from when my face first got smashed with a baseball bat and my teeth were ruined, that it's a mind-f*ck to be told 'you're beautiful' when nearly every single consequential, real-world factor tells you otherwise." I totally agree with this article, and I wrote something similar a while ago: We CANNOT say "everyone is beautiful".

The Election and the Economy (Without the Jargon)

First of all, Perfectnumber is in way over her head here. Politics are confusing- who can possibly understand them? But then she realized that the average American has to at least somewhat understand them, if they want to vote.

Pictured: The average American's take on politics. Image source.

I am going to do my best to articulate what each side believes, and the assumptions about the nature of the world that lead to those beliefs, and what questions one would have to answer in order to determine which side has beliefs closest to one's own.

(If I miss any important facts, or get something wrong, tell me.)

Here we go! Today's election-related topic is: the economy.

Image source.

Obama's position:

Obama's plan focuses on tax cuts for the average American. He passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, with tax cuts specifically targeted towards working families and small businesses. He believes the economy will benefit most when more money is going directly into the hands of American people, not a wealthy minority or enormous corporations.

Source: barackobama.com, and a lot of being puzzled and suspicious of any statistic related to politics.

Romney's position:

Romney believes that in order to improve the economy, businesses must be given the means to create more jobs. There are way too many government regulations on business- this is a huge burden- it is smothering the economy. Therefore, Romney plans to get rid of a lot of the regulations and bureaucracy, and cut taxes on businesses.

Source: mittromney.com, and a lot of sifting through biases and jargon until I finally figured out where he's coming from.

So all those ads I see, telling me to vote for Obama because Romney would have middle class families paying $2000 more or whatever- that's because Romney's plan does not directly target "middle class families" for tax cuts- it targets businesses. It all makes sense now.

Questions to consider:

So, Romney wants to remove a lot of regulations on business. What are "regulations"?

According to this page, there are 5 areas in which government regulates business:

1. Advertising (truth-in-advertising laws)
2. Employment and labor (for example, minimum wage)
3. Environmental (limits on pollution, etc)
4. Privacy (don't spread around customers' credit card numbers)
5. Safety and health (providing a safe, clean work environment for employees)

All of that seems very important to me. However, it may be the case that regulations have gone way too far, and there are so many small and relatively unimportant requirements that it holds back progress. This is Romney's position. Is it true? I don't know.

Which regulations does Romney want to get rid of? What practical effect would it have on employees, customers, and the environment? 

What are the current tax rates for different income levels?

Everyone is talking in terms of an increase or decrease and "tax cuts for the rich". What are the absolute numbers we're dealing with here?

According to wikipedia, a married couple filing jointly (I picked this case because everyone's been all about families in this election) pays an income tax of 10% on the first $17400, then 15% on the next bunch of income up to $70700, then 25% on the next bunch of income up to $142700, then 28% up to $217450, then 33% up to $388350, then 35% on any more.

OKAY that was a bunch of numbers in paragraph form. Not so useful. Take a look at this graph of household income in 2010, and then we'll try to make sense of the tax rates.

I recommend clicking here to see it bigger: Image source.

(I know this is "household income" and a household sometimes just has 1 adult rather than 2 filing jointly. I'm just trying to get some estimates. Calm down.)

15% of households earn $17400 or less, which puts them in the 10% tax bracket.

54% of households earn $17400 to $70700, which puts them in the 15% tax bracket.

15% of households earn $70700 to $142700, which puts them in the 25% tax bracket.

12% of households earn $142700 to $217450, which puts them in the 28% tax bracket.

4% of households earn more than that, which puts them in the 33% or 35% tax bracket.

(Used data from this table, which is from 2003 but is probably the pretty much the same as that graph. And I did the math quick and dirty.)

So as a voter, ask yourself if these tax rates seem fair. Should higher incomes be taxed at higher levels? If so, how much higher?

Who are these "middle-class" "working families"?

I once saw a study that said almost everybody considers themselves to be middle-class, even though a lot of them totally aren't. Both Obama and Romney are talking about all the wonderful things they plan to do to benefit "the middle class."

To me it seems like a sneaky political attempt to show they totally identify with you. Like when you take one of those personality tests, and at the end it tells you a bunch of incredibly vague statements, but they're worded so you don't realize they're vague- you think that personality test TOTALLY GETS you.

"Though at times you enjoy being the life of the party, you feel you also have a quiet, introspective side that your friends do not know." Image source.

So it's unclear to me who the supposed benefits to "the middle class" are really for.

Huge corporations are being portrayed as faceless, callous, uncaring, evil- let's take a look at this criticism.

I made this chart using this data from 2008, to show how many Americans are employed by small businesses and large businesses:

Blue: employees. Red: payroll.

So don't demonize the huge companies- they're employing 25%-50% of the workforce (depending on your definition of "large" vs "small" business). They're generating a huge chunk of the money floating around in the economy. We NEED them.

(Disclaimer: I know everything about math and nothing about politics or the economy. If I'm using the wrong numbers or interpreting them wrong, tell me.)

One more note- as a feminist, I have to mention how it's a bit suspicious that Romney wants to strengthen those who already have power (big businesses), with the idea that of course then they'll use their power to help out everyone else (by creating jobs). Because we all know that's how power and oppression work.

What is our goal for the economy?

What exactly are Obama and Romney aiming for here? What is the ideal picture of the American economy? A few ideas I have:

1. Everyone who is skilled and willing to work should be able to find a job that suits them.
2. Income levels, after tax, should be high enough to support people, so they never have to worry about basic needs like food, housing, health care, etc.

(Agree/disagree? What other things should be true of the economy? Decreasing the gap between rich and poor? Not allowing anyone with bad work ethic to get a "free ride"?)

This raises more questions about what "high enough" income means- does it mean supporting kids too? Minimum wage isn't enough to support a whole family- is that a bad thing? In setting wages, is the goal to give workers the amount they need to live on, or to give them an amount corresponding to the difficulty and skill required for that particular job?

How do jobs get "created"?

It seems like both Obama and Romney are relying on the assumption that if a company has more money, it will expand and "create jobs" (though Romney's plan is definitely way more dependent on this assumption). I suppose this is true... Does it have the same effect for both small and large businesses?

Also, there is fear of jobs "moving overseas"- particularly in the case of a large company expanding. (Why so much fear? It looks a lot like racism to me. Why are Americans more deserving of jobs? Okay, whatever, right now I'm just talking about what will benefit Americans economically.)

What causes the whole "move overseas" thing? Is it more likely that American jobs will be lost in this way under Obama or Romney? I don't know. This question is left as an exercise to the reader.

The main difference (as far as I can tell):

In Obama's worldview, many Americans are being oppressed by larger forces at work in the economy. There is inequality built into the system, and he wants to change that by directly giving American taxpayers more money, and therefore more control. If people just had more opportunities, they would work hard and be more successful- he intends to provide them with those opportunities.

In Romney's worldview, economic standing is earned through talent and hard work. People who have more money are the ones who are the most responsible and hard-working. Therefore, to improve the economy, successful companies should be given more tax breaks. They have shown they are the most deserving, the most likely to put that money to good use.

And now the voters can decide which they agree with. I've made my decision.

When a dream convinces you to marry your cheating girlfriend

We now come to Matthew 1:18-25, which explains the birth of Jesus from Joseph's point of view. In summary, Joseph found out that his fiancee, with whom he had never had sex, was pregnant, so he was going to break up with her, but he had a dream which said to marry her because the baby was totally from God. So he did.

Seems legit. Image source.

Here are my thoughts and questions:

What was Mary and Joseph's relationship like? There seems to be a serious lack of communication.

How did Joseph find out Mary was pregnant? Did he hear it from other people, or did she tell him herself? Communication is perhaps the most important thing in a relationship- shouldn't there be at least some conversation between them before he makes the decision to divorce her?

You'd think Mary would know that this is a situation where she needs to explain everything to Joseph. Does she not know what he's going to think if he hears through the grapevine that she's pregnant? Or did she know there was no chance he'd believe her (because, seriously, that is not how abstinence works) so she just assumed it was over, so no use trying to explain to him?

The way it's worded, it sounds like Joseph just heard about it secondhand. Maybe my criticism is completely invalid because "dating" back then was not at all like "dating" now, but ... dude, COMMUNICATION.

Joseph is a good guy.

It's amazing how much respect he has for Mary. He knows that since she's pregnant, they have to break up, but he's not interested in getting revenge on her.

Actually, I don't know the typical procedure for this situation- was stoning an actual possibility?

Is this because dating then was different than dating now, and it was more about arranged marriage and economic/social reasons to get married, rather than the high emotions that come with dating as we know it today? Like, was Joseph heartbroken over Mary's (supposed) cheating, or was he just like "meh"?

Here's another aspect to consider: he's a great guy, and he's acting out of love and respect for Mary- but his plan to divorce her is actually the "wrong" choice. You could say it's "against God's plan." Joseph is trying his best to do the right thing- and given the information he has (including his knowledge of sex ed), breaking up with Mary in a respectful way, without humiliating her, is the best thing to do.

But it's not what God wants. But there was no way Joseph could have known that. God had to tell him. And since his relationship with Mary seemed to be suffering from terrible communication skills, God had to tell him in a dream.

Does this mean that if we try our best to follow God and do what's right, but we make a wrong conclusion because of our own lack of information (or whatever other weaknesses we may have), God understands and will help us out?

Because that would be awesome- that would give me a lot less to worry about in terms of my plans for the future.

Okay, how often do you base major life decisions on dreams?

It seems like in the bible everyone knows when God is talking to them. In my life, sometimes a thought pops into my head and I wonder "was that from God, or did I just think it up?" So how does Joseph know whether this dream is a message from God, or whether he's just crazy?

Which is more likely: Mary cheated on him OR she is the one person in the history of the world who was specially chosen by God and got pregnant without having sex?

And perhaps Joseph's judgment on this is a little off because of all the emotion involved. Doesn't it seem like he's a little bit in denial? Like he's looking for any excuse not to accept the fact that it's over, she's cheating on him, she's having someone else's baby.

My point is, this must have been a super-legit type of dream in order for him to take it so seriously.

I really hope the angel explained more than what Matthew wrote down.

According to Joseph's dream, "what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit." Sooooo... I really hope it was more explicit than that. Because the message for Joseph is actually "Mary is TOTALLY NOT cheating on you- God just made her magically pregnant- she is still a virgin though."

Can Joseph reasonably draw that conclusion from the abstract, bible-y language "what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit"?

I think there was more to it- somehow, God communicated to him the completely bizarre circumstances.

Joseph's obedience.

But somehow, Joseph did know this was from God. And he was obedient- he married Mary and raised the kid as his own. And that's a big deal.

Maybe it was the hardest thing he'd ever done.

Because people probably judged him. And maybe there were times Joseph doubted. And maybe sometimes Jesus was a bratty little kid and said "you're not my REAL father!"

Summary/ take-home message:

Sometimes God asks us to do things that are incredibly hard, things that redirect the whole course of our life- like raising someone else's kid. 

Also, God knows and appreciates our good intentions. Matthew points out that Joseph was righteous and that's why he wanted to divorce Mary "quietly." However, it was the wrong choice, so God spoke to him to clarify what he should do.

It seems like the message is: If you honestly are trying to do the right thing, God knows, and God's not going to punish you for making "the wrong choice" if it comes from good intentions- but remember, part of those "good intentions" include being open to hearing God's voice, and being humble enough to realize you misjudged the situation and you need to change your plans in order to obey God.

One last thing: The passage mentions that Jesus would also be known as Immanuel, which means "God with us." That's beautiful- don't ever forget this promise.

Disclaimer: Yes I believe in the virgin birth, but a few times in this post I mentioned how Mary was cheating on Joseph, and I didn't qualify it with a "supposedly." That's because the passage focuses on Joseph, and from his point of view, he can't possibly conclude anything else, until God shows up and clarifies it for him.

Seriously, is Joseph going to think "She's probably cheating on me, but the other possibility is that God made her magically pregnant, which has happened exactly 0 times in history"? No. She's totally cheating on him. You know, until God steps in and clears up everything.

----------------

This post is part of a series on the gospel of Matthew.

Previous post: A Bunch of Names (Matthew 1:1-17)

Next post: The Wise Men Found Jesus In Another Religion (Matthew 2:1-12)

Click here to go to the beginning of the series.

The Bible and Homosexuality: There are 2 arguments

The bible is NOT clear on this, and I'm about to explain why. I believe there are 2 different positions that Christians can take:

Side A: Gay people can totally go ahead and have monogamous relationships/marriage with someone of the same sex.

Because the bible never mentions gay marriage. Whenever it mentions homosexuality (only 6ish times), it's in the context of promiscuity or prostitution or something else that Christians think is bad anyway. For example, Genesis 19 tells us that homosexual gang rape is wrong. Well, no kidding.

And then there's Leviticus 18:22, which says "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." (Which, there's some sexism in this verse- did you notice? It assumes the reader is male.) So... was that command just for ancient Israel or for everyone forever? There are a lot of commands that we totally don't follow today. How do we know if this is one of them?

Also, it just doesn't make sense that if two people are in a committed relationship and they're trying to seek God and honor God, the relationship is automatically EVIL because they're the same gender.

So, this view treats homosexual relationships the same as heterosexual ones. Like, don't have sex outside of marriage, don't get overcome by lust, don't manipulate someone's heart, etc, things that you need to do in order to be obedient to God, in the context of attraction/dating/marriage. 

Side B: All homosexual relationships are sinful.

Because every time the bible mentions homosexuality, it's portrayed negatively. And the ideal for marriage, as presented in the bible, is one man and one woman. (Though there was a lot of polygamy and stuff- but you can see that never worked out too well.)

For example, in Genesis 2 you have God creating the first couple- male and female (though if anyone makes the "Adam and Steve" joke as if it's an actual argument rather than something appropriate for a snarky bumper sticker... seriously?). When Jesus answers a question about divorce in Matthew 19, he points to the first marriage, and his teaching assumes marriage is between a man and a woman. Everywhere the bible talks about what marriage should be, it assumes a man and a woman.

That's the way God made it- he made men and women to be different and work together. So same-sex relationships just don't make sense/ they're unnatural.

So, gay Christians are called by God to be celibate.

(I got a lot of this info from here. And if I missed any important points in either of these arguments, please tell me.)

Both sides need to be accepting and loving towards gay people, because, you know, Jesus said that. Both sides need to agree that bullying is wrong, that treating people like political issues rather than children of God is wrong, and that mocking/stereotyping the other side is wrong (don't accuse Side A of not taking the bible seriously, and don't accuse Side B of being homophobic bigots).

But which view is correct, side A or side B? Both of their arguments seem reasonable to me. I really don't know which is right.

But the piece that is missing is the reality of God speaking to individual Christians. I will let gay Christians pray about this and listen to God, and whatever answer they come up with, I'll believe it, because they obviously know themselves better than I do. For me, this is just an abstract philosophical discussion- it doesn't really matter to me in real life. For other people, this issue is incredibly huge and personal. I respect their conclusion above my own. (And there are gay Christians on both side A and side B.)

(Oh, and for gay non-Christians: I can't tell them what to do.)

Because I'm not gay, but I know about how conscience works- how I feel when I know I'm doing something wrong. I know how it feels to lust for some hot guy, and to know that what I'm thinking is wrong. I know how it feels to be angry at boys, to desire power over boys, to want to manipulate them- and I know the guilt that comes with that, because I know it's wrong.

Does same-sex attraction feel like that? Or does it feel like a healthy desire to show love to someone, to work together and be better off than if you were separate?

I will never know the answer to that. I'm not gay.

And it's totally possible that in some cases it's healthy and some cases it's unhealthy. In the same way that me being attracted to boys can lead to both healthy and unhealthy thoughts and behaviors.

So whatever a gay Christian says about God wanting them to be in a relationship or not- I'll believe them. And I'll try to listen and be humble, because I know they have a very different perspective/experience than I do, and I'd like to understand.

And this is different from what I used to believe. I used to think obviously the bible said it was wrong, because, well, that's gross, obviously. And if someone tried to make an argument about how homosexuality is mentioned so few times, or we don't follow the rules in the Old Testament anyway, I would think "okay it doesn't say it SUPER-EXPLICITLY but you know that's what it means." Because, obviously, that's wrong.

And then I decided to actually see what the bible had to say, rather than starting out with the conclusion that "well gay sex is gross, obviously" and only seeing the evidence that fit that view.

So here I am now. Turns out, the bible is NOT clear. I respect both side A and side B. I don't know which one is right. But I want people to know that both sides have legit Christians who are doing their best to follow Jesus.

Blogaround

1. Just some cute animal pics I got from reddit:

Image source.

Image source.

Oh, China. Click here to see the full-size image: Image source.

2. Today was one of the best days of my life... (posted August 27) An American blogger talks about his visit to Sri Lanka, where he witnessed a huge celebration- a "going away party" for World Vision. World Vision has been working to help a community there for 15 years, and now they are self-sufficient and no longer need World Vision. This is great. This is beautiful.

3. The Cost of Your Call (posted August 24) This is an article about young people serving God by going into the mission field. It comes at the issue from several different sides: obstacles like college debt, the idea that moving to a faraway impoverished country is more romantic/exotic but sometimes less useful than working in the US, and willingness to endure risk/persecution for Jesus.

4. Why America Lacks Global Leaders (posted August 23) A ton of really great insight here about the usefulness of learning a foreign language- because it changes the way you THINK. (However, I only half-agree with this article- I think it's way too critical of Americans, without offering a comparison of how other nations may or may not be doing it better.)

5. How long will women pastors be news? (posted August 27) "Why must we live with a reality that a female senior pastor is presumed less qualified? Why do we still perpetuate this blatant sexism?"

6. Why Women Don't Get Promoted or Hired- and How to Level the Field (posted August 28) My initial reaction is I DO NOT LIKE the suggestions this article makes. But it's something to think about.

7. Confessions of an accidental feminist by Rachel Held Evans (posted August 29) This. So much this. She explains that she is a feminist not because of some evil, radical, anti-Christian influence, but because she saw and experienced oppression and sexism firsthand in the church, and because she read in the bible about Jesus' respect for women, about both daughters and sons prophesying, about "in Christ there is no male or female."

She says, "I am a follower of Jesus first and a feminist second." Amen. Me too. At some point, I will post my own story of how I became a feminist.

8. I hope some other Star Trek fans out there find this as hilarious as I do:

Image source.

9. To the Boys, Her Role Is Simple: Teammate (posted September 2) A girl quarterback on a high school football team. Good for her. ^_^

"It would have happened anyway."

All right, we're gonna bring this small group meeting to a close now- time for prayer requests!

"My family's traveling to Chicago- pray that we have a safe flight."
"My sister is sick today- pray that God heals her."
"Pray that we all get through final exams!"

And sometimes I roll my eyes at this. Do you know how many hundreds of planes take off from every airport in the United States every day? And ALL OF THEM are fine? And okay, your sister has the common cold. God better intervene on this one or she might miss a whopping 2 days of school! Also, guess what- no matter what happens, a week from now all the finals will be over.

You have access to the power that created the universe and raised Jesus from the dead, and all you can think to ask is that your luggage doesn't get lost? Image source.

(So, in other words, perfectnumber likes to judge other people's prayer requests...)

But that's not what I want to write about today. I want to write about when we pray for something and then it happens.

Suppose I prayed for the safe flight to Chicago. And then I had a safe flight to Chicago.

If I don't stop and thank God, I'm kind of a jerk.

Ah come on, thousands of people have "a safe flight to Chicago" every day. (67 million passengers came through O'Hare International Airport in 2011. Oh dude, I just realized I'm one of them!)  Regardless of whether they prayed for it. God didn't do anything- it would have happened anyway.

All right, if you're so sure "it would have happened anyway," then why did you pray for it?

Sometimes I pray for stuff, and it's stuff that I totally expect to happen, so I don't even remember that I prayed about it- I definitely don't remember to thank God.

And I wish I remembered more.

But it's not big epic stuff. It's not "oh look at the awesome power of God answering prayer." It's just a plane and a clear sky and a pilot who has done this exact same route for the past 10 years. It's just me not getting sick on the first day of school. It's just a good grade on an easy physics test.

"Thank you, God, that I didn't have to draw an elephant on my exam." Image source.

When I pray, do I really think I'm talking to God? Because if I'm not gonna take him seriously when he does what I asked, why should he take me seriously when I pray?

Yes, we could debate whether "it would have happened anyway." But the fact is that I prayed for it and then it happened, and it's a slap in the face to decide that "nope, that wasn't God, that would have happened anyway."

Because either I was not certain that "it would have happened anyway", so that's why I prayed, or I just pray things that I don't mean at all. I just say the stuff you're supposed to say. Yeah God, help us be safe, help us have fun, thank you for the food and the hands that made it.

(Actually I personally never use the "hands that made it" line because I take everything literally and it sounds like some disembodied hands made pasta for us...)

Dig in! Image source.

What to do? What if I completely forget I prayed for something? How to remind myself to check later and see if God did it and then thank him?

Realizing my tendency to be kind of a jerk in this area (by not remembering to thank God) has caused me to focus more on prayer lately. To dedicate time to pray every day with no distractions (with my computer off). To think about people I know- friends and family- by name, and pray for them. To be thankful for everything God has given me, and lay out all my concerns about my future in front of him.

And I pray that God keeps reminding me to do that.