Okay, I am going to start this post with a few anecdotes. A friend of mine recently told me a story about how she thought someone was hitting on her and it freaked her out a bit. Another friend told me of two incidents in which he thought two different people were hitting on him. Yet a third friend of mine has a huge crush on this girl and is totally trying to drop hints. Friend four recently started dating a guy she worked on a drama production with. Friends five and six complain at times about their boyfriends being less than emotionally available. Friend seven is in love with someone who can never return her feelings. Friend eight cycles through boyfriends. Friends nine and ten are dating, and then not, and then again. And the list goes on.
And here I sit, listening to "Marry You" from the Glee episode "Furt" on YoutubeRepeat.
Relationships are confusing beasts. For some they offer excitement, for others they bring security. Some think that they come filled with passion. Some find them more subdued. No two are the same, no two are entirely different. But all of this "love in the air" gives me pause. With everyone hitting on everyone else, why are some people left out? I dislike throwing myself a pity party, but I have to wonder, why am I left out? (I think it would be a bad thing to list negative qualities about myself here, so I won't.)
I think, at least at the moment, that it is somewhat because I have to wait for someone else to make the first move. If someone were flirting with me, I honestly think it would go straight over my head. So until then, I am getting sick of this lovesick paranoia.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Art meets Religion: Naked Morality
The human figure has often been regarded as the highest form of subject matter in the arts, above landscapes, above the still life. Nudity in regards to the human figure in Art has been a hot button issue since the Middle Ages (or before, if you really want to argue that). The Ancient Grecian/Roman tradition states that the nude human form is something to be celebrated. In the middle ages, a nude was something shameful. The nude in Art had its rebirth in the Renaissance, again in celebratory fashion. Ever since, the argument about where the line between classical nudity and pornography has raged on.
This question of morality of the nude in Art hit home for me last year in an upper level Drawing course on figure rendering. This class was actually my first introduction to the private male anatomy that was not immediately blocked from my memory. It was here that I learned the professional detachment from and sheer aestheticism of the human figure, male or female. At this point, I figure that if the purpose of the nude is Art, then there is no perversion on the part of the artist. There were no emotions, no reactions, none of the discomfort or sense of shame that came from tracing the outline of the naked human form.
If my experience had ended there, on the side of the artist, I would have learned only one side, but I would have been happy, if yet blissfully unaware. Staying in the art program at any number of universities provides one with the most interesting of opportunities. For me, I was asked by a fellow art major to pose nude for the sake of his senior exhibition. This decision requires much deliberation and more soul searching that I would have ever guessed. I would like to take you through the short list, whirlwind tour of the thought process behind someone's decision of whether or not to pose as a nude model for the sake of art.
First, there are professional concerns, things like: this could end up in a gallery or professional portfolio. The model has to, in a sense, give up the rights to their image (literally in this personal case as the medium is photography). Am I comfortable with my peers seeing me naked, on a wall in a gallery? What would I represent by being there? What is my body going to be used to say? Will it be something I can agree with? All of these questions run through my head as an artist, and oddly enough, are answered by the character of the eyes behind the camera.
My friend, the artist, whom we will call Lloyd, is an artist in the truest sense of the word. I am very familiar with his work, and have seen how he has treated nude models in the past. He takes care not to objectify women, which is a plus for me, as a woman. Because of his professional detachment, I feel oddly at ease about my concerns with his "political" agenda.
There are more middling concerns, about the actual event of the modeling session. Does he just want to see me naked? Will he get some kind of sexual thrill out of this? Will I? Is that experience okay for the sake of Art?
My concerns on this note were honestly somewhat unwarranted. Lloyd is very open and out about his homosexuality, which eased my concerns about his possibly getting a sexual thrill out of this. Also, my being asexual and not attracted to him at all helps me to not have to worry about this situation possibly becoming sexually charged.
Finally, there are immense personal concerns. Am I comfortable enough with my body to allow someone else to see it? Take pictures of it? Don't I have too much fat? I don't fit what modern America calls "attractive."
These concerns are the ones that cannot be answered as easily as the rest, because, by nature, they can only be answered by the one asking them. I have body issues. You'd be hard pressed to find any female in America who doesn't. I have stretch marks from weight fluctuation. I am short and have breasts that are uncomfortably large for my small frame. Believe me, I am not boasting. I find nothing about me to be visual appealing or striking, but of course I'm biased. So, to get past this last hurdle, I did what the cautious part of me looses sleep over. In my mind, duty and responsibility always win out over comfort, so I said "yes." I agreed to model nude for my friends senior exhibit, because when am I ever going to get to do it again?
So, here I am, waiting for the call about "are you free to come to the lighting studio?" I've already battled second thoughts, but so far, the "ayes" still have it.
Stay tuned for the follow up post to find out how this story ends.
This question of morality of the nude in Art hit home for me last year in an upper level Drawing course on figure rendering. This class was actually my first introduction to the private male anatomy that was not immediately blocked from my memory. It was here that I learned the professional detachment from and sheer aestheticism of the human figure, male or female. At this point, I figure that if the purpose of the nude is Art, then there is no perversion on the part of the artist. There were no emotions, no reactions, none of the discomfort or sense of shame that came from tracing the outline of the naked human form.
If my experience had ended there, on the side of the artist, I would have learned only one side, but I would have been happy, if yet blissfully unaware. Staying in the art program at any number of universities provides one with the most interesting of opportunities. For me, I was asked by a fellow art major to pose nude for the sake of his senior exhibition. This decision requires much deliberation and more soul searching that I would have ever guessed. I would like to take you through the short list, whirlwind tour of the thought process behind someone's decision of whether or not to pose as a nude model for the sake of art.
First, there are professional concerns, things like: this could end up in a gallery or professional portfolio. The model has to, in a sense, give up the rights to their image (literally in this personal case as the medium is photography). Am I comfortable with my peers seeing me naked, on a wall in a gallery? What would I represent by being there? What is my body going to be used to say? Will it be something I can agree with? All of these questions run through my head as an artist, and oddly enough, are answered by the character of the eyes behind the camera.
My friend, the artist, whom we will call Lloyd, is an artist in the truest sense of the word. I am very familiar with his work, and have seen how he has treated nude models in the past. He takes care not to objectify women, which is a plus for me, as a woman. Because of his professional detachment, I feel oddly at ease about my concerns with his "political" agenda.
There are more middling concerns, about the actual event of the modeling session. Does he just want to see me naked? Will he get some kind of sexual thrill out of this? Will I? Is that experience okay for the sake of Art?
My concerns on this note were honestly somewhat unwarranted. Lloyd is very open and out about his homosexuality, which eased my concerns about his possibly getting a sexual thrill out of this. Also, my being asexual and not attracted to him at all helps me to not have to worry about this situation possibly becoming sexually charged.
Finally, there are immense personal concerns. Am I comfortable enough with my body to allow someone else to see it? Take pictures of it? Don't I have too much fat? I don't fit what modern America calls "attractive."
These concerns are the ones that cannot be answered as easily as the rest, because, by nature, they can only be answered by the one asking them. I have body issues. You'd be hard pressed to find any female in America who doesn't. I have stretch marks from weight fluctuation. I am short and have breasts that are uncomfortably large for my small frame. Believe me, I am not boasting. I find nothing about me to be visual appealing or striking, but of course I'm biased. So, to get past this last hurdle, I did what the cautious part of me looses sleep over. In my mind, duty and responsibility always win out over comfort, so I said "yes." I agreed to model nude for my friends senior exhibit, because when am I ever going to get to do it again?
So, here I am, waiting for the call about "are you free to come to the lighting studio?" I've already battled second thoughts, but so far, the "ayes" still have it.
Stay tuned for the follow up post to find out how this story ends.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Perfectionism: Not as Perfect as One Might Think
We all have areas in our lives where we want to excel, but really, at what cost? What do we lose when we devote so much time and effort, sweat and tears into something instead of simply moving on? Is it possible that we can actually lose a part of ourselves?
Let's walk through a scenario or two. First: let us say that you have an appointment to keep that is several miles away, and your car decided that it no longer wanted to function properly. But fortune smiles on you because a close friend informs you that he was going that way anyway and doesn't mind giving you a ride. They tell you that they have a meeting prior to setting out, but it shouldn't last long. They'll meet you at their car around this time.
Now, under the guise of being careful, you show up 20 minutes early, and you feel horribly betrayed when arrive five minutes after the time they said. How could they be late?! Don't they know that you have somewhere to be? They must not understand how important this is! Frantically, you pace the parking lot until they arrive, of course, all smiles.
They tell you that they're sorry, they got stopped by a coworker on their way out the door, but you don't want to hear it. You don't care about their coworker. You need to make your appointment, and unlike some people, you can't be late. You have a reputation of being impeccably early, and nothing is going to stop you.
The entire car ride, the only thing you can see is the clock. You know that if traffic is fair, you will be there just on time; it might just be enough. But then, traffic slows to a stop. No, there's no way you are going to make you appointment now. Your perfect record is broken. You might as well not even go now. Never once, in your despair do you look up to see the car on the side of the road with its passenger door caved in from the crash that stopped traffic.
Too depressing? How about one more, different scenario? You have a presentation in class due tomorrow that is worth 30% of your grade. You're working frantically for weeks because you want to maintain your perfect 4.0 grade point average. You've stayed up until 3a.m. making sure that all your research is correct, and your presentation flows smoothly. At last, it is finished, A+ material. You save your project on your flash drive and go to sleep. The next morning you wake up and get dressed in a flourish because of your excitement. You even remember to eat breakfast, to make sure you're in peak condition.
You're sitting in class, taking notes on all the other presentations until it is finally your turn. You walk up to the computer and reach into your pocket. Maybe you left your flash drive in your backpack. Maybe it fell out and is under your desk. Maybe it was in your other pocket. Back pocket? Desk drawer? Just outside?
No, you left it on your desk back home. But your teacher isn't going let you have an extension; that wouldn't be fair. So you step back in front of the class sullenly and give your presentation based solely on memory, with no visuals, none of those awesome effects or anecdotes you spent so much time working on. How will your grade stay up now?
I tell these stories to say this: there are things in our lives that we can't control. Perfection may be something we strive for, but it is on many levels simply impossible. So, do your best, but don't hold yourself, or anyone for that matter, to a standard that is unreachable. Don't get caught up in the cycle of perfectionism that tears you and those around you down.
If you are not being a blessing to those around you, you are a lot farther from perfect than you may think.
Let's walk through a scenario or two. First: let us say that you have an appointment to keep that is several miles away, and your car decided that it no longer wanted to function properly. But fortune smiles on you because a close friend informs you that he was going that way anyway and doesn't mind giving you a ride. They tell you that they have a meeting prior to setting out, but it shouldn't last long. They'll meet you at their car around this time.
Now, under the guise of being careful, you show up 20 minutes early, and you feel horribly betrayed when arrive five minutes after the time they said. How could they be late?! Don't they know that you have somewhere to be? They must not understand how important this is! Frantically, you pace the parking lot until they arrive, of course, all smiles.
They tell you that they're sorry, they got stopped by a coworker on their way out the door, but you don't want to hear it. You don't care about their coworker. You need to make your appointment, and unlike some people, you can't be late. You have a reputation of being impeccably early, and nothing is going to stop you.
The entire car ride, the only thing you can see is the clock. You know that if traffic is fair, you will be there just on time; it might just be enough. But then, traffic slows to a stop. No, there's no way you are going to make you appointment now. Your perfect record is broken. You might as well not even go now. Never once, in your despair do you look up to see the car on the side of the road with its passenger door caved in from the crash that stopped traffic.
Too depressing? How about one more, different scenario? You have a presentation in class due tomorrow that is worth 30% of your grade. You're working frantically for weeks because you want to maintain your perfect 4.0 grade point average. You've stayed up until 3a.m. making sure that all your research is correct, and your presentation flows smoothly. At last, it is finished, A+ material. You save your project on your flash drive and go to sleep. The next morning you wake up and get dressed in a flourish because of your excitement. You even remember to eat breakfast, to make sure you're in peak condition.
You're sitting in class, taking notes on all the other presentations until it is finally your turn. You walk up to the computer and reach into your pocket. Maybe you left your flash drive in your backpack. Maybe it fell out and is under your desk. Maybe it was in your other pocket. Back pocket? Desk drawer? Just outside?
No, you left it on your desk back home. But your teacher isn't going let you have an extension; that wouldn't be fair. So you step back in front of the class sullenly and give your presentation based solely on memory, with no visuals, none of those awesome effects or anecdotes you spent so much time working on. How will your grade stay up now?
I tell these stories to say this: there are things in our lives that we can't control. Perfection may be something we strive for, but it is on many levels simply impossible. So, do your best, but don't hold yourself, or anyone for that matter, to a standard that is unreachable. Don't get caught up in the cycle of perfectionism that tears you and those around you down.
If you are not being a blessing to those around you, you are a lot farther from perfect than you may think.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
A Picture that is Irritating
http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=52350
Go look at this picture. Right now. You have nothing better to do, just go. Come back to me once you've taken a good hard look at it. I'm not going anywhere; I'll be here when you get back. Go on.
Did you see it? I mean really see it? Scary isn't it (and I don't mean the kid in the mask)?
First, let me just say that this picture does call out those luke-warm Christians who have no cause to champion. All Christians have been called by God, and while most have not been caused to lead the war on abortion rights, some have, and I appreciate them. I do not believe that I personally am called to combat abortion rights.
Abortion does not continue because Christians don't care, it continues because humans have this wonderful thing called "free will." This idea of "free will" is what allows us to love and act in compassion, but it also allows us to do other things, like stealing and indulging in chocolate. It allows us to do things we want, like enjoying the beauty of an Appalachian sunrise or voting in an upcoming election. Free will also allows people to get abortions, and carry signs condemning their fellow Christians for not throwing the country into chaos over what some women do with their lives. Let's take a look into the Bible real quick. The Bible is filled with prostitutes. Prostitutes who were redeemed, FORGIVEN! even. Jesus himself forgave a prostitute who would have been stoned otherwise.
You know, I think our emotions end up misplaced very easily. We can do nothing after someone has an abortion. Nothing we can do is going to bring that child back to life. So what good does it do to condemn our brothers and sisters for something they have no control over? Instead of holding up signs like these, how about we start holding ones that say: "Christians, Remember to love your neighbors!" or "Nothing can separate us from the love of God."?
This whole idea of people holding signs talking about how much "God hates YOU!" really pisses me off. I know that there probably is a place for it, but does it seriously work? Go look at Westboro Baptist Church, the "Christians" who protest soldiers' funerals, saying that they died to protect profanity and corruption. How can people who have experienced the LOVE of CHRIST, condemn the world outright? True we are called out of the law of the world, but we stay in the world to be the light. Who in their right mind will run towards the light if all it does is condemn them. These people tell the world that there is no loving God, there is no forgiveness, there is no abundant life, only judgment and death and condemnation. Oh yes, that's what Christianity is ALL ABOUT! (Please note the sarcasm.)
So, that's why these people piss me off. Yes, they challenge us to examine our lives and consider our own apathy, which is good, but we are told to reproach our brothers in love, not judgment.
Go look at this picture. Right now. You have nothing better to do, just go. Come back to me once you've taken a good hard look at it. I'm not going anywhere; I'll be here when you get back. Go on.
Did you see it? I mean really see it? Scary isn't it (and I don't mean the kid in the mask)?
First, let me just say that this picture does call out those luke-warm Christians who have no cause to champion. All Christians have been called by God, and while most have not been caused to lead the war on abortion rights, some have, and I appreciate them. I do not believe that I personally am called to combat abortion rights.
Abortion does not continue because Christians don't care, it continues because humans have this wonderful thing called "free will." This idea of "free will" is what allows us to love and act in compassion, but it also allows us to do other things, like stealing and indulging in chocolate. It allows us to do things we want, like enjoying the beauty of an Appalachian sunrise or voting in an upcoming election. Free will also allows people to get abortions, and carry signs condemning their fellow Christians for not throwing the country into chaos over what some women do with their lives. Let's take a look into the Bible real quick. The Bible is filled with prostitutes. Prostitutes who were redeemed, FORGIVEN! even. Jesus himself forgave a prostitute who would have been stoned otherwise.
You know, I think our emotions end up misplaced very easily. We can do nothing after someone has an abortion. Nothing we can do is going to bring that child back to life. So what good does it do to condemn our brothers and sisters for something they have no control over? Instead of holding up signs like these, how about we start holding ones that say: "Christians, Remember to love your neighbors!" or "Nothing can separate us from the love of God."?
This whole idea of people holding signs talking about how much "God hates YOU!" really pisses me off. I know that there probably is a place for it, but does it seriously work? Go look at Westboro Baptist Church, the "Christians" who protest soldiers' funerals, saying that they died to protect profanity and corruption. How can people who have experienced the LOVE of CHRIST, condemn the world outright? True we are called out of the law of the world, but we stay in the world to be the light. Who in their right mind will run towards the light if all it does is condemn them. These people tell the world that there is no loving God, there is no forgiveness, there is no abundant life, only judgment and death and condemnation. Oh yes, that's what Christianity is ALL ABOUT! (Please note the sarcasm.)
So, that's why these people piss me off. Yes, they challenge us to examine our lives and consider our own apathy, which is good, but we are told to reproach our brothers in love, not judgment.
Monday, August 30, 2010
CWO to sent up Propoganda for the Pope
London, September 2010, Pope Benedict will share the streets with fifteen of London's famous red buses carrying signs that simply say "Pope Benedict - Ordain Women Now." The CWO, or Catholic Women's Ordination, has paid a healthy sum to the city to use the buses as advertising space, and also plans to rally during one of the Pope's scheduled speeches.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100826/od_nm/us_britain_pope
So, what does this mean, for those Christians here in America? Well, to Catholics worldwide, should the CWO succeed in their endeavor, female priests will finally become a reality. Should the Pope decline to head the CWO'c demands, the possibility of further driving a wedge into the Catholic community would become imminent. So here stands Catholicism, on the verge of change, no matter what the Pope decides.
Now, I'm not Catholic, so at first, I have to ask myself: "What do I care?" Well, not being Catholic doesn't mean that what happens with the Pope doesn't affect me at all. Let's take a short trip down history lane. Judaism gave way to Christianity, which evolved into Catholicism, which split and helped give rise to Protestantism, and subsequently, all the non-Catholic Christian denominations. Ergo, just like what affects the Jewish nation affects us, what happens to Catholicism affects us.
If the Pope allows the ordination of female priests, it will become easier for other denominations to allow women into positions of authority. Currently, very few Christian denominations allow women into high positions, but that could change.
In all honest, I don't see the Pope ordaining women. I think it's sad that he most likely won't, but I feel that he will most likely hold to tradition. It seems like the Catholic thing to do. (Please don't think I am necessarily stereotyping all Catholics; I am just basing that statement on the knowledge that Catholicism leans towards conservatism and traditionalism.) So, odds are, in my opinion, the rift over sexism in the church will simply linger on.
What do you think?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100826/od_nm/us_britain_pope
So, what does this mean, for those Christians here in America? Well, to Catholics worldwide, should the CWO succeed in their endeavor, female priests will finally become a reality. Should the Pope decline to head the CWO'c demands, the possibility of further driving a wedge into the Catholic community would become imminent. So here stands Catholicism, on the verge of change, no matter what the Pope decides.
Now, I'm not Catholic, so at first, I have to ask myself: "What do I care?" Well, not being Catholic doesn't mean that what happens with the Pope doesn't affect me at all. Let's take a short trip down history lane. Judaism gave way to Christianity, which evolved into Catholicism, which split and helped give rise to Protestantism, and subsequently, all the non-Catholic Christian denominations. Ergo, just like what affects the Jewish nation affects us, what happens to Catholicism affects us.
If the Pope allows the ordination of female priests, it will become easier for other denominations to allow women into positions of authority. Currently, very few Christian denominations allow women into high positions, but that could change.
In all honest, I don't see the Pope ordaining women. I think it's sad that he most likely won't, but I feel that he will most likely hold to tradition. It seems like the Catholic thing to do. (Please don't think I am necessarily stereotyping all Catholics; I am just basing that statement on the knowledge that Catholicism leans towards conservatism and traditionalism.) So, odds are, in my opinion, the rift over sexism in the church will simply linger on.
What do you think?
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Job Search
In our current economy, many people feel that "rising" unemployment rates makes it nearly impossible to land a job, even a temporary job, much less a career. Well, let me first encourage any job seekers out there with some statistics from the Department of Labor Statistics:
"Total non-farm payroll employment declined by 131,000 in July, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 9.5 percent. Federal government employment fell, as 143,000 temporary workers hired for the decennial census completed their work. Private-sector payroll employment edged up by 71,000."
So, as you can see, there are still jobs out there. Employers are still hiring. So, let's go through a few options that might help with landing that all-important income.
1) First off, there's nothing that says willingness to work than simply pounding the pavement. However, nothing says desperate like pounding the pavement. It can also say "inexperienced." So, it may work, it may not. A lot of people do it, but that means it has to work every now and then, or else no one would do it.
2) Fork over the 50 cents to buy the local newspaper, or if your newspaper lists it's classified ads online, check them out there. Know what openings there are in your area. Know what employers are wanting out of someone in this capacity. Contact the company directly and let them see how good you could be for their image, reputation, productivity, etc.
3) Manage your profile on social networking sites. Many companies now check the way promising employees act on sites like Facebook and MySpace. If the smiling, well dressed, impressive candidate who walked through their door turns out to be a drunk flousey, your chances have just dropped, my friend.
4) Go to a temp agency. It may seem beneath you, but how desperate are you? If you need some kind of income, a temp agency may be the way to go.
5) Make sure you're qualified. This could mean anything from going back to school, to learning what not to put on an application. There are many online and print resources on how to write a resume, a CV, fill out an application, etc. Take advantage of those resources.
6) Check out news websites like Yahoo!. It was there that I came across this headline: "Can't Find a Job, College Grad? National Park Service Is Hiring." How awesome would it be to work for the National Park Service. Granted, it's a government job, but money is money.
So, whatever method you choose to pursue, remember to pray that God leads your life and your job hunt.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/110370/cant-find-a-job-college-grad-national-park-service-is-hiring
"Total non-farm payroll employment declined by 131,000 in July, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 9.5 percent. Federal government employment fell, as 143,000 temporary workers hired for the decennial census completed their work. Private-sector payroll employment edged up by 71,000."
So, as you can see, there are still jobs out there. Employers are still hiring. So, let's go through a few options that might help with landing that all-important income.
1) First off, there's nothing that says willingness to work than simply pounding the pavement. However, nothing says desperate like pounding the pavement. It can also say "inexperienced." So, it may work, it may not. A lot of people do it, but that means it has to work every now and then, or else no one would do it.
2) Fork over the 50 cents to buy the local newspaper, or if your newspaper lists it's classified ads online, check them out there. Know what openings there are in your area. Know what employers are wanting out of someone in this capacity. Contact the company directly and let them see how good you could be for their image, reputation, productivity, etc.
3) Manage your profile on social networking sites. Many companies now check the way promising employees act on sites like Facebook and MySpace. If the smiling, well dressed, impressive candidate who walked through their door turns out to be a drunk flousey, your chances have just dropped, my friend.
4) Go to a temp agency. It may seem beneath you, but how desperate are you? If you need some kind of income, a temp agency may be the way to go.
5) Make sure you're qualified. This could mean anything from going back to school, to learning what not to put on an application. There are many online and print resources on how to write a resume, a CV, fill out an application, etc. Take advantage of those resources.
6) Check out news websites like Yahoo!. It was there that I came across this headline: "Can't Find a Job, College Grad? National Park Service Is Hiring." How awesome would it be to work for the National Park Service. Granted, it's a government job, but money is money.
So, whatever method you choose to pursue, remember to pray that God leads your life and your job hunt.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/110370/cant-find-a-job-college-grad-national-park-service-is-hiring
Monday, August 23, 2010
Stuck in Traffic?
The vast majority of people I know hate getting stuck in traffic. Some of my co-workers will stay at work, off the clock to avoid running into busy school bus routes. Some of my classmates will leave over a half an hour early to avoid lunch hour congestion to travel through downtown.
While I will often give myself plenty of time to get from point A to point B, it is generally never to avoid. On the contrary, it is to allow for time "wasted" sitting in traffic. Whether it's on I65 heading to work, I64 to or from school, or just local roads heading across town, somehow or another, I always end up spending time stuck in traffic. So, aside from planning on, and jamming to the radio, I have discovered a number of ways to get through those long moments when one can't to anything but stare at the same three license plates.
So here are some of the things I do, to keep patience and not get overly frustrated with time lost in transit:
1) Turn off the radio and look out at the horizon. Taking in the beauty of the moment often serves to help take my mind off of the fact that I have moved three feet in the past five minutes. Look at the trees or buildings. Take a few moments to cloud-watch. Check out the stars, if you're caught in night road construction.
2) People watch. Now, obviously be careful because heavy traffic is often prime-time to run into someone experiencing road-rage, so don't make eye contact with someone visibly irritated. Instead, look at some of the makes and models of cars around. Imagine who these people might be and where they are going, or what they are leaving. The man in the Volkswagen just in front of you may be a frugal middle-class businessman who's fallen on hard times. Maybe he needs prayer because he was recently laid off and his wife is threatening to leave him because he can't support her and their two children on his unemployment check. Just people watch and imagine some scenarios.
3) Take some time to pray. I know it may sound odd, but picture God sitting in the seat next to you. Tell Him about your day, your relationships, your dreams. Ask Him questions like "God, what do you think about last night's news? I know that story about Pakistan was really depressing, but there has to be some good in that part of the world, right? You know, I think I heard something about missionaries going over to help feed some of those starving children. Thank You for those people." Speak to Him out loud; it makes it more real, at least for me. And don't worry about if other people are looking at you funny, they think you're singing along with the radio.
So next time you find yourself stuck in traffic, don't get frustrated, practice love. Practice the presence of God, and remember, at least this traffic jam is not going to last for 9 days like this one in China:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100823/sc_afp/chinaroadtraffic
While I will often give myself plenty of time to get from point A to point B, it is generally never to avoid. On the contrary, it is to allow for time "wasted" sitting in traffic. Whether it's on I65 heading to work, I64 to or from school, or just local roads heading across town, somehow or another, I always end up spending time stuck in traffic. So, aside from planning on, and jamming to the radio, I have discovered a number of ways to get through those long moments when one can't to anything but stare at the same three license plates.
So here are some of the things I do, to keep patience and not get overly frustrated with time lost in transit:
1) Turn off the radio and look out at the horizon. Taking in the beauty of the moment often serves to help take my mind off of the fact that I have moved three feet in the past five minutes. Look at the trees or buildings. Take a few moments to cloud-watch. Check out the stars, if you're caught in night road construction.
2) People watch. Now, obviously be careful because heavy traffic is often prime-time to run into someone experiencing road-rage, so don't make eye contact with someone visibly irritated. Instead, look at some of the makes and models of cars around. Imagine who these people might be and where they are going, or what they are leaving. The man in the Volkswagen just in front of you may be a frugal middle-class businessman who's fallen on hard times. Maybe he needs prayer because he was recently laid off and his wife is threatening to leave him because he can't support her and their two children on his unemployment check. Just people watch and imagine some scenarios.
3) Take some time to pray. I know it may sound odd, but picture God sitting in the seat next to you. Tell Him about your day, your relationships, your dreams. Ask Him questions like "God, what do you think about last night's news? I know that story about Pakistan was really depressing, but there has to be some good in that part of the world, right? You know, I think I heard something about missionaries going over to help feed some of those starving children. Thank You for those people." Speak to Him out loud; it makes it more real, at least for me. And don't worry about if other people are looking at you funny, they think you're singing along with the radio.
So next time you find yourself stuck in traffic, don't get frustrated, practice love. Practice the presence of God, and remember, at least this traffic jam is not going to last for 9 days like this one in China:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100823/sc_afp/chinaroadtraffic
Friday, August 20, 2010
An Irish Proverb
"The three sharpest eyes are a blacksmith on a nail, a priest on his parish and a young girl on a boy."
Think about it.
Think about it.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Convents and Sisterhoods
Okay, so:
Just as a thought, I have considered devoting my life to God and becoming a nun. Part of the problem with this is that I have no desire to convert to Catholicism or Buddhism. There is good news though, there are indeed protestant convents. Again there are problems, they are all orthodox denominations: Methodism, Lutheranism, Anglicanism, etc. Being part of a Christian church, and no, not DoC, I don't really want to convert per se.
So, here in lies the problem: should I decide that this is the path for me, and I'm not 100% sold out, I have nowhere to go. I could make the vows on my own to God, and I believe that they would be binding and honored by God, but not by man. Oh well though. Just a thought.
Just as a thought, I have considered devoting my life to God and becoming a nun. Part of the problem with this is that I have no desire to convert to Catholicism or Buddhism. There is good news though, there are indeed protestant convents. Again there are problems, they are all orthodox denominations: Methodism, Lutheranism, Anglicanism, etc. Being part of a Christian church, and no, not DoC, I don't really want to convert per se.
So, here in lies the problem: should I decide that this is the path for me, and I'm not 100% sold out, I have nowhere to go. I could make the vows on my own to God, and I believe that they would be binding and honored by God, but not by man. Oh well though. Just a thought.
Blog Moved
The blog at onesteplife.blogspot.com has moved to 2ndsteps.blogspot.com due to the page not letting me update my email address.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Open Call
Okay, should anyone stumble across this site, I am currently taking suggestions for blog topics. Should you have a topic you wish to discuss, or wish to watch me dispute with myself, just comment here or email me.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Biblical Sexualities: part 5
The final installment of this series on sexualities is finally here. "What is it?" you may ask, and you are about to find out. We have looked at what the Bible says about Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Bi-, Pan-, Poly-, and Asexuality; so what's left? Really? The one thing that all of these have in common is that they are a certainty in one's life. Ergo, the last thing to discuss is the most fluid sexuality, the one that is still. . .
Questioning.
Many adolescents go through phases of uncertainty regarding their sexuality, as well as many other things about their life, including their faith and what not. Now, I want to take the approach of likening these things: faith and sexuality. There is a certain point when decisions start being made about whether or not to adopt their parents' beliefs. By questioning one's beliefs in God and religion, we determine where we as free-thinking individuals stand with God. We develop our own unique relationship with God, and in doing we either affirm our parents' beliefs our refuse them.
The same can be said of sexuality. From childhood we are presented with models of sexuality that we can either internalize them or reject them. By taking the time to truly question our sexuality, we can determine our own identity, what is truly in our hearts and not just what the world tells us to believe, who to love. Obviously the Bible does not talk much on the topic questioning one's sexuality, however, I did find something to talk about.
Genesis 1:"21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, 'Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.' 23 And there was evening, and there was morning--the fifth day. 24 And God said, 'Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.' And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good."
So, God tells us to "be fruitful and multiply," which we often take to mean that God also designed the sex drive, which tells us to "get happy." And because Faith and Sexuality are interconnected, questioning one's sexuality should be just as natural as questioning one's faith. There is a preferred way to deal with sexuality should you wish to follow the "multiply" portion of life not realizing the fact that our world has too many mouths to feed on such poor leadership, Heterosexuality is the way to go, buy hey, I can't tell you how to live your life.
So let me close out this series with a passage from Romans 14:
"22 So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23 But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin."
Questioning.
Many adolescents go through phases of uncertainty regarding their sexuality, as well as many other things about their life, including their faith and what not. Now, I want to take the approach of likening these things: faith and sexuality. There is a certain point when decisions start being made about whether or not to adopt their parents' beliefs. By questioning one's beliefs in God and religion, we determine where we as free-thinking individuals stand with God. We develop our own unique relationship with God, and in doing we either affirm our parents' beliefs our refuse them.
The same can be said of sexuality. From childhood we are presented with models of sexuality that we can either internalize them or reject them. By taking the time to truly question our sexuality, we can determine our own identity, what is truly in our hearts and not just what the world tells us to believe, who to love. Obviously the Bible does not talk much on the topic questioning one's sexuality, however, I did find something to talk about.
Genesis 1:"21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, 'Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.' 23 And there was evening, and there was morning--the fifth day. 24 And God said, 'Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.' And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good."
So, God tells us to "be fruitful and multiply," which we often take to mean that God also designed the sex drive, which tells us to "get happy." And because Faith and Sexuality are interconnected, questioning one's sexuality should be just as natural as questioning one's faith. There is a preferred way to deal with sexuality should you wish to follow the "multiply" portion of life not realizing the fact that our world has too many mouths to feed on such poor leadership, Heterosexuality is the way to go, buy hey, I can't tell you how to live your life.
So let me close out this series with a passage from Romans 14:
"22 So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23 But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin."
Friday, July 2, 2010
Biblical Sexualities: part 4
In this series on Biblical perspectives on the various sexual orientations, we have come to a certain end. By an end, I mean to say that I have covered the vast majority of sexualities (with the exception of Poly-sexuality, but the argument about Pan-sexuality pretty much can cover that as well). However, for those of you who were astute enough to notice, there is another piece to this puzzle. (Actually, there will be a part 5, but you can find out what that is going to be tomorrow.) Currently, the missing piece is: the lack of sexuality.
Asexuality
A definition might be in order for everyone who is unfamiliar with Asexuality, and think I'm talking about people who reproduce by budding. Someone who is Asexual generally does not feel sexual attraction towards anyone: men, women, trans, androgynous, etc. This is not to say that they cannot fall in love, as many have what are known as "romantic drives." Also, many Asexuals also have a sex drive, it just is not tuned towards any orientation. Also, Asexuality is not Celibacy, though I will briefly discuss both here. Many, but not all Asexuals, find the act of sexual intercourse to repulsive, which could honestly make a celibate lifestyle easier, should one choose that lifestyle. But anyway, let's talk about the Bible and eunuchs.
Matthew 19:10 "The disciples said to him, 'If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.' 11 Jesus replied, 'Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.'"
Now, obviously this passage talks about celibacy, but it can provide us some insight to how the Bible views Asexuality. Being Asexual is like someone being born a eunuch, (not really, but for the sake of comparison, roll with it). One who was born a eunuch may still feel a romantic attraction, but due to lacking the capability to make certain hormones from birth, may never have experienced sexual attraction. They can still to valuable Kingdom work, and just as back in the contextual times, there were certain tasks only given to eunuchs, there are certain things that Asexuals can do more easily because they lack what Paul later calls the "distraction" of sexual desire.
1 Corinthians 7:"8 Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.". . .
"27 Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. 28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this. 29 What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none". . .
"32 I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the LORD's affairs--how he can please the LORD. 33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world--how he can please his wife-- 34 and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the LORD's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the LORD in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world--how she can please her husband. 35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the LORD."
Okay, so it is better never to marry. In fact, don't just not ever marry, don't seek to be married or locked in a consensual relationship because you're actually going to care about your spouse/ significant other. There is a bit of sense here though, concerning the risk of placing your spouse above God in your life.
As stated previously, Paul is primarily talking about celibacy, but it also has insight into the life of an Asexual. By not giving into sexual desire, one is better able to focus on other things, in Paul's case: spreading the gospel. So, while in Mathew, we see that the Bible tells us that choosing celibacy for the Kingdom of Heaven is to be preferred over all, but Paul's extrapolation tells us that Asexuals are not to be put down just because they may find it easier to focus on Kingdom work. Now, I'm not saying that Asexuals are preferred by God, because it was made clear that chosen celibacy is preferred, at least according to Paul.
So, yeah. One more installment, stick around until tomorrow night and find out what the last edition is.
Asexuality
A definition might be in order for everyone who is unfamiliar with Asexuality, and think I'm talking about people who reproduce by budding. Someone who is Asexual generally does not feel sexual attraction towards anyone: men, women, trans, androgynous, etc. This is not to say that they cannot fall in love, as many have what are known as "romantic drives." Also, many Asexuals also have a sex drive, it just is not tuned towards any orientation. Also, Asexuality is not Celibacy, though I will briefly discuss both here. Many, but not all Asexuals, find the act of sexual intercourse to repulsive, which could honestly make a celibate lifestyle easier, should one choose that lifestyle. But anyway, let's talk about the Bible and eunuchs.
Matthew 19:10 "The disciples said to him, 'If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.' 11 Jesus replied, 'Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.'"
Now, obviously this passage talks about celibacy, but it can provide us some insight to how the Bible views Asexuality. Being Asexual is like someone being born a eunuch, (not really, but for the sake of comparison, roll with it). One who was born a eunuch may still feel a romantic attraction, but due to lacking the capability to make certain hormones from birth, may never have experienced sexual attraction. They can still to valuable Kingdom work, and just as back in the contextual times, there were certain tasks only given to eunuchs, there are certain things that Asexuals can do more easily because they lack what Paul later calls the "distraction" of sexual desire.
1 Corinthians 7:"8 Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9 But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.". . .
"27 Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife. 28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this. 29 What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none". . .
"32 I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the LORD's affairs--how he can please the LORD. 33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world--how he can please his wife-- 34 and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the LORD's affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the LORD in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world--how she can please her husband. 35 I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the LORD."
Okay, so it is better never to marry. In fact, don't just not ever marry, don't seek to be married or locked in a consensual relationship because you're actually going to care about your spouse/ significant other. There is a bit of sense here though, concerning the risk of placing your spouse above God in your life.
As stated previously, Paul is primarily talking about celibacy, but it also has insight into the life of an Asexual. By not giving into sexual desire, one is better able to focus on other things, in Paul's case: spreading the gospel. So, while in Mathew, we see that the Bible tells us that choosing celibacy for the Kingdom of Heaven is to be preferred over all, but Paul's extrapolation tells us that Asexuals are not to be put down just because they may find it easier to focus on Kingdom work. Now, I'm not saying that Asexuals are preferred by God, because it was made clear that chosen celibacy is preferred, at least according to Paul.
So, yeah. One more installment, stick around until tomorrow night and find out what the last edition is.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Biblical Sexualities: part 3
What did the American Psychological Association consider to be a mental disorder until 1973? What do many fundamentalist Christians, including Dr. James Dobson, believe can still be cured? That's right; today I will be discussing homosexuality.
Homosexuality
Okay, this short essay is going to be set up a little differently. I will be addressing each verse dealing with homosexuality one at a time, starting with the story or Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19.
"v4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom--both young and old--surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.' 6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 7 and said, 'No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing. 8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.'"
These verses are generally pointed to when someone wants to use the Bible to condemn homosexual acts. That view however, overlooks an even more grievous crime (in context of the time): disrespecting the laws of hospitality towards guests. The ancient Hebrews, like many ancient civilizations, had strict standards regarding how guests are to be kept. Hosts took them into their homes, provided them with the best meal they could, and let them sleep under their protection. If a guest broke a law in the town, it was often the host's responsibility to pay. Lot offered up his two daughters to the crowd because public multiple rape was less of an atrocity than violating guests.
Romans 1:25-27: "25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
Now here, Paul talks about men "being given over to shameful lusts." He talks about exchanging natural relations for unnatural ones, but he also says than each receives their due penalty for their perversions. Now, from a human standpoint, and also taking into account other passages (Romans 14) discussing stumbling blocks, if each person holds an account of their own perversions, do they really need me breathing down their necks telling them that what I believe says they're wrong? No, they've got enough to deal with considering that they're still openly persecuted. As I mentioned in the last edition, Homosexual people need love, just like any of the rest of us.
Leviticus 18:22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."
This is the big one now isn't it? Paul also discusses in later in his epistles. The funny thing is that people seem to forget that this law is written down with others like "don't eat a calf in it's mother's milk." Now each of these Levitical laws had it's place in the day they were written. Due to the technology of the time, it was dangerous to eat most of the animals because of communicable diseases. Many of the laws governing sexual relations had the purpose of preventing common incestuous birth defects and disrespectful affronts to elders in the family. At the time, reputation was key to political influence and honor was what made and kept the family. It was highly dishonorable to one's family to sleep with a close relative or someone of the opposite sex. (Also, and no disrespect to the homosexual community here, but many diseases have often been associated with homosexual relationships [AIDS], which gives this passage more credibility being placed besides laws governing food to control diseases.)
Now to deal with Paul and his epistles dealing with sexual immorality. First, we must remember that Paul was trained as a Pharisee, which mean that he had grown up learning all of the classical Jewish law: the Laws of Moses. Christ himself tells us that we are no longer bound under the law (but if we love Him we will keep His commandments). Most Bible scholars have no problem with saying that the laws we are freed from include the Levitical food laws, but not the Levitcal sexual laws. Now, does that sound like picking and choosing to anyone else? Paul is advocating the laws he learned; preaching Jewish laws to a Gentile community, because that's what he knows. No one is going to fault him for deferring to what is familiar, we all do it. However, there are also reasons why "sexual immorality" is not so desirable, including various health reasons. AIDS is most prominent among gay men, therefore one good way to keep yourself free from AIDS is to avoid sexual contact with gay men. That's not to say that just because a man is homosexual means he has AIDS or is a person not to be associated with. On the contrary, I have many gay friends who do not have any STDs and they are quite intelligent and good friends.
In conclusion, as I've stated before, seeking love is not a sin. No one should be put down because they want to feel loved, but we should all remember that true love first came from God and there are reasons behind the commandments He gave us.
Homosexuality
Okay, this short essay is going to be set up a little differently. I will be addressing each verse dealing with homosexuality one at a time, starting with the story or Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19.
"v4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom--both young and old--surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.' 6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 7 and said, 'No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing. 8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.'"
These verses are generally pointed to when someone wants to use the Bible to condemn homosexual acts. That view however, overlooks an even more grievous crime (in context of the time): disrespecting the laws of hospitality towards guests. The ancient Hebrews, like many ancient civilizations, had strict standards regarding how guests are to be kept. Hosts took them into their homes, provided them with the best meal they could, and let them sleep under their protection. If a guest broke a law in the town, it was often the host's responsibility to pay. Lot offered up his two daughters to the crowd because public multiple rape was less of an atrocity than violating guests.
Romans 1:25-27: "25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
Now here, Paul talks about men "being given over to shameful lusts." He talks about exchanging natural relations for unnatural ones, but he also says than each receives their due penalty for their perversions. Now, from a human standpoint, and also taking into account other passages (Romans 14) discussing stumbling blocks, if each person holds an account of their own perversions, do they really need me breathing down their necks telling them that what I believe says they're wrong? No, they've got enough to deal with considering that they're still openly persecuted. As I mentioned in the last edition, Homosexual people need love, just like any of the rest of us.
Leviticus 18:22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."
This is the big one now isn't it? Paul also discusses in later in his epistles. The funny thing is that people seem to forget that this law is written down with others like "don't eat a calf in it's mother's milk." Now each of these Levitical laws had it's place in the day they were written. Due to the technology of the time, it was dangerous to eat most of the animals because of communicable diseases. Many of the laws governing sexual relations had the purpose of preventing common incestuous birth defects and disrespectful affronts to elders in the family. At the time, reputation was key to political influence and honor was what made and kept the family. It was highly dishonorable to one's family to sleep with a close relative or someone of the opposite sex. (Also, and no disrespect to the homosexual community here, but many diseases have often been associated with homosexual relationships [AIDS], which gives this passage more credibility being placed besides laws governing food to control diseases.)
Now to deal with Paul and his epistles dealing with sexual immorality. First, we must remember that Paul was trained as a Pharisee, which mean that he had grown up learning all of the classical Jewish law: the Laws of Moses. Christ himself tells us that we are no longer bound under the law (but if we love Him we will keep His commandments). Most Bible scholars have no problem with saying that the laws we are freed from include the Levitical food laws, but not the Levitcal sexual laws. Now, does that sound like picking and choosing to anyone else? Paul is advocating the laws he learned; preaching Jewish laws to a Gentile community, because that's what he knows. No one is going to fault him for deferring to what is familiar, we all do it. However, there are also reasons why "sexual immorality" is not so desirable, including various health reasons. AIDS is most prominent among gay men, therefore one good way to keep yourself free from AIDS is to avoid sexual contact with gay men. That's not to say that just because a man is homosexual means he has AIDS or is a person not to be associated with. On the contrary, I have many gay friends who do not have any STDs and they are quite intelligent and good friends.
In conclusion, as I've stated before, seeking love is not a sin. No one should be put down because they want to feel loved, but we should all remember that true love first came from God and there are reasons behind the commandments He gave us.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Biblical Sexualities: part 2
"What is 'The Kinsey Scale?'
The Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale, sometimes referred to as the “Kinsey Scale,” was developed by Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues Wardell Pomeroy and Clyde Martin in 1948, in order to account for research findings that showed people did not fit into neat and exclusive heterosexual or homosexual categories." (http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/research/ak-hhscale.html)
Bisexuality and Pan-sexuality
Bisexuality and Pan-sexuality, in Biblical terms are a bit harder to deal with because they are orientations never specifically mentioned. On the other hand, hey may also be the easiest to deal with, because they are rather nonspecific. What I mean to say, is that Bisexuality and Pan-sexuality are much more fluid that strict heterosexuality or strict homosexuality. People who identify as Bisexual claim to be attracted to both males and females; Pan-sexuals are attracted to people regardless of gender (consider it as being attracted to men, women, transsexuals, neutrois, the androgynous, etc.).
First let's deal with Bisexuality only; life is easier this way. Okay, to begin with, the Bible never actually mentions bisexuality. The problem is that the Bible discusses Heterosexuality favorably (arguably, as discussed in the previous edition), and Homosexuality unfavorably (as we will discuss in the next edition). Because Bisexuality spans both Hetero- and Homosexuality, it is a bit unfair to say that the Bible either condones or condemns Bisexual behavior. It would be arguably more accurate to claim that the Bible smiles upon those who engage in heterosexual behavior, yet frowns on those who engage in homosexual behavior. Therefore, could it be said that the Bible does not frown on Bisexuals who date those people of the opposite sex? On the opposite hand, few fundamentalists would disagree if I said that the Bible DOES frown upon Bisexuals who date those of the same sex.
So, as long as Bisexuals deny, discipline, and/or try to overcome half of their sexuality, they pass under the radar, because as far as anyone knows, they are functionally Heterosexual.
Now, Pan-sexuality is a slight bit harder to deal with. In an effort to better illustrate some issues that are exclusive to Pan-sexuality, let me tell two short, real (as in they've actually happened) stories. First, an example from my own life:
I was in a relationship with a man for over four years and most everything was good and pretty much normal. This was, until my boyfriend informed me that he has come to terms with his being transgendered. He was a woman in a man's body. She has now legally changed her name and begun hormone therapy. Hypothetically, had we continued dating, would that have constituted Homosexuality, because she is now technically female?
Another story, in which I will change the names to protect the innocent, begins with a friend of mine from school. Meagan began talking to this guy on the internet. She liked him and he liked her, and everything was fine and normal. This was, until Richard told Meagan that he was transgendered. He was born female, but had now been through the whole process of hormone therapy and is male except for the actual sexual reassignment surgery. Because Richard was born female, does his dating a woman constitute Homosexuality?
As food for thought, I would pose these questions. Are these events the same? Do they really constitute events of Homosexuality/ same sex Pan-sexuality? Is dating someone who is transgendered/neutrois defined under the blanket term of sexual immorality?
These people are not unlovable. In fact, they need the love of God just like everyone else, perhaps even more so. Perhaps there is a reason that there are people who are willing to seek love in any format. There is no sin in wanting to be loved.
The Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale, sometimes referred to as the “Kinsey Scale,” was developed by Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues Wardell Pomeroy and Clyde Martin in 1948, in order to account for research findings that showed people did not fit into neat and exclusive heterosexual or homosexual categories." (http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/research/ak-hhscale.html)
Bisexuality and Pan-sexuality
Bisexuality and Pan-sexuality, in Biblical terms are a bit harder to deal with because they are orientations never specifically mentioned. On the other hand, hey may also be the easiest to deal with, because they are rather nonspecific. What I mean to say, is that Bisexuality and Pan-sexuality are much more fluid that strict heterosexuality or strict homosexuality. People who identify as Bisexual claim to be attracted to both males and females; Pan-sexuals are attracted to people regardless of gender (consider it as being attracted to men, women, transsexuals, neutrois, the androgynous, etc.).
First let's deal with Bisexuality only; life is easier this way. Okay, to begin with, the Bible never actually mentions bisexuality. The problem is that the Bible discusses Heterosexuality favorably (arguably, as discussed in the previous edition), and Homosexuality unfavorably (as we will discuss in the next edition). Because Bisexuality spans both Hetero- and Homosexuality, it is a bit unfair to say that the Bible either condones or condemns Bisexual behavior. It would be arguably more accurate to claim that the Bible smiles upon those who engage in heterosexual behavior, yet frowns on those who engage in homosexual behavior. Therefore, could it be said that the Bible does not frown on Bisexuals who date those people of the opposite sex? On the opposite hand, few fundamentalists would disagree if I said that the Bible DOES frown upon Bisexuals who date those of the same sex.
So, as long as Bisexuals deny, discipline, and/or try to overcome half of their sexuality, they pass under the radar, because as far as anyone knows, they are functionally Heterosexual.
Now, Pan-sexuality is a slight bit harder to deal with. In an effort to better illustrate some issues that are exclusive to Pan-sexuality, let me tell two short, real (as in they've actually happened) stories. First, an example from my own life:
I was in a relationship with a man for over four years and most everything was good and pretty much normal. This was, until my boyfriend informed me that he has come to terms with his being transgendered. He was a woman in a man's body. She has now legally changed her name and begun hormone therapy. Hypothetically, had we continued dating, would that have constituted Homosexuality, because she is now technically female?
Another story, in which I will change the names to protect the innocent, begins with a friend of mine from school. Meagan began talking to this guy on the internet. She liked him and he liked her, and everything was fine and normal. This was, until Richard told Meagan that he was transgendered. He was born female, but had now been through the whole process of hormone therapy and is male except for the actual sexual reassignment surgery. Because Richard was born female, does his dating a woman constitute Homosexuality?
As food for thought, I would pose these questions. Are these events the same? Do they really constitute events of Homosexuality/ same sex Pan-sexuality? Is dating someone who is transgendered/neutrois defined under the blanket term of sexual immorality?
These people are not unlovable. In fact, they need the love of God just like everyone else, perhaps even more so. Perhaps there is a reason that there are people who are willing to seek love in any format. There is no sin in wanting to be loved.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Biblical Sexualities: part 1
So, I have a friend who likes to get on a soap-box about how the Bible condemns homosexuality. Now, I have read the Bible cover to cover (except for about half of psalms and proverbs). There were some interesting finds, familiar stories and long rambling lists. Here though, I would like to discuss the views of the Biblical stance on the spectrum of sexualities as we understand it today. Let's start with the easy one:
Heterosexuality
Genesis 2:24 and Mark 10:7 state that "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." This passage is one of the most quoted in reference to the Bible's PRO stance on heterosexuality. The "reason" in question is found in the previous verse in Genesis: "The man said, 'This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man.'" Now, some people will also tell you that even though this particular woman was Eve, she was not Adam's first wife. Many cultures believe that Adam's first wife was a woman named Lilith, who was created at the same time as man, and not after from his rib. The legends surrounding Lilith tell of how she refused to submit to Adam and went as far to lie with Archangel Samael. One question that this raises is "Why did Adam have to have a new wife?" Aside from the fact that his first wife was a cheating whore, she was also the first feminist. So, does the Bible condemn feminists, whores, or women? Well, it's accepted that women are not condemned. The Bible does talk about promiscuous women and how they are foolish, sinful, and should be stoned to death, however, God commanded one of his servants, Hosea, to marry a whore, ergo it's possible that they can be redeemed. Several times throughout the Bible though, author's discuss women being subordinate to men, so who knows on the feminism note?
Anyway, we're discussing heterosexuality, not feminism. Many people never make it to the point of the Bible advocating heterosexuality, only the point of it condemning homosexuality. Paul, a disciple of Christ, tells the church in Corinth that "It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command." (1 Corinthians 7:1-6) Now we're getting somewhere. Here, Paul advocates celibacy, which will be discussed in a later section of this discussion. The interesting thing though is that Paul promotes marriage only because of immorality. Why would he do this? Was the sexual immorality he combating homosexuality, as many people believe, or was is promiscuity? Honestly, which seems more likely in this context?
Do I really have to answer for you? Really? Okay, *sigh* it's promiscuity, prostitution, frequent unprotected sexual activities among multiple individuals which often results in spreading STDs, STIs, children that parents can't afford, and lots of mental trauma.
So, while Paul does set up a heterosexual model, he does so out of concession not only for health reasons, but also for the primary logical reason, that heterosexuality is the only childbearing model of sexuality that we have.
And there we go. It doesn't sound as great as it did in my head, but it'll serve for now. Open comments time!
Heterosexuality
Genesis 2:24 and Mark 10:7 state that "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." This passage is one of the most quoted in reference to the Bible's PRO stance on heterosexuality. The "reason" in question is found in the previous verse in Genesis: "The man said, 'This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man.'" Now, some people will also tell you that even though this particular woman was Eve, she was not Adam's first wife. Many cultures believe that Adam's first wife was a woman named Lilith, who was created at the same time as man, and not after from his rib. The legends surrounding Lilith tell of how she refused to submit to Adam and went as far to lie with Archangel Samael. One question that this raises is "Why did Adam have to have a new wife?" Aside from the fact that his first wife was a cheating whore, she was also the first feminist. So, does the Bible condemn feminists, whores, or women? Well, it's accepted that women are not condemned. The Bible does talk about promiscuous women and how they are foolish, sinful, and should be stoned to death, however, God commanded one of his servants, Hosea, to marry a whore, ergo it's possible that they can be redeemed. Several times throughout the Bible though, author's discuss women being subordinate to men, so who knows on the feminism note?
Anyway, we're discussing heterosexuality, not feminism. Many people never make it to the point of the Bible advocating heterosexuality, only the point of it condemning homosexuality. Paul, a disciple of Christ, tells the church in Corinth that "It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command." (1 Corinthians 7:1-6) Now we're getting somewhere. Here, Paul advocates celibacy, which will be discussed in a later section of this discussion. The interesting thing though is that Paul promotes marriage only because of immorality. Why would he do this? Was the sexual immorality he combating homosexuality, as many people believe, or was is promiscuity? Honestly, which seems more likely in this context?
Do I really have to answer for you? Really? Okay, *sigh* it's promiscuity, prostitution, frequent unprotected sexual activities among multiple individuals which often results in spreading STDs, STIs, children that parents can't afford, and lots of mental trauma.
So, while Paul does set up a heterosexual model, he does so out of concession not only for health reasons, but also for the primary logical reason, that heterosexuality is the only childbearing model of sexuality that we have.
And there we go. It doesn't sound as great as it did in my head, but it'll serve for now. Open comments time!
Hiatus
Okay, so. . .
Even though I know no one actually follows this blog, I'd like to just say that I'm back from my school-year long hiatus. Having returned, I would like to start somewhere near where I left off, but that will have to also start a new post, so here we go!
Even though I know no one actually follows this blog, I'd like to just say that I'm back from my school-year long hiatus. Having returned, I would like to start somewhere near where I left off, but that will have to also start a new post, so here we go!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)