The "Lens of Love" reapplied

A few years ago I wrote a post that was driven by a conversation we had with a friend of ours from church, one where I came to the conclusion that the core of Christianity can be summed up by one directive: Love God (and, in doing so, love your neighbor). Everything else naturally stems from it.

Since I believe that God is love and anything that is of love is of God (and vice versa!), I brought up the concept of a "lens of love" through which your actions can be filtered: do your actions pass the test of love?

At the time, I applied the post mainly to the issue of whether or not homosexuality is a sin. Recently, however, I was engaged in some debate about another part of Scripture that insists that only men can be pastors/elders in the church, and, as an offshoot, that women must submit to their husbands.

Now, either side can pick apart specific verses to make their case. One can point to the creation story of Adam and Eve as evidence of a "created order". Or one can argue that the historical context addresses false teachings (that happened to be done by women who had likewise been taught wrong) and not women themselves as a whole.

I do believe it's important to consider the historical and cultural context in which a verse in question was written. EVERYONE does this to some degree. I don't think there's anyone who really takes the Bible 100% literally, or we'd all be following a bunch of arcane rules about wearing jewelry, mixing fabrics, and dealing with women on the rag.

In this case, for instance, I'd argue that Scripture says masters should treat their slaves well, and that slaves should submit to their masters, but that doesn't mean the Bible condones slavery-- it was just addressing examples of godly living for the circumstances of the day. Circumstances that include not only slavery but a very patriarchal society, one where women had few rights and were fully dependent on their husbands. In those days, "submit to your man" was very much the norm, maybe even a downright survival mechanism for women.

But where do you draw the line? 

After all, one could argue, even applying context is just another form of human (i.e. fallible) interpretation, so when you encounter specific guidance like this, where do you draw the line between applying contextual interpretation, and taking it literally (ignoring, for the moment, that even literal interpretation involves linguistic context)?

Well, that's where the "lens of love" comes into play.

No matter how you slice and dice it, claiming that only men can be pastors and that husbands must be heads of the household says only one glaringly obvious thing: that women are inferior to men. The "best" arguments I've seen in favor of these principles are always quick to defend themselves against this charge, insisting that men and women are indeed equal beings in the eyes of the Lord, they just have different roles to play. Biologically, that may be true-- Schwarzenegger's "Junior" notwithstanding, women are the ones who bear children.

But we're more than just biological beings, aren't we? That's the whole point of having a spirit and a soul, the whole point of being created in God's image.

So if you're saying that men and women are equal in the eyes of the Lord but have different roles to play, you're basically saying that men and women are "separate but equal". Gee-- why does that sound so familiar? That didn't really fly too well during the civil rights movement, and it doesn't really fly too well today. And for good reason:

When you examine this claim, that one fellow human being is inferior to you, through the "lens of love", it is most decidedly NOT a loving claim. By any stretch of the imagination. It fails the "love" test. You cannot claim that men and women have equal worth and yet relegate them to specific roles within the church and family based solely on gender. Therefore, I reject the notion that only men can be pastors or that women should submit to their husbands. Not because I'm part of a culture that promotes feminist ideals, but because those notions are the antithesis to love.

This is also why I continue to circle back to the single, lone directive in the Bible that is completely free of cultural and historical context: Love God, love your neighbor. Everything else just follows. And in this case, loving your neighbor means treating them and valuing them as human beings of equal worth to your own, no more, no less.

N'est-ce-pas?

Birthday Fun

Last week I celebrated my 36th birthday. It's not exactly a milestone, unless you count the Chinese zodiac, in which case, yes-- after 36 years, it's cycled back to my sign, the year of the Snake :-)

But it was probably THE most fun I've ever had!

It started out on Thursday, the actual day OF my birthday, when, in keeping with office tradition, my co-workers broke out the cake and ice cream, and we hung out in the conference room, chatting, snacking, and relaxing for an hour.

The next day, Friday, I took the day off work so I could accompany Todd at "Grandparents/Special Guests Day" at his school. I'm extra glad I took the time to go, because the look on his face when he saw me arrive for the flag salute in the morning was priceless. He was soooo excited to lead me to his classroom and partake of the planned activities together.

All the special guests got to sit in the kids' seats, and together we worked on making "quilt squares" out of construction paper together. Each quilt square consisted of cutout traces of our hands, common personality traits, favorite Bible verse, and a picture of a favorite memory. Afterward, we enjoyed a mid-morning snack together and then watched the kids perform a musical they'd been working on all semester. Here are some shots of the day: me seated at a kid's desk, our quilt square, and Todd right after the performance:

Traits on common: Sense of Humor and Love of Animals. Favorite memory: Fun trips together: Strawberry Festival (hence the strawberry), California Adventure (hence the turtle) and Universal Studios (hence the Hollywood sign on the hills)

After the performance, we headed to UCSB for lunch. It was the start of Staff Appreciation Week on campus, and Friday was a chancellor's luncheon on the grass by the lagoon. I set up our picnic blanket and settled Todd in with a sack lunch while I got my food. As it just so happened, another, unrelated group had set up bouncy castles on the same lawn, so Todd got to play on some of them! I took a turn once, too, and quickly realized why these things are meant for kids :-P

A bouncy sparring ring, with Storke Tower in the background

After lunch, we headed home to change and pack up... for a hike! Since Allan was still battling a bad bout of the flu, and since the hot weather meant that the rest of our friends preferred the beach or staying home, Todd and I went by ourselves. It actually ended up working out great, even though we'd never hiked that trail before. Since it was such a hot day, we could take our time deviating from the trail at various points along the way, splashing in the San Ysidro Creek to cool off.

That ice cold water was refreshing! Too bad every bug in creation had the same idea-- we had to fight them for clear spots of water!

Though I was a little concerned with the fact that we would be hiking alone, the trail was pretty straightforward and easy to follow, and we encountered plenty of other hikers/runners along the way. We ended up spending so much time playing in the creek that we had to turn around after going less than 2 miles up the trail, as it was starting to get late!

That evening, after returning home and washing up, Todd and I went out for dinner at Denny's-- again, just the two of us.

Overall, Friday was probably one of the best and most enjoyable days I'd ever spent. It was great to be able to spend an entire day with my little boy, and do all kinds of fun things together, by ourselves. And since it just happened to be the day after my birthday, I considered it part of my birthday celebration with my son :-)

The next night, though, was the adult party :-) We hired a sitter, reserved a couple of tables at our favorite karaoke spot-- Old Town Tavern, brought in sandwiches and cake, and celebrated with 17 friends!

I had fun with my dance and singing partners, respectively (aka the "other men" in my life) :

Our party practically took over the whole place! While there were a handful of other people at the beginning of the night, by about 10-11pm most of them had vanished, leaving only our big group to sing, dance, and patronize the bar :-) What a blast!

Despite the fact that I'm apparently staring off into space in the above photo, I had a good time, honest! You can tell how much by the gamut that my facial expressions ran:

All in all, I'd say this was one of the best birthday celebrations I'd ever had. One day was spent entirely with my son, the other was spent in the company of good friends, with lots of fun and laughter. Completely different types of fun, but both left me feeling pretty cheered and satisfied by the end of the weekend :-)

Now... what to plan for that upcoming milestone of 40!

On Hiking

About a year and a half ago, I wrote a blog post that expanded upon why I disliked running so much, to the point that we created a religion where "Thou shalt nor run" was one of its core tenets. In a nutshell, I grew to dislike it after having experienced it in the Army. My friend Wayne made an observation in the comments section, wondering if the reason I hated it was because I was being forced to, and that I might change my tune if I were to try running purely for myself, for enjoyment.

Well, I tried it. And sad to say, but no, running and I are still not on good terms. It's hard on my knees, and being so out of breath makes it really hard to enjoy anything. Plus I'm not naturally a fast runner-- even when I was in top form during my Army days, and could knock out pushups and situps like nobody's business, my fastest time for the 2-mile run was still somewhere between 16-17 minutes.

I felt the same way about hiking, too-- until recently. I thought about what Wayne said, and it occurred to me that, indeed, my idea of "hiking" was largely shaped by my Army experiences-- traipsing through thick brush, wearing my long-sleeved, long-pants camouflage uniform, heavy Kevlar helmet, face smeared in camo paint, wielding an M-16 rifle in my hands, and lugging a rucksack on my back that weighed at least half as much as I did. The concept of hiking in shorts or walking on a beaten trail free of foliage was totally foreign to me. Add to that the fact that my sudden overexposure to the outdoors when I started my military training caused previously-nonexistent allergies to develop, and you can see why I was so averse to anything related to the outdoors after that.

Several years later, however, my allergies finally abated, and I no longer needed to regularly pop Benadryl or Claritin at the first sign of spring. I also began to appreciate what a beautiful place I lived in, with both oceans:

Campus Point and Goleta Beach

and mountains:

View along Tunnel Trail

just a few short miles away!

When my friend Tabitha began actively taking up hiking again, we decided to join in! And I realized-- Wayne was right. It was all about attitude. Now I'm looking forward to what has become a weekly endeavor. For the past 2 months, we've managed to tackle some sort of hike every single week. Most of them are the standard uphill/downhill trail hikes. We did a couple of long beach walks. And a rock-hopping excursion was pretty fun, too!

And you know what I've discovered? I've been thoroughly enjoying myself! I just can't get enough of the beautiful outdoors, especially when you're rewarded with magnificent views of the coastline and the mountains, both during the hike and at the end of it. Even the canyons provide shade and a quiet, sanctuary-like forest feel. And if it's not too dry, running creeks and water cascades! I love feeling like I'm on top of the world when I reach a summit on the mountain. I love the smell of the ocean when I'm walking near it. I love the sound of running water through the trees in the canyons.

I've always said that I find breathtaking beauty in nature's creations, and now that I've rediscovered the outdoors, this concept has extended from animals to the wilderness they inhabit. Nothing makes me feel closer to God than when I'm admiring his handiwork and pondering just how magnificent and huge it all is.

So here's to more hikes, with seals!!

Seal Sanctuary at Carpinteria Bluffs

 Pretty wildflowers in the spring (even if they're shrouded in fog):

Cold Spring Trail, East Fork

Pools, cascades and creeks:

Along Cold Spring Trail, East Fork

Views of our beautiful coastal city:

Goleta, the SB airport, and Santa Cruz Island from Lizard's Mouth

Santa Barbara and the Harbor, from Montecito Overlook

And a magnificent, breathtaking mountain ranges. Maybe it's not as big or as towering as other ranges, but compared to an average-sized human, it's still pretty impressive!

Santa Ynez Mountains (ridgeline is Camino Cielo Rd) from Montecito Peak

Where else in the world can you get both a mountain view AND an ocean view all in one shot/spot?

Part of Santa Ynez mountains plus Carpinteria and the Pacific Ocean, from the USGS marker at Montecito Peak

It's also terrific exercise! My pants and shorts fit me better now, and I feel better all around. I've slowly been getting into better shape-- after nearly 2 months of 3-3.5 mile hikes (and longer walks on level terrain), we managed to tackle an almost-5-mile hike yesterday, and I'm not too sore today!

Looking forward to many more, and to exploring all this beautiful country has to offer!

Judge Not...

A few things have come to a head this week to inspire this post.

It started on Monday, when my friend Mitch and I had some interesting conversations over coffee (well, tea) on a variety of topics, including being judgmental of others, and how we ought to refrain from it. We didn't delve into this topic deeply, but I feel like even that brief discussion opened my eyes and ears to picking up that same message elsewhere.  

On Tuesday, I read a blog post from Dan Pearce, of Single Dad Laughing fame, that summed up, quite humorously, the various ways people not only butt into your business, but judge you for the things you do and the decisions you make. I saw myself in quite a few of these, both as having been a recipient of said judgment, and in being guilty of judging others:

http://www.danoah.com/2013/02/20-things-that-aint-none-of-your-business.html/

I'm currently in the midst of reading "The Grace Awakening" by Chuck Swindoll, and yesterday I got to a chapter about letting go. The main point was that God's grace allows you the freedom to either choose to follow him or succumb to the same sinful temptations you were unable to fight off without his help. This freedom, however, also extends to others and how you deal with them. If they are to have true freedom to pursue grace, then you must let them go, and that means refraining from interfering with their decisions. It's up to God to work through those decisions and work in their lives, and it's not up to you to decide what constitutes a poor decision or a good one. In other words: butt out, don't judge, and just continue to show them love and compassion.

Then today I came across this graphic posted on Believe Out Loud's page:

I liked it because, as I've stated in previous blog posts, the whole "love the sinner, hate the sin" adage has never sat well with me. And today it occurred to me that the "hate the sin" portion is actually a form of judgment. And judgment, by its very nature, is unloving. So how can you love yet hate at the same time? You can't.

Some might interpret this to mean that loving the person without hating the sin means condoning his sin, but I don't believe that's the case. A person's sin should not be within our realm to pass judgment on-- that is solely God's domain. It's not even our business to decide what is and what isn't sin. Again, that's entirely between God and the "sinner". All we can do, all we should do, is take our fellow, fallible human being and love them.

And how best to love someone than by refraining from passing judgment on them?

Of Maids and Muscle

This past weekend, in between meeting up with friends, both old and new, I got a chance to partake of two things that are pretty much on opposite ends of the "edifying" spectrum.

On Saturday, I had a chunk of downtime between brunch with the old UCSB Geeks and dinner/karaoke with my SB friends. So after cleaning the house, I settled into my chaise and promptly got lost in what is now one of my favorite books: "The Help"

I got the hardcover version, so it was a pretty sizeable tome. And one of the reasons I can zip through books like that so quickly is that I tend to skip over the long, rambling paragraphs that describe a setting or a character. Impatient as always, I prefer to go straight for the action and dialog. So for most fiction books like that, I really end up reading only about 80% of the entire book.

Not so with this one. This is one of those rare books where I slowly savor every single word. The writing is so good that the characters come vividly alive-- I can picture them and hear their voices in my mind. Of course, since I'd never seen the movie, the characters ended up looking a lot like characters from Downton Abbey, which I'm currently in the midst of watching ;-)

Moreso than an enjoyable read, however, it offered a good glimpse into what life was like in the South in the 1960's-- a time when racial tensions ran rampant. Not unlike "To Kill a Mockingbird", another perennial favorite. And I particularly enjoy books that are fiction at the core, but deal with real historical events.

When I got home from karaoke at around midnight, I couldn't resist picking the book back up-- and promptly stayed up till past 2:00am, finishing it. It was that good! Now I can't wait to see the movie-- it's next up in my Netflix DVD queue :-)

So after that edifying Saturday, I took a turn in the opposite direction on Sunday, when my friend Leah and I got together at my place to watch "Magic Mike".

I came into this movie with extremely low expectations. Which, of course, meant that it exceeded them :-) The plot was thin, but the acting was actually pretty decent. And I did like how they portrayed how the tables were turned-- how the men were used and objectified and seen as nothing more than a piece of meat, much like many women in today's society still are. I'm not entirely sure if the social commentary was intentional or not, but I definitely caught it.

The actual dance scenes, which comprised about half the movie, were okay. I confess that the main draw for me was Matt Bomer (whom I love as Neal Caffrey on "White Collar"), so I was a bit bummed that I didn't get to see much of him (hooray for deleted scenes, at least!)
Channing Tatum is not really my idea of eye candy. He's too overbuilt for my taste, and I don't find his face pretty in the least. What I was impressed by, however, were his dance moves. You wouldn't think that a big guy like that would be able to move so fluidly, but he did!
And Matthew McConaughey gyrating in a G-string? Not a scene I'd like to relive again, thank you very much. He's a little too old for that, and I just felt sort of sad and full of pity when I watched him do that last dance scene at the end.

"Magic Mike" was an enjoyable way to waste a couple of hours, especially since I got to hang out with Leah, whom I haven't seen since before her now-2-year-old began talking! But it further reinforced the notion that this is how I prefer my men: neat, fit, clean-shaven (for the most part, anyway), and dressed smartly:

Friday Five: Attraction Edition

Haven't done a Friday Five in ages, and lately Blogthings has been hosting their own Friday Five, so I thought I'd draw from them. Plus it gives me a chance to take one of their quizzes-- the answers of which are usually quite obvious, but are fun little time-wasters nevertheless :-)

Today's Friday Five is about attraction:

1. How accurate are your first impressions of people?
2. In your view, what sort of vibe do you give off?
3. If you’re in a crowd of strangers, what sort of people do you gravitate towards?
4. What is more likely to attract you to someone – their voice or their scent?
5. What Type Do You Fall For? Take the quiz and share your result. Is it true?

1. I've never been known for being an accurate judge of character, especially not with first impressions. But I think I get it right more than half the time. Maybe it's because I've gotten older and have had more experience dealing with different types of people, and can more easily detect the same patterns?

2. I like to think I give off a happy, carefree, approachable vibe. I feel like I'm more successful at it now than when I was younger, and I think that's maybe because I'm already settled and have no need to try and impress anyone.

3. I would gravitate towards people giving off the same vibe: happy, carefree, sociable and friendly. Maybe also the wallflowers, just because that what I usually was in social situations-- hanging back, feeling shy and timid, nervous about approaching other people. Sometimes it's a real relief to  have someone approach you and strike up a conversation. I'm still mindful of what it was like to be in their shoes, so I sympathize.

4. Ooooh, that's a tough one! A deep, beautiful voice (think Josh Turner) can make any girl swoon, and I'm no exception. But I think scents would do it more for me. In particular, I like a clean, fresh, crisp scent-- like a guy has just showered, put on freshly laundered clothes (I LOVE the smell of clothes laundered in Tide!), and applied just a little dab of aftershave. No cologne necessary-- in fact, I'd wager to say that most colognes would be too overpowering, even in small doses. A natural, fresh, clean scent is more to my liking. There is, after all, something to be said for the phenomenon of pheromones ;-)

5. Well, here are the results of my quiz:

You Fall for the Guy or Girl Next Door Type

You think that people make love too complicated, and what you want in a partner happens to be pretty simple. You're content with someone who's nice, attractive, honest, and normal. So how come that's so hard to find? You are fairly traditional, and you value security in relationships more than most people. It's important for you to find someone loyal. When you find the right person, you don't expect much from him or her. You're just happy to be together.

What Type Do You Fall For?

Blogthings: Take a Quiz. Annoy Your Friends.

I think it's pretty accurate. I've never been one for the dark, mysterious, bad-boy type. Or the dashingly handsome muscle dude that EVERY girl wants. This is pretty much evidenced by my "top 5" list that I blogged some years ago, and that hasn't really changed much (except to add Silas Weir Mitchell to the list-- whom, as you can see, also fits neither the "bad boy" or the "gorgeous hunk" type).

How about you?

Karaoke Ring of Death: The top of your playlist

Although I recorded mine in December for December's theme, the actual posting got pushed back a month in an effort to drum up more participation. I'm hoping that it was just the hectic holiday season that kept people busy, but if you like singing and don't mind recording yourself, I'd encourage you to give Karaoke Ring of Death a try! You can always check out more at:

http://karaokeringofdeath.wordpress.com

Anyway, this month's theme was the song that's been dominating the top of your playlist. I get to host Heather of Musings of a Girl, who bravely takes on one of the toughest songs anyone can do: Adele's "Rolling in the Deep". And if that wasn't enough, she rocks it a cappella, as well!



You should be able to find my song (Helly in stereo, again-- and since I recorded it right before Christmas, you can guess what kind of music was on my playlist at the time!) on Edwin's blog: http://blog.myadultbrain.com/

However, since it doesn't appear to have been updated with even November's KROD, here's a link to my video on YouTube in the meantime:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SW7LL7r2y2M

Enjoy! :-)