One other thought

I want to extend heartfelt thanks to everyone who took the time to visit, especially those who posted comments. I valued your insights and truly appreciate them. Good luck to all, and those of you who have your own blogs can expect me to continue checking in on you there.

I give up

It's been a while coming and I've probably been in denial, but now I'm admitting defeat. I'm giving up on this project. I just don't have the time I had available when I first launched it, and I feel the need to devote time to another long-lingering writing project that could actually result in a paycheck. Call it the perils of being self-employed.

Beyond that, I'm sorry to say that this endeavor has become a chore that I dread. I have to force myself to do Bible readings, viewing them more as an assignment than a choice. And I think this perspective is causing me to miss a lot. I just push through a day's readings to reach the allotted number of pages, and I'm relieved when I finish. I spend little or no time pausing to think about the implications of what I'm reading or have read and regard my entries as a tedious exercise in regurgitation. I thought jumping ahead to the NT would help, but I find myself thinking, "Yeah, yeah, I've heard this in church a hundred times."

I hate to be a quitter, but I have to confess that it's a pleasure not to have that Bible sitting on my desk, silently tut-tut-ing me for not picking it up. Judge me as you will.

Let's try this again

So I finally picked up the Bible again this week, getting started on the gospel of Mark. Per the NRSV introduction, “Mark may have been the first sustained, literary interpretation of the traditions about Jesus in primitive Christianity.” It’s theorized that Mark was the first of the four gospels written and served as source material for Matthew and Luke. But who/what were Mark’s sources?

I was surprised to read that Mark covers little of Jesus’ teaching and no stories of his birth and resurrection. I guess that’s why “Mark has been overshadowed” by the other gospels. Onward …

Mark opens by quoting the prophet Isaiah: “See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way …” The scene then shifts to John the Baptist—presumably the messenger Isaiah references—baptizing scores of people in the river Jordan. John foretells the coming of Jesus, saying, “The one who is more powerful than I is coming after me.” Well, that depends on how you define “after me,” as Jesus actually shows up at the river to be baptized by John. As Jesus comes out of the water, he sees the heavens tear apart and the Spirit descends on him, accompanies by a proclamation from heaven that “You are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased.” The Spirit (this is the Holy Spirit we’re talking about, I assume) immediately drives Jesus into the wilderness, where he withstands 40 days of temptation by Satan.

At some later point, “after John was arrested,” Jesus goes to Galilee to proclaim the good news of God. He urges the people to repent and believe because God’s kingdom has come near. As he moves along the Sea of Galilee, Jesus recruits the fishermen (and brothers) Simon and Andrew: “Follow me and I will make you fish for people.” I thought the line was “fishers of men”—different version, I guess. I know this is a horrid segue, but when I read that line right now, my mind immediately went to an article I saw about an hour ago on the Chicago Tribune Web site about a priest accused of recently molesting some boys. Fishers of men, indeed. Ugh.

Anyway, Jesus also connects with James and John, and the five men travel to Capernaum. Jesus teaches in a synagogue and astounds the people, “for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” Take that, scribes. While he is teaching, a man with an unclean spirit approaches Jesus and cries out to him, asking if Jesus has come to destroy them. Jesus rebukes him; more precisely, he rebukes the unclean spirit occupying the man by calling him out. After the spirit leaves the man, Jesus’ fame begins to spread, and his fame grows after he heals Simon’s mother-in-law and many others who were sick or possessed by demons.

Like any smart rock star, Jesus decides to go on tour, traveling to neighboring towns to proclaim his message, “for that is what I came out to do.” Along the way, he cures a leper. Jesus send the former leper away to show himself to the priest. He warned the man not tell anyone what had happened, but the man couldn’t resist. He went out and freely relayed his story, “so that Jesus could no longer go into a town openly, but stayed out in the country.” Much like a rock star, some might say.

Next: Healing and parables

***
On a totally unrelated note ...

Today is the 30th anniversary of my father’s death (I should say “the discovery of” my father’s death—he died in a room at the local Holiday Inn and was found by a maid, so there’s some uncertainty about the actual time of death). I was 8-years-old, with three older siblings. Two, in high school, were still at home; the third was away at her freshman year of college in the city. She moved to California within the next year or two, never to return but for fewer than 10 visits. But Death Day, as we so macabre-ly call it, is being eclipsed this year because my other two sibs and I are going to Carlsbad to consolidate her belongings before she returns to the Chicago area, where she will be forced to stay with my mother because she has lost her home, job, and, finally, the car she has been sleeping in for two months. She is two years older than my mother was when our father died. My brother, who has four kids, is the age my mother was when she was widowed. I’m the age my mother was when she gave birth to me. And my mother now lives in a retirement community that was previously a Catholic boarding school that my oldest sister attended for her first year of high school. She’ll return to live there almost 34 years after she left. At least she won’t have to wear a plaid skirt.

I'm rambling. Suffice it to say that life is really, really strange and unpredictable.

Progress report

I've started reading Mark this week, and I hope to make a posting tomorrow.

In the meantime, because I don't hesitate to get on my soapbox when I see what I consider to be hypocritical Christian behavior, I want to link to a story from yesterday's LA Times. It talks about Evangelicals who are moving beyond abortion and gay marriage to other political issues that overlap with Christian precepts, such as global warming, affordable housing, fewer tax cuts for the rich, and more food stamps for the poor. I found the piece encouraging.

Addendum:
But then I read this, about Christians accusing AOL of blasphemy for using two of the most common words in the English language in their marketing. And then there's this, about Christians protesting a film about missionaries because one of the actors is gay. Yep, these particular Christians really know how to focus their energies in positive ways--if you consider it positive to spend your days looking for things that offend you.

Another bite at the apple

OK, rather than dump this project altogether, I've decided to change course. After all, only the stubborn and foolish insist on staying the course when it's obviously not working. So I'm going to shift my attention to the NT, delving into Mark at the end of this month. Until then, I'm going to let myself soak in the delusion that, because I can wear shorts every day in my new home, I'm actually on vacation. Of course, having applied for my new drivers license and picked up California plates today, it might be more difficult to continue the delusion, but the license won't arrive for a week or two and, hey, no rush in putting on the new plates, right? The Illinois plates don't expire until May, and who needs to drive when you have a bike?

I'm looking forward to the NT--I suspect I'll find its teachings more applicable to life today than the OT, despite the recent allegations that God remains actively engaged in smiting. Or will I have a hard time reconciling the OT God with His NT son? We'll see.

I've been remiss

I was posting a comment on a friend's blog yesterday, and I had to stop and think for a while before I could come up with my login info for Blogger.

In other words, it's been a while since I've made a posting, and it's been even longer since I posted an entry directly related to my Bible reading. As I wrote in November, I needed to go on hiatus while I prepared for my move from Chicago to California after Thanksgiving. At the time, I wrote that I would return to my Bible reading in December. Well, we're safely into January, and I've yet to resume my reading. And here's the problem--I'm not feeling at all motivated to do so.

I've found the OT so tedious and redundant that I have little desire to dive back into it. Perhaps I'd find it more interesting if I did believe in a literal interpretation, but, as it is, I find it difficult to get through. And, honestly, living in California, about a mile from the beach, probably isn't helping much, either. No, not because it's such a decadent, humanist Blue State, but because the weather is so much better than the Midwest. Going for a run or a bike ride, to the driving range, for a hike, etc. is so much more appealing than reading the Bible (as you can imagine, I'm also having a hard time fitting work in to my schedule). It was much easier when I launched this project--in Chicago last February, where I wasn't very inclined to go outside and had plenty of extra time on my hands.

Now, I'm not generally one for quitting. But I also don't see the virtue in forcing myself to do something I'm dreading and don't feel I'm getting anything out of in the end. Perhaps I need to take a different approach, rather than the chronological order I've been following. When I first started thinking about this last year, and was checking out different Bibles, I came across some Bibles that were broken down into daily readings. Maybe that's the way to go ...

Just when I think the Right can't make me any sicker ...

... I see where the House found the time last week to pass H. Res. 579, titled "Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the symbols and traditions of Christmas should be protected for those who celebrate Christmas" (the resolution was amended to tack on those last five words, according to the Washington Post). Not surprisingly, it passed by a vote of 401-22. And you know those 22 legislators who dared to take a stand against this absurdity will be depicted in their next campaigns as the candidates "who voted against Christmas." Horrors!

As Rep. Scott of Virginia noted, this is the same House of Representatives that in recent weeks slashed funding for food stamps, Medicaid, and student loans, while gleefully extending tax cuts for the richest among us. Yes, Virginia, this is a governmental body that truly "recognizes the importance of the symbols and traditions of Christmas." As people used to say, actions speak louder than words.

A little perspective, please

I was just reading an article in the Washingtong Post about religious conservatives getting up in arms because the White House holiday card doesn't mention Christmas and is adorned with a secular photo--the Bush family's pets frolicking on a White House lawn.

When will these so-called Christians recognize that the president is the president of the entire country, regardless of religious orientation or lack thereof? It's absurd that Laura Bush's press secretary actually has to explain: "Certainly President and Mrs. Bush, because of their faith, celebrate Christmas. Their cards in recent years have included best wishes for a holiday season, rather than Christmas wishes, because they are sent to people of all faiths." Duh! Why do these people refuse to recognize that Christmas is not the only holiday celebrated in December?

The Post notes that the press secretary's rationale is the same offered by major retailers for generic holiday catalogues, including those currently subject to boycotts initiated by various overreaching [my word] Christian groups. And it's not just overtly religious groups--the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, claims that there is a "war on Christmas" involving an "ever-stronger push toward a neutered 'holiday' season so that non-Christians won't be even the slightest bit offended."

It was a quote from "one of the generals on the pro-Christmas side" in the Post article that really caught my attention. Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association (which I believe was behind the threatened boycott against Ford for advertising in gay-oriented publications), said, "Sometimes it's hard to tell whether this is sinister -- it's the purging of Christ from Christmas -- or whether it's just political correctness run amok," he said. "I think in the case of the White House, it's just political correctness." Of course, it's not sinister, whether on the part of the White House or retailers! The White House sends cards to people of all faiths and maybe even some atheists, God forbid--it's a matter of sensitivity to send secular cards to non-Christians. For retailers, it's a matter of trying to appeal to the broadest possible market (capitalism, anyone?). And, as these blowhards so conveniently overlook, in the case of governmental institutions, it's a matter of constitutional law. There's just nothing sinister about it.

But, of course, "Wildmon does not give retailers the same benefit of the doubt [he gives the White House]. This year, he has called for a consumer boycott of Target stores because the chain issued a holiday advertising circular that did not mention Christmas. Last year, he aimed a similar boycott at Macy's Inc., which averted a repeat this December by proclaiming 'Merry Christmas' in its advertising and in-store displays." The forced capitulation turns my stomach.

These people are just out of control. If they expended only a fraction of the energy they devote to combating their persecution fantasies to emulating the Messiah they claim to want to protect, perhaps more hurricane victims would be back on their feet. But who has time to help those in need when Target is saying Season's Greetings?