Joseph and Mary Were Refugees? Really?

Recently I came across a graphic that made an interesting statement:

Interesting and assuredly complete and total nonsense.

If you read the accounts of the birth of Christ, the only people present the evening of the birth were Mary, Joseph, and the shepherds. They were all Jewish people.

None of them were refugees.

And everyone was on his way to register for the census, each to his own city. Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David... (Luke 2:3-4)

Mary and Joseph were not refugees. Joseph was simply returning to his hometown, nothing more.

But, you ask, what of the magi? They were Arabs!

Good question and an accurate observation.

They showed up two years later. They were not present at the manger even though they are portrayed as present at any traditional creche scene.

Therefore, here is a more accurate version of the graphic:

“Ah, yes,” you say, “but what about their flight to Egypt?”

The reality is that Egypt was part of the Roman Empire and the Holy Family did not need special permission to move to a country that was under Rome. Also, Egypt already had a sizable Jewish population.

Don’t get me wrong. The refugee problem in the United States needs to be dealt with legally and humanely. I confess, I have no solution.

But don’t alter a religious story in order to emotionally manipulate people. I would hope that most people are above that.

Society of Evangelical Arminians

I have been blessed to be a member for the last two years. You can learn more about them by visiting their website here.

I know that many of my readers are Calvinist/Reformed and though I admit disagreement, it is very respectful and I recognize you as a brother/sister in Christ "if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; for “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

However, should any of you feel led to change my mind, please read this first and affirm that you have done so. With due respect, that is a requirement for discussion on this matter.

So You Got A Lousy Pastor?

Let's Talk About Psychological Triggers

Recently I've read quite a bit about psychological triggers such as students at a college being traumatized by somebody writing positive Trump statements in chalk on sidewalks. I read an essay about a woman experiencing trauma from watching the cartoon show, Animaniacs, and how it should be removed from the air completely.

Though I acknowledge the reality of psychological triggers for those who suffer PTSD, the concept has now been carried to ridiculous lengths and I find myself in an unusual position that I never asked for.

I just love my Keurig® coffeemaker.

On my doctor visit, I will most likely get a Tetanus vaccine booster.

 I agree with the American College of Pediatricians that certain sexual addictions are inherently self-defeating and even self-destructive.

In November, if the final selection is between Clinton and Trump, I will most likely hold my nose and vote for Trump.

In Christian thought I am Arminian-Wesleyan, I have no problem with old earth creationism, I play table top role playing games (and haven't been demonized once), I enjoyed the Harry Potter movies, (and haven't been demonized once), I only use the New American Standard Bible translation, I don't think 9/11 was an inside job, and I think it's a national shame that most Americans only speak one language.

Now a question for those who are currently offended by any of these statements.

Why did you give me this power and authority over you? Seriously, is the problem with me, or most reasonably, with you that you are so sensitive to disagreement that the writing of one person makes your gut and jaw tighten and you wish there was some way you could shut me up or you are barely resisting a troll attack in the comments section?

I never asked for this power and yet, some of you have freely bestowed it upon me as if I asked for it.

Maybe you need to get off the Internet for awhile and remember what real life is.

Let Us Now Praise Noble Men: Pastor Chris Little

Since the advent of the new years, a number of celebrity deaths have filled the news: Natalie Cole, Alan Rickman, David Bowie, Patty Duke, Merle Haggard, and just yesterday, Prince. I am not negating the importance of those deaths. I agree with a quote I found some years ago that was attributed to Theodore Roosevelt: "All death is a tragedy, for if it is not then life has become one."

However, last Tuesday evening, a fellow pastor in the denomination I serve passed away unexpectedly while working in his garden and his death has affected me more than all the celebrities that have passed away since New Year's Day.

I have known Pastor Chris Little since 1996 when he took the helm of Associate Pastor at Mt. Pleasant United Brethren Church (Chambersburg, Pennsylvania). In 2001, he became the church's senior pastor and I would meet him often at denominational events. We were never close friends, but only because we moved in different pastoral circles, but he was a man I liked and respected because of his numerous talents and gifts and we would always greet each other with a hand shake and a smile.

My impression of Chris was that of a talented administrator who had the guts and fortitude to serve a church of 300 members. Being seminary trained, he knew the Bible intimately and there was no doubt he also knew the Author. You can read Chris' obituary here and an affectionate tribute to him here. You will soon be aware this was a man who was not passive in the face of life, but a man who lived it deliberately with purpose. I'm also not surprised that Chris died in his garden as gardens play such an important role in Judaeo-Christianity as places where God meets with people.

As a Christ follower and a pastor, people believe I have all the answers. I don't. The 'why" of things I've never been able to fully grasp, only promises God put in His Word of His own free will that he would make all things right. Why an effective pastor with such impressive skills would be taken is beyond my comprehension. Chris was a young 51 and, to me, seemed to be in wonderful health. He was blessed with a great family and along with his wife was an entrepreneur running The Sweet Shop in Eagle's Mere, Pennsylvania on top of his pastoral responsibilities.

And in the midst of all that life, now we face the fact that there are family and friends and a congregation still mourning and grieving with questions that will remain unanswered this side of glory.

So we honor Chris' life and we cherish our memories as well as commit our own lives to an understanding that as regards life on Earth, there is no promise of tomorrow. But for we who follow Christ, we cling to a promise that stands in the face of all the why questions we have:

A Father's Advice to His Son at College

When my oldest son first went to Houghton College, I shared my wisdom of surviving college with him. Your actual mileage may vary

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #1:

It is not unusual to sit through the first day or two of class and think to yourself, "I don't have a clue as to what they're talking about." Rest assured, nobody else in the class does either (and that may include the teacher), but everything does ultimately make sense after the first week.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #2:

Treat college like a job. Spend 8 hours a day on class, homework, study, writing, reading, reading ahead, etc., spend the other 8 hours doing whatever you like to do, and spend 8 hours sleeping. Now there are times when you'll have to dedicate more than 8 hours a day to the college aspect of life (tests, finals, etc.), but on the whole, this is a good plan for success.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #3:

There are three types of people to avoid at college: The student who is there to please his/her parents, the student who is there because s/he had nothing better to do, the young lady there looking solely for her MRS. degree.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #4:

1. An active social life.
2. Good grades
3. Sleep

Choose two. Welcome to college.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #5:

When you are as old as me with a metabolism that flows as fast as molasses on a freezing January morning, you can skip meals. Heck, I could probably skip weeks without ill effect. However, skipping breakfast at your age is a no-no. When I was at college I lived on quick meals and lots of Almond Crush soda. The result was some intriguing vitamin deficiencies. No fun at all.

Eat your Wheaties.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #6:

True story. I went to a STRICT Bible College and ended up having to take a linguistics class as I needed an elective and it was the only one available. Hated the class and there was some minimal friction between the teacher and myself over some disputed grades.

At the final, he walked into the class, took a huge rock, slammed it on the desk and said, "This is how hard this test is going to be."

I turned to the guy sitting next to me and said, "Hey, look. His heart fell out."

The teacher heard me and failed me on the spot.

Draw your own moral.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #7:

It is not unusual for college students to switch their majors and there is nothing wrong with that. It is sad to climb the ladder of life only to discover you have leaned it against the wrong wall. However, unless you can show me a detailed plan of effectiveness with a future, if you choose English, Communications, or Art, I will spend the rest of my life crying myself to sleep.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #8:

You will look back at your college years as the years you had the greatest freedom. Many people use that freedom to make friendships, travel, and learn. Others shipwreck themselves on self-defeating and self-destructive behaviors mistakenly thinking that liberty means license.

"Go for the gusto" is good theology for Christians as long as we understand what moral boundaries are.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #9:

Your deadliest enemy at college: Procrastination.

GET 'ER DONE!

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #10:

Remember when doing laundry that you should not combine a white load with a dark load or with a colored load. This seems very mundane until you realize how many freshmen are going through their first year with their tighty whities a pastel pink.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #11a:

Here is the only bad news about college: At college you are making new friends, learning new ideas, and seeing life in a new way. You are stretching your wings and you are learning what independence is. When you come home, you will have subtly changed which will cause a shock to friends and family who remember you as you were when you left. Psychologists call this "Reverse Culture Shock." Poets say, "You can never come home again."

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #11b:

Ignore the psychologists and the poets. Where your family is, there will always be home.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #12:

Remember also your Creator in the days of your youth. (Ecclesiastes 12:1a)

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #13:

It is easy at college to develop a lifestyle that can function out of balance in the unique atmosphere of university life. However, remember you have a long life after your four to six years and must balance all aspects of your life: spiritual, physical, relational, financial, emotional, mental, vocational, and there is probably one or two more I have forgotten.

A Father's Advice to His Son at College #14:

Caffeine can be an asset if it is used responsibly. However, do remember that those whom the gods destroy, they first addict to caffeine.

Christian Fantasy: A Biblical and Rational Defense

Christian Fantasy As Art Form and Educational Tool - A Biblical and Rational Defense

"When literature like The Lord of the Rings is criticized, it is often attacked for being `escapist.' This means we should ask a question. What is being escaped from? As Tolkien once put it, the people who are so concerned about escapism do have a name—we call them jailers." -- Douglas Wilson

As a Christian, as a writer of fantasy, and as a Christian who sees his writing as an extension of his ministry, I was puzzled and eventually appalled by the attacks against the Christian use of fantasy as an art form as well as a method of evangelism and an educational tool. Directed to an essay by Biblical Discernment Ministries attacking Christian fantasy as an unbiblical and godless oxymoron, I will here attempt to answer the points of the attack from a Biblical standpoint. It is assumed the author of the essay is BDM's editor, Rick Miesel. It is recommended you read the essay in its entirety here before you read my analysis.

It is my hypothesis that the writer of the essay:

1. Misrepresents the literary genre known as Christian fantasy by misdefining it as well as unfairly lumping it with secular fantasy.
2. Misrepresents what Christian authors communicate without reading their works.
3. Misrepresents what Christian readers are able to discern.
4. Sets up straw man arguments using definitions and Biblical verses out of context.
5. Makes statements that have, most importantly, no Biblical foundations and secondly, no rational foundation.

Miesel writes (from here on, sections taken from Miesel's essay will be highlighted in red):

-  The dictionary defines fable as:

"fantasy/fiction/falsehood dependent for effect on strangeness of setting (as other worlds or times) and of characters (as supernatural or unnatural beings); the setting is usually in a non-existent or unreal world, the characters are fanciful or unreal, or the conflict focuses on physical or scientific principles not yet discovered or contrary to present experience."

And already we find ourselves with a problem. What dictionary did the writer find this definition in? I own several dictionaries with access to online dictionaries and failed to find one that used this definition.

We need a better and unbiased definition. In Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary we read:

Fable applied in the New Testament to the traditions and speculations, "cunningly devised fables", of the Jews on religious questions (1 Tim. 1:4; 4:7; 2 Tim. 4:4; Titus 1:14; 2 Pet. 1:16). In such passages the word means anything false and unreal. But the word is used as almost equivalent to parable. Thus we have (1) the fable of Jotham, in which the trees are spoken of as choosing a king (Judg. 9:8-15); and (2) that of the cedars of Lebanon and the thistle as Jehoash's answer to Amaziah (2 Kings 14:9).

I'll grant a point to Miesel in that fable is a synonym with the word "falsehood," but points to me that "the word is used as almost equivalent to parable." A lie is "a false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression." A literary fable is meant to make "an edifying or cautionary point." Therefore, a lie is a fable, but not all fables are lies.

Case in point, in the reference to Jotham's fable, the prophet did not attempt to communicate that trees actually talk. Rational men know that they do not and communicating such as truth would be a lie. The prophet was using this "Jewish fantasy" of talking trees to communicate the destruction that was to come upon their hearers for embracing an evil man as their king.

-  Fantasy is especially dangerous for children. While most children in the 1970s knew enough truth to place divination in the forbidden realm of the occult, today's children -- who often feel more comfortable with occult games than Biblical truth -- see nothing wrong with pagan practices. Fantasy movies, like Disney's The Lion King, are good matches for the new earth-centered paradigm or world view that is transforming childrens' views of reality. While God told us to continually communicate truth to our children (Deut. 6:5-7), today's culture trains children to see reality through a global, earth-centered filter. This "new" mental framework distorts truth, stretches the meaning of familiar words, and promotes mystical "insights" that are incompatible with Christianity. Packaged with entertainment, this message usually bypasses rational resistance, desensitizes opened minds, and fuels general acceptance of pagan spirituality (Berit Kjos, "The Spirit Behind The Lion King," 1/95, The Christian Conscience, pp. 32-34).


This paragraph is a good example of how the author of this essay puts up straw men to knock them down. Defining "fable," he immediately jumps to the word "fantasy" makes a statement that it is "especially dangerous for children" without any supporting evidence and then lumps Disney's The Lion King into the hopper with all Christian fantasy.

So with that in mind, let's first do what the writer refused to do and define the word "fantasy:"

fan·ta·sy
n. pl. fan·ta·sies

1. The creative imagination; unrestrained fancy.
2. Something, such as an invention, that is a creation of the fancy.
3. A capricious or fantastic idea; a conceit.
4. Fiction characterized by highly fanciful or supernatural elements. An example of such fiction.
5. An imagined event or sequence of mental images, such as a daydream, usually fulfilling a wish or psychological need.
6. An unrealistic or improbable supposition.

If fantasy is especially dangerous for children, it is amazing that the majority of children survive childhood! Children are certainly blessed with a creative imagination (#1) and in their play with toys, they definitely indulge in #2. And even in some of the most conservative Sunday School literature, I've seen Biblical truths illustrated with animal characters, so #4 is present. Children daydream. There's #5. Yet, the author against all reason only accepts #3 as his definition which means he himself is practicing definition #6. I will refer back to this later. Now let's really walk on the side of illogic.

-  Most true Christians would recognize fantasy, such as the movie Star Wars, as being extremely wicked (in this case, sorcery -- "The Force" being equivalent to black magic and white witchcraft). Yet, apparently, when we call it "Christian," this somehow sanctifies what we do with our minds (imaginations), or what we allow our minds to entertain. For example, one can look in any issue of the Christian Book Distributors Fiction Catalog and find the most outrageous fantasy literature, yet it is all dubbed "Christian." The following is taken from the CBD Fiction Catalog, 9/94 premier edition:
 
(Note here the charge that all Christian fiction is based on the same premise of Star Wars and other secular fiction.)

" ... now there's no more compromising for those who love Christian fiction, because you are holding the key to your next escape-from-it-all right in the palm of your hand ... CBD's brand new Fiction Catalog? It's filled with the latest and the best refreshing, thrilling, inspiring, wholesome fiction for you and your family" (p. 2).

Christian Book Distributors does not define Christian fantasy. They are in the business of selling books. What then follows is an unintentionally hilarious description of Christian fantasy by judging each work from its promotion blurb. The author has not read these works. He knows them only by their advertising! Is this rational, Biblical scholarship?

Wholesome? The following is a sample of that which CBD considers "wholesome." [Much of this type of writing comes from medieval mysticism, which God hates (cf. Deut. 18: 10-12).]:

(a) Millennium's Dawn, by Ed Stewart (p. 25):

"June 2001. The future never seemed brighter for Dr. Evan Rider and his new bride, Shelby, as they prepare to embark on the honeymoon of their dreams. But the dream quickly becomes a nightmare as a long-buried secret shared by three college friends erupts, engulfing the couple in a sinister plot of blackmail, terror, and betrayal."

(Millennium's Dawn is neither a Christian fantasy nor medieval mysticism. It is an example of another type of fictional genre, but the writer doesn't care. He tars everything within reach with a broad black brush in gleeful abandon.)

(b) Till We Have Faces, by C. S. Lewis (p. 34):

"The unlovely Orual, eldest daughter of the King of Glome, becomes so consumed by her mingled love and jealousy of her beautiful half-sister that she makes a complaint to the gods -- and receives an answer she did not expect. This novel, possibly Lewis' best work and the one he considered his own favorite, is his compelling rework of the myth of Cupid and Psyche." [Sound like something you could want your children to read -- about "the gods"?]

(Yes, it does. If Miesel had actually taken time to read Till We Have Faces he would have learned that C. S. Lewis was using an ingenious literary device called allegory to make several important points about man's relationship with God and the subtlety of sin, especially pride. I do not know of any instance where somebody was lead into occultism by reading the works of C. S. Lewis unless they were already immersed in it or were mentally ill.)

(c) The Song of Albion, by Stephen Lawhead (p. 33):

"Wolves prowl the streets of Oxford. A Green Man haunts the Highlands. A breach has been opened between our world and the Celtic Otherworld and anything, anyone, may now enter [sounds similar to Poltergeist, one of the most wicked movies ever produced]. But it's Lewis Gillies, an American graduate student at Oxford, who reluctantly stumbles through. In the savagely beautiful Otherworld, Lewis finds himself caught in an epic struggle between light and darkness -- a struggle that will determine the fate of his own world. Memorably penned with vivid and poetic imagery, Lawhead's breathtaking reworking of Celtic myth will keep you reading long into the night" [no doubt, and right into the DARKNESS! -- the Celtic civilization is the culture from which we have received much of our modern day Halloween practices.]

(Like Miesel, I have not actually read this work, so unlike Miesel, I cannot comment on it with integrity.)

Isaiah 32:6 describes error against the Lord. All lies are against God (1 John 1:21; John 8:44). Satan is the father of lies. Since fantasy is not true, then it is a lie! We have been duped into thinking there is some spiritual gray realm out there in which something can be neither true nor a lie. It's just called fantasy! But fantasy is made up of lies, deceit, and unreality, all wrapped up in a pretty (or sometimes, not so pretty) package.

We've covered this. I know of no example of Christian fantasy that is communicated as a description of reality. C. S. Lewis would have been shocked with the idea that he was communicating that Narnia was a real place (The Chronicles of Narnia). Walter Wangerin, Jr. would have called the men in the white coats if somebody had accused him of telling people that roosters and dogs actually talk (The Book of the Dun Cow).

Miesel then tackles The Lion King condemning Focus on the Family's endorsement of the movie and then makes the outlandish statement: "Besides the spiritism in the film, ask yourself a question -- "Do animals talk?" Just on this fantasy alone (animals talking) it is a lie."

Miesel has now moved from the role of essay writer to a mindset that almost smacks of paranoia. Does he actually believe that Disney was trying to convince people that animals could talk? And if Disney was actually insane enough to make such a statement, does Miesel actually believe that people are gullible enough to strike up a conversation with Fido?

At this point Miesel slips gears and again judges Christian books by their CBD advertising blurb. I cannot comment on The Guardian, by Jane Hamilton or Darien: The Guardian Angel of Jesus, by Roger Elwood as I have not read them and I will not judge a person's works unless I have read or seen them directly, but I can make one comment:

(a) A Skeleton in God's Closet, by Paul L. Maier (p. 25):

"Move over, Indiana Jones! In this novel, Harvard archaeologist Dr. John Weber has just discovered a shocking secret -- Jesus' bones. The evidence [an obvious denial of the resurrection] seems incontestable. When word of the discovery leaks out, pandemonium ensues and millions abandon their Christian faith. But which is the hoax -- the archaeological find or the Resurrection itself?" [How can this be edifying?]

I have read this book. If Miesel had read the book instead of the blurb, he would he learned that 1) the book was not presented as a fantasy and 2) its purpose was to teach the reader how archeology functions as a science and supports the truths of Scripture, affirming the fact of Christ's physical resurrection from the grave.

Remember when Close Encounters of the Third Kind came out? People believed it! Fantasy gets people to fantasize about reality. It is a slippery slide into lies unknowingly.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind was marketed as science fiction and like Poltergeist, another movie Miesel mentions, presents a worldview against Christian teaching. Therefore, they have no bearing on the discussion as they are not Christian fantasy.

How can a lie be used for evangelism, worship, or anything else godly? By its very nature, fantasy removes the person from the Truth (reality) and moves them into a realm away from God. This ungodliness is well depicted in the CBD Fiction Catalog, where it says on page 2:

"It's been said that reading fiction is one of the best ways to 'escape' from the cares of everyday life. Since the beginning of time, great thinkers and writers (even Jesus himself) have been inspired to create allegories, parables and epics, as well as the good, old-fashioned novel itself. What a tragedy to think we have to settle for fiction that merely grabs our attention, but lacks the values and spiritual insight we could carry with us when we return to the 'real world.'" [Again, the move from fantasy to reality.]

Personally, I wish Miesel had quoted a better expert than the CBD catalog. He could have attacked the essays of C. S. Lewis, Madeleine L'Engle, Franky Schaeffer, T. S. Elliott or H. R Rookmaker. I will let the reader deduce as to why he did not.

Again, beating a very dead horse, if fantasy is presented in all its conception as truth, it is therefore a lie, but if used as an art form using allegory, hyperbole and symbolism, it is another form of a sermon and must be judged on the message it conveys. This is why Philip Pullman's atheistic His Dark Materials trilogy is evil and C. S. Lewis' Till We Have Faces is spiritually edifying. It is called, judging a work by its fruit.

And what about the claim that Jesus' parables and the allegories in Scripture, or figurative speech, are parallel to the use of fantasy? No! The Bible's parables, allegories, and figurative speech are not about fantasy at all. They are all about Truth!

Just like well-written Christian fantasy. Its parables, allegories and figurative speech always point to the truth of God's Word. No Christian writer would say that his or her story is an end in itself, but like any good sermon, point the way toward the Word of God, both written (the Bible) and living (Jesus Christ).

If a Christian is loving the Lord with all his MIND (imagination), he will be dwelling on truth, reality, His Word, and Him, NOT FAIRY TALES AND FANTASY!

Agreed. I would be concerned about a Christian who does nothing but read Christian fantasy just like I worry about a Christian who spends all his time watching baseball or washing his car or writing diatribes disguised as essays without doing the necessary research.

After a few more paragraphs on how people are too stupid to tell the difference between reality and fantasy, and attacking John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress as a work of godless fantasy and myth (if that has not destroyed his credibility for the reader than Dear Reader is hopeless) he then attempts to make the following points.

1. Parables are not fables.
2. Allegory is symbolic, not mythical -- Gal. 4:22-31 (real/real)
3. Figurative is not mythical -- John 6:53-63 -- Jesus does not fly out of the realm of reality. In fact, He uses such explicitly (real) language that people are having a hard time understanding Him. Yet, He explains that He is speaking in a figurative way (John 6:63).
4. Dreams and Visions are not untrue stories -- Daniel 7:1ff; 8:17 refers to truth; 8:26 ("is true"); 9:21 (writing of Truth). These are not untrue stories (fables). Ezekiel 1 &10 -- these are real creatures!

Wait a minute here. There's another term here tossed out for the first time that he has failed to define. Let's go back to the dictionary.

myth
n : a traditional story accepted as history; serves to explain the world view of a people.

Again, a myth is the same as a lie. It is a story that is presented as truth, a historical event that happened in time and space. Pilgrim's Progress is not a myth. It is an allegory that symbolizes the need for every person to embrace the salvation of Jesus Christ and his righteousness. Bunyan may not have dotted his theological i's and crossed his creedal t's the way Miesel would have liked, but Miesel cannot deny the important role Bunyan's allegorical sermon has played in the Christian conversions of countless people. Long after this blog and Miesel's misanthropic essay have long faded into time, Bunyan's testimony of the saving grace of Christ's work on the Cross of Calvary will still be used of God to win souls, imperfect as it it may be.

In closing, it requires an abstract mind to understand allegory and symbolism. I could suppose that Miesel has a concrete mindset and is therefore unable to appreciate what Christian fantasy represents and how it is communicated. If so, then Miesel has done Christendom a great disservice, masquerading an emotional preference as spiritual truth.

My advice to the writer of Christian fantasy is to remember that it will not be Rick Miesel sitting on the bema seat of Christ. If God has given you a gift of storytelling to be used for His glory, then remember the words of the author of Psalm 45:1:

"My heart overflows with a good theme; I address my verses to the King; My tongue is the pen of a ready writer."

Do Pets Go To Heaven?

There are those who will think that in the light of current events, the subject of this essay is frivolous and trivial and they may be right. Yet there are those who have lost animal companions to whom this question is very important. This essay was written to bring comfort, not division. If you disagree with my thesis, you may be correct, but should you encounter someone who has lost a dearly loved dog or cat, I would respectfully encourage you to keep your opinions to yourself and simply express acknowledgement of their sorrow. Sometimes maintaining theoretical theological purity on a secondary issue is nothing more than arrogant cruelty. Don't go there.

What follows is the full text of my essay from a Smashwords edition that is no longer available to the public. All rights reserved.

SMASHWORDS EDITION

* * * * *

Published by Alan Loewen on Smashwords

Do Pets Go To Heaven?

Copyright © 2012 by Alan Loewen

Smashwords Edition License Notes

Thank you for downloading this free eBook. Although this is a free book, it remains the copyrighted property of the author, and may not be reproduced, copied and distributed for commercial or non-commercial purposes. If you enjoyed this book, please encourage your friends to download their own copy at Smashwords.com, where they can also discover other works by this author. Thank you for your support.

* * * * *

An elderly woman, one of my parishioners, had lost an important member of her family to death. With tears in her eyes, she asked me if she would ever see her loved one again.

However, the loved one she spoke of was not a spouse or child, nor even human at all. She spoke of her beloved little dog who had comforted her for many years in the loneliness of her old age and who had finally fallen victim to a long-term illness. This short essay attempts to answer her question.

I acknowledge that for some, the question, if not the answer in and of itself, will be controversial. For others, responses to even researching the question will range from contempt to even a possible charge of blasphemy.

Because of this reaction and many other reasons, the Christian church appears reluctant to tackle the subject of the eternal destination of animals. However, for those few individuals whose lives have been touched by the faithful, unconditional love of a pet, the question is very important, even if only more for emotional than intellectual reasons.

So the Church Universal should not shy away from hard topics. To do so gives other worldviews an opportunity to fill the vacuum and makes the Church look impotent in the face of real life questions. Jesus Christ commanded his Church to be the salt of the earth, the light that cannot be put under a shade, and to be the city on a hill.  So with that in mind, I ask you, Dear Reader to be Judge, Jury and Executioner. I will be the lawyer and attempt to present my case.

But before we begin, I pause for a moment to challenge you to consider that what appears to be a simple question about the eternal destiny of a beloved pet actually speaks to a much bigger question: Is the redemption of Christ restricted only to the human sphere or does it also include the whole of creation?

I submit to you the question truly transcends the destiny of somebody’s cat or dog. The answer affects our view on all of creation.

I want to be very careful what I say and I do not want to infer anything that is not found in Scripture, but as far as my research goes, when it comes to the question as to whether our pets are redeemed, I lean heavily toward yes and I believe I can safely do so with good reason.

The Parable of the Poor Man’s Lamb

In my opening argument, let's take a look at an incident from the Old Testament where the Prophet Nathan is talking to King David:

And the LORD sent Nathan unto David. And he came unto him, and said unto him, "There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor. The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds: but the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter. 

"And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him." 

And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, "As the LORD liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die: and he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity." (2 Samuel 12:1-6)

Clearly, the Old Testament world, even with the reality of its hardscrabble existence, understood the concept of family pets. In the ancient Near East, sheep were nothing more than animals used for their wool, milk, and food. However, it appears David, who knew the life of a shepherd well before he became king, understood the idea that an animal could be so dearly loved it could be treated as a member of the family. Notice that neither Nathan nor David chide, shame, or ridicule the poor man for treating a lamb as a beloved family member. Instead, David’s venom is saved for the rich man who killed the poor man’s pet.

It is important to note the debate is not over the concept of simple property being stolen. King David equated the death of the lamb as equivalent to murder because of the emotional value the poor man put on his beloved lamb. Far more than property, the lamb had been elevated to family status and both Nathan and David accepted this reality with no problem. Evidently God had no problem with it either as it was originally his idea to have Nathan tell David the story.

God’s Attitude Toward Animals

In the poetry of Job 39, God challenges Job if he understands why he made the animals as he did, mentioning wild goats, wild asses, wild cattle (mistranslated as "unicorn" in the King James), peacocks, the ostrich, the horse, the hawk, and the eagle. God makes special note of them reminding Job that he is the creator of them all.

Even the most casual reading of that section reveals the joy of God in his creation.

In the gospels Jesus states that his Father cares for the smallest portions of creation:

"Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father." (Matthew 10:29) 

"Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God?" (Luke 12:6)

If sparrows were truly of no value in God's world, if God considered them temporal, why does he waste his vast energies in remembering them?

And if he considers the small, twittering birds of the world, what more when he considers animals that his own children have deemed to be of great emotional value to them?

ALL of Creation Shall Be Redeemed

My final observation is that God's work of redemption does include all of creation:

For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. (emphasis mine) For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. (Romans 8:19-23)

I deem it unlikely that Paul is here speaking of creation in merely anthropomorphic terms. He speaks of creation with the implication of sentience, that it has “earnest expectation," and that it "waiteth," it "groaneth" and "travaileth." If creation is merely going to be replaced with something new instead of being made new, then it should be merely waiting for annihilation. Instead it waits for full redemption provided not only to humanity, but all of creation due to the finished, compelted work of Jesus Christ on the Cross of Calvary.

Therefore, looking at the evidence that:

• The Bible speaks of pets in a supporting fashion, 
• That God clearly cares for ALL creation, and 
• ALL of creation waits for future redemption, 

I submit to you: Judge, Jury, and Executioner, the inference is very strong that we will see our beloved pets again. You are welcome to visit my blog (the link is at the end of this essay) to discuss your verdict.

Speaking for myself, I think the question settled.

I leave you with a story I wrote about this many years ago where I indirectly address the issue of the full redemption of creation:

Fallen Angels and Fallen Sparrows

It was another space and time. Satan strode into the Throne Room ignoring the suffocating light of purity and the stares of the angels who refused to join him in rebellion so many millennia ago.

He looked over the panorama before him. These angels--these so-called Sons of God--had gathered to present themselves to Him who sat on the Throne. Satan's pride drove him to present himself along with his brothers.

There was no visible form on the Throne. Being Spirit, only the Shekinah glory of God occupied the megalithic Throne and permeated the room to such an extent, there were no shadows. Satan could barely endure that Light. It made him feel transparent.

A Voice spoke from the Throne; three voices of thunder speaking as One. "Satan, from where do you come?"

Satan flinched at the sound and the echoes, but he displayed no reverence or awe. "From going to and fro in the earth," he said, "and from walking up and down in it."

"And why do you come here?"

Satan clenched his fists in frustrated wrath. How many times had he come here before? How many times had he been humiliated in front of these poor excuses for angels?

"Your creation suffers," he said, spitting out the words in fury. "It suffers still even after you tricked me at Golgotha. Do what you will, but I have the last laugh. They suffer and you can do nothing."

The Voice spoke again and in spite of its thunder, there was a sense of sadness. "You know as well as all that with freedom and choice comes the potential of revolt and loss. All are tested, even Myself."

"They think you don't care."

"Not a sparrow falls without My knowing."

Satan leered into the Light. "But they fall nonetheless."

"And they fall into My Hand."

With that, a gigantic hand--its fingers closed securely--materialized from the Light. It opened and a small sparrow, bright and redeemed flew into the Throne Room.

There was a sigh of a fresh breeze and all the angels turned to see the glowing portal that had opened into Paradise. Satan too looked and for a moment there flashed across his face a look of immeasurable loss and regret, but only for a moment. With a sneer he looked upon the scene forever denied him where countless millions of animals stood on the infinite hills and valleys of Paradise.

Singing as if its throat would burst the sparrow flew through the portal to join the trillions of its feathered brethren.

And to join the children.

With undisguised lust, Satan could do nothing but glare at the children forever beyond his grasp; safe forever where his fury and rage would never touch them again. There they were; these creations of mud and dust bathed in ineffable Light they felt as Love, their memory of life on Earth overshadowed into insignificance by the Light of Glory.

And also there He walked with the animals and the children. Present with the Godhead on the Throne and also present in Paradise, this Creator that had left Eternity to be born of a human woman and clothed in a body of clay walked with the redeemed as if they were intimate friends.

Satan shook his head in disgust. Had God no pride?

The Voice spoke again. "It is finished. As Time unfolds to its end, I will undo all that you have done and those that choose to join you will do so, but for those who choose to be with Me will be in My Love for all Eternity. And with my own Hand, I will wipe every tear from their eyes."

Satan turned and fled from the Room, past the majestic doors, over the golden streets, past the Great White Horse that patiently waited for its first and only Rider.

Screaming his defiance, Satan fell back to Earth like a falling star. Time, he thought to himself. So little time.

* * * * *

NOTE TO THE READER:

Cover graphic is taken from the 1834 version of Edward Hick’s "Peaceable Kingdom."

All scripture quotes are taken from The Holy Bible, King James Version. New York: Oxford Edition: 1769

Alan Loewen is an ordained pastor who lives with his wife and three sons in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania along with a Sheltie, a rabbit, a homicidal parrot lovingly dubbed "The Death Chicken," and far too many cats. You can follow his misadventures in writing by paying him a visit at 

Alan Loewen: Author, Storyteller, Dreamer

Religion vs. Christianity: This Explains It All

Is "Blind Faith" An Oxymoron?

Mark Twain:
Awesome satirist, not so great a theologian.

Mark Twain defined the word faith as, “Faith is believing what you know ain't so.” I give America’s best-known humorist points for comedy, but I have to say that is not what faith means at all.

When people talk about faith, they are usually referring to the Christian faith and for militant skeptics, their point in deriding faith is that belief in the cardinal points of orthodox Christianity is no different from believing fairies cavort in one’s rose garden on a daily basis. Most people would agree with Twain’s definition of faith and equate it as the same as any irrational and nonsensical belief.

The author of the New Testament epistle to the Hebrews defines faith as, “the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” Now at first glance this appears to support Twain’s supposition, but let’s take a closer look.

The Greek word behind "faith" in the NT is pistis. As a noun, pistis is a word used as a technical rhetorical term for forensic proof. As a legal term, it is a verdict based on testimony and evidence.

The phrase “blind faith” is then a true oxymoron, two contradictory words that have no business being together.

The Christian pistis is based on the verdict that there was an itinerant, historical rabbi in 1st century Palestine who made claims consistent with Messianic prophecies that had been recorded over several millennia. This man also made claims to have a special relationship with the Jewish God, Yahweh. Because of the political climate of the time, this man was publicly executed, but his followers not only made the outlandish claim that he physically rose from the dead, they were willing to die for that supposition and many of his followers did just that, sometimes under torture.

As one looks at the possibilities of what this man, Jesus of Nazareth, could have been, there are four main options. He was a liar, a lunatic, a legend, or he was exactly what he claimed to be which was the Son of God and the Jewish Messiah who had come to provide salvation not only for the Jewish people, but also for the entire world.

And so, people make up their minds about Jesus and what he represents, if they are honest with themselves, by looking at the evidence. They are judge, jury, and executioner and must make up their own minds about him, but the verdict that I have come to, that Jesus is exactly who he said he was, is not based on blind faith, but a careful weighing of the evidence from my understanding of archeology and history, my knowledge of how to read historical literature, the historical impact of Christianity, and a careful study of the person of Christ himself including the culture and times in which he lived. As there are an estimated 2.2 billion Christians in the world who have come to the same conclusion as myself, to think that so many people simply adhere to “blind faith” without any logical reason is more akin to Mark Twain’s definition than true faith itself.

Happy New Year's? Why Of Course!

Last year was basically one where I had to write off my own personal goals as it was one where I moved from crisis to crisis. That is not a complaint, just a mature analysis of a year filled with urgencies, critical junctures, and difficulties.

This year promises to not be any more merciful, but one gift I received from 2015 is the gift to be a little stronger emotionally, to teach me better habits, and to strengthen my faith and perseverance in following the one who said, "In the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the world."

Anno Domini 2016 is going to be a continuing challenge. However, one of the biggest challenges is that for the first three months or so, I will be writing the date like this:

I leave you with one of my favorite Irish blessing:

May the road rise up to meet you. 
May the wind be always at your back. 
May the sun shine warm upon your face; the rains fall soft upon your fields and may God hold you in the palm of His hand.

~ Craig Alan Loewen
White Rabbit Ministries