A Grain of Salt

I’m getting tired of not being able to embed videos.

Like this one.

Well, anyway, here are the lyrics.

it’s been so long I’ve been out of my body with you
I feel alone, feel at home, feel like nothing is true
she took me to a place where my senses gave-way
turn it round, shut it down, what the people say
climbing up, killing time, let them give you some
take my hand and let it come, let it come, let it…

take it back when she knows that your doing it right
cuz everybody else knows what their taking tonight

but I just wanna play it right
we’re gonna get there tonight!

it’s been so far, I’ve been walking the line on my own
lift me up to the stars, we are coming home
I only had a chase, but were out of time
we are souls in the cold, physical design
set me free, set me out on the run
lift me up to the sun, to the sun, to the…

we are burning down, we are burning down
it’s the way that you fake it, I know it’s too late

but I just want to play it right
we’re gonna get there tonight!

I just want to take you down
we’re gonna get there tonight!

but I just want to play it right
we’re gonna get there tonight!

Songs like these can be hard to analyze for one simple reason- they really don’t say much. Notice I said songs LIKE this one; this song has a true meaning behind it. What it seems to be happening to me (taken with the video, of course.) Some may disagree, or think I’m being naive, but I believe this song is another message about drugs. It seems that the narrator is describing his girlfriend encouraging him to take drugs, and, not wanting to upset her, agrees. The hospital scene in the video reflects this- he did not make a wise choice.

Don’t just take this as a “drugs are bad” message– it goes further than that. Acceptance is not worth your life; peer pressure IS effective; and desire to fit in actually is a huge influence. And if you think this is another “drugs are bad message”, enjoy the song anyway.

If I wasn’t so lazy, I would have embedded this video.

Start out with listening to the song, then hop back here for an analysis.

“I do not exist,” we faithfully insist
sailing in our separate ships,
and in each tiny caravel -
tiring of trying, there’s a necessary dying
like the horseshoe crab in its proper season sheds its shell
such distance from our friends,
like a scratch across a lens,
made everything look wrong from anywhere we stood
and our paper blew away before we’d left the bay
so half-blind we wrote these songs on sheets of salty wood

you caught me making eyes at the other boatmen’s wives
and heard me laughing louder at the jokes told by their daughters
I’d set my course for land,
but you well understand
it takes a steady hand to navigate adulterous waters
the propeller’s spinning blades held acquaintance with the waves
as there’s mistakes I’ve made no rowing could outrun
the cloth low on the mast like to say Ive got no past
but I’m nonetheless the librarian and secretary’s son
with tarnish on my brass and mildew on my glass
I’d never want someone so crass as to want someone like me
but a few leagues off the shore, I bit a flashing lure
and I assure you, it was not what it expected it to be!
I still taste its kiss, that dull hook in my lip
is a memory as useless as a rod without a reel
to an anchor-ever-dropped-seasick-yet-still-docked captain spotted napping with his first mate at the wheel floating forgetfully along, with no need to be strong. we keep our confessions long and when we pray we keep it short
I drank a thimbleful of fire and I’m not ever going back

Oh, my G-d!

“I do not exist,” we faithfully insist
while watching sink the heavy ship of everything we knew
if ever you come near I’ll hold up high a mirror
Lord, I could never show you anything as beautiful as you

I’ll start out with a quick look at some of the lyrics.

To start out with, I believe the general meaning of the song is quite obvious. The speaker is caught in an adulterous relationship that he cannot seem to escape. He tries his hardest to get away from his problem, (the propeller’s spinning blades held acquaintance with the waves, as there’s mistakes I’ve made no rowing could outrun) but can’t seem to be able to.  Even when he is leaving his situation, he falls into another sin (as shown by the section on the fishhook.) Even though it appears alluring, he is trapped by it. The only thing that frees him from his capture is the memory of God’s love (…thimbleful of fire…). Without the sin holding him down, the narrator is free to bask in God’s glory.

The last verse contains as much theological significance as the rest of the song in it’s entirety. “While watching sink the heavy ship of everything we knew,” I believe, symbolizes the author’s final commitment- getting rid of his former self entirely, and accepting God entirely. However, the one line that sticks out to me more than any other in this song is the last– “Lord, I could never show you anything as beautiful as you.” It’s pretty self explanatory. Nothing we could ever do would be an adequate representation of the love God has for us, much less the enormity of the sacrifice of his son.

The rest of the song is chock-full of good nuggets- I just scratched the surface. Feel free to leave other impressions in the comments.

Well, I’ll be darned.

People are arguing again.

It seems that CBS approved an ad from Focus on the Family, a Christian organization, that seems to portray an anti-abortion slant, featuring Tim Tebow and his mother. She talks about her decision to ignore a doctor’s advice and carry tim to term, despite health risks. I personally have not seen the ad yet, and I’m not entirely sure anyone has. But many groups have decided that they do not like the message one bit.

“An ad that uses sports to divide rather than to unite has no place in the biggest national sports event of the year — an event designed to bring Americans together,” Jehmu Greene, president of the Women’s Media Center, said in a statement.

Well. Although I can’t find  a direct quote, I can remember that I heard one woman from a similar organization call the commercial a “message of hate.” She said that it was wrong for the group to only present it’s point of view as the correct one. Well, I have a problem with that.

Everything presents an opinion. Watch any commercial. Do you hear “Buy our product, but the others are just as good?” No. Anyone with any message comes an opinion. It is ridiculous to believe that any one message can be banned for not supporting it’s detractors. Some may take another route, however, and claim that CBS’ decision to not air ads from the Church of Christ and PETA show obvious favoritism. Short answer- they recently changed there practices regarding ads. Long answer- THEY RECENTLY CHANGED THERE PRACTICES REGARDING ADS. There. I said it. Now everyone, shut up and watch the Super Bowl.

Well, ain’t this cool news.

It seems that our friends in Britain have declared a fatwa against Islamic extremism. For those who don’t know, a fatwa is essentially an official statement by an Islamic ulema, a kind of religious legal expert, that someone or some practice violates the law of the Koran. This specific case is probably surprising to many people, especially those who view Islam as a religion of violence.

The document, written by Dr Muhammed Tahir-ul-Qadri, a former minister of Pakistan and friend of Benazir Bhutto, declares suicide bombings and terrorism as “totally un-Islamic”. It is one of the most detailed and comprehensive documents of its kind to be published in Britain.

The fatwa, which was released in Pakistan last month, uses texts from the Koran and other Islamic writings to argue that attacks against innocent citizens are “absolutely against the teachings of Islam and that Islam does not permit such acts on any excuse, reason or pretext”.

What many people (Including many Christians!) seem to forget is that Islam is, to most of it’s followers, a religion of peace. But that news is hard to bare with the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Islamic extremists are seen as our one enemy. Truth be told, Islamic extremists are more than likely the most common, if not only enemy we face. But this fact has led to a horrible increase in anti-Muslim sentiments across the western world. What these leads to is- to put it bluntly, horrible cases of hypocracy.

Most Christians today seem to be getting uptight and generally paranoid about the government forces that they see as being “unfair”, “anti-religious”, or “prejudiced”. But how can we complain about our own treatment when we harbor such hatred against others? Have we forgotten the Golden Rule? Or maybe we just think it only applies when we are treated unfairly? Maybe what we need to remember is- fairness applies to everyone, and we are ORDERED to love everyone as we love ourselves. So instead of passing the blame for our misfortunes around, maybe when we begin treating others fairly we will get the blessings we want.

Very original.

Woah, nelly.

According to that purply-looking text up there, 87% of people in the United States believe that “sin”, which was defined as something “that is almost always considered wrong, particularly from a religious or moral perspective.” Of course, that’s good news, in a way. But what I think is more important are the actual statistics behind that one.

The top-rated sin ( Wow, never thought I would say that) is adultery, with 81% of people saying they believe that it is still a sin. Strangely enough, however,  only 45% believe that premarital sex is a sin. What seems to be the difference? Well, if you were to ask me, I would probably give two reasons. First, I would say that it has something to do with our society’s disregard for the consequences of sex in a relationship. There’s an excellent article in The Week (one of my favorite magazines)  about the state of relationships among young people today that I thought explained the problem well. Without getting into too much detail, I’ll just say that without a permanent relationship, sex does nothing but provide a connection that will be torn apart.

The other is selfishness. People as a whole (myself included) are inconsiderate. We only like to think about ourselves, and what benefits us in the here and now. It’s as simple as that- we want what feels good, we want it now, and as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone know, go right ahead. Too bad for us, I guess.

Last week, I did something I thought I would never do, but I guess I was speeding toward since I started this blog. I started at a USA Today article about a bishop (Nick Baines) that supposedly “slammed” Christmas carols in a recent book. Judging by the wording of the article, along with the title of the book (which was suspiciously missing it’s sub-title) Why Wish You a Merry Christmas, I assumed that he was another  one of the bunch of crazies that look to profit off Christmas by stirring up controversy, then fading into the background.

Boy, was I in for a surprise.

Almost immediately after the post, I got a message from the author, which you can read by scrolling down a little bit. I don’t feel like copy-pasting the whole thing again.

There, now that you’ve read it, you can understand why I was so embarrassed. With no other knowledge of the book than a news article, I attacked the author. Turns out, USA Today never contacted Nick– and left out what I consider to a very important piece of understanding the meaning of this book, the sub-title. What matters (and what doesn’t) in the festive season is actually a book that (after more research) I can say I recommend to any and everyone who can get their hands on it. And again, my apologies to Mr. Baines.

Startin’ here this week.

In recent years, some Americans have come to view science and religion as consistent antagonists, butting heads over everything from the origin of the cosmos to when human life begins (abortion) and when it ends (euthanasia).

This article was written by a columnist on the USA Today website. After a brief explanation of the views of “Conservative denominations,” he states the reason for bringing the topic up.

The issue surfaced again over the summer. When President Obama named Francis Collins, an outspoken evangelical as well as former director of the Human Genome Project, to head the National Institutes of Health, some scientists, secularists and at least one prominent atheist criticized the appointment. They were concerned that Collins’ faith might influence his decisions at the NIH. This despite the fact that Collins, author of The Language of God, supports both evolution and embryonic stem cell research

This really shows a lot about… well, everyone. First, the “scientists, secularists, and at least one prominent atheist.” They believe that the new appointee would be influenced negatively by his faith. Maybe they don’t entirely realize the point of this government- to represent the people. When the majority of the nation is against abortion, isn’t it logical to have a leader who reflects those views? And if President Obama felt it appropriate to appoint the man to the position in the first place, then shouldn’t we trust that the decisions made will be good ones that reflect common opinion? I realize that their exists a very simple argument against this one, so I’ll go ahead and address it. “Well when people you disagree with are appointed,” some of you may be thinking, “why do you always go up in protest against them?” Well, first of all, I prefer to wait and see a politicians decisions before I decide anything about them, while trying not to pin the blame on their moral character. And if I do decide to protest, it’s because I disagree with some of the decisions that they have made. Not for the reason of disagreeing with their belief system.

Next is the way the Christian community as a whole is viewed. These people obviously see us as all holding the same opinions- the outcry wasn’t against him, it was against the way they felt he would respond. So these scientists may think that all evangelical Christians hold the same opinion. Sure there are several beliefs that all Christians should share, but some are simply a matter of belief. I think that Christians should embrace and share the differences that we have, explore them, and then maybe come to a reasonable conclusion. That may be too much to ask. But maybe if we can get the world to see us differently, these kind of disgraces wouldn’t happen.

More on the rest of the article next week.

I guess this isn't King James...

Ha ha. Wow.

For all of you who may have happened to miss the link… well, I’ll just copy the entire article.

CANTON, North Carolina (AP) — A North Carolina pastor says his church plans to burn Bibles and books by Christian authors on Halloween to light a fire under true believers.

Pastor Marc Grizzard told Asheville TV station WLOS that the King James version of the Bible is the only one his small western North Carolina church follows. He says all other versions, such as the Living Bible, are “satanic” and “perversions” of God’s word.

I just… wow. Again, I have two main points about this article. The first of which is, well, get over it. The King James version, while poetic, striking, and powerful is NOT THE ONLY VERSION OF THE BIBLE. You read that right. I do love me some King James, to be true, but when people claim it is the only REAL version that can be trusted, it gets to me. Sure, several other translations may leave out verses, making King James one of the most accurate. But to a new Christian, accuracy may take a back seat to readability. To anyone new to the faith, I recommend a read-through of John, in a version like NIV. But for later study, I cannot recommend King James highly enough. It’s accuracy is unparalleled. Now, this person has taken this thought process to it’s logical extreme- the versions that don’t match up with this one are from the devil… Offending anyone who reads them and deeply confusing new believers who rely on their language.

Secondly, this is exactly the sort of action that portrays Christianity as a fragmented religion. I can see nothing wrong with the books of Billy Graham, (though Rick Warren… meh.) and think he is one of the centuries’ greatest evangelists. If you’re going to do something like this, try something a little less…drastic. Perhaps a seminar on why you believe these things are wrong, a sermon, or maybe even your own book. But actions like this serve no purpose other than to rile people up and draw attention to yourself. So THINK BEFORE YOU ACT. The appearance of our religion is failing, and we need to set the public right about the world’s true religion of love.

A small side note- appearance isn’t everything. More on that later.

The answer to God?

While exploring last week’s topic, I came across this little gem. In the article, it explains the recent trend of  de-baptism, where the water of baptism is symoblically blown off with a hairdryer labeled “Reason”. Afterward, the newly de-baptized enjoy an “anti-sacrament” of peanut butter and crackers. The group said-

“We made fun of Islam, we made fun of Hinduism, we made fun of Christianity with intent to be blasphemous on purpose to make a point” about a proposed anti-blasphemy initiative at the United Nations, Scott said. “It’s not done with malice or intent to offend. But anytime you criticize religion or poke fun at what atheists would call the sillier parts of religion, you’re going to offend somebody. There’s just no way around that.”

First, personal freedom is a pillar of the American ideal. I believe that this person had every right to say what he said. I also believe that I have the right to disagree with him. This statement is entirely innapropriate. If the only way you can get your point across is to be “blasphemous”, then maybe you should rethink your standing. Secondly, and bigger…

The actions described in this article are a great way to demean the power of God. Just by performing this action they (if they care) are saying that God is not as powerful as… a hairdryer. They are saying that they can remove themselves from the will of God with a quick burst of air. Once you have accepted Christ, (I believe) you cannot leave him. Like a father and son, you can never stop being his child, though your relationship may change. Also, with the hairdryer marked reason, what are the really saying?

That reason is the enemy of God.

No.

We CANNOT let this become a commonly thought ideal- if it does… well, we’re done.

We have to act against this, letting people know that God is not anti intelligence, anti science, or anti anyone. Show love, show intelligence, show passion, and show restraint in all these, and spread the word of the love of Christ.

Nones- American’s who profess no religious affiliation- now make up 15 percent of the population. Given their rapid growth, their numbers might soon surpass the nation’s largest denominations. but get this: Twenty-four percent [of Nones] say they believe in ‘a higher power but no personal God,’ the belief that used to be called Deism. they don’t believe in Scripture, or cotton to organized religion. But in the privacy of their home, they think that the distant, aloof God occasionally checks in to listen to their prayers.                             – Beliefnet founder Steve Waldman, quoted in  the Wall Street Journal

This is… shocking. According to USA today, the Nones now take up more of the population than Catholics and Baptists. ‘Baptist’ is very broad, however, and encompasses several different denominations.

It seems the people of the United States have decided to join the movements against Christianity. Why would they choose to believe in an impersonal, uncaring god, when they have the choice of a loving God, who cares for them and wants the best for them? It doesn’t seem to me to be too large of a step from ‘a higher power’ to God. The good news is that people who do believe in a ‘higher power’ will (most likely) more easily turned to Christ than one who does not believe in any sort of God. But the main point seems to me to be this blurb near the bottom of the USA Today piece.

The percentage of those who choose a generic label, calling themselves simply Christian, Protestant, non-denominational, evangelical or “born again,” was 14.2%, about the same as in 1990.

This is very interesting to me- not the content, but it’s placement. It takes digging to find this. In addition, the title of the articles is “Nones now 15% of population.” Simply reading that, along with the opening paints a very different picture of the religious affiliations of our country today. When you read into it though, you see a new portrait- one of a constant group of faithful Christians who call themselves just that, while the different denominations have slowly decreased. I find it interesting that this facet was placed farther down the page- almost as if showing the steady faithfulness of the church would somehow discredit the rest of the article or it’s message. Of course, I could be mistaken. Maybe it was placed their purely arbitrarily. Who knows.