merittmusings

Connecting the Dots – The Death of James

About that time Herod the king laid violent hands on some who belonged to the church. He killed James the brother of John with the sword, and when he saw that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded to arrest Peter also. This was during the days of Unleavened Bread. (Act 12:1-3)

James is the only apostle whose death is recorded in the Scriptures. While many are familiar with the death of Paul who was beheaded in Rome and Peter who was crucified upside down outside of Rome, both are attributed to traditional material, the Early Church Fathers and so on. Only James’ death, of all of the original 12 apostles (with the exception of Judas) is recorded within its pages.

Outside of what we find in the gospels, James (or Jacob)’s ministry is virtually unknown. Thus it is a great mystery why he was selected for this act of persecution by Herod Agrippa I. We know James was one of the inner circle of disciples, along with his brother John and business partner Peter. He and his brother are noted for their desire for special privilege in the coming Kingdom by asking to sit at the right and left hands of Jesus (Mark 10:35). They were given the special nickname “sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17) and were especially incensed by the reaction of the Samaritans to Jesus, asking that Jesus lay waste to their cities with fire (Luke 9:54). We might gather that before the resurrection, James was a hot-tempered individual, but these few examples may merely point to a greater degree of zeal on his part. Their family was aligned with the house of the high priest, and may have had frequent business dealings there (John 18:15). It seems that James and John, whose mother was Salome (Mark 15:40; 16:1) and father Zebedee may have been related to Mary and Joseph as Mary’s sister, but this isn’t conclusive. Even so, it is Salome who approached Jesus (along with her sons) to ask for the right and left hands, something Jesus’ aunt might have felt entitled to, as Jesus’ own brothers didn’t believe in Him.

As the other disciples, James saw the risen Lord, and heard the commission to go into all the world. According to tradition, James obeyed the commission and went to the Iberian peninsula (Spain) and the origin of the word “Santiago” or Saint Iago ,means “Saint James”. After his death, his remains were allegedly taken to Spain and are in the Santiago de Compostela in northern Spain.

However, some early church sources refute this claim, Clement of Alexandria and Apollonius (See Eusebius Eccl. Hist. VI.18) saying that James never left Jerusalem before he was martyred in AD 44. Paul in Romans 15:20 and 24 intended to go to Spain, but did not desire to build upon another man’s foundation. Wouldn’t Paul have known if James had gone to Spain? Wouldn’t that have been a noteworthy trip for even Luke to make a note of before James was martyred? Strangely, James’ travels are more famous after he died.

Iberia is in Biblical terms the ends of the earth. Jonah desired to escape to Tarshish, as far as he could get from Nineveh. Paul desired to go to Spain (to satisfy his apostolic commission). Perhaps the truth is somewhere in there. Perhaps James, as the fathers said, never left Judea because the church up to that point was still wrestling about extending the gospel to Gentiles. It wasn’t James who first made that invitation, but Peter. We should not be surprised that James was still under the impression “to the Jew first” for most of his ministry, for Jesus said, “You will not finish going through the towns in Judea before I come.” (See Matthew 10:23) Ironically, if tradition is at least partly correct, James went on to evangelize Spain after his death, a martyr to the message of Jesus to an extent far more notable in death than during his life.

Connecting the Dots – Who was Lazarus?

Lazarus (Heb. Eleazar), who we find in John 11, is the only named person in Scripture that Jesus raised from the dead. We find in this chapter that Lazarus and his family were friends of Jesus (implied by John 11:3, 5) and well-known of Him. What makes this more interesting is a parable in Luke’s gospel in which Jesus uses this same name for his protagonist, Lazarus the beggar. Lazarus is both a man who died and was raised to life, and a man who died and went to Abraham’s bosom. Is this a coincidence, Jesus sharing a story with some factual details? Maybe, but let’s looks at some of the details.

Lazarus is the beggar at the rich man’s door (Luke 16:19) who is carried to Abraham’s bosom. His character isn’t described, but only that he sat at the rich man’s doorstep, dogs licked his sores, and he waited on crumbs from the man’s table. Obviously, this Lazarus had some illness that prevented him from working and caused these “sores” on his skin. He may have had leprosy, which was a grievous illness of the skin, but lepers in that day were required to stay away from other people, not camp out on their doorstep. Yet, this is a parable, and the details may be more symbolic than actual. Because of his skin disease, this Lazarus was no doubt relegated to the outside of society, while the rich man was at the heart of it. When both men died, their roles are reversed, the unclean man allowed within the best of Paradise, while the rich man is outside in an awful place. Because he is the only named character in any of Jesus’ parables, some are inclined to believe he may have been an actual person.

As for the Lazarus of John 11, we don’t know how he got sick, or much of what happened after his story. In fact, it is the fact that he dies is what makes him so notable. In another part of Luke (10:38-42), there is a short story involving Mary and Martha, but Lazarus is not mentioned. Vs. 38 implies that the home is Martha’s, not her brother’s. When Mary and Martha are mentioned, Lazarus is not always there. Only in John is Lazarus associated with his sisters. In Matthew 26:6 (Two days before the Passover), Jesus is in the house of “Simon the Leper” where takes place a similar event to Mary’s anointing of Jesus in John 12:3 (six days before the Passover). Is it possible that leprosy was a family illness? Could Simon, a formerly healthy man, been afflicted with leprosy, and so his house is run by his eldest daughter (Martha)? Note also earlier in Luke 7:36-38 that the house of Simon the Pharisee is the setting for the anointing of the woman. Even though Simon was a very common name in those days, it seems odd that these anointings take place under similar circumstances in the houses of men named Simon.

See note the similarity and differences between these events at:

https://www.agapebiblestudy.com/charts/In%20defense%20of%20two%20dinners%20at%20Bethany.htm

Archaeologists have discovered a tomb outside of Bethany with the names of Simon, Martha, and Lazarus. A run-down of the story can be found here:

http://adamoh.org/TreeOfLife.lan.io/NTCh/TheDiscoveryOfTheTombsOfMary.htm

Of course, all three names are extremely common, and the chances that all three would be found in the same tomb shouldn’t be a surprise. However, it is possible that Simon was the father (the leper of Matthew 26:6; Mark 14:3) who owned the house in Bethany and that Lazarus was the younger brother of Martha and Mary. It is not said that Simon was present at the dinner in John 12, or in Matthew 26, so it’s possible that Simon was not cured of his leprosy as many assume. Because Simon was known as “the leper” may tell us why these two women were still unmarried (as indicated by Mary anointing Jesus with her dowry), as leprosy was a disease which caused uncleanness. But those whom the world avoided, Jesus seems to embrace as his closest friends. Might Jesus have favored this family because of their disadvantage? It was perhaps passing through Bethany at one time that he saw this family and knew their story, and attached Himself to them, above all the families in Israel. The disgust of the disciples at Mary’s extravagant sacrifice is not dissimilar from us disgusted at the “poor” given money, only to spend it on drugs and alcohol. Just a thought.

At Jesus’ ascension in Luke 24:50, it seems unlikely that Lazarus and his sisters would have missed it since it was just outside of town. The New Testament is otherwise completely silent about what happened to them, unless the group of believers who gathered in Acts 1 included them. Tradition doesn’t tell us much about Lazarus and his family after the gospels, except that they went on to become evangelists in their own right.

It’s all historical guesswork and supposition, but it may help us piece together Jesus’ relationship with this family. I have to wonder if the parable of Lazarus is in some way connected the actual life experience of Lazarus of Bethany. If Lazarus’ father was a leper, that can’t have helped him much growing up. If his father had leprosy early, who would teach him a trade, or have a family business to work into? Maybe Lazarus took up begging from a young age, and sat outside the houses of the rich for morsels? And maybe it was Jesus who turned the fortunes of this house around, by giving them the good news of the kingdom. Maybe Lazarus turned his life around because he discovered a God who loved him, despite the harshness life had dealt him. Maybe Lazarus was so loved by Jesus because he was a lost soul who made something of himself as a disciple serving faithfully in Bethany.

Tasting the Goodness of God

bible.com/72/psa.34.8.hcsb

So what comes to mind when you see this verse? Can God be tasted, or is that what God intends for you to take away from this verse? And how do you combine both the idea of refuge with the perceptions of taste and sight?

Many a time, David sought refuge in caves. For him, a Cave was a place of safety. It was hidden, inaccessible but to the ones who know where the caves are. As a boy, he probably spent months exploring the caves while out keeping watch over sheep, looked for caves that he and his sheep could take refuge for the night. This became for him a metaphor for the protection of God.

So what does a cave taste like? Maybe our understanding of what this verse means needs to meet its context. Are there odors so powerful you can taste? And would those odors, associated with safety and comfort arose those feelings in you whenever you smell them?

As we approach Autumn, I begin to smell these things again. Burning wood, Pumpkin Spice, autumn leaves, baked pies and roasted meat. These are smells of comfort, safety, and family. Our senses are reacquainted with home and our anxiety resets when we feel safe. Like David, we feel the surrounding reassurance that everything is going to be ok. Why? Because we are in the presence of God.

Wherever you are, taste. Wherever you are, see. Take in the world around you and be reminded of the goodness of God. He is a certain and steady refuge for the weary of heart.

The Sanctification of Donald Trump

I’ve been hearing this week about the funeral of John McCain, former Senator from Arizona. Yet much of the rhetoric from the funeral services (that I’ve caught) has been about how much McCain is a patriot, even the uber-patriot, while the present occupant of the oval office is a farce, a sham, a pretender to the throne. The comparison was made that while McCain was suffering in a Vietnamese prison camp, Donald Trump was in the lap of luxury. Surely on this basis, Trump is the villain and McCain the hero. Yet I lived through the 2008 presidential election. I remember the hatred poured out upon the Senator from Arizona who dared to run against the first (actually second) black presidential candidate in history. Why, to vote for McCain was to vote against history!

Something more telling. Do you all remember when Billy Graham passed away and a state funeral was given for him? He up to this time is the only non-government individual to be given such an honor (to my knowledge). Donald Trump was the only President to attend the funeral. By contrast, McCain specifically prohibited Donald Trump from attending, while simultaneously inviting both President Bush (whose policies he denounced during his presidential run) and President Obama to speak on his behalf.

Donald Trump has been decried as a philanderer, a liar, born with a silver spoon in his mouth kind of man. It is said he was born into privilege and so doesn’t know what it’s like to live like a real American (not unlike Mitt Romney), but unlike Mitt Romney, Donald Trump could connect with the common man. And while he has certainly not been a saint, he is getting better.

Many people despise Trump, and they have their reasons. I don’t hate him. I can’t say I like him either, because I’ve never met him. But he seems like the sort of man who did not know what he was getting into, the complexity of the office, the depth of the forces arrayed against him, but one who is learning. Trump is politically inept. That’s why he was elected. He is a straight-forward, plain-talking man who means what he says. He is the kind of man with whom you know where you stand, because he will tell you. He seems like the kind of man who has learned that time is more valuable than anything else, so he doesn’t waste it, not anymore.

Many decried that Trump is not a Christian, that his history is too black, he’s done too many things to be forgiven. And this is coming from Christians. It seems to me that while Trump may not be a Christian (who am I to judge another man’s servant?) he is definitely trying to act like one since he’s entered the oval office. I don’t know if he has been baptized, but then again, I don’t know that George Washington was either.

My point is, while Donald Trump may have been a man who lived for himself when he became President, I believe he has matured. While he still tweets, he doesn’t tweet nearly as much as he did to start. While he still has obtuse remarks, they is more time between them. America elected an outsider to take the fight to Big Government. They didn’t expect any less. And he has not disappointed them. I don’t believe any man knows what being a President is like until he is sitting in the chair. But I believe that Mr. Trump has grown into it, and will continue to mature as he works for the American People.

Infinite Yearning

bible.com/72/ecc.3.11.hcsb

Where does natural human curiosity come from? It seems that everyone has this yearning for the infinite, a wonder that reaches beyond their five senses into the what if? It is a lack of contentment with all that we are because we feel a great pit within us waiting to be filled with something. We try to fill it with many things, money, power, relationships, but nothing fits. Nothing is big enough.

Ancient cultures tried to fill it with inventions of gods and goddesses, trying to explain a much bigger picture of the world around them, but those were all corruptions. Few remembered the beginning. There were some that did, but they seemed reluctant to share with Gentiles. It wasn’t until someone they raised and taught, a perfect child so they thought, who would declare that His message was for all. So they fought, arrested, and killed Him. But He was too good to die, and didn’t stay that way. He rose from the dead and declared to all when he said, God has sent His Son into the world to die so that they might live.

That great yearning for eternity can only and should only be filled by the grace, mercy and love that come through Jesus Christ. Come and be filled.

Not Sure Where To Go?

bible.com/72/2th.3.5.hcsb

The world says to “follow your heart” and “listen to your heart”, but it seems the heart is just as confused as the rest of us. The Bible has a different take on this. Let the Lord lead your heart into love and steadfastness, or, let the Lord lead you into His kind of love, and the perseverance to stay there. His kind of love is unconditional, needs no prompting, and no promise of reward. That kind of love is tough, which is why you must also have perseverance, the kind of endurance that allows you to weather adversity. It calls for loving the unlovable, loving without expecting anything in return for those that can do nothing for you, even your enemies. It is love for others, simply because they are God’s children wherever they are, and sharing that love with them, sharing God’s love for them through His Som Christ Jesus. Follow your heart as God leads it. God bless you today with good journey.

A Divide Between the Man and the Woman

Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. (1 Corinthians 11:11-12)

Our culture is trying to divide men and women, actually trying to make us homogeneous, rather than heterogeneous. Gone is the macho man, here is the metro-sexual. Gone is the mother, housewife, and vixen, here is the career woman, who can do it all and can do it all better. Men are told to sit down and shut up. Boys are told to behave and given medicine to keep them from being rowdy. Girls are told to burn their aprons, put on their shoes, and go get a real job.

And by trying to make us all the same, some have tried to be homosexual. Men have given up their natural urges, and felt justified in doing so. They give up trying to be men and stay boys, never becoming Dads, or the real men we knew 50 years ago. Women attempt to take up the slack, and try to be Dads and Moms, some feeling utter guilt for being away from home, but guilt at home for being away from work.

These gender-based issues plague the church, for these attitudes infect us everywhere. Men are content to sit on their hands and let the women run the church. The women are frustrated, because they don’t know who they are supposed to be. The men are frustrated because they are not allowed to be what they are. There is friction in the home, in the workplace, and in our country as a whole. But this is an old problem. Society’s answer to the problem of man and women is only creating bigger problems. No one knows what they are supposed to do anymore.

So why did God create man and woman? Why did He create them both? That’s the heart of the of all the complaints we have, men about women, women about men. Why did God in His infinite wisdom make men and women? Did He make them to be unique in role and function? Or did He make them from the same mold?

May I put forward that the reason God made men and women was to teach us to love and be loved in return. Man was not created for the woman, though they were created the same day, maybe even hours apart. Man was created first, from dust, from the inanimate earth, while woman was created from the man, the very machine of his biology.

Man was created in isolation, given time to learn loneliness, despite all the glory expressed in creation. God gave him time to learn that he was alone. Adam did not know that God would create a woman. What he did know is that despite all the wonderful and perfect things God had created, there was no one else like him. This should seem strange to our ears, because surely Adam had the companionship of God. Didn’t God walk the garden in the cool of the day? Couldn’t God fulfill all the needs for companionship that Adam had? And yet it is God who says, “It is not good for man to be alone.”

Woman was created in answer to this. While Adam slept, God took a “rib”, which was more likely Adam’s baculum, or, “penis-bone”, and from it created the woman, that which literally completed him, and this through the physical act of intimacy and reproduction. The woman was brought to the man, so that she was never lonely. But to say that woman was created so that Adam could have sex is overstating the idea. What did Eve bring to the relationship? God calls her a “helpmeet” or a companion to Adam. Some theorize that her role was more than just a companion, but a fellow warrior, someone to watch his back. Others suggest that Adam was the hunter and explorer, while Eve was the nurturer and homebuilder, that their abilities complemented each other.

But it seems to me that making a man and a woman, God has Himself in mind. God exists in a Trinity, three Persons who exist as One Being. The man and the woman, especially in a marriage relationship, reflect this. Alone, they feel incomplete, even lonely. Yet while they are still two persons, they reflect a common commitment, and common direction and agenda. In many cases, only the companionship of another of the equal yet opposite gender will satisfy and fulfill that need.

Men and Women are unique, but similar, different, but their parts and processes are complementary. We cannot expect men to act like women nor vice versa. To do so is to cause depression, anxiety and guilt that shouldn’t be caused in the first place. Men. Is it ok to be masculine. Women, it is ok to be feminine. That is what you were built for, and why your heavenly Father endowed you with these gifts.

Let us praise God for our differences, and yet for our common need in Christ. Let us praise His holy name.

Doctrinal Insights from ‘Heaven is For Real’

Several years ago, after I had read the book Heaven is Real, I jotted down these notes. I thought I might share them with you, just to see what you thought about them. If the vision that Colton Burpo received was true, then we might receive these truths about the spiritual world.

The Resurrection of The Dead
- The righteous dead already have new, recognizable bodies with reference to their previous bodies, and know the events following their demise, at least regarding their own family.
- All the dead, have wings (like angels).
- Babies who die in utero live on in Heaven. Example: Colton’s unborn sister died at two months gestation. When he sees her in Heaven, she is not a fetus, but a little girl, who has apparently aged. Do babies who die (or are killed) in utero grow into children and later adults in Heaven? She was not named on earth; she has none in Heaven. The Burpos assumed that they would have the responsibility of naming her. (If they had named her posthumously, would she then have a name?)
Salvation in Jesus Christ
- Salvation and entrance into Heaven is based solely on faith in Jesus Christ. The particulars and rituals (such as confession, baptism by immersion) are not mentioned (nor do they apply as strictly in Wesleyan doctrine as they do in the Restoration Movement Churches, so the author wouldn’t have made much of them anyway).
- But, without a doubt, faith in Christ is essential, however displayed, to gain entrance to Heaven.
The Physical Presence and Reality of Satan
- Satan’s presence is seen from Heaven.
- His description is not mentionable by Colton. (Too terrifying?)
The End of Days
- There is a War in which women and children watch the men battle the forces of evil with swords. (The book states unequivocally that such a war takes place in the future, but Colton sees it already happening, so while the author may believe it is in the future, it may already be occurring. On the other hand, Colton’s insights are rarely, if ever, symbolic. He describes things as he sees them, not as images which point to something else.)
- More importantly, Colton describes his father is already fighting, which means that if this is a reference to the end times, they are within the lifetime of the author.
Trinitarian Doctrine
- Jesus is a physically recognizable presence, who sits at the right hand of God the Father, and loves children, especially. He also goes up and down (without wings). Jesus hears our prayers and directs the answers. He also receives the dead.
- God the Father is a physically imposing presence, huge to behold.
- God the Holy Spirit is perceived as a blue aura, but He sends power to His servants in a visible way, to empower them for ministry to others.

For the rest of Colton’s visions, the greatest objections to them stem not from whether they agree with the Bible, but our doctrinal interpretations of it. The book passes the same tests we apply to the gospels, in that is written in the lifetime of the people mentioned in it, so that it is verifiable. If there were any serious objection to its facts, the book has been out long enough to have been rebutted several times (the events themselves occurred in 2003).

Reflection (written 8/28/18):

However, Colton is not and has not been considered an apostle, so, there’s that. I have no doubt that Mr. Burpo said he saw all the things that he saw. That much is recorded history. Whether his father had a hand in massaging his son’s story or not, I cannot know. The fact that Colton had an accident, that he nearly died (or did actually die on the table) are facts that have been repeated by many, and thus not exactly rare. We could go back to the hospital Colton was treated in and probably find all these things corroborated.

However, the testimony that Colton shares does have troubling insights. How much of what is above agrees with Scripture? With revealed testimony from the prophets and apostles? And with whom do we agree? I hate to say this, but Paul says it better:

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. (Gal 1:8-9)

I cannot fault Mr. Colton, but I can fault those who would seek to use his testimony to undermine Scripture, using the testimony of the dead (or briefly so) and make some extra bucks. The book, written by his father, became a movie not long ago, and I’m sure did very well. But his father stated that he is a minister himself. Would he not have know that his son’s testimony could be used by some to alter and even disregard the statements of Scripture. If Faith in Jesus was enough, why do so many of the apostles insist on baptism? If all who die in Christ become angels, then what makes angels special in the Bible? Are they dead people too? As the three-fold presence of God is described, does that support or undermine trinitarian thinking?

When Paul went to the “third heaven” he knew enough to say this:

And I know that this man was caught up into paradise—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows— and he heard things that cannot be told, which man may not utter. (2Co 12:3-4)

Maybe Paul saw some of the same things that Colton did. Maybe not. But Paul wisely chose not to reveal these things, even as an inspired apostle, to his readers. Is it possible that people would be far more interested in what awaits us in heaven, and ignore the responsibility of inviting others to it?

When it comes to books like this one, books which some call, Heaven Tourism, I feel it comes dangerously close to necromancy, that is, to consult the dead (or briefly so) to get insight into the future. The Bible strictly forbids this. Because even the Devil can masquerade as an angel of light and lead millions to Hell.

Forgetting What is Behind

Recently I commented back to a individual who asked about Christians attending a same-sex wedding. It’s under the post entitled, “The Gay Blade Cuts Both Ways” if you want to see it. A tougher question, and one that I’ve been pondering since I gave the initial comment, is about whether its OK to attend the wedding of someone who was divorced.

I’ve had several friends that I’ve met over the years, many of them good friends, who at some point “needed” to divorce their spouse. One recently mentioned that her husband, the man she married in place of her prior husband, had died. This is what prompted this post. Because I found myself not knowing how I should feel. I knew her first husband and felt we were friends. I don’t know all the details, but he and she divorced and then she married again to the man who has now recently passed. I believe her previous husband is still alive and I wonder if she hadn’t divorced if she would be mourning today.

I gave advice to a hurting wife years ago that she took as an encouragement for divorce. I still cringe when I recall the situation. I never heard from him, but she went on about how he was gone all the time, never spent any time at home and barely did anything together with her. I realize now that I was far too hasty, and ought to have encouraged her to try and work things out, to talk with the two of them together before I said anything, because let’s be honest, divorce is devastating. The only people who benefit from divorce are lawyers, and those who have been cheating on their spouse. I am not saying she did, but it seemed a very short time before she was married again. I never saw the husband, and I wonder today how I must have hurt him unintentionally by giving unwise advice.

God hates divorce, and He is far better glorified in a hurting marriage that is reconciled than in legal separation, divorce proceedings, and custody hearings. Now I know there will be those who say, “Well, you just don’t know my circumstances! If you did, you would know I needed a divorce!” Christians, if we are going to be hard on same-sex marriage, then we ought to be equally hard on marriage after divorce. There may be a thousand good reasons for divorce, but the Scriptures only suggest two, and these are merely permissions, not commands to divorce: 1) infidelity, and 2) an unbelieving spouse who decides to divorce you.

For the first, infidelity is a powerful reason for divorce, but it is also a powerful reason for forgiveness and reconciliation. Husbands and Wives, to look on anyone who is not your spouse and even to imagine sex with them is Infidelity. I may even add it is possible to commit emotional infidelity, if you close yourself off to your spouse and confide on an emotionally intimate level in another individual of the opposite gender. He who is without sin, cast the first stone.

For the second, note that the Christian spouse does not initiate the divorce, but the unbelieving spouse. So that it is the unbeliever who says, “I’ve had enough of your Jesus!” and leaves the marriage, NOT the Christian spouse who says, “I’ve had enough of you!”

So when I go back through my friends who have divorced, and church members and others I’ve known, I know infidelity is often cited. I cannot sit here and tell you I know everything that happened, because I don’t. We all make mistakes, even when it comes to the person we marry. And I’ve married people who were previously divorced, so I am as much a hypocrite about this as anyone. I know some churches are very adamant about refusing to marry divorced people. And yet I think we all need to practice forgiveness in this area. But would refusing to attend the wedding of a divorced friend be wrong? Or would it be standing on conviction?

This calls for understanding and discernment. It seems to me that if you know the situation well enough to decide whether or not the divorce was biblical, you are informed enough to decide to attend or not. I think that the Christian who divorces their spouse for reasons other than the ones mentioned above, needs to spend a great deal of time and effort working on their own lives and Christian walk before bringing someone else into their lives again as spouse. A Christian ought not to make the same mistake twice, especially when it comes to whom they choose as a partner in their walk with Christ.

So I’ve probably offended most of you by now. Trust me when I say I don’t know what to say either. I know many whose second marriages were truly blessed compared to their first. And I rejoice with them. But if we are to be consistent, then we ought to look our our own marriage practices just as hard as we do to those who marry within their sex. If that isn’t biblical, then are we truly doing it right either?

Keep Your Fork; The Best is yet to Come

This another one from my archives. It is a sweet story, and may even be true.

____________________________________________

There was a young woman who had been diagnosed with a terminal illness and had been given three months to live. So as she was getting her things “in order,” she contacted her pastor and had him come to her house to discuss certain aspects of her final wishes. She told him which songs she wanted sung at the service, what scriptures she would like read, and what outfit she wanted to be buried in.

Everything was in order and the pastor was preparing to leave when the young woman suddenly remembered something very important to her.

“There’s one more thing,” she said excitedly.

“What’s that?” came the pastor’s reply.

This is very important,” the young woman continued. “I want to be buried with a fork in my right hand.” The pastor stood looking at the young woman, not knowing quite what to say. That surprises you, doesn’t it,” the young woman asked.

“Well, to be honest, I’m puzzled by the request,” said the pastor.

The young woman explained. “My grandmother once told me this story, and from there on out, I have always done so. I have also, always tried to pass along its message to those I love and those who are in need of encouragement. In all my years of attending church socials and potluck dinners, I always remember that when the dishes of the main course were being cleared, someone would inevitably lean over and say, ‘Keep your fork.’ It was my favorite part because I knew that something better was coming … like velvety chocolate cake or deep-dish apple pie; something wonderful, and with substance!” So, I just want people to see me there in that casket with a fork in my hand and I want them to wonder ‘What’s with the fork? Then I want you to tell them: ‘Keep your fork … the best is yet to come.’

The pastor’s eyes welled up with tears of joy as he hugged the young woman good-bye. He knew this would be one of the last times he would see her before her death. But he also knew that the young woman had a better grasp of heaven than he did. She had a better grasp of what heaven would be like than many people twice her age, with twice as much experience and knowledge. She KNEW that something better was coming.

At the funeral people were walking by the young woman’s casket and they saw the pretty dress she was wearing and the fork placed in her right hand. Over and over, the pastor heard the question What’s with the fork?” And over and over he smiled. During his message, the pastor told the people of the conversation he had with the young woman shortly before she died. He also told them about the fork and about what it symbolized to her.

The pastor told the people how he could not stop thinking about the fork and told them that they probably would not be able to stop thinking about it either. He was right.

Friday, December 26, 2003 CompuServe: EBRUN1234