Palm Sunday ...

Of anyone that has a greater fascination with Israel/The Promised Land and all that's going on there than me, I know not. Well, I guess Mr. Dindi would be one such person seeing as he got me interested in the affair in the first place. And then there are all those "I-must-go-to-Israel-and-see-where-the-savior-walked" fanatics - a group which I'm gradually warming up to and probably going to join if I should be just a trifle candid. So what holds me back (apart from the consistent absence of the American Dollar - or the Kenyan shilling if you will - in my pocket, the obvious lack of time - which seems to be an excuse for everything I don't do)? Probably the press about all the action in the Gaza strip and the stifling conflict. Makes it a bit less desirable to me - quite likely out of my ignorance of the situation on the ground. Now, if I could just find what I was trying to say... yes.. Now, in all my church going years (which trust me, aren't that many), I've never encountered an explanation for the destruction of Jerusalem. Is it because it was that obvious? Pastor Mark of First Friends Church finally pointed out the key to me (and anyone else present that was paying attention). Jesus mourns for Jerusalem at "The Triumphal Entry" (Luke 19:28-48), and specifically exclaims in verse 44 that

They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God's coming to you.

Wikipedia's "Siege of Jerusalem" also mentions this view as one of the beliefs held by many Christians. What would have happened if the 'Jerusalemites' had actually recognized the moment of their visitation? Basically a whole city of devout disciples of Jesus. That would have been totally radical! Picture Pilate and all the Roman leaders in awe of a city totally devoted to one man. Quite the scenario that would have been. Not to suggest that the way things happened didn't leave much of a story to be told. Think of the very same crowds shouting "Hossanna in the highest" yelling "Crucify him" a few days later - that's quite something in itself. What's mind blowing to me is that the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD would mark the beginning of a rather depressing (in my opinion) millennium for the Jews. A whole millennium. And then comes the 1940's and Israel is born! and today most of us don't even bat an eyelid at the thought of how long the drought has been for Israel and how momentous these events unfolding before us really are. Israel/Jerusalem, the closest thing to a custodian of all our destinies (a fact probably more evident to the dwellers of the Middle East than the rest of us)!

Oh, BTW, someone pointed out to me that Easter will never occur this early in our lives again - interesting - I think...

Pro-[Life / Choice]

Somehow, the winds of fate determined that on this - the 9th day of my 24th year, I would stumble upon an interesting "realization." Without exception, all the arguments and critiques (on issues such as abortion and gay marriage) that I have witnessed have been heated and passionate in an almost Pharisaical sense. I do realize the weightiness of these issues and their probable causes - the fact that society has always been ordered based on statutes enforceable in a court of law (and what the law says about this is what's being debated), but so disparaging are each side's opinion of the other that one could almost be forgiven for not having an opinion on the matter - perhaps I say this realizing that I would be one such soul in need of forgiveness. (For now, don't consider whether it's actually possible to not have an opinion). But what is the solution to these passionate arguments?

In most of these arguments, the ultimate emphasis is on the "self." This is quite evident in the pro-choice camp. "Every woman has the right to decide whether she will deliver a baby or er... not, and don't bring religion into this matter, for the constitution grants liberty." On the other hand, I suspect that the "self" is a bit more subtle on the pro-life side. The argument goes something like: "... fetus is a human being ... abortion = taking fetus life so abortion = murder ... do not murder ... do not abort." This latter case I think is more like the Pharisees. Matt 12, "Lord of the Sabbath" records the Pharisees showing Jesus that his disciples "are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath" - the starving disciples (it seems Jesus wasn't in a pray-for-bread-from-heaven mood that day) and therefore, they are dead wrong/Jesus needs to whip em into shape! Maybe Jesus' reply can help temper what I would call "hardcore religious pro-lifers": I tell you that one greater than the temple is here! It was all about Him, not the grain, or the hunger, or the law, or any of that junk. Pro-lifer's seem to drown in the law (whether religious or not).

The greatest flaw we make in these arguments and debates is overemphasizing the importance of the absoluteness of right and wrong. Of course there is absolute truth (okay, that's another issue altogether for some, so I absolutely take back my "of course," ... but somewhat relatively). Of course lying is wrong. I dare venture that it sustains many a friendship though (I'm not talking about I'm-cheating-on-my-spouse type of lying!). Try being 100% honest about what people look like, for example, and see how many of them will consider you a friend. Nonetheless, we still endorse some types of lying and reject others. Perhaps a solution much more acceptable to all on contentious issues like abortion will easily be found if we bear in mind that abortion may in a way be like lying. Also important is the fact that pro-choice people do not endorse the termination of life itself, for example. Since everyone's pro-something, perhaps it is not necessary to define whether it is absolutely right/wrong as we many times try to do. Why not realize that we live our lives by making judgments on a white-to-gray-to-black, and not a white-black scale and instead focus all our energies on the root of the problem: "The Hunt for Meaning." Let's say we find that there are too many abortions. Why are they occurring? Too much sex (Why is it occurring)? Lack of sex education (Why is that the case)? In sufficient condoms (Where is the $$$)? These are the questions that should be addressed instead of this pro-life/choice affair. After all, that's the only way to make a tangible difference in people's lives outside a debate room. I suggest this based on my claim that everything we do is based on our individual quests for meaning.

Perhaps I should mention that the fact that there are involuntary cases such as rape that can lead to unwanted pregnancies is one reason I'm not a "hardcore" pro-life advocate. Nonetheless, I point out that as a Christian, the Father is supposed to be the focus of everything we do. That means that you must always think of what will honor him - and I dare venture that this is specific enough to even allow for abortion sometimes. (er... someone give me an example if you would be so kind).

As I conclude this post I realize that the inclusion of religion changes the equation in this debate, but I make no apologies for taking the pursuit of God to be the foundation of this argument. It doesn't change the fact that we need to focus on addressing bigger questions concerning how people end up in situations where they want/need an abortion. (For we are like doctors in the hospital realizing that there are too many car accident victims and arguing about whether we should amputate limbs or prescribe analgesics instead of trying to find out why these accidents are occurring and how to stop them - Christians that do nothing but point out how wrong abortion is should also think of the "...keep warm and well fed" in James 2:16). Moreover, I also realize that there are many girls and women that actually have to face this dreaded issue as a reality (and not as a "philosophical debate") as it seems it now is to me. My heart goes out to you. I apologize for any insensitivity and ignorance on my part about this matter.