Random Musing

I was diagnosed with High Functioning Autism / Aspergers Syndrome a few years ago after events in my life guided me to seek professional insight into some of my own strengths and weaknesses.
And while I'll readily admit there are rough days due to some of the alleged weaknesses associated with Autism, I don't view myself as suffering.
Sure, some days my sensory issues are so bad I can't handle listening to music and driving at the same time. There are days when I can't handle the chatter of a crowd of people and have to avoid social situations where my differing abilities aren't accepted. (Though if I'm in a crowd where it's known and accepted I may shutdown, I'll happily hangout.)
 But I don't view that as suffering. Because while bright lights and certain noises can be unbearable, I also notice lights and sounds and other details of the world that most people would miss.  I catch subtle differences in things that bring out a level of beauty in my environment others usually miss. That beauty makes me smile, and I thank God for the gift he's given me, the ability to see the world through eyes most people don't experience, and through ears most people will never hear with.
And while I might not be thinking such positive thoughts when the tunnel vision sets in, when my sensory world starts to shutdown because my brain has had too much, it's still a marvel to me later. I get to experience life so abundantly that it shuts my mortal body down. Think about that. Scripture says if we could see God's glory, if we saw heaven in all of its wonder, it would kill us. I can only imagine.
If in this life, living in the Shadowlands this side of heaven, majesty of everyday life can make my body tune out, how much more splendid must eternity be? 
I'm thankful for the life experience I've been blessed with.
No, as cliche as it may be, my biggest struggles are when people treat me as less than a person; when people treat me as broken instead of merely different. My biggest issues have been when people speak and interact with me as if I'm somehow less rational than they are, when they try to hold me back from trying to experience life because I might shutdown, or when they disrespect me because I've chosen to take it easy rather than socialize so I can handle necessary things in life such as my job, which puts food on the table and keeps a roof over my head. My biggest problems are when people criticize, shun, and disrespect me for not approaching life the way their controlling opinion of how I should be living dictates. If I'm keeping a roof over my head, food on my table, and am otherwise happy, you've no place telling me I'm living life wrong.

It's Dead, Jim

"When we Christians behave badly, or fail to behave well, we are making Christianity unbelievable to the outside world." - C.S. Lewis

I loathe this quote. Because it's all too real; too true. I'm really done with church. Or at least, I'm done with the social club that we call church. I have been for a long time, I guess. I just was too chicken to say it. 

Not that I despise fellowshipping with other believers. I enjoy that. I don't like hanging out with people who'll say, "I'm praying for you," on Sunday, but when you want to reach out to them on Tuesday from the depths of depression, you really can't trust them to be there. And if you dare to point that out to them, it's your fault not theirs. It's your lack of faith and you just need to pray harder. It's always turned back on you. Nobody takes responsibility for dropping the ball.

I'm done with that sort of Christianity. I'm done with those people. I'm done with fake. I'm done with those buildings called churches that only serve to give me a feel good rush on Sunday, gospel centered preaching or not, but the body of believers doesn't fellowship outside structured church activities. 

I'm done with a model of family that enables this sort of culture. I'm done with a culture that keeps itself so busy doing things as a "family" unit, that it drops friends that are single by the wayside. I'm done with a culture that accepts that as okay.

Why? Because I have friends that don't go to church. I have friends that don't believe in God, or at least not the God preached from the pulpit, but they find time to be there for me when I'm down. They do this despite having busy families of their own. They do this despite working full time. They do it despite all the things the Christians friends serve up as reasons for not having time to build relationships. But somehow, they find the strength and the time to do what the Christians can't. They rise up on eagle's wings to do what Christians are telling me is impossible. These people that the church would label as bad influences, as publicans and sinners, are a more consistent support than any church going friend I've ever known. 

I've heard the parable of the prodigal son. How he left home and made a lot of fake friends that were there for him until the money ran out. These friends aren't those kind of people. These friends I'm speaking of aren't there for money. I'm broke as hell, but they'll still listen when I'm down, and I do the same for them. I see more Jesus in these people than I ever see in church.

Christianity is supposed to change you. It's supposed to be something powerful, radical, transforming. But the Christ preached from the pulpit can't even make a "hey Josh, we should hang out sometime," follow-through and build that relationship and trust that's necessary for those desperate, needing-someone-to-talk-to conversations to happen. I see more faithfulness from my cat than I do from those people. 

"When we Christians behave badly, or fail to behave well, we are making Christianity unbelievable to the outside world." 

So maybe, just maybe, the Christ preached in those pulpits isn't as real as the carefully crafted doctrine and theologies they recite would claim. Maybe, just maybe, the people who are showing me Christ, despite their lack of obeisance to Christianity, are more real. Sure, they don't do all the "right things." They watch those heathen shows like Game of Thrones, or indulge in a few too many beers, but they are there. They might have language that's too salty for Sunday school, but when they say "I know I'm a sinner, I'm not perfect," they mean it. It's not some platitude that they really don't believe, just recite because it's the proper catechism. 

Maybe all this talk of church being a hospital for sinners, not a haven for saints is just that, talk. Maybe the reason Christ was known for being the friend of publicans and sinners is because he knew where the real people were. The people that would live out love if shown mercy, kindness, and love. 

I really don't care what's right, if I'm honest. Not anymore. I just care who's going to be there for me when I need a friend. Not the people who are going to tell me to go talk to an intangible, invisible being and hope I find comfort in that rather than the God-made desire for tangible human empathy and companionship.

I want to be around the people who will put a real, tangible, arm around me and help me hold on when life doesn't feel worth living. Not people who brush me off, trivialize my struggle, and tell me to pray harder. 

And I really can't see a God who made me to want that kind of fellowship and friendship expecting his people to do any less than come alongside and meet that need. 

Mamma used to sing a song when I was growing up. "They'll know we are Christians by our love." There ain't a lot of love in the Bible belt. There ain't a lot of love in the churches back in Virginia where I grew up. There's a lot of love at Mikey's house on Friday nights. There's a lot of love sitting on the floor in the middle of eight cats with a bottle of catnip. There's a lot of love in a friend that'll message me out of the blue on Sunday night just to check on me. There's a lot of love in a friend that'll do lunch with me whenever he can.

But there isn't a lot of love in the congregations I once knew. 

Show me your faith by your works. Because right now, the works of people who've forsaken church are more real than all the sermons I've ever heard.

Faith - Based Books That Have Greatly Shaped Me

I figured it'd be worth putting this here for those that follow me. This list consists of serious, mostly non-fiction books that my parents, relatives, or other people have introduced me to that had a significant impact on my faith. It is by no means exhaustive, but if I had to pick a list of books that did the most outside of the Bible itself, this would be it. I don't stand 100% by every teaching that the authors of these works of literature put forth. My parents taught me to think, not mindlessly follow a pastor, teacher, or system of theology. Paul said that if even an Apostle came preaching anything but the Gospel, don't listen to them. So I don't. I was taught to let Scripture speak for itself, don't force it to fit what I believe is true. If what I believe is true conflicts with a plain reading of Scripture (in the original text, not any translation, as things sometimes get lost in translation,) always assume your belief is wrong, and find out where the error is. 

• Turn Back The Night: A Christian Response to Popular Culture by Stephen R. Lawhead.
  This book probably did more to solidify my involvement in culture than any other book. In the "only sinners go to the movies and listen to rock music" culture I found myself in in my late teens and early twenties, it was a beacon of hope amidst a sea of heresy.

• The New Evidence that Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell
  When I turned 12, my parents encouraged me to read this set. Having raised me on Christian principles (act justly, love mercy, walk humbly with your God; the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, etc) and as I'd made a profession of faith at a much younger age, they figured I was ready for it. Me, I was just curious because the guy was also named Josh. It wasn't until I finished reading it that they noted that I'd been named for Mr. McDowell, not the Joshua of the Bible. The book did much to solidify my faith. 

•  Martyrdom: The Final Triumph of Faith by Scott Anderson and Dan Cruver.
  Mr. Anderson was my Sophomore High School Bible Teacher. He's a genuinely kind man, and I'm lucky to have known him. Mr. Cruver was the Senior Bible teacher at my High School. I didn't know him as well, but he was also a truly kind individual. Though I didn't know it at the time, my Sophomore class was a guinea pig for the rough draft of this book. This small book did a lot to shape my views on pain and suffering and how to cope with their existence, and my life has been infinitely happier for it. Mr. Anderson is now the President and CEO of Desiring God Ministries, and Dan Cruver is the President and Founder of Together For Adoption. 

• Found: God's Will: John MacArthur by John MacArthur
  This book was given to my church youth group for a short study. It didn't make a great impact at the moment, but later in life, I found it helped me greatly.

• Paradise Lost by John Milton
  Read it as part of my Senior reading project. I found it inspirational. I'd never thought about what Christ or Heaven's perspective on my Savior's offering must have been, and when my Sr. English teacher did a dramatized reading of scenes of Milton's epic, it opened my eyes to a beautiful picture.

• The Pursuit of God by A.W. Tozer
  It was required reading for one of my Bob Jones Bible classes. Oddly enough, it did more to drive me away from the school I was attending's variety of Fundamentalism than the teacher intended. Tozer's admonition to avoid the error of "seeking God and ____" convinced me that the institution had failed to apply this simple principle to its way of life, and no amount of talk would convince anyone otherwise. 

• After the Flood by Bill Cooper
  This book's impact is not so much one of theology or doctrine as it is interest. The beliefs that it struck a chord with were already firmly established. However, the curiosity it sparked was one of interest in history from a Christian perspective. You don't really understand history until you dig in and try to understand things from all points of view. Today, we really scoff - at least in Christian circles - at some of the splits and schisms in the Body of Christ's history. But at one point, they were serious issues. At some point in history, some follower of the Crucified Savior stood his ground and professed a devotion to, for example, the Date of Easter with just as much fervor as we today stand by our positions on politics. It behooves us to get in the shoes of the losers now and then, lest history repeat itself, or in some cases, so that history can repeat itself and justify the fallen. 
  

Is that Smurf pastel blue, cornflower blue, or navy blue?

Because if it's Navy Blue, it's not any good!

http://thisfeliciaday.tumblr.com/post/79718617942/tiger-lily-doesnt-equal-human-torch-plus-a-very-long

My copper pieces on the subject.
We're all one race, the human race. Sadly, the human race historically been good at picking on members of its own race for stupid reasons. Whether that reason is a dumb blonde, a soulless redhead, an albino freak, a barbaric Celt, Mongrel, or Rus; whether you have freckles, wear glasses, are tall, short, or skinny, or, more recently, how concentrated your melanin is, has changed throughout history.
It's not an issue of skin shade. It is an issue of cultural background. In America, historically, it's generally assumed that African Americans weren't educated. While examples of educated people of color exist, in the Slave States there was rarely incentive to provide a field hand with book smarts, so young black men weren't formally educated. This lead to people making a rule of thumb that dark skin equals uneducated. After emancipation, and as it  became  acceptable for the children of slaves to be learned, the uneducated stereotype held on, leading to present day negative stereotypes of African Americans. The stereotype is wrong, but it is not without a historical foundation that has been engrained in our culture.
That said, in any job, be it acting or scrubbing toilets, neither your body's concentration of melanin, or your cultural background should be a factor. The only thing that should matter is the individual's  ability to do the job he or she is hired for. In the case of acting, being a certain skin tone is not a factor for playing a darker skinned person's part. The Stage has used face black makeup in the past. Being blonde isn't a factor. Hair dye and wigs are easy to use. Having a certain accent isn't a factor to a good actor, that's what speech/dialect coaching is for. Even being a specific gender shouldn't matter, actors in Shakespeare's day dressed cross gender when the role called for it. Is it easier to play a black person's part in a play if you're black? Yes. Is a woman better able to play a woman? Yes, but in the end, an actor's talent should be the only deciding factor. I've known white men who can act the part of a boisterous black lady as well as any African American woman I've seen.
Does this mean I think they are not discriminating in this case? I don't know. I don't have the script, for all I know the new twist has a Biff World twist where whites are (culturally) the Native Americans and Peter Pan is an Asian visiting a tribal African female shaman/story teller named Wendy. Additionally, I didn't see every audition for the part. Even if you gave me a list of people that auditioned, I still don't have the script and I still didn't see the people audition.
Is it possible this is a case of bias? Maybe. Is it probable? I don't know, do the producers, directors, etc have a history of being "racially biased? ” Is there evidence that they chose this actor because of her skin tone? If not, you only have speculation.
Stop  giving Hollywood a "minimum ethnic actor count" standard and let the best human being win the part.
That's my first copper piece, my second ties into it. We're told here that in days gone by, stories were just about white people. While most of the people in European folk stories are lighter skinned, that doesn't make them prejudice against people with other skin tones. It  simply means the story wasn't focused on people that had differing skin tones. Look at Beowulf. He's described as a Geat. That's a cultural/racial label if ever there was one. Caesar's writings portrayed the Celts in a barbaric light, that's also a "racial" discrimination. Macbeth describes the title role as a Moor, which some scholars think may mean he was Arabic, African, or Hispanic.
The point is, European literature is full of "racism," just not the exact prejudices we see today. To tell present or past authors, directors, or story tellers that you have to have a specific mix of your own prejudices represented so you feel good is arrogant. You aren't the writer's muse. Go write the story yourself if you want, but don't slander him or her because he or she didn't suit your tastes.
I think the story concepts presented in the ending of the blog I'm linking to sound fun. They could very well make for a good story. But just because I didn't get the story I wanted is no reason to toss the race card into the mix. Enjoy the story for what it is, or leave it alone. If you don't enjoy it, fine, but don't mud sling because your preferences aren't catered to.

Thanksgiving's Pagan and Catholic Origins

http://www.medievalists.net/2013/11/02/thanksgivings-roots-in-old-world-harvest-feasts

"It would be misleading not to point out that virtually all cultures around the world who’s societies were built around agriculture had (and many still do have) their own harvest feasts wherein thanks is given to whichever gods are honored in that culture."

Be sure and check out the pdf at the end of the teaser article for the full load on thanksgiving's history, including its catholic origins as well, something the Puritans and Pilgrims would have been aware of in the context of history.

So, again, it's like I've been saying for years; Thanksgiving is no less pagan than Christmas, Halloween, or Easter. If you celebrate any of those holidays "for God," you can stop bad-mouthing the others. Either you accept the Psalmist' s decree that, "the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof," and that nothing is "pagan" in origin because as Creator He has first ownership, or you passively reject it through your deeds.

The End Of An Era

Almost half a decade ago, I picked up a Dungeon Master's Guide. At first, it was "just this once," for a friend who's busy life wouldn't let him attend my Dungeons and Dragons group's regular sessions. I had a simple quest planned out, gathered a couple extra players, and drove out to my friend's house in Easley for my first ever D&D session as the Dungeon Master.
I had a blast, and story ideas blossomed.  Little did I realize that the tiny story seed I'd just planted that night would blossom into a five year long campaign that not only traversed the entire continent, but would break into epic levels.
At the time, I didn't think being a DM would become a passion. It was just something I was doing for Ryan Wagner because I wanted to help a friend try out D&D. But the story wouldn't end.
Many people would come and go as PC's and one-shot cameo NPC's over the next few years, too many for me to name them all, but it all started on the road to Elversult.
Now, it's time to tie up the loose ends and take a bow; at least for this Dungeon Master. That's some bitter-sweet Kool-Aid, but no worries, I'm not killing everyone. (Or at least, I don't plan on it....)
We've come a long way from a party of rag-tag level one's. We've robbed a Thayan Enclave,and lived to tell about it; vanquished vampires in ways that would make a Paladin cheer; violated dragons while cackling maniacally at our own good fortune with the dice while the DM smiles and nods at the level of chaotic creativity; we've learned about the real business end of a Tarrasque; and we have fought alongside angels, and stormed the gates of hell. We've gained power, wealth, infamy, titles, and changed the course of history for all of Toril forever.
I look forward to these last few sessions, and I hope you will as well.

It's been epic.

A Rant on Greenville's "Christianity"

I'm so glad I didn't grow up in Greenville. If I had, I have little doubt in my mind that I'd be an atheist. The Christian community here makes the whole of Bluefield look like Saints.  If it weren't for my parents, a few good Christian leaders that the Greenville area seems hell-bent on labeling "not Christian enough," and the Godly examples of the friends of my family back in Virginia, I'd think I was being fed a bunch of lies when read the Bible.
This region is disgusting. The only people I can trust around here to lead an exemplary life are people who've sworn off the so-called church because it's no longer a Church, it's a social club to be catty, holier-than-thou at after fucking the pastor's pre-teen daughter on Sunday so you could get the position on the board of Elders and earn the title of "spiritual leader."
I honestly think the best thing for this area, and quite possibly the country as a whole, is for it to fall to religious persecution. After all, the Church has always thrived under persecution. Persecution makes us forget about the things that don't really matter and focus on the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
This need is evidenced by the rampant complacency in some parts of the Church for doctrine, and the vile hatred for the lost in the name of "loving doctrine" or "despising sin" in others.

Just A Catalyst.

This is just a rough draft. Whether I ever work on it again or not, eh.

Were I blind, my ears would have heard nothing from you to speak of Christ's Grace.
Were I deaf, my eyes would have seen nothing of Christ's love in your deeds.
Whether word or deed, I don't see Christ in you.
But I am not blind; I am not deaf, I see and I hear all your hate and all your whisperings.
And though you claim Christ, your deeds make lies of your claims.
But even a dumb rock can be a catalyst to the Almighty's testimony
For in your harsh words and diabolic deeds, my dear bride has been a portrait
Of her Savior, suffering your incourtesies and returning grace;
Enduring your impurity and offering love that truly is without condition.
Would I could be so meek and bold! But one truth bars me.
You claim my Christ, yet profane His name by your very interactions.
That I cannot forebear. It sickens me; it makes the bile rise in my throat
To think that deeds like yours will be the only Christ some will ever see.
Were I those sad souls, gladly would I chose damnation over such a false, pretentious hope.
But praise be that I am not them! My precious darling, in her every interaction with you
Is a constant reminder of the Grace that Abode with us.
And while my anger calls for burning justice, she stands and intercedes for you.
So, if you ever do give thanks, give praise to God that you were used of Him as a catalyst.
If you ever speak of grace, plea for it in earnest. Like all souls eternal, there is much need of it.
But woe to you who give my bride sorrow. Her intercession is all that stays me.

Random Questions On Reality.

Just a few of the random questions that run through my head while showering....

1. If there are multiple realities, when did they begin in reference to a literal Genesis account of Creation? Did they begin before the fall of Adam? If so, then how was Creation "very good"? If they began after, was part of the curse a fractured reality?
2. If multiple realities exist, then many would say the number of realities that exist are infinite. If that's so, then there must be a reality where Adam didn't sin and the world is still perfect. Was Christ's death, then, a sacrifice necessary to bring all the other realities into coexistence with the perfect reality? Is the end of the world an event where God hand-waves and destroys all imperfect realities and merges the souls that have come to a saving knowledge of Christ with the perfect reality?
3. If multiple realities exist, could it be possible that we as humans really have no true imagination? Imagination could simply be one person's mind becoming attuned to another reality. Story writers are merely penning the history of another reality. If that's the case, I want to stay in Middle Earth.

And we wonder why I don't fit into most churches....

Symbols and Imagery in Christianity.

Why is it that we are so small as to recognize the Trinity in nature in the form of plants, states of matter, among other things, but we cannot bring ourselves to recognize the five wounds of Christ, or the five senses?

We are quick to say that "sevens and threes" are "holy" numbers, but we fail to see that if God did make this universe, then not just the sevens and the threes are holy, but all the numbers are? The fact that Holy Writ points out instances where sevens and threes are of note does not make the twos and the fives any less meaningful or holy, it just means that they have another divine, holy purpose. God told Noah to take two of every kind of animal, but to take seven of every "clean." This doesn't have to mean that the "unclean" animals (the ones gathered in pairs) were evil, they just had a different divine purpose.

We are so quick to label His Creation as, "this is holy and that is not," but we have no place to do so. God declared creation "very good," and though fallen, creation is still a shadow of that goodness.

We do live in a fallen world. However, it is man's sin that makes it so, not nature's existence. Any unpleasantness in nature is a result of man's doing, and not nature's. We, humanity, need to own up to that fact.

Symbols, and the meanings behind them, are transient. The Greek Alphabet has little meaning to the common man today beyond symbolizing what fraternity or sorority you belong to. Egyptian hieroglyphs have even less meaning. The common man has no idea what those symbols meant to the Egyptian, but we do know that a hieroglyph depicting a bird looks like a bird. The symbol's meaning has lost value over time. 

In the story of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, the pentagram, or pentacle, was used as a symbol of Solomon, giving power over demons, and of infinity, fidelity, among many other virtues. Today, many Christians ironically balk at the pentacle's presence, since the symbol is used by some pagan groups.

We have lost sight of the very notion that the pentacle, a geometric shape present in many naturally occurring things, like the apple pictured, has no inherent evil. It isn't a demon. It isn't a devil. It isn't a bodily manifestation of Satan himself. It is a work of nature; a nature that was designed by a Holy God,  and while fallen, the inherent sin is not in existence, but in death and decay. The Bible says when Adam sinned, death came into the world, not pentacles, not spiders, not the color black. All of those things were present in a very good Creation. While death and decay will fall to apples, and the paper or metal that pentacles are drawn or fashioned from will decay, the symbols themselves are not created evil. It's how man uses them that makes a difference.

The cross was in existence long before Jesus Christ Himself long before our Lord was nailed to it. And mankind ascribed many different meanings to it. But after the Messiah was crucified, the cross slowly became a symbol of Christianity. In fact, most people today see the Cross as a Christian symbol, and so do most Christians. Why can't we do the same with the rest of Creation? As the Psalmist says in Psalm 24, "The earth is the LORD's and the fullness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein. For He hath founded it upon the seas." In short, God made it, it's His. The rest of the Psalm goes on to call on all nature to give God praise, for as the Creator, He's earned it.

Why can't we do the same instead of constantly finding symbols and styles of art to rant at each other about? A pentagram is not a symbol of evil unless by man's actions he makes it associated with evil, and even then, that five-pointed star is made by God. It's not mine to let fall by the wayside. My God made it. He cared enough to speak its beauty into existence, I should care enough to not allow it to be perverted by a pagan.  A cross is not a symbol of Christ's death and redemption unless man makes a conscious decision to allow it to represent that. The earth is our Lord's, live like it. Don't just shove a symbol in a box labeled evil because it gives you the willies or you don't care for it. It's beautiful in His eyes.

What I Look For In A Roleplaying Game

First, I look for an agreeable setting. I want an escape; not a survival game. I struggle every day to survive in real life. Do I want starvation to be a possibility? Yes, but I'm an adventurer. My life is about survival and risk. Making sure I have food & water is second nature to me. If I am captured or somehow overcome, then it makes sense for basic necessities like food to become a concern. If I strike out into a desert when my normal travels are through areas where water is easily found, then I need to concern myself with provisions, but those are all special circumstances. I don't want such menial things to be a spotlight feature. I want adventure. Whether that's saving the fairy princesses, defending my homeland, saving the world, or standing for right in a difficult situation, I don't care, but I want good to prevail and be the focus of the setting, though not necessarily of every game session. That's why I don't enjoy Vampire or Dark Sun. They've been presented to me as back-stabbing, nitty-gritty, climb your way to the top & who cares who you step on enroute worlds. I don't enjoy that.

Granted, those settings can be run in the heroic manner I am trying for, but they don't lean toward such a style of play. I do enjoy the Realms. Yes, Toril has its dark side, but it's largely a world that is made up of good people. Are there evils to face? Aye, aplenty. But they don't dominate or rule everyone. The world isn't run by an evil Dark Lord. I'm more likely to be overcome by a wandering monster than become the focus of the Church of Cyric's ire. Can I make myself their target? Oh yes, but if I do, I'm doing so by butt-kicking for goodness.

So I want a sense of heroic in the setting, but on the flipside of that, I'm not looking for a world run by Paladins that follow the "Lawful Stupid" alignment. My every turn shouldn't be halted by some goody-two-shoes going "there's a law against that, citizen;" or "there's only one right way to do that - go through the proper channels or be imprisoned." I may encounter a town or village where that's the way things are run, but not all the time.

Again, the Realms provides that for me. That's what I look for in a Campaign Setting. What I look for in a rules set is detailed simplicity.I look at combat and  I look at skills.
I want to be able to be very good at a variety of things; not just a one-trick pony. Just because I'm a Mage shouldn't dictate that I can't be very good at Stealth. Just because I'm a Rogue shouldn't dictate that I'm not good at being a Charismatic, Bard-like character, capable of playing the crowd, but disappearing in an instant. Just because I'm a Fighter shouldn't mean that I'm a numbskull, incapable of sounding intelligent on anything but war and tactics. I want to be able to be that fighter that is the charmer, wooing at court, but a juggernaut on the battlefield. I don't want my perception and social skills tied to my race or class. Skills might be enhanced by Class or Race, but not limited.
Combat should provide for variety. It shouldn't be a "one roll is the end-all." If I'm making an overhand, finishing blow, it should be different from grabbing the foe by his throat. Marshall proficiency shouldn't be limited to Class, either. If I'm a mage, there's no reason I'm not practicing fencing to get away from the books for awhile. I'll never be as good as a master swordsman, but that's where my Art balances the equation.

Easter is far from pagan.

This time of year, I see a lot of people proclaiming Easter as a Pagan holiday. I call bullshit. Yes, bullshit.

In name, and a few of the "traditional" symbols, yes. The time of year that Christ's historical ressurection took place corresponds to many pagan equinox and first rites of summer celebrations. And the birth of new life is definitely a theme of the season. But it celebrates Christ's Ressurection in Christianity. That ressurection took place after the Passover week, as Christ was Cruicified during Passover. Passover takes place near the spring equinox. The exact date has been argued and debated throughout history, but the general timeframe remains the same.
If you have a problem with celebrating the equinox itself, see my post on Christmas for why an astronomical event is made by God, and stated in Genesis that its purpose is to mark the passage of time. Celebrating that time is not a problem. It was Created by God for that observance.
If you have a problem with the pagan trappings; the name and the fertility symbols, fine. Don't use them, call Easter by another day.
But this Spring, by all tradition and Biblical fact, is the anniversiary of the event that rocked the ancient world, this spring is when the Jews were given the sign of Jonah, when more than 500 witinesses saw a living, risen Savior, and when the "New" Religion was born.
In the fullness of time, God sent forth His Son. The stars given for signs, seasons, and years proclaimed His birth, and those same heavens marked His death, and the world was changed by His ressurection. He is risen, indeed.

Christians in a transient culture

In my personal experience, most "Christians" who scream, "don't conform to the world's culture" don't mean it. What they REALLY mean is, "make sure you're conforming to the culture of days gone by, regardless of the wrongs it contained."
Where is the discernment? Are we content to look at past cultures through rose-colored glasses and always be a generation removed from the current culture that surrounds us?
What benefit is that? Is all the church stands for merely a throwback culture; a place people sick of dealing with trends and fashion waves can go and make themselves feel better because they now have a "moral" reason to not follow what's going on in the world around them?
Such an attitude won't last. Eventually, people will wake up. Eventually, they'll realize they don't need a moral reason to not conform to the prevailing social trends. They'll realize that they only need to have a different preference and enough backbone to stand out because they want to.
Such an attitude is happening today.
Such a wake-up call is making pastors sound like fools and Christians who hold to yesterday's trends and cry that it's "for moral reasons" look like idiots.
Why? Because it wasn't too long ago that anything below a woman's neckline was too much skin to show. Because now the same church that said a piano was of the devil, only fit for bars and pleasure halls is screaming that a church without a piano is sinful.
Because the church has set its foundation on a base that is as transient as the next social revolution, not the truths of Scripture.
You can cry, "thou shalt be modest," "thou shalt be above reproach," but any thinking individual will look at you and say, "that two-piece suit was grossly immodest a few generations back, and in twenty years, my jeans and turtleneck will look just as over dressed as you," and walk away; justifiably so.
The church is holding people to a standard that is changing, and yet preaches that we serve a God who never changes.
Such a double-standard will not win a generation that can think.
So are we to do away with standards? No. But we must make sure our standards are not transient. Rather than concern ourselves with whether a modest neckline is four finger widths below the collarbone or a span, maybe we should set standards that are more immutable. If I journey to the jungles of Africa where the women typically run around topless, suddenly my five-finger width below the neckline standard is grossly over-the top.
What is the solution? Admit we're wrong. Admit that not every "standard" is absolute. Yes, God does give us standards that are absolute. But there are some things, like what is modest, that He left to our disgression. If He wanted to give us standards for modesty, He could have easily given us the pattern for the garments He made Adam and Eve after the Fall.
He didn't.
In His Wisdom, He left some things undefined. Why He did so is a subject we can debate from now until eternity, but there is no point to it. We might as well debate how many angels fit on a pinhead for all the good it will do.
He did define this: "I Am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No man comes to the Father but by me." That coming gives us plenty to work on without worrying about such transient things as culture.

The Reason behind the Seasons

"For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-all things were created through him and for him." (Colossians 1:16)

"And God said, 'Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years'"
(Genesis 1:14)

I'm posting this, and just saying, before anybody else starts sending requests for me to "keep Christ in Christmas," and refuse to acknowledge "Happy Holidays" or "Merry Solstice," I'm not going to.

My God is greater than such petty drivel because He's always been there. Before Bethlehem, He was the reason for the season before time began.
The pagans are right. Christmas was originally a Solstice celebration. No honest examination of history can say otherwise. Solstice celebrations were taking place before the Birth of Christ.

However, it doesn't stop there.

Christ, as the self-existent, eternal Creator God, is the reason for the Solstice. He made it.
It's right there in Genesis 1, He made the stars "for signs, seasons, and years." That means the Solstice, an astronomical event marking the passage of time, the passing of a season, is His design. He built it into nature; He put it there for us to observe and celebrate if we chose.
Throughout Scripture we see this thread,
"the earth is the LORD's and the fullness thereof, the world and they that dwell therein" (Psalm 24:1.)

It doesn't matter if you're saying, "Merry Christmas," or "Happy Solstice." God was behind it. He made it. He's still the reason behind the season. He created  the Solstices, and He, not some pagan, set the Solstices and the phases of the moon aside to mark events, the passage of time.
How we as Christians choose to celebrate these events is crucial. We can acknowledge Christ as the reason behind them all, the Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer of all, or we can ignore His handiwork.
The world is going to celebrate without us. They are going to have feasts, light menorahs, acknowledge the passing of His solstice with or without us.
We have simple choices. We can ignore it, not celebrate, and by our silence keep the truth of the Creator to ourselves. We can pick petty fights over whether we call the Season Christmas, Hanukkah, or the Solstice, as if Christ were only the reason for the season for the Christ Mass, a Catholic holiday celebrating the Virgin Birth, and not the fact  that He made the Solstice; He was behind it. He also led the Maccabees; He was behind preserving His people. He made this world, and as the Great Giver, the One who gave the ultimate gift of Himself is behind the gifts and the presents.
He's behind it all, regardless of the name you give the Season, He is there, standing boldly, the Creator, the Giver of Salvation, the Preserver of His People, Jesu the Messiah. 

I can no more force my fellow man to acknowledge Christ in the season by insisting on calling it "Christ mass" than I can force them to believe in His redemptive work.
We would do well to take a page from the early church. Point people back to the Creator, not shove Him down their throats.
Next time someone says "Happy Holidays," or "Happy Haunukkah," remember, what God blessed the Maccabes' Revolt and miraculously kept the menorah lit? What Creator made the solstice? Yahweh.
All things were made by Him. He is the reason for the Solstice, He preserved the Nation of Israel; He's the Reason for Haunukkah. When the fullness of time was come, God sent forth His Son; He's the reason for the Virgin Birth. (And really, whether Christ was born on Christmas day or not is a mute point. We don't celebrate Washington's birthday on His birthday, either.)
No matter how you spin it, He's the reason. Stop nitpicking over names. He's behind them all.
EDIT: For those that want a more detailed look at what the Scripture says about Christmas: link

Today sucks. Tomorrow will be better.

Any attempt to promote yourself as a "Christian" environment; meaning a wholesome, safe, secure place is doomed to fail. This is because a "Christian" isn't someone who never does wrong. You are starting on a false premise.
A "Christian" is someone who does wrong, but accepts God's forgiveness and trusts in God's grace to give him the ability to do right.
A Christian environment isn't free of wrongdoing. A Christian environment openly admits that wrong has been done, and lovingly enables the wrongdoer to not do wrong again. A theif isn't beaten down and told "go find a job, don't steal." A theif is told, "hey, here's a job we need done that your talents fit. Work for us and we'll pay you a decent wage."
An environment that tries to label itself Christian, but hide wrongdoing from the public eye is going to fail. Not only is it going to fail, it will do more to mar the name Christian than if it just admitted they weren't perfect in the first place. Not admitting you're a sinner is just as much a slight to Christ as saying, "yeah, I'm a Christian, but I'm going to sin anyway."
The gospel is keyed to, "while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Anyone that's been through the Romans' Road knows the first "step" to Salvation is admitting you're a sinner in need of God's grace.
And anyone that's been an honest Christian knows that accepting God's grace doesn't immediately transform you, or any other Christian, into a sinless person.
To try and hide the fact that Christians are sinners from the world is to lie to the world about who Christians are, and lie about the real need for Christ.
We should strive for honesty with those around us. Because honesty is more powerful than a polished front.
I know, it's very utopian of me. But you know what, dreaming and striving for a better world can't be all that bad. I don't expect it to happen in my lifetime. But I do think my life can make a difference. Not just by living for today, but by living so I'll make a difference sixty years from today. By living for a brighter future. Because I know it will someday happen, He promised me it will. And I believe Him.

True Science

Washington Post
The problem with what Bill Nye is saying is, I personally know many PhD's that  found scientific conflicts in the scientific data on assertive statements like, “The Earth is not 6,000 or 10,000 years old,”  and they changed their scientific stances accordingly.
It wasn't religion that changed their mind, at least initially. It was when they found that the thories put forth by Creationists better fit the data they saw that they came to faith.
If you want to start with the science, please do, but do so honestly. If the "facts" so strongly supported evolution, you wouldn't have a (rising) near majority of the population disbelieving that the "facts" presented to them in the classroom are true. Especially when, not a generation ago, that percentage of disbelief was much smaller.
If you truly believe in science, in facts, truth will out. I know many Creation scientists, including my father, who are more than willing to let the facts fall where they may, as long as you don't supress the other side of the scientific coin.
It's a viewpoint based on science whether the earth is 10 thousand or 10 billion years old. If the facts speak as strongly as Nye is saying, then truth will out. If the facts aren't so strong, then causing these young minds to question the status quo is probably a good thing and may lead to many scientific advancements.
I always find it interesting that questioning the status quo is alright as long as it only leads to a viewpoint that the speaker agrees with. If it doesn't, it's dangerous and shouldn't be tried. Then again, my own questioning of the status quo in Christianity puts me in a minority among most Christians, liberal or conservative, so I see this happening a lot on both "sides."
Anyway, back to my point.
What Bill Nye is suggesting is unscientific. Telling people to supress their theories, supress facts and knowledge, despite how well the facts may fit, simply because they don't agree with the prevailing theory is just as bad as telling people not to believe that the earth orbits the sun simply because the prevailing theory says the sun orbits earth.
Truth will out. Shut up an let freedom speak.  

Ambassadors

As a kid, I made a pledge. This was not a "purity" pledge or any of the commercial fluff that the modern Christian pop-culture has produced that effectively drives a wedge between young adults and their relationship with Christ. This was a pledge that stuck with me and has driven, sometimes unconciously, my walk with God over the years.
It was the Royal Ambassador's pledge. I'll copy it here for reference.

"As a Royal Ambassador I will do my best: to become a well-informed, responsible follower of Christ; to have a Christ-like concern for all people; to learn how to carry the message of Christ around the world; to work with others in sharing Christ; and to keep myself clean and healthy in mind and body."

That pledge came to mind today as I read a post a friend on Facebook made.
She said,

"A group of Christians showed up at a Chicago gay pride parade in July. They were holding up signs saying “I’m sorry that Christians judge you” “I’m sorry for how the churches treated you”"

This post got me to thinking. As the Royal Ambassador (RA) motto states, "We are Ambassadors for Christ." (2 Corinthians 5:20)

Remember, the job of any Ambassador is to communicate the message of his lord. If the Ambassador uses words that do not properly relay the intended message, he is failing his lord.
It doesn't matter if the recipiant is "hostile" to the lord, the Ambassador must find a way to burn through the hostility, find an area of common understanding, and relay the message in light of the common understanding. That is the definition of communication, and the duty of an Ambassador. Being an Ambassador is also a learning experience. An Ambassador learns how to better understand his lord, and how to better understand the people his lord has sent him to. The duty is a life long learning experience.
An Ambassador's duty is NOT to sit and pontificate or dictate terms. An Ambassador is a peaceful mediator.

We are Ambassadors for Christ. We are peaceful mediators. We are supposed to learn how to communicate Christ's message in a way that reflects Him, the Holy and Just God who "so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son." Not a God of hate.

Christianity, Dungeons and Dragons, and shooting your own wounded.

The Knight Shift: Gary Gygax and Christianity: Dungeons & Dragons creator was a believer
This article was informative and the supporting links very clearly back the facts. Gary's own statements from Gen Con 2007 sealed any critical doubts anyone could have.
This did surprise me that Gary claimed faith in Christ, but the supporting articles did point to some small details of the early game that I was unaware of. The spells that reflect Biblical miracles were right there in front of me and it never clicked.
It did not surprise me that Christians managed once again to shred their own. There are plenty that speak against C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien simply for dabbling in a creative fantasy world using tools given them by their Creator for His glory. Perhaps the only reason other Christians so vocally support Lewis and Tolkien is because their other works are so blatantly "Christian" that they somehow are more worthy of vindication.
I hold that Gary is equally worthy. He created a game that could have been a magnificent tool in the hands of Christians to reach others. Imagine a story-telling game where you could demonstrate moral principles in subtle ways to your players.
Sadly, Christians smashed that tool underfoot and left it unused. They left a loaded gun for the enemy to pick up and point right back at them. Nay, they picked up the gun and pointed it at their own head.

Been saying this for a good long while. Posting here for safe keeping.

Government, marriage rights, and same-sex marriage | Washington Times Communities

Dealing With Imprudence

Just venting and putting my thoughts to letters.

I try to be cordial and not cause trouble as much as I am able. However, this does not mean that I will allow myself, or my family to be walked over or treated with disrespect.
I have always been of the mind that good intentions don't amount to much in this world, and thus I give very little consideration to an individual's intentions; only their actions, the way a person comes across, and the results of a person's actions hold much weight with me.

I have very specific beliefs about what is and is not a person's business; my income and welfare being among them. Only two people in the world, as far as I am concerned, have any "right" to that information, myself being one, and my fiancée being the other. Anyone else, my family included, is only informed of such information if I or my fiancée see it appropriate. Note, Lydia and I are the only two persons who are entitled to make such a decision of appropriateness. No one else.
For anyone to press and pry into our affairs is rude, and disrespectful. A single inquiry with a polite reply is understandable, I do not expect anyone to read my mind and know my preferences on things of this nature. However, once that person has been informed that this is the state of affairs, I expect the subject to be dropped and left alone.
To continue to pry and insist you know better than me how to run my life is rude and disrespectful, and I will not sit and endure such action.
Today, I had to deal with such rudeness.
The inquiry is not the primary insult, of course. It was merely the catalyst to a larger issue.
The issue is how I and my fiancee see fit to run our lives. It is our life, and no one else's. No family member, no friend, no stranger, no aquaintence has any right to tell us how to live. It is our decision, between us and God, and no one else. No priest, no financial advisor, no culture has any authority to order or advise unless we ask for that advise.
If I desired someone's council, I would have asked for it. For an individual to insist on giving it without asking is an offence. To continue to offer it after being graciously informed the advice was unecessary, and to press the point is rude and unbecoming. Today, such nosy rudeness was pressed on me and Lydia. I responded with as much grace as I was able under the situation and left.
To say that such a prying slight was unexpected would be a lie. Thanks to the family grapevine, the poor opinions the individual in question holds were known to me. I do have ears. My fiancée communicates such matters to me, as communication is a key point to any relationship, most especially a marriage. I had hoped that prudence and standard politeness would keep this situation from manifesting. It was a small hope, but a hope nonetheless. Unfortunately, such a mercy was not bestowed on myself and Lydia.
I have dealt with such rudeness. I refuse to endure it again, unless a full apology is made and the method of behavior is ammended. Apology without repentance is no apology. It is a lie for convenience sake.
Anyway, vent over.