God at the Movies: A Christian Reading of Disney's "Pinocchio"

     I’ve been watching some of my old Disney classics lately, and while watching some of them, I’ve thought about different ways to interpret them.  Bambi lends itself quite easily to an analogy of what life and death are all about, beginning with birth and the learning of the world, through to the death of a parent, love blossoming, overcoming adversity, struggling and fighting, and life continuing.  Even more surprising this time through was how clearly I could see a Christian interpretation of the movie Pinocchio.

     In the beginning of this story (and specifically the Disney version, not the 1883 story by Carlo Carllodi that is quite a bit different in tone and plot from the Disney film), an Italian woodcarver named Geppetto has carved a marionette boy he names Pinocchio and then wishes upon a star that the puppet might become a real boy.  Because of his wish, a Blue Fairy later flies through the window in the middle of the night and grants Gepetto’s wish by giving life to Pinocchio, though he is not a real flesh and blood boy, but rather a moving, talking puppet made of wood.  She tells Pinocchio that in order to become a real human boy, he must prove himself “brave, truthful, and unselfish” and listen to his conscience to determine right from wrong.  When Pinocchio asks her what a “conscience” is, a little talking cricket named Jiminy pipes and up and tells Pinocchio it is that still small voice, and when Pinocchio asks Jiminy if he is his conscience, the Blue Fairy gives Jiminy this responsibility.

     The Christian analogy is quite clear to me.  Pinocchio is like us:  Something not quite real yet given life and the free will to choose right from wrong.  And like us, the choices he makes will determine what kind of heart he has, and if he will, in time, be given the real life he desperately desires, not this wooden variety (that is still quite magical in its own right, but pales in comparison to the real thing).  Geppetto created him, and in this respect, he is like Pinocchio’s human father.  The one who gives him life, however, is the Blue Fairy, who in this story is similar to the way God is with us.  Our human parents may have created us through procreation, but only God can give us life, and is born out of something beyond us and beyond this world, yet it is not the true life we will have someday in heaven.  To help Pinocchio on his path in life to make the right decisions is Jiminy Cricket, charged as being Pinocchio’s conscience, and in this respect, Jiminy is like the Holy Spirit, who guides us and helps us make moral choices.  All we have to do is “give a little whistle” and call on His name.

     Geppetto is thrilled when he realizes his wish came true and Pinocchio can move and talk, and the next day he sends Pinocchio to school.   On his way, Pinocchio is approached by a couple of nefarious fellows from the original book, a fox and a cat, and it’s ironic the fox is named Honest John, because in all actuality, he is not honest, and represents the temptation to sin, and it’s no coincidence Carllodi, and then Disney, chose a sly fox to play this part.  In the Disney story, he convinces Pinocchio down the easy path and Pinocchio finds himself performing for a local puppeteer by the name of Stromboli.  This is all allegorical, from a Christian perspective, of succumbing to temptation and sinning, something for which we need the grace and forgiveness of God, and in this story, that figure, represented by the Blue Fairy, does come to his rescue.  Pinocchio had been enjoying himself with what Honest John sold to him as the easy life, and even  ate up the fame and adoration he received from his newfound audience.  And just like all of us, he soon finds that this existence isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, as Stromboli imprisons him, using him for what he can get out of him, with plans to chop him up for firewood when he has outlived his usefulness.  Life can be like this for us sometimes as well.  

     When Pinocchio is in his darkest hour, Jiminy returns to wish him well and finds him in his cage.  Unable to free him from the trap he has stepped into, the Blue Fairy arrives one more time.  Questioning Pinocchio about what has happened, Pinocchio heaps lie upon lie as his wooden nose continues to grow with each lie, until is sprouts branches, a nest, and little baby birds.  The Blue Fairy tells Pinocchio that lies “grow and grow until they are as plain as the nose on your face”.  Then she intervenes on Pinocchio’s behalf, but warns him that this is the last time she can do so, and releases him from the cage, despite his lies.  We can lie to God, but we’re really lying to no one because God knows our hearts and can see our lies as if they were a long, growing nose.  But his love for us provides much the same as the Blue Fairy provides Pinocchio, which is forgiveness and another chance; always another chance!

     Yet things don’t go so well for Pinocchio once he is given this second chance, and once again he comes across those shady fellows in the fox and the cat, and winds up going to the aptly named Pleasure Island where he and all the other boys, including his new “friend” Lampwick, smoke, drink, gamble, play pool and tear up the place.  To me, I’ve noticed that often, it seems the closer we get to God, the more the devil desires to throw roadblocks in our paths that cause us to sin, and when we fall, we can fall all the harder.  The island, you see, has a curse upon it that transforms bad little boys “who make jackasses out of themselves” into donkeys, and the evil Coachman then sells them to work in the salt mines and circuses.  Like Stromboli, I see the Coachman as an allegory for life in general.  This earth can become nothing more than Pleasure Island for us, the devil’s playground, and he will do his best to use us for his purpose if he can until it is too late.  Before Pinocchio’s eyes, Lampwick turns into a donkey, and Jiminy and Pinocchio barely make it off the island in one piece, but manage to stop the transformation occurring in Pinocchio, though he now has the ears and tail of a jackass.  Like Pinocchio, we too must still suffer the consequences of our actions.

     Towards the end of the movie, when Pinocchio arrives back at Geppetto’s workshop, he and Jiminy are delivered a note by the Blue Fairy that informs them that Geppetto and his pets (Figaro the cat and Cleo the goldfish) have gone in search of Pinocchio and been swallowed by a giant whale named Monstro.  It is at this part in the movie that Pinocchio finally displays heroic qualities, for he heads off immediately to save Geppetto without a second thought – ears, tail, and all - and jumps into the ocean to seek out Monstro.  Once inside the belly of the whale, he reunites with Geppetto and then devises a plan to burn wood to make Monstro sneeze.  The plan frees them from Monstro, but the huge whale becomes furious and tries to kill them.  Pinocchio manages to save everyone, but ends up paying the ultimate price.  

     As Geppetto, Jiminy, Figaro, and Cleo mourn Pinocchio, the Blue Fairy makes him a real boy for his final commitment and heroism.  The Christian allegory here is also quite clear to me.  Pinocchio died, and then was resurrected as something he wasn’t before.  This can be seen as either being born again, or the real death and resurrection in heaven that awaits us, but both are a product of our commitment to the Lord and our desire to follow by his example.  Pinocchio the Blue Fairy's words throughout the story, telling him he must be brave and true and to choose right from wrong, but it isn’t until his “father” is in peril that those words actually become reality for him, and he begins to act on them.  The book of James, however, reminds us that we do not do these things to earn our way into heaven, they will simply be a byproduct of our faith; our actions will prove our faith.  When Pinocchio dashes off to save Geppetto, it isn’t to prove his worth or earn his life as a real boy; it is simply something he must do because he loves Geppetto, and he lives the Blue Fairy’s words.  In this way, it is an allegory for proving our faith as the book of James talks about, which leads to his death and resurrection into a new life as a real boy.

     Someday, if our actions prove our faith, and not because of the actions themselves, we will be reborn into new life, and it will make this one seem like we were all once made out of wood.

 When you wish upon a star / Makes no difference who you are

Anything your heart desires / Will come to you

If your heart is in your dream / No request is too extreme
When you wish upon a star / As dreamers do

Fate is kind / She brings to those who love / The sweet fulfillment of / Their secret longing

Like a bolt out of the blue / Fate steps in and sees you through
When you wish upon a star / Your dreams come true

            - “When You Wish Upon a Star”

                Cliff Edwards

Boldly Live as You've Never Lived Before: A Bungled Book About "Star Trek" and Personality Types

     Since I am a "Sci Fi Guy" (though - and this is IMPORTANT - also a Christian), I sometimes can't help checking out some strange books geared towards the Trekkie in me.  Boldly Live as You’ve Never Lived Before by Richard Raben and Hiyaguha Cohen is yet another book using Star Trek as a backdrop for some part of life, this time for determining and dealing with personality types.  I really didn’t get too much out of it.  The book explained the four main personality types as "Leader" (such as Captain Picard), "Warrior" (such as Worf) "Analyzer" (such as Data) and "Relator" (such as Counselor Troi).  I already knew I would score high as a "Relator" and "Analyzer," and lower as a "Leader" and "Warrior," so not much help in that arena.

     The book didn’t do too much in the way of helping me to become a more well rounded individual, as I would expect an introspective self-help book about personality types might be, and I noticed it actually took a lot of annoying liberties with some of the characters and shows, even going so far as to suggest that Scotty, the Chief Engineer from the original series fit the Warrior profile!  I'm sorry, but in all fairness, that character has more in common with "Analyzer" Data than with "Warrior" Worf.  They said Scotty was always ready for battle, making sure his precious engines could handle any job the Captain requested, and would always come through for Kirk in a pinch.  I say that all of that was merely happenstance – Scotty’s an engineer, a tinkerer, and whereas Worf would welcome a good fight, Scotty would be more apt to hold up in his quarters with a technical manual; an "Analyzer," just like Data.  Take “The Trouble with Tribbles” for instance.  Scotty doesn’t want to go on shore leave.  He wants to hold up in his quarters with one of those geeky tech journals.  When he’s ordered to go, he does get involved in a brawl when a Klingon insults the Enterprise, Scotty’s “baby,” so to speak, but when Kirk reprimands him and confines him to quarters, he’s elated.  That’s really what he wanted to do all along!  Did the writers of this book conveniently forget that, or the fact that Scotty is a techie at heart?  I'm sorry, but techies (not to be confused with Trekkies) are basically "Analyzers."

     There are other questionable examples in this book, and that, coupled with the fact that they don’t really pull it all together to teach a person how to grow makes it all just some pointless endeavor.  In the end, it’s certainly an interesting idea, one that might actually mean something in better hands, but here, they kind of bungled it!

The Avengers: The Best Superhero Movie Ever Made!

Image from http://teaser-trailer.com/movie/avengers/

     I wasn't always a big fan of comic books, but I love superhero movies!  When they are done right, they are fantastic, and there is a glut of them these days.  Batman, Spider-Man, Superman, the X-Men, Ironman, The Incredible Hulk, Thor, and Captain America have all had some pretty good movies, and every so often, some critic comes along and says something like “This is the best superhero movie they’ve yet made!”  I remember hearing some critics say that about such films as The Dark Knight, Ironman, and Captain America.  Some of the lesser films in the superhero sub-genre include the Hellboy, Blade, and Fantastic Four franchises, along with DareDevil, The Green Lantern, The Green Hornet, Electra, Darkman, Ghost Rider, and even Warren Beatty’s Dick Tracy from 20 years ago.  There have also been all manner of super-hero comedies and parodies, from My Super Ex-Girlfriend and Hancock to Kick-Ass and Megamind.  My personal favorites from this genre are The Incredibles, Sky High, and even Mystery Men.

Image from http://spiritualpopcorn.blogspot.com/2012/05/avengers.html

     And yet The Avengers blows them all away!  That’s quite a statement considering how very much I simply loved Batman Returns (still my favorite of the Batman films), Spider-Man 2, X2: X-Men United, X-Men: First Class, and also thoroughly enjoyed a smattering of most of the others (even the first Hulk and the two Fantastic Four movies that most critics and die-hard fanboys hated).  The Avengers really IS the best superhero movie they’ve ever made, and they managed to take the characters of Ironman, The Hulk, Thor, and Captain America, combine them into one movie, and make their characters even more entertaining than they were in their individual movies!  Who would have thought that with such a combination, and such great characters (and with Black Widow and Hawkeye added superbly to the mix), and especially Robert Downey Jr. doing his best arrogant, super genius, playboy schtick as Tony Stark/Ironman, that the Hulk would actually be the one to steal the show!  Some of the best action sequences involve his character, as well as some of the most humorous moments.  Right off the top of my head, I can think of four very funny moments that involved the Hulk!  That takes some skill considering he’s really nothing more than a big green guy with anger issues!

     The balance of this film was spot on, and seems to mix the right amount of character inter-relationships, action, and humor better than any other superhero film I’ve seen.  Spider-Man 2 and a few of the X-Men films came awfully close, but even they don’t have such a perfect, entertaining mix of both action AND humor!  The Avengers was craftily designed to be a real crowd pleaser and I LOVED IT!!!

Watch the trailer here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPoHPNeU9fc

Sorry LaHaye & Jenkins: You're "Left Behind" Series Certainly Isn't Shakespeare!

     As I settled down to read the second of the Left Behind books, Tribulation Force, way back in 1999, I had this to say, and it wasn't all that flattering, I'm afraid:

     In the continuing saga of those Left Behind, the anti-Christ himself, Nicolae Carpathia, begins to heat things up by starting World War III, the “red horse” of the apocalypse.  Although there are some tense and chilling moments, and [SPOILER ALERT] it ends with the tragic death of the beloved Pastor Bruce Barnes, the book felt more like a transitional piece than an actual novel in its own right.  Left Behind is the exciting beginning, and the third novel Nicolae will focus on the anti-Christ, I’m sure, and this novel, Tribulation Force, kind of feels like the attempt to get from point A to point B.

     And one other very important thing:  As good as these novels may be, I also realize that they are straight forward storytelling at its most simple.  There are few artistic flourishes, if any; just basic narration that lacks any kind of creative poetry.  The number one tenant for fiction writers is not to tell, but to make the reader FEEL.  I guess one reason I’m not just devouring these books like my sister-in-law and my friend Kary have is because the writers haven’t really taken this story and these characters and delved into their psyches and the situations like they could, or like I could.  If this story were a swimming pool and the writers were swimmers, it feels as if they are merely skimming over the surface of the water, rather than exploring and diving into the depths of their expansive tale.  As a reader, I feel like I am on the outside looking in, whereas a really good writer has the ability to grab me and set me right in the middle of all the action, making me feel a part of it rather than some outside observer, even taking me inside the body and mind of the characters so I feel what they feel, and know what it is to be them.  I don’t get that from these books.  The story and characters are so fascinating, I want to get to know them better than I do, but this story is written at almost a grade-school level.  To put it another way, I did not find any writing here that is as colorful or as passionate as what I have just written myself!

     Compare these guys to someone like William Shakespeare, and there is no comparison!  Shakespeare is full of passion and poetry, and that is why he is still loved and performed even to this very day and age, 400 years later, and why Hollywood is constantly making new films of his works, as well as countless independent filmmakers and theaters.  It’s because his plays contain what good drama should, and what the Left Behind books seem to lack:  Emotion, humor, drama, passion…and poetry!  Who would have thought that Shakespeare would be as popular now as he was then; perhaps even more so.  It’s due not only to the quality of the stories themselves, but of his writing of those stories, and the language he used.  Would they be making films of these plays if he had devised the basic structure and characters and then handed them over to the stable boy to write?  I don’t think so!  In the decade before the millennium, while countless renditions of his works have seen the bright lights of theaters around the globe or the enjoyment of audiences in movie houses or gathered around the TV, a fictitious film about the writer won the Oscar for Best Picture of 1998!  I sincerely doubt that Jerry B. Jenkins and Tim LaHaye will be remembered in anywhere near this fashion in another 400 years… that is, if the rapture and tribulation haven’t already occurred!

Book image from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribulation_Force

Reel Heroes: Walt Disney

Note: There are 19 fun links hidden throughout this page!
Yes, I'm 47, but I'm also quite a fan of animation, whether it's something new, like How to Train Your Dragon or Tangled, or something older, such as Disney's old hand-drawn animation.  Because of this, I look up to a guy like Walt Disney, even as the rumors surface all these years later, as they always do (and you know they do; the internet is rampant with rumors about every celebrity who ever lived).  I can still admire the guy for his achievements, at the same time I might question his real convictions.  Even admired presidents like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan certainly still have their detractors to this day!  

     The fact is, I’ve been on a Disney kick lately, watching some of the old classic Disney films, the ones that started it all:  SnowWhite and the Seven Dwarfs, Fantasia, Pinocchio, and Bambi, along with the behind the scenes material and the commentary tracks.  Some of them were quite interesting and enlightening, and it makes me realize what a labor these were, even if, at the same time, they were a labor of love.  Walt really believed in the material and, unlike many, but not all, filmmakers these days, both in and out of animation, he really strived to make the material and the stories classic and timeless, and not just a way to make money.  With Pinocchio, for instance, when it wasn’t going the way he wanted, he actually scrapped a lot of completed, or nearly completed, footage.

Clips from Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Pinocchio, Fantasia, and Bambi

     His name is synonymous with classic animation, and then one realizes how the history of animation grew from Walt Disney himself.  From the Silly Symphony’s and “SteamboatWilly”, his art continued to grow from rubbery looking bodies to animation that cannot be seen as anything other than art.  In many respects, and in my opinion (not shared by art critics, no doubt), what Disney accomplished is not too far removed from other great artists like Michelangelo and Picasso (this is where I picture the stuffy art critics start to giggle).  I dare anyone to watch these old animated movies - the scene in Snow White where she is running through the woods scared to death and all the trees turn into creatures with long, knarly hands, or the Monstro chase in Pinocchio, or the “Rite of Spring” segment with the dinosaurs in Fantasia, or the scene where Bambi looses his mother and shouts for her in a snowstorm and comes face to face with his father - and not see the art in it.  Why, even seemingly simpler scenes such as animating Gepetto working Pinocchio’s strings before he comes to life, or Bambi and Thumper playing on the ice, are still breathtaking in their animation and their ability to capture the wonder and emotion of the audience, and that is still evident today.  One has to realize that by the time he started making the full length, full color animated features, among critics and colleagues deriding him for it, that it was no longer Disney doing the actual animation.  No, by this time he was the head of a studio and was responsible for directing the animation of his workers, and since animated works of this magnitude were never attempted before, his studio not only had to churn out the work, but he had to school his animators in form and movement.  Just look at the difference between the deer seen in Snow White to the deer as they are drawn and animated in Bambi just a few years later:

     Disney turned from a doodler of little cartoons into a mogul, and there is much to be admired in that, and what is even more amazing is how he wasn't just in it for the money, but that he cared about such things as story and artistic vision.  His product wasn’t just product; he managed to make it into what is so often eluding the world of the entertainment business, and that is melding profit with vision and art.  You would think that the first full length feature cartoon wouldn’t be very good or very artful, being the first, and that only over time would the process grow to become more mature and artful.  There is an obvious progression that can be traced through animation, but there was still an amazing level of high-quality art right from the beginning, from the moment Snow White, an evil Queen, and seven little men were projected up on the big screen two years before Rhett told Scarlett he didn't give a damn and Dorothy got lost in the land of Oz.  And then Disney followed that up with an even better film in my opinion (Pinocchio, quite possibly Disney’s real Masterpiece, despite the fact that the advertising for all Disney's films on video and DVD seem to use that same term) and the melding of animation and classical music in the same year with the release of Fantasia, and then you realize just what it took for Disney and his animators to set the stage.

     Then, during World War II, after releasing Dumbo (yet another classic, if a bit short), he turned his studio over to be used for war time propaganda for the military, but still managed to churn out animated shorts and vignette movies like Melody Time, Make Mine Music, and Fun and Fancy Free, and when the war was over, in the fifties, he was still making classic animated movies like Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan, Lady and the Tramp, and Sleeping Beauty, but at the same time, expanded into the realm of documentaries and live action movies, all in full color, and into the television medium which was quickly changed to color almost as soon as it was possible, with shows such as  The Mickey Mouse Club and Disney’s Wonderful World of Color, and into other realms of business such as the construction of his theme park Disneyland in California.  I remember all of these fondly from my own childhood.

     Disney was a mogul and a businessman who left a lasting legacy, but even more than that, he was someone who never wanted to make something just to make money.  With Disney, the story was paramount, and that is the one thing, more than any other, that makes me admire him, moreso than his drive to succeed and expand in so many different areas, enough to leave such a lasting legacy.  Like Ronald Reagan, he never listened to the critics, but forged ahead anyway, because he believed in himself and in what he was doing, striving to make it the best, even among criticism, and when the war hit, he put his country first, for which his studio suffered for a time, and then came back strong with not only more animated features, but expanding into so many other realms.  Would that we could all have such a legacy, having a name synonymous for, among a few other aspects, bringing joy and happiness to so many people and children, and building a lasting entertainment empire at the same time!  Not too shabby!

The Evolutionist/Creationist Debate and the Book “To Seek Out New Life: The Biology of Star Trek” by Athena Andreadis, Ph. D.

Like The Physics of Star Trek, The Metaphysics of Star Trek, or even, at times, my own journals, this author uses Star Trek as a backdrop to examine an interesting topic; in this case, biology.  Athena Andreadis is not the best author, however, because she comes off as a stuffy, scholarly know-it-all, at least to me, and I did not like her condescension towards Christian studies, nor her mistaken belief that what she believed had already been proven, beyond the need for others to even question her.  Wrong!!!  As I recall, The Physics of Star Trek and The Metaphysics of Star Trek handled similar material in a more neutral manner.  After reading The Biology of Star Trek, I have a good handle on the author and her beliefs, and I have a pretty good idea what Andreanis would think of me if she ever met me, and it isn’t nice, and it isn’t pretty.  That reason alone is enough for me not to like her, but based on her book, she also is the type of person who supports Star Trek whenever it becomes heavy handed in the way it presents its humanistic agenda and world view.

Image from http://www.amazon.com/To-Seek-Out-New-Life/dp/0609804219

     If I were to mount an offensive to her scientific arguments, and a defense of my own spiritual beliefs, using Star Trek as a backdrop, then I might just attempt the following argument opposing the theory of evolution in support of creationism:

     The fantastical character of the holographic Doctor from Star Trek: Voyager looks human, but is in fact nothing more, really, than a sophisticated computer program consisting of, among other things, projected light, energy fields, and computer sub-routines.  How far away is a creation like the Doctor?  Is he purely fantasy and science fiction?  I would venture that the Doctor is not so far in the future.  We’ve already been able to create dinosaurs that don’t exist and put them on film, seeming to interact with people and objects that are real!  If you increase that technology by about 400 years, when the Doctor supposedly exists, then the existence of something like the Doctor becomes more of a possibility.  Imagine, for instance, developing the technology to project one of Spielberg’s CGI dinosaurs into a room 3 dimensionally.  In fact, we might have the basics of that kind of technology even now!

     Now imagine that a scientist examined the good Doctor, knowing full well that he is not a human, but a hologram.  If they also took a look at the dinosaurs created for Jurassic Park, knowing that they were a kind of realistic computer animation, I perceive that they would eventually come to the conclusion that these entities were created, had to be created, and had to be designed by an intelligence.  Yet it boggles my mind that these same scientists would look at the CGI programmers working for Steven Spielberg, or perhaps the fictional but human character of Dr. Zimmerman, the physician who programmed The Doctor, or better yet, the real actor Robert Picardo, who plays the Doctor on Voyager, and say that they were not created by an intelligent designer.  Andreadis would say this as well, and I just don’t understand how they can clearly see that the Doctor and those computer animated dinos were created, but not the human beings that created them!  In many ways, these human beings are more fantastical, wondrous, and complicated than either the fictional Doctor, or those equally fictional dinosaurs.  Not only that, but these same scientists always look down their noses at people like me, who do believe in creation.

Creators Not Created?

     The problem with modern science, as I see it, is that they do not always adhere to the SCIENTIFIC METHOD of examining all possibilities, especially when considering the likelihood of a creator.  If these educated men and women are going to be TRULY scientific, they should at least consider this possibility, but they don’t (can’t?).   They actually end up doing what science should NEVER do, which is to limit themselves, put themselves in a confining, closed box, and assume right from the start that one possibility – that there is no creator - is impossible.  Before even beginning, they already shut themselves off to the concept of God existing since considering that possibility supposedly causes them to enter into the realm of religion; never mind that if they tried it the other way, they might discover that religion is scientifically provable.  What I mean to say is that if scientists all the sudden decided that something like air or gravity didn’t exist because admitting their existence breaks some stupid, unwritten rule in the modern science playbook, that doesn’t mean that gravity and air don’t exist.  And I’m certain they could come up with quite a few good arguments and mathematical theories to help prove their anti-gravity or no-air theories, and would be able to get massive numbers of people to believe them by utilizing the right amount of fake scientific clout, linguistic mumbo jumbo, and the backing of a manipulative media that would help to twist and distort the truth – you know, sort of like they do now!  But the simple fact is that gravity and air do exist, and if God exists as well, who are they to determine ahead of time that he doesn’t just because they want to sidestep religion.

     I say, “So what if studying the possible existence of God brings religion into the picture?”  Science should always begin by assuming and examining all possibilities rather than limiting themselves right from the start.  (And let’s be honest here; limiting themselves right from the start is not scientific).  Well I’m here to say that the study of the theory of creationism is as necessary as the study of the theory of evolution.  A scientist MUST study ALL facts, including – in fact, especially – opposing facts; yet they, the “scientific” evolutionists, do not do that.  By enclosing themselves in a box from the start, they really are not practicing proper science, and therefore should not be counted as REAL scientists.  In fact, what they actually become is nothing more than pieces of propaganda.  And Andreadis wrote nothing in her book to make me think that she isn’t one of them!

...And Your Heavenly Father Knows That You Need Them

I’ve wanted to write a passage like this for a long, long time, and truthfully, it’s been a long time coming!            

     I’ve felt very dry lately, having come through the fire of unemployment for almost a whole year, and losing yet two other potential jobs in the meantime.  My thoughts have been turning rather negative, depressing, and unfortunately, selfish.  But now I feel like I’ve renewed my choice for God, and that’s all I really needed to do for wheels to start spinning the other way.  The spiritual and financial “cogs” that had started grinding to a halt have started moving again.  At church today (May 27^th), the weekend after my initial training at my new job, I felt almost as if my past, and all the negative thoughts and self doubt that have been swirling around me for the last year, now seemed far below me, as if at the bottom of the murky ocean, way down there with all the weird looking fish and eels and bottom sea dwellers that look more like bizarre alien creatures than they do like fish, living down there in the mud and muck that make up the ocean floor.  

     I, on the other hand, felt that I was on a mountain top far removed from the ocean, or that I was actually starting to float above the mountain, and that God had let me know that He was there, and had always been there, and that the power of mine and other people’s prayers were being answered:  Kim, who told me she had gotten down on her knees for me, Mom, Terry & Darece and their Bible group, family and friends and former co-workers, and I had prayed too, more for Mom than even for myself, and, after writing prayer request on the giving envelope, the church staff on the very day I got the news about the new job.  I felt the love and support.  Yet it leaves me feeling like my love for Jesus is so conditional! 

     And still God reaches me.  They said a prayer in church for the fallen soldiers who died protecting us, some who were family members of church patrons, and it actually moved me to tears!  I thought about that Bible passage that says something about the things of Jesus’ heart becoming the things of our hearts.  I felt God’s presence and I felt that God was perhaps blessing me and helping me in my time of need.  I don’t know if that’s true, but it sure felt that way. 

     And truthfully, I don’t know how I’ll feel if the same kind of thing happens again, and I am let go at yet another job because I’m “not the right fit”.  I do know that, despite it being only a long term temp position, that it came along at just the right time, and that everything seems to be pointing to this job right now as a light and the right thing, in many, many ways!  And I need to praise God for this blessing!

Image from: http://johnkrohn.blogspot.com/2012/05/when-mom-is-standing-there.html