wherever i may roam

as i sit here and begin the long, arduous process to prepare for my imminent departure, i think about the life that God has called my family and i to.  it is a life of constant change:  housing changes, friend changes, location changes, school changes, job changes, doctor changes, church changes, uniform changes, just to name a few.  and then there is the huge elephant in the room.  in the military, it's one that we tend to really ignore until we bump right into it, but we are always aware of its presence.  we know it's just a matter of time before we have to start eating that elephant, one bite at a time.  that elephant?  deployment.  there's a saying in the navy/marine corps, not if but when.  it's not if you deploy, it's when.  my date is coming up rapidly, and i have begun the preparations for it.  i am preparing physically, with packing, training, etc.  i am preparing mentally, with classes, schedules, and what not.  i am preparing spiritually, constantly seeking God's face as to what He would have me accomplish for the deployment. but i am not prepared emotionally.  some would call it denial, as if i can ignore it and won't have to deal with the emotions that go along with it.  but it is more than that.  men are not emotional beings, as a general rule.  you ask a man how he's feeling, and you're liable to get either a one word answer (fine, okay, good, ticked, etc.), or the inevitable "i don't know".  this is not men being difficult.  it is simply us being honest.  we never really think about feelings too much, so when we are forced to define them, it is like asking for us to describe some place we've only been to a scarce few times.  we might know some general details, but not specifics.  you ask a woman how she is feeling, and you are likely to get 15 answers.  women are an emotional roller coaster, so a woman can truly say she's happy one minute, and sad the next, or any of the countless variations (frustrated, upset, depressed, confused, the list goes on and on!).  but not men.  we know three basic emotions:  happiness, sadness, and anger.  that's the emotional trichotomy of a man.  recognizing this weakness innate within me, i will attempt to describe what is going through my soul as i approach departure.

the first emotion i would have to own up to is excitement.  i am excited because i am getting to do what God has called me to do.  i can do it here in the states, i know that, but i joined the military with the anticipation of deploying and going where the marines and sailors need me most, and now that is here, so i am excited.  i am excited because i am an experiential being.  i have a wandering bug in me.  i love to see new places, experience new things.  i am getting to go to places that i've never been before, meet people in cultures that i would otherwise never be exposed to.  through that, i am getting to be a light for CHRIST everywhere i go.  i may not be able to openly proselytize, but i am still allowed to wear my cross on my collar, which gives me an in whenever anyone sees it, to be a witness in my actions to those i meet.  so i am excited.

another emotion i am experiencing is apprehension.  i would not go so far as to call it fear, but i will say i am apprehensive.  some of the places we are going will inevitably place us in danger.  we have been vaccinated for every disease and illness they can vaccinate us against, but there are still those out there that have no vaccination, and we will likely be exposed to those.  so there's that element of danger.  also, whenever we leave the united states, we are exposing ourselves to danger.  we will visit war-torn areas, impoverished areas, and areas influenced by those who seek to do us harm.  you never realize what a blessing it is to live in the united states in relative safety until you leave her for foreign shores.  i trust in my God, and know that He is with me, but i do understand now what the psalmist said in the 23rd psalm.  i am also apprehensive as to my family.  i worry about their safety when i am gone.  i worry about who is going to change the flat tire on my wife's suv.  i worry about my middle son jumping out of his treehouse with his superman cape on and ending up in the hospital.  i worry about my youngest son not being able to remember and recognize me when i return.  so there is apprehension.

there is also sadness.  this one is a given.  in the past week, i have hardly been able to talk about it while looking at my bride or three beautiful boys without tearing up.  they are a part of me, and you might as well be ripping me in half and leaving one half here and shipping the other off.  it is excruciating to think about being away from them, and what i will miss while gone.  thankfully, i have not had to miss a birthday yet because of military travel, and this is one of those times when i won't.  however, i do know the time will come when i may have to do that, and that saddens me.  i think about going to sleep every night without my "baby love" cuddled up in my arms.  i realize that there will be no warm body in my bed for me to snuggle up to when i am freezing.  i will miss the comfortable silences we share, when being in the same room with each other is enough.  i will miss the playful banter we toss back and forth when we talk "smack" to each other in jesting.  and i will even miss having her there to infuriate me because she told me something that i really needed to hear, but didn't want to admit because of pride or stubbornness.  i will miss my boys.  gavin is like me.  i know it affects him, but he kind of keeps it to himself.  he is truly my "mini-me".  he looks like me, acts like me, and talks like me.  i will miss his random facts about snakes, sharks, the titanic, weather, or whatever subject he happens to be focusing on at that moment.  but mostly i will miss when he calls me to his room to give him a big hug and kiss before he goes to sleep.  he won't go to sleep without it.  nathan, now he's like lori.  he looks like her more than me, and he is like her in that he wears his heart on his sleeve.  there is never any doubt about what nathan is feeling at a particular moment, as he will readily let you know.  his flare for the dramatic keeps us either in hilarity, or in frustration.  i will miss his playful spirit, coming up and wanting to try and take me down.  but most of all, i will miss nathan climbing up into the chair with me for no other reason than to sit in my lap and lay his head on my chest and watch "phineas and ferb".  then there's logan.  he's my little buddy.  we had an amazing day playing at the beach yesterday.  he loves for me to flip him up in the air like we are part of a traveling circus act, while his mom gasps in apprehension.  i will miss his giggle whenever he and i play our cat and mouse game through the house.  but most of all, i will miss holding him to get him to sleep at night.  he normally gives lori a hard time going to sleep, but when i hold him, he settles down and goes right out, as i rock him back and forth and he and i look into each other's eyes as he drifts off into dream land.  so there is sadness, and it is the elephant in the room that takes up most of the space.

wow, all this emotional talk is draining!

but there is yet another emotion looming.  i couldn't put my finger on it until last night.  as i was packing some things, i was watching my bride over on the computer, who is a master at multi tasking, as she typed, watched "army wives", and watched me.  as i was selecting items and checking them off, the excitement was building in me, but the sadness was there as well, and then it hit me.  i was feeling guilt!  i was feeling guilt that i was excited about this trip.  how could i be excited about leaving my family?!?  i was feeling guilt that i was leaving my bride all alone for months to take care of the house and the kids by herself.  she is an amazing woman and i know she can handle it, but never the less, i was still leaving her.  i was feeling guilt that i was about to cause them terrible sadness by leaving for such a long period of time.  every time that nathan comes up to me and hugs me and says in a sad voice, "i will miss wu when wou're gone," it twists the knife in my soul.  God has called me to this ministry, and i know this is part of it.  i now realize what paul meant when he said that he wished all men were like him, unmarried, so they would be more willing to go anywhere God sent them without an emotional conflict.  don't get me wrong here, i love being married, and would not change it for the world, but i understand what paul was saying.  however, i also know that when i do get back, i will experience that other verse where God said, "it is not good for chris to be alone" (italics mine!), as i will have a bride waiting on me that will wrap me in her arms and three boys who will jump on me as soon as i get off that bus, and i'll take that over coming back home to an empty barracks room any day!  so i will deal with the guilt.

i still have some time left before i leave.  it's not a long time by any means.  if you ask me, it would never be long enough.  so i have chosen to tuck these emotions away for now, and enjoy having my family beside me until the time comes that i must deal with these emotions.  all of these emotions will likely stay with me, and morph during the trip, with some outweighing others at different times.  however, the emotion that i will hold on to is anticipation.  anticipation of my reuniting with the family that God has blessed me with.  anticipation of my bride's embrace!  anticipation of playing with my sons!  anticipation of being back home, where i belong.

p.s. doesnt' this give you an idea of how it should be with us as CHRISTians?  excitement at the opportunities God places before us.  apprehension at the unknown places he will take us.  sadness at living in a fallen world, that is not our home, and at what we could be experiencing in heaven.  and guilt at having loved this present life more than the next.  but most importantly, anticipation of eternity with our Jesus!  

you say po-ta-to, i say po-tah-to

before i get started, let me first throw this out there:  webster's dictionary defines pornography as
the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement.

okay, now that we have that clear, i want to address something that is not a new concept, but one that has recently gained notoriety through a book and a movie:  mommy porn.

i have seen numerous blog postings by females on the subject, both for and against, by both CHRIST-followers and secularists alike.  these blog posts seem to either condemn or justify the reading of books or watching of movies by women, that are blatantly sexual in nature.  the purpose of this post is not to address these arguments, but rather to actually look at the materials and give them a proper classification, because once we can strip away all the hooplah and actually look at something for what it is, then we can make an informed decision on the morality of indulging in the materials.  again, it is not my motive to condemn anyone for any behaviour, but to simply speak the truth, and then allow persons who enjoy such materials to make their own decisions. 

the first item up for discussion is the latest craze among women entitled, say it with me, "fifty shades of grey".  now, i have not read the book personally, but i did see a rather disturbing youtube video of gilbert gottfried reading excerpts from it.  let me just say this, i was embarrassed at having seen the 20 seconds of the video i did, because i know the images that popped into my head, which with gilbert gottfried reading it, were rather horrifying!  now, there are those that would argue that they are reading the book for the story, which is always a perplexing argument to me.  if someone is reading it for the story, and the story is about sex, then what is the redeeming factor in that argument?  it goes along with the man who says, "i only read 'hustler' for the articles", when, if the pages the articles are in between are filled with sexual images, then likewise, where is the redeeming factor in that?  i postulate that the story is classified as pornography.  now, before anyone gets all bent out of shape, i ask you to refer to the above definition of pornography:  the depiction of erotic imagery (in pictures or in writing) intended to cause sexual excitement.  it is a well known psychological fact that women are not turned on by pictures to the extent that guys are, but more so by their imaginations based on emotions.  as a guy, i can honestly say that a romantic comedy does nothing to get me going, nor does reading erotic writing.  so it is clear that this book is targeted towards women (if it were for men, there would be pictures with the story underneath in captions!)  now, if it is targeted towards women, we have to ask what is the motivation of the author?  you can find articles that address the topics of s&m, as well as sexuality, that are designed to be informative, rather than gaining a sexual response from the reader.  the author clearly stated that the book was the author's own sexual fantasies written down in narrative format, to excite others.  so, the author admits that her work, by definition, is pornography.  next, is the responses by the readers.  one female critic is quoted as saying, "guys, buy this book for your wife, and you will not be disappointed", insinuating a sexual favor in return based on the wife's reaction to what she reads.  so women define it as pornography, by definition.  so, if it is pornography, as the evidence shows, then what makes it different from the erotic magazines, movies, and websites that men visit on a daily basis?  is there a double standard here? 

the next piece of entertainment (no pun intended) is a movie entitled "magic mike".  this movie is about, and this is no secret, male strippers.  the fact that it contains actors that are known for their looks further solidifies the appeal to women.  women who would never dream of darkening the door to an actual strip club are flocking in droves to see this movie.  again, based on the above definition, i postulate that this movie is also pornography.  it is designed to elicit a sexual response in women.  there was a movie along the same lines that came out a few years ago with elizabeth berkley, of "saved by the bell" fame, entitled "showgirls".  i always thought it ironic that berkley went from playing a girl who fought against the objectifying of women, to playing a role that objectified women, but i digress.  any male who went and saw that movie in the theaters, was classified by women as perverted.  i know, because in college i witnessed the treatment of guys who went to see it by girls that were their friends.  they were classified as perverts.  now, again i ask, is there a double standard here?  women are going to the movie, objectifying the men in a sexual way, and getting aroused by the images on the screen.  as one facebook picture posted by a female said, "i don't know what happened in that movie theater, but i think i'm having channing tatum's baby!" 

now, as said before, erotic fiction geared towards females has been nothing new, it has just been thrust into the limelight.  harlequin romance novels have been around for decades, and all are designed to elicit a sexual response based upon the imagination created by the emotions within the novels.  however, it has always been acceptable for women to read these, yet reprehensible for men to read "playboy" or any of the other erotica that is out there. 

based on the above items fitting the definition of pornography, should someone who calls themselves a follower of CHRIST partake in this sort of entertainment?  or does Jesus' admonition about a man "looking upon a woman with lust in her heart" only apply to males?  should a man lower his standards as the spiritual leader of his home and buy these materials for his wife in hopes of sexual repayment in return?  or, should our sexual desire be excited by, and only be for, our spouses?  when counseling a married couple, sometimes the excuse is, "the excitement is gone out of the marriage bed, so i (we) use erotic materials to excite us".  my response is, if the excitement is gone, then you must be doing something wrong!  and, if it takes another person to get you sexually aroused, then are you not lusting after that person when engaged in sexual relations with your spouse?  if so, how is that not adultery, based on Jesus' definition? 

like i said before, the purpose of this article is not to condemn anyone for watching or reading these forms of entertainment, but to strip them down (again, no pun intended) and pull the curtain back to see what they actually are, and then for people to make their own decisions.  one of satan's primary tools, as the father of lies, is deception.  if he can wrap up a hook in some harmless looking bait, then the undiscerning will take it.  there are millions of males whose lives and homes are wrecked each year because of the detrimental effects of pornography, and now it seems that satan has his sights set on the females.  "be vigilant and watchful, for your adversary, the devil, prowls about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour!"

pay no attention to that hateful person behind the curtain

i am angry.  as a CHRISTian, i am angry.  and ashamed.  and embarrassed.  "why?" you ask?  well, i'll tell you.  up until now i have kept mostly silent about the whole "homosexual marriage" debate.  i have reasons for that, but mostly it has to do with casting my pearls before swine.  and my purpose behind writing this is not to address that debate.  my purpose is to address the reprehensible behaviour by those who call themselves followers of CHRIST in recent days.

as the debate swirled around our nation like a philosophical hurricane, it has swept up everyone from the president, to state governments, to celebrities, and to various members of faith groups including CHRISTianity, judaism, islam, etc.  and like a hurricane, it has caused astronomical amounts of damage on all sides.  nobody has been left untouched.  however, the damage i am concerned about is the damage caused by those i call my brothers and sisters in CHRIST.

if you look throughout history, you can usually pinpoint a particular vice or perceived sin (whether biblical or not) that people have focused on and attacked.  in the 1920's it was alcohol.  in the 1950's it was rock 'n' roll.  in the 1960's it was race.  in the 70's it was drugs.  in the 80's it was divorce.  in the 90's it was abortion.  now, that sin is homosexuality.

now, before you start accusing me of saying that homosexuality is ok, i must reassure you that i do believe fully what the Bible says about homosexuality.  let me clarify even further:  i believe what the Bible actually says about homosexuality, not what people think it says, nor what people twist it to say.  the Bible is a powerful weapon, and refers to itself as a two-edged sword, yet some who call themselves CHRISTians choose to use it more like a machete, wielding it with no skill and hacking away at whatever vice lost people are engaged in that they think needs a good clearing.  the problem with this approach is, it is not what the Bible was given to us for!  Scripture says it is to be used for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and for training in righteousness.  it never says that we are to use it as a flagrum, beating the lost into submission.  Scripture was given so the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly equipped for all good works.  get that?  Scripture is given to the man of God!  lost people, while under the condemnation of sin, are spiritually ignorant of Scripture, and unless the Holy Spirit moves in their soul, they will never comprehend it.  i've always said to expect lost people to act like lost people, so why should we be shocked when they do not adhere to our Scripture-based values?  so the Bible is to be used by us, for us, not to judge the lost.

however, those who call themselves CHRISTians engage in this targeting and think that they are somehow crusaders out to vanquish evil and to eradicate the infidels if they don't bow to our God or adhere to our values!  the issue is these same people are guilty of sin, many of sexual sin which places them in the same category as those who engage in homosexuality, yet they have the audacity to decry others who are guilty of the same sort of sins.  the whole concept of grace and mercy is foreign to them, making me wonder if they have ever experienced the grace and mercy of the Saviour themselves.

why do they do this?  i suspect that it either has something to do with helping them to feel better about their own shortcomings if they can target someone and make them out to be worse, or they feel like they are doing God a favor and legislating all of the evil away, as if they are God's version of "judge dredd".  their fires are further fueled by organizations such as afa, or american family activists as i like to call them.  they buy into the whole "get out and vote the evil away" mantra, and next thing you know we have a religious lynch mob attacking anyone who engages in their targeted sin and trying to beat them into submission with rallies and signs and laws.  what does this actually accomplish?  absolutely nothing.  oh, sure.  it may make them feel comfortable for the time being knowing they helped to put those evil people in their place, and if they win, then they don't have to have their comfort zones upset by seeing two people holding hands that are of the same gender.  and there you have the real reason for it.  nobody wants to be uncomfortable.  everyone wants to sit on their blessed assurance, get all dressed up in their sunday best, and go to church on sunday and have nothing but CHRISTians at their workplaces, where they don't have to interact with those sinners.  why?  because then they actually might have to start sharing their faith with someone they don't think deserves it.  many in the church today have the mentality of "get right and then you can become a CHRISTian".

THAT'S NOT THE MESSAGE OF CHRIST!!!

the message of CHRIST is love your neighbor as yourself.  it is to go into all the world and preach the gospel to everyone, whether you feel they deserve it or not.  that is the message of CHRIST, that God loves us despite our sin, and we are to do the same to others!  not go into all the world and condemn everyone!  we do not have the authority nor the right to condemn anyone!  we like to quote john 3:16, but we leave out 3:17.  "for God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him."  that's right.  Jesus did not come to condemn.  one day, all will stand before Him, and the condemnation will not come from Him, but from those who reject Him!  they are in essence condemning themselves!  so, instead of looking at those who engage in homosexuality as "perverts", look at them as people in need of a Saviour!   we are all born with the penchant for sin.  and we readily engage in that sin so we are all guilty before God.  the difference is, those of us who have been saved from our sins know the true meaning of grace, mercy, and forgiveness.  so we should not be like the man who was forgiven a large debt and then was ruthless in collecting debts from those who owed him.  instead of looking down our nose at those who do not behave as we think they should, perhaps we should follow our Master's example and actually get to know them.  spend time understanding why they choose to engage in the behaviour that they do, and then show them, not tell them, the godly way.  show them the Saviour.  but if they do not see CHRIST's mercy and forgiveness in your actions, then they will simply see you as a bigot who looks down on them, which quite frankly, you possibly are.  stop bringing reproach on CHRIST's name, and reach out to those He came to save.  we are His hands and feet, and if we don't tell them, through our words as well as through our actions, then we are condemning them to an eternity in hell.

(oh, and just for the record, i am not against voting your conscience.  i believe we should use the vote God has blessed us with to glorify Him!  but don't stop there.  that does not solve the problem.  you can outlaw the action, but unless the heart is changed, the action will always find a way to continue!)