Throughout the world, people of all faiths openly and unabashedly celebrate both the ambiance and the festiveness of the holidays.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Yes Virginia, Some Atheists Do Celebrate Christmas
Throughout the world, people of all faiths openly and unabashedly celebrate both the ambiance and the festiveness of the holidays.
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Naomi's Rain
A group of roughly 100 people gathered at the Oklahoma state capitol Wednesday to pay tribute to and demand justice for Naomi Whitecrow, a 2 year old Cheyenne and Arapaho tribal member killed in 2009 while in the care of a foster family. The foster mother, Amy Holder, of Edmond, Oklahoma was found guilty in October of child abuse and after about 10 hours of deliberation the jury recommended a $5,000 fine but no jail time. After word of the jury’s recommendation was released, outrage sparked throughout the Indian community as family members, friends, and total strangers struggled to understand how the brutal murder of a child could result in a mere fine.
Formal sentencing was set for November 7th in Guthrie, Oklahoma and many participants vowed to be present there as well to show support for Naomi. The event coordinator, Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribal Tribune editor Rosemary Stephens, opened the event by introducing Cheyenne and Arapaho Governor Janice Prairie Chief Boswell who welcomed the participants and encourage continued awareness of Naomi’s case and the need for stricter laws regarding child abuse.The Campaign Justice for Naomi rally brought about supporters protesting for more consistent and harsher penalties for those found guilty in the death of a child in foster care. Debby Whitecrow, Naomi’s aunt, told supporters and media members the family wanted Holder held accountable and felt the punishment in no way fit the crime. “We want justice that is what we are looking for in all of this. We are here to remember her life and the life she is no longer going to be able to live with us.”
Glenda Deer, a Kickapoo tribal member from Shawnee, Oklahoma and outspoken supporter of the event, wrote the following on the Facebook event page she created make the public aware of the sentencing date, “$5,000 for killing a Indian child in 2011?!… Our Indian kids are priceless….there is NO amount of $ that can be set on ANY child…I SAY PACK THE COURTROOM NOVEMBER (7th)…!!! LET GUTHERIE FEEL THE PRESENCE OF INDIAN PEOPLE! There is no JUSTICE for indian people…it really is “JUST US”
After reviewing the medical examiner’s report and photographs, forensic pathologist Dr. Dean A. Hawley (Indiana University School of Medicine) determined that Naomi had died as a result of blunt force trauma to the head, abdomen, and extremities.
The arrest warrant, signed by District Attorney Vincent Antonioli reads, “Child abuse - a felony, on or between the 12th day of September, 2008 through the 20th day of January, 2009, by maliciously failing to provide minimum, proper, and medical attention to N.W., age 2, while she was in the care and custody of the defendant as a foster child, and performed unnecessary physical procedures on the aforementioned N.W., causing the following physical injuries from the resulting blunt force trauma, to wit: pancreatic hemorrhage; fat necrosis; multiple contusions and abrasion of her face and scalp; fresh left occipital subarachnod hemorrhage; left occipital and parietal cerebral cortical contusions; contusions to the back, back of the head, front and back of legs, and buttocks.
This crime is punishable by for imprisonment for up to life and/or 1 year in the Logan County Jail and a fine of between $500.00 and $5000.00, or both.“
Yolanda Bluehorse, a member of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, spoke openly and emotionally at yesterday’s rally, recalling her own daughter’s murder at the hands of a trusted caregiver. Bluehorse was there to support the family and remember Naomi. “I’m here to support the family. I’m here for the little girl, for Naomi Whitecrow.” After fighting the state of Texas to bring her own daughter’s killer to justice, Bluehorse was visibly upset at the jury’s recommendation for the $5,000.00 fine. “A monetary amount. Really? Does that mean anyone found guilty just pays a fine? Are we putting a price on child abuse?”As the clouds grew dark and the wind grew cold, the crowd remained steadfast as several tribal members and activists stood and spoke of the need for justice and changes in current laws. Supporters from many different ethnic backgrounds held signs adorned with Naomi’s photo, with phrases such as, “Justice For Naomi,” “Is This Going to Happen Again,” and “Please Give Me a Voice.” Rally-goers were given pins with Naomi’s photo that read, “Justice For Naomi” and a white ribbon, to reflect and remind everyone of the innocence of our children.
The loss of that innocence was still apparent as Naomi’s mother, Kala Whitecrow, stood to thank supporters for attending but could only say a few words before she began to weep. “I’m sorry, I’m just too emotional, I can’t do this.” Audible sobs were heard from the crowd as Whitecrow nearly collapsed into the arms of her mother, sister, and Rosemary Stephens.As the women stepped away from the podium and the final prayer was about to be offered, a light gentle rain began to fall. Ben Carnes, a Choctaw tribal member who had spoken earlier in the event, quietly requested to address the crowd again. With the raindrops apparent on his face, Carnes spoke to Naomi’s mother. “I’m a member of the Choctaw Nation and they say Amy Holder is Choctaw. From my nation to yours, I apologize for what she done.” He lifted a hand to the sky. “In our tradition, a soft gentle rain is a feminine rain. You can be sure little Naomi is up there right now watching us and smiling.” He bowed his head and paused for a moment, then lifted his eyes to the clouds. “It’s a feminine rain but it’s also a healing rain if we let it be.”
As the event ended, those who were there to pay tribute to and demand justice for a little girl many had never met, stood in silence as the soft gentle rain not only touched their face, hair, and jackets, but their very souls.
A soft, gentle, feminine rain. A healing rain. Naomi’s rain.
Read the arrest warrant here (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader): http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/griffin/NEWS9/PDF/1001/amyholder.PDF
Edmond Woman Convicted of Child Abuse in Death of Foster Child KOTV News 6 Oklahoma City: http://www.newson6.com/story/15608546/edmond-woman-convicted-of-child-abuse-in-death-of-foster-child
Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribal Tribune: http://www.c-a-tribes.org/Websites/michaelwood/images/Newspapers/NewsPaper%202011/Oct.%2015,%202011.pdf
Glenda Deer’s event page for the sentencing: https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=123236737781181
This article was first published on CNN iReport by Raz’n Cain entitled Naomi’s Rain. Copyright 2011. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Breast Cancer… It’s Not Just A Girl Thing
With the arrival of October, Breast Cancer Awareness campaigns are going into overdrive and with good reason.
Nearly 250,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer each year; more than 11,000 of those women are under the age of 40. 40,000 women will fall victim and die of breast cancer. And that number is rising.
However, all too often, the comment I receive when speaking about male breast cancer is, “I didn’t know men could get breast cancer.” The media is not geared towards awareness for men, therefore it is no surprise that more people are not aware, let alone knowledgeable in this area.
What doesn’t make the news is that more than 2,000 cases of breast cancer are diagnosed annually in men and nearly 500 men will die each year. As with women, that number is rising. Men of African-American decent are more at risk than Caucasian men and men who develop breast cancer are more likely to develop other cancers, and less likely to survive than women. Certain medical and genetic dispositions also create a higher risk for some men while others develop breast cancer with no known risk factors whatsoever. While the statistics for male breast cancer appear to be low, it is also something that most men (and women) do not consider when it comes to personal health care. It is also our belief, that the numbers for men are grossly under-reported and often not reported at all.
On September 17th our organization held a poker run and benefit to raise awareness for breast cancer and to raise funds to help men and women alike obtain mammograms year round if they are unable to afford them. Unfortunately, local radio stations mistakenly announced that “the cancer poker run has been cancelled due to the weather,” but did not mention which cancer benefit. Sadly, after a year of planning and advertising, only seven bikes and one car participated.
Although we were unable to raise the funds we hoped for, we were however able to meet an amazing number of individuals and offer information and education on how to understand the risks and perform self breast exams. Education and the willingness to be one’s own advocate is our greatest weapon and in that aspect, our benefit was an overwhelming and amazing success. We are forever grateful to all of the businesses, organizations, and individuals who donated, volunteered, and participated in support of the cause.
Even though we associate the month of October with the color pink… please remember to paint a little blue in there as well and remind the men in your lives to do breast self exams as well. It could save their lives.
Breast tissue is breast tissue and cancer doesn’t care whether you sit or stand to pee.
Neither should you.
Visit your physician, request an exam, and ask about your risks.
Beki Fox Cain, Director
Ride For The Ribbon
Ride For The Ribbon
Please visit “Men Get Breast Cancer, Too!” to read Thomas Bell’s account of his experience with male breast cancer, published by the American Journal of Nursing.
Thursday, November 25, 2010
A Reflection of Living in Two Worlds
On this day of Thanksgiving, I'm often asked how I reconcile my disdain for the "holiday" with spending time with my family who observe the "traditional" American version. While it appears simple, it really isn't so much when you look through my eyes. It's a deep conflict of my soul and one that I struggle with each and every year. Walking in two worlds is never easy, but living in two worlds, is even more difficult. Difficult, but very real and at times, very rewarding.
I am Indigenous and I am Caucasian. There's no denying that, all I one has to do is look at my fair skin and blue eyes and I'm questioned more often than not how I can call myself Indigenous. I am not asked this so much by my Indigenous brothers and sisters, but rather by Caucasians who insist that I am white. Even more so by those who ask to see my "Indian Card" and have attempted to force me to list "white" as my race because I am not a member of a federally recognized tribe. My ancestors didn't need the government to "recognize" them, because when they did, their blood was spilled, their children stolen from them, and their culture nearly erased from history. That is a recognition I do not need, want, or require.
As for my Indigenous "family," blood means nothing when you call yourself related. Acceptance is because of who and what you are, and I have many, MANY Native brothers and sisters, simply because we are so. We are family because we choose to be family, that's just the way it is.
I can recall working in a sports bar in Indiana, just over the river from Louisville, KY. My hair was short and blond then and there were a group of Native activists protesting excavation of Indian grounds on the other side of the river. One Native gentleman came in one night and ended up at the bar where I asked him what he would like to drink. I can't remember what he ordered, but he looked at me and asked if I was Indian. I affirmed that I was and he sadly shook his head and said, "Then why do you color your hair?" He picked up his drink and as he walked away, he turned back and said, "Just be who you are..."
I don't remember if he told me his name or even what nation he was from. I just remember the look of disappointment and sadness in his eyes and the effect it had on me that day. It would be the second step in my journey of finding who and what I was in the two worlds that I had been thrust into at birth.
I am Haudenosaunee, Kanienkehaka, Mohawk Indian. My ancestors lived in the Mohawk Valley area of New York state before they were slaughtered and those who survived, removed to the St. Regis Reservation. My knowledge of my family is sparse, having been adopted by a Caucasian couple at birth who denied me any and all access to my Mohawk heritage, culture, tradition, and identification. Through the years, I have found lines to the Delaware, the Algonquin, the Creek, and the Mohigan tribes. But my heart, my spirit, my soul, and my identification as an Indigenous woman, lie with the Mohawk of St. Regis.
I was raised in a "Christian" home where all Christian holidays were observed and celebrated, or else. Although time with my adopted Grandfather was the epitome of love and devotion, I had little else to look forward to when it came to spending time with "family." I was told the myths surrounding Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Easter and forced to attend services honoring them. Even as a young child, I could never understand how death of the innocent was to be celebrated.
Perhaps I was fortunate to have the company of an Elder Indigenous man whom I met as a young girl, who had the patience of eternity with my meandering thoughts, endless questions, and often times, unseemly behavior. His instruction, his smile, his love, his gentle hands, and the deep weathered wrinkles embedded into his ancient skin, will remain in my soul forever. He was more than my friend, he was my guide, my teacher, my conscience, and the only one who could have prepared me for the world I was destined to walk through. He led me through my first steps in finding who and what I was to be.
He taught me the true history of Thanksgiving, and yet I would return home and sit quietly and solemnly through the holiday dinners, faking interest, while nauseous at the idea of ingesting a meal in which the history was surrounded by blood and genocide.
I don't know what ever happened to him. I don't remember his name. I don't remember his nation. But I remember his face, the lines in his hands, the way they held mine as he taught me so many things, I remember his voice, and I remember his blue, blue eyes and often wonder as I look into the mirror and see my own cerulean sea of vivid questioning blue, if perhaps he and I were related somehow. I still wonder today what became of him. I went to visit him one day and he was gone. That's all. Just, gone. I was too young and too afraid to ask anyone about him, lacking the knowledge to check the newspapers to search obituaries, although something tells me his name or likeness were never there.
One of the things he taught me was that I would always walk in two worlds, because I had two worlds living inside of me. He said I could struggle with them, or find peace with them. I struggled for decades, until I learned that they CAN live in peace if I allow them. He taught me to respect the beliefs of others while honoring and living my own as best I could. And that's exactly what I try to do.
I spend time with my family at Thanksgiving, Christmas, Easter, and other holidays, because it's important to them. Not so much about the religious aspect of the holidays, but rather the time spent with family and friends, just being together. Every day with them, every moment, is a gift that I cherish, thus placing the history of whatever day it may be, behind me, is more important than allowing myself to miss out on the opportunity to love them yet another day while they are still with me.
And so on this Thanksgiving, while I abhor and despise what it stands for, I remain walking in two worlds simply because it was destined to be so. I love my family and what is important to them, I honor just as I honor my ancestors and thank them for the sacrifices they made, for their blood that runs through my veins and the veins of my children and grandchildren, for the Elder who made such a difference in my life as a child, and even now, there is much to be grateful for regardless of the history behind Thanksgiving and America's refusal to treat it as the celebration of genocide that it truly is.
I am Indigenous. I am Caucasian. I color my hair again now that I'm older, but instead of blond, I color it my natural black. My hair is now as white as the Elder's who taught me as a child. My skin is just as fair and my eyes are just as blue. I walk in two worlds, I live in two worlds, I AM two worlds... and that's the way my Creator made me to be and therefore, I not only accept my destiny, I am proud to wear it as openly and honorably as I can and pray that I am exactly what it created me to be and am doing exactly what it created me to do.
The tattoo on my left arm bears the words, "Tohsa sasa'nikon:hren..." Never forget.
May we never forget those who sacrificed their lives so that we are who and what we are today, may we never forget who and what we are, and may we never forget those that we love and cherish and never... NEVER forget to tell them that we love them.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
THE SCAR Project on Raz'n Cain Live on BlogTV
Even if you are unable to join us for the event, please share it with others. We will also have the show saved in our archives, for those who must miss the show.
The chat room will be available for viewers to converse and ask questions if they'd like, but please remember to keep the conversation appropriate, as the chat logs are included in the recorded archives of the show and we do expect viewers of all ages.
For those of you who are not familiar with THE SCAR Project, it it a collection of outstanding photographs of these beautiful and amazingly strong ladies who are in various stages of post-mastectomy reconstruction (and some who have chosen not to opt for reconstruction) following breast cancer diagnoses or as a prophylactic option to prevent breast cancer.
Please visit The SCAR Project or their Facebook Page and not only support breast cancer awareness, but these courageous women who have not just survived, they have LIVED!!!
Also, please visit the pages of these amazing ladies who participated in The SCAR Project: Sara Bartosiewicz-Hamilton's, "That Girl... Tales From the Edge," Melissa Ward's, "Cancer Fighting Princess," and Sylvia Soo's, "Breast Cancer Smancer, I HEART LIFE."
From THE SCAR Project's Facebook page:
The SCAR Project is a series of large-scale portraits of young breast cancer survivors shot by fashion photographer David Jay. Primarily an awareness raising campaign; The SCAR Project puts a raw, unflinching face on early onset breast cancer while paying tribute to the courage and spirit of so many brave young women.
The SCAR Project exhibition will open October 14th in NYC.
All photos are copyrighted and the sole property of David Jay. Used with permission.
Friday, August 6, 2010
From Saul to Paul: Martyr or Spiritual Predator?
Although well known throughout Christendom, the Apostle Paul remains an enigma to many who fail to question the historical dogma that has been passed down through the generations.
As a Pharisee, Paul’s life as Saul was one of laws, rules, and education. At an early age, his educational level far exceeded what most people today could achieve in a lifetime. He vowed early in inception of Christianity to destroy all Christians, even standing guard over the cloaks of the council as the disciple Stephen was murdered.
His hatred of Christians ran so deep that he requested permission from the Jewish high priests to bring any and all Christians, both man and woman alike, to Jerusalem for trial as heretics. It was his belief that Christianity would be the end of Judaism and of course, to his lurid career. We must remember though, that Saul’s passion of Judaism was no less than those with a passion for the teachings of Christ. And so he continued to seek out and persecute those who followed Christ in an effort to put an end to the threat to his beliefs, race, his way of life, and all that he held dear to his heart.
Perhaps it is safe to say that Saul was the last one to expect to see a miracle, let alone experience one that would change his life. While so many fervent followers of Christianity hoped and prayed that they too might experience Christ, it would be the one man who sought to destroy them that God Himself would reach down and deliver from his own anger and hatred and in doing so, completely alter the path that Saul so desperately and determinedly sought to continue upon.
As Saul left Jerusalem to arrest believers in Damascus, a bright light caused him to fall to his face in the road. And as those who know the story of Saul, a disembodied voice cried out, “Saul! Saul! Why are you persecuting me?” Now one would assume that Saul, having heard the rumors of miracles and the fantastic stories of how God spoke to His followers, would have known immediately who it was that spoke to him. But instead, he asked who was speaking. Jesus answered that it was he, the very one Saul was trying to destroy, then instructed him to arise and await further instructions in Damascus.
As scripture tells us, Saul was accompanied by other men who heard the voice, but saw no one or no thing to attribute it to. Blinded by the light and apparently unable to eat or drink, he was led to Damascus by his companions where he waited for three days. At the instruction of God, a man named Ananias approached Saul and laid hands upon him, causing him to open his eyes and see once more. Just the miracle Saul needed to make a true believer out of him and bring about one of the greatest testimonies for Christ that history has ever seen.
As Saul became Paul, his fervor did not end but rather, only strengthened with his newfound faith and agenda to spread the word of Christ. It is interesting to note though, that Paul, the orthodox learned Jew, set out to countries that were, by demographics, basically non-Jewish (1).
While no one is able to really justify or explain the nature of Paul’s conversion or his sudden abandonment of his assuredly comfortable lifestyle, it is apparent that his change of heart spread to those that he normally would not associate with. Gentiles and “half-Jews” would have been the scourge of his society, yet it was those that he brought the brunt of Christ’s message to. Those with no former education of Judaism or knowledge of the traditions, cultures, and laws, those who searched for a savior, if not the promised Messiah (having heard this from the Jews) or perhaps, those easiest to fool?
Over the next few years, Paul became mentor to many, but most profoundly mentioned, that of Timothy. Although the Bible leads us to believe that Paul treated Timothy with at least some disdain, as the time of his execution neared, it would be Timothy that was handed the ministry of Paul to carry on. During his imprisonment, Paul wrote letters to numerous churches, chastising them of their bastardization of Christ’s message. Looking deeper into Paul’s own teachings, it is easy to see that he too, was guilty of the very same thing. He took the love, mercy, and inclusiveness of Christ and turned it into dogma, rituals, and confusing metaphors that I believe Christ would have found embarrassing.
Even today, the authorship of Paul’s letters fall under scrutiny as to their authenticity (2). But regardless of how they came about, they are widely accepted by most Christians as scripture and therefore not to be questioned. But it is those letters to the churches and his missionary trips in an effort to convert others to Christianity which Christians today look upon as their example of how to live a godly life. Paul was willing to give up everything he knew in order to help others find the salvation that he had been granted.
Did Paul have an agenda to be a spiritual micromanager thus a predator or was he truly a martyr for the cause? It’s difficult to ascertain given the fact that he gave up a life of luxury and high social status to become basically a beggar and lowly road scholar living day to day off the handouts of others, knowing that one day, his life would hang in the balance and ultimately be lost for the very cause that he himself once vowed to destroy.
References
1. Savitri Devi. “Paul of Tarsus, or Christianity and Jewry.” Last accessed 24 March 2008.
< http://library.flawlesslog
2. N.S. Gill. “Paul of Tarsus.” Last accessed 24 March 2008.
< http://ancienthistory.abou
As a Pharisee, Paul’s life as Saul was one of laws, rules, and education. At an early age, his educational level far exceeded what most people today could achieve in a lifetime. He vowed early in inception of Christianity to destroy all Christians, even standing guard over the cloaks of the council as the disciple Stephen was murdered.
His hatred of Christians ran so deep that he requested permission from the Jewish high priests to bring any and all Christians, both man and woman alike, to Jerusalem for trial as heretics. It was his belief that Christianity would be the end of Judaism and of course, to his lurid career. We must remember though, that Saul’s passion of Judaism was no less than those with a passion for the teachings of Christ. And so he continued to seek out and persecute those who followed Christ in an effort to put an end to the threat to his beliefs, race, his way of life, and all that he held dear to his heart.
Perhaps it is safe to say that Saul was the last one to expect to see a miracle, let alone experience one that would change his life. While so many fervent followers of Christianity hoped and prayed that they too might experience Christ, it would be the one man who sought to destroy them that God Himself would reach down and deliver from his own anger and hatred and in doing so, completely alter the path that Saul so desperately and determinedly sought to continue upon.
As Saul left Jerusalem to arrest believers in Damascus, a bright light caused him to fall to his face in the road. And as those who know the story of Saul, a disembodied voice cried out, “Saul! Saul! Why are you persecuting me?” Now one would assume that Saul, having heard the rumors of miracles and the fantastic stories of how God spoke to His followers, would have known immediately who it was that spoke to him. But instead, he asked who was speaking. Jesus answered that it was he, the very one Saul was trying to destroy, then instructed him to arise and await further instructions in Damascus.
As scripture tells us, Saul was accompanied by other men who heard the voice, but saw no one or no thing to attribute it to. Blinded by the light and apparently unable to eat or drink, he was led to Damascus by his companions where he waited for three days. At the instruction of God, a man named Ananias approached Saul and laid hands upon him, causing him to open his eyes and see once more. Just the miracle Saul needed to make a true believer out of him and bring about one of the greatest testimonies for Christ that history has ever seen.
As Saul became Paul, his fervor did not end but rather, only strengthened with his newfound faith and agenda to spread the word of Christ. It is interesting to note though, that Paul, the orthodox learned Jew, set out to countries that were, by demographics, basically non-Jewish (1).
While no one is able to really justify or explain the nature of Paul’s conversion or his sudden abandonment of his assuredly comfortable lifestyle, it is apparent that his change of heart spread to those that he normally would not associate with. Gentiles and “half-Jews” would have been the scourge of his society, yet it was those that he brought the brunt of Christ’s message to. Those with no former education of Judaism or knowledge of the traditions, cultures, and laws, those who searched for a savior, if not the promised Messiah (having heard this from the Jews) or perhaps, those easiest to fool?
Over the next few years, Paul became mentor to many, but most profoundly mentioned, that of Timothy. Although the Bible leads us to believe that Paul treated Timothy with at least some disdain, as the time of his execution neared, it would be Timothy that was handed the ministry of Paul to carry on. During his imprisonment, Paul wrote letters to numerous churches, chastising them of their bastardization of Christ’s message. Looking deeper into Paul’s own teachings, it is easy to see that he too, was guilty of the very same thing. He took the love, mercy, and inclusiveness of Christ and turned it into dogma, rituals, and confusing metaphors that I believe Christ would have found embarrassing.
Even today, the authorship of Paul’s letters fall under scrutiny as to their authenticity (2). But regardless of how they came about, they are widely accepted by most Christians as scripture and therefore not to be questioned. But it is those letters to the churches and his missionary trips in an effort to convert others to Christianity which Christians today look upon as their example of how to live a godly life. Paul was willing to give up everything he knew in order to help others find the salvation that he had been granted.
Did Paul have an agenda to be a spiritual micromanager thus a predator or was he truly a martyr for the cause? It’s difficult to ascertain given the fact that he gave up a life of luxury and high social status to become basically a beggar and lowly road scholar living day to day off the handouts of others, knowing that one day, his life would hang in the balance and ultimately be lost for the very cause that he himself once vowed to destroy.
References
1. Savitri Devi. “Paul of Tarsus, or Christianity and Jewry.” Last accessed 24 March 2008.
< http://library.flawlesslog
2. N.S. Gill. “Paul of Tarsus.” Last accessed 24 March 2008.
< http://ancienthistory.abou
Matthew, Mark, and Luke: An Analytical Comparison of Faith vs. Scripture (From July 13, 2010)
Perhaps in some instances, faith and theology have no business as bed partners. Even though they consistently awaken in an embrace of connubial pandemonium, neither can seem to find a legitimate ground for divorce. And sadly, the seed that was sewn through Christ’s message of love and salvation, has brought about endless discord regarding faith vs. fact through the Christian community simply through individual interpretation of what is now considered to be Scripture.
The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, offer the reader an intimate yet incomplete look at the early life and later ministry of Jesus. While the Book of John is easily compared to the three Gospels, it must be noted that while each provide a similar recollection of the life of Jesus it is also very clear that each gives a very different narrative to the events that have become some of the most important views in the Christian religion.
Therein lies the issue with faith. Are the Gospels accurate and to be accepted with their differences and attributed to artistic freedom? Or are they misleading and deliberately vague due to the different cultural and religious backgrounds and political agendas of the writers? Are the Gospels to retain the title and authority of Scripture or will an examination of them give cause to the questioning of their authenticity and reliability and to the very foundation of the single most powerful religious movement that has spanned nearly two millennia?
Known as the “Synoptic Gospels,” it is important to understand the definition of the term synoptic. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines synoptic as “1. affording a general view of a whole; 2. manifesting or characterized by comprehensiveness or breadth of view; 3. presenting or taking the same or common view; specifically often capitalized : of or relating to the first three Gospels of the New Testament; 4. relating to or displaying conditions (as of the atmosphere or weather) as they exist simultaneously over a broad area” (1).
Essentially, what the Synoptic Gospels give us is an “overview” of Jesus’ life from birth to twelve years and then from the age of thirty until his death, resurrection, and ascension. The problem however, lies in the inconsistencies that lead to the questionable authenticity of at least two of these Gospels, specifically Matthew and Luke, as well as the question of who wrote which book first and who copied what information and rewrote it from whom.
Although Matthew and Luke are listed first and third in the New Testament, it is widely believed and accepted that Mark was the first account written of the life of Jesus. Known as the Markan Theory, this is based upon the minor errors found in the Book of Mark, such as incorrect timelines, geographical locations, and historical events, which the Books of Matthew and Luke correct (2). Had either Matthew or Luke been written first, it would seem obvious that Mark would have taken the time to make these corrections to preserve the continuity and assumed validity of the information presented.
With yet another theory to the corrections found in Matthew and Luke, we introduce “Q” or “Quelle,” a hypothetical source of writings, teachings, and sayings of Jesus that Matthew and Luke used to, in effect, fill in the blanks and elaborate on certain events, causing Jesus to appear even more divine and powerful in his ministry and claims of being the prophesied Messiah. Although the assumed writings of “Q” have been long lost, the idea of this author has become the most widely accepted theory for scholars and teachers alike, as it gives a commonality to Matthew and Luke that cannot otherwise be explained.
In his introduction, Luke instructs the reader in chapter 1 verses 1-4 that, “Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (3).
In reading this, we can assume that not only is Luke aware that others had written of Jesus but that oral tradition also played a large role in what he planned to commit to writing. In a sense, he is stating that although others had made written accounts, he felt it necessary since he had investigated everything from the beginning, that it was he who could provide the most accurate account of the life of Jesus.
As a well educated man and physician, it is easy to see why Luke would believe that he was more than capable of giving the most exact and dependable history of Jesus. As a Greek and the only Gentile author in the New Testament, it is understandable that he would pen his account in Greek rather than Hebrew or Aramaic, the language which Jesus most likely spoke, yet we must still ask the question of whether or not the teachings of Jesus were adequately translated in the way that he spoke them (4).
Matthew begins his writings with the genealogy of Jesus through the line of King David until he reached Abraham (5), thus proving his “royal” lineage. Luke, however, lists the genealogy of Jesus down through Adam (6), both of which are interesting as Jewish genealogy is traced through the matriarchal lines in order to give validity to the Hebrew ancestry, which may or may not come from the father. It’s also interesting to note that Luke ends his genealogy of Jesus with “the Son of God” before Adam.
The problem with both of these genealogies is that only direct bloodlines were considered authentic and, assuming the story of the virgin birth is true, Jesus cannot be considered a descendant of King David. One genealogy is traced through King David’s son Solomon and the other through his son
Nathan. Matthew shows the royal line and Luke the natural line.
Perhaps what Matthew and Luke were attempting to do was show both the divine and human nature of Jesus, corroborating the idea that he was both God and man combined (7). It is feasible to assume that Matthew embellished a bit more than Luke and Mark, as his reputation as a tax collector preceded him and those who knew of his profession were less than likely to believe anything he had to say without Scriptural basis and comparison.
Mark though was very simplistic and basic in his representation of the life and ministry of Christ. He began his writings with the short note, “The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (8). Mark relied on the teachings of Isaiah to present the prophesies of the upcoming Messiah. His purpose was to present Jesus in a human aspect as a teacher and identify his work and miracles (9).
Although not one of the original twelve disciples, Mark (also known as John Mark) was an avid follower and companion of Saul of Tarsus, later known as Paul the Apostle, with whom he accompanied on his first missionary trip. In his writings, which are thought to have occurred between A.D. 55 and 65, Mark focuses on the miracles of Jesus and records more than Matthew and Luke. It is also worthy to note that both Matthew and Luke cite all but 31 verses in the Book of Mark, and that Mark portrays Jesus as a servant of the people rather than “King of the Jews” (9).
Meanwhile, Matthew, set out to prove the divinity of Jesus that he was, in fact, the Messiah and the Savior of the world. His writings, believed to have been written between A.D. 60 and 65, focused on fulfillment of the Scripture rather than the miracles or humanity of Jesus. Although Matthew mentions the miracles of Jesus, he points out numerous times that Jesus is the “Son of David” (9).
Luke, on the other hand, wrote his account sometime around A.D. 60 and centered his writings to show Jesus as the perfect human as well as the Savior. Luke wrote about the relationship Jesus had with the public and is one of the few who even bothers to mention the role of women in the ministry of Jesus.
Given these accounts, both with the similarities and diversities, we see three very different men with very different agendas portraying the person that Jesus was, yet all firmly believing that he was the one begotten Son of God to whom the responsibility fell for bringing about salvation of the world.
With the citations of Mark within the books of Matthew and Luke , we must also give credence to the idea that each were written after Mark’s version, thus giving even more credibility that both Matthew and Luke borrowed the words of Mark as well as those of “Q.”
While many set out to solve the Synoptic Problem, many also may ask why the problem requires solving. As a matter of faith, the Synoptic Gospels simply give differing versions from different men who are telling the same story long after the death and resurrection of Christ. While some may argue that Mark’s account has no validity, it is still widely accepted that his words were penned first and those of Matthew and Luke merely corroborated them and gave further detail to the birth, life, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ.
They are not seen as inconsistencies or contradictions, but rather as oral accounts set to paper in order to preserve their existence for fear that the tradition of oral accountability would lose its place in the culture, and these historical and miraculous events of the life of Christ would be lost forever.
More controversially, there are many who believe that the differences in the Synoptic Gospels are a deliberate misrepresentation in order to confuse those with little faith or little education in the Scriptures or history of Christianity. It is for those that the “problem” exists and continues to perpetuate a reason to research and find the legitimacy that seems to evade mankind throughout the centuries, of who and what the man Jesus Christ may or may not have been.
For those with faith, the details and differences are mundane, senseless, and meaningless. To live their lives as the Christ commanded and spread his word of unconditional love, salvation, kindness, and humility is enough, and there is no need to further explore his persona. Yet for those who look into the life and ministry of Jesus, the proverbial mustard seed, will always feel as the splinter in the bottom of the foot; always irritating, always elusive, and always, not quite within sight or reach.
Is there a solution to the Synoptic Problem? With the writings of “Q” long lost and the enigma of wording lost in translation, it would seem that the only solution is to continue to examine the literature surrounding the controversy or simply accept the Gospels in faith that whatever the “Word” may be, it has been and will be revealed in the love and salvation of Christ himself.
References
1. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. “Synoptic.” Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin
2. The Synoptic Problem. Felix Just, S.J., Ph. D. Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://catholic-resources.
3. BibleGateway.com. “Luke 1 (New International Version). Accessed 03 February 2008. <http://www.biblegateway.co
4. About.Com: Christianity. “Luke.” Mary Fairchild. Accessed 03 February 2008. <http://christianity.about.
5. BibleGateway.com. “Matthew 1:1-16.” Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://www.biblegateway.co
6. BibleGateway.com. “Luke 3:23-37.” Accessed 03 February 2008.
<<http://www.biblegateway.co
7. Response to the Fabulous Prophesies of the Messiah. Part IV: Problems in the Genealogies of Jesus [Revised: July 2006]. Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://www.christian-think
8. BibleGateway.Com. “Mark 1:1.” Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://www.biblegateway.co
9. Life Application Bible (The Living Bible). Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. and Youth for Christ/USA. Copyright 1988. Pgs. 1398-1400, 1316-1317, & 1460-1463.
The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, offer the reader an intimate yet incomplete look at the early life and later ministry of Jesus. While the Book of John is easily compared to the three Gospels, it must be noted that while each provide a similar recollection of the life of Jesus it is also very clear that each gives a very different narrative to the events that have become some of the most important views in the Christian religion.
Therein lies the issue with faith. Are the Gospels accurate and to be accepted with their differences and attributed to artistic freedom? Or are they misleading and deliberately vague due to the different cultural and religious backgrounds and political agendas of the writers? Are the Gospels to retain the title and authority of Scripture or will an examination of them give cause to the questioning of their authenticity and reliability and to the very foundation of the single most powerful religious movement that has spanned nearly two millennia?
Known as the “Synoptic Gospels,” it is important to understand the definition of the term synoptic. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines synoptic as “1. affording a general view of a whole; 2. manifesting or characterized by comprehensiveness or breadth of view; 3. presenting or taking the same or common view; specifically often capitalized : of or relating to the first three Gospels of the New Testament; 4. relating to or displaying conditions (as of the atmosphere or weather) as they exist simultaneously over a broad area” (1).
Essentially, what the Synoptic Gospels give us is an “overview” of Jesus’ life from birth to twelve years and then from the age of thirty until his death, resurrection, and ascension. The problem however, lies in the inconsistencies that lead to the questionable authenticity of at least two of these Gospels, specifically Matthew and Luke, as well as the question of who wrote which book first and who copied what information and rewrote it from whom.
Although Matthew and Luke are listed first and third in the New Testament, it is widely believed and accepted that Mark was the first account written of the life of Jesus. Known as the Markan Theory, this is based upon the minor errors found in the Book of Mark, such as incorrect timelines, geographical locations, and historical events, which the Books of Matthew and Luke correct (2). Had either Matthew or Luke been written first, it would seem obvious that Mark would have taken the time to make these corrections to preserve the continuity and assumed validity of the information presented.
With yet another theory to the corrections found in Matthew and Luke, we introduce “Q” or “Quelle,” a hypothetical source of writings, teachings, and sayings of Jesus that Matthew and Luke used to, in effect, fill in the blanks and elaborate on certain events, causing Jesus to appear even more divine and powerful in his ministry and claims of being the prophesied Messiah. Although the assumed writings of “Q” have been long lost, the idea of this author has become the most widely accepted theory for scholars and teachers alike, as it gives a commonality to Matthew and Luke that cannot otherwise be explained.
In his introduction, Luke instructs the reader in chapter 1 verses 1-4 that, “Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (3).
In reading this, we can assume that not only is Luke aware that others had written of Jesus but that oral tradition also played a large role in what he planned to commit to writing. In a sense, he is stating that although others had made written accounts, he felt it necessary since he had investigated everything from the beginning, that it was he who could provide the most accurate account of the life of Jesus.
As a well educated man and physician, it is easy to see why Luke would believe that he was more than capable of giving the most exact and dependable history of Jesus. As a Greek and the only Gentile author in the New Testament, it is understandable that he would pen his account in Greek rather than Hebrew or Aramaic, the language which Jesus most likely spoke, yet we must still ask the question of whether or not the teachings of Jesus were adequately translated in the way that he spoke them (4).
Matthew begins his writings with the genealogy of Jesus through the line of King David until he reached Abraham (5), thus proving his “royal” lineage. Luke, however, lists the genealogy of Jesus down through Adam (6), both of which are interesting as Jewish genealogy is traced through the matriarchal lines in order to give validity to the Hebrew ancestry, which may or may not come from the father. It’s also interesting to note that Luke ends his genealogy of Jesus with “the Son of God” before Adam.
The problem with both of these genealogies is that only direct bloodlines were considered authentic and, assuming the story of the virgin birth is true, Jesus cannot be considered a descendant of King David. One genealogy is traced through King David’s son Solomon and the other through his son
Nathan. Matthew shows the royal line and Luke the natural line.
Perhaps what Matthew and Luke were attempting to do was show both the divine and human nature of Jesus, corroborating the idea that he was both God and man combined (7). It is feasible to assume that Matthew embellished a bit more than Luke and Mark, as his reputation as a tax collector preceded him and those who knew of his profession were less than likely to believe anything he had to say without Scriptural basis and comparison.
Mark though was very simplistic and basic in his representation of the life and ministry of Christ. He began his writings with the short note, “The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (8). Mark relied on the teachings of Isaiah to present the prophesies of the upcoming Messiah. His purpose was to present Jesus in a human aspect as a teacher and identify his work and miracles (9).
Although not one of the original twelve disciples, Mark (also known as John Mark) was an avid follower and companion of Saul of Tarsus, later known as Paul the Apostle, with whom he accompanied on his first missionary trip. In his writings, which are thought to have occurred between A.D. 55 and 65, Mark focuses on the miracles of Jesus and records more than Matthew and Luke. It is also worthy to note that both Matthew and Luke cite all but 31 verses in the Book of Mark, and that Mark portrays Jesus as a servant of the people rather than “King of the Jews” (9).
Meanwhile, Matthew, set out to prove the divinity of Jesus that he was, in fact, the Messiah and the Savior of the world. His writings, believed to have been written between A.D. 60 and 65, focused on fulfillment of the Scripture rather than the miracles or humanity of Jesus. Although Matthew mentions the miracles of Jesus, he points out numerous times that Jesus is the “Son of David” (9).
Luke, on the other hand, wrote his account sometime around A.D. 60 and centered his writings to show Jesus as the perfect human as well as the Savior. Luke wrote about the relationship Jesus had with the public and is one of the few who even bothers to mention the role of women in the ministry of Jesus.
Given these accounts, both with the similarities and diversities, we see three very different men with very different agendas portraying the person that Jesus was, yet all firmly believing that he was the one begotten Son of God to whom the responsibility fell for bringing about salvation of the world.
With the citations of Mark within the books of Matthew and Luke , we must also give credence to the idea that each were written after Mark’s version, thus giving even more credibility that both Matthew and Luke borrowed the words of Mark as well as those of “Q.”
While many set out to solve the Synoptic Problem, many also may ask why the problem requires solving. As a matter of faith, the Synoptic Gospels simply give differing versions from different men who are telling the same story long after the death and resurrection of Christ. While some may argue that Mark’s account has no validity, it is still widely accepted that his words were penned first and those of Matthew and Luke merely corroborated them and gave further detail to the birth, life, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ.
They are not seen as inconsistencies or contradictions, but rather as oral accounts set to paper in order to preserve their existence for fear that the tradition of oral accountability would lose its place in the culture, and these historical and miraculous events of the life of Christ would be lost forever.
More controversially, there are many who believe that the differences in the Synoptic Gospels are a deliberate misrepresentation in order to confuse those with little faith or little education in the Scriptures or history of Christianity. It is for those that the “problem” exists and continues to perpetuate a reason to research and find the legitimacy that seems to evade mankind throughout the centuries, of who and what the man Jesus Christ may or may not have been.
For those with faith, the details and differences are mundane, senseless, and meaningless. To live their lives as the Christ commanded and spread his word of unconditional love, salvation, kindness, and humility is enough, and there is no need to further explore his persona. Yet for those who look into the life and ministry of Jesus, the proverbial mustard seed, will always feel as the splinter in the bottom of the foot; always irritating, always elusive, and always, not quite within sight or reach.
Is there a solution to the Synoptic Problem? With the writings of “Q” long lost and the enigma of wording lost in translation, it would seem that the only solution is to continue to examine the literature surrounding the controversy or simply accept the Gospels in faith that whatever the “Word” may be, it has been and will be revealed in the love and salvation of Christ himself.
References
1. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. “Synoptic.” Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin
2. The Synoptic Problem. Felix Just, S.J., Ph. D. Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://catholic-resources.
3. BibleGateway.com. “Luke 1 (New International Version). Accessed 03 February 2008. <http://www.biblegateway.co
4. About.Com: Christianity. “Luke.” Mary Fairchild. Accessed 03 February 2008. <http://christianity.about.
5. BibleGateway.com. “Matthew 1:1-16.” Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://www.biblegateway.co
6. BibleGateway.com. “Luke 3:23-37.” Accessed 03 February 2008.
<<http://www.biblegateway.co
7. Response to the Fabulous Prophesies of the Messiah. Part IV: Problems in the Genealogies of Jesus [Revised: July 2006]. Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://www.christian-think
8. BibleGateway.Com. “Mark 1:1.” Accessed 03 February 2008.
< http://www.biblegateway.co
9. Life Application Bible (The Living Bible). Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. and Youth for Christ/USA. Copyright 1988. Pgs. 1398-1400, 1316-1317, & 1460-1463.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
