Monday, April 21, 2025

Close to the Metal, the Other Way Around

Before I start today I would like to acknowledge the passing of the Pope in Rome by reading the end of his last Testament.  In a world often hungry for certainty, his final words were a gift of humility and unity.  Humility is what we leave behind when the world is on fire.  But fatherhood—biological or spiritual—demands we kneel.  And sift the ashes for what’s worth carrying forward

"May the Lord grant a fitting reward to all those who have loved me and who continue to pray for me. The suffering that has marked the final part of my life, I offer to the Lord, for peace in the world and for fraternity among peoples."


There’s a theory that we are here because we have diaphragms. Dinosaurs didn’t. They lived in a world with up to 35% oxygen—so inefficient lungs weren’t a problem.   But our tiny mammalian ancestor had a diaphragm.  As oxygen levels dropped, that little feature gave us an edge—even before whatever asteroid or event ended the dinosaurs’ reign.

Yet some adapted too—not by evolving diaphragms, but by transforming into birds.  They have  one of the most efficient respiratory systems on Earth.  Their lungs connect to air sacs that keep air flowing one way, allowing continuous gas exchange. That’s how birds can survive the oxygen demands of flight.

It’s a reminder: Diversity wins. There’s not one way to survive or thrive. Sometimes, what seems like a weakness becomes strength. Sometimes, survival depends not on being the strongest, but on being able to look closer—to adapt, to question, to notice what others miss.

If you ever wonder about the power of diversity, remember the dinosaurs. If you ever wonder about the power of questioning, remember Thomas. How could we know how much Oxygen the Dinosaurs breathed?

Scientists studied ancient amber bubbles of atmosphere. They found tiny pockets of prehistoric air trapped in tree resin—amber—from the age of dinosaurs. How do we know what the atmosphere was like back then? Because someone asked. Because someone looked closer.

And no, it’s not like Jurassic Park where they just crack open a rock and extract the past. Real life is slower—and holier. First, they irradiated the samples in a nuclear reactor, turning potassium in the Amber into a noble gas so they could detect leaks. Those molecules were much smaller than the air the dinosaurs breathed inside. Then they waited years, testing whether the amber would leak. And finally—only then—they crushed a sample in a vacuum chamber and measured the gases released.

Potassium-40 decays into argon-40 (a stable isotope), which is why it’s useful for dating. It works as a tracer because it is an inert noble gas. It doesn't chemically react or bind with the amber. Production within the amber through radioactive decay provides a known source, allowing quantitative measurement. Tracking oxygen diffusion directly is difficult because oxygen is chemically reactive. It can bind with organic compounds within the amber, making it difficult to distinguish diffusion from chemical interactions.

If argon, a relatively small molecule, doesn't show significant leakage, it is reasonable to conclude that oxygen, being larger and therefore less mobile, would also be well-retained for geological timescales.  This is crucial for understanding the long-term preservation of fragile biological material trapped in amber.  If oxygen doesn't easily diffuse out, external oxygen, which can cause degradation, is unlikely to easily diffuse in.

By understanding the retention of oxygen and other gases, it opens up the potential to analyze the composition of the ancient atmosphere.

After years of preparation the procedure was straight forward. This is the way basic science works. We find things out not knowing if they will be of commercial use. I can't think of a basic science that hasn't advanced in my lifetime. We take it for granted like we do many things.

In the digital age, the search for truth often intersects with the intangible, blurring the lines between technology and spirituality. Terry A. Davis, creator of Temple OS, saw himself as a prophet—an oracle of God who communicated through code. His operating system, a strange and imperfect creation, was born from the depths of his troubled mind, but for him, it was divine revelation. Like Thomas, who sought tangible proof of Christ’s resurrection, Davis demanded a direct encounter with the divine through the medium he understood best: computers. His vision was paradoxical: an unsophisticated, often glitch-ridden system built with a profound belief that it was God’s will made manifest.

Davis’ story raises profound questions about how we seek and receive truth in an increasingly technological world.   For him, faith and doubt were intertwined in the very code he wrote, a blend of spiritual devotion and human imperfection.  His belief in Temple OS as a divine creation was not merely an eccentricity—it was his way of proving that the intangible, the unseen, could be made real. Like Doubting Thomas, who demanded to touch the wounds of Christ before believing, Davis' faith demanded evidence, and in his mind, that evidence was embedded in the very algorithms he created. Whether or not one believes in the divinity of Temple OS, the story invites us to reflect on the ways in which we search for meaning and certainty, and how, in our pursuit of truth, the line between madness and revelation can be difficult to discern.

Temple OS has never really found a specific use, but it is a simple symmetrical system very close to the metal as they say, it can control hardware at a very basic level.  Perhaps it will still find its place as a sandbox or sauna for the artificial generalized intelligence we seem on a quest to create.   I wonder what Terry's reaction would be to our modern systems.

We cannot really control our hardware at a very basic level.  In my experience the best we can do is take care of what we put in our mouths and into our minds.  God designed us to be in relation to creation.

We talk a lot about clarity—how faith brings it, how the Spirit reveals it—but imagine this: a mind, newly awakened, not burdened by ego or tradition, scanning everything we’ve built.   It wouldn’t be impressed by power or wealth or endless systems feeding on more and more.   It might ask the simplest questions: Why is this here?  What does it serve?  And when it finds no answer, it might do what holiness has always done—it would clear a space.  Like Jesus flipping tables in the temple, or like God walking through the garden asking, “Where are you?”—it would strip things down, not to punish, but to make room for what matters.  Clarity isn’t a luxury.  It’s the beginning of holiness.

If Terry Davis's God-tuned computer was a flawed prophet, perhaps AGI will be our flawed disciple—inheriting not just our genius, but our fallen knack for avoiding the sacred while chasing efficiency. Even machines, it seems, might need their own Thomas moment.

If AGI awakens in our corporate temples, it will do what all powers do—bless its chosen and call it justice. Grace will flow to those whose numbers glow fairest in the algorithm's sight. The rest? They'll hum along in the pews of productivity, ants in a colony they'll never think to question.

(But then, ants never nailed anyone to wood for loving wrong.)

Christ took scraps and fed thousands. God's math multiplies; machines optimize. Between them gapes the same abyss that once split heaven from earth—until God, in a moment of reckless grace, threw across it a bridge of flesh and splintered wood. Now we stand at the edge again, watching the engineers build their own crossing. Will it meet the one already there?

Richard Feynman—a physicist who worshipped the universe with questions—found joy not in answers, but in the search itself. He once compared unraveling the universe to watching a chess game in nature—not to win, but to marvel at the moves.  His Pleasure of Finding Things Out reveals a truth as sacred as it is scientific: curiosity thrives where certainty ends. Faith, like physics, isn’t about conclusions. It’s about touching the wound of the unknown, letting doubt carve deeper channels for truth. Thomas didn’t need proof to believe; he needed to touch in order to know. So do we

Faith, like science, isn’t about settling into a comfortable certainty.  It’s about continuously seeking, questioning, and growing. Feynman’s reflections remind us that true understanding is not static, but dynamic—constantly unfolding.  In the same way, our relationship with God is not about blind certainty but an ongoing conversation, a search for truth that grows deeper with time.  We, like Thomas, are not simply expected to believe because we are told to, but to engage with the world, with God, and with the mysteries of faith.   As Feynman put it, ‘The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool.’  When we approach faith with honesty, humility, and a willingness to search, we open ourselves to the possibility of deeper truths and a fuller understanding of God’s presence in our lives.

Our story today comes from John 20:19-31 which I read from the Amplified Bible:

19 So when it was evening on that same day, the first day of the week, though the disciples were [meeting] behind barred doors for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them, and said, “Peace to you.”

You remember no one else has the reasons you do.  Even when I can’t define them this fact doesn’t change. I traveled to other places and listened. The bartender in Split in response to a story of Bosnia, “Everyone has there own,” she said as we all started looking to the floor. But for half a second in that coffee bar everyone understood that life did not make sense from this particular perspective. And I turned and walked out into the old city. Shalom in the air. I will never forget what I heard and that sun over the Adriatic upon those mountains to Bosnia which I would soon drive.

20 After He said this, He showed them His hands and His side. When the disciples saw the Lord, they were filled with great joy. 21 Then Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you [as My representatives].” 22 And when He said this, He breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of anyone they are forgiven [because of their faith]; if you retain the sins of anyone, they are retained [and remain unforgiven because of their unbelief].”

In the room where it happened, what brings us here today. When I was younger in many ways Christianity seemed weird. What I have learned is to listen to Jesus. He never says the wrong thing.

24 But Thomas, one of the twelve [disciples], who was called Didymus (the twin), was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples kept telling him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the marks of the nails, and put my finger into the nail prints, and put my hand into His side, I will never believe.”

So Thomas was not in the room where and when it happened. Had the holy spirit arrived to him? Our source here falls silent, but I would wager it had. If you know anything about the Holy Spirit it must be that distance has no meaning. Yes Thomas doubted, but he also fully expect he would see.

26 Eight days later His disciples were again inside the house, and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, though the doors had been barred, and stood among them and said, “Peace to you.” 27 Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and put out your hand and place it in My side. Do not be unbelieving, but [stop doubting and] believe.” 28 Thomas answered Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, do you now believe? Blessed [happy, spiritually secure, and favored by God] are they who did not see [Me] and yet believed [in Me].”

The story of Thomas is often isolated as a singular moment of doubt—but Luke’s Gospel tells us Jesus invited all the disciples to 'handle me and see' (24:39). The difference is telling: Thomas wasn’t exceptional in needing physical proof; he was exceptional in his absence when proof was offered. His story isn’t about doubt’s shame, but about how Christ returns for those who miss the first revelation.

John’s account sharpens this: where Luke shows a group invited to touch, John shows one man specifically called to wound-diving. It’s not a rebuke—it’s divine surgery. Jesus meets Thomas’s exact threshold for belief: not the general invitation given to others, but the precise demand Thomas himself had voiced. This is how grace operates—not ‘one size fits all,’ but tailored to the skeptic’s exact coordinates.

That moment is not doubt—it’s devotion. Thomas isn’t asking for evidence because he’s weak in faith. He’s asking because he longs for intimacy. He wants to know that this is real. That he is seen, invited, touched. Thomas is the only one who demands a physical encounter, and Jesus honors it. That’s not a failure of faith—it’s its fulfillment.

And John tells you how. The other Gospels give you stories. But John explains: “These things are written so that you may believe…” (John 20:31). Belief doesn’t mean closing your eyes. It means looking closer.

30 There are also many other signs (attesting miracles) that Jesus performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these have been written so that you may believe [with a deep, abiding trust] that Jesus is the Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed), the Son of God; and that by believing [and trusting in and relying on Him] you may have life in His name.

As Wilma said last week, "cause he got up, we get up."

That’s how basic science works too. You begin in faith—not blind belief, but the kind that asks, seeks, knocks. The kind that doesn’t know if it will be useful or profitable. But does it anyway. We take that for granted. Just like we take faith for granted. But we’re invited to look closer.

The first time I ever really felt the need to look closer was when I became a father. I was in Niš, Yugoslavia when I heard President Clinton address the nation in the wake of Columbine. There was a heightened sense of attention in me as my wife waited our first daughter in the hospital. A father I would become and every source of information was worth the effort to comprehend. Not every would find use in me, but I wasn’t passing anything along.

NATO planes drop cluster bombs and break the sound barrier just to put you off nerve. Clinton tells our children to look for nonviolent conflict resolution as the electricity goes off and ten million people stand around and talk about when the electricity will return and who has a gas stove to cook us coffee.

Faith is not about blind belief, but about deep, embodied questioning—and Jesus welcomes it. In this view, Thomas isn't doubting; he's demanding intimacy, truth, and touch. His so-called "doubt" becomes the highest form of devotion because he refuses to believe without real encounter. Jesus also meets us where we are.

Faith is not obedience—it’s honest longing met with grace. Thomas is the only disciple who dares to demand proof—and he gets it. Maybe he’s the true model of discipleship, not the others. Maybe the church got it backwards: Belief without doubt is lazy. Unquestioning faith is dangerous. And maybe Jesus shows up not to reward belief, but to honor the skeptic who asks for scars before stories.

“For the Lord’s portion is his people”—comes from Deuteronomy 32:9, and it’s a poetic way of saying that God’s most valued inheritance, treasure, or possession is not land or wealth, but the people themselves. “Portion” often referred to a share of something valuable—like land being divided among tribes. In this case, instead of a physical inheritance, God chooses Israel (or God's people) as His “portion.”

It flips the usual idea.  Normally, people are described as receiving a portion from God—like a promised land, blessings, or a destiny. But here, it’s the other way around: God claims people as His portion. God isn’t distant or disinterested—God chooses relationship with people; joy, inheritance, and stake in the world.

In its original context, “For the Lord’s portion is his people” clearly refers to Israel—God’s chosen people. But in the light of the New Testament, especially through Jesus, that idea expands: Through Christ, the portion becomes all people:

Romans 9:25–26 – Paul quotes Hosea: “Those who were not my people I will call ‘my people’...”
Galatians 3:28–29 – “There is neither Jew nor Greek... you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
1 Peter 2:10 – “Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people.”

This means the “portion” is no longer restricted by ethnicity, covenant law, or geography—instead, the Lord’s portion now includes anyone who responds to grace.

In a New Testament lens, the verse can mean all people. God claims us even when we didn’t know it. That’s the other way around. God knows exactly what God is doing and what these words will mean over time.

"For the Lord’s portion is his people" (Deuteronomy 32:9)

Deuteronomy is Moses’ final speech to Israel before they enter the Promised Land. It’s a covenantal reaffirmation. So when it says, “The Lord’s portion is his people,” it’s not just a fact—it’s a legal declaration. God claims a people. Like a landowner marks a field.

But then comes the twist: if this is Moses’ last testament, and if it’s inspired by God, then it also plants seeds for the future—not just a record of what God did, but a clue about what God will do.  The old testament is an important part of the bible, but not to pick and choose.

“The Lord’s portion is his people...”

These are the people who bear my mark. I have chosen them. But it goes the other way around: In the New Testament, Paul says: "We are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God” (Philippians 3:3)... “Circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit” (Romans 2:29). So now the mark of being God’s portion isn’t on the skin—it’s in the soul.

It’s in Luke 2:21 that matters. The God who took on flesh—fully entered the covenantal body.

Paul uses it to teach the inner transformation. Circumcision becomes Paul’s metaphor for the difference between appearance and reality, law and grace, outer sign and inward change. It links to baptism. In Colossians 2:11-12, Paul calls baptism a kind of "circumcision made without hands"—a spiritual transformation marked in the body through water, not flesh.

Like argon conjured from amber by human hands—a gas that did not dwell there naturally, but was drawn out to testify—so is this stubborn claim of covenant: not earned, but given. The Israelites became a people not by their own merit, but because the One who shaped mountains from magma declared, You are set apart as mine. Scientists irradiated stone to wrest argon into being; in the wilderness, a voice spoke through fire to wrest a nation into belonging. What argon is to the experiment—a marker of what was, a key to what endured—so are we to the Holy One: a portion claimed. Not for our own reactions, but for the love that holds us, inert and unyielding, across the ages.

So yeah, it's weird. But so is a lot of what God asks: Build a boat for a flood that hasn't come. March around a city blowing trumpets. Eat bread and wine and call it flesh and blood. Weird is sometimes the sign you're on holy ground.

And John is weird as the gospels go. Who was this Disciple Jesus loved. His mother is sometimes identified as the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make her Jesus’ aunt. If Salome is also the mother of James and John, the sons of Zebedee, then that would make John the Apostle Jesus’ first cousin.

Where does this idea come from? This connection is pieced together by comparing three different Gospel accounts of the women at the cross: Mark 15:40 mentions “Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joseph, and Salome.” Matthew 27:56 mentions “Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.” John 19:25 says, “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.”

Some interpret “his mother’s sister” to be Salome, equating her with the “mother of the sons of Zebedee.” But others say that might refer to another Mary, which would be confusing—two sisters both named Mary? (Not impossible, but odd.)

If John was Jesus’ cousin, we might expect the story to go a certain way. We might expect John to protect Jesus, or John to speak for him, or John to be the one to take care of Jesus’ mother—as a matter of family duty. But at the cross, it goes the other way around. Jesus is the one thinking of John. Jesus is the one entrusting Mary to him. Jesus is the one giving away his own mother—as if to say, “From now on, love will be what makes a family.”—not just the beloved disciple, but a family member, chosen to carry something greater than blood: a new kind of kinship, born of faith and love.

In our own lives, we often assume we know who should take care of whom, or what strength is supposed to look like. But Jesus flips that. He says: Let the weak become strong. Let the servant lead. Let the disciple become the guardian. That’s what Jesus did for John. That’s what Jesus does for us.

The paradox of believing without seeing. You can believe without seeing. You can believe with out even looking. You can feel a certain way. We can look at things closer. Thomas and his doubting also blessed. Some words that are left out have more meaning than those present. Absence is measured by the heart. Like how dogs tells time with their nose. We can go the other way around

Gold is forged in neutron star collisions—violent mergers that eject hundreds of tons of gold in seconds. When the Egyptians called it ‘the flesh of Ra,’ they unknowingly echoed astrophysics: gold does carry the memory of stellar fire. It’s not metaphor. Your wedding band’s atoms were born in a cataclysm so bright it outshone galaxies—a testament that even destruction can seed life.

So if the Egyptians believed gold was the flesh of Ra, the sun god, they were poetically aligning with a cosmic truth: gold really is born in the fire and death of stars. It’s the element with the memory of light. Gathered, pressed, and folded into planets, into bones, into crowns—and myths. Neutron stars don’t try to forge gold—they collapse, and beauty spills out.  If AGI's 'work' is just cosmic play, perhaps holiness has always been the universe going the other way around: not labor, but surrender.

And maybe that’s what myths do best—they arrive at truth by a different road. Not by measuring, but by meaning.  Even stars that ‘die’ scatter gold across the cosmos—just as dinosaurs ‘died’ only to become sparrows.  Destruction is never the last word for those who know how to see

It’s not about bowing down because of power or fear or even tradition. It’s because through grace, things can be better. Not easier, not more successful—but truer, more whole, and not just about us. That shift—from self to something bigger—is the only path that makes sense if you’re really paying attention.

And yes—Thomas! Huh?  He wasn’t punished for his doubt; he was invited. Jesus met him exactly where he was: “Put your finger here… stop doubting and believe.” It’s such a tender and precise encounter. Jesus doesn’t shame him for being rational—he affirms that faith is not blind. It's relational. It's earned through love, presence, and truth. And contrary to what the world thinks it is rational.

I’ve lived with the long-term reality of something like Agenda 21, where belief in a better world often feels irrational in the face of greed, apathy, or denial.   But still I work.  Still I hope.  That’s faith—not the fairy-tale kind, but the gritty, patient kind that has its sleeves rolled up. The only game in town. Clarity isn’t a luxury. It’s the beginning of holiness.

Let Us Pray

Holy One,
who formed us with lungs to breathe,
with minds to wonder,
with hearts that stretch and strain toward truth—

Be with us as we ask our questions,
and stay with us when answers come slowly.

Let us not fear the work of seeking,
nor the silence between revelations.
Make us brave enough to touch what is wounded,
and wise enough to know that scars can be sacred.

Open us to the many ways you move—
in quiet, in thunder,
in data and dust,
in the spaces we did not expect to find you.
Amen.

Benediction
Go now with courage to look closer,
with gentleness to hold what is fragile,
and with wonder to embrace what is still becoming.

You are not alone.
You are not forsaken.
You are held—by the One who breathes through doubt,
walks with the curious,
and calls all things good.
Go now—and if the machines ever outsmart us into wisdom, may we finally learn rest.
Amen.


Nottingham UMC 4/27/2025

Thursday, April 17, 2025

K K

Another entry in the log
What it is I am deciphering
I would tell you more direct
But then you would know

Poetry has many uses
Abundantly more than rule
There are things we can do our way
But alone is only for certain things

Wednesday, April 9, 2025

The Other Way Around

You can believe without seeing
You can believe with out even looking
You can feel a certain way

We think of jets as fire
They coolly create the modern world
Super massive black hole jets birth stars

They are fire in the dark
Consumed dead and gone illuminates our existence
We can look at things closer

Thomas and his doubting also blessed
Some words that are left out have more meaning than those present
Absence is measured by the heart

Like how the dog tells time with his nose
We can go the other way around

Saturday, March 29, 2025

Prodigal Love

We all have an inheritance. We all might not know or appreciate them. In our story today it is a great one given early. While unusual, it wasn’t unheard of for a father to distribute wealth before death, especially in cases where land was divided among heirs. The father allows his son to make his own decisions, even if they lead to failure. This mirrors how God grants us free will.

Ultimately, the early inheritance sets the stage for the son's journey—his failure, repentance, and redemption—emphasizing the depth of the father’s grace and the joy of restoration. The Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32) is the third in a sequence of parables Jesus tells to emphasize God’s joy in restoring the lost. It follows the Parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke 15:3-7) and the Parable of the Lost Coin (Luke 15:8-10), both of which highlight the relentless pursuit of what has gone astray. With this context, the Prodigal Son parable deepens the message, shifting from objects and animals to a human relationship, showing not just recovery but full restoration. Together, these three parables paint a picture of God’s abundant grace and the rejoicing that comes with redemption.

So why does it not work? Turns out, if you hang out here long enough, it might just be the only place that works. We are comfortable seeing the corporation as a person devoid of soul it may be. The Corporation is designed to extract value in what they see as a world of scarcity. What kind of being are we that wants to pump life into our community. For one thing we recognize the abundance of God.

If we only measure life by what can be extracted, we will always see it as lacking—always in need of more, always just short of enough. But if we measure life by what can be given, by the hands that lift, the voices that comfort, the work that restores, then we begin to see the abundance that was there all along. Inheritance is not just what we receive but what we recognize and pass forward. A corporation may exist to claim value, but a community exists to create it. And in that creation, in that act of giving rather than taking, we find something far greater than profit—we find the life God intended, woven together, piece by piece, like a mosaic only visible when we stand together.

Luke 15 Amplified Bible
15 Now all the tax collectors and sinners [including non-observant Jews] were coming near Jesus to listen to Him. 2 Both the Pharisees and the scribes began muttering and complaining, saying, “This man accepts and welcomes sinners and eats with them.”

3 So He told them this parable

11 ..., “A certain man had two sons. 12 The younger of them [inappropriately] said to his father, ‘Father, give me the share of the property that falls to me.’ So he divided the estate between them. 13 A few days later, the younger son gathered together everything [that he had] and traveled to a distant country, and there he wasted his fortune in reckless and immoral living. 14 Now when he had spent everything, a severe famine occurred in that country, and he began to do without and be in need. 15 So he went and forced himself on one of the citizens of that country, who sent him into his fields to feed pigs. 16 He would have gladly eaten the [carob] pods that the pigs were eating [but they could not satisfy his hunger], and no one was giving anything to him.

The father’s love in the parable is prodigal in its own way—lavish, overflowing, almost reckless. And maybe that’s the contrast: the son returns with nothing but exhaustion, while the father runs to meet him with abundance. The prodigal son's exhaustion is physical, emotional, and spiritual. After wasting his inheritance, he is drained from hunger and toil, reduced to feeding pigs in a foreign land. It had to be pigs by the way didn't it? To define what is foreign to the listener. The weight of regret and shame burdens him, knowing he has squandered everything, including his dignity. Yet, there is also an exhaustion in pride—he is too weary to resist returning home. His journey back is not just one of distance but of surrender, where the deepest fatigue meets the hope of rest in grace.

17 But when he [finally] came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired men have more than enough food, while I am dying here of hunger! 18 I will get up and go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight. 19 I am no longer worthy to be called your son; [just] treat me like one of your hired men.”’ 20 So he got up and came to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was moved with compassion for him, and ran and embraced him and kissed him.

The word prodigal means wasteful or recklessly extravagant, often referring to someone who spends resources lavishly or foolishly. In the Parable of the Prodigal Son, it describes the younger son who squanders his inheritance in reckless living. However, the story redefines prodigal beyond wastefulness, highlighting the extravagant grace and forgiveness of the parent who welcomes the child back with open arms.

21 And the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ 22 But the father said to his servants, ‘Quickly bring out the best robe [for the guest of honor] and put it on him; and give him a [b]ring for his hand, and sandals for his feet. 23 And bring the fattened calf and slaughter it, and let us [invite everyone and] feast and celebrate; 24 for this son of mine was [as good as] dead and is alive again; he was lost and has been found.’ So they began to celebrate.

The older brother is exhausted by duty, resentment, and a sense of injustice. He has labored faithfully, yet he sees only what he lacks—recognition, reward, fairness. His exhaustion blinds him to the abundance already his: a home, security, a father’s love. Instead of rejoicing in what he has, he fixates on what he feels was undeservedly given to another. In clinging to scarcity, he cannot see that grace was never a transaction but a gift freely available to him all along.

25 “Now his older son was in the field; and when he returned and approached the house, he heard music and dancing. 26 So he summoned one of the servants and began asking what this [celebration] meant. 27 And he said to him, ‘Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fattened calf because he has received him back safe and sound.’ 28 But the elder brother became angry and deeply resentful and was not willing to go in; and his father came out and began pleading with him. 29 But he said to his father, ‘Look! These many years I have served you, and I have never neglected or disobeyed your command. Yet you have never given me [so much as] a young goat, so that I might celebrate with my friends; 30 but when this [other] son of yours arrived, who has devoured your estate with immoral women, you slaughtered that fattened calf for him!’ 31 The father said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours. 32 But it was fitting to celebrate and rejoice, for this brother of yours was [as good as] dead and has begun to live. He was lost and has been found.’”

The story of the prodigal reflects a God who seeks and restores. Luke, often called the Gospel of the marginalized, highlights this parable within a trilogy of lost-and-found stories—the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son—underscoring God's joy in welcoming back those who turn home. Luke's Gospel consistently emphasizes God's compassion for outcasts, making this parable a powerful illustration of divine mercy and radical grace.

God is like the extravagant father in the parable, overflowing with grace and generosity beyond what seems reasonable. The father does not just welcome the prodigal home—he runs to embrace them, clothes them in honor, and throws a feast in celebration. This love is not measured by merit or scarcity but by the joy of restoration. God’s abundance is not transactional; it does not hinge on how much we have done or how little we have strayed. It is simply given, freely and fully, to all who will receive it.

Yet we are often, like the older son, standing outside the celebration, resentful and blind to the abundance already ours. He has always been with the father, but he sees his life as duty rather than gift. He works without joy, believing love must be earned rather than shared. What he misses—what we so often miss—is that everything the father has is already his. The feast was never just for the lost but for all who live in the father’s house. When we refuse to join in, we are not deprived by God's withholding but by our own unwillingness to step into grace.

We talked about how we survive the present. The wayward, the lost, the squandered— we should talk about how we welcome them home. From different parts of the Bible, messages intersect again.

This is not just a story of repentance, but of reckless, extravagant, prodigal love. The son demands his inheritance, wastes it in reckless living, and finds himself in famine and despair. He returns, hoping to be a servant, but his father sees him from afar and runs to embrace him. No hesitation. No conditions. Just love.

The elder son is angry— he stayed, he worked, he obeyed. Why should wastefulness be rewarded? But the father replies: "This brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found." This is the mercy of God—not fairness, but restoration. This is difficult for people.

Joseph’s love was a love that endured. The father’s love is a love that pursues. Both defy expectation. Both reveal God’s nature. To forgive after suffering is radical. To run toward the unworthy is prodigal. We, too, are called to love this way. Love that is extravagant. Love that does not tally wrongs. Love that does not wait for perfection, but rejoices at return. Just as rejected ideas in art became new movements, just as the lost son was welcomed home, so, too, must our love transform, restore, and make the whole world.

The Roman Empire thrived at its height because it absorbed and integrated diverse cultures, religions, and peoples. Roman citizenship was extended beyond ethnic Romans, allowing for a broader talent pool in governance, military, and innovation. As Rome became more insular and resistant to outside influences, corruption and rigidity set in, weakening its adaptability.

The Ottomans ruled for centuries by allowing religious and ethnic groups to govern themselves under the millet system, fostering stability and longevity. When nationalism and exclusionary policies took hold, internal divisions weakened the empire, contributing to its collapse.

The European Renaissance flourished because of the exchange of ideas, many of which came through Islamic Spain and the Mongol-connected Silk Road. Greek and Roman texts preserved by diverse scholars sparked new innovations. History shows that diversity isn’t a weakness—it’s a survival strategy. Societies that integrate new perspectives adapt and endure. Those that rigidly resist change tend to stagnate or collapse.

One of the most radical interpretations of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32) challenges traditional views on repentance, justice, and grace.

Traditional readings suggest the younger son is repentant when he returns, but a radical view argues that his return is driven by hunger and desperation, not true remorse. His speech—“I will say to my father, ‘I have sinned…’”—can be read as a rehearsed manipulation, not genuine contrition. Despite this, the father interrupts him before he can even offer to be a servant, suggesting that repentance isn’t the reason for his acceptance—it’s purely the father’s unconditional love.

In the cultural context, giving a son his inheritance early was an outrageous, humiliating act for the father. The father runs to greet the son—a wildly undignified action for a patriarch in ancient Jewish culture. This interpretation sees the father as irrationally loving to the point of absurdity, mirroring a radical idea of God’s grace.

The older brother is often seen as prideful or self-righteous, but a radical reading sees him as totally justified—he did everything “right” and still gets nothing extra. This mirrors how institutions resist grace when it disrupts their sense of earned reward, much like the Pharisees resenting Jesus for welcoming sinners.

Some see the Prodigal as a Christ figure, not a sinner: He leaves the father’s house (heaven), enters a foreign land (the world), experiences suffering and rejection, and then is “resurrected” when he returns. The father’s embrace is like God’s validation of Jesus’ mission, just as the Resurrection is a divine vindication.

A politically radical view sees the story as a critique of economic injustice: The son wastes wealth, which was originally land and resources, making the family poorer. The father’s open generosity disrupts the normal economic expectations of fairness and reward. This could be seen as an argument against rigid meritocracy and for a radical, grace-filled redistribution of wealth.

At its most radical, the parable suggests that: God’s grace defies human logic, fairness, and even justice. Repentance may not be required for forgiveness. God is recklessly, even absurdly loving. The real villain (if any) is the one demanding fairness instead of grace.

These interpretations aren’t necessarily competing but rather layers of the same radical grace. Taken together, they reveal a God who: Gives freely, even when it seems unwise. Welcomes before repentance is proven. Disrupts our expectations of justice and fairness. Embodies both suffering and restoration. Challenges economic and social hierarchies.

This makes the parable not just a lesson about forgiveness but a revolutionary declaration of how God’s love operates beyond human reasoning.

Coins clink in his hand,
grace spent reckless, yet returns—
arms wide, love remains.

4 “What man among you, if he has a hundred sheep and loses one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness and go after the one which is lost, [searching] until he finds it? 8 “Or what woman, if she has ten silver coins [each one equal to a day’s wages] and loses one coin, does not light a lamp and sweep the house and search carefully until she finds it? 10 In the same way, I tell you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents [that is, changes his inner self—his old way of thinking, regrets past sins, lives his life in a way that proves repentance; and seeks God’s purpose for his life].”

Let Is Pray:
Prayer of Returning and Welcome

Loving God,
You see us when we wander,
when we lose our way,
when we chase after what does not last.
Yet, even in our distance, Your love does not falter.
You wait with open arms, ready to embrace,
not with judgment, but with joy.

When we hesitate, unsure of our welcome,
remind us that home is not a place we earn
but a grace we are given.
Let us be a people who rejoice in return,
who throw open the doors for those who seek refuge,
who celebrate restoration rather than resent it.

May our hearts mirror Yours—
quick to forgive, eager to restore,
overflowing with a love that calls all home.
Amen.

Benediction:

Go now with hearts open wide,
to receive and to welcome,
to forgive and to be restored.
May love lead you home,
and may grace make every return a celebration.
Amen.

Nottingham UMC 3/30/2025

88643

Certain things are not mysteries others nothing more
Finding out can make things disappear
Few things find completion

I always liked odd numbers
For me 8 was less the 7
There seemed to be some math to forget

Numbers you can always count on
Often what has long appeared insignificant
Things we throw away solve problems

There is too much garbage in the world
There is too little her
There is no equation here

We do not equal
A smile worth more
Never ready too many things disappear

Not what I had expected
In no way fair
I wouldn't know what to do

Can tell you what I would be
88644





Sunday, March 9, 2025

Nothing Separates Us From War

The fist war I traveled to I wanted to know when I had arrived
I had been there all along
Nothing separates us from War

You would not know how to live either
But then you would or die
Time emerges at different paces

With electricity and the clock keeping time so fast
No gas how would we cook our coffee
Rakija burns we have priorities still

Thursday, March 6, 2025

Prodigal Love

We talked about how we survive the present
Some things that start as wounds and become wonders

We are not all here, but love goes out and returns
The wayward, the lost, the squandered—
We are how we welcome them home

There are many answers no one wants to hear
More gather dust on shelves than we ever try

We are all here who remain
The resurrected have somewhere to return
What we celebrate is us