Galileo and the Heavens

It has been almost 400 years to the day that Galileo Galilei fist observed the moons of Jupiter and other astronomical phenomena, which would change the world forever. His findings resulted in a solar system instead of an earth system formerly believed. He was tried and found to be a heretic, a title he held until October 13 1992, when Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled, and officially conceded that the Earth was not the center of the universe. In March 2008 the Vatican proposed to complete its rehabilitation of Galileo by erecting a statue of him inside the Vatican walls. Why was this finding so controversial? In today’s world if we discover something new we all are marveled, but at that time such knowledge was seen as a direct contradiction to the scriptures. If the bible was right, then Galileo must be wrong; if Galileo was right, then the bible must be wrong.
Of course, we now know that Galileo was right. This knowledge is beyond question. Therefore, people’s view of the bible had to change. Either, they had to accept that the bible was wrong or they had to change their view on hermeneutics and exegesis. Nevertheless, why were Galileo’s findings so controversial?
I have been doing some thinking and I believe it primarily rests not on a verse or two but on the overall view espoused in the bible. This view was spoken repeatedly that the space above the clouds is where the Heavens are. The Heavens was a physical place. Elijah road a chariot of fire into the heavens – this was not a spiritual event, this was a spacecraft heading into the clouds where God was thought to reside. When Jesus ascended, he did it in a physical body. He went into the air and up to God. The rapture is another example. Jesus, in his super physical body, will come down from heaven and our physical bodies will rise up to meet him in the clouds. This is a physical ascension and resurrection.
Now, I see why the church was so threatened by Galileo’s findings. His telescope should have found God, and he was nowhere to be found. Galileo not only didn’t see God or his angels around the earth, he also discovered that the earth was not the center of the world. If the earth was not special, then maybe Mankind wasn’t either. Later, with Isaac Newton’s findings, the world now did not even need God to control it. Prior to Newton, God was busy making everything happen. While Galileo and others took away God’s direct involvement on the earth, with rain, earthquakes and other “acts of God”, Newton found the universe, as a whole, as self-regulating. God wasn’t supernaturally keeping the planets and stars in the heavens anymore, there was physical laws that accounted for that phenomena now. These revelations and the emerging scientific method would bring about the deism movement espoused by many of our nation’s founding fathers. Deism is a philosophical belief in the existence of a God on the basis of reason, and observation of the natural world alone. Deist held that God made the world then left it to handle itself through natural laws. They did not believe in special or divine revelation of God believed by Christians.

Therapists Missing Fingers

I was just thinking back on earlier days. I remember taking “shop” in elementary school, Jr. High and Senior High. It seems that times have changed because it was mandatory for boys to take these classes and girls were required to talk home economics and other cooking or sewing classes. One thing I specifically remember was how nearly every one of my shop teachers was missing a finger. I hope this wasn’t a requirement but it was often the case. This got me thinking about credentials. Would a shop teacher be a better safety instructor after losing a finger or a poor role model for children? What if he or she lost more than one finger in separate incidents? Would that take away the person’s credibility more?
I wanted to relate this metaphor to counselors. Life experience is a great teacher and can help make a good counselor even better. I believe a shop teacher that has experienced the bite of a buzz saw usually becomes an advocate of stricter safety standards. I also believe that counselors who experience many of life difficulties and learn from them, often become the best therapists. Those who have been sheltered from life’s struggles in their own life, often become prideful and unable to relate to other human beings. We can learn from the mistakes of others, which is a good way to go, but there is something about us as humans that still needs to learn through our own experience. However, we should learn the first time and not go back to the same old behavior.
I cannot imagine sending my son or daughter to a shop teacher who has several fingers missing from several incidents. This would indicate to me that this teacher does not learn from their mistakes and may not be able to help others from their experience. Touching a hot stove once, helps us learn; continuing to touch the hot stove is incompetence. Unfortunately, I see counselors that continue to put their hand in the saw without learning some of life’s important lessons. Therapists should be experts in human relationships and communication. They should know the correlation between cause and effect and how one’s actions, whether positive or negative, always result in a consequence.
This relates to so many areas of therapist competence. Although, I believe I am a good addiction counselor without having had a particular drug addiction myself, I believe many individuals who have had a problem in the past can make excellent counselors. However, those who remain in “recovery” forever and continue to struggle need to step away from the field of counseling. I can see a how a divorced counselor could still be an effective marriage and family therapist, however, if this person has a divorce, after a divorce, after a divorce, their credibility becomes questionable. Soon, the counselor can cut off so many fingers that they lose their integrity with their clients or their stubs for hands leave so many scars that they are more focused on themselves and their recovery that their effectiveness with others is limited.

To blog or not to blog (about family stuff)

My blog is a record of some of my thoughts. You do not need to agree with them. Please comment on them and give me an alternative perspective. I am willing to change. I seek the truth. I desire knowledge and wisdom to behave responsibly. I like debate and those willing to engage me intellectually.
One thing that I have struggled with in my current pursuit of truth is working through my own past. My experiences are interwoven with others of my family and friends. It is never my attempt to hurt anyone’s feelings through personal reflections of the past. However, I want to also be honest in my writing and not have personal and family secrets. I am blatantly honest. This means that I may express my feelings and interpret the past actions of my family and friends, which they may find offensive. Yet, I am torn between two extremes. I see the positives and negatives of my own behavior and I also see the same in family members. If I talk about a negative trait or belief of a family member, it does not mean that I do not see their positive traits or that I have lost my love for them. I dearly love my family but I also hope they respect my own views. I have been told that my views are wrong and that I'm sending my own children to hellfire; yet, I respect their opinions and understand their perspectives. I ask for the same respect. Please allow me to write about how, for instance, I may see my grandfather on my mother’s side as a child abuser and a tyrant, but I also can see another side of him. Yet, I believe it is important to evaluate this life and how my mother and I were influenced by the heritage he left. I want to be honest about him and others and I do not want to wait until people are dead before I can do my own assessment and share my own feelings with my family, students and others I feel may benefit from this information. I could only share the happy and uncomplicated times of my life, but this is dishonest with others and myself. I like to talk about these but I also want to explore times of personal struggles. If someone can help me in my quest for balance, please feel free to share.

Christian Faith vs. Muslim Faith pt.1

I just received a phone call criticizing me for statements from my blog of March 18. I understand this criticism. To associate Christian parental training with extremist Muslim indoctrination seems unfair, radical and almost hateful. Yet, I have even stacked the deck with the way the last statement was worded and the culture in which it was presented. The truth is that most parents, Christian and Muslim, want the best for their children. They want their children to follow the commands of God as written in their scriptures. They want their children to seek after the eternal values and not worldly desires. They want them to be men and women of faith and to be willing to defend their faith even if it means martyrdom. Interestingly, they also use the same arguments to defend their own faith and dismiss others.
There are some differences in my opinion. First, I do believe that Christians in this century like to follow the God from the Sermon on the Mount and not the God of the Old Testament. They have developed elaborate doctrines, such as dispensationalism, to separate Jesus, the God of Love, from the God of wrath, vengeance, jealousy, hate (I can give verses to back up statements, if needed) and more, of the Old Testament. One thing about Christianity is that we Christians can find solace in large parts of the Bible and be illiterate or ignore other parts, which shows another side of God. Muslims find very little of love and tolerance from the Koran. Christians can look to the New Testament for elements of tolerance of differing views and ignore God’s laws instructing his people to kill adulterers, those who turn you away from God, homosexuals, wayward children and more from the Old Testament. The Koran doesn’t have large sections of tolerant love to find comfort. Of course, one could argue that Christians do not really believe their scriptures wholly while Muslims do…. but that is a different blog.
Recently even well-known atheist Christopher Hitchens was physically attacked when debating Muslims from Damascus but described a Christian debate last week as being thrust in a “Den of Lambs”. Dr. Hitchens was grateful and respected the collegial debate and respect of Christians as compared with Muslims. Yet, this was not always the case. Historically, Christians of every persuasion were very intolerant of differing views and the result was often death.

Animal- Assisted Therapy