Two Icons Move Through Life-Changing Experiences to Carve Out New Meaning and Purpose
The Wired Word for the Week of June 2, 2024

In the News

Two weeks ago, 90-year-old pilot Edward Dwight, who in 1961 became the first black astronaut candidate, although he was never picked to go into space, joined five other people on board the Blue Origin New Shepard rocket to fulfill a lifelong dream. 

"I really, really want(ed) to do this, because each person that goes up there all of a sudden has a totally different perspective of this little place here," Dwight said, emphatically pointing down at the Earth with both hands. "Space can bring people together." 

The oldest person to ever go into outer space, Dwight said he didn't need the experience, but after the 9 minute and 53 second flight, he said, "I lied." As he disembarked from the crew capsule, the nonagenarian raised his fists in the air, declaring, "Long time coming," adding that he was "ecstatic" and that the flight had been "life-changing."

In the early 1960's, President John F. Kennedy championed the idea of opening the space program to blacks, but Dwight said he was told at the time that Gen. Chuck Yeager, the director of the Aerospace Research Pilot School at Edwards Air Force Base in California, disapproved of Kennedy's policy and tried to sabotage Dwight's involvement in the program. 

After Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, Dwight was dropped from consideration in the NASA program. In 1966, he resigned from the Air Force, suspecting "racial politics" for forcing him out, according to The Guardian. 

"I could have been the first black guy in space," Dwight said ruefully. "Was that my fate that I'll be remembered for that, for something that I didn't do? Think about that one. How the h-ll do you get famous for something you didn't do?"

Dwight commented about the opposition to his inclusion in the astronaut training program: "All that nonsense, couldn't give it a parking space in my brain. … If I just receded into nothingness, it would have been all well and good with everybody else, because that's how things are supposed to happen."

But while his father tried to steer him away from pursuing goals he thought were not realistic for black men in America, Dwight's mother fed him a daily dose of love, encouragement and confidence in his ability to overcome any obstacle as long as he worked hard. Dwight said he learned that "you can teach your brain to help you, or you can teach your brain to destroy you. And your brain will react to what it's been told."

Though deeply disappointed when he realized he would not be advancing in the astronaut program, Dwight said recently, "As I look at it philosophically, my role in the whole process was to open up a conversation about blacks in space, and so I served a purpose, and I was very, very proud of it."

When asked what he thought he might have done if he had been the first black astronaut in space, he said that probably would have been the highlight of his life, and it's likely he wouldn't have done anything else.

"I would have loved going into space, you know, had this thing all worked out that way. … Maybe my fate was I had to bring the African-American story to the public venue."

Noting the lack of "any black imagery in city parks, museums, galleries," he returned to his early love of art as a means of honoring the contributions of black people to society. To date, he has created almost 20,000 gallery pieces and more than 130 memorials throughout the country. Over his lifetime, Dwight trained and worked as an aeronautical engineer, experimental test pilot, sculptor, restaurateur and real estate developer. 

"How do you go from slavery to freedom and accomplishment?" Dwight asked rhetorically, answering his own question: "Harriet Tubman, George Washington Carver, Rosa Parks, Sojourner Truth, Dr. King, B.B. King, Dizzy Gillespie, Miles Davis. Step by step by step by step. Guion Bluford, first African-American in space" (which happened in 1983).

Another icon who has had a potentially life-changing experience is eight-time Olympic gymnast Oksana Chusovitina, who announced that while training for the 2024 Paris Olympics at the Asian Championships, which took place at the end of May in her home country of Uzbekistan, she sustained an injury that led to her withdrawal from competition. 

A vault specialist, Chusovitina has competed in more Olympics than any other gymnast. She had hoped to qualify for her ninth Olympics when she was injured. At the age of 48, she is the oldest gymnast ever to participate in the games. 

During Chusovitina's 34-plus-year-long career, she competed for the Soviet Union, the Unified Team, Germany and Uzbekistan, adding an Olympic gold team medal and an Olympic silver medal on vault to the 70-plus other medals she won on the international gymnastics circuit. She holds the record for the most individual world championship medals in a single event. 

This is not the first time Chusovitina experienced a life-changing event. In 2002, her only child, Alisher, then 3 years old, was diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. She and her husband, Uzbek wrestler Bakhodir Kurpanov, moved to Germany, where their son received effective medical care. During their residency, Chusovitina trained with the German gymnastics team, eventually becoming a German citizen and competing for her adopted country.

"What quality helps me? … I don't know," Chusovitina reflected. "It's probably genes. Thanks to my parents, maybe something was passed down from them.

"I do have perseverance in me," she continued. "If I set some goal, … I have to achieve it. … I have to do it. Or at least try to do it."

Chusovitina expressed the ideal that guides her: "Everything is possible in our lives. So we will live today and we will see what happens tomorrow."

Regarding the legacy she hopes to leave, Chusovitina said, "I haven't thought about what I want to leave behind in sports," she said. "But … there are five elements in the rules which are named after me. And gymnasts perform them, so they will be in contact with my name forever."

More on this story can be found at these links:

I Was Poised to Be the First Black Astronaut. I Never Made It to Space (Video 12:38). The New York Times
First Black Astronaut Candidate Ed Dwight Jr.'s Second Mission (Video 6:10). CBS Mornings
Gymnast Oksana Chusovitina's Quest to Qualify For Record 9th Olympics at Age 48 Ends With Injury. Yahoo!Sports
Oksana Chusovitina: 'If I Set Some Goal ... I Have to Achieve It.' Olympics
63 Years Later, First Black Man Trained as Astronaut Goes to Space. The New York Times

Applying the News Story

The ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus of Ephesus is often credited with the statements: "The only constant in life is change" and "Everything changes, and nothing remains still; and you cannot step twice into the same stream."

Much of life is about learning how to safely navigate through the changes we experience. When we can accept that seasons come and seasons go, we might take steps to prepare for challenges that are sure to come as seasons change, and seek to appreciate the gifts each season brings.

"Change is inevitable. Growth is optional." So wrote John Maxwell, pastor and expert on leadership. We explore how our faith can help us grow spiritually when we experience life-changing events.

The Big Questions

1. When, if ever, have you had a life-transforming experience that meant you had to change course and head in a new direction? How did you navigate the change?

2. How do we find a new purpose when our primary purpose changes due to injury, relocation, retirement/age, illness, etc.?

3. Does God have a specific plan for our lives? If not, how do we decide how to live our lives? If so, how do we discern what God's plan is and what our role in that plan is? Might our role in God's plan change over time? Explain. 

4. What role does faith have in discerning when we need a Plan B, when "life as we knew it" ends?

5. How, if at all, have you sensed God guiding you along your journey through life?

Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

Ecclesiastes 3:1, 6, 11-13
For everything there is a season and a time for every matter under heaven: … 
a time to seek and a time to lose;
a time to keep and a time to throw away; … 
[God] has made everything suitable for its time; moreover, he has put a sense of past and future into their minds, yet they cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end. I know that there is nothing better for them than to be happy and enjoy themselves as long as they live; moreover, it is God's gift that all should eat and drink and take pleasure in all their toil. (For context, read Ecclesiastes 3:1-13.)

The Teacher who penned these words had seen and tried much in his lifetime, and found that the pursuit of knowledge, hard work, power, wealth, materialism and pleasure do not lead to lasting fulfillment. The only way to find meaning and purpose, he claims, is to center one's life in God.

Here is a rendition of this passage sung by Judy Collins. 

Questions: How would you describe the season of life you are in right now? What does it mean that God made everything "suitable for its time"? Are there some things that are always suitable, no matter what season you are in, and if so, what are those things? What are the things that have a definite shelf life or an expiration date? What is the difference between things that are permanent and things that are ephemeral in nature?

Genesis 12:1-2
Now the LORD said to Abram, "Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing." (For context, read Genesis 12:1-9.)
Hebrews 11:8-10
By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to set out for a place that he was to receive as an inheritance, and he set out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he stayed for a time in the land he had been promised, as in a foreign land, living in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. For he looked forward to the city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God. (For context, read Hebrews 11:8-12.)

When God called Abram (whose name was later changed to Abraham) to leave his home and follow his guidance to a new land, Abram was already 75 years of age. He took his wife Sarai, his nephew Lot, his entire household and all his possessions, to travel to the land of Canaan, which was already occupied by Canaanites. God promised to give the land to Abram's descendants, who didn't exist yet. 

Shortly after his arrival in Canaan, famine struck, and he pulled up stakes to head for Egypt in search of food. Talk about a life-changing event! Following God's call didn't lead Abram to an instant paradise.

Instead, Abram and his family lived a nomadic lifestyle in tents, without a sense of permanence. What he relied on, by faith, were the promises of God, that one day his family would have rest in a city God would build for them.

Questions: What exactly is the nature of God's promise to Abraham, as the writer of the book of Hebrews describes it? How do you understand the promises of God? Are we to take them literally, or as metaphors for something spiritual? If the latter, what do those metaphors (of "a place," "an inheritance," "a promised land," "a city whose architect and builder is God,") represent? What difference does it make how we interpret them?

Matthew 4:18-22
As [Jesus] walked by the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea -- for they were fishers. And he said to them, "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of people." Immediately they left their nets and followed him. As he went from there, he saw two other brothers, James son of Zebedee and his brother John, in the boat with their father Zebedee, mending their nets, and he called them. Immediately they left the boat and their father and followed him. (For context, read Matthew 4:18-25.)

At the beginning of Jesus' public ministry, he invited Simon Peter, Andrew, James and John to join him. Mark adds the detail that James and John left their father with the hired men (Mark 1:20). Luke informs us that Jesus called the four men after Jesus had visited Simon's house and healed his mother-in-law of a high fever, cured many other people of various diseases and cast demons out of many people (Luke 4:38-44). Luke also tells us that Jesus had given the fishermen instructions that led to an enormous catch of fish just before he called them to become his disciples (Luke 5:1-11).

What are we to make of these details? First, the call to discipleship didn't come out of nowhere. Jesus had already been building a relationship with these men before he invited them to follow him. Second, Jesus called individuals, but demonstrated awareness and care for their families as well. Not only did he cure Simon Peter's mother-in-law, but he provided a huge catch of fish that would have benefited the disciples' families while they were not on hand to make a living. Third, he called these men in pairs. As brothers and coworkers, they knew each other well, and would have had a natural bond that might well have made the life change Jesus was calling for smoother for them.

Questions: What traces of God's presence are evident in your life before you began to intentionally seek after him? What does that tell you about the nature of God's interest in you? 

How has God provided for your needs in life-changing events you have experienced?

How has your response to the call of God on your life impacted your family and friends?

Acts 9:19-22
For several days [Saul (AKA Paul)] was with the disciples in Damascus, and immediately he began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, saying, "He is the Son of God." All who heard him were amazed and said, "Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem among those who invoked this name? And has he not come here for the purpose of bringing them bound before the chief priests?" Saul became increasingly more powerful and confounded the Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Messiah. (For context, read Acts 9:1-9, 17-22.)
2 Corinthians 5:17
So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; look, new things have come into being! (For context, read 2 Corinthians 5:14-21.)

Paul indicates that being "in Christ" leads to a complete overhaul of the way a person thinks and acts. He spoke from his own life-changing experience on the road to Damascus. When he was intent on arresting and persecuting followers of the Way, Jesus confronted him. The encounter left Paul temporarily blind, until the prophet Ananias laid hands on him, restoring his sight. After that Paul was filled with the Holy Spirit, was baptized, and began preaching that Jesus was the Son of God and God's Messiah.

Questions: How, if at all, has your life been changed due to your decision to follow Jesus Christ? How exactly are you a new creation? What old things have passed away, and what new things have come into being?

For Further Discussion

1. Consider these statements:

• "Don't be afraid to give up the good to go for the great." -- John D. Rockefeller, American business magnate and philanthropist
• "The truth is, unless you let go, unless you forgive yourself, unless you forgive the situation, unless you realize that the situation is over, you cannot move forward." -- Steve Maraboli, decorated military veteran and author
• "If you want to fly, you have to give up what weighs you down." -- Roy T. Bennett, author

When have you found that you needed to let go of something you valued in order to move forward? What might make it hard to let go? What empowered you to make the change, and what were the results of that action?

2. Oprah Winfrey, American host and television producer, said, "The greatest discovery of all time is that a person can change his future by merely changing his attitude."
            Wayne W. Dyer, self-help author and motivational speaker, agreed: "Change the way you look at things and the things you look at change."
            What is the importance of attitude to a person's mental health and well-being throughout the challenges of life? How hard is it to change one's attitude? What tools might be helpful in the process of changing the way people think about the circumstances of their lives?

3. The first time he went up in an airplane, Edward Dwight was hooked. "Immediately, when you can see past the horizon, … all of a sudden your world expands to this bigger and bigger and bigger space. That whole expanse of stuff, you get even more curious about it," he said. "Why are we here? And what part do we play? And what, if anything, can we do about it?"
            What is it about flying that seems to fire up the human imagination, perhaps prompting existential questions like those Dwight pondered?

4. American motivational author William Arthur Ward wrote: "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
            Using this definition, would you consider yourself primarily a pessimist, an optimist or a realist? How has that approach to life served you or hindered you? What changes in your approach, if any, do you think might be appropriate at this stage of your life?

5. According to actor Harrison Ford, "We all have big changes in our lives that are more or less a second chance."
            A second chance for what?
            What (besides replacing the letter "g" with the letter "c") transforms change into a second chance?

 6. Think about this:
            "Yesterday I was clever, so I wanted to change the world. Today I am wise, so I am changing myself." -- Jalaluddin Mevlana Rumi, 13th-century Iranian poet
            "Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world." -- Harriet Tubman, American abolitionist and social activist
            Are these two statements mutually exclusive? Can a person only do one or the other? Is it possible to change oneself and also change the world? Explain how that worked in the lives of the two people mentioned in the news article.

7. Listen to British musician Seal's rendition of Sam Cooke's heart-wrenching anthem, A Change Is Gonna Come (Video 3:59). What does this song mean to you?

Responding to the News

You may wish to read the hymn text, "Day By Day," as a prayer, accompanied by this instrumental, or sing along as a testimony of your experience of God through all the changes of life. 

Prayer

O God, whose character is not arbitrary or fickle, but constant and faithful, you are the still point in a swirling universe. Whatever changes we face, remind us that we can always rely on you to be true to who you are. May your presence comfort and encourage us to trust you, come what may. Amen.

AI Can 'Re-create' Our Loved Ones After They Die, but Is This a Good Idea?
The Wired Word for the Week of May 19, 2024

In the News

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to present us with ethical dilemmas, and not the least of these is whether we should create representations of people who have died that allow us to see and hear them again. And, asks an article in The Wall Street Journal, where those representations are of people we loved, will those lifelike renderings bring comfort to us who are grieving, or will they distort the grieving process?

This is not the same as viewing a video of a departed loved one that was filmed while the person was alive and voluntarily speaking. Rather these are compilations of segments of existing audio and/or video and CGI (computer-generated imagery) controlled by algorithms that allow the deceased individual to have whole new conversations.

Hollywood has already done this, most famously by reproducing Carrie Fisher to appear in Star Wars films after the actress herself had died. (See the SYFY link in the list below for some details on the process.)

More recently, parents of some school shooting victims have permitted their deceased children's recorded words to be AI-rearranged and used to generate AI calls to lawmakers to plead for gun control measures. In each call, the speakers identified themselves as dead victims of the shootings.

Also, during the recent New Hampshire primary election, a deepfake robocall, claiming to be President Joe Biden, went to many potential voters in an attempt to discourage Biden voters ahead of the primary. The call, which did indeed sound like Biden, was commissioned by a political consultant working for a rival candidate. Unlike the movie uses and calls to lawmakers, this use of AI has been ruled illegal by the FCC since it was intended to dampen voter turnout, and the consultant and the companies who helped him create the call have since been sued by the League of Women Voters.

But these uses aside, the thrust of The Wall Street Journal article is on whether AI re-creation of deceased loved ones as digital avatars is helpful to grieving people, especially as the AI technology is sure to be improved. 

Rather than offering an opinion, the Journal asked readers for reactions. The Journal posed the question this way: "AI is already creating chat, audio and video representations that mimic deceased people. Will conversing with them comfort loved ones, or prolong the feeling of loss and prevent them from moving on? If the chatbots are flawed, could they warp our understanding of who the person really was?"

Reader responses were varied and thoughtful, some with a firm  "yes" or "no," some with a "yes, but," others considering the potential, and still others calling the practice "cold comfort," "warping reality" or even "creepy." Some said the matter should be left to individual choice.

One of the "nos" put it, "I would find no comfort from chatting with a mimic of a lost family member. There's no possible way an algorithm could capture my family member's humor, spontaneity, quirkiness and spirit. No way. That's an AI bridge too far."

Another "no" said, "Having photos or videos of lost loved ones is a comfort. But the idea of an algorithm, which is as prone to generate nonsense as anything lucid, representing a deceased person's thoughts or behaviors seems terrifying. It would be like generating digital dementia after your loved ones' passing."

One of the "yeses" called the development "A positive for many," adding, "I think this aspect of AI will prove ultimately popular, as people live longer, and as we face personal loss. The mimicry will be significantly flawed initially, but probably since this sort of application is likely to have great appeal, improvements will be rapid. … Something to look forward to."

Another "yes" said, "So bring it on. Progress always entails costs and uncertainty. The faster this can be accomplished the faster the benefits accrue and the costs will diminish. Mistakes will be made, but we'll learn from them and there are some good outcomes here worth striving for."

Another respondent pointed to the divine Creator, and said, "A machine isn't an embodied human being. AI chatbots will prolong the effects of loss if used this way. They will divide humans. They will muddy our understanding of reality. Humans are made in the image of God; a machine cannot replicate that." 

See The Wall Street Journal article below for more responses.

More on this story can be found at these links:

Should We Use AI to Re-Create Our Loved Ones After They Die? The Wall Street Journal
These Six Young People Died by Gun Violence. Now Their AI-Generated Voices Are Sending Gun Control Pleas to Lawmakers. CNN
It Took More CGI Than You Think to Bring Carrie Fisher Into The Rise Of Skywalker. SYFY
Democratic Operative Admits to Commissioning Fake Biden Robocall That Used AI. NBC News 

The Big Questions

1. What experiences have you had with AI? Do you feel qualified to talk about its potential for good ... and for bad? 

2. Whether you know much about AI or not, what does your experience with grief suggest about the good or harm of having access to avatars of your deceased loved ones to converse with?

3. After a loved one dies, might a representation of that person discussing with you things the two of you never got around to discussing be of help when you are grieving? How do you think the knowledge that the loved one's side of the conversation was generated by AI impact you in your grief?

4. If an AI representation is flawed, could it warp our memory of who the deceased person really was?

5. What is unique to humankind that can never be replicated in any invention? Is it something other than intelligence? And if so, what is it?

Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

1 Samuel 28:8, 15
… They came to the woman by night. And [Saul] said, "Consult a spirit for me, and bring up for me the one whom I name to you." ... Then Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" Saul answered, "I am in great distress, for the Philistines are warring against me, and God has turned away from me and answers me no more, either by prophets or by dreams, so I have summoned you to tell me what I should do." (For context, read 1 Samuel 28:3-25.) 

When Saul was initially chosen to be Israel's king, God directed Samuel, who was a judge, priest and prophet in Israel, to anoint Saul for this role. After Saul took the throne, Samuel became his spiritual adviser, telling Saul of God's instructions and will. 

But then came an incident where Saul disobeyed God, and consequently, God rejected Saul as king of Israel. Though Saul stayed on the throne until his death, he did so without any guidance from Samuel, who left Saul's presence on the day of the king's disobedience and did not see him again. In the intervening time, Samuel, at God's direction, anointed David to replace Saul. 

Samuel was not the only priest in Israel, but later, after one priest gave David some food as he was fleeing from Saul (who was out to kill him), Saul, in a rage, had all 85 priests in that place put to death. 

At some point during his reign, Saul expelled the wizards and mediums from Israel. This was in keeping with the Law of Moses, which expressly prohibited frequenting wizards, witches and mediums (Leviticus 19:31).

That brings us to the incident at Endor. Sometime after Samuel died, the Philistine army marched against Israel. This struck fear in Saul's heart. He knew he needed to do something, but he wanted to know what to do that would have God's blessing. The problem was, he had no channels left for hearing from God. 

In that day, leaders sometimes relied on dreams to hear from God, but Saul did not receive a dream answer. Leaders sometimes heard from God by way of prophets, but the prophet Samuel had died, and there was no other prophet on the scene. Leaders could ask the priests to determine God's will using the Urim and Thummim, which were sacred objects carried inside the breastplate of the high priest of ancient Israel and used as oracular media to determine the will of God. But after Saul killed so many of their colleagues, what priests remained in Israel stayed away from him. The high priest, in fact, was now with David.

But Saul really wanted God to tell him what to do, so he told his servants to find a medium so he could call up Samuel from the dead. Although there were officially no mediums left in Israel, his servants apparently knew of a woman in the city of Endor who had been one, so Saul decided to visit her.

The medium did manage to call up the disembodied spirit of Samuel, but instead of telling Saul what to do, Samuel reminded Saul that God had already rejected him and told him that he and his sons would die in battle with the Philistines the next day, which is what happened.

When the séance ended, Saul was so overwhelmed that the medium had to cook dinner for him just to revive him enough to be able to return to his palace.

This biblical story is not a validation of spiritualism, mediums and others who claim to be able to communicate with the dead. In this particular case, Saul believed talking to the dead was possible, and apparently God permitted him to have an experience in which Saul received the message God wanted him to hear, but we should not generalize this story as evidence that so-called ghost whispering is anything more than theatrics, or these days, technology.. 

Questions: What does this biblical story tell you about God? What does it tell you about encounters with the dead? What expectation would you have of a meeting with a technological representation of a deceased loved one? Who should control the algorithms in those encounters?

Revelation 7:9-10
After this I looked, and there was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, robed in white, with palm branches in their hands. They cried out in a loud voice, saying, "Salvation belongs to our God who is seated on the throne and to the Lamb!" (For context, read Revelation 7:9-17.) 

Here, John of Patmos has a vision of heaven in which he sees those faithful ones who have died, and he discovers that they are not lost, but are doing just fine there in God's presence.

Questions: How does the Bible's teachings about eternal life figure into your grieving for those who have died? What is the significance of their white robes?

Hebrews 12:1-2
Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith ... (For context, read Hebrews 12:1-13.) 

The news story is about AI making it possible for us to view our departed ones in some kind of digital format. But this verse from Hebrews reverses that idea in that it talks about the faithful dead as a great "cloud of witnesses" who, having already completed their race of life, have gone to the viewing stands to cheer us on as we run "with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith." 

Questions: What actions are followers of Jesus urged to take as they run their race? Of what practical help to us is the cloud of witnesses, a sample of which is described in Hebrews 11?

1 Thessalonians 4:13-14
But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who have died, so that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have died. (For context, read 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.) 

The apostle Paul's purpose in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 is to address believers' concerns about those who die before Christ returns. And his point is that when Jesus returns, the faithful who have died will be raised to join Christ and the faithful who are still alive.

But his statement above has a larger application as well, for it applies to all our concerns about those who pass away. We grieve just as nonbelievers do, but we have one difference: We do not grieve as those who have no hope. That hope, of course, is based on Christ and his resurrection, and on his promise of eternal life.

Questions: How does that hope express itself in times of grief? How is hope related to faith and love?

For Further Discussion

 1. In 2001, the Steven Spielberg/Stanley Kubrick movie A.I. was released and was a box-office winner. The movie was part science fiction, part fairy tale story about a boy robot who is programmed to love a human parent. The plot was set in the 22nd century when A.I. has come very close to approximating human intelligence. In the story, a husband and wife, whose son is in a lingering coma from which he may never awake, accept the prototype of a boy robot, "David," who is indistinguishable in appearance from a human boy, and, more importantly, who can be programmed to love them the way a real son would love his parents. The mother, Monica, initializes the programming and David becomes her loving son.
            But then the couple's real son awakes from his coma, and a sibling rivalry develops. The couple comes to view David as a threat to their biological son and eventually, Monica reluctantly turns David out, abandoning him in a forest. But David's programming, to love Monica, cannot be shut off, and the story goes on from there. Read the rest of the plot here and discuss how it makes you feel.

2.  A movie made in the early '80s had Robert Duvall playing the character of Mac Sledge, a boozy, broken-down, ex-country singer who checked into a rural Texas motel and then could not check out because he was flat broke. He stayed on to work on odd jobs around the place and eventually married the widow who owned the motel. He overcame his drinking problem and in time was baptized in the little church where his wife sang in the choir.
            One of Mac's big regrets was that he had been prevented from seeing his daughter from his first marriage. But then his daughter, now grown, stopped to see Mac. Sadly, their new relationship had just begun when she was killed in an automobile accident. After her funeral, Mac said to his wife, "I prayed to know why my daughter died and I lived. But I got no answer ... I don't know why I wandered out here and you took me in and married me. ... I don't trust happiness. I never did. I never will." And yet, by the end of the movie, we have the sense that Mac is going to be all right. Why do you think the movie was titled Tender Mercies?

3. Read and respond to this article, written from a Roman Catholic perspective, that is against the idea of using AI representations of the dead. 

Responding to the News

If you believe that viewing AI representation of the dead is not a good idea, you might want to specify in final written instructions you give to loved ones that you do not want to be presented to them in any AI format following your death.

You may also want to think about what you might want to leave behind to help those who will be grieving your passing to find some comfort and peace. For example, you may want to prepare a letter or video for each family member in which you tell them how much they mean to you and how you value them. You could arrange for these letters to be delivered soon after you die, but it might be even better to deliver them while you are still living, so that some good conversations can follow between them and you. 

Prayer

O God, come with comfort and mercy to all those who are grieving departed loved ones. Help us to be instruments of your mercy. In Jesus' name. Amen.

Copyright 2024 Communication Resources

 

AI Can 'Re-create' Our Loved Ones After They Die, but Is This a Good Idea?
The Wired Word for the Week of May 19, 2024

In the News

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to present us with ethical dilemmas, and not the least of these is whether we should create representations of people who have died that allow us to see and hear them again. And, asks an article in The Wall Street Journal, where those representations are of people we loved, will those lifelike renderings bring comfort to us who are grieving, or will they distort the grieving process?

This is not the same as viewing a video of a departed loved one that was filmed while the person was alive and voluntarily speaking. Rather these are compilations of segments of existing audio and/or video and CGI (computer-generated imagery) controlled by algorithms that allow the deceased individual to have whole new conversations.

Hollywood has already done this, most famously by reproducing Carrie Fisher to appear in Star Wars films after the actress herself had died. (See the SYFY link in the list below for some details on the process.)

More recently, parents of some school shooting victims have permitted their deceased children's recorded words to be AI-rearranged and used to generate AI calls to lawmakers to plead for gun control measures. In each call, the speakers identified themselves as dead victims of the shootings.

Also, during the recent New Hampshire primary election, a deepfake robocall, claiming to be President Joe Biden, went to many potential voters in an attempt to discourage Biden voters ahead of the primary. The call, which did indeed sound like Biden, was commissioned by a political consultant working for a rival candidate. Unlike the movie uses and calls to lawmakers, this use of AI has been ruled illegal by the FCC since it was intended to dampen voter turnout, and the consultant and the companies who helped him create the call have since been sued by the League of Women Voters.

But these uses aside, the thrust of The Wall Street Journal article is on whether AI re-creation of deceased loved ones as digital avatars is helpful to grieving people, especially as the AI technology is sure to be improved. 

Rather than offering an opinion, the Journal asked readers for reactions. The Journal posed the question this way: "AI is already creating chat, audio and video representations that mimic deceased people. Will conversing with them comfort loved ones, or prolong the feeling of loss and prevent them from moving on? If the chatbots are flawed, could they warp our understanding of who the person really was?"

Reader responses were varied and thoughtful, some with a firm  "yes" or "no," some with a "yes, but," others considering the potential, and still others calling the practice "cold comfort," "warping reality" or even "creepy." Some said the matter should be left to individual choice.

One of the "nos" put it, "I would find no comfort from chatting with a mimic of a lost family member. There's no possible way an algorithm could capture my family member's humor, spontaneity, quirkiness and spirit. No way. That's an AI bridge too far."

Another "no" said, "Having photos or videos of lost loved ones is a comfort. But the idea of an algorithm, which is as prone to generate nonsense as anything lucid, representing a deceased person's thoughts or behaviors seems terrifying. It would be like generating digital dementia after your loved ones' passing."

One of the "yeses" called the development "A positive for many," adding, "I think this aspect of AI will prove ultimately popular, as people live longer, and as we face personal loss. The mimicry will be significantly flawed initially, but probably since this sort of application is likely to have great appeal, improvements will be rapid. … Something to look forward to."

Another "yes" said, "So bring it on. Progress always entails costs and uncertainty. The faster this can be accomplished the faster the benefits accrue and the costs will diminish. Mistakes will be made, but we'll learn from them and there are some good outcomes here worth striving for."

Another respondent pointed to the divine Creator, and said, "A machine isn't an embodied human being. AI chatbots will prolong the effects of loss if used this way. They will divide humans. They will muddy our understanding of reality. Humans are made in the image of God; a machine cannot replicate that." 

See The Wall Street Journal article below for more responses.

More on this story can be found at these links:

Should We Use AI to Re-Create Our Loved Ones After They Die? The Wall Street Journal
These Six Young People Died by Gun Violence. Now Their AI-Generated Voices Are Sending Gun Control Pleas to Lawmakers. CNN
It Took More CGI Than You Think to Bring Carrie Fisher Into The Rise Of Skywalker. SYFY
Democratic Operative Admits to Commissioning Fake Biden Robocall That Used AI. NBC News 

The Big Questions

1. What experiences have you had with AI? Do you feel qualified to talk about its potential for good ... and for bad? 

2. Whether you know much about AI or not, what does your experience with grief suggest about the good or harm of having access to avatars of your deceased loved ones to converse with?

3. After a loved one dies, might a representation of that person discussing with you things the two of you never got around to discussing be of help when you are grieving? How do you think the knowledge that the loved one's side of the conversation was generated by AI impact you in your grief?

4. If an AI representation is flawed, could it warp our memory of who the deceased person really was?

5. What is unique to humankind that can never be replicated in any invention? Is it something other than intelligence? And if so, what is it?

Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

1 Samuel 28:8, 15
… They came to the woman by night. And [Saul] said, "Consult a spirit for me, and bring up for me the one whom I name to you." ... Then Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" Saul answered, "I am in great distress, for the Philistines are warring against me, and God has turned away from me and answers me no more, either by prophets or by dreams, so I have summoned you to tell me what I should do." (For context, read 1 Samuel 28:3-25.) 

When Saul was initially chosen to be Israel's king, God directed Samuel, who was a judge, priest and prophet in Israel, to anoint Saul for this role. After Saul took the throne, Samuel became his spiritual adviser, telling Saul of God's instructions and will. 

But then came an incident where Saul disobeyed God, and consequently, God rejected Saul as king of Israel. Though Saul stayed on the throne until his death, he did so without any guidance from Samuel, who left Saul's presence on the day of the king's disobedience and did not see him again. In the intervening time, Samuel, at God's direction, anointed David to replace Saul. 

Samuel was not the only priest in Israel, but later, after one priest gave David some food as he was fleeing from Saul (who was out to kill him), Saul, in a rage, had all 85 priests in that place put to death. 

At some point during his reign, Saul expelled the wizards and mediums from Israel. This was in keeping with the Law of Moses, which expressly prohibited frequenting wizards, witches and mediums (Leviticus 19:31).

That brings us to the incident at Endor. Sometime after Samuel died, the Philistine army marched against Israel. This struck fear in Saul's heart. He knew he needed to do something, but he wanted to know what to do that would have God's blessing. The problem was, he had no channels left for hearing from God. 

In that day, leaders sometimes relied on dreams to hear from God, but Saul did not receive a dream answer. Leaders sometimes heard from God by way of prophets, but the prophet Samuel had died, and there was no other prophet on the scene. Leaders could ask the priests to determine God's will using the Urim and Thummim, which were sacred objects carried inside the breastplate of the high priest of ancient Israel and used as oracular media to determine the will of God. But after Saul killed so many of their colleagues, what priests remained in Israel stayed away from him. The high priest, in fact, was now with David.

But Saul really wanted God to tell him what to do, so he told his servants to find a medium so he could call up Samuel from the dead. Although there were officially no mediums left in Israel, his servants apparently knew of a woman in the city of Endor who had been one, so Saul decided to visit her.

The medium did manage to call up the disembodied spirit of Samuel, but instead of telling Saul what to do, Samuel reminded Saul that God had already rejected him and told him that he and his sons would die in battle with the Philistines the next day, which is what happened.

When the séance ended, Saul was so overwhelmed that the medium had to cook dinner for him just to revive him enough to be able to return to his palace.

This biblical story is not a validation of spiritualism, mediums and others who claim to be able to communicate with the dead. In this particular case, Saul believed talking to the dead was possible, and apparently God permitted him to have an experience in which Saul received the message God wanted him to hear, but we should not generalize this story as evidence that so-called ghost whispering is anything more than theatrics, or these days, technology.. 

Questions: What does this biblical story tell you about God? What does it tell you about encounters with the dead? What expectation would you have of a meeting with a technological representation of a deceased loved one? Who should control the algorithms in those encounters?

Revelation 7:9-10
After this I looked, and there was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, robed in white, with palm branches in their hands. They cried out in a loud voice, saying, "Salvation belongs to our God who is seated on the throne and to the Lamb!" (For context, read Revelation 7:9-17.) 

Here, John of Patmos has a vision of heaven in which he sees those faithful ones who have died, and he discovers that they are not lost, but are doing just fine there in God's presence.

Questions: How does the Bible's teachings about eternal life figure into your grieving for those who have died? What is the significance of their white robes?

Hebrews 12:1-2
Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith ... (For context, read Hebrews 12:1-13.) 

The news story is about AI making it possible for us to view our departed ones in some kind of digital format. But this verse from Hebrews reverses that idea in that it talks about the faithful dead as a great "cloud of witnesses" who, having already completed their race of life, have gone to the viewing stands to cheer us on as we run "with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith." 

Questions: What actions are followers of Jesus urged to take as they run their race? Of what practical help to us is the cloud of witnesses, a sample of which is described in Hebrews 11?

1 Thessalonians 4:13-14
But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who have died, so that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have died. (For context, read 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.) 

The apostle Paul's purpose in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 is to address believers' concerns about those who die before Christ returns. And his point is that when Jesus returns, the faithful who have died will be raised to join Christ and the faithful who are still alive.

But his statement above has a larger application as well, for it applies to all our concerns about those who pass away. We grieve just as nonbelievers do, but we have one difference: We do not grieve as those who have no hope. That hope, of course, is based on Christ and his resurrection, and on his promise of eternal life.

Questions: How does that hope express itself in times of grief? How is hope related to faith and love?

For Further Discussion

 1. In 2001, the Steven Spielberg/Stanley Kubrick movie A.I. was released and was a box-office winner. The movie was part science fiction, part fairy tale story about a boy robot who is programmed to love a human parent. The plot was set in the 22nd century when A.I. has come very close to approximating human intelligence. In the story, a husband and wife, whose son is in a lingering coma from which he may never awake, accept the prototype of a boy robot, "David," who is indistinguishable in appearance from a human boy, and, more importantly, who can be programmed to love them the way a real son would love his parents. The mother, Monica, initializes the programming and David becomes her loving son.
            But then the couple's real son awakes from his coma, and a sibling rivalry develops. The couple comes to view David as a threat to their biological son and eventually, Monica reluctantly turns David out, abandoning him in a forest. But David's programming, to love Monica, cannot be shut off, and the story goes on from there. Read the rest of the plot here and discuss how it makes you feel.

2.  A movie made in the early '80s had Robert Duvall playing the character of Mac Sledge, a boozy, broken-down, ex-country singer who checked into a rural Texas motel and then could not check out because he was flat broke. He stayed on to work on odd jobs around the place and eventually married the widow who owned the motel. He overcame his drinking problem and in time was baptized in the little church where his wife sang in the choir.
            One of Mac's big regrets was that he had been prevented from seeing his daughter from his first marriage. But then his daughter, now grown, stopped to see Mac. Sadly, their new relationship had just begun when she was killed in an automobile accident. After her funeral, Mac said to his wife, "I prayed to know why my daughter died and I lived. But I got no answer ... I don't know why I wandered out here and you took me in and married me. ... I don't trust happiness. I never did. I never will." And yet, by the end of the movie, we have the sense that Mac is going to be all right. Why do you think the movie was titled Tender Mercies?

3. Read and respond to this article, written from a Roman Catholic perspective, that is against the idea of using AI representations of the dead. 

Responding to the News

If you believe that viewing AI representation of the dead is not a good idea, you might want to specify in final written instructions you give to loved ones that you do not want to be presented to them in any AI format following your death.

You may also want to think about what you might want to leave behind to help those who will be grieving your passing to find some comfort and peace. For example, you may want to prepare a letter or video for each family member in which you tell them how much they mean to you and how you value them. You could arrange for these letters to be delivered soon after you die, but it might be even better to deliver them while you are still living, so that some good conversations can follow between them and you. 

Prayer

O God, come with comfort and mercy to all those who are grieving departed loved ones. Help us to be instruments of your mercy. In Jesus' name. Amen.

Copyright 2024 Communication Resources

 

Vatican Declares Gender Theory, Transgender Surgeries and Surrogacy Violations of Human Dignity

Vatican Declares Gender Theory, Transgender Surgeries and Surrogacy Violations of Human Dignity
The Wired Word for the Week of April 21, 2024

In the News

In an April 8 document put forth from the Holy See Press Office, the Vatican declared that gender theory, transgender surgeries and surrogacy are threats to human dignity. Titled "Infinite Dignity," the declaration compared those practices on par with euthanasia and abortion as violations of God's plan for human life.

In talking about gender theory, the document first affirms that "every person, regardless of sexual orientation, ought to be respected in his or her dignity and treated with consideration, while 'every sign of unjust discrimination' is to be carefully avoided, particularly any form of aggression and violence." 

Question 1: What does it mean that someone has “dignity” with respect to their sexual orientation?  . Is human dignity a God-given quality? If so, what do you understand that to mean? If not, how is human dignity attained? What might the Catholic Church mean by calling human dignity "infinite"?

Defining gender theory often seems circular because the explanation requires you to know the meaning of gender (which is sometimes defined as "an internal persona, the sense of being a man or a woman"), but Encyclopedia.com defines the theory as "looking at masculinity and femininity as sets of mutually created characteristics shaping the lives of men and women. It replaced or challenged ideas of masculinity and femininity and of men and women as operating in history according to fixed biological determinants." Bing's AI app says, "Gender theory proposes that the ideas we have about gender are shaped through the cultures in which we live. This theory has played a major role in our understanding of how gender expectations are socially and culturally constructed."

However we understand gender theory, the Vatican document labels it as  "dangerous since it cancels differences in its claim to make everyone equal."

Question 2: In what sense can different people be equal?  How can people be different but also equal at the same time?

Further, the document said, "the Church recalls that human life in all its dimensions, both physical and spiritual, is a gift from God. This gift is to be accepted with gratitude … Desiring a personal self-determination, as gender theory prescribes, apart from this fundamental truth that human life is a gift, amounts to a concession to the age-old temptation to make oneself God." 

The document also declared that gender theory is an attempt to introduce new rights that are not among those given by God.

Question 3: What are some of the rights we have that are given to us by God?

Regarding transgender surgeries, the declaration said, "any sex-change intervention, as a rule, risks threatening the unique dignity the person has received from the moment of conception." The document did go on to say that it is acceptable for "a person with genital abnormalities that are already evident at birth or that develop later" to "receive the assistance of healthcare professionals to resolve these abnormalities. However, in this case, such a medical procedure would not constitute a sex change in the sense intended here."

Question 4: Do you think it is necessary to better define “genital abnormalities?”

The Vatican takes its stand against surrogacy, "through which the immensely worthy child becomes a mere object," by citing Pope Francis' words: "The path to peace calls for respect for life, for every human life, starting with the life of the unborn child in the mother's womb, which cannot be suppressed or turned into an object of trafficking."

Question 5: What Bible verse talks about respect for EVERY human life?  How would you define “respect?”

Also, said the document, surrogacy violates the child's "unalienable dignity," in that every child "has the right to have a fully human (and not artificially induced) origin and to receive the gift of a life that manifests both the dignity of the giver and that of the receiver." 

Question 6: Does everyone have a right to a “fully human” origin?

Surrogacy also "violates the dignity of the woman," the Vatican said, "whether she is coerced into it or chooses to subject herself to it freely. For, in this practice, the woman is detached from the child growing in her and becomes a mere means subservient to the arbitrary gain or desire of others."

Question 7: Here is the word “dignity” again.  Is a mother that has artificially induced any less dignified than a mother having a natural childbirth?

For their part, Catholics who consider themselves transgender say the Vatican statement is tone- deaf to the reality of their lives. Although the document restates long-standing Catholic teaching, it still came as a disappointment because recent actions by Pope Francis had encouraged some trans Catholics to hope the church might become more accepting.

The pope has welcomed some transgender women to his weekly general audiences and also said that under certain circumstances, trans people can be baptized as Catholics and serve as godparents.

Maxwell Kuzma, 32, a lifelong Catholic and transgender man living in Ohio, said, "A document like this is very hurtful to the larger LGBTQ+ community but especially to the trans community." He views the declaration as failing to show the "respect, love and support" that Pope Francis has personally extended to the trans community."

Noting the declaration's claim that attempting to change one's sex is trying to "make oneself God,"  Michael Sennett, a transgender man involved with an LGBTQ+ ministry at St. Ignatius of Loyola Church in Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, said, "Trans people who take hormones or have surgeries are not playing God; we are respecting and accepting our authentic selves."

Question 8: Do you think that someone trying to change their sex is “playing God”, as the Vatican document states?

Surveying more broadly across the U.S. population, a 2022 poll by the Pew Research Center found that a majority favor laws that would protect transgender individuals from discrimination in jobs, housing and public spaces, but at the same time, 60% say a person's gender is determined by their sex assigned at birth, which is up from 56% in 2021 and 54% in 2017.

And perhaps surprisingly, even the LGBTQ community is not of one mind about transgender matters. This blog, published in and to the LGBTQ community, stated "trans women and men are often neglected by those who set political priorities of our community, if not treated with outright hostility and prejudice." However, the fact that the blog post is from 2018 and was the most recent statement we could find about transphobia in the U.S. LGBTQ community suggests that those attitudes are changing within that group. 

More on this story can be found at these links:

Vatican Declares Transgender Surgeries, Surrogacy, Gender Theory Threats to Human Dignity. National Review 
Transgender Catholics Say New Vatican Document Shows No Understanding of Their Lives. AP News 
Declaration of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith 'Dignitas Infinita' on Human Dignity. Holy See Press Office 

Applying the News Story 

We are presenting this news without pushing a position on the topics as an opportunity for discussion of gender theory, transgender surgeries and surrogacy. Since there are no Bible verses directly related to any of these three subjects, we will look for some that seem applicable to the general thinking and attitudes about these topics.

Question 9: Has your view about any of the three topics changed? If so, what has caused that change? If not, what has caused your view to remain unchanged?

4. Genesis 1:27 (see text below) says God made human beings "male and female." So if a person is born with genital abnormalities that make it unclear which sex they are, what should we assume about their personhood and human dignity? The Vatican declaration says such persons may "receive the assistance of healthcare professionals to resolve these abnormalities," but in the case of infants who cannot speak for themselves, how might healthcare professionals know which sex to resolve the abnormalities toward?

Question 10: If a person is born with the "hardware" (genitals) of one sex but seems to have received the "software" (brain chemistry, sense of identity and personhood) of the opposite sex, how do they fit into God's scheme of things? 

 

Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

Genesis 1:27
So God created humans in his image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them.
(For context, read Genesis 1:26-31.)

This verse from the creation story summarizes God's creative act in making human beings. 

And he made them -- us -- "in the image of God." Some theological interpretations of that phrase suggest:
- that the "image of God" means a certain quality or characteristic granted to humans -- in short, the soul.
- Others argue that it means a role or task assigned to humanity.
- But still others see it as a definition of humankind that refers to the sanctity and inherent worth of every human being as a whole person. In other words, the value of the person is not just because of his or her soul, but because God has stamped his image in some way on the person's entire being.

Question 11: What does “formed in the image of God” mean to you?  Which of the suggested interpretations of "the image of God" makes the most sense to you? Why? 

 

Whatever the interpretation of the phrase, note that the passage containing this description of the creation of humanity ends with these words: "God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good."

Question 12: Can God create anything but good?

In the comments below the National Review article about the Vatican document, one commenter said, "Problem starts right with the title. Man does not have 'infinite dignity'; he has 'inherent dignity' by virtue of being created in the image of God. Only God has infinite dignity." Do you agree or disagree? Why? 

Psalm 139:13-14
For it was you who formed my inward parts;
    you knit me together in my mother's womb.
I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
    Wonderful are your works;
that I know very well.
(For context, read Psalm 139:13-18.)

The imagery in verses 13-18 provides a picture of God the Giver of Life, forming and shaping the psalmist while in utero, leading the psalmist to exclaim, "I am fearfully and wonderfully made." (By "fearfully" the psalmist means that the contemplation of God's life-giving act has filled the psalmist with awe.) This verse presents the biblical view that human life is not merely the result of biology, but the result of God's intentional will and work. By inference then, human life is of great worth to God.

Questions: If God is the one doing the formation of the individual in the womb, is God's participation in any way lessened if the uterus is a "borrowed" one (as in surrogacy) or if the conception itself occurred in a test tube? 

How is the worth God has assigned you expressed in your everyday life? 

For Further Discussion

2. In discussing issues related to gender theory and transgender surgeries, it is helpful to understand how the words involved are often medically and sociologically defined. The following explanations come from a version of the book Walking the Bridgeless Canyon: Repairing the Breach Between the Church and the LGBT Communityby Kathy Baldock, and are used here with permission:

"'Sex,'in the framework of this book, is not a shortened version of the term 'sexual intercourse'; it refers to the body and to biology. A person's sex is determined by the reproductive system, external genitalia, chromosomes, and hormones."

"Gender is more complicated than sex. You cannot know the gender of a person by examining the genitals, chromosomes, or reproductive system, because gender is an inborn knowledge that develops by the time a child is six years old. Gender refers to socially constructed roles, along with behaviors and activities, most often associated with biological sex. Gender refers to an internal persona, the sense of being a man or a woman. ... Sex and gender are two separate characteristics of a person; because this fact is widely misunderstood, this cannot be overstated, or repeated enounk most people dogh. The words sex and gender are not interchangeable and are commonly misused."

Question 13: Do you understand the difference between “sex” and “gender?”  Do you think most people do?  Is that a problem? 

"Intersex: Infants born outside the XX and XY sex norms have existed throughout history. While these individuals were once called 'hermaphrodites' and 'pseudohermaphrodites,' those terms are not accurate, and are no longer acceptable. The correct term for this condition is 'intersex.' Shrouded in relative secrecy, this topic has only been publicly discussed or more widely acknowledged within the last [20] years. … Intersex people are not unintended by nature, or unknown by God. ... Every person can claim Psalm 139:14, 'I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.' It is vexing to hear Christians claim this verse for their own lives and not be willing to extend the omniscience of God to others who are different."

Question 14: Have you ever known an “intersex” person?  Did you think of them differently?

"Transgender people are not the same as intersex. In the case of transgender people, the sex clearly indicated by the single sex alignment of genitalia, the reproductive system and the chromosomes does not match the internal sense of gender. … 'Transgender' is a larger umbrella term for many groups that express a gender contrary to their biological sex. ... " Transgender, and 'trans' for our purposes, refer to those who experience a fulltime desire to change their outward appearance to achieve greater congruence with the gender they feel that they are. Often, this will include the use of hormones and perhaps surgery."

Question 15. How does the belief in human dignity and worth help in cases where lives must be considered on both sides of the equation? In other words, when taking one life might prevent the loss of another life? What examples of life against life can you think of? 

NOTE: A good question (above), although for me, I am not sure it is “either/or”  (loss of life)

 

 

Prayer

O God, help us who are fearfully and wonderfully made not only to value the lives you have given us, but also to value the lives you have given others, even when we don't understand or don't approve of their situation. And when the latter is the case, don't let our disapproval be based on ignorance of facts. In our relationships with others, enable us to lead with kindness and a willingness to "walk a mile in their shoes." In Jesus’ name. Amen.

 

 

 

From April 16 2024

Richard Dawkins, Famed Apologist for Atheism, Considers Himself ‘A Cultural Christian’

April 1, 2024

 

Dr. Richard Dawkins, a British biologist who is famous for his leadership in the New Atheism movement, said in an interview on Easter Sunday (March 31) that he considers himself “a cultural Christian.”

Perhaps Dawkins’ most famous book is “The God Delusion,” which was published in 2006. In it, Dawkins argues that belief in a personal God is not merely untenable but actually delusional. 

Nevertheless, Dawkins seemed to defend Christianity’s cultural impact in Britain during an interview with talk radio station Leading Britain’s Conversation. When asked what his “Easter message” for the nation would be, Dawkins said, “Well, I was quite horrified that Ramadan was being promoted instead.”

“I do think that we are culturally a Christian country, and I call myself a cultural Christian,” Dawkins added. “I’m not a believer, but there’s a distinction between being a believing Christian and being a cultural Christian.”

Question: Do you think this is true?  What do you think is the difference?

“I sort of feel at home in the Christian ethos,” Dawkins said, citing his affinity for Christian hymns and Christmas carols. “I feel that we are a Christian country in that sense.”

At the same time, Dawkins pointed out that “the number of people who actually believe in Christianity is going down” and that he’s “happy with that.”

“But I would not be happy if, for example, we lost all our cathedrals and our beautiful parish churches,” Dawkins said. “So I count myself a cultural Christian…If we substituted any alternative religion, that would be truly dreadful.”

Dawkins went on to express concern about the number of mosques that are being constructed in Europe, saying, “If I had to choose between Christianity and Islam, I’d choose Christianity every single time. I mean, it seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion in a way that I think Islam is not.”

Question 1: If Richard Dawkins is thinking about what a decent religion is, or is not, it seems to me that he is going way beyond looking at religion as just “cultural”.  It seems to me that he is making judgements as to what “good works” a religion promotes (or doesn’t promote) and why those “good works” are done (i.e. response to assurance of salvation, grace, faith, etc.)

Is Richard Dawkins a Christian?

2 April 2024, 1:09pm

 

When the New Atheism thing was new, I (not Richard Dawkins) wrote a piece saying that the people who supported it were pretentious and cowardly. They pretended to know what religion is, and said that it caused great harm. I said this was ‘intellectual cowardice’. The intellectual coward is one who chooses simplicity over complexity and difficulty.

Question 2: Some (like this author) say that Richard Dawkins is choosing simplicity over complexity and difficulty by just concentrating on the cultural aspects of Christianity and not the underlying beliefs.  What do you think?

One aspect of their cowardice is related to Islam. Their popularity was a result of 9/11, and the widespread fear of religious extremism that ensued, but they didn’t dare focus on Islamic extremism; they wanted to say that religion in general was to blame, that mild-mannered liberal Christians were implicated in violence.

Now Richard Dawkins is trying to sound more nuanced about Christianity. A recent radio interview with LBC is the latest example. But until full repentance occurs, I will continue to associate the man with intellectual cowardice.

Dawkins now says that he is not, of course, a believing Christian, but a cultural one. He’s glad that the old faith is still around. ‘I sort of feel at home in the Christian ethos.’ He notes that Christian belief is declining in Britain, ‘and I’m happy with that. But I would not be happy if we lost all our cathedrals and our beautiful parish churches. So I count myself a cultural Christian.’ Unlike Islam, Dawkins says, Christianity is ‘a fundamentally decent religion.’

‘I don’t despise religious people, I despise what they stand for,’ Dawkins said at the ‘Reason Rally’ in 2012. ‘Mock them! Ridicule them! In public! Does Dawkins still despise what religious people stand for? I wonder what it feels like to realize you’ve been peddling muddle for decades, and that you don’t know what you think. Dawkins ought to say: ‘Sorry, I was intensely conceited to have held forth on this subject, which I now realize is rather complex. I promise to stick to biology from now on.’

Question 3: Why do you think some people feel that Christians should be mocked?  For that matter, why do some people feel that anyone who doesn’t believe what they believe should be mocked?  How do we deal with people who mock us?  How do you feel about mocking people behind their back?

The distinction between a believing Christian and a cultural Christian is dubious, because religion is culture. Belief is not, or not just, an invisible thing in one’s head – it takes the form of culture.  

A lot of people are not sure if they believe, or are not sure how to articulate their half-belief, but sometimes take part in Christian worship – even if it’s just singing the occasional carol, as Dawkins himself enjoys doing. Dawkins wants to categorize such people as merely cultural Christians, like him, not believing ones. But there is no clear distinction.  

In Dawkins’ view, it is harmless and even healthy to participate in Christian culture a little bit, for there is a ‘beauty’ and ‘decency’ to it, but it is deeply mistaken to cross the line into ‘belief’. But there wouldn’t be any Christian culture if there weren’t plenty of committed believers, and there is no clear line between mild participation and tentative belief. In practice, someone who values Christian culture, and sometimes dips a toe in, and is more nuanced and honest than Dawkins, often admits to believing a bit too. I’m sorry if it confuses the sciencey mind, but religious belief just isn’t black and white.

Question 4: Do you think that religious belief (belief in a loving God, salvation from the sinful nature of man, faith and grace) is black and white, or a lot of shades of gray?

Question 5: Do you ever have times when you are not sure if you believe or not?  That your church participation may just be for the “cultural” aspect of church?

NOTE: back in May of 2014, Richard Dawkins described himself as a “secular Christian”.  Before that, he described himself as a “cultural Anglican”.  It seems to me that he spends a lot of time trying to defend his “anti-Christianity” instead of exploring what real Christian belief really is, and accepting that "magnetic pull that kicks in if humans stray off the path they were destined to take.”

 

From April 2 2024

 

BASIC AGENDA
Social Time … 10 mins

Introduction … 5 mins

Discussion: Reaching the Unchurched … 10 mins

Discussion: Getting the Message Out …. 10 mins

Discussion:  Who Are You Going to Offend … 10 mins

Discussion: The Power of Christ ….10 mins

Leading With a Limp ..... 10 mins

What Did We Learn … 5 mins

Announcements …. 5 mins

Prayer Requests ….. 10 mins

Closing Prayer …. 5 mins

 

Steven Furtick's Elevation Church sent Easter seeker-friendly invites that omit 'resurrection,' 'Calvary'

 

INTRODUCTION. (5 MINUTES)
Steven Furtick’s Elevation Church in North Carolina revealed the megachurch doesn’t use words like “resurrection,” “Calvary” or the “blood of Jesus” in their Easter invitations for fear of alienating potential non-Christian attendees.

Nicki Shearer, Elevation Church’s digital content director, recently spoke with Pro Church Tools and said the church, which has 20 locations, avoids using language that “immediately makes someone feel like an outsider.”

Question: Can you imagine how the Easter message of the risen Christ might make someone feel like an outsider?

Question: How many times was “resurrection” or similar words used in our Easter service this year?

 

REACHING THE UNCHURCHED (10 MINUTES)
“When I think about how I’m going to talk about Easter, I’m thinking about how I’m going to talk to people far from God, because that’s the thing that matters most to us,” Shearer said, adding the church wants to reach the “un-churched” and churched alike. 

Bottom of Form

Shearer, who Pro Church Tools said is “responsible for what Elevation says and how they say it,” said Easter and Christmas are the only two events of the year that are “actually wrapped around a particular passage in the Bible.”

“I'm putting a lot of my focus, energy, time, resources toward what I would call the ‘cold audience,’ people far from God,” she reiterated. “I'm not going to say the word ‘Calvary,’ not going to say the word ‘resurrection,’ I'm not going to say the ‘blood of Jesus,' I'm not going to say any of these words that make someone feel like an outsider. This is really an important guide for how we develop language. Anyone can be a part of our church; it might not be for everyone, everyone might not like it, but anyone can come.”

Pro Church Tools attempted to clarify that while certain terms are absent from invitations, they are indeed emphasized during Elevation's services, particularly regarding the resurrection of Christ. 

“[It] doesn’t matter how amazing your message might be if it’s not accessible to the people you’re trying to reach,” interviewer Brady Shearer of Pro Church Tools said. 

Question: On the highest of the church’s holy days (Easter), should we be watering down the (what some would say) the most important message of our lives?

Question: Do you think it is the language used that keeps the unchurched away from church?

Question: The UMC has a different approach to reaching the unchurched.  They call it “Dinner Church” - sharing the gospel over a meal in a very informal setting and utilizing empathetic listening skills.   Which approach would you prefer – a watered down version or a discussion over a meal?

 

GETTING THE MESSAGE OUT (10 MINUTES)

On its website, Elevation made available an Easter message that can be copied and pasted to send to potential attendees.

"Hey, do you have plans for Easter Sunday?" The message reads. "I'm heading to Easter at Elevation. Would you like to join me? The music and the message are always incredible. It's honestly one of my favorite ways to celebrate the holiday. I'd love to have you as my guest this year!"

Nicki Shearer’s comments sparked controversy among some on social media, with critics accusing Elevation Church of diluting Christian messages for the sake of inclusivity.

 

WHO ARE YOU GOING TO OFFEND (10 MINUTES)
“This is woke-ism,” Shane Idleman, pastor of Westside Christian Fellowship in Southern California, said. “'I don’t want to offend others.' Well, you just offended God. … I want to say, listen, you can market the Gospel; just say, ‘Come and see what Christ has done. … I'm not embarrassed of the Gospel, Calvary is a wonderful thing. He shed His blood on Calvary and has set me free and He has risen again.’”

“You might want to get up and go and find a place where you're not offended because the Gospel offends us,” he added. “It breaks us, it humbles us. I'm here because of God, not because of you. … When did the Church become for non-believers? We are to welcome them, reach them, love them and understand them. But at the end of the day, I'm here because of God, and I will not apologize, if that's a little too strong.”

Question: Do you think God is offended by this approach, as some have suggested?

 

THE POWER OF CHRIST (10 MINUTES))

“In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul declares that the foundation of Christianity is the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ,” he told The Christian Post. “To try to reach people on Christmas and Easter without mentioning the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ is like trying to swim in an empty swimming pool. What’s the point?”

Shane Everett and Shane Barnard of the worship duo Shane and Shane told CP that the resurrection has a non-negotiable place in Christian doctrine and stressed that omitting such crucial elements risks presenting a form of Christianity devoid of its power. 

Question: Are we creating a Christianity that is devoid of its power by trying to show that it is a religion/place where we won’t be offended?

LEADING WITH A LIMP (10 MINUTES)

“This seems like a very dangerous place to be,” Everett told CP.

Barnard added that while he’s heard some “great sermons” by Furtick, "you can’t leave the resurrection and even the ascension out of the Gospel."

"Jesus died on the cross for our sins, and the resurrection is proof that the check cleared. It’s a key event in history. I don't know how you could read that and, especially on Easter, not proclaim the resurrection for all who would believe," he said.

The Gospel, according to Shane and Shane, should be presented in its fullness, including the challenging aspects like the acknowledgment of sin, without dilution or omission for the sake of making it more palatable.

"Boasting in our weakness and leading with a limp," as they put it, is the key to creating an environment where seekers feel welcomed and understood, as exemplified by the Apostle Paul.

“The Gospel is an invitation for sinners; Christ Jesus came to die for sinners,” Everett said. “That's not to say that some aren't and some are. It's just that some see that they are and some see that they're not. The Gospel is an invitation for sinners, the lowly and weak. … If you're a sinner, and if you're in need of a Savior, it's the greatest news ever. There's nothing you need to do. You don’t need to pad that for a seeker, because a seeker is seeking the Gospel. They’re after a life of freedom, the forgiveness of sin, everlasting life and God.

You don’t have to overthink it. If you're on an island and you read this book, it's pretty clear what the hope of our salvation is. Be bold and share it. And trust that God's going to do the work. It's His perfect Word.”

Question:  How do we boast in our weakness?  Should we be boasting in our weakness?

 

 

-----

From March 26th, 2024

INTRODUCTION

Researchers Discover Switch in Brain That Turns Stress Into Paralyzing Fear
The Wired Word for the Week of March 24, 2025

In the News
Last week, neurobiologists Hui-quan Li, Nick Spitzer and their colleagues at the University of California San Diego (UCSD) published a report in the journal Science detailing their discovery of a switch in the brain that turns stress into fear. Their research could lead to significant advances in the treatment of patients with debilitating generalized fear responses to stress, such as is often experienced by those suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and similar mental health conditions.

The emotion of fear is a deeply embedded survival mechanism that warns us of the need for vigilance, to avoid or prepare to fight possible threats. But if fear mushrooms to gigantic proportions when we are not in any real or present danger, it can be detrimental to our health and safety. People who have had life-threatening experiences or long-lasting severe stress may find intense fear showing up on their doorstep, even when they are not in any actual danger. 

"Overgeneralization of fear to harmless situations is a core feature of anxiety disorders resulting from acute stress," the researchers wrote. "Traumatic events can lead to anxiety disorders often associated with generalized fear. When this occurs, context-associated fearful behavior generalizes to harmless situations, with adverse consequences on life quality and mental health."

In their study of the dorsal raphe area located in the brainstem in the brains of mice, the UCSD team discovered the neurotransmitters that control how the animals reacted to acute stress (in this case, a series of strong electric foot shocks). As explained in a Brain Tomorrow article,after the mice experienced intense stress, they began to freeze "in fear not just in the chamber where they'd been shocked, but in completely new environments that should have felt safe -- a clear sign of generalized fear."

By overriding the transmitter switch in the chemical signals in the neurons, researchers found that generalized fear responses to stress could be suppressed, reducing the level of fear the mice experienced.

The researchers then compared what was happening in the brains of the mice to the postmortem brains of humans who had suffered from PTSD, and found a similar neurotransmitter switch present there as well.

In their work with mice, the scientists discovered that they could suppress the production of generalized fear by injecting the dorsal raphe of the mice with an adeno-associated virus (AAV) prior to placing them in a situation of acute stress. They also learned that mice who received the antidepressant fluoxetine (commonly known as Prozac) right after a stressful event did not experience generalized fear.

 

Question: Do you think that we can use Biblical truth to fix a medical or physiological problem? 

 

SITUATIONS PRODUCING FEAR

What are some situations which can produce fear?  Here are a few possibilities:
- Relocating residence
- Being arrested or charged (falsely)
- Involved in a fight with a gun or knife
- Threats made against you
- Possibility of the stock market falling dramatically
- Fear of a potentially bad future for our (specific)  
  children (i.e. illness, lack of education, violent nature, etc)
- Fear of a bad future for children (large budget deficit,    
  political issues/decisions, foreign aggression /
  manipulation)
- Diagnosis (personal) of a deadly condition (i.e. cancer)
- Worldwide virus / malady killing millions
- Fear of God’s wrath

 

Question: What are your 3 biggest fears … How are you dealing with them?

 

Question: Are there other situations you want to add to the list?

 

WHAT ABOUT ANXIETY AND WORRY

Question: Does anxiety, and worry count as “fears?”  

1 Peter 5:7-11

^“7 having cast all your anxiety on Him, because He cares about you. ⁸ Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. ^9 [a]So resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experiences of suffering are being accomplished by your ^[b]brothers and sisters who are in the world. ¹⁰ After you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace, who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, will Himself perfect, confirm, strengthen, and establish you.

Question: Do these verses provide any help or comfort for you in times of stress and anxiety?

 

FEAR NOT

Some people have popularized the idea that the phrase, "Fear not!" or "Do not be afraid!" is repeated 365 times in the Bible, one time for each day of the year. But the number of times the phrase appears is actually much lower than that. 

By missionary James Arendt's count, variations of the command appear 104 times in the Bible (still a healthy figure). Rebecca Davis, who describes herself as "a trauma-informed writer," agrees that the Bible doesn't contain a command to fear not for every day of the year. She points out, as have others, that there are some instances when the command not to fear doesn't mean what you might expect it to mean. You can check out the links in this paragraph if you want more information about that. 

"I've thought a lot about the people who feel guilty for their fear, and how the weight of 'fear not' hangs over them when they continue having panic attacks or nameless anxieties. 

 

I think looking closely at the 'fear not' Scriptures really can help relieve that guilt instead of simply increasing it," Davis writes. "Also, when you look closely at the 'fear not' Scriptures, you'll see that when our Lord speaks to people who are afraid, He doesn't treat their fear like a sin. He treats it more like an injury. 'Here, let me make this better,'" she adds.

The Bible makes no bones about the fact that the people of God do have adversaries. Peter describes the devil as our adversary who prowls around like a roaring lion, looking for someone to devour. That image would likely have stirred feelings of anxiety and fear in the hearts of his readers. But Peter doesn't just warn of the threat posed by the devil. He also gives wise counsel: Keep alert, resist the devil, hold fast to your faith. And he assures his readers that God cares for them, so they should cast all their anxiety on him, and that their trials will not last forever, because God "will himself restore, support, strengthen, and establish" them (1 Peter 5:7-11).

Question: In a fearful situation (for you), do you find comfort in the words of the Bible “Fear Not?”

Question: How can remembering Jesus’ words to “Fear Not” help at the time of stress?

 

 

THE FEAR OF THE LORD

Proverbs 9:10
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight.

This is a different type of fear … fear of the Lord.

Question: What does that mean – the fear of the Lord?  

Matthew 10:28-31
[Jesus says,] Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, fear the one who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. And even the hairs of your head are all counted. So do not be afraid; you are of more value than many sparrows.  (For context, read Matthew 10:28-34.)

In Proverbs 9:10, fear is actually urged and commended as the beginning of wisdom! But it is not fear itself, but fear of God. Jesus expands on this, noting that God is the ultimate judge and arbiter, and is the only One actually worthy of utter fear.

Question: In light of what Matthew says, how easy is it now to put aside our fears, except for the fear of the Lord?