Like most people, I do my best thinking in the shower.  Of course, it would help if I were actually taking one when I did it (har har).  Some will argue that their best thinking is done while driving, or commuting, and that is when I usually fine tune my points, none of which are worth fine tuning.

 

So, while in the shower, I thought about this title, and started thinking of things in life that we give such high credence to, but are never really worth anything, only to pacify someone's penchant for control and order.  Like, why do Catholic's (or any religion) give out a certificate of baptism, as if we need it, like some 'green card' for Heaven.  As some of you have read here, you know my feelings about Catholics, and being a former Catholic (like being a former New Yorker, (and for those of you who are, you know what I mean)), I'm entitled to exposing the 'secrets'.

 

I'm digressing.

 

One thing I wonder about is the jobs many people have, that...well...are just outright stupid, or so pathetically easy (and good paying), that you wonder how they ever came about (and why you couldn't have a job like that!). 

 

For instance, under the category of stupid is the job of smelling arm pits.  The companies that make deodorant have teams of people checking to see how long, or powerful, their product is by testing on subjects, and then...well...smell pits to see if it really works.  I'm sorry, but some things aren't worth the benefits!  I can imagine some mom working there, going to each pit thinking, 'I'm doing this for my kids.'

 

Under the category of easy, those who play with toys comes to mind, (or shopping, or watching TV), and give their feedback.  Also runway models (I missed my calling!).  Okay, those aren't good examples, but I recall my father-in-law talking about a custodial worker at the Chrysler plant in Kokomo, IN.  The guy was union, and the only responsiblity he had was to care for two offices, which consisted of emptying two trash cans every day, dustmop the floor, and once every six months, strip and rewax the floor.  He wasn't allowed to clean any other office, or do any other work because of contract rules.  His time to do the job every day took a total of 15 minutes.  He spent the remainder of the 7 hours and 45 minutes reading newspapers, etc. (this was before internet).  When my father-in-law told me about this in the early ninety's, the annual income for that worker was over $50,000 per year.  He figured he was getting paid somewhere in the neighborhood of $250.00/hour for the work he actually did (come to think of it, I know a couple of pharmacists who fit this to a 'T'). 

 

And we wonder why our country is in such shambles.

 

Well enough for now.  I will bring up other topics as they push themselves into the area of my mind I like to call the pissing-me-off zone, (and when I can finally figure out how this stupid shower works).

 

(Footnote to todays post: On MSN today, they're running an article about amazing careers.  Writer is listed, with an average salary of almost $50,000/year.  Hmmm, that's almost $250.00/hour!)

 

I read through the book again, this time much slowly, trying to find what it is that has all the doctrine police's dander on end.  I read a rebuttal article by Wayne Jacobsen, from the Wind Blown Media website, discussing the points made about the book. 

 

I must admit, my first reaction about the issue of how Paul Young represents forgiveness was wrong.  I knee-jerked, so to speak.  Though I agree with Tim Challies's assertion on forgiveness NOT being unconditional, I have to say that it doesn't apply to what Mr. Young was expressing in The Shack.  The content in question, is from the chapter titled A Morning of Sorrows, and starting on page 227 (of the hard cover edition, third printing), is the discussion Mack has with God about forgiving the murderer.  After reading this several times, there is no indication to me that the author hints at God condoning unconditional forgiveness, but to pronounce forgiveness, regardless of the offender acknowledging their offense.

 

This, along with many other issues covered, were handled with truth, and loving care.  Mr. Jacobsen, as well as others who collaborated with the story, all agree that one needs to turn to the bible for the answers, and see if representation of scripture in this piece of fiction holds true.

 

I think its time we quit squabbling over nuance, and trivial matters.  These self-proclaimed doctrine police need to take the advice from Romans 14 & Colossians 2:18-23.