Acts of God

by James Beauseigneur

  Decker knew that Rosen must have used his telepathic abilities to have such a detailed knowledge of what Christopher had told him on the plane to Jerusalem. Decker had not given that much detail to the news media, and he certainly had not told them the part about him being Judas. Right now that didn't matter, though. Rosen's arguments were becoming much more convincing than Decker had expected. And if Rosen's references to Jewish prophecy were accurate, then his conclusion that Christopher had lied would be hard to argue. Decker tried to find the flaw in Rosen's logic, but initially found none. He wondered if there might be something that was overlooked, some way perhaps that Christopher and Rosen could both be right. Maybe there was something Christopher had missed; something that occurred after the resurrection of Jesus that he would not have known about because he was cloned from cells left on the Shroud only moments before the resurrection occurred. Then he thought of the one thing that proved Rosen was wrong.

  "Well, Rosen," Decker said with renewed confidence, "I have to admit you tell a pretty convincing story. I can even see why many people, including Tom Donafin, would believe as you do. I could almost believe it myself. There's just one'little' problem. Unlike Tom and the KDT and the fundamentalists, I have known Christopher Goodman almost all of his life, and he has never once told me a lie or done anything that was in the least bit self-serving. Your logic may seem sound now, but I'm sure there's another side to the story and, assuming you really do intend to let me go, when I get back to Babylon I'll ask Christopher about it. And frankly, when it comes down to who I believe, I can guarantee you that I'll give more credence to what Christopher says that to what a kidnapper has told me."

  Rosen frowned and though he seemed disappointed, he honestly appeared to accept Decker's conclusion. "I can accept that," he said to Decker's great surprise. "And I realize there's no way to argue conclusions based upon your experience, so I won't even try. But regarding what I've told you, I know that I rushed through it and later you may want to check to see if all the things I told you are actually in the Bible. I've made a list of the key prophecies and I'll leave you a Bible so you can look them up if you like." Rosen retrieved the satchel he had brought with him and pulled out a sheet of paper and a white leather-covered Bible. The paper contained handwritten notes listing the references for the prophecies Rosen had used.

  "And just supposing I did decide to check your references," Decker said, "how do I know it's not just your version of the Bible?"

  Rosen did not answer directly but handed him the book. "I think you'll recognize the handwriting," he said.

  Decker hesitantly took the Bible and opened it. There, scattered throughout the pages were handwritten notes and yellow-highlighted text. The lettering of the notes was small and precise and despite the years, there was no doubt in Decker's mind who had written it. Turning to the front page, he found confirmation, a note which read: "To Elizabeth Hawthorne, with love from Joshua and liana."

  For a moment Decker could not speak, a fact which he disguised by blindly flipping the pages. "Where did you get this?" he asked quietly after a moment, avoiding eye contact with Rosen. His whispered tone failed to hide the emotion in his voice. The book itself was unimportant, but the notes which contained his wife's thoughts made it unspeakably precious to him.

  "I found it in my parents' house after the Rapture. There was a note with it from my mother to your wife, but I'm afraid that's been lost. Your wife apparently left the Bible at my parents' house when she came to Israel to get you. They were going to mail it back to her. When I found it I intended to send it to you, but it mistakenly got put in a box for storage when I packed up my parents' belongings. I forgot all about it until I was going through my things a few weeks before I left Israel to come to Petra."

  Decker could feel that his defenses were down. He just wanted this session to be over so he could gather his thoughts and deal with his emotions.

  CHAPTER EIGHT

  Necessary Risk

  June 5, 4 N.A. (2026 A.D.)

  The next day Decker awoke much later than the previous morning. Just as before, he awoke to find Petra covered in white. There were far fewer people out gathering and the many bare spots revealed that most had already gathered the manna for the day. Also as before, it seemed to Decker that the number of KDT had significantly increased.

  Rosen did not return until after lunch.

  "Good afternoon, Mr. Hawthorne," Rosen said as he came in. His black eye looked every bit as bad as it had the night before, a fact which Decker found quite satisfying.

  Decker folded his hands over his stomach and leaned back on the bed, electing not to respond to Rosen's greeting. As always, Decker's response or lack of one did not deter Rosen from saying what he had come to say.

  "Yeshua told a story about a farmer who had two sons," Rosen began immediately. "The younger of the two sons decided that he wanted to be on his own, so he went to his father and asked for what would be his inheritance. Reluctantly the father agreed, and the son left. On his own, the younger son fell in with people who were only too happy to help him spend his money. And, of course, before very long his money and his 'friends' were both gone. He found himself with nothing, far from home and working on a pig farm — which, incidentally, is not a good place for a nice Jewish boy to be. Looking at the mess he had made of his life, the son remembered that his father was much more generous to his servants than was his current employer. It occurred to the son that it would be better to admit his failure, go home, and ask his father for a job rather than stay where he was. Along the way, as the son neared the farm that had been his home, his father saw him coming. To the son's surprise, his father ran to meet him on the road, and received him, not as a servant but as a son.

  "But though he was welcomed back by his father, remember I said he had already taken his part of the inheritance. Everything that remained of the inheritance belonged to the older brother. The father couldn't change that. He couldn't just take what was left and split it in half again — that wouldn't be fair to the son who had stayed with him. And I think it's safe to say that, human nature being what it is, if the father had done that, the younger brother would not have learned much from his experience.

  "Your friend, Tom Donafin, had an interesting way of putting it. He said it was like in the movie The Wizard of Oz,51 where the good witch of the north, Glinda, tells Dorothy that all she has to do to go home is to click her heels together and say 'There's no place like home.'" Decker smiled despite himself as he recalled Tom Donafin's penchant for describing everything in terms of a movie. "When Dorothy asked Glinda why she hadn't just told her that to begin with, Glinda answered that she wouldn't have believed it. The point was, that until Dorothy experienced life away from home, she wouldn't truly understand and believe that there really is no place like home. The way Tom Donafin put it was that in order for Dorothy to learn her lesson, she had to earn her lesson so that she could appreciate how true it really was.

  "The same was true for the farmer's younger son. Like almost everything else in life, Mr. Hawthorne, wisdom has a price. Lessons bought too cheaply seldom stay learned. If there is no price there is no value, and consequently nothing is learned. Of course, some lessons cost more than others."

  Decker could not deny the truth in what Rosen said nor could he tell where he was going with it, so he stayed silent.

  "When God created the earth," Rosen said, "he gave Adam and Eve a perfect paradise to live in and nearly total freedom to do as they wished. The only thing he told them not to do was eat from a particular tree — the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. But of course, as soon as you tell someone not to do something, that's exactly what they want to do: it's human nature. So sure enough, before long Adam and Eve were checking out the tree, where they met Lucifer in the form of a snake. Lucifer told them that the reason God didn't want them to eat from the tree was because it would make them like God. Now when you think about it," Rosen said, "that's got to be the greatest temptation in
the world. Everyone wants to be in charge, to make their own rules, to be their own god. It's certainly proven to be a successful drawing card for Christopher and the New Age movement."

  "Twice now you've blamed human nature for the way people act," Decker interrupted, "and I don't really disagree with you on that. But explain to me, if you can, why this god of yours, who you think is all-powerful and all-knowing and all-loving, made human nature so imperfect to begin with. And, while we're on the subject, what kind of an idiot is this god of yours to put the tree in the garden, within easy reach of Adam and Eve, if he didn't want them to eat it? Unless, of course . . ." Decker said, pausing to make his point, "he wanted them to fail. And if that was his intention then surely you have to admit that he's every bit as evil as Christopher says he is." Decker hoped that his questions might catch Rosen off guard, but as always, Rosen had a ready answer.

  "People have struggled with that question and questions like it for thousands of years, Mr. Hawthorne. But the answer is really pretty simple."

  "Oh brother," Decker said, already regretting that he had asked the question.

  "But to understand it," Rosen began, despite Decker's protests, "you need to look at what it was that Adam and Eve actually did. It wasn't the fruit itself that was the problem. The real problem was their defiance. They defied God and his law because they wanted to be like God. That's really not so unusual, though. We all want to have our own way, to be in effect, our own lawgiver, our own god.

  "So far all you've done is to restate the problem. You still haven't answered why."

  "I'm getting to it," Rosen said. "Because we are made in God's image, it's our nature to want to be God."

  "Oh, I see! You're saying Yahweh made a design error," Decker interrupted with a verbal jab.

  "Not a design error," Rosen countered, "for now let's just call it a necessary risk. It's the same risk every parent takes when they have children. Just as a child is created in the image of its parents, God created us in his image to be his family. Anything less and we would not be his children — we'd be his pets or slaves. But God did not create us to be his pets or slaves, he created us to be his family, his children! Now it's up to us to decide whether we want to be his children or not —just as the decision was up to the farmer's two sons, and just as it was up to Adam and Eve. And though, like Adam and Eve, we all may want to be gods, there can be only one God. A wheel with two centers will not turn. A universe with two gods cannot function."

  "Let's get back to what you said about God creating us to be his children," Decker said. "There comes a time when children need to leave the nest, to go out on their own. And whether the parents like it or not, they have to be willing to let go"

  "That is true, Mr. Hawthorne. The child must be given more and more responsibility for himself as he grows. But we should clarify our terms. The term 'child of God' does not speak of immaturity on our part, but of unceasing love for us on God's part. A child will cease to be a youth, but a parent never ceases to be a parent. The relationship goes beyond the ages of the individuals involved. Being a child of God denotes a relationship of love, trust, and respect — not of oppression."

  "Yeah, sure," Decker said, "just as long as we're willing to obey his laws and follow his orders."

  "I know that Christopher says that Yahweh's laws are designed to oppress people, to keep them forever unable to reason for themselves. But God himself said to mankind, Come, let us reason together. If you really take the time to consider God's laws, you'll find that they are as reasonable and beneficial and indeed as necessary to our very survival as are the law of gravity and the other laws of nature. God's laws are designed not to oppress but to sustain. Jesus was asked by one of the religious leaders what God's greatest commandment is. He answered that the greatest commandment is 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' And he said the second greatest commandment is like the first: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' Not only are those the two greatest commandments, Jesus said that every other law in the Bible is wrapped up in those two commands."

  "Yeah, but those aren't the only things Yahweh said we had to do," Decker answered. "The Bible includes a lot more laws than just the Ten Commandments."

  "Six hundred and sixteen laws, to be exact," Rosen replied. "But all of those laws, every one of them, has as its foundation the two laws Jesus talked about."

  "So what if I disagree that something is wrong in a particular situation?"

  "Making a decision about whether something is right or wrong based on the situation would be fine if you could be sure you knew everything that there is to know about the situation. But can you really know all of the consequences of your actions? Can you look into the future to determine every outcome of your decisions? You'd be a liar or a fool to say you could. Very little in life turns out as we expect it to. It's Murphy's law: 'If something can go wrong, it will.' And of course, something almost always can go wrong. At best, those who depend on their individual judgment to determine right and wrong end up making a 'best guess' based on the known data and the range of anticipated possible outcomes. At worst, they ignore the obvious consequences of their actions, telling themselves everything will work itself out, just so they can do what they wanted to do in the first place. And somewhere between the best and worst cases are the decisions which, despite our intentions, find their origins in judgments unavoidably clouded by our self interests. God's laws are the standard established by the only one who knows everything — past, present, and future — so that we don't have to rely on our own limited knowledge of situations."

  "So we're just supposed to put our brains on hold and follow blindly along the path that God has set for us!" Decker responded.

  "Not at all, Mr. Hawthorne. Remember, Jesus said that the greatest commandment is to love God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. He included your mind. He doesn't want us to blindly accept what somebody tells us; he wants us to consider the evidence, to use our mind as well as our heart in coming to him and in following him. Blind faith is an alien concept to the mature Christian. It's the New Age religions that tell their adherents to put their minds on hold and let some spirit guide or unknown force direct them. It's the New Age religions that tell us that our future is determined by such things as the location of certain stars on the day we were born."

  Rosen had hit upon two things that had always made Decker a little uncomfortable about the New Agers. He had never had any difficulty with anything Christopher said and only a little trouble with most of what Milner said, but some of those who followed Christopher and Milner held what seemed to Decker to be very bizarre and unscientific beliefs and practices that he would rather not try to defend. Spirit guides and astrology were two of them. And since he preferred not to dwell on these things, he did not mind at all when Rosen went on to what seemed to be another subject.

  "When Jesus was crucified," Rosen continued, "there were thieves crucified on either side of him. One of the thieves, even though he was dying on a cross, taunted and insulted Jesus. But the other thief realized that while he deserved punishment for the crimes he had committed, he knew that Jesus was innocent. Somehow, by the grace of God and despite the circumstances, he also recognized Jesus as the Messiah.

  "You might think that a condemned man doesn't have much to lose, but even then a person may still cling to his pride. Even as he hung there on the cross, the first thief wanted to be accepted by the crowd. I suppose he thought he could make himself appear better by tearing down someone else. The other thief, though, was willing to give up his pride and dignity, admit his guilt and, there in front of everyone, turn his fate over to the Messiah, saying, 'Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.'

  "Jesus' response to the thief s request was very unusual. He didn't give him a list of things to do so that he could be accepted by God. He didn't tell him he had to be baptized, or sanctified, or take communion, or do good works, or walk acros
s burning coals, or make a pilgrimage, or chant, or anything. He simply said, 'I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.'"

  "It may seem like the thief didn't do anything except ask, but we should not miss the point of what he did do. Just like the farmer's younger son, who admitted his failure and returned humbly to his father, so the thief recognized his guilt and turned humbly to Jesus.

  "You see, Mr. Hawthorne, just like the fanner's son and the thief on the cross, people don't become Christians because they're good people; they become Christians because they realize that they've failed. They know that they've broken God's laws, and that they are sinners.

  "When you get right down to it, Christianity is like bankruptcy. To accept Yeshua is to admit defeat and throw yourself on the mercy of the court because you realize that justice demands more than you can possibly pay. The down payment alone would cost you your life; and what good is learning the lesson, if the cost of earning your lesson leaves you dead?

  "I remember reading in school about a bizarre practice used by royalty in Europe to punish a prince. Instead of punishing the prince himself when he was bad, a boy of the prince's same age — called a whipping boy — would bear the punishment for the prince. It always seemed both incredibly unfair and incredibly stupid to me — incredibly unfair because a boy who had done nothing was punished for what someone else did, and incredibly stupid because the prince had no motivation for changing his behavior. More recently, though, it occurred to me that it was not so stupid as I had assumed. Properly administered, it could be a very effective deterrent against bad behavior by the prince."