Restitution by ordinary Americans to Indigenous Americans

This month, November, observes Indigenous Peoples here in the USA -  Native American Heritage Month.  Such an observance is long past due.  There's lots to mourn, and lots of celebrate.  And lots of work still to do.

Recently I have been reading a lot about justice, restitution, Native (Indigenous) Americans and the dominant (white) culture here in the United States.  I was already familiar with the pattern of land grab, treaties, deceit, violence and more land grabs that been the pattern of dealing with the indigenous peoples during the last centuries in the USA.  I hadn't known as much about the situation in the last century, but more recently I have read about the boarding schools, the reorganization of tribes to steal yet more land from them, the violence toward natives, and the poverty on the reservations.

Much of the reading I've been doing has been simply educational - telling the stories of the injustices and current problems.  But what I'm looking for is an answer (or answers) to this question: 

What can I, as an ordinary American with little power and voice, do to help find justice for those who have been oppressed by my culture and perhaps by my own ancestors?  How can I help to make up for the injustices of the past and those of the present?

Hopefully this is a question that many dominant (white) culture Americans would like to have an answer to, not just towards the Native peoples, but also towards other groups as well.

I've found few suggestions other than the suggestion to educate myself and speak up to politicians about issues of importance to indigenous peoples in this country.  But surely there must be more. 

As I was thinking about this over the last few weeks, I thought of the mill levy.  If you own property in the US, chances are you know about mill levies.  A mill levy is a tax of one dollar per $1000 of value usually paid to a government entity.  It is usually paid on real estate such as a house or other property.  Similar taxes are levied on vehicles.  You pay a certain amount per $100 or $1000 of value of the property.

What if we non-Indigenous people paid a "tax" similar to a mill levy to various Indigenous groups that would help them in health care, food, food sufficiency, culture and language preservation and growth, and land acquisition? 

For example, if I paid $1 per $10,000 value on my house, and my house were worth a half a million dollars, then I would pay $50.  That's not much, but it's a beginning.  And if that were multiplied by tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or millions of people who were giving money to Native groups  then think of the impact - financial, emotional, social, and spiritual.  

Those giving the money would be acknowledging the faults of the dominant culture that they are part of (whether or not their own ancestors participated in the evils of the past), and the role that culture has played in harming other people.  As they give the money to various organizations, they must also give up control of their money to the receiving group to use as they see fit.  Of course, the recipients must be honest and use the donated funds ethically.  But they should be in charge of their own resources to meet their own needs as they deem best.

So where would an interested person give?  A lot would depend on your own interests and geography.  A Christian might give to various Christian groups that work with Native Americans or to various Native American ministries.  People interested in language and cultural preservation might give to some groups, and those interested in meeting physical needs might give to health, housing or food organizations.  The link immediately below has a tremendous wealth of resources about various tribes and tribal governments and how to contact them.  If you live in an area with a lot of Native American people, either on a reservation or off, then directly contacting them might be a first place to start.  Or one might want to give one's "rent" to a nation that used to live where you do now.

https://nativemi.org/all-things-native/

Christian groups

• Rain Ministries
• Indigenous Pathways 

Language preservation (a few samples I found.  There are a lot of others as well.)

• NativeLanguages.org  Scroll down a ways
• Lakhota language
• https://www.stjo.org/programs/lakota-language/ 
• Native American Language resources
• Endangered Language Fund
• Navajo Language Resources
• Northern Arapaho Immersion program

Cultural preservation

• Native America today
• Native Hope

Health

• Native Hope 
• Native Partnership 

Housing

• Native Hope
• Southwestindian.com 

Food

• Tanka Fund
• Indigenous Seeds
• Alliance of Native Seedkeepers
• Indigenous Seedkeepers Network
• Southwestindian.com 

Under no circumstances do I think that paying a 1/10 of a mill levy is enough to make restitution for what has been lost and for the current conditions of many Native Americans.  No, it's just a beginning.  Hopefully others will see the vision and begin to do this and increase this amount so that real help can be given.

Science, the Bible and Adam and Eve

Given my theological training and study and my background in science and teaching science, I have developed a real interest in human origins.  One of the major sticking points in holding both science and the Bible to be true has been the historicity of Adam and Eve.  Traditional understandings of them claim that they must have lived in the Middle East around five to ten thousand years ago and that they, and they alone, were the first humans and that all of us descend from them and only them originally.  Furthermore, Adam and Eve were directly created by God and placed in the Garden of Eden.  The entire Earth was idyllic. 

Scientific understanding, however, is rather different.  At no time in the last several hundred thousand years has the human population fallen to less than about ten thousand individuals.  There is no way that we are all descended from only two individuals, especially two people who lived less than fifteen thousand years ago!  Furthermore, rather than being a direct creation by God, humans and great apes share a common descent from ancestors who lived several million years ago.  The Earth has always been pretty much as we know it today as far as weather, climate systems, biological and geological processes.

So how should we deal with these conflicting claims?  Some will jettison the understanding in my first paragraph above, and others will jettison the second.  There are other solutions which involve God picking a pair of evolved people and dealing with them in a special way.  But all of these solutions run into the problem that humans today are not descended from only two people at any point in time. 

So along comes a book, The Genealogical Adam & Eve by S. Joshua Swamidass.  Dr. Swamidass proposes that both the ideas of science and the traditional understandings of the Bible are true.  How?

The first thing that we need to realize is that we are descended from people that we have no DNA from.  That is, they are genealogical ancestors, but not genetic ancestors.   The amount of DNA that is passed along is cut in half every generation, until finally a given DNA piece that you have will vanish from nearly all of your descendants.   That is what makes doing DNA tests interesting, but frustrating.  You are related to people that you share no genes with.

Now, given this fact (which the author explains in detail), we can be descended from people that we have no genes from.  When, though, could these people have lived?  The author explains mathematical models that show that all people alive in the first century AD could very well (and almost certainly are) descended from a pair of people alive a few thousand years before, and that if they lived in the Middle East, it is even more likely.  He deals with objections such as genetic isolation in the Americas, and in Australia and Tasmania, showing that it is likely that even these people are not as isolated as one might think and that these people too are likely descended from a pair of people who lived a few thousand years ago.  The rest of humanity at Adam and Eve's time would have been descended from animals.

Now, there is no scientific way of proving that this pair existed and who they were, but there is no scientific way of proving that they did not, and in fact it is likely that they did exist. 

Dr. Swamidass has thus shown that both positions could very well be true.   This has a lot of interesting ramifications.

First, Adam and Eve are now a theological  "problem" rather than a scientific one.
Second, what are the theological questions that follow?
There are a lot of them, and the author answers some of them in more details, but for most of them, he lays out the questions in the hope that others will fill in the questions or add to the discussions that will hopefully follow.  (See his website here)

What is the relationship between Adam's contemporaries and God?  The author differentiates between biological humans and "textual" humans.
What is the nature of the "Fall"?  How does sin affect biological humans who are not textual humans?  How is sin transmitted?
How do we deal with texts that appear to teach that Adam and Eve were the ancestors of all people of all time?
How does this affect the Atonement and our understanding of what Jesus did and why he came?

Not everyone thinks that this approach solves the problems; see this review for example.  But I think that Dr. Swamidass' approach opens many doors for fruitful discussion and thought.  Has he solved the questions that are raised, theologically and textually?  No.  But I think that he has shown that one can hold to both a traditional understanding of Adam and Eve and to a scientific understanding of the origins of humanity. 

Hans Madueme, the author of the review I linked to in the paragraph above, holds to the traditional understanding of the Genesis text.  I don't think that he deals with the scientific problems in his review.  He critiques Swamadass on the basis of Biblical texts that appear to indicate that Adam and Eve were the ancestors of all humans everywhere, every when.  Madueme is unwilling to re-examine his traditional understanding of the text in the light of genetic and evolutionary evidence that points against it. 

Is it time to re-examine our understanding of the text, just as our spiritual ancestors did in a shift away from a geo-centric model of the solar system and universe?

Group Identity and the Gospel

Today we live an age where our culture is pushing and demanding identity politics.  We are to find our identity in our sexuality, our ethnic backgrounds, in a group that has or is experiencing real or imagined suffering.  Rather than find common ground with others, we simply find those who hold similar views to ourselves and view those that not as we are as strange, different, or even evil.

Of course, many of the claimed sufferings of individuals or groups in the past and the present are real and should be addressed.  Slavery and its long-lasting effects, racism against indigenous peoples and against Hispanics and Asians in this country need to be addressed.  Poverty and oppression are real problems.  Women have been the recipients of oppression and sexual abuse as well.  These problems are even worse in other parts of the world.  (Although perhaps conveniently ignored by the identity culture.)

But the tendency to divide and sub-divide into splinter groups to address these issues or cast blame or complain about past or current abuses is not helpful.  While I believe this tendency is not helpful from a social viewpoint, it is also counter to the Gospel and counter Christian, which is what I would like to address.

I'm currently a book, Reading Romans with Eastern Eyes.  The author has many years of experience with Eastern Asian cultures and has written much about honor and shame in Christian and in Asian contexts.  In this book he shows how Paul, the author of Romans, wishes his readers to find their honor and acceptance in God through Jesus and in the Christian community rather than in their ethnic identity as Jew or Greek.  The Jews were the descendants of Abraham and the recipients of God's promises to him, as opposed to the Gentiles.  The Greeks were civilized and looked down on the surrounding nations, the barbarians.  The Romans saw themselves as cultural Greeks and therefore looked down on other nations as well.

Part of the reason we seek to find our identity in various groups is that it is within those groups that we find our "belonging" or "honor" or "face."  It is within those groups that we find acceptance and approval and we seek those groups to bolster our esteem.

The danger for the church in Rome was that the Jews would look down on the Gentiles, and the Romans would look down on the Jews.  They found their acceptance, approval, and honor in their own group and in putting down the other group(s).

So too American (and probably others as well) Christians are tempted today to find their acceptance and honor and approval in following a certain political group (and opposing the other groups), in one's own ethnic group or sexuality or in some other characteristic.  In other words, it is about one's identity.  This article talks about going beyond identity politics, to finding one's acceptance as an individual, rather than as a group.  But that is not enough

W. in his book on Romans points out that for Christians, finding our identity in an ethnic group, sexual group or any other groups is completely against the Gospel.  "Glory is not rooted in group identity" (page 114).  As Christians, our acceptance and approval don't come from our political alliances, the groups that reinforce our sexual identity or from our ethnic identity.  Rather, our glory -- our acceptance and approval -- come from being in Christ, allying ourselves with him, and in our future glorification and resurrection.

I believe that as human beings, we desperately want to belong, to find acceptance, and to have face/honor/recognition.  Where will we find these things?  Our culture increasingly says in identity politics, others say these will be found as individuals.  God says that we find these things in following Jesus and that he will give these things to Jesus' followers.

Where will you find your acceptance?

What are the ramifications for Christians today?  We must refuse to be drawn into the game currently played in our culture and on social media.  Although there are worthy goals on both sides of many of the debates today, the whole game is couched in terms that we Christians cannot accept.  There is something more important than our sexuality, history, and skin color.

First, our acceptance and face/recognition has to come from God and his standards be reinforced by the Christian community. 

Second, as Christians it is our task to reinforce each other in these standards. This is one of the most important functions of the church.

Third, we should not encourage Christians, nor should we ourselves, be involved in identity politics.  As Lisa Spencer wrote in a recent article, Choose this day whom you will serve: Jesus or Skin Color?

The inability of the Left to make important distinctions

MAGA hats are racist.  MAGA hats are divisive.  MAGA hats are a vehicle of white supremacy.

Here are a few recent examples.

"Why Trump's MAGA hats have become a potent symbol of racism" is the title of one article written in just the last few days.

"The MAGA hat, like the Confederate flag, wouldn't elicit outraged reactions if it were only a piece of cloth that harkened back to bygone days never to be relived. But it isn't. It is a signifier for those who believe America was great during some point in the past they dare not name, knowing if they do, it would reveal a time when it was worse for people of color. When was America "great"? When millions of black people were slaves? When hundreds of thousands of black men were sold to US companies via convict leasing? Maybe during the heart of Jim Crow, the height of lynching, or when black people struggling with drug addictions were viewed as criminals to be controlled, not fellow human beings needing help?"

"You can read the white rage in their MAGA hats"

"Alyssa Milano: 'The red MAGA hat is the new white hood'" 

Triggered over a MAGA hat.  by a CNN commentator!!


So what do I mean by the inability of the Left to make important distinctions?

1. They can't see how America was ever great if it was flawed, such as in treatment of the indigenous peoples or in slavery.  By this measure, no one and no nation is ever great, nor could be.  Rome wasn't great.  Because only perfection is great, but nothing human is perfect.  They can't recognize that people and nations can be great and yet flawed.  Our Founding Fathers were great people for the most part.  But some of them supported slavery and others didn't but were slave owners.  The Greatest Generation was just that, but by today's standards we couldn't call them great because they didn't get rid of Jim Crow and racism.  Martin Luther and Martin Luther King, Jr. were great, but both deeply flawed.  The first was anti-Semitic, and the second an adulterer.  I would argue that the ability to make distinctions is the sign of maturity.  We should be able to recognize that Rome was great, but had serious flaws.  We can acknowledge the great good that MLK Jr. did, but not ignore the sins and flaws in his life.
2. They can't see how people can wear a MAGA hat for different reasons.  There are undoubtedly racists and white supremacists who support Trump.  But those on the Left assume that anyone who wears such a hat or supports Trump is a racist or white supremacist, just because some of his supporters are.  But not all of his supporters are.  There are a lot of reasons why people supported Trump or would like to make America great again.  But the Left wants to associate all or most of his supporters with those groups.  This is utter nonsense and shows the lack of intellectual sophistication on the Left.  
3. Anything that the Left disagrees with is reaaallllyyyy bad.  Like Hitler bad.  Or KKK bad.   Just because something is bad, doesn't mean it's totally, terribly, completely evil.  Really?  You can't make distinctions about how bad things relative to other things?  Everything is equally good or equally bad?
4. The Left doesn't get that Trump doesn't care about words.  He uses them, but they don't mean that much to him.  What he cares about is getting things done, and words help him get there.  Results are what matter.  To the Left, results mean very little.  What does matter is words, and process, and feelings.  This is why Trump's gotten so much done.  If results mattered to the Left they would abandon many of their policies (such as the war on poverty) and try something else.
5. The Left can't distinguish between legal and illegal immigration.  If you are against the latter, you be against all immigration.  And you are a racist.  Really?
6. If I disagree with something, then I hate it.  Really?  You don't see the difference between hate (see my previous post) and disagreeing?  Hate means a strong dislike and a desire for bad things to someone or an idea. 

Is this an unwillingness or an inability?

• Are those on the Left unwilling to make such distinctions?  If so, are they lazy, or evil?
• Are they unable to?  If so, then are they mentally deficient, or merely uneducated?

Friends and others on the Left.  

Grow up.  

Develop some mental muscle and the ability to distinguish between things, ideas, and people.

If you are on the Right, you are probably agreeing with me at this point.  If you are a moderate Democrat, you are perhaps annoyed at my painting all Democrats with the same brush and not making any distinctions.  You might even accuse me of doing the same thing that I'm accusing the Left of doing.  And you would be mostly correct.  First, how do you like my doing what the Left does most of the time?  Second, please call out those on the Left when they are over top and when they fail to make distinctions.  Then we can make distinctions where they need to be made and begin to respect each other's views and each other.

thank you!

We are a hate filled nation, not a loving nation

Yesterday a story hit social media. 
"Teens in Make America Great Again Hats Taunted a Native American elder at the Lincoln Memorial"

and later in the day the other side. 
"Teen in confrontation with Native American elder says he was trying to defuse the situation"

and a summary and analysis.

The teens in question, students at a Catholic school in Kentucky, were in Washington DC for the Pro-Life March and were waiting for their bus to pick them up in the late afternoon.  Exactly who said and did what, and in what sequence, is still open to question.  Who was in the right or wrong isn't really my concern at this point.  I would instead like to make a different point.

This episode (and others like it such as those involving Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, and Henry Louis Gates Jr.) show that as a nation we are quick to judge and condemn and slow to forgive.  We don't want the whole story; we want the story that fits our narrative.  We want to feel righteous and condemn others. 

I was introduced to the story above yesterday by feeds on Facebook from two of my younger friends (both young enough to be my children).  In both cases the individuals who posted the story condemned the young man in the picture and his classmates.  I pointed out that this was a rush to judgement and that we should wait for the entire story to come out.  This morning there was much more on the second side, casting major doubts on the first narrative.  No doubt there will be more information that comes out, and who knows what the final verdict will be?   One of my two young friends is still inclined to believe the first narrative, and the second apologized for rushing to judgement so quickly.  (hooray for him!)

So how do love and hate fit in with this?  I think that the famous love passage from St. Paul will shed some light on this.

First Corinthians 13
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.  8 Love never fails.   NIV, from https://www.biblegateway.com on January 21, 2019

My two young friends (and a whole lot of other people) did not exhibit love in this situation.  They were easily angered, and kept a record of wrongs.  They seemed to delight in the "fact" that the young man was a racist and was disrespectful.  It didn't seem to occur to them that this was a sad thing, and might not even be true.  Lewis' comments below shed light on this. 

C S Lewis on 
“Suppose one reads a story of filthy atrocities in the paper. Then suppose that something turns up suggesting that the story might not be quite true, or not quite so bad as it was made out. Is one's first feeling, 'Thank God, even they aren't quite so bad as that,' or is it a feeling of disappointment, and even a determination to cling to the first story for the sheer pleasure of thinking your enemies are as bad as possible? If it is the second then it is, I am afraid, the first step in a process which, if followed to the end, will make us into devils. You see, one is beginning to wish that black was a little blacker. If we give that wish its head, later on we shall wish to see grey as black, and then to see white itself as black. Finally we shall insist on seeing everything -- God and our friends and ourselves included -- as bad, and not be able to stop doing it: we shall be fixed for ever in a universe of pure hatred.”

― C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity  found on https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/170990-suppose-one-reads-a-story-of-filthy-atrocities-in-the on January 21, 2019

What do the Leftists and Progressives think of Trump supporters?  Do they think that MAGA supporters are as bad as possible?  Yes, I think that overall they do.  Are people on the Left frequently looking for reasons to be offended by those on the Right?  Yes.  Democrats think the worst of Republicans.  I don't think that the reverse is true, but it is rapidly become so.  As a nation we are increasingly acting out of hateful attitudes and motives.   We see the worst in the other side, and we only want to see the worst.  We want to be offended by the other side.

What's the remedy for this?  I'm reminded of Jesus' words of the second greatest commandment. 

"Love your neighbor as yourself."

Love is wishing the best for another person, and the best love is actively working toward that best.
Hate is wishing the worst for another person, and the worst hate is actively working toward that end.

By those definitions,

• When we get angry at another motorist, are we acting in love?
• When we react negatively toward people we disagree with, do we wish them the best in spite of our disagreement, or do we hope the worst for them?  Is this love, or hate?
• When people threaten others professionally, or their lives, or in other ways because of disagreements, are we acting in love or hate?
• When we look for reasons to be offended, are we acting in love?

What can you and I do about this situation?  

• Practice thinking the best about others and giving them the benefit of the doubt.
• Encourage others to wait for a more complete picture before rushing to judgement.
• Call people out on truly hateful attitudes, words and actions.  
• Differentiate between disagreement and real hate.
• Pray for those we disagree with.
• Actively do good things for others.
• Stop looking for reasons to be offended by what others say and do

Our culture can be improved if we act more out of love, and less out of hate.

My Etsy site

Yes, this is a shameless advertisement for my shop.  I know it's a little late for Christmas gifts this year, but I have an Etsy site with a lot of handmade wood craft items and forged items.  I also have some other items that might interest a local person, but are too expensive to ship.  My wife also has a lot of soaps, shampoo bars, and lotion bars, although she's sold out of most items at the moment.   

My Etsy shop
Pegler Crafts and Forge

Here are some pictures of items I've made that you might think of for yourself, or gifts that are on the Etsy site.  For other items, such as pens and pencils (mechanical pencils), please check out the Etsy shop above.

 

 

 



Here are the log slice lamps that I've made.  They are mostly around 20 inches tall, and are made of birch, walnut, juniper, aspen.  They aren't plugged in in the pictures below, but they can be plugged into a 120 v wall outlet.  No batteries.  These would be expensive to ship, so if you are in the Front Range of Colorado and are interested, let me know.

 

 

all things work together for good

Romans 8:28 English Standard Version (ESV)
28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.

Romans 8:28 American Standard Version (ASV)
28 And we know that to them that love God all things work together for good, even to them that are called according to his purpose.

Romans 8:28 Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)
28 We know that all things work together for the good of those who love God: those who are called according to His purpose.

This verse has become very meaningful to me recently.  My children still aren't reconciled to me, my parents moved across the country in their 80s, my job is in jeopardy as I write this.  Much of this is my own fault, as well.

Some observations about what Paul writes: 

1. Paul does not say that the good things will work together for good.
2. Paul does not say that the things I've done right will work together for good.
3. Paul does say all things.  That includes the things that I've done well, the things that I've done badly or for the wrong motives.  It includes even sin and the effects of sin.

God is bigger than our mistakes and our errors and our sins, and he will work these things out for good.  This is not an excuse for doing things poorly or sinning, but it is a great comfort to know in times of difficulty, even difficulties that are of our own making.