After sending an e-mail to our friend asking her to publish it to the loop, it never happened. A few days later I received an e-mail back with responses from Berit Kjos who has written extensive exposes on C.S. Lewis and others for her own words on these subjects go to www.crossroad.to. My comments were taken to mean things other than what I said although I will admit my ignorance on the timeline of when things in C.S. Lewis’ life happened. My response to the e-mail is as follows:
My statements were not ones of growing weary over the constant battle of ensuring the integrity of the gospel. My weariness is over how we treat those who are in error. Those who are called to be defenders of the truth are often to quick to condemn the person to hell if anything they state is in error. I too have been guilty of this in the past. I am not saying that we should not be diligent in pursuit of the truth. We often get in the mode of destroying the fallacies of the enemy that we unwittingly become his tool in that we destroy all in our path without regard. The very people we are trying to reach see the way we attack others and do not see our love, then they are turned away. It is one thing to point out if someone is in error, I am not one to shy away from that, it is another thing when we take those statements of error and speculate about their eternal destiny. Mr. Lewis may well have been a Christian, but had his thinking skewed by the influences in his life including a church that did not ascribe to tight literal conservative theology.
While I may have been wrong about the timeline (I relied on knowledge as told to me by others without doing my own research, my bad) it does not change my basic message. I will not ascribe C.S. Lewis to hell because he may have said a few things in error. The only thing that could place him there is if he did not accept Jesus as his Lord and Savior. Again this does not mean that we sit back and say that everything he wrote is correct. What it does mean is that if we find error we document it, verify it, expose it, and then expect our statements to be held to the same level of scrutiny.
We as Christians are tasked with two important things, One is to spread the gospel and reach others with the message of the unending, awe inspiring, wonderful love that He has for His greatest creation, the second is to defend the faith from attack both from without and from within. Our feeble, finite, and fallible brains cannot begin to wrap around even a tenth of a percent of His love for us and what measures he would go through to reach us, yet we are all too quick to destroy that which does not line up with our preconceived ideas in our attempt to defend His message. Who is more in the wrong? The person who says something in error or the person who attacks the person in error rather than exposing the error, if both lead to people being turned away from His love?
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
Sunday, December 25, 2005
Merry Christmas
26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.
37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.
38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
Luke 1: 26-38
1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.
2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)
5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.
6 And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.
7 And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us.
16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.
17 And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child.
18 And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds.
Luke 2: 1-18
27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.
37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.
38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
Luke 1: 26-38
1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.
2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)
5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.
6 And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.
7 And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us.
16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.
17 And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child.
18 And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds.
Luke 2: 1-18
Saturday, December 24, 2005
NFL Picks Week 16
At the end of week 15 I was 9-7 for the week and 117-58 for the year. Which gives me a 66.86 % correct rating.
Blue = win
Red = loss
Atlanta at Tampa Bay: Tampa Bay
Buffalo at Cincinnati: Cincinnati
Dallas at Carolina: Dallas
Detroit at New Orleans: New Orleans
Jacksonville at Houston: Jacksonville
N.Y. Giants at Washington: N.Y. Giants
Pittsburgh at Cleveland: Pittsburgh
San Diego at Kansas City: San Diego
San Francisco at St. Louis: St. Louis
Tennessee at Miami: Miami
Philadelphia at Arizona: Philadelphia
Indianapolis at Seattle: Seattle
Oakland at Denver: Denver
Chicago at Green Bay: Chicago
Minnesota at Baltimore: Minnesota
New England at N.Y. Jets: New England
Blue = win
Red = loss
Atlanta at Tampa Bay: Tampa Bay
Buffalo at Cincinnati: Cincinnati
Dallas at Carolina: Dallas
Detroit at New Orleans: New Orleans
Jacksonville at Houston: Jacksonville
N.Y. Giants at Washington: N.Y. Giants
Pittsburgh at Cleveland: Pittsburgh
San Diego at Kansas City: San Diego
San Francisco at St. Louis: St. Louis
Tennessee at Miami: Miami
Philadelphia at Arizona: Philadelphia
Indianapolis at Seattle: Seattle
Oakland at Denver: Denver
Chicago at Green Bay: Chicago
Minnesota at Baltimore: Minnesota
New England at N.Y. Jets: New England
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Difster Hits A Home Run.
“Whether or not C.S. Lewis was a Christian is indeed irrelevant.
It cannot be argued however that the Chronicles are based heavily on Biblical theology. Is that theology complete and correct? It's allegorical fiction so it's not likely to be complete or correct.The books he wrote say nothing of his eternal destiny.
There is nothing that prevents me (other than a lack of talent and time) from writing a work of fiction that would, to a Muslim, seem inspired by Allah himself. Writing such a work would say nothing about what I actually believed or my eternal fate. As a Christian, it would be quite unexpected for me to write such a thing but not a point on which to judge my life or my beliefs.â€
Difster
To say that this has been a hot topic of discussion around the Eaglewood household would be an understatement. It basically came down to this in our discussions: Lewis wrote from what he knew and what types of influences he had during his life. He was led to Christianity late in life and was a professor of English literature. As a mater of fact the first two books in the Narnia series were originally written before C.S. Lewis converted and then rewritten to reflect more of his Christian worldview. He was a member of the Church of England, which was heavily teaching theistic evolution at the time, and Greek, Roman, and Celtic mythology heavily influence English literature.
The books were meant as an allegory, a loose one but still an allegory. Is it heavy in Biblical theology? No it is not, but there are allot of Christian based stories that are out there that are not. Should we just simply not read or see anything that is not directly associated with the Word of G_d?
The thing that disturbed me the most was the apparent use of proof texting on C.S. Lewis’ works without the context of the whole of his work. Taking isolated passages out of anyone’s writing can be made to look bad upon the author. We as Christians should be very careful about this, and should understand this the most because our own book from G_d is taken out of context all the time. Does C.S. Lewis’ writings deserve scrutiny? I would be disappointed if they were not scrutinized, but I hate when people ascribe motive and intent to works of pure fiction, and then make assertions about a person’s salvation based upon those few texts. This especially in the light that he cannot either defend his position or make the claim that he was wrong about something he wrote early on in his walk. Could C.S. Lewis of had some mistaken thoughts and beliefs during his short walk as a believer? I am sure he did as we all do, we are all fallible, fallen beings and prone to getting things wrong, and viewing things through our own limited vision.
It cannot be argued however that the Chronicles are based heavily on Biblical theology. Is that theology complete and correct? It's allegorical fiction so it's not likely to be complete or correct.The books he wrote say nothing of his eternal destiny.
There is nothing that prevents me (other than a lack of talent and time) from writing a work of fiction that would, to a Muslim, seem inspired by Allah himself. Writing such a work would say nothing about what I actually believed or my eternal fate. As a Christian, it would be quite unexpected for me to write such a thing but not a point on which to judge my life or my beliefs.â€
Difster
To say that this has been a hot topic of discussion around the Eaglewood household would be an understatement. It basically came down to this in our discussions: Lewis wrote from what he knew and what types of influences he had during his life. He was led to Christianity late in life and was a professor of English literature. As a mater of fact the first two books in the Narnia series were originally written before C.S. Lewis converted and then rewritten to reflect more of his Christian worldview. He was a member of the Church of England, which was heavily teaching theistic evolution at the time, and Greek, Roman, and Celtic mythology heavily influence English literature.
The books were meant as an allegory, a loose one but still an allegory. Is it heavy in Biblical theology? No it is not, but there are allot of Christian based stories that are out there that are not. Should we just simply not read or see anything that is not directly associated with the Word of G_d?
The thing that disturbed me the most was the apparent use of proof texting on C.S. Lewis’ works without the context of the whole of his work. Taking isolated passages out of anyone’s writing can be made to look bad upon the author. We as Christians should be very careful about this, and should understand this the most because our own book from G_d is taken out of context all the time. Does C.S. Lewis’ writings deserve scrutiny? I would be disappointed if they were not scrutinized, but I hate when people ascribe motive and intent to works of pure fiction, and then make assertions about a person’s salvation based upon those few texts. This especially in the light that he cannot either defend his position or make the claim that he was wrong about something he wrote early on in his walk. Could C.S. Lewis of had some mistaken thoughts and beliefs during his short walk as a believer? I am sure he did as we all do, we are all fallible, fallen beings and prone to getting things wrong, and viewing things through our own limited vision.
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
IS C.S. Lewis a Christian?
I know I said I was going to post on something else now but this has been on ongoing issue for sometime on an e-mail loop Birdie belongs to. Jimmie (also a member) piped in and said what has been on my mind concerning the issue and said it, quite frankly, better than I could.
There has been some controversy over C.S. Lewis, The Chronicles of Narnia, and his other writings, all of this stemming from the recent release of The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. This debate has worked its way into whether or not C.S. Lewis is a Christian. I was getting quite disgusted and was considering saying something myself when Jimmie piped in. Here is what he said:
“Why do we kill the weak and wounded?
It was once argued that everyone who baptized infants went to hell.
It was once argued that each person who did not believe in handling snakes to prove salvation went to hell.
It was once argued that all Papists went to hell.
It was once argued that all communists went to hell.
It was once argued that all good men went to heaven.
It was once argued that all murderers went to hell.
I was once told to be careful of intellectually educated people because they were all liberal in their theology and Godless.
I was once told that anyone who did not believe in the virgin birth went to hell.
I was once told that no true Christian can have a Christmas tree in their home.
I was once told that none of the elect can own a television or radio.
I was once told a person who writes allegory and thoughts about their faith were hell bound if every word they ever wrote did not line up chapter and verse with Biblical text.
I was once told that if every believer did not believe the exact same thing that I believe for the exact same reasons I believe, those people are bound for hell.
I was once told in 1989 in East Texas that black people are cursed by God and are all doomed for hell even if they claim to be a Christian and the Holy Spirit demonstrates activity in their lives.
I was once told the Jesus Christ was not the only way to heave and that we Baptist just need to get over it.
Out of all of the above idiotic statements above, only one deserves attention from believers. I was once told that there are only three to five things that are necessary for a person to be a Christian. I was also told that everything but those three to five things were up for debate and interpretation. This is absolutely true. What does it really take for a person to go to heaven?
I believe the first thing required to be a convert is being called by God to become a convert. I believe the second thing required is to accept Jesus as the Lord and Savior of your life. I believe the third thing required to be a convert is accepting forgiveness of sins from God. There may be one or two more, but there are no more than that.
If I have a brother or sister in the faith who agrees on these three to five necessities of the faith, then what ever they believe about any of the arguable things should not matter to me. I am only concerned about their eternal destiny not their orthodoxy. I think orthodoxy is important, but not to the point of maligning another believer with charges of having heretical views concerning areas of acceptable debate.
That leads me to the latest attacks on C. S. Lewis. I am quite sure C.S. Lewis never claimed to write "Inspired Words from God." I am also quite sure he was an intellectual apologist. He never had a biblical education or ever stated that he was a Biblical scholar. Lewis like many normal people who placed their own thoughts down on paper is being deconstructed by those who do not understand the original intent. Directly assuming theological implications based in C. S. Lewis' writings is weak at best and insipid at worst. I am not an apologist for Lewis; but I am worried about many of the articles questioning his eternal destiny. Almost all theological orthodoxy is always up for debate on any given day, but questioning the eternal destiny of a> person based on debatable issues is not acceptable for believers, whether mature or immature in the faith.â€
In His Grace,
Jimmie W. Kersh
Jimmiekersh.blogspot.com
There has been some controversy over C.S. Lewis, The Chronicles of Narnia, and his other writings, all of this stemming from the recent release of The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. This debate has worked its way into whether or not C.S. Lewis is a Christian. I was getting quite disgusted and was considering saying something myself when Jimmie piped in. Here is what he said:
“Why do we kill the weak and wounded?
It was once argued that everyone who baptized infants went to hell.
It was once argued that each person who did not believe in handling snakes to prove salvation went to hell.
It was once argued that all Papists went to hell.
It was once argued that all communists went to hell.
It was once argued that all good men went to heaven.
It was once argued that all murderers went to hell.
I was once told to be careful of intellectually educated people because they were all liberal in their theology and Godless.
I was once told that anyone who did not believe in the virgin birth went to hell.
I was once told that no true Christian can have a Christmas tree in their home.
I was once told that none of the elect can own a television or radio.
I was once told a person who writes allegory and thoughts about their faith were hell bound if every word they ever wrote did not line up chapter and verse with Biblical text.
I was once told that if every believer did not believe the exact same thing that I believe for the exact same reasons I believe, those people are bound for hell.
I was once told in 1989 in East Texas that black people are cursed by God and are all doomed for hell even if they claim to be a Christian and the Holy Spirit demonstrates activity in their lives.
I was once told the Jesus Christ was not the only way to heave and that we Baptist just need to get over it.
Out of all of the above idiotic statements above, only one deserves attention from believers. I was once told that there are only three to five things that are necessary for a person to be a Christian. I was also told that everything but those three to five things were up for debate and interpretation. This is absolutely true. What does it really take for a person to go to heaven?
I believe the first thing required to be a convert is being called by God to become a convert. I believe the second thing required is to accept Jesus as the Lord and Savior of your life. I believe the third thing required to be a convert is accepting forgiveness of sins from God. There may be one or two more, but there are no more than that.
If I have a brother or sister in the faith who agrees on these three to five necessities of the faith, then what ever they believe about any of the arguable things should not matter to me. I am only concerned about their eternal destiny not their orthodoxy. I think orthodoxy is important, but not to the point of maligning another believer with charges of having heretical views concerning areas of acceptable debate.
That leads me to the latest attacks on C. S. Lewis. I am quite sure C.S. Lewis never claimed to write "Inspired Words from God." I am also quite sure he was an intellectual apologist. He never had a biblical education or ever stated that he was a Biblical scholar. Lewis like many normal people who placed their own thoughts down on paper is being deconstructed by those who do not understand the original intent. Directly assuming theological implications based in C. S. Lewis' writings is weak at best and insipid at worst. I am not an apologist for Lewis; but I am worried about many of the articles questioning his eternal destiny. Almost all theological orthodoxy is always up for debate on any given day, but questioning the eternal destiny of a> person based on debatable issues is not acceptable for believers, whether mature or immature in the faith.â€
In His Grace,
Jimmie W. Kersh
Jimmiekersh.blogspot.com
All I can say is AMEN.
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Christians and Abortion Part 1
Few things amaze me more than someone who can claim a Biblical argument in favor of abortion. Over the past couple of years my views on a lot things have changed, but one thing that has not changed is my view on human life. Even before finding Yeshua I had a basic understanding that killing an unborn child was wrong. This attitude was prevalent in my family life as a child even though I did not know it at the time. My parents divorce was caused by a breakdown in their relationship after my mother found out that a positive pregnancy test could mean that she had cancer and the only way it could be determined for sure would kill any child if she was pregnant.
I had a less than pleasant discussion with Ted over at Emunda when Erik had a discussion about abortion. Ted claims that abortion is moral and legal in the Bible because he claims the life does not begin until a person starts breathing based on Genesis 2:7. Well he hit one of my buttons, partially because of his claim, and partially due to his attitude. He came across as someone who has a lot of hatred for those who do not fall in line with his view on the world and religion. After several personal attacks from him I disengaged from the discussion, not because I cannot handle attack (the Lord knows how much personal attack I have gone through to think his petty attacks would hurt me), but because he repeatedly dodged the questions I presented.
Ok, on to the point of the matter. There are two main verses in the Word that people like to use to justify abortion. Exodus 21:22-25 and Genesis 2:7. This first is used as a justification on the premise that an unborn child’s life is worth less than an adult’s and the second is used to justify abortion on the grounds that a person does not have spirit until he / she is born. Both are incorrect interpretations of these verses. Lets take a look.
We will look at Genesis 2:7 first, as that is the verse that Ted used in his defense.
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul
KJV
The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
NIV
Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
NASB
And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
ASV
Then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath or spirit of life, and man became a living being.
AMP
These are several translations of the same verse. And they all discuss the same point in that G_d gave life to Adam. Now in order to truly understand the meaning of this verse we have to look at it from the Hebrew perspective. Seeing as how I am just learning all of this now I asked someone for a little help on this. I was told that a more literal translation of the phrase “LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life†would be “"Yahweh blew into the nose of the dirt he had assembled." It is not a literal bending over the man with His mouth to man's nose, it is a Hebrew way of saying, "Yahweh brought breath into the nose of the dirt He had assembled." The understood meaning for those Moses wrote this to would be, "He caused life to be in the dirt He assembled together."â€
With looking at this from a Hebrew perspective we can see that there was no life at all; Adam was basically mud. No heartbeat, no brain activity, no movement of any kind, just a lump of clay. Then G-d miraculously breathed LIFE into His creation. The important part is that the clinical first breath is not what was being discussed in this verse but that Adam was brought to life. His heart started beating, his brain started functioning, and all things in his body started working and moving. Taking a breath is not a determining factor of whether or not we are alive.
The logical problem with the argument about the breath issue is this, is life in existence without the lungs taking in air voluntarily? The answer is a most definitive yes.
I will discuss the verses in Exodus Christians and Abortion Part 2.
I had a less than pleasant discussion with Ted over at Emunda when Erik had a discussion about abortion. Ted claims that abortion is moral and legal in the Bible because he claims the life does not begin until a person starts breathing based on Genesis 2:7. Well he hit one of my buttons, partially because of his claim, and partially due to his attitude. He came across as someone who has a lot of hatred for those who do not fall in line with his view on the world and religion. After several personal attacks from him I disengaged from the discussion, not because I cannot handle attack (the Lord knows how much personal attack I have gone through to think his petty attacks would hurt me), but because he repeatedly dodged the questions I presented.
Ok, on to the point of the matter. There are two main verses in the Word that people like to use to justify abortion. Exodus 21:22-25 and Genesis 2:7. This first is used as a justification on the premise that an unborn child’s life is worth less than an adult’s and the second is used to justify abortion on the grounds that a person does not have spirit until he / she is born. Both are incorrect interpretations of these verses. Lets take a look.
We will look at Genesis 2:7 first, as that is the verse that Ted used in his defense.
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul
KJV
The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
NIV
Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
NASB
And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
ASV
Then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath or spirit of life, and man became a living being.
AMP
These are several translations of the same verse. And they all discuss the same point in that G_d gave life to Adam. Now in order to truly understand the meaning of this verse we have to look at it from the Hebrew perspective. Seeing as how I am just learning all of this now I asked someone for a little help on this. I was told that a more literal translation of the phrase “LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life†would be “"Yahweh blew into the nose of the dirt he had assembled." It is not a literal bending over the man with His mouth to man's nose, it is a Hebrew way of saying, "Yahweh brought breath into the nose of the dirt He had assembled." The understood meaning for those Moses wrote this to would be, "He caused life to be in the dirt He assembled together."â€
With looking at this from a Hebrew perspective we can see that there was no life at all; Adam was basically mud. No heartbeat, no brain activity, no movement of any kind, just a lump of clay. Then G-d miraculously breathed LIFE into His creation. The important part is that the clinical first breath is not what was being discussed in this verse but that Adam was brought to life. His heart started beating, his brain started functioning, and all things in his body started working and moving. Taking a breath is not a determining factor of whether or not we are alive.
The logical problem with the argument about the breath issue is this, is life in existence without the lungs taking in air voluntarily? The answer is a most definitive yes.
I will discuss the verses in Exodus Christians and Abortion Part 2.
Saturday, December 17, 2005
NFL Picks Week 15
At the end of week 14 I was 13-3 for the week and 108-51 for the year.
Blue = win
Red = loss
Tampa Bay at New England: New England
Kansas City at N.Y. Giants: Kansas City
Denver at Buffalo: Denver
Arizona at Houston: Arizona
Carolina at New Orleans: Carolina
N.Y. Jets at Miami: Miami
Philadelphia at St. Louis: St. Louis
Pittsburgh at Minnesota: Pittsburgh
San Diego at Indianapolis: Indianapolis
Seattle at Tennessee: Seattle
San Francisco at Jacksonville: Jacksonville
Cincinnati at Detroit: Cincinnati
Cleveland at Oakland: Oakland
Dallas at Washington: Dallas
Atlanta at Chicago: Chicago
Green Bay at Baltimore: Green Bay
Blue = win
Red = loss
Tampa Bay at New England: New England
Kansas City at N.Y. Giants: Kansas City
Denver at Buffalo: Denver
Arizona at Houston: Arizona
Carolina at New Orleans: Carolina
N.Y. Jets at Miami: Miami
Philadelphia at St. Louis: St. Louis
Pittsburgh at Minnesota: Pittsburgh
San Diego at Indianapolis: Indianapolis
Seattle at Tennessee: Seattle
San Francisco at Jacksonville: Jacksonville
Cincinnati at Detroit: Cincinnati
Cleveland at Oakland: Oakland
Dallas at Washington: Dallas
Atlanta at Chicago: Chicago
Green Bay at Baltimore: Green Bay
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Christmas Traditions
With it being ten days until the celebration of our Lord’s birthday I thought I discuss Christmas traditions. Over the years it seems that different cultures have added to and taken away from things that have been done at this time of year. Now I am not going to claim to be some kind of expert on Christmas but Birdie and I have over the years done different things and have found what we think truly reflects what Christmas is supposed to be about.
1. We have stopped putting up a tree. Now I know for some this is the first sign that we are loons. Some people come out and claim that decorating a tree is forbidden in the Bible, but my study of the verses used to claim this shows that this is more about making wooden idols than decorating trees, although I do have problems with a certain song that worships the Christmas tree. We have simply found that it is not what we want to do due to how we present our gifts.
2. We place our gifts around a nativity. When we decided to stop putting up a tree we decided to place the gifts we gave the children around a nativity scene. There is some symbolism here. Fist we limit the number of gifts to three symbolizing the three gifts given to Jesus when the Magi visited Him. Secondly it teaches the children a lesson about not only laying our burdens before Yeshua but also to lay all of the good things we get in life at His feet. Thirdly the limit on the number of gifts teaches the children that the holiday is not about greed and what they are going to get.
3. Santa does not visit our household. This is the one we get the most flack over. This is also one of the first Christmas decisions we ever made. To begin with we made the pact not to lie to our children, and I do not care how you couch it or rationalize it telling your children Santa exists is lying to them. The practical reason being is that if our children knew we lied to them about Santa who they cannot see they have a reason to doubt Yeshua’s existence as well. There are other studies in greed and such that can be discussed as well but that was our primary reasoning.
1. We have stopped putting up a tree. Now I know for some this is the first sign that we are loons. Some people come out and claim that decorating a tree is forbidden in the Bible, but my study of the verses used to claim this shows that this is more about making wooden idols than decorating trees, although I do have problems with a certain song that worships the Christmas tree. We have simply found that it is not what we want to do due to how we present our gifts.
2. We place our gifts around a nativity. When we decided to stop putting up a tree we decided to place the gifts we gave the children around a nativity scene. There is some symbolism here. Fist we limit the number of gifts to three symbolizing the three gifts given to Jesus when the Magi visited Him. Secondly it teaches the children a lesson about not only laying our burdens before Yeshua but also to lay all of the good things we get in life at His feet. Thirdly the limit on the number of gifts teaches the children that the holiday is not about greed and what they are going to get.
3. Santa does not visit our household. This is the one we get the most flack over. This is also one of the first Christmas decisions we ever made. To begin with we made the pact not to lie to our children, and I do not care how you couch it or rationalize it telling your children Santa exists is lying to them. The practical reason being is that if our children knew we lied to them about Santa who they cannot see they have a reason to doubt Yeshua’s existence as well. There are other studies in greed and such that can be discussed as well but that was our primary reasoning.
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Poking at Anthills
Living here in Texas you get to learn about a wonderful little creature called the fire ant. For those of you that live in the north and have never had the pleasure of meeting one of these creatures consider yourselves blessed. These ants have a nasty temper and will attack in mass with only the slightest of provocation, and leave the nastiest of welts after you have been bitten repeatedly. They also have readily recognizable mounds. As a child I liked to stir up these ants from time to time. You had to be careful and use a long stick. From the point that you stuck the stick in onward you had them in an angry frenzy. It was quite fun at least from the perspective of a young boy. It was not so much fun when I got bit, or when I picked the wrong kind of anthill and the ants in it would scurry but not to the point of the fire ants, or if the ants had moved to a new mound.
Why do I bring this up? Because I have been trying to poke the stick at the proverbial anthill just to see if I could get a reaction from a particular “fire ant†atheist and his friends over at Vox’s. You see this person made the claim that a person cannot be a libertarian and a Christian because Christianity is a might = right system and that the self-ownership platform is contrary to the so-called Christian belief that we are either owned by G_d or by Satan.
First off his claim of might = right is not true to Christian teachings. Although we believe that G_d created the universe, has ordered everything in its place, has set the rules, and has the power to enforce those rules; we also know that he created free will, which allows us to refuse to follow those rules. If we choose to go our own way then we will suffer the consequences of our actions because we in our imperfection cannot coexist with G_d in His perfection. But a way has been provided for us that we do not have to be destroyed but that we can coexist with our creator through the perfect sacrifice of His Son.
It is also a misconception that G_d “owns†us. This is also due to free will; if G_d owned us then we would be little automations that did whatever He pleased. Free will allowed for us to show our love for our Creator but also allowed for us to reject Him. The place where “ownership†comes in is where the person who has freely surrendered his life to Yeshua now realizes that his life has been bought with the blood shed for him. That means he has freely given control of his life to G_d and accepts the price paid for it.
Nowhere does this contradict libertarian views. What it does do is challenge the atheistic viewpoint of those who would deny that G_d does exist. Using the very definition that the poster at Vox’s used I will show that a Christian can be a libertarian.
“Libertarianism is a modern political philosophy [1] that strongly advocates the maximization of individual rights, private property rights, and free market capitalism... Libertarians see themselves as consistent supporters of maximum freedom and minimum state intervention in all human activities (where "freedom" is defined as negative liberty)... Libertarians hold that no one should be restrained by initiatory coercion... Libertarians believe that individuals should have the liberty to make their own moral choices as long as they do not use coercion to prevent others from having that same liberty.†(emphasis mine)
From Wikipedia.
As a Christian believing in free will I do not think that a Christian can force another person to live by the moral code set forth by G_d in the Bible, but we do have an obligation to warn people of the consequences of their actions if they do not heed what the Creator has said. This fits right into libertarian views. I could go on more but this post is already long so I will finish for now, but if someone wishes for me to expound further let me know.
BTW the poster in question never answered any of my questions and was eventually banned from Vox’s site due to breaking one of Vox’s very few rules. So I left from this anthill a little frustrated because I was not the only one to ask the same basic question just to be ignored. For those who are curious here is my question:
What I wonder is if you are truly libertarian then why do you care what some other person who claims to be a libertarian thinks? Is not one of the basic tenants of libertarianism about each person living as he sees fit? So if you choose atheism and I choose to live my life following Jesus what does it matter to you? The only difference here would be that I am concerned for your immortal soul and you don’t care because we are all going to end up as worm food.
Why do I bring this up? Because I have been trying to poke the stick at the proverbial anthill just to see if I could get a reaction from a particular “fire ant†atheist and his friends over at Vox’s. You see this person made the claim that a person cannot be a libertarian and a Christian because Christianity is a might = right system and that the self-ownership platform is contrary to the so-called Christian belief that we are either owned by G_d or by Satan.
First off his claim of might = right is not true to Christian teachings. Although we believe that G_d created the universe, has ordered everything in its place, has set the rules, and has the power to enforce those rules; we also know that he created free will, which allows us to refuse to follow those rules. If we choose to go our own way then we will suffer the consequences of our actions because we in our imperfection cannot coexist with G_d in His perfection. But a way has been provided for us that we do not have to be destroyed but that we can coexist with our creator through the perfect sacrifice of His Son.
It is also a misconception that G_d “owns†us. This is also due to free will; if G_d owned us then we would be little automations that did whatever He pleased. Free will allowed for us to show our love for our Creator but also allowed for us to reject Him. The place where “ownership†comes in is where the person who has freely surrendered his life to Yeshua now realizes that his life has been bought with the blood shed for him. That means he has freely given control of his life to G_d and accepts the price paid for it.
Nowhere does this contradict libertarian views. What it does do is challenge the atheistic viewpoint of those who would deny that G_d does exist. Using the very definition that the poster at Vox’s used I will show that a Christian can be a libertarian.
“Libertarianism is a modern political philosophy [1] that strongly advocates the maximization of individual rights, private property rights, and free market capitalism... Libertarians see themselves as consistent supporters of maximum freedom and minimum state intervention in all human activities (where "freedom" is defined as negative liberty)... Libertarians hold that no one should be restrained by initiatory coercion... Libertarians believe that individuals should have the liberty to make their own moral choices as long as they do not use coercion to prevent others from having that same liberty.†(emphasis mine)
From Wikipedia.
As a Christian believing in free will I do not think that a Christian can force another person to live by the moral code set forth by G_d in the Bible, but we do have an obligation to warn people of the consequences of their actions if they do not heed what the Creator has said. This fits right into libertarian views. I could go on more but this post is already long so I will finish for now, but if someone wishes for me to expound further let me know.
BTW the poster in question never answered any of my questions and was eventually banned from Vox’s site due to breaking one of Vox’s very few rules. So I left from this anthill a little frustrated because I was not the only one to ask the same basic question just to be ignored. For those who are curious here is my question:
What I wonder is if you are truly libertarian then why do you care what some other person who claims to be a libertarian thinks? Is not one of the basic tenants of libertarianism about each person living as he sees fit? So if you choose atheism and I choose to live my life following Jesus what does it matter to you? The only difference here would be that I am concerned for your immortal soul and you don’t care because we are all going to end up as worm food.
Monday, December 12, 2005
Random Thoughts
I have felt inspired by a couple of posts I have read today one from my mentor Jimmie and one from Tom Cotter. Both of them separately were expounding on similar ideas from different angles. Jimmie was talking about the church having cocooned itself from the world for decades and Tom was discussing being out-of-control Christians.
Jimmie's post hit me personally due to the amount of time I have spent over the years cocooning myself from the world and I am now coming out of that cocoon and desiring to be the out-of-control Christian Tom talks about on his blog.
To be completely sold out for Yeshua forsaking all and taking up my cross is what I desire to do now, and I feel a little frustrated that things are not moving as fast as I would like them to. I feel like I have a lot to say to the bride about The One Who Loves Her and here I am stuck working two jobs and trying to study the materials that Jimmie has given me so far. I have portions of sermons that bounce through my head all the time and I need to start writing them down and collecting my thoughts. I think that may be the direction my blog goes for a while.
I am really rambling now so I will finish for the night.
May Yeshua bless you all.
Jimmie's post hit me personally due to the amount of time I have spent over the years cocooning myself from the world and I am now coming out of that cocoon and desiring to be the out-of-control Christian Tom talks about on his blog.
To be completely sold out for Yeshua forsaking all and taking up my cross is what I desire to do now, and I feel a little frustrated that things are not moving as fast as I would like them to. I feel like I have a lot to say to the bride about The One Who Loves Her and here I am stuck working two jobs and trying to study the materials that Jimmie has given me so far. I have portions of sermons that bounce through my head all the time and I need to start writing them down and collecting my thoughts. I think that may be the direction my blog goes for a while.
I am really rambling now so I will finish for the night.
May Yeshua bless you all.
Answered Prayer
Some time back I mentioned some tension in the family between Birdie and her parents stemming from when we announced we were going to have our fourth child. We were very concerned about what would happen when they found out about the fifth one that is on the way.
They came to visit today and I was not home in case there were problems. When they arrived Sneefert informed his Grandma on the way in the door that Mama was going to have a baby. Things went very well from there and they are actually seeing the child as the blessing and gift that he/she is. They also understand our position on letting G_d decide our family size as well. All around this was a good visit. And we have no more worries about Birdie’s family being against this child. They even like the names we have picked out.
They came to visit today and I was not home in case there were problems. When they arrived Sneefert informed his Grandma on the way in the door that Mama was going to have a baby. Things went very well from there and they are actually seeing the child as the blessing and gift that he/she is. They also understand our position on letting G_d decide our family size as well. All around this was a good visit. And we have no more worries about Birdie’s family being against this child. They even like the names we have picked out.
Wings and Prayers
My lovely wife is a very talented and intelligent woman. She also has a great sense of humor. I hear her talking around the house about this and that and I am constantly telling her if she started her own blog other people would appreciate what she has to say. Every time I do so she tells me “Nobody wants to hear what I have to say.†I have also consistently told her that was not the case.
So what happens? After reading a post on Difster’s blog about the best of his readers blogs, and coming to the conclusion that she is the only person over 5 with internet access that does not have a blog she starts one.
Go and check her out and make her feel welcome. BTW I love what she named her blog.
Wings and Prayers
So what happens? After reading a post on Difster’s blog about the best of his readers blogs, and coming to the conclusion that she is the only person over 5 with internet access that does not have a blog she starts one.
Go and check her out and make her feel welcome. BTW I love what she named her blog.
Wings and Prayers
Sunday, December 11, 2005
NFL Picks Week 14
At the end of week thirteen I was 13-3 for the week and 95-48 for the year.
Blue = win
Red = loss
Chicago at Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh
Cleveland at Cincinnati: Cincinnati
Houston at Tennessee: Tennessee
Indianapolis at Jacksonville: Indianapolis
New England at Buffalo: New England
Oakland at N.Y. Jets: Oakland
St. Louis at Minnesota: Vikings
Tampa Bay at Carolina: Tampa Bay
N.Y. Giants at Philadelphia: N.Y. Giants
San Francisco at Seattle: Seattle
Washington at Arizona: Cardinals
Baltimore at Denver: Denver
Kansas City at Dallas: Dallas
Miami at San Diego: San Diego
Detroit at Green Bay: Green Bay
New Orleans at Atlanta: Atlanta
Blue = win
Red = loss
Chicago at Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh
Cleveland at Cincinnati: Cincinnati
Houston at Tennessee: Tennessee
Indianapolis at Jacksonville: Indianapolis
New England at Buffalo: New England
Oakland at N.Y. Jets: Oakland
St. Louis at Minnesota: Vikings
Tampa Bay at Carolina: Tampa Bay
N.Y. Giants at Philadelphia: N.Y. Giants
San Francisco at Seattle: Seattle
Washington at Arizona: Cardinals
Baltimore at Denver: Denver
Kansas City at Dallas: Dallas
Miami at San Diego: San Diego
Detroit at Green Bay: Green Bay
New Orleans at Atlanta: Atlanta
Update:
I am 13 and 3 for the second week in a row. My prediction ability on football is getting allot better .
Thursday, December 8, 2005
!!!!!Thought Crimes Alert!!!!!
Billy D was the one who kept us up to date on this stuff up until now but with the beloved IDV closing it’s doors it falls to someone else to alert the masses, I guess that will be me as I have the info on this one.
HR 2662 is the bill. Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005
Go here for the text of the bill and look at it for yourself. Once you get there type in “HR 2662 IH†under the word / text search.
This is the same kind of hate crimes bill that was introduced by the ADL in Canada that has caused some free speech problems there. Contact your congress critters and let them know how you feel about this kind of infringement on our free speech rights.
For more info you can go here.
HR 2662 is the bill. Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005
Go here for the text of the bill and look at it for yourself. Once you get there type in “HR 2662 IH†under the word / text search.
This is the same kind of hate crimes bill that was introduced by the ADL in Canada that has caused some free speech problems there. Contact your congress critters and let them know how you feel about this kind of infringement on our free speech rights.
For more info you can go here.
Tuesday, December 6, 2005
The War on Christmas
I have been contemplating this subject for some time especially in light of my employment a Sears. Sears / KMart are the chief offenders in the refusal to admit what this holiday season is all about. The area I work in covers the lawn and garden area, which includes the Christmas decorations and Christmas trees. These are the only things that will get mentioned with the word “Christmasâ€, no place else in their advertising is Christmas mentioned. This is all to set up what happened the other day at work.
Even though Sears will not mention Christmas I make it a habit to wish the customers I work with a Merry Christmas. This is something I hold to on an almost religious fervor, I have even been thanked by a customer for acknowledging Christmas. A couple of days ago I am finishing up with a customer and wishing them a Merry Christmas when I hear from behind me a small accented voice say “you can’t say that.†I turn around and say, “Excuse me?†and the “twerp†repeats, “you can’t say that.†First off, this is not a manger he is one of a group of people at work I call the twerps*, and I have seen no written policy that states an associate cannot say Merry Christmas. I am now waiting for a manger to tell me I cannot say it. I am almost itching for a fight, because I will refuse to stop wishing customers Merry Christmas. They will have to fire me to get me to quit saying it. Then the real fight will begin, because then I will have a case for religious discrimination. I am willing to use the same venues the secular progressives use to destroy Christmas to protect the right of people to say Merry Christmas.
* The twerps are a group of teenage to early twenties kids who work in my department and are there only because the job pays more than fast food. To be honest if one of these near hoodlums came up to me and asked if I needed any help I would tell them to go get one of the adults to help me. (I know this is not very Christian of me but every time I get near one of these “kids†who have not worked a hard day in their lives I get quite disgusted)
Update:
After receiving an e-mail from the AFA I have found out that Sears is backing off of it’s anti-Christian bias. They are going to be putting up Merry Christmas signs in their stores. WoHoo!!!!!!!!
Even though Sears will not mention Christmas I make it a habit to wish the customers I work with a Merry Christmas. This is something I hold to on an almost religious fervor, I have even been thanked by a customer for acknowledging Christmas. A couple of days ago I am finishing up with a customer and wishing them a Merry Christmas when I hear from behind me a small accented voice say “you can’t say that.†I turn around and say, “Excuse me?†and the “twerp†repeats, “you can’t say that.†First off, this is not a manger he is one of a group of people at work I call the twerps*, and I have seen no written policy that states an associate cannot say Merry Christmas. I am now waiting for a manger to tell me I cannot say it. I am almost itching for a fight, because I will refuse to stop wishing customers Merry Christmas. They will have to fire me to get me to quit saying it. Then the real fight will begin, because then I will have a case for religious discrimination. I am willing to use the same venues the secular progressives use to destroy Christmas to protect the right of people to say Merry Christmas.
* The twerps are a group of teenage to early twenties kids who work in my department and are there only because the job pays more than fast food. To be honest if one of these near hoodlums came up to me and asked if I needed any help I would tell them to go get one of the adults to help me. (I know this is not very Christian of me but every time I get near one of these “kids†who have not worked a hard day in their lives I get quite disgusted)
Update:
After receiving an e-mail from the AFA I have found out that Sears is backing off of it’s anti-Christian bias. They are going to be putting up Merry Christmas signs in their stores. WoHoo!!!!!!!!
Sunday, December 4, 2005
NFL Week 13
At the end of week twelve I was 9-6 for the week and 82-45 for the year.
Blue = win
Red = loss
Atlanta at Carolina: Carolina
Buffalo at Miami: Buffalo
Cincinnati at Pittsburgh: Cincinnati
Dallas at N.Y. Giants: Dallas
Green Bay at Chicago: Chicago
Houston at Baltimore: Baltimore
Jacksonville at Cleveland: Jacksonville
Minnesota at Detroit: Minnesota
Tampa Bay at New Orleans: Tampa Bay
Tennessee at Indianapolis: Indianapolis
Arizona at San Francisco: Arizona
Washington at St. Louis: Washington
Denver at Kansas City: Denver
N.Y. Jets at New England: New England
Oakland at San Diego: San Diego
Seattle at Philadelphia: Seattle
Blue = win
Red = loss
Atlanta at Carolina: Carolina
Buffalo at Miami: Buffalo
Cincinnati at Pittsburgh: Cincinnati
Dallas at N.Y. Giants: Dallas
Green Bay at Chicago: Chicago
Houston at Baltimore: Baltimore
Jacksonville at Cleveland: Jacksonville
Minnesota at Detroit: Minnesota
Tampa Bay at New Orleans: Tampa Bay
Tennessee at Indianapolis: Indianapolis
Arizona at San Francisco: Arizona
Washington at St. Louis: Washington
Denver at Kansas City: Denver
N.Y. Jets at New England: New England
Oakland at San Diego: San Diego
Seattle at Philadelphia: Seattle
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Making An Appeal
I have been considering what to write for the past few days and the toll working two jobs has just sort of left me flat. I have been considering posting some advice I left over at Serena's blog a few weeks ago and I think I will do it now. One of the reasons I had not posted it here is context. The post was in reply to a woman who felt convicted that she should allow G_d determine the size of her family. The problem was that here husband was not on board. The other problem was that it seemed one sided in that it was advice to the ladies and not to men. But the more I thought about it the more I was convinced that there is some advice for the men on this subject as well. I will post it after the advice to the ladies.
"Justine,
You are in a very difficult situation. Family size is one of those blessings that G_d actually will let us determine to some degree. If we refuse to allow him to bless us in that way then He will honor that, but my question has always been why would we place a limit on G_d? On to your question on getting pregnant without your husband's heart being in it. It most assuredly would be wrong. G_d has placed him as the head of the household and his decisions are final. The anger and mistrust that would happen if you put yourself in a position to deceive your husband about weather or not you would get pregnant would cause problems in your marriage. With that out of the way your submission to his authority does not mean you do not have options. First no method of birth control other than abstinence (not really an option) or either one of you being surgically sterilized is perfect. He needs to understand this because of the second part of my point.
First go ahead and surrender your will to G_d on family size. That means you personally are doing nothing to prevent conception. Then you make your choice known to your husband, lay out your case before him including scriptural references and any other information you can give him regarding your choice. Let him make the decision based on all of the evidence. If he is persuaded then hallelujah, if he is not let him know you will submit to his authority but it will be his responsibility to ensure that no more children are conceived. If he does not wish to do this then he will have to understand any time the two of you have marital relations then a child could be conceived because you have given your will on the subject to G_d. This is from a man's perspective. Either way you have won because you have submitted your will and allowed G_d to work His will. If two children are all that will have rejoice in those two, If G_D works in your husband's heart and he gives over his will as well then rejoice in the number of children you are blessed with whether it is one or twenty. He will provide the resources that you will need to provide for them."
This advice will work on any subject that a woman finds herself in attempting to follow G_d and submitting to her husband's authority.
O.K. men, now for your part, if your wife comes to you and wishes to discuss something that has been laid on her heart and in convicted that this is the correct biblical way to go then you have an obligation to hear her out. Get all the evidence from her (if she has done her homework she will have it ready for you) let her know that her desire to follow G_d is important to you and prayerfully consider what she has said. If it will take more time to make a decision than during that conversation then let her know and keep her updated on your progress. Above all be a man and make a decision, do not keep her in limbo forever.
If after prayerfully considering your wife's appeal your decision is contrary to your wife's desire give her clear concise reasons backed up with biblical evidence to support your reasoning. Then it will be up to you follow what you have laid out. As in the above case you cannot force your wife to use contraceptives. The burden will be entirely upon your head because to cause your wife to willfully do anything to prevent a pregnancy on her part would be sin.
Although I will say that the vast majority of times that a wife will appeal to her husband in this way will be successful because a husband that follows the Lord will be able to see if what his wife is appealing to him about is from Yeshua.
"Justine,
You are in a very difficult situation. Family size is one of those blessings that G_d actually will let us determine to some degree. If we refuse to allow him to bless us in that way then He will honor that, but my question has always been why would we place a limit on G_d? On to your question on getting pregnant without your husband's heart being in it. It most assuredly would be wrong. G_d has placed him as the head of the household and his decisions are final. The anger and mistrust that would happen if you put yourself in a position to deceive your husband about weather or not you would get pregnant would cause problems in your marriage. With that out of the way your submission to his authority does not mean you do not have options. First no method of birth control other than abstinence (not really an option) or either one of you being surgically sterilized is perfect. He needs to understand this because of the second part of my point.
First go ahead and surrender your will to G_d on family size. That means you personally are doing nothing to prevent conception. Then you make your choice known to your husband, lay out your case before him including scriptural references and any other information you can give him regarding your choice. Let him make the decision based on all of the evidence. If he is persuaded then hallelujah, if he is not let him know you will submit to his authority but it will be his responsibility to ensure that no more children are conceived. If he does not wish to do this then he will have to understand any time the two of you have marital relations then a child could be conceived because you have given your will on the subject to G_d. This is from a man's perspective. Either way you have won because you have submitted your will and allowed G_d to work His will. If two children are all that will have rejoice in those two, If G_D works in your husband's heart and he gives over his will as well then rejoice in the number of children you are blessed with whether it is one or twenty. He will provide the resources that you will need to provide for them."
This advice will work on any subject that a woman finds herself in attempting to follow G_d and submitting to her husband's authority.
O.K. men, now for your part, if your wife comes to you and wishes to discuss something that has been laid on her heart and in convicted that this is the correct biblical way to go then you have an obligation to hear her out. Get all the evidence from her (if she has done her homework she will have it ready for you) let her know that her desire to follow G_d is important to you and prayerfully consider what she has said. If it will take more time to make a decision than during that conversation then let her know and keep her updated on your progress. Above all be a man and make a decision, do not keep her in limbo forever.
If after prayerfully considering your wife's appeal your decision is contrary to your wife's desire give her clear concise reasons backed up with biblical evidence to support your reasoning. Then it will be up to you follow what you have laid out. As in the above case you cannot force your wife to use contraceptives. The burden will be entirely upon your head because to cause your wife to willfully do anything to prevent a pregnancy on her part would be sin.
Although I will say that the vast majority of times that a wife will appeal to her husband in this way will be successful because a husband that follows the Lord will be able to see if what his wife is appealing to him about is from Yeshua.
Barnyard Welfare
Once upon a time, on a farm in Texas, there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered quite a few grains of wheat. She called all of her neighbors together and said, "If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?"
"Not I," said the cow.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Not I," said the pig.
"Not I," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen. And so she did. The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain. "Who will help me reap my wheat?" asked the little red hen.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Out of my classification," said the pig.
"I'd lose my seniority," said the cow.
"I'd lose my unemployment compensation," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen, and so she did.
At last it came time to bake the bread.
"Who will help me bake the bread! ?" asked the little red hen.
"That would be overtime for me," said the cow.
"I'd lose my welfare benefits," said the duck.
"I'm a dropout and never learned how," said the pig.
"If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen. She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, "No, I shall eat all five loaves."
"Excess profits!" cried the cow.
"Capitalist leech!" screamed the duck.
"I demand equal rights!" yelled the goose.
The pig just grunted in disdain.
And they all painted "Unfair!" picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities. Then a government agent came, he said to the little red hen, "You must not be so greedy." "But I earned the bread," said the little red hen. "Exactly," said the agent. "That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle," And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, "I am grateful, for now I truly understand," But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread because she joined the "party" and got her bread free.
And all the Democrats smiled. 'Fairness' had been established. Individual initiative had died, but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared.....as long as there was free bread that "the rich" were paying for.
I know this has been around a while, but Birdie got it in her e-mail from a friend and I felt like sharing it.
"Not I," said the cow.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Not I," said the pig.
"Not I," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen. And so she did. The wheat grew very tall and ripened into golden grain. "Who will help me reap my wheat?" asked the little red hen.
"Not I," said the duck.
"Out of my classification," said the pig.
"I'd lose my seniority," said the cow.
"I'd lose my unemployment compensation," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen, and so she did.
At last it came time to bake the bread.
"Who will help me bake the bread! ?" asked the little red hen.
"That would be overtime for me," said the cow.
"I'd lose my welfare benefits," said the duck.
"I'm a dropout and never learned how," said the pig.
"If I'm to be the only helper, that's discrimination," said the goose.
"Then I will do it by myself," said the little red hen. She baked five loaves and held them up for all of her neighbors to see. They wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, "No, I shall eat all five loaves."
"Excess profits!" cried the cow.
"Capitalist leech!" screamed the duck.
"I demand equal rights!" yelled the goose.
The pig just grunted in disdain.
And they all painted "Unfair!" picket signs and marched around and around the little red hen, shouting obscenities. Then a government agent came, he said to the little red hen, "You must not be so greedy." "But I earned the bread," said the little red hen. "Exactly," said the agent. "That is what makes our free enterprise system so wonderful. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations, the productive workers must divide the fruits of their labor with those who are lazy and idle," And they all lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, "I am grateful, for now I truly understand," But her neighbors became quite disappointed in her. She never again baked bread because she joined the "party" and got her bread free.
And all the Democrats smiled. 'Fairness' had been established. Individual initiative had died, but nobody noticed; perhaps no one cared.....as long as there was free bread that "the rich" were paying for.
I know this has been around a while, but Birdie got it in her e-mail from a friend and I felt like sharing it.
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Be Carefull Who You Say Goodbye To
Patrick Mead came by and had something interesting to say concerning my post on the word etymology of “goodbyeâ€.
“In Shakespeare's day it had already shortened to "God bye you" and appears in a few of his plays that way. BTW, when JW's or others who deny Jesus equality with God come to my doorpost, that is why I do not say "Goodbye" to them when we are done speaking. The scripture says not to bring the deniers into your home or wish them God speed.â€
Patrick Mead
I went and read the verses he left me on the subject and I thought I would post a couple of versions here, plus some information on what Godspeed means.
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
2 John 1: 9-11 KJV
9 Anyone who runs on ahead [of God] and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ [who is not content with what He taught] does not have God; but he who continues to live in the doctrine (teaching) of Christ [does have God], he has both the Father and the Son.
10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine [is disloyal to what Jesus Christ taught], do not receive him [do not accept him, do not welcome or admit him] into [your] house or bid him Godspeed or give him any encouragement.
11 For he who wishes him success [who encourages him, wishing him Godspeed] is a partaker in his evil doings
2 John 1: 9-11 Amplified
Godspeed
NOUN: Success or good fortune.
ETYMOLOGY: From Middle English God spede (you), may God prosper (you) : God, god; see god + spede, third person sing. present subjunctive of speden, to prosper (from Old English spdan, from spd, success; see speed).
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000
“In the modern world, speed has come to simply mean a rate of movement (e.g. high speed, miles per hour, meters per second etc.), but the English (derived from the Anglo-Saxon) origin of the word meant not velocity, but to thrive, or to prosper. The term God speed, used by some translations of the Holy Scriptures, is a contraction of the saying, "I wish that God may speed you," or in today's terminology, "I wish that God may bless you with success." Both specific uses of "God speed" found in the King James Version have nothing to do with physical motion.â€
(Pulled off of a Church of Christ website)
I found What he had to say enlightening as I have never heard this before. What do you think?
“In Shakespeare's day it had already shortened to "God bye you" and appears in a few of his plays that way. BTW, when JW's or others who deny Jesus equality with God come to my doorpost, that is why I do not say "Goodbye" to them when we are done speaking. The scripture says not to bring the deniers into your home or wish them God speed.â€
Patrick Mead
I went and read the verses he left me on the subject and I thought I would post a couple of versions here, plus some information on what Godspeed means.
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
2 John 1: 9-11 KJV
9 Anyone who runs on ahead [of God] and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ [who is not content with what He taught] does not have God; but he who continues to live in the doctrine (teaching) of Christ [does have God], he has both the Father and the Son.
10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine [is disloyal to what Jesus Christ taught], do not receive him [do not accept him, do not welcome or admit him] into [your] house or bid him Godspeed or give him any encouragement.
11 For he who wishes him success [who encourages him, wishing him Godspeed] is a partaker in his evil doings
2 John 1: 9-11 Amplified
Godspeed
NOUN: Success or good fortune.
ETYMOLOGY: From Middle English God spede (you), may God prosper (you) : God, god; see god + spede, third person sing. present subjunctive of speden, to prosper (from Old English spdan, from spd, success; see speed).
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000
“In the modern world, speed has come to simply mean a rate of movement (e.g. high speed, miles per hour, meters per second etc.), but the English (derived from the Anglo-Saxon) origin of the word meant not velocity, but to thrive, or to prosper. The term God speed, used by some translations of the Holy Scriptures, is a contraction of the saying, "I wish that God may speed you," or in today's terminology, "I wish that God may bless you with success." Both specific uses of "God speed" found in the King James Version have nothing to do with physical motion.â€
(Pulled off of a Church of Christ website)
I found What he had to say enlightening as I have never heard this before. What do you think?
NFL Picks Week 12
Ok, due to a brief interuption due to finacial problems I did not get last weeks picks in. As I did not start at the begining of the season, I will not hold it against myself.
At the end of week ten I was 10-4 for the week and 73-39 for the year with a percentage correct of 65.18 %.
Blue = win
Red = loss
Atlanta at Detroit: Atlanta
Denver at Dallas: Dallas :(
Baltimore at Cincinnati: Cincinnati
Carolina at Buffalo: Carolina
Chicago at Tampa Bay: Tampa Bay
Cleveland at Minnesota: Browns
New England at Kansas City: Kansas City
San Diego at Washington: San Diego
San Francisco at Tennessee: Tennessee
St. Louis at Houston: St. Louis
Jacksonville at Arizona: Jacksonville
Miami at Oakland: Oakland
Green Bay at Philadelphia: Green Bay
N.Y. Giants at Seattle: Seattle
New Orleans at N.Y. Jets: N.Y. Jets
Pittsburgh at Indianapolis: Indianapolis
Update:
So far at the end of Sunday I am 9-6. I sure hope Indy can pull out the win.
At the end of week ten I was 10-4 for the week and 73-39 for the year with a percentage correct of 65.18 %.
Blue = win
Red = loss
Atlanta at Detroit: Atlanta
Denver at Dallas: Dallas :(
Baltimore at Cincinnati: Cincinnati
Carolina at Buffalo: Carolina
Chicago at Tampa Bay: Tampa Bay
Cleveland at Minnesota: Browns
New England at Kansas City: Kansas City
San Diego at Washington: San Diego
San Francisco at Tennessee: Tennessee
St. Louis at Houston: St. Louis
Jacksonville at Arizona: Jacksonville
Miami at Oakland: Oakland
Green Bay at Philadelphia: Green Bay
N.Y. Giants at Seattle: Seattle
New Orleans at N.Y. Jets: N.Y. Jets
Pittsburgh at Indianapolis: Indianapolis
Update:
So far at the end of Sunday I am 9-6. I sure hope Indy can pull out the win.
Update 2: 10-6 for the week.
Well the Colts did it again. Is there any team that can beat them now? Pittsburg was the team I thought had the best chance of doing so. The only other team I can see beating them is Denver, and the Colts will not face them in the regular season.
Monday, November 21, 2005
Going Through the Valley
Sometimes things get a little rough. Our money problems I think are in the low part of the valley right now. Due to the uncooperative nature of SBC my phone was cut off Friday afternoon, hence the reason for no posts over the weekend. I know things are getting on the upswing due to my new second job. I have the potential to add $1000 a month to our income. This will be enough to get us back on track, give us some much needed breathing room and have some savings for the harder times. Even and extra $ 500 a month would do us some good.
The phone was not that big of a need we still had my cell phone that could be used in an emergency, we just did not have access to our usual means of talking to the outside world. This was and is a little harder on Birdie as she does not get out much with us having only one car right now and we cannot afford for her to take me to work each day. To be honest I hope to be able to provide a “new†van for Birdie in the future with the money from my second job.
The bottom of the valley is a rough place to be, but I can see that we are on our way up the other side now and will be able to have our emergency fund and start paying all of our bills on time soon.
The phone was not that big of a need we still had my cell phone that could be used in an emergency, we just did not have access to our usual means of talking to the outside world. This was and is a little harder on Birdie as she does not get out much with us having only one car right now and we cannot afford for her to take me to work each day. To be honest I hope to be able to provide a “new†van for Birdie in the future with the money from my second job.
The bottom of the valley is a rough place to be, but I can see that we are on our way up the other side now and will be able to have our emergency fund and start paying all of our bills on time soon.
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
G_d Be With Ye
Birdie loves word etymology and she sent me something real neat.
"To show you a sample of how our basic language is rooted in Christianity, even the word "Goodbye" is a shortened form of "God Be With Ye," which was apparently slang of students at Harvard in the 1700's. It was so outrageous at the time that it got the attention of Congress, where speeches were made to try to force a vote to put a stop to it!"
"To show you a sample of how our basic language is rooted in Christianity, even the word "Goodbye" is a shortened form of "God Be With Ye," which was apparently slang of students at Harvard in the 1700's. It was so outrageous at the time that it got the attention of Congress, where speeches were made to try to force a vote to put a stop to it!"
Answers Part 2
Here are the answers to the second half of my questionnaire. Questions 6-9 are directly tied to my calling and of utmost importance to me.
5. What are the roles of the pastor and deacon within a local church body?
This is something I am still studying. My concepts could change as I study this, but I will answer to the best of my knowledge at this time. Initially the local congregations had a pastor or teacher or priest whatever you wish to call him. The problem he was swamped with everyone wanting him to do something for them. This was causing problems with the pastor’s ability to teach the scriptures, as he had no time to devote to study of the scriptures. The solution was the creation of the office of deacon. The deacons were to be the servant leaders of the local church body freeing the pastor to study and serve the church by teaching.
6. How do you see the different spiritual gifts mentioned within the Bible and are they still used today?
There are allot of spiritual gifts mentioned in the Bible. Each one has a purpose to further the goals and aims of Christ. Now the hard part is for people to grasp that they all are still in use today, this coming from a Southern Baptist point of view. The teaching that all the gifts are not used today because we have to Word is one that I cannot swallow.
7. In the Bible, Jesus mentions that those that follow Him will do the things He has done and greater things. What is your take on this?
This question is sort of a follow-up of question #6. And almost is not needed If I get a positive answer to that question. This is sort of a challenge to see if a pastor still believes in the supernatural workings of G_d and whether or not he believes they still happen today. As to my beliefs If you have read many of my posts you will know my position on this.
8. If you find a discrepancy between what the denominational convention says and what the Bible says, which is more important to you?
You would think that this would be a no-brainer type of question, but it is sad that many a pastor or preacher will not take the Word as the final authority in a matter. Many times I have had even lay people confess that one denomination’s teachings are more important than another’s, even if it sacrifices what the Bible say’s is true.
This question also has some meaning to me in my belief that each denomination is there for a purpose and that this understanding should be a uniting factor for the denominations.
9. Have you or has your church been through the “40 days of purpose� Do you follow the teachings of Rick Warren?
This is question where the rubber meets the road. I have posted some on this already and the best place to read what I have to say on this is here.
10. What is your position on Biblical education? Do you think it is a requirement that a minister go through seminary or are alternative methods acceptable (such as mentoring)?
This question is mostly for my benefit and not an exclusionary question. I believe that there should be more than one method of obtaining a ministry status or gaining the education needed, mainly because each calling is different. The idea of seminary and Bible College is not a bad one and for many people a profitable route, but that is not the case for all people. I think that the more Biblical approach is one of mentoring, and has been illustrated on many occasions within the Bible. That is the path I am taking and I would like to know that a pastor supports that approach
5. What are the roles of the pastor and deacon within a local church body?
This is something I am still studying. My concepts could change as I study this, but I will answer to the best of my knowledge at this time. Initially the local congregations had a pastor or teacher or priest whatever you wish to call him. The problem he was swamped with everyone wanting him to do something for them. This was causing problems with the pastor’s ability to teach the scriptures, as he had no time to devote to study of the scriptures. The solution was the creation of the office of deacon. The deacons were to be the servant leaders of the local church body freeing the pastor to study and serve the church by teaching.
6. How do you see the different spiritual gifts mentioned within the Bible and are they still used today?
There are allot of spiritual gifts mentioned in the Bible. Each one has a purpose to further the goals and aims of Christ. Now the hard part is for people to grasp that they all are still in use today, this coming from a Southern Baptist point of view. The teaching that all the gifts are not used today because we have to Word is one that I cannot swallow.
7. In the Bible, Jesus mentions that those that follow Him will do the things He has done and greater things. What is your take on this?
This question is sort of a follow-up of question #6. And almost is not needed If I get a positive answer to that question. This is sort of a challenge to see if a pastor still believes in the supernatural workings of G_d and whether or not he believes they still happen today. As to my beliefs If you have read many of my posts you will know my position on this.
8. If you find a discrepancy between what the denominational convention says and what the Bible says, which is more important to you?
You would think that this would be a no-brainer type of question, but it is sad that many a pastor or preacher will not take the Word as the final authority in a matter. Many times I have had even lay people confess that one denomination’s teachings are more important than another’s, even if it sacrifices what the Bible say’s is true.
This question also has some meaning to me in my belief that each denomination is there for a purpose and that this understanding should be a uniting factor for the denominations.
9. Have you or has your church been through the “40 days of purpose� Do you follow the teachings of Rick Warren?
This is question where the rubber meets the road. I have posted some on this already and the best place to read what I have to say on this is here.
10. What is your position on Biblical education? Do you think it is a requirement that a minister go through seminary or are alternative methods acceptable (such as mentoring)?
This question is mostly for my benefit and not an exclusionary question. I believe that there should be more than one method of obtaining a ministry status or gaining the education needed, mainly because each calling is different. The idea of seminary and Bible College is not a bad one and for many people a profitable route, but that is not the case for all people. I think that the more Biblical approach is one of mentoring, and has been illustrated on many occasions within the Bible. That is the path I am taking and I would like to know that a pastor supports that approach
Monday, November 14, 2005
Answers Part 1
Heidi asked what my answers to my questions for a pastor would be? I will answer the first five here and the second five in a new post.
1. Where do you stand on the inerrancy of scripture?
I belive that all Biblical scripture is the inspired, inerrent Word of G-d. To deny this is to make the sacrifice of Jesus meaningless and without need.
"All Scripture is breathed out by God"
2 Timothy 3:16.
"And now, O Lord God, you are God, and your words are true, and you have promised this good thing to your servant."
2 Samuel 7:28
"God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?"
Numbers 23:9
"The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times."
Psalm 12:6
"Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him."
Proverbs 30:5
2. What do you believe concerning the blood of Christ?
The Bible teaches that blood is required for the remission of sins. This was demonstrated through the “perfect†animal sacrifices the Hebrews were required to perform. The problem was that as innocent as these animals were they were not enough to cover all of our sin. G_d knew this from the beginning but used it as a symbol to teach what was required.
G_d knew that only one sacrifice would be perfect enough to justify us to His righteousness. He had to sacrifice Himself for us and did so with His death upon the cross. The blood shed in His death is perfect enough to cover our sin so that He will not see it, but see His own perfection in us.
3. Who or what is the bride of Christ?
The bride of Christ is the people who have accepted Him and the sacrifice he has made for us. The bride consists of those who have chosen to give their lives to G_d, taken up their cross and died unto themselves so that they can be made acceptable in His eyes. It is not a building, place, creed, or specific denomination.
4. What is your take on corporate family worship? Do you allow well-behaved children in the sanctuary during services?
This is something relatively new to me (within the past two years). It is of utmost importance to Birdie. Basically this will give me an idea of the importance of family in that congregation. We have been at a number of churches that have real problems (have even asked in the bulletins to not have children in the service) with children being allowed in the service. I think that a provision for unruly or upset children, but it should involve a parent taking the child to another room and viewing the service via CCTV, basically the old concept of a crying room. No nurseries, children’s church, or separate youth groups. Church should not be about excluding people, but including all people regardless of age.
5. What are the roles of the pastor and deacon within a local church body?
This is something I am still studying. My concepts could change as I study this, but I will answer to the best of my knowledge at this time. Initially the local congregations had a pastor or teacher or priest whatever you wish to call him. The problem was he was swamped with everyone wanting him to do something for them. This was causing problems with the pastor’s ability to teach the scriptures, as he had no time to devote to study of the scriptures. The solution was the creation of the office of deacon. The deacons were to be the servant leaders of the local church body freeing the pastor to study and serve the church by teaching.
1. Where do you stand on the inerrancy of scripture?
I belive that all Biblical scripture is the inspired, inerrent Word of G-d. To deny this is to make the sacrifice of Jesus meaningless and without need.
"All Scripture is breathed out by God"
2 Timothy 3:16.
"And now, O Lord God, you are God, and your words are true, and you have promised this good thing to your servant."
2 Samuel 7:28
"God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?"
Numbers 23:9
"The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times."
Psalm 12:6
"Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him."
Proverbs 30:5
2. What do you believe concerning the blood of Christ?
The Bible teaches that blood is required for the remission of sins. This was demonstrated through the “perfect†animal sacrifices the Hebrews were required to perform. The problem was that as innocent as these animals were they were not enough to cover all of our sin. G_d knew this from the beginning but used it as a symbol to teach what was required.
G_d knew that only one sacrifice would be perfect enough to justify us to His righteousness. He had to sacrifice Himself for us and did so with His death upon the cross. The blood shed in His death is perfect enough to cover our sin so that He will not see it, but see His own perfection in us.
3. Who or what is the bride of Christ?
The bride of Christ is the people who have accepted Him and the sacrifice he has made for us. The bride consists of those who have chosen to give their lives to G_d, taken up their cross and died unto themselves so that they can be made acceptable in His eyes. It is not a building, place, creed, or specific denomination.
4. What is your take on corporate family worship? Do you allow well-behaved children in the sanctuary during services?
This is something relatively new to me (within the past two years). It is of utmost importance to Birdie. Basically this will give me an idea of the importance of family in that congregation. We have been at a number of churches that have real problems (have even asked in the bulletins to not have children in the service) with children being allowed in the service. I think that a provision for unruly or upset children, but it should involve a parent taking the child to another room and viewing the service via CCTV, basically the old concept of a crying room. No nurseries, children’s church, or separate youth groups. Church should not be about excluding people, but including all people regardless of age.
5. What are the roles of the pastor and deacon within a local church body?
This is something I am still studying. My concepts could change as I study this, but I will answer to the best of my knowledge at this time. Initially the local congregations had a pastor or teacher or priest whatever you wish to call him. The problem was he was swamped with everyone wanting him to do something for them. This was causing problems with the pastor’s ability to teach the scriptures, as he had no time to devote to study of the scriptures. The solution was the creation of the office of deacon. The deacons were to be the servant leaders of the local church body freeing the pastor to study and serve the church by teaching.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Back on-line
I got the old computer back up and running. Basicaly it took reloading Windows to fix the problem but it worked, and it seems to be a little bit more stable for now. I miss my XP computers, XP is a much better operating system than 98. I have one more thing to try with my laptop and then it is off to the manufacturer to get it fixed.
NFL Picks Week 10
12-2 Last week
63-35 total with a percentage of 64.29%
Blue = Win
Red = Loss
New England at Miami : New England
Minnesota at NY Giants : NY Giants
Baltimore at Jacksonville : Jacksonville
Houston at Indianapolis : Indianapolis
Arizona at Detroit : Detroit
San Francisco at Chicago : Chicago
Kansas City at Buffalo : Kansas City
Denver at Oakland : Denver
NY Jets at Carolina : Carolina
Washington at Tampa Bay : Washington
St. Louis at Seattle : Seattle
Green Bay at Atlanta : Atlanta
Cleveland at Pittsburgh : Pittsburgh
Dallas at Philadelphia : Dallas
Update:
As of Sunday night I am 9-4. We will see how the Boys look tomorrow.
63-35 total with a percentage of 64.29%
Blue = Win
Red = Loss
New England at Miami : New England
Minnesota at NY Giants : NY Giants
Baltimore at Jacksonville : Jacksonville
Houston at Indianapolis : Indianapolis
Arizona at Detroit : Detroit
San Francisco at Chicago : Chicago
Kansas City at Buffalo : Kansas City
Denver at Oakland : Denver
NY Jets at Carolina : Carolina
Washington at Tampa Bay : Washington
St. Louis at Seattle : Seattle
Green Bay at Atlanta : Atlanta
Cleveland at Pittsburgh : Pittsburgh
Dallas at Philadelphia : Dallas
Update:
As of Sunday night I am 9-4. We will see how the Boys look tomorrow.
Update: Monday 10-4
What a game! Dallas should have lost that one. But in the last 5 minutes the Boys pull a win out of the jaws of defeat. Monday Night Football is going to like Dallas at more of their games.
Thursday, November 10, 2005
You Asked for it, You got IT
Joelle asks, “What is the importance of #9? Just curious.â€
Joelle, you certainly know how to open a can of worms. I will try to make this as short as I can as I do not wish to get too deep into theological issues I am not yet prepared to battle. I have alluded to a cancer or if you will (as Jimmie puts it) a virus that is infecting the church and growing rapidly. I have mostly alluded to the “church growth movement†when I have talked about these things.
The ““40 Days of Purpose†program is part of the Purpose Driven Life and Purpose Driven Church teachings of Rick Warren. Rick in his teachings has introduced a marketing scheme to grow the “church†which totally denies the sacrificial atonement of Jesus and incorporates pop psychology, and elements of the New Age Movement. People are all too willing to buy into his teachings because they are all about building self-esteem and meeting “felt†needs. He plays a good game and on the very surface what he teaches looks good, but if you scratch the surface and truly look at what he teaches you will see the deception. He preys on the fact that people do not want to be told they are sinners and tickles their ears with what they want to hear.
So you can see why this question is so important, when a good portion of my ministry will be to be one of the instruments that G_d uses to warn His church of the enemy within. I need a home base that is not entrenched with the enemy.
I know there will be some people who read this and want to fight with me on this. I will not engage in any argument concerning Rick Warren at this time, as I am not ready. To be honest I am jumping the gun a little just mentioning it. I want to be able to logically and Biblically show the fallacies in Rick’s teachings and I have not been able to form all of those arguments yet.
Joelle, you certainly know how to open a can of worms. I will try to make this as short as I can as I do not wish to get too deep into theological issues I am not yet prepared to battle. I have alluded to a cancer or if you will (as Jimmie puts it) a virus that is infecting the church and growing rapidly. I have mostly alluded to the “church growth movement†when I have talked about these things.
The ““40 Days of Purpose†program is part of the Purpose Driven Life and Purpose Driven Church teachings of Rick Warren. Rick in his teachings has introduced a marketing scheme to grow the “church†which totally denies the sacrificial atonement of Jesus and incorporates pop psychology, and elements of the New Age Movement. People are all too willing to buy into his teachings because they are all about building self-esteem and meeting “felt†needs. He plays a good game and on the very surface what he teaches looks good, but if you scratch the surface and truly look at what he teaches you will see the deception. He preys on the fact that people do not want to be told they are sinners and tickles their ears with what they want to hear.
So you can see why this question is so important, when a good portion of my ministry will be to be one of the instruments that G_d uses to warn His church of the enemy within. I need a home base that is not entrenched with the enemy.
I know there will be some people who read this and want to fight with me on this. I will not engage in any argument concerning Rick Warren at this time, as I am not ready. To be honest I am jumping the gun a little just mentioning it. I want to be able to logically and Biblically show the fallacies in Rick’s teachings and I have not been able to form all of those arguments yet.
Wednesday, November 9, 2005
Questions for a Pastor
I was asked if I was going to post my list of questions for a pastor. I got some very good advice from everybody. Here is my list as I have it now I may add to it in the future, but I think I can get the feel for a church and a pastor off of these questions.
1. Where do you stand on the inerrancy of scripture?
2. What do you believe concerning the blood of Christ?
3. Who or what is the bride of Christ?
4. What is your take on corporate family worship? Do you allow well-behaved children in the sanctuary during services?
5. What are the roles of the pastor and deacon within a local church body?
6. How do you see the different spiritual gifts mentioned within the Bible and are they still used today?
7. In the Bible, Jesus mentions that those that follow Him will do the things He has done and greater things. What is your take on this?
8. If you find a discrepancy between what the denominational convention says and what the Bible says, which is more important to you?
9. Have you or has your church been through the “40 days of purpose� Do you follow the teachings of Rick Warren?
10. What is your position on Biblical education? Do you think it is a requirement that a minister go through seminary or are alternative methods acceptable (such as mentoring)?
Tuesday, November 8, 2005
Somehow it is Fitting
You scored as Maximus.After his family was murdered by the evil emperor Commodus, the great Roman general Maximus went into hiding to avoid Commodus's assassins. He became a gladiator, hoping to dominate the colosseum in order to one day get the chance of killing Commodus. Maximus is valiant, courageous, and dedicated. He wants nothing more than the chance to avenge his family, but his temper often gets the better of him.
Which Action Hero Would You Be? v. 2.0 created with QuizFarm.com |
Sunday, November 6, 2005
Yeshua Provides
To say that the past month has been difficult for us financially speaking would be an understatement. As I have stated before, I work as a contractor doing quality control testing on medical instruments. Due to the year end slow down the contractors were asked to take some days off basically reducing my pay for the month by over $500. This on an already tight budget. We were able to scrimp and pinch pennies to the point of being able to pay our rent and have a little left over for food. The catch was that I could not pay the electric bill (other than rent my biggest bill). I was trusting Yeshua to provide the way to pay the bill. Rent and electricity are due at the same time ( I always end up paying electricity late due to it). TXU sent out a cut-off notice demanding payment in full for two months (standard practice for TXU) by the 14th I could not pay before the 16th. TXU would not budge on the date ( Have I mentioned I hate TXU?). After work last night (on my new second job) I went and talked to my landlord and told her what was going on and she told me not to worry about it, pay the electric bill and then pay her the rent on the 16th when I get paid (Have I mentioned I have a great landlord?) . :)
On to the other provision for us. Due to our budget problems Birdie and I discussed me getting a weekend job to help make ends meet. I have tried from time to time to do this with little success. I was about at the point of thinking I may have to do the unthinkable and get one of those fast food jobs. That still small voice told me to try one other place. I applied there and inside of a week I had a job. I started Friday. The cool thing is that once I am out of training I have the potential of making more per hour than my “day†job, as this is a consultive-sales position in the home improvement department at Sears.
On to the other provision for us. Due to our budget problems Birdie and I discussed me getting a weekend job to help make ends meet. I have tried from time to time to do this with little success. I was about at the point of thinking I may have to do the unthinkable and get one of those fast food jobs. That still small voice told me to try one other place. I applied there and inside of a week I had a job. I started Friday. The cool thing is that once I am out of training I have the potential of making more per hour than my “day†job, as this is a consultive-sales position in the home improvement department at Sears.
NFL Picks Week 9
10-4 Last week
51-33 total with a percentage of 60.71%
Blue = Win
Red = Loss
Carolina at Tampa Bay : Carolina
Houston at Jacksonville : Jacksonville
Cincinnati at Baltimore : Cincinnati
Atlanta at Miami : Atlanta
Detroit at Minnesota : Detroit
San Diego at NY Jets : San Diego
Tennessee at Cleveland : Tennessee
Oakland at Kansas City : Kansas City
Seattle at Arizona : Seattle
Chicago at New Orleans : Chicago
NY Giants at San Francisco : NY Giants
Pittsburgh at Green Bay : Pittsburgh
Philadelphia at Washington : Washington
Indianapolis at New England : Indianapolis
51-33 total with a percentage of 60.71%
Blue = Win
Red = Loss
Carolina at Tampa Bay : Carolina
Houston at Jacksonville : Jacksonville
Cincinnati at Baltimore : Cincinnati
Atlanta at Miami : Atlanta
Detroit at Minnesota : Detroit
San Diego at NY Jets : San Diego
Tennessee at Cleveland : Tennessee
Oakland at Kansas City : Kansas City
Seattle at Arizona : Seattle
Chicago at New Orleans : Chicago
NY Giants at San Francisco : NY Giants
Pittsburgh at Green Bay : Pittsburgh
Philadelphia at Washington : Washington
Indianapolis at New England : Indianapolis
Update: 12-2 for the week making me 63-35 total. My winning percentage is 64.29%.
Football note here: Ditto just will not believe me when I say the Colts are going to the Superbowl even after they just crushed their biggest rival. I am not sure what he has against the Colts, but they are the best team in football today.
Wednesday, November 2, 2005
A Biblical Education
I posted recently on being mentored and thought I might elaborate.
Since becoming a Christian I have questioned the requirement that a person must go to seminary or a Bible College in order to teach and preach about God’s Word. I had never seen a Biblical model that required a formal education to learn God’s Word. The closest thing I could think of was the older Levite priests training the younger priests but is not the same thing. I understand that the original intent of seminary was to be able to concentrate education in one place and have more than one student trained at a time, thus maximizing the teachers effectivness. There is nothing wrong with this, even Jesus taught eleven of the apostles not including Judas who killed himself. Paul did take some time to educate himself after his conversion, but it was not a formal education like he received as a pharisee. The most effective model I have seen is the one of the mentor and student. The model I think of most is Paul and Timothy.
Since becoming a Christian I have questioned the requirement that a person must go to seminary or a Bible College in order to teach and preach about God’s Word. I had never seen a Biblical model that required a formal education to learn God’s Word. The closest thing I could think of was the older Levite priests training the younger priests but is not the same thing. I understand that the original intent of seminary was to be able to concentrate education in one place and have more than one student trained at a time, thus maximizing the teachers effectivness. There is nothing wrong with this, even Jesus taught eleven of the apostles not including Judas who killed himself. Paul did take some time to educate himself after his conversion, but it was not a formal education like he received as a pharisee. The most effective model I have seen is the one of the mentor and student. The model I think of most is Paul and Timothy.
So I am talking to G_d and asking him what I am to do now that I have surrendered to this calling, and I am told that He will send me a teacher. Shortly after that Birdie sends me an e-mail from one of he e-mail loops. The content of that e-mail was on part of a book that the author of the e-mail was writing on having Biblical world view. I get a small voice telling me to contact him. I wrote a long e-mail to him telling him my story, fully thinking that this guy is going to think I am a nut. He writes me back that night to tell me that he would be happy to mentor me, that he thinks the last place a person looking to preach the Word is in seminary,and that although being called to pastor a church by G_d and ordained by the Southern Baptist Church he is not currently pastoring a church and has been put in the unique position to be able to help me.
I shared this before, but I liked what he said about himself so I will share it with you again.
“I am reformed in my theology and extremely conservative theologically. I am irreverent, sarcastic and critical of almost all institutionalized Christianity. If it is not Biblical, I want nothing to do with it.â€
His name is Jimmie Kersh. I have also found out that he has a blog as well. It is the first one on my blogroll.
Tuesday, November 1, 2005
Just Thinking
It has been a while since I posted anything new here partially because I have been studying, partially due to getting into a debate on Halloween over at Evil Squirrel’s blog. I spent way too much energy on a futile effort. (Just a note, never debate someone who will not even read the facts put before them.)
I want to thank all of you for your support and prayers that have been offered so far. Taking up this mantle has not been easy. I forget sometimes that people do not want to hear a message that asks them to step outside of themselves. It is real easy to forget when the people you normaly talk to agree with you. My little debate just reminded me that some people are more comfortable in their complacent skins. How quickly I forget that I was there recently myself. Pray that the Lord uses this to soften my heart and be more understanding of those who are not yet ready.
I also want to ask my readers a question. Due to my time as a Jonah I have not darkened the door of a church in a couple of years. I am being more and more convicted of my need to be involved in a church body for instruction and for fellowship. I also feel led to interview the pastor of any possible church I may join. In that light I would ask you if you were sitting face to face with a prospective pastor what is the most important question you would ask? I have a list almost completed and decided this would be an interesting exercise.
I want to thank all of you for your support and prayers that have been offered so far. Taking up this mantle has not been easy. I forget sometimes that people do not want to hear a message that asks them to step outside of themselves. It is real easy to forget when the people you normaly talk to agree with you. My little debate just reminded me that some people are more comfortable in their complacent skins. How quickly I forget that I was there recently myself. Pray that the Lord uses this to soften my heart and be more understanding of those who are not yet ready.
I also want to ask my readers a question. Due to my time as a Jonah I have not darkened the door of a church in a couple of years. I am being more and more convicted of my need to be involved in a church body for instruction and for fellowship. I also feel led to interview the pastor of any possible church I may join. In that light I would ask you if you were sitting face to face with a prospective pastor what is the most important question you would ask? I have a list almost completed and decided this would be an interesting exercise.
Monday, October 31, 2005
Why Celebrate Halloween?
Note: This will be the top post until after Halloween. I will post more stuff, just scroll down and read.
I have a serious question. If we call ourselves Christians why do we celebrate Halloween? Is it just a harmless children’s holiday where they dress up and get people to give them candy or is there a more sinister aspect to the celebration of this holiday? Just for the record my family does not celebrate this holiday and we never have. Also I want to make it clear I know that the majority of children will never be harmed by the practice of dressing up and collecting candy, other than the occasional tummy ache. That argument will not fly here. My question here is why we “wink†at this holiday by allowing our children to participate in the less sinister aspects, yet ignore that this is the most important holiday of the year for the occult.
I could go on and on about this subject but I will leave you with some passages from the Word and some web sites for you to do your own research on the subject. I will also challenge anyone to give me a solid argument as to why we as Christians should celebrate Halloween. Telling me the children will be left out is not a solid argument.
21 But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good;
22 abstain from every form of evil.
1 Thesalonians 5:21-22 NAS
10 "There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer,
11 or one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead.
12 "For whoever does these things is detestable to the LORD; and because of these detestable things the LORD your God will drive them out before you.
13 "You shall be blameless before the LORD your God.
14 "For those nations, which you shall dispossess, listen to those who practice witchcraft and to diviners, but as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do so.
Deuteronomy 18:10-14 NAS
6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.
7 Therefore do not be partakers with them;
8 for you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord; walk as children of Light
9(for the fruit of the Light consists in all goodness and righteousness and truth),
10 trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord.
11 Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them;
Ephesians 5:6-11 NAS
The first site is a Christian site the second in a pagan site. I am using both so that I can show that the research I have done on this is not just Christian propaganda. This is truly a holiday for the pagans and we as Christians should not participate in its practices and traditions.
A Christian take on Halloween history
A Pagan take on Halloween history
I have a serious question. If we call ourselves Christians why do we celebrate Halloween? Is it just a harmless children’s holiday where they dress up and get people to give them candy or is there a more sinister aspect to the celebration of this holiday? Just for the record my family does not celebrate this holiday and we never have. Also I want to make it clear I know that the majority of children will never be harmed by the practice of dressing up and collecting candy, other than the occasional tummy ache. That argument will not fly here. My question here is why we “wink†at this holiday by allowing our children to participate in the less sinister aspects, yet ignore that this is the most important holiday of the year for the occult.
I could go on and on about this subject but I will leave you with some passages from the Word and some web sites for you to do your own research on the subject. I will also challenge anyone to give me a solid argument as to why we as Christians should celebrate Halloween. Telling me the children will be left out is not a solid argument.
21 But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good;
22 abstain from every form of evil.
1 Thesalonians 5:21-22 NAS
10 "There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer,
11 or one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead.
12 "For whoever does these things is detestable to the LORD; and because of these detestable things the LORD your God will drive them out before you.
13 "You shall be blameless before the LORD your God.
14 "For those nations, which you shall dispossess, listen to those who practice witchcraft and to diviners, but as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do so.
Deuteronomy 18:10-14 NAS
6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.
7 Therefore do not be partakers with them;
8 for you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord; walk as children of Light
9(for the fruit of the Light consists in all goodness and righteousness and truth),
10 trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord.
11 Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them;
Ephesians 5:6-11 NAS
The first site is a Christian site the second in a pagan site. I am using both so that I can show that the research I have done on this is not just Christian propaganda. This is truly a holiday for the pagans and we as Christians should not participate in its practices and traditions.
A Christian take on Halloween history
A Pagan take on Halloween history
Saturday, October 29, 2005
Theology Pair Flips Out
I read things like things like this article on WND and wonder how it is that these people are news worthy. Then I remember this is just what the people want to hear. People taking the Word and corrupting the meaning to fit their particular worldview, and not letting the truth of the Word change them to conform G_d’s view.
“James L. Crenshaw, professor of Old Testament at Duke Divinity School, questioned Scripture's authority to govern matters of sexuality – the Old Testament text, he argued, was written over 12 centuries under a variety of shifting circumstances. It is the reader, he argued, that determines the text's meaning.â€
It is amazing that the Word is consistent in its teachings on sexuality considering the amount of time that it has been written over, and the changes in culture through that time period.
“While agreeing that homosexuality is forbidden in passages of Leviticus, Crenshaw said those prohibitions should not be taken as the final word.â€
WHAT????? If the Word is not the final word on these matters what is? I was going to comment more but I just keep getting upset. I know I will have to work on this but for now read what my mentor had to say on this.
“Read this and check out how subtle the professors are with their
interpretation model. They use an interpretation model where the individual believer interprets as they choose.
This sounds right to many people concerning the idea of the priesthood of the believer. The problem is that the interpretation must come form the other direction, from the understanding of the author and the original understanding of the original hearers. The difference is inductive verses deductive study methods. The historical/Grammatical method of interpretation is essential to keep from reading our own thoughts into the text.
We want the text to speak to us from the historical setting and the grammar of the text as well as from the culture from where it came. It is only logical to conclude these men are more interested in reading a western mindset into the text, which is insidious to understanding the authority from the Biblical text itself.â€
Jimmie Kersh
“James L. Crenshaw, professor of Old Testament at Duke Divinity School, questioned Scripture's authority to govern matters of sexuality – the Old Testament text, he argued, was written over 12 centuries under a variety of shifting circumstances. It is the reader, he argued, that determines the text's meaning.â€
It is amazing that the Word is consistent in its teachings on sexuality considering the amount of time that it has been written over, and the changes in culture through that time period.
“While agreeing that homosexuality is forbidden in passages of Leviticus, Crenshaw said those prohibitions should not be taken as the final word.â€
WHAT????? If the Word is not the final word on these matters what is? I was going to comment more but I just keep getting upset. I know I will have to work on this but for now read what my mentor had to say on this.
“Read this and check out how subtle the professors are with their
interpretation model. They use an interpretation model where the individual believer interprets as they choose.
This sounds right to many people concerning the idea of the priesthood of the believer. The problem is that the interpretation must come form the other direction, from the understanding of the author and the original understanding of the original hearers. The difference is inductive verses deductive study methods. The historical/Grammatical method of interpretation is essential to keep from reading our own thoughts into the text.
We want the text to speak to us from the historical setting and the grammar of the text as well as from the culture from where it came. It is only logical to conclude these men are more interested in reading a western mindset into the text, which is insidious to understanding the authority from the Biblical text itself.â€
Jimmie Kersh
NFL Picks Week 8
6-8 last week lets see how it goes this week.
Overall since I started picking is 41-29 or 58.57%
Blue = Win
Red = Loss
Cleveland at Houston : Cleveland
Green Bay at Cincinnati : Cincinnati
Arizona at Dallas : Dallas
Chicago at Detroit : Detroit
Oakland at Tennessee : Oakland
Washington at NY Giants : NY Giants
Jacksonville at St. Louis : Jacksonville
Minnesota at Carolina : Carolina
Kansas City at San Diego : San Diego
Miami at New Orleans : Miami
Tampa Bay at San Francisco : Tampa Bay
Philadelphia at Denver : Denver
Buffalo at New England : New England
Baltimore at Pittsburgh : Pittsburgh
Update: At the end of Sunday I am 9-4 for this week. As I am sure Pittsburgh will hand Baltimore its head I will be 10-4 for the week. GO BOYS!!!! Take a much needed rest next week.
Overall since I started picking is 41-29 or 58.57%
Blue = Win
Red = Loss
Cleveland at Houston : Cleveland
Green Bay at Cincinnati : Cincinnati
Arizona at Dallas : Dallas
Chicago at Detroit : Detroit
Oakland at Tennessee : Oakland
Washington at NY Giants : NY Giants
Jacksonville at St. Louis : Jacksonville
Minnesota at Carolina : Carolina
Kansas City at San Diego : San Diego
Miami at New Orleans : Miami
Tampa Bay at San Francisco : Tampa Bay
Philadelphia at Denver : Denver
Buffalo at New England : New England
Baltimore at Pittsburgh : Pittsburgh
Update: At the end of Sunday I am 9-4 for this week. As I am sure Pittsburgh will hand Baltimore its head I will be 10-4 for the week. GO BOYS!!!! Take a much needed rest next week.
Update 2: 10-4 for the week and 51-33 total with a percentage of 60.71%.
Friday, October 28, 2005
Now I am Going to Sound Like a Real Minister
The unfortunate part of starting a ministry is that unless you are independently wealthy you have to survive on the donations of others. While I am not quitting my day job yet it does not afford me the extra money I will need to work on my education process and then cover expenses once I start to travel from church to church. I am not asking for money, but if you feel led to give I have added a link to my Pay Pal account on the sidebar.
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
D.C.‘s Real Gospel Vs the Whole Gospel
I am a regular reader of Digital Cowboy’s blog. I was reading a post on real masculinity V evil and he had a link to a prior post (The Real Gospel) he had written. It was while reading that post that I felt a check in my spirit, and I am beginning to listen to those checks more often. I stopped and asked the Father what he wanted me to see and how should I respond if at all. While his premise is good it has a fundamental flaw in that he glosses over the why it was that Yeshua had to die on the cross.
"I wish more churches preached the Gospel. The word means, "Good News." Is it "good news" that you’re a sinner? Is it "good news" that you don’t measure up? Is it "good news" that you’re not perfect? That’s what many religious churches preach. Probably the second most often quoted verse in the Bible is "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God."
Well, duh.
Do you wanna share the solution or do you just want to beat people over the head with the problem?
The answer to all those previous rhetorical questions is, "Nope. That’s not good news." All those things are true, none of them are "good news" and that’s why Jesus Christ came. That’s the good news. No reasonably sane person has to be told that they don’t meet God’s standard. We all know that instinctively because we’re spiritual beings. I find it fascinating that John 3:16 is the most well-known and oft-quoted verse in the Bible, but it seems no one ever reads or quotes on into John 3:17. You can’t get the full message of the Gospel without them both."
While the Gospel is the good news in that Yeshua came and died on the cross and was raised from the dead on the third day it is also the story of why it was necessary. D.C.’s statement that no reasonably sane person has to be told that they don’t meet G_d’s standard is not necessarily correct. There are many reasonable and sane people who do not believe they are doing anything wrong, yet they still fall short of the mark. The fact that we are spiritual beings has nothing to do with whether or not we “instinctively know†we have fallen short of G_d’s standards. If that were the case the Word would not be full of references to our sinful nature.
The quoting of John 3:16 has become a popular because it imparts the essence of the gospel in a simple to remember verse. It was never meant as a substitute for the gospel message. If you wish to take the verse in full context it needs to be included in a series of scriptures from John 3:11 to John 3:21.
11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
As we can see Yeshua was not sent to condemn the world, it was already condemned by the evil actions of man. To gloss this fact over and ignore it because it is uncomfortable or might offend is just as wrong as it is to crush someone’s spirit by focusing in the sin. Rather we should portray the gospel in its entirety showing a righteous and just G_d that cannot abide the imperfection of sin, man’s complicity in that sin, and the message that G_d through His Son has provided a perfect sacrifice for that sin. All we have to do is acknowledge our need and accept the gift.
D.C. goes on to discuss the numerous passages in the Bible concerning His mercy. Yes the Father is very merciful, but He is also righteous and just. D.C. states that it is religion that brings the talk of sin into the picture, I strongly disagree. It is religion that distorts the picture of sin. Religion takes sin to the point that it makes a mockery of Yeshua’s perfect provision for our degenerate nature. As much as D.C. says he hates religion, it is also religion that glosses over why it was that Yeshua had to die. Religion is when man takes the truth and distorts it to fit his own worldview. We are all guilty of doing this to some point or another. It is the nature of man. It is our job to look beyond our worldview study the scriptures and ask the Father to show us the truth.
"I wish more churches preached the Gospel. The word means, "Good News." Is it "good news" that you’re a sinner? Is it "good news" that you don’t measure up? Is it "good news" that you’re not perfect? That’s what many religious churches preach. Probably the second most often quoted verse in the Bible is "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God."
Well, duh.
Do you wanna share the solution or do you just want to beat people over the head with the problem?
The answer to all those previous rhetorical questions is, "Nope. That’s not good news." All those things are true, none of them are "good news" and that’s why Jesus Christ came. That’s the good news. No reasonably sane person has to be told that they don’t meet God’s standard. We all know that instinctively because we’re spiritual beings. I find it fascinating that John 3:16 is the most well-known and oft-quoted verse in the Bible, but it seems no one ever reads or quotes on into John 3:17. You can’t get the full message of the Gospel without them both."
While the Gospel is the good news in that Yeshua came and died on the cross and was raised from the dead on the third day it is also the story of why it was necessary. D.C.’s statement that no reasonably sane person has to be told that they don’t meet G_d’s standard is not necessarily correct. There are many reasonable and sane people who do not believe they are doing anything wrong, yet they still fall short of the mark. The fact that we are spiritual beings has nothing to do with whether or not we “instinctively know†we have fallen short of G_d’s standards. If that were the case the Word would not be full of references to our sinful nature.
The quoting of John 3:16 has become a popular because it imparts the essence of the gospel in a simple to remember verse. It was never meant as a substitute for the gospel message. If you wish to take the verse in full context it needs to be included in a series of scriptures from John 3:11 to John 3:21.
11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?
13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
As we can see Yeshua was not sent to condemn the world, it was already condemned by the evil actions of man. To gloss this fact over and ignore it because it is uncomfortable or might offend is just as wrong as it is to crush someone’s spirit by focusing in the sin. Rather we should portray the gospel in its entirety showing a righteous and just G_d that cannot abide the imperfection of sin, man’s complicity in that sin, and the message that G_d through His Son has provided a perfect sacrifice for that sin. All we have to do is acknowledge our need and accept the gift.
D.C. goes on to discuss the numerous passages in the Bible concerning His mercy. Yes the Father is very merciful, but He is also righteous and just. D.C. states that it is religion that brings the talk of sin into the picture, I strongly disagree. It is religion that distorts the picture of sin. Religion takes sin to the point that it makes a mockery of Yeshua’s perfect provision for our degenerate nature. As much as D.C. says he hates religion, it is also religion that glosses over why it was that Yeshua had to die. Religion is when man takes the truth and distorts it to fit his own worldview. We are all guilty of doing this to some point or another. It is the nature of man. It is our job to look beyond our worldview study the scriptures and ask the Father to show us the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)