CONNECTING THINGS

Everything is preceded by some other thing.  And everything I’m doing has something else coming after it.  What I’m doing has been helped - - or hindered - - by what I did before.  What I do now can help, or hinder, what I will be doing.  It’s like everything has sticky spider webs attached to it.

I am blessed because I can isolate myself in the moment.  I can ignore the spider webs.  I don’t agonize about what I did, or didn’t do.  I don’t fret about what is next.  Or, maybe, this is a non-blessing.  Maybe I should be thoughtful of how one activity connects to the next.

But on the other hand, I often don’t have the best I could have in the present because of what I’ve left out of what should have come before.  Also I don’t take the opportunity to set up for what is supposed to come next. If I did, it would make it easier for myself.

At the time of procrastination I could replace my for-the-moment self with a reflective, evaluative and forward looking, planning self. 

This would take place at a very time when I don’t want to make any changes.  Maybe I feel this way because I’m between two for-the-moment periods.  Since I am for-the-moment, and don’t presently have anything to do, I feel uncomfortable.

Yet my tendency is always to stay the same.  Changing from one thing to another is something I don’t want to do  - - I want to stay the same, stay the course, whatever it is.

THINKING OF VALUES

While I was still at work, I wondered if I was doing anything that actually had value.  I asked myself what could I write down to tell another of the value I added to a project or a task?  What would that paper say?  In the process it became apparent to me how valuable writing it could be. 

We often get a short distance in time from events and can not recite their true significance, we can not recall the value.  We forget.  If we do not spend some time in analysis, we fail to recognize important details, occurrences and aspects of the events we just completed.  Our memory fades with time.

Once I realized this I came up with three or four areas where my presence did add value.  I realized also there were other areas where I could have added value if events had been slightly altered.  I wrote a list of things to measure.  Measurable items are the ones to which you can assign quantities.  With the list in hand I had a record of my accomplishment and a device by which I could plan future strategies.

Such a list would be valuable to reinspect at later times to see if I could identify additional items to quantify or additional areas where my presence had an effect. Using such a list I could also analyze each task planned for the future to identify other possible quantifiable items.  I could ask each time:
- - What today can I quantify, can I add a quantifiable item to the list?
- - What sub tasks within a quantifiable item can I quantify?

Such observations must be written, kept and reviewed to have any value.
- - This would get me into the frame of mind to quantify things
- - This would help me identify what sorts of things can be quantified.
- - This would help me with the language of quantification:  what should I express, how should I express it?

KILL OR MURDER?

My wife recently wrote the following.  I liked it so much I decided to post it here:

"I like your inquisitive mind...and your question from Psalm 137:9...its still banging around in my head...

"The God of the Bible is not a god we can make up:

"In the Bible are two meanings for putting a person to death: (1) is to kill, (2) to murder. 

"Murder is a sin and God calls for the death penalty.  The other: to kill is the responsibility of a government or the military to dispense justice.  If we are sinned against, vengeance is God's option and He uses government to create law and order and to give us justice.  Our responsibility is not to seek vengeance.  Our job is to forgive...but, Roxy here is something helpful, I think:

"C. S. Lewis in Mere Christianity has a freeing explanation of forgiveness:

" 'Does loving your enemy mean not punishing him? No, for loving myself does not mean that I ought not to subject myself to punishment - even death.  If you had committed a murder, the right Christian thing to do would be to give yourself up to the police and be hanged.  It is therefore, in my opinion, perfectly right for a Christian judge to sentence a man to death or a Christian soldier to kill an enemy....'Thou shalt not kill,' (Jesus)...There are two Greek words used in the New Testament for putting to death: the ordinary word to kill and the word to murder.  And when Christ quotes that commandment He uses the murder one in all three accounts...I am told there is the same distinction in Hebrew (in the Old Testament).  All killing is not murder any more than all sexual intercourse is adultery...'

"In Psalm 137, it is referring to justice: God is the One to handle it.  When we forgive we are not pretending we do not "see" the injustice, it is laying down our inclination to pay back.   Forgiveness (and I'm getting this understanding from C.S.Lewis chapter on forgiveness) is "fighting" the hate and hoping the person who hurt us will become a better person. Always remember:  "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." Romans_12:19

"One more thing:  Edom called for Jerusalem to be demolished (Psalm 137:7) (they ) were a historically evil enemy to God's people. Some people have darkened hearts...only God knows what their judgment should be."

LESSONS FROM WEIGHT LIFTING

I learned some things form the time I was doing weight lifting that apply to life in general.   Before going to the gym I apprehended the upcoming weight lifting sessions to be burdensome, threatening, worrisome and frightening.  The following contrasting statements show what I mean:

THOUGHT:  You think of how hard it will be to be under the weight.  REALIZED:  The point of lifting the weight is for it to be hard.  No effort = no adaptation.  When it is hard, it is good.

THOUGHT:  You wonder if you will fail.  REALIZED:  You may fail every once and a while.  You need to be close to that point.  You may not know where that pont is unless you fail.  When you experience failure you know where the point is, then in successive sessions you can come close to  but not cross over the failure point.

THOUGHT:  You wonder if your form will be bad.   REALIZED:  Some times mistakes in form teach what good form is.

THOUGHT:  You wonder if you will injure yourself.  REALIZED:  It is good to have the fear of injury, that keeps you in good form and not over trained.

THOUGHT:  You wonder if people will be in your way.  REALIZED:  If you are not in the gym you do not know how many people will be there.  In fact I found most of the time all has been clear.

THE BODY FOR LIFE CONTEST

Lizzie and I once participated in a physical fitness contest named “Body for Life Challenge”.   The goal was to build strength while losing weight.   We did not “win” but we learned many things more valuable than a trophy or lines in a record book.

While we were in the process of training, I wrote in a journal:
It was hard to get out to the aerobics today.  I wanted to make it an “easy” day, but thought, “this is a contest and you don’t win contests by doing things the easy way, the other contestants are not taking it easy.  They will gladly run past those who are taking it easy.  After you eliminate all the ones who take easy days you have left the ones who are trying hard.  These are competing against each other.  In this class you have to struggle and persevere to win.  It may be you are outclassed by some of the contestants but to assume so and let up on some of your own drive is to allow the others to run past you.  Until you are past the finish line you do not know who the winner will be.

In any case, the real challenge is to strive against your own limitations.  No matter what anyone else does you must run past yourself.  It’s a matter of ruling your body, your mind, your spirit, for these are what must be enhanced so that they can compete against any other.  If you do not master yourself you will overcome no other.  True, God may not have made your body like a professional athlete’s.  Perhaps it is physically impossible for you to win the Tour de France, or to finish the Iron Man.  But even if you could, you have to deal with yourself on a day-by-day, minute-by-minute basis.  It’s your reluctance, your tiredness, your pain, your exhaustion you must deal with and not the difficulties of someone else.  Only in dealing with yourself will you advance in dealing with others.

All this is also true for activities that relate to the spirit and to the character.  It’s you that needs to pray, it is you who needs to read the Bible, you who needs to reach out to others.

As I wrote that day I realized we were coming to the final push . . . “We only have three weeks left in the Body for Life Challenge.  From how we look right now it does not appear we will be in contention for any of the prizes.  Yet we dare not let up in any of our effort.  Who knows, the judges may select us for some reason.  It would be no comfort to have let up, let the contest end, and always know we did not put a hundred percent into it.  If we never hear a word from the contest officials, yet we tried until the last day, we will know we will have tried right until ten feet past the finish line.  Finish up, don’t wind down. 

TRAINING NEW CHRISTIANS

The value of a new, uninitiated Christian, one who has been saved from a background removed from church attendance, is that in his freshness, never being influenced by tradition, he can understand the Scriptures free of possible error introduced over the years by the tradition of men.

On the other side of that coin tradition built through the years by earnest men who have studied the Scriptures can keep new believers from wandering into erroneous territory.

To be protected from error one must read the Scriptures for himself.  Then he has some background against which he can compare to what his teacher is telling him.  It takes time to build up this background.  It also takes time to gain an apprehension of the organization behind the teaching.

A question worth asking is: “what does this man gain by teaching me this, does he have an angle or agenda?  Is the result of this teaching to advance the position or influence of the organization he represents?”

FARMER OR HERDSMAN

Noah believed God for things that had not yet happened - - things for which, I suppose, there was no indication they would happen.  But he thought those things so real he dared not go against them - - he feared God; he knew God would do what he said he would do.  His neighbors may have thought him a fool but Noah proved them foolish by his doing of the things God told him.  What God said happened. 

Was Noah a farmer or a herdsman, or both?  As a farmer it would have been easier for him to grow crops while the four men (Noah and his sons) built the ark.  If he were a herdsman he would have to move the flocks around to keep the pastures fresh.  This would have made the construction much more difficult.  In either case, he had to produce enough extra to fund their subsistence, materials and construction of the ark.  This indicates the possibility that he may have hired the work done from people from outside the family.

For such a large structure he and his sons would have needed plenty of “free time”, time away from providing subsistence.  Primitive construction techniques would also consume time.  Did they use contractors, suppliers?  If they did, they needed the funds to pay them.  They probably ran a very successful farm, or they had large flocks over wide areas with many employees to oversee them.

VIBRATIONS

We perceive vibrations at least two ways: as light and as sound.

The visual artist takes a paint brush and with thought and skill (little or much) captures the vibrations of light - - colors - - in a single place for us to view as a picture.  This static color show is concentrated in one place, with all the relationships frozen for a length of time - - as long as the picture lasts.  It is all concentrated in the picture, which does not change, which lasts for a while, and which many can see.  The viewers all see the same unchanging thing.  In a painting or photograph the sun does not rise or fall and nothing in the scene moves.

The sound artist works to produce interesting vibrations either by himself or with others.  But a single tone or note makes little sense until there is change in tone.  Even many voices together make no sense if there is only one tone.  A single note, or a single chord soon becomes boring; so movement - - rhythm - - progress from one tone to another is necessary.  When one voice moves to different tones it is melody.  When many voices move together it is harmony.  Melody and harmony each require some kind of rhythm or progress from one tone to the next.  Thus the progressing sounds must take up some length of time.  Once the time is done the work of art is finished - gone.

Visual and sound art are different.  Visual art is thin, it takes up only specific vibrations which do not change in relationship and which can last for long periods.  Sound is fat, it must take many changing vibrations and change in relationships which last for a specific length of time.  Paintings can hang in art museums for hundreds of years.  Once a music concert is performed it is over.

THE INCONVENIENCE OF SELF CONTROL

The need to use self control comes at inconvenient times.  They come at times when I am not listening for direction, or don’t particularly want to seek direction.  For example, last night I stayed up late because a) I am used to staying up late and because b) I wanted to do a crossword puzzle.  I did not even think to seek for God’s advice much less dedicating the time to God.  I was busy with the activity I wanted to do.

There seems to be two easy ways to slip off the path of self control.  One is pursuing a path you are "used to": an established routine, something familiar, a habitual activity.  Another is doing something you "want to do": something easy you enjoy and it feels good at the time.

But what I’m used to and what I like to do (crosswords, for example) may not be what at that particular time is the most profitable for me.  More profitable things might be:  memorizing Scripture, reading a book, or practicing drums or another musical instrument.  For the long picture literature and music are more noble things than the number of crosswords I complete or the TV programs I watch.

Maybe I should recognize these "used to it" "want to do" times.  Recognize that they exist, that they will appear at inconvenient times, and make plans to resist them.

SETTING ASIDE SELF CONTROL

How sweet is it to think of self control when I am removed from temptation and, how dim the goal of self control seems when temptation looms near. I remember one night I had the opportunity to a) control my eating, b) study the scripture, and c) practice the congas. Instead I watched PBS. It seems easy to quickly push the right things aside so I can take advantage of the less useful things. It's as if I realize the right thing will have it's way and I won't get to do the less useful thing. Accordingly I just pass quickly as possible over the right things putting them aside. I'm good at doing that and thereby I miss a) the Spirit of God and b) the benefit of accomplishing the right things.

I need somehow to stop the rush. How do I do that? Do I look at my watch and make myself think about what I’m doing for one minute? Two minutes? Do I quote scriptures? Do I say aloud to myself the choices I am considering, announcing to myself the benefits I will have from doing of the good things? Should I do ten push-ups before I can commence on the bad thing? Sit-ups?

I may be my own worst enemy when it comes to acting on my feelings. The things I feel like doing (watching TV) will not benefit me whereas the things I do not feel like doing (memorizing, practicing) will greatly benefit me. This is a case where working from the mind is better than working from the feelings (maybe it always is).

ASKING FOR SELF CONTROL

I noticed at one time in my journal I was asking the Lord for self control.  I seems odd for me to ask the Lord to give me self control since I am the one who should be controlling myself.  I thought either should have it or, minimally, I should want to develop it.  I am the one who should be controlling myself.  If another controls me, it is not myself.  Certainly I would not want someone to force control over me, yet there may be times where I need some assistance.  If another assists me in my control is it a flaw in my spirit or is it it an opportunity to develop my spirit?

I need to consider if I need assistance the Holy Spirit is known to be our "helper".  What is wrong with asking the helper to help?  Self control is identified in the Bible as a "fruit of the Spirit".  Since I have the Spirit residing within me, the fruits thereof are available to me.  This alone is a justification for me to ask.  Not asking for help might be a demonstration of being insensitive to the Holy Spirit. Perhaps if I would ask and then listen I would hear.  Certainly if I do not listen I will not hear.  If I do listen I might hear.  Perhaps the habit of asking and listening increases my sensitivity to hearing.  This may build to a point where I will more thoroughly know God:  know what his will is, sense his direction of my life, feel his direct presence.  This could result through the practice of listening for God's guidance. 

REINS

Jer 17:10 - - The Lord searches the heart and tries the reins of a man in order to give every man according to the man’s ways and according to the fruit of the man’s doings.

God has a continuous view into each person’s thoughts, intentions, feelings, hopes and emotions.  As we can control a horse’s direction with reins, the Lord can control our direction but gives us decisions to make.  The question is: will we obey Him?  Once God tries us (pulls on our reins), he rewards or corrects according to what we have been thinking or according to how we have acted.  Once our thinking or acting has produced a product, he rewards or corrects us for that product - - according to the accomplishments, or mess, we have made for ourselves.  God is directly involved with our lives.

“For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to show himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him.” (2Ch.16:9)

ONLY THE APOSTLES ARE WORTHY

A reformed pastor I was listening to said of the “you” in John 16:13 that it was written to the Apostles and not for us.  I wrote in the builtin when he preached it:  “If the ‘you’ is only the apostles according to the context, then should we throw the Bible aside and ignore these verses?  Context only applies = Apostles = Early Fathers = Tradition.  Tradition interprets the Scripture.”  We have to be careful of men’s logical devices such as this one, since they can take us the wrong way from the truth.

At the time I was feeling very sad, almost to tears, for the idea that God does not communicate to me, only to the Apostles, only to this pastor.  Can I take nothing from Corinthians because the book was written to the Corinthians?  Can I take nothing from the Psalms because it was David writing to God?  Or - - is what was good for the Corinthians also good for me?  Are David’s feelings like my feelings and the answers from God also valid for me?  Was what was said to the Apostles also valid for me?

In v25, when Jesus says “I shall show you plainly of the Father” does it mean that at this time, at the coming of the Holy Spirit, that he will show it only to the Apostles?  If this is only for the Apostles then does John 14:15 - 19 mean that only the “yous”, the Apostles, get the Holy Spirit”?  Does this pastor have a lock on Bible meaning that I, the peon, the non-seminary trained dolt, can not have?

Maybe rather the “Apostles” or “disciples” (KJV) are those who are closest to Jesus in a personal commitment level.  They follow closely to him, depending on him, while others come and go.  They are capable with their own intellect to interpret the Scriptures.  They represent Christians while the others, the well trained egotistical others, represent the religious lost.

BUT ITS MY PARTY

At the turn-of-the-century (August 1999) I had a birthday party at my house with my family and some others. During that party my wife and children gave me a djambe which is a type of drum. They all started to sing and I played along with them with my drum. After the first song one of the women there asked if I could play any softer, so I just put my drum aside. Her husband was obviously upset and remained upset the rest of the evening. The others played and sang at my birthday party but I was not welcome to play my drum in my own house.

This helps you to thin out your guest list for future events.

DOES IT MEAN WHAT IT SAYS

I went to a men’s Bible study at a church I once attended where the pastor trotted out his “the primary purpose of the Old Testament is to show Jesus Christ” routine.  I don’t dispute it is A purpose of the Old Testament but I wonder about being the PRIMARY purpose.  It makes it seem that anything else we get out of reading the Old Testament is of lesser value - - value that is inferior.  Therefore any other application we can draw, since it is inferior, can be lightly esteemed or even discarded.  According to this man such applications are more or less worthless.

Why then should we have an Old Testament study if the only answer of worth must be “How does this demonstrate Christ?”

What do I do with a scripture that says, “All Scripture is given for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”?

So, now that I know (according to this pastor) that the Bible is only about Christ, what good is the rest of it?  All I really have to do is see how it relates to Christ, then close the book and forget about the rest since it is minor anyway.  Once I know the one important fact - - that the writing is somehow showing me about Christ - - what else do I need to know?

If I want to find out about homosexuality I should read contemporary books about homosexuality.  The Bible may define the homosexual act as wrong but, so what, since that is not the main intent of the Scriptures, which is to reveal Christ, not necessarily to teach us what is right and what is wrong.

It it permissible for me to ask of the Bible, “does it mean what it says”?

Here are three statements encountered from that particular Pastor:

Statement 1. “Because the culture today is different from the culture of Biblical times we can think of things differently than what the Scriptures say.”

This depends upon what the overarching intent of the Scripture is.  Although some things are definitely different between past and present cultures, other things are comparable.  The role of family, for example, existed and was important in the past as it is today.  While I may not tend sheep as many in ancient Biblical lands did, I can learn from the role of the shepherd basic, important character traits like faithfulness, watchfulness and diligence.  A problem arises when we try to relieve ourselves from the types of personal and social responsibility that is called for in the Scriptures:  for example a life-long marriage to one person.  Because in this present day culture it is easy and acceptable to get divorced does not mean it is an option to choose because it is convenient.  Because today’s society embraces sexual intercourse between people of the same sex does not relieve us from the prohibition of that activity as expressed in the Bible.

Statement 2. “The primary purpose of the Scriptures is to reveal Christ and other revelations are of lesser importance.”

Of course the revelation of Christ is important - - crucial - - to the eternal life of any person, but to say other lessons that could be learned from the Scriptures are of “lesser” importance seems to be a semantical trick.  We know that knowing Christ is vital, yet we still need to know other things like:  we should not kill, we should not steal, we should not commit adultery, etc.  Clearly we must first breathe to stay alive after which we need to do other things like drink water and eat food.  I can not (or at least I should not) pick up The Book, learn about Christ, and then toss it aside as if it’s all I really need.  There is so much more of inestimable value to be found, if we will but pay attention.

Statement 3. “The context of certain Scriptures eliminate the reader from taking the plain meaning of the text as for himself.”

Without an example of a specific scripture this statement makes no sense.  It seems to me you have to first know the plain text meaning of the words you read.  Then you compare what knowledge you have of the context to the meaning of the text.  From the comparison of the text and context you arrive at a conclusion about the intention of what was written.  Whatever conclusion the reader arrives at has meaning for the reader.  What I think this pastor was really wanting to say is that he only is capable of interpreting the meaning.   The average parishioner must look to him, the seminary graduate, for the correct interpretation.  He once said, "The Holy Spirit teaches your pastor, and your pastor teaches you."  The Pharisees said that too.

SENSES

The Scripture speaks of the “Lust of the eye, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life.”  I notice there is no mention of the “Lust of the ear” or the “Lust of the nose.”  Is this because there is some special property of vision?  Is there some way that this particular sense has more power to be damaging? Is it wired more directly into emotions and passions not being filtered first through the thinking mind?

A nude body is of the eye, but music is of the ear.  You can sexually arouse yourself by seeing images of nudes.  You can even imagine morally damaging visual scenes.  But can not sexually arouse yourself through music absent any visual image.  Today’s options include music videos.  If you heard the music without ever seeing the video could you get the same impressions (thoughts, emotions and feelings) as you could be seeing the video?

You can get impressions through the lyrics of music.  The lyrics can carry sexual messages.  Lyrics can be carried and reinforced by music, but the music does not carry the message.  Music without lyrics can  not carry the visual image.  The song “The Stripper” by itself will not convey the image of a stripper, the listener has to have, if fact, seen a stripper’s performance.  The imagery of the stripper, once seen, can be overlaid on the music in the listener’s mind.

Can the music alone give all people the same visual impression?  I’ll bet not.  I’ll bet ten different people could get ten different visual impressions from a piece of music – even one with lyrics, but if all ten saw a video with the music they would all get the same impression - - that of the videographer, not necessarily of the one who composed the music or wrote the lyrics.

The song, “the Song Remembers When” talks of a song being able to evoke a strong memories of a past event.  But it was an event that had a host of other senses tagged to it - - not the least of which is what was seen when the event occurred.  These are the events inside the head of the listener, not of the song writer. The lyricist has his memories, visual or otherwise, and the listener has his; they are not the same.

CHOICES THAT SEEM PREDESTINED

I don’t hold with the theological doctrine of Predestination.  But there is a reason to find value in the theory of the “Predestination” position - - not as the sole position, but as a balance for the “Free will” or “Decisional” position.

Joseph said to his brothers, “You decided to do evil to me, but God used it for good.”  God had determined that Abraham’s seed would go into Egypt and grow there.  Joseph’s brothers on their own volition decided first to murder Joseph, but then to sell him into slavery.  Although their free choice was for evil, by God’s sovereignty the results of it turned out for good:  God’s good, Joseph’s good, the brothers’ good, Israel’s good, and even our good.

To say God made Joseph’s brothers decide to do murder is to say that he made his creatures do something which is against the nature of God himself.  They must have chosen to do the evil.  God, being good by definition, converted the evil into good.  But God, being in existence at all times (past, present and future), knew before the bad happened that it was going to happen.  He did not preclude the brothers’ bad decision.

We should not be afraid to make choices, or be made to think that our choices have no real meaning or effect because some others are fully persuaded about predestination.  “If God has predetermined things what choice do we have, is there really any choice at all, why bother?”  Because, as Joseph’s brothers did, we have options before us that we can choose.  But we should also know that God has all firmly in his control and in the end his will will work for the good.  And if God has all in control, we can see he will be more than willing to give us the power to accomplish his will.  And if we fail to accomplish his will God will make it come out his way anyway in spite of the mess we make.

If Joseph’s brothers can choose evil, then so can we.  But, as an extension to this, we can also choose good.

At some time we are going to be in a place where we will have to choose - - we will not have the luxury of passing the choice by.

EMOTION CHANGES DNA

I Read an article that said emotions from negative social activity, like being rejected or ignored, actually changes our DNA.  They cause emotional or psychological results that can eventually express as physical results.  I quote a portion of this article:  “Within 40 minutes, they and other researchers have found, these experiences affect the expression of individual genes, determining which parts of our DNA are turned on or off . . . they have found, [these experiences] can change how DNA behaves.”

So we are to believe that emotion changes DNA.  I have been taught that DNA is a chemical structure within a cell.  It is supposed to resemble a helix, a double coil, having rungs like a ladder.  The "rungs" of the ladder are our genes.  The article states our emotions are supposed to change these genes.

I suppose if someone, who I thought liked me now says he hates me, has made my genes change.  How could you know my genes have changed?  How can this be proved? Will a piece of skin be taken from me, frozen, sliced up, dyed and microscopically analyzed to show the changes?  This presupposes a skin sample was taken before the "rejection" so it could be compared to the one taken after the "rejection" that the differences could be observed.  Do I need to take a blood test, will that work? 

Remember, this all takes place within 40 minutes so we can not allow for the possibility that the emotional trauma may have physical manifestations resulting in lack of care for physical maintenance or safety.  Even if we allowed 40 hours could not eating or lack of sleep (resulting from the despondency) change my genes?

This seems absurd to me.  I doubt if sad (or angry, or happy) emotions can express directly as physical gene changes.  I don't believe it has any bearing in truth.  This statement seems to be a contrivance to have something exciting and provocative  to write about

Maybe time and physical / psychological experiments will prove me wrong, but until then I'll file this away in the "Wacco" bin.

WHAT A FAST IS, IS NOT

ACCORDING TO ISIAH 58
According to Isaiah 58 this is what a fast in not:
- - Finding pleasure (we do it to get something that will give us pleasure)
- - Exacting our our labors ( we require God to pay something back for our inconvenience)
- - For strife and debate (we are at odds with someone and want God to take our side against them)
- - Smite with the fist of wickedness (we want harm to come to someone else)
- - Make our voice to be heard on high (we want our will to prevail in the courts of heaven)
- - To afflict our soul (a time to make ourselves uncomfortable, perhaps thinking we deserve it)
- - Bow down the head as a bulrush (it is not good for us to be happy, we must be sad to please God)
- - Spread sackcloth and ashes under us (make a public demonstration of our discomfort)

What a fast is:
- - Loose the bands of wickedness (from ourselves, from other people)
- - Undo the heavy burdens (things that are too difficult for us or others to bear)
- - Let the oppressed go free (we help the oppressed gain freedom, or release ourselves from oppression)
- - Break every yoke (the things that are controlling us or others, the things for which we need to give up control)
- - Deal your bread to the hungry (do with a little less in order to feed some hungry)
- - Bring the cast out poor into your house (give up space, privacy)
- - Cover the naked (do with less clothing so that others can have at least some clothes)
- - Not hide yourself from your own flesh (endure some inconvenience for the aid of your relatives)
- - The yoke (do away with the unhealthy associations where others are bad for you and where you are bad for others)
- - Putting forth the finger (Stop looking at others for blame and ignoring your own, sidestepping responsibility)
- - Speaking vanity (Stop talking so much about things that have no lasting eternal value)
- - Draw out your soul to the hungry (seek for a few opportunities to feed the poor)
- - Satisfy the afflicted soul (rather than than thrusting the non-repentant aside provide spiritual aid for them)

BE NOT SILENT

There is the old saying:  "A woman, a dog and a walnut tree -- the harder you beat them, the better they be.”

My Wife has written a book, Submission Is Not Silence.  I think some people react to the title itself without knowing its content.  Some have said things like “submission is good”, “submission is commanded by the Bible”, “wives submit to your husbands as unto the Lord”  When they stop there, never expanding on what they mean, it becomes obvious they have either have not read, or have not fully read my Wife's book.  She never says submission is bad.  She says some forms of submission as administered by some authorities or some men is oppressive, and that it is not good to be silent about it.

She says it is not good to be silent about or to endure truly oppressive submission.  For example it is not good for a woman to submit to being beaten by a man.  She should speak and tell him it is wrong to beat her when reasoning could accomplish what he wants.  If that did not work she should report him to the authorities.  In this country the authorities view wife-beating as a crime, and it is.

It is obvious certain submission is good, and we all submit much of the time.  We all stop for traffic lights.  We drive (in the USA) on the right side of the road.  We don’t speak in church when the pastor is speaking.  We don’t beat up people because they disagree with us or annoy us. 

Some have said "Submission is in the Bible” inferring anything objecting to absolute submission is to speak against the Bible.  When submission is oppressive and harmful it needs to be opposed.  That’s what World War II was about.  Even God does not force absolute submission; we are all free to say, “There is no God”.  A woman should not remain silent if she has an idea that may be better, and she certainly should not remain silent if she is being abused.  Hence the title of my wife’s book:   Submission Is Not Silence.  If some had read beyond the title page they would have realized that.

The saying may be cute, and it may roll off the tongue, but it’s not true that, "A woman, a dog and a walnut tree -- the harder you beat them, the better they be.”

SEVEN TIMES AROUND

On Memorial Day in 1998 I was trying to replace the rack-and-pinion of an old Oldsmobile.  It was a very frustrating job with many time stoppers, the culmination of which was trying to get the clamp from the steering wheel apparatus back onto the shaft of the rack-and-pinion assembly.  Working until 10 pm that night I remembered all the old Navy language.  During my sleep (which was uncomfortable because of a sore bruised back from laying on the concrete) I had a dream.  In it I saw the clamp slipping easily onto the shaft and two holes matching up.

When I continued the job two days later I started by walking around the car seven times praying.  After a little fiddling I noticed a notch on the side of the shaft which looked as if it was supposed to accommodate the pinch bolt.  I rotated the steering wheel to match this notch and the clamp “fell” onto the shaft just like in the dream.

I think God was speaking to me about this.  I Think he gave me the dream to encourage me and to show me the nature of how the two parts would come together.

When I walked around the car seven times, like Joshua marched around Jericho, I felt silly and I wondered if it was doing any good.  Maybe those marching around Jericho also felt silly and wondered if it was doing any good - - yet the walls fell down, and the clamp fell onto the shaft.

The Bible software I use shows me the phrase “seven times” occurs 33 times:  Gen_33:3, Lev_4:6, Lev_4:17, Lev_8:11, Lev_14:7, Lev_14:16, Lev_14:27, Lev_14:51, Lev_16:14, Lev_16:19, Lev_25:8, Lev_26:18, Lev_26:21, Lev_26:24, Lev_26:28, Num_19:4, Jos_6:4, Jos_6:15, 1Ki_18:43, 2Ki_4:35, 2Ki_5:10, 2Ki_5:14, Psa_12:6, Psa_119:164, Pro_24:16, Dan_3:19, Dan_4:16, Dan_4:23, Dan_4:25, Dan_4:32, Mat_18:21, Mat_18:22, Luk_17:4.

FROM PROMISE TO LAND

Psalm 105 speaks of remembering and rejoicing in what the Lord has done.  It speaks of the progress of the Children of Israel from Abraham’s time to the promised land.  He gave the promise to Abraham, Issac and Jacob.  He preserved Israel in the places where they were and in the places where they were to come.  He sent Joseph before them to prepare a place in Egypt.  He brought them to Egypt and developed them into a great number.  He delivered them from slavery.  He brought them to the promised land. 

Promise, Start, Develop, Transition, Delivery

For Israel these elements applied to:
- - The initial stage (the giving of a promise, beginning of a concept)
- - Start of an undertaking (the founding patriarchs)
- - Development of the undertaking (growth in Egypt)
- - Moving of the undertaking toward its purpose (delivery from slavery)
- - Formalizing and establishing the purpose  (bring into the promised land)

Can we look at broad pictures like this and see comparisons in our own lives and families?

- - The initial stage
- - Start of an undertaking
- - Development of the undertaking
- - Moving of the undertaking toward its purpose
- - Formalizing and establishing the purpose

STANDING AGAINST SCORNING

According to Proverbs 21:11:  “When the scorner is punished the simple is made wise:  and when the wise is instructed he receiveth knowledge.”   A scorner is someone who unjustly speaks words of disgust against someone or something else.  He disapproves.  He belittles.  This is not a healthy situation and it is a good thing to correct it.  The scorner needs to be publicly told his words are damaging and are not helpful.  Apparently when this reproof happens the simple person now perceives the scorning for what it is.  When they make this perception - - that scorning is a damaging activity - - they become wiser than they were.  Once someone becomes wise they can increase in knowledge.

Several things happen when you publicly stand against scorning:  a scorning is stopped, exposed for what it is, and people are instructed toward wisdom.  The scorner is also spotlighted for what he is.

WRITE IT DOWN

Sometimes I think what I write is not worth writing if it is not related to Scripture or somehow addressing my relationship with God.  I am tempted to think that I should not write it. 

Yet my innermost thoughts are open to God and he knows most of them are neither related to Scripture nor to Him.  If my innermost thoughts are open to him then whatever I write is even more open because it is recorded, it takes a solid form - - writing does not vanish like thoughts do.  Whatever I am should be as open to me as it is to God.  In other words, I should be able to remind myself of the ground I have covered.  That written thought might serve as a sort of marker or mile post from which I can determine a correction (or confirmation) of the direction my life is taking.  It won’t do to restrain myself if the restraining holds back my development. 

The writing time would be a problem if it encouraged a direction away from God.  But, even then, having it on paper might make the mistake so obvious that it identifies it as something that should be avoided. 

When I re-read these things later I find important markers that help to direct (or redirect) myself.

OLD PRINCIPLES STILL APPLY

When we have a difficulty or question about Scripture what should we do?  We can ask:  what does the Scripture tell us to do (think, act, etc.), what do we want to do (think, act, etc.), and how are the two different?  Then we can ask:  is there an honest way to resolve the differences?  If there is no honest resolution, what are we gong to change; our ways, or the meaning of the Scripture?  This sort of question can come about when we notice the differences between the culture of Biblical times and our present time.

It is not that we should ignore the cultural setting in which God sets forth his principles, but if God has set forth a principle in one culture, and the principle was true (by definition God’s principles are always true) then it will be true in any other culture or time.  The application of the principle may take different forms between cultures.

We cannot change the principle.  If we do we are saying God wrote an irrelevant book:  we are saying sections of it have gone out of date and have lost their meaning.  Therefore we are effectively saying we can determine on our own, and without God’s input, what is the best way for us to act.  If we throw out part of God’s word, what other parts can we throw out?  Which of God’s principles can we selectively disregard?

We do not throw out any part of Scripture.  We ask God for wisdom to know how his principles apply in our times.

POSITIONING

God has provided a certain position for each of us.  It’s as true for us as it is for the big shots.  In 2 Tim 1 we see this example in Paul the apostle’s case.  His positioning came from God through his family, they served God “. . . from [his] forefathers . . .”  His father served God, his Grandfather served God, his nation served God.  Paul grew up in a family that served God. (v3)  Timothy also had a line of faith starting with his Grandmother Lois. (v5)  While many of us do not have this long family tradition, God still cares for us and gives us a position too.

God has a plan for us, a calling which is not according to our works, but according to his own purpose.  God had this plan in place before we ever started to plan our own lives.  It was in place “. . . before the world began. . . .”  Paul was called to be a preacher, apostle, and teacher of the gentiles. (v11)  Timothy had “. . . that good thing . . .” (v13)  God has given you “a good thing” too.

Do we make plans for ourselves which may not be in accordance with God’s plan?  David  tried, he wanted to build the Temple but God wanted his son, Solomon, to build it instead.  What was God’s reason?  As we see in 1Ch_28:3,  "But God said unto me [David], Thou shalt not build an house for my name, because thou hast been a man of war, and hast shed blood."  Would David pay too much attention to the construction of the building and not to the construction of the nation?  We don’t know.  We know it was not in God’s plan for David.

Some of where we are in life is a result of God’s plan.  The more we have been trying to be sensitive toward God, the more likely we have not disturbed the positioning God has made for us.  Our positioning is close to where it should be.  The more self centered and worldly we have been the more likely we have made the position less effective.

How do we know what God’s plan is for us personally?  By:
- Word of God
- Prayer
- Circumstances
- Other people
- Observation
- Opportunities

SELF-FULFILLING INTRODUCTIONS

I have heard phrases used, particularly contained in PBS programs such as “Nova” or “Front Line”, which I call “self-fulfilling introductions”.  These statements are intended to give an air of established truth to the content that follows them.  The introductory phrases appear to give authority to what comes next, as if to say, “let there be no question about this”.  They provide appearance of a reliable source, albeit an unnamed and unexplained source.  Here are some examples:

 - Research has shown . . .
 - Extraordinary new light indicates . . .
 - Science now knows . . .
 - New evidence has shown . . .
 - There is a new revelation that . . .
 - We now know . . .

One reason for using these phrases may be that the explanation about the nature of the source would be too lengthy to explain in a limited time and would distract from the subject to be presented.  However, there may be other reasons for the self-fulfilling introduction:

- What is to come is really based on theory, not fact.
- The source information does not clearly relate to the presented subject.
- The name of the source might be embarrassing or hard to justify.
- There is really no thorough knowledge about the subject.
- The presentation to follow is intended to argue or favor only one side of an issue that has opposing views.  Example:  Evolution vs. Creation.

Most of the time I like these shows.  If I didn’t like them, I would not watch them.  I do find, however, the pervasive use of the concept of evolution-as-fact annoying.  We must always be careful of what we take for truth and be aware of where it is coming from.  I suggest we modify such self-fulfilling phrases to:


 - Research suggests . . .
 - Extraordinary new light may indicate . . .
 - Science now seems to support . . .
 - New evidence may show . . .
 - There is a new revelation proposing that . . .
 - Some now think . . .

SETTING THE RIGHT COURSE

Consider  2 Tim 3.  These verses written in Scripture centuries ago speak in the current day of some people who are wicked and also are in the church.  It seems to me the list found in these verses can apply equally to the lofty legalist as to the flamboyant charismatic.  It's easy to see the aberrance of some charismatics because they are in the open.  Less apparent are those who have the “form of godliness but deny the power thereof”.  They look good but they aren't good.

When we recognize them we avoid them by our:

- continuing in things learned and assured (proved) (v14)
- learning things having come from good sources (v14)
- life long learning from the Scriptures (v15)

The Scriptures are good for:

- Doctrine  - The teaching of and systematic way of thinking
- Reproof - “You are wrong, stop!  Repent!”
- Correction - “You are going off course.  This is what you must do to correct.”
- Instruction in righteousness – Showing what are the right actions and thoughts

The progression should be as follows:

- First we must know the basic truth – doctrine
- We must stop the wrong activity – reproof
- We must show the way to correct the activity – correction
- We must show the right way to do things – instruction

Here is the Instruction:  2Timothy 3:1 to 7:

"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.  For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away . . .”

IT’S THE MIDDLEMAN’S JOB

Exo 20:19  “And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.”

The people were distancing themselves from God.

1Sam 8:10-11, 18-20:  “And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a KING.  And he said, This will be the manner of the KING that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.  And ye shall cry out in that day because of your KING which ye shall have chosen you; and the Lord will not hear you in that day.  Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a KING over us;  That we also may be like all the nations; and that our KING may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.”  (emphasis added)

When people sought for a king God was displeased with them  They wanted someone to take responsibility of doing the work of governing.  They did not want the responsibility themselves and they apparently did not want to be responsible directly to God.  The government (king) would be the middleman between them and God.  They were distancing themselves from direct relationship with God They wanted to point to the government for the common provision and the common security, they themselves did not want to bother with it.  If there was lawlessness it would be the king’s fault, if there was general immorality it would be the king’s fault.  The king would pay for their health care and for their education.  The king would be responsible for their mental health after earthquakes.

This is a common mark of irresponsibility:  “Let the government do this or that for me . . .”   Or, “It’s not my fault, it’s the government’s fault.”

But people do not want God, they want a king.  “We will not have this man to rule over us . . .” was a cry for distance from their best source of wisdom and strength.

However, God wants each individual within himself to know and obey his law (that is Gods law).  Every man is to know what God’s law is and every man should keep God’s law.  We should do our diligence to hear directly from God.   We can not distance ourselves from responsibility by setting up middlemen.

WHEN IT COMES TO DOUBT

From the first part of Psalm 11 are questions one would ask about raising doubts in a believer (or perhaps it is a question of doubt the believer himself is asking)  The rest of the psalm answers the question (vs 4-7)

We get doubts about what we commonly fear:
- - You should retreat (v1)
- - The wicked are working (v2)
- - They do it in secret, no one sees (v2)
- - If the foundations are destroyed what can the righteous do? (v3)

The answers . . .
- - Got still reigns in heaven (v4)
- - God sees all (v4)
- - God tries everybody, but he hates the wicked (v5)
- - God will punish the wicked (v6)
- - God sees the upright.

GOOD WELLS AND BAD WELLS

From Proverbs 10:32:  “The lips of the righteous know what is acceptable, but the mouth of the wicked speaketh frowardness.”  The righteous shows kind consideration when he speaks.  He knows what is acceptable because he has studied the other person and knows something of their state.  He knows how different words would affect him.

The wicked also knows of the other but speaks away from the appropriate answer (froward means away from).  So the wicked shows hurtful consideration, the desire to oppose.

Verse 11:  “The mouth of a righteous man is a well of life, but violence covereth the mouth of the wicked”  A well has an opening from which something must be drawn out.  What good is inside the righteous must be drawn out.  He is not quick with his answers.  When he gives answers they are healthful, as water is healthful.

If there is any healthful thing within the wicked, it is inaccessible because the well is covered.  He does not want to give out health but harm.  Obvious to all who see is the violence that covers his mouth.  It is always on top, always presenting to people.

COURT IS IN SESSION

Psalm 9:7:  “But the Lord shall endure forever:  he hath prepared his throne for judgment.”

I wonder, if man were not sinful would God not have to set up his throne for judgment?  If there were no sin his throne would be needed only for ruling; it would not be needed for discovering sin and pronouncing punishment for the wicked.  But since the wicked exist, God is preparing his throne for a time when they will be brought to account for transgressing his will.  God will outlast any hope of the wicked for covering up, or justifying, or getting past their wicked deeds.  There will be no hope the deeds will be forgotten or overlooked.  From the time a wicked act is performed God’s judgment throne is ready to pronounce a punishment.  Court is in session and the sinner is on the docket.

While the judgment is inevitable we must also remember “. . . the needy shall not always be forgotten:  the expectation of the poor shall not perish forever. . .” as said in v18.  We should consider afresh how we ourselves deserve judgment, but have been excused.  Jesus paid our fines.

TRAINING SPIRITUAL CHILDREN

What do we do to bring up spiritual children?  I think there at least three areas:  Devotions, Training and Example.

Devotions:  When I say devotions I mean reading the Bible as a family, aloud, all together in one place at regular, consistent times.  The Bible is the primary source of our knowledge about who and what and why God is, and what he requires.  There are other means such as at church or Sunday school or TV ministries, but how do you know what they are saying is what the Bible says?  You must read the Bible to know what it says so you can compare it to what the other sources are telling you.  Remember the Bible says, “In the beginning was the Word . . .”

Training:  We can interpret what the Bible is saying to us and our children as we are reading it to them.  We can direct them to other reliable Bible teachers.  We can assure they are among upright, wholesome friends, families and other teachers.  We can oversee what types of media (books, movies, TV, internet, etc.) they consume.  We can encourage them when they demonstrate good character and correct them when they don’t.  We can support them as they engage in activities such as sports, band, theater, etc. and converse with them about their experiences.

Example:  The most effective method is to be a good example.  They will learn as they see us talk among ourselves in the family and with others in public.  They will learn about character as they see our character.  They will learn what is fair and reasonable as they view us being fair and reasonable.  We show them what good works are by doing good works ourselves.  It won’t be so hard to “do as we say” as we ourselves do as we say.  They will learn about giving as they see us giving and as they experience what we give to them.

DRIFTING TRUTH

Proverbs 5:3  “Her mouth [the strange woman] drops as a honeycomb and her mouth is smoother than oil”.  This is how the wisdom of the world sounds, it is sweet and smooth.  It is difficult to overcome because it sounds as if it is good (honey) and it sounds so logical and solid (smoother than oil).  But it is death (v5).  The wisdom of the world is movable (v6).  It has no standard upon which it is based, so it is free to drift in any convenient direction.  When you shine the light of scripture and logic upon it, to show that it is incorrect, it slips aside into avoiding discovery.

The wisdom of the world will cause you to:

-  Give your honor to others (v9) – your sense of worth and dedication will be account to the evolutionists, and not with God’s people or family.

-  Give your years to the cruel (v9) – your time will have vanished among the vitriolic agitators, and not with God’s people or family.

-  Strangers will be filled with your strength (v10) – the materialists will have the effect of your strength and not God’s people or family.

-  Your labors will be in the house of the strangers (v10) – Your labors will be in the house of careerists and not with God’s people or family.

-  Your flesh and body will be consumed – at the end of your life your flesh and body will have been spent for your humanist education, for the vitriolic agitators and wrong-sex proponents, for possessions (many of which will have long since decayed), for your career (which did not further God’s kingdom).

God’s truth does not so shift.

MINING FOR TRUTH

Referring to Proverbs 2:1-5 it seems that it takes a lot of continual effort to get knowledge, understanding and wisdom.  These things don’t come easy and they don’t come quick.  It takes work , and it takes work every day.  You must receive, hide, incline, apply, cry, lift your voice, seek and search.

“Pro 2:1-5  My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee; so that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, and apply thine heart to understanding; yea, if thou [cry] after knowledge, and [lift] up thy voice for understanding; if thou [seek] her as silver, and [search] for her as for hid treasures; then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.”

When you seek for silver and search for hid treasure it is not done in five minutes of idle time before watching a video.  To seek you must decide where to go, you must do diligent research.  You have to determine how your search will be funded.  You must actually go there and methodically comb the area inspecting every rock formation.  You must balance your resources while doing it.  It takes time and it takes resources.  You have to spend something to get something.

So it is we have to spend some time in God’s word to get something out of it.  Seeking through the pages of Scripture brings to us understanding, knowledge, wisdom and is to arrive at the conception of right paths, the right way.  Truth will deliver people who find themselves in the wrong paths.

WHEN DOES “CAUSE AND EFFECT” HAPPEN

By looking at Genesis one I wonder if we can make an observation:  All things that appear to have a cause and effect may not have, or may not always have had, a cause/effect relationship.  God first made the light, then he divided it from the darkness, then he named the darkness “night” and the light “day”,  then the evening and the morning were the first day.  It was after that (three days later, on the forth day) that God created the lights (Sun, Moon, stars) and attached them to the day/night cycle(“rule over the day and over the night”).

- -  There was light without a source for it (Sun, stars).

- - There may have been “day and night” without the rotation of the earth.*

- - Things may become associated into cause and effect after they both are brought into existence:  there was light - - then there were sources for the light - - then the sources were made to “rule” over the light.

Might there be other things that seem to be in a cause and effect relationship which really may not be that way?  Were other energies made before the sources for them came into being?

Is it natural for us, in a human sense, to create “energies” before we create the “sources”?

- - Spirit [goes to] Soul?

- - Idea [goes to] Thought?

- - Feeling [goes to] Thought?

*Was all the light, after the division, on one side of the Earth, and the darkness on the other?  Then the earth rotated to achieve day and night?  Was day and night achieved some other way?

DEVELOPING CHARACTER

Pro 14:8  The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit.  - - -  You should understand your way.  You should know and plan for what you are going to do and how and when you are going to do it.

Pro 14:12  There is a way which seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.  - - -  Many ways seem good, so in your plans make sure you are going where God wants, and not some other way.  God’s way is always safest.

Pro 14:15  The simple believes every word: but the prudent man looks well to his going.  - - -  Think about the direction you go and be wary of your counselors.  Every word of counsel should be examined and re-examined.  All should contribute to the building of God’s kingdom.

Pro 14:18  The simple inherit folly: but the prudent are crowned with knowledge.  - - -  The simple inherit folly because they have not made any plans.  They get whatever Satan brings their way.  The prudent see their plans unaffected by evil; they get them accomplished.

Pro 14:23  In all labor there is profit: but the talk of the lips tends only to penury.  - - -  Plans are good, but if you only talk or write of them, and never work them, they are useless.  You have to take action on your plans adjusting them along the way.

Character and righteousness do not just happen.  They are built step by step on a daily basis.  They do not exist in us because of some naturally inborn, unchangeable part.  They are not like our body type that has been given us from birth.  When we need them, if we have not been developing them, they will not be there.

GOD’S WORDS THROUGH MEN

We endanger ourselves when we think too much of the men who physically penned the Scriptures.  Biblical critics would tell us the men who wrote the Scriptures were captives of their time.  They ignore the possibility that God could use men to capture the Creator’s timeless truths.  Some would say the present time represents a different culture than the past so we should not apply historical ethical writings to ourselves.  Behind the issue is the assumption that Paul, not God, was the author of these words.  Therefore, some would say, we do not have to accept them as scripture because God did not write them. 

But we know the words on every page of the Bible are inspired by God, they are all his words.  How did the men that God used to choose the canonical scriptures choose this or that letter from Paul as authentic?  Was it not because Paul wrote it and it was very obvious to these men that Paul was God’s man (these men having lived closer to the time Paul actually worked and lived)?  Maybe it was because of who the authors were - - Apostles of or “blood relatives” of the Lord Jesus.

Biblical days were days when public discourse was oral.  Even written words were not dominant for most because the printing press was not yet invented.  All discourse tended to be local.  Yet the fame of Paul was widespread.  His fame, if not a sign of God’s working through Paul, at least it is a sign of the magnitude of his importance.  The words were copied and re-copied.  There had to be something more behind them than simply the letter of a churchman.

It is inspiring that the Bible should come from God as a collection of books written by men because, as God has worked among men in the past for the purpose of inspiring us, so he today works to inspire us in the Church - - by men of the present.  Then God was working in real live people who were doing things among their contemporaries.  They wrote it down as, or soon after, it happened.  If you were there, God was working among people you could have heard with your own ears, or touched. 

Although what churchmen of today write will not be in the Bible, God is working still among the people of the Church.

VITRIOL ON POSTS OR COMMENTS

While viewing a Pro-Trump site I saw some posts and comments that were condescending and acid in their tone.  I was sad to see vitriolic language used by anti-Trump people  I was sadder still to see the vitriolic language used at a pro-Trump site.  Vitriol is a sign of rude, insensitive caustic people who seem to want to do damage.  The language is not a simple expression of disagreement but is a indication of intent to embarrass and harm.  It fails to influence the targeted blogger or poster to either moderate the author’s opinion or lessen his resistance to the ‌commentator‌’s opinion.  It rather fortifies his opposition to the commentator‌’s opinion.

Vitriol is more like a declaration of war than a wish to achieve either an change or to reach a mutual agreement.  Vitriol will cause you to isolate yourself from the ones or the situation you wish to influence.  You will show yourself to be a disrespectful person of low manners and little influence.

Why would any other wish to even hear, let alone be influenced, by a rude, angry person?

To get results it is far better to assume the people reading your words are:  intelligent and can understand your point and might decide to make some change from what they think.  While commenting be courteous and assume they will kind enough to realize you both differ and respect you for sentiments.  Don’t act the opposite way yourself by being discourteous and disrespectful.

IMAGINING

I have been trying to do away with my imaginations.  I wonder if they do not short circuit any good that I might do?  (I imagine it, therefore I have “done” it, therefore I do not really do it.) 

God says, “without vision the people perish.”  Some sort of thinking about what will happen is good.  But I wonder if the way I imagine takes away from positive action.  Certainly the negative imagining is not good for it sets an evil cast upon events which have not yet happened.  Sometime is puts future events in the framework of the familiar - - the way we are used to events happening; yet, they may not actually happen that way.

I think, “men do not want me around” and I launch my imagination off in that direction.  Better for me to say, “I resist that thinking.  God said, ’resist the Devil and he will flee from you, draw neigh to
God and he will draw neigh unto you.’  In the name of Jesus I resist that thought.”

Maybe my mind being so full of imaginations keeps me from hearing from the Spirit of God.

I need to walk “by faith and not by sight”.  While I am doing what faith says, I can observe the results of faith - -  the “sight” part.

What would faith teach me about my relationships with other men?  I’m sure of this:  it’s important to know what God says is right - - as in the Law, Proverbs, parables, etc.

BEING WISE AS A SERPANT

Be careful of your personal information.  I recently read a Washington Post news article about Russian hackers implanting malicious code in a Vermont electrical grid computer system.  In the article it said:  “According to the report by the FBI and DHS, the hackers involved in the Russian operation used fraudulent emails that tricked their recipients into revealing passwords.”  This highlights something I hope you already know:  NEVER, NEVER give your personal information to any request for it to a source you are unsure about.  This applies to emails, phone calls and particularly to requests from the web.

I can’t imagine why you would provide an answer to anyone who wanted to know your password.  Why would they need to know it?  The very concept of “password” implies only you and that one particular entity (and no one else) already know what it is.

NO SOLOISTS

As I was thinking about a computer software problem I realized that I was feeling bad that I could not solve the problem alone.  I remembered that Jesus is called our “Advocate”.  How would you like to represent yourself as your own lawyer before God in Heaven’s courtroom?.  How wonderful That Jesus is our lawyer, our advocate.  Being a man, and not God, there are some things I can not do.  Then I remembered that God says that “in the multitude of counselors there is safety”.   So I should not feel bad to need another to help me solve a problem.

The world is such that if you do not keep pouring energy into your work, it will dissipate into nothing.  We have to keep active to keep anything we value.  Thank God he pours his energy into us.  How could we keep ourselves straight if we did not daily remind ourselves by reading, prayer, fellowship and church about God and his ways?  Even as we are doing that we need his Holy Spirit, and we need our family, friends and work-mates..

MUSINGS ON GENESIS

When God created the heaven some other things were there also:  darkness, the deep, waters.  Did these things come along with the creation, or was there darkness before there was an earth?  Before there was a heaven or earth was there nothing?  Or was this the place where, in the course of the spiritual dimension, God set the physical dimension running as a “new thing”:  Spiritual always, physical in time?

The earth was without form and void (empty)?  Does this mean there were no geologic features (lakes, mountains, seas . . .) or does it mean the Earth somehow was not coagulated into a solid physical sphere?

Where was the Deep?  On the Earth, outer space?

God created light and “saw” that it was good.  Did God “see” anything before there was light?  God knows everything, of course, but is “seeing” something different?

If darkness was upon the face of the deep, where was it not?  Were there other places that darkness was not upon?  If there were such places, what was upon them?  (Not light because light came after darkness).

God divided the light from the darkness (implying that light and darkness were mixed together).  When he did that “. . . the evening and the morning were the first day”.  This seems to be the start of time.

Apparently God was not satisfied with darkness and waters alone because he did not see that they were good, when God created light he saw that it was good; did the three have to be together?

CHURCH SELF-SEEKERS

(Jude 1:11)  “Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.”

Cain:  The sacrifice of works rather than the sacrifice of blood.

Balaam:  Seeking to become rich in the doing of God’s work.

Core:  Pushing himself to usurp the place of God’s appointed leaders. 

Cain and Abel both brought sacrifices to God but God preferred Abel’s offering over Cain’s.  Cain killed Abel in a fit of jealousy; Why?  Perhaps he thought his offering should have been more valuable.  He put more labor in growing crops than raising animals.  He had to plow, sow, reap, transport his produce whereas all Abel had to do was watch his sheep feed themselves and  self-reproduce.  Are we in a figure murdering each other for jealousy over the gifts of another?

Balaam sought riches in the doing of God's work.  We shouldn’t seek reward for doing what is normally expected of us.  We should do God's work because it is right.  We should do God's work for God's profit, not our own.  What are our real reasons for what we do in the church?

Core (and Dathan and Abiram) attempted to take the place of the ones God had already appointed for leadership:  Moses and Aaron.  God positions the ones he wants to be leaders in the church.  We should seek a church position to benefit God's work, not for self status.  Are we seeking a position within the church body for the sake of our status?

We are supposed to rebuke these self-seekers in the Church:  how much does rebuking really happen in the church of today?

ANGRY PASTORS

I once attended a church where it appeared that I made two of the clergy angry. One was older. He never smiled at me or ever gave any indication of welcome, let alone kindness. Once or twice he reached around behind me to smile and welcome another. If I had committed some great offense I was never shown what it was. The other was younger and phoned me up to ask why I had not provided an “Exit Interview”. He seemed quite put out about it. I neither executed any “Membership Document” nor verbally expressed an interest in becoming a “Member”. I thought being a member of the Body of Christ was enough. If there was a contract written, stated or implied I was ignorant of it.

Perhaps I was wrong by being a regular participant in the worship and providing them with a portion of my tithe.

If someone is angry at you, and you both are going to continue in contact, he should tell you what it is you do or say bothers him. And you should do the same. No one can improve from a wrong if they don't know what the wrong is.  Things like that can bother a person for a lifetime.

CHANGING JUDGMENTS

2 Cor 1 (paraphrased):  "When we purpose things within ourselves it is 'yes' or 'no'.  But the purposes (or promises) of God are 'yes' "(v20).  We make up our minds according to an occasion and decide “yes” or “no” about the occasion.  It may be “yes” today, buy tomorrow the situation may change and then become “no”.

The promises of God are not made up to fit the situation but are decided beforehand.  What is “yes” today will be “yes” and not “no” tomorrow.  When we can, we should make up our minds using God’s everlasting principals as our base, and not with facts that change from day to day or minute to minute.

A man kills another man with a brick.  Today we say he should be hanged (“yes”).  Tomorrow we look at his background:  the brick thrower is disadvantaged, he was beaten and abused all his life, he was half crazed with drugs, the dead man was an undercover police officer who was wanting to entrap the brick thrower.  Tomorrow we reconsider and say he should not be hanged (“no”).

God’s law does not change.  If a man sheds a man’s blood, by the hand of other men must his blood be shed.   We say, “unless there is a situation such as war, self defense, or by accident (no malice of forethought)”.  Have we instituted mercy into a Biblical concept where there seems to be none?  Yet we notice men of the Bible were not put to death because they killed others in battle, cities of refuge were set aside for people who killed another accidentally.

WORK DIVISIONS

Here is how many companies are organized:
A.  Operations - Decide what Tasks should be done.
B.  Administration -  Decide how to accomplish the tasks: when and where.
C.  Laborers/Craftsmen – Perform the Manufacturing or service

Here is what 1 Corinthians 12 says:
A.  (v4) Diversities of gifts, same spirit – Father, Operations
B.  (v5) Differences of Administrations, same Lord – Son, Administration
C.  (v6) Diversities of Operations, same God – Holy Ghost, Gifts

1. Word of wisdom
2. Word of knowledge
3. Faith
4. Healing
5. Working of miracles
6. Prophecy
7. Discerning of spirits
8. Tongues
9. Interpretation of tongues

DAILY READING

When I was 50 years old I wrote:

I'm still not one for a strong personal devotional time.  Yet, all these married years, and a little before – 25 (now 53) years in all – I have had the family devotions.  The daily Bible reading.  This small thing has been great in my life.  As God said – it has been the mustard seed that, though a tiny seed, grew to a great tree with branches for the fowls of the air to nest in.  One thing I have confidence about:  I know what God thinks about a lot of things.  Some would whisk me aside as being a “Christian Bigot”;  I would say to them, “What principles are a guide for your life?  Any?  Some favorite author or politician?  Some particular group you belong to?”

I know right from wrong, good from bad, profitable from unprofitable.  Each time I read the Bible I get yet more from it.  I have been a better man to the world because of it – even to those who would say it's  “just another book”.

FAST JUDGEMENT

Pilate, otherwise having a peaceful day, was inadvertently sucked into Jewish religious matters.  The Jews had a serious problem with Jesus for which they wanted him executed.  However, the only authority that could legally execute a person was the Roman government.  Pilate tried to kick the ball back into the Jew’s court.  They refused because they wanted Jesus killed and they weren’t allowed.  Now Pilate cared nothing for Jesus’ life, it mattered not at all to him, nor did Jewish religious disputes.  When Jesus was forced back into his lap he tried to quickly get him to admit he was “King of the Jews”.  If he could do that, he could render a quick death penalty judgement:  for no one could be king but Caesar.  He could get no evidence against Jesus except the troublesome fact that Jesus had said he was the “Son of God”.  That wasn’t enough in Roman eyes.  He brought him out before the people in “kings clothing” saying, “Behold your king” but the people said, “We have no king but Caesar.”  Now Pilate was stuck because, in his view, there was only one king, and that was Caesar.  The people knew he could not back away.

He tried to release Jesus until the Jews said that Jesus made himself king in the place of Caesar.  That was enough to let Pilate off the hook and get Jesus crucified for no one could be king but Caesar

The fact that an innocent man might die had no effect on Pilate’s thinking.  He wanted to avoid anything that would embroil hem in consequences for months to come, and in Jerusalem religious matters always have consequences.  He wanted out of a Jewish religious argument.  He did not want to be exposed to a religious discrimination suit by the Jews because of anything he did.  After all, that was a career stopper.

EASY PROCRASTINATION

What comes ahead of time is really important.  Get to bed on time so I can get enough sleep, so I can get up in time, so I can exercise in time, so I can get ready in time so I can read on time, so I can get in to the day on time.  Everything is preceded by something.  Everything I'm doing has something else coming after it.  What I'm doing has been helped or hindered by what I did before.  I can help, or hinder, what I will be doing.  But I don't want to move from one thing to another.  It's like everything has sticky spider webs attached to it.

That's what procrastination is: the sticky spider web of not wanting to change.

Sometimes when I am doing something I am blessed because I can isolate myself in the moment  - I can ignore the spider webs.  I don't agonize about what I did, or didn't do.  I don't fret about what's next.  It's so easy just to stay the same.

But on the other hand, I often don't have the best I could have in the present because of what I've left out of what should have come before.  Also I don't hake the opportunity to set up for what's next, thereby making it easier for myself further on.

At the time of procrastination I could replace my for-the-moment self with a reflective, evaluative and forward looking, planning self.

This would take place at a very time when I don't want to make any changes.  Maybe I feel this way because I'm between two for-the-moment periods.  Since I am for-the-moment, and don't presently have anything to do I feel uncomfortable.  Yet my tendency is always to stay the same.  Changing from one thing to another is something I don't want to do - - I want to stay the course, whatever it is, even if changing the course would make things easier or better.

SCHEDULING A DRY HEAD

A journey of a thousand miles is traveled one inch at a time.  Sometimes we will not move an inch unless we schedule it in.  Sometimes the only reason we travel an inch is because, “it is time”, the schedule says, “do it now”.  At such times we possibly have no vision, no desire, no emotion:  only THE SCHEDULE.  Yet when that happens we can begin to achieve something, perhaps of great value.  In this way the mundane can build the glorious.

Most of the time scheduling is informal, done out of habit or as a need presents itself.  Practical scheduling acquires a bit more formality when we think, “what shall I do today, this week, this month.”  It becomes most formal when we take the time to carefully consider needs, times, other events, personalities and such, and proceed to write out a time line or schedule.  It becomes more formal  as we add more detail. 

As an example:
The need to get out of the rain requires a shelter and a schedule to find or build it.  It rains; we need protection so we either find a cave (if we're lucky) or build a lean-to from a tarp or  branches.  Even if we don't realize it we have to schedule time to erect the shelter.  The schedule may be as simple as:  “Do it now”.  “Do it before it rains”.  “Do it whenever and wherever we can”.

If we want more permanence we might require a cave or a log cabin.  Then we have to schedule time to locate a cave or to clear a site and gather trees.  We must re-arrange our schedule.  We have to set aside hunting for now and find or build the shelter.

For more convenience we might want to add rooms which means we have to schedule gathering yet more lumber, or stones, and setting aside time for the construction.  We would be helpful if we scheduled the drawing of a detailed construction plan.  We would have to rearrange other activities to either build the structure or oversee its construction.  As our use of time allows we schedule time for the acquisition of our amenities such as bringing the bathroom inside.

Most anything that takes repetition requires scheduling.  Important things like Bible reading certainly need scheduling.  Some days scheduling may be the only reason we read the Bible.  Important things, Bible reading, music practice, would never get done unless they are scheduled in, made to have important status.

In this way the mundane can build the glorious.

DETERMINING TRUTH

There seems to be two ways that people approach truth:  some do it inwardly first, and some do it outwardly first.

The ones that first approach truth inwardly make up their mind without outside input (for example:  "There is no God").  Once their truth is determined they take from the outside what supports their version of "truth".  If the outside evidence does not support their “truth” they may ignore, or develop arguments against, what the outside world may suggest.  Then they act toward the outside as if their "truth" is actual fact.

The ones that first approach truth outwardly try to observe in the events outside them that seem to be the truth.  They may wonder, “How does all that I see originate?”  They look at the outside to see what might represent the truth and try to discern what is the truth from those observations.  Then they evaluate what they have inwardly determined as the truth (for example, “There is a God”) to see if it tracks with the outside observation.  They will then act in accordance with this “truth”.

Both these views carry with them two aspects:  an inward and outward acknowledgment or definition of truth.  There is an inward reality of the individual.  This is the subjective reality that exists within the individual.  It is different for each person.  There is also an outward reality of the physical/social world.  This is objective and unchanging, or changes according to unvarying principles and is the same for all people.

One says, “There is no God”, the other says, “There is a God”.  But neither can prove the other wrong.  One can decide inwardly first "there is (or there is no) God and treat the outside world accordingly.  One can make outside observations about the world and conclude from these "there is (or there is no) God.

Seeing the Bible says, "The fool hath said in his heart, 'There is no God' . . ." Which do you think is the safer conclusion as your physical life unceasingly, unremittingly moves toward the grave?

DANGER: TV!

Watching TV may provide little return on investment because:
-- May leave dangerous Hollywood-driven images and opinions upon the mind.
-- Soaks away time that could be better spent on other activities and therefore:
-- Robs us in areas of development we care about.
-- May rob us of sleep we need and therefore:
-- Makes us less effective in our work or business the next day and
-- May injure our health
-- Encourages and expands a pool of discouragement and self deprecation for activities we leave out

MUSIC IN CHURCH

Here are some of my observations about music in church:

Most churches divide their worship into separate times. They have a separate time for music which they call “Worship” music.  There may also be anther separate presentation called "Special" music.  These music performances seem to have been elevated to equal importance to other parts of the service (i.e. equal to, or better than, scripture reading, preaching or prayer).

While purporting to  lead the congregation in music, it resolves to the music being presented as a performance.  There are special performers, a "worship team" on the platform in front of the congregation.  These are the "Stars", the "Personalities".  This presentation has devolved away from being a single Worship Leader in front of a choir leading the congregants in music.  Frequently the style of music  is "Praise Music" exclusively, rarely, if ever using "traditional music" (i.e. hymns).  Often the praise music  lyrics are light on spiritual content.  Some of the songs may only consist of eight or nine words.  They may be oriented toward the needs of the singers as opposed to the will of God. 

For some unfathomable reason praise music needs to be loud music.  Most places we've been the music is too loud.  It is miked up so loud the congregants can not hear themselves sing.  It has become a show you watch and listen to rather than one in which to participate. 

The congregants that want to escape the volume of music must either sit outside during the music time or elect to attend a separate service.  This separate service is often called a "Traditional" service.  In some places the “traditional” service may be held at a non traditional time, i.e. not the 11am hour.  This presents the impression that "traditional" worshipers are of less value than the people who attend the "regular" service.  Sometimes this separate service is a video feed where the congregants  watch a big screen and are separated from the “real” service.  Perhaps music in the video service the may be at a reasonable volume.  This raises the question: if you're going to watch a TV why bother to leave your house to go to church?  Just sit at home and find a preacher who does good preaching and watch him.

My Mother-In-Law used to say, “The Devil often gets into the Church through the choir loft.” These days he gets in through the amplifiers, the sound control booth, and the need in people to be “stars”.

THE PASTOR SAID IT, THAT SETTLES IT

Several years ago I was attending a Men's Bible study at a church.  We were working around the circle when the Pastor got into his “the primary purpose of the Old Testament is to show Jesus Christ” routine.  That makes it seem that anything else we get from reading the Old Testament is of lesser, inferior value.  Therefore any application we can draw can be dispensed with because, after all, that is not the main purpose of the writing.

Why then should we have the study if the only answer of worth will be: “How does this demonstrate Christ?”

Yet “. . . all scripture is given for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”  Did the others also think this way - - that the Old Testament is of less worth?  So, according to this pastor, I should now know that the Old Testament is only about Christ.  So what good is the rest of it?  I suppose he wanted me to only see how the OT relates to Christ and forget about the rest since it only has minor meaning anyway.  Once I know the one important fact what else do I need to know?

If I want to explore the true ramifications about morality I suppose I should read contemporary books about morality and ignore what the Old Testament says is right or wrong.  But not to worry, according to this pastor, because moral prescriptions of the OT are not to teach us right from wrong; the point of the OT is to show us Jesus Christ.

This pastor also taught, “Your pastor reads and understands the Bible and teaches you what it means.”  I think I can do more than that.  I can read and understand the Bible for myself.  Indeed, I need to read it so I can defend myself form the one-sided incorrect opinion of any man.

BIDDING EXERCISE

What if I, or another person, were to seek to award a “contract” to someone among a group of students that would ask them to do a study.  This study would tell me the probability of a fallen pine tree falling where it lies. I would write up a “Request for Proposal” (RFP) and give it to a class, or to a particular grade level at a school.  The interested students would attend a “Pre Bid Meeting” where I would allow them to see the site where the tree fell.  My RFP would tell them I would award on the basis of merit as opposed to low price.  They would submit their dates on or before a certain time after the RFP meeting.  Their bids would detail their rationale and back-up material of how they reached their conclusion.  The winner would be paid $25.00 for the study plus expenses for developing their study.  The award would not guarantee that the study would ever actually be conducted.  (In fact the whole exercise it just to demonstrate the request-bid-award process.)

EXULTATION AT CALAMITIES

I once saw videos of a group of people dancing and singing because another group suffered a calamity.  Unlike them we should be very careful about assuming calamities are God's judgment upon People.

Calamities can be of two types:  those which God generates (as a tornado), and those which men generate (as in the Twin Towers.)

A “Calamity” is different than a “Judgment”.  Calamity happens to the guilty and innocent alike.  It is more generalized, far reaching, than a judgment.  It seems to cover much more area than a peoples' transgression would warrant.  A calamity is like a tornado destroying a whole town rather than a specific household.

Judgment is what happens to those deserving punishment for wrong-doing.  Judgment is targeted specifically toward the sinners and not the innocent about them.

Feeling of glee for the misfortunes of others is itself a sin.  It is bad, perhaps dangerous, to have happy feelings when something bad happens to someone you do not like.  "... and he that is glad at calamities shall not be unpunished."  (Prov 17:5b)

The Twin Towers were a “Calamity” to us but a “Judgment” to the thugs who perpetrated it.  Under our law and under the international law, what these thugs did was a crime, not a judgment.  What we know is that God will have the ultimate judgment, maybe not at a time we desire, but it will be at the perfect time and it will be a perfect judgment.

We should hope that God's judgment will turn the wicked toward righteousness and that God will get glory from pulling diamonds out of the ashes.

DIFFERENT IMPRESSIONS

The Bible mentions “the lust of the eye, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life”.  I notice there is no mention of the “lost of the ear” or “the lust of the nose”.  Is there some stronger aspect of the “lust of the eye”?  Is there some particular way this sense has more power to be damaging?  Is it wired more directly into the thoughts and emotions?.

The naked body is of the eye, but music is of the ear.  You can sexually arouse yourself by seeing or imagining visual scenes.  Can you sexually arouse yourself through music only?  Today's options include music videos.  If you heard the music without ever seeing the video, could you get the same impressions (thoughts, emotions and feelings) as you would while also seeing the video?

The song, “The Song Remembers When”, talks of a song being able to evoke a strong memory of a past event.  In reality that event had a host of other senses tagged to it - - not the least of which is what you saw when the event occurred.

I'll bet ten different people get ten different impressions from a piece of music.  But if all ten saw a video with the music they would all get the same impression - - the vision of the one who made the video (but not necessarily of the one who made the music).

There are events inside the head of the listener that are not the same as the events inside the song writer.

I'M FOR FREEWILL

There is balance between the theories of predestination and freewill.  I am firmly in the freewill camp, yet must be tempered with concepts from the predestination camp.  Consider the following:

Joseph said to his brothers, “You decided to do evil to me, but God used it for good.”  God had decided that Abraham's seed would go into Egypt and grow there. Joseph's brothers, on their own jealous volition, decided to murder Joseph and instead sold him into slavery.  Although their freewill choice was for evil by God's sovereignty the results of it turned out for good - - God's good, Joseph's good, even the brothers' good.

To say God made Joseph's brothers to decide to do murder is to say God made these men do something which is against the God's design for mankind's morality:  “Thou shalt not kill.”  The brothers chose to  do the evil; God did not force them to do evil.  God did not create the brothers intending them to do evil; his intention was they should do good.

God (who by definition is good) converted the evil actions into good.  God, being in existence at all times (that is:  existing in the future to us who are captured only in the present) knew before the bad happened that it was going to happen, and that the happening of it would turn out for the good.

We should not be afraid to make choices, or be made to think that our choices have no real meaning or effect because of the theory that God hard-wired the choices before we were created (as some who are hard-over on the predestination theory would say).  Because, as Joseph's brothers, we have options before us that we can choose.  But we should also know that God has all firmly in his control and in the end his will will work out for good.  And if God has all in control, we can see he will be more than willing to give us the power to accomplish his will.

If Joseph's brothers could choose evil than so can we.  But we can choose to do good.  Sometimes we are going to be in a place where we will have to choose - - we will not have the luxury of passing the choice by.