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.
Monday, January 9, 2017
Wednesday, January 4, 2017
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.
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.
Saturday, December 31, 2016
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.
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.
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.
Friday, December 9, 2016
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..
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..
Monday, November 28, 2016
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?
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?
Monday, November 21, 2016
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?
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?
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
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.
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.
Monday, November 14, 2016
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.
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.
Friday, November 11, 2016
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
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
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
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”.
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”.
Friday, October 28, 2016
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 12, 2016
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.
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.
Friday, October 7, 2016
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.
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.
Thursday, September 22, 2016
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?
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?
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
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
-- 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
Thursday, September 8, 2016
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”.
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”.
Monday, August 29, 2016
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.
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.
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
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.)
Monday, August 15, 2016
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)