Your Top Match
Based on your responses, your top candidate for 2008 is below.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Betrayal
One thing that I hear across the board, whether reading, talking with folks in semi-counseling mode, or watching the Farnsworth box, is that if a woman is unfaithful (read: screws around on her S.O.) the virtually universal response is:
She shakes her blonde little head, and with quivering mouth and running mascara says in tearful tones:
"I was confused."
This brings me no small amount of amusement and angst.
I'm kind of a black-and-white guy. I even prefer B&W photography. All those colors just get in the way. So, emotional nuance is something that sometimes escapes me, even though I'm a sensitive 21st-century kind of guy.
What part of "faithful" do you not understand? What part of "vows" escapes your cognizance? What is confusing about "Don't commit adultery"? Does the brain utterly shut down in a fog of arousal? Is it pointless to train kids in morality, in Biblical standards of behavior?
Does God demand the utterly impossible?
"I was confused."
FEH.
One thing that I hear across the board, whether reading, talking with folks in semi-counseling mode, or watching the Farnsworth box, is that if a woman is unfaithful (read: screws around on her S.O.) the virtually universal response is:
She shakes her blonde little head, and with quivering mouth and running mascara says in tearful tones:
"I was confused."
This brings me no small amount of amusement and angst.
"Counselor Troi, what do you sense?"
"I feel ahnger...and great joy...."
I'm kind of a black-and-white guy. I even prefer B&W photography. All those colors just get in the way. So, emotional nuance is something that sometimes escapes me, even though I'm a sensitive 21st-century kind of guy.
What part of "faithful" do you not understand? What part of "vows" escapes your cognizance? What is confusing about "Don't commit adultery"? Does the brain utterly shut down in a fog of arousal? Is it pointless to train kids in morality, in Biblical standards of behavior?
Does God demand the utterly impossible?
"I was confused."
FEH.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
The Aamazing Aardvark makes his challenge
Well kiddies, I have a little challenge for the evangelicals around the ant-hill. The Lord makes various references to Doors and Keys in His teaching, so I want to know:
Where in the Gospel (or even in apostolic teaching in the New Testament) is it taught that in order to become a Christian, one must pray a prayer and "ask Jesus into your heart"?
I am offering a bounty of $200.00 (Two-hundred dollars) for the Biblical source of this teaching. Not a huge sum, but surely more than ZERO dollars.
There are two restrictions:
First: Do not deign twist the Scripture by pointing to Revelation 3:20
This is written to the church at Laodicea (the church, which is made up of people who are already IN Christ), and thus refers to fellowship with Christ, not entry into the Kingdom.
Second: Do not supply a daisy-chain of unrelated, de-contextualized bits of Scripture.
When the Jews in Acts 2, to whom Peter preached, cried out in terror upon learning of their theocide, Peter provided the remedy, the Keys to the Kingdom, if you will. He did not send them roaming through Romans (yes, I KNOW Romans had not been written yet), or marching through Malachi. He spoke simply and clearly, and gave them the answer.
So, If you can show me Biblically verifiable, apostolic teaching that cannot be Scripturally refuted, that you pray a prayer, and ask Jesus into your heart in order to become a Christian (in order to be saved), then the first one who does so will receive two hundred dollars, US. ($200.00).
On the other hand, if you cannot produce such evidence, then why do you believe it, and why do you teach it?
Well kiddies, I have a little challenge for the evangelicals around the ant-hill. The Lord makes various references to Doors and Keys in His teaching, so I want to know:
Where in the Gospel (or even in apostolic teaching in the New Testament) is it taught that in order to become a Christian, one must pray a prayer and "ask Jesus into your heart"?
I am offering a bounty of $200.00 (Two-hundred dollars) for the Biblical source of this teaching. Not a huge sum, but surely more than ZERO dollars.
There are two restrictions:
First: Do not deign twist the Scripture by pointing to Revelation 3:20
"Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me."
This is written to the church at Laodicea (the church, which is made up of people who are already IN Christ), and thus refers to fellowship with Christ, not entry into the Kingdom.
Second: Do not supply a daisy-chain of unrelated, de-contextualized bits of Scripture.
When the Jews in Acts 2, to whom Peter preached, cried out in terror upon learning of their theocide, Peter provided the remedy, the Keys to the Kingdom, if you will. He did not send them roaming through Romans (yes, I KNOW Romans had not been written yet), or marching through Malachi. He spoke simply and clearly, and gave them the answer.
So, If you can show me Biblically verifiable, apostolic teaching that cannot be Scripturally refuted, that you pray a prayer, and ask Jesus into your heart in order to become a Christian (in order to be saved), then the first one who does so will receive two hundred dollars, US. ($200.00).
On the other hand, if you cannot produce such evidence, then why do you believe it, and why do you teach it?
Friday, September 21, 2007
If I may shoot from the hip, the Jena LA racial tensions may be misplaced.
The CBS Radio news had a young woman of color defending the six stalwarts of hue who beat up one white stoont. She said that there was a double standard in the way justice is applied between the races. Clearly a product of the public schools, as it should be clear that six-to-one beats a mere double standard any day.
I am aware that there was Provocation. There always is, especially where the unalike are forced to be in close proximity.
"Oooooooh, he's a RAY-cisst." Nope. some of my best friends...blah blah. The Freedom to Assemble is a dearly won right which has been trampled in the effort to Be Nice To Everyone. As a youth, I was struck by inequities that I saw. My (then in his eighties) grandfather was a doctor, the last of the breed of GPs who would make house calls, and accept produce as payment. Turnips and okra and country hams have been seriously devalued in their rate of exchange of late. Ben Bernanke should see to this. His office had two-count 'em- two waiting rooms. One was somewhat cushier than the other. This was odd to me, but I was too young to become a Freedom Rider.
We have a broad assortment vari-colored folk in our orbit. A good friend and business associate is the spokesman for the local NAACP chapter, and he is not in the habit of hanging out with bigots. The Klan visited our town last weekend, and I suggested that we both go in sheets, throw off our hoods, and have him shout "Where the white wimmen at?" He loves "Blazing Saddles", but we agreed it was probably a bad move.
My youngest son is a budding photojournalist, and went to the rally to take pictures of the sheetsters. I'll post some with suitable commentary.
My point is, like people tend to flock together. The classic microcosmic sociological study occurred at the filming of "Planet of the Apes". The makeup was so involved that the actors had to eat in costume. Sure enough, the chimps ate with the chimps, the orangutans ate with orangutans, gorillas with gorillas. Charlton Heston ate with God, I guess.
If I want to hang out with Asians, or Africans, or Guatemalans, or even Presbyterians, then I'll happily do so. Just don't MAKE me do it.
It's like teaching a pig to sing.
You just get all muddy,
...and it annoys the pig.
The CBS Radio news had a young woman of color defending the six stalwarts of hue who beat up one white stoont. She said that there was a double standard in the way justice is applied between the races. Clearly a product of the public schools, as it should be clear that six-to-one beats a mere double standard any day.
I am aware that there was Provocation. There always is, especially where the unalike are forced to be in close proximity.
"Oooooooh, he's a RAY-cisst." Nope. some of my best friends...blah blah. The Freedom to Assemble is a dearly won right which has been trampled in the effort to Be Nice To Everyone. As a youth, I was struck by inequities that I saw. My (then in his eighties) grandfather was a doctor, the last of the breed of GPs who would make house calls, and accept produce as payment. Turnips and okra and country hams have been seriously devalued in their rate of exchange of late. Ben Bernanke should see to this. His office had two-count 'em- two waiting rooms. One was somewhat cushier than the other. This was odd to me, but I was too young to become a Freedom Rider.
We have a broad assortment vari-colored folk in our orbit. A good friend and business associate is the spokesman for the local NAACP chapter, and he is not in the habit of hanging out with bigots. The Klan visited our town last weekend, and I suggested that we both go in sheets, throw off our hoods, and have him shout "Where the white wimmen at?" He loves "Blazing Saddles", but we agreed it was probably a bad move.
My youngest son is a budding photojournalist, and went to the rally to take pictures of the sheetsters. I'll post some with suitable commentary.
My point is, like people tend to flock together. The classic microcosmic sociological study occurred at the filming of "Planet of the Apes". The makeup was so involved that the actors had to eat in costume. Sure enough, the chimps ate with the chimps, the orangutans ate with orangutans, gorillas with gorillas. Charlton Heston ate with God, I guess.
If I want to hang out with Asians, or Africans, or Guatemalans, or even Presbyterians, then I'll happily do so. Just don't MAKE me do it.
It's like teaching a pig to sing.
You just get all muddy,
...and it annoys the pig.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
I love all my reader.
I will be back in the bloggish saddle this weekend. We have been absolutely swamped at Aardvark Screenprinting. It is amazing how busy we are. Keeps me away from the Important. Ahhh, the Tyranny of the Immediate.
As I said LAST weekend, I'll finish my answers to Rocinante's 12 questions. This weekend.
I will also post a Challenge. With Money, even. If the Amazing Randi can do it....
I will be back in the bloggish saddle this weekend. We have been absolutely swamped at Aardvark Screenprinting. It is amazing how busy we are. Keeps me away from the Important. Ahhh, the Tyranny of the Immediate.
As I said LAST weekend, I'll finish my answers to Rocinante's 12 questions. This weekend.
I will also post a Challenge. With Money, even. If the Amazing Randi can do it....
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
9-11 musing
(Firstly, Roci's questioning is not being ignored. My work load has avalanched, and I've not been able to finish. This weekend is my goal)
Nine-eleven. (NOT nine-one-one...that's the emergency phone number.) Tune in your television box, or radio, and let the scab-picking commence. Rolls of Our Honored Dead are unfurled and read to renew the mourning of those who should be over it by now.If it were for a purpose, it would be one thing. It could be a tool of maintaining National Rage at the Evil Ones wot done it. (Curse the Japs...kill The Hun...like that. We used to do war so well .) Now we are involved in an endless round of Kum-ba-ya. Light those candles, and get out the Kleenex. If we had a focus of Evil, we could at least flick our scabs at it, but even Osama bin Ladin is reduced to a Grecian Formula ad, with his hot new beard color and all. No, kiddies, there must be an Emperor, a Fuehrer, to aim our rage at. "Terrorism" is wholly insufficient. An "ism" is only good for Cold wars, filled with spies and propaganda. The Hatfields did not aim thar shootin' irons at "McCoyism"; they were too busy shooting at Cletus and Clem. This hoedown is yet another reminder of our National Impotency, and there is no magic pill to save us.
At least the mourners have gotten a day off.
(Firstly, Roci's questioning is not being ignored. My work load has avalanched, and I've not been able to finish. This weekend is my goal)
Nine-eleven. (NOT nine-one-one...that's the emergency phone number.) Tune in your television box, or radio, and let the scab-picking commence. Rolls of Our Honored Dead are unfurled and read to renew the mourning of those who should be over it by now.If it were for a purpose, it would be one thing. It could be a tool of maintaining National Rage at the Evil Ones wot done it. (Curse the Japs...kill The Hun...like that. We used to do war so well .) Now we are involved in an endless round of Kum-ba-ya. Light those candles, and get out the Kleenex. If we had a focus of Evil, we could at least flick our scabs at it, but even Osama bin Ladin is reduced to a Grecian Formula ad, with his hot new beard color and all. No, kiddies, there must be an Emperor, a Fuehrer, to aim our rage at. "Terrorism" is wholly insufficient. An "ism" is only good for Cold wars, filled with spies and propaganda. The Hatfields did not aim thar shootin' irons at "McCoyism"; they were too busy shooting at Cletus and Clem. This hoedown is yet another reminder of our National Impotency, and there is no magic pill to save us.
At least the mourners have gotten a day off.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Roci has a blog with musings and questions. I should like to discuss the issues raised over there, over here. I shall interpolate my comments in blue. These are in no way exhaustive. They are merely to pint a direction of thought.
Answers to Rocinante's "12 Problems with 'Churchianity' "
The modern Christian Church is a neon lit shadow of its former glory. As I examine the modern church and my own needs for it, I am confronted by its total inadequacy for the role assigned to it by Jesus, its founder.Nice imagery, there. Reminds me of the enormous neon crosses along the interstate advertising the presence of enormous independent Baptist churches. We share concern for the Whole State of Christ's Church.
1. I can find no Biblical support for obligatory weekly attendance at a particular church.
There are two essential ways that the Scriptures establish authority for a practice. First is by Command: thou Shalt, thou Shalt Not.
And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen (Matthew 28:18-20)We have Jesus telling his followers what to do to upon His departure. More detailed instructions are recorded by Luke. The second is by Example.
7 Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight. (Acts 20:7 NKJV) Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace be with you.” (John 20:19 NKJV) Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given orders to the churches of Galatia, so you must do also. On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come. (1 Cor.16:1-2)The saints from the very beginning met on the first day of the week (Sunday) As the Apostles were given the authority to bind and loose, their example is potent.They met to break bread (sharing in the Lord's Supper, detailed in 1 Cor.11) and at least in special instances, to take collections for needy saints.
The need for fellowship with brothers and sisters, sharing Communion, and meeting needs is expressed by apostolic example. The early church did so on the first day of the week. It is in no way the Sabbath, as that was fulfilled in Christ's Sacrifice. This is a New Day for the New Covenant.
2. I can find no Biblical standard for what constitutes a church attendance. Why there is singing of certain types in certain places, a collection, Sunday school, a sermon and an altar call. Since there is no common standard, then anything can rightfully qualify as church attendance.
I assume here that you refer to "order of worship". More on this later.
3. The concept of driving over 5 miles to attend any worship service appears on its face to be contradictory to the commandment to rest on one day in seven. Or perhaps Saturday is intended to be the Christian day of rest while Sunday is devoted to the maintenance of the church and its programs. In the modern world, it no longer appears to even be possible to keep the Sabbath. I blame the Christian Church for killing it.
The modern church love affair with the Ten Commandments is borne of Biblical doctrinal illiteracy, with a healthy dose of political posturing. Acts15 makes VERY clear the apostolic take of binding Mosaic Law on (Gentile) believers. There are four "requirements" outside of the Acts 2 Keys of the Kingdom.
Sabbath-keeping is nowhere to be found in this Holy Spirit inspired apostolic command to the Gentile church.24 Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law”—to whom we gave no such commandment— 25 it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.
Farewell.
4. I cannot find any Biblical context or historic tradition of the church to support the concept of driving by 35 churches to get to church number 36.
There isn't any. The multiplicity of congregations is NOT a positive comment upon American spirituality.Rather, it is symptomatic of what Paul rebuked the Corinthians for:
To my understanding, there was ONE church per city (To the angel of the church of Sardis write...).
10 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you...
5. The building, wherein the modern church meets, is not a biblically required element of a church.
No argument. The architecture-centric nature of the church today is troubling, and stems from the need to support extra-biblical practices and programs. The (apparent) NT model is an existing central meeting place -whether riverside, meeting hall, synagogue, temple porch- with additional meeting occurring house-to-house througjhout the week. The Jerusalem church of Acts 2 behaved thusly:
46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, 47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.
Their meeting from house-to-house was apparently not a program established by Peter and Co., rather their excitement and joy caused them to want to be together regularly to share the good things of God.
NEXT: points 6-12
bethyada puts forth the prescription:
1. Answer maybe it wasn't the Lord because his word says thus...
In a manner that is appropriate for the questioner of course. And you could seek to fully understand what exactly they are saying.
Jesus refuted wrong ideas based on Scripture.
_______________________________________
Yes indeedy! The Word is the corral in which the Holy Spirit runs (He will surely not contradict that which He inspired!). The ticklish part is the pervasiveness of this kind of pseudo-doctrinal high-handedness. I mean, how does one argue with the Pronouncements of God?
Of course, by using the Word. The reaction is the fun part. Years ago, we went to a "Bible Study", briefly. It was actually the Thursday night cough-and spew, otherwise known as a "deliverance meeting". The woman (!) who headed this group had it from the Lord Himself ( He spoke to her!) that she was to withhold conjugal favors from her hubby 'til he got right with the Lord. Ummmm... "Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband."
I had a Righteous Anger rise up in me, and what came out of my mouth was:
"Whispers in the night
Don't change what's written in black & white."
I informed her of the Scripture, whereupon it was darkly hinted that perhaps I had a demon.
We cleared that part of our social calendar.
1. Answer maybe it wasn't the Lord because his word says thus...
In a manner that is appropriate for the questioner of course. And you could seek to fully understand what exactly they are saying.
Jesus refuted wrong ideas based on Scripture.
_______________________________________
Yes indeedy! The Word is the corral in which the Holy Spirit runs (He will surely not contradict that which He inspired!). The ticklish part is the pervasiveness of this kind of pseudo-doctrinal high-handedness. I mean, how does one argue with the Pronouncements of God?
Of course, by using the Word. The reaction is the fun part. Years ago, we went to a "Bible Study", briefly. It was actually the Thursday night cough-and spew, otherwise known as a "deliverance meeting". The woman (!) who headed this group had it from the Lord Himself ( He spoke to her!) that she was to withhold conjugal favors from her hubby 'til he got right with the Lord. Ummmm... "Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband."
I had a Righteous Anger rise up in me, and what came out of my mouth was:
"Whispers in the night
Don't change what's written in black & white."
I informed her of the Scripture, whereupon it was darkly hinted that perhaps I had a demon.
We cleared that part of our social calendar.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Happy Sunday, all.
I note that I have had a visitor from Florence, SC. As that used to be my stomping ground, in the way-back, I would love to have you email me, on the off chance that I may in fact be acquainted with you.
Yeah, I've got SiteMeter, and I'm not afraid to use it.
-------------------------------------------------------
We are getting into some ticklish areas in our Sunday morning class, which I am currently leading. Two things were brought up this morning:
1) How do you deal with folks that use the "The Lord laid it on my heart" to explain or justify a (usually non-Biblical) practice or belief that they hold.
2) Since the Scriptures say "Call for the elders of the church, and they will anoint you with oil" in cases of illness." (James 5), why don't we do it?
Y'know, I think I'm gonna be in trouble one way or another. Frankly as to #2, I think folks are just afraid to look too much like the Pentecostals.
I note that I have had a visitor from Florence, SC. As that used to be my stomping ground, in the way-back, I would love to have you email me, on the off chance that I may in fact be acquainted with you.
Yeah, I've got SiteMeter, and I'm not afraid to use it.
-------------------------------------------------------
We are getting into some ticklish areas in our Sunday morning class, which I am currently leading. Two things were brought up this morning:
1) How do you deal with folks that use the "The Lord laid it on my heart" to explain or justify a (usually non-Biblical) practice or belief that they hold.
2) Since the Scriptures say "Call for the elders of the church, and they will anoint you with oil" in cases of illness." (James 5), why don't we do it?
Y'know, I think I'm gonna be in trouble one way or another. Frankly as to #2, I think folks are just afraid to look too much like the Pentecostals.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Monday, August 20, 2007
...Walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.
Galatians 5 is often referred to when doing Cautionary Lessons against the gross activities of bodily lust, but the list of "deeds of the flesh" contains a majority of non-squishy activities and attitudes:
It's really interesting to look at those, and compare them to the Whole State of Christ's Church today. Jesus' prayer that we may be one is at variance with that list. I have a pet peeve, and that is cool, distinctive names of churches. The Crossroads, Crosspointe Church, The Church of No Color (honest...there really is one), New Life Family Worship Center. Second to that is preacherly "gimmicks": "My preacher wears camo and preaches on spiritual warfare...". These things serve to make that particular group different from the others, as well as making the message distinct from the others.
This distinction militates against the unity Jesus prayed for. The purpose of God for the church is that we make disciples of the nations, as part of His redemptive plan for the world: one mission, one message, one purpose, one plan.This bespeaks of Unity in the church.There is no hint of "look at ME...look at MY MINISTRY...look at MY METHOD...we're DIFFERENT from Those Other Churches.".The imagery in the New Testament is of the Body of Christ, the collectivity of brothers and sisters in Christ, each having "a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let(ting) all things be done for edification.", striding through the earth with redemption on every side, unified, authoritative in the Word, by the Spirit, redemptive and reconciling.
Sadly, the image the world has of the church is of a Frankenstein's monster of mismatched and disunified parts, shambling across the world scene, shedding rejected bits across the landscape, making incoherent and disjointed noises this way and that, blown from here to there by the blows it suffers from the world, and reacting to the things it sees in the world.
A local church (Athens, AL) recently made the national news by initiating a Temperance Drive in an attempt to get the sale of alcohol repealed.Try as I might, I cannot see a single instance in the New Testament where Jesus, Paul, Peter, James or John initiated a march, drive, petition, or mass pout to stop people from doing something that offended. Take slavery, f'rinstance. Paul did not start a campaign to stop the Offending Practice. Brights and other annoying persons find this terrible, for clearly it meant that Paul Did Not Care, that God Did Not Care, and thus ANY modern atheist is morally superior to either if he opposes slavery. (Perhaps they should stage Abolitionist Marches in Sudan.) The fact is, Paul recognised that the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation (rescue, deliverance from bondage), and was thus sufficient to quell the deed, which indeed it began to do, as believing slave owners learned the difficulty of calling Property whom he also called Brother. Long and short: you teach the Word. Do something silly like. oh...do it like Jesus said. Make disciples of the nations. That means show them, teach them HOW to live the Kingdom life. This takes years, like it took years for Jesus to teach His disciples. Saying a prayer and sitting in a pew doesn't cut it. Baptise them by the authority of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. You are promised to receive the Holy Spirit, God Himself residing in your person.This is for starters.
Back to the point.If everyone does JUST what the Word says, it will result in unity. If, however, I insist on MY neat name, MY cool new way to do the gospel, thinking MY way is THE way, then I make myself distinct from my brothers and sisters. I become the enemy of unity.I become factious, jealous of other "ministries", become angry when you don't agree with MY way.
The world will not hear us unless we are unified. They will not believe our message unless we love. They will not believe in forgiveness in Christ if the church puts on its judge's robe.Wait...it HAS no such robe, 'cos it's NOT OUR JOB.
Yes. I yelled.
Galatians 5 is often referred to when doing Cautionary Lessons against the gross activities of bodily lust, but the list of "deeds of the flesh" contains a majority of non-squishy activities and attitudes:
...idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying...
It's really interesting to look at those, and compare them to the Whole State of Christ's Church today. Jesus' prayer that we may be one is at variance with that list. I have a pet peeve, and that is cool, distinctive names of churches. The Crossroads, Crosspointe Church, The Church of No Color (honest...there really is one), New Life Family Worship Center. Second to that is preacherly "gimmicks": "My preacher wears camo and preaches on spiritual warfare...". These things serve to make that particular group different from the others, as well as making the message distinct from the others.
This distinction militates against the unity Jesus prayed for. The purpose of God for the church is that we make disciples of the nations, as part of His redemptive plan for the world: one mission, one message, one purpose, one plan.This bespeaks of Unity in the church.There is no hint of "look at ME...look at MY MINISTRY...look at MY METHOD...we're DIFFERENT from Those Other Churches.".The imagery in the New Testament is of the Body of Christ, the collectivity of brothers and sisters in Christ, each having "a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let(ting) all things be done for edification.", striding through the earth with redemption on every side, unified, authoritative in the Word, by the Spirit, redemptive and reconciling.
Sadly, the image the world has of the church is of a Frankenstein's monster of mismatched and disunified parts, shambling across the world scene, shedding rejected bits across the landscape, making incoherent and disjointed noises this way and that, blown from here to there by the blows it suffers from the world, and reacting to the things it sees in the world.
A local church (Athens, AL) recently made the national news by initiating a Temperance Drive in an attempt to get the sale of alcohol repealed.Try as I might, I cannot see a single instance in the New Testament where Jesus, Paul, Peter, James or John initiated a march, drive, petition, or mass pout to stop people from doing something that offended. Take slavery, f'rinstance. Paul did not start a campaign to stop the Offending Practice. Brights and other annoying persons find this terrible, for clearly it meant that Paul Did Not Care, that God Did Not Care, and thus ANY modern atheist is morally superior to either if he opposes slavery. (Perhaps they should stage Abolitionist Marches in Sudan.) The fact is, Paul recognised that the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation (rescue, deliverance from bondage), and was thus sufficient to quell the deed, which indeed it began to do, as believing slave owners learned the difficulty of calling Property whom he also called Brother. Long and short: you teach the Word. Do something silly like. oh...do it like Jesus said. Make disciples of the nations. That means show them, teach them HOW to live the Kingdom life. This takes years, like it took years for Jesus to teach His disciples. Saying a prayer and sitting in a pew doesn't cut it. Baptise them by the authority of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. You are promised to receive the Holy Spirit, God Himself residing in your person.This is for starters.
Back to the point.If everyone does JUST what the Word says, it will result in unity. If, however, I insist on MY neat name, MY cool new way to do the gospel, thinking MY way is THE way, then I make myself distinct from my brothers and sisters. I become the enemy of unity.I become factious, jealous of other "ministries", become angry when you don't agree with MY way.
The world will not hear us unless we are unified. They will not believe our message unless we love. They will not believe in forgiveness in Christ if the church puts on its judge's robe.Wait...it HAS no such robe, 'cos it's NOT OUR JOB.
Yes. I yelled.
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Fashion faux pas
The rolling-up of the trousers leg is not my sole sartorial sin.
Oh my, no.
Besides having short legs (when descending stairs, my gait is not dissimilar to that of Dr. Loveless) I also have size 8 1/2 wide schoon. The local shops have what are purportedly 8.5 W, but are exaggerating somewhat.Thus I was driven to try... (Pretty Lady, I struggle )
To try Crocs.
A local head shop (what used to be called such...now it's Trendily Nostalgic) "Crossroads" carries the artless beasts, so I went to check them out. I picked the black original design for guys, and mercy, it's the best idea I've had since the last best idea I had. I have no discomfort after a prolonged bout of printing t-shirts. Relatively cheap, and very comfy. And ugly. I just wish the old-style Earth Shoes were available, or even the Thom McAn knockoffs.
'Course, they were ugly, too.
The rolling-up of the trousers leg is not my sole sartorial sin.
Oh my, no.
Besides having short legs (when descending stairs, my gait is not dissimilar to that of Dr. Loveless) I also have size 8 1/2 wide schoon. The local shops have what are purportedly 8.5 W, but are exaggerating somewhat.Thus I was driven to try... (Pretty Lady, I struggle )
To try Crocs.
A local head shop (what used to be called such...now it's Trendily Nostalgic) "Crossroads" carries the artless beasts, so I went to check them out. I picked the black original design for guys, and mercy, it's the best idea I've had since the last best idea I had. I have no discomfort after a prolonged bout of printing t-shirts. Relatively cheap, and very comfy. And ugly. I just wish the old-style Earth Shoes were available, or even the Thom McAn knockoffs.
'Course, they were ugly, too.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
How I Left My Ministry, and So Single-Handedly Ended the Charismatic Movement.
No fire burns longer than the banked embers of Regret.I have long considered that this will be the most potent pain of Eternal Judgment.The woulda, coulda, shouldas, whether regarding relationships, poor business decisions, or Dark Secrets, are an abiding source of internal darkness, and hold the power of unhappy wakefulness in the dismal AM's.
I have not had a terrible life. My major testimony earlier on was that I was a mediocre sinner. Nonetheless, I find Regret lurking betimes, and must be vigilant lest I begin to auger in. It is SO easy to take a measure of comfort in an old friend, regret. It is familiar, and so ready to spend time with you.
Back in college, my best buddy and boon companion, Brad Bradfield, a core of other Christian kids, and I began an experiment in New Testament Reality. We sought to do the church the way the early church did it, and we had a wonderful time of it. We had an enthusiastic group, members from all kinds of backgrounds, including an Iranian girl.
We were, as they say, "Spirit-filled", Charismatic, Neo-Pentecostal. We did not give way to emotional excesses, having a Reformation view of the primacy of the Scripture.
(The way I have explained it: the Written Word of God is the corral in which the Holy Spirit acts.-how can the Inspirer of the Word act in contradiction to it?)
After the Dread Dormomoo and I were married, we stuck around, and I still worked in leadership of the church with Brad and a couple of others. We had oversight by a dear brother and overseer, Roger Bush (whose wife went to seminary with Fred Rogers, no less.). My "calling" was clear, but one must keep body and soul together, so I did work as a variety-store portrait photographer, as well as doing product shots for the same store chain. This of course had us away on weekends, which kinda puts a crimp in helping lead a young congregation. The situation caused me to be out of fellowship. A lot.
This creates Hunger, unless you are wilfully seeking the Jonah route and running from your God-appointed Task. I was not intentionally wilfully rebellious; I was merely in the situation at the time.The DD and I went to a store on the coast, where I ran into some Christian pals from high school days, who invited me to their church.
I was beguiled.
The LOVE...the SINGING...the UPBEAT PREACHING...it was What I Wanted.
The upshot: we moved. I left the place in which a Sovereign God had placed me, left the people I served, and the people with whom I served. I rationalized the move as a Career One, as I sought to open a photo studio of my own. It failed spectacularly, in the Hindenburg style. The church turned out to be a "Faith Walk, name-it-and-claim-it" variety. The DD and I were ultimately rejected- partially due to immaturity on my part, partially due to taking people up on offers of help once too often (also a function of immaturity), partially due to the pernicious nature of the doctrine which produces an "MLM love". As long as you Measure Up, and Do the System, we'll back you, but step outta line, and well...
I was a shepherd who left his flock. The college group puttered along for a time with the others, but ultimately fizzled out. The Brave experiment in New Testament Church Life was successful 'til it died.A Word-based Spirit-led congregation disappeared. Perhaps it was the plan of that same Sovereign God all along...
I don't think you really believe that. I know I don't.
Now, this is not a pity-party. I do not lie awake in despair over the awful thing wot I done.
God's grace and mercy are, well, gracious and merciful. (I coulda been King David's understudy!). In the years spanning the mid-50's into the 80's, the Holy Spirit was doing a work of biblical and spiritual unity.The Wave of the Spirit had disparate factions coming together under the banner of Jesus' Lordship. Things were happening that had not been seen in 1500 years. Spiritual gifts manifested in orderly fashion for the most part. Men and women took seriously their roles of servants and teachers, making disciples. There were controversies, sure, but unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace was happenin'. Arminians were loving Calvinists, who were loving Orthodox who were loving Catholic believers, who were lovin' up on Messianic Jews. Walls of sect and faction were tumbling down, until folks were spooked by the Spirit, and wanted a return to The Familiar. " We'll STILL be Spirit-filled, but, you know, let's have our own Presbyterian charismatic conference, to better meet OUR peculiar needs. Likewise, Methodist, Catholic, you name it. No sooner does the Spirit work to de-Babel-ize the church factions, we have to go and Balkanize the church once more. I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, I of Calvin, I of Moody, eye of newt.
So, the soulish desire for What I Want put the kibosh on the Dream. Sovereignty vs. Free Will. How to reconcile them? As one preacher said, "I never try to reconcile friends." The answer lies in taking seriously the heart of the Gospel. Jesus is Lord.
As Roger Bush was fond of saying: "How do you spell Lord?".
B-O-S-S.
We need to ACT like we believe it. Me, I'm in the water paddling on my board.
I want to be ready for the Next Big Wave.
No fire burns longer than the banked embers of Regret.I have long considered that this will be the most potent pain of Eternal Judgment.The woulda, coulda, shouldas, whether regarding relationships, poor business decisions, or Dark Secrets, are an abiding source of internal darkness, and hold the power of unhappy wakefulness in the dismal AM's.
I have not had a terrible life. My major testimony earlier on was that I was a mediocre sinner. Nonetheless, I find Regret lurking betimes, and must be vigilant lest I begin to auger in. It is SO easy to take a measure of comfort in an old friend, regret. It is familiar, and so ready to spend time with you.
Back in college, my best buddy and boon companion, Brad Bradfield, a core of other Christian kids, and I began an experiment in New Testament Reality. We sought to do the church the way the early church did it, and we had a wonderful time of it. We had an enthusiastic group, members from all kinds of backgrounds, including an Iranian girl.
We were, as they say, "Spirit-filled", Charismatic, Neo-Pentecostal. We did not give way to emotional excesses, having a Reformation view of the primacy of the Scripture.
(The way I have explained it: the Written Word of God is the corral in which the Holy Spirit acts.-how can the Inspirer of the Word act in contradiction to it?)
After the Dread Dormomoo and I were married, we stuck around, and I still worked in leadership of the church with Brad and a couple of others. We had oversight by a dear brother and overseer, Roger Bush (whose wife went to seminary with Fred Rogers, no less.). My "calling" was clear, but one must keep body and soul together, so I did work as a variety-store portrait photographer, as well as doing product shots for the same store chain. This of course had us away on weekends, which kinda puts a crimp in helping lead a young congregation. The situation caused me to be out of fellowship. A lot.
This creates Hunger, unless you are wilfully seeking the Jonah route and running from your God-appointed Task. I was not intentionally wilfully rebellious; I was merely in the situation at the time.The DD and I went to a store on the coast, where I ran into some Christian pals from high school days, who invited me to their church.
I was beguiled.
The LOVE...the SINGING...the UPBEAT PREACHING...it was What I Wanted.
The upshot: we moved. I left the place in which a Sovereign God had placed me, left the people I served, and the people with whom I served. I rationalized the move as a Career One, as I sought to open a photo studio of my own. It failed spectacularly, in the Hindenburg style. The church turned out to be a "Faith Walk, name-it-and-claim-it" variety. The DD and I were ultimately rejected- partially due to immaturity on my part, partially due to taking people up on offers of help once too often (also a function of immaturity), partially due to the pernicious nature of the doctrine which produces an "MLM love". As long as you Measure Up, and Do the System, we'll back you, but step outta line, and well...
I was a shepherd who left his flock. The college group puttered along for a time with the others, but ultimately fizzled out. The Brave experiment in New Testament Church Life was successful 'til it died.A Word-based Spirit-led congregation disappeared. Perhaps it was the plan of that same Sovereign God all along...
I don't think you really believe that. I know I don't.
Now, this is not a pity-party. I do not lie awake in despair over the awful thing wot I done.
God's grace and mercy are, well, gracious and merciful. (I coulda been King David's understudy!). In the years spanning the mid-50's into the 80's, the Holy Spirit was doing a work of biblical and spiritual unity.The Wave of the Spirit had disparate factions coming together under the banner of Jesus' Lordship. Things were happening that had not been seen in 1500 years. Spiritual gifts manifested in orderly fashion for the most part. Men and women took seriously their roles of servants and teachers, making disciples. There were controversies, sure, but unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace was happenin'. Arminians were loving Calvinists, who were loving Orthodox who were loving Catholic believers, who were lovin' up on Messianic Jews. Walls of sect and faction were tumbling down, until folks were spooked by the Spirit, and wanted a return to The Familiar. " We'll STILL be Spirit-filled, but, you know, let's have our own Presbyterian charismatic conference, to better meet OUR peculiar needs. Likewise, Methodist, Catholic, you name it. No sooner does the Spirit work to de-Babel-ize the church factions, we have to go and Balkanize the church once more. I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, I of Calvin, I of Moody, eye of newt.
So, the soulish desire for What I Want put the kibosh on the Dream. Sovereignty vs. Free Will. How to reconcile them? As one preacher said, "I never try to reconcile friends." The answer lies in taking seriously the heart of the Gospel. Jesus is Lord.
As Roger Bush was fond of saying: "How do you spell Lord?".
B-O-S-S.
We need to ACT like we believe it. Me, I'm in the water paddling on my board.
I want to be ready for the Next Big Wave.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Back from Ft. Wayne.
Riatsila and I went to IkasuCon in Ft. Wayne, Indiana.this weekend. Nice town, good con.
The weekend before we were in Orlando at AFO. Another excellent convention. We have done very well.Yaaay. I suffer from car lag big time, though.
--------------------------------------------------------
This weekend I reacquainted myself with the exegetical stylings of W.J. "Ern" Baxter.
His teaching, along with that of the other Gulf Coast Fellowship worthies did much to form me spiritually in my high school and college days. A quote that means a lot to me is:
"God is more intent on the production of Character than the provision of Comfort.".
Bro. Baxter was known for taking the long view, for seeing the Big Picture. I know of no preacher or teacher better able to communicate the vastness of scope of the Redemptive work of Jesus Christ, the Very Reclaiming of our silent planet into the song of Moses and the Lamb, as 'twere.
The impact is that of Scale. God works a work of cosmic redemption, while we argue over the arrangement of toys in the sandbox. At the risk of being utterly misunderstood, I see in the Scripture Jesus praying for the Church, that "they may be one, as (the Father) and I are one". Jesus prayed that we be One, not that we be Right.
I must bow to His will in that prayer.
Clearly, Jesus is not praying for "peace at any price", or tea parties with the Gnostics.
The scope of our unity is clearly defined in God's Word.
The point I see is that I must not sacrifice Unity on the altar of my rightness.I hold views and opinions which may be at variance with my brethren. The heretic (the factious man) insists upon "my way or the highway". This leads to division. I must instead trust that God is Sovereign:
Once again, the Word defines our bases for unity. My opinions do not. The Issues do not. Only the Word. To borrow again from Bro. Baxter, "the Word of God is the Intelligence of the Holy Spirit". He will not act at variance to that which He has so ably inspired.
Coming next:
How I Left My Ministry, and So Single-Handedly Ended the Charismatic Movement.
Riatsila and I went to IkasuCon in Ft. Wayne, Indiana.this weekend. Nice town, good con.
The weekend before we were in Orlando at AFO. Another excellent convention. We have done very well.Yaaay. I suffer from car lag big time, though.
--------------------------------------------------------
This weekend I reacquainted myself with the exegetical stylings of W.J. "Ern" Baxter.
His teaching, along with that of the other Gulf Coast Fellowship worthies did much to form me spiritually in my high school and college days. A quote that means a lot to me is:
"God is more intent on the production of Character than the provision of Comfort.".
Bro. Baxter was known for taking the long view, for seeing the Big Picture. I know of no preacher or teacher better able to communicate the vastness of scope of the Redemptive work of Jesus Christ, the Very Reclaiming of our silent planet into the song of Moses and the Lamb, as 'twere.
The impact is that of Scale. God works a work of cosmic redemption, while we argue over the arrangement of toys in the sandbox. At the risk of being utterly misunderstood, I see in the Scripture Jesus praying for the Church, that "they may be one, as (the Father) and I are one". Jesus prayed that we be One, not that we be Right.
I must bow to His will in that prayer.
Clearly, Jesus is not praying for "peace at any price", or tea parties with the Gnostics.
The scope of our unity is clearly defined in God's Word.
I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk worthy of the calling with which you were called, with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in all. (Ephesians 4:1-6)
The point I see is that I must not sacrifice Unity on the altar of my rightness.I hold views and opinions which may be at variance with my brethren. The heretic (the factious man) insists upon "my way or the highway". This leads to division. I must instead trust that God is Sovereign:
All of us who are mature should think in this same way. And if any of you think differently, God will make it clear to you. Philippians 3:15 (Contemporary English Version)
Once again, the Word defines our bases for unity. My opinions do not. The Issues do not. Only the Word. To borrow again from Bro. Baxter, "the Word of God is the Intelligence of the Holy Spirit". He will not act at variance to that which He has so ably inspired.
Coming next:
How I Left My Ministry, and So Single-Handedly Ended the Charismatic Movement.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Friday, July 20, 2007
Pardon whilst I take a curmudgeonly turn.
I HATE glurge.
This email is a perfect example:
This is a beautiful photo of a giant American flag in Arizona The photo is authentic, UN-Touched and was taken on regular Kodak 35mm film. The person who took the picture couldn't believe the image created by the suns rays.
Nice of them to share it with the world!
Read what is says under the picture...
Here is what it says:
"For those that prefer to think that God is not watching over us...go ahead and delete this.
For the rest of us...pass this on"
Once again, my faithfulness is determined by whether-or-not I pass along a photo, or meme, or chain letter. It is a weariness.
The cross image is in no way miraculous. The warp and woof of the fabric of the flag acts as a star filter, showing the sunlight in a cruciform image.
God does indeed watch over us, but this photo merely shows His dabbling in physics. and it certainly does not show His approval of our nation or our foreign policy.
Nice of them to share it with the world!
Read what is says under the picture...
Here is what it says:
"For those that prefer to think that God is not watching over us...go ahead and delete this.
For the rest of us...pass this on"
Once again, my faithfulness is determined by whether-or-not I pass along a photo, or meme, or chain letter. It is a weariness.
The cross image is in no way miraculous. The warp and woof of the fabric of the flag acts as a star filter, showing the sunlight in a cruciform image.
God does indeed watch over us, but this photo merely shows His dabbling in physics. and it certainly does not show His approval of our nation or our foreign policy.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Boy...sometimes dealing with stuff in the Blog-o-Verse tm is like playing Whack-a-Mole.
The issues of Marriage and Family particularly pop up repeatedly. The issue of polygamy (BOY that's a ripe pun...) or specifically Biblical polygyny keeps being flogged in the Virtual Debates.
Beyond the obvious (apparent) attraction of being able to do more than one woman ethically (tho' not simultaneously- threesomes are frowned upon in much "Biblical" polygynous ettiquette) I cannot fathom the attraction. There is the putative Biblicality of it all (David, Solomon...like that), but having lived in a two-nuclear-family household for a time (no hanky-panky there) having two ummm, strong willed women under the same roof was a trial at best.
Perhaps separate tents would have been the answer.
Most of the proof of God's happiness with the arrangement is circumstantial.
Not good syllogisms, no, but the reasoning tends to run that way.
When God states a thing, he does NOT have to repeat it. Once "Thou shalt not steal" is chiseled into stone, well, He has published it. He does not therefore have to go to each man-jack of us in serial theophanies and say "Y'all don't be five-finger-discountin' at the Wal-Mart, y'hear?".
The most basic Scripture on marriage is this:
Jesus went on to quote this in Matthew:
The math here is simple: 1 man + 1 woman = 1 marriage.
God said it, Moses wrote it, Jesus agreed with it.
As an acquaintance is fond of saying, "two or three witnesses".
As Barbie says, though, "Math is hard."
Is this a deep defense of historical Christian marriage? No, but I find that where there is much verbage, there can be much obfuscation. If the Gospel is simple (not simplistic), I find that it can work to be simple in explanations. (...as a little child, mayhaps?)
The issues of Marriage and Family particularly pop up repeatedly. The issue of polygamy (BOY that's a ripe pun...) or specifically Biblical polygyny keeps being flogged in the Virtual Debates.
Beyond the obvious (apparent) attraction of being able to do more than one woman ethically (tho' not simultaneously- threesomes are frowned upon in much "Biblical" polygynous ettiquette) I cannot fathom the attraction. There is the putative Biblicality of it all (David, Solomon...like that), but having lived in a two-nuclear-family household for a time (no hanky-panky there) having two ummm, strong willed women under the same roof was a trial at best.
Perhaps separate tents would have been the answer.
Most of the proof of God's happiness with the arrangement is circumstantial.
David was King, and a man after God's own heart.
David had multiple wives.
Therefore God wants men to have multiple wives.
Solomon had multiple wives.
God blessed Solomon.
Therefore God was happy with Solomon's multiple wives.
Not good syllogisms, no, but the reasoning tends to run that way.
God did not condemn it, therefore He is happy with the arrangement.
When God states a thing, he does NOT have to repeat it. Once "Thou shalt not steal" is chiseled into stone, well, He has published it. He does not therefore have to go to each man-jack of us in serial theophanies and say "Y'all don't be five-finger-discountin' at the Wal-Mart, y'hear?".
The most basic Scripture on marriage is this:
So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.23 The man said,
"This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called 'woman, '
for she was taken out of man."24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. (Gen.2)
Jesus went on to quote this in Matthew:
4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' 5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." (Matthew 19:4-6)
The math here is simple: 1 man + 1 woman = 1 marriage.
God said it, Moses wrote it, Jesus agreed with it.
As an acquaintance is fond of saying, "two or three witnesses".
As Barbie says, though, "Math is hard."
Is this a deep defense of historical Christian marriage? No, but I find that where there is much verbage, there can be much obfuscation. If the Gospel is simple (not simplistic), I find that it can work to be simple in explanations. (...as a little child, mayhaps?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
