ISLAM [incomplete study]
[1625 WE ARE IN- As you know the U.S. and our allies have
begun enforcing the ‘no fly zone’- in actuality the stated mission is more than
a no fly zone, it’s a mission that is too open ended- basically it says we can
do anything we need to do to protect the civilian population of Libya- geez-
too broad. Now- is this the same type of resolution that Bush had for his 2
wars? No- president Obama has NO resolution from the congress- nada. He’s
operating under U.N. and Arab league language- kind of a problem- don’t you
think? I heard a major news person say Obama is operating the same way Bush
did- without congressional approval. The news broadcaster explained that Bush
did not go to congress for Afghanistan or Iraq. Actually Bush went to congress
in 2001 for Afghanistan- and 2002 for Iraq. Though the internal debate [now
made public] was that the president did not need to go to congress- yet they
did anyway. Those defending Obama’s recent action say ‘yeah- but Clinton didn’t
get congressional approval for Kosovo- Serbia’ true. Either way- we are there
now. If you go back and read my posts on Libya- I was not a hawk on the matter-
someone who advocated U.S. military action. But I felt some of the statements
from the president [Gadhafi must go] kinda put us on the hook to do something.
Though the defense secretary did not want to engage in another Muslim country
[not Arab!] yet it seems as if the secretary of state changed her view and
Obama decided for limited action. The U.S. will do the early work- and do a
quick hand off to France [Britain]. The problem is we never seem to be able to
do the darn handoffs! So let’s pray and try and do our best.
As I mentioned above- the media often simply report stuff
wrong. It does not help that most of us hold a view of that part of the world
thru what we see/hear in the media- a media that gets stuff wrong [not just
Fox]. The majority of Arab people are indeed Muslim- but that makes up only 20
% of the entire Muslim world. The most populous Muslim states range from North
Africa to Southeast Asia- Islam is the world’s fastest growing religion- and
the world’s 2nd largest [around 1.2 billion followers]. Islam also
holds huge minority followings in the Western world [Europe and the U.S.]. Most
Americans associate Islam with radical Islam- though most of today’s terrorists
have come from the radical sect of Islam- all Muslims are not radicals. There
is an internal debate in Islam on how to deal with modernity- some scholars
teach that true Islam is Patriarchal in nature and the role of women is
subordinate. These hold to the idea that a true Islamic adherent seeks for a
true Islamic state- ruled by Sharia law. Others believe in a type of separation
of Mosque and state- they hold to the view that Islam’s survival depends on its
ability to ‘liberalize’ and adjust- like Christianity has done thru the
centuries [most Christians are not seeking a theocratic state- though at one
time the world was literally governed by the church]. Islam was founded in the
7th century under the prophet Muhammad, and within a hundred years
after his death spread into a vast empire [under the Umayyad and Abbasid
empires]. Islam also has a sect within her that could kind of be described as
Mystical- that is like the Christian Mystics of church history. This branch is
called Sufism. So you could say the 2 great institutions of Islam are Islamic
law [Sharia] and Sufism [the mystical expression that seeks a more romanticized
experience with God- like Christian Pietism].
As an avid boxing fan- I was watching a fight one night- and
the official bell ringer ‘rung’ the bell after only 2minutes into the round
[rounds are 3 minutes]. At first the ringside announcers- who are not paying
attention to the clock- picked it up by simply feeling like the round was
short. Sure enough during the break they were told the bell ringer- whose sole
job is to ring the bell- messed up. As I watch the coverage unfold over the
next weeks/months- and yes- years- I want to try and do my best to stick with
the facts as much as possible. I understand it’s not easy to keep all the facts
straight [the official bell ringers do at times mess up] and the distinction
between the Arab/Muslim world is at times hard to see- I’m sure we will hear
lots of reports confusing the 2- but being we are living in a real dangerous
time- a time of change thru out the world that we cannot stop [I didn’t even mention the recent events in
Yemen, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia- major events- Yemen ‘snipers’ killed 50
protestor in cold blood- shot in the head/neck. Bahrain cracked down brutally
on her protestors- and Syria is beginning to see more of an uprising]. So as we
become more familiar with this part of the world- we want to get our facts as
straight as possible. In this post I’m just beginning to cover Islam as a
religion- over the coming months I want to do some posts strictly on the actual
history of Islam- what Islam believes and teaches- and what Islam does not
teach. The purpose is not to give a defense to the religion- but to inform each
other about a religion that most westerners see only thru a lens of radicalism-
thru news reports that fixate on the extreme elements of Islam. Part of our
responsibility in the West is to know the subject/people we are dealing with-
and for today one of the facts that should help form the coming posts is all
Muslims are not Arabs- and all Arabs are not Muslim- the majority of nations
that are ‘majority’ Muslim [around 53] are indeed African and Asian. And the
latest one that we just engaged in- militarily- is smack dab in the middle of
the North African rim that has been on fire- first to its left in Tunisia- and
then to its right with Egypt- and we are ‘stuck in the middle with you’.
[1626] PILLARS 1-2.
As the Libya story
unfolds- you have some sincere critics of the president [Dick Lugar] and others
who just want to find fault. Now- one of the debates going on is who will
eventually take over the command of the ‘no fly zone’ [war]. The Arab league-
though initially in support of the action, has since said what they signed up
for [protect innocent civilians] is not what happened [bombing the country].
Vladimir Putin [Russian P.M.] said ‘it’s a crusade’ Yikes! The Russian
president [who I thought was supposed to be a puppet] Medvedev rebuked the
words publicly. Before we hit Libya- I started asking a few questions- things
like ‘look- I know the leader seems like a nut, but I’m beginning to wonder if
there might be some truth to his charge that the Rebels are Al Qaeda’. Sure
enough there have been lots of reports that do say the radical element in these
protests are larger than what we saw in the other nations [Tunisia, Egypt].
Richard Engel- a top NBC [NOT FOX!] reporter said that 1 in 5 of the rebels are
fighting because they want to kill Gadhafi ‘the Jew’. So as we debate
when/where the U.S. should take action- we need to also keep in mind that the alternatives to the toppling of leaders
might be just as bad- or worse- than the actual leader. Okay- why was the word
‘crusade’ so charged? It plays into the world history of the western nations
fighting against the Muslim world. Many in the Arab league are not comfortable
with NATO taking charge because of this history. The last few weeks the song
‘from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli’ have gone thru my mind.
I remember the old Abbot and Costello shows on the foreign legion and stuff
like that. What war is the song describing? It speaks about the wars that the
U.S. engaged in- yes- with Libya- many years ago. After the American colonies
broke away from England we continued to conduct world trade by the use of
ships. At one point [1800’s] the Mediterranean became a flash point [like
today] you had pirates and countries who retaliated by disrupting the water
ways. America of course fought back- and the Libyans were actually called ‘the
Mujahedeen’ yes- the same term used for the Rebels who we supported in toppling
the Russian influence in Afghanistan. These were the Barbary wars- Barbary
Coast. So- we need to be careful that our actions don’t play into the idea that
the U.S. is actually waging a 21st century crusade [this is also why
it was unbelievable that Bush actually used the term crusade during his term].
Okay- let me do a little more on Islam [the teaching series
I started in the last post]. Islam has 5 Pillars- basic tenets that all Muslims
hold to;
1- The declaration of
their faith ‘There is no god but God [Allah] and Muhammad is the messenger of
God’. To become a Muslim- one simply has to accept/confess this statement.
Muslims believe that the final/complete revelation of God to man has come thru
the prophet- by way of the Quran. As Christians accept Jesus as God’s final
prophet/Messiah to mankind- so Muslims see Muhammad as the final and complete
authority.
2- The second Pillar is Salat [prayer]. Muslims pray 5 times
a day while facing Mecca- the holy city where the Kabba is [Kabba- the house of
God believed to have been built by Abraham and his son Ishmael]. Once a week on
Friday Muslims pray corporately at noon in the local mosque or Islamic center.
The next few days I’ll try and cover the other 3 pillars- I
actually think the 3rd pillar is more in keeping with the teachings
of Jesus and the bible than what most Christians practice- it deals with the
Muslim practice of giving to meet the needs of the poor. For today that should
cover it- remember- the reason we are covering Islam as a religion is so we can
have a better grasp on what Muslims believe. Too many of us are only familiar
with the more radical elements that the media focus on when an attack takes
place. At the same time there are also prejudices in Islam as well- many young
Muslims are taught a radical hatred for the Jew- these wrong ideas are formed
in their minds as young people- and they too need to reject these anti- Semitic
ideas. As the U.S. begins engaging in the 3rd Muslim country in the
last 11 years- we need to be very careful that we are not playing into the
hands of those who embrace radicalism- there is a very real extreme element in
Libya. Al Qaeda has operated out of the nation for many years- we need to be
careful that we are not being ‘useful idiots’.
[1629] MUSLIM IN AMERICA- THE PRESIDENTS SPEECH AND OTHER
MUSINGS.
Last night the president finally spoke to the nation in
defense of our military action in Libya. He made the case that there are times
when the U.S. can/should act if we feel we can avert a humanitarian disaster-
he also said we can’t always intervene in every conflict. I guess for the most
part this makes some sense- it’s just the way he handled it [going on vacation-
congress in recess]. There are still lots of questions to be asked/answered.
Today the rebels are on the outskirts of a western city that is ‘pro Gadhafi’.
The city is called Sirte and like other cities in the west they favor Gadhafi
more so than the rebels. The question is; how do we justify the bombing of
Gadhafi’s military- in order to protect civilians- while the rebels are getting
ready to overthrow a civilian population- with force- against the majority of
the will of the people? We have indeed enabled the rebels to advance this far
west, and we are basically on the side of the rebels- in this case- against the
populace.
The other night I watched a CNN special on Muslim
discrimination in America- most of you who read my posts [blog] know I try and
take the more moderate position of not branding all Muslims as radical. I do
think there are times when Muslims are discriminated against wrongfully because
of their faith. Yet at the same time the media often show their bias. The show
did a good job at revealing how Muslims face discrimination in America- the
host- Soledad O’Brien- kind of showed the ‘ignorant’ Christians versus the
moderate Muslims. The town was Murphysboro Tenn. [yes- they picked a spot that
would be a little more redneck than usual] and they interviewed a few American
Muslim women whose sole experience of Islam comes from an American perspective.
These women, as sympathetic as their causes are- do not even begin to breech
the absolute discrimination and oppression that many Muslim women experience
around the globe on a daily basis- it was just unfair for CNN to portray Muslim
women as victims of Christian discrimination while overlooking the real
problem- expressed by many women who have chosen to speak out- against the oppression
women face when living in countries that have Sharia law as the law of the
land.
As I continue to teach the study on Islam [so far have only
done 1 post on it] I want to try and approach the strained relationship that
exists between Western society and Islam- yet I don’t want to be an apologist
for Islam. I’m currently going thru a course on Islam that is taught by the
official govt. teacher on the subject. I believe he was sitting in the second
row of the president’s speech last night. Over the years I have studied on lots
of subjects- years of utilizing the public library system, buying university
level books [not pop culture Christian stuff on how to ‘get what you want’] and
I have also ordered courses [C.D. and book] from the top professors of the
universities of the world. These course are not cheap- yet they are cheaper
than actually getting credits for the courses [you can take the same courses as
extension courses from the universities and get credit- but that’s way too
expensive- especially if done thru the elite universities- Harvard, etc.] So
instead I simply purchase the courses and do them on my own. Now- the reason I
say this is to explain a ‘funny thing’ that happened on my study of Islam. When
I first ordered the course I noticed the ratings were not that great. Most
courses are rated in the 80-90 percentile- from others who have done the
course- this one was in the 60’s. I hesitated to get it- but the other courses
that dealt with Islam also dealt with other religions- and I didn’t want to do
an entire comparative religion study at this time. So these courses are taught
by the top tier professors in the world [these professors are peer reviewed and
deemed to be in the top 10 %]. This one on Islam is taught by the person who
teaches Islam to the incoming govt. employees under president Obama. As I’m
going thru the course- there are times where I feel like the teacher is too
defensive of Islam- sort of like the CNN special. At one point the professor
defends Muhammad as a religious leader who freed women from oppression and
instituted an open and liberal society for all people- especially women. Geez-
stuff like this is very problematic- I know enough about the current world
nations that have Islam as the official religion of the nation- these nations
are without a doubt very oppressive to women.
Like many things in life- we all try and do our best to give
people the benefit of the doubt- and as someone who has disagreed with the
president and been openly critical of him- yet I try not to be so biased that I
find fault with everything he does. The media has far left defenders- who never
find anything wrong with the man- and far right critics who never find anything
right. At this time- the revolts in North Africa and the Middle East are really
getting out of hand- the Christians in Egypt- an ancient Christian church
[Coptic] have lived there since the early days of Christianity- they have just
voted in Egypt to recognize Sharia law as the official law of the land- this
referendum was passed by 70 % of the population- and the Muslim Brotherhood
showed their organizational abilities by gaining a majority of the vote for the
things they wanted. So now the Christians in Egypt might face the same fate as
those in Pakistan- being put to death for blaspheming Islam [which often means
witnessing for Christ]. The rebels who we are fighting for in Libya are much
more radical than Gadhafi- yes Gadhafi was/is a madman- yet the rebels have
more Al Qaeda influence than Gadhafi- they have been enemies in Libya for
years. Do we really want our people dying for the Rebels?
There are still lots of questions to be answered- I am
uncomfortable that the course I’m going thru on Islam is so skewed to the point
of defending Islam as a great liberator of women and their rights- I was even
more troubled to have seen ‘my instructor’ sitting in the 2nd row at
the president’s speech.
[1630] EPISTEMOLOGY- Lets do a little more on how we learn-
know stuff. The actual ‘study’ of how we know things is called Epistemology.
Today’s popular movement is called Post Modernism- a challenge to the classical
idea of Modernism. The classical way of looking at knowledge said there are
things that are ‘really true’ and things that are not- this is called Objective
Truth. The Post Moderns say words are limited [true to a degree] and because
words are simply vehicles that transmit ideas that are not really ‘true’ in the
classical sense, then it is wrong for one group [like Christians] to say to
another group [non- Christians] that Jesus is the Way- Truth and Life [Johns
gospel]. So the battle lines are drawn. It should be noted that a growing
number of believers are describing themselves as Post Modern and they argue
that it is possible to be Christian and Post Modern at the same time. Okay- as
more of the classical type- I believe it is possible to get to objective truth-
that the pursuit of what’s true is not a vain pursuit- and yes- though we are
all limited in our understanding, yet to even have this conversation requires
an element of Absolute Truth. If the Post Modernist says ‘words have no
objective truth- only relative truth- they only convey what the hearer decides
they convey’ then I can say ‘Oh- so if I
take your words to mean there is such a thing as objective truth- that’s okay’?
O know you idiot- you’re not hearing what I’m saying! So you see that the Post
modernist needs his words to mean something- to convey a specific thing to the
hearer- if the hearer can make the words mean whatever he wants- then you can’t
even engage in the discussion- got it? So anyway- as I’m thinking about
scrapping my Islam course [and just teaching it from stuff I learned myself- in
the immortal words of defense secy. Bob Gates ‘on the fly’] I do want to
utilize whatever objective truth I can pick up along the way- while at the same
time realizing all people have their own biases and we need to listen with a
careful skepticism. I ordered a course on Physics a while back- good course-
but the instructor- though smart- made a classic mistake in Logic as he taught
the course. He often said ‘the universe was created BY CHANCE’. Now- as a
purely grammatical- logical argument- this incorrect [a fallacy]. Why? What he
really means to say is ‘there are unknown causes in the universe that created
the effect of existence- we do not know what these causes are- but we believe
that thru a series of actions- which have no particular direction [chance]
these unknown causes have caused the effect of the universe’. Okay- I don’t
want to be nitpicky- but when I hear an intelligent person say ‘everything was
made BY CHANCE’ and for him to get away with this without a rigorous challenge-
then the Christian thinker has failed in his task to challenge the skeptic on
his own terms- to show that even though the person may be an expert in his
field [Physics] yet this does not mean he can get away with fallacious
arguments- arguments that are invalid from the get go. So as we progress over
the coming weeks/months on the various fields of study- we want to be open to
learn from others who have specialized in their particular fields of study- we
want to be open minded enough to learn from people who reject the faith- yes
atheists can teach us things- there are
areas of knowledge that all people have that can benefit the rest of us.
And we want to weigh all things that we hear- we all make mistakes- and are
susceptible to error. Just because my Physics ‘teacher’ screwed up in a classic
way- a way that most apologists recognize right off the bat- I mean you have to
be an amateur ‘arguer’ of truth to make this type of mistake- yet I didn’t
reject the entire course- I still learned valuable insights from the man. So I think
this is the best approach to take- listen to all sides of a matter- doubt the
things that seem a little off- do some research- check into it yourself- and at
the end of the day let a variety of sources be your pool of knowledge- don’t
just rely on one source. Proverbs says ‘In the multitude of counselors there is
safety’. Be sure you’re listening/hearing from the multitude [broad range of
thought and learning] because often times single sources can be right in one
area- and off in another.
[1632] 3rd PILLAR- ZAKAT.
As I was debating whether or not to continue my study on
Islam [today] the spot I stopped at last was the 3rd pillar. Sure
enough yesterday [and the rerun at 1 a.m.] Beck did an interesting show on
Zakat. He had on a few experts- who are known to not be sympathetic to Islam-
and they covered the subject of non violent Jihad- those who advocate for an
Islamic society thru non violent means. Now- I know some Beck supporters have
been upset with me in the past because I criticize Beck- it’s not that I don’t
think he actually brings up things that other networks don’t- sometimes he does
reveal stuff that the other networks don’t because they are so ‘in the tank’
for the president. I never thought I’d see the day where a news host actually
would describe his ‘feelings’ that come over him when he hears the president
speak- he actually used sexual connotations to describe it [a tingle goes up my
leg]. Now- I’m not saying this to be cute [okay- maybe a little] but to say I
have never in my life seen the media- the so called 4th estate- so
one sided. So Beck [Fox] does serve a purpose. Now- Beck covered the groups
that raise money under the banner of ‘charity’ and yet they have ties to
radical Islam, and they discussed the ancient Islamic practice of Zakat [or
Tithe].
In the Muslim community Zakat is giving a portion [2.5%] of
both goods and finances for the sole purpose of providing for the poor. In
Muslim communities the Zakat is like social security. The word literally means
purification. The word itself is not a terrorist term- nor the practice. It is
important for Beck and others to cover stories about the use of Zakat given to
charitable groups for radical purposes- yet most Americans have probably not
heard of the term before- and their first introduction to it was seen thru an
association to terror.
Years ago I had a chance meeting with a Muslim- I’m sure he
didn’t realize he ran into some nut who studies just about everything a person
can study [I was working at the fire house and on duty]. He was a devout
Muslim- dressed in Muslim garb an all. As we talked I gave him the biblical
history of Abraham and his 2 sons Isaac and Ishmael. I traced the lineage of
Christians and Jews from Isaacs’s line, and the genealogy of Muslims [Arabs]
thru Ishmael. I spoke about the coming of Jesus in the 1st century
of the Common Era as the promised offspring that God originally told Abraham
about. I explained the purpose of the Messiah [Jesus] as being the predestined
one sent by God to unite all people and tribes under one new nation- the
Kingdom of God. I explained to my friend that Christianity teaches that Jesus
was not simply a prophet- but one who died for the sins of the world and rose
again as the final sacrifice that would ever need to be made for the sins of
men. I was surprised to see my Muslim friend hearing the whole story- for the 1st
time. He told me he was not familiar at all with the history [even though it is
both biblical history and Islamic- the part about Ishmael which is found in the
book of Genesis]. He seemed so grateful to have heard it thru ‘this angle’ not
from the angle of the Crusades- or of Western Colonialism- but from the angle
of the grace of God that has come to all tribes and races thru Jesus Christ.
As I watch the media day after day- seeing more unrest in
the Middle East than I have ever witnessed in my lifetime. Seeing the growing
strain between Christians and Muslims and Jews [the Fla. Pastor went and burned
a Koran and Muslim demonstrators in Afghanistan attacked the U.N. building and
killed and beheaded some workers]. As I see the lines being drawn in the sand-
I come back to the story of my Muslim friend- who obviously was dedicated to
his faith [wearing the robe and all] yet he never clearly heard the gospel-
which actually means Good News. The bible commands us [Christians] to live in
peace with ALL MEN- to love our neighbor as our self- to even love those who
hate us- to pray for those who persecute us and to do good [a type of Zakat] to
our fellow man. While I make no excuses for the killing and beheading of the
U.N. people- yet to burn the holy book of another religion is also not living
peaceably with all men.
I believe the Islamic practice of Zakat is closer to actual
biblical teaching than what most Christians practice today. The majority of
Christian giving- often wrongfully referred to as the Tithe- goes to the
function of media ministry- church buildings- salaries- etc. under 10 percent
goes to meeting the needs of the poor. Yet in the teachings of Jesus and in the
New Testament the majority teaching on giving is in context of giving to meet
the needs of the poor [go read my books under the Feb- 2010 posts- and also the
study called ‘what in the world is the church’ under the Feb posts]. So in a
very real way I do think the Islamic Zakat is closer to the biblical practice
than what most 21st century Christians practice.
I will obviously have many things I will not embrace about
Islam in future posts- I will try and cover those differences as respectfully
as I possibly can- without being a biased defender of Islam [as my current
instructor on the course seems to be]. And I will make the case for Christ as
well. At the end of the day hopefully we can learn more about our various
beliefs- try and have respect for those who differ- and root for the moderates
among us. I reject the Koran burning pastor in Fla. And I hope most Muslims
will also reject the radical elements within their ranks. The history of the 3rd
Pillar of Islam is a good one- a practice that centers around the teachings of
Christ- it’s a shame that some in the Muslim community have hijacked it for
violent Jihad.
[1642] LESSON FROM A MUSLIM-
I read a story in my local paper yesterday- there was an
ecumenical dinner held this week between Christians, Jews and Muslims. The
Christian staff writer who attended shared how it helped her to overcome
previous prejudices that she had. She told what the various speakers discussed
and I was particularly impressed with what the Muslim speaker said- she talked
about how true religion is not performance, putting on a show- but is expressed
in reaching out to those in need- the poor and hurting.
In fact she was basically quoting the New Testament book of
James- James says ‘pure religion is to visit the fatherless and widows and to
stay clean from the world’. A few weeks back one of my homeless buddies stopped
by- he’s basically a genius when it comes to the bible- I mean it’s sort of an
autistic thing to be honest- he knows- by memory- much more than the average
preacher. As I visited with Henry I gave him the latest bible studies that were
sent to me over the last few months. Years ago I heard a N.J. Jewish preacher-
who pastors a Messianic congregation in Lodi, N.J.- he had a short radio show
on the same station I’m on- and as a courtesy I sent him some of my books and
told him hi and all- being I’m a former Jersey brother and all. Ever since he
has sent me these really great bible studies every month.
The studies are really in depth- and he usually only sends
them to partners [those who support his ministry with money]. But I guess he
appreciated my sending him a nice note and he forever put me on the list. Now-
I’m an avid reader- I’ve read just about everything you can get your hands on-
but these past few years I’m trying to stick with scholarly stuff- not that I’m
‘too good’ for the basic stuff- It’s just I really don’t have the time to just
read tons of stuff that’s in the category of ‘devotional’ material- stuff that
just kind of talks about Christian things.
So I hate to throw the stuff out- I mean they’re great bible
studies. I don’t want to write Jonathan [the pastor] and say ‘take me off your
list’- so I save them up and give them to Henry- he devours them and even
quotes them back to me the next time I see him. So anyway we had a good talk.
Somehow we got into discussing the book of James [the verse I quoted above] and
I told Henry how it’s funny that James [we believe this letter in the New
Testament- called James- was written by the James who was Jesus’ brother-
mentioned about in the bible. He was the same James mentioned as one of the
leaders in the church at Jerusalem in the book of Acts, chapter 15. To my
Catholic friends- it might sound strange ‘Jesus had a brother?’ these words are
found in the New Testament. Catholic teachers don’t deny this- they just
interpret it to mean ‘cousin’ or near relative- some say its speaking of
‘Christian brother’. Don’t want to debate it- just thought I should mention
it].
Anyway- I told Henry how it’s strange that one of the key
leaders in the early church- who was closer to Jesus than all the other
disciples [he lived in the same house] that he would write such a scathing
indictment against the rich- and he would defend the poor so strongly. James’
letter is one of the strongest rebukes against the rich that you will find in
the bible. Anyway Henry agreed with me- of course Henry’s poor- homeless- but
he knows his stuff. He said ‘you know John- as true as you are- you never hear
this from the famous pulpits in America’. He was agreeing with what the Muslim
lady said at the dinner- that true religion is not fame and glory- but serving
those in need.
I liked the spirit of the article I read- It does not mean I
will not continue to advocate for the exclusivity of the gospel of Jesus- that
Jesus is truly the only way to God. Pope Benedict has also come under some heat
for saying the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus is the only way of salvation-
to which I agree.
Yet at the same time- as we make our case to our Muslim and
Jewish friends- we can also sit down with them- live as citizens of the same
community with them- and even learn something from them every now and then.
NOTE- To any of my friends who might be ‘rich’. The early
church did have certain individuals who were rich- and it was oaky. The person
who gave his grave spot to Jesus- Joseph of Arimathea- was rich. Also in the
books of Acts there were believers who sold their real estate and dedicated the
money to the church. So the bible doesn’t just outright condemn those who are
rich- but there are many warnings against being rich in ‘this world’ while
forgetting to build riches in the kingdom [works of love and charity]. That’s
the main theme of James’ letter.
[1644] THE ARAB SPRING-
This week the president took some criticism for identifying
the struggle going on in the Arab/Muslim world with the struggle for freedom
that the Jewish people experienced- and commemorate during this Passover
season. The president- who celebrates the Passover meal- said that the present
Arab struggle for freedom- what is sometimes referred to as The Arab Spring, is
much like what the Jews went thru when they too felt oppressed by their leaders
many years ago. I actually just did an entire study along these same lines
[Insights from a Revolution].
The president’s critics tore into him ‘how dare he compare a
radical Muslim terror campaign with the honest struggle of the Jewish people’.
Beck had John Hagee [the famous Pastor out of San Antonio] on his show- as well
as a Rabbi and another Israeli official- they discussed the subject of God
being on the side of the geopolitical decisions of Israel- and how the
Arab/Muslim world just want to ‘kill everybody else’.
Hagee offered his friendship to the Rabbi- stating ‘though
we disagree on who the Messiah is [no small disagreement!] yet we can still
overlook our differences and work together’. Now- I would simply ask- why not
take this position with the Muslim/Arab world too? The difference that Hagee
was willing to ‘gloss over’ with his Jewish friends is quite a leap- though I
too agree with it- that is even though our Jewish friends do not embrace Jesus
as the Messiah- yet we should love them as Jesus commanded- and fight for their
rights as a people.
We should also extend this hand of friendship- as much as
possible- to the Arab world. ‘What- are you nuts- don’t you know the Koran has
verses in it that are incompatible with Christian doctrine’- actually I do know
this- but that 'incompatibility’ is just as severe- doctrinally- as saying
Jesus is not the Messiah. According to the Apostle John- this denial is the
worst doctrinal denial one can make [Johns 1st letter found in the
New Testament ‘if anyone denies that Jesus Christ is the Messiah- come in the
flesh- he is anti Christ’].
Okay- the point? Why couldn’t Beck, Hagee, and the other
multitudes simply give this same benefit of the doubt to the Muslim world? In
Genesis chapter 16 we read the actual history of the Arab/Muslim world- yes
it’s in our bibles. Sarah [Abraham’s wife] tells her husband to sleep with her
maid Hagar and have a son. Sarah was barren and this was an acceptable thing at
the time to do- sort of like a surrogate mother type thing. After the maid gets
pregnant there arises tension and jealousy in the home and Abraham says ‘look-
she’s your maid- do what you want’ and Sarah kicks her out and the maid winds
up crying in the wilderness..
God sends an angel to talk with her and God promises her
that her son- Ishmael [the father of the Arab/Muslim people- who is also the
son of Abraham- the father of the Jewish people!] will become a great people
and that the son- Ishmael- will be a wild man and he will be at war with all
the nations around him and all the nations will fight with him. Now- does this
history sound accurate to you? Does the Christian bible say God is the one who
multiplied this group of people? If these things are true- and recorded in our
Christian bibles- why not at least give them the same chance as our Jewish
brothers?
Look- I am not advocating glossing over the serious
doctrinal differences between Islam and Christianity- but the Evangelical
community- for the most part- has managed to ‘gloss over’ a pretty major
doctrinal difference with our Jewish friends- why not with Muslims? I mean as people
who live together on the same planet- as people whom God said ‘I am the one who
increased them’ surely we can take these same verses and use them as a bridge-
to bridge some serious gaps for sure- but a possible bridge that God has given
us- in our bibles- that states that God himself is concerned with the Arab
world and the present ‘war’ between Ishmael and all the nations around him-
well that too was recorded in God’s plan.
[1656] ANTI COLONIAL REDO
Let me try to cover a few current events. This week we had a
few presidential hopefuls drop out of the race- and a few announce. Newt
Gingrich did his first Sunday news interview since officially getting into the
race.
David Gregory- Tim Russert’s replacement on NBC- did an okay
interview- but he did raise the question of racism [so soon!]. Yes- he
questioned Newt’s speech where he mentioned that Obama is the ‘food stamp
president’. That is Newt criticized the economic policies of this
administration and said how we have over 40 million people on food stamps. That
the lack of the president’s ability to create jobs is seen in the food stamp
[and welfare] rates rising.
Gregory questioned whether or not this played into the race
game. Now- MSNBC and one of the most biased news people in the media today [Chris
Matthews] had on 2 liberal minded men. He got right into the race card- he
played it hard and long. To my surprise- both of the liberals he interviewed
disagreed with him. They distanced themselves from the race card.
One of the men- Richard Wolfe- is an Obama insider. He has
lots of access to the inner workings of the White House. He has written books
on the president and he is close to the real sources. I had to ask myself why
both of these liberal minded men agreed with me- that to use the race card on
something like this is shameful.
I realized that as ‘true insiders’ they know that this type
of accusation surely does not play well in Rio Linda. That is the majority of
voters- especially white independents- they might not say it- but this stuff does
not gain votes.
As smart politicos- these Obama supporters knew this- and
for the welfare of the president, whom they support- they did the right thing.
Matthews- well he’s a lost cause.
One of the things that gets raised with the Newt debate is
the accusation that our president is ‘anti- colonial’ or that he is an ‘anti
colonial Kenyan’. In the past I have defended the president against this
accusation- yet at the same time others who have defended the president against
this accusation have seemed to not know what they are talking about [Matthews
again].
These last few years Newt Gingrich has positioned himself
for a possible run for the White House. One of the things he has done is he has
converted to Catholicism. Now- I do not question his conversion- as a matter of
fact if you realize that Newt is an intellectual- than the conversion to a
Christian denomination that has the greatest intellectual heritage of them all-
well that just makes sense.
As a new convert Newt is obviously going to read the books
of other Catholic intellectuals. And a top seller during this time was a book
by Dinesh Desouza. A Catholic intellectual himself. The book critiqued the
development of the political/social thought of the president. It covered the
presidents own journey as he grew up and later learned more about his father’s
struggle- and the black mans struggle in general. The president wrote about
this in his book Dreams of my Father.
Part of the critique that Dinesh mentioned is that the
presidents father- like many Kenyans and other foreign ethnic groups- had what
you would describe as an ‘anti colonial’ mindset. What’s that? Our world has
gone thru many stages of growth and development. Some stages were good- other
times bad [the Hitler stage!] After the great breakthroughs in science and
technology that occurred during the 18th-19th centuries-
you had European [western] world powers colonizing other parts of the world.
Africa [Kenya] as well as other Arab nations became colonies of the west.
The famous struggle of Gandhi was all about India breaking
away from Britain’s rule over them. They indeed were ‘anti colonial’. Now- in
this conversation many can’t believe [Matthews] that anyone would ever even
venture to say that the president might be ‘anti colonial’ as in if this is a
bad thing. Geez- America is ANTI COLONIAL for heaven’s sake. We revolted
against the English king and became a nation of our own.
So the anti colonial mindset-in itself- is not so terrible.
Yet some of the president’s accusers do use the accusation as saying the
president buys into the whole spirit of anti colonialism- which in many parts
of the world does come with an anti American attitude- why? Well they resent
our political influence in their nations.
The present protests going on in the Arab world also play
strongly into this feeling. Many in the western media have simplified the
reasons for the Arab protests. Some [Beck] simply see a radical world uprising
that wants to take over the world. Others are a little more thoughtful- they see
the actual religious divisions in these countries [between Sunni and Shii] and
they tell the story of one sect of Islam fighting the other sect. But this too
is ‘too’ simple.
I read an article a while back- written by a Muslim woman
who lives in Bahrain. She said that when the west views the protests in her
country as simply a Shiite majority population protesting a Sunni minority
dynasty- that this narrative misses the point. She explained how in the Arab
world there is a strong undercurrent running thru the unrest- and that this
undercurrent is anti colonial in nature.
She explained how many of the younger generation
Muslim/Arabs are seeing their leaders as sell outs- that their rulers have a sort of unwritten
colonial pact with the west- and that this unspoken agreement says ‘if you work
with us in fighting the radicals among you- we in turn will support you- even
if you treat your people badly’. Thus you had the uprising in Egypt that ousted
the long term president. Mubarak was indeed America’s strongest ally in the
Arab world- he had maintained a cold peace with Israel for 30 years- and the
west loved it.
So in essence the protests are not really about the
religious divide within Islam [The divide itself dates back to the 7th
century under the founder Mohammad. After Mohammed’s death he was replaced by
another top organizational leader- who was not related by blood to Mohammed.
This passing of of the leadership- by ability as opposed to blood- this is
called Sunna- the example of the prophet spoken about in the Hadith.
Those who describe themselves as Sunni adhere to this
example. The other side- Shii [partisan] broke away from this idea and instead
believed that the leadership should pass thru those who have blood relations to
the former leader. This division has existed till this day and that’s why in
some nations you have the Sunni in charge- and in others the Shii.
In Bahrain- when they repressed the protestors- they
appealed to another Sunni led nation- Saudi Arabia- and they sent their soldiers
into Bahrain to put down the uprising. On the other side of the coin you have
Iran [Shii leadership] backing Assad in Syria because he too adheres to their
division.
So some in the western media have played this up as the main
cause of the protests- when in reality it plays a smaller role than you would
think.
Okay- all that to say this. If the defenders of the
president want to defend him against ‘anti colonial’ accusations- then have
some background into what’s going on. If you want to criticize Newt for the
accusation- realize that it’s not totally unfounded- and it’s not wrong to be
anti colonial. All our founding fathers were.
[1713] THIS ROCK
A few weeks ago I mentioned how I want to try and cover the
Sunday Mass readings every now and then. I watch the Mass every Sunday [as well
as hold a Protestant meeting- home meeting] and I wanted to hit on the verses
so my Catholic friends can get a little more into bible study.
Last week one of the readings was from Isaiah 56- the week
before chapter 55. These chapters sort of cover one of the main themes that I
spoke about during our overview of the letters of the N.T.
If you remember- one of the ‘mysteries’ we spoke about was
the truth that in Christ- all ethnic groups are now one in Christ. This was spoken
about in Paul’s letter to the church at Ephesus. In Isaiah we read about God
bringing all nations to Christ ‘you will call a nation that you do not know-
and nations that do not know you will come running to you’ ‘My fathers house
will be called a house of prayer for all nations’- Jesus quotes this verse when
he throws out the Money Changers from the temple. Another one ‘whoever is thirsty- come- drink
of this water freely’ the themes of these 2 chapters is God is inviting all
groups- they can come and make this Covenant with God.
God is opening the door for all groups to make it in!
On my site- a while back I made some friends from various
countries- Muslim countries. I actually did a teaching on Islam- in a positive
way- not to ‘trick’ Muslims to convert- but because I felt the anti Muslim
feeling in the West- with the world facing so many geo political problems- that
we needed to take some positions as Christians that were more gracious to
people in general.
Now- I know I too ‘hit hard’ on my site- sure. But I do
believe God wants us to live peaceably with ‘all men’. That friends from other
religious backgrounds- if they are going through very hard times- then we need
to do what we can to help them.
Every conversation with a young Muslim person- who might be
struggling with the problems taking place in their nation- we need to also be
able to do ‘justly’ see that many of their nations have been oppressive- and
all the young people in these nations are not radical Muslims.
Many are women who have been treated badly by the leaders-
because the leaders are strict Muslims. So for these people- we need to say
‘yes we see your situation- we are praying for you’ we can’t simply think all
the problems will be solved if we only preach to them- without also acting
justly- seeing their plight and being concerned and speaking out.
Okay- that’s the main reason I connected with some of these
friends. At the same time- obviously I teach the bible- and I hope lots of
these friends from various groups [Jews, Muslims, etc..] that they can see that
Christianity is not based on the West- or a certain view of Christianity- but
its Gods free offering to all men/women ‘come- drink- accept the free gift-
it’s for you!’
So of course I want all my friends to feel free to take the
benefits that God has given to us- while also respecting them if they choose to
worship their own way.
So- this week we saw that in the N.T. the death and
resurrection of Christ was Gods way of saying ‘whoever wants to come-
come!’. Christ died for everyone- we can
all get in.
The prophet Isaiah said this years ago- that God would bring
all nations and ethnic groups to ‘his holy mountain’ [kingdom] he would make them joyful- he will accept their gifts
[prayers and thanks] and that he is doing all these things for the benefit of
all nations- not just one.
As we close the week- go and read these chapters- to my
Catholic friends – see what chapters will be in the Mass this Sunday- when you
get home after the Mass- read them.
The bible says Jesus is the Chief Cornerstone of the
spiritual building called ‘the church’. The bible says many people stumbled
over this stone- they were offended at him.
Jesus asked once ‘Who do men say that I am’- Peter said ‘You
are the Christ- the Son of the blessed’. Jesus says ‘Blessed are you Peter-
flesh and blood did not reveal this to you- but my Father who is in heaven’ and
Jesus went on to say ‘Upon this Rock I will build my church and the gates of
hell shall not prevail against it.’
Later on in Peters letter’s- he says we are spiritual stones
in this spiritual temple- and Jesus is the main Rock. All the bible hinges on
him- we must see everything as it relates to ‘This Rock’.
God made provisions for all people thru his Son- he said
‘whoever wants to drink- drink- come freely- without charge- it’s for you too’.
[1735] THE YEAR UZZIAH DIED
After the debate last night I caught the 1st 7
minutes or so of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. As an avid news watcher- I
try to catch what the most influential pundits are saying at the time.
Though Stewart is a comedian news guy- yet he usually gives
you a balanced view- with a few F bombs thrown in every so often.
So his top skit was today’s vote at the U.N. [well- they
won’t vote today on it] the Palestinian request for the U.N. to recognize them
as a state [nation- called nation states in that part of the world].
Stewart did a pretty funny [and eye opening] skit. He had
one of his reporters ‘report’ from Halifax- Nova Scotia [of course he shoots
these scenes from his area- I guess?] And the skit was that the new Holy Land
is actually Halifax.
That they discovered this new scroll [in his hand] and the
evidence pointed to Halifax as the spot.
So as they talk the reporter also pronounces Halifax with a
rolling ‘Hal’ you know- to make it sound Jewish.
So- after this new find- I guess the whole war over the ‘2
state’ solution is now resolved- right? Wrong.
On the split screen you have the Muslim reporter show up-
and he makes the claim that Muhammad actually found Halifax first- he even says
he has proof that ‘the prophet’ was there- they have evidence that he caught a
huge fish once on a visit.
Now of course- these guys are all taking risks with this
stuff- but it is funny. So the ‘Jewish’ reporter says ‘okay- show me the
picture and I’ll believe it’. Of course- in Islam- it’s blasphemous to depict
the prophet in a picture- so they go back and forth on the thing- The Muslim
guy pronouncing Halifax with a sort of Muslim drawl [Halalafax].
The sad thing is- even though it’s a comedy show- Stewart
showed us how all the religious ‘wars’ and fights- how they look to the
‘outside world’.
As I have been doing a ‘jump around’ study on the Old
Testament these last few weeks- in my own study [for the posts] I am at the
prophet Isaiah.
Isaiah is one of the Major Prophets- he is quoted more than
any other Old Testament prophet- in the N.T.
There are more famous prophecies from Isaiah- about Jesus-
than any other prophet [A Virgin shall conceive and have a child].
When we read the books of the bible- we usually have pretty
accurate dates on when the book was written- at what time the prophet lived.
In Isaiah’s case he gives us a specific date to his calling-
in chapter 6 he says ‘in the year that king Uzziah died- I saw the Lord’.
King Uzziah [a king in Israel] died in the year 740 B.C.
If you walk down to the Mediterranean shore from Israel- you
can look North West and see Italy. In the year 740 B.C. - Rome became a city.
Of course it would be centuries before Rome would become the capital of the
world empire- yet it was birthed as a city the same year Isaiah was called by
God.
If you look west- you see Egypt, Libya and Tunisia- all
places where the ‘Arab Spring’ has taken root.
It’s amazing to think- that after thousands of years- this
whole area is still one of the most influential news making spots on the map.
After John the Baptist baptized Jesus- the Spirit descended
on Jesus ‘like a dove’ and the bible tells us ‘the Spirit DROVE Jesus into the
wilderness to be tempted by the devil’.
In Luke’s account [chapter 4] One of the first events to
take place after the wilderness test- was Jesus goes into the synagogue on the
Sabbath- and as ‘his custom was’ he
‘opened the book and read’.
Now that’s the way the English version reads. But it really
doesn’t give you the full picture. The Jewish people [till this day] don’t have
their bibles [Called Torah for Jews- Pentateuch for Christians- which are the
first 5 books of the Old Testament] in book form.
They have their bibles in scroll form. It’s actually part of
their worship to have these beautiful hand written scrolls- which cost
thousands of dollars to make- in this form.
So when you read ‘Jesus opened the book and found the place’
it really means he unrolled the scroll- and came to the spot where the reading
was marked for that day.
I have heard many preachers over the years correctly say
that it was a scroll- yet they seem to think that Jesus just unrolled the thing
and supernaturally came to the spot where he read from.
No- the spot was already marked out the week before- he was
just reading from this predetermined spot.
Now- he reads a famous passage ‘The Spirit of the Lord is
upon me because he has anointed me to preach’ and the prophecy goes on and talks
about the ministry of the Messiah.
Now- for Jesus to have read this- and for the people to have
heard-was nothing out of the ordinary- until what happened next.
Jesus then ‘closed the book’ and says ‘This day this
prophecy has been fulfilled in your ears’ and the bible says that the eyes of
everyone there were fixated on him.
Jesus read from Isaiah 61 that day- the prophet that was
called 740 years earlier.
This happened right after the temptation- it was the
difficulty- the tests- the very tough things he went through- it was these
things that gave him the ability to speak- and for all the people to hear.
As they will present the Palestinian request today- and as
this same land- where Jesus walked- Isaiah heard God- the devil tempted Jesus-
as this land once again becomes the center of attention- I hope we don’t all
look like the caricature that Jon Stewart showed- brilliantly- on his show.
Quite often ‘the world’ sees the church [religious fights in
general] as stupid and silly. They see certain adherents willing to fight- and
kill- over their beliefs.
They see a never ending feud between groups of people who
are so fixated on a certain side- an issue- that it seems almost impossible to
sit down and actually treat the other side as human beings- who are all indeed
created in the image of God- who Jesus said ‘even if we see them as our enemy-
we are to love them’.
Isaiah was a cultured man- not like most of the other
prophets. He had influence in the politics of his day- and most Christians
today revere his prophecies as at the top of the list- as far as prophets go.
In chapter 6- after he saw God- and heard the call- he
responded ‘I am a man of unclean lips- it the middle of people who are also
unclean’.
And the bible says an angel took a ‘live coal’ from the fire
and put it in on the prophet’s lips. God was saying ‘Yes Isaiah- you are
unclean- this whole nation is unclean- man is unclean- yet when I use people to
speak to a people- it’s based on my character- not yours’.
Isaiah would fulfill the mission- and be honored by having
Jesus read from his scroll on the opening day of the preaching ministry of
Jesus- and for him to have said ‘today- this has been fulfilled in your ears’.
[1752] IMMACULATE CONCEPTION
Was gonna do one last post [for now] on Libya- we will need
to cover the whole development of how we began to view/and act over a 6 month
period- we acted [as a nation] contrary to our public statements. We swore-
over and over again- that we were not targeting the man [or his family] and he
swore [before the U.N. - by his rep.] that we were lying- and did indeed
already kill a few of his grandkids [which was true] and were going after him.
Then- on national T.V. - we saw him flee Sirte [his
hometown] and get bombed by both NATO and American planes [ours were Drones].
We destroyed a bunch of vehicles- left a lot of dead bodies- but he made it to
a tunnel.
Then he got pulled out- ended up with a bullet in the head.
O- forgot- this happened a day or 2 after Hillary Clinton visited Tripoli [her
first visit] and said ‘we are waiting for you to capture or kill him’ [oop’s!]
She later had to ‘clarify’.
She also was caught on tape- laughing and rejoicing over his
death- okay- many people did- but if your saying publicly- ‘that’s not what we
want’- then it looks bad.
Of course the other Arab nations want the U.N. to
investigate- they were being told- by us- that we were not going after him. He
begged for a peaceful resolution [he did do this!]. But we basically said no.
There are lots of questions to still be answered on this
thing.
Okay- yesterday I wrote a quick note about a conversation I
had with a new friend who just joined my site. She was into some new age stuff-
we talked a little- I defended historic Christian belief- then she blocked me.
Let’s talk a little about Apologetics/Theology. Apologetics
is the field where Christians Defend the Faith.
In our day- it is common for believers to be ‘left in the
dust’ when they bang up against an atheistic scientist [they not all are!] or
someone versed in Philosophy [Sartre or Camus- atheist thinkers- or Hitchen's
and Dawkins].
Many times these various fields of study are too much for the average believer to feel like he
can engage in- in an intelligent way- and ‘win’ the argument for the Christian
view.
But church history has a long- and very successful- track
record doing this very thing.
A few weeks back I did about 5 posts or so on Philosophy- a
field I like to study. But if you do too many of those posts at one time- then
it can get a little heavy [and boring!] So I try to break it up by only doing
so many at a time. The same goes for Theology- Church History- etc.
But over time- if we become well versed in these various
fields- it will help us defend the Christian view- in an intelligent way-
without being mean about it [I try!]
But sometimes you will offend people- even if you try to be
nice- because you’re engaging in a conversation that says ‘yes- as Christians
we believe in ultimate truth- and that truth is in the person of Jesus Christ’
yes- that will offend some.
My approach to these types of debates is I’m what you would
call Ecumenical- I believe that Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox- and all the
other ‘churches’ that profess Christ- I believe they are all Christian.
Now you might say ‘well John- doesn’t everybody?’ Actually
no- many of the most knowledgeable Apologists do indeed go after the other
groups. Quite often you will have a strong protestant defender [usually from
the Reformed faith] that will really hit the Catholic church- in my view- too
hard.
While it is true that historically Catholics and Protestants
have differences- I have often found that Many ‘average’ Catholics/Protestants
are not really aware of the real differences- they often have very limited
perspectives about the ‘other side’ and these limited ideas [often wrong] seem
to stay with the people- for most of their lives.
One example- the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception- what
is it?
The teaching became Official- only in the last 2 centuries
of the Catholic church- though it was held
by many- it finally became official in the last 2 hundred years [ 1854
for the Immaculate Conception- 1950 for the Assumption of Mary doctrine].
The doctrine teaches that the Virgin Mary- Jesus Mom- was
born ‘without the taint of original sin’. Now- what does that mean?
Some Protestants think the Catholics teach that Mary was
‘sinless’ in the same way Christ was sinless.
Actually- that’s not the official doctrine [see- it’s
important to know the official teaching when we engage like this]. The actual
teaching- that has the churches Imprimatur on it- is that Mary WAS A SINNER-
just like the rest of us- but in order for Jesus to have been born from a pure
vessel- that the actual work of the Cross- Redemption- it was applied to Mary
‘ahead of time’.
Yes- the official teaching is that Mary ‘was saved’ from her
sin- just like the rest of us- thru the Cross. The difference is the
forgiveness that came to Mary- came to her before she was born- yes- the
teaching does teach that Mary was born ‘without sin’ but not like Jesus was
without sin- but she was ‘without sin’ because her salvation was applied ahead
of time- way ahead of time- before she was born.
Okay- do Protestants believe in this teaching? No. But is it
‘so way out of line’ to the point where we should view our Catholic brothers
and sisters as ‘non Christian’ because of it? No- not in my view.
Plus- many Catholics don’t even realize that this is what
the doctrine teaches- many think it is talking about the birth of Jesus- being
born without sin- by the act of the Holy Spirit descending upon the Virgin Mary
and Mary conceiving.
No- this is what we call ‘The Virgin birth- conceived by the
Holy Ghost’. Jesus being born from a virgin with no earthly father.
This is not the Immaculate Conception.
So right here alone [trust me- there are many more examples
that I could give] Both Catholics and Protestants usually get the doctrine
wrong- yet they remain divided their whole lives- over something that they are
not even right about.
So I have found this type of stuff to be a problem while
striving for Christian unity- and many Christians prefer to see the ‘other
side’ in a negative light- and will continue to view them that way- till they
die.
I always feel bad when I lose a friend from the site-
sometimes you can’t help it [other times it is my fault!] but sometimes it’s
because we have views about things- strongly held views- and when others hold
to a different view- well we try and avoid them.
One day I received a Friends Request- to my surprise- it was
from a young Catholic priest- I did not know him but he must have read a few
posts of mine and liked them. He often gave me Thumbs Up comments on the posts-
and at times would tell me he loved the posts.
Most were my Theology/Church history posts.
Often times Catholics and Protestants can agree and enjoy
these types of studies. I love studying and teaching on the Church Fathers and
early Christian history- and these sources all have a very strong Catholic
flavor to them- so I see my fellow Catholics as being a part of a long
tradition of Christian history.
Many famous converts to the Catholic Church [Bishop John
Newman- converted from the Anglican Church] convert because they read the
Church Fathers- and when you read them- it’s obvious to see the catholic nature
of the early church in these men’s writings.
So anyway I was very happy to have a Catholic priest as one
of my ‘on line students’ [and honored].
But one day- during one of my studies [covering one subject
for a month or so] to my surprise I saw he was gone [yes- the dreaded block]. I
thought- geez- wonder why?
I realized it was right in the middle of a study I did on
Islam- and while I was doing the posts- I was also going thru a study on Islam-
by the same guy who teaches it to the U.S. govt. - yes- it was a prof. [I think
named Espinoza?] who teaches Islam to our govt. employees [sort of like a
tolerance type thing].
Though the teacher was Catholic- yet he was VERY much pro
Islam- I mean to the point where I had to reject some of the stuff he was
saying- and finish the study from my own education on Islam.
At one point- he taught that the spread of Islam thru out
the world had a wonderful- liberating effect on all the women in the lands
where Islam spread. I mean it was so obvious that the man had no idea what he
was talking about [in this area] that I realized he was not a good source [this
happens every so often].
And it was more troubling that this was the guy Obama picked
to teach Islam to our govt. employees [don’t get me wrong here- he teaches our
govt. workers- not to convert them- but more of an informative type thing- just
like you would teach any other course about sexual harassment- or whatever].
Anyway- in one of my posts while teaching on my site- I did
refer to Mohamed as ‘the prophet’- now- I don’t receive Mohamed that way
myself- but because I was teaching some Muslims who did recently join the site-
well I used the title in this way.
I think that might have been the ‘last straw’ for my student/priest-
he ‘went on Pilgrimage’ right after that post.
Okay- today’s point is we all should try our best to be
‘tolerant’ that is- we should give people as much grace/mercy as possible- but
at the same time we also need to be honest about the Christian faith.
Yes- as Christians we believe salvation comes thru Christ-
he was not just ‘one religious leader among many’ no- we believe he is the Way-
the Truth- the Life/light- no man comes to the Father- but by him.
Sometimes we do our best not to offend- we might even go out
of our way to receive people- other religions and systems that are not
Christian- that’s okay- I have Muslim and Jewish and all types of friends- I’m
glad they are my friends!
But we also have to be honest about our beliefs- and every now
and then that might- just might- earn you a BLOCK.
[1753] ARAB SPRING UPDATE
Been wanting to cover the Arab Spring protests for a while
now- but also want to do a few more posts on Catholic/Protestant relations.
Let’s start with the protests- and see how far we get.
To my surprise [and disappointment!] the new ‘leaders’ of
Libya have already come out and said they will indeed have Shariah law as the
law of the land.
They said- very boldly ‘we are a Muslim land- and Shariah
law will be the law’. Did they have
Shariah law under Gadhaffi? Actually no- they did have some elements of it
[Polygamy] but it was not full Shariah law.
For instance- under Gadhaffi men could have more than one
wife [look at him!] yet they needed the permission from the 1st
wife. Under the new leaders- you won’t
need that.
I saw one of the new team respond to this question- he
basically said ‘don’t worry- the woman will get used to it’- no- I do worry.
We need to have some sort of ‘standard’ policy when it comes
to all of these types of conflicts- a signed agreement- maybe an informal
outline for a new constitution that states very clearly- that the rights of
woman and Christians in these new governments will be respected.
We need to say ‘yes- Muslims- as well as all other groups-
will have the freedom to be represented- but no group [or groups] will be
forced to live under any religious law’.
‘But John- who are we to dictate something like that’? Look-
if they ask for our help- to intervene- and in Libya’s case to basically bomb
the hell out of the other side- spend a billion [probably more] and to be the
air force for the Rebels- then if you want that type of backing- then that’s
the new price tag- freedom for all sides- no Shariah law imposed- and freedom
for all the women- no more oppressive regimes like the Taliban.
Okay- this concept is difficult for us in the West- we have
managed to pretty much make a distinction in our minds between separation of
Church and state.
Though you have arguments about whether one political side
wants to establish ‘Christian Shariah’
[Heard Frankie Schaffer make the charge again the other day. He is the son of
the late Frances Schaffer- an influential figure in the early ‘Christian right’
movement in our country. Frankie is still a Christian- but he is very anti
‘religious right’ but he goes too far- he says that Perry and others like him
do want a Christian Shariah law for the U.S.- the problem with this is many of
these radical Muslim nations are actually killing Christians and women and
others who ‘violate’ their laws- we should not use this comparison- it dilutes
the seriousness of what is happening in the ‘real world’] yet for the most part
we have made the distinction between govt. and religion.
Yet when you study Islam- Islam is both a religion and a
form of govt. - those who embrace Islam have not yet made this type of
distinction. Now- there are some moderate Muslim voices who are calling for
this type of Reformation within Islam- but they have a long way to go.
Okay- that’s why it’s easy for these ‘new’ nations to say ‘o
yeah- Shariah all the way’.
This week- Tunisia- the first Arab Spring nation to fall-
did indeed vote in Shariah law. Egypt- the 2nd Arab Spring nation is
heading there- and the new leaders of Libya have already stated it- we do have
a problem folks.
Okay- I have a few Muslims friends who read my site- and I
am very grateful to have them as friends. One lives in Bahrain- and out of the
3 top ‘bad actors’ right now- Bahrain is one of them [the other 2 are Yemen and
Syria].
The argument could be made that the leaders of these
countries have done just as bad- or even worse- than what Gadhaffi did.
The U.S. has our 5th fleet docked right off the
coast of Bahrain- we need them- that’s why our leaders have overlooked the
serious oppression that the Bahrain leaders are foisting upon their people.
In the last few weeks they have handed down some very
serious sentences to the medical workers who simply helped tend to the wounded
protestors. Many of these nurses and doctors are going to prison- for a long
time- just because they did their job.
The ruling autocracy in Bahrain is a division of Islam [I
think the rulers are Sunni- the majority of the population Shiite- it’s been a
while since I studied it- sometimes I forget which is which]. The ruling
‘minority’ do indeed oppress the majority population.
Now- Bahrain does get lots of money- and help- from the U.S.
having our fleet there- yet their army is not a strong- huge force. So what
they have done is they hired ‘soldiers’ from Saudi Arabia- a fellow country-
whose leaders are of the same religious division that the Bahrain leaders
embrace- and these soldiers have come in and have been the security for the
unpopular rulers.
In Syria- just last night- new reports have come out- Assad
[the Syrian leader] has sent his men into the hospitals- they are torturing the
wounded protestors right in the hospitals.
And in Yemen- the leader- Salleh- has returned from getting treatment
from the burns he suffered during an assassination attempt- and he’s back in
Yemen- also fighting against the protestors in his land.
In Libya- we- along with NATO [primarily French and British
warplanes] decided to team up with a side- a side that did take up arms against
the leader from the West [Tripoli].
As I have watched this play out- and have looked at all the
angles- I have come to the conclusion that the main reason we intervened there-
and not in these other places- was because you had a very pubic threat made by
Gadhaffi at the start- he and his troops were right outside Benghazi [the
rebels stronghold in the east] and he did publicly threaten to go in and wipe them
out.
Now- at the same time- the Arab league and other Arab
nations were calling for help- fine. But we should have said ‘okay- but you
guys must pay for this’. All the very rich Arab nations that wanted us to
intervene- we should have said ‘your oil rich nations will pick up the tab’.
Also- if the criteria for us intervening like this- if we
state- over and over again- that we are just doing a no fly zone- then we need
to just do that.
In Libya- we did indeed hunt the man down [if that’s what we
think we should do- fine- but we must say so]. And if our public statements are
saying something different- then we are doing wrong.
I do hope and pray for all of my friends in these nations- I
want very much for all the people in these nations to have freedom- and I want
for us in the U.S. to make it plain- we want freedom for the woman and the
Christians too- even if the majority vote for Shariah- that still is not
acceptable- we want no religious rule that will oppress woman and Christians.
Yes- there are some woman who choose to live under Shariah-
but the majority of women in these countries want freedom- and if we are going
to ‘help’ these nations like we did in Libya- then we need to have some
agreements ready to sign- right at the start.
We don’t want to ‘liberate’ another Arab country- to find
out that the new leaders are already calling for Shariah law- in my mind-
that’s not liberation.
CHURCH HISTORY- PHILOSOPHY- 2013- B
1954 DON’T MOVE THE ROCKS
I want to cover a few things
today- not sure how much we will get to.
A few months ago I kept having a
‘thought’- I was thinking about a church/ministry that I have known for years.
They are from Kansas City [the
Missouri side].
I have read the pastor’s book- I
have met many that were involved in the church/movement- and I even had a good
pastor friend who eventually went and joined the ministry.
He held a doctorate in theology
and became one of the teachers for their university.
Okay- so- for some reason an
image of the ministry kept coming to mind.
Actually- I kept thinking about
the off balance of a few things I had heard over the years.
I was thinking about their
belief- taught to the students/members of the ministry- that they are all
convinced that we are definitely in the ‘end times’ and that they are actually
fulfilling a role of an end times prayer ministry that will rise up before the
Lord returns [which they believe the bible speaks about].
At its most basic level- this is
dangerous to do- for a variety of reasons.
The other thing that came to mind
was a simple statement I heard the minister make years ago.
He was mentioning some criticism
that their church/university has gotten over the years.
Some of the parents of the kids
have said to them ‘but you need to also learn some type of job skills- some
type of learning in the liberal arts- you can’t just spend all your time
praying and learning about being the Lords end time army’.
When I heard this- I actually
agreed with the critic- though I was sympathetic to the ministry.
Okay- after having these things
in my mind- for a few weeks [that’s how you know you’re actually praying in a
way for them- because you’re thinking about them- even during prayer].
Then I read in my local paper
that a kid from my town was I involved in a possible murder plot and killed his
wife.
They were involved in the above
mentioned ministry.
I went on-line a bit yesterday to
read up on it before I comment- I won’t mention the names- you can find that
from many other sources.
I just want to mention the danger
of various expressions of Protestant ministries- and why this is so.
The other day one of my friends was
mentioning some stuff about not being a ‘lone ranger’ in ministry.
And I agreed with him.
But I also reminded him that the
church he associates with [Baptist] is in many ways a ‘lone ranger’.
How so?
Depending on what kind of Baptist
church your involved with- some are highly ‘lone’- others not as much.
But by ‘lone’ I mean historically
they are a church movement that came out of the 16th century
Reformation [later on- they were part of what’s called the Radical Reformers-
those who took the reforms further than the initial protestors] and in
historical terms- they are all ‘rebelling’ against authority.
They left the historic church.
Now- I don’t take this view in a
harsh way- I have many good Baptist friends and many good churches are Baptist.
I say this only to give the
broader perspective.
Okay- as time progressed [from
the 1500’s] you had a multitude of churches/denominations break away from one
thing or another.
It's really astounding to see the
many divisions that have come since the days of the Reformation [which some
Catholic scholars warned would happen].
In these ‘off shoot’ expressions
of Christianity- some are less dangerous- others more.
Many cult watchers have lists of
what to look for in these movements- and these lists can be helpful.
What I try and tell people [and
teach] is if you stay connected as much as possible with the historic church
[yes- both the Catholic and Protestant expressions of it] then you are in safe
territory.
But if you truncate yourself from
'the church’ then you are heading for trouble.
In the above example- the thing
that troubled me was having lots of young kids- on ‘fire’ for God- being taught
that they are God’s ‘end time army’.
The actual ones!
Geez- that in itself is really disturbing.
Why?
First- I think the Evangelical
church has to do some real soul searching about the way she views/expresses the
‘end times’.
The fact that over the last few
years some of the best sellers are Tim Layahes books- his End Times series- is
troubling.
He gives a very narrow- and
skewed view [in my opinion] of the bibles’ teaching about End Times.
I posted the other day from
Daniel 12- and I have hinted about these problems over the years.
But some of our view about the
end times comes from a miss reading of the actual Greek text.
In the gospels when we read ‘end
of the world’- the term actually means end of the AGE.
Okay- that little adjustment
alone can change our understanding about lots of stuff.
That’s just one little thing- I
have posted lots more over the years.
But the point I’m making is if we
have a whole group of fine young people- embracing a view- from the elders over
them- that they are indeed the actual 'end time army’ or prayer movement- that
was foretold about in the bible- than that’s very disturbing.
When I read about the case
yesterday [the ministry is IHOP_ Mike Bickle is the main leader- I won’t
mention the name of the local boy who is implicated in the death of his wife].
The church is trying to distance itself
from the incident- and to be fair the young kid seems to have started his own
‘break away’ community [which can also be one of the problems with a Protesting
position form the start- that is when the actual name of your group
‘Protestant’ seems to say we are nonstop protestors- well that can give rise to
the nonstop protests- you think?]
We don’t know all the facts right
now- but we know enough to say we- as Evangelicals- as Protestants [which I am]
need to make every effort to stay connected to the historic church.
Yes- there are things that
Evangelicals disagree with- there are things that the historic early church
might view differently than we do.
But- they are our Fathers in the
faith.
Over the years I remember a verse
that some in the above movement used to mention.
It was a sort of obscure verse
found in the Old Testament.
It says ‘don't move the
foundation stones that your Fathers have laid down’.
Yeah- I think that verse fits
pretty well.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1946 JEWS TEACHING SCIECNE- WHAT
IS THIS?
I want to try and cover a little
bit more on Einstein.
But just a few quick notes.
The last few days- as I have
watched some of the post election coverage- I find it funny how the ‘4th
estate’ has tried to rise above their own ignorance.
This past year- as I have both
read- viewed- listened to many media sources- all sides of the various debates
that go on in the country.
There was a conscious decision
made- by some on the left- to ‘suppress the vote’.
What?
I thought it was the Repubs that
were trying to do this?
Yes- there were efforts made-
whether noble or not- to suppress some of the minority vote [noble - some say
they were just trying to stop voter fraud- others said they were trying to
suppress the minority vote].
But- how did the left do this?
Once again- yes- hailing from the
great state of N.J. [ the headquarters of many media outlets- it is sad that
the most grievous offenders come from my hometown area! - Fort Lee- Secaucus-
spots right where I grew up].
MSNBC spent an entire year
mocking the faith of Romney.
I saw Martin Bashir- actually
say- on air- that Christians should not vote for Romney because he denies the
Trinity.
Can you imagine him saying this
about a Muslim candidate?
Chris Matthews- he spoke about
Romney and his religion as weird- a cult- and other interesting terms [Matthews
says he was taken out of context- but simply using the word accomplishes the
task].
Now- after a year of this- it is
true that some White evangelicals [their target audience of suppression] did
indeed not vote for Romney.
In media lingo they call this
‘failed to get out his base- the White vote’.
Mission accomplished.
They see what they did as a noble
cause- a good thing.
When you convince yourself that
those who don’t embrace your ideas are racist nuts- then it justifies this
double standard.
There was an article on Hillary
Clinton seeing the Broadway play the Book of Mormon [yeah- Bloomberg manages to
keep the lights on Broadway on- but watch out if you’re from Staten island or
the Rockaway’s!]
When she came out of the theater
she said it was so funny- she couldn’t stop laughing.
What was she laughing at?
The play is an open mockery of
the Mormon faith.
Yet- this same state dept
official- she was outraged over the release of some on line movie clip that
depicted the prophet Muhammad in a negative light.
They just sentenced the maker of
the movie to a year in jail- over some probation thing.
Yes- that’s the double standard
of the media- politicians- it is quite obvious.
Okay- Einstein.
As I read a few chapters every
few days- I want to comment on the important- relevant stuff.
One of them being the very word
Relativity.
Now- I am tempted to go back and
review all the posts we did on physics [you long time blog readers might
remember?].
But this book is not a physics
book per se’- but a biography.
Yet a quick review might help.
Einstein became famous for a few
things- most of us know the famous equation E=mc2.
Simply a conversion of mass into
energy formula- it works for all things- not just Nuclear.
His theory of Relativity shook up
the world of physics- and Einstein is indeed the father of what we call modern
physics [and Quantum theory].
Okay- what he did was he took the
centuries old ideas of Newton [the father of classical physics] and he said
that time and space were not absolutes.
That’s is- that depending on the
observer [and his speed] time actually changes.
Some in the scientific community
could not fathom what he was saying.
The book has actual headlines
from the NY times- they openly doubted some of Einstein’s work
I remember reading this years
ago- but this time I saw the real headlines.
They said stuff like ‘what is
this new theory- that space might be limited- this defies the actual definition
of space’.
Now- it would take too long to
tell you what they were covering- but it is one of the various theories of the
universe.
In actuality- the times might
have been right in this one case [it’s a theory that the universe is curved-
has no detectable edge- if so- you can than argue for an infinite universe in a
closed space- because there is no edge- or end].
As a side note- logically- the
times was correct.
Just because you can’t find a
‘sharp edge’ to a thing- that does not mean the thing is ‘endless’.
I covered this years ago in our
apologetics posts- it was interesting to have re –read this from this author
[Isaacson].
He is a good author- and explains
stuff well.
Okay what was the other stuff
that some objected to?
Some associated- wrongly- the
theory of Relativity- with the modernist philosophy called Relativism.
Relativism [remember the
philosophy stuff?] said that there was really nothing as objective truth- that
what you see might be just as true as what someone else sees.
You might both be looking at the
same thing [morally- murder- etc.] yet to one it might be wrong- to the other-
right.
This idea- Relativism- was
strongly rejected by many philosophers- especially those with a
Christians/Theist background.
Even today this is one of the
major debates going on in the world of the philosophy.
But- some confused what Einstein
was saying- and they thought [or used it] to back up the ‘moral’ philosophy of
Relativism.
This was a mistake.
Einstein himself- as I mentioned
in an earlier post- was not a relativist at all- that is when speaking about
moral absolutes.
So some began to associate him-
as one of the new ‘Jew’ scientists- who were introducing dangerous doctrines to
the world.
Yes- some of the objectors to
Einstein objected on the basis of this new ‘Jewish science’ that was breaking
away from the moors of Christian science- whose father was Isaac Newton.
See how both anti Semitism- and
religious belief played a role in this?
I’ll end with a quote from a
famous man of the time- an up and coming politician- I mean he could awe his
audience like no other.
Obama- Clinton- even the great communicator-
Reagan- were no match for this man when it came to giving a speech.
He said ‘Science- once our
greatest pride- is today being taught by Hebrews’.
Who said this?
The future leader of Germany-
Adolph Hitler.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1942 POLITICS AND EINSTEIN
Let's start with the big story of
the day.
The election.
Just a few things before I get
back to Einstein.
As I have followed the news on
this- over the past few weeks there has been some question on whether or not
the media have manipulated any of the numbers.
How?
Going in to today’s election- if
the media are correct- Obama will no doubt win.
Why?
They have shown polls that have
the president winning in enough states [battle ground states] that he should
win.
Are any of the polls wrong- or
possibly skewed?
That the question.
It’s hard to say that all
pollsters would have some inside conspiracy to do this.
Actually I don’t believe that
they would [they do have reputations you know].
But- we do have some actual
evidence that some have done this.
It’s hard at times to filter out
the bias- on both sides- but let’s try and take one example of possible
skewing.
Most of the polls we have seen
these past few weeks have shown the sample of people that they use.
For instance- you might have one
say they polled a thousand folk- then they’ll say 39% were Democrats- 31 %
Republicans.
Now- some on the right were
saying ‘see- they are cheating’.
Would this be cheating in a poll?
No.
Why not?
Because the pollsters are trying
to get an accurate picture of the electorate- that is- if they ‘think’ that
more Dems will vote- then this would be a fair way to poll.
So- how do they figure out who
the likely voters will be?
They usually look at the last
election [presidential].
But- everyone who watches
politics will tell you that the last election- 2008- had an historic turnout of
Dem’s.
Why?
Many were not only voting for a
man they felt would do a good job- but they also felt like they were part of an
historic thing- the possible election of
Americas first Black president.
Everyone [well most] will admit
this- and it’s not wrong to admit this- that many came out to be part of an
historic event- fine.
So- did some of the pollsters do
this- did they use a larger number of Dem’s in the polls?
Yes.
Now- a case can be made that you
would not have the same type of turnout this time.
Why?
Because you don’t have the same
historic significance- it’s not historic to say ‘yeah- we voted for the first
Black president in history- the second time’.
See?
Okay- but the pollsters do have a
reason to have more Dems than Repubs- sometimes.
But- there were some polls that
showed twice as many Dems [as a percentage- that is if you had 7% more Dems
last time- this time they were showing about 14%- something that would be next
to impossible].
So- yes- in this few cases- we do
have some evidence that some pollsters were rigging the system to benefit one
side.
Okay- said all that to say this.
If Romney wins- and big [which I
doubt] then you just saw a good example of media bias- because according to
most of the media- Obama should win.
Lets see what happens in the
morning.
Okay- just a few notes on the
Einstein biography I’m going thru.
The book is an older book- I
picked it up a few months ago at half price books.
But it’s a good book- not written
from a religious perspective at all- the author- Walter Isaacson- is a top
notch writer.
The reason I say ‘not from a
religious perspective’ is because it’s kind of amazing how many times Einstein-
and his companions- either speak about God- or outright quote him!
Yeah- over the years I have heard
views from both sides [Atheists and Theists] who have tried to make Einstein
more like them.
But the actual quotes from him-
and how many times they allude to God- is really more than I thought.
I’m at the point in the book
[about halfway] where you begin seeing the anti Semitism rise up in Germany.
As most of you know- Einstein was
a Jew- who came from Germany.
He lived at the time of the rise
of the Nazi’s- and the anti Jewish ‘ness’ of the times would affect him.
Einstein held teaching positions
at various universities of his day- one was in Berlin.
Some of his contemporaries- men
like Max Planck- were indeed all in for the German nationalism that was riding
a wave at the time.
Einstein on the other hand
resisted the mixing of science with nationalism- he believed more in a global
type citizenship- that the great breakthrough’s they were making at the time-
were for the world- not just for the benefit of one nation.
Einstein would refuse to sign a
declaration signed by many of the thinkers of his day- one that supported
German nationalism.
Instead he was part of a smaller
group who drew up a sort of pacifist declaration- one which would fall by the
way side because of its lack of support.
A few notes.
I find his insight into war-
where it ‘comes from’ to be enlightening.
I’ll give you a quote- it comes
from “a biologically determined feature of the male character” “What drives
people to kill and maim each other so savagely” “I think it is the sexual
character of the male that leads to such wild explosions”.
Einstein saw a sort of genetic
‘defect’ in man- something within him- that was the root cause of war.
In the book of James- in the New
Testament- the brother of our Lord writes ‘from whence come wars and fighting’s
among you- come they not hence- even from your lusts that war in your members’.
Yeah- I think James and Einstein
were on the same page.
Eventually Einstein would oppose
the war- that is- the initial aggression that was sprouting from his homeland.
The book does not go into detail
about the actual war [WW2] at least not yet.
But we know from history that the
Nazi’s would be part of one of the most heinous mindsets the world has ever
known.
Hitler’s idea that a certain race
of people were inherently ‘less human' that others.
Many do not know that some of his
thoughts were formed by the popular idea of Evolution.
The teaching that all humans are
on a scale of the ‘most evolved’ and the ‘least evolved’.
Yes- I have gotten into this in
the past- and don’t want to do it again right now.
Eventually the allies would also
cross a line of war- a line that divided the U.S. and the British for a short
time.
The line of bombing urban
centers- and targeting civilians.
Some of the correspondence that
came out after the war showed that certain American military commanders
objected to the bombing of civilian centers.
They would eventually do as they
were told- but they did make their objections known.
The British were more willing to
engage in the bombing- after all- Germany had already bombed them.
The first city center to go was
Hamburg- a convenient target- right across from the British on the North Sea.
Above Belgium and the
Netherlands.
War has a tendency to take all sides further
than their conscience would allow at the start.
There seems to be something
within the nature of man that always leads down a road of more destruction- not
less.
One of the greatest minds of our
time- a man who was brilliant- and also struggled with his own passions- saw it
as some type of inner flaw of man.
A sort of ‘sinful nature’.
Yeah- James- the Lords brother
called it ‘the lusts that war in our members’.
On this point they agree.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1940 WHY THE EXCITEMENT?
Okay- as promised let’s cover the
gospel of Luke- chapter 15.
First- we had a good fellowship
last night- cooked lots- and 4 guys spent the night crashed out on the floor.
I just saw Hugh on the way to my
office room- he was eating left over chicken for B-fast.
Luke 15.
This story- the Prodigal son- is
famous amongst preachers/bible readers in general.
The chapter actually starts with
2 other stories.
A lost sheep- 1 out of 99.
And a lost coin- 1 out of 10.
Context.
Why these stories from Jesus?
The bible says Jesus was eating
with- and ‘receiving’ sinners.
The religious leaders at the time
developed their idea of serving God- as a ritualistic thing [remember
yesterdays post- Isaiah 58?].
Part of their understanding of
this service to God- was being separated from ‘the world’.
Yes- the world of Jesus’ day was
much like ours- you had outcasts- ‘illegal’ aliens- and the overall class of
people that couldn’t quite seem to make it in life.
Now- when the religious leaders
saw Jesus accepting them- that is he received them- loved them- but at the same
time never ‘whitewashed’ sin- they got mad.
He never said ‘oh- that’s fine-
we all mess up- keep on doing it’.
No- in time they knew that Jesus
was showing them the love of God- yet God had a better way for them- than the
old paths of sin.
So- it’s because of this reaction
from the Pharisees that Jesus tells these 3 stories.
A man has 100 sheep- he loses 1-
and he goes after the lost one.
When he finds it- he’s so happy-
not because he didn’t care for the 99 that stayed home- but because he regained
one that went astray.
A woman has ten coins- she loses
one- the same thing happens.
Jesus is telling them ‘look- all
of you who are jealous that I’m accepting these non Jews- these Gentiles- your
mad because I’m excited about these outcasts- but it’s just like when you guys
lose a sheep- or coin- you react with joy because you regained something that
was missing- that was supposed to be a part of the puzzle all along- that’s why
I’m going after these outcasts’.
See?
Then he tells the longest story of
the chapter.
A man had 2 sons [in context-
these are references to the Jews- Gentiles].
The one son asked his father for
his inheritance and the father gave the money to both the sons.
After a while the younger
irresponsible son goes and wastes all the money on partying.
He becomes broke- realizes what
he did- and repents and heads home to his father.
His father sees him coming and
rejoices- he accepts the son- throws a huge party for him- gives him this nice
robe- puts a ring on his finger- and all is well.
Not really.
As the party is going on- the
older son- the one who never left home [a type of the Jew who saw themselves as
part of Gods people all along- they never had left God- not like these ‘dog’
Gentiles- see?]
This older son is outside-
sulking.
The father goes out to see what’s
wrong- the older son says ‘look dad- I was with you all these years [a type of
the Old Covenant- the Jewish people had a long history with God] and you never
acted excited like this with me- making a big party- killing the calf- the
whole thing’.
The dad [a type of God] says
‘son- you were always with me- all hat I have is yours- don’t take my
excitement wrong- it’s not because I don’t love you- but it’s because your
brother was gone for a long time and finally made it home’.
That’s the story of the Prodigal
son- God was just as excited about regaining a lost human [the Gentiles]- as we
are about regaining things we lose.
The story deals with jealousy in
the human heart- how we often benefit from the blessings of God- yet we feel
wronged somehow if others too get the blessing.
These themes run thru out the
teachings of Christ- talking about us receiving forgiveness- yet not giving it
to others.
In the 1st century
context- the Jewish people saw themselves as part of this special covenant that
God made with them many years earlier.
They kept this covenant- as best
as they knew- and when they see their Messiah- accepting these others who were
like the younger son- they felt wronged.
They felt like all their years of
being with God- as Gods special people- were for nothing.
That’s the mindset Jesus was
dealing with here.
If I had more time/space- I would
make a few applications about the current situation with the storm.
Some are mad at Governor Christie-
he’s buddying up too much to Obama in the view of some on the right.
It's not exactly the same- but
there are side’s people take- there are jealousies and divisions with all of
us.
And it helps us if we can sit
back and examine what’s really going on- Socrates said the unexamined life is
not worth living.
When we examine ourselves- do a
self inventory- maybe we should be happy that others are getting help- that we
should not see it as us losing out in some way- whether it be politically or any
other way.
In the end- there was enough
mercy to go around- the father was happy that the lost son was found.
Just like we get happy when we
recover things.
It doesn’t mean that the things
that never got lost hold less value [99 sheep- 9 coins].
No- its juts a natural reaction
to be excited that something that was lost- that seemed like it had no hope-
was recovered.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1936 EINSTEIN THE DETERMINIST.
In keeping with the last post
[propaganda] I read an interesting AP article on Syria.
As most of you know Syria has
been in a civil war for many months- they are the 1st ‘Arab spring’
nation that has not ‘fallen’ to the rebels.
Now- there are lots of political
things going on in the region [Russia and China not supporting a Libyan style
NATO action] that are sustaining Assad’s regime.
But I found it funny how the
western media have chosen to portray the war.
In order for the media to side
with those who want to depose Assad- they must ‘side’ with the ‘deposers’.
So- the article spoke about the
outside Al Qaeda groups who are coming in to assist the rebels.
It used terms like ‘heroism’
‘valor’ ‘experienced fighters who know what they are doing’.
These terms were used to describe
Al Qaeda fighters- in contrast to Assad- a ‘crimes against humanity’
description.
Wow- I never thought the media
would actually try and honor Al Qaeda fighters- in order to accomplish their
agenda.
That my friends is the ultimate
in propaganda.
Okay- I read some more on
Einstein over the weekend- and wanted to cover a few things.
Over the years as you read
various sources about famous folk- you need to be aware of the source.
For instance- Christian writers
[writing from that perspective] often portray the religious tendencies of a
figure in a more favorable light then an atheist writer would.
So you have to be careful that
the author is not writing his own story into the person he is covering.
But the biography I’m reading was
not written from a religious view.
Yet- the author does share the
various positions Einstein has taken about God over the years.
One thing to note is Einstein was
a lover of philosophy- he admired men like Hume, Kant and Spinoza.
If you remember- a few years ago
I covered the history of philosophy and how much of it dealt with what the
causes of things are.
The law of Cause and Effect [also
referred to as causality].
As a Physicist- Einstein had a
great interest in these subjects.
At the end of the day- Einstein
fell into a camp of thinkers called Determinists.
That means he believed that that
the universe was ruled by definite principles- even though we did not have the
answers to all the puzzles- yet he was convinced that if we searched long enough-
we would find order to it.
This belief is in keeping with
Theistic thinkers- not with those who ascribe chance and disorder to the
creation.
I might have bitten off a little
much here- but the point is- at the end of the day Einstein rejected the commonly
held belief that there is no real cause to the things we see.
Many thinkers who argue against
the existence of God argue form a perspective that chance is behind the
‘perceived’ design we see in nature.
Dawkins [the famous atheist]
calls it ‘the appearance of design’.
Einstein did not simply believe
in the ‘appearance’ of design- but he believed that the Cosmos was indeed a
product of some type of cause that gave it design.
Now- I’m not saying Einstein was
a Christian [or observant Jew]- but the point is- in his thinking- he rejects
the most commonly held arguments that are made against the Theistic world view
[in Cosmology- science] and sides with the Christian thinkers of our day.
Einstein famously said ‘God does
not roll dice’ meaning he did not believe in the atheistic argument that things
just happen without any cause.
No- Einstein seems to agree with
one of his favorite thinkers- Spinoza said ‘All things are determined by the
necessity of Divine nature’.
Yes- Einstein was a Determinist
in his thinking- he did indeed side with the Theists at the end of the day.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1931 A PLACE CALLED REST
When I get up in the morning- I
spend about an hour or so praying/meditating before I write.
I get the entire ‘message’ during
this time.
This morning- in my mind- I saw a
sort of panoramic view of all of church history- quite a message for a short
post.
I also felt like covering the
history of Judaism during the time of Christ- another long subject.
I think the main reason for these
themes popping up is because I have been reading some in the book of Hebrews-
and I want to cover Hebrews 4.
But- let’s try the other stuff
and see if we can get it in.
In the early days of the church-
in the 4th century- we had the rise of the Roman emperor/military
ruler- Constantine.
Part of the achievements of
Constantine was his development of the eastern half of the Roman empire- whose
capitol was named after him- Constantinople.
Over a period of years the early
Roman church fought over whose bishop would have more influence- the bishop of
Rome [Pope] or the bishop in the east.
Many bishops in the Catholic
Church have disagreed over the influence of one bishop being greater than the
others [the idea that all the bishops should have an equal voice at the church
councils is called Collegiality].
This has caused splits within the
Catholic Church thru the centuries [the last big one in the 19th
century].
Eventually the early church
split- and the Eastern Church separated from Rome.
The eastern empire [called
Byzantium- the seat of the Eastern Orthodox Church] officially split in the
year 1054.
Now- in church history we call
this the Great Schism- even though the Protestant split which took place in the
16th century was greater in effect.
Okay- the Protestant reformers
split over various issues- I have an entire study on the blog about this.
But the main issue became what we
call justification by faith.
Over the centuries many good men-
and average church goers- lost the main message of the New Testament- which was
a message of being saved by the grace of God.
Many well meaning Christians were
struggling to do penance in a way that sort of earned them their salvation thru
works.
The Protestant reformer Martin
Luther was teaching the book of Romans [he was a scholar and a Catholic leader
in intellectual circles at the time].
During his teaching on the
epistle of Paul [Romans- in our bible] he came across a verse that said THE
JUST SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.
As he mediated on the passage-
and the other themes in Romans that speak about being saved by faith and not by
works- he started a sort of mini revolution amongst the students and he became
a sort of favorite teacher in the area of Germany where he was teaching.
Over a period of time- thru all
sorts of religious and political machinations- he launched what we now call the
Protestant Reformation.
Okay- Hebrews 4.
How does this fit in?
In Hebrews 4- the writer is
appealing to a first century Jewish audience who were steeped in a legalistic
mindset.
That is- in many ways- they were
like the Christians of the 16th century who lost the idea of grace-
and were seeking to please God thru the works of the law.
The writer tells them that thru
the appearing of the Messiah- Christ- we can enter into a new type of covenant-
one based on rest.
He says ‘those who have entered
into Gods rest have ceased from their own works- as God did from his’.
Okay- there’s a lot to unpack
here- and time is running out.
The writer uses the creation
account in Genesis chapter 2- where the bible says God created the world in 6
days- and on the 7th day he rested.
He symbolically says ‘there is a
place- called Gods ‘rest’ that we too must enter into’.
He’s using an analogy- God rested
from his works on the Sabbath day- so we too must strive to enter into this
Sabbath rest [a type of the New Covenant- established on the death and
resurrection of Christ].
If you read the chapter- you should
be able to pick up this main theme- the main point he is making is because
Jesus has come and become the final Passover sacrifice for the sins of man-
therefore the Old law- with all of its sacrifices and demands- has now been
fulfilled thru Christ.
We sit ‘at the table’ with the
other disciples- the Lords table- and we freely partake of the Body and Blood
of Christ- and by faith we receive eternal life- not by the works of the law.
See- this is the whole point.
Thru out the centuries Christians
have lost this sense of free grace- this reality that we come to God by faith-
not based on how good we have been- how hard we have tried to obey the law.
No- we come to God- Boldly
[Hebrews] ‘because we have a great high priest who is now in heaven- seated at
the right hand of God’.
Jesus represents us to God- he is
before the throne of God interceding [praying] on our behalf.
It is no longer a matter of our
effort- our striving- no- we are truly saved by grace.
Amen.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1925 WHEN TWO BECOME ONE [a short
critique on the pastoral letter from the Bishop of Newark]
Today I want to comment on the
Pastoral letter that the Archbishop of Newark put out last month.
Being I’m here in N.J. for a few
days- one of my goals was to visit all the old places I saw as a kid.
And 2 of those spots were the
Catholic churches I went to as a kid.
I went last Sunday to Our Lady of
Fatima- and this Past Sunday I visited Our Lady of Grace.
It just so happened that the
Bishop of Newark put out this Pastoral letter- a letter to all the Christians
in his area- a few weeks before I arrived.
The letter;
The letter is in some ways a
defense of the historic position of the church.
It’s titled ‘When Two become One:
A Pastoral Teaching on the Definition, Purpose and Sanctity of Marriage’.
In short the Bishop does an
excellent job of defending the traditional definition of marriage between One
man and One woman.
He bases this teaching on both
Natural [Moral] law- and what we call Revelation [or Revealed Truth- which
means teaching that comes to us from God].
Natural Law?
Natural law simply means in
society in general- since the early times of man- there was a basic understanding
of what was right or wrong.
Where did this Moral foundation
come from?
The Church teaches that this
comes from God [Apostle Paul- Romans 1 and 2].
Since this Moral law exists- and
part of this ‘collective conscience’ includes the basic idea of traditional
marriage- therefore we [the Church] make the argument that traditional marriage
is not only a Church teaching- but also a foundational truth that all men have
known since the beginning of mans existence.
The bishop notes that the early Greek
philosophers and other ancient societies have indeed believed that Moral law
does exist- and therefore it is not only a church belief.
The Bishop is also careful to
treat Homosexual people [language that the church does not use- the church
teaches that all people- even those with ‘homosexual tendencies’ are indeed
created in the image of God. The Church says both Heterosexual and Homosexual
are words that describe sexual attractions- but are not fundamental identities]
with respect.
That is even though the Church
believes in One man One woman union- that it recognizes that all people
struggle with ‘sin’ and that the Church calls all people to live repentant
lives- and to strive to live an abundant life in Christ.
The Bishop emphasizes that the Christian
community does include people who have homosexual attractions- but it simply
does not legitimize homosexual lifestyles as an acceptable way of life for the
practicing Christian [I do understand that others see this very thing as
discriminatory- and that would take a long time to get into- my purpose in this
post is to kind of break down the 4 page letter of the bishop and hit the high
points.]
All in all the letter was written
in a scholarly way- the bishop used what we call the classic Apologetic tools
to defend the Faith [he appealed to natural law- he quoted the Greek
philosophers- etc.]
And he made the case in a way
that was as gracious as possible to those who consider themselves Homosexual-
while still defending the Traditional definition of marriage.
I of course did read- and re-read
the letter.
I guess that around 10 % of
Catholic Christians might have gone home after Mass and read the letter [it was
kind of long- and a little scholarly].
But it was written in a well
thought out way- and it does give you the official Catholic teaching on this
matter.
The Church teaches that those
Catholics who reject the traditional definition of marriage are rejecting a
serious doctrine of the church- a ‘Grave matter’- and the church says these
Catholics need to repent from this position.
In the Catholic Church there are
degrees of Moral teaching- that is some areas are not considered as serious as
others- the Church teaches that this doctrine- traditional Marriage- is one of
those serious doctrines.
At the end of the letter it has
the signature of Archbishop John J. Meyers- the bishop of Newark.
This was the first time I ever
read an official Pastoral letter- one that was actually circulated in the
handouts from the Church meeting.
I found it well written-
scholarly- and of course- in keeping with the teaching of the historic church.
Whether you agree with the
teaching or not [for instance I am a Protestant- and not bound to the teaching
of the Catholic church].
You must admit- that the Catholic
church puts out responsible material- material that is well thought out and in
a way ‘peer reviewed’.
Yea- all in all- it was a good
letter.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1920 SHEEP FROM ANOTHER FOLD
One of the challenges on this
journey is I have friends/family who have hearing problems.
My dear mom has a hard time
hearing- and it’s natural to talk loud.
You think because it’s difficult
for you to hear- that to talk loud will somehow help the hearer as well.
I have a homeless friend who has
been legally deaf his whole life.
He has learned how to talk low-
on purpose.
I was telling my friend Patrick
that this homeless friend also likes to dominate the conversation- he will
talk- nonstop- literally for hours.
To be honest- I don’t mind- or
lets say I realize that it helps him- so for 20 years I have had lots of talks
[or should I say ‘hearings’] with him.
Okay- so as I’m sitting at my
mom’s house yesterday- everyone is out- and I figure ‘wow- some quiet time-
let’s make the most of it’.
Well- let’s at least try.
My phone rings- it’s a Texas
number ‘what the heck- might as well get it’.
I usually never answer my phone
unless it’s a number I recognize.
I get it- it’s my deaf homeless
friend on the line- yelling ‘hey John- I can barely hear you’.
I know.
So- this is my buddy stuck in the
forest in Texas- his girlfriend left him there [remember the last 5 posts?]
Anyway- he does not know I’m in
Jersey- none of my homeless buddies know- I had no plans to have left the day I
left- so no one knows.
So- as Dirk’s on the phone-
telling me ‘I can’t hear you- you’re breaking up’.
I keep saying- well- yelling ‘I’M
IN NYC [that’s really the spot- N.J. - right on the Hudson] I CAN’T TALK RIGHTT
NOW’.
He keeps telling me he can’t hear
me- but says ‘well- I can’t hear- but I guess I’ll just talk anyway’.
No- no- don’t guess that- not
today!
I finally got thru and told him
I’ll talk whenever I get back to Texas.
Okay- the journey has been
interesting so far.
Whenever I drive cross country
[or south to north] I enjoy reading the different ‘church’ names along the way.
You can see the development of
Christianity across the country- by reading the signs.
As somewhat of a church
historian- when I see the signs- I remember the times I read about the various
movements.
Some church signs show the debate
over the Trinity ‘Pentecostal oneness church’- they emphasize the divinity of
Jesus a lot.
‘Pentecostal Trinity church’-
they are saying ‘we are not the other guys’.
Of course you see the standard
Baptist churches- the Methodist regions as well.
Over the years all of these
groups have come to emphasize various teachings of Christianity.
As I headed further north- of
course I come to my ‘homeland’- and I see the great catholic churches- the ones
I remember from my youth [sort of like crossing the Tiber in a way- for you non intellectuals- google it].
It’s a sort of spiritual lesson-
this past week- as well as the coming months- the Catholic church is going to
focus on Vatican 2- the last church council.
This council [a meeting of all
the catholic leaders/bishops] emphasized Ecumenism- for the first time the
church recognized the various Christian churches- you know- all the ‘signs’ I
saw on the road- as ‘separated Christian brothers’.
It was a big step for the church-
a step of unity- based on the desire of Christ we read about in the gospel of
John- chapter 17 ‘that we all would be one’.
In my talks these past few days-
and my bible reading in the gospel of John- a theme kept popping up.
The Lord has been telling me to
‘shepherd all the people I bring to you- all those who are on a spiritual
journey’.
In John’s gospel the message- at
least to me- is to do my best to present the pre-imminence of Christ- that he
is the source of salvation- and to recognize that there are also ‘sheep- not of
this fold that he will bring’.
Now- in context Jesus was
speaking about the Gentiles- the ‘non- Jews’ who would convert.
In the ‘broader’ context- I am
taking it as being open to the other Monotheistic faiths.
So- I have good talks with
Muslims [and have even shared some good things about Islam- yes- there are good
things- with fellow Christians].
My mom told me ‘John- do you know
who died’.
No- who?
Sandy.
Huh?
Sandy is a nice Jewish lady who
lived right up the block from me when I was a kid.
I was friends with her son.
She became a Facebook friend a
few years back.
I am always grateful when I make
Jewish/Muslim friends on the site.
When I first friended Sandy- we
talked some.
Then I noticed one time- we
didn’t talk much [you know- when you write a lot- people are going to get
offended at one time or another].
So- when I did not see her
comments- I figured she got upset about some post.
But then one day- about a month
ago- I saw some action form her page- I forget what it was- but I saw that she
came back to read the posts.
Then- well- she passed on.
When my mom told me that she
died- I said ‘are you sure’.
I went to Sandy’s page- and there
was no indication that she died.
So I left a little note to tell
my friend good bye.
Yes- I’m grateful for ‘the other’
sheep if you will.
The other friends of mine who are
on a spiritual journey.
I’m grateful for all the
‘separated brothers’ those various Christian churches who are now seen as
brothers in Christ.
Make no mistake- as a Christian I
believe that Jesus is the Son of God- who died- was buried- and rose again
‘according to the scriptures’.
I believe he will come again to
judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the resurrection of
the dead- the forgiveness of sins- and life everlasting.
I also believe that in this life
God will bring to us others who are on a journey as well- and maybe for a time
these people might be on a different path- maybe they do not see everything
like I do.
But when these contacts are made-
do your best to try and see them as ‘others who are not from this group’ but
others whom God has brought your way- at least for a season.
NOTE- One sign I liked was on the
side of this huge gun store ‘GUNS- GUNS- GUNS- JESUS IS LORD’.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1916 WHO IS JOHN GALT?
Over the weekend- my habit is now
to watch a couple of documentaries from Netflix.
I always got into them- but with
the Rocu thing- I can start a few at a time- and then pick up right where I
left off.
I’m watching the Cosmos- Carl
Sagan [excellent by the way].
Just started Greek Civilization-
narrated by one of my favorite actors- Liam Nessen.
And I caught a short one on Ayn
Rand- the now famous author of Atlas Shrugged.
I have never read any of Rand's
stuff- she is a novelist- and I don’t read them.
But- she is also a philosopher-
the founder of the system called Objectivism.
And her works and thought are
more known right now because a movie was made about the book- Atlas Shrugged.
Rand taught a system that said
mans main purpose in life is the pursuit of his/her own happiness.
Now- she was not a strict Hedonist-
she also taught that man should be productive- should be a contributing member
of society- and should be free to excel- to ‘make it’ without the state making
the rich guy feel bad about it.
Yes- back to the 99 versus the 1.
As you can see- that’s why her
work has made it back into the collective consciousness at this point in time.
The other day we went to see my
friend John at the hospital- I took Henry [John Henry], John from Arlington-
Andy- and of course myself.
The day before we went to the bookstore-
and I met father John- a nice Catholic Priest.
The guys were calling John [from
Arlington] Joe.
I told Henry 'no- his name is
John’.
Henry quipped ‘too many John’s’
In Rand’s work- she tells the
fictional story of John Galt [who is John Galt? This sign pops up every so
often]
Galt is the leader of the
‘productive’ class in society- the thinkers- producers- etc.
These noble ones rebel against
what they see as an all encroaching Entitlement society- a ‘world’ that keeps
blaming them for the ills of man.
Eventually these productive
people have had enough- and they withdraw from the world and start their own
world- based on the principles of Objectivism.
‘Every man for himself’ type of
thing.
There is one line in the book-
where you have this image of Atlas [the man who has the world on his
shoulders].
He is bowing and bending and
struggling under this Entitlement world.
The ‘have nots’ keep seeing the
‘haves’ as the cause for their problems.
The more pressure put on Atlas-
does not seem to appease the Entitlement class.
So- he shrugs- and walks away.
A couple of years ago when we did
a short history of Philosophy- I never covered Rand.
Why?
She never came up in any of the
stuff I was reading at the time.
Rand was a Russian American who
came to the states in the early 20th century.
She saw the rise of Communism in
her homeland- and she believed that the U.S. was in danger of going down the
same road.
She lived to see the presidency
of FDR- and his creating of what we call the Entitlement society.
But Rand- like other thinkers of
her day- also rejected Faith and Religion [Marx].
She believed that Reason was
enough to establish morality- and build an adequate Ethical society.
To be honest- Ayn was wrong about
this.
But- because she angered the Left
with her capitalist thought- and the Right with her anti God ideas- well she
would alienate not just the 47% [Romney’s gaff] but both ‘47’s’.
Thus- Rand never came up on the
radar when I was studying philosophy.
I have not read the book- but
from what I picked up on line- I can see how Christians would indeed have a
hard time with Objectivism.
In scripture- we don’t see
‘statism’ per se- but we do see a sort of collective ideal.
In the books of Acts we see the
early believers selling their goods and giving to those in need.
We read many-many portions of the
bible that speak about helping the less fortunate.
Yet- the argument is ‘should the
state force man to do this’.
The state- govt. - according to
scripture- has the right to tax.
Rand’s argument [and others] is
‘fine- but don’t demean me because I am one of the producers- don’t demonize
those in society who are holding the system up’.
Rand did not teach that you
should never help another- but she rejected the govt. forcing you to do it.
In Ayn’s Utopia- the John Galt’s
of the world withdraw- they take their toys and go home.
From a biblical perspective- we
are indeed our brother’s keeper.
That does not mean we encourage
people to be non productive- to live off the wealth of others.
But we see the goal of our lives
as more than seeking happiness- more than pursuing the Dream.
No- we often give things up-
material things- in order to pursue a more just society.
In our World- Atlas doesn’t
shrug.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1906 CHE
I watched another documentary
this weekend.
It was the story of Che Guevara.
Che is well known today as a sort
of symbol of the revolutionary youth movement.
He embodies the persona of those
who defy ‘Imperialism/Colonialism’.
Che was an Argentinean doctor-
who at a young age took a motorcycle journey thru Latin America [South- Central
America] and he saw the extreme poverty of the people.
He would see one of the main
factors of this poverty being the influence that the U.S. held over these
nations thru corporate agreements with the ‘puppet’ leaders of these nations.
For instance- many of the poor of
these nations were peasant farmers- they worked the land for rich land owners-
and they subsisted on a few dollars a day wages.
Yet the owners of the land- they
were rich.
Likewise- Che believed that the
leaders of the nations were ‘in bed’ with the U.S. - and they allowed U.S.
corporations to rake their countries of wealth- at the expense of the people.
Now- I am not saying I totally
agree with Che.
He has many critics- as well as
supporters [he’s dead of course].
Jean Paul Sartre [remember our
philosophy posts?] supported him- others did not.
The point being- Che saw a system-
the U.S. govt and American corporations- as an all powerful system that
polluted the nations to her south.
He felt the influence of greed
and corruption were the main causes of the plight of the Latin American people.
His revolution- Che literally left
his duties as a doctor and led an armed rebellion against the U.S. - would
eventually lead to his execution by Bolivian forces [Bolivia is just north of
Argentina- Che’s homeland] backed by the CIA.
Che was a key factor in the Cuban
revolution that deposed Batista- the U.S. backed leader of Cuba- and installed
Castro.
Che’s influence lives on today in
many of the leaders of south/central America.
If you ever hear Hugo Chavez
[Venezuela] speak- you hear the words and thoughts of Che.
This last week I have been
reading Revelation- the last 5 chapters or so.
The apostle John writes about the
Mystery- the ‘Whore of Babylon’- this great city- that pollutes all the nations
of the world with her lust for wealth.
This city [nation] lures the
other nations of the world by her wealth and power.
She has all types of merchandise-
even the Souls of men.
As you read the account- it’s
easy to see a type of what Che saw when rebelling against U.S. interests in his
homeland.
I had a talk with my street friend
Dirk the other day.
Somehow we got into a discussion
about the U.S. prison system.
I mentioned to Dirk how over the
last 5 years or so I started cutting out of the news paper all the cases of
people from this region who got sent to prison.
I regularly pray for them- now
hundreds of them- every week [just did this morning].
I try and pick the cases that I
think are really tough.
There was one lady- in her 60’s.
Sandra Briggs [I remember her
name- and her face].
She was sent to prison for a DWI
that killed a person.
Mrs. Briggs was a widow- she
owned a jewelry store for many years with her husband.
He was shot and killed a couple
of years ago by a burglar.
One night she went to a bar- I
guess a place where she would stop in and have a few drinks before going home.
She had a couple of drinks- and
on the way home [I think at night?] there was a wreck- and one car was in the
middle of the road- and she hit it.
Now- as I read the case and
followed the story in the San Antonio paper.
The person who was killed was a
young off duty cop.
The other car that hit him cut
him in half.
Yeah- a very bad accident.
His body was lying over the
barrier- it looked like someone was bending over- to pick something up.
During the testimony- they said
how when she was standing there- after the wreck- she was kind of laughing.
I guess it was a nervous laughter
type thing- she did not know she killed a person.
The prosecutor made it sound like
she was laughing- right over the severed body.
Now- I’m sure the lady had no
idea that this guy was dead- and cut in half.
But they gave Mrs. Briggs 45
years in prison for it.
Now- I make no excuses for what
she did- she messed up- she should not have been drinking and driving- we all
agree.
But I have seen cases where a
gang kid shoots another kid in the head- on purpose- and gets less time.
So these are the tough cases.
As I talked with Dirk I told him
I was surprised about the large amount of cases where guys get sent up for
solicitation of minors.
I never remember hearing about
it- years ago.
But the development of the
internet- and the availability of everyone on line- well the cases must be up a
million %.
Now- here's the rub.
In the U.S. - you have legal porn
all over the net.
It’s legal for 18 year olds to be
in porn.
The U.S. says this is freedom-
this is what we are all about- if you don’t like it- you don’t have to view it-
but the U.S. has made it available all over the world- even to countries that
outlaw it [Iran- and many Muslim nations].
But- many of the cases I have
read- are cases where men tried to contact under age girls for sex.
Yes- wrong- we all agree.
Legally- if you view- or try to
contact an 18 year old- this is deemed okay.
A 17 year old- 364 days- and 1
minute form her 18th birthday- this is a crime.
Okay- yes- this should be a
crime.
But why does the U.S protect this
[the viewing of the 18 yr old]?
Our country calls the
exploitation of the 18 year old- ‘free speech’.
Huh?
You mean viewing or contacting an
18 year old is considered a right- a part of our freedom- yet the 17 year old
is a crime.
There are many nations who outlaw
it all- now- there are ways people in those nations get around it- but the
nation itself does not actually encourage it- like we do.
In some of these nations- we are
militarily involved- on the basis of some type of moral judgment.
Yes- all of our wars- in some
way- come down to the fact that we deemed some act- like 9-11, as immoral.
Of course most of us would agree
that 9-11 deserved a response.
But what about a situation like
Libya.
After the rebels rose up- we
eventually had an air campaign under the guise of NATO- and it led to the
killing of Gadhaffi.
Most people could care less.
His grandkids were bombed and
killed in a civilian home- we said it was a legitimate target.
His daughter- pregnant- was on
the run to a neighboring nation for safety.
If the rebels caught her- who
knows- they might have ripped her baby out right there.
Yes- the rebels we backed have
done stuff like this- and much worse.
Okay- the point?
When we- as a powerful nation-
make moral judgments and intervene in the affairs of other nations- we justify
our actions.
Even though some of these nations
abhor our values [the above 18 year old example].
We- in our nation have in a way
‘increased the sins among men’ [a description of Babylon in the book of
Revelation].
Because we simply deem the
distribution of porno- to all the nations of the world- as ‘freedom of speech’.
Yet- as we ‘protect’ this right-
at the same time hundreds of thousands of cases of on line crimes have
increased over the last few years.
Are our values in any way
contributing to this?
And then we at the same time
interfere in other nations- at times militarily- because of a value judgment.
Do you now see why the Che’s of
the world have such a following?
Don’t misread this post.
Che is a popular figure among
many socialist groups- I am not one of them.
I simply want you to see the
ancient war that has been going on since the days of the apostle John.
John described Babylon [any human
govt. that becomes corrupt] as a system that increases the sins of men- that
pollutes other nations based on her own skewed value system- and that uses it’s
extreme wealth to bribe the other ‘kings of the earth who have drunk from the
cup of her fornication’.
Yes- as I read the many cases of
people being trod off to prison- because they viewed a 17 year old girl- who is
being exploited by some money hungry corporate interest- and this is all
protected- vigorously- by the U.S. govt. if the girl is 18.
I wonder if our values have
contributed to the ‘sins among men’.
A quote from Che ‘man truly achieves his full human condition
when he produces without being compelled by the physical necessity of selling
himself as a commodity’
A quote from the apostle John ‘in
her were the souls of men- she made all nations drink of the wine of her
uncleanness’.
Yeah- some things never change.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1905 DID THE JEWS KILL CHRIST?
Kinda want to try and wrap up for
the week- maybe one more post in the morning?
I posted some pics of the street
guys yesterday- want to make a few comments.
I like taking the pics and
posting them right when I’m with the guys- I’ll tell them ‘hey- right now your
pics are going to the site’- they love it.
I also want to wrap up a few
final points about the church- and the 2 extremes that she strayed into over
the centuries.
In the last few posts we have
been discussing the over emphasis on natural Israel- the promises of God- found
in the Old Testament- concerning the restoration of the land- the re-building
of the temple- stuff like that.
The church also has a sad history
of anti Semitism- racism against Jewish people.
To our Catholic friends- the
church has tried to deal with it in the last 30 years or so.
The present Pope- Benedict- who I
do like [I have read his books] got into some trouble a couple of years ago.
It was a noble attempt to try and
heal some long time divisions within the church.
It has been said when the
Protestants disagree with something- they go out and start their own church.
When Catholics disagree- they
start their own order.
I like that- funny- and true.
So- part of the Catholic
divisions is the older type churches- the ones who rebelled against the noble
reforms of Vatican 2 [The last church council- held between 1962-65].
Within the Catholic Church there
are disagreements over what the council was trying to do.
Liberal Catholics believe the
church was trying to trend into a more liberal institution.
Conservatives say that’s a
misreading- that the church still held to her conservative roots- and was
simply trying to be more Ecumenical.
Either way- one of the results
was the more traditional type churches- sometimes called Tridentine [the ones
who prefer the old Latin Mass].
These churches kind of split off
from Rome and have been worshipping using the Latin mass [which was originally
a violation of Vatican 2].
Vatican 2 said the Mass should
now be done in the vernacular- the language of the people.
So- Benedict made a noble attempt
to bridge this division- and he allowed for the Tridentine churches to do the
Mass in Latin- and he also restored an old prayer- about the Jewish people-
which simply said we pray for the conversion of Jews.
Okay- was this a big thing?
To simply say Christians are
praying for the conversion of Jews- is that real bad?
In my mind- not a big thing.
Might it offend some of our
Jewish friends?
Maybe.
But that’s the tradition of the
church- to want people to come to belief in Christ.
But- because of the history of
anti Semitism- this became a big thing.
‘How dare you pray for our
conversion’ type thing.
So the church has had to grapple
with how she looks at the Jewish people.
Historically- there were times of
persecution of the Jews.
Most of us are familiar with the
inquisitions.
The ones in Spain did ‘force’ the
Jews to convert- and there were ‘inquiries’ made to see if the Jewish people really
converted.
Some were put to death during
this time.
During the protestant Reformation
of the 16th century- out of Germany- which was Martin Luther’s home
country.
There were anti Semitic writings
penned by Luther.
Some of these writings were later
used- in Germany- under Hitler- to justify anti Semitism.
Very sad history.
Now we have the ‘over emphasis’
[in my view] of the role of natural Israel- and the End Times [last couple of
posts].
So- as you see- we have been to
both sides of the aisle on this.
Why did anti Semitism play a role
in the church?
Understand- we have bibles- that
as Christians we accept as the Word of God.
There are also statements in our
bibles- well- to be honest- might not have been written the same way- the same style- if we
‘re-wrote’ them today.
Huh?
Bare with me a moment.
When the Mel Gibson’s movie came
out- the Passion of the Christ- the criticism was he stuck very closely to the
bible text- and it was indeed a violent crucifixion.
The writings of the apostle John
specifically talk about the ‘Jews killing Jesus’.
There are other themes like this
in our New Testament.
It’s not hard to see how these
statements could lead to anti Semitism.
One of the things that the Pope
recently clarified- which I absolutely agree with- is that when we read these
things in our bibles.
We should not read them as saying
‘all Jews- of all times- are responsible for the death of Christ’.
No.
In the bible story- the Jewish
leaders conspired with the Roman govt. to ‘kill Christ’.
Many [all] of the original
believers in the Messiah were indeed Jewish.
And the ‘anti Semitic’ statements
in the New Testament were written by Jews- who were simply saying that they
believed that some of their Jewish brothers were missing the boat by not
accepting Jesus as the Messiah who was to come.
Okay- as you can see- we- the
church- have a long history with this.
I would like to make one last
comment before we close our talks on this.
For many years- as a bible
teacher- writing- doing radio- etc.
It never dawned on me how these
statements can indeed be offensive to our Jewish friends.
I mean say if you read ‘the
Italians killed Christ’ or the Germans- etc.
That would indeed be problematic
if you were trying to get your kids to read the bible.
The same thing with our
references to the Arab world.
There are verses- in the Old
Testament- that talk about Syria- Iraq [Babylon] and other Arab/Persian nations
as the ‘enemies of God’.
So- when we use our bibles- in
the modern day- it’s vital to understand that today- the kingdom of God is not
about natural borders- or ethnic backgrounds.
It’s about Christ’s new kingdom-
the kingdom of God.
All nations and races are
welcome- we do not discriminate.
And we- as the church- do confess
our sins against our Jewish friends- against our Arab friends- yes- we confess.
In the heated political
environment of our day- the post 9-11 world- it’s hard to avoid animosity- and
at times- hatred- towards others.
But we- as the people of God-
should strive for forgiveness and unity- at least unity as people who live in a
global society.
Yes- maybe we- as preachers
especially- should re-think how we phrase things.
Yes- there are out and out
statements in the bible about the ‘Jews killing Jesus’.
But in context- it would be wrong
to put this on all Jews of all times- and if we ‘adjust’ the way we say these
things- I think God would be well pleased.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1904 JERUSALEM DIVIDED?
I want to pick up a little from
the last post- but I also got with the street guys yesterday and maybe will
make a few comments.
Yesterday we talked about the
first century context of the Jewish people- as it relates to the Messiah.
That is the Jewish nation was
waiting for centuries for the promised one who would come and deliver them.
Jesus showed up on the scene and
claimed to be the One.
The early followers of Jesus- all
Jews- did not fully grasp the spiritual nature of Gods kingdom.
He would teach them principles
about the kingdom that seemed to go against the flow of normal life.
‘The last shall be first’
‘He that dies shall live’
‘You have heard an eye for an
eye- but I say love your enemies…’
All these principles were showing
them that the Kingdom that Jesus was talking about was a spiritual kingdom-
that would also affect the world as we know it- but at its heart it was not
about material stuff.
Okay- now- the Jewish people at
the time of Christ were wanting a national deliverance- they were pre-occupied
with getting free from the rule of Rome- and their hopes- like many people
today- were tied up in the advance of their nation- their people.
But you have the writings of the
early apostles talking about this new kingdom- where Jesus died for all people
[Jews and Gentiles] and he ‘reconciled both [groups] unto God in One Body on
the Cross’. [Ephesians]
So- your getting a different
picture here- Paul the Apostle is saying that we are all now part of this new
community of God- he says ‘we are now partakers with the Jewish people- we are
this new commonwealth’.
The actual teaching- from the
bible- is very advanced for its time.
I mean if you think about it-
these words were written 2 thousand years ago- and they speak about relations
between groups that the modern church seems to miss.
When we- in our day- appeal to
the Old Testament verses about God giving land to Israel- and we couch all of
our ‘end times’ preaching in scenarios that have one side killing the other- or
when Western Christians visit the ‘Holy Land’- talking about the staging of the
final ‘assault’ [Armageddon] and how many Arabs [Muslims] will be slaughtered
by a Jewish army- lead by Christ- I mean do we really realize what we are
saying?
I just read Revelation chapter 4-
and it had nothing to do with this post- but as a side note it said there was
thing angel flying in heaven- preaching the ‘everlasting gospel’ to all nations
that dwell on the earth.
The gospel means ‘good news’- we
often read the book of Revelation- and use it to back up the scenarios I just
spoke about.
But this verse says the intent of
God is to tell the good news to ALL ETHNIC GROUPS.
No one is left out- do you hear
this?
Arabs- Jews- everyone- the good
news is Christ brought us all back to God by his death for us.
That’s good news.
Would it be good news if I said
‘hey Arab- guess what- Christ is coming back- oh- he will lead a war against
you and your kids- if you get lucky you might be killed by Christ’.
Now- I know this sounds absurd-
but that’s the majority teaching in the American Protestant church today.
Just last night I caught a little
of the coverage of the Democrat convention.
They were reporting on a ‘big’
news event.
What was it?
That the Dem’s took the wording
out of their platform that said they believed Jerusalem should be the undivided
capitol of Israel.
Why would this big a big deal?
It dates back to the 19th
century- and the rise of what we call Dispensational theology.
Basically the development of this
whole teaching that I just covered.
Eventually the teaching would
influence large swaths of American Protestantism.
And it would seep in to the
political world.
Yes- the actual statement that
Jerusalem will be the capital of Israel- found in the political parties of our
day- stem straight from the influence of the Dispensationalists of the 19th
century.
Okay- what am I saying?
Do I advocate for the
Palestinians getting half of Jerusalem?
[See- now I’m getting into
politics]
Practically speaking- I don’t see
how that could ever be workable.
You have Hamas- a recognized
terror group by the U.S. - holding elected positions in Palestine.
So- I don’t see how this same
group can share Jerusalem- practically speaking.
But- when you begin basing your political
agenda on your view of the bible which might very well be wrong- then that’s
when we get into trouble.
See?
The New Testament apostles saw
Jesus as the Messiah that they were waiting for.
All Jewish people do not see it
that way- that’s their right- they have the freedom to believe the way they
want.
Arab people have the freedom to
believe the way they want.
Christians have the freedom to
believe the way they want.
We as believers should share the
Good News with all people groups.
That’s our mandate.
I just fear that much of what we
are preaching is not good news.
See?
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1903 JEWS AND THE END TIMES?
I want to delve into a hard issue
for the church.
The last few weeks I have been
watching the documentaries from net flix.
I mentioned that most [if not
all?] are done from the liberal perspective- which I’m okay with.
But it is important on all issues
to see both sides.
One of the things they dealt with
was the history of the church and anti Semitism.
Yes- the Christian church has had
a long history of treating the Jewish people badly.
Why?
As a Protestant- those of you who
have been reading my posts for a while- well you realize that I’m not in the
‘normal’ category of Protestantism.
Many of the subjects I hit on are
going against the strain of what we normally view as American Evangelicalism.
I often reference the Pope- in a
good way- or talk about our Catholic brothers and sisters- well- as brothers
and sisters!
So- I realize I have rubbed many
the wrong way.
So- this subject of the treatment
of the Jewish people has seen extremes- and in the American Evangelical church-
much too much of the ‘end times’ stuff- in my view- is missing the boat.
As we read the New Testament we
see Jesus and the disciples [all Jewish by the way] living at a time when the
Roman govt. ruled over the Jewish people- and the Jewish people were waiting
for their ‘salvation’ by means of a Jewish Messiah who would come and deliver
them from their oppressors.
Much of their understanding of
salvation was tied in to a national deliverance.
When you read the prayers/praises
of both John the Baptists dad- and also Mary’s praise [called the Magnificat]
you see a strong sense of national deliverance.
They speak about God sending the
Messiah to deliver the people form their oppressors.
Okay- in this milieu we have
Jesus and his guys living and believing that the ‘salvation’ of God is near.
It was only natural for the
disciples- especially those who we call Zealots [Simon- not Peter] to think
that this whole salvation story was about God restoring natural Israel back to
a place of prominence once again- no more Roman rule type of thing.
But we see an interesting thing
with Jesus- he keeps making statements that seem to lead the disciples away
from seeing things this way.
‘My kingdom is not of this world-
or my men would fight’
‘Put up the sword- those who live
by it will die by it’
And the verse I quoted the other
day ‘see all these buildings- temple- there will not be one stone left upon
another’.
He basically is rejecting the
nationalistic idea of him being the Messiah who would redeem Israel in a
nationalist way.
He’s showing them that his
purpose is different- it’s salvific for sure- but not in the way they perceive.
Okay- I’m beginning to realize I
won’t be able to cover the whole thing in this post.
Maybe I’ll do a few more like
this in the next few days.
The point is- I want you to see
that God’s purpose for our Jewish friends- our Muslim friends- for all races
and ethnic groups.
His purpose is not to pit one
side against the other.
It’s not about Jesus defending
one side- at his second coming- and actually leading that side in a real war-
where he shoots people- or kills them with a sword!
No- these scenarios- which
prevail in the End Times books you see at Wal mart.
These ‘narratives’ if you will-
go against the entire grain of the teachings of Jesus.
This is why you see me so
negative at times- against the Evangelical church.
Many Protestants- well meaning
people- have such a negative view of the historic church- that they reject the
ancient church’s position on these things.
For the most part- the historic
church took a position called A-Millennialism.
Basically it’s a kind of
spiritual way of seeing all these things.
God’s kingdom is not seen thru
the eyes of natural war- but thru the eyes of a heavenly kingdom.
I think that’s the correct
position- for the most part.
But most American protestants
believe that this position is just one of the many ‘doctrines of the Whore of
Babylon’ see what I mean?
Okay- lets end there- think on
some of this stuff- read the New Testament with this in your mind.
Why does the Apostle John refer
to natural Jerusalem as ‘spiritual Sodom and Egypt’? [Revelation]
Was his intent to be anti
Semitic?
No- he was showing us that God’s
concern was for all people groups- no longer was it about a nationalistic
thing- a type of salvation that the disciples at first were thinking of.
As I end this post- I want to
make sure that all my friends- Jews- Muslims- all- understand that my position
is that God loves us all- and he’s not in the business of backing any side-
militarily.
I hope to show you this in the
coming days.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1897 WHITE’S CREATED
AIDS TO KILL BLACKS
Okay- we spent the last few days talking about the Todd Akin
comment.
Akin is running for senator in Mo.
He said that ‘legitimate rape RARELY produces a pregnancy-
because a woman’s body has ways of shutting that stuff down’.
Yikes!
So- the national media has spent days on this.
Last night I caught a short clip of ABC world news with
Dianne Sawyer.
It teased an upcoming special 2 DAY coverage of Mormonism.
So- I figured instead of my usual channel surfing- I would
watch the entire 30 minutes of ABC news at 5:30.
It was revealing.
For their political coverage- they showed a few negative ads
about Ryan/Romney [none of Obama].
They covered the abortion views of Ryan.
Then they said ‘okay- that’s it for political coverage’.
Was that political coverage?
No.
It was free ad time for the President.
How so?
Many of the web ad’s that are produced- by both sides- only produce
them for the purpose of various media outlets picking them up and showing them
on their shows.
Yes- nothing wrong with the strategy.
But- when the so called unbiased media only plays the ads of
one side- they are spending hundreds of thousands giving free ad time to one
side.
What about the Mormon coverage?
ABC began a 2 night ‘world coverage’ of Mormonism.
Like I said before- I am very aware of their teaching- I
have Mormon friends- but quite frankly- the media realize that if they high
light the religious beliefs of Romney- it will hurt him.
So- during the coverage they used words like-
‘strange- peculiar’ [fits in with MSNBC’S mantra of
referring to Romney as weird- member of a cult]
‘imposing temples’
‘secret rituals’
‘all male leaders’
‘suspicious’
Got it?
Now- you might ask ‘so John- if these things are true- then
what’s wrong with the media exposing it’.
That’s the point.
When President Obama was running in 2008- his church
background had almost no coverage at all.
The little coverage it did get was by Fox- or those in the
media saying his religion is off grounds.
Matthews [MSNBC] kept accusing the conservatives of imposing
a ‘religious test’ on Obama.
So- the church Obama belonged to was a Black Liberation
church.
Now- for the record- much of what you read on my site has a
very strong strain of liberation theology in it.
Yes- my defense of the poor- the illegal alien- many of my
themes are indeed found in liberation theology movements.
In the past I covered this teaching- how it rose from the
Catholic bishops in Latin America- how the Catholic church had debates within
their church over it.
All in all- in some ways I actually defended Liberation
Theology- and even Rev Wright [to a degree].
So- having said that- what were some of the beliefs of
Obama’s church?
Rev Wright [Obama’s pastor for 20 years] believed that AIDS
was created by the White man [the govt.] for the purpose of infecting Blacks to
kill them.
Wright worked closely with Farrakhan in Chicago- and they
often espoused hatred for the White race.
How much of this did you ever see on the news?
Did ABC do a 2 night ‘world coverage’ of the ‘strange
beliefs’ of Obama’s church?
Now- how much of this affected the President?
Obama’s defense was he never heard Wright say any stuff like
this- though he said Wright was one of the most influential men in his life.
He was married by Wright.
Wright baptized his kids.
And Obama titled one of his books after a phrase from the
pastor [The Audacity of Hope].
Now- as a listener of both the right and left- I also get to
hear [radio] stuff that you don’t hear on the news.
These are actual quotes from President Obama
‘White man’s greed rules a world in need’ [he was quoting
from his own book- he did an audio version of it]
‘White’s move into the suburbs because they don’t want to
pay for the education of inner city kids’
Does he really believe this?
If you are White- and you move out of the city- he says you
did this because you are racist.
Not because you want to escape the crime- pollution- have a
better school for your kids.
No- according to the Presidents own words- it’s because you
don’t want your money going to educate inner city kids [mostly Black kids].
Why are these actual quotes important?
They show you that the beliefs of rev. Wright did indeed
affect the President.
Yet- you never heard any of this from the media- they would
not dare cover the religious beliefs of Obama.
They said it was outrageous that anyone would ask.
As I watched last night- I was reminded of all the comments
I heard these past few weeks by the media.
Bashir [MSNBC] said outright that Christians should not vote
for Romney because he denies the Trinity.
A major Democrat funder said Romney does not give to
charity- but to ‘his cult’.
On and on.
I personally do not believe we should pick a candidate
because of his faith.
Other Christians do indeed differ- I have friends who will
not vote for Romney because he is Mormon.
The point I’m making is this is what you call media bias.
You would never see a so called news man say ‘you should not
vote for Obama because he is a Black Liberation Christian’.
Now- you will hear that from others- but never from the news
itself.
Yet- we have heard all of the above from so called main
stream news sources.
If we- as Citizens- are expected to make informed votes- then we either need to
know all of the above- about both sides- or none of the above- about both
sides.
I assure you- if the world news covered the statements- of
the president himself- and the beliefs of the church he attended for 20 years.
That the 2008 election would have been much different.
But the media had their man- and they did all they could to
cover him in a favorable light.
Now- they are covering his challenger in an unfavorable one.
They are outright saying he is a cult member- that he denies
the Trinity- that his church is strange- weird.
They are covering Romney’s religion nonstop.
Yet- the church belief that the White man created AIDS to
kill Blacks- well that’s a personal religious belief.
We have no right to know that.
O- Sorry.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
We bought the Rocu thing the other day.
That’s the device that lets you watch movies on line.
You get a lot of real good stuff- I was surprised.
I was also surprised to see all the documentaries about
religion and Christianity.
The ones from Netflix looked interesting- so I watched a
couple.
Yikes!!
All of the ones I saw were done from a skeptic’s point of
view.
Now- as someone who writes on apologetics [the defense of
the faith] I am familiar with these arguments against the faith.
But- if you are not familiar- these doc’s will shake your
faith- for sure.
Why?
They are done from the perspective that Christianity
basically copied the Greek myths of God and religion- they focus on the
‘similarities’ between Christianity and Greek [and other cultures] religions.
Okay- what was wrong- or deceptive?
First- this entire school of thought was popularized in the
19th century- from the Christian universities in Germany.
Yes- some good men- well meaning men [others not so good!
Freud- etc] believed that in order for the faith to survive in this ‘brave new
world’ [modernity- and the whole humanistic advance of man since the
enlightenment].
That they had to re-fashion the faith and sort of bring it
up to date with the times.
Men like Rudolph Bultman introduced the idea of ‘de
mythologizing’ the bible.
So- these guys rejected all the supernatural elements of the
bible- no more miracles- angels- demons- or resurrection!
Many people embraced this ‘new’ bold approach to the faith-
and basically became theological liberals.
One of the reasons some of these men went down this road
were covered in the above documentaries.
Okay- as I watched a couple of them- they had similar
themes- and were also wrong in the same way.
They compared about 25 other religious myths- from other
cultures- and they said these other religious myths all had a savior- a son of
god- who had 12 disciples.
They said this Lamb of God died- was buried- and on the 3rd
day rose again.
They said he did miracles- was born of a virgin- was called
Lord and savior.
And they made it sound like this ‘story’- in complete form-
was repeated many times before the Christians ‘picked it up’.
Wow- double wow.
Why are these documentaries dangerous?
First- I actually have read/studied in this field.
The similarities that they described in the doc’s were way
overdone- they simply are not true.
That’s the first problem.
But- they did mix in some truth- with the false stuff.
Both of the documentaries I saw [it seems like there is one
person- producer- behind the 2 I saw] did give an actual quote from a 2nd
century Christian leader- Justin Martyr.
The quote is indeed real- Justin is known as one of the
first Apologists of the church.
He defended the faith during a time when many enemies of the
faith slandered the religion.
In one defense [out of many] he said that those who reject
Christianity because we believe that a Divine son rose from the dead- that
others also held the same type of belief in the pagan world.
He was referring to the god Jupiter and the stories that
surround those who believed in him.
You also do find this same type of thing in the myth of
Hercules.
Okay- so the skeptic was right then?
No.
In the documentary- the skeptic actually gives the quote
from Justin- and Justin says that just because these similarities did exist in
other religions- before Christ- that this in no way means the Christian faith
is false.
How so?
Justin said it was possible for satan to have ‘imitated’
what was really going to happen.
The skeptic mocked this argument from Justin- and went on to
challenge the faith.
A few things.
First- it is possible that Justin was right.
2nd.
This whole line of attack is not new [unless you never heard
of it before- which is why I’m kinda surprised that Netflix has them in their
lineup].
It goes all the way back to the writings of Gilgamesh.
These are writings that also have similarities to the things
we find in the bible- yet they are not coming from the Christian perspective.
They contain a story about a flood [like the one in
Genesis].
So- over time- skeptics have said ‘see- the bible must have
copied these flood stories- because we find them in other cultures’.
I actually covered this before.
Let me give you the short version.
We- as Christians- do indeed believe the story of Noah [the
flood].
Some debate whether it was a global event or local- I don’t
want to get into that now.
But- if there was a huge event- say like a 911 plane attack
on the world trade center.
Would you not expect to find that event- recorded in more
than one culture?
Of course you would.
So the fact that other cultures have a flood event recorded
too- this does not mean the Christians plagiarized the flood- no- it would be
evidence that the flood really did happen.
See?
Now- the similarities between a divine son who rose from the
dead.
First- there ARE NOT 25 or so stories like this- with 12
disciples- raised on the 3rd day- and so on.
The producer of the doc was simply mislead- or outright
lying.
2nd.
We must remember that anything we find in Greek culture-
which predated Christian ‘culture’ was also predated by Jewish culture.
That is to say that the story of Judaism comes before the
Greek philosophers.
Are there any themes in the Jewish religion that speak about
a Messiah who would come- die- and be the Messiah of all mankind?
Yes!
So- you could argue that any similarities between Greek
myth- and Christianity- are actually ‘copies’ taken from the Old Testament
story.
That is- God himself gave us clues about the story of
redemption- and these clues might have very well ‘seeped’ into the Greek
culture- before Christ- and that’s why you might find similarities between the
2.
See?
Okay- I could go on- but I think I made the point.
I was not mad that these documentaries were on net flix.
But I saw the danger in presenting one side like this-
without giving the other view [which I just gave].
All in all- the Christian faith has more historical backing
[like the many thousands of bible manuscripts that survived the early days]
than any other religion or writings of any kind.
The documentaries made a couple of good points- things that
were indeed true- but they had way too much mis information in them to be
playing on such a huge venue.
Buyer [or watcher] beware!
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1886- DIVINE LOGOS
Okay- just read Isaiah 65- one
chapter left.
These past few weeks I have been
going thru the last 15 or so chapters of the book.
There are lots of great themes to
do- maybe I’ll take a pic of the verses I wrote down and hung up here in my
study.
I also wanted to engage in a
conversation on the Divine Logos.
Huh?
Well yeah- maybe a little
scholarly sounding- but my goal has been to ‘upgrade’ our level of teaching.
When I say ‘our’ I’m talking
generally about the present day church in America- and the obsession with ‘the
now’.
That is ‘what do I get out of
this- monetarily?’
Yeah- that’s the rave of the day.
So- every so often I do my best
to walk the other road- to give the other side of the coin.
So- a few weeks ago I was at my
daughter’s house- we usually have the whole family over for the b-days and
stuff.
And my kids like playing those
word games.
So they bought some game- don’t
remember the whole name- but part of the name had LOGOS in it.
I just quipped ‘you do know what
that means’?
Now- I kid around so much-
sometimes they have a hard time believing me- like ‘sure- you’re making it up’.
No- for real!
Logos means WORD.
It’s the Greek language- which
the New Testament was written in- and it simply means WORD.
My 2nd oldest said ‘I
should have known that’.
My oldest daughter- Bethany- just
turned 27- Becky is a couple of years younger.
They both have degrees from
A&M University here in Texas- top notch school for sure.
So that’s why Becky ‘should have
known it’.
Anyway- this word is a favorite
in the writings of the apostle John.
In both the gospel and his 3
little letters [1st, 2nd and 3rd John] he uses
this term to describe Jesus.
‘In the beginning was THE WORD
and the word was with God…’
That’s the Greek word- Logos.
It should be noted that the early
Greek philosophers had a concept much like this.
All the way back to the time of Plato-
Socrates and Aristotle [around 500 years before Christ] the Greeks were
speaking about a universal principle- some type of ‘unifying theory’ that would
be the basis of all knowledge.
They spoke about this principle
as THE LOGOS.
So- some of the critics of
Christianity did use this as a criticism of the church- they say ‘see- the
disciples were just making stuff up- borrowing themes that were already there’.
Do they have a point?
A point- maybe- but that’s all.
In the letters of John we also read
him refuting a cult of the day- called Gnosticism [Gnosis is the Greek word for
knowledge. They believed that they had secret knowledge that the others did not
have. A modern twist on this is
sometimes referred to as Revelation Knowledge- it’s a form of this ‘special
knowledge’ idea that existed in the early days of the church.]
An off shoot of this group were
called the Docetists.
These guys were pseudo
Christians- they held to some form of Christian belief- but denied the true
faith of the church.
They taught that Jesus was ‘a
phantom spirit’ that is- they denied what we refer to as the incarnation.
That God became man in the person
of Christ.
John was one of the youngest
disciples- and he also outlived the others.
His writings are probably the
oldest in the N.T. [Revelation]
So- he was around long enough to
refute the growing philosophical challenges to the church.
So- putting all this together-
when John said Jesus was the Divine Logos- he was not ‘stealing’ that idea from
the earlier Greek philosophers who were indeed looking for a Logos principle.
No- he was saying ‘look- we- the
followers of Christ- have found the thing you were looking for all the time- he
is the Wisdom- the Logos of God’.
See?
Okay- I haven’t read John in a long
time- nor have I ever studied Greek.
But- I do have a Greek lexicon [a
book that gives you the Greek word before it was translated into English].
And back ‘in the day’ when we
were young believers- seeking to learn the faith- these were the basic tools of
the trade.
But today- well- the tools are
motivation- success stuff.
Learning how to invest- make a
buck [or 2] - how to ‘create your world’.
Yeah- we really don’t have time
for all that silly stuff like the Logos.
After all- it’s all Greek to me.
Yeah- I know.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1880- ZIGGY STARDUST
I’ve been catching some of the
classic rock concerts on VHF 1- you know- the stuff I [we] saw back in the day.
I must admit- I have been an
amateur ‘singer’ for many years.
I used to belt them out at the
fire house on a regular basis- you know- sweeping the stalls- or doing a daily
routine thing.
Okay- no lie- I did get some real
compliments over my ‘career’.
One of the Captains asked one
morning ‘were you playing the radio in there’.
I told him no- laughing- he did
not believe I was singing.
My captain [Lopez] said for years
that I should go on the ‘Americas got talent’ type shows.
So- after a while the guys would
give a request or 2- and I tried my best.
I remember Sam- a younger guy-
one day I sang Lola [the Kinks].
Sam knew the song as a remake- I
guess some new group re-did it.
So- I sang the words- which Sam
said he never really knew.
I told Sam ‘you do know who Lola
is’.
He did not.
‘She walks like a woman and talks
like a man’
‘When she squeezed me tight she
nearly broke my spine’
‘I never ever kissed a woman
before’ [nor this night!]
Yeah- you’re talking Penn State
football locker rooms for the years that Sandusky was there.
So- one day I drove the girls to
school- I tell them ‘you guys want breakfast- then you have to bear thru
another one of dads songs- without laughing’.
They were up for it.
So- I picked one from my catalog
[in my head!]
And I was off.
They managed to not laugh- or
smile- that was the deal.
At the end- my daughter- per
instructions of the bet- said ‘wow dad- that was really good’.
Hmm?
Still- no laugh.
I responded- with a dead pan
serious face ‘are you serious.’
She lost the bet right there.
Ziggy Stardust.
So- I caught the re-run of a
David Bowie concert tour.
To be honest- I never really
liked the guy- Changes was an all right song- but not much else.
But the stardust character that
he sang the tour as [he was this androgynous type persona for the tour]
reminded me of the famed Physicist – Neil Tyson.
Tyson heads up the Hayden
planetarium in N.Y.
My dad took me there a bunch of
times as a kid- I loved it.
Tyson has been making the rounds
recently- talking about the Higgs Boson thing.
He is a nice guy- and he is
trying to ‘popularize’ physics for the average guy- a noble cause.
But he- like a long line of
others- stumbles very badly when he wades into the field of Apologetics/Logic.
Recently I saw a clip- he gave a
very enthusiastic account of how the stars ‘made us’.
He said that we now know that the
basic elements of the stars are in us.
And he then reached the unfounded
conclusion that ‘we came from stars’.
Okay- a brief review.
This type of argument- which is
not new- says if you find common elements in 2 different things- then one must
have come from the other.
Why would this be false- at least
in the star debate?
Because you cannot get
intelligence- information- consciousness- from a non living thing.
As wonderful as the study of the
stars can be- yet- to give the stars ‘Ontological status’ [meaning- you give a
non living thing the status that only a living thing has] is wrong.
Tyson gives us no mechanism of
how the stars actually created us.
I mean you can’t even appeal to
biological evolution- because at least it uses living things.
No- the stars have no life.
Then how would you [I] explain
the fact that stars have the same base elements that humans have?
Easy- there was one creator- a
‘first cause’ if you will- and according to the biblical argument- he made man
from the base element- dirt.
So- in the Christian view- you
have both how the same elements are in various things- and you have a
‘mechanism’ that explains how intelligence- consciousness- and life arrived.
They came from an infinite being-
who has life in himself.
In the end- this is really the
only logical explanation for the creation.
Remember- you can’t get
intelligence from non intelligence.
It would be like finding a C.D.
in a field- you popped it into a computer and you found information on it.
Then- you broke down [in a lab]
the basic elements of the makeup of the C.D. - the actual hardware- not the
info on it.
And said ‘aha- I have found the
source of the info on the device’.
And you proceeded to show me the
ingredients that make up the disk itself.
I would respond ‘all you have
done is shown me the common elements that make up the disk- you have in no way
proven that these base elements are responsible for the info on the disk’.
That’s the mistake that Tyson
makes- he assumes that the common elements we find both in the stars and in
humans- is proof that ‘we came from the stars’.
He’s wrong- very wrong.
About as wrong as me thinking I
can make it on America’s got talent.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1878- THE DARK KNIGHT OF THE SOUL
Well today is surely a day of
mourning.
As you all know- yesterday marked
another tragic day for our nation.
We had another deadly rampage in
Colorado [Aurora].
Right down the road from
Columbine.
James Holmes- a 24 year old
student- walked into a theatre- carrying multiple guns- and shot randomly at
the audience.
Last I heard- 71 shot- 12 dead.
It was at the premiere of Dark
Knight Rising- the new Batman movie.
We don’t yet know the motivation
for the killings- maybe we never will.
But of course- that won’t stop
the media from making fools of themselves.
Brian Ross- ABC’s ‘chief
investigative reporter’ had breaking news on their morning show.
He actually had the audacity to
report that he found a man with the same name- James Holmes- who had a web site
affiliated with the Tea Party.
Huh?
Gee- I’m sure there are no other
people with such an odd name that live in Aurora Colorado.
I’m sure if this were a Muslim
name- I’m sure you would have reported a random find- that you found another
Muslim name- sounds the same- and he’s affiliated with Al Qaeda.
The sad thing is- after a little
while- Ross had to apologize- the man he ‘outed’ was not the shooter.
The shooter was a 24 year old-
the Holmes from the Ross report is 54.
The 54 year old had to disconnect
his phone- his family immediately became a target for revenge.
What a bang up job you did Brian-
may God have mercy on your soul- and please- please go away.
It’s sad- right up the road from
where I live- we had the Fort Hood shootings.
Major Nidal Hassan walked into a
crowded room on the base and fired on his fellow military men and women.
Killed many- shouted ‘Allah
Akbar’- and opened fire.
During the investigation we
learned that Hassan carried a card that identified himself as a soldier for
Islam.
He dressed in garb that indicated
he was Muslim.
He made many statements thru out
his career that said he was a radical.
He had on line contacts with nut
sites that advocate radical Islamic terrorism.
Yet- for all this- the
administration refereed to this killing as ‘work place violence’.
Yet- ABC news thought it fine to
simply share- with the world- that someone with the name Jim Holmes was
connected to the Tea Party.
We had another ‘attack’ just up
the road from me a few years back.
The nut who flew his plane into
the IRS building in Austin.
The NY Times reported- on their
on line forum- ‘Tea Party unhinged’.
It was later found out that the
pilot was actually a communist sympathizer- not a Tea partier at all.
Gifford’s- when the congresswoman
from Arizona was shot- the media spent a week trying to connect the dots- that
somehow the political use of ‘targeting a district’ used by Sarah Palin- was
responsible for the tragedy.
And of course- who can forget the
nemesis of the large size cola.
Yes- a few years back Bloomberg
[mayor of NY] referred to the Times Square bomber as ‘probably someone who is
mad at Obama Care’.
We later found out- yes- once
again- that the guy was a radical Islamist.
It’s sad how slow the media are
to report the associations of radical Islam- when it’s obvious for everyone to
see.
Yet- they go hunting- and even
report innocent names- when they think there might be a connection with a right
wing group.
How did Ross do his research?
You think he just stumbled upon a
name that was the same?
You think he might just have
googled ‘Tea Party- Jim Holmes’.
No- I’m sure the chief
investigative reporter would never stoop so low.
I’m sure.
This last week I’ve been reading
Isaiah- chapters 49 thru the end.
There are so many key verses in
these chapters- ones that I have memorized and quoted over the years during
prayer.
In chapter 53 we read that God
saw the ‘Travail of his soul and was satisfied’.
‘Because he poured out his soul
unto death’.
‘He was numbered with the
transgressors’.
The chapter speaks about the
suffering Messiah.
Our Jewish friends apply this to
their struggles as a nation.
I think both are applicable.
There is a term we use in
Christianity- it’s called ‘The dark night of the soul’.
Saint John of the Cross [a famous
Christian from church history] made the term popular.
Mother Theresa- we found out
later- lived many of her years in this state of ‘darkness’.
It simply speaks about the trials
we all go thru- times when we think all hope is lost.
Some people experience it more
than others- the above chapter says this travail- this numbness- is redemptive
in nature.
God uses it- and the people-
nations- that go thru it for a purpose.
It was because Christ suffered-
poured out his soul ‘unto death’ that he became the savior for mankind.
It was because of the struggles
of the Jewish people that they have now become one of the most prosperous
nations in that part of the world.
I’m not saying God ordains that a
mad man shoot innocent people in a movie.
But I am saying that we as a
nation can become a better people thru it all.
Yesterday Obama and Romney both
suspended their campaigns for a day.
And I even heard MSNBC give credit to both men
for it.
Yeah- we saw civility- by both
camps- for the first time in a while.
Today we pray for the victims of
Aurora.
We try and resist the stupidity
of associating this mad kid’s act with any group- at least until we get more
facts.
And we- as a nation- have an
opportunity- we have a ‘dark night’ opportunity- we can either become worse-
hate more- blame the other side for it.
Or we can reflect- we can turn
our minds to the things that count.
In the end- we can find
redemption in the collective ‘travail of our souls’.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
1873- DON’T DO THE CRIME IF YOU
CANT DO THE TIME
Last night I was arrested for
impersonating a cop.
Okay- not really [see last
Facebook post- real time].
No- the title comes from one of
my favorite TV shows as a kid.
Barretta.
How many of you saw the interview
he did last night with Piers Morgan?
I rarely watch this show- but the
night before I saw a quick plug for it- and decided to watch the thing.
It was one of the weirdest
interviews I’ve seen.
Blake [Robert Blake played
Barretta in the cop flick].
He made it into the headlines a
few years back because he was suspected of shooting his wife- Bonnie Lee
Blakely.
It became one of those viral type
stories- you know- the whole ‘movie star’ is in trouble thing.
He was eventually acquitted- but
found guilty in civil court.
I was surprised to hear Blake
talk about God- a lot.
He cursed Morgan a few times-
rambled about his past- and it was genuinely a wacky interview.
I started thinking about the old
TV shows when I was a kid.
Okay- what one was your favorite?
[Between 1970-80].
I’ll never forget this one
episode of a show simply titled FAMILY.
It was one of those down to earth
Walton type things.
I used to watch it with my
sister.
This one episode- the star of the
show- I think the actor was Gary Frank [show name- Buddy?]
Anyway- I guess he was the latest
‘cute kid’ that the girls flipped over.
I hated having to compete with
these guys.
You know- how can you impress the
girl in class if she’s thinking of David Cassidy all day?
So- in this episode some ex-con
knocks on the door.
Buddy gets it.
The guy introduces himself and
then the mom comes.
Buddy walks away- and the convict
says ‘That’s one tough looking dude’.
Huh?
Where in the world did the
writers come up with a line like that?
I mean it was so out of the blue.
This convict just spent 10 years
in the hole with murderers and all.
Yet- his first impression of
Buddy was ‘he’s tough lookin’.
So- as we laughed- hard.
I told my sister ‘I know- Frank’s
contract must have been up- and instead of a raise- he wanted this line in the
next show’.
Ahh- vanity of vanities.
Okay- the other day I got with
the homeless guys.
I was surprised- Mike [the
artist] had a gift for me.
As we sat at the mission- outside
on one of the benches.
Mike pulled out a new CD- still
in the wrapper.
Boston.
I told Mike- you wont believe
this- I just asked my girls to get me the Boston CD for father’s day.
They made me about 5 cd’s from
the internet. [I told my future son in
law- after he informed me of where he can burn them- for free. I said ‘I do the
same thing- I just Google ‘burn illegal songs without getting caught’ and a
bunch of real good sites pop up- even from the FBI]
Actually- he did burn me some
good tunes.
But Mike remembered that I said I
liked Boston [the rock group- not the state]
And he picked me up the CD.
I also had another good long talk
with Dirk.
Dirk lives in his van- has been
for the past 25 years- ever since I’ve known him.
Dirk can't stand the homeless
guys- even though he is one.
One good friend Henry [written
about a lot over the years] is also the ‘street Deacon’ for a church that’s
called ‘Church without walls’.
Brother Ray- a street preacher-
runs the ministry.
Dirk often talks bad about Ray-
and the people that go to the free meals he serves [Dirk being one].
So Dirk was once again ranting
about the bums and addicts and all.
He often says ‘the bible says
you’re not supposed to help these people- if they don’t want to work [like
Dirk] then they should not eat’!
He is blind to the fact that he
is actually one of them.
He mentioned the apostle Paul’s
writing to the Corinthian church.
Paul did say ‘don’t eat with the
heathen’.
Dirk said ‘see’.
I spent a little time trying to
put it in context.
Let’s try.
Jesus was accused of being A
FRIEND OF SINNERS.
Notice- it wasn’t just ‘I have a
ministry to homeless folk’.
No- a friend.
That’s what irked the ‘heck’ out
of the Pharisees.
I mean they were willing to
‘minister’ to them [by judging them].
But no- Jesus was their friend.
Actually- there’s a famous song
on this very theme.
Okay- in the city of Corinth-
well- you had a lot of stuff happening.
Corinth was on the way to Athens
[the center of philosophy of the day].
And it would be considered one of
the more ‘liberal’ cities of the day.
It was like the Amsterdam of our
day.
Prostitution was legal and open
on every corner.
Paul told the women in the
Corinthian church to ‘wear head coverings’ when they went to church.
Huh?
Why?
More than likely- a cultural
thing just for the day.
The way the ‘street ladies’ put
on the Red Light was to wear no veil/hat.
So Paul told the women in the
city- wear your hat.
You had a few other things like
this- where the context explains the meaning.
So- another big thing at Corinth
was eating ‘at the table of idols’.
One of the local customs was you
would buy some type of animal- use it as a sacrifice to one of the idols- and
then the meat would be sold ‘at the shambles’.
A sort of market where you bought
the meat at a cheap rate.
This stuff became an issue at
Corinth- and they wondered whether it was okay to eat the meat.
They also had a controversy over
the Lords Supper [Eucharist] and some other stuff.
So- Paul did say ‘don’t eat with
the heathen’.
But- in context- he was telling
them not to be a part of the custom of eating at this idol type buffet thing.
See?
They were having their own meal
[Lords Supper] and they ought not to be worshipping the idols at the other
table.
Okay- that’s context.
That’s why Jesus did eat with the
prostitutes and sinners- and he was not violating the law.
Okay- there are lots of things
like this when you study the bible.
And I do see the point that Dirk
was making.
You do want to encourage people
to not become a permanent member of the welfare state.
You do want to try and help them
get on their feet.
The apostle Paul did say ‘if they
don’t work- they should not eat’.
Talking to the actual church
members- he did not want people ‘coming to Christ’ for the free stuff.
But- we always have people in
need- and we’re commanded to love/help them.
Okay- that’s it for now- maybe I
can catch a re- run of Barretta tonight?
I have not seen it yet on the
guide.
I try to avoid Family- Buddy
scares me.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
1872- TEXAS ‘HOLD-ER’ [Texas
Hold-em is a popular scratch off down here in Skynard land]
I had an interesting day on
Facebook yesterday.
I kinda hung out for most of the
day- reading my friends sites and all.
Being I’ve been living in Texas
for the past 32 years- to me it’s neat to see all the old pics from my hometown
area.
Some of my friends post
classic/current pictures of my old stomping grounds- that’s so cool.
As I perused the landscape- I
also noticed something- many of my friends get lots of comments.
At first this seemed like a good
thing- but as the day wore on- and I watched the news [Holder story- in a sec]
I began letting ole slew foot in the door.
‘Yeah- why do they get so many
comments- and I get none’?
‘Wait John- don’t go down that
road- you know where it leads’.
Okay- I resisted ‘resist the
devil and he will flee from you’ [James].
Yet- the more comments I saw- the
worse it got.
‘John- focus on the word- find a
short- 2 or 3 word verse that you can fixate your mind on’
Good idea!
‘Love those that treat you wrong-
don’t get even- don’t be jealous’.
I mean- there are so many to
choose from- plus- they sound real good- but I can’t seem to ‘get satisfaction’
by focusing on them.
I also saw lots of old Rock pics
and stuff- yeah- even ran across that old Stones tune ‘I can’t get no
satisfaction’ I know what you mean Mick.
So- after a while- I found a
short- 3-4 word phrase that seemed to do the trick- but it came from the
Facebook site itself.
REPORT/BLOCK THIS PERSON
Oh yeah- sweet- so sweet.
Easy to remember- and it feels
sooo good!
Okay- I kid.
Now- what actually did get me
riled up a bit?
As a news watcher- I flip the
channels nonstop.
I watch em all.
So- as I’m resisting the jealousy
thing- I see that Eric Holder came to Texas to address the NAACP.
They showed a few short clips of
the speech.
He has sued our state multiple
time- he just sued Corpus Christi last week [few posts back].
So as he’s giving the speech- he
criticizes the new voter ID law.
He even mocks good ole Texas.
You know- Skynard said ‘southern
man don’t need him around anyhow- in Birmingham we love the govn’r’ yeah- he
stuck it to old Neil Young.
So Holder says that the new law
would permit you to vote if you showed a pictured gun permit- but you could not
use a student ID.
Yeah- you preach it Holder!
Doesn’t that sound like Texas is
filled with a bunch of A holes?
Boy did they roar in the crowd.
He then went on and said the law-
which requires an ID [I’m pretty sure you can get one for free if you don’t
have the money?] is a POLL TAX.
He said we were all racists.
This is our attorney general.
‘John- be honest- it’s because
he’s Black- isn’t it’?
No- that’s only about 5 % of it
[okay- I kid once more].
The truth be told- this is indeed
playing the race card- and for the chief officer of the justice Dept. to be
playing this card- well- that’s bad.
I mean why would a gun permit do
the trick- yet a student ID wont?
In Texas- many students
[thousands- 10’s of thousands?] are not U.S. citizens.
It’s not against the law for a
non citizen to have a Texas student idea.
Yet- you can’t get a gun permit
without an extensive background check.
If you have a permit- you are a
citizen.
Now- Holder knows this- so what
he did was pure politics- he appealed to the racist instinct in all men- yes
even in Black men- and he played the race card.
This is shameful- it is racist-
and the man needs to resign his job- now.
Okay- see- now I’m struggling
again- just like the comment thing ‘love your enemies- pray for those who do
you wrong’.
Yeah- I know.
But BLOCK THIS PERSON.
It just feels so much better.
All right.
Psalms 78.
I have been reading/meditating on
it the last couple of days.
The Psalm recounts the story of
God meeting the needs of his people when they came out of Egypt and were in the
wilderness- for 40 years.
You find the story in the book of
Exodus.
During this 40 year journey-
which in reality was a couple of day journey- but they wandered in circles for
40 years because they would not believe the promise God made to them.
So- during this time they
complained- lots.
‘we will starve out here- we have
no bread- no water- no meat’.
And time after time God would do
a miracle and give them what they needed.
In the Psalm we read that he gave
them bread from heaven- it was called MANNA- the word means ‘what is it’.
It was called Angels food.
It was a little wafer type thing
[Catholic friends- think Host] and in the morning when they got up it was on
the ground- every day- for 40 years.
They wanted meat- they started
complaining about the Manna ‘Manna every day- cant we change the menu up
Moses’.
So God sent them meat- he caused
a strong wind to blow and tons of Quail blew in from off shore- they had meat
‘until it came out their nose’- yeah- this is a quote from the bible.
So- God did provide for them- yet
they still complained.
Years ago when reading the story
I came across a verse I liked [almost as much as BLOCK THIS PERSON].
It said Moses kept the ordinances
in the wilderness for 40 years.
Think about that.
After God parted the Red Sea-
they spent 40 years wasting time.
They were supposed to go right
into the promised land [Cancan- Israel] but because of their whining- it took
40 years to make the 3 day trip.
Yet- God gave them ordinances-
religious type rituals that he wanted them to keep- Passover- etc.
And Moses kept observing them-
even though the promise was so far away.
Yeah- that’s the tough part if
you will- what divides the men from the boys.
It’s not your talent [or how many
darn comments you get] or your good looks.
No- at the end of the day- can
you keep the ‘ordinances in the wilderness’.
Can you do what needs to be done-
even when all hope seems gone.
Yeah- that’s the key.
So- as I end this post- I too
have a choice.
Will I think ‘happy thoughts’?
Nah- the BLOCK THIS PERSON still
seems to give me that extra umph- one more night with the frogs will have to do
[one of the 10 plagues- it’s a long story for another day].
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
1869- THE GOD PARTICLE [and Mayan
flag day]
Hope you ‘all’ had a good 4th
of July.
I actually flew the flag for the
2nd time in so many months.
For years I never had a house
flag- I hung them up daily at the fire dept for 25 years and it never dawned on
me to get one.
So when I woke up on Memorial Day
and saw my neighbor’s flag flying high- yea- it made me feel like a commie.
So I went and bought a flag.
I asked my wife- ‘where did you
put the flag’ ‘it’s in the closet’.
I get the flag- it’s around 7 or
so- and I walk back into the room ‘let’s go hang the flag’.
My wife says ‘what do you mean-
you need 2 people to hang it’?
No.
But I want you to stand next to me and recite
the pledge.
I thought it was funny- she
didn’t seem to think so.
Yeah- I’m one of those types that
get the most use out of a purchase as possible.
I’ll probably be flying it on
that Mayan calendar day- I think it’s coming up pretty soon?
So- as I debated about what we
should discuss today- I picked up the paper [yesterday morning] and the front
page headline read ‘JUSTICE DEPT SUES CITY’.
I mentioned this the other day-
about the fire dept not hiring enough women [they say].
I read about half of the article-
I read the stats- we actually hired more women than other comparable cities.
I really did not want to do
another whole post on the thing- but it was sad to see that as a front page headline-
I don’t think we have ever been sued by our own govt. before.
[in the post the other day- I
think I used the word threat- maybe not- but now I know they did sue].
I have written about our attorney
general before- Eric Holder- this guy has politicized the justice dept to no
end.
I could give you example after
example- even his past dealings are very shady- the Mark Rich pardon- a pardon
he recommended when he worked in the Clinton days.
By all accounts- Clinton pardoned
a crook because he had connections- Holder used his influence to get the dirty
deed done.
Pure- 100% Chicago politics-
corrupt to the core.
Okay- instead- let’s do the other
big news story- the so called God Particle.
Yeah- I heard/read a bunch of
stories on the so called breakthrough discovery.
Now- I am not ‘anti science’.
I am not a person who believes
the earth is only 6 thousand years old- or that kids rode on the backs of
dinosaurs.
But- in the historic setting of
apologetics- and the role that science has played in the debate- I must say
there are lots of misconceptions floating around in the air.
Okay- a brief history of the
scientific method and how it came to be.
The past year or so I covered
lots of posts on philosophy and physics and world history in general.
We covered how during the middle
of the last millennium [500years ago] the world began a break thru in many
areas- and we often refer to this as the modern era.
Man- science- thought- all of the
fields we see as part of the modern era- they began at around this point.
Science/philosophy and religion
all played a big role in the debate.
One of the big boys was a man
named David Hume- he was a thinker who questioned what we talked about the
other day- the law of cause and effect.
This law simply says that every
effect has a cause.
Hume challenged the popular idea
that we can know causes.
He said we think we can know the
cause of something- but in reality we can’t be sure.
The example Hume gave was the
Pool table.
He said we see a person hit the q
ball- the ball hits another ball and it goes into the pocket.
Hume said it might look like this
a string of cause and effects- but we don’t know for sure.
Maybe there are other reasons why
the balls are reacting like this.
Another famous example is the Rooster
crowing- the guy couldn’t sleep in because the sun kept shinning in his window-
so every morning right before the sun rose he heard the darn rooster crow.
So he shot the rooster.
Just because one act precedes another- this
does not mean that is the cause.
Okay- we got it Hume.
But some began to doubt all
possible knowledge- they said you can’t make any judgments at all- because we
don’t know for sure what the real cause is.
Okay- this led another great
thinker- Kant- to challenge Hume [the famous quote from Kant was ‘he woke up
out of his dogmatic slumber’] and Kant said even though we can’t be 100 % sure-
yet for any possibility for science to function- we do need to be able to have
some type of way we can settle on knowledge- science does need to be able to
say ‘okay- we have looked at this long enough- we think this is what’s causing
this’.
Okay- this whole debate is called
Epistemology- how we know stuff.
Now- the God particle.
As I listened to the various
reports the last 2 days- I could tell right off the bat that there was some
funny stuff going on.
The actual statements form the
scientists are saying ‘well- we haven’t ACTUALLY seen the particle [also called
Higgs Boson] but- we have detected enough other particles- so we think the Boson
is more than likely there too’ or ‘it’s like looking in the distance- and you
think you see someone- but maybe you’re looking at his twin instead’.
Okay- what kind of argument is
this?
This is what we call a
Metaphysical argument.
It’s an argument that is made-
not because you actually detected the thing- but you have come to a conclusion
based on the Scientific Method of Induction/Deduction.
You looked at- observed- and
tested various things- and you now say ‘well- it must be there- because look at
all the other stuff’. [layman’s terms].
Okay- is there anything wrong
with this.
Not really.
But- here’s the catch- many in
the modern field of physics refute the argument for the existence of God
because in the end it is a metaphysical one.
That is- the materialist
scientist [one who says we only deal in facts that we can actually see\detect]
uses metaphysical arguments all the time- he just does not realize he is doing
this.
Remember the other day- I posted
about the many contradictions good men make when mixing science with
apologetics and the laws of argumentation [or logic].
They often do not realize they
are contradicting themselves- or making out right nonsense statements- because
they are scientists- not logicians.
So what we have in the Higgs
Boson case- in the Dark Matter- Dark energy case- in the entire Multi Verse
theory [many universes].
In all these theories- which now
make up the majority of modern physics- they are all the same type of argument
that the materialist scientist says are not good arguments- at least when it
comes to the argument for the existence of God.
In a nutshell- if we agree to
accept that a certain particle must exist- not because we have actually
detected it- but because ‘well- it must be there- because if not- then how do
we explain everything else’?
If these arguments are being used
in all of the above scenarios- and trust me- they are.
Then we can’t exclude the Theist
from the table- we can’t say ‘no- you silly Christian- you deal in things we
DON’T SEE- we deal in things we do see.’
Actually- you don’t.
All of the above theories are
conclusions based on how the other things around them respond.
The reason many think Dark Matter
exists- is not because we have found it- we haven’t.
But because in order for the
standard model- well- to stand- then Dark Matter simply ‘must be’.
Okay- this is the same type of
argument the Theist [one who believes in God] uses.
If you want to exclude the
believer from the table- on the grounds that he appeals to a ‘non detectable’
being.
Then we must ditch all of the
above.
And it seems- Higgs Boson too.
NOTE- all scientists are not
materialists- many are believers- and even many non believers are not
materialists. If you are a pure
materialist scientist- one who says we cannot accept any other non material
arguments [things we don’t actually see/detect] then you also would not be able
to accept any of the major theories of physics today- that is if you were
consistent in your thinking.
Also why did the researchers at
CERN release this as some great new finding?
The ‘discovery’ was made at the
new 10 billion dollar Hadron Collider.
This is the world’s largest Atom
smasher.
In order for the Europeans to
justify the cost- they had to convince people that this was the best chance to
actually discover this long elusive particle.
Now- Europe is in a near
depression- as most of you know.
This underground ‘particle
smashing tunnel’ [I think it’s right on the French Swiss border?] when first
opened- had a bad day.
It leaked oil into the tunnel and
it was shut down- and had to be repaired at the cost of millions of dollars.
Okay- all of these guys realize-
if you do not justify the cost of this thing- in the midst of a European
depression- then what are the odds that your gonna keep getting funded?
I don’t know if this was the main
reason they came out with the statement now- but for them to have come out- and
kinda have fudged on it- makes me wonder.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
1861- THE 40 YEAR REUNION
Let’s recap the week’s news.
The lines are drawn- the pres has
asserted Executive Privilege- for the first time.
And Pelosi has come out and
accused the Repubs of outright racism.
Chris Matthews- the most dangerous
man alive [sorry Ken Shamrock] has also jumped on the bandwagon.
He had on 2 Black Dems and said
those who want Holder to release the documents on fast and Furious are racists.
The other week Matthews was
defending the right of Asian Americans to abort their baby girls because they
preferred a boy.
Yes- he took the other side when
the Repubs wanted to outlaw sex selection abortions.
Now- he claimed he was not for
it- but argued against the passage of the law- because he said it was only a
problem in the Asian community.
So- he thought ‘why outlaw it-
only Asian girls are dying’.
This is the same guy who sees
racism in the Holder affair.
About a month ago I said to
myself ‘let's see how long it will be before the media begin re running the Watergate
movie nonstop’.
To my surprise- not only are they
running the movie- but all the major networks have come out in full regalia-
‘celebrating’ the 40th anniversary of Watergate.
I also read an article the other
day- some Texas professor wrote Holder- demanding the release of the other
documents from Watergate.
Holder responded in a way that
sounded like ‘there is no longer any good reason to continue the cover up of
Watergate- by golly- the truth must show!’
Let’s see- did we celebrate the
20th- 30th anniversary?
No.
Do you normally celebrate the 40th
anniversary- of anything?
No.
Your normally have a big bash on
the 25th- and 50th.
But the media have actual real
time scandals- the cover up of the murder of 300 hundred Mexican citizens- and
at least one border patrol agent.
The Solyndra scandal that
revealed that the presidents own men [All the Presidents men?] actually told
him- in a memo- that what he was about to do looked illegal.
This was said- in a memo- by his
own men.
What he did was changed the loan
to Solyndra- in order for his top fundraiser- who put money in the company- to
get paid back first if the company went bust.
This loan change was not done for
any other person/company- only for the loan that his top fundraiser made.
When this was first revealed- a
mainline news reporter [Sharyl Atkinson] who broke the story said it looked
like this might bring the presidency down.
What?
This was all revealed on a
Friday- after months of denying any involvement in the scandal.
For it to be revealed that your
own people thought what you did was illegal [not just knowing about an illegal
act- Wateragte- but actually doing it!] and you did it anyway.
And you did it for your friend-
against the actual law that regulates the loan- which said you can’t do this.
Well- even a mainline reporter
thought it as bad- or worse than Watergate.
What happened John- Nothing.
The media simply kept silent.
Now- in the current scandal- you
know- the ‘race haters’
In this scandal- when congress
asked the Justice Dept. if they had any knowledge about the Fast and Furious
program- they sent a letter to congress denying involvement/knowledge.
This was the beginning of 2011.
Now- when you go on record like
that- the investigating team usually drops the case- because you would be lying
to congress at that point.
Holder left the letter out there
for most of the year- claiming they had no knowledge of the program.
When congress continued digging-
Holder pulled the letter back.
Why?
Because they did indeed know
about the program- this in itself is enough for a resignation- this in itself
is a Watergate.
Congress just tried Roger
Clemens- twice- for lying to congress.
I’m glad he got off- they found
him not guilty.
Did he lie John- and use
steroids?
Sure.
But for this crew to be trying
people for lying- well that’s laughable.
So- Holder basically already
admitted that he lied- whether he knew it or not at the time we don’t know- but
we do know they said- for around 9 months ‘we had no knowledge of the program’.
Then he pulled the letter back.
At the least- we need to know
what changed- who was lying- why?
The parents of the dead agent-
Terry- went on the news this week- they too think Holder and Obama are covering
up- by all accounts- it does look like they are covering up.
Are the parents racists?
According to Pelosi and MSNBC-
yes.
We have very real scandals-
things that rise- easily- to the level of Watergate.
Watergate was the cover up of a
botched break in of a political office in a hotel- the name of the hotel was
Watergate.
The cover up of fast and furious
involves the murder of at least 300 Mexican citizens [the Mexican govt. by the
way does not see this as a joke- they are outraged over this].
And the murder of an American law
enforcement officer.
The Solyndra scandal was
presidential involvement [not just knowledge!] to change a loan- illegally-
even said to be illegal by the president’s own people- in writing!
He changed the law so his number
one fundraiser would not loose money- and he denied it- until he was caught.
These lies- these scandals- they
outrank Watergate- I said it at the time- but the media tried their hardest to
make these things look like nothing.
I’ll end with one last ‘lie’.
This week I read some of the
Leaks that are believed to have come from this White House.
These are the leaks of all the
classified intelligence info that outed Israel- got the Pakistani doctor put in
prison for 35 years- you know- no big deal.
When I looked at the leaks- I
mean they were laughable in the way they were made to portray the president in
a favorable light.
Most leaks are simply info coming
out- lots of time from good men who see wrong things and are trying to expose
the corruption.
We call these people Whistle
Blowers.
But as I reread some of the
recent leaks- I mean they are saying things like ‘As the president sat there in
his chair- debating on which terrorist to kill next- he contemplated his recent
study of Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas- and he acted with righteous
indignation’.
What?
St. Thomas and Augustine.
I mean these are 2 of my favorite
Catholic scholars.
Augustine- the 4/5th
century Bishop of North Africa- and Thomas- the great 13th century
Doctor Angelicas [Angelic Doctor].
Yes- these are some big players
in Theology and Philosophy.
So why have the media reported
that the pres used them in his war strategy?
They are also famous for the
development of the Just war Theory.
Yeah- people for centuries have
appealed to these great thinkers in their justification for war.
But Obama- how does he find the
time to read these guys?
I mean- unless their names are on
the golf balls [he just played his 100th round!]
I don’t see him having time to
read them.
So why mention it?
Because he fumbled the ball with
our Catholic friends [who just began a 2 week prayer and fast against the
repression of religious liberty- because of the presidents demands that they
provide birth control thru their institutions].
And he needs to make amends- so
lo and behold- he loves reading the Catholic scholars!
If you put all this together- the
ongoing scandals- not just one.
The actual lies- the ones they
have been caught in- on paper.
I mean even a mainline reporter
could not believe that the revealing of this was ‘no big deal’.
And now- the fact that the pres
came out the other day and addressed the nation ‘me and my Whitehouse have not
released any CLASSIFIED information’.
‘It’s an insult to think this’.
Then- one week later- on Friday-
they sent a letter to congress- declassifying the drone war
in Yemen.
They were basically saying ‘yeah-
we were behind the releasing of all the info- it’s just we ‘declassified it’
first’.
He is going to say when he
released the info- his office first ‘declassified it’.
But when he addressed you- and
me- he was outraged- he made it sound like he was not aware of the leaks.
And 99 % of the public took it
this way.
Look- when you get caught doing
this- over and over and over- I mean this is not a one time affair.
Then it does make the public
wonder about everything else.
And when the public asks for
answers- and you respond by playing the race card- then it’s time for some
people to resign.
Holder needs to go.
Whoever else has lied about their
involvement also needs to go.
And if Nixon had to go because he
lied about his knowledge about a 2 bit break in- then what about the possible
cover up of your knowledge about the murder of a U.S. border patrol agent and
at least 300 Mexican men, women and children.
But wait- I forgot- we don’t have
time to cover these present scandals- no- we are covering the golden [or
brass?] 40th year anniversary of Watergate.
Drink up.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
1860- POLITICS OR RELIGION?
I wasn’t sure how to close up
this week- I know how much you guys like it when I do politics! [note- every
now and then I drop a joke or 2 in- I realized once that everybody does not
know when it’s a joke- but if you have to say each time ‘here I kid’ it kinda
ruins the thing].
I did go to the mission
yesterday- and Dirk- my homeless friend that I gave a lecture to on the ‘proofs
for the existence of God’ [he was kind of going off the other day on how
everyone believes what they hear- that there is no real way to know who is
right- so I covered the history of apologetics and the proofs for the existence
of God- I kinda blasted the guys for about 15 minutes- and wasn’t sure they
were following].
So when I see Dirk- the first
thing he shows me is this book on Bertrand Russell- the famous British
philosopher- I wrote about him when I was doing the study on philosophy.
Dirk was kind of repentant- he
must of took my ‘speech’ to heart- and he told me he was going to put more of
an effort into researching stuff.
Now- it was a surprise to see my
homeless buddy running around with a Russell book- but I got the hint that he
did get something from my talk and wanted me to know he was trying.
By the way- being he showed me
the book- I encouraged him to read it- but had to let Dirk know that Russell
was a very influential 20th century British philosopher- he was
famous because he was a public protestor against the use of nuclear weapons.
But in the field of thought he became
an Agnostic.
He was raised as a believer- but
at a young age he read a book from another famous thinker- John Stuart Mill.
Mill wrote about what we have
been discussing these last few days- the law of Cause and Effect- and how
things came into being.
Mill said ‘if everything has to
have a cause- then why not God? Who caused God?’
Now- Mill wasn’t the first
thinker to pose the question- but Russell became influenced by this idea and
espoused it for the rest of his life.
The problem?
Though both of these men were
smart- they stumbled over this misconception.
The law of Cause and Effect [also
referred to as causality] does not say EVERYTHING has a cause.
It states that all EFFECTS have a
cause.
In essence- it’s within the realm
of logic to espouse an infinite- causeless being.
Now- some might say this is
‘illogical’ but using the laws of logic [like we covered the last few days].
In the end- the only logical
explanation for all things is an infinite being.
Anyway- don’t want to re hash the
whole thing again- just thought it interesting that Dirk was reading Russell’s
book.
Even though there are a lot of
news events that could be covered today- lets finish with a few ‘religious’
things.
I have a verse here [about 200!]
hanging on my wall- it’s from Isaiah [I think? I write them down and hang them
up- but I don’t write the reference].
It says ‘do these things- and
when others read about them- this will be a witness to them’.
There are others along this line
that I have come across these last few years.
I started working with the
homeless in 1992- with guys that were on drugs- ex-cons- before that.
I never told any of these stories
until a few years back.
I started the blog in 2006-
Facebook a couple of years later.
I felt that it was part of the
‘next step’- that is doing ministry- that the Lord wanted me to get into.
So- even though I did not even
have email until 2006- or even get online until that time- I did my best to put
together the blog [amateurish as it is] and start the process.
Now- over the years- as a student
of religion, philosophy, ecclesiology [church]- I have written a lot about what
it means to ‘do church’ or ‘be church’.
In Christian circles this has
been hotly debated in recent years.
Many in the House Church movement
have written- and debated with those who are more into the Traditional type
churches.
There are many Protestants who
have all types of ways they see ‘church’.
In its most basic form- the best
definition that I have been able to come up with- is Church is a community.
It’s a worldwide community of
those who confess Christ [the universal church].
And it’s a local community of
those who follow him.
If you read the gospels- Jesus
and his disciples are a good picture of the church.
Now- many will say ‘No John- the
church was not formed until Acts chapter 2’.
Okay- I hear that.
I see the whole thing.
But- as community- it’s a
mistake- in my view- to dismiss the gospels as ‘pre church’.
I don’t want to get into a
theological debate- because I’m not even sure how many are following right now.
But- the point is- if we actually
read the things that Jesus told us to do [sounds simple enough].
We would end up doing a lot of the things that most of us call ‘prison
ministry’ or ‘street ministry’ or ‘outreach ministry’.
In actuality- these things are a
main function of being a community.
So- over the years- because many
of us associate church with the meeting [or the building]. We have a tendency to shift the focus from
community- to the corporate entity.
Years ago I filed the corporation
papers for our ‘church’.
Instead of paying a lawyer- I got
a self help book- ‘how to incorporate your church’ and filed.
It was no big deal.
But I realized how we confuse the
actual corporate laws of a state- they have ways they recognize what they call
‘a local church’.
And what the bible actually
teaches.
In the bible- the church is a
community of people- much like Jesus and the disciples going thru the towns-
preaching- healing- helping others.
Yet- much of the focus of modern
‘church’ is the corporation ‘how much do we need this month? How many members
do we need each month to tithe- and cover the vision of the church’.
Much of the focus- and effort- is
spent on raising money for the corporation.
People are ‘challenged’ to
sacrifice for Gods work- but the challenge is often seen thru the lens of ‘give
till it hurts’.
Look- I’m not against giving- I
give lots of money away.
But when you have the majority of
church goers- who mean well- when they begin seeing their sacrifice mainly thru
a paradigm of giving more money to a corporation- then this blinds them to the
majority of teaching in the New Testament that calls us into the world- in real
ways- to be the ‘actors’ [ones who act- function- not just give money so others
can act/function on our behalf].
That is- the primary
responsibility of the believer is not simply to go to church on Sunday [though
this is a good thing].
Or to tithe to the ‘church’.
But to be active in helping one
another- to be giving our lives away for other people.
This is the heart of the whole
New Testament.
So- my purpose in telling these
stories the last few years was simply to show one example [out of many- there
are many Christians who do see the stuff I just showed you] So these things
could be ‘the wisdom’ that the example of people seeing what it means to ‘be
church’ might lead others to a ‘more better way’ [Hebrews.]
So- I’ll end the week with the
example of my homeless buddy reading the writings of a 20th century
British philosopher.
The politics will have to wait-
yeah- I know your sad.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
1859- NOT A CHANCE
Went Down to the mission
yesterday- saw the guys.
Dirk has his van running good-
put the new radiator in [a few posts ago].
Gave Henry a ride back to the
boat dock where he works- there were these beautiful Pelicans all lined up
along the dock- never saw so many in a row like that.
On my way back to the house I saw
a few cars in front of me make a detour- I realized there was a cop car with
his flashing lights parked in the local speed trap.
Of course they’ll stop you for
anything- I had gotten a ticket for driving without my license in the same spot
a while back.
My inspection sticker has been
expired since around May- of last year.
Yeah- I know.
I took it to the inspection guy a
couple of month’s back- it failed for the tires.
So- as I saw the cop- I did a
detour too- and went to another shop [yeah- I know].
I figured ‘Lord- I just helped
the guys out- maybe I can get a break’.
So as I sat in the waiting room-
doing one of those silent prayers ‘Lord- blind his eyes to the tires’.
You say ‘John- I thought you
weren’t one of those positive confession type guys’.
I’m not- but when you’re in a
bind you do what you have to.
The kid comes back ‘sir- your
tire failed- your brake light is out- and you have a hole in the catalytic
convertor’.
The plan didn’t work out too
well.
Okay- let me finish a few more
comments on proofs for the existence of God.
Yesterday I got into it a little
with Dirk- and the other week I mentioned my friend Mike.
I have known Mike for a long time
[the homeless artist] and I never knew he was really into the science shows and
all.
As we talked Mike told me how
over the years he has spoken with Christians/preachers and he has said ‘why do
you think God created everything- Fungus and bacteria seem to produce on their
own- maybe the cause for all things is that’.
Now- this was a good question-
Mike told me that the only response he ever got was ‘the bible says God made
everything’.
Okay- I got the point.
I told Mike that what he has
observed over the years- the shows he has seen- that these things are good-
they are true- science and God do not contradict.
I simply explained to Mike that
fungus is part of the material world- and science teaches us that the material
world did not always exist.
Therefore- if fungus did not
always exist- it could not be the ‘creator’ of everything else.
Mike never heard this simple
truth.
He actually thought about it-
kind of in a way- a look on his face- like ‘geez- I just lost the last thing I
clung to’ type expression.
He thought it through- understood
what I said [I went a little more in depth] and then responded ‘well- maybe
some other non physical being did it- instead of God’.
I simply gave him the argument I
posted around 2 posts ago.
Okay- what was Mike seeing in the
fungus?
He saw what we call Secondary
causes.
That is there are many things in
the natural world that do indeed re produce on their own.
Things grow and develop.
God made the creation to be self
sustaining in a way.
Yet- many good people have heard
‘bad’ arguments- things that are false on its face- and don’t really know it.
The most popular ‘misstatement’
today is ‘everything was made by CHANCE’.
Now- I’m not a physicist- but
this statement- on its face- is not true.
Why?
Look carefully- chance is NOT A
THING.
Okay- chance is NO THING.
Chance is NOTHING.
When people make this statement they
do not realize what they are actually saying.
This statement says ‘chance is
the actual cause of creation’.
They are giving what we call
Ontological status to the word Chance.
They are treating it as in if
chance was a living thing- a real thing- not simply a word that describes the
odds of something.
Okay- the other misconception is
‘Given enough time- anything can happen’.
Is this true?
No.
If you took a room- were able to
seal it- nothing gets in- nothing gets out.
And you have nothing in the room.
How many years would it take for
you to open the door- and find a functioning world?
People- planets- stars- parades-
horses- stores- etc.
I mean- is it possible- over a
long period of time- for this to happen?
No- this is simply not possible-
not scientifically possible.
But if you knew there were some
being who had control over the room- who did have access to it- and had the
power to create.
Well then it would be possible
for the room to contain things.
When it comes down to it- there
are really only 2 choices.
Either everything popped into
existence from nothing [this is impossible].
Or something caused everything to
be here [the Christian view].
When people realize this- that
this debate is not about ‘well- you believe in faith and the bible and fairy
tales- and I believe in fact’.
Actually no you don’t [you being
the atheist- unbeliever].
No- in this debate there really
is only one rational conclusion- that someone is responsible for ‘everything in
the room’.
The other explanation ‘everything
in the room came from chance- given enough time’ is not an option- at least not
a logical one.
See?
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to ‘click’ the note App on my Facebook
Profile- I have posted lots.
No comments:
Post a Comment