YOUR WRONG [note-
title applies to end of video- not beginning- see if you figure it out]
https://youtu.be/97ZW34gJfGc Your wrong
Special request- Please pray for my friend Don, he’s been
sick for a while and they just found a large growth by his abdomen- they will
check if it’s cancer. Update- They think it is cancer and spreading rapidly- I
will try and comment on this on the next video. Don has been complaining of
severe pain for months on end- he noticed a growth- time and again he tried to
access the health care system [he’s on Medicaid]. They kept putting him off-
the agency that accepts Medicaid- that he has been using- did not want to have
to treat/pay if it was cancer. That’s what Don believed. They delayed for
months- refused to do x-ray/cat scan- said he had an infection. Don was right-
as soon as they gave him the cat scan- the tumor was so huge- it’s probably too
late.
ON VIDEO-
.D.A. testifies- under oath
.Hayden trial
.Marx
.Industrial Revolution
.Salvation army
.Adam Smith- Wealth of nations
.Homicides solved?
.Knives- that shoot!
.Veteran killed
.Ozzy
.Bourgeoisie
.Laissez Faire
.Das Capital
.Communist Manifesto
NEW STUFF-
[Past posts- verses
below]
In the 19th
century we had the Industrial revolution.
With the invention of the steam engine and the development
of factories- this created poor living conditions in the cities of Europe [and
later the U.S.]
Many workers were no longer living and working the land- an
agrarian society-
But were now ‘products’ of the industrial city.
Working long hours in smoke filled buildings- with very poor
working conditions.
Children being used as ‘slave labor’ for poor wages.
And the working poor had no real voice in society.
You also had the development of the Bourgeoisie- those who
had opportunity to own the factories- and make it rich.
Observers realized that the good benefits from the
Industrial Revolution- also had bad ‘side effects’.
Some asked ‘what can we do’?
The response – nothing.
We call this the Laissez-faire mindset-
Meaning the natural capitalist system- those who strive in a
free market system- will benefit at the end.
But what about those who were raised in ‘the system’- their
families owned no property [thus they had not voting rights at the time].
They followed their fathers into the same working class
conditions- never realizing the dream of one day being in the ‘ownership
class’.
The struggle for a more just system came both from within
and outside the church.
Christians like William Booth would reach out to the poor
and drunkards on the streets of London- and eventually would launch a Christian
ministry aimed at alleviating the plight of the poor.
He is the founder of the Salvation Army.
Men like Karl Marx took a more radical approach- he
published his Communist Manifesto in 1848 and later das Kapital.
He challenged the system of capitalism itself- and called
for a radical revolution of the working class.
His intentions were good- but over time his system too has
failed.
He believed the power of the rich factory owners- and those
who actually owned the tools themselves- needed to be taken from them.
And the state itself should own the equipment- the ‘engine’
that ran the Industrial revolution.
Marx was raised by Jewish/German parents- and his father
accepted Christianity only as a means to an end.
His father could not succeed in business unless he wore the
label ‘Christian’.
As a young boy Marx saw the hypocrisy of it- and eventually
saw Christianity itself as a tool to manipulate the working class and keep them
under the ruling class.
Socialism/Communism sought to empower the people- but in
effect it empowered the state.
In Adam Smiths ‘Wealth of Nations’ he taught the classic
capitalist argument- the laissez faire’ mindset- that in a free society- where
all men have the opportunity to advance-
In the end- some will attain wealth and success- and others
will not.
But Smith believed this to be the best system.
The Socialist rejects this idea- and believes in the common
sharing of goods- the natural resources of the land should not belong to the
few who had the wealth passed down to them by former generations.
Today the debate applies to corporations- should private
corporations own vast resources [some have even patented actual seeds- yes-the
seeds that people plant in the ground for food!]
There are American Indian tribes who had actual treaties
with the U.S. govt. - and the govt. has claimed their land- began charging them
for the grazing of their animals- on their own land.
And eventually brought federal charges against the Indian
family-in a case I just watched- a Grandmother!
Because the Federal govt.
would no longer recognize the ownership rights of the Indian family [
Shoshone tribe].
So we see the danger on both sides-
The state itself can become an enemy of the rights of the
people it is supposed to serve.
And a free market system can develop to the point where
following generations of families born into poverty find themselves with little
hope- or a way out.
The opportunities have passed many of them up- some do
indeed make it out- but others feel stuck.
PAST POSTS-
Was the teaching that matter was good- that God created the
material realm- so it is not inherently
evil.
But- after the fall of man [Genesis 1-3] a curse did indeed
come upon the earth [some times when the bible says ‘the world’ it is speaking
of the earth- but other times it is speaking of the fallen order- the sinful
realm of man. That’s why there is some confusion- till this day- among
Christians. They might read verses like this- and think the bible is saying the
earth itself- the planet- is wicked. Actually in those verses it is speaking
about the fallen order of sinful men. See? ‘For all that is in THE WORLD- the
lust of the flesh- the lust of the eyes and the pride of life- is not of the
father- but is of the WORLD- and the WORLD is passing away’- this is one
example from the epistle of John- here the World is not saying the planet- but
the world of sinful man- a fallen ‘world’ order.]
So- in conclusion [if I ever get there!] we- as believers-
reject the belief that all matter is evil.
No- man was created in the image of God- and God is the
creator of all things- both visible [earth- man- etc] and invisible [mentioned
in the above chapter].
The evil we see in the ‘world’ today is simply a result of
mans sin- mans choice to live in rebellion against God.
Renaissance means ‘re-birth’. It was a rebirth of the
ancient Poets and philosophers of days gone by. Men like Cicero and Aristotle
were once again brought to the fore front of many thinkers and lovers of
culture.
The catch phrase for the Renaissance was Ad Fontes- which meant
‘back to the sources’ [source- Fountain- Fontes]. In the 14th
century a famous and influential Catholic family- the Medici’s- were a catalyst
for mixing this cultural movement in with the church.
The Renaissance sort of challenged the historic view of
education- up until this time most learning was done thru the prism of the
church. In the universities of the day Theology [study of God] was called the
Queen of the sciences- and philosophy was referred to as her Handmaiden.
Well the Renaissance thinkers said they wanted to study
things for what they are- they did not want to see everything thru the lens of
the church.
Eventually the theme of the movement [back to the original
sources] would play a major role in the Protestant Reformation of the 16th
century. Men like Erasmus [the famous 16th century Catholic
Humanist] would re discover the original Greek New testament- and it was thru
the study of the Greek text that many of the Reformers made their case to get
‘back to the bible’ and eventually break from Rome.
This was also the beginning period of modern capitalism.
Recently when Libya had her ‘civil war’ and the new leaders started talking
about a new constitution- one of the interesting things that came up was they
wanted to do away with interest on loans.
Why? Well Muslims teach that interest itself is a bad thing.
‘Gee- wonder where they get that idea from John’ Oh- from a little book- called
the bible.
Yes- to the surprise of some- this is very much taught in
the Old Testament. Now- it was God’s law governing the nation of Israel- but
they were forbidden to charge interest.
‘So John- is it wrong for us today to make interest’? Not
really- Jesus used interest [usury] as an example in some of his parables- and
overall- we as believers are not under the Old Testament laws that govern
natural Israel.
But- for many centuries- the world did not see interest on
money as a legitimate way to earn a living. So during the Renaissance you also
had the rise of exploration- and explorers like Columbus would go on their
voyages with the financial backing of investors.
The normal rate for these voyages was a 75/25% cut. When the
explorer returned- the investor [Spain- or whoever] got 75% of the goods- and
the explorer kept 25.
So there were a lot of changes taking place in the world at
the time- and the rise of modern capitalism was one of them- money of course
existed way before this time- but as a commodity- this was a new way of viewing
the world.
Okay- just thought I would throw in a little history along
with the current events of the day. As we see the current turmoil in the
Italian markets [the original renaissance started in Florence- Italy] maybe
seeing money/interest as a commodity- and ‘usury’ as a major way to increase
ones wealth- well maybe that’s not such
a smart way to do things after all.
When Jon Corzine's global investment firm went bust the
other day- it was a direct result of taking a gamble on the ‘gullibility’ of
the common man.
What his firm did was they took a huge risk by investing in
European bonds- bonds from Greece that everyone knew was a terrible 'bet’. Then
why did he do it?
RENAISSANCE STUFF -
The renaissance was the
13-14th century revival of culture and learning that was lost for
centuries- It began in Florence Italy.
The catch phrase for it was ‘Ad Fontes’ meaning ‘back to the sources’- both in
philosophy- as well as in Christian learning.
This began a revival of studying the Greek New testament again
from its original language.
The Catholic Humanist- Desiderius Erasmus [15-16th
century] - re introduced the New Testament in the Greek version [He was
referred to as a Dutch renaissance Humanist- as well as a Catholic Priest and
scholar]
Now- Erasmus was a critic of the Church- like Luther- but chose a
‘middle road’- he did not join the breakaway Protestant Reformers- but chose to
stay within the fold of Rome- while speaking out against the abuses he saw.
But his first Greek translation of the New Testament did indeed
set a spark-
[parts]
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.
. (1298) THEY ARE GREEDY DOGS
WHICH CAN NEVER HAVE ENOUGH AND THEY ARE SHEPHERDS THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND: THEY
ALL LOOK TO THEIR OWN WAY, EVERY ONE FOR HIS GAIN… THEY SAY TOMORROW SHALL BE
MUCH MORE ABUNDANT- Isaiah 56:11-12 In the mid 18th century we had
what is commonly called ‘the industrial revolution’. In Europe there arose a
new class of people that never existed before, these were the capitalists that
were making lots of wealth and the laborer was drawn from an agrarian type
lifestyle [country/hamlet living] into the strong industrial cities like
London. These poor workers were thrust into a system of profit that consumed
their days and surrounded them with a new atmosphere of industry/factory. The
invention of the steam engine by James Watt was one of the catalysts of this
new era. Men like William Booth [founder of the Salvation Army] would see the
hopelessness of these Londoners and start a ministry to help them. Even in our
day the effects of the industrial revolution still impact us, as a boy growing
up I listened to Black Sabbath, Ozzy came from an area like this. Contrast his
songs with Kiss and you can see the difference! There was an observer of this
scene who would write a document and launch a revolution as a result of what he
saw as the encroachment of capitalism on the common person- His name was Karl
Marx, his document was called ‘the communist manifesto’. Many people resent the
western mindset because of its seeming inability to never be satisfied with
finally having enough, we are a consumerist nation. I caught a quick few
minutes of religious channel surfing the other day and of course I heard the
normal preaching on ‘this year is the year of more abundance than any other
year’. Have we ever asked ourselves when we will have enough? Seriously Isaiah
is pronouncing a judgment on ‘greedy dogs- those who are never satisfied’ one
of the condemnations in Revelation is to believers who say ‘I am rich and
increased with goods’ yet they were spiritually poor. Jesus challenged his
followers on many occasions to forsake all to follow him. Now I am not
advocating irresponsibility, but I am challenging our western mindset and our
inability to say ‘that’s enough’. We preach a message that never seems to leave
this option open; we create an insatiable desire within the church to live each
day with an obsession to gain more. The bible condemns this attitude over and
over again, yet we as westerners never seem to get it, if we ever want to truly
have peaceful relationships with the rest of the world, then we will have to
change our mindset in these areas. Many Muslim countries see our materialist
arrogance and use this as an excuse to reject ‘the Jesus of the west’ [though
he was technically from the east!] We as the people of God need to return to
our own ‘manifesto’ [the gospels] and live them out in reality, if not there
will always be a Marx waiting in the wings with his own.
(1295) FOR AS THE HEAVENS ARE HIGHER THAN THE EARTH, SO ARE
MY THOUGHTS HIGHER THAN YOUR THOUGHTS; AND MY WAYS HIGHER THAN YOURS Isaiah
55:9 the other night I caught an interview of Frances Schaffer on the Rachel
Maddow show. Frances is the son of the famous Frances Schaffer senior, the
prolific author/speaker of the 20th century who dealt with Christian
worldviews. He wrote Christian Manifesto and How shall we then live, among
other titles. Frankie and his dad were key leaders in the rise of the religious
right and the moral agenda type groups. Frankie eventually converted to Eastern
Orthodoxy and is now a vehement opponent of the religious right. First I want
to commend him on his conviction of not being willing to abandon Christianity
all together; some children of famous Christian leaders have taken that route,
but Frankie [he calls himself Frances now, but for this entry I’m using the old
title] has chosen a great Christian tradition to place himself in and for this
he should be commended. But he is so vehement against the religious
[parts]
(1082) ‘For
the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his
mouth. For they are the messengers of the Lord’ Malachi 2:7. I remember a few
years back, I was listening to the various teachings that were on the radio
station that I broadcast on. Some brother out of the Fort Worth area used to buy air time and all.
One time the focus was ‘what is Gods essential character?’ if there were only
one word to describe who god is, what his essential makeup was, what would that
word be? And of course the answer was ‘abundance’ specifically ‘financial
increase’. I know of know other way to describe stuff like this, it falls under
the category of ministerial malpractice! God commands leaders/teachers to seek
the truth coming from him, we are responsible to at least get the most basic
things right! What would be the most obvious answer to the question of how to
define God in a word? Surely every preacher should know the answer. It would be
‘God is love’. While there are many attributes of God [omnipotence,
omniscience, etc.] yet the ‘one’ word definition, if you had to give one, would
be love [yes, he is Spirit too]. The last
word you should use to describe God would be ‘much money’. Paul said the false
teacher’s god is their belly; their appetites, they live to satisfy their
desires. Jesus taught us one of the greatest desires of man is acquiring great
wealth. He said you can’t serve God and money [mammon]. Why people still send
their offerings to ministries like this is beyond me. The challenge to wealth
and oppressive wealthy nations/peoples is sown all thru out human history;
Homers Iliad revealed the monster 12 centuries before Christ in his writings on
the Trojan War. Adam Smith penned his famous book ‘wealth of nations’ in 1776.
Challenges to oppressive govt's. of men who use wealth and power to come
against the poor in society are noble themes that all great prophetic voices
have hit on [Gandhi, Martin Luther King, etc.]. Who was thee singular greatest
prophetic voice who engaged in this type of polemic? Jesus Christ of Nazareth . Most know him as
the carpenter, but the actual word used to describe his trade in the Greek
means ‘hand laborer’ [or day laborer] you know, those poor brothers we see
waiting for a job on the corners of streets, going to ‘labor ready’ [a local
place to find daily work]. It is quite possible that Jesus was ‘less’ than a
carpenter/tradesmen, but more of an odd jobs worker. Willing to take any job he
could get. Well, once he entered his teaching ministry, boy did he speak to
power and wealth. If you read all the actual words of Jesus [yes, the red
ones!] and try and come up with a singular theme thru out his writings, it
could very well be his contrast of the rich and poor. The powerful oppression
of wealth and unjust govt. against the poor and weak in society. His incessant
condemnation of the wealthy and affluent, I mean you can’t possibly miss this!
Unless you are not seeking the ‘law’ [words] that actually were coming from his
MOUTH! Malachi rebuked the priests of his day, they were functioning and active
and everyone knew they were priests, yet they were not really listening to the
words of God himself, I think we need to all give heed to what the brother
said.
(1080) In keeping with our recent train of thought, lets
talk a little on who wrote the new testament, and when did they write. During
the rise of higher criticism in the universities [a type of learning that cast
serious doubt on many of the truths of scripture, though some of the elements
of higher learning were helpful; like the historic method, learning to study
scripture thru a contextual lens] you had some who dated the gospels as being
written by the end of the first century, even into the second! Today, no
serious scholar would put them anywhere near the second century. And like I
said the other day, those who attribute Paul’s writings to various unknown
sources, they also can stick the older label on Paul's stuff. Do the scriptures
themselves give us any hint at when they were written? Sure. They don’t tell us
exactly, but some good hints. The gospels contain lots of historical records in
them, who was ruling at the time. Certain census that were being taken, things
like that. Of course this doesn’t mean the writers were writing at the exact
time of the events, but it shows you their familiarity with them. Or if a
gospel writer [I think its Luke] says ‘just as others compiled stuff about
Jesus and all that he did, so I thought it good that I should do the same’.
This would show you that the writer was not as close to the actual events as
others. Or when Luke writes the book of Acts, he states that he had already
written his gospel. Luke is pretty meticulous about historic stuff in Acts; he
records the believers who were killed for the faith [Stephen, James- the
disciple, not the Lords brother who was one of the main leaders at Jerusalem , who is also
believed to be the author of the epistle]. The point being, if Luke ends Acts
with Paul living in a rented room in Rome ;
plus he never mentions the martyrdom of Paul or Peter, this would indicate that
Acts was written before their deaths. Nero killed them both in the 60’s, Nero
died a couple of years before A.D. 70. It would seem rather odd for Luke to
have left their martyrdoms out of the book! Peter and Paul are the two main
characters in the book. If Luke is recording the
[parts]
VERSES-
Exodus 3:1 Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his
father in law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of
the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb.
Exodus
3:2 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the
midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the
bush was not consumed.Exodus 3:3 And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.
Exodus 3:4 And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I.
Exodus 3:5 And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.
Exodus 3:6 Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.
6 Therefore
we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we
are absent from the Lord:
7 (For we
walk by faith, not by sight:)
8 We are
confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be
present with the Lord.
2nd Cor. 5
If any of you lack wisdom,
let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and
it shall be given him. Ja. 1:5
Wisdom hath builded her house,
she hath hewn out her seven pillars: Prvb.
facebook.com/john.chiarello.5
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.#
No comments:
Post a Comment