The Peril of Slavish Myopia
"Reading gang related graffiti, doesn't make one a gang-banger. Reading tea leaves at the bottom of a cup doesn't make one a cup of darjeeling or a lover of tea. Reading the decadence that so suffuses the very fabric of this nations moral tapestry, and seeing in it the inevitable and undesireable future does not make one desireous of said future."
--Me
Every now and again someone says something stupendously profound. One such bit or oracular profundity was uttered by George Santayana... "Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it." It ranks right up there with Robert Fulghum's All I Really Need To Know I Learned In Kindergarten. It's as simple as,
"Look both ways before crossing the street"
And why shouldn't it be? Nothing in this life is truly hard. The intricacies of genetic manipulation aren't hard once you master the underlying science. For what is science, really? A stack of postulates and corollaries and proofs that say, 'Yes, with what has gone before we can now do X, Y and Z. And if it doesn't work we'll merely add our results to the stack and try again'
Within the body of a short story I once desribed science as a magic whose 'very source, was limited only by the understanding of what was, and what was not possible; and the common thread that ran through every spell wrought was the idea that anything was possible provided one understood why such a thing should be, and the how of it's making.' Simply put, you can't build an atomic bomb-- let alone conceive of one --without first understanding a lot of other things, stacked one upon another, until such a time the right questions can be asked, and enough is gleaned from those answers to conceive of the possibility of building an atomic bomb.
Looking back upon what has gone before is not only prudent, as Santayana illustrates, but practically speaking, building upon the lessons of the past allows for ever greater achievements. Without question, Knowledge grows exponentially; history bears this out.
It is further true, beyond question, that crossing the street without looking in both directions is a recipe for disaster. But even this little axiom is flawed. In truth, no one with caution at the fore of his or her brain will cross a street without looking in three directions-- Left, Right, and Straight Ahead. Make the mistake of not looking where you're going and a tumble you could take... Right into the grinning grille of a speeding semi.
So why is it that so many people these days seem incapable of looking in more than a single direction? Let alone in Three? The Past, the Present, and the Future? Dickens didn't have trouble with this concept-- three ghosts visited Scrooge. And while the first two certainly had an affect upon him, it was the third that compelled him to change... The Spirit of Christmas Future... Prophecy. Latency written in stone.
If Pat Robertson wants to warn the nation of America of impending disaster, why should America not listen? Because Robertson has made bizarre statements in the past? Well so has Albert Gore, but why is Robertson's observations so ripe for ridicule? Could it be because he names the name of Christ? After all, who in their right mind would take the word of a man of God over a man of inconvenient truths? Yes, that was sarcasm.
Men who, in days of yore, called aloud, "Bring out your dead!" certainly didn't wish for death. If anything the cry was a warning! 'Bring out your diseased dead that we may dispose of their bodies and so bring an end to this curs`ed plague!'
Seeing the possibility of destruction and countless lives lost in the bargain, likewise, is not an advocation of death and destruction, or even general mayhem. Nor does it imply that seeing such possibilities requires the seer to be stricken with glee and eager anticipation. There are, undoubtedly, many who fit that bill, but to assume such people are in the norm is to be slavishly myopic. Just as it is slavishly myopic to look at the past and either ignore altogether or be altogether incapable of seeing the future plainly written. But then, just like crossing the proverbial street, there is that pesky third view: Those who, seeing the future written in the past, choose to believe it could never truly happen.
Like Pat Robertson the Bible too is too often discounted, and pooh-poohed-- Its prophecies are too cryptic, its laws too 'myopic', too strict, too irrelevent for a brave new world of intelligent men and women standing upon a centuries tall stack of postulates, corollaries and proofs, upon whose principles and new-found enlightenment gave birth to multiculturalism-- as though all cultures are somehow equal... morally equivalent. If no two people can be 'morally equivalent' why on earth would anyone believe the fantasy that whole cultures can somehow overcome and achieve what no two individuals can?
Does anyone remember 'Duck and Cover'? How can anyone who remembers those days-- those anxiety filled days --not see that the peril is greater now than it has ever been? How can anyone who remembers what Hitler was allowed to do to more than ten million souls not see the same lunacy rising in the middle east? And is it fair to call the messenger a gore-crow for pointing out the bodies in the street? This attitude that now so infects this nation, and the world; the attitude that says, "Don't distract us from Britney's crotch, and Paris' DUI, and the next American Idol," these are the same ones who can't be bothered to remember half a million American lives lost in World War II, in less time than 3,000 lost in Iraq and Afghanistan. These are the same ones who, claiming a love for God and Jesus, call the portions they don't like "Pie in the Sky". The same ones who can't recognize Israel returned to her own land, lost tribes of Jews making aliyah, Israel in control once more of Jerusalem, Russia aligned with Persia, a two million man army in China, the proliferation of atomic weapons-- to say nothing of Israel's possession of the neutron bomb and specific prophecies of old. The same ones who either cannot, or simply refuse to see the future already written... Latency gouged in stone by the finger of God.
And I've said all of this to say,
Just because I see the inevitable doesn't mean I desire it.
What this world needs to do, and forgive me for being so blunt, is to pull its collective head out of its collective.... nether region. The world IS going to hell in a handbasket, but no one wants to look at it, let alone lift a finger to try and turn the boat around. It's called slavish myopia and yes, you've got a deadly dose of it. But fear not, there is a cure.
"When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand."
Ezekiel 3:18
"But if ye will not do so, behold, ye have sinned against the LORD: and be sure your sin will find you out."
Numbers 32:23
Consider yourself warned. Find God while He may yet be found. There's your cure... and it's the only cure that works 100% of the time on 100% of the people who tried it, as directed.
No one is promised tomorrow, least of all me. One day it's going to be too late. What will you do then? What happens when, on the last day, you hear the Angel of the Lord call out to the grave, "Bring out your dead!" and you find yourself responding to that call? Trust me on this one... You don't want to find out.
Find Him while He may yet be found.
from the mind of... Eric | 11:42 PM
36 Comments:
Re, "Could it be because he names the name of Christ?"
No, it's because Robertson is a buffoon.
"This attitude that now so infects this nation, and the world; the attitude that says, 'Don't distract us from Britney's crotch, and Paris' DUI, and the next American Idol,' "
So please EL tell us how do we get the country on track? Required Church attendance? Should we burn copies of Entertainment Weekly? A national dress code for women? Maybe a government based on a religious text? The more you rage against modern America the more you sound like the Taliban or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Same product different brand.
"these are the same ones who can't be bothered to remember half a million American lives lost in World War II, in less time than 3,000 lost in Iraq and Afghanistan."
YOU are the one who keeps forgetting the deaths of half a million Iraqi's and Afghani's since this war of choice began.
Expounding upon a point: Dickens' 3 ghosts
It's easy to understand why the first three ghosts had marginal effect on him.
The Ghost of Christmas Past showed him a static past; one that is what it is and impossible to change. We can't very well pluck the stone out of the lake from where we just tossed it... We can't stop the resultant ripples.
The Ghost of Christmas Present also showed him what he cannot change. it is impossible to change the hearts and minds of people in the midst of expression; they merely speak what they believe based on what they've learned over time. And while the present is not static-- for it moves steadily along, unstoppable --we most certainly are! We are trapped upon this slow boat to Eventuality. Not even death frees us completely, as bones mouldering in the earth can attest.
But it's the Ghost of Christmas Future where the greatest impact is made upon miserly miserable Scrooge. Everyone instinctively knows and understands (two words with two very different meanings) that this is something we have power over: We can choose NOT to throw the stone; to NOT create the ripple effect that will inevitably lead to undesired eventualities.
But that's not to say the past cannot, nor should not be read-- Santayana has succinctly warned us of that peril --for ripples can be read! As the ripple spreads out it is easy, if one looks, to see where they will land, and often when... The ripples will collide with this dock piling before that one. Oftentimes you can gauge the result, if not its severity.
Dan mentioned a little something about his take on prophecy at his place... There are basically two kinds; the kind that proceeds from the lips of genuine seers who utter specific predictions about the future with reason given for the judgment, and the kind that comes from reading the signs of the times and making prognostications based on available data. And that's a fair assessment, but herein lies the difference. One comes from a genuine man of God (assuming his prophecy is borne out), while the other comes from an average Joe; meaning, everyone else.
It is therefore foolish to rely only upon prognostications based on available data alone. It is far more prudent to compare timely available data to proven sources of prophecy to discern whether or not any corrolation exists; any corroboration, or dovetailing of the two.
The difference between Prophecy and Ripples in a pond is we can choose not to throw the stone. Prophecies once uttered, by their very nature, are all but impossible to avoid. It depends, of course, on the prophecy. When God has said, "Repent and I will not let these evils befall you," there is reason to hope for a reprieve; meet a list of conditions and evil will not come. But when God says, "These things must come to pass that all things might be fulfilled!" There's no pulling that stone back.
Studying the signs in the sky for hints of inclement weather is not a desire to see such weather arrive. But merely a desire to know whether or not preparation should be made to weather the storm with as little damage to ones livelihood as possible. Scrooge was bright enough to see the difference and make a few small repairs that likely went far to alleviate many of an evil opinion his peers had of him. But then Scrooge is merely a construct of pen and ink-- an inventive mind and a blank sheet of paper. Many today are not so fortunate as Ebenezer Scrooge, being unable to discern the signs of the times. Others are either unwilling, or simply can't be bothered to look at the ripples; how they will affect the future.
Require Church attendance? God wants us all to choose it freely.
Burn copies of Entertainment Weekly? Is there a better use for Entertainment Weekly? But no, what honestly would result? Fear, Intimidation, Malice? God wants us all to choose burn them freely, metaphorically speaking.
National Dress Code for Women? Why stop at women? Everyone should dress modestly. But no, God wants us all to choose modest dress freely.
Create a Government Based on a Religious Text? What?!! With man being filled with latent evil from the moment of conception?!! Even God knows it's impossible for Man to create such a government that would be both fair and just to all people; let alone righteous; which is what God really wants, and He wants us to choose it freely, as a promissory of righteousness to come, in exchange for our obedience today. Much like Wimpy's tried and true... "I'll gladly pay you tomorrow for a hamburger today!"
But you're right to mention the Taliban, for that is exactly the kind of government you get when a government is founded on religious texts. Man is inherently evil.
I haven't forgotten the deaths of Iraqis or Afghans, or their numbers, but its not THEIR numbers that has the Left so up in arms, it's not the reason they want to tuck tail and run, and lose yet another war... they way they lost Vietnam. No, what has these quailing hearts so in a tizzy is 3,000 AMERICAN deaths. The mantra is "Bring our boys home NOW!" not "Save the Iraqis!"
And for the record, EVERY war is a war of choice.
"Like Pat Robertson the Bible too is too often discounted, and pooh-poohed"
The difference being, of course, that the Bible has some credibility and Robertson none. To echo ER.
NOOOO credibility? None whatsoever? So there are some people we're allowed to discount altogether, eh? So long as they're people you personally discount. Rick Warren? God forbid! he's a man of God! But Pat Robertson? He's a kook!
I see how it is, and I find it quite curious.
Someone line up public remarks of both men and it will be plain who the buffoon is. I said buffaoon, not a kook.
..:Correction:..
3rd comment down, 2nd paragraph:
"It's easy to understand why the first three ghosts had marginal effect on him."
SHOULD READ:
"It's easy to understand why the first TWO ghosts had marginal effect on him."
Apologies for the confusion.
Perhaps EL this recent increased spiritual focus stems from your health problems. I know when my father became terminally ill, he had a sudden desire to feather his post-mortal nest. His religious study brought him acceptance, and peace.
You seem only to have sort of an angry, arrogance. Everyone who doesn't believe like you is going to hell, and no one will listen to your superior understanding and just do what you say.
I hope you can find peace and happiness in life and don't have to wait till after death.
I second that last thing Ben said. My mama has never been sicker, I have rarely had more confusion in my work and home life, Dr. ER has dealt with one health issue after a nother for the past two years, we squabble a lot, I'm a jerk sometimes -- but I have never had more joy in my faith. Ever. Mainly because I quit pretending I knew JACK, and I throw my self at the Cross every day, sometimes every day, and NOT at somebody else's idea of the Cross and what it means -- and whatever tendency toward worshiping, or even venrerating, the Bible in the place of the Creator of the Universe and Jesus, Son of Man and Son of God is gone to the trashbin of my experience. As I've said before, I take the Bible way too seriously to take very much of it literally. I'm reading in Joshua right now. That God is NOT the God of the New Testament. That God is a murderous monster -- and in the liberty of Christ I declare it. Jesus saves, and I let him more and more every day -- from sin, hell, the devil, doctrine, meanness and graceless "interpretation" of Scripture. I digress.
Sigh.
I throw my self at the Cross every day, sometimes every day,
should be:
I throw my self at the Cross every day, sometimes several times every day,
re: Should have been "the first TWO ghosts had marginal effect on him."
I just figured you were counting Jacob Marley as the first ghost...
"That God is a murderous monster -- and in the liberty of Christ I declare it."
Go right ahead, sir. You are, of course, in my prayers.
Actually, I hadn't considered the ghost of Jacob Marley.
"None whatsoever?"
Not in the public eye, no. The man is a popular joke, nothing more. He has made a mockery of Jesus by his pronouncements in the name of Jesus and done so so consistently and repeatedly that he has become nothing but a joke with no public credibility.
Now, I'm sure if he and I were to sit in a room and talk, I may find he has some cogent points to say - ideas that have credibility.
But our actions have consequences and his very public actions have had the consequence of removing any credibilty not only from himself (which is on him and no sweat off my back), but also from the Church - which IS of concern to all of us.
By the way, I think "The Peril of Slavish Myopia" would make a great title for an Edgar Rice Burroughs fantasy novel...
Wow! your last comment strayed dangerously into "Pot and Kettle" territory.
By the way, Burroughs was one of my favorite authors as a kid. I'm still quite fond of him. Thanks for the compliment.
I noticed your fictional character earlier was named Burroughs... I am a fan, too. Or was when I was a kid.
As to the difference between this pot and that kettle is that I haven't spoke words that conflict with Jesus' teachings. But certainly this pot is as black as the next one and ought always be called lovingly on the carpet anytime I ever speak a word against Jesus' Way.
RETRACT "or even venrerating ..."
I let my rhetoric run away from my thinker on that.
I do venerate the Bible: "regard with feelings of respect and reverence."
Prayers always accepted.
Ya know, I realize the words I wrote above seem awfully harsh, especially to one who *does* believe undoubtingly that the Bible is inerrant, infallible, etc.
But I just cannot wrap my heart or brain around this, from Joshua, the Jericho story:
"They devoted the city to the LORD and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it — men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys."
It's gratuitous. Now, do I beloieve it? I believe this: That the story, as part of the Jewish Scriptures belonging to the first Christian, has value for us as our inheritance from those first Christians. But I also believe that the Jews probably took Jericho, then attributed their success to God, and took literary license in recounting the tale.
Such a view is not incompatible with the Christian faith in general, nor with my own personal faith.
Just so you know. I don't discount the Bible -- and I don't disbelieve it. I -- and millions of other believers -- believe it differently than fundamentalists do, is all.
Oh, and I just reread Dickens, onj Christmas Eve. Scrooge was paying close attention by the second (non-Marley) ghost, it seems to me.
I believe that the story of the Battle of Jericho happened exactly the way the bible says, and I believe that Joshua and his Army did exactly as they were instructed by God.
A lot of self-proclaimed "followers of Jesus" feel the need to discount the particularly bloody or gratuitously harsh passages of the Bible because these incidents do not fit with their understanding of Jesus' message of Peace and Love.
As a result, they have to then doubt the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible.
"A loving God would never order the bloody murder of women and children!"...
"A loving God would never exclude anyone from Salvation simply because they disagree with the 'fundies' definition of what is and is not Sin!"...
"A loving God would never punish an entire nation for the sins of a few!"...
But He would, and did, and we have record of it in the Bible.
That is, unless we choose to disregard these glimpses of the Personality of God which episodes like the Battle of Jericho provide for us.
If we choose to ignore the record, then we are forced to create God in our own image, because we have nothing else to go on other than the Bible.
God is at once loving and just. He is at once caring and jealous. he is at once creator and destroyer.
For the Bible tells me so.
Disregard Robertson if you like. Noah had no credibility in his day either, even while the clouds gathered.
Toss out whatever you disagree with, no matter the source, and work out your own Salvation in the way that seemeth right unto you.
God punishes disobedience, whether we believe He does, or not.
One more point about Jericho...
Joshua was not accused of starting a "War for Cattle", nor did he spend the next twenty years trying to put down an insurgency in Jericho.
God knows what He is doing, whether we understand His motives or not.
It *is* easier to accept it all without thinking, and pretending you don't doubt, I realize. Very easy. Actually, in this country right now, I mean among those who profess Christ, *that* is the broad way. The easy way. I'll take the narrow way, the one that acknowledges that I neither know everything nor has God made evrything plain. It's harder, but more honest.
You're right, God is not the author of confusion. The problem is that none of us can "read" much of it clearly! "Glass darkly" -- do you think that's just a turn of phrase? Anyone who thinks he or she has much of a handle on what's what -- I mean beyond there is God, I am not Him, He has bridged the chasmm, His name is Jesus -- is deluded, IMHO.
I don't doubt God's grace. Just about everything else is up for grabs. Doubting is PART of faith.
Which is why I say anyone who doesn't doubt is relying on something besides faith. Superstition maybe. In fact, I think that if you think you've got all the answers, or even very many of them, then you *are* leaning on your own understanding.
..:Glass Darkly:..
1 Corinthians 13
Charity [love] never fails
But prophesy does
Tongues do
Knowledge does
What does it mean, really? There are prophets of God today working through the Holy Spirit in churches across the globe... Prophesy has not failed.
People speak in tongues world wide... Tongues have not failed.
Knowledge has increased world wide-- exponentially... Knowledge has not ceased.
On top of this, to have abiding faith in God it must be understood that God does not lie. How, after all, can one have faith in a god who cannot keep his promises? So this passage must mean something else.
It's true we don't know everything. How does the finite grasp, intellectually, the infinite? We think we do, but in truth we haven't a clue what eternity really means.
But God said all scripture is given by inspiration of Himself, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
We know what we need to know. God has revealed to us all He needs to reveal; He's laid His hand on the table. Now it's our turn... do we lay our lives at the foot of the Cross for what Christ, God incarnate, did for us, or do we call His bluff and hope our hand is better than His?
What a terrifying, terrible choice! What hubris!!! To think we can outplay God, Almighty maker of heaven and earth!
Do we see through a glass darkly? Absolutely! Because we don't see the things God sees; we don't know the things God knows, but that's not to say we cannot see the truth of His message, His purpose, His love, His sacrifice, His infinite love... for us. NO ONE who is in Christ is blind, for the Light of World is in us. Do we stumble on occasion? Absolutely! Even the sighted take their eyes off the road before them on occasion-- billions of stubbed toes can attest to that!
I can easily look at the Bible and see within its pages all the proof I need to know that it is the inspired word of God; inerrant and infallible. There are enough "bright as the noon day sun" moments between the covers of the Bible to discern right from wrong, sin from righteousness. There is no "Dark Glass" in this respect.
When all is fulfilled, Prophecy will surely cease-- for what is prophecy's function but to stand as a witness to God faithfulness?
When all is fulfilled, tongues will cease-- for who will need convincing of God's power and majesty?
When all is fulfilled, knowledge will cease-- for we will know everything He knows.
But love... Love will never cease. It will endure for eternity, and we will dwell in it's presense and bask in its glory, and praise God for all eternity for the great love he demonstrated toward us... while we were yet sinners!
Praise God! Hallelujah!
There's a lot I don't know... don't understand, and for all these the glass is indeed dim. But for everything else.... Why would Jesus tell us to set our candles where others could see the light of truth; to come out of darkness and into light, only to blind them once more?
Wow! That last sentence! What a prodigious slice of Rhetoric Pie!
Thanks, mom2.
EL, I agree with this!
"We know what we need to know. God has revealed to us all He needs to reveal; He's laid His hand on the table. Now it's our turn... do we lay our lives at the foot of the Cross for what Christ, God incarnate, did for us, or do we call His bluff and hope our hand is better than His?"
Just don't ask me to agree with you on minor doctrinal details. Not that you ever have ...
And, belief in the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible is not required to adhere to it. Getting the gist of it is plenty! WARS are fought over niggling details of manmade doctine.
One more, then I collapse. My words, recycled from another blog:
Jesus just said, "Follow me," so if one tries to follow Him, has the desire to follow Him, which requires one to be led of the Lord God Almighty in the first place, then one can be considered a Christian, which just means "little Christ."
Elaboration: Metaphysical discussions and arguments over Jesus, His humanness versus His Godness -- those are all creations of His followers.
My Christian faith says that anyone who tries to follow Jesus's words -- including the trust thing -- and His example, does, in fact, have a part in the spreading of the Gospel, and the "Kingdom of God" as Jesus meant it, by definition.
My faith further says that those who do so, or strive to do, the hardest of the two main commandments, that is, to love your neighbor as yourself, are way closer to the ideal Jesus had in mind than those who say they love God but show no love for their neighbors.
And those who love their neighbors as themselves experience little human epiphanies and spiritual revelations that make concern over the metaphysics of who Jesus is melt away like the intellectual dross it is.
The pastor of my radically hospitable church, who Mark maliciously and falsely accuses me of worshiping, recently said that people often tell him they want to help with the church's homeless ministry, or this outreach effort or that one, but are reluctant because, they say, "I'm not sure I'm a Christian." And the pastor said, "I tell them, 'Just come on. You'll get it when you do it.' "
Bottom line: What Jesus said about how people are to act toward one another is way more important than what people have said about Jesus.
This will be my last word for tonight as well....
In regard to "minor doctrinal details" and "man-made doctrine"
I agree that all anyone need do to be saved is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and follow him. But let's not forget that 'following Him' requires us to spread the good news; that we need not be shackled to our sins, that there is a way to be free from the bondage and penalty of sin. And that way is Jesus.
Take a look at Acts and the Epistles... These holy men of God preached reams of doctrine, and none of it was man-made. Jesus said,
And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you... But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. --John 14:16-18, 26
First he says God will give them another Comforter, then says HE will come to them.
If we are out doing the Lord's will; winning souls, and teaching them to go out and do the same, they are going to have questions. Face it, the above quoted passage from John is doctrine... And doctrine that's likely to engender questions? How is it Jesus says God will send a comforter, then says that comforter will be Him? How is that possible? Well, because this statement points to the diety of Christ and the oneness He shares with God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit; in essense the doctrine of the Trinity, the triune nature of God.
Do new Christians need to know these things to be genuine believers in Christ? No. But without this understanding they will never be effective witnesses for Christ, for how else are they to answer these questions when the focus of their witness asks for answers?
Let's also remember that,
...No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. --2 Peter 1:20-21
The bible is the word spoken by God to holy men of God... and no prophecy is of a private interpretation; meaning, no prophecy stands on its own merits; it is supported by the sum total of prophetic scripture, and is in complete and utter agreement with said sum total.
The penitent thief whom Jesus promised would be with Him that day in Paradise, knew nothing of doctrine... Only belief that Jesus was who He said He was. This serves to demonstrate that our faith is by Grace alone, without works. But it should also be pointed out that had the penitent thief received a last minute pardon and was removed from the cross, his faith would have required a response, in works. Works that demonstrate personal gratefulness for the Grace of God... Not of works lest any man should boast...
The doctrine I try to get out there in Cyberland is not man-made, though it is prone to error... I can make mistakes if I don't keep my head and knees bowed and my heart humble. But anyone with the Holy Spirit inside them, who are listening to the Spirit, will recognize the truth of what I say. And not just me! Anyone who speaks God's truth.
Without a firm grasp of doctrine we will find the harvest a difficult-- if not entirely impossible --slog. It's hard enough with a firm grasp, but without it? Talk about hard rows to hoe!!!
I take issue with the 'minor doctrinal details' bit only because we have to be ready to preach (and teach) in season and out of season. We have to be able to give an answer to those who have questions. Perhaps the greatest reason the church is so ineffective these days, is there is too much confusion within the church in regard to doctrinal details... Even the visible Church doesn't agree denomination to denomination! And that is perhaps the greatest tragedy of our time... Why we are in fact living in the Laodicean age.
The bible is the word spoken by God to holy men of God...
Spoken by God? Thats the supersition I'm talking about. Holy? Yes, in that it is our inheritance. Inspired? Yes. The ones who penned those words were seeking God, the Truth, etc. "Spoken by God" makes it a carnival trick.
And anyone who concerns him or herself about "saving souls" withoput concern about people's physical needs as well has missed the whole point.
As a pastor and author I am fond us (recently deceased) once said, "“When I entered the ministry, it was not for the purpose of saving souls. The purpose of my ministry is to point people toward a relationship with God, because I believe the soul of a person who honestly seeks a relationship with God is in good hands.”
He also said this, whioch I believed long before I took the steps I've taken the past several months (so Mark, nip it):
"Fundamentalism is a threat to Christianity not because of the fundamental beliefs themselves, but rather because of the judgment that so often accompanies those beliefs. For example, it is perfectly acceptable to believe Jesus was born of a virgin. It is not acceptable to think that a person who disagrees with you on the subject is going to hell. For all of its libraries and theological books, Christianity is at its heart a fairly simple religion. In fact, the teachings of Jesus can be summarized nicely in four words: LOVE EVERYBODY. JUDGE NOBODY. To believe that another person is forever beyond the grace of God because of the way that person practices religion is the ultimate judgment. For that reason, modern fundamentalism is often a negative force within the Christian faith."
There's the doctrine I strive for, in Christ: "Love everybody. Judge nobody." Everything else -- all of it -- is busy work and a distraction.
..:It depends on what the meaning of "Of" is:..
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God..."
Now the word "Of"-- for being only two letters --carries with it tremendous weight in terms of meaning. "Of" means one thing, "In" means something entirely different. When reading scripture the small words are just as important to meaning as the larger words are to larger thoughts. The small words determine how the larger words relate to one another. Simple as that.
"OF", quite simply, means 'to proceed from, to issue out of, deriving its source from...' No, that's not Websters, just common sense.
The inspiration is God's... the words are God's, they were placed in the minds and hearts of the authors as Jesus said they would...
"...the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things,"
So yes, the bible is God inspired, but that inspiration did not 'proceed out of the minds and hearts of men' but rather, from the mind of God the Holy Spirit.
..:Love everybody. Judge nobody:..
If that's all there was to it, why then did Jesus need to die? That is NOT how ANYONE get's saved! No one can get saved by doing or refraining from anything.
Firstly, a person has to see their sin, and realize that without a savior they are, quite literally, toast!
Secondly, the only way a person comes to such a realization is if the word is preached to them. They will never come to the realization they need a savior without someone first showing them their sin and telling them someone came to pay for that sin.
Thirdly, Jesus said, "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day." --John 6:44
In order for ANYONE to be saved the Father must first draw them. And since faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God, someone must preach to the man, drawn by God's Holy Spirit, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, at which point the Holy Spirit convicts, or pricks the conscience of the hearer compelling them to either repent and accept Christ or turn away and reject Christ. There is no middle ground.
Lastly, since no one is saved by any desire they possess within themselves outside of God's intervention via the convicting power of the Holy Ghost, simply loving everyone, and judging no one will buy the unsaved absolutely nothing!
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned..." --Romans 5:12
"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" --Romans 3:23
'Love Everybody, Judge Nobody' then becomes Salvation by Works. These are both Godly ideals everyone should strive for, but they will not save a single soul. We are damned at birth by the death bought for us by our father Adam. The seed of propensity resides in every human heart, and only the blood of Jesus can spoil that seeds ultimate fruit.
Only God's own blood [Acts 20:28], the blood of Jesus Christ, can save men's souls from sin. And only God can draw men to want to be saved. They cannot do it on their own.
This has become a distraction. We're arguing about crap that absolutely does not matter. Jesus saves. Let him.
Sorry. Not trying to be rude. :-)
I'm a Christian. Y'all, by your profession, are Christians. We're on the same team -- we just see the game differently. It starts and ends with Jesus. The rest really is niggling details to me.
Peace!
If you deny the virgin birth, you deny the truth of the Bible, and as such, the truth of God.
Be that as it may, No one will go to Hell because he doesn't believe Mary was a virgin.
There is only one unpardonable sin for which one will go to Hell. That is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
Even then, if one repentsd for his blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, he can then enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
What is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit? Refusal to accept the gift of God, which is eternal life, not of works, but of faith, and the continual refusal of said gift until death, after which, it is too late to change ones mind.
God is a loving God. God doesn't condemn anyone to eternal damnation. We condemn ourselves by refusla to be saved. Indeed, we are all condemed already because we have not believed in Him.
John 3:16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. NIV
I deny the inerrancy of the Bible. I deny the infallability of the Bible. I accept the overall truth of the Bible. It really isn't very complicated. Enough, here anyway. Oh, and Mark, until you recant what you said about shooting down illegals as they cross the border -- and you may have -- your thoughts on faith, the Bible and anything else to do with, well, anything, are worth spit to me.
Post a Comment
<< Home