The Blame Game

The secret of dealing with anger is putting the things that cause your anger in perspective. Anger CAN be a good thing, but most often it is not. It is good if it motivates you to do something positive as a result of it. However, the other outcomes of anger are harmful. One can stew in their anger and put stress on their minds and bodies. Or, anger can motivate people to do something DEstructive. So, if you play the odds, the best thing to do is to let go of it.

That is where perspective comes in. I am having trouble with finances right now. That makes me upset and angry if I allow it to. The first thing we like to do is blame. I could blame my wife. She had a part in it, by quitting a job, being unemployed for months, and then taking only a part-time job when she did go back to work. On top of that, she spends too much, in my opinion.

I could blame God. He could arrange it so I would get a heavy winfall from someplace.

Or, the most painful, I could blame myself. Blaming the self is the least likely place people target in the blame game. We like to be victims, don't we? If someone else is doing something to us, we don't have near the hit on the ego and we can fantasize that if life was fair, we would be happy.

I would say blaming God is the most prevalent of the targets we have. There SEEMS to be no negative outcome. We don't have to deal with the friction blaming someone in our lives would cause; we wouldn't have to deal with self-worth and all the ugliness and pain that goes with that, either. No, we build a straw man (God) and blame Him. That way we get to blame, but do not suffer the physical consequence of it.

There are spiritual consequences, however. Oh, it isn't that God will punish us for blaming Him. He is bigger than that - and more loving. No, instead we separate ourselves further from the only One that can really help us with the problem, or the peace we need as a result of the problem. More importantly than that, we separate ourselves from a life of grace and communion with our Creator.

So, I let the anger go by putting it into perspective. I try to discover the actual source of the problem, not to blame, but to gain understanding. With understanding, comes peace. I, then, look at how things could be worse. I praise God that I have the blessings that I DO. I pray that I will see, understand, and learn from the trial - that I may be better as a result of it and that I will shine as a result of this "polishing".

A Wretch Like Me

It is easy to get full of yourself. You look around and think, "I don't live like THAT guy," or "I would never do what SHE did." We look around to justify are own wretchedness.

God did not call us to be better than our neighbors; He called us to be perfect. Don't misunderstand; He doesn't expect us to be perfect. No, He just wants us to admit that we aren't and we cannot be in His presence without His grace - no matter how good we think we are.

What do we do instead? What have I caught MYSELF doing? I rest on my "good deed" laurels or my so-called pious living. My life is not THAT pious and my very best "righteous cloak" is a mere filthy rag to God.

Jesus told a story to some who were complacently pleased with themselves over their moral performance and looked down their noses at the common people:

"Two men went up to the Temple to pray, one a Pharisee, the other a tax man. The Pharisee posed and prayed like this: 'Oh, God, I thank you that I am not like other people--robbers, crooks, adulterers, or, heaven forbid, like this tax man over here. I fast twice a week and tithe on all my income.'

Meanwhile the tax man, slumped in the shadows, his face in his hands, not daring to look up, said, 'God, give mercy. Forgive me, a sinner.'"

Jesus commented, "The tax man, not the Pharisee, went home made right with God. If you walk around with your nose in the air, you're going to end up flat on your face, but if you're willing to accept who you are AND God's grace, you will become more than you are."

(Edited from The Message [a Bible paraphrase])

I have known that story for years. I have believed that I understood it and lived it. I guess I will always struggle to grasp it because here I am in another fight with myself over it.

"Several years ago Dr. (Billy) Graham was interviewed on PrimeTime Live. He was sitting somberly in a chair when the last question came his way: "What do you want people to say about you when you're gone?" His response took many by surprise. "I don't want people to say anything about me. I want them to talk about my Savior. The only thing I want to hear is Jesus saying, 'Well done, my good and faithful servant.'" Then he bowed his head and said softly, "But I'm not sure I'm going to hear that." It was a rare but honest look into the true nature of Billy Graham's heart. In spite of all he's done for the work of the Kingdom, he still sees himself unworthy of God's commendation"

(from Embracing Eternity by Tim LaHaye, Jerry B. Jenkins and Frank M. Martin)

I should be so humble. So what are my sins? They are too many to list. One obvious one is having the impudence to think that anything I write here should be considered important enough to post to the public. Such audacity! I harbor a lot of things in my heart that I can't seem to purge. I have a friend that always talks about his son. I hate his son's name. It is too pansy for me. If I could just have an opinion and desert it, it would be okay. However, it is everything I can do to NOT say something about it. Why!?! Only by the grace of God have I not hurt my friend with this nonsense.

My wife was in a depressed mood today. Although I presented myself as sympathetic, my wretchedness was making a speech to my psyche, "How dare her be in this mood now!? She has used up all the rights for her depression by now. You deserve peace, not this wife-manufactured hardship!"

Oh, wretched self.

These are just examples. Thoughts like this permeate my day - every day. Oh, wretched self!

All I can do is confess it and hand it over to the One that can handle it. Yet, I struggle to do that sometimes. One thing that haunts me is hearing from someone, "That's not fair!" Of course whatever the matter is unfair. We live in an unfair world where we don't often get what we deserve.

Thank God we don't, though, and thank God that we have grace.

A Hitch in my Get-Along

I touched on this in my other blog, Psychosomatic Wit, but I am having a major concern about the walk that others see of me. I have generally been a happy person, full of hope. Lately, since my marriage, I am sure I don't come off that way. It is just the pressure is getting to me.

My wife has some problems that hopefully she is working out. In the meantime, she has no job and subjects me to the fallout over her problems. This fallout amounts to torture. My home should be a refuge, but it isn't and that is taking a toll.

As a result of her unemployment and my inability to sell my other house, finances are getting to me also. I have cut out all recreational spending and all purchases that rise above absolute necessity. That is too much pressure, also, because I was subjected to this kind of poverty - wondering if I will have electricity today type stuff when I was a kid after my father died.

I am also checking on my mother at least three times daily. She is disabled after having 34 hours of brain surgery. My time and stress plate is full. Quite ironically, the times I check on my mother are the most peaceful times of my day.

I mentioned all these things just to say this: People who see me and observe my "walk" are probably not seeing in me the God of peace that we all long for. I am not representing well. I know that we all go through valleys and this is normal, but that doesn't excuse those strangers and acquaintenances that do not know my story. I don't feel compelled to tell it anyway.

My faith sustains me. I don't know where I would be without it - or maybe I do and it isn't pretty. Yet, it sure doesn't look that great from the outside observer. I just wish I was stronger.

Beginnings Revisited: Man

The whole Evolution vs Intelligent Design issue has got me on edge. The non-intelligent design folks are in the "if you don't see it my way, you MUST take the radical opposite of my view" camp. They accuse the other side of wanting to teach the Bible in science classes at public schools. It is the classic straw man argument and it grows weary.

Here is the debate: The Evolutionists believe that man evolved from lower animals over millions of years. Ultimately, we are the ancestors of wet rocks. The extremists on this side think that it should be taught as fact in our schools - period.

The intelligent design folks say that the world and life is too complex for it to unfold by chance, so logic demands that there is/was an intelligent designer. The extremists want the Genesis account being taught in school.

If one cuts off the extremists on both ends, the mainstream view is still pretty extreme in the pro-evolution camp. Here is why:

Conventional thinking believes that there is no place in the "science" classroom for intelligent design. As a matter of fact, there is no room for bringing up the problems in science that Evolution has. They don't want the students to be confused into thinking that Evolution is anything but fact, despite some evidence to the contrary.

Basically, the mainstream intelligent design people want is the leeway to talk about the problems in Evolution and "mention" that there is an alternate theory of "Intelligent Design" in which some people adhere. They are not interested in advancing a particular religious ideology, just a small portion of the class to state this view. How is that destructive?

My view:

Science should be about discovering the truth. However, the scientific method procludes the possibility of certain truths even before the investigation gets started.

This method looks only for naturalistic reasons and causes which makes sense to a degree. After all, one can't follow scientific rules or laws to explain the system of things if one can merely chalk it all up to magic or God. However, scientists go as far as to discount anything that is not naturalistic, they run incredibly dangerous to doing the thing they claim to despise - creating myth.

For instance, no one as of yet can scientifically prove the existance of God. However, no one can prove that God does not exist, either. It follows then, that if God does exist and is responsible for ANYTHING, then science missed it from jump. Each day that passes with science chasing the white rabbit farther down the path, is one more day farther from the truth. If science is truly interested in the truth, they should leave this door open. Science could get so far away from truth that even intelligent people could believe that we came from wet rocks and those rocks came from nothing.

The Truth Shines Through

Previously, I explored the reliability of Scripture in regard as Truth. I came at it from a secular, legal angle. Would there be enough evidence in court for a jury to deem it true? My answer was yes and outlined why. It can be read or reviewed with my post "Jesus the Key."

I came across a story today that gives the other side of how convincing the the New Testament, particularly the Gospel Accounts, ring as true. This account illustrates how the Gospels stand by themselves. I found it interesting:

___________________________________________________________________

Dr. E. V. Rieu was a classical scholar and translator for many years. He rendered Homer into very modern English for the Penguin Classics. Rieu was 60 years old and a lifelong agnostic when the same firm invited him to translate the Gospels. His son remarked: "It will be interesting to see what Father makes of the four Gospels. It will be even more interesting to see what the four Gospels make of Father."

The answer was soon forthcoming. A year later, Rieu, convinced and converted, joined the Church of England. In an interview with J. B. Phillips, Rieu confessed that he had undertaken the task of translation because of an "intense desire to satisfy himself as to the authenticity and spiritual content of the Gospels."

He was determined to approach the documents as if they were newly discovered Greek manuscripts. "Did you not get the feeling," asked Canon Phillips, "that the whole material was extraordinarily alive?" The classical scholar agreed. "I got the deepest feeling," he replied. "My work changed me. I came to the conclusion that these words bear the seal of the Son of Man and God." (from a daily devotion, originally from J. B. Phillips, The Ring of Truth. quoted by R. Kent Hughes in 1001Great Stories and Quotes.)

Psycho Stands Trial As Phony Christian

In my recent post, "Written on their Hearts" which can be found below, I discussed how evidence of God can be found in the most unlikely of places. In making that point, I have undoubtedly invited criticism of myself even to the point where I may not believe the Bible is God's Word. This indictment comes from Danny Kaye. For those of you who read this blog, Danny Kaye also has other issues with my so-called Christianity. In "A Question of Blogging," he came down on me for keeping my blog thoughts away from my wife. After that post, I thought that he was a Christian brother just concerned about a mistake I may be making in my walk. I welcomed his comments and thoughts to help me stay accountable.

After this post, however, I am coming to the realization that there may be more than this from Danny Kaye. It almost seems that he can't wait to see the splinter in my eye in order to call me on it. I still will give him the benefit of the doubt, but I do see the possibility that he may have some kind of "moral police" mentality. At any rate, I STILL welcome his comments. They still will help me think about my life and keep me accountable. As a matter of fact, I actually enjoy the engagement and would not reject off hand the idea of partnering with him on a Christian debate blog if this one hasn't morphed into that already.

I never dreamed that Danny Kaye or anyone would have a problem with my post. Instead of concentrating on my point, which he DID recognize, it seemed that he was just waiting to pounce by taking liberties with his assumptions.

Now for his charges and my response:

"First, let me say that I love concerts. I love music. I love crowds. I love a cold beer (especially after an ultimate frisbee game). I love entertainment in a big way! But...I have to ask this question before I start: Do you believe the Bible? (No, seriously.) . . . I mean, do you believe that the Bible is the Word of God and that it is the Standard and Ruler on which we should base our lives? The answer to that question will determine whether or not my comments will be heard without a "filter", or if my comment will fall flat."

Ironically, the post before this controversial one concluded with me pointing to the Bible as Truth and the Word of God. This means that either I am being charged with being a hypocrite, or not understanding what the concept of the Word of God means. I admit to being a hypocrite. I admitted that on this blog before. We ALL are. However, I don't believe I was hypoctical with my views of the concert. I do believe that the Bible is "the Standard and Ruler" on which I should base my life. However, the last sentence in Danny Kaye's quote is illigitimate. He sets up an exlcusive conditon which there is no room for any other possibility. Frankly, I don't see how he can claim that authority. Even if he does, I don't recognize it because I see a vast number of possibilities.

"But the part I have difficulty with is the part about not being offended by the sinfulness you saw there. I have to say that this one definately does NOT stack up well against the Scriptures.I am reminded of the Tower of Babel. Here was a bunch of folks who were sinning up a storm (the act of attempting to reach heaven without the help of God). The Lord found their activities offensive, even though they were unified."

I don't disagree with this. The people about the Tower of Babel were bypassing God to try to reach heaven. God was offended and TOOK ACTION AGAINST THEM. This is important. It was GOD that was offended and took action. This judgement was and is reserved for God. Who am I? What power do I have to affect those concert goers. The only instruction I know from Scripture is to love them; not condemn them.

"I am reminded of a passage in 2 Cor. 6:14-16 which says, "Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols?"

From reading your post I would guess that you fellowshipped, harmonized and agreed pretty well with the crowd."

I have no problem with the 2 Cor. verses. Can you guess which part of his quote that I DID have a problem with? When I originally read his feedback, I was forced to go back and re-read my post. Here is what I found:

"In my church, the worship is led by a band that plays upbeat, even rock music. Looking around the auditorium, many people (mostly teenagers) were swaying, raising their hands, worshipping. I am a little more demure about my worship . . ."

The clue here that was easily missed was that even though it is common place at my church to do these kind of activities, I do not "get into" it in that way. It isn't my personality. However, somehow I AM that kind of person at a rock concert. It isn't true and there is nothing I wrote that would reasonably assume that I am.

"In unison, they sang, jumped, pumped their arms toward the objects of their affection. It was more than the throng admiring the music or the musicianship. The multitude was enraptured and was caught in unified worship.

I was in awe. Not that I have never witnessed this phenomenon before, but I never truly SAW it before. It confirms what my Christian spirit and the Scriptures have always taught me. God writes instructions on the hearts of mankind. He programs us."

Here, from the same post that Danny Kaye ASSUMES that I am WITH THE CROWD, I am in a role of witnessing it. I didn't write WE sang, jumped, etc., I wrote THEY. I truthfully do not know why he assumed the worse of me. He just did.

"I dunno, mate. I compare your admiration of their unity to seeing a couple involved in adultery and thinking, WOW!!! Look how much they love one another!"

I didn't admire the crowd; I admired God, His Word, the confirmation that this action was programmed by God, but perverted by this fallen world. There is a bigger picture there than drunken concert goers. There is something there that screams, "No matter how perverted or depraved the activity, the influence of God is still there. His fingerprints are everywhere. It is a shame that it gets perverted, but it has to be there for it to BE perverted. That is what I was in awe of.

"Look, I can avoid joining in on the profanity. I can avoid joining in on the drunkeness. And perhaps you are more pure and not so easily dragged into sin than I am, but if a naked woman (or many naked women) was flaunted in front of me, I imagine it would take me all of about .01 seconds to start lusting after what I saw."

That's a shame. I am not trying to be disrespectful, but Danny Kaye and I are different in this area. I am just not turned on by drunken women exposing their breasts in this fashion. I don't even think there was a lot of lusting in the crowd. There was more laughter than lip licking. And before DK jumps to more evil-seeking conclusions about me, I wasn't laughing either. Truthfully, I was just indifferent at this point of the concert (the very end).

"I am sure you are familiar with Galatians 5:19ff. But in case you are not, I'll post it:"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God." Dude! You experienced at least 5 or 6 of the things in this list alone at that concert!"

Again, I have no problem with the Word, just a problem with his assumptions. What did I experience (as opposed to witness)? Sexual immorality? Nope, I didn't even have my hands in my pockets. Impurity? Nope, showered and shaved before I left and I didn't then or do now use profanity. Debauchery? Nope, may have witnessed it, but I was pretty much a wall flower. Idolotry? Double no, I was worshipping God at the time. Witchraft? Please. Hatred? No. Discord? No, but I would have had I stood up an condemned the crowd. Jealousy? Hardly. Fits of Rage? No, but Danny Kaye may have had one had he been there (tongue in cheek). Selfish Ambition? Not hardly. Dissensions? See "Discord" above. Factions and Envy? No and no. Drunkeness? Nope, I had one overpriced Diet Pepsi. I have never been drunk in my life. Orgies? Ah . . . . no. I can't find one thing that I EXPERIENCED on that list.

"I guess I am a terrible Christian. Because I would have had to high-tail it outta there. I would not have been able to stay and see the wonders of God in that crowd. I gotta hand it to you, Jeff. You must be a VERY strong Christian."

Thank you, but don't worry. We are all terrible Christians. That is why we have a God of Grace and Mercy.

Let me give a little more background. I don't really like Motley Crue. As a matter of fact, if not for the song, "Home Sweet Home", I think I would dislike ALL of their music. However, a friend won two tickets to this concert, kind of likes '80's bands, and asked me to go with him so he wouldn't have to go alone. I agreed.

I didn't know what I was getting into, but I praised God that I got that little message from Him from going. That, in of itself, confirmed to me that God was not unhappy that I was there. Maybe some people like Danny Kaye can't handle that situation. I agree with his statement: "I would not have been able to stay and see the wonders of God in that crowd." He wouldn't and God would probably not have bothered to try to get him to see it. That doesn't make Danny Kaye wrong or inferior, just different. I think it is a gift to be able to see the Biblical God in all places. I thank God for that gift.

I am not going to judge people. That is up to God. If someone comes up to me and askes me what my opinion of an activity is, I would tell them. However, I won't judge them. Some people have to go through a lot of things to find God and the life that He wants them to live. I do not have the authority to prescribe that life. There is a Christian principle taught in AA that states that no one should deprive another of their suffering. There is a reason for that principle.

As I stated in the original post, "These people, the band and crowd alike, are on their paths - living out what they think is written on their hearts." Some day they will find God (if they hadn't already). Hopefully, it will be on this side of their last breaths.

Written on their Hearts

As I was sitting in church Sunday, I couldn't help but notice all the people that were REALLY getting into the worship part of the service. In my church, the worship is led by a band that plays upbeat, even rock music. Looking around the auditorium, many people (mostly teenagers) were swaying, raising their hands, worshipping. I am a little more demure about my worship - especially in the past few months because of situations that are trying to rob me of my joy (but ultimately failing). But I digress . . .

I am reminded about the time I attended a Motley Crue concert a couple of years ago. It was an interesting night, actually. There were plenty of things to look at that one usually doesn't see as he trifles down life's avenues. For one thing, I saw a scantily-clad young woman leading a little person (although he was referred to as a midget) by a leash. There were nearly naked trapese performers, fire, explosions and plenty of f-bombs to go around. The music was loud and true to the original sound of the eighties glam bands. Oh yeah, there was also a miniversion of "Girls Gone Wild" thanks to drummer Tommy Lee, a hand-held camcorder, and two giant screens - oh and of course local women and two hours worth of consumed beer.

The thing I noticed the most, however, was not the nudity, profanity, or the rock and roll. It was the crowd - it's behavior. Notice that I described the crowd as a singular entity rather that a plurality of people. That is because they were of one mind, one spirit.

In unison, they sang, jumped, pumped their arms toward the objects of their affection. It was more than the throng admiring the music or the musicianship. The multitude was enraptured and was caught in unified worship.

I was in awe. Not that I have never witnessed this phenomenon before, but I never truly SAW it before. It confirms what my Christian spirit and the Scriptures have always taught me. God writes instructions on the hearts of mankind. He programs us.

God gave us a necessity for worship. When we are lost in this world, the instructions are often perverted. Nevertheless, they always manage to surface. The crowd worshipped Motley Crue because they had a NEED to worship . . . something. The band offered a loud, high energy, outlet. It made perfect sense.

Many Christians would have been offended if they saw what I saw on that night. I wasn't. These people, the band and crowd alike, are on their paths - living out what they think is written on their hearts. No, I wasn't offended. I praised God for letting me in on a little more truth.

The Key, Part II.

Previously, I discussed how Jesus was the key to discovering God. I will continue from there. I am not going to spend time re-hashing WHY Jesus is key. If you want to explore that more, then visit my original post here. I will now investigate Jesus being the key at another level. He is central in discovering what God has to say to mankind OUTSIDE of the words of Christ, Himself.

Showing previously the reliability of the New Testament, I will now explore the Old Testament from the credible standpoint OF the New Testament. First of all, there are only five Old Testament books not mentioned in the New Testament: Ezra, Ecclesiastes, Ester, Nehemiah, and Song of Solomon. The rest of the 39 books are accounted for there.

The Gospel writers have Jesus referring to Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - all of which are historical figures found in the book of Genesis. The Gospel of Luke even traces Jesus' lineage all the way back to Adam.

Jesus talks about Moses as the lawgiver on a number of occasions. Moreover, Matthew, Mark, and Luke all described the transfiguratation (represented at the left from a painting by Carl Bloch) where Moses and Elijah came to commune with Jesus on a mountain. Jesus often mentions Moses and the prophets in his teachings.

We can conclude here that if Jesus was/is the Son of God, He would know whether or not these Old Testament stories were false. Instead of discrediting them, He affirms the Old Testament as Truth. This is ironic when one considers the beliefs of the Jews. The Jews do not recognize Jesus as Messiah, yet Jesus provided the most credible evidence to date that the Jewish scriptures are legitimate.

I don't spend too much time here hammering out evidence after evidence. If there is any reason to disagree with me, I welcome it in the "comments" section. Other than that, I will explore how the Old and New Testaments tie together as an overall love letter from God to man; the ultimate Good News to the human race.

Amazing Grace

Have you ever listened to a song that you have heard a thousand times before, but it hits you suddenly like you have never heard it before? This has happened to me before and also today. I guess it is a matter of listening instead of hearing.

This is where some bloggers tend to list a whole song of lyrics for all to peruse. I am going to resist that urge and talk about a few things in the song instead - and yes, will probably include snippets of the lyrics. For some reason the whole song transcript thing just gets on my nerves.

The song in question is "I Need You to Love Me" by Barlow Girl. When I heard it today on the radio, I actually listened to every word. The tune and the sweetness of the harmony of the group's voices made it all the more bittersweet for me. It reminded me of my failures, but not in despair but in hope. It starts out this way:

Why, why are you still here with me
didn't you see what i've done?
In my shame i want to run and hide myself
But it's here i see the truth; I don't deserve you

Facing God in a situation like that is heart wrenching - if you believe that He is there. There is no place to hide. Yet, if you feel the mercy and the Grace, you know the only place you want to run is to Him.

After taking you down the road of self-examination, we are led in the chorus to facing the moment, our needs, and our lifeline:

But I need you to love me,
And I won't keep my heart from you this time
And I'll stop this pretending
That I can somehow deserve what I already have
I need you to love me

The last verse is what got me. It literally changed my state of being while driving to work:

I just never saw how you could cherish me
'Cause you're a god who has all things
And still you want me

I understand that if you don't have this kind of vision of God, that this song really has no meaning for you. I don't want to sound superior, but I really pity those who do not know God or even recognize His existance. Without Him, all you have are others who have their own agendas and all of them do not include you. People, every single one, will ultimately let you down. All you have left is yourself and if you are as honest as I am at this moment, you know how wretched you really are.

Where is the hope? The hope lies with the One that includes you in every agenda. The One who does not grade you at every turn and will not turn from you when you betray Him. Because if you aren't in a state of betrayal to the God who sacrificed for you right now, you will be in the future. You can't help yourself. And when you are, He will still be there taking your best shots. He can't help Himself, either. It is His nature.

I am sure I will be there again as the first verse describes, wondering why God is still there after knowing what I have done. It is knowing that He will be is what gets me through today.

A Question of Blogging

Danny Kaye from Nothing Important To .US and I are having a discussion concerning the "Separate Worlds" theory I incorporate in my blogging practice. It comes from "The Interview" post I recently made.

Interview question that started this discussion was:

1. Is your wife aware of the degree to which you blog about your relationship? If so, her reaction?

My answer was, "My wife, to my knowledge, is not even aware that I have a blog, much less a blog that reveals aspects of our relationship. I am a firm believer of the “separate worlds” theory as perceived by George on Seinfeld. We all need a place where we can be real, a place that is a sanctuary from those closest to us. If my wife started reading my blog and became familiar with those who regularly read and comment on it, 'Independent Jeff' would cease to exist.

No one in my real life knows about or has read my blog, so it is not just about hiding things from my wife. However, I do try to protect the most sensitive of details and people that I mention in my blog by keeping them somewhat anonymous"

Danny Kaye questioned this answer and wondered if I thought it would stack up against Scripture.

This is how I clarified this question, "I don't really think there is a conflict - not by the way I am thinking about the concept, anyway. I guess I can see the conflict from an outsiders point of view.

We all have thoughts and opinions and ways to work out problems in our lives through words and processses. It is not imperative for those that are involved in those conflicts and things to be aware of every thought in my head. Some couldn't handle it. Some would be hurt by it. For some things I may choose to write about, people in my life may spread it like gossip or try to use it against me or someone else to hurt them.

This way, I and the people in my life do not have to deal with it. I can still use my blog to process those things and get objective feedback. Where is the conflict?"

___________________________________________________________________

I included this extensive background to this question in order that some detail doesn't get lost in the string. Danny Kaye gave a very long and well thought out response. I will include his remarks in "blue" and my thoughts in regular type.

I guess I hear what you are saying, Jeff. Here are my thoughts if you want them.

Absolutely. Thanks for your input. I appreciate the thought and time you put into your answer - the caring of a brother. Thank you.

I can agree with almost everything you stated below. I think you view my blog as something fundementally different than how I view it. I will try to address what you are saying in detail.

First, a husband and wife are "one flesh" according to Genesis 2:24 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh."

There is a unity that exists in marriage (and especially a Christian marriage) that surpasses anything else this world has to offer. A husband and wife are "one." When we got married, we made the decision to let go of our independent ways and cleave to another person.

I agree with this entirely. There is a lot going on that I don't put in my blogs. These things would put more clarity on this issue. However, there are some deeper and personal things that I will not even put in my blog. However, these omissions do not preclude what I use my blog for at times, which is to process my thoughts - whether anyone reads them or not.

In the best of marriages, I do not share EVERY thought with my wife that pops in my head. I do not audibly let her know the wheels and cogs that turn inside my head. I would guess no one does. It wouldn't be prudent.

Second, according to Genesis 2:18, God gave us our wives so that they can help us. "The Lord God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

You will find no better way of drawing near to your wife than by sharing your heart with her. She is your helper, given by God and accepted by you. Don't deprive her of doing what God created her to do.

I agree with this whole-heartedly. As a matter of fact, it breaks my heart that I agree with this so much. Right now, for reasons I cannot fully explain in this forum, this isn't possible. However, even if it was possible, I would still independently process my life, have independent thoughts. Some of those thoughts wouldn't be useful and could be hurtful for others that know me to see. The beauty is that they don't have to see it. They are my PERSONAL thoughts. The obvious question, I know, if they are so personal, why put it on a public blog? I guess the clear answer is that it doesn't feel public. It WOULD feel public if the people that were in my life read it.

And consider how she would feel if all of a sudden she found that the man she thought she knew, the man who agreed on their wedding day to be "one" with her, had thoughts and feelings she never knew about, yet he was willing to share them with the rest of the world. Imagine the insecurity she would feel about that. She might begin to question whether or not she really knows you.

Understood. However, my life is somewhat anonymous here. To say that I am sharing my thoughts with the rest of the world, the rest of the world would have to know who I am. I could offer a challenge that everyone that reads my blogs should send me a card in the mail. Please include my first and last name on the envelope and make sure you get my address right. If you like, call my cell, too. I am not saying it is impossible. There are investigative things that people could do, I guess, but for the most part. I am one of thousands of Jeffs that live in my part of Indiana. That, to me, is anonymous enough. Therefore, I see my blogs similar to my wife's own diary - that I don't read.

Third, Jesus would not have encouraged the guys to share their hearts with everyone else in the world, but not with each other. I can think of no situation in which Jesus told them to do that. Yet I find a plethora of passages that speak of the unity among the brotherhood.

Again, this is akin to my diary. I don't think it applies.

Ephes. 4:2-6 teaches us to be "completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to one hope when you were called--one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all."

If unity is lacking, it really should be restored through humility and an intense longing for the "one-ness" described in that passage.

You are right and trust me, I am not negligent in trying to make my marriage all it should be.

Is there no one in your life with whom you could confide, and in whom you could trust? Surely there is someone. One thing is for sure, if you aren't getting outside input from the those who know you personally, then the only pool of wisdom from which you are drawing is your own and strangers you might meet out here. And let's face it, we don't know you from Adam's housecat! And yes, prayer is essential. But the Lord gave us the Church so that we could bear our souls with one another (Col. 3:13). Use Mat. 18:15-16 as a guide to help restore unity.

Yes, there are people that I confide in. One friend has helped me immensely. However, he doesn't read my blog nor would he read my diary if I kept one in the traditional way. These are my thoughts - a visual representation of the workings of my mind. We all censor are thoughts before we share them with the people around us. Every time you see a beautiful woman walking along, do you tell your wife EXACTLY what crossed your mind? It wouldn't have to be lustful, but if I mentioned another woman's beauty to my wife, she would be sour for the rest of the day. So, I censor my thoughts in real life and even to a lesser extent, on this blog. I do not look for wisdom among my readers. If someone gives me something helpful, it is gravy, not the potatoes. When they offer encouraging words to me, it is great, but it isn't what sustains me. It is just a bonus for keeping this kind of diary.

Would you not be willing to sit and be a pair of open ears and a closed mouth for a brother who needed to get something off his chest, whether or not it involved you? Of course you would. And others would do the same for you, I'm sure.

Yes, and they do.

I dunno. I know I got kinda preachy there. But if you are bearing your heart out here, and this is the pool of wisdom from which you have chosen to draw, then I will freely, gladly, and eagerly offer you whatever wisdom and insights the Lord has past on to me.

Thank you so much. I know you would and that is one more blessing I get from my blog world. You find kinship in the most unexpected places. It doesn't replace my real life, but it is a nice amendum to a diary.

My Interview

On my other blog, Psychosomatic Wit, I posted this. It is an interview a fellow blogger created for me to answer. There is a lot of spiritual content, so I thought I would include it here.
_____________________________________________________________________

Jaquandor (Kelly) from Byzantium’s Shores was kind enough to interview me. Truthfully, I saw the interview thing going around and had some reservations about asking to be interviewed. I don’t know, it seemed a little self-absorbed to ask someone to interview you. However, after seeing the questions he asked some other bloggers, I was intrigued by what he just might ask me. So, risking my own humility, I asked him to interview me.

These are his questions:

1. Is your wife aware of the degree to which you blog about your relationship? If so, her reaction?

My wife, to my knowledge, is not even aware that I have a blog, much less a blog that reveals aspects of our relationship. I am a firm believer of the “separate worlds” theory as perceived by George on Seinfeld. We all need a place where we can be real, a place that is a sanctuary from those closest to us. If my wife started reading my blog and became familiar with those who regularly read and comment on it, “Independent Jeff” would cease to exist.

No one in my real life knows about or has read my blog, so it is not just about hiding things from my wife. However, I do try to protect the most sensitive of details and people that I mention in my blog by keeping them somewhat anonymous.

2. How much, generally, do you find Christianity to be a struggle?

True Christianity is not a struggle at all. It is we humans who have to incorporate our wills and interpretations on Christianity that makes it difficult. We like to think that we can set up our own agenda. Because we are believers, we believe that agenda can easily be incorporated into God’s will for us. When the square pegs of our agenda items are being forced into the round holes of God’s will, there is bound to be a struggle; we are bound to feel that pain.

Christianity is all about surrender. Surrender is really not a tough thing, but our pride and ego get in the way and make it difficult. For example, if one is being hunted by the police who have weapons fixed on him, how hard is the decision to surrender going to be for him? The problem is that we tend to believe that our own weaponry is equal or even part of God’s - that we are hunting WITH Him rather than being hunted BY Him.

The best “Christians”, although I don’t like to imply that one person is better than any other, are those who have hit rock bottom and completely surrender to God.

So, to answer your question as it concerns me, I still need to work on surrendering from time to time. In those times, there is a struggle. However, what lessens the impact of that struggle is knowing that the Savior has already provided remedy for those shortcomings. So even when I fail, the love of God has already made my life blemish free. The realization within my spirit that God loves me to that degree, makes it a little easier to live my life in a way that is pleasing to Him.

3. What's your favorite book in the Bible, and why?

That is a tough question. Each book of the Bible is part of the overall message. However, if I had to pick one, it may be the Book of James. It is full of hope and teaches about love. There are many key passages in this short book of only five chapters. It discusses living in the success of Christ - showing HOW to live it. James also points out how powerful words are to cause harm and blessing. It shows the meaning of God’s love and reveals His heart.

Because of my current trials, the first chapter of James is there to remind me of what I have come to trust:

“Consider it a sheer gift, friends, when tests and challenges come at you from all sides. You know that under pressure, your faith-life is forced into the open and shows its true colors. So don't try to get out of anything prematurely. Let it do its work so you become mature and well-developed, not deficient in any way.

If you don't know what you're doing, pray to the Father. He loves to help. You'll get his help, and won't be condescended to when you ask for it. Ask boldly, believingly, without a second thought. People who "worry their prayers" are like wind-whipped waves.” (James 1: 2-6 – The Message Bible Paraphrase).

I recommend to all that they should read this short book. I have provided it in the easy to read “The Message” paraphrase on my appendix blog. It is fantastically better than any drivel you will read on my blog. Read it here and be blessed.

4. Describe the best and worst meals you've ever had.

The best and worst concept is difficult most of the time. Let’s say I have had 25 simply outstanding meals in my life. From those, how could I accurately pick the best? Some meals are outstanding for reasons different than others. The best I can do is say that when my grandmother was alive, one of the best meals I have ever had was at her house. When she served fried chicken, mashed potatoes and gravy, green beans and corn on the cob, there is little that could compete with that. Her chicken was unique for no apparent reason. I asked her what she did to it and she simply said, “Oh, I just use flour and add a little salt and pepper.” Yet, grandma magic made it more delicious than any other I have ever tasted. It is a pity that I will never taste it again.

The worst meal in my life came on a first date. It was a lunch date and we walked from her apartment to the Cracker Barrel which was a short block away. I had . . . chicken, ironically enough. It was grilled chicken and it tasted terrible. I noticed that it was raw inside, but I didn’t want to say anything and look like I was some malcontent on this first date. However, my date noticed the bloody pink filet and encouraged me to notify the server. At that point, I was no longer hungry, but my meal was free, awkward, and bad tasting. I think I recall feeling sick the rest of the day. A great date!

5. You, at home, a night alone, and you won't have to clean up. (Elves, or something.) What do you do? What's for dinner?

As great as a question this is, I don’t want to answer. Is it because I am embarrassed of my actions on such a night? Nope. The truth is, I am boring. However, here it goes: I would probably want an “Una Pizza”. This is a pizza unique to my town (for the most part). It is a thin, cracker-type crust with an interesting blend of cheese, sauce and toppings. I can’t explain what makes this blend taste different than other pizzas (since they ALL have cheese, sauce and topics); it just does. After dinner, I would probably watch a movie that I have been putting off for sometime (there is always at least one), and end up writing (either blogging or working on one of my projects). Before bed, I would get some magic powder from those elves to keep mosquitoes off of me without smelling like DEET, lay in a hammock that apparently those elves provided, stare at the stars, listen to the crickets and other nocturnal life, and fall asleep praying to my God, thanking Him for the gift that the evening was – and, of course, for supplying the elves.

What Is It To Me?

I just completed a series (and I use the term "just" loosely) on the search for God. You can read or review it by scrolling down and work yourself back up. As a result, I was asked by Michelle what Jesus meant to me. As she put it, "you've written this great argument where everyone gets to tell their opinion of Jesus, except you. I'd have liked to have heard what Jesus means to you, even more than hearing what Jesus meant to Pliny, St Paul or.. you get the idea.

What is Jesus to you? How do you feel about him? Never mind the logic and the reasoning - what makes Him important just to Jeff and Jeff's life?"

Before starting my new direction of where I am taking this blog, I thought I would address those questions. I get uncomfortable when talking about what Jesus means to me. I guess the reasons for that are a bit convoluted in my mind. You see, I am a hypocrite. I sing the praises of my Lord, then get caught up in my own life - despite knowing better. That simply makes me uncomfortable. However, I know that I am in good company. We are ALL hypocrites! It is in our human nature. So, if you ever hear anyone say that they don't want to go to church because of all the hypocrites there, ask them if it is better to stay away from church with all the hypocrites. At least in church (good ones, anyway), we are reminded of our hypocrisy and told to shun it. But, I digress.

What makes me a hypocrite just because I get caught up in my own life? As a Christian, I have basically given up my rights to my own life. As '80's rock group, Degarmo and Key put it on their 1989 single The Pledge, "He died for me; I'll live for Him". This pledge is what Christians take, even if it is just silently and spiritually. I sing the praises of Christ at the top of my lungs and with the strokes of these keys, yet I spend too much time worrying about my lot in life with marriage and finances. It sickens me.

In my other blog, Psychosomatic Wit, I do a weekly exercise called "NEWSFLASH". In the last installment of it (NEWSFLASH #6), I wrote, "I have been getting too caught up in my life situations lately. When I think about worrying about my wife not bringing in any money with two mortgages to pay, etc., I feel so hypocritical. I either trust in God, or I don't. No matter what the circumstance, things really shouldn't distract me so much. I mean, I only have 40 or 5o years (barring accidents and fatal disease) left on this planet. I can put up with ANYTHING for 40 years. I think about Jesus and HIS world. He just came to offer Himself up. He didn't claim ANY life for Himself. I can't live without a car or financial stress for a while? What a hypocrite I am."

Some people may have thought that the "I can put up with ANYTHING for 40 years" was a little tongue-in-cheek. It wasn't. As a Christian, 40, 80, or even 100 years is just a drop in the bucket compared to eternity. Jesus came from the bosom of the Father, just to die so his body can become a bridge between God and man. He didn't fuss about a car. He didn't even worry if Mary Magdalene had a crush on him (despite recent pieces of fiction). He just came to bridge the gap. During that mission, Jesus healed the sick, fed the poor, and comforted the mourning. If He had more years, He would have done so much more for the people of that time. Since He died for me, I should live for Him - be His hands and feet. I should help people find that bridge and extend love. I do those things, but not the way I should.

Don't get me wrong. That doesn't mean that I live in guilt. I don't. It is just sometimes uncomfortable to hide in darkness when His light shines in my soul to expose it. Fortunately, the life I must live is laid out before me with the strength of God to take me through it. That is the hope that I wouldn't have if I didn't know Christ.

What does Jesus mean to me? He means life. He means hope and strength. He means total sacrifice. It is a good thing that He also exemplifies forgiveness, because that is what I need, each day, each hour, each minute. And I have it so He also means joy beyond any circumstance - when I let it shine.

The disease of self runs through my blood

Like a cancer fatal to my soul

Every attempt on my behalf has failed

To bring this sickness under control

What's going on inside of me

I despise my own behavior

This only serves to confirm my suspicions

That I'm still a man in need of a savior

--Charley Peacock ("In the Light")

Jesus the Key

This one is overdue. My apologies for those who checked for it and kept checking and kept checking . . .

The prerequisites for this entry are as follows:

1. The Search
2. The Search Continues
3. Whittling Down the Choices

If you read (or re-read) these in this order before continuing to the rest of this post, it will make good, logical order sense. I know that no one does it, but I have to urge that anyway.
____________________________________________________________________

What we know about Jesus comes mainly from the New Testament of the Bible. Already, some of the critically minded are thinking, "Yeah, those are real objective sources." I admit that on first blush, it doesn't sound very objective. What if the sources of history were a group of documents - some letters, some accounts by historians and other manuscripts that were from different authors in different times. Would that be an objective way to uncover historical facts? That IS how the written history is determined for antiquity. That is also what makes up the New Testament of the Bible. Later, after they were written, those in authority put them together and declared them Scripture. Before that, they were just a number of independent documents.

In these documents, there are accounts of Jesus' life and many direct quotes from Him. There are also accounts and letters on the effect that Jesus had in the lives of people many years after his death.

In these accounts, Jesus was a teacher, a miracle worker, and a prophet. Jesus also proclaims his deity and by these accounts, backs that claim up. He announced that He will be killed, but asserts that He will rise from the dead. By these New Testament chronicles, He does it - a humble man from the family of a carpenter claims he is God (i.e. Son of God) and then backs up the claim. If these documents were not in the Canon of Scripture, nonbelievers may be a little more hesitant about their disdain. However, these documents are all from believers so the credibility (rightly or wrongly) comes into question.

What about the historical accounts of nonbelievers? What kind of clarity can be added to the equation? In my other blog, Psychosomatic Wit I wrote a post about Jesus and Easter called Easter, By Any Other Name:

I am reminded at this time of the year how miraculous the Christian faith really is. A fairly large group of individuals followed their spiritual leader only to watch him miserably and shamefully die. From all accounts, they and their new belief system took a large blow. This execution also killed the new religion of these men and women. They went back to their old lives with their tails between their legs.

Then, something happened. The new faith surged! There was talk of this man Jesus actually be seen – returning from the dead as He said He would and talking and teaching to His followers. Even though the tomb was empty and there was no sign of the body, that doesn’t mean he resurrected, does it? Many of the skeptics accused Jesus’ followers from bribing the soldiers guarding the tomb and stealing the body. There were all kinds of theories.

Yet, something happened that took these dejected followers from their hopeless lives and brought them back to preaching Jesus resurrected. They, by the hoards, were willingly dying for this new belief system. Non-believing historians such as the Roman Tacitis and the Jewish Josephus recorded the unlikely events of this new Christian group - that they grew from nothing and hopelessness, to zealots in the name of this Jesus who was rumored to have conquered death. The disturbing query was this: why would these people come back to this faith, preaching a resurrected Jesus if they merely stole and hid the body? Why would they willingly die for a cause they knew was a lie? They knew if they really saw Him. They knew if they really hid his body? What would they gain but death?

These were not the only nonChristian sources. Others include Suetonius, Thallus, Pliny the Younger, Lucian of Samosata, and the Babylonian Talmud. When all these non-believing sources are pieced together, they are very much compatible to the documents now contained in the New Testament.

Unlike the other religions that I looked into, Christianity stood alone in both reliability, and the number of sources available to check the reliability. An intelligent Creator who wants to commune with his creation, for me, found "the Way" and provided it for us.

Whittling Down the Choices

In the last post, I reduced all valid beliefs in God to the big three: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. Of course if they all come to a dead end, that would open things up to others.

When examining Judaism, I found SOME evidence. The Jewish scriptures were kept remarkably well over the centuries. The scribes painstakingly made sure that they remained accurate generation after generation. Even when the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in the mid 1900's, they were found to be faithful to the book of Isaiah and Habbukuk. Still other books were hard to find verification. When comparing the Genesis story to contemporary science theory concerning the origins of the Universe, there appears to be some conflict there.

Because Christianity accepts the Jewish Bible (for lack of better term), I jumped to examining it. The basic difference between Judaism and Christianity is the figure of Jesus. I found that Jesus was the central key to comprehending the standing of all religion. It all fell on him or it was back to the drawing board. That, however, is a post all in itself.

When I examined Islam, I found it faulty and unsubstantiated. Basically, we have to have faith that the prophet Muhammad was who he said he was without any sound proof. The main thing that I found and tested this claim was examining what he said about the Bible. He claimed that the Bible was God's book, but it had been corrupted. Since there was hundreds and thousands of copies from different sources and different regions of the Earth, the evidence just doesn't support this. As I mentioned above, the Scribes were too careful and serious about their work - and they were all unbelievably consistent. Plus, finding the Dead Sea Scrolls and discovering it consistent with the other manuscripts, one has to conclude that there is just no evidence of this universal tampering that Muslims claim.

There is also some inconsistancies about the personality of God (Allah). On the Earth, people are to refrain from sex (except with the spouse), but as a reward, God can give a large number of virgins for Muslim men to have sex with? It just doesn't make sense. God prepares us HERE for a holy life in heaven. There has to be a reason God wouldn't want us to be promiscuous here. He is not merely a cosmic killjoy. Because of these major reasons (the lack of evidence of Bible corruption, the total reliance on one man's testimony, and the obvious inconsistency of the personality of Allah), I must conclude that Islam can not be trusted. I state this with no malice to my Muslim brothers and sisters, I am just following a path to its logical end.

I will look closer at Christianity and Judaism next.

The Search Continues

Discovering that there was a reason to believe in God (from the previous post), I set out to determine which god could it be? It only made sense to me, that if an intelligent being created the Universe and set the world in motion, He would want us to know Him. Everyone is built with an inclination to believe in God. Atheists call it a "god gene". They think it explains away God, but I think it supports the opposite. If I would send my sons and daughters out in the world, I certainly would like to plant a homing device on them so I could continue my fellowship with them.

So I decided to examine the giant religions. I looked at Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism.

Truthfully, I kind of tabled Hinduism and Buddhism. Hinduism makes way too many claims that can't be confirmed. All the mess about reincarnation just can't be substanciated. Buddhism doesn't really hold to a god, so that kind of eliminated itself. However, I do think that there are elements of both those religions that has truth to it. Just another example of the Bible's claim that God has written on the hearts of man.

Judaism and Christianity are basically the same religion with Christianity opening a new chapter on what was built by Judaism. Islam, in a sense, does the same thing with Christianity with Muhammad coming along 700 years of so after Jesus. I will address how all this stacked up to me soon.

The Search

Prerequisite: Beginnings

Somewhere around high school, I drifted from my belief in God. I wasn't the flaming atheist, but everything I thought about as it related to my life was absent of God or a god. School filled me up with Evolution which replaced Creation as fact in my life. There was also plenty of situational ethics and no absolutes. I lived a godless life without even thinking about it.

Slowly over time, I started considering the issues of God. I knew I had to make a decision in some way. I wanted God to prove Himself to me, but He wouldn't. You can't come to know God on your own terms but only on His. I took a leap of faith and believed. "Now will you show me, God?"

With "Pascal's Wager" in mind and beholding all the wonders of the world, I set out to allow God to confirm Himself to me. I found interesting tidbits such as the moon is exactly the right size and distance from the Earth to allow the Earth to sustain life. By chance? I don't think so. Shoot just believing that life came from nonlife takes more faith than to just believe in a Creator.

Getting to the point where it was becoming obvious that there is a God. How can we know who or what god is correct? An answer for another time.

Good or Evil

A friend of mine told me that she believes that everyone is basically good, but through bad experiences they change for the worse. I cannot see it that way. Why did the first bad experience happen?

I believe we have a trace of goodness in our spirits because we are the handiwork of God who created us. However, just being born into this fallen world with the fallen genes of our ancestors wrecks that goodness. We then have to learn to tap into it again. However, we are incapable of doing this on our own.

My point is that we are all born self-centered and have to learn not to be. My friend countered that babies aren't self-centered and that is why she believes that we learn to be self-centered.

Babies are the HEIGHT of self-centeredness. I told her that I have never NOT seen a self-centered baby! They want and want and want. They have to have this or cry. They are VERY self-centered. When was the last time you saw a baby put someone else in front of his own needs? They don't know how to NOT be self-centered. I am not blaming them; I'm merely pointing out an observation.

She argued back that babies only do that because they are trying to survive.

My answer was, "Fine, so they have an excuse. It is still self-centered. They have to learn not to be. They have to be taught to share when they are old enough to understand. If they were born "good" and selfless, there would be no instruction needed. We don't have to teach them to suckle, do we? However, we surely have to teach them to share.

Ironically, on the day of my discussion, I found an ally in the newspaper. Billy Graham writes an article and addressed this. This is what he wrote:

". . . most of our problems have a deeper cause: the greed and selfishness of the human heart. Jesus said, 'For out of the heart comes evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander' (Matthew 15:19)."

Most people will not want to believe as I do. I didn't want to believe it either. What we want to believe is irrelevant to the truth, however. We live in a fallen world and it is all we can do to daily climb out of it enough to not suffocate from our own odor.

Focus, Please

I was thinking about how different people see God. Then, there are some that do not see him at all. It is amazing to consider that when God's love and laws are written on
all our hearts.

Then I read something written by C.S. Lewis:

"When you come to knowing God, the initiative lies on His side. If He does not show Himself, nothing you can do will enable you to find Him. And, in fact, He shows much more of Himself to some people than to others - not because He has favorites, but because it is impossible for Him to show Himself to a man whose whole mind and character are in the wrong condition. Just as sunlight, though it has no
favorites, cannot be reflected in a dusty mirror as clearly as in a clean one.

You can put this another way by saying that while in other sciences the instruments you use are things external to yourself (things like microscopes and telescopes), the
instrument throught which you see God is your whole self. And if a man's self is not kept clean and bright, his glimpse of God will be blurred - like the Moon seen through
a dirty telescope."
___________________

I think the way I would put this is if our soul or spirit is not alligned in such a way where we can focus on God, then we will only see an ambiguous figure that we cannot
properly distinguish. So, instead we assign OUR ideas of what God should be to Him and miss what He really is and has always been.

Pass the Windex!

Again, trouble . . .

I don't if there is enough following on this blog to justify this entry, but I wanted to let anyone that might happen by know that I am not gone from here permanently. To get a slightly better explanation check out my other blog.

What is the point without vision?

What are we doing - really? We fill up our lives with the most mundane things and act like they are important.

You know what I did over the weekend? Yard work and maintenance. I cleaned the gutters, got up on the roof and removed branches from our dying, scary tree that fell on our outdated roof, cut grass, and cut up wood.

That is just an example from ONE day in my life. How many of those things are really important? We only have a limited number of days in our lifetime. The chief part of our minds are devoted toward dreams (important and not-so-important), finding love, and stressing out over societal expectations. It is all so useless.

Here are just some of the dreams that I have:1. I want to start a ministry that actually helps people in this world and helps them prepare for their spiritual destination.2. I want to be published and be able to finally cross over the line of being a blog owner who routinely is read by a couple dozen people to someone who many would recognize as having something useful to say - something that is relavent to #1 above or at least a distraction from the stressors of life.3. I want to routinely hear the voice of God and be where and what He would have me be so I could have some meaningful use in life.

I am not close enough to ANY of these dreams. I'm not, because for some reason, the grass can't wait another day, or I can't cough up the energy or resources to do them. The ministry? A few years ago, I thought I was getting there. A couple of setbacks and the obligatory excuses and now I seldom even think about it.

What about being published. I can't. My job is too time consuming or my family is too demanding or maybe, just maybe, I can't maintain the confidence to push things aside enough to follow through with it - not yet, anyway.

The voice of God eludes me, too. However, if I am not careful, He will get a few words in. He has before. No, I REALLY don't want to hear Him, do I? Why have the responsibility? Not when there are holes to fill in the back yard or a garage that needs cleaning - you know, the list of things you think about on your death bed with a smile knowing that it was life well-lived.

So I run and worry. I worry that I won't sell my house or about my family's health. I stress over the fact that I have four automibles but none of them have my confidence to take a two-hour road trip or I fret over the fact that I have to report to jury duty tomorrow, or about my meetings at work next week.

Ironically, after writing this, God gave me this little gem from my daily devotions. It is from Oswald Chambers and based on Proverbs 29:18:

There is a difference between an ideal and a vision. An ideal has no moral inspiration; a vision has. The people who give themselves over to ideals rarely do anything. A man's conception of Deity may be used to justify his deliberate neglect of his duty. Jonah argued that because God was a God of justice and of mercy, therefore everything would be all right. I may have a right conception of God, and that may be the very reason why I do not do my duty. But wherever there is vision, there is also a life of rectitude because the vision imparts moral incentive.
Ideals may lull to ruin. Take stock of yourself spiritually and see whether you have ideals only or if you have vision.

"Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp,Or what's a heaven for?"
"Where there is no vision. . . ."

When once we lose sight of God, we begin to be reckless, we cast off certain restraints, we cast off praying, we cast off the vision of God in little things, and begin to act on our own initiative. If we are eating what we have out of our own hand, doing things on our own initiative without expecting God to come in, we are on the downward path, we have lost the vision. Is our attitude to-day an attitude that springs from our vision of God? Are we expecting God to do greater things than He has ever done? Is there a freshness and vigour in our spiritual out look?

Today is Wednesday May 9, 2007 and I am no closer to my life's goals as I was yesterday or last year. However, now I have a clearer vision.

Battle Over Origins

In my church this week, they launched a new series that they like to call "Star Wars". It is a discussion of evolution and creation - I guess a battle over who created the stars. This first week, the discussion was confined to "old Earth" vs. "new Earth".

Of course, the atheists believe it is an old earth that some how miraculously appeared from nothing (with a big bang, etc.) I don't have enough faith in that to give it much press here. That is for another post. For today, I am just thinking in terms of God.

The Old Earth theory dictates that the Book of Genesis can easily be interpreted in a way that allows for each of the "days" of Creation could be something other than 24-hour periods. Some of the terminology in Hebrew (the language of the Old Testament) provides for this possibility. Therefore, depending on the amount of time for each day, the Earth could be billions of years old which would satisfy the contemporary scientific age estimates of rocks, fossils and the expanding Universe.

On the other hand, the New Earth theory states that the Bible states it took six days to create the Earth. The new Earthers reason that if God said it, then by golly, it took six days to create (and one day to rest). God understood that we (in this case contemporary Americans) know that a day is a 24-hour period and that was the word He chose to use in this account. Therefore, why should we try to put words in God's mouth in order to pacify the pagan scientists anyway? After establishing that one can conclude that since the creation of man was at the end of the first week, one can figure out the age of the Earth by tracking each generation up to Jesus through out the genealogy that the Bible provides. It even gives the age of death of each ancestor (or most) of Christ. Add all that together and calculate the new era dates and you can figure out that the Earth is only 6000 to 8000 years old.

One attached theory to the OET, is that God created the Earth in six days, but made it appear to be mature and old (millions of years old) just as He did the first man (Adam) by creating him to "appear" to be about 16-18 years old - even though his actual age was one day old. I will let that theory just stand alone as an FYI for this entry.

At any rate, it would appear that the "Old Earth Theory" is the most reasonable of the two original theories presented here. First blushes are often deceiving, though. Since one supporting piece of evidence suggests that the plants and animals took care of multiplying themselves with God's direct action in Genesis 1:12 "And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good (KJV)."

However, on further examination, all this happened on Day 3 - according to Genesis. But on Day 4, God created the sun and the moon. The problem is that the plants and grasses couldn't multiply on their own without the sun. So, it would be logical to assume that everything had to be in place before life could spontaneously replenish itself.

In addition, there is evidence that some things that appeared to happen over millions of years actually could have happened in a matter of days if certain dramatic events were present (i.e. a world wide flood, earthquakes, etc.) The Grand Canyon is one example.

I am not going to come to a conclusion here. I think both scenarios are possible. The Bible states that all things are possible with God. I guess the lesson is to not get married to any explanation. There is just too much still to examine and learn.

Pascal's Wager

It is strange writing in this blog. I mean, I am writing but I know that no one is reading it - or hardly anyone. My other blog started the same way, but that was a year ago. When one is used to having a semblance of community, it is hard to hear the echos of his voice in an empty room like this. Oh well.

I have yet to hear anyone defeat Pascal's Wager. Skeptics tend to cite that the argument is, indeed, "Pascal's Wager" like it is self-defeating, but I really haven't heard anything that actually deals a death blow to it. Pascal's Wager is like this (paraphrased):

If person "A" does not believe in God, and it turns out that God doesn't exist, then he was correct and nothing happens at death other than nonexistence. However, if "A" does not believe in God, yet God does exist, then "A" may suffer dire circumstances in eternity.

Conversely, if person "B" DOES believe in God, and God does exist, then person "B" may be rewarded in eternity. However, if "B" believes in God, but God does NOT exist, then person "B" gets the same result as person "A", i.e. nothing happens but nonexistence.

So, in this small scenario, it makes no sense to be in the position of person "A" because there is nothing to gain and everything to lose. Person "B", conversely has nothing to lose and everything to gain for being a believer.

Of course there are subsequent issues such as "intellectually believing" may not be enough, or what if person "B" believes in the wrong god, etc., but the root of it is hard to refute.