2 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Tuesday, December 04, 2007 at 10:00 AM. 
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".
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".
Labels: christian living, finding God, grace, self examination
4 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 9:30 AM.
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.
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.
Labels: blog, christian living, debate, finding God, grace
6 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Tuesday, August 14, 2007 at 9:35 AM.
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.
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.
Labels: bojr, finding God
1 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 at 10:20 AM.
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.
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.
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.
Labels: apologetics, comparing religions, finding God, Jesus, origins
4 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 4:42 PM.
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.
_____________________________________________________________________
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.
Labels: blog, finding God, Jesus
4 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Friday, June 22, 2007 at 3:19 PM.
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.
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.
____________________________________________________________________
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.
Labels: apologetics, comparing religions, finding God
1 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Monday, June 11, 2007 at 11:55 AM.
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.
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.
Labels: apologetics, comparing religions, finding God, Islam, Jesus, Judaism, Muhammad
4 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Wednesday, June 06, 2007 at 10:04 AM.
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.
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.
Labels: apologetics, comparing religions, finding God
1 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Friday, June 01, 2007 at 3:40 PM.
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.
Labels: apologetics, childhood, finding God, origins
1 Comments
Published by Jeff
on Thursday, May 24, 2007 at 9:07 AM.
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!
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 onall 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!
Labels: bojr, finding God, vision
