WW 12/13 Death

The belief that this life is not the only one (i.e. that we have a continuing individual conscious existence of some sort after our present bodies of flesh cease functioning) is fundamental to my faith and significantly influences the way I live. This may seem gloomy, but I honestly believe this is a fallen world full of fallen creatures and that, simply put; we are here to overcome sin and pursue humble holiness (love God) and to help others do the same (love your neighbor). I believe we cannot accomplish this alone; but, by the grace of God, Christ has covered our sin so that by faith we may enter a living relationship with God through the Holy Spirit Who empowers our efforts. Thus, to me, this present life is one of sacrifice and service as we comfort and encourage one another along the path of sanctification that the Holy Spirit sets and guides uniquely for each person. I believe Jesus Christ is truly a resurrected being Who will literally stand as King of kings and Lord of lords to judge each person when all is said and done.

From my perspective then, whether I die today or live 50 more years is irrelevant to my eternal state. I’m not much interested in houses, cars, clothes, jobs, technology, progress, entertainment, recreation, or any of the other common concerns of worldliness… “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity” and “having food and raiment let us be therewith content.” … and I don’t suppose there is some certain degree of pleasure or volume of experience that I must encounter here for this life to be meaningful or fulfilling. For me, meaning and fulfillment (as well as good feeling like joy and peace and such) come directly from knowing God, loving and serving others, and having hope in eternal life. Neither do I think of there being some specific quantity or type of good works that I must accomplish or some perfect moral standard that I must attain in order to be found acceptable by Jesus Christ. Rather, like I said above, I believe it is about cultivating and pursuing, day by day, moment by moment, with the help of and according to the leading of the Holy Spirit, a certain kind of heart: one with a genuine love of God that manifests in the diligent pursuit of holiness and a sincere, active love for others.

So if I was told that I only had a little while left to live, I don’t think I would change much. Life is often sad and painful for me, and I think a big part of me would be happy and feel relieved… going home! My biggest sadness would be that I wouldn’t get to watch my children grow into adults or see the grandbabies they may have, and I would worry that they would be too sad to see me go… but I would pray for their comfort and hope that I may see them all again someday. It would also be hard saying good bye to the sky and the trees and the land. I do so love this natural world and find her quite beautiful and amazing to behold… but I would hope maybe some of those natural things will be in heaven too… and expect probably there they will be even more majestic to behold!

Making Old Things New

This is an earlier thread that I just realized had been posted. I didn’t want it to ‘fall through the cracks’, as the saying goes, so I am reposting it and reopening the dialogue for any who would like to engage in the discussion.

Henry wrote:

I believe Jesus is a part of a Supreme Being that enters all sentient societies in a manner/person that is consistent with each society's comprehension. I think it would be extremely presumptive of us to think that he has favored mankind only in the last 2000 years and then only the Caucasian peoples, omitting eastern societies.

I view the Bible as a book that was written by inspired people who also included ideas and concepts important to themselves. I take the accounts of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection and factual.

I don't have any meaningful views of life after death.

Response:

The first sentence (about entering sentient societies) is one I might say about the Holy Spirit. The main idea seems to be that God (the Supreme Being) presents to people in ways they can comprehend. You call this ‘Jesus’… I call it the ‘Spirit of God’. But hey, we’re Trinitarians, so in a way, they are the same… though I do believe there is great value in distinguishing the Divine Persons also. I would, however, probably say sentient beings rather than societies and I would limit that involvement to post-Pentecost time (when the Holy Spirit- God’s Presence- was given as a gift to mankind because Jesus’ sacrifice fulfilled the law).

The idea of the next two sentences seems to be that ‘Jesus-Supreme Being’ MUST present to all peoples during all historical times. I do not hold this assumption. Rather, based on the Biblical record, I adhere to the concept of progressive revelation. That is, I believe since the fall of humanity the Godhead has been progressively, incrementally and in stages revealing and manifesting Its Divine Nature to redeem and restore mankind. As for omitting Eastern societies; remember it was Middle Easterners who were given extraordinary revelation. The Israelites lived in the most populous area of the world and their territory was a central trading route. They were called out to be witnesses- demonstrating to those around them Who God was according to the special revelation they were given at Mt. Sinai. The Easterners were not disregarded. Further, I believe it was only in the man Jesus that the Godhead manifested to this whole world as an individual person like us... and He wasn’t Caucasian! That is why I believe the life and testimony of Jesus is special and unique and deserves exceptional consideration and emphasis.

I believe every word of the original text of the written record we call the Bible was inspired directly by the Spirit of God. I agree that God spoke through people in particular times and situations and used the categories and culture and concepts that were then present in the vessels of His Revelation. I agree that the people who wrote had conscious experiences and may even have thought they were thinking on their own at times… but I believe God was sovereign even over their thoughts. I take the Bible as literally as possible allowing for metaphor, perspective, situational/cultural nuances and so forth. I consider my belief in the inspiration of Scripture to be an article of faith.

Too much to say about life after death… maybe another time…

WW11/29 Personal Safety Concerns

The Wired Word of 11/29 raised a number of questions concerning the extent one may/should go to address personal safety factoring in the promise of a happy afterlife (other conditions being met) recorded in the Bible.

First, to put the current terrorist threat in reasonable perspective to ongoing daily life risks, the terrorist threat is different but not of great significance. Most of the anxiety has to do with the news media hype. There have been several commercial passenger aircraft crashes this year due to mechanical problems, pilot error and weather. These crashes rate one to two day exposure on the news and are then replaced by other breaking news. When the news media talks about an aircraft downed by terrorists, it has to go back five or ten years generally to a crash in Scotland.

Second, opting for the benefits (promises, providing other conditions are met) of life after death, generally via suicide, the driving force is usually despair, fear or some other major negative life situation. The only persons generally opting voluntarily for death do so for religious and/or patriotic or to protect a loved one. Those that opt for death on religious grounds generally do so because of strong pressure from a highly regarded individual or group. An example of the former would be the Jim Jones group suicide in South America 15 or 20 years ago. An example of the latter would be the suicide bombers in Afghanistan.

Third, I think the major cause for concern in the present situation regarding terrorists, arises from our not being accustomed to such a threat. We do not get overly concerned about the 30,000 to 40,000 people killed in automobile accidents each year, are the large number of deaths due directly or indirectly to alcohol or tobacco. Given time, we will find the right level of action to put the terrorist danger in proper perspective. It is probably fortunate that we have serious doubts regarding the benefits of life after death, otherwise the suicide rate would be overwhelming.

GPS 11/22 Paul has Vision of Jesus

Paul committed some terrible atrocities in the name of religion. One of the most notable was his standing idly by as Stephen was stoned to death. Stephen was a very religious person and gave many talks (sermons) to the masses. Paul's position was apparently "If you are not with us, you are against us". Sometime after the stoning of Stephen, Paul encountered a vision of Jesus and some physical difficulties and subsequently became a convert to Christianity.

I have difficulty in understanding the meaning of this series of events.

Paul's conversion came after a number of Christians were kill for being Christians. I don't understand why Paul's conversion wasn't forced on him earlier, it would have saved the lives of some innocent people. We are given no hint regarding the delay.

One thought is that the conversion of Paul was made to maximize the number of converts in the future, i.e., the sacrifice of a few innocent people to convert more people. One question that arises from this approach is just what is the maximum ratio of innocent deaths to future converts that is acceptable, somewhat like a business decision. This type of action violates a couple of Commandments: Do unto others.... and Thou shall not kill . . .

Another possibility may be that Paul needed a number of deaths under his belt before he would be receptive to a conversion. I would think that a very hard heart could be changed with enough visions and bodily pains.

And then, it may be that we are deliberately left to ponder why a misguided Jew, also a Roman citizen, would be the one chosen, instead of Stephen, to spread the Christian gospel.

A casual article on how to approach the Bible

Question has been raised about how to interpret and use the Bible. Here is a link to an article that talks about this subject in a casual way for those who might want to think about it further. I don't agree with it all, but I thought it was an interesting perspective.

The article is called, 'A Conversation in God's Kitchen'.

How I've learned to understand the Bible

by Michael Spencer

Enjoy the food!

A Plain Account of Christian Perfection

I've been reading some of Wesely's original work. This is from a pamphlet called, 'A Plain Account of Christian Perfection'. I thought it was awesome!

1. What I purpose in the following papers is, to give a plain and distinct account of the steps by which I was led, during a course of many years, to embrace the doctrine of Christian perfection. This I owe to the serious part of mankind, those who desire to know all "the truth as it is in Jesus." And these only are concerned in questions of this kind. To these I would nakedly declare the thing as it is, endeavouring all along to show, from one period to another, both what I thought, and why I thought so.

2. In the year 1725, being in the twenty-third year of my age, I met with Bishop Taylor's "Rule and Exercises of Holy Living and Dying." In reading several parts of this book, I was exceedingly affected; that part in particular which relates to purity of intention. Instantly I resolved to dedicate all my life to God, all my thoughts, and words, and actions; being thoroughly convinced, there was no medium; but that every part of my life (not some only) must either be a sacrifice to God, or myself, that is, in effect, to the devil.

Can any serious person doubt of this, or find a medium between serving God and serving the devil

3. In the year 1726, I met with Kempis's "Christian's Pattern." The nature and extent of inward religion, the religion of the heart, now appeared to me in a stronger light than ever it had done before. I saw, that giving even all my life to God (supposing it possible to do this, and go no farther would profit me nothing, unless I gave my heart, yea, all my heart, to him.

I saw, that "simplicity of intention, and purity of affection," one design in all we speak or do, and one desire ruling all our tempers, are indeed "the wings of the soul," without which she can never ascend to the mount of God.

4. A year or two after, Mr. Law's "Christian Perfection" and "Serious Call" were put into my hands. These convinced me, more than ever, of the absolute impossibility of being half a Christian; and I determined, through his grace, (the absolute necessity of which I was deeply sensible of;) to be all-devoted to God, to give him all my soul, my body, and my substance

Will any considerate man say, that this is carrying matter too far or that anything less is due to Him who has given himself for us, than to give him ourselves, all we have, and all we are?

And it goes on... Any thoughts?

Praise God for Mr. Wesley's life and for the Methodist church!

Cross Purposes

It seems to me there is a lack of connection in these discussions. That is; for some reason I do not feel we are on the same page, or that we are concerned with the same aspects of the issues, or perhaps we just do not understand one another accurately. I have tried to discern the source of this and have a few thoughts and a request.

First, I confess that I do not watch TV and rely on word of mouth to receive ‘news’. Often I am hearing of the issues we discuss for the first time on the Wired Word and my knowledge of the circumstances and details is limited to what is printed there. I do not understand many of the jokes and references that are used in our conversations and perhaps this is because I am fairly illiterate when it comes to pop culture and current events.

Second, friends over the years have informed me of a weakness which I cannot observe in myself but which, in response to their loving feedback, I have come to accept as one of my authentic character flaws. It has been called naivety, cluelessness, bluntness and extreme literalness and is the tendency of my mind to think, speak and receive words according to their plain meaning without awareness of the subtle but common social or emotional nuances of what is communicated. Because of this, I can sometimes miss the point of things or come across as blunt, disrespectful or offensive. If such has been the case, I apologize.

Third, I have come to Christ by what appears to be an unusual path. Having had a significant religious experience wherein I was called to faith outside of any church setting, and being compelled by life circumstances to attend several different denominational churches in my short 10 year walk with the Lord, I have been taught primarily by the Holy Spirit and my doctrine is non-standard. Though some may be leery of this, I truly believe it was by Divine appointment and intent, and that a good portion of my calling in the Lord is to labor for the unity of THE Church, the entire Body of Christ… that is, to work toward an authentic and fervent love among ALL those who claim the name of Jesus.

As it is written in John 13:35, “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” I understand this to be a statement specifically about relationships withIN the Church… meaning, among ALL those who profess faith in Christ… and believe ‘ecumenicalism’ is a fundamental duty for Christians to actively pursue. Similarly, I am motivated to develop a sense of unity with each brother or sister in the Lord and am disturbed when such does not seem to be the case. In an effort to improve the situation, I would like to request… from Henry again and from any others also… a statement of perspective so that we may understand one another better and perhaps engage in more fruitful dialogues.

Specifically, I ask…

What are your personal beliefs and views about religion in general?
Why do you come to church?
What view of the Bible do you hold?

Blessings in Christ.

WW 10-25-10 FREEDOM OF SPEECH

The speech behavior of the Westboro church folk is abominable, but I think well within the boundaries of free speech in that no harm was inflicted upon the target family other than a temporary emotional ordeal. The primary purpose seemed to be to obtain publicity for the church's families views on certain subjects. We had a prominent pastor of a local church state( to paraphrase) that the 911 terrorist destruction of the twin towers was caused by American citizens sinful ways. This type of behavior is rampart in current political ads and candidate comments regarding their opponents. The magazine "Newsweek" current issue contains a long list of outright untruths and insinuations publically made by both major parties. In this case to obtain political gain.

As a wag once said "If God had knowed the facts He'd have said/done the very same thing".

I am very concerned that government changing of current legal interpretations of past cases regarding free speech will go too far in restrictions and do more harm than good.

WIRED WORD OCT. 11 CHRISTIAN EDUCATION

Religion, like other non-sciences (such as literature, history, poetry to name a few) has few ground rules, guidelines, or foundations that are not subject to interpretation. This is true between countries, states, and even villages. Therefore, everybody can be an expert - and many of us think we are - in that we cannot be easily proven wrong. In addition, the gist of our belief generally depends on the geographical area were we were raised. Finally, religion quite often is used by politicians for their own purposes. We have found the "enemy" and he is us, to paraphrase Pogo, the possum. It is small wonder that many people become numb to the various claims and interpretations made to them by others, and decide to "keep it simple". By "keeping it simple", one avoids the contradictions and confusion that arises when one tries to rationalize away the defining differences between religious groups.

Christian religion is out of step with the advances made in other educational areas in that Christian religion claims that most truths pertaining to religion were made manifest to the world 2000 - 5000 years ago. As far as I know, religion is the only area of knowledge that makes that claim. Today, we have world organizations, world wars, and we have local through world politics. Few of us know how to engage in religious thought to those areas. For example, how do we evaluate the exaggerated and even fake claims being made in political ads that being aired at this time, other than in very general terms. Yet, the people who are elected to office have vast influence on how to treat the needy, how to provide opportunities for unemployment, how to fairly impose taxes to name a few office responsibilities. Many of us generally fall back on the "keep it simple" idea and vote party lines and pay little or no attention to what the candidates say.

I close with the not too unrealistic joke of religious sect differences.

There is the story of a traveler in a southern town that saw two churches on opposite sides of a street of the same denomination. The traveler asked a villager "Why two churches?". "Well" said the local, "Thems that go to the church on this side of the street, they believes that Pharaoh's daughter found Moses in the bulrushes. And thems that go to the church on the other side of the street believes that that's what she say".

bad things

There is an idea that God does not will for anything bad to happen to anyone, but that any problems or pain we experience is caused by our (or someone else's) bad choices. I guess if you consider the source of 'bad choices' to be 'original sin' then I would agree; but in a more practical, day-to-day kind of way I would have to disagree.

Certainly there are lifestyle choices (e.g. drug use) or character traits (e.g. dishonesty) or heart conditions (e.g. jealousy) that tend to lead to painful consequences. Yet there are also tragedies and hardships that befall people

I believe God is more concerned with our spiritual development and the purification of our hearts

Wired Word 10-4-10 Helping the Poor

The Big Questions

1. Do you agree that if the world's poor come up to Western economic standards, the impact will be unsustainable? Why or why not?

Yes. I believe even if the world’s poor do not change, the current Western economic standards are unsustainable. We consume and waste resources faster than the earth can produce them.

2. When you talk about "helping the poor," what do you mean? Giving them enough to survive? Bringing them up to your income level? Something in between? How do you think Jesus would answer this question?

I think of poverty as a situational and fluctuating condition and when I say ‘helping the poor’, I mean supplying material needs for another as you are able when you see the need. It seems sometimes large-scale, organized outreaches to people/areas with dire lack can supplant neighbor to neighbor charity. I think Jesus would say do the one without leaving the other undone.

3. What would a world without poverty look like? Everyone in the world living like we Americans did before the recession? The "American way of life" (if there is one American way of life) getting translated into something new that is "smaller" than what we have now? Something other, and if so, what?

Heaven

4. How will the kingdom of God be different from what we experience now? What will make it different?

“And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.” Revelation 21:3-4

5. Quite apart from issues of sustainability, should following Jesus mean that we shouldn't seek an affluent lifestyle? Why or why not?

I believe as we grow spiritually, progressively taking hold of the joy, peace, goodness and so forth of life in the Spirit, we will desire affluence less. To me, following Jesus means that we seek to love God, to serve others and to place our material circumstances in His hands.

Jesus said, “Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.” (Matthew 6:31-33)

WW 9/27 God is not Necessary

A lead-in statement for the WW 9/27 article was (to paraphrase) that "God was not necessary for the creation of the universe. Scientists have a routine for catching attention by making strange statements that they cannot backup except by using phraseology that no one understands; including themselves. Stephen Hawking suggested that only scientific laws were needed to create the universe. He did not bother to tell us where the scientific laws came from. He did not because he does not know. What he stated was an assumption (belief on his part). He cannot prove himself right, nor can anyone prove him wrong. However, the statement serves an important purpose, i.e, to keep himself in the public eye and possibly help secure his position at the university where he lectures.

I can also make a statement, not as strange as Hawking's, that can catch your attention, and also have a meaningful proof. The statement is "We are all accidents".

Each of us today have a direct ancestry extending back several thousand years which would total over a thousand persons for just 10 generations. Each of these persons came to many forks in the road of life where they had to choose which path to take. At any of these forks where the choice would lead to a different mate, the subsequent future descendants would be different persons because of the different DNA combinations. Another way of stating the case, multi-millions of young men were killed in wars before they sired families. If the wars had not occurred, multi-millions of their descendants would have been born. Restating this thought; bullets, and bombs are not selective in their victims, thus the survivors in many situations were determined by chance (in other words, no one could say what caused the bomb fragments and blasts to hit specific persons). Bombs were not dropped to hit specific individuals, nor was artillery aimed at specific persons.

One could state that God directed the gunfire, however that constitutes belief, not reason. I think my logic is stronger than that of Stephen Hawking, a world renown thinker.

WW 9/27 God is not Necessary

WW 9/20 Young People Faith Practices

In reading the Wired Word of 9/20 regarding faith practices of young people, the criticisms made of young people seem to me to be just about the same as the criticisms that can be made for their parents and other adults, for tfhe most part. Religion is definitely on the back burner and generally practiced on a "feel good" basis.

I expect that the tests offered by the authors for 1) giving 20% of one's income to the needy and 2) putting oneself at personal risk in faith practices are passed by few adults.

On the other hand, the "feel good" practices probably are much more acceptable than the radical practice of suicide bombings by the Muslim fanatics against the infidels in their countries..

WW 8/30 - PROBLEMS WITH PRAYER

The text enumerates a variety of facets regarding individuals communicating with God, ranging from boredom with the subject to working in the garden. One not touched upon, is the misuse of prayer. An extreme example of this is the zealot who believes his own convictions to be those of the Lord, such as the suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan who no doubt think they are doing the Lord's work, having been instructed to do so by their religious leaders. I guess that as the bombers are making their final runs they are praying to God that they be successful in their efforts.

There are those of us who go through the motions of praying for guidance while continuing to do what we planned to do all along. Quite often that is called evidence of "successful prayer"..

There is the joke of the preacher who rushed in through the door of his house yelling to his wife to start packing while he prayed for guidance as to whether to move nor not.

And then there is the problem of unanswered prayer. The trite explanations that God always answers but: 1) sometimes the answer is "No" and 2) God answers but in a manner that is not recognized by the beseecher, do not adequately address the problem of "Why". The anguish of parents over the sickness and possible death of a young child is an example. I am sure the Lord is capable of making an unmistakable response, even to weak believers. It would appear those are the very persons that need clear answers.

Often we trivialize prayer by partaking in it while thinking of something else - a sort of rote or habitual thing, or we ask for action on sweeping general requests, or it is part of a ritual.

I am not about to show my ignorance by defining what prayer is, or should be. If I knew that, I probably would not be writing this critique.

Henry Jones

I

WW 8/23 - Muslim Mosque At Ground Zero

In principle, a mosque at Ground Zero is lawful and acceptable. In practice, I think such action will add to the concern and mistrust that the average Christian, including me, has for the anything Islamic today. We are ignorant of the Islam religion and we are not likely to bother to become knowledgeable in the future. Our understanding of the Christian faith does not go much beyond the Ten Commandments. Many of us actually apply teachings from the Old Testament rather than those from the New Testament. We seldom hear or read from the news media arguments over love, but we sure get a lot regarding the Ten Commandments.

At the level of the Ten Commandments, for the Islam religion we hear about proclamations for killing of infidels, stoning to death, and eye for and eye, disfigurement of women, etc. We do not hear from moderate Muslims. Hence, we tend to be suspicious of all Muslims. We can't tell before the fact whether a Muslim is a zealot or not. The after effects of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will be with us for decades. The mistrust of Muslims, and vice versa, will also continue if not increase.

I think it would be judicious for principals on both sides to agree that it is not in the best interest of either side to erect a mosque at the proposed site in the near future.

Welcome

Please enjoy the opportunity to connect with other church members and Christians and share both ideas and discussions Blessings, Grace and Peace, Liz