Take a lesson from Iron Man

I edited together clips from Iron Man to illustrate the Biblical truths found in Ephesians 6:10-18. Make no mistake we are in a war and if you are not prepared you will be a casualty. Before we look at the clips here are the relevant scriptures I think need to be brought to mind.

Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints.
Ephesians 6:10-18

Sci-Fi / Journalist: Battlestar Galactica Republican Look-a-likes

Sci-Fi / Journalist: Battlestar Galactica Republican Look-a-likes

Obama's View on Bible

Ok, I just posted an anti-McCain YouTube video, so here is one where the editor takes a speech Barak Obama gave where he said that the Bible could not be used to set policy. In the speech Obama is trying to make the point that a separation of church and state must be maintained. Unfortunately, he tried to bolster his points by using Bible verses out of context, managing to offend a lot of people (like me) who have high view of scripture.



Here is the original unedited video. The speech is "Call to Renewal" from June 28, 2006.

An Opinion on John McCain

I found this video on YouTube. This is the testimony of a man who has a lot in common with John McCain. He too graduated from the Naval Academy (except he was in the top 25 % of his graduating class and McCain was 5th from the bottom), highly decorated Naval aviator, served in Vietnam, also was shot down, and also spent several years as a prisoner of war also enduring its horrors. Look at what he has to say about John McCain.



The one thing that bothers me the most is that this man said that when he knew McCain during the war, McCain was agnostic and now McCain says he is deeply religious. I'd like to know more about McCain's faith journey. It's possible that his wartime experiences drove him to Christ but it does not explain how he came to leave his first wife. Oh well.

Biblical Basics - The Deity of Christ - Redux

This post is a follow up to my posts on Jesus' Humanity and Deity and a response to the comments made by Adam Pastor. Brother Pastor agrees with me and all Christians that Jesus is the only way to salvation and that He is the one through whom we are saved when we put our faith in Him. He disagreed with me on my statements on Jesus' deity. So I will restrict my post to only consider his comments against the deity of Jesus Christ.

Brother Pastor wrote:

Jesus Christ isn't just any man;
he is GOD's only-begotten Son, who died for our sins, who was raised by Almighty GOD;
the man whom Almighty GOD made both Lord & Christ, and set him at His own right hand;
making Jesus of Nazareth,
the most exalted human being,
second only to GOD Himself!
[Acts 2.32-36]

Let's look at what Acts 2:32-36 says. Keep in mind that this is part of Peter's first sermon on the day of Pentecost.

"God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said, " 'The Lord said to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." ' "Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."

I agree that Peter is not denying Jesus' humanity and he is saying that Jesus is glorified and that he is better than David. It's interesting to me that Peter quoted Psalm 110:1 and said that David was a prophet (verse 30). Why is this important? Jesus used this very same scripture to establish his identity. In Luke 20:41-44 Jesus says:

Then Jesus said to them, "How is it that they say the Christ is the Son of David? David himself declares in the Book of Psalms: " 'The Lord said to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." ' David calls him 'Lord.' How then can he be his son?"

Jesus used this to show the people who he is. If you deny that Jesus claim to be God, then you have to explain How the messiah can be David's son and David's Lord at the same time. Think of it this way if you look at two "Lords" in Psalm 110:1 they are not the same words. In Hebrew it reads "Yahweh said to my 'adown". "Yahweh" also known as "Jehovah" is the proper name of God. It is the name that God identified himself to Moses. "'Adown" means "lord" or "master". The New Testament quotations of these verse use the Septuagint translations. In that translation the same word is used for "Lord". The word is "Kurios". It was considered a title given to God and to the Messiah.

Brother Pastor also said:

And nowhere does Jesus ever claim to be Almighty GOD!
No rather, Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, the Son of the Living GOD

Yet Brother Pastor never gave any response to the verse I raised that show that Jesus did claim to be God such as John 8:48-59.

Brother Pastor further wrote:

Hence, yet another proof that Jesus cannot possibly be Almighty GOD;
because GOD ALMIGHTY CANNOT DIE!!

This struck me because it is the same line of argument that Muslims use against Christians. The best way to argue is to use the same argument you would use against a Muslim making the same assertion. One of the best scholars that I have ever heard deal with this issue is James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries. Please view the following clips of him responding to Ahmed Deedat.
Part 1

Part 2

Part 3


I agree with Brother Pastor on his point that Paul taught that there is only one God. So did the apostle John. I would have liked him to respond to my raising of Colossians 1:15,16. It says:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

Paul taught that was pre-existed everything. That He created everything. I'll cover how the Bible could say the Father is God and Jesus is God and yet there be only one God when I cover the Trinity in a separate post. At this point, I just want to establish that the Bible declares Jesus' deity.

Another assertion that Brother Pastor made was when he wrote:

John, a monotheistic Jew does not present Jesus as "God" in his Gospel at all.
Not only does he call Jesus "a man" more than the other Gospel writers; John must be allowed to state exactly why he wrote his Gospel, which he indeed does:
(John 20:31) But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

No argument that John is being correctly presented, but He does also talk about Jesus' deity. How would Brother Pastor explain John 1:1-5:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

We know John was talking about Jesus and calls him the Word - the LOGOS. And the LOGOS was God and through him all things were made. Paul said the same thing. And what about Philippians 2:6:

Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

Paul said that Jesus was in nature God and that He was equal with God. What else can we do with this scripture along with all the other scriptures that teach about his humanity but conclude that Jesus is both God and man.

As for the Film Brother Pastor suggested I watch I could not get it to play. I think that there is something wrong with the file but I will try again later. One last scripture I want to discuss in this post was also brought up by Brother Pastor 1st Corinthians 8:4 and 6. Verses 4-6 state:

So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Nowhere in this text does it say that Jesus is not God. It's a parallel construction describing God as the Father and Jesus. As I understand Greek grammar I am convinced that the verse s are making a comparison to our God verses the idols and false gods of the world. There is one God. The Father "from whom all things came and for whom we live", Jesus "through whom all things came and through whom we live", and the Holy Spirit by whom all things came and by whom we live. The Holy Spirit keeps us.

Saddleback Showdown - John McCain

A couple of weeks ago, Barak Obama and John McCain went on national television and allowed themselves to be individually examined by Pastor Rick Warren. He asked them questions about their world view, what its means to be a "born again" Christian, abortion, taxes, gay marriage, and several other great questions. I'm going to do 2 posts - one for Obama and the other for McCain. This will not comprehensively cover every important thing they talked about. I will choose just four. This post is about McCain's responses.

What about Jesus?

McCain claimed that he is a follower of Christ. He said that he is "saved and forgiven". What? I wish he had elaborated. Saved from what? Forgiven for what? How? Who? I realized that he may have assumed that everyone understood his "Christianeeze" - the jargon of Christianity. However, it doesn't take much to realize that some people mean entirely different things in using these words than what Christians have historically and Biblically meant. Mormons use those terms too, but if you study what they believe it doesn't line up the same. Instead of fully examining the question, McCain gave an emotional and heart-wrenching story of how his Christian faith connected him with a North Vietnamese prison camp guard. Grant it he was also trying to get people to connect with him not Jesus. He really wants to be elected. I think that is a problem.

Abortion?

I was amazed how direct he was about what he thinks about abortion. I agree with him, all people are entitled to human rights at the moment of conception.

Taxes?

It sounds good doesn't it. He said he wants everyone to be rich. I agree with his definition of "rich" - having what you need to be happy. I think that he's naive in thinking that there is no need for re-distribution of wealth and that there is no class warfare. The gap between people who have wealth and those who don't is growing. The middle class is disappearing. I think that he and Obama agree in trying to better the lives of people. They just disagree on how to do it. I think he's right the government has been overspending. I would have liked to hear the year and administration that allowed the money to be spent on the study of Bear DNA, but it was an effective joke. I disagree with the thought that the government should be scaled down because people cannot be trusted to love their neighbor as themselves when money is involved.

Gay Marriage?

I really liked his response to the question on the definition of what marriage is. Changing the definition of marriage is a bad idea. I did notice that he was very carefully politically. He did not openly challenge the morality of same-sex marriage so he would not alienate people, but he said that the issue should be decided by states themselves and not the federal government. It fits with his ideas of smaller, less-controlling government. The problem is that unless this country makes a decision as to whether or not we will follow God or not on the issues of abortion and same-sex marriage we are going to continue to see division and failure, if not a civil war, as a nation just like slavery divided the nation 140 years ago.

Is there Evil?

I thought the question was vague. I'm not sure what Rick Warren meant by the question...."evil" in what sense? Did he mean the evil in each one of us that can only be destroyed by the power of God? To McCain, evil equates to the Radical Islamic Fundamentalism. He blames it for producing Osama Bin Laden and the horror of September 11, 2001 and the wars on terrorism taking place today. I agree that Bin Laden must be found and brought to justice and I believe that Islamic Fundamentalism is antithetical to Christianity. It cannot be reasoned with. It cannot be ignored. It can't be reconciled. They really want to kill us. They must be stopped. The problem is that as near as I can tell our government made the terrorism possible when we supported and trained Bin Laden against the Russian in Afghanistan and then pulled out and did not fulfill promises made to the rebels. It's blow back from bad foreign policy that we are paying for now. Of course what the terrorists are doing are evil and must be stopped, but are we really any better? Ask the South American and Caribbean countries we have invaded. Ask the people in Africa and other parts of the world who were exterminated and we did nothing because they did not have oil. Ask the black folks that were lynched, oppressed, disenfranchised. Ask the Native Americans, those that survived the genocide. As a nation we are called by God to do better by people. If we don't do better how can expect the rest of the nations to do good to us?

Saddleback Showdown - Barak Obama

A couple of weeks ago, Barak Obama and John McCain went on national television and allowed themselves to be individually examined by Pastor Rick Warren. He asked them questions about their world view, what its means to be a "born again" Christian, abortion, taxes, gay marriage, and several other great questions. I'm not going to rehash the entire discussion, just pick out 5 major themes. I'm going to do 2 posts - one for Obama and the other for McCain. This post is about Obama's responses.

What about Jesus?

Obama did better in explaining what Jesus means to him as a Christian than McCain. He actually used the word "sin" as that thing Jesus saved him from. The only thing that bothered me about his response is that he said "hopefully" his sins would be forgiven. If you are a "born again" Christian and have put your faith and trust in Jesus, your sins, by definition, are promised from God to be expatiated. You will not be punished, although you and I should be, because Jesus took our punishment for us. He may have been trying to sound humble as to not alienate non-christians. It is one of the gripes of non-christians that Christians are so sure, so confident, and are even sometime called "arrogant". It's not arrogance we just know that God will do what he promised he would do. What other religion can give you that kind of blessed assurance of reconcilliation with the one who made everything?

Abortion?

Obama's response on Abortion really bugs me. I realize he is trying to sound humble. He does not want to alienate any would-be voters. The problem is that if you are Christian it does not matter what you or anyone thinks. All that matters is what God thinks. We know what God thinks about Abortion because the Bible tells us. If God tells us all lives belong to him, do we really think that He is pleased about surgically sacrifices children because they are inconvenient to the lifestyle we want to live? Men are just as guilty because some men father children and abandon the women to raise them. I see no difference between that and the ancient Canaanites sacrifices their babies to idols as burnt offerings. God destroyed them. Rick Warren had also asked Obama when does an unborn baby becomes entitled to human right. I thought Obama, under the guise of humility, tried to weasel out of answering by asserting that the authority to answer was "above his pay grade. " Agreed. But God did answer it. All he had to do was say what God said. It's a question that falls in line with what all Christians struggle with. Are we going to obey the one to whom we belong? Are we going to go with God's judgement or are going to try to figure it out on our own. Unfortunately, in this area, Obama has decided to figure it out on his own as most of America....this is why keep coming up short.

Taxes?

I think Obama did a great job when he talked about taxes and about who he would tax and how it would affect people. I think that Obama's economic plan is a little more realistic than McCain's. McCain is saying that he wants to cut taxes for everyone, but I don't see how we are going to balance any budget without people paying more in taxes and wealth being re-distributed by the Government to close the gap between the "haves" and the "have-nots". Like it or not the gap between rich and poor is getting wider (and only the rich is benefiting). When I was a kid in the 80's a salary of $50K - 60K a year as great for a four-person family. However with banks failing, people loosing their homes, not being able to have health insurance, and generally working harder but not living as well, I don't see why we would not want the government to do something. I'm not placing the blame solely on Republican economics but "trickle-down economics" never helped me nor anyone else I know. McCain's ideas about less government and everyone taking care of their own insurance has not really worked out that well the past 8 years. Are you living better today than you were in 1999? Me Neither. I've got to add that at least on this point I think Obama won.

Gay Marriage?

I liked Obama's definition of Marriage. I just not sure I like the idea that he is unwilling to define it in the constitution. Here is an opportunity to "draw a line in concrete" and establish an ideal that we and our children will live by. The reason why marriage is not defined in the constitution because the framers, never in their wildest imaginings, ever thought it would be a question. Western Civilization is in trouble. Countries in Europe have already recognized homosexual unions as viable marriages. They are also on the brink of falling away from Christianity and towards Islam. Obama said he did not believe same-sex unions threaten his marriage or our society. If we do not categorically define marriage and leave it up to people anything will go. Society will slide further into disarray. It's a slippery slope to more debauchery. When I was a kid, if someone said "I love ____" someone else would say, "If you love ____ so much why don't you marry it." This will literally happen. People would start marrying their pets and there will be no logical reason to say that its wrong. Pedophilia will have to be recognized as legal. Why would polygamy be illegal? Eventually none of it will be illegal.

Is there evil?

I thought that Obama answered this question much more circumspectly than did McCain. He more broadly defined it than McCain did. It's more than just the Islamic terrorist that hate us. He points out that we need to be humble and remember that although we must confront evil leave room for God to define who and what is evil. The problem I have is that not everything that I consider evil is what Obama considers evil. I think abortion is evil. He doesn't. This is why God's laws and viewpoint must be the standard for what evil is, not us. We are so tainted by own sins, and so blinded by the thought "I'm not as bad as so and so" that we cannot be trusted to know what is wrong and what evil truly is. Evil is what God isn't. It's the absence of his purpose and direction, contrary to his will.

Democratic National Convention 2008 part 1 - Into Post

The last week of August 2008, the Democratic National Convention was held in Denver, Colorado. I viewed all the major speeches and will probably post about each speech that I thought was noteworthy. In this introductory post, I want to just make general comments. I've go to admit that the goal was to make Obama and Biden look as electable as possible. I heard more saber-rattling than substance. By this I mean that I heard more about Bush and the Republicans have messed up our economy and our Foreign Standing among the nations of the world rather than how we are going to fix it. I also found out that for the first time at the DNC, a church service was held the Sunday of that week to officially kick off the convention. I posted a video earlier that shows the whole hour service. I call it a church service but in order to make sure not to alienate or offend anyone it was called an "Interfaith Gathering". They had clergy from all the major religions to speak and honor their view of God. Selections from the Torah, Bible, Koran, and other holy texts were read before each speaker. Each speaker was able to say what ever they wanted to say.

Each speaker spoke about our "Sacred Responsibility" in a different context. For example Bishop Blake, the Presiding Prelate of the Church of God in Christ, spoke of "Our Sacred Responsibility to our Children". He spoke about prioritizing Children all over the world and protecting them. In addition he brought up the contradiction of loving and caring children but supporting abortion. He said that children are a gift of God. He said he disagreed with the Democratic Party's Pro-Choice stance, but agreed with Obama's plan to cut down on abortion by giving women more choices.

Another example was Sister Helen Prejean. She is a Roman Catholic Nun and Anti-Death Penalty Activist. She spoke of "Our Sacred Responsibility to Our Nation". She focused on her pet-issue. Her contention was that abolishing the death penalty is part of our responsibility to the nation. I thought that she appealed to emotion and the guilt of misapplying the death penalty. She pointed out how only poor people who murder white people actually end up on death row. I think she's right about that, but then she went to a very troubling place theologically. She said that our opinion on the death penalty brings up our view of God. I agree. Unfortunately she said that the Bible conflicts itself on God's character. Either He is forgiving and merciful or He is vengeful and harsh, is what she put forth and that we must pick which view we want to base our lives on. She then said that some Christians believe that God sacrificed his son to pay for our sins and that in the death penalty criminals pay for their sins to go to heaven. This is not what the Gospel is, but it is something you can get out of Roman Catholicism. To hear the Gospel mangled like that really offended me. She rejected that view and seemed to me to suggest Jesus' death on the cross had no redeeming value for anyone - all to disparage the death penalty which has nothing to do with saving anyone from hell.

There was a lot of good and bad said during the meeting. The CEO of the convention is a Pastor out of Washington DC named Leah Daughtry. The goal of this meeting was to show the world that you can be religious and still be a Democrat. Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer, on August 19, 2008, says the there is a "God Gap" between the Republicans and the Democrats. The Republicans are often depicted as being "people of faith" more so than Democrats. The problem I have is with trying to be all things to all People. Orthodox Judaism Islam, and all the other religions represented contradicts Christianity. They say Jesus is not the only way to God that their way is just as valid. Christians say Jesus is the only Way. We can't all be right. Holding hands and singing "Kum Bah Ya" is not going to erase this division and all depends on what you think about Jesus. Is it what Jesus said about himself or not? Everyone who spoke was very careful in all they said not to offend anyone. Pastor Daughtry even referred to God as he/she - what ever you believe God to be. In effect this is allowing people to make up their own God instead of how God truly revealed himself in the Scriptures. Not good.

The last point that I would raise is how many Muslim women spoke on behalf of Islam while in a Muslim country this would have been the case at all. Islam was depicted as a religion of peace and enlightenment on par and equal to Christianity while it does not take any time to show that there are very many discrepancies between the Koran and the Bible and in faith and practices.

Ever Feel Like this?

The thing that is missing is the sounds to truly capture the experience!!!

The Terrible C's Part 3a - Calvinism

Here I am on the 3rd part of my post responding to the series of GodTube videos titled The Terrible C's and it was about Calvinism. They spent the most time on this particular subject so I will need to split my post into two posts so that this will not be too long. In this part I will focus on the facts that are wrong and my next post will focus on how scripture was used to show their points. Before I significantly make comments, here is the video



I have some serious concerns about some of the points raised in this discussion. There are some ideas brought up as facts that I know have been demonstrated as not true.
1. Edom is related to Ismael and thereby responsible for Islam.
2. In the Old Covenant you must be a Jew to be saved.
3. Ismael went to hell
4. John Calvin ran a police state.

It is a stretch to equate Esau (Edom) with Ismael. We know from Genesis that "Edom" was a kind of nickname for Isaac's son Esau and his descendants were known as the Edomites (Genesis 36). However Ismael would have been Esau's uncle because his father was Abraham. Although Ismael was not the son of Abraham through whom God had chosen to bring the Messiah it had nothing to do with Ismael himself anymore than Jacob had to do with himself being chosen over Esau. Recall that Abraham had sons after Isaac and there is reason to conclude that they or Ismael were condemned to Hell. Ismael became the father of great nations. That was something God did. Today's Arabs are descended from him, but one of his descendant about 3 millennia later founded Islam. He can't be held responsible. Recall in Genesis 21:17 God miraculously saved Ismael and Hagar from dying in the desert and verse 20 emphatically says that God was with him. Why would God be with Ismael? Abraham loved Ismael and Isaac. There is no evidence that he loved Ismael less or that he did not teach Ismael the ways of God. The last time we see Ismael mentioned in Genesis is where He and Isaac buried their father together (Genesis 25:9). How significant! This must mean Ismael must have not harbored any ill-will to his father or brother. They seemed to have "buried the hatchet" a long time prior to Abraham's death. How could anyone conclude that Ismael went to hell when God pulled that kind of reconciliation?

Jews have always played a special part in God's plan to save humanity, but we have many scriptures that show that just being a Jew is not enough. Two people that come to mind that we can point to who were not Jews and lived before Christ but were saved along with the patriarchs and prophets and all the other believing Jews are Rahab and Ruth. Not only are we told that they were not Jews, but we know that by faith they pleased God and ended up being in Jesus' genealogy. Of course one might want to suggest that you could be listed by name in Hebrews 11 and as one of Jesus' ancestors and yet end up in hell, but I don't know anyone who would want to do that. Remember also the lengths God went to to save the people of Nineveh in the Book of Jonah. If he did not care about non-Jewish people before Jesus then why did He send a prophet to do his will?

Unfortunately, not everyone in our society today know that much about Jean Calvin. He was just a man like any of us - flawed and a sinner. However God did use him to do many great things during the time God allotted to him about 500 years ago. Many of the points raised against Jean Calvin as a man and the things he did are raised to dispel and disparage Calvinism. There is a radio program that is also web casted out of the New York area that has dealt with Jean Calvin form a historical basis. In this light, Jean Calvin does not fit the caricature painted in this video. Calvin did not run a police state in Geneva. The radio show is called Iron Sharpens Iron and is broadcasted at 3 pm Eastern every weekday. Fortunately for us who don't live in that market, the show is recorded and archived everyday so you can listen on the Internet. Here is the show broadcasted October 4 and November 11, 2007 talking about the historical persons of Jean Calvin and Arminius both of whom are mentioned in this video. It's called THE EXPOSITORY GENIUS OF JOHN CALVIN.

If there is enough information out there directly contradicting what they have stated in this video, it would be wise to investigate further, weighing every single word and thought expressed.

The Terrible C's Part 2 - Roman Catholicism

Here is part 2 of my response to Ex-Catholics for Christ's series of videos on what they called the Three Terrible C's. The second video is about Roman Catholicism. The videos are again found on Godtube and here is the second video.



As you can see in this video, instead of talking about the ways Catholicism falls short on being in line with Bible, more time is spent on talking about the Catholic Catechism. I agree with no book outside the Bible should be used to dictate faith and practice for a Christian, but there are many other important issues to talk about other than what was chosen to be discussed in the video. I do think that mitigating the centrality of Jesus in being right with God and basically embracing Hinduism, Islam, and other religions that deny key Biblical truths because of their sincerity of faith is wrong. I can sincerely believe 3 plus 3 equals 5 but that won't change the fact that I would be wrong. Unfortunately despite the fact that the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus is the way to get God, they seem willing to accept that other faiths are just as valid. I also do not want to paint all Roman Catholics as this way. I'm referring only to those Catholics who follow the Pope, the Vatican, and the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church that contradict what the Bible says. There are many Protestant denominations that are also off and do not follow the Bible as they should. This video seems to me imply that all of Roman Catholics are off center and deceived. To argue that idea means thinking that for over 1000 years God was not powerful enough to protect his Church from error. Jesus said that the Gates of hell will never prevail against his Church.

COGIC at the DNC 2008

The Presiding Bishop of the Church of God In Christ, Bishop Blake, spoke at the 2008 Democratic National Convention. View the video below. On the main page of COGIC website it is clearly stated that as a denomination COGIC is not endorsing any political party.

The Terrible C's Part 1 - Charismatic Movement

I was in my Google RSS Reader today and came across three interesting videos on GodTube from a ministry called Ex-Catholics for Christ. The three videos are part of a series called The Terrible C's. Part 1 is about the Charismatic Movement. Part 2 is about Roman Catholicism. Part 3 is about Calvinism. I found the videos very interesting and worth discussing in detail. I will write three posts - one for each video. Here is the first video:



I found several things I disagreed with in this video. By and large there is very little scripture foundation offered for their idea. The men in the video believe several things that I nearly feel out of my seat when I heard them. I will enumerate three of them one by one.
1. The spiritual gifts discussed in the Bible are not in practice today. Spiritual gifts such as prophecy, speaking in tongues, healing, and other supernatural gifts that the Bible speaks about ended when the last book of the New Testament was completed.
2. Women did not ever speak in tongues
3. No one has spoken in tongues since the Apostles of the first century died and before the 19th century


Here are my responses to each one.
1. They did not offer any scripture to base on their teaching on the cessation of tongues. The only scripture I can even think of may be twisted to say that tongues and signs ended with the closing of scripture is 1 Corinthians 13: 8-12 which says

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

Many people who use this scripture to prove that tongues and prophecies are over stop at verse 10 and say that the perfect thing that came is the completion of the New Testament. I don't hold to that because although the scripture is completed we still do not know or understand everything. In context, Paul is talking about Jesus' second coming. Then we will understand fully because we will finally be like him and see him as he is.

Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 1 John 3:2

2. Where does the Bible say women never spoke in tongues? In the video, the man attempts to summarize the rules Paul passed on from God concerning how to incorporate tongue speaking and prophesying into the order of church services in 1 Corinthians 14. I want to focus on verses 26-40.
What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.

Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

In the video, the King James version was appealed to. It says "If any man" but newer translations say "anyone". I looked up the Greek and found that the word being translated in verse 27 as "anyone" is "tis" and it makes no designation according to gender. The Strong number is 1500 and it means "a certain, a certain one". You cannot use this scripture to say women never spoke in tongues in the early church. I realize that I could say something about the verses admonishing women to keep quiet but I will save this for another future post. Additionally, the Bible says in Acts 10:47 that the people at Cornelius' house spoke in tongues. This would have had to include the women in his household.

To be fair, the video is not all wrong.They did point out that according to scripture if there are to be tongues spoken in the environment of a church meeting, there must be an interpretation and if there is not, people need to to keep their tongues to themselves. Unfortunately, not all churches follow this prescription. In addition, it was pointed out that speaking in tongues is the easiest spiritual gift to fake.

3. No proof is offered for the idea that no one has spoken in tongues between the end of the New Testament and the beginning of the Charismatic Movement. I would not say that I am part of the Charismatic Movement, but I am part of a Pentecostal Denomination that does believe in the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. In our history, we have taught in the past that speaking in an unknown tongue (human or heavenly languages) is the proof of being filled with the Holy Spirit, but now many of us believe that speaking in tongues is one of the signs. No where is scripture does it say that Tongues is the best sign of belief. Scripture says that we "...will know them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:20). We believe this because of the experience of realizing that people were speaking in tongues but not coming to Christ. There must be a change in behavior and a desire to live holy if a person is truly born again and filled with the Holy Spirit.

As for the challenge of proving that baptism of the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts still goes on today the one question I have is if you want proof I have to ask what church are you going to where the gifts of the spirit is not being manifested? The same God who empowered the apostles empowers us today. Why are you not seeing miraculous healing? Why is cancer not being healed? Or the lame walk? Or amputated or withered limbs restored? Why are you not seeing true prophesy where God says something and validates it in a miraculous way? There are many recorded examples of these. Some of which I have personally experienced. I know what it's like to be sick with arthritis and medical science not being able to do anything to help me. I was on crutches and constant pain for 5 years and God healed me. No where does the Bible say that He will stop being our everything...the one upon which we must trust and depend on everything. One final scripture about laying hands is found in James 5:14,15. Remember no where does it say that there will come a day when we will no longer need to do this until Jesus returns for his perfect church.

Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven.

Unless you want to argue that telekinesis is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit then you must concede that the elders were laying hands on the sick people they anointed with oil and prayed for.

Biblical Basis - Jesus' Humanity

One of the most important doctrines of Christianity is the fact that Jesus has duel natures. He is 100% man and 100% God. Again, like in the post about Jesus' deity, I will not discuss the Trinity in this post but next week. I'm also skipping the question of Jesus' race. The truth is the color of his skin, while an interesting discussion, has no bearing on a person's identity in a first century context, which is the time Jesus was on earth. It has no bearing on his identity as the Savior of this, his creation.

Instead, I'd like to discuss what the Bible says about Jesus' humanity. One of the gripes some people express about the Gospels is that they do not emphasize the same things. They do not tell all the same stories and when the stories parallel they contain varying degrees of detail and aimed at different audiences. Some folks even try to use these differences to say that the Gospels conflict with one another. I disagree. I can find no contradiction and no conflict. It's important to recognize that each of the four Gospels emphasizes different aspects of Jesus. Matthew was written to Jews and emphasis his kingship and messiah status, focusing on how He fulfills Old Testament prophecies. You can see much about Jewish culture. Mark was written to the Romans and more action oriented. It moves at a more rapid pace and covers nothing of his background before his public ministry and talks more about His deeds. Mark emphasizes Jesus' identity as a Servant. Luke was written to the Greeks. It reads more like what we think of today when we talk about biographies. We see Jesus as a baby, at age 12, and during his public ministry. Luke emphasizes Jesus' humanity. He really was born and had many of the same experiences that we all have to face. In John's Gospel we see Jesus as God. No other Gospel is more blatant on that point. You will notice the John's Gospel contains some of the strongest languages on that point.

Turning attention to Jesus' claim to be fully human, it's important to recognize that his humanity is fundamentally different than ours. Jesus had no taint of sin that permeates the rest of us. He is what God had intended us to be. It is through Jesus and only through Jesus that our humanity can be purely and truly expressed. He always did the right thing and never ever sin. None of the rest of us can say the same thing. Jesus is the second Adam. Paul wrote in Romans 5: 12-19

Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.

Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. For just as through the disobediencee of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

It was only as a man that we could be redeemed from sin and death because it was by a man that we all feel into slavery. In Philippians 2:5-11, Paul also wrote:

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death— even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

We see that Paul taught that Jesus is God and voluntarily became a man and then died for us in humble obedience to save us all. It is important to embrace all things that the Bible teaches about Jesus. A whole book could be written about the Humanity of Christ but I will make one last point based on Hebrews 10:1-10 which says:

The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said:
"Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but a body you prepared for me;
with burnt offerings and sin offerings
you were not pleased.
Then I said, 'Here I am—it is written about me in the scroll—
I have come to do your will, O God.' " First he said, "Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them" (although the law required them to be made). Then he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

The entire book of Hebrews is apologetic in nature - it brilliantly defends the faith in light of Judaism. By Chapter 10 the author explains why Jesus' sacrifice was necessary and uses a couple of scriptures from the Old Testament to show the Jesus really did have a human body - a life to be laid down only to be picked back up again. The scriptures quoted were Psalm 40: 6-8 in verse 7. The author makes the point that Christ's incarnation is nothing strange to Judaism. Jesus fulfilled this and many other scriptures from the Old Testament and those that are yet to be fulfilled He will fulfill in His second advent.

Biblical Basics - The Deity of Christ

After studying the Bible and apologetics I agree with what Hank Hanegraaf, the Bible Answer Man, when he said:

"...nearly all heresies begin with the misconception on the nature of God."

This has been true throughout history. Think of how in the first 3 centuries of the common era, the Gnostics denied the humanity of Jesus - the very reality of his life. Fortunately, God made sure that we had an antidote to this poison.

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born. 1st Corinthians 15: 3-8

In his first recorded letter to the Corinthians, Paul set forth the key truths of the Gospel. Jesus really did die and was really raised from the dead on the third day to save us all from our sins. All of Christianity rests on these facts. These facts brings into focus questions concerning who Jesus is and how does he relate to God.

During the third and fourth centuries the heresy known as Arianism reared its ugly head. Arianism denies the deity of Christ in particular and the Trinity in general. It seems to have started with Arius (c. AD 250-336). Thankfully the church was largely able to snuff these ideas out but even today these ideas come up again and again even today. The purpose of this post is to discuss the deity of Christ. I will discuss the Trinity in another post.

Many people try to deny the deity of Jesus Christ. I think the reason why is if Jesus is not God, then He was either a myth, a lunatic, or a liar. This would mean that one could go off and live any kind of way he/she feels fit because there would be no consequences. The Bible could be ignored. Problem is that each one of us must deal with the question of who Jesus is for ourselves. It's been two thousand years and He is not going to go away. Sooner or later you have to deal with what He said. I am going to be basing this post on the Bible. If you do not believe that the Bible is the true and inspired word of God...complete and perfect...then you should look at a couple of my earlier posts where I deal with those issues. For the purposes of this post I will assume that the reader agrees with me that the Bible is true and all that I write must line up with it. Whole books have been written on this and right now I will barely scratch the surface.

Many people who claim to believe the Bible, like Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses, are quick to discount the deity of Jesus. They and others claimed that Jesus never claimed to be God.
Let us look at some scriptures to see what Jesus really did say and what his earliest followers said. I often wonder if they are reading the same book. Consider John 8:48-59

The Jews answered him, "Aren't we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?"

"I am not possessed by a demon," said Jesus, "but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. I tell you the truth, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death."

At this the Jews exclaimed, "Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that if anyone keeps your word, he will never taste death. Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?"

Jesus replied, "If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad."

"You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!"

"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

Why was the Jewish leaders so angry? They were angry enough to kill Jesus because they understood exactly what He was claiming. Jesus said that if they were really children of Abraham in more than just a physical sense they would be happy to see Jesus come. Jesus asserted His authority in the strongest possible way in their context. He applied the divine name of God to Himself. If you look up "I am" from verse 58, you will see that in Greek it is the same name God used when He revealed Himself to Moses from the burning bush if you look at the Greek translation of Exodus 3:14. The Jews understood that Jesus is claiming to always have existed and will always exist. Jesus is not teaching that He and the Father are the same person. In order to fully expand on His relationship with the Father, I will leave it to what Jesus said about that and save it for my Trinity post.

Further, the Greek word for the name "I Am" ( I use "name" because in Hebrew it was the name God gave himself) was also used by Jesus when He walked on the water to the boat His disciples were on at the time (Matt 14:22-33; Mark 6:47-51; John 6:16-21). Our English translations miss the thrust of Jesus' words translating John 6:20 this way:

But he said to them, "It is I; don't be afraid."

More accurately, Jesus said: "Don't Be afraid. I am." again applying the divine name to himself.

Although there are several other example that could be used, let us turn attention to what Jesus' followers said about his divinity. Paul wrote the following in Colossians 1: 15,16

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

The "He" and "him" in this passage refer to Jesus Christ. Obviously, if Paul is saying that Jesus made everything and everything is held together by him, then Jesus must be deity. When Paul uses the word "firstborn" he is not saying that Jesus is the first thing God created. He means that Jesus is primary and most important and over all creation.

Here is another passage of scripture talking about who Jesus is. It is found in Phillippians 2:5 -11 which says:

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

I really like this scripture because it gives insight into what Jesus' mindset and motivations were when he went to the cross for me and you. It points out that the reason why it was a humbling experience for Christ is because Jesus is God. In an upcoming post I will write about Jesus' humanity.

One last thing. We as Christians talk about Jesus being "God Incarnate". - literally God-in-flesh. Some say that this is antithetical to common senses and the Old Testament. They say that God cannot become a man and enter into his own creation. This is one of the first objections Jews and Muslims raise. Rather than tackle this in a lengthy discussion, I'll use a Hip Hop song the group called Hazakim in which they take on this very issue. I've already posted the video that goes with this song on this blog in the post called "The Truth Behind G. Craig Lewis Part 2" and it is on YouTube and GodTube so now I will just post the song itself. I ask with Hazakim, is it really that far fetched to believe that God became a man? And if it is impossible, then who was Abraham conversing with in Genesis 18:1-33?

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

Bible Basics - Objections to the Bible

There are a few major objections that people use to attack the Bible. I don't believe these objections or any objection are valid. I'm not intending to cover all objections but two that I consider major. One objection is that the Bible contains no eyewitness accounts, especially the New Testament, and were written down so long after the events that one cannot trust what is written without thinking that myth and legend had crept into it. Another objection is the translation and transmission of the Bible. They ask that if the Bible has been copied and recopied, translated and re-translated over and over again how can we be sure that the message has not been corrupted?

The thing to remember about time lines concerning the dates the books of the bible were written is that scholars and historians disagree. Some date them very early and some of them date them very late, many times depending on whether or not they are believers. Scholars even use different rules for deciding how to date the book. Some use use the earliest fragment and others use the oldest complete version. When it comes to the Old Testament I hardly ever hear this objection but it's sometimes the first objection raised against the New Testament. For example, if the Gospel according to John was not written before 100 AD, then detractors could argue that there would be no way the author could be one of the original disciples let alone an eyewitness to Jesus' life and works, thereby casting doubt on the veracity of the whole book of John. Even if you argue a second century dating for any book of the Bible there is not sufficient time for myth and legend to crop into the early church's teachings about Jesus. No one has been able to prove that the second century Christians beliefs differed all that greatly from the first. Even the most liberal and/or Christian-hating scholar will grant you that Paul most likely wrote his epistles (letters) like 1st Corinthians in the 60's AD. This means that 1st Corinthians 15:3-8 which says:

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

must have been written within 30 years of Jesus' crucifixion. This means that the early church did believe in Jesus' resurrection and all of Christianity is based on that truth. Further that this was something Paul inherited and not originated. More could be said and few have done it better that Lee Strobel in the his book The Case for Christ.

As for the second objection, the numerous copies are a good thing. We have so many copies from various times and places we can compare them and see that the variations are slight. From these copies, through comparing them against one another, we can figure out what the originals actually did say. This is what our modern translations are based on. The majority of the variations include misspelled words or phrases with words in different order. The new testament was written in kione Greek and I have found out that in Greek you can have nouns and verbs switched in order and not change the meaning of a sentence. Not so in English. As for the Old Testament, written in Hebrew and Aramaic, the text doesn't seem to be much in dispute. The oldest copy of any book from the Old Testament we have is a copy of Isaiah from the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is more than 99% the same as the text from which our Bibles are translated from. For more information on this I think one should read The King James Only Controversy by James White for a wonderful treatment on Biblical translation and transmission. Here is a video about the reliability of the Bible:

Be Transformed

Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will. Romans 12:2

Bible Basics - the Bible

Orthodox Christianity teaches that the Bible is the word of God. We believe that it is the revelation from God on faith and practice as we live out this life according to God's purpose. This is an important part of any discussion of theology. It must be agreed upon what standard will opinions and conclusions will be based. I mean how do you know Jesus love you? How do you know that you are a sinner, cut off from relationship with God - caught in an endless bondage to sin terminated only in death? How do you know that you are in a predicament whose only remedy is the life, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus Christ? Simple, the Bible says so. I'm not suggesting that there is not any reasonable evidence outside of scripture to believing these things, but I do recognize that the fundamental evidence that I am basing my life on is based on what the Bible says. No way we could know these truths without direct revelation from God.

This is why you find many agnostics, atheists, other religions, and cultists attacking the Bible. Their ilk have attacked it since the beginning because they know if the Bible is not the word of God then everything Christians believe is a lie. This is why how you see the Bible is very important. If its full of errors, then how do you know that the parts promising eternal life are not lies? If it embellishes miraculous events then maybe the hope-giving encouragements are to be taken with a "grain of salt"? It also means that there is no judgment and everyone can live and do as they themselves see fit. In this case, laws and civil order go out the window. Who are you to tell someone like Hitler that he is wrong to kill anyone he doesn't think was worthy of life? Or what stops a person from walking up to you, smacking you on the head, and taking all you own? That person could no longer be called a "thief" or a "murderer". Those terms and many others would loose all meaning. Thank God that he gave us a standard outside of us that we can use to know right and wrong. That measuring stick is the Bible - against with all faith, opinion, suggestion, idea, thought, and conclusion should be weighed, counted, and measured against and if found wanting - should be discarded. No one, no matter how dastardly their deeds thinks of themselves as evil, even if they know they are wrong.

It took 1,500 years for all 66 books of the Bible to be written. It was written by over 40 different authors, writing in different languages, from different backgrounds and cultures, on three continents. The kicker is that despite these facts there are coherent messages without conflict or error. How could this be unless God is behind it? I want to turn to some scriptures in which itself tells us what it is.

We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain. And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. 2 Peter 1:16-21

And Paul said:

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16,17

This is why I consider Biblical Inerrancy to be a major sticking point concerning anything with Christianity. The Bible tells us what our world view should be and gives us glimpses into the mind of God. It also records for us how God has related to other people who were like than any of us. We see their triumphs and their failures. How if they trusted God, they succeeded (just read Hebrews 11 as a summary of this point) and if they turned their own way they failed with disastrous consequences. This is no different today.

This post went a little longer than I thought it would. I had planned to discuss,on the surface, some of the objections that have been raised by those who don't think that such discussions on real matters should be based on the Bible. I guess I'll save that one for a later time.

Biblical Basics - Introduction

I am intending to write a series of post that discuss biblical topics. Most of it will be very basic and will do nothing to challenge orthodox Christian theology. All my posts will be attempts to read only out of the Bible what was intended to be there and not read into it my own biases and traditions. I use the word "attempts" because I know how hard it is to do that and I welcome feedback and challenges. These are going to be things that I desire to get the correct understanding of I know that i will always have more to learn and to grow into yet. I don't have it all now and I will never have it completely down until I see Christ. Paul said:

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
1st Corinthians 13:8-12

If the apostle Paul, handpicked by God to take the Gospel all over the Roman world , understood that he did not have the complete picture, makes you wonder why any of us have such audacity to think we do. I pray daily not to fall into that. Because of the grace of God, and only the grace of God, I have three college degrees in engineering and technology so I am constantly examining my attitude towards other people. The following scripture helps with that. It almost seems written for me.

Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness."
1st Corinthians 3:18,19

One thing about the Bible is that for every scripture that you can use to condemn others there are several that get you too. To add emphasis, Paul uses the weight of the Old Testament quoting Job 5:31 in verse 19. Reminding others and informing some that God cannot be outsmarted, tricked, or manipulated. I intend to follow his lead the best I can as I write, footnoting and referencing whenever I can. I want to use science, history, philosophy, archeology, anthropology, and art to talk about theology and Bible doctrine. When I make a mistake, or when clarification is needed, please comment and let me know. Also if you have some ideas for articles that I can research with you on, please also let me know.