Home for the Holidays

So I'm home for the holidays! Three precious weeks of freedom. I need to use them well, so I figured I'd spend a little while writing a blog - something I don't do enough. This one is not a really focused blog, just a few little musings about some things that have recently come to my attention.

1) On looking forward to better days

We all know those days we can't wait for. Especially this year around Christmas time that day is obvious. Everyone wants that day when they can rip open their presents to come super quickly. Some of us - yours truly - look forward to said days so passionately that we forget we have been graciously been given this day by God, and all the other days behind us, but not tomorrow. There are no guarantees for tomorrow.

Probably most of us are familiar with the verse in Matthew where Jesus says, "Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble" (Matt 6:34). This is speaking of a practical way to tackle everyday life - take it one day at a time! We can apply this principle also to days that are going really well for us. Don't waste your todays looking forward to your tomorrows.

2) On the meaning of what is said

I recently came to the realization that the Bible does not always mean what it says. Now, before you spam me and send me viruses or post evil comments, let me explain. A while ago I had a chat with some guys outside a Harvest Crusade Festival. Their hermeneutic is really interesting. The motto, as I found out later on their website, is "God says what He means and means what He says." I thought, that sounds good. We can finally get away from the allegorically interpretations of Genesis and the gospels and get down to the meat of what the Bible says. Little did I know that they were more than serious about their literalism. Of course, I reject much of their theology (although they do hit the nail on the head in some places), because the Bible simply "doesn't mean what it says" sometimes in the same way that we "don't mean what we say" when we muse that someone "has ants in their pants" or that we are "so hungry could eat a cow" or that our large football playing friends "are tanks."

Apparently to some people, the Bible isn't allowed to use metaphor. "That's what the text plainly says" they will tell you, reminiscent of something I myself have told people many times over. Perhaps you'll be accused of twisting the text to meet your own theology. Foolishness I say. The men in that group at Harvest Crusade actually thought wisdom was a person who stood on rooftops shouting at people (cf. Proverbs)! They then took those verses (which portray wisdom as a female) and combined them with the fact that Jesus is God and that Jesus is called "the wisdom of God." From this they concluded that God was a female. They also concluded that the Bible is Jesus, since both the Scriptures and Jesus are called the Word of God. It has been rightly noted that such wooden literalism could build a fleet of ships! (Mr. Holding's words from his site www.tektonics.org).

Keep in mind that God is called a consuming fire (Deut 4:24), a sun and a shield (Ps 84:11), a rock, a horn, and a fortress (2 Sam 22:3). Perhaps we are to conclude that God is a physical flame. Maybe he's just a huge ball of burning gas. No, no. He is a big metal plate used for blocking arrows with 2 straps in the back to put your arm in. Oh wait, He's actually an inanimate chunk of minerals... for... standing on? You can see how utterly ridiculous this sort of reasoning gets.

So don't twist scripture and turn something historical into something super mystical or secret if it is unwarranted. But come on, when you're reading a Psalm, don't assume that God actually has wings we go under (Ps 17:8). If something sounds weird, check out the context, including the literary context. Word pictures are extremely common everywhere. Paul used them often. Jesus used them often. We should take them as such.

So in that sense I reject the strict literalism of "The Bible says what it means and means what it says."

3) On an old friend's blog

I was going down my AIM buddy list and looking at all the updated profiles. I came across one of an old friend from elementary school. He updates his profile whenever he writes a new blog, and I like reading them to check up on how he's doing. In case you're wondering - not well. He's pretty angry at everything it seems like and has no lack of supply of curse words. This blog was no different, except this one caught my eye because it was named "Karma and Other Meaningless Beliefs." Most of it was angry and insulting (not personally, in general), but he did have some notable points.

Essentially it was a rant about people who basically make up their own beliefs and call themselves "spiritual" but not "religious." The idea here is: what makes you think that all of a sudden you come up with your version of spirituality that has it more correct that everyone else? Most people of course realize the arrogance (and unreliability) of their position and conclude that everyone can pave their own path to God. "I'm not the only right one. I'm just the only person on my path! Everyone else has theirs and they all work!" This, of course, is just plain illogical and a glossing over of the difficulties between opposing views.

My conclusion: We need to gently show people where they have not yet fully thought through their beliefs, help them think through them, and point them to the cross.

There was also a good quote, which I fully agree with him on: "No one can realistically be indifferent to the existence of god." He's right! The common cop outs such as "Hell will be a party!" or "I guess we'll find out when we get there" are not reasonable. It's not fun to be punished. Period. I think that's part of the definition or something. It's also not fun to find out that you are going to be punished for eternity simply because you were too wrapped up in your little sphere of comfortable living to give any substantial consideration to the possibility that God exists and that He will judge all evil. That isn't something you're going to want to find out when you die.

My conclusion: We need to gently show people why Christianity is worth considering, help them consider it, and implore them to accept God's sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins - the only way of salvation.

From the looks of the ending of his post, it's obvious that this is not what my friend had in mind. He is only interested in ridiculing anyone with spiritual beliefs. We don't want to ridicule people, we want to love them and lead them and show them God's forgiveness. That's what this whole season is supposed to be about - God's love for His lost sheep (John 3:17).



Merry Christmas, all!

Continuing an Old Tradition

I thought about writing a blog about everything I'm thankful for (and believe me, there is a lot), but I just thought I'd do something a little different. For all you old-timers, you might remember that I started this blog as a commentary on 1 Corinthians , but got "sidetracked" at chapter 11, verse 1. Quite honestly, there are some verses there that I didn't know what to do with, and I was getting better at finding other things to write about (not a bad thing). Anyway, I thought I'd pick up right where I left off and try to tackle ONE of these verses that deal with obscure areas of church behavior and theology.

Since I left off at verse 1, I think I'll pick up at verse two! That makes sense. Lately I've been quite active on the Facebook boards having nice conversations with my Catholic buddies, and verses like this one just have to come up. Now, if you know anything about Catholicism, you'll know that they rely heavily on their traditions to "interpret" Scripture. Of course, I'm convinced that plenty of the time, no interpretation is needed; it just needs to be read! So let's read it:

Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things
and the traditions just as I delivered them to you.

The Roman Catholic would gladly quote this verse to support their emphasis on tradition in the church. Of course, I don't think this verse can be used to justify such a position for several reasons:
1) Paul is talking about specific traditions he delivered to the Corinthians, not tradition in general.
2) Paul doesn't directly tell us what this tradition is. For all we know the tradition could be a reference to staying faithful to the Word of God!
3) Paul isn't advocating the interpretation of Scripture via tradition! In fact, Paul warned the Colossians to "not be taken captive through...the traditions of men" but rather to base our thinking on Christ (Col 2:8).
4) The tradition could be the very next thing he addresses: the hierarchy of authority in the church and proper conduct during prayer (vv. 3-16). In that case, we have it in Scripture anyways, and still are without need of "tradition"!

And ultimately, tradition is never allowed to violate Scripture, but this is exactly what Catholic tradition does. This is the real reason I do not accept the Catholic idea of tradition, because it's gotten to the point where it goes against the Word of God so much so that I cannot even consider the Roman Catholic Church a Christian church. The works salvation wrapped up in the sacraments of Catholicism is directly forbidden in Scripture (Gal 3:10) and those who preach it (a different gospel) are declared anathema (Gal 1:8-9).

We need to be committing ourselves only to Christ's sacrifice and not trusting in our own righteousness to save us. Silly things like eating bread and drinking wine, getting dunked in water, praying repetitiously, and giving money to the church (among others) do not affect our salvation! Perhaps they are effected by our salvation, but they have no effect themselves on our standing before the just Judge.

I hope this encourages you that you can rest assured in your salvation because Christ has paid the full penalty, and requires no merit from you. I also hope this encourages you to live an all the more full and holy life (Lev. 20:7), now that you Christians are free from the control that sin used to have over you. Now these are definitely some things we can all be very thankful for!!!

Well... it's time to get to some homework. Yes... they assigned us stuff over break... >_<

Giving an Answer

I once was talking to this dude named Blakey who told me that there's no excuse for going a month without blogging. Well, today is day 31, and I don't want the CBC to take away my blog, so I better get crackin'!

Lately the Lord has blessed me with the opportunity to have many spiritual conversations that I didn't even actively seek for. The Lord sent them to me, much like he did with Christian. I have done my best to obey 1 Pet 3:15, and I can only pray that it has made an effect in conjunction, of course, with the Lord's grace in allowing me to live a life pleasing to Him.

What I want to do is something I've always wanted to do, which is study the Biblical examples of people who defended the faith, how they did it, and what we can learn from their example.

The first, I think, should be Paul, who was appointed by God to be a missionary to the Gentiles. Hey, that's me! Cool, whats the dude got to say?

I think that possibly one of the most common passages that pops up in Christian apologetics (along with 1 Pet 3:15; 2 Cor 10:5, and Col 2:8-9) is Romans 1:18-20 which says that

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse."

I'd say that's about as clear cut, inconsiderate, straightforward, offensive, and intolerant as it gets folks. No one is without excuse. I often hear people say, "If God existed, he would make it more obvious." This is a wake up call to those people. It IS obvious. The reason you don't believe is because you love your sin more than the truth. God has graciously given you a chance to turn from your ways and run to Him for forgiveness.

Of course, this is to be expected, since we are by nature sinful, do not understand, and do not seek after God (Rom 3:11). So what is a Christian to do? Give up on those filthy sinners? They can't understand anyways, so why bother? No, I don't think Paul would be happy with that. He shows us what his attitude was toward the unbelieving when he visited Athens and reasons with them...

"his spirit was provoked within him when he saw that the city was given over to idols. Therefore he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and with the Gentile worshipers, and in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there." (Acts 17:16-17)

So Paul was a straight up street preacher who talked to anyone who would listen! There are a few distinctive traits concerning Paul's style of preaching.

1) He uses logic

Some people erroneously mistake using logic with "leaning on your own understanding" (cf. Pr. 3:5). Sound logic, however, is the wisdom of God, which we should strive for (Pr. 4:5)! For example: every time you read "therefore" in the Bible, the writer/speaker is appealing to logic. "your heart is not right before God. Repent, therefore" (Acts 8:21-22). Peter here is telling Simon the magician that his heart is not right with God, so the appropriate, reasonable response is to repent. It naturally follows logically. X therefore Y. Your heart is not right, therefore repent. In Paul's example he uses this kind of logic to denounce idol worship. "We are the offspring of God," therefore "we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man's devising" (29). There's that X therefore Y setup again. See how easy this is?

2) He engages the culture (but doesn't participate in it)

Paul, as he has a chance to speak publicly to a crowd (an example of open air evangelism), lets us know what he has done in preparation for this moment. He says, "I was passing through and considering the objects of your worship" (Acts 17:23). He got acquainted with the culture. He found out what was meaningful to these people. He also found a sort of discussion starter with the "Unknown God" idol, and proclaimed to them who that God is. They thought they might be missing something. Paul noticed this, and filled in the gap. That there is a God they do not know (23), but he can be known (24-26), wants to be known(27), and is not far(27).

3) He appeals to their authoritative texts

In a later verse, Paul reveals to us that he even knows something about their pagan writings! No, Paul would never spend time reading pagan books to see what they say so he can effectively use that as a witnessing tool to win many to Christ... would he? You bet he would, and you should too, within reason of course. Please understand that Paul quotes only one line of one pagan poet(28), uses one line to appeal to their desire to be religious(22) and uses the rest of the passage to proclaim Him who they "worship without knowing"(23). I'm not calling everyone everywhere to have a 1:1:8 ratio, but there is a principle here:

4) He keeps his focus on the gospel

He feeds them God's spiritual truth first and foremost, appealing both to their current status as "religious" people, an authoritative text, and logic to make his case persuasively.

What is his case for? It is but this: that "all men everywhere repent, because [God] has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained." Did Paul preach a repent or burn message? Well... yes and no. Paul preaches repentance and judgment ("...repent, because... He will judge..."), but he doesn't couch it in the typical hellfire and brimstone terminology with hateful words and a condescending attitude that we typically associate with people who preach those things. Let's not lie to people. If someone never believes on the Lord Jesus Christ, that person is not saved. That's the hard truth. This is naturally part of our message. But then again, let's not make the bad news our focus. The gospel is "good news" for a reason.

Paul takes a bit more friendly approach, yet without compromising the hard truths. He says that they are "in all things...very religious" (22) What's he doing here? He is using something important to them to lead into spiritual conversation. He is taking some part of their lives, their culture, and using it to connect to the gospel and preach the good news that men should repent because Christ has been crucified and risen.

Let's do the same.

Act with Knowledge

I fear there is a myth going around in Christian circles that Christians are not supposed to be intellectual. We aren’t supposed to question what we believe, because then God won’t like us, or something along those lines. We can’t be critical of the Bible, because for some things the answers are difficult. Well, besides the obvious verse 1 Pet 3:15, which says to “always be ready to give an account (a defense) for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and respect,” there are plenty of practical and biblical reasons for criticizing our own beliefs and relying on evidence and knowledge rather than simply having blind faith.

Before you do this, however, you have to ask yourself one thing: are you willing to go wherever the truth leads you, even if that means your beliefs (in this case, Christianity) is false?! Are you willing to do that? You must be willing. Besides, as Christians we are obligated to know the truth because “the truth will set you free” (John 8:32).

First off I would like to come straight out and say that if you hate knowledge you are a fool and the Bible agrees with me. “Fools hate knowledge” (Prov 1:22). Anyone who hates knowledge is not on a Biblical path, so don’t let anyone tell you not to do archaeology, or study the claims of the Bible, or explore contradictions in the Bible, or dig in to the original language, or consider perhaps an atheist’s argument against the existence of God. The truth has nothing to hide! It’s a wonder we Christians seem to run away from it so often. “With his mouth the godless man (atheist) would destroy his neighbor, but by knowledge the righteous are delivered” (Prov 11:9).

In fact, I go so far as to say that those who dislike exercising their minds for God’s glory are not fearing Him: “They hated knowledge and did not choose the fear of the LORD” (Prov 1:29).

Secondly, I must clarify what I mean by the word “faith.” Some people think that it takes more faith to believe something you know little about. This definition of faith goes something like: a belief in spite of the evidence against said belief, or belief in spite of the lack of evidence for said belief. This is the wrong definition of faith. I might go so far as to say that this is the dead faith that James addresses in his epistle – a simple intellectual assent to an idea, no matter where the evidence points.

The faith I’m talking about is the kind of faith that James tries to encourage his readers to exhibit: the kind of faith that is reliance on or trust in something. For example, I have been putting faith in this chair for the last few hours to hold me up. I have no problem doing this, because I have had experience with it holding me up for such extended periods in the past. It’s not as if my faith in the chair diminishes with use. Just the opposite! My faith has been increased or, at the very least, confirmed. The same goes for God. The more we know about the reality of His existence and the more we have experienced His transforming power in our lives, the more we are certain of His actual, real presence in our lives, the more our faith increases! It’s not as if our faith in Him diminishes because we don’t need faith, we know. No, we have less trouble putting more faith in Him. It’s a beautiful thing. “…knowledge will be pleasant to your soul” (Prov 2:10).

Knowledge is actually an extremely valuable thing to the Lord. He commands us to guard it with our lips (Prov 5:2), to take it before choice gold (Prov 8:10), and if we are wise, to store lots of it (Prov 10:14). I wonder then why we have people saying things like “a god who can be proven to exist is not a god worth proving.” This is a common quote I’ve heard before, though I don’t know the original coiner. But think about it. If God can’t be proven to exist, then there is no foundation for the opening chapter of Romans which states that simply because the heavens exist, men are without excuse. Sounds like Paul thinks proving God is fairly easy to do! Yes, that means even the random aborigine tribe in the middle of a remote jungle in Africa is responsible for knowing some truth about Him, because His existence is that obvious… Of course, I by no means am saying that everyone will believe He exists. Men’s hearts are hard towards the things of God (Jer 17:9), and will often refuse to accept the obvious, logical implications of simply being alive in this amazing world that we’re in.

When we make decisions in life, they are calculated. We weigh pro’s and con’s, we examine the evidence and come to a conclusion based on a mess of inputs, yet with eternal things we are supposed to accept blindly what some book says? I think not. That is not a Christian value. That is a Mormon value. Instead, the Bible says “in everything the prudent acts with knowledge, but a fool flaunts his folly” (Prov 13:6).

I hope I have made a strong case for the importance of knowledge in the Christian life. I have some new dorm mates here at Stanford who are churchgoers who say that it’s impossible to know whether God exists or not. Forgive me, but what is the point of worshiping something you aren’t even sure exists? We don’t worship a false, dead, deaf God, but a living one. He actually exists. This isn’t just tradition. It isn’t a formality. It isn’t a matter of preference. The Christian life is about living in right relationship with God who is really here, not just an abstract concept in our heads.

Well, time to sign off. Perhaps next time I’ll post a few of the most commonly offered proofs/evidences for the existence of God. Until then, enjoy life with the Lord.

“And this is eternal life, that they may know You…” (John 17:3).

An Encouraging Witnessing Experience

Today I was reading more of Mark Cahill’s book One Thing You Can’t Do in Heaven. The great thing about this book is that it is almost hard to read even though there are so many awesome stories, because it compels you to get out there and witness to lost people right away! There is even a line in the book that says: “Go means ‘do not stay.’ It means put this book down, get up, and go bring the good news of Jesus to every person you can find in our lost and dying world” (170). Well that was convicting to say the least! So that’s what I ended up doing! Except in my typical fallen fashion I was pretty reluctant to talk to anyone.

I went to the Starbucks on Homestead and Hollenbeck, knowing that that is popular hang out spot for kids who go to Homestead High – perhaps I’d be able to talk to one of them! Well, as the Lord would have it, everyone there was Asian and speaking a different language. Not that I have anything against Asians, I just get really uncomfortable around people who are jabbering in a language I can’t understand. So I ordered a Strawberries and Crème, grabbed a newspaper, and started doing a crossword puzzle. After about 15 minutes I realized I was doing horribly and that probably even the answers I had down were mostly wrong, so I ditched that for some Sudoku. All the while I’m planning on ‘getting stuck’ somewhere and asking someone for ‘help’ in order to start a conversation with them. Everyone was so busy talking to other people or coming in and out so quickly that an opportunity never seemed to open up, though. I prayed that God would make me bold and allow me to have a conversation with someone in there; I was already feeling guilty for not starting one with anybody.

Lo and behold, a quarter of the way into my game a Mexican boy came into the shop and walked right toward me on the soft chair. He stood next to me, looked at me, and smiled. I noticed this and looked up at him.

“Hi,” I said.
“Hi!” he replied, sitting on the other soft chair adjacent to mine.
“How’s it going?” I asked.
“Good, good,” he said – a typical answer, even from people I know well. He then returned the question.
“I’m fine. What’s your name?” I asked, wanting to start a more personal conversation.
“Christian,” he said.

I couldn’t believe it! Some random kid came up to me and said hello evidently because I looked like one of his friends and he wanted to borrow some money. And his name was Christian! Talk about a conversation starter! I was too afraid to start a conversation with someone, so God sent someone to start a conversation with me! It was amazing. After a few minutes of small talk, I tried to transition to eternal things by mentioning the extremely recent and sudden death of Steve Irwin, the crocodile hunter. I wasn’t able to control the conversation well, however, and we got off topic. He ended up asking me, though, if he could ask a ‘personal question.’

I thought, “Are you kidding me?” I half suspected this kid would start witnessing to ME! Sadly, though, his question proved my suspicion wrong, and instead bolstered my other suspicion: he needed Christ in his life.

After the conversation came to a dead point, I said, “Now that you have asked me a personal question, may I ask you one.” He was most definitely open to talking to me at this point. I had already found out more about his life and his friend John’s life than anyone should know about another person within the first 10 minutes of meeting them. I asked him if he were to die today where he would go. The sparked the rest of our 40 minute conversation during which they accidentally missed two busses! I felt a little bad for holding them up, but I knew they needed to hear what I had to say.

During that time we talked about everything from the Ten Commandments, to how to get into heaven, to suicide, to holy water, to the reliability of Scripture, to dragons. It was a fairly good conversation, and I was glad I got to explain to them that they couldn’t be good enough for God, that they needed something else (Being a pretty good person is the most common reason people give for their justification of entering heaven). I had to explain that even committing one sin was enough to keep you out of heaven; in fact it’s like breaking all of the Law (James 2:10)! Christian was actually quite knowledgeable about the Bible, nodding whenever I quoted verses as if he recognized them and mentioning things he’d heard were said in it – even some pretty obscure things. I really enjoyed talking to him and was hopeful that he would understand and believe – he seemed close to the kingdom. He noticed my enthusiasm and asked me at one point during the conversation if I was an angel!

That would be the third time my proverbial jaw dropped during this conversation (but only in my mind). He also mentioned that there was something about me that just reflected some sort of angelic presence. “When I look at you,” he said, “I see ‘pure.’ But when I look at you,” turning to face his friend, “I see ‘death.’” Jaw-drop-session number four! You know when Jesus talked about being a light to the world, He wasn’t joking around (Matt 5:13-16). This became incredibly obvious the moment Christian said that. The kid could sense a huge difference between us simply because the stark contrast between his friend and me. His friend was into drinking and getting high; I was trying to show him I cared about the things of the Lord and his eternal soul. He noticed, and I am confident that he saw exactly what Jesus promised the world would see in us – light.

It felt like the conversation was over far too quickly, and I was tempted to beat myself up for not saying more, but I realized that God had set up their time to come into my life, and that meant he was also setting up a time for them to leave it. I thanked the Lord for the opportunity to talk to these Homestead High kids. It seemed as if the Lord had been working on Christian’s heart a little – I was able to give him the address and directions to FBLA, which he expressed an interest in attending almost as soon as we started talking! I pray that I will have the chance to see Christian again, if not both of them. If that doesn’t happen, though, I can rest in the fact that I planted a seed, and God will be faithful to provide the increase if He so desires.

I hope this story encourages you to get out there and be bold to share your faith with others, especially when God practically plops them right in your lap like He did for me today! It doesn’t take much, and the only time you’ll regret it is when you don’t do it! So get out there and evangelize the lost! They’re all waiting to hear from us.

One thing I would have done differently had I been able was to have tracts ready to hand out. Since they were asking for money, I could easily have had those money tracts and simply said something like this: “You need 25 cents? How about a million dollars and 25 cents!” and then hand them a ‘million dollar tract’ with the real quarter that they’re looking for. That is always fun. We had a few in Colorado and we’d slip them in as tips when the workers weren’t looking. Tracts are a great way to get the truth out to people when you don’t have a ton of time to start a 40-minute conversation with them like I did.
Some good tracts can be found at www.livingwaters.com. My personal favorites are the million dollar ones and the “IQ Test” ones – 100 tracts for 5 dollars. That literally means you’re giving out five-cent pieces of paper with the priceless gospel message on each of them. Everyone wants money and to prove that they’re smart, so it’s a good way to tie in biblical, eternal, salvation truth to the things that people seem to want most.

Another Encounter with the Mormons

Two days ago I went on a crazy adventure. Jose and I piled into my car at about 9:30 am and trekked two and a half hours to Sacramento where a brand new Mormon Temple was being opened. For those who know nothing about mormon temples, they are completely off limits to the public, only after they're dedicated. So for two weeks they have an open house where they show off a bunch of the rooms inside. They advertise the whole temple to be open, but Jose and I both noticed at least one room that was completely blocked off that we never saw the inside of. I also heard stories about people asking about off limits rooms. The tour guides responded that they "didnt know" what the rooms were. Fat chance.

The temple is extremely beautiful, clean, and honored. It is considered sacred by the Mormons, as it is the literal dwelling place of God (That's interesting, I thought our bodies were God's temples?) Before actually taking a tour, we saw a video presentation about what is inside the temple, and some of the doctrines the Mormon church has concerning the temple practices. The movie was quite moving indeed - emotionally satisfying to most I'm sure.

That is, after all, the primary basis of the Mormon church's validity: the emotional satisfaction and assurance you get from praying about the truth of the Book of Mormon and receiving a testimony of the Holy Spirit. I'll be honest. This is all incredibly annoying.

I truly feel sorry for anyone getting duped by the Mormon church and everything it has to say. I don't mean to be condescending; I am simply disturbed by all the false teachings it puts forward, the false gods, the false Jesus, the false testimony. It is all completely convincing too! In fact, if I weren't a Christian with a knowledge of the truth, I honestly may have fallen into the trap myself. The whole production was well put together, the people were nice and excited, and the movie blended almost seamlessly the things everyone wants to hear with a little bit of religious practice involved to give the illusion of being spiritual. It is extremely family oriented too. They are all for that ideal fantasy of happily ever after - extending it even to eternity in heaven!

One speaker in the video even said, "heaven wouldn't be heaven without my wife and kids. And you may think thats wishful thinking, but for me..." etc., etc.

Wow. Just, wow. I wasn't sure what to do with myself after that. I was so stunned in fact that I missed the discreet reference to Heavenly Fathers (yes, plural) that Jose was able to catch. Man... what happened to loving Jesus first and foremost? Even hating your closest relatives and self in comparison (Luke 14:26)! What happened to considered EVERYTHING loss when compared with knowing Christ, suffering loss of all in order to gain Christ (Phil 3:7-8). Indeed, an especially sharp LDS member may read this and say, "Hey! you're taking that out of context! Paul is counting his works as rubbish, losing his leadership among the Jews to gain Christ." Yes, that is true, but the principle of Christ-high-above-all-else still stands, as does Luke 14:26. Not to mention the fact that Pauls exclamation completely destroyes the Mormons' idea of works-salvation. Why do you have to keep all the commandments in order to be saved if Paul considered following the law rubbish compared with knowing Christ? I have no idea!

The most common way a Mormon defends the truthfulness of his position is the "testimony" he has, which basically comes down to a "burning in one's bosom" or "feeling of assurance." These are all, of course, inadequate in discerning truth. The Bereans were commended for searching the SCRIPTURES to test PAUL, not their own hearts. Besides, "the heart of man is desperately wicked" (Jeremiah 17:9). I quoted this to one of the Mormons who insisted that I wasnt that evil and she immediately ended the conversation. Amazing, Mormons don't like to hear God's word preached truthfully. Sadly, neither do some Christians, and they should be totally and utterly ashamed. I cannot express how shameful and ridiculous it is for a Christian to not want to hear God's word. Does that even make sense? It almost makes me want to puke. But before you tell me that's "just a feeling," let me say that my feelings coincide with what God's word says, and THAT is why they're right, not the other way around as the Mormon church will tell you. Read Psalm 119 and it will become dreadfully obvious the importance of the role of God's Word in the Christians life, and the love with which the Christian cherishes said word.

Ok hopefully my tirade is ended. We'll see; I might slip into another; I can get pretty excited about these things. The fact is this, we(Christians) believe in that which is true, sound, and logical. It is historically verifiable to a reasonable extent. That is of course when referring to historically verifiable things. Events such as the virgin birth, Jesus walking on water, etc etc are not verifiable outside of eyewitness accounts, all of which we have in the Bible. Other things however such as coins referenced, livestock, plants, technology, wars, cities, and so forth, are all verifiable. The Mormon position is not so. Concerning coins, none have been found. Concerning technology, there are no traces of such an advanced civilization. Considering civilization in general, there is absolutely no trace - No, none, whatsoever, nothing - of large civilations such as the Nephites or Lamanites running around America having a jolly old time for a thousand years. There is a pivotal hill mentioned in the Book of Mormon, the location of which is actually known. Guess who owns it? Mormons! Guess who could dig it up and prove their stories of millions of people dying in one battle? Mormons! Guess who refuses to commence archaeological study on said hill! Mormons! Granted, not all mormons should be held responsible, but when leadership in your church refuses to take an excellent opportunity to add credibility to the faith, you must wonder why. I'll tell you why. They won't find anything. Out of the little they've done, they havent found anything, and they arent going to start again because it would be a terrible embarassment to the church. I sympathize. I wouldnt want to dig up a hill if I was fairly certain it would refute everything I put my faith in. No one wants to be disappointed like that.

The Bible however has the reputation of being historically verifiable. In fact, the Bible is even sometimes used as a guide in archaeology because of its demonstrated trustworthiness! Sounds like it has a much better track record than "the most correct book on the face of the earth." It is representative of real peoples and places, a book of plain, historic fact, communicated through contemporaries of the day. To them it wasnt history. There was no mystery. That's why they didnt get anything wrong. (That and they were inspired, which helps a little bit too ;-) ). Contrast that with Joseph Smith's book which popped out of nowhere getting almost everything wrong that he possibly could. I daresay it is a disgrace to man's God-given intellect. There's a fine line between things we don't understand, or take by faith, and those things that are clearly made up by a young man with an overactive imagination and a knack for wooing people.

We have certainty in what we trust in, not based on a feeling or what some nice person told us, but on the historicity of the pivotal event. The most important event in history is Christ's physical resurrection which actually happened in real time-space history. It actually happened, and the trustworthiness of the people telling the story can be verified, to a certain extent (Of course, anyone who doesnt want to be convinced by the evidence, wont be convinced by the evidence). Nevertheless, our faith is based on evidence. It is not blind, as some say it should be.

I love my Lord. Good thing He actually exists.

Baptism

Well… in my usual inconsiderate form I have written a book on baptism. This post is 3.5 pages long, single-spaced, 12 Point Times in Word with 1 inch margins (not including the list of verses at the end). That’s not for bragging purposes, but just to warn you: if you are the kind of person that can’t stop once they’ve started, make sure you have a little bit of time set aside! Otherwise, I think I’ll just use this post as a reference to give people when they ask me of my views on baptism!

I do not have time to address each verse (of which there are approximately 50 addressing baptism), but I will address the main issues people seem to have concerning baptism. There are, I think, four main questions raised. First, how should one be baptized? Second, who should be baptized? Third, in who’s name is it to be administered? Fourth, does it play any part in a person’s salvation?

First, how should one be baptized?

To answer the first question, it is extremely important to note that the Greek word for baptism is “baptisma” which literally means “immersion.” Having studied baptism (albeit, not extensively) I find no evidence whatsoever to support any other method or example of baptism by anything but submersion. There are, however, examples of submersion where the author wrote his account in enough detail to mention it. In Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism, he says “Jesus came up immediately out of the water,” implying of course that He had been in the water during the baptism. In the account in Acts 8 when Philip baptizes the Ethiopian, it says, “When they came out of the water” perhaps implying that Philip also went all the way into the water! Simply stated, I don’t know of any argument from scripture for any other method of baptism.

Second, who should be baptized?

People who have professed faith in Jesus Christ, that is, people who have demonstrated and articulated an understanding of true saving faith should be baptized. The Ethiopian asked to be baptized after having the Scriptures explained to him. Twelve men whose names are unknown were baptized a second time (they were first baptized under John) after hearing the gospel from Paul. There isn’t any required waiting time (or even suggested!) between the time someone professes faith in Jesus Christ and when they should be baptized. Every example of baptism I know of is almost immediately after hearing and professing faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is the easiest way Christians can begin obeying their Lord. I would be wary of someone who professes faith in Christ and refuses to be baptized. I was that person once, and the reason I did not want to be baptized was because I didn’t want to obey Jesus’ commands, hiding behind the fact that we don’t have to work to be saved. Does a person opposed to following the commands of his Lord sound like a Christian to you? I didn’t think so.

In addressing this question, I hope that the issue of infant baptism has been covered. If the infant has expressed an understanding of Biblical salvation and professes to accept it, then sure, baptize him! Otherwise, wait until he can appreciate its significance and chooses it for himself. Don’t give him any reason in the future for a false sense of security, and don’t be so naïve as a parent to think that since a pastor got him wet in a church in front of people that his fate is somehow sealed. Doesn’t work like that.

Third question, in whose name are we to be baptized?

This is a particularly annoying question to debate those who believe it is strictly “in Jesus name.” After all, every example of baptism in the Bible is in the name of the Lord Jesus. Personally, I think this is a needless hairsplitting distinction, and I’ll explain why. When we do something “in the name of Jesus,” what do we mean? We are saying that we do it in His authority. Now, how did Jesus say we are supposed to baptize? In the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. Now, when I say that we should be baptized as Jesus commanded us to be baptized, I am challenged to find one example of this happening. However, I hope we can see the error in this. If no one ever followed God’s command, does that mean that we are therefore not supposed to follow his command? I’m not sure how anyone in his right mind could come to that conclusion, but people do. Anyways, it’s a foolish distinction as I said, because the authority of the Son is not different than that of the other persons of the Trinity. This is because each member of the trinity is equally God with the other two. It can also be concluded from the verse in Matthew 28, since the word “name” is actually singular in the Greek. It does not read, in the names of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but in the name. They are one God, and one authority.

The troubling thing about discussing this issue with those who distinguish these two baptisms is that, in my experience, they do not believe anyone baptized any other way is saved! I’ve been told that I'm unregenerate because I was baptized the way Jesus commanded to baptize. They join the apostolic examples of baptism with their erroneous view of salvation and Eph 2:5, which says we have one baptism, thereby assuming that since I was not baptized into the same baptism, I am not within the circle of believers. Now if that dumbfounds you, join the club.

Fourth, and most importantly, does baptism play a part in salvation?

It absolutely does not play any part in justification of the believer.

It is of course important to offer a positive reason for my own position that baptism plays no part in salvation in order to justify my interpretation of certain verses. The best way to do this is provide an example of someone being baptized after being saved, proving conclusively that baptism is not necessary for salvation (although all people saved should do what they can to be baptized). Acts 10:47 is that verse: “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” So the Gentiles of whom Peter speaks received the Holy Spirit before being baptized. This absolutely demolishes the idea that baptism can be a part of our salvation. Couple that with the multiplicity of other verses in the Bible which are clear we cannot work for salvation, but are justified by faith and saved by grace only, and you have no excuse to hold to the heretical idea that we are saved by anything we do, or have done to us for that matter (Eph 2:8-9, Rom 5:1, Gal 3:2, 2 Tim 1:9, etc.). The list goes on for quite some time I assure you.

Most people that try to argue for cleansing of sin via baptism use Acts 2:38, John 3:5, 1 Peter 3:21, Acts 22:16, and Mark 16:16. Before I start, however, I must mention another thing to note when studying this topic: “baptisma” does not always refer to water baptism. In fact, especially in the context of John the Baptist, a baptism of the Holy Spirit is mentioned (Mk 1:8, Lk 3:16, Jn 1:33, Acts 1:5, Acts 11:16). There is also a baptism into Christ (Rom 6:3), a baptism by the Spirit (1 Cor 12:13), a baptism by fire (Lk 3:16, related somehow to the baptism of the Spirit), baptism into death (Rom 6:4), etc. It is clear that the word “baptisma” could be used liberally with reference to “immersion” in anything, not strictly physical water (though that does seem to be the most common usage).

Now, let’s address these verses. The easiest to explain is 1 Peter 3:21, which is used because it says, “baptism now saves us.” The thing here is context. In fact, this is the weakest verse to use in favor of baptism playing a part in salvation because Peter bends over backwards to prove that water baptism isn’t what he’s talking about! Let’s post the whole verse from the NKJV: “There is also an antitype which now saves us – baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” It should be painfully clear here that Peter isn’t talking about physical baptism.

The next verse to be explained is Mk 16:16. Now, besides the textual problem with the end of Mark (Mark probably did not write any of the verses after 8), I am not convinced that this proves baptism is necessary for salvation. The text reads that all “who believe and are baptized will be saved.” So let me ask you, if someone believes and reads the Bible daily, will he be saved? Or if someone believes and goes to church, will he be saved? The answer is yes. But does reading the Bible or going to church play any part in justifying you before God? No, of course not. Our works are as filthy rags (Is 64:6). It is the believing that saves, the baptism is a commandment of God to be followed, not relied on for salvation. And if we look at the end of Mark 16:16, what characterizes those who are condemned? Unbelief. So the believing is the concentration here, not baptism. Couple this with the textual dilemma and Mark 16:16 is a weak source indeed from which to attempt to support baptism for salvation.

John 3:5 is also fairly easy to explain. Again, context is key. It reads “unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” Now you might be thinking to yourself, “Wait, that doesn’t say anything about baptism!” Yea… that’s what I think every time anyone points me to this verse! They erroneously interpret “water” as a reference to baptism based on their erroneous presupposition! Water carries no such strict defintion in the Bible. The following is my interpretation of the passage. Since the context is Jesus’ discussion with Nicodemus on being born again, and Nicodemus mentions grown men entering their mother’s wombs, it’s obvious to me that Jesus is clearing up what it means to be born the second time. He’s saying, “Nicodemus, you don’t get it. You have to born physically [water] and spiritually [Spirit], not physically a second time!” The water here is talking about the water of the womb. There are other interpretations to what is meant by water, namely that of John MacArthur, who I greatly respect, who interprets it as a need for spiritual cleansing; however, in light of the rest of scripture, baptism cannot and should not be forced into this verse.

Next comes Acts 22:16, where Paul is recounting the story of his journey to Damascus. He recalls that Ananias says “And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” To me it seems like the grammatical order of the words connects “wash away your sins” with “calling on the name of the Lord” rather than with “be baptized.” However, since English translations often add commas and order words based on interpretation, such an argument is admittedly weak. So I grab my handy dandy Greek-English Bible and read straight from the original language! Upon reading it, I find that the rendering in the NKJV is accurate, and washing away one’s sins is connected with “invoking the name of God.”

The final and, frankly, most troubling verse on baptism is Acts 2:38: “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Without a solid understanding of salvation as taught throughout the rest of scripture (i.e. by grace through faith, not of works – Eph 2:8-9), it would be easy to assume that we need to get baptized in order to be saved. But with proper guidance from those who know the nuances of Greek (ex. John MacArthur via the MacArthur Study Bible or Matt Slick via www.carm.org!), we can see that better translations might render “because of the forgiveness of sins” (MacArthur) or “for the purpose of identifying yourself with the forgiveness of sins” (Slick). Understanding the verse in this light would then remove any implication that baptism has anything more to do with forgiveness than as an outward picture of an inward reality.

We need to stop trying to play a part in salvation. This comes only from our selfish desire to contribute to the grace of God, to somehow feel needed or important, neither of which describe us lowly human beings. Quite frankly, we need to get over ourselves. As Christ said, we need to die to ourselves. We need to stop putting our actions up on a pedestal and start seeing ourselves for what we are, cesspools of wickedness and sacs of sin that God through His Son Jesus Christ has decided to graciously redeem and transform into the likeness and image of Jesus. All glory belongs to Him and Him alone.

A list here is provided of all the verses I could find that mention baptism of some kind.

Mt 3:6 – John is baptizing
Mt 3:11 – baptize unto repentance
Mt 3:13 – Jesus desires to be baptized by John
Mt 3:16 – Jesus completes his baptism
Mt 21:25 – Jesus talks with Pharisees about the baptism that John performed
Mt 28:19 – baptize in the name of the father son holy spirit
Mk 1:4 – a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins
Mk 1:8 – John baptizes with water, Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit
Mk 10:39 – With Jesus’ baptism, James and John will be baptized
Mk 16:16 – Those who believe and are baptized will be saved
Lk 3:3 – baptism of repentance for the remission of sins
Lk 3:16 – John baptizes with water, Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit and fire
Lk 7:29 – tax collectors proclaim John’s baptism righteous
Jn 1:26 – John baptizes with water
Jn 1:31 – John baptizes with water
Jn 1:33 – John baptizes with water, Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit
Jn 3:22 – Jesus baptized people
Jn 3:23 – John was baptizing
Jn 3:26 – John testified that Jesus was baptizing and people were coming to Him
Jn 4:1 – the Pharisees hear that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John
Jn 4:2 – Jesus did not physically do the baptizing, but his disciples did
Acts 1:5 – John baptized with water, the apostles would be baptized with the Holy Spirit
Acts 2:38 – repent and be baptized for the remission of sins
Acts 8:12 – both men and women are baptized
Acts 8:13 – Simon the sorcerer is baptized
Acts 8:16 – People who had been baptized in Jesus’ name had not received the Holy Spirit
Acts 9:18 – Saul is baptized
Acts 10:47 – Peter says that these who have received the Holy Spirit should be baptized
Acts 10:48 – Peter commands that Christians be baptized in the name of the Lord
Acts 11:16 – John baptized with water, Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit
Acts 16:15 – Lydia is baptized
Acts 18:25 – Apollos only knows the baptism of John
Acts 19:3 – About 12 men say that they were baptized in John’s baptism
Acts 19:4 – John baptized them with a baptism of repentance
Acts 19:5 – They get baptized in the name of the Lord
Acts 22:16 – Ananias commands Saul to arise and be baptized, and wash away his sins
Rom 6:3 – People baptized into Christ Jesus baptized into his death
Rom 6:4 – buried with Christ through baptism into death
1 Cor 1:13 – “Were you baptized in the name of Paul?”
1 Cor 1:17 – Christ sent Paul not to baptize, but to preach the gospel
1 Cor 12:13 – Christians baptized by one Spirit into one body
1 Cor 15:29 – Paul mentions people being baptized for the dead
Gal 3:27 – As many of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ
Eph 4:5 – one Lord, one faith, one baptism
Col 2:12 – buried with Christ in baptism
1 Pet 3:21 – baptism now saves us

Soul Support

An article in Stanford caught my eye today. It made it as cover story and is titled "Soul Support." It is about the spiritual discussions that have become so much more frequent on the Stanford campus lately. One student said it seems like they've "doubled." Diane Rogers says that "Students are speaking up about their religious beliefs, as many on campus work to replace polite silence with genuine understanding." I was quite pleased going into it, but I had my suspicions about exactly what they were praising in this article, since Stanford isn't exactly the bastion of righteousness I wish it could be.

The format is as follows: The main article with pictures and bios dispersed throughout. The bios are what interested me because they had stories about real people, not just some journalist analyzing the progression of spiritual discussions in dorms and in the classroom. The article was pretty repetetive anyways (that seems to be a trend in the material im reading lately...). It did keep my attention through the whole article, though, so I'll give that much credit to the author/editor.

I read all the bios, but was sorely disappointed with all of the "Christian" entries. The first was of the son of an Episcopal priest. He grew up very much enjoying the church, and said he always felt like a part of it. He apparently struggled with homosexuality and said that in his senior year of high school he decided to choose his faith because his faith was more important to him. How refreshing! Someone who decided to conquer with the power of Christ such a painful struggle. But I was mistaken. That's not what he meant. I guess he meant his community or earthly relationships with people of a certain religion were more important, and that by 'coming out' he would lose those. "That changed during his freshman year on the Farm." It was then that he decided being closeted was keeping him from a right relationship with God. By the time school let out he had a boyfriend that his parents wanted to meet and was still active in the Christian church.

But is honesty really all that's necessary to have a right relationship with God? It's certainly the first step. You have to admit you have sin before you can start seeking a Savior. But there's a difference between confession and repentance and simply "being honest with yourself." Sinful behavior is simply not acceptable to God. It breaks off communion with Him. The apostle Paul addresses this area quite tactfully in Romans 1:27: "and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another. Men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error." In 1 Tim 1:9-10, men who practice homosexuality are listed among murderers, the sexually immoral, liars, enslavers, those who dishonor their parents, and that which is contrary to sound, or healthy, doctrine. I simply find no evidence from the Bible or my own experience for the possibility of being in communion with God and being sexually immoral in any way. It doesn't make sense. It can't happen.

Another story that was actually not in a bio reported a Christian that had been dating a Jew for over 2 years. Now, one believes that Jesus Christ is the Messiah and Savior, and another totally rejects that. I'm not sure what sort of spiritual encouragement they could possibly get from each other based on this observation, but I don't see how this is at all excusable. Perhaps the Christian missed 2 Corinthians 6:14 which tells us explicitly not to be "unequally yoked with unbelievers."

One encouraging story featured a particularly gentle student, apparently gifted with service. She says she leans toward the "social" aspect of Christianity. The context was going on missions trips, so I can only assume she means giving of herself to her community (or someone else's!). She seemed pretty solid, being confident that she was "well-equipped" (2 Tim 3:17), striving for "continuous communication with God throughout the day" (1 Thessalonians 5:17), and keeping a daily journal to keep herself accountable. She certainly seemed like an example to be followed!

One red flag came up at the end of the bio, though, when she said she distances herself from "the ugly side of Christianity that can be so alienating for so many people." They didn't go into any detail about it, but I can only hope she meant the history of the Roman Catholicism and not the sayings of Jesus such as are found in Luke 14 or Matthew 7, which contain very radical claims about who is a Christian.

My purpose here is only to follow the command given us in 1 Timothy 4: "Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by doing so you will save both yourself and your hearers." The goal of correction is never rejection, but restoration. We need to guard our life and doctrine and take care that it does not turn one iota to the left or right, then we will rescue ourselves and hearers from sinful behavior and bring each other into a right relationship with God.

Misquoting Jesus

The following is an email I wrote recently. It requires some background knowledge to understand better, so I'll give that to you before you read this monster. I went on a cruise to Alaska to kick off my summer, and while I was there I did a lot of reading. I stopped by a bookstore in one of our ports and replenished my reading supply with a couple books, both unfavorable to the Christian worldview. One was by Freud, or Nietzsche, one of those philosopher guys whose books had to be translated. Forgive my ignorance. I have yet to read that one. The second was a book called Misquoting Jesus, by a Bart D. Ehrman. He made a case, or tried to, for dismantling the reliability of the Bible, specifically the New Testament. At the very least he believes we cannot put quite as much trust in it as we would like to even if we don’t outright reject its veracity. One reason he gave for this was the fact that we could not be certain of the authorship of some of the books. No, he didn't just stick with Hebrews, the author of which we in fact are not certain. He went so far as to attack the authorship of "closed case files" (i.e. Paul's letters, of whom the authorship seems quite obvious). Maybe Paul didn’t actually write all those epistles, perhaps someone claiming to be Paul did. Or perhaps scribes later added some things to support their own worldview.

One passage specifically came into question that seems to look unfavorably upon women. Paul, however, looks quite favorably on women throughout his writings. Could this be an addition or a fraud? We shall see. With that, here is the email.


------------------

I'm glad to see that you read the book you borrowed. Had it been me I would have been far less determined to finish reading it - especially with the way this particular author writes. I do not remember too many specifics based on what the author wrote, so I can only respond to what you have told me. This especially applies to the subject that you brought up about women teaching. I was not aware that he addressed it. Perhaps I have simply forgotten or skipped over that part like I did with a lot of that book. Anyways, here begins my rant.

When you admitted you had no answer to this apparent contradiction in Paul's theology as perhaps an evidence of his non-authorship of one or the other passage, my apologetic mind kicked in and I immediately had an answer for you. I am convinced that Paul wrote 1 Timothy 2:9-15 (I assume that’s what you meant, though you forgot the "2"), and frankly, I am surprised you were so easily convinced (or perhaps it was not easily?).

Now, I'm not sure what "bulk of his writing" you are referring to that contradicts his view in 1 Tim 2:9-15, because I know of none. However, if we simply compare his view of women using both 2 Tim 1:5 and 1 Tim 2:11-15, leaving out verses 9 and 10 - modesty doesn’t seem to be the issue - we see a healthy view of the role and value of women and of the plan of God for mankind, rather than a contradiction in the former.

Lets look first at 2 Timothy 1:5

"I am reminded of your sincere faith, a faith that dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice and now, I am sure, dwells in you as well."

Paul commends two women for being sincere and devoted faithful followers of Christ. The way it is worded would imply that they passed it on to Timothy. They taught him what he knows. A later reference to his godly upbringing is made in 2 Tim 3:14-15. Timothy is told to remember, "from whom you learned it" (14). The Greek “whom” is plural, so it becomes quite obvious that Paul is referencing his earlier acknowledgement of his mother and grandmother. Clearly Paul is pleased with the fact that Timothy's mother and grandmother raised him in godly fashion, teaching him spiritual things.

Now, 1 Timothy 2

"11 Let a woman learn in quietness with all submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control."

First, I would like to note that this clearly is referring to women's authority over men in the church. That is of particular importance when it comes to discussing God's plan for the role of women. In the case that a woman was never allowed to exercise any authority over any male of any age in any situation, a woman would not be able to bring up her own male children! Such an interpretation of this passage would be utter foolishness.

Paul has never been one to look down on women, or consider them of less worth than men. In his epistle to the Galatians, he says, "there is neither male nor female" in the context of salvation (3:28). He encouraged an equal view of men and women, and frequently esteemed women for their service to him and the gospel, mentioning them by name in his letters. However, it had clearly been revealed to him that men and women do not serve the same purpose [that is, they do not have the same roles. They both serve the purpose of glorifying God, to be sure]. In the church, women should submit to male authority and not teach grown men.

They are, however, encouraged to bring up children in godly fashion, drawing support from both references we are using! The support from 2 Tim 1:5 is self evident, and I have already discussed it. However the evidence from 1 Tim 2:15 probably gets lost in the rest of the passage and the discussion over this often controversial matter.

"Yet she will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control."

It seems to me that Paul is encouraging women here to raise babies (childbearing) in godly fashion (faith, love, holiness, self-control), so that what was meant to be [God’s plan for the role of women] will be restored (saved). This is exactly what he commended Lois and Eunice for. So there is complete harmony, rather than contradiction and question of authorship.

I think there's good reason he [Ehrman] didn't use the "easy" argument.

With respect to the rest of the book, I too noticed that the author does not suggest reasoning with which to view the subject (or any other subject he makes mention of). He stated facts, but didn’t draw conclusions, and that was something else that frustrated me.

I thought it was interesting how many times he stressed that there were mistakes or changes made to the text. However, if we actually look at it, what we have as scripture is incredibly reliably preserved despite our human shortcomings, and I am convinced that we have a Book that can be trusted as the Word of Christ, leading to salvation (Rom 10:17).

-----------------------------

I hope this helped in convincing you of the reliability of Scripture and its ability to “give an answer” (1 Peter 3:15). Anything in brackets was added to the email to help clarify meaning that I thought might not be obvious, and the grammar/spelling was edited, though I'm sure there are more mistakes to be found. If anything is unclear, let me know.

Where Home Is

There has been a lot of rearranging lately concerning where friends’ homes are. Many have moved down to the OC, and it has been extremely difficult to see them go. Soon I myself will have a new home, moving into the dorms on campus at Stanford. It has caused and will cause separation between friends when it is time to go home.

The Bible says that a Christian’s home is not in the world; rather, it is in heaven with Christ. It metaphorically relates this truth to people visiting a foreign country, being citizens of their homeland. “But our citizenship is in heaven” (Philippians 3:20). We desire heavenly things and put our minds on Christ and things above, as opposed to people who put their mind on earthly things.

I’ve noticed that when I am away from home (i.e. away from friends and family) I long to be back there, and to be with the people I love. I miss people, a lot. There are tears, many of them. And how often does this happen with my Lord? How often do I long to be home with Him, at peace forever? Tyler Sultze was our speaker last week at middle school camp, and he made some radical statements about our desire to be with Christ. He asked us to apply Philippians 3:7 to its extreme: “But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ.” If we could give up the one thing that is most important on this earth to be with Christ, would we be content? He said that if he never saw his wife or unborn baby again, but instead went to be with Christ, he would be satisfied. And he hopes his wife thinks the same.

And what of the very thing that keeps me from Christ now? Do I mourn over the sin that separates him and me? Do I strive to be united with Him as much as is possible in this life by seeking to live as He lives? Sin is a terrible thing. It is a sign of our citizenship when we have godly sorrow over sin, yet it is never good to be unhealthily preoccupied with it. We need not spend all our time mourning, but rejoicing over the fact that our relationship with Him is real, and we are blessed. Philippians says, “we eagerly await a Savior from [heaven]” (3:20). We can’t wait to see our Lord Jesus. We look forward to being with Him finally.

So a change in perspective takes place. I may be sad that I have left my friends, or that my friends have left me, but my God is with me always, and He is who I most long to be with. Let us rejoice with each other that we can all await so great a future as fellow children of God.

Ephesians 5:15-20

Paul is writing the second half of his epistle to the church in Ephesus about Godly and holy living. He has switched from theology in his first half to practical Christian living.

In these verses Paul encourages us to walk “circumspectly,” or heedfully, being aware of the consequences of ouractions. He realizes that days are running low and time flies and often the time that does pass is not spent wisely. Paul encourages the church to use their time wisely, because the days we have are evil. This flows right into knowing what the will of the Lord is. Walking wisely means I will naturally know what the Lord’s will is for my life. One practical example of this is to not get drunk. We should allow the Spirit to consume us and control us, so that we will be encouraging each other with godly speech and always giving thanks to God. Of course, this principle should be applied to everything. We are controlled by none but the Lord. He is our only Master!

This passage seems to be pretty clear on how to apply it to my life. I need to be heedful of the consequences of my actions, not just doing anything on a whim. Paul used drunkenness as a specific action to be on guard against. Getting drunk would mean something other than the Holy Spirit is controlling my body, which goes directly against the purpose of salvation – to be freed from the control of the world and placed under the control of Christ. We Christians should walk wisely, being an example to others, and redeeming the time, not conforming to the pattern of this world but using every opportunity we have to do good. That idea is pretty revolutionary and completely destroys this idea of being able to put off doing good. We have only a certain amount of time here on this earth, so when we pass up an opportunity to do good in some way, that opportunity is lost forever and never coming back. We cannot ever add a day to our life, all we can to is take advantage of the opportunities we have, and that pleases the Lord. That is the Lord’s will.

I find the last verse to be appropriate for this time of year, seeing as we have just passed Thanksgiving. I feel like some people have an attitude that wants to stop even thinking about being thankful as soon as Thanksgiving is over. I know I was that way (More so than now. I am still working on it) when I was younger. According to this verse, giving thanks is an all-the-time thing for Christians. I know I’ll always have something to be thankful for, because I can always thank the Lord for saving me from myself.

Ephesians 5:8-14

These are some long overdue Bible journals that I had ready to post but never did. I kept telling myself it was because I hadn't typed up verses 1-7, but do you care? I didn't think so.

Ephesians 5:8-14

Paul is writing the second half of his epistle to the church in Ephesus about Godly and holy living. He has switched from theology in his first half to practical Christian living.

These verses talk about living as light – just as Christ taught to be the light of the world (Matthew 5:14-16). We have been transformed from darkness to light and therefore should live like it! Paul lists a few fruits of the Spirit (or in other manuscripts, fruits of the light); those are goodness, righteousness, and truth. Our job as light is to “have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret” (vv. 11, 12). Only light can expose dark deeds, and we must realize that this light comes only from Christ, for we are asleep and dead to Him in and of ourselves, having no power to produce goodness.

I absolutely love this passage. It continually exhorts to take affirmative action when it comes to living the life of godliness (or in this case, the life of light), yet at the same time reminds us that the power comes from Christ alone! We were once darkness, but Christ gave us light, now lets share it with the world! By living such a life, we will have an increasingly clear idea of what God’s will is, “finding out what is acceptable to the Lord” (v.10). So many people wish they could know what God’s will for their life is; I do too! First we live according to His will; only then will we be shown what His will is for our lives. This isn’t usually what I want to hear, being human and having a slight case of what my mom calls immediatitis, but it is so true. Once I stop worrying about what exactly I’m supposed to do, start surrendering that to God, and start living like He wants me to, all the extra information comes to me in God’s perfect timing. Again, often this is not exactly the timing I’m comfortable with, but the point is that I’m closer to God because of the trust I placed in Him, and He is once again confirmed to be faithful.

The next exhortation of this verse it seems to me is to expose sin – in us and in others. As light, we will naturally reveal things; that’s what light does! Partaking in them would be shameful. Even talking about them would be shameful, yet sometimes I find myself caught up in sin. I have to remind myself that sin is a small problem for the God whose infinite love conquered it. It has no power over me because I have the power of God. The last verse is just awesome. It is a calling of the dead and asleep to Christ to rise and to wake, so that Christ may give them the power that He has over sin. Christ did that for me, and it is my job to spread that good news to others so they can receive that power as well.

Cautiously Carefree

Consider this part 2 in the series of paradoxes in the Christian faith. The last one was Swimming in Time, where we refuse to delay in completing what God has for us to do, yet always wait for His timing on all matters. This one has to do with worrying.

In the Bible we are commanted to "not be anxious about anything" but instead "present our requests to God" (Phil. 4:6) and trust him for all our cares. Jesus also reasons with us, asking "Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?" (Matt. 6:27). Clearly stressing about how everything will turn out is not a good habit for a Christian to get into. We need to trust God for his faithful deliverance. He will take care of us: "...for he guards the lives of his faithful ones and delivers them from the hand of the wicked" (Psalm 97:10).

However, God in no way intends for us to be naive in our actions. Jesus didn't live His life carelessly, doing whatever trusting it would all work out. He was practical in his decisions, and we should be too. He acted on what He knew to be true. When people came to Him and believed in Him, He did not simply accept them and "trust" that God would work everything out in their lives. The Bible says He actually would not entrust Himself to them because He knew what was in their hearts. He knew they weren't really committed to Him and so did not commit Himself to them (John 2:24-25).

Another thing to note is the Christ took action, deliberate and convicted action. When He saw the way Israel was treating the temple, He didn't sit back and say, 'Oh well, God will work it out for good. It'll all be ok.' He did quite the opposite! He wove together a whip and started making a difference - He took action on an issue He observed. The same goes for us. When Christ tells us not to worry about where we will get our food or clothes, that in no way means we sit at home playing videogames trusting that an angel will drop off our daily bread at the door whenever we need it. We work. Diligently. Heartily as for the Lord.

There is a balance that become necessary when living the Christian life. We wait, not procrastinate. We work, not worry. There is a middle ground that needs to be acheived if perfection is to be attained. We most definitely need to trust God to be our Provider and Sustainer (Carefree) but let us remain reasonable, knowing that God works through practical means (Cautiously). He favors the hard working. He loves the diligent. Yet let us always remember that all things are possible only through Christ who strengthens us.

Mr. Stanford

That's what Bobby Blakey called me the first time he IMed me after finding out I would be going to Stanford in the fall. It was not an easy decision for me, but I am totally confident that this is the plan God has for me. I'll miss my friends, but God will always be by my side.

Throughout this college process, my parents would incessantly inquire as to which colleges I was leaning towards and why. Well, which one I'm leaning towards is pretty obvious now. In fact, you could say I've fallen on it, if you want to keep the metaphor consistent. This summation attempts to explain why in a few words.

Why did I choose this college?

Some things I wanted to be true about my college

- Have fun

- Southern California, to be with friends etc.

- Honor God with decision

Reason I had for not wanting to go to this college

- I was afraid of working all the time

- I was afraid of compromising my Christianity

I had always been told to choose what college was right for me, as opposed to choosing a college simply for the big name, or reputation. Well, I don’t really like when people tell me to do what’s right for me. I know myself, and I know the truth. What I want is evil. “There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death” (Proverbs 14:12). I’m not interested in dying anytime soon. The only way I can know I’m making the right choice is if I can be confident that God wants me to be there. That is what it means to honor God with my decision, and it might even mean I have to give up the most important thing to me that I’m looking for in a college.

That means all doors are open and I need to evaluate each school objectively, not closing the door on a school simply because it has a big name. So schools like MIT, Caltech, Stanford, Berkeley, and LA were all in the running, even though their prestige actually gave me a lower view of them because I assumed they were stuck up and full of themselves. But that’s my judgmental side coming through. See? Evil.

I was actually coming home from Sunday Night Bible Study, got talking with a few people there who went to UC Berkeley, and realized then what college I needed to go to. Actually I thought about a parable that seemed very applicable. It is the parable of the men who received certain sums of money according to their abilities. The ones who used what they were given were blessed. The one who was afraid of using what he was given was cast into “outer darkness,” where there is “weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Now, this is speaking of the kingdom of heaven, so the story being applied to college is a bit out of context; however, I have learned that there are biblical principles reflected through stories that can be applied elsewhere. For example, the Lord loves a diligent worker: “The soul of a lazy man desires, and has nothing; But the soul of the diligent shall be made rich” (Proverbs 13:4).

A fear of working hard was therefore out of the question, no college on the list accepts anyone they think cannot handle the workload, and I have been preparing for college level for quite some time now with all the AP classes and such. I decided that I needed to go to the place where I could use all my abilities for the glory of God. This doesn’t mean I would have to go to a Christian school. We are commanded to be in the world, yet not of the world. When Christ prayed for us he did “not pray that [God] should take [us] out of the world, but that [He] should keep [us] from the evil one” (John 17:15). We are also encouraged by John, who tells us that “whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith ” (1 John 5:4). That characterizes me. I have been born of God in a second birth, and I put my faith and hope in Christ for my salvation, regeneration and daily renewal. Now I must continue in that habit/discipline each morning and prepare myself for a rocky future. I can trust that God “will never leave [me] nor forsake [me]” (Hebrews 13:5). I may feel alone, or challenged academically, socially, spiritually, or physically, but I know that it is in God’s strength that I carry out the will of God, not needing to be fearful of failure.

O God in heaven
Please hear my cry
O how I need Your help now

I’ll be expectant
Waiting by faith
For Your answer come down

We don’t pray to a god who can’t save
We pray to the God who will hear

So I will call upon You
And watch for what You will do
You’re the help of Your people

You reach down from on high
And put joy in my life
So I praise You as faithful...

Swimming in Time

A few weeks ago I went to lunch at Taco Bell with a good friend of mine before school had to start (it was SAT's and seniors didnt have to be there until 1pm). Some of you may know us as Kevan. We were just finishing up our lunch and I asked what time it was. It turned out to be only 12:30, to which she exclaimed, we're swimming in time! That immediately made me want to write a blog about time, which I told her I would, and this is me letting my yes be yes (Matthew 5:37).

Swimming in Time. That was an interesting phrase to hear, and in one sense it is true; yet in another sense it is deadly. For the Christian, life is long and short. I am only talking about physical life, not eternal life, which is... well... eternal. We both have all the time in the world and no time at all. Don't let this confuse you too much; I'll explain what I mean.

We have all the time in the world

There isn't any need to rush through our lives. No hurry to grow up. No need to experience all of life in a day. We are not impatient, afraid of "wasting" time, so long as we are in God's will. "I wait for the Lord, my soul does wait, And in His word do I hope." (Psalm 130:5). The Lord's timing is the perfect timing, and as long as he has decided now is not the time for a girlfriend, I will not seek a girlfriend; that now is not quite the time to leave my parents, I do not seek to leave my parents; etc. These things come in their own time, and I do not become discontent or impatient in waiting for them.

We have no time at all

So we better get moving. The message of the Bible has a sense of urgency attached to it. For example, Paul says that today is the day of salvation: "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation" (2 Cor 6:2). Not tomorrow. We don't wait until we're old and about to die to accept God's good news to humanity. We accept it now, and we know God today, and we enjoy His blessing, and we do nothing until we put our faith in the Word of God. "Man who is born of woman Is few of days and full of trouble" (Job 14:1). We don't have much time to start living life before we've realized we missed it. We need not live it all at once, but if we don't start living now, we might not live at all. Let's give our lives to God, that He may pay us back abundantly and overflowing the life that He promised us.

We have plenty of time - no need to rush things. We don't have much time left - let us put off laziness and start worshiping the Lord with passion.

Mexico

I havent been on this site for a long time, and I truly have a lot to say, and have been thinking about a lot, but have preferred to simply discuss it with people - in person. That has been a blessing unlike any other, and I highly recommend it. There isnt anything like close personal relationships with fellow Christians, so for whoever doesn't know what that is like, well, get to know what its like.

Anyways, I also enjoy jotting down my thoughts every once in a while, and i figure once in a month and a half is quite long enough to wait. This one is about something i noticed about the past 4 years ive been going to Mexico with King's. We just go once a year and it is a life-changing experience if you let it be. Then again you can also come back and forget about it in a month like most people do.

When I first went to Mexico I came back thinking: "Wow, these people are so poor. They have nothing compared to me, how can I be complaining about what I don't get to have." This is a legitimate perspective, and was very eye-opening and helpful to keep a mindset of contentment with my "well-0ff" situation in the great Estados Unidos (an understatement, i now understand).

But since then I've noticed a slight change. Actually it was a pretty large change. Now I'm the poor one. I'm the one who has been found lacking. Houses decay. Computers go out of date. The love of Christ and treasures in heaven cant ever be lost or stolen or destroyed. Matthew 6 is clear on that. That is what some of those people have, and they have more than me. I met this guy Charly last year who has a heart-wrenching testimony. Now he is a hardcore Christian and this year we met back up and he was witnessing to the mother at my site this year. That was really awesome. He's going to have a lot of treasure in heaven. Then no one will "feel sorry for him" because he's not "as well off as we are." Now instead of being challenged to just be content , he encouraged me to be a better Christ figure to those around me, and I wish I could thank him now for that.

Thats all for now, thanks for reading.