Remembering the Fall

In these times, part of the world, mostly those who were locked within, are celebrating the destruction of the Berlin Wall. It is no accident that those who would do the locking up behind new walls are the ones who stay away from commemorating the destruction of the old.

But I was drawn to another Fall, one that is even more ignored by much of mankind to its eternal detriment. Man sinned and death resulted. Not even the most modern science of man has been able to undo the curse of God. Man is frail, and after almost a hundred years of “modern” medicine the life span of man is the same as it has always been. Moses, in Psalm 90, comments that 70 years hath the life of a man and 80 years if due to strength.

Today we realize that someone reaching 80 with good health to be as remarkable as it was in Benjamin Franklin’s day. Soon, with the kind help of our national government, we may look forward to living to 70—as long as we senior citizens do not impinge our poor health on the rest of the system.

It is abhorrent to me that society built on human dignity and rights would so cavalierly discard both that dignity and those rights. But may I add that I am not surprised? Disappointed but not surprised. You see, my religion teaches that men are intrinsically evil, unable even with utmost effort to effect salvation upon themselves. Even when we manage to create, in the words of Winston Churchill, the worst form of government ever devised by mankind, saving all others. The problems of our society are growing faster than we are able to reason our way toward morality and rationality—if indeed we are ever able to get there at all.

I used to call this the pull of evil and in my mind, fancied it as sort of a 20:1 ratio. That is for every problem attempted to be addressed and eradicated, twenty others would spring up to pull society down again. Sort of like Jason fighting the perennial soldiers that sprang from the earth. It seems to me that this is one of the rare points where I do find agreement between conservatives and liberals is in the decay of society. Neither group seems to have much hope for the redemption of mankind and see an ongoing, seemingly unstoppable, degradation of our society. They might disagree about the points of society’s fall, but both groups would not expect to see another generation of Americans grow old.

Which leads me to my point of these feeble comments: the redemption of mankind. Christ said that He would return, that his return would be visible and manifest to all. He also said that if He did not return mankind would destroy all. The elements themselves will be burned with fervent heat, He declares, and that does sound to me like a nuclear holocaust. He told us to not count Him slack concerning His promise, but also asked the rhetorical question if He would find any faith when He returned. It is to rescue us from the Fall that He came the first time; it seems that He is coming the second time to stop the total Fall of civilization itself.

That time, that day, will be like no other. Those who are waiting believing in God’s Son, and in his redemption will be made forever holy, separate unto Him, a cherished people. But life on earth will continue with a peace that knows not conflict, where swords will be beaten into plowshears, where a child who dies at 100 will be thought to be cursed.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

On Christian Unity

I was in church this morning with someone who mentioned that he had been raised Catholic, and before I realized it, we were in a quite interesting conversation speculating on whether the Catholics we personally knew really had faith in Christ. Such speculation is always incomplete, though at times fascinating, since who can know the heart except God alone? At any rate I came home thinking of one of the greatest statements of unity of all time was made by Paul the apostle: There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28) Of late I have been studying Revelation, and have pondered long on the “Roman prostitute” that is in league with the beasts and also hated by them. Long have I pondered of the meaning of the prostitute, and after 2,000 years of Bible scholars similar ponderings, I confess that I have nothing more to offer other than this weak observation: God will reveal His truth in time, and that time is almost upon us.

The unity of our faith is most precious. But the world unity and the unity which we will have under Christ’s hand seem to me to be very different. In the former, faiths are taught to give up ideals and principles of heritage and doctrine to bring a neutral harmony of mankind; in the latter, Christians are transformed into the correct beliefs of Sonship, and share that transformation eagerly and fluidly with one another for all of eternity. I see the march of many churches fighting to give up one Biblical doctrine after another in hopes of pursuing their elusive goal of harmony balanced with a tolerance that they seem to expect will make them more greatly respected (but, it seems to me, only makes them more despised, for in their efforts towards tolerance they give up their very character, and the one least respected is the one without character).

In our present world thus lies the difficulty; we are commanded to be one, yet find ourselves to be many. If we force ourselves to compromise and be the one, we find no character left to our message, and the world receives it as such. Do let me remind you that the world church will draw together in the last times, and they will proudly proclaim the false messiah. So part of the movement of our churches to unite must be seen as preparatory for the false world church. Our unity is nevertheless our strongest testimony of Christ. If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other (Galatians 5:16). And again the prayer of our Lord: May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. (John 17:23).

I figure my bottom line is to unite in Christ with my brothers present in this world, but is also to hold fast to the doctrines revealed in the Scriptures. In our present time, I admire Mr. Billy Graham for his steadfastness with core principles, yet his ability to reach across to others who accented different strands of the Christian faith.

Lastly, I would say make no mistake for God is not mocked. Whatever a man may sow, we are told, that shall he also reap. If your doctrine is one that splinters man from knowing God, you shall be judged of your false teaching. Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly (James 3:1). But we have this from the Word to comfort us: Abraham believed God and it was reckoned unto him as righteousness. If we are to be saved in these most perilous times, it will be because we believed God when He sent His Son to save us- not for correct or incorrect doctrine. The advantage of steering the correct course of truth is that we become much more free to emphasize the true gospel that can save all men.

If you are Catholic or Protestant or otherwise in the Christian faith, it is not what is false in your teaching that saves you—it is your faith in believing God only which shall save you. I believed God and it was reckoned unto me as righteousness. At that time, we shall become like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. And I shall walk through eternity, not with Catholics or Protestants, but with men and women who are changed, just like me, into the very image of our Lord. What a marvelous time that will be! What unity we shall at last have!

The Day that Death Dies

Death is the antithesis of life. In Revelation, God tells us that “Death and Hades will be thrown into the lake of fire.” In the third chapter of Genesis the fall of mankind takes place when woman and man both disobey God. God banishes them from the Garden of Eden, and will not allow mankind to escape the penalty of death until the Supreme Sacrifice is made, and time is given to all man to believe their God. Then we are told to look forward to a time on earth when the wolf shall lie down with the lamb, where the child will play next to the adder and suffer no harm, and where “none” shall be told of the Lord, for all mankind, from the least to the greatest, shall know him. Swords will be beaten into plowshears as a time of peace unbeknown to man shall abide on him. The “child” who dies at age one hundred shall be thought to be accursed, since the lifespan of even sinful man shall be extended dramatically.

When well-meaning but thoughtless people say about the death of their loved ones, “Oh, it is just the natural life cycle, and I know that, but I have a hard time with it anyway,” I cringe at their statement even while I try to offer sympathy. The sympathy is easy because there is so much empathy in each of us about the subject of death. Death shadows us all until it at last conquers. We empathize deeply with others losing their grandparents, or their parents because the same has happened to us. But it is only when we come to terms with the gospel of God that we see death is the enemy, the antithesis of what life should be.

There is nothing “natural” about death. The natural state was before the Fall, when man was in harmony with God. The unnatural state is to have to watch older generations diminish and die as they lose control of their bodies. So the position of the Christian should always be to utterly reject this awful penalty of death, for it is a curse, and it is for a specified duration, and it is to one day be lifted.

In our debate on health care, I wonder if it is we Christians who are causing much of the problem. It is our nature, the nature of life, to perceive death as the “last enemy.” Hence we reject utterly the offers of a peaceful assisted suicide, or any giving in to what is now inevitable: the march of death sweeping over mankind. Hence, we tend to support the “heroic” measures that Obama is against because we have such value in life itself.

“For the Lord Himself will come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ shall rise first. After that, we who are alive and are left will be caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air.” Death will be no more for we shall be with the Lord forever!

The pearls

I have often stumbled over the precious gems of life in my pursuit of the cheap and shiny.

Reflections on The Abolition of Man

In reading The Abolition of Man, I found myself thinking in a new way. I have observed that this often happens with Lewis, who is a master at taking things of an ordinary sort and putting them in quite a fresh perspective.

Lewis talks extensively, and I confess, somewhat boringly, about his Tao. His Tao as best I can conceive, is an unassailable perspective or philosophy which is the kernel of who man is, or should I say, should be. I have always found The Abolition of Man to be more remote and abstract than it should be, and have found his arguments persuasive while not heroic, and certainly not central to the way I might want to present the rationale of Christ. Until I read him this time.

What I find so different in this time perusing through the book was, of course, my own reflection. The power of the best writers is not found in their ability to persuade us to their cause, but rather to cause us to begin persuasion of ourselves in trying to fit that piece in our philosophy which has not quite fit before, but now, because of the great writer, seems a bit more abhorrent than it ever was before. In rethinking this little bit that does not fit, the thinker may find himself trying to refine his own sense of philosophy, of decency by twitching a little this way, or by tinkering with a little thought that way. Frustrated at his efforts he perseveres, annoyed that no matter how he twists or bends his thoughts, it does not fit; in the end he is forced to throw out the whole bit and start over. Of course this is the result of and the power of great writers.

What is it that I threw out? Not so much I would warrant, just that I saw where Lewis was coming from. He was presenting the very bad arguments that I myself have had from my Father’s generation when they told us of the sixties’ generation that we should do this or that. “Go pick up your rifle and give your life cheerily for your country. Live your life virtuously. Be brave and be truthful. Your country needs your body and it is your duty to go to war.” All of these maxims my generation questioned. I also questioned them, and found many of the older generation unable to voice why I should do this or that. What is it, I would reasonably ask, that makes me want to die for my country, or be a hero, or even truthful, for that matter?

My father, not being a Christian, and not being a philosopher either, could never articulate the reason why we should do this or that over another, perhaps more preferable course. It was not until I encountered Christ that I began to see that most of what he had been teaching me, was part of Lewis’s Tao. That is, it was the underpinnings to the why of life, and it was largely left out by my father’s generation. His generation subscribed to a plethora of dictums that largely came from Christianity.

I realized this fact very soon after my receiving Christ, but as hard as I tried to articulate it to my Dad, it never seemed to soak in. I do not think it soaked in for a lot of his generation—my Father did not believe himself until near the end of his life. I find it ironic in thinking about his generation, a segment of heroic men and woman who became much bigger than themselves and gave us the greatest gift—our continued freedom. The irony is, of course, they knew not whom they served.

In thinking about it today, I could extend a metaphor of a great generation handing us the greatest engine of civilization of all time. They had given us the greatest and most powerful diesel engine by one of the great American generations, but they forgot to tell us about the fuel to run the engine. We of the sixties frustrated them to no end with our questions of why; they could only see their marvelous diesel engine of civilization and could not understand our questions. What we should have been talking about was, of course, the fuel. Neither generation was finding The Christ, the master of both generations, and the diesel fuel on which the greatest engine runs.

An Analogy of Time

As a child I remember learning to fly a kite. There was something very empowering to me to finally successfully launch a kite, and watch it bob and weave in the wind. I remember trying to see how high I could get the kite, sometimes tying two or three rolls of string together, until the kite became just a speck in the sky that could hardly be seen.

I remember when using a new ball of string I had to be very careful. I could let the string run through my fingers as the ball unraveled at my feet, but if I was not careful I would not see that I was at the end and the kite would soar off into the sky, not to be recovered.

An apt analogy for today, I think. The string of time is running through our fingers in a steady stream. But the string of this age is about to run out, and the only connection to that string is the time of great judgment that is coming on the world. Fortunately for earth and mankind, that roll of string is also connected to a time on earth when peace will rule, when our swords will be turned in plow shears, when the wolf will lie down with the lamb.

I can feel the string of time whizzing through my fingers now. The end of the string will be upon us before we know it. As the seconds go by, waiting for the end, I would ask: are you ready?

Abraham believed God and it was credited to him for righteousness. Patrick also believed God, and it was also credited to him for righteousness. God so loved the world that whosoever believeth. . .

Truth

Truth never shares its pedestal.
Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Simple logic. Jesus was one of three people. First we could suppose him a liar, bent on the worst evil and deceiving the world. He built a deception in his whole life that would unalterably change the world to accomadate a lie.

Don't like this Jesus? Good, because neither do I. Second, we could suppose Jesus to be crazy, a maniacal man bent on his destruction and the destruction of his people. He did what he did out of some mental disease and was unable to help himself. Indeed, not only did he end on the cross, he has followers by the thousands who have irrationally followed his madness.

I don't think that works too well either. Third we have the Jesus who was who he said he was. The Son of God come to redeem a lost world. As Lewis so aptly points out we are not ever, in strict logic, left with the idea that Jesus is merely a nice man.

Would that the world was better trained in simple logic! What do they teach them in schools these days? (Oops, that would be me!)

Romans One and Two

Concluding Thoughts

Key verses:
Romans 1:32 and Romans 2:1 (NIV)

Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you who pass judgment do the same things.

Just a few brief thoughts to note hear. Verse 32 tells us plainly not to 1) do the sorts of things previously listed (including homosexuality) and 2) to definitely not give approval of those who practice them. But verse 1 tells us plainly that we are completely unfit to judge others without condemning ourselves because we do the same things.
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus plainly sets a bar so high that it is impossible that we should reach it; rather it is only faith which can save us. Jude further tells us that “we are to snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.”
The walk of the believer then is most assuredly a narrow one. He is called to stand against sin, condemning it completely, shunning it and denouncing it as sin. At the same time he is called to stand with the sinner, being merciful and humble, hoping by any means that the sinner might recognize that he too is naught but a beggar in need of grace.

Romans One Part Two

The general theme of Romans is succinctly stated in the maxim: “The just shall live by faith.” Paul’s cogent argument that we are “without excuse” is powerfully built in the last half of Romans One. I shall try to demonstrate his persuasive points in these next few paragraphs.

First Paul establishes that “men are without excuse” by depicting the downward spiral of sin. First he tells us that “their thinking became futile.” It is futile thinking which marks the beginning of the trek away from God. How many ways are there for modern man to engage in “futile thinking”? I wonder about our movement into the worship of nature and its mythical balance. Today we are more worried about our carbon production than we are about being judged by an angry God. The former is largely imagined while the latter is a coming reality. We are engaged in futile thinking when we imagine ourselves as saviors of the earth--it is we ourselves who are in desperate need of a Savior.

If “futile thinking” is the first mark of the sinful man, the second mark is “darkened hearts”. I see a connection here. Futile thinking would frequently lead to darkened hearts. People become captured by their vain imaginings and those imaginings bring about a heart which is darkened. I look at the wonders of creation, having gazed at the beauties of the Grand Canyon and Yellowstone. They make me see the Creator, but those with darkened hearts and vain imaginings only see accident and happenstance. I cannot look at a tree without wondering about the one who created it, but those who vainly imagine darken their own hearts. Paul tells us that they are “without excuse” because the Creator is plainly seen, “being understood from what is made”. They think they are wise, yet they are but fools, worshipping created things rather than the Creator.

Sexual impurity is the next result. Fools who pretend they are responsible to no one begin to act toward one another without righteousness. The loss of any righteous stance leads the sinner to sexual impurity, and Paul lists the worst outcomes of sexual impurity: women lust toward other women, and men lust toward other men. Such behavior comes from those who “do not retain their knowledge of God”. (Please scroll down to see Marriage Compact, written several years ago).

Those who leave their knowledge of God so willfully spiral yet further into sin and disobedience by developing “depraved minds”. The rest of the chapter lists the marks of the depraved mind:
“29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.” I count 21 ways that depravity is counted here.

I can quite imagine the righteous man, indeed it is my tendency too, to read this list and become incensed at the wickedness of mankind, thinking foolishly that it is “those others” who engage in sin. The next verse especially seems to make me want to establish myself as different, better than ‘those sinners’.
32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

I find myself wondering about how other people have gone so far wrong, and in my suppositions I fall into Paul’s trap. Paul’s trap comes in the next verse, which is the first verse of the second chapter. When Bible scholars chopped the text up into chapters and verses they correctly saw verse one of chapter two as beginning a new thought; but it is also the summation of what Paul has been building. It is put there as a cold bucket of water to be tossed over the righteous head and awaken him to his dire need. I find myself a bit shocked in reading it, even after all these years of being a Christian, because it does point at my utter depravity.

1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.

I, then, am guilty of the same things, the sexual sins, the list of 21 sins, the wickedness of futile thinking and darkened hearts. I think of Jimmy Carter who famously spoke of the lust in his heart, and I think of Bill Clinton who never quite acknowledged the lust of his zipper. Together they are both condemned. Moreover I am condemned right along with them. Jesus makes this explicit in his Sermon on the Mount, but Paul makes us see the three fingers pointing back at ourselves when we point our accusatory fingers and say “j’accuse”. The gospel has been magnificently explained as one beggar telling another beggar where to get bread. I need to forever remember my own beggar status when I speak to others about unrighteous lifestyles. I definitely should not approve of such lifestyles, but if I lose sight of my utter wretchedness I risk losing not only my testimony, but also my very proper perspective. I am a sinner who is made righteous, and called to live by faith.

Romans One part one

Key verses:

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

In Romans Paul starts out immediately letting me know that God includes more than His people, the Jews, in his grand designs. The key verses of the book are found in Romans 1:16 & 17.

16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

17For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

Paul tries to succinctly state the broad theme of Romans by letting us know first that the very Power of God is illumined when the merest man partakes in belief. It is only faith which brings us imputed righteousness. My belief in God is the only thing that pleases Him; I receive that which was done on the cross with His Son, and that alone is what pleases God.

Hebrews tells us this also: But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. (Hebrews 11:6). Paul is restating this in Romans, or perhaps it was first, for if my memory serves Romans is the earlier book.

Now Paul begins to craft his arguments that all men are in the same fix: lost without Christ. His first argument is almost a trap to the righteous Jew, or to the righteous Christian. He begins with stating clearly that righteousness comes by faith but then moving to a great list of sins that are favored by those with a “depraved mind”.

Paul brilliantly marshals his arguments by plainly telling us that all men are without excuse:
19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.

In other words the natural mind is capable of and responsible for discerning the Creator through His creation. We should be able to look at a tree or a tall mountain and see the Creator behind them.

But men’s willfulness always corrupts them; though we do see God’s handiwork, and even His presence everywhere we have so darkened our understanding that we are incapable of seeing the Light of the World.

21Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Idolatry is a chief manifestation of the wickedness of men- I wonder if we have really changed all that much this last several years. In the Old Testament the Israelites sacrificed their children to Molech by casting them into the fire; these times woman are counseled to sacrifice their unborn to the god of convenience. In former ancient times men worshipped the sun and feared it; today we have the religion of global warming that still fears angering the sun.

In our next passage to look at, Paul brilliantly captures the supposed righteous man by listing many more of the awful sins of the depraved mind. Stay tuned.

A Layman’s Look at Romans

For me, Romans is a most exciting book. I remember my college semester studying Romans but even before that, some 36 years ago, my wife and I attended young couples conference, and a man named Roger taught us about Romans. I recall some of his words as freshly as they were spoken still. He spoke to us of the old man that we are to put away and be renewed in the “new man” to which we are called. But as I recall those messages I do remember his summary of the earlier chapters, encapsulating great themes and arguments in single sentence summaries.

Even today, after reading through my Bible many hundreds of times, I find the words penned in Romans some of the most humbling and liberating for the wayward soul. It teaches the Christian of his relational place to Christ, from our humble, sinful, and lost beginnings to the exalted status that even the angels look on with amazement and wonder at what God has done.

I am undertaking to memorize key verses of each chapter, and have chosen those key verses from my own study, not from notes or another Bible study source. They are words chosen by me, the sole guidance I use is what God seems to speak to me as important. Romans, is, of course, a very coherent and strong argument to explain the complete and total loss of man’s righteousness apart from faith in Christ. It also gloriously explains to us what majesty that faith restores to us as the sons of God.

I intend to give the key verses of each chapter as I wind my way through this. My guide to “key” verses is my own, and I use only my sense of what is important, hopefully coupled with the conviction of the Holy Spirit. Though I enjoy checking commentaries out from time to time, it is again, my reliance on my common sense and the Holy Spirit which dominate my studies.

A final word on memorization. I have given myself through my life to much memorization (and sometimes I think- more forgetting!). I have found it a wonderful tool for getting familiar with the Word of God, but also for mediation and reflection, it is for me, an unparalleled tool. If by chance anyone ever bothers with reading this blog, please do accept my recommendation of committing this verses to your memory. I trust that God will enrich your life as He has mine.

A Flair for the Dramatic?

In the beginning there was the Word.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth
In the beginning there was the Word

In the end of all things God tells us in The Revelation that Christ meets the armies of Armageddon with a sword protruding from His mouth. His sword is invincible, and the vast armies of the world are instantly and completely defeated, apparently without one more casualty on the part of the saints who are standing behind him.

What is this sword that protrudes from the mouth? It is the awesome power of the Creator, fully exhibited in His Son; the power of God Himself in the spoken word. One word from Jesus and it all ends- all the thousands of years of man striving against his Creator, all the sin and willfulness meeting against a single word.

Consider for a moment the setting. All the armies of Europe, and all the armies of the east mass together in one valley. The eyes of the world are upon them. They threaten the continued existence of Israel. Then steps in the Creator, in all of His awesome power, at the last moment, at the very last possibility. With one word it all stops and amounts to exactly nothing.

Does God indeed have a flair for the dramatic?

These Truths are Self Evident

What truths are self-evident? Today I read a sad story about a nine year old girl killed after she annulled her marriage to a forty-five year old man. She was killed as a matter of honor by her family.

I know not all the self-evident truths, but this I do know. Man is responsible to his Creator, who will hold us in judgment for all our deeds. Solomon told us to eat, drink, and be merry, but know that we will account to God for our lives. This country where the vile deed was done has politicians defending the practice, saying that it includes hundreds of years of tradition.

Of course, on its own, that is a fallacious argument, for tradition itself has no merit other than force of habit. Habits may be good or bad, but it is my own observation that most habits are bad and the ones which we would keep and abide by are so much harder to develop and maintain. Following tradition for tradition’s sake would mean that if we had opportunity we would crucify Christ yet again. Thinking about this analogy, I do not doubt that we would do exactly that if He offered us the chance. This time around, however, he is coming as the Lion of Judah, not the Lamb of God.

The Lion of Judah will severely judge misdeeds that happened to this nine year old girl. I think of the apostle Paul, belittled so often by our American culture. He said in perhaps the greatest equality statement of all time, that we are all part of one body, Jews or Gentiles, slave or free, male or female. Those cultures treating women as property shall not escape a harsher look. The Lord comes and with Him, so does judgment.

Socialism in Action

Years ago I worked among the homeless in Skid Row. I recall that we served two different meals: one to the staff men who worked and lived with us, and one for the men who came to us directly from the street. The staff would get a better fare- a balanced meal (though I remember it very heavy on carbs!). The homeless would get a stew or beans with bread.



We got a new director who saw this discrepency and decided to do something about it. Standing before all the staff men, he announced that these differences would no longer be tolerated. Henceforth all men would be treated equally with regard to meals. It was a rousing speech and one of the few times I actually saw the staff men stand and cheer. Someone was here to put things right at last!



Imagine their disappointment the next day when they found their meals now consisted of the plainer fare- beans and bread or stew and bread. Yes, things were now the same, just as promised. How awful was the result!



So it is with me when politicians promise national health care for all. I always think of those poor gullible souls believing in their director. Government will apportion and deny health care in the most bizarre fashion. We will all become casualties of care!

History is yet to be told

There is a famous aphorism that history is always written by the victor. Imagine what history might read like had Hitler won his global conquest. Just maybe it would be a tad different than what we read today. Imagine reading a biography of Hitler’s archenemy, Churchill. Undoubtedly we would read of many vile and contemptible deeds done by this dastardly character.

It occurs to me that history, even as close as it is to culmination, has not yet been written. One of my private passions is the reading and understanding of history, but if my musing is correct, the real view of history, as told through the ultimate Victor, has yet to be written. I wonder how the stories of history will change when we see them through the hand of the Pattern-Maker.

Random Recent Thoughts

He who carries the biggest baseball bat inevitably wants to swing at your head; if you really want to give government a bigger bat you should probably invest in a good helmet (government-approved, of course).

Overheard from church:
I work for DMV and am looking to the Lord’s return because I really want to see what he is going to do with the DMV.

There has never been a time in history where it has not been later than it ever has been before; nevertheless all the rehearsals of the Last Supper are culminating in the real event.

What is Truth?

Reflections on Truth

Doesn’t the very word “truth” imply one-sidedness and bigotry? If there is a truth to be found, would it not necessarily divide people? That division would of necessity be in two camps: 1) those who believe and embrace the truth, and 2) the larger group of those who reject the truth.

Thinking over this, a probable outcome would be that the larger group would be divided into many further subsets.

Now suppose that there is one truth for knowing and coming to the Divine. Part of those rejecting the truth would inevitably twist portions of the truth for themselves, proclaiming that their new version is genuine. Inevitably there would be a falling out and new versions would result. Part of those rejecting would reject in total, asking what is truth?

That which I find amazing is the world about me seems to pretty much reflect this argument. In the United States it is not even considered polite anymore for someone to stand and say he has the truth. Perhaps that is what Jesus meant when he said I am not come to unite, I am come to divide, to set father against son, etc.

Oh, the sharp point of truth! Take care for upon it all of history has already divided, cleaving us neatly into our two groups. “I am come that ye may know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”

Howard Dean- prophet?

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic Party, and theologian extraordinaire, states: “The Democratic Party believes . . . that there are no bars to heaven for anybody.”
Jesus, a theologian of no small note, states: “No one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.” He also said: “Whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.”
It is one thing to be tolerant of others who do not believe as they should; it is quite another to state that all will go to heaven. There is no support for this in the Bible, which plainly states: “But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.”
Indeed Jesus spent most of his ministry (count and categorize his words if you will) warning the world of the way that it was going and the penalty thereof. The world is clearly on a path to mass destruction, and Jesus did not mince words about it. He frequently picked on the leaders of his day, calling them “hypocrites” and “vipers”.
There are of course only three logical assumptions from these contrary teachings. First Howard Dean is right and Jesus is wrong. Second Howard Dean is wrong and Jesus is right. Third, both Howard Dean and Jesus are wrong.
If the first assumption is right then all of mankind should be at the feet of Howard Dean rather than Jesus. If the second is right then all of mankind should reject Howard Dean’s statement as absurd, and should be at the feet of Jesus. If the third is right, solipsism reigns supreme, and there is no reason to be at the feet of anyone.
Choose which leader you will follow; but as for me and my house we will follow Jesus. And Jesus clearly taught that there are many bars, the chief of which shall be the rejection of God’s only son.

Uniforms in School

As a teacher I absolutely hate the way our society seems to want to shred individual dignity. Uniforms for school children was in its heyday about five years ago, and good school behavior was linked to getting kids all into the same blah white shirts. I enjoy seeing my children express their individuality with their shirts. One shirt I remember from this past month was worn by a boy and said, “Blame My Sister”. I think it is wonderful to stimulate creativity and individuality.

Today we have evolved to let the gangs own certain colors. It is now against most school laws for students to wear gang colors. Now may I ask what made them gang colors? Did gangs purchase the trademarks? Obviously not; what has happened is that schools have unwittingly handed gangs a major victory. Henceforth children will not be allowed to wear red or blue because they are the sole province of gangs. The gang leaders ought to send thank-you’s to all the foresighted educators who gave them this victory.

It sort of reminds me of the argument against guns. We have been told for sixty years that if we just make guns illegal, crime will disappear. So the battle is on; laws are constantly being fashioned to take guns out of the hands of lawful citizens, but those same laws are ignored by the lawless. What we have now is a society where only the police and criminals have guns- frankly we ought to be a little afraid of both elements. So are we moving to a society in which we will have no colors allowed- all of us becoming bleached-out-empty-human-shells devoid of all individuality?

In church this morning, our minister taught on the righteousness of Christ. I always think of the white robes of righteousness that Christ clothes us with in the end times. That is one uniform I can accept! And even beg for- because without it I am lost in my wickedness- as out of place as Dan Brown at the Second Coming. Willingly I will take the white robe of righteousness and cling to it most tightly, mindful of my need and His wonderful grace.

Awestruck- or thoughts from the morning sermon

Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. Ephesians 1:3 NIV SB


Our job as Christians is to be awestruck, and sometimes I forget that. I had a rather marvelous conversion at the ripe old age of nineteen. I had learned much from my world and was very analytical for a nineteen year old. Somehow I had never connected much in my life to the numinous, though in early childhood I do have memories of dealing with spiritual issues on a childhood level (isn’t that the way Jesus commands us to come, as children?) in praying for sick animals and people.
Nonetheless it was a profound change in the way of appreciating the world about me that took place, and I had moments where I even feared for my sanity. Some might point out that that fear was righteously place (isn’t there another place in scripture that says the wisdom of God is as foolishness before men?). To see spiritual forces around me was both dismaying and exciting at the same time; dismaying because I saw them as unverifiable, exciting because I saw them as true.
My analytical nature soon tried to classify and present that remarkable discovery of truth to my immediate friends, none of whom were themselves believers. I tried through reason, to no avail, to present that which had so profoundly and dynamically changed my life.
I was more awestruck than many new believers, I think, because a deadness was creeping over my soul rather early with the modern American belief that what you see is what you get. Analytically that appealed to my nature, and the occasional friend I had who still went to church I would challenge on an analytical basis until I found that they appeared to have no rational reason why they believed, they appeared uncertain as to what they believed, and, in some cases, appeared to be believing out of fear of hell rather than conviction of reason.
After my conversion, apologetics appealed to my analytical nature, and I developed many strengths in arguing persuasively for Christ. In my thirty six years since then I have seen scores of people come to Christ, but I freely admit none have been persuaded through apologetics. I have come to see apologetics as merely the entrance argument to open the eyes of the willing skeptic so that the true testimony can take over.
I am convinced that people are not rational creatures. Has not one of the chief skeptics of the modern age, Bertrand Russell, said: “It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this.” People can have a semblance of rationality which is always over-ridden by their emotional core. Hence the topic of this essay: being awestruck.
Ephesians points out that God has presently blessed us with every spiritual blessing in Christ. In my better moments I know this; there are days and sometimes weeks going by where I feel both close to and presently blessed by Christ. I am awestruck. If I am to convince my neighbor of the reality of unseen things, then I need to regularly affirm the way in which He makes me awestruck.
Note:
I think the best way to approach people is through what Christ does to us in our emotional department. This is exactly contrary to the Four Spiritual Laws, which always rated facts as the engine, faith as the coal car, and feeling as the caboose. I think that even Bill Bright was a bit taken with the American myth that what you see is what you get. In thinking this through though, I do wonder if perhaps it is a mark of our post modernism age that causes this shift to emotion. I do think modern man tends to say that facts are different things to different people and thus impossible to ascertain (relativism).

Israel The Hated Nation

Israel- The Hated Nation.

The end times are coming. Already a beautiful pastel of colors is being splashed across the world canvas to describe in vivid detail that which is appearing with the famed four horsemen. Iran swears on the destruction of Israel; their leader is only waiting for the appearance of the 12th Iman to signal its destruction. Meanwhile the “civilized” (yes, Iran, I do mean the slur) world (yes world I do mean the quotes) is appalled at Israel’s inappropriate response. I even read one commentator (a US birdbrain) who suggested that Israel contrived the whole situation, that they are using the two soldiers who were taken from Israeli soil as an excuse to bomb Lebanon. This birdbrain evidently is incapable of factoring in the thousands of bombs landing on Israel, driving many millions to leave their homes and their businesses to live for weeks in bomb shelters.
Why is it that the world does not understand that Moslems are being driven in their hatred not by themselves, but by another? This "other" defies all reasoning and peace proposals; only left are summurizations of destruction. I wish we were better than this, yet we are not.
It is precisely this other that has yet to be identified. Is it the 12th Iman? Or is it some future pope- which a Christian I have intermittent contact with suggests, and it has been suggested (by Protestants only obviously) for centuries? Much speculation has gone into the identity of this man, and all I can say is that the Bible promises that he will be revealed in due time.
Currently the US support of Israel is anemic at best. Bush and all of his zealous support for Israel is being derided by nearly half the country. This past week there were even attempts by some to oust Condi Rice by trying to pretend she was not in tune with what the administration. I do not think it worked but it is perhaps only a matter of time.
If there is one place that I do not support Bush it is in the Iraq war. I simply believe that over a long period of time people get the government that they deserve. The Iraqi people have been here for thousands of years; their government has not evolved beyond the basic bestial dictator model. Why? To me the answer is obvious: the people are so factionous that they cannot survive under any other model of government. Bush is attempting to bring democracy to this people and while I laud his attempts to do so, it seems to me that he so obviously is shortchanging our founders, namely Jefferson, Adams, and Monroe (both Christians and non Christians). It took thousands of years of thinking and reasoning for us to get to the point of responsibly handling democracy, even with this great slate of leaders we had. Even today, the D'Toqueville ascription of the great experiment still exists; we may well self ignite and destroy ourselves- such is the abomination of democracy (for further info ask France, who had everything and voted it away).
May I add one point? I do hope fervently that my analysis is wrong and that Bush is right. He certainly has a great goal- but one I do fear is doomed to failure. It does relate to my twenty year problem with neocons, but there are many other things about Bush that I do admire.
There is a ten nation confederation governing the world; it is not the ten nation confederation of Europe much ballyhooed by Lindsey and others in the seventies. It is instead the ten nation confederacy (the same confederacy I thought in the seventies to be much more likely to hold economic power- boy, did the Late Great Planet Earth miss that one!) holding virtually all the oil pools of the world (the US has much more oil, but it also has wacko environmentalists who have stopped its development these past thirty years).This is the same ten nation confederacy prophesied about in Daniel. May I point out that this confederacy has already blackmailed both France and Germany to its cause, to the embarrassment of its leaders?
All this has been foretold beforehand. It will become apparent as time unfolds. What exciting times to live in! To think that I may live to see the changing of the ages, the coming of our Christ.
Nevertheless, it needs to be said plainly that there is a coming time when those in the world will all appear to be against Israel. Iran will march against Israel, the tiny nation the size of greater Sacramento, and will send something towards Judea that should call all to flee. At that time Judea better look out; moreover the world better look for the coming of the Son. I suggest the skeptical do a reading of Jeremiah, particularly the 50th and the 51st chapter (please do read Jeremiah 51: 24).
Finally, it needs to be said that when I became a Christian in 1972, I was warned by a prescient godly man to watch Iraq and Iran. Why is it that 35 years later the world is watching Iraq and Iran?
Great explanation of Isreal by Charles Krauthammer here.

The End Times?

I have waited since the age of 19 for these days! My coming to a knowledge of Christ took place under very dramatic circumstances (for me). I was about as agnostic as one could be; trained hard in biological theories, and so skeptical. I remember questioning so many people who went to church, asking them to defend their beliefs, most of whom admitted to a weak stupid sort of faith. However, two people, Mike and my future wife, talked to me, not about salvation, but rather about the end times. They talked to me at a college cafeteria table about Daniel and Revelation, telling me that the Bible spoke specifically about the “Last Days” before the coming of their Christ. I was so interested that I went home, found an old (and unread) Bible and proceeded to read The Revelation.
I at 53 remain the only person I know to have received Christ on the basis of having read The Revelation. I found it absolutely filled with stuff I did not understand (neither did my prof understand it later in Bible college), but it was filled with stuff that seemed to prick my spirit. But after reading it, I prayed perhaps for the first time as an adult that God, if He were real, would reveal Himself to me, and implicit in that prayer was the knowledge that I must follow Him if He were real.
Some thirty three years later I find my life so different than what I might have thought. But my purpose in saying this is that there was a special revelation among a very few revelations that I received in those first days. I know this is a personal anecdote, and as always, people should remain skeptical of it unless it is confirmed from outside sources. But I was so excited about the times that were coming upon us, and I queried the Lord as to when this may be, sure in my own mind that it was going to be the next month or the next year. The year was 1972. Instead what I got was a specific dream in which I saw myself as an “old man” seeing the coming of Christ. Needless to say for a young man to receive this kind of dream was sort of dismaying. God is coming, but how much better for a young man if it were right now? Young men do not wait well. Nevertheless my dream was that as an old man I would see the coming of Christ. I am now 53. Is that old? Replacing my father’s roof (I did this 20 years ago) certainly makes me feel old. My ankles and my back tell me I am not young anymore.
But what do world events tell us? Iran and Syria are launching a war against Israel. They both want the total destruction of Israel because of their religion. Israel is yet again in the fight for their very existence. Will they win again? Or is this the time prophesied from long ago:
When you see the abomination that causes desolation standing where it does not belong—let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the roof of his house go down or enter the house to take anything out. Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! Pray that this will not take place in winter, because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again. If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them.
Mark 13: 14-20

Sometime soon this is happening. Those in Judea who will heed will run. Is this day upon us in this time, or five years from now? I am not at all sure as I have no particular vision into the future, but I am sure that I am getting older.

When you see the abomination that causes desolation standing where it does not belong—let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the roof of his house go down or enter the house to take anything out. Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! Pray that this will not take place in winter, because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again. If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them.
Mark 13: 14-20

I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.
Mark 13:30

That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat.
2 Peter 3:12

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/the_war_comes_to_us.html
The War Comes to Us, by Robert Tracinski

Israel's Existence at Stake, by Charles Krauthammer
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/israels_existence_at_stake.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/a_tricky_battlefield_for_israe.html
A Tricky Battlefield for Israel and America
By David Ignatius

http://www.saneworks.us/Is-the-War-Against-Terror-Rational-article-131-1.htm
Is the War Against Terror Rational?
By Dick Morris

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/442luknw.asp?pg=2
The Rogues Strike Back Iran, Syria, Hamas, and Hezbollah vs. Israel. by Robert Satloff
Excited about End Times!

The Gathering Storm

I should think the storm over today’s emphasis on Canada’s arrest of 17 terrorist suspects should jar Americans. Though I agree with this article’s premise, I want to point out that we are asleep at the wheel again. Yet I doubt that Americans will ever see the danger as plainly as they should until too late. I ask the question: how many countries does it take to perpetuate a war? The answer is as it always has been: One. In 1981 Israel devastated the nuclear program of a new entry, Iraq, into the quagmire. Iraq, and Saddam Hussein, had promised forever to extinguish Israel, as has every one of the Arab states around Israel. I do wonder if the world even knows that, as I think it is one of the most underreported facts in all of history. Every Arab state is utterly dedicated to the demise of Israel, and they have repeatedly openly stated so. It surprised England to no end, those who had soon signed on to the Balfour Declaration, long before the advent of WW2. Churchill himself expressed amazement at the quantity of resistance to the new Jewish influence on the part of the Arabs.
Yet it fulfilled God’s exact prophecy. Israel was to be scattered, judged heavily, and then regathered for the End Time. Today we are told of an egoist in Iran who believes the time has come for a confrontation with Israel. He would develop nuclear weapons deeply underground, and is far enough away from Israel to not worry about a sufficient attack, nevermind the fact that Israel is politically in a position not to attack; the whole world is waiting to condemn them for any wrong action. He prophesies of a coming end time war in which Islam will forever conquer; I would submit that he is absolutely wrong. The war will come, but the Victor is Christ, and no other. Of such is the final conflict.

History and the Pull of Losers

History and the Pull of the Losers
I am afraid I have been reading for too much history lately. Today in my reading of Churchill, I learned how Joseph Kennedy supported Hitler until late in his career (at least as late as 1939). One of Joseph’s comments incited Churchill to an answer, in years which he was trying to bite his tongue. Of course there were many others during this period who supported Hitler, including Lindbergh and the “never say enough appeasement” Neville Chamberlain. All of which is to say nothing I suppose. But I have been fascinated with the way history has acted towards losers. May I point out that we elected the son of one, JFK, president?
I just read a great piece from Jimmy Carter, and it reminded me of all the reasons I respect him, as well as the all the reasons why he must remain a loser. You see though I have a great problem with Jimmy Carter, he loves the Lord, the same Lord which I love. I do not doubt that love for an instant, and I commend him for all of his forthright efforts to eradicate disease and help Africa to become better. I look forward to spending eternity with him, where I have no doubt whatsoever that we will stand shoulder to shoulder working in the labors which our Lord will give us.
BUT, as for the present world, he and I must have a very different view. In his article he correctly attributes the beginning of the great movement of Christians to the Republican Party to 1979. He has noticed that that is the year in which conservatives seemingly forever captured the heart and soul of the Southern Baptist Conference. I became a Christian in 1972, and at that time, I saw about an equal number of Democrats and Republicans in the church. He laments; I celebrate. Most Christian organizations have a history of being eaten by the world views that they are supposed to challenge. Consider the Methodists and the Presbyterians, and their early history with the United States. They were at one time considered the radicals, hated by their peer organizations, and yet today are the very staid churches which excite the least comment, let alone change to Jesus Christ. My own viewpoint is that the longer the church exists, the less chance it has to shine for Jesus. I thanked God for the Southern Baptists, although I am not one, that they fought the trend of history, and that they shined brightly for the One that they are called to represent.
The problem, as I see it, is that we are coming upon the time when the Greatest Deceiver of all time will live on the face of the earth. Pericles, Churchill, nor anyone else will convince the world of his evil until it is almost too late. At that moment, if I understand scripture aright, the Lord himself will rescue us from self-destruction. I do think, in large measure, the philosophy of Jimmy Carter will be put forever to rest. There is much enviable in that philosophy, its earnest efforts to help the needy notwithstanding, yet it must remain an ungrown fruit, destined to fall off the branch long before ripening, starved in its infancy, in the face of the Truth. It is based forever in humanitarianism without God.
I am sorry that Jimmy Carter does not see that; yet I pray that he will live to see the coming of our Lord, and the usher of the New Age.
Just so you know, at the age of 18, I registered non-partisan and in the intervening years I have remained forever so. Neither party have I ever endorsed, and I lament for the country that is told there are two answers for every problem, exactly two answers, only two answers, one good and one evil. I think such a system, though I know not a better one, has created much mischief in our pursuit of righteousness.

Iluvator and Evil

Then Iluvatar spoke, and he said: ‘Mighty are the Ainur, and mightiest among them is Melkor; but that he may know, and all the Ainur, that I am Iluvatar, those things that ye have sung, I will show them forth, that ye may see what ye have done. And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined.’

I took the above passage from The Simarillian, by JRR Tolkien, to write about the present confusion over God’s reigning on earth. Biblically speaking, we are at or near the period in which Lucifer is cast to earth and is furious, knowing that his time is coming to an end. We humans tend to see the need for order and coherence in our world; instead we see disorder and confusion. Why, we cogently ask, is there not a seemly pattern to our world- why is it all the time invaded by evil, dominated by evil, and we often see humans doing what humans ought not to do- furthering the cause of evil? Tolkien believed strongly in the power of the myth to teach reality. His works greatly reflected his strong religious beliefs and the above passage shows his clarity of understanding of our present plight.
     Evil is here, apparently ruling and reigning. But even while evil is having its day, the goodness and power of God are going to pattern that evil into good. There is nothing that Lucifer does which, in the nanosecond God says to stop, shall not instantly cease. Nevertheless God allows evil to have much sway, and herein fits the doctrine of original sin. But even the instance of original sin is under the providence and dominion of God; he has all, the least jot and the tittle shall not happen without God’s having allowed it.
Lewis does this same theme great justice when he gives us the character of Aslan. When Aslan is absent from Narnia, evil reigns (or thinks it does). The White Witch even reasons that if she can kill Edmund there would only be three to fulfill the prophecy, and then she reasons that Aslan himself may go. I find it intriguing that never for an instant does she feel that evil can stand against good; it is her fervent and fruitless hope that Aslan may leave Narnia.  
     Tolkien and Lewis of course met regularly and often agreed that myths are an excellent means to explain reality. Their works which differ so much in literary style both harmonize on this one theme. Descartes famously said I think therefore I am- a statement I think is a sound basis of modern western thought. But if perhaps I might be allowed to play with such a great statement, let me change it a bit: I feel right and wrong therefore there is good and evil.
     I am not trying to be philosophical here. Rather I am trying to argue from backwards design. Isn’t it obvious that we have been made to see good and evil, however poorly, and isn’t that a sound reason for our Creator? Why should we feel right and wrong at all if it were not true that there is both good and evil? The day is coming when our Melkor’s reign shall end, when our Aslan will assume command and “begin setting things aright”. Our God is but reigning at present in a distant sense, an absent Aslan, but the day is soon coming when he will reign in visible physical form.
     I think therein is the confusion of many over the presence of evil. Evil cannot live with good- so the poor reasoning goes- therefore there is no good, or if there is good it is too weak to overcome evil. They could not be more wrong. The good which they only imperfectly see at the best of times is a lot bigger and a lot stronger than anything imagined. What of a goodness, shown to us with the mythical charms of Tolkien and Lewis, that is capable of folding evil into a greater pattern of good? Good food for thought.

Magician's Nephew

     In the Magician’s Nephew, C.S. Lewis likens the singing of a song to the creation of the world. In his book Lewis has Polly listening to the song and sometimes catching a glimmer of the connection to the creation going on around her eyes. Of course Lewis was not the first author to do that; Tolkien did it earlier- and perhaps Milton was the earliest of all, but there is still something special about the idea of a beautiful song meshing somehow with the creation of the world.
      Today I realized the song from time to time happens to believers. Perhaps the song is but dim, and perhaps we do not hear the right notes, but it is still our majestic song; it marches along as surely as the drumbeat of time plays its cadence to the unfolding of history. All does happen as our Creator has foreordained, and somehow even the discordant notes that do not seem to fit the song entirely mesh into the song planned from before the beginning of time.
      Tolkien deals with the discordant notes through his evil character Melkor; on a much simpler level Lewis deals with evil with the “accidental” presence of Jadis. Neither evil character realizes that the creator of their respective worlds has a larger plan capable of turning even their evil into something fine. Milton does the same thing with his chapter on Lucifer. To me as a believer I find these comforting notes from these great authors playing a beautiful melody for me. Isn’t it comforting to know that even the evil in our world somehow is fitting into God’s melody?
      In my later years I find the apprehension of evil growing somewhat. I read Mein Kampf and studied Hitler’s pitiful plans which grew so wildly successful only to be put aside by another man named Churchill, raised up for just such a time as this, who spent a whole decade apprehending and preparing for the evil of Hitler despite his own Britain thinking he was bonkers. During that dark decade of Churchill’s fall and Hitler’s rise, a Lady Astor took a party of appeasers to Stalin. Stalin asked about Churchill. The Lady Astor said now the power was now Chamberlain. “What about Churchill,” Stalin asked? “Oh, he’s finished!” proclaimed Lady Astor.
      Fortunately for the free world she could not have been more wrong. Were it not for the prescience of Churchill, we might find ourselves in a much darker world today. Somehow all the brutality and loss of life fit into the plan of God. Even the wicked man must have his day. He shall not prevail; neither shall the purpose of the Creator be frustrated in the least.
      If I am right in my reckoning, and the time is upon us (see previous post), the man of sin is now living among us, with his false christs and prophets. A time of evil is coming upon us such as the world has never seen, nor will ever see again. It is comforting for me to know that in view of my apprehension of evil that Polly is right all the time- the song is being sung as it should be and all will unfold in the planned manner.

This Train is Bound for Glory

     This train is bound for glory. One of these days we are going to hear ‘all abroad’ and ‘last call. The question is when is that day going to come? My father, who is a skeptic, says that the world has been saying that Christ is coming forever, and it never seems to happen. I patiently point out that never ever before has Israel been regathered. When we see the fig tree got tender and put forth leaves, (Israel regathering) Jesus says that this generation shall not pass away until they see the coming of the Son of Man. What exactly does that mean? Bible scholars have variously defined a generation as being forty to seventy years. Moses himself defines it in Psalm 90. Moses, you remember, lived to be a hundred and twenty years old, with his strength and vigor not abated. Yet he himself said that a man lived to be seventy years, eighty if due to strength.
     So doing a little math we can confidently assert that the time is upon us. The Balfour Declaration set aside Palestine for the horribly mistreated Jews, and the Jews flooded back to their homeland. The year was 1948 when Israel declared itself a nation. Add seventy years to 1948, and you get 2018. Remember that we cannot get exact here; rather Jesus said specifically that that generation would not pass away until they saw the coming of man. I do find it interesting though to see that Iran is supposed to be five to seven years from developing nuclear bombs, and the present leader has sworn to destroy Israel.
     Now I have observed that Jerusalem was not part of the original regathering, and it was not until 1967 that Israel conquered Jerusalem and began occupying it. So it may be permissible to add seventy years to 1967, but I do think not. Jesus’ parable was simply put forth: when you see the fig tree beginning to bud. That would indicate 1948 as the more reliable starting point.
     But this is not all the evidence. It might interest you to know that early Bible writers were all convinced that the world itself was to last 6000 years until the coming of Christ. Over 1900 years ago, writers wrote convincingly of this, repeatedly stating that the coming of Christ was going to signal the coming of the last age- the age of Christ reigning on earth.
     I love my father. If I loved him less, I might have rejoined his last statement with Peter’s talking about the scoffers who said, “Where is the promise of his coming?” I do not like putting my father down, and I am not sure he would get it anyway. Skeptics seem to have a veil over their eyes, but in my father’s case it is a veil partly torn away. I do hope for its full tearing.
     This train is bound for glory. The next line says: Don't ride nothin' but the righteous and the holy. The time is upon us. Let us not neglect well doing; neither let us be timid in our warnings. Jesus Christ is coming and until he does there is still room for more!

Groundhog Day

I would like to write again about Groundhog Day. I have been watching it this evening once again (actually I told my wife tonight that I thought someone could never watch Groundhog Day once) The meaning of a man is in his courting of his love, which he wishes to be eternal, but which is not, is probably what makes this a guy film, and that may explain why I keep returning to it. I am not sure about that analysis at all- but you tell me why I am so fascinated with it. It does refer to time change which is an awesome attraction to humans, but it's main theme is trying just once to get it right and you cannot. Of course the film eventually has its star getting it right, but in real life, in our hearts, we know that we could never do that.
     “What would you do if you were stuck in one place, and every day was exactly the same, and nothing you did mattered?” asks Bill Murray. That has to be the quintessential question for modern man. What poignant words to express our lives apart from their meaning that our Lord gave us? Aren’t we all dunderheads, repeating over and over again the same stupid things that make up our inane days? What if we could but live the day again (and again)?
     I just came off of a wonderful day with children. I am a fourth grade teacher who gives children an extra hour before school to learn web page building. Many of the children who are coming this year have younger siblings who come along; voila! I am a babysitter too. This morning I happened to feel especially exuberant (that does happen to an older fellow less and less often), and played with the younger children, lifting them into the air and letting them down suddenly. They swamped me and begged for more; that is the problem always with young ones- they have so much more energy than I do. Of course I do remember running out of energy with my young nephews when I was a mere twenty. What chance do I have now?
     But still during that day I had things wrong which I thought, which I wished I could think differently about. I had things I might have said better, or compliment that I might have expressed to put my peers at ease. Wouldn’t it be nice to relive the day so that I could get those things right? Wrong!
     If I had all of eternity to relive a day, I could not live it perfectly no matter how hard I tried. This is the meaning of what Calvin calls total depravity. Though he defines it in a way that I could never ever agree with, I do believe in my own definition of total depravity. Man can never ever be right in the total sense. At the best he can be right only erratically- most of the time even at the best of times I would get only a B minus. Most of the time I, of course, cruise in the “less than B minus category.” In the eyes of God we are inept, and less than the perfect which he desired us to be. We can never ever reach the standards which Christ has dared us to live in: “Be thou perfect, as even the Son of Man is perfect.”
     Yes, I am aware that the word perfect might have been better translated, or at least as accurately translated, complete. But, in my opinion, that begs the question. We cannot in any sense be complete. We are stuck with being incomplete, just vestiges of what we should be, specters of what God has called us to be. That is total depravity. It does not mean, as Calvin insists, that there is nothing good in us. Rather it means that we can never ever be finally good; rather we are condemned to our random goodness (and general badness) - and that only when we are at our best. That is total, complete depravity. We are irredeemably lost apart from the grace of Christ.
     But let me talk about what it does not mean; and what we as Christians give the short shrift to our testimony about Christ because of our insistence on a poor doctrine. I think this is one of the dangers of Calvinism, and I want to explain why it does go way too far. It does not mean that a mother’s love for her child is evil. It does not mean that a brother cannot express love to his brother in a good way. It certainly does not mean that a friend cannot give the greatest goodness in giving his life for his friend. “Greater love hath no man than this, that he should give his life for his friend.” Was Paul a liar in saying this? Nay, let it never be said! Rather let us assume that there is something in man, created in the image of God, which reflects the creator who made us, however dimly.
     I am aware of Lewis and The Great Divorce. In that very great book, Lewis does us a great service by letting us know about how selfish a mother’s love might become; still in its conception and common practice who would ever say it is an evil thing? That a good thing might become utterly defiled Lewis poignantly shows- what he is not attempting to show is that there might be a good thing that is done in man apart from God’s doing it. Are we to believe that every man who gives his life for his friend, every mother who loves her child, and every brother who shows brotherly love is only showing what God empowers them to show? I think not.
     Rather the holistic view of depravity is one that I believe. Man, created in the image of God, is able to feebly replicate the goodness of his God in good deeds, but he is never able to share in the goodness of God because of sin. That sin has forever sold him to evil, which must always predominant apart from the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Let us not then look forward to living one day over and over again forever; let us do look forward to a day without end which we will live forever at the feet of Christ.

Marriage Charter

I was playing with the words of our declaration and my strong feelings for marriage. I think it is one of the Biblical pillars and not only because our Lord uses it so often to describe our relationship with him. What do you think of my fighting words?

Marriage Charter

To our esteemed President, the Supreme Court and the Honorable Congress of the United States:
Be it known to you:

We the people hold marriage to be an unalienable right emanating from our Creator. No state organization or court may define marriage any other way other than that which has been handed down to us from our forefathers through the religions of the Jew and the Christian. We do not wish to oppress any nor uplift any in our assertion of this unalienable right; rather we wish to succinctly state that which is obvious from the historical record: marriage is an institution rendered by our Creator and is therefore inviolate. It can not be altered from its basic definition of a man and a woman enjoining for the purpose of living their lives before society.

Further,
Since we hold this right to be unalienable, we do not recognize the right of the state to alter or subtract from it in any way. We do advise you therefore of our concern on the part of some to redefine marriage. We consider such altering as tampering with that over which you have no recognized power. Respectfully we ask that you do recognize the sacrament of marriage as such a right. Governments are instituted among men to secure those unalienable rights, and when governments begin to stray, it is the duty and solemn obligation of the governed to revoke their consent of governance. Be it known to you that we will treat any usurpation of the sacrament of marriage with the utmost suspicion and will hold such usurpation in the lowest regard.

Citizens sign here:

Emotion and Rationality

     I read with interest a doctoral work by Dr. Bahnsen last night on what I would term self deception. The work very scripturally analyzes the facet of human self-deception. The article is probably too lengthy for general interest, but if you like the link is here. At any rate, one of the intriguing contradictions of the modern day world and our apostle Paul is where in Romans One, Paul says that all know God, having seen him clearly in nature.

I believe Paul. The scripture is very plain and couldn’t be clearer. But there is a huge problem; men deny knowing God by the millions, and other millions claim to know him but have made up a false god whom they worship. How can this apparent contradiction be explained?
     In thinking about it last night in bed (that is where I have all my really good ideas) I thought that it might be best explained by postulating that man is an emotional creature. He is not a rational creature. In my lifetime, very few times do I manage to bring people away from their beliefs by arguing for rationality—people are far too emotional to give much credence to rationality. The recent riots by Moslems over cartoons are a good illustration of people working from the basis of emotion rather than reason, but our history is replete with many hundreds of examples of emotion ruling us rather than reason. The ripple of high emotion governing our acts as an American people after 9/11 is but one ripple in a never ending tide of human emotion.
     Rationality seems to be an unlikely end for mankind; witness the emotion throbbing through the greenhouse effect debate. But more than just an abstract debate, emotion pervades our daily actions. Most of what we say and do is based first in emotion—the smile I have at work for someone I genuinely like is different from my “being nice” smile I reserve for those I do not like. I suspect that the unwritten communication of those smiles do transfer to the recipients in spite of my desires. But that is a discussion for another paper--that of the strength of nonverbal communication. I do think that nonverbal communication is strongly underestimated.
     But the point is that we are emotional first and rational second. We decide we like or dislike, and then build our rationality around those likes and dislikes. Dr. Bahnsen’s paper kept coming back to one very good analogy. Let me repeat the gist of that analogy here. Johnny is a child at school who has been caught stealing. The teacher has caught Johnny, the kids have implicated Johnny in stealing, and even the principal has caught Johnny. Well and good, except for the fact that Johnny’s mother does not believe her son would do such a thing. Her perpetuated mythical son becomes stronger than the real son that she knows she has.
     Let me even carry the analogy a bit further. Johnny’s mother is missing money from her purse. This is not the first time it has happened. Johnny’s mother rationalizes the missing money saying that she must have forgotten that she had spent it somewhere. In no place in her mind does she allow herself to face the obvious: Johnny is stealing her money. She carefully builds an artificial environment that precludes that one fact that in her deepest recesses she knows is true. She carefully nurtures the myth of her angelic son.
     This analogy is so commonplace among teachers that if I were to share it, it would be thought too obvious. Anyone who has been teaching sees the pattern of overly defensive parents refusing to deal with real problems exhibited in their children. My point is that in real life the problem is not limited to parents defending their children, which we would all understand to be a normal even if deplorable reaction. I would submit that it is in virtually everything we do.
     Spiritually all know God without even being told, but all of us are like Johnny’s mother. We find ways to deny and rationalize that which we do not want to face. Some of us see the evil and wickedness and tragedy of the world and construct a paradigm for ourselves. Surely a good God would not allow such a world to exist, we reason, therefore such a God does not exist. All the while we are fooling ourselves, for we know God exists. He just does not conform to our definitions. He seldom does because he is God. It is our emotion which dictates our rationality when we deny God.
     All of the above discussion was started from Bob’s blog, which is an excellent place to investigate.

The Unsung Death

     The denials of our society are profound and almost limitless. I suppose that such denials are indeed the only way that man can not deal with his sin. I have news for you; this is not the way it is supposed to be. We are not to be haunted by the specter of death in our very young and our very old. God had another original plan for us and it did not include death. What a lament it is that the world should shrug off the death of millions of our forefathers.
     Shortly before my grandmother of 89 passed away, I was visiting and caring for her. I started wondering about what life was like for someone so old so I asked her. (Those who know me are not surprised by my bizarre wonderings which always do seem to surface.)
     “Grandmother,” I asked, “what does it feel like to be 89? I mean you have been both 17 and 89. How is it different to get old?”
     Grandmother understood me very well, and deliberated for a few seconds—but only a few. She replied, “Pat, I feel exactly the same as I did when I was 17.”
     We went on to chat about it for a few moments, and the whole while I was considering her remark. If she is correct, then the whole of our spirit must spend all of our lives denying death. What an awful thing it would be to have a 17 year old spirit locked in a decaying 89 year old body! The eternal is locked with the bosom of the fragile crystal of the human body. Perhaps that explains why hope springs eternal. Hope, after all, is a part of the consciousness unique to humans; how ready we are to hope even in the face of brokenness.
     Of course when God told Adam not to eat of the fruit, He said in the day that you eat of it you shall die. There is another death unseen and unsung that has taken place within us; the death of our very soul. What is it that becomes our soul? It is that which seems to separate us from the animals, for it is said that God breathed into man and he became a living soul. If I may be permitted to extend the metaphor, it is the holy breath of God which made us unique. It is our disobedience which brought us death, which in its first context must mean the death of our very breath of our Creator.
     We know from later scripture that death is really a separation from God, a transfer of deed of our souls to Lucifer who would own us forever except for the ransom of the Son. Our society denies this penalty of death, attempting to reduce us to mere animals without consciousness or responsibility. But our spirits rail against this, shouting to our bodies that there is more, so much more.
     Right now I am enjoying a powerful storm blowing through my city. It speaks of God, just as much as does the serene green pasture with the blossoming trees. God who spoke to Elijah in the still wind sent his Son as a Babe that the world might be reconciled to Him. But the same God is capable of speaking to us in the awesomeness of the storm; in the return of Jesus, if I am not all out of my reckoning, that will be a major gale, a world-wide Katrina if you will. All of nature does declare the glory of God. A denial of death is ultimately a denial of God. How wonderful it is that we who were dead were made alive again in Christ Jesus. Oh death where is thy sting? Oh death where is thy victory?

The Case against Evolution (Part 2)

The Case against Evolution (Part 2)

I hardly know where to start. The subject is huge, the distortions are legion, and many times the arguments are suspect. Evolution has been postulated at least primitively from the time of Aristotle, who noticed the progression of the simple to the complex organisms. Indeed the Bible seems to give some attention to differentiation of species and seems to delineate it in the story of the creation.
      But first let me start where I left off in the first part. There is a fundamental difference that cannot be explained away between creation and evolution. Particularly this contradiction becomes more severe to those who choose to interpret the Bible literally. The Bible clearly gives creation happening approximately 6 thousand years ago; neo-Darwinists postulate an earth five billion years old.
      In my first part we learned how the creationists have gotten the 6 thousand year figure. In this paper, I do not want to bog down in trying to understand the dating systems of evolution; rather let me say as an outside observer, that the dating systems used by evolutionists have seemed to expand as they realized their need for more time. I might further observe that the dating systems, as I primitively understand them, frequently have to do with things like molecular decay rates. For instance, scientists drill down in polar regions into the ice, measure the carbon dioxide, and then calculate the rate of decay, or the rate of loss, and attempt to measure age in that fashion. Carbon 14 dating works in a similar fashion, though I think it no longer is the darling of dating that it once was.
      I speak in the fashion of a layman, and since my arguments reflect my considerable ignorance, I only wish to point out the obvious. The evolutionist assumes uniform decay of ages past, and assumes like conditions to present. His assumptions are as big as the intelligent design arguments. No one can see or speak of what it was like from about 3,000 BC, as the earliest written records of man date from about that time. No one can be sure of origins of man or of the uniformity of dating assumptions, but to hear the evolutionist speak, one would never know that.
      It has always seemed to me to be a strange thing for man to take so long to figure it out. I am speaking of the current view that neo-Darwinists have of modern man being around for a million years or so. What did modern man do—sit and twiddle their fingers (when not making cave paintings of dinosaurs and men fighting) around their campfire at night? I am being facetious here. It does seem strange to me that men would take so long to write, speak and build. We ought to see ancient civilization ruins going back hundreds of thousands of years, but where are they? The ancient Greeks glorious civilizations should be repeated a score of times if modern man has been around so long.
      It seems to me also obvious that creationists believe in a God who creates things with the appearance of age. When He created the stars, did man have to wait the light years necessary for the light to reach the earth? Or did he create the stars, light on the earth and all? Did God create Adam as a baby or a man? It seems evident that God created frequently things with the appearance of age, and should not be something difficult for the believer to appreciate.
      Which brings us to the point of which I am on firmer ground. Evolution in Darwin’s time thought the earth was about one million years old; today the same theory recognizes the need for five billion years. Why the change? The fundamental assumption of evolution is that natural selection and beneficial mutations work together to produce variation and new species. As scientists have seen the rarity of the beneficial mutation, and the lack of species changing from one to another in the fossil record, they have realized that they need much more time for the impossible to happen.
      Am I the only one who recognizes the unlikelihood of this happening? No, indeed, many mathematicians in the 60s said the same thing. Let me quote just a couple from the fine work of Pamela Winnick in her A Jealous God. “We have. . . wondered how it appeared extremely unlikely a priori that in the short span of one billion years, due to successive random mutations, all the wonderful things we see now could have appeared,” observed Stanislaw M. Ulsam of Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory.” (p. 122 Winnick)““We believe that there is a considerable gap in the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, and we believe this gap to be of such a nature that it cannot be bridged with the current conception of biology,” said Marcel-Paul Schutzenberger, and internationally renowned mathematician from the University of Paris and a member of the French Academy of Sciences.” (p. 122, Winnick) Evolutionists historically did not have the same acceptance as scientists and there was a time when this “soft” science was not accepted among the hard sciences such as mathematics and chemistry.
      At any rate, evolutionists quickly found out that they did not have enough time for variation to happen and they have been expanding the evolutionary time span ever since then. Stephen Jay Gould, an avowed believer in evolution, and a famous one at that, believed that he saw something the neo-Darwinists did not. His group was “. . . postulating their own theory of “punctuated equilibrium” which holds that evolution progresses in leaps and bounds, often responding to natural calamities that wipe out all those who can’t adapt.” (p. 166 Winnick) Gould went on to announce that neo-Darwinism was “effectively dead”. Gould saw little bursts of evolution happening very rapidly, perhaps because of changes in environment, or for other unspecified reasons. In other words, little miracles made evolution happen. Gould was very angry during his lifetime when creationists seized on his words, but his words do cause huge gaps to open in evolutionary argument. The creationist may reasonably ask whether it is better to believe in lots of little miracles or in one big one.
      Darwin cannot be right if he cannot show billions of years to the earth; moreover he cannot be right if he cannot demonstrate one species changing to another. Survival of the strong has been easily demonstrated by Darwinists. What is not demonstratable is the movement of one species to another. The variety of species, with their wonderful differentiation, speaks of a necessary sharp intercession of a creator; I believe that we find that explanation clearly enunciated in the Bible. For 150 years men have speculated about this myth. It is time to collapse the myth and move on. I close with a poignant quote from one good book (if you are looking for a simple treatise on the history and the subject). “Accepting Darwin’s explanation is a little like believing that a piston rod will make a car run a little bit, and then, if you connect it to a crank shaft, it will run a little bit better. Finally, when all the parts are in place, it will get thirty miles to the gallon.” (p. 213, Bethell)

Bibliography

Bethell, Tom, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, Regnery Publishing, Inc. 2005

Winnick, Pamela R., A Jealous God, Nelson Current, 2005

Creation versus Evolution

Creation versus Evolution
The case for creation Part 1
(Next: The case against evolution Part 2)

It seems to me that many today do not bother to study the issue; the evolutionist smugly says that it is okay to believe in religion as long as you believe in evolution while the Christian somehow believes the two contradictory propositions to be true. What I hope to show in this two-part posting is that the two views are incontrovertibly contradictory. What we are left with is simple logic: either both are untrue, or one is true and the other is false. What is not possible is that both can somehow harmonize. It is nothing but the simplest logic.
      In Genesis, the Bible says that God created the earth in six days and on the seventh He rested. Some who would reconcile the irreconcilable do so on one of two bases. First they argue for a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Indeed, it is my opinion that there could be a gap forced between the two verses, but it is not likely. However long it took the Creator to do this logically does not force a gap, preferably the one of five billion years which is what evolution currently teaches as the age of the earth. In any case for the Christian the case is clearly settled in Exodus 20:11, an important passage giving the 10 commandments to the children of Israel. Hardly a disputed passage, it clearly states: “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day” (emphasis added). It seems very clear that the Creator did create in very short order.
      Which brings us to the second basis: that of the long-day-interpretation. Some have postulated that each day could be lengthened to a nonspecific term. This term would have been considerably shorter a mere fifty years ago when evolutionists said the earth was much younger. Now they believe that they need more time, and believe it or not, dating systems today show an earth about 5 billion years old. So today we would have to suppose that each day is lengthened to something shorter than a billion years. But what is a few million years more or less when we are talking about such a long period?
      The Hebrew for day is the word yowm, which means, according to Strong’s Concordance either from one sunset to another or an unspecified age. At first appearance one might exalt in harmonizing the two views, crying out “Here it is. The place where evolution and religion meet.” But alas, such is not to be. For when the scripture is compared with scripture we clearly see the week that the children of Israel being compared to the same week in which creation took place. Israelites are told to rest on the seventh day, exactly as God rested. The Israelites are told to rest on the seventh day over and over again on the basis of what the Creator did. To make the one a billion years and the other an ordinary day would severely distort the plain sense of the passage.
      The real and unstated problem is of course those who refuse to believe in the spiritual. If God is a spirit and all-powerful, why would it take him seven eons instead of seven days? Thomas Jefferson was so furious at the miracles of God that he retranslated the New Testament taking all the miracles out. But it evidently did his faith no substantial good to remove the miracles; as far as I know he remained a skeptic to the end of his days. Some have made the same mistake in trying to naturalize the miracles. I have heard some say the parting of the Red Sea came when a great natural wind came up, providentially this time for the Israelites, but a natural occurrence nonetheless. Naturalizing miracles, or gainsaying them away will not bring us to a knowledge of the Creator; instead the miracles are what point us to the unspeakable power of God. It is His authentication of who He is.
      So what? What can be made of this and where is the contradiction? It is really quite simple. Everything from Adam to Abraham is counted in years in the Bible. The years add to 1,946. Abraham was born about 2,150 BC, a date well established in Jewish history. Thus we have 2,150 plus 1,946 to equal 4,096 BC as approximately the time of creation. We are limited in this math somewhat because the Bible only tells us that each father was so old when he had his child. To better exemplify take the case of Noah. Was Noah exactly 500 (did he have his birthday on the same day as his son Shem?) or had he been 500 for 364 days already? This does lend some uncertainty to my math, so for each generation I add a year of uncertainty. Thus in the 20 generations to Abraham I have added 20 years of uncertainty. We are also unsure exactly of Abraham’s birth although New International Version (hardly a conservative icon) lists his birth at 2166 BC. No matter—for the sake of simplicity I will give another 50 years of uncertainty, thus moving my total uncertainty to 70 years. There is not a lot of room for any more uncertainty.
      Bishop Ussher gave a famous chronology in the Middle Ages for this, figuring the creation of the world to be 4004 BC. In my opinion, for the above reasons it seems impossible to be this precise, but it can be stated that the Bible does give the clear beginnings of the earth to be at or about 4,000 BC. That is, in a nutshell, the problem of evolution which now states the earth to be five billion years old. This chronology as well as an excellent short biography of Ussher is given by Answers in Genesis.
      So let me state the contradiction succinctly: the literal interpretation of the Bible shows the earth to be about six thousand years old and the current hypothesis of evolution says the earth is about five billion years old. Not much room for harmony there. The choice might well be stated as Darwin or God.

A Jealous God

I have been reading a book entitled A Jealous God, by Pamela Winnick. I was surprised to find out how immoral we as a society are- not just because of red light districts, or the Mafia, or greed and corruption, or even dishonest politicians. But because of men who believe that they know better than we do. They define their own morality. Of course the world is responsible to God and those who choose to deny that responsibility are doomed to an inferior morality. Even the well-intentioned will go astray. Remember the Ten Commandments? The first four have to do with honoring and worshiping God. If you blow the first four, the very best you can do is a mere 60%, a single point away from failure, at least in the class that I teach. I have observed that those who carry their own morality often will be very particular in one area, but lapse in another area. One might choose not to steal, but does commit adultery or vice versa. So it is a virtual cinch that all would lose and fail in their so-called morality.

But what Ms. Winnick says in her book is even worse. Men dress in white coats, and have an aura of respect—garnering respect not just for being scientists but also for somehow having the inside track on real morality. Put in charge of the country after WWII, they have systematically undercut Christianity to further their aims. After reading the book I would say that we are not in what is frequently termed the post-modern era; rather we are in the pre-antichrist era. Our country is, as they say, going to hell in a handbasket, and it seems to be going at an unstoppable pace.

The morality many of today’s scientists sell comes from the same place that the creed of Nazism, of Satanism, and of ghastly terrorism comes from. It is in new packaging but is the same old product. Coming from the depths of the hell it is concerned only with deceiving followers into descending into the same depths from which all such philosophies originate. It is all the more horrific when it is done by men who ought to, and indeed, do know better. Such a moralist can see anything to make his case seem right. He reminds me of the man standing in a downpour insisting it wasn’t water that made him wet. So is the scientist who looks at nature but denies the Creator that made it, who sees the world but sees only an accidental burp followed by ten billion other accidental burps that produce the wonders of life. A man that denies God has already denied everything that is.

Ms. Winnick fingers the wrong philosophies and the people behind them in a very scholarly work. But she is also careful to point her finger at those scientists who wrest their craft to fit their belief; she makes a clear distinction between the hard science of mathematics and the soft science of biology, a distinction I fear is lost on our present society.

For instance, she quotes mathematicians in the sixties who questioned the probability of evolution. Two brief quotes will suffice. “‘We believe that there is a considerable gap in the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, and we believe the gap to be of such a nature that it cannot be bridged with the current conception of biology,’ said Marcel-Paul Schutzenberger, an internationally renowned mathematician.” In other words, hard scientists were dubious about evolution’s even being possible. Beneficial mutations are so mathematically improbable that in the words of historian Gertrude Himmelfarb it would be “an improbability as great as . . . a monkey provided with a typewriter would by chance peck out the works of Shakespeare.” My observation is that perhaps the biologists would be better served to get those monkeys typing. After all they do have a case to prove.

Anyway, I am delighted with the thoughts provoked so far by reading A Jealous God. I am only about one half of the way through it and may post again on it. By all means, put it on your reading list. Be ready for a book that will turn your stomach a bit—at least it did mine. But I do not think that is the fault of the author. Instead it is the fault of the country giving itself over to the latest idolatry—men in white coats.

Prophecy and the Second Coming

I just read an article about the current leader of Iran that promises the coming of . . . well, you tell me what it is the coming of. We are indeed in the last times, and the man of sin will soon be revealed. Where he ends up being revealed from no man is certain, but this does raise interesting speculations. Iran must confront Israel during these last times, and Israel is told to flee to the mountaintops in that day. It is very interesting for me to read of a religion absolutely opposed to both Jews and Christians having a tradition of this coming.
      The current leader of Iran believes passionately in his coming. He looks to his religious creed and says the following: "The ultimate promise of all Divine religions," says Ahmadinejad, "will be fulfilled with the emergence of a perfect human being [the 12th Imam], who is heir to all prophets. He will lead the world to justice and absolute peace.” To a Christian who does believe in the One perfect human who is also God, these words ring in a frightening manner.
      Throughout history many Protestants, (I believe both Calvin and Luther, but I am not on firm ground here, only twenty year old memories of stale studies) have believed the man of sin would be a pope. Today I think many Protestants would be alarmed to even countenance that as a rational thought. We just are not sure. We do know that his rise to power will be spectacular, and many will be deceived.
      When the last pope was selected, I did read of an interesting tradition. I wish I had marked the article, and am going to try to go back and find it. Actually it was maintained to be an actual prophecy. Many popes were prophesied to come and the last pope was named. According to this prophecy of many hundreds of years ago, the current pope is to be the second to last in what the prophecy said was a chain of (here my memory is unclear) of an immense number of popes. Each pope had a specific prophecy about his nature or his work. The prophecies were not too clear especially to one unstudied in popiology, as I am. But the really interesting point of the article was that there is to be but one more pope after the current one.
      In like manner it seems to me that even the irreligious elements of our society are prophesying frantically about the end of the world. Of course they see no coming Savior, preferring to think of the end of the world in a Mad-Max (Mel Gibson) scenario. Al Gore in Earth in the Balance and Rachel Carson in her Silent Spring speak of coming destruction of the earth, though always evading the responsibility of man to his Creator.
      Where and When? We are not sure as Christians, but I do believe the time is very near. In any case here are the Biblical pillars which are important to stress.
Facts:
1) He is coming. (He who is taken up from among you into heaven will return in the same way.)
2) He is coming soon. (When the fig tree begins to bud, know that that generation shall not pass away until they see the coming of the Son of Man)
3) When He comes He will have a hard time finding faith on the earth. (When the Son of Man returns will he find faith on the earth?)
4) We are to vigilantly watch for his return. (We are told to be as watchmen in the night, for we know not at what hour He comes.)
I used to have an old Southern Baptist friend who often quoted to me the old refrain about prayer: Pray as if it all depends upon God; work as if it all depends on you.
I think that refrain might be slightly changed for the sake of our subject to: Expect him to come today but work as if you are going to have a tomorrow. Of course one day soon we will not have the tomorrow; at least not in our present bodies. What exciting times we do live in! All of the world has groaned and travailed for this brief moment in history that most of us will be privileged to see.

Fruitful and Arid Times with Providence

I have been thinking a lot about my last post. Bruce Wilkerson, by all accounts, is going through a deep dry spell, not having God bless his efforts in Africa, at least in the anticipated way. During much of his ministry he has seen the Holy Spirit move mightily in changing lives and bringing marvelous changes. How can that compare to the Providence of God? This reflecting turned inward as I contemplate the way God has deigned to work in lives around me. I support a missionary in the darkest Africa, who is serving a mostly willful and disobedient people, unwilling to come to the Light. She does see some response, but the work seems to be all uphill. What a marvelously hard work she has been called to!
But we see some missionaries who are called to great harvests. I recently read a biography on George Whitefield, and a fine work it is. As I read the book I realized that I may owe my very own salvation to the work that God did with early Americans through George some 200 years ago. What a marvelous thing the work of the Spirit is such that “no man knoweth whence it cometh and whither it goeth.” My question is why is it that some are called in the Providence of God to relatively lackluster ministries, while others shine like a city on a hill?
In my own life my wife and I saw in an all-too-brief-time a couple of hundred people come to salvation through Jesus Christ. Yet I am 53 years old now, and many of those years of my life have been bereft of much fruit. Why is it that God worked so wonderfully those first years, and not as much later on?
An introspective soul might blame himself; on many occasions I have certainly done that. But when my life is carefully self-examined before God, I am left only with the Providence of God. Why is the Providence of God thus? Why is it not something else which I would prefer?
I think the last question has to do finding the key to my question. If God’s Providence were what I wanted it to be it would not be God’s at all—it would be my providence. I may not be sure of much in this twisty turning wicked world, but at least I am sure of this: the world is a better place for it not being my Providence. And that is perhaps the only answer we get when we ask God why. It is his immutable sovereign purpose that is working its way out, whether we will or no, and it is in that knowledge we find our refuge. Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Thinking with God

The Prayer of Jabez
Jabez was more honorable than his brothers. His mother had named him Jabez, saying, “I gave birth to him in pain.” Jabez cried out to the God of Israel, “Oh, that you would bless me and enlarge my territory! Let you hand be with me, and keep me from harm so that I will be free from pain.” And God granted his request.

Bruce Wilkerson has been receiving a lot of bad press, and World Magazine has loaded on his wagon with a bit more in this month’s issue with a commentary by Joel Belz. Now, normally I greatly respect Joel’s columns and read them with delight and anticipation but this time I found myself asking why. Why did he write this column?
As one who heard Wilkerson speak during his early years of preaching on Jabez I heard a Biblical passage with strong conservative exegesis, and as a student of Biola, I watched his sermon motivate some 95 students to go overseas to witness and preach the gospel. I am aware of those who have tended to go too far with his exegesis, which I suppose is what Joel is implying when he refers to Wilkerson’s quirky philosophy.
As I read the passage waiting for Joel to explain his term “quirky” I was somewhat appalled by his never bothering to do that. He faults Wilkerson for dreaming too big in his Africa trip and makes an analogy to another person named Peter, emphasizing the smallness of his dream. I am not sure he pulls off the analogy very well because, at least in my mind, I perceive the other person must have had the very vision of God in his successful ministry. I am uncomfortable with deigning the plan of God as something “small”, and I cannot see how Peter could be very happy with it either. Perhaps the more important question would be: is God happy with being termed small?
I cannot leave this review without taking a stab at the exegesis of the passage of Jabez. I do think this passage compares favorably with many New Testament passages. In discussing this Jabez thing with my daughter, a different alumni generation from Biola, she rightly pointed out that the Bible seems to amply cover the doctrine of Jabez in other passages. For example, Jesus said that if you have the faith of a mustard seed you can move mountains. The theology of asking great things of God is replete in the Bible; I think it was A.W. Tozer who famously said, “Expect great things from God, attempt great things for God.”
Of course along with our expectations comes the uncomfortable doctrine of the Providence of God. I do not pretend to know whether Wilkerson has been giving proper deference to the Providence of God. For the sake of argument, let us assume that he has made a mistake in what is frequently wrongfully termed “getting ahead of God”. (I think the term to be spuriously wrong as we can never get ahead of God—at those times that we think we are ahead we are of course falling rapidly out of the plan of God.) So he has become guilty of exactly what? He has dared too dream too largely, and out of the Providence that God wishes to dispense. Which one of us has not also done the same thing? I have built what I term castles in the air many times as I have sought for the will of God in my life. I am concerned that Joel has become guilty of “casting the first stone” perhaps unconsciously implying that he is “without sin” in this area. I would that he would reconsider his hurtful remarks. As a loving Christian I do expect better of Joel.

A Huge Accident or A Purposeful Happening?

By Pat Davis
I look at a single tree and the forest behind it. I look at the glorious mountain and the great green valley. I look at the bubbly spring, the raging river, and the majestic sea. I look at the moon and the shining stars in the heaven. And behind it all I see the Creator.
The evolutionist looks at a tree and sees a million accidental burps causing variation of species. The tree stands on a mountain; the mountain stands on the earth. The evolutionist declares the biggest burp of all started our universe, and that we are only one fly speck on the pattern of an uncountable number of accidental burps working to create only an illusion of purpose. It has all just been one act of ultimate randomness.
Which is easier to believe? Which view takes the most faith? Which view is the most incredible?
When the simple sense makes the best sense then seek no other sense.

Faith Seen or Unseen

by Pat Davis

How is it that when we come to faith that some demand that we show them God? They tell us they chose not to believe or alter their life based upon someone whom they cannot see?
Here is a problem of our time. We live in a place where empirical observation has led us a long way in developing technology and medicine. But it is improper to apply empiricist doctrine when we come to the field of abstract nouns. There are many such nouns that we cannot see, that communicate life-changing ideas.
I have long used the light switch as such an illustration. It works, for which of us has seen electricity work when we turn the light switch? Often we proceed into the room after hitting the switch and are walking in the dark for a nanosecond before the light comes on. We are operating on faith, trusting that that momentary darkness will turn to light.
What about kindness? Can it been seen? Can it be measured? And yet who among us does not appreciate it, when we are its recipients?
Sometimes it is not the measure of its “seenness” that tells of its reality. Sometimes the best measure of the concreteness of a noun, is how sorely it is missed when its absence is noted. How much more God?

The Last Supper

By Patrick Davis
The picture

I remember the picture so well. Judas Iscariot is portrayed as a shifty eyed fellow whom no one would trust. I would now debunk that characterization of Judas forever. Judas was the one person whom all the other Jews trusted with their money. I submit to you that he had an honest face and was probably the most trusted one of the group. After all, these were poor Jewish men who did know the value of a shekel. Who else would they chose to guard their money other than the most trustworthy and fair-haired boy of their lot?
I picture Judas as being the up and moving young man, whose character was thought to be above blemish. I picture Judas as being the outstanding Jew that mothers would want to give their daughters to.
“Ahh, look daughter,” they would say, “there goes a good man for you to catch- one that would know how to take care of you.”
And undoubtedly the daughters would preen themselves, pinching their cheeks, and smiling demurely whenever they saw his passing imposing figure.
Of our Savior, it is said that there was no form or comeliness that we should desire him; but of Judas, it might be said his form and appearance brought much notice and desire. Of course, in the absence of pictures, I am only guessing, and reading far more into the fragments of the story than I have the right to.
But I wonder a few things about the second most famous traitor in all of history. I wonder where he initiated the contacts with the Jewish elders of his day. Could it be possible that he had contact and knowledge of the leaders from his circles of acquaintances? Is it beyond imagination to think of Judas as being the fair haired boy whose very countenance precipitated trust?
Further, I cannot help but wonder what was going on in the heart of Judas. I enjoy knowing however imperfectly the pictures of hearts of those that I am around. I wonder if I were alive and acquainted with Judas if I would see anything in his demeanor that would show his heart. We know from scripture that his heart was as far from faith as the east is from the west, but we do not get any clues as to what motivated this man to join a band of paupers.
Was it the fact that he was trusted and made treasurer? Or did he bet on Jesus as the new rising king? His heart was not apparent to others until his deeds were done, and in doing those deeds, even his own soul drew back with intense loathing.
This I do know. If I had the ability, I would enjoy going back and talking to Leonardo. I wonder if I shared my point of view if he would change his masterpiece at all?

Perseverance and Providence

On the futileness of trying to understand Providence
“Providence is wonderfully intricate. Ah! You want always to see through Providence, do you not? You never will, I assure you. You have not eyes good enough. You want to see what good that affliction was to you; you must believe it. You want to see how it can bring good to the soul; you may be enabled in a little time, but you cannot see it now; you must believe it. Honor God by trusting Him.” Charles Spurgeon

It seems to me that any discussion of free will and election sort of presupposes what Spurgeon says. When we are in a particular situation we are generally denied the knowing why. Today at noon, I sat down and commiserated with a fellow worker who has a mild cancer. It looks as if surgery will easily cure him, and I pointed out that he would probably be able to walk away from this with a very good remainder of his life. His quick rejoinder was to offer to switch places with me, and he wondered how I would take it. Of course, how I would take it will never be known. I live and walk blindly in the life God has given me with very little perception of what the future will bring-- except that, if Christ does not return, I shall surely die like all of my species. I will have my pain and suffering to live through, and it will either bring me closer to God, or drive me away. Instead of pointing this out to my fellow worker, I did mention my neighbor who at the age of 59 just was diagnosed with lung cancer. He immediately got the point, and agreed that it could be worse.
In my life I have noticed many times that two postulates are possible. The first is that I could have one of the many better lives that I see others having around me. The second postulate is that I could have one of the many worse lives that I see others having around me. But the reality is in neither of the postulates; I have the life that I have and no other. Nor is there any choice about the main events of my life. I shall live a certain while and then I will get sick and die, or I will get in an accident, or etc. None of these facts of my life will I be able to control.
But as a Christian I do have something more. I cannot understand the manner of Providence in my life but I do understand somewhat of the gentleness of the hand of Providence in my life. More simply put, I do not fathom the why me but I do fathom who is allowing it. It is my duty to trust God when events in my life might dictate otherwise. I can choose to let the events of life, good and bad, to drive me closer to Christ. I will not understand the why of much of it; I do understand the duty to trust. As Spurgeon says it more poignantly, Honor God by trusting Him.

A Grocery Store Trip

When is a grocery store trip more than a grocery store trip?
Answer: When it is done in behalf of Katrina victims.

    Recently my two brothers and their sons spent their Christmas vacations doing something useful. They went to Gulfport, Mississippi to help Katrina victims rebuild. One hundred and five men left their families and their vacations to join together with an ongoing effort put together by Calvary Chapel Ministries. Every few weeks Calvary Chapel is rotating men and crews together and rebuilding in the name of Christ.
    On a one to ten scale of life changing experiences, my 50 year old brother said this one was off the charts! One of the many stories that he told I would like to recount here. Anyway my brother was directed to be the designated gofer. He practically lived at Home Depot, which he said was so short-handed that he had to wait hours for check out, and they kept trying to give him a job! The day before he left, it was his turn to teach a replacement, who became somewhat abashed over contractors asking him to pick up unknown stuff. The guy evidently felt inept (as well I might) in picking up the right stuff to please the contractors.
    I guess the fellow expressed his frustration and their leader took him aside and suggested that he was looking at this the wrong way. Their leader said I want you to go buy groceries for all the guys and when you are in line find someone who is a Katrina victim and buy their groceries.
So, in the grocery line he introduces himself to a couple who say they are doing fine and are not victims. However someone in the next line overhears the conversation and says that they lost everything. He offers to pay for their groceries which they gratefully accept, but the first couple he had introduced himself too started crying. He asked why they were crying, and they said, “You are doing what we should be doing.”
    So why do I include this story in Building Biblical Pillars? There are several levels in which the love of Christ are showing in the story, but I am reminded of the prayer of Jesus for his church: May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me.
    My brother told me scores of stories like this, of people coming to Christ that they worked with and worked for. I think they encountered a Biblical Pillar in their unity together. What do you think?

The Four Thrones at Cair Paravel

On Sovereignty and Free Will

Did you notice that at the outset of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe that we are told by Beaver that there are four thrones waiting for two sons of Adam and two daughters of Eve? Not three thrones. I do sort of speculate strangely sometimes but I can’t help but wonder what if Aslan had prophesied of three thrones instead of four? Think of the advantages. He could have avoided the whole bloody mess in one swoop. Let the Witch have the sniveling Edmund. He certainly wasn’t worth anything anyway.
    Analogies help us understand deep things in the Bible that are difficult to grasp. I want to look at the analogy of Aslan and Edmund. It is not entirely clear where the prophecy of the four thrones comes from but it certainly must have originated from Aslan. Let us assume so for the sake of this discussion. Aslan, in a sovereign act, says there are going to be four thrones. He knew beforehand that one would betray him in an act of free will. Edmund chose to follow the White Witch, knowing full well in his innermost being that the Witch was evil.
Was sovereignty compromised? No! Was free will abrogated? No! The prophecy was fulfilled exactly as told. But as Aslan says: It may be harder than you know. Edmund did his very worst, and it worked exactly into the predestined plan of Aslan.
    If I may be allowed to do something that Lewis correctly points out is wrong, let me suppose that Edmund had done everything as correctly as he possibly could. Here I am asking the “What if” question that Aslan reminds us constantly is not allowed. But I ask nonetheless: what if Edmund did everything exactly right? Would the sovereignty of Aslan nevertheless prevailed?
    My analogy thus gives us the widest spectrum of free choice. But whether Edmund says no or yes, there prevails the sovereignty of Aslan. Could not the free will of man and the sovereignty of God work in harmony in a similar fashion? To borrow from my Lewis again, Nothing is more probable.
    A final thought, if I may. I am probably more of a sniveling Edmund than Edmund ever was. What was I worth? Somehow God thought me worth the great price of his own son. Thankfully he did not eliminate my throne at Cair Paravel!

Judas and Edmund

What is to be said about the two traitors: one from history and the other from the rich literature of Lewis?  If compared, we of course find much that is similar, but startling, there are some differences.  
     Judas betrays his Lord for thirty pieces of silver and he finds the price disgusting before he is through.  Edmund betrays his lord for thirty pieces of Turkish Delight that enchant him to wicked service.  Judas recognizes that he has betrayed innocent blood; Edmund, we are told, must never learn the terrible price his lord paid for him.  Both repent, Judas in hanging himself in disgust, and Edmund in genuine sorrow for his misdeeds.
     But the odd thing I find in comparing the two is that Lewis’s Edmund is allowed repentance unto life whereas Judas perishes under the justice of God.  There is only one person whose soul I understand to be condemned to hell.  It says in Psalm 109, speaking prophetically of Judas, “When he is tried, let him be found guilty.”   Again Acts says that Judas left the office of apostle “to go where he belongs.”
     Was Lewis kinder to Edmund than God was to Judas?  I think that might be true, if taken only from the human viewpoint.  Perhaps Lewis could not stand to slay one of his fellow children with judgment, and so had Edmund seek and receive forgiveness.  Or perhaps Lewis sought to picture Edmund’s betrayal only to be allegorical to that of Judas.  He never intended a children’s story to be a forum for discussing the justice of God.
     Which leads, I think, to the far more provocative question: what is to be said of the justice of God?  Not much, if we read today’s liturgy.  Christians are given needed homilies and blessed with thought of benevolence and forgiveness- all of which ought to be properly emphasized.
But what of the demands of a holy God for complete justice?  Jesus, as the herald of the coming wrath of God, told his world that most of them were going to hell.  Of course they crucified him for his message.  As believers today, we find ourselves in sympathy with Lewis and Edmund, and hesitate to condemn others.  And in so doing, I think we ignore the second coming.     
     The first coming, our Lord came as a meek Lamb to literally be led to the slaughter.  In the second coming, our Lord comes as a lion (not a tame lion, to bespeak Lewis) who will rend and slaughter among the flocks of mankind.  I remember growing up when the opossum got in the hen house he did not stop with the killing of one chicken; he killed all that he could sink his teeth into.   I am told that lions loosed in a flock of lambs are even worse; often not a lamb survives.
     It is this bloodiness that Revelation tells us is coming upon mankind.  Aren’t we being a bit remiss in only telling our brothers and sisters of the love and forgiveness of God?  Shouldn’t we also be warning of the coming judgment?

He's not a tame lion.you know

Problem Stated
Let me see. Today I have a problem. I want to construct a box for God to fit in. “What a ridiculous notion,” you say. “God cannot fit into a box of your creation.”


If I understand the meaning of hermeneutics it is the Biblicist’s job to try to trace outlines of the box that God has made for himself. It is a high calling and many do a wonderful job, yet sometimes the box can be drawn too narrowly. I remember many years ago arguing with my Bible college peers about something called “dual fulfillment”. I think it is a classic illustration of what I wish to discuss in this paper. I have named it the box problem.

Dual fulfillment, as I understand the term, is the belief that God can indeed make a single prophecy that has one fulfillment, often in the time of the prophet, and a second fulfillment, often a messianic one. The prime example of dual fulfillment is Isaiah 7:14 where the prophet says: The virgin shall be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. This was fulfilled in Isaiah 8:3, where it says: Then I went to the prophetess, and she conceived and gave birth to a son. It is fulfilled in a more wonderful and far more established way as is made plain by Matthew 1:23, where it says: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel.

Some professors at Biola taught dual fulfillment; others vehemently disagreed. We students were also divided; some of my good friends did not see dual fulfillment at all. I perceived that they had a box problem. In other words, they were so busy building a box for God, folding and tucking him into each corner very neatly, and then very tidily sealing the box that they forgot that God makes his own boxes. I am reminded of Aslan, of whom Lewis tells us again and again, is not a tame lion. Not wanting to establish or disestablish dual fulfillment here, I instead would like to point to the box my good friends had inadvertently built when denying dual fulfillment. I think it is easily seen when I pose the question, Can God be big enough and wise enough to say one thing that will have different meanings at different times?

If you say no, God is not that big then you have a box problem. You have just built a box for God that he himself did not build. No where in scripture is dual fulfillment denied, and if you insist on moving forward with this negative answer, then it seems to me that you will have to establish why God would restrict himself to this box.

God does restrict himself to some outlines of a box. He tells us often what he is like. For instance, scripture tells us that he cannot deny himself, he cannot lie, and he is both truth and light. But, as far as I know, nowhere does he say prophecies cannot have two meanings. And that, in a nutshell, is the box problem. If God has not stated a limit of himself, who are we to restrict him?

I am often guilty of the box problem analogy in my own life. I see something evil happening to someone, and instantly I feel that to be so wrong, and sometimes I take the next step of questioning God. Whenever that happens I am constructing a box, however large, in which I wish to fit God.

What a wonder we are that we can question our Creator! What a folly we commit we do so! He came as the Lamb of God the first time, and we in the world rejected him. He is coming as a Lion of God the second time, and he is rejecting the world. In all probability most of us living today will see his coming. It will probably be more bloody and messy than anything we wish to dwell on, but we should remember that he is not a tame lion. We are not telling him what he ought to be; he is telling us what we ought to be.

The Wisdom of Beaver

The Glory of God in Man

“Are you the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve,” asked the Beaver?
“It’s a saying time out of mind that when two Sons of Adam and two Daughters of Eve sit in those four thrones, then it will be the end not only of the White Witches reign but of her life.”


What is man that you are mindful of him? The psalmist first asks the question, but many since then many have asked the same question. I ask the question frequently but I notice that in different moods I am coming at the question from two slightly different perspectives.

The first way of asking the question what is man that you are mindful of him often comes when I am appreciating the vastness of God’s creation. For instance I might be gazing at the starry host on a dark night when even the duller stars seem to glow superlatively. I find myself thinking of me as very small-- and marvel that the God who created all of this host still remembers me. I think this view implicitly has my sinful nature in the back of its countenance. It is not at all the view of Beaver in the above quote. Beaver is looking at man as the natural heirs of the kingdom; something I rarely see if only because of my introspection. Instead, I look at the enormity of God and his creation, and that makes me inevitably feel small and insignificant.

The second way of asking the question what is man that you are mindful of him? seems to often originate when I am looking the inward manner of human life, particularly my own. For instance I might be caught up in part of what God has created in me, or in humans in general. I am looking at the plan of God for us, rather than at the humble state of my sinful soul. Why in the universe would God chose to become a man and why would he have such a glorious plan for humans? Rather than seeming smaller, in some fashion that I cannot fathom, I seem to have been made grander, as if I were two again and my father had given me his shoes to play in. The shoes are too awesome for me, and as a little boy I can never hope to do more than shuffle about in them. Now I am looking at the same verse but differently. I am looking at the enormity of me as God’s creation, and that too makes me feel inadequate, but awestruck at the enormous place He has given me.

Which way is the way the psalmist meant the question? I cannot answer for sure but I would rather hope the latter. For God to be so concerned about us does not seem to be a natural thing (the first manner) but God becoming man is at least equally unnatural (the last manner). Yet doesn’t a logical tenet follow from God becoming a man? Does it not follow that such a God would indeed be very concerned with the humans He has chosen to become? I take comfort in a God who has become like me, wearing my shoes that someday I may walk in His. As Beaver says, “The Sons of Adam and the Daughters of Eve will one day sit in thrones.”

Mr. D 2005

Interesting article

This article does an excellent job of explaining the fundamental contradiction between the two views of creation and evolution. There can be no reconciliation between the two views.
Pat
P.S. This article refutes the contradiction and insists that all can be rosy between creation and evolution. It is full of solipsism in my opinion.

Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design
By P. Davis ©2005

     It seems to me that almost no one is doing the job of putting forth the facts these days. I am always surprised by the official story screaming in the headlines. Always the headlines portray the reasoned voice of a fatherly science compared to those irrational wacko religionists. Beware of those who do not answer their opponents, but rather belittle them, for oftentimes they have only the weakest arguments. And this is where evolutionists are increasingly finding themselves these days.
     The truth is that the theory of evolution, as promulgated by Charles Darwin, is faltering and failing under its own myth. There are a number of fallacies in the myth of evolution that would alarm the world if they were honestly debated. So the answer on the part of the evolutionists is to stifle debate. And they are doing a very successful job of it.
     Now I admit my bias. I am an evangelical Christian, who is almost an endangered species today. I believe in the creation of an intelligent designer and I cannot look at a tree, a mountain, or a thunderstorm without seeing the work of the creator. I stand in constant awe at the creation he has made.
     Now I have admitted my bias. When was the last time you listened to an evolutionist admit his bias? I cannot remember one instance. Instead they carefully insist that their work is a work of science, while what I am talking about is philosophy. Actually many of the evolutionists are disguised atheists looking for an opportunity to further their creed in the name of science. And that somehow makes their claim that their view is science and therefore not to be debated philosophically much more suspect.
     The major problem with the theory of evolution has always been the fossil record. As Darwin neared the end of his life he himself enthusiastically proposed a worldwide search of the fossil record. In that record, he believed, would be the thousands of intervening species that showed how evolution had happened. After 130 years of searching the fossil record scientists have found millions of fossils but zero intervening species.
     Often they will try to illustrate intervening species. I remember one argument presented in which evolutionists tried to present horse fossils as smaller and then growing larger over a period of ages. The only trouble with that argument is that modern horses do come in a variety of sizes, both very small and very large. The can be no evolution of one size to another when all sizes do exist today.
     Another problem with evolution is found in the deep complexity found in the animal kingdom. Remember the claim that scientists made a few years back? They claimed that they were going to be able to make a genetic map and within a few years they confidently predicted genetic engineering would begin to do away with diseases. Unfortunately, in higher organisms such as man, the genetic record in far more complex than anticipated, and scientists have not even been able to “engineer” one cure.
     Scientists can not even agree how many genes there are. Estimates have wildly ranged from 30,000 to 100,000. What is agreed on is that man is a whole lot more complex than at first thought. Back in the seventies, when I first became a Christian, I looked at the human eyeball. How could evolution ever have produced such an enormously complex organ of the body? All of the thousands of genes and molecules that work flawlessly to give sight to the body, according to the theory of evolution, had to come from literally millions of mutations in a species. They had to coordinate together, and happen within a very short time or else what benefit would they give if not sight? And this is just one organ in the human body.
     And that brings us to another major problem of evolution. In Darwin’s time scientists thought that this process could take place in a relatively short time; hence the projections of the earth’s age were relatively short. In the hundred odd years since Darwin scientists have begun to realize the enormous complexity of life forms they have realized the need for vast amounts of time; hence the projections for the age of the earth began to greatly multiply. In other words, as the impossibility of evolution began to become apparent the true believers merely added the magic ingredient of time. "With enough time, all things are possible”, they assured us.
     I must say that I am not a scientist, but as I begin to appreciate the complexity of the human eye, ear, and brain, just to name a couple of the organs of the body, I can easily see that the earth would have to be far, far older than any model today that I have seen proposed. In fact, some evolutionists realized this fact, and have argued for a “sudden surge” in the evolutionary model from time to time through the ages. They have no convincing argument for the surge, or a plausible explanation of why it has happened.
     I could go on and on, but since no one will probably read much further than this, let me invite you to question and debate. I do believe that debate is good for the soul, and sometimes brings truth to light. There are a great number of books available for reading that will persuade you to question the myth of evolution. The latest one I have read is entitled The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, by Tom Bethell. It has the advantage of being current, but there have been a plethora of books published over the last twenty years. An excellent author is Henry Morris and the Institute for Creation Research has published many fine works over the years.
     

The Answer Age

The Answer Age
By P. Davis © 2005

I have a new term for our age. The Answer Age. As a fourth grade teacher, I am absolutely enamored with my high speed internet access. I can find the answer to virtually everything. I have found information about everything from unicycles to swimming pool pumps; from cars (we bought one online) to finding books like A History of the English-speaking Peoples, by Winston Churchill (I haven’t made a successful Ebay bid on this yet); and from US actual presidential vote counts to an explanation of our starry constellations.
Everything is there. Everything. I so envy the children of my class. Nine year old children with the world at their fingertips must be rich beyond measure. I remember trying to form opinions and figure things out at that wonder filled age, and being frequently frustrated from lack of information. One of the richest gifts I got as a nine year old was a pictorial history of the Civil War, by Bruce Catton. It had more information about the Civil War than a nine year old could imagine, and I became a life-long lover of historical books.
But children now have histories of the Civil War at their fingertips. A simple word typed into Google and they find themselves with a plethora of pictures and anecdotes of the war. And not only that war. Virtually every war of which we might think has many web pages. Often there are interactive sites as children are asked, in some manner, to participate with these sites. Never has learning been so fun!
My own fourth graders pick a research topic and become nine year old experts on their topic. They then build web pages so that they can share their discoveries with other nine year olds. As a teacher, I like teaching this because it teaches children to think, to write, and (what they like the best) to create.
But I do have to wonder. As a pre-modernist growing up in a post-modernist age, I wonder if we haven’t lost sight of the great questions. Like these. Why am I in this world? What end is there for me? Why do I feel there is a definite right and a definite wrong? We do indeed have web pages on these subjects, but I wonder a bit at the irony. Most people today do not even acknowledge the importance of these questions. Here we live in the Answer Age. But having the answers without the questions has put us in a fine muddle.

Rules

Rules
By Patrick Davis
©2005

     Rules are the threads that bind the multi-colored fabric of our society together.  Yet they are hated by most of us privately.  How many of us would gush over the fact that the speed limit is 65 miles per hour?  Rules are there, to be observed, to build fences, to force respect and toleration, but never to be gushed over.
     Imagine that you were living 4000 years ago.  Your leader has gone on a retreat and he comes back with a list of ten commandments, most of which begin thou shalt not. . .   Are you going to gush over the rules?  I expect that most of us have remarkably similar reactions to being forced to conform to something we may find grating on our natural desires.  
     Rules:  we know the reason for rules, at least in our finer moments we acknowledge their justness.  In our weaker moments we do remember Mom’s reason for doing something: “Because I said so.”  When you were little did that raise the hairs on the back of your neck the way that it did for me?
     I have found, purely from empirical lifelong observation, that everyone seems to have it in for a certain rule; there is one rule that incenses them beyond reason.  It may be the speed limit.  It may be waiting in a long line.  It may be when he notices the cell phone being used in the car next to him.   But one rule will make anyone sometimes go ballistic.
     But today I wonder what it is exactly that brings our obstinacy to the forefront with that certain rule. Is it perhaps a sign of our weak conscience? We are hard against one thing that we ourselves would never be caught doing, but all the while there are a hundred things equally as bad that we do everyday. “Before you find the speck in your brother’s eye, take care to remove the beam from your own eye.”

Thanksgiving 2005

Thanksgiving, 2005
By P. Davis

Thanksgiving is over.  Whew!  All the family and the food gone.  Another year gone.  And I am another year older, but probably not another year better. I want so much to be better with each year, but the wrinkles come and come, and I still wrestle with the same me that I wrestled with even when a youngster.
     And that has brought me to a truth.  An “I wonder about truth”.  I am really thankful for lots this year.  My father yet lives and walks.  So do both of my in laws.  I have three wonderful grandsons beginning to grapple with realizing their own shortcomings.  And they are beginning to unravel their own strings that represent the joyous yarn of living.
     While I am so thankful, I do realize with age that some things do not change, at least in the few years of our life.  I wonder about my father, who I prayed for so long ago.  As he lay upon what I thought would be his deathbed, I prayed to God, who in His mercy heard and answered.  I prayed for extra years to be added to his life, that he might yet have time to see the grace of God that is provided for in Jesus.
     I have watched God deal with my father during these successive years, and watched most anxiously as He would steer my father so close, and then....  My father would pull away once more, tantalizingly coming so close, and yet so far from redemption.
     Which brings me back from my digression.  My “I wonder” for this weekend is whether adding years would do anything for the salvation of my dad.  I lay in my bed this morning wondering about praying for more years for my dad.  I see his hurts, his aches and pains grow, and not his alone, but also those of my in laws.   I see the frailness of their shell that used to hold such hearty promise of life, and now that shell has become so thin and fragile so as to almost be translucent, waiting for just the slightest knock to break it irretrievably.  How I hate death!  I abhor that which must come, unless the Day of the Lord should redeem us.  Even so, come Lord Jesus, come.
     And may my father, even in his eleventh and one half hour, still find the mercy of Jesus Christ.

Thoughts about our World

Thoughts about our World
By P. Davis © 2005
     When I first became a Christian, others sometimes ridiculed my decision saying I was using religion as a crutch. I would rejoin that that was totally an incorrect analogy; Christianity is not a crutch. Rather it is the whole hospital, and not just a hospital, but the emergency wing of the hospital, and not just the emergency wing of the hospital, but the heart-attack room, with the patient’s heart having just quit, and the whole hospital staff working to revive even the faintest of heart beats. I am on that table now, receiving “urgent medical care” for my soul, and apart of the care of God in Christ, I shall surely come to complete and utter ruin. I could wish for the crutch analogy to be true, but it is about the biggest understandment of the need for grace that I know. I am a total wretch, a lost street urchin, a homeless soul bereft of food or clothing. There is no hope for me, until I met Christ.
     And so, it is in that spirit that I wish to make the following statement. Jesus spent more of his time warning about hell and judgment than he did telling about the promises of heaven. In our day of “niceness” where no one is ever told anything distasteful, this statement must jar the ears like fingernails across the blackboard. Last month I concluded a class discussion in which someone in the class made the statement that she did not believe in a God who would judge someone evil; rather she believed in a God who saw good in people no matter who they were. The class was not religious and since I did not want to offend her, I suggested that she line up the words of Jesus. What do they actually say? I suggested that she might be surprised. Jesus spent many words warning of condemnation and coming judgment.
     C.S. Lewis aptly points out that this choice is not one logically left open to us; in spite of that there are many people today who platonically state that Jesus was a good man. To say he is a good man ignores the content of his message which simply put was he that has seen me has seen the Father. Obviously we only have two choices left to us in the face of such a claim. One is that he was a delusional nut who, in evangelizing the world, committed the greatest crime against mankind ever conceived. He got the world to believe in a savior who wasn’t. The second choice is that he was who he claimed to be. The Son of God come to rescue a needy planet. He absolutely could not be the third choice, a good man.
     So the record of what he said is vital to us. Was it a nice message? I submit that it mostly was a message warning of mortal judgment coming upon man except for those who heard his message and received his freely offered grace. What is the mortal judgment of which he warns?
     First he tells us that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. He tells us that if we act unjustly towards others we will be handed over to the jailers to be tortured. He tells us in many parables that if we do not measure up to the standards of heaven, we will be cast out into the outer darkness where there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. He says that those who do not measure up will go away to eternal punishment. Not trivial punishment, not temporary punishment, but eternal punishment, where as he says, the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched. Whoever does not believe, he declares will be condemned. And how condemned? He that believes not is condemned already because he has not believed in the name of the only son of God. Whoever rejects the son will not see life.
     And it is on this basis that I would offer that it is necessary for Christians to warn of the coming storm. Not only is the gospel defined aptly as one beggar telling another beggar where to get bread; it is sometimes the needed thing for the beggar to tell where not to get bread.
     Whatever else we may know about Christianity, we are certain of this. Christ himself claimed to have exclusive truth and to be the only way to God. No one is allowed to come to God except through him. Again, I refer you back to the logic. Either Jesus was a demented and crazed man, or he was who he said he was. There is no third option.
     So what can be said for those who reject this grace of God? Their judgment includes the eternal decision of God. And where are they put? They are put into the hell which causes eternal torment evidenced by weeping and gnashing of teeth. Are there special judgments for those who are specially wicked? Revelation 21:8 seems to indicate so for it spells out the sexually immoral, the vile and the murderers.
     So what shall we say about those who terrorize our society today? Who believe that their bombs will explode them to instant heaven? If we are to believe the words of Jesus, their bombs will explode them into eternal judgment where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.
     What an awful waste of life! And what sort of judgment will fall on those men who teach these young men to blow themselves into Hell? I shudder at the coming judgment. Jonathan Edwards had it right: Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.
     
     
     
     

Election and Freewill

Election and Freewill
By P. Davis © 2005

It seems to me that hundreds of years after Calvin first raised this issue, there is still much to be resolved. The Bible presents both points of view in the strongest terms; both election and freewill are presented as pillars in the scriptures. Since they seem to be an apparent contradiction, I find many fine people who either give up on seeing it, or worse, seize one side or the other to the detriment of the Biblical view. Of course this issue has been debated almost ad nauseum, and I realize that revisiting it is like trying to boil an egg a second time- it probably is a useless gesture. Here I do not hope to resolve the bitter fights of each side. Rather I just want to speculate on one way in which they might be in total harmony with each other.
With the wise Christian the harmony must, it seems to me, be assumed. How could we countenance a God who authored evil? Or how can we hold people responsible for what they cannot help, as they are being manipulated?
God has of course given us the preeminent example of the two working in harmony together way back in Genesis. Pharaoh hardened his heart exactly one half of the time in not letting the people of Moses go; the Lord hardened his heart the other half of the time. So is God responsible for Pharaoh’s actions? After all, it might be argued, God is a lot bigger than Pharaoh, and how could Pharaoh possibly be held responsible?
While trying to think of an analogy which might help understanding, I found myself thinking of a huge livestock corral. In a large corral there are different paths or chutes which the cattle may be driven and sorted. For the sake of my analogy, assume that there is one chute splitting into two minor chutes. One chute leads to the slaughter house; the other leads to the greenest pastures imaginable.
For the sake of our analogy, cattle are now literate. Plastered along the chutes that all the cows are being pushed through are signs warning of what is ahead. Cows are given ample opportunity to read signs. Signs picturing the greenest pastures are clearly marked; signs of becoming a future Big Mac are equally well presented. All cows have free choice.
Now let us imagine that the head cowboy is somehow omnipresent with each cow, even before they enter the chute. The head cowboy somehow lives outside of the process of time. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. All points of time he is totally aware of for his cows, yet he is commanded by none of the points. In other words he sees the end and the beginning of each cow even before the cow enters the chute.
Further he is present at all times with each cow bumbling through the chute and through vigorous means he attempts to call each cow to the green pastures. But his appearance is found to be appalling to many of the cows, who find themselves shying away from the one who would direct their paths. Frustrated with their hardness of heart, the head cowboy waves his hands in disgust, further shying the cows away. Other cows seem to recognize the head cowboy, and listen eagerly to his call. Those he chooses and has sweet cubes of sugar to feed them along the chute.
Is the cow free to choose? Yes. Has each cow been called, yet only some chosen? Yes. Can the head cowboy say that each cow is predestined for one end? Yes. Did the head cowboy harden the hearts of some of the cows along the way? Yes. We now have a possible scenario where free will and election peacefully coexist.
In the beginning of my paper, I said I did not want to go beyond speculating one way in which it might happen; I do not suggest this is the way that it is happening. I merely wish to suggest that the God who so loves the world is in harmony with the God who judges those who will not heed his manifold warnings. The Christ of the first coming is in perfect accord with the Christ of the second coming. Of that the Christian should be assured for, as the Scripture reminds us, He is truth, and those that worship him must worship him in truth.

The Spiritual Host

The Spiritual Host
By Patrick Davis

     I went to church this morning and it was well attended.  There were almost a thousand people in the chairs and on the risers.  How marvelous it is when believers draw together in unity!
     One question: if we had spiritual eyes, what would we see?  It says in Psalms that the angels surround us; I know one old favorite pastor who used to say that it meant that each of us had eight angels.  Six to surround us as a cube, and two more: one to carry our prayers to God, and another to bring them back.  I smile as I remember that teaching- nearly thirty years ago- but it does give me pause from time to time.
     I wonder.  Do you remember the prayer of Elisha when surrounded by his enemies?  He was not at all afraid, as was the man petitioning Elisha, for he saw the spiritual host.  He prayed that God would open the man’s eyes that he might see- and the man saw all the heavenly host arrayed against the enemies of Israel.
     What pause it gives me to think we are here feeling so alone, when all the while, the focus of the heavenly host is upon us, watching to see what we will do.  Waiting for our weak petitions, that they might move.  With the coming judgment upon us, how shall we neglect so great a salvation?  And what shall become of us in our neglect?
     I wonder what we would see, if we had spiritual eyes, I mean.  With a thousand souls gathering to worship, what angels, what hosts, what armies would we see if we had but the eyes?  Oh God, give me the eyes to see not only the host before me which I must fight, but also the eyes to see the greater host behind me.

Society and Christians

Society and Christians
By P. Davis
On the one hand we have an attitude of righteousness as Conservative Christians. We condemn certain lifestyles as abhorrent, and declare the judgment of God upon those people. Jesus did this, and it is good that we try to follow in his footsteps. I am told by Bible scholars that Jesus spent the great majority of his time talking about Hell and judgment for those who do not repent.
But let us remember that Jesus also taught us great compassion. One of the many poignant moments that define my life came when I was working with the homeless in Los Angeles. I worked with a friend whom I respected and admired very much. He would often pick out the homeless man who was totally emaciated, perhaps from his alcoholism. Lice often crawled on his shirt, which in any case was dirty beyond description. To these men my friend George would go, and hug the men, saying gentle things which I could not hear, but which often brought a genuine human smile from a poor wretch. Often as not, both would disappear into George’s office, and there he would try to reach through to the man’s soul.
When I think of George I often think of the pictures I would see on TV of Mother Theresa, hugging the lepers and the poor pitiful souls that she would give her life of service to. I am convinced that both George and Mother Theresa had something which I need- something which was also present within Jesus. Remember the woman taken in adultery and about to be stoned? Jesus stood by her side, not praising her lifestyle, but standing against the men who would have taken her life. Those people Jesus reminded of their own sin, and they, being convicted by their own sin left the woman to Jesus. He remonstrated her, telling her to go forth and sin no more.
How can we be a people who are not only counted as being against poor lifestyle choices? How can we become a people who are known for being as compassionate as Jesus, and not compromising His message of sin and grace?

The Miracle Record

By P. Davis © 2005

I much like the interventions of God in the Bible; they speak of a God who does love his world. Though the miracles are not as often as we might imagine; Elijah, the chief of all prophets, had only eight miracles during his entire lifetime. We are reminded in the New Testament that there were three thousand deserving widows during the famine of Elijah, yet God took care of only one. In the Old Testament (the book to which we moderns look for miracles) His miracles seem few and far between; in fact we are often told that visions were infrequent. God has seemingly always been reluctant to stop the march of men through history. We may well ask "who is man that Thou art mindful of him", yet in some manner God cares far more for us than we deserve. He speaks to us through those rare miracles: the unusual, the dramatic moment, the turning of a point of history, or the revelation of some new mercy.
I do like the parting of the Red Sea for I can imagine the huge sea with immense walls of water on each side. The Bible tells us that the Israelites walked across on dry land. It was a very huge miracle indeed- far beyond the capability of anything that we might imagine. Pictorially the Israelites were baptized and redeemed as they began their journey of forty years of walking with God.
I think of the miracle of Elijah calling down the fire from heaven. What a light show that must have been! He scoffed and mocked the prophets of Baal all day long and at the evening sacrifice time he had his entire offering washed with four barrels of water three times. Thus the miracle again showed the redemptive cleansing of God for the twelve tribes of Israel. I have always wondered where the water came from. It was the end of a long three and half year drought. As one who always looks for the comedy of the scene, I have imagined that the water belonged to the king who was hoarding it. Elijah called on the mighty power of God so that the people would know that the LORD is God, and fire descended from heaven licking up the sacrifice, the wood, and the very stones themselves. What a mighty act of God!
And there is of course the great miracle where the sun stood still for Joshua as the Lord helped them fight their enemies. I have always wondered about the mechanism of the miracle of the sun standing still. What did God do to the sun to cause that to happen? What a mighty force of awesome power is exhibited in the one who created and is master of the sun! Or if that is not powerful enough for you, Isaiah prayed and the shadow went backwards ten degrees as a sign to the king Hezekiah. Did God indeed march the sun backwards ten degrees? What a marvelous and powerful one we trust in!
But perhaps my personal favorite miracle came when the doctor stood over the bed of my father telling him and me that something had happened beyond the explanations of science. For they had cut open my father's chest to find a burst aneurism and the aneurism was NOT bleeding. The doctor stated that he did not understand why my father had not quickly bled out and could not explain why he was living. To a son who had claimed the life of his father before God in prayer, those words rank as perhaps the sweetest testament that I will ever hear.
But the time of the year is upon us when we celebrate the greatest miracle of all. That God in the flesh would come into this awful world to redeem us is beyond our richest dreams. That he would come as a babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, signifying his future death, was almost unlooked for. Except for an old man named Simeon and an old widow named Anna, almost no one noticed the babe, the savior of mankind. Simeon declared himself ready for death now that he had seen the salvation of mankind, a light for the Gentiles to see by. The son of God was in the world and yet the world hardly cared.
In this season let us remember the Christ child who came to die for the ungodly. Let us lay aside our ungodliness in the coming year in hopes that someone might see Christ in us. For we may be the Anna and Simeon that live to see his second coming- a coming in which he will not be as an innocent babe, but rather as a roaring lion. And it will prove to be a coming when the time for many choices for people will be past. How much more should we be found working upon that day!