Wednesday, December 31, 2008

What Is Patience?


Not merely endurance of the inevitable, for Christ could have relieved himself of his sufferings (Heb. 12:2, 3; compare Matt. 26:53); but the heroic, brave patience with which a Christian not only bears but contends. Speaking of Christ’s patience, Barrow
remarks, “...it was not out of stupid...or stubborn resolution that he...behaved himself; for he had a most vigorous sense of all those grievances, and a strong (natural) aversation from under going them; … but from a perfect submission to the divine will, and entire command over his passions, a great love toward mankind....” The same writer defines patience as follows: “That virtue which enables us to bear all circumstances and all events, by God’s power working in us, both mentally and emotionally, as God requres and good reason guides." (Sermon XLII., “On Patience”). Vincent, Marvin Richardson: Word Studies in the New Testament
Biblical patience is a God-exercised, or God-given, restraint in face of opposition or oppression. It is not passivity. The initiative lies with God’s love, or the Christian’s, in meeting wrong in this way. In the OT, the concept is denoted by Heb. ’ārēḵ, meaning ‘long’. God is said to be ‘long’ or ‘slow’ to anger ’erek ’appayim- (see Ex. 34:6; Nu. 14:18; Ne. 9:17; Pss. 86:15; 103:8; 145:8; Joel 2:13; Jon. 4:2). This idea is exactly represented in the Gk. makrothymia, often translated as longsuffering’, and defined by Trench as ‘a long holding out of the mind’ before it gives room to anger. Wood, D. R. W. ; Marshall, I. Howard: New Bible Dictionary. 3rd ed. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill. : InterVarsity Press, 1996, S. 873
In Proverbs the practical value of patience is stressed; it avoids strife, and
promotes the wise ordering of human affairs especially where provocation is
involved.
The patience of God is a ‘purposeful concession of space and
time’ (Barth).
Wood, D. R. W. ; Marshall, I. Howard: New Bible Dictionary. 3rd d. Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill. : InterVarsity Press, 1996, S. 873

Sunday, December 28, 2008

Islam's First Hundred Years of Violence

When Edward Gibbon introduced the prophet Muhammad in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, he observed that the rise of Islam was “one of the most memorable revolutions, which have impressed a new and lasting character on the nations of the globe.” Gibbon saw that Islam did not just inaugurate a religious revolution. Its unparalleled expansion changed the course of history by altering the map of the world.

No event was as consequential to Christianity in the 600-700's as the rise of Islam. Islam rose with great swiftness and disruption. In the span of less than a hundred years after its founding, Arab commanders made their way from the edge of Egypt along the North Africa until they reached the Atlantic Ocean. From the Arabian Peninsula they also advanced northeast through Persia and across the Asian steppes to India.

Within the space of a century, the movement inaugurated by the prophet Muhammad had planted a permanent political and religious rival to Christianity in historic Christian lands. Its advance both to the West and to the East meant that a large part of the globe was claimed for Islam, fulfilling the words of the Qur’an: “We appointed you successors on the earth after them.”
By the year 750, a hundred years after the conquest of Jerusalem, at least 50 percent of the world’s Christians found themselves under Muslim hegemony. In some regions, most notably North Africa, Christianity went into precipitous decline. At the time of the Arab conquest there were more than three hundred bishops in the area, but by the tenth century Pope Benedict VII could not find three bishops to consecrate a new bishop. Today there is no indigenous Christianity in the region, no communities of Christians whose history can be traced to antiquity. Though originally conquered by the sword, most of the subject peoples eventually embraced the religion of their conquerors.

By the eleventh century, however, Christianity had begun a long demographic decline in its eastern homeland, and, carried by the militancy of the Turks, Islam resumed its relentless drive westward. The end of the eleventh century also marked the beginning of the First Crusade.

Consider some statistics. In the eleventh century, the population of Asia Minor was almost wholly Christian. By the sixteenth century, Muslims constituted 92 percent of the population. During those centuries, the Church lost most of its property, its ecclesiastical structures were dismantled, and its bishops prohibited from caring for their dioceses. At the beginning of the period, there were four hundred bishops; by the end, 97 percent had been eliminated.

Most of the territories that were Christian in the year 700 are now Muslim. Nothing similar has happened to Islam. Christianity seems like a rain shower that soaks the earth and then moves on, whereas Islam appears more like a great lake that constantly overflows its banks to inundate new territory. When Islam arrives, it comes to stay—unless displaced by force, as it was in Spain.

Nothing from its earliest years has changed. Islam is still a religion bent on conquest.

Saturday, December 27, 2008

Marriage Overcomes Paganism

In ancient religion sex was the height of "spiritual" experience. Dennis Prager explains...




The gods of virtually all civilizations engaged in sexual relations. In the Near East, the Babylonian god Ishtar seduced a man, Gilgamesh, the Babylonian hero. In Egyptian religion, the god Osiris had sexual relations with his sister, the goddess Isis, and she conceived the god Horus. In Canaan, El, the chief god, had sex with Asherah. In Hindu belief, the god Krishna was sexually active, having had many wives and pursuing Radha; the god Samba, son of Krishna, seduced mortal women and men.


Because sexuality was the essence of god and worship ancient cultures, near and far, there was no special status given to the unique sexual relationship of one man and one woman. Prostitution and homosexuality were on an equal or superior status with any other form of sexuality. The only important difference lay in between "the one who was penetrated and the one who did the penetrating." Then came Moses like a towering light in chaotic darkness. Alone in the midst of all of the cultures of the world he taught monogamous covenental marriage. Sexual energy was to be channeled through marriage, alone. Out of this direction came two consequences: 1) Women achieved equality with men in marriage. They became partners. No longer was a man to have a house maid who primary purpose was to fulfill his sexual gratifications. A woman is to be an equal marriage partner. 2) The ideal social unit became centered in the family. Life then becomes more directed by real and objective love. Not love as we wish it would be for "me" but love as it really needs to be--for the "benefit of the other." Further men and women, though equal, are not identical. Their very differences are important to the very nature of what love is to be. (The great English journalist G.K. Chesterton once marveled during his first long stay in America, that Americans can seek divorce “on the grounds of incompatibility.” “I would have thought,” he commented dryly, “that incompatibility is the reason for marriage.”)

Michael Novak sums up the importance of this Mosaic standard and difference...

Thus, the complementarity between a man and a woman in
covenantal marriage—a privileged image of God—is designed to increase the best of all forms of happiness among human beings: growth in the ennobling habits of the heart, in virtue, in honesty, and
in mutual caring, “until death do them part.” This complementarity is also designed to generate productive, creative, and ever-advancing societies, driven by dreams of perfection yet to come (and never
to be fully realized).














Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Faith in God or the Faith in the Outcome

It is a major mistake we often make in our walk with God when we put our faith in an outcome rather than in the Lord. We do this because we set our hearts on a thing rather than on God Himself. If we trust in the Lord, we also need to trust Him that the outcome of a matter will be what best advances His cause, what will be “His triumph,” not just ours. In many cases, the greatest triumph would be the growth of our faith, which has greater value than any earthly outcome.

Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. James 1:2-4

Monday, December 22, 2008

The Intolerance of Liberalism

It is a horrible thing when abstract principles become objects of devotion. This is what modern liberalism is. (gay marriage, no exclusive status for Christian holidays, economic socialism, radical feminism, animal rights, etc.) It is a devotion to ideals which have never been been realized. Nothing is so selfish as to attack reality out of devotion to one's ideas. To displace an existing cultural order one must slay the inward moral and religious sentiments long established in a society in order to destroy the outward forms to which they give life. (This is at the heart of our cultural war which will probably be on the increase.) The liberal loves broad and expansive ideals at the expense of social realities.
For liberal progressivism to be established there needs to be a culture of critique to replace a culture of loyalty. (Away with patriotism and up with revisionist history!) If you oppose liberal initiatives, you are called a hate monger. (Look at what Rick Warren has been subjected to even though he has raised millions of dollars to fight AIDS.) Liberalism has no room to be tolerant. It cannot be if it hopes to fundamentally remake culture.

Obama's New Deal or Ordeal???

I have been relieved at the "broad tent" administration of the president-elect's administration. I am also encouraged by Obama's choice of Rick Warren to do the prayer of invocation at his much anticipated inaugural address. This at least shows that Obama does not have an open hostility to evangelicals.

I still remain concerned about a number of issues. There are three in particualar. 1) Future federal court picks. 2) Overturning pro-life policies. 3) A 1 trillion dollar stimulus package.

The 1 trillion dollar stimulus package will be Franklin Roosovelt's New Deal on steroids. What we know about the New Deal is that it did not work in the 1930's. If anything it prolonged the Great Depression. The Great Depression was broken because industry was revitalized out of the need created by the Second World War.

What makes us believe that another New Deal will nor worsen our financial Ordeal??? Our nation has come so far economically. Let's help our economy, not overhaul it.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Persons or Individuals??? (Lewis Weighs In)

I read a story of C. S. Lewis where he once heard of parents who were teaching their children to call them and their adult friends by their first names. Lewis said he understood what they were trying to do. They wanted to show their children "we are all fellow citizens of the human race, equal partners in the race of life." But Lewis said it was a perverse thing.

The strength of the family isn't that each person is counted equal. Persons aren't equal. That's precisely the meaning of being a person. We're each unique and not equal. The strength of the family is in its ability to affirm the uniqueness of each person. Families don't foster equality. They foster a community of persons, each of whom is unlike the others but invaluably belongs to the rest.

Lewis likens this radical democratization to prisoners in jail cells. Each one of them becomes equal to all of the others: everybody calls everyone by their first name. No titles of personal relationship or respect are given.

Lewis' warning helps us to guard against the secular drift of our culture which has an anthropology of individual and masses, but not communities of persons created after the Trinitarian image.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Gay Marriage and Islamic Polygamy

One can only tolerate that which with we disagree.

We may disagree with another person's religious beliefs, e.g., Islam. Yet, we should tolerate their beliefs on the civil or social level. If, however, a Muslim man wants to acquire another wife, this will entail him changing the laws of the land which would make polygamy legal. At this point it would require a political and social debate. The Islamic community would need to show that polygamy would serve as a public good.

There would be considerable opposition to this legal change, especially from the Christian community. But democracy is open to exchange and competition of ideas.

This is the same with gay marriage. It is an issue of civil debate. The Christian community is tolerant of homosexuals. But we don't believe that homosexual marriage is in the interest of the public good. So, it is not because of bigotry we oppose it. It is because we don't believe it serves in the interest of the public good.

Saturday, December 13, 2008

Importance of Understanding Culture

A Christianity that is indifferent to its cultural environment is captive to its culture. A faith that is not aware of its culture reinforces the cultural definitions which so easily dupe the believers who live in it. Nowhere is this so evident as in the ready Christian acceptance of the cultural ideology that religion is essentially a private matter of spiritual experience, that religion is a matter of private choice rather than a universal obligation. Against that assumption, we must insist that Christian faith is intensely personal but never private. The Christian gospel is an emphatically public proposal about the nature of the world and our place in it. It is a public way of life obliged to the truth. --adapted thoughts from Richard John Neuhaus

Friday, December 12, 2008

President Bush is the "Dark Knight"

I watched "The Dark Knight" last night. Even my wife thought it was an incredible...amazing movie. That says a lot! This alone should make it worthy of several Oscar nods.
Aside from being an incredible watch...it is a pro-Bush movie. Maybe/probably not intentionally. But I can't help but think of our current president as I watched it.

1) Batman is hated by the people he protects...so is President Bush.
2) Batman temporarily extends the limits of his authority to do what is necessary in the most extreme and dangerous of circumstances...so has President Bush.
3) Batman is willing to be hated to do what is necessary and right. He is not moved from his mission by opinion polls...So is President Bush.
4) Batman understands he is dealing with pure evil that just loves "to see things burn"...So is President Bush.
5) Batman made some errors of judgment (...to err is human)...You guessed it...So has President Bush.

How appropriate the movie has come out as our President ends his controversial and very consequential 2 terms.

Better seen and not heard??? (Again)

The reason Paul says a woman is not to have authority over men is because...

For Adam was formed first, then Eve. (1 Timothy 2:13)

Paul is showing that the order in the church is patterned after the order of creation. God chose to create them in a particular order, it was not arbitrary.

And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived... (1 Timothy 2:14)

Paul, then, makes this statement addressing the problem which occurs when men allow their authority to be usurped. Eve was deceived in her sin. Adam sinned knowingly. In allowing women to usurp the role of overseer (see Monday, December 8 blog), they step into the trap that plunged our first parents into sin.

Monday, December 8, 2008

Finding Yourself


"You find yourself in community, not in the woods." --John Piper in conversation with John Macarthur
It is essential to be in the church to discover your identity. Piper is right.

Sunday, December 7, 2008

Bible and Geology: the Mantle


Food is grown on the earth above, but down below, the earth is melted as by fire.
New Living Translation. Job 28:5

The Earth’s crust is only about 3–25 miles in thickness. Under the crust are several thousand miles of molten matter—like a plastic which glows red hot. It is interesting that Job appears to allude to this geological reality.



Thursday, December 4, 2008

The Flood and the Formation of Coal Beds

This week a person at my church asked me how the fossil beds could have formed from the Flood. This person's question was prompted after he had spoke to a biologist who informed him that it would take millions of years to form the world's existing fossil beds.

In fact some geologists have claimed that even if all the vegetation on earth was suddenly converted to coal this would make a coal deposit only 1-3% of the known coal reserves on earth. That means it would take around 33 Noah’s Floods, staggered in time, to generate our known coal beds.

Consider this...

1) Biologists have overestimated how much vegetation is required to make coal. Originally it was believed to take to 12:1 ratio. It is believed by many to be much less. By some accounts it can be a 2:1 or less. Whatever the case may be it is probable that we can reduce the vegetation to coal transition ratio.

2) Also consider that 60% of today’s land surface is covered by deserts or only sparse vegetation. Only 40% of today's land contain fuller vegetation.

3) In the world before the Flood it would appear that all of the land was filled with abundant vegetation. For instance, beneath the vast icy wastes of Antarctica there are rock layers containing thick coal beds. So at one time Antarctica contained an environment of lush vegetation. Consider today's desserts where a great amount of our oil comes. (Keep in mind that the world under the influence of a global sub-tropical greenhouse effect before Noah’s Flood—implied by the Bible’s description of the ‘waters above’--the so-called water vapour canopy-- and the mist that watered the ground daily--instead of today’s unreliable intermittent rain--would have created a much better and more consistent environment for vegetation.

4) It is most likely that there was a much greater amount of land before the Flood than what exists today. Much of the water that now covers the globe was added at the Flood with the burst and down pour of the canopy and the release of water from below the earth's crust.
(10 And after the seven days the floodwaters came on the earth. 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. Gen 7:10-12)

5) The fossil evidence indicates that ancient plant and animal life was much greater than it is now. (We had a family at the church who just got back from New Zealand and said that the plants are twice as large as the ones in the U.S. Imagine what they would have been like before the Flood.)

6) But there is another way of comparing vegetation growth and volume with the known coal beds, a way that is probably far more reliable, and that is by comparing the stored energy in vegetation with that in coal. International authority on solar energy, Mary Archer, has stated that the amount of solar energy falling on the earth’s surface in 14 days is equal to the known energy of the world’s supply of fossil fuels. She also said that only . 03 % of the solar energy arriving at the earth’s surface is stored as chemical energy in vegetation through photosynthetic processes. From this information we can estimate how many years of today’s plant growth would be required to produce the stored energy equivalent in today’s known coal reserves:

Divide 14 days by .03%i.e. (14 x 100)/.03 days equals 46,667 days or 128 years of solar input via photosynthesis. So we can conclude that only 128 years of plant growth at today’s rate and volume is all that is required to provide the energy equivalent stored in today’s known coal beds! There was, of course, ample time between Creation and Noah’s Flood for such plant growth to occur—1600 years, in fact.
Summary...
1) With less vegetation to coal transition ratio than often suggested...
2) With a more plentiful vegetation to land mass ratio than currently exists...
3) With a much greater land mass than exists today...
4) With much greater vegetation than exists today...
5) With a more realistic assessment of the time needed to store energy into coal...
You have a plausible framework of how the Flood produced existing coal beds.

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Second Amendment and Original Intent


Let Madison weigh in on this discussion....

Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.

Redwoods and the Flood


The giant redwoods never die of old age. Why, then, are the oldest living specimens only about 3,500 years old? Could it be that the redwoods can help us date the Flood and discover the extent of the Flood. These giant trees are very resistant to insects, diseases and fire. They never die of old age, but only suffer injuries caused by accidents such as freak windstorms. In fact, never has a redwood tree been found dead from old age. So why aren’t there living specimens much older than approximately 3,500 years? From the fossil record it is known that they existed much earlier; sequoia leaves, cones and trunks have been found buried and fossilized in the layers of the Earth. Could it be that there was a worldwide catastrophic event like the Flood as recorded in Genesis, which accounts for the sudden and complete destruction of trees?

Saxby Shows How Influential Obama Is

On November 4, 2008, Saxby Chambliss received 49.8% of the vote, while Democratic challenger Jim Martin received 46.8% and Liberatarian Allen Buckley received 3.4% of the vote.
Since no candidate exceeded 50% of the vote, a runoff election between Chambliss and Martin was held on December 2, 2008.Chambliss defeated Martin 57.4% to 42.6% in the runoff election. What is telling is that on Nov. 4th Barack Obama gave Jim Martin approximately 12% points.

Nov.4th Chambliss won by about 3%.
Dec. 2nd Chambliss won by about 15 %.
Barack Obama gave Chambliss' opponent approximately 12% on Nov.4th.

Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Hamiliton and the Second Amendment


According to one site I have read the intention of the second amendment was not to make gun ownership contingent upon a "well regulated militia." The militia clause was added simply to ensure that the U.S. government would have a militia. The second amendment guarantees gun ownership, period.

On another note, following up from yesterday...
There certainly appears to be merit to the idea that the Founding Fathers were concerned that the people of the colonies were armed to protect themselves against tyranny. Here are the words of Alexander Hamilton from the Federalist Paper No.28:
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.

Way To Go Chris Wallace


Last night’s special screening of the new movie “Frost/Nixon” in Washington, D.C., film producer Ron Howard paralleled the abuse of power of the Nixon administration with the abuses of power of our current President. Chris Wallace (man in picture), a news anchor for Fox News would have none of it. Below is his response to Ron Howard when the microphone was passed around to the screening audience and landed in Wallace's hands...
"Richard Nixon's crimes were committed purely in the interest of his own political gain...I think to compare what Nixon hat Nixon did, and the abuses of power for pure political self-preservation, to George W. Bush trying to protect this country -- even if you disagree with rendition or waterboarding -- it seems to me is both a gross misreading of history both then and now," Mr. Wallace said. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/02/fox-news-journalist-defends-bush/
Ron Howard had no reply.

How Obama Will Help the Church


Rick Joyner (that's the guy in the photo) has some important insights on how we are to understand ourselves as Christians with the upcoming Obama administration.


Joyner tells us that the church can no longer rely on the government to do the job that we ourselves are supposed to do. He speaks to the area of abortion...


Joyner states that Obama wants to turn the abortion laws back to the states. Below he lists some important measures states need to pass...


1) The need for a minor to notify their parents before getting an abortion or to get their permission for an abortion. This is quite shocking, since an abortion is a serious medical procedure that can be dangerous. This brings the issue down to the ridiculous place of nurses needing parental permission to give a child an aspirin, but not an abortion! This is also a direct attack and intrusion on the fundamental authority of parents and guardians. Even the pro-abortion people should be alarmed at this.
2) The second major issue that is under pressure are the laws in some states that require one to receive basic instruction about what an abortion is, what it does to the baby, and potentially to the mother. It has been demonstrated that a high percentage of mothers who receive this basic education decide to have the baby.


Joyner then writes...


I have never met a person who understood abortion procedures and what they do to the baby and the mother who did not become pro-life. Most people who are pro-abortion would not be if they had some basic education about it. They would quickly understand that it is one of the most horrible and dehumanizing acts taking place in our times. It they just understood the procedures used, most would be in shock.


It has to be up to the church to communicate this message. We need to do a better job of shining the light so that people will become more pro-life out of a conviction and knowledge. We also need to be vigilant in educating people about law which leftist groups will try to sneak by congress which would undermine the authority of parents and freedom of speech, especially in the areas of expressing biblical conviction.


The church will need to be more dependent on God, and we will have to appeal to the ultimate authorities in our government--God and the voting population ("we the people").

Monday, December 1, 2008

"A well regulated militia.."




"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." --Second Ammendment to the Constitution

The second ammendment guarantees the right to "keep and bear arms." True! But isn't this for the purpose of national defense..."security of a free state?" Or was it also originally for the purposes of the original 13 states to protect themselves against the tyranny of a nationalized government? What were the original intentions?

Obviously, now, we do not have a militia or citizen army. Those who promote strict gun control laws do so on the basis that the second ammendment was given for the purpose of a militia. Now that we have a professional army, this ammendment no longer secures the right of citizens to "keep and bear arms."