I just got about three solid hours of sleep, from what would be 6pm to 9pm my normal time zone. I was so tired after my day's travels to the East coast, that when my event wrapped up at 9pm local, it dawned on me that it was midnight my time. That seemed like a good explanation for why I was so tired, besides a stressful day of travels, and meeting tons of strangers, and it didn't occur to me until shortly before I went to sleep that I had miscalculated. It was 6pm back home, not midnight. Oh well, going to bed early will help me get up early, and get on East coast time. It turns out not, since I am now wide awake, and more refreshed than usual, at 1am local time. That is a bit earlier than I had in mind. I usually make a point of not posting on here after midnight, to discourage my work on here from cutting in on my sleep. When traveling, I try to adapt that rule to local time, but in this case, I went to bed before midnight local, and am posting before midnight PST, so here we are.
I have been planning to do a post about patience, which relates a bit. I think I have discussed that in the past, and how patience is hard to define, and sort of an illusion. Situations that involve waiting can be seen to involve patience, regardless of how gracefully we respond to them. Usually that is not an issue for me, in that responding to setbacks and waiting are not sources of other problems for me. But that has not been very true the last two of three months. So I made the mistake last week of praying for patience, and not only that, but had other people pray for patience for me. It seemed appropriate, in that patience has been lacking in my response to situations recently, which is unusual for me. This applies to both long term struggles and immediate ones like something dropping or breaking. But there are many accounts out there of people praying for patience, and being blessed with a deluge of new opportunities to practice patience, which is kind of the reverse of what I am looking for. So due to that trend, I recognized long ago that I didn't want to be praying for patience. God actually answers prayers far more than most people recognize, just not necessarily in the ways that they originally anticipated.
But that wasn't on my mind at Bible study the other day. The first time it came up, I was being prayed for, and hadn't come up with any specific requests beyond safe travels on my upcoming trip. Mid way through being prayed for by the group, I recognized how much a lack of patience appeared to be contributing to a number of the issues I was dealing with. How one responds in this situation demonstrates how much freedom they walk in, in a given environment. Do you interrupt the prayer in progress to add that to the list, or keep your mouth shut, and pray for it yourself? God hears what I am thinking either way, but I had interrupted a prayer the previous week at my other church group, for a different reason, which was still unusual for me, but had probably been a good thing. In this case I kept it to myself, until I was being prayed for again by my other group a few days later. I didn't think much of it until they started referencing the potential folly of praying for patience in their verbal prayers for me. At that point I did interrupt, for a slight clarification on what I was looking for. I had no shortage of opportunities to practice patience, I was just looking for the grace to handle those situations better, specifically a return to the way I used to be able to handle them.
Anyhow, I haven't had any shortage of opportunities to practice patience since then, and anticipate many more during a loosely planned trip with many variables to balance. Just between landing and getting to the hotel, I had to spend an hour dealing with a "bold faced lie" from the rental car company (their term for it, not mine), the poorly signed tool booths on the highway, and the outrageous parking situation of a hotel situated directly next to a major theme park. And now I am wide awake to 1am, "patiently" waiting to get some more sleep. Only three more weeks to go, before I have to adjust back to Pacific time.
Thursday, January 30, 2014
Saturday, January 25, 2014
You and Your Household
Modern evangelical Christianity usually views faith and salvation exclusively as the result of a unique personal choice. It isn't something you inherit from your parents, the way that Jewish heritage is passed down. It isn't something that other people do for you, like being baptized into the Catholic Church as an infant. Just because you were "raised Christian" doesn't mean you are automatically "saved." Salvation is viewed as the result of "accepting Jesus into your heart" as a motivation for repentance.
So what are we to do with the numerous passages in the New Testament that reference the idea of one's entire household being saved due to their faith? Acts 10:24 is about Cornelius and his entire household being saved, and Acts 16:15 is about Lydia and her entire household being baptized. As a female dye merchant, presumably her "household" would have likely consisted of her serving staff. Now I see nothing preventing servants from becoming Christians, but I am not convinced that my employer changing their beliefs would lead to me changing mine in all cases. Now in their favor, they did have Paul evangelizing to them, and he was pretty good at that I hear. But he didn't have a 100% success record, so that is not the magic solution to the puzzle. Now God can bring all of those people to him through an experience of his presence and the Holy Spirit and such, so that could be the "magic solution" that would explain that outcome.
But the best example of this is in Acts 16:31 where Paul tells the Philippian jailer “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.” Now that statement could be taken a number of ways, and is followed by a description of Paul sharing "the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house." But it is a strange offer or promise none the less. I don't think we usually should presume upon God to save others, regardless of what we have seen in the past. That is where the gift of free will is supposed to take effect.
Now I know God can do whatever he wants, and those stories are hardly impossible, especially when compared to other things going on at the same time. I just think it is interesting to examine how those events are presented in the Bible, as household events. It causes me to rethink my preconceived ideas on the mechanics of salvation, that come from a very Americanized individualistic perspective. Not to dramatically change them, just to re-evaluate them.
So what are we to do with the numerous passages in the New Testament that reference the idea of one's entire household being saved due to their faith? Acts 10:24 is about Cornelius and his entire household being saved, and Acts 16:15 is about Lydia and her entire household being baptized. As a female dye merchant, presumably her "household" would have likely consisted of her serving staff. Now I see nothing preventing servants from becoming Christians, but I am not convinced that my employer changing their beliefs would lead to me changing mine in all cases. Now in their favor, they did have Paul evangelizing to them, and he was pretty good at that I hear. But he didn't have a 100% success record, so that is not the magic solution to the puzzle. Now God can bring all of those people to him through an experience of his presence and the Holy Spirit and such, so that could be the "magic solution" that would explain that outcome.
But the best example of this is in Acts 16:31 where Paul tells the Philippian jailer “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.” Now that statement could be taken a number of ways, and is followed by a description of Paul sharing "the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house." But it is a strange offer or promise none the less. I don't think we usually should presume upon God to save others, regardless of what we have seen in the past. That is where the gift of free will is supposed to take effect.
Now I know God can do whatever he wants, and those stories are hardly impossible, especially when compared to other things going on at the same time. I just think it is interesting to examine how those events are presented in the Bible, as household events. It causes me to rethink my preconceived ideas on the mechanics of salvation, that come from a very Americanized individualistic perspective. Not to dramatically change them, just to re-evaluate them.
Monday, January 20, 2014
Polar Vortex
Just when I thought I was familiar with all of the potential natural disaster we may face, the media had to come out and invent a new one. So if there isn't a hurricane or a tornado, now we might have to be concerned about a polar "vortex." While a technically accurate use of the term, the general public's primary cognitive association with vortexes (or vortices) is probably from science fiction movies. You have to admit it is pretty good marketing, from a media engine desperate for viewers' attention. It would be interesting to research who first coined the term in that context a few weeks ago.
The weather has been a bit unusual recently, but that is nothing new. Far wilder fluctuations have been recorded in the past. Humans just have a terrible memory of the past relative to the present. Our current problems always appear to dwarf the obstacles that we have previously overcome, regardless of the objective reality or the situation. For an easy illustration, just ask any teenager about their current problems.
A brief overview of the Old Testament will demonstrate that same human trend as a major theme. Do this, this, and this, so that you remember what the Lord your God has done, and they still constantly forget. The same people who had followed God as a physical pillar of clouds and fire, after he parted the sea for them, were so quick to despair when any potential issues arose.
So while we are experiencing a drought here, and other parts of the country are flooding, or surviving vortexes, the present isn't any more drastically abnormal than the past. Weather changes and fluctuates, and sometimes that sucks. There is basically no snow in the Sierras right now, which doesn't do lend itself to much skiing this year. But most of the fear driven paranoia about the change in climate is extremely shortsighted in viewing the past. And whenever you see something that is leveraging fear, pause and examine the answer to the question "who is benefitting from this?" And then go run and hide, because if you aren't careful, a polar vortex is coming your way. (Or maybe a "thermal wormhole.")
The weather has been a bit unusual recently, but that is nothing new. Far wilder fluctuations have been recorded in the past. Humans just have a terrible memory of the past relative to the present. Our current problems always appear to dwarf the obstacles that we have previously overcome, regardless of the objective reality or the situation. For an easy illustration, just ask any teenager about their current problems.
A brief overview of the Old Testament will demonstrate that same human trend as a major theme. Do this, this, and this, so that you remember what the Lord your God has done, and they still constantly forget. The same people who had followed God as a physical pillar of clouds and fire, after he parted the sea for them, were so quick to despair when any potential issues arose.
So while we are experiencing a drought here, and other parts of the country are flooding, or surviving vortexes, the present isn't any more drastically abnormal than the past. Weather changes and fluctuates, and sometimes that sucks. There is basically no snow in the Sierras right now, which doesn't do lend itself to much skiing this year. But most of the fear driven paranoia about the change in climate is extremely shortsighted in viewing the past. And whenever you see something that is leveraging fear, pause and examine the answer to the question "who is benefitting from this?" And then go run and hide, because if you aren't careful, a polar vortex is coming your way. (Or maybe a "thermal wormhole.")
Tuesday, January 14, 2014
The Existence of Evil
There is a famous line from The Usual Suspects: "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist." That seems truer than ever today. Lots of people, even professing Christians, seem completely blind to the presence of evil in the world, or really to anything spiritual. American are beginning to become more cognizant of the spiritual world, but primarily through the manifestations of the darker side of spirituality. There are lots of movies about witches and demons and summoning evil spirits. How many movies are coming out that involve summoning good spirits, or the Holy Spirit? There actually maybe a couple this year, based on what is scheduled. I am curious to see what angle is taken by Noah, Exodus, and a few others in the works.
I saw a trailer for the movie the other day, in which one of the characters, who had been clearly established as a witch, tells another character "we're not all bad." If we are to define witches as those who call on or worship the spiritual powers of darkness, then yes: they are all bad. This is not to say that they can't be redeemed, but that they should be resisted, and not just accepted. Most people don’t believe that even exists, and most of those that do condemn anyone involved as implicitly irredeemable without actually saying that.
There is a balance between human's "sinful nature" and God's redemption. Mankind was created "good," but still sinned. Sin is made possible by a combination of free will and the capacity to be deceived. I believe it is possible for Jesus to redeem a Christian's sinful nature in this life. But that will not necessarily put a complete stop to all of theirs sins, just make that not their default nature. But it seems obvious that people by default have a sinful or selfish nature, which exerts a strong influence over their actions and decisions. And modern culture encourages embracing this selfish nature in many ways.
So I am not trying to highlight mankind's sinful nature so much as the existence of evil forces in the spiritual world, which affect the physical world. People need to recognize the existence of evil in order to resist it, and in order to identify its influence on other people around them.
I saw a trailer for the movie the other day, in which one of the characters, who had been clearly established as a witch, tells another character "we're not all bad." If we are to define witches as those who call on or worship the spiritual powers of darkness, then yes: they are all bad. This is not to say that they can't be redeemed, but that they should be resisted, and not just accepted. Most people don’t believe that even exists, and most of those that do condemn anyone involved as implicitly irredeemable without actually saying that.
There is a balance between human's "sinful nature" and God's redemption. Mankind was created "good," but still sinned. Sin is made possible by a combination of free will and the capacity to be deceived. I believe it is possible for Jesus to redeem a Christian's sinful nature in this life. But that will not necessarily put a complete stop to all of theirs sins, just make that not their default nature. But it seems obvious that people by default have a sinful or selfish nature, which exerts a strong influence over their actions and decisions. And modern culture encourages embracing this selfish nature in many ways.
So I am not trying to highlight mankind's sinful nature so much as the existence of evil forces in the spiritual world, which affect the physical world. People need to recognize the existence of evil in order to resist it, and in order to identify its influence on other people around them.
Thursday, January 9, 2014
Statues and Idols
There is a group in Oklahoma trying to get a statue of Satan erected at the state capitol. This could be viewed in two ways. Those who don't believe in true evil being present in the world will see this as a political stunt designed to protest the fact that there is an explicitly "Christian" symbol there, in the form of the ten commandments. Others will see this as Satanists becoming much more public than they have been in the past. Regardless, most Christians should be able to recognize this as a bad thing on many levels.
Does it even matter? The Old Testament is full of examples of God's judgment falling on Israel when they erect idols to other gods. The high places and asherah poles are referenced throughout Kings and Chronicles, and condemned by the prophets. God does not look kindly on those who explicitly worship other powers. This is probably made worse by the fact that Satan does exist, while Baal did not, but may have been masqueraded by demons. Those complicit in those actions are in a bad position as well.
So what is the proper response? It is happening in Oklahoma, a state I am not a resident of. But we are all part of the US, so it is happening in my country. Those who value state sovereignty would see it as not related to me. I don't elect those who make those decisions, so I am not responsible for what happens there, and it in no way reflects on me. Those who value national sovereignty will see it as happening in their country, no matter what state they live in. But that doesn't answer the question of what should be done about it. Obviously concerns can be voiced in a variety of ways, and it is my understanding that a deluge of correspondence does affect decisions that politicians make. But in this case, even if the governor and the legislature reject the idea, the courts can force the issue, and the people responsible for those decisions are not elected officials, and have no reason to be swayed by public opinion.
So if the statue is put up, what should be done then? It could be destroyed, either in secret at night, or in broad daylight as an act of civil disobedience. Either way would be illegal, as vandalism, and probably prosecuted as a hate crime. But illegal does not necessarily mean wrong. And while the Bible encourages submission to governing authorities in both the Old and New Testaments, it infers exception to the times when governing law is in direct opposition to God's stated commands. (That is why abortion is wrong, even though it is legal.) But is that the right thing to do, as it could easily start a larger religious conflict?
There already is a huge spiritual conflict going on, it is just that most Americans are either unaware or refuse to acknowledge it. Openly fighting in that conflict is looked down upon, as not politically correct, even though it is obviously happening. The idea of "the separation of church and state" has become utterly twisted and abused at this point. And greater steps need to be taken by Christians to counter that abuse.
I don't think I will be physically doing anything about a statue in Oklahoma, but it I am very concerned about the larger precedent that is being set. And I will definitely get more involved if things like that start happening closer to home.
Does it even matter? The Old Testament is full of examples of God's judgment falling on Israel when they erect idols to other gods. The high places and asherah poles are referenced throughout Kings and Chronicles, and condemned by the prophets. God does not look kindly on those who explicitly worship other powers. This is probably made worse by the fact that Satan does exist, while Baal did not, but may have been masqueraded by demons. Those complicit in those actions are in a bad position as well.
So what is the proper response? It is happening in Oklahoma, a state I am not a resident of. But we are all part of the US, so it is happening in my country. Those who value state sovereignty would see it as not related to me. I don't elect those who make those decisions, so I am not responsible for what happens there, and it in no way reflects on me. Those who value national sovereignty will see it as happening in their country, no matter what state they live in. But that doesn't answer the question of what should be done about it. Obviously concerns can be voiced in a variety of ways, and it is my understanding that a deluge of correspondence does affect decisions that politicians make. But in this case, even if the governor and the legislature reject the idea, the courts can force the issue, and the people responsible for those decisions are not elected officials, and have no reason to be swayed by public opinion.
So if the statue is put up, what should be done then? It could be destroyed, either in secret at night, or in broad daylight as an act of civil disobedience. Either way would be illegal, as vandalism, and probably prosecuted as a hate crime. But illegal does not necessarily mean wrong. And while the Bible encourages submission to governing authorities in both the Old and New Testaments, it infers exception to the times when governing law is in direct opposition to God's stated commands. (That is why abortion is wrong, even though it is legal.) But is that the right thing to do, as it could easily start a larger religious conflict?
There already is a huge spiritual conflict going on, it is just that most Americans are either unaware or refuse to acknowledge it. Openly fighting in that conflict is looked down upon, as not politically correct, even though it is obviously happening. The idea of "the separation of church and state" has become utterly twisted and abused at this point. And greater steps need to be taken by Christians to counter that abuse.
I don't think I will be physically doing anything about a statue in Oklahoma, but it I am very concerned about the larger precedent that is being set. And I will definitely get more involved if things like that start happening closer to home.
Friday, January 3, 2014
Hope
I watched the second installment of the Hunger Games this evening. It had a much deeper plot than the first one. I don't even understand the mechanics of some of what happened, but the series clearly revolves around the theme of hope. The basic premise is that hope overcomes fear, and that fear is what is used to oppress people. Hope and fear are at opposite ends of the spectrum, but Hunger Games takes the position that hope's very existence overcomes fear. So the government is trying to totally stamp out all sources of hope, so they can rule through fear.
People were willing to sacrifice their lives in order to spread that hope. It happened repeatedly in the movie, and was directly discussed frequently. I am used to the idea of males sacrificing their lives to protect females, and I assume that is a natural instinct. I have trouble accepting the idea of the reverse happening, so I had trouble understanding the why, let alone the how, when the movie addressed that issue. The movie is not subtle about the fact that the plot hinges entirely on hope.
The whole experience has caused me to examine what effect hope has on my life. Certain things in my life have gone pretty much as I hoped they would, and I think it is safe to say that is a good thing. But they are now things that I no longer have to hope for. There are other things I have been hoping to see happen for a long time, and I see little positive progress towards those hopes being realized.
I feel like I am starting to lose hope for some of those things. For example, in a generic sense, I hope to get married someday, preferably sooner rather than later. But the specifics of how that might happen, or with whom, I have little vision for anymore. Hope requires a degree of vision. You have to be able to see or imagine what you are hoping for. It is hard for me to even imagine a scenario that would lead to what I am hoping for occurring anytime soon, so it is hard to work towards the realization of that hope. Being able to envision the future is the first step to bringing it about. Envisioning a positive future is a source of hope, envisioning a negative future is a source of fear. So in part due to the fact that I have a pretty clear vision of what I want my house and property to be like, I have made much progress recently in working to make that happen. So I guess that is going as hoped.
Now there is hope and then there is Hope. And I am not lacking in regards to the Hope, and that affects my hopes about the future past this current life, but there certain things that I still hope to experience before then.
In the same way that hope is shared in the movie, the Gospel can be shared with those who are oppressed. And similar to the movie, that sharing sometimes happens at the expense of people's lives. The negative things implied in the book of Revelation and in other prophesies can be a source of fear, which I find to blunt that hope more than it probably should, at least from my perspective. So I don't find myself sharing that Hope as much as I probably could be. And I hope to improve things in that regard.
People were willing to sacrifice their lives in order to spread that hope. It happened repeatedly in the movie, and was directly discussed frequently. I am used to the idea of males sacrificing their lives to protect females, and I assume that is a natural instinct. I have trouble accepting the idea of the reverse happening, so I had trouble understanding the why, let alone the how, when the movie addressed that issue. The movie is not subtle about the fact that the plot hinges entirely on hope.
The whole experience has caused me to examine what effect hope has on my life. Certain things in my life have gone pretty much as I hoped they would, and I think it is safe to say that is a good thing. But they are now things that I no longer have to hope for. There are other things I have been hoping to see happen for a long time, and I see little positive progress towards those hopes being realized.
I feel like I am starting to lose hope for some of those things. For example, in a generic sense, I hope to get married someday, preferably sooner rather than later. But the specifics of how that might happen, or with whom, I have little vision for anymore. Hope requires a degree of vision. You have to be able to see or imagine what you are hoping for. It is hard for me to even imagine a scenario that would lead to what I am hoping for occurring anytime soon, so it is hard to work towards the realization of that hope. Being able to envision the future is the first step to bringing it about. Envisioning a positive future is a source of hope, envisioning a negative future is a source of fear. So in part due to the fact that I have a pretty clear vision of what I want my house and property to be like, I have made much progress recently in working to make that happen. So I guess that is going as hoped.
Now there is hope and then there is Hope. And I am not lacking in regards to the Hope, and that affects my hopes about the future past this current life, but there certain things that I still hope to experience before then.
In the same way that hope is shared in the movie, the Gospel can be shared with those who are oppressed. And similar to the movie, that sharing sometimes happens at the expense of people's lives. The negative things implied in the book of Revelation and in other prophesies can be a source of fear, which I find to blunt that hope more than it probably should, at least from my perspective. So I don't find myself sharing that Hope as much as I probably could be. And I hope to improve things in that regard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)