It has been 16 days since my last post so I thought I'd better write something to let everyone know I'm still planning on posting regularly and that I have not given up on it! ;-)
Tomorrow I will be teaching in the youth Sunday school (jr. and sr. high) on the topic of Theodicy. They are currently going through the book of Genesis but I thought I'd go with this while the regular teacher is away. In any case, I will post that study tomorrow afternoon. Another topic I will post on in the coming days is my book reviews. As some of you may know, I am reading through Michael Horton's "A Better Way" which deals with worship. I am almost done with it but I confess it's taken me a long time to get through it. The book itself is good, great in many areas, but my heart has not been in it for some reason. I have vowed to myself that I am going to reread every one of my theology books one by one and I will only read one at a time so it's been frustrating because I normally read two or three books simultaneously...but I want to do it one at a time so that I can review every one of them! Oh well, i'm going to focus on finishing it and if the Lord wills it I will post a review of it by the end of the week at the latest!
One final thing...for you book lovers out there. Go to www.paperbackswap.com and sign yourselves up! It is an awesome site. You basically agree to give up any books you post, and mail them to whomever requests them, at your cost. In return, if you see a book you want, you request it and it gets sent to you...FREE!!! Every time you send one of your books, you can order another one! And when you first sign up, if you post 10 books, you get two credits for free! I've already sent out three of my books and ordered two...how exciting!
Well enough advertising, or else I might have to ask them to hook me up with some more credits! ha ha!
I'll post more later!
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Christianity and Hell
I'm taking a quick break here at work so I headed over to Dr. Albert Mohlers blog and read a pretty eye opening post there. I'm adding it here so that anyone interested will read it...and actually I would highly recommend that you do. If you are willing, I'd love to know your thoughts in the comments section here! ;-)
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Brief Thoughts on Genesis 15
Those of you who know me well are aware that the book of Genesis is among my favorite books in Scripture. In addition to this, chapter 15 has to be among my favorite chapters from Genesis! The reason is quite simple...it serves to remind me of the awesome trustworthiness of God. I know that I can rely upon Him to remain true to the promises He has made; true to His covenants. And so it is that I know that my relationship with Him cannot be severed by my stupidity or by my failure to fully ignore this body of flesh in which I dwell.
Indeed, if my salvation depends on myself, then I am eternally lost! I have recently come across people who believe they are unable to sin, indeed that they are holy as God is holy. I don't share their views...the children of God sin, did not David have a man killed in order to cover up his lust? Was he not a man after God's own heart (1 Samuel 13:14)? Indeed he was. Therefore it seems to me that it was a good thing for David that God had chosen him, or David's actions would have separated him from God forever! Likewise, in my own life...I see that I am so unworthy of His mercy, of His grace. I could catalogue the number of sins I am guilty of on this day alone! Don't worry, I won't actually do so, but I hope you understand what I mean!
So yes, when I read the book of Genesis, it is such a joy to turn to Genesis 15:17 and read that "...it came to pass, when the sun went down and it was dark, that behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a burning torch that passed between those pieces."
I could go on and on about the meaning of this verse, but I've already done so on a different post. Suffice it to say that it ranks right up there with Romans 8:38-39 as far as giving us assurance of salvation. So as I get ready to head to bed, I do so with a heart at rest.
My God is worthy of trust. For while God is for us, who can be against us? (Romans 8:31)
Amen!
Indeed, if my salvation depends on myself, then I am eternally lost! I have recently come across people who believe they are unable to sin, indeed that they are holy as God is holy. I don't share their views...the children of God sin, did not David have a man killed in order to cover up his lust? Was he not a man after God's own heart (1 Samuel 13:14)? Indeed he was. Therefore it seems to me that it was a good thing for David that God had chosen him, or David's actions would have separated him from God forever! Likewise, in my own life...I see that I am so unworthy of His mercy, of His grace. I could catalogue the number of sins I am guilty of on this day alone! Don't worry, I won't actually do so, but I hope you understand what I mean!
So yes, when I read the book of Genesis, it is such a joy to turn to Genesis 15:17 and read that "...it came to pass, when the sun went down and it was dark, that behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a burning torch that passed between those pieces."
I could go on and on about the meaning of this verse, but I've already done so on a different post. Suffice it to say that it ranks right up there with Romans 8:38-39 as far as giving us assurance of salvation. So as I get ready to head to bed, I do so with a heart at rest.
My God is worthy of trust. For while God is for us, who can be against us? (Romans 8:31)
Amen!
To: Anonymous Re: last post
Dear Anonymous:
I want to begin by thanking you for taking the time to read and comment on my blog. As one who blogs “just for the fun of it,” it is always exciting to know someone other than my immediate family is reading it!
Though we obviously differ as to the actual intent of the ACLU’s actions here (protecting our constitutional rights vs. suppressing the will of the people), I agree completely with you regarding the makeup of the organization, meaning that it is indeed made up of people from all walks of life and geographical locations, including our own Nampa, Idaho. So when I used the term “outsiders” you are correct in bringing me to task for that comment, and I apologize for it (and chalk it up to rhetorical passion!). I will not remove it from the post for the sake of maintaining the flow of the discussion, but I stand corrected on that. As to the rest, again, we differ as to our opinions of what the actions of the ACLU intended to accomplish, but if you were to read my post a second time perhaps you’ll see (I hope) that the issue at hand, for me anyhow, is the involvement of the ACLU at all.
I won’t bore you by repeating everything I wrote, but to me this is problematic because I do indeed feel it is an unwarranted intrusion into the authority of local governing entities. I will point to the actions of those who wanted the books removed and remind you that they did not turn to lawsuits when the decision of the board went against them. Admittedly they did not move on and focus their energies on spreading the Gospel, but that is neither here nor there. They continued to try to influence the Board through other means, and while we can debate forever and ever whether they should have done this, I suspect you and I would agree on that issue! Again though, my premise is that turning to the legal system to handle an issue such as this one does indeed represent uncalled for intimidation, because whether or not it was the local members of the ACLU that took this to that next step, it used the impressive powers of the ACLU to do so.
Whether this is in defense of the constitutional rights of all citizens is debatable for two reasons:
1) I don’t think most people consider their rights to have been violated…only those who felt they “lost” with that last decision from the Board.
2) Even though you seem to imply by your wording that the Board is unfamiliar with the Constitution (“All the ACLU did was remind the board of the first item on the addendum to that obscure document called the Constitution”), I myself am not. Nor do I believe the Board members themselves are unfamiliar with it, for my experience with every one of them is that they are highly intelligent and caring members of the community…exercising their authority and fulfilling their roles as each is led by his/her conscience to do so. Whether one agrees with their decision or not, it is unfair to characterize them as something they are not. Those on both sides of the issue are wonderful people and I appreciate one and all of them.
At any rate, the 1st amendment to that wonderful document you cite is as follows:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
-Constitutional Amendment I (Bill of Rights) ratified December 15th, 1791
Here is where the problem lies…looking at the portion in question here, “…abridging the freedom of speech…” it is difficult to determine what exactly freedom of speech means. Certainly the Founding Fathers were confused about it as much as anyone else, as witnessed by the true examples of 1st amendment violations exhibited by them…including shutting down opposition newspapers! Talk about censorship! :-)
All I mean by pointing this out is that nobody can say emphatically that the Board made an “indefensible decision” because it is actually not clear that sequestering books constitutes a 1st amendment violation. I personally don’t think it even constitutes censorship, for the reason I mentioned in my post. Isn’t this, in part, one of the reasons the ACLU may have been so quick to attempt a lawsuit? Not merely to make the Board reverse its decision but to take this, hopefully, to the Supreme Court so that a murky issue can be clarified? I think so, but I could be wrong. And again I refer to my main concern…that this is a local issue and should remain so.
I hope this kind of clarifies where I was coming from. I do welcome any questions you may have as to my views, or if you’d like me to clarify anything I’ve said.
Before ending this comment (can it be a mere “comment” if it has more than two paragraphs? ;-) I do want to address your second paragraph. I have never written anything regarding the Ten Commandments issue but I did write the following as a result of the last incident at the library:
http://luna4him.blogspot.com/2008/03/christian-behavior-in-public-arena.html
Although you end the paragraph by stating that you would not accuse me of that which you wrote, you kind of did. You said that "it seems a tad hypocritical for a self-professed Christian to call the ACLU bullies when they approached the library board, yet it's perfectly acceptable for a radically conservative Christian group to do do the same thing to the library board, and for Christian activists to sue a city to impose its will on local government by forcing it to place the Ten Commandments monument in the park." I must assume I am that "self-professed Christian" in question. But it's okay because I myself have written pretty strong stuff before and made general assumptions that turned out not to be true. We all do it, so I accept that you are not actually lumping me in with those whom you mention! ;-)
Whether it is the ACLU or a Christian group, I do NOT think lawsuits are the way to go. I have been wronged before, for matters which I would have been justified in seeking legal resolution, but I do not believe it is right for me as a Christian to sue for my "rights." My trust must always be in God alone. Indeed, one of my biggest concerns with the whole Ten Commandments monument issue was summarized quite nicely by one of my heroes, Dr. Albert Mohler (President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary), who preached a series on the Ten Commandments and referred to all the nationwide legal battles over public diplays of the Ten Commandments. He said that he suspected that those most zealously guarding our religious "freedom" were also the ones least likely to be able to recite the Commandments if asked to do so.
Based on my personally knowing some of those who were active in the Boise incidents, I would agree with his suspicion. How much better if we as Christians actually focused on sharing the Gospel rather than fighting for our "rights" through the court systems! A society will not be made more holy by legal rulings...only by the change that Christ alone brings. But I digress...
I hope this adequately adresses any concerns you may have had. I have noticed that while preparing this response to you that I've received two more comments! Wow...when I write on Biblical issues I don't get this kind of response! Maybe I should change my focus and write on more politically revelant issues from now on! ;-) Nah...
Thank you again for having read my blog!
I want to begin by thanking you for taking the time to read and comment on my blog. As one who blogs “just for the fun of it,” it is always exciting to know someone other than my immediate family is reading it!
Though we obviously differ as to the actual intent of the ACLU’s actions here (protecting our constitutional rights vs. suppressing the will of the people), I agree completely with you regarding the makeup of the organization, meaning that it is indeed made up of people from all walks of life and geographical locations, including our own Nampa, Idaho. So when I used the term “outsiders” you are correct in bringing me to task for that comment, and I apologize for it (and chalk it up to rhetorical passion!). I will not remove it from the post for the sake of maintaining the flow of the discussion, but I stand corrected on that. As to the rest, again, we differ as to our opinions of what the actions of the ACLU intended to accomplish, but if you were to read my post a second time perhaps you’ll see (I hope) that the issue at hand, for me anyhow, is the involvement of the ACLU at all.
I won’t bore you by repeating everything I wrote, but to me this is problematic because I do indeed feel it is an unwarranted intrusion into the authority of local governing entities. I will point to the actions of those who wanted the books removed and remind you that they did not turn to lawsuits when the decision of the board went against them. Admittedly they did not move on and focus their energies on spreading the Gospel, but that is neither here nor there. They continued to try to influence the Board through other means, and while we can debate forever and ever whether they should have done this, I suspect you and I would agree on that issue! Again though, my premise is that turning to the legal system to handle an issue such as this one does indeed represent uncalled for intimidation, because whether or not it was the local members of the ACLU that took this to that next step, it used the impressive powers of the ACLU to do so.
Whether this is in defense of the constitutional rights of all citizens is debatable for two reasons:
1) I don’t think most people consider their rights to have been violated…only those who felt they “lost” with that last decision from the Board.
2) Even though you seem to imply by your wording that the Board is unfamiliar with the Constitution (“All the ACLU did was remind the board of the first item on the addendum to that obscure document called the Constitution”), I myself am not. Nor do I believe the Board members themselves are unfamiliar with it, for my experience with every one of them is that they are highly intelligent and caring members of the community…exercising their authority and fulfilling their roles as each is led by his/her conscience to do so. Whether one agrees with their decision or not, it is unfair to characterize them as something they are not. Those on both sides of the issue are wonderful people and I appreciate one and all of them.
At any rate, the 1st amendment to that wonderful document you cite is as follows:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
-Constitutional Amendment I (Bill of Rights) ratified December 15th, 1791
Here is where the problem lies…looking at the portion in question here, “…abridging the freedom of speech…” it is difficult to determine what exactly freedom of speech means. Certainly the Founding Fathers were confused about it as much as anyone else, as witnessed by the true examples of 1st amendment violations exhibited by them…including shutting down opposition newspapers! Talk about censorship! :-)
All I mean by pointing this out is that nobody can say emphatically that the Board made an “indefensible decision” because it is actually not clear that sequestering books constitutes a 1st amendment violation. I personally don’t think it even constitutes censorship, for the reason I mentioned in my post. Isn’t this, in part, one of the reasons the ACLU may have been so quick to attempt a lawsuit? Not merely to make the Board reverse its decision but to take this, hopefully, to the Supreme Court so that a murky issue can be clarified? I think so, but I could be wrong. And again I refer to my main concern…that this is a local issue and should remain so.
I hope this kind of clarifies where I was coming from. I do welcome any questions you may have as to my views, or if you’d like me to clarify anything I’ve said.
Before ending this comment (can it be a mere “comment” if it has more than two paragraphs? ;-) I do want to address your second paragraph. I have never written anything regarding the Ten Commandments issue but I did write the following as a result of the last incident at the library:
http://luna4him.blogspot.com/2008/03/christian-behavior-in-public-arena.html
Although you end the paragraph by stating that you would not accuse me of that which you wrote, you kind of did. You said that "it seems a tad hypocritical for a self-professed Christian to call the ACLU bullies when they approached the library board, yet it's perfectly acceptable for a radically conservative Christian group to do do the same thing to the library board, and for Christian activists to sue a city to impose its will on local government by forcing it to place the Ten Commandments monument in the park." I must assume I am that "self-professed Christian" in question. But it's okay because I myself have written pretty strong stuff before and made general assumptions that turned out not to be true. We all do it, so I accept that you are not actually lumping me in with those whom you mention! ;-)
Whether it is the ACLU or a Christian group, I do NOT think lawsuits are the way to go. I have been wronged before, for matters which I would have been justified in seeking legal resolution, but I do not believe it is right for me as a Christian to sue for my "rights." My trust must always be in God alone. Indeed, one of my biggest concerns with the whole Ten Commandments monument issue was summarized quite nicely by one of my heroes, Dr. Albert Mohler (President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary), who preached a series on the Ten Commandments and referred to all the nationwide legal battles over public diplays of the Ten Commandments. He said that he suspected that those most zealously guarding our religious "freedom" were also the ones least likely to be able to recite the Commandments if asked to do so.
Based on my personally knowing some of those who were active in the Boise incidents, I would agree with his suspicion. How much better if we as Christians actually focused on sharing the Gospel rather than fighting for our "rights" through the court systems! A society will not be made more holy by legal rulings...only by the change that Christ alone brings. But I digress...
I hope this adequately adresses any concerns you may have had. I have noticed that while preparing this response to you that I've received two more comments! Wow...when I write on Biblical issues I don't get this kind of response! Maybe I should change my focus and write on more politically revelant issues from now on! ;-) Nah...
Thank you again for having read my blog!
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
The ACLU and the Nampa Public Library
Let me begin this short post by apologizing ahead of time for taking a small detour away from thoughts on Biblical issues. I am asserting my rights as the writer to diverge from it in order to quickly comment on something that has happened at work which is really troubling to me. You see, the Nampa Public Library, for which I work, has returned some controversial books on sexuality to the shelves. You may be surprised to know that this does not trouble me as much as another issue which I will address in just a moment. For now, however, please read the aricle in the Idaho Press-Tribune, found here
Now then, a number of years ago the library was approached by concerned citizens and asked to remove the books because they were considered pornographic in nature. I suspect that another major motivator was the presence of one book in paritcular since it had to do with homosexuality. Because I hold to the Bible as the literal and revealed Word of God, I believe the best way to impact our society is by sharing Christ and making disciples of all people, NOT by forcing others to believe as we do; but be that as it may, the citizens exercised their rights to protest the books in question. While many of my co-workers and others immediately took up the cry of censorship, I believe this is an exaggeration. Censorship is given different definitions by different groups depending on their own agenda, but traditionally censorship has been the action of the government attempting to ban material by preventing its access by any means. This was not the case here at all. Access to the books would be limited at the library but nobody can truly censor books from everywhere else, only a government can do that. Besided which, all citizens have the right to express concern, to challenge books, and to have a voice in the decisions of their government, local or federal. So while I disagreed with the manner in which the books were challenged (there were many exaggerations and even complete falsehoods were used to justify the attack on the books...unfortunately by many people I attended church with at the time), I have never thought that those who brought the challenge were wrong in doing so...even if I do think there were confused as to their duties as Believers.
At any rate, the Board at that time voted to keep the books in the collection because of the library's mission statement and collection development policy. In many ways, they were right to do so. I don't say I agree with the decision made, but I can see why they made it. So at that time many people celebrated the "defeat of censorship" or were saddened by the "defeat of family values," the label applying to which side you were on, of course. Regardless though, a local board made a decision and that is as it should be.
Fast forward to June of this year, when a Board made up of a couple of different members once again faced a challenge to the same books, brought up again by the same people. This time, however, the Board moved to sequester the books in the Director's office and then change the collection development policy to prevent pornographic books from being selected. I lost no sleep over the removal of the books, but I was still concerned over the Board's decision, but only because they should have changed the policy first and then allowed the books to remain until they could be weeded out if they were not being circulated (which is our policy with all books). Again though, a local board made a decision and some people were sad but others were happy. And now, as you know if you've read the article linked above, the books are once again on the shelves (as of today).
Here is my issue: However chaotic local government can be, and however much people on either side of an issue will fight within the community, it is at the local level that these things belong. The ACLU, however, has come into a situation and unilaterally decided for everyone what is right and what is wrong! This really makes me upset. Whether for good or bad, our local governing entities have the right to make decisions for which we elect them, but outsiders come into a community and decide it does not matter how people feel about an issue so long as they know what is right and what is wrong. Rule by judicial fiat in other words. And now, while many of my co-workers will rejoice that the books are back on the shelves, our local autonomy has been washed away because a powerful lobby has used its wealth to intimidate into compliance our Board of Trustees. I wish they would have been willing to take this all the way to the Supreme Court, but I cannot judge them too harshly for not doing so. The members did what they felt was the right thing to do, and I respect that. But I do not have any respect for the bullies of the ACLU...and as for those who are all too happy over the decision, I can only think of that scene in "Revenge of the Sith" (come on, it's a GREAT movie!) when the empire is declared...and Mrs. Skywalker turn to her retinue and says, "Is this how democracy dies? To the sound of applause?" (I know, it's not an exact quote!) This is exactly how I feel. Again, democracy is messy, but it is about what the people want, not what lobbies determine is best.
Those are my thoughts.
Now then, a number of years ago the library was approached by concerned citizens and asked to remove the books because they were considered pornographic in nature. I suspect that another major motivator was the presence of one book in paritcular since it had to do with homosexuality. Because I hold to the Bible as the literal and revealed Word of God, I believe the best way to impact our society is by sharing Christ and making disciples of all people, NOT by forcing others to believe as we do; but be that as it may, the citizens exercised their rights to protest the books in question. While many of my co-workers and others immediately took up the cry of censorship, I believe this is an exaggeration. Censorship is given different definitions by different groups depending on their own agenda, but traditionally censorship has been the action of the government attempting to ban material by preventing its access by any means. This was not the case here at all. Access to the books would be limited at the library but nobody can truly censor books from everywhere else, only a government can do that. Besided which, all citizens have the right to express concern, to challenge books, and to have a voice in the decisions of their government, local or federal. So while I disagreed with the manner in which the books were challenged (there were many exaggerations and even complete falsehoods were used to justify the attack on the books...unfortunately by many people I attended church with at the time), I have never thought that those who brought the challenge were wrong in doing so...even if I do think there were confused as to their duties as Believers.
At any rate, the Board at that time voted to keep the books in the collection because of the library's mission statement and collection development policy. In many ways, they were right to do so. I don't say I agree with the decision made, but I can see why they made it. So at that time many people celebrated the "defeat of censorship" or were saddened by the "defeat of family values," the label applying to which side you were on, of course. Regardless though, a local board made a decision and that is as it should be.
Fast forward to June of this year, when a Board made up of a couple of different members once again faced a challenge to the same books, brought up again by the same people. This time, however, the Board moved to sequester the books in the Director's office and then change the collection development policy to prevent pornographic books from being selected. I lost no sleep over the removal of the books, but I was still concerned over the Board's decision, but only because they should have changed the policy first and then allowed the books to remain until they could be weeded out if they were not being circulated (which is our policy with all books). Again though, a local board made a decision and some people were sad but others were happy. And now, as you know if you've read the article linked above, the books are once again on the shelves (as of today).
Here is my issue: However chaotic local government can be, and however much people on either side of an issue will fight within the community, it is at the local level that these things belong. The ACLU, however, has come into a situation and unilaterally decided for everyone what is right and what is wrong! This really makes me upset. Whether for good or bad, our local governing entities have the right to make decisions for which we elect them, but outsiders come into a community and decide it does not matter how people feel about an issue so long as they know what is right and what is wrong. Rule by judicial fiat in other words. And now, while many of my co-workers will rejoice that the books are back on the shelves, our local autonomy has been washed away because a powerful lobby has used its wealth to intimidate into compliance our Board of Trustees. I wish they would have been willing to take this all the way to the Supreme Court, but I cannot judge them too harshly for not doing so. The members did what they felt was the right thing to do, and I respect that. But I do not have any respect for the bullies of the ACLU...and as for those who are all too happy over the decision, I can only think of that scene in "Revenge of the Sith" (come on, it's a GREAT movie!) when the empire is declared...and Mrs. Skywalker turn to her retinue and says, "Is this how democracy dies? To the sound of applause?" (I know, it's not an exact quote!) This is exactly how I feel. Again, democracy is messy, but it is about what the people want, not what lobbies determine is best.
Those are my thoughts.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
"Christian" Chat Rooms and Discussion Boards
Well today is the last day of August and it strikes me that this has been one quick summer! I realize that as we get older time seems to speed up for us but still...
In my own life, many of you know that I have been going through quite a bit in the last couple of months. Well while the worst of that situation appears to be over, it is not completely over nor will it truly be over for the next three years! Unfortunately we live in a wicked society, but this gives me all the more reason to be in the Word and remain faithful to my God! I will not sit down to rest from the battle while the enemy indeed seeks to devour the followers of our Lord!
But aside from that quick update, my purpose in writing tonight is to share a brief thought I've had over the last few weeks. As you know from my blog, I have an account with LibraryThing (you can see the widget that shows my books on the right of my posts). Well I have catalogued all my books on theology and am seriously contemplating doing the same for my books on history and my novels. The only thing that has kept me from doing this so far has been that my widget is on this blog and I don't want my books on WW2 or my novels to show up on my blog! But I may do so anyhow and then remove the widget...we'll see. If I do leave it on the blog just don't be surprised when you start seeing Louis L'Amour novels show up from time to time! lol
Back to my thesis here though...on my LibraryThing account I joined a Christian discussion board and over the last few months I have been reaffirmed in my belief that the vast majority of those who refer to themselves as Christians are not truly saved nor do they even pretend to acknowledge that there is such a thing as the Word of God! They act like members of the Jesus Seminar, deciding for themselves what they will and what they will not believe! So many times I have attempted to engage someone in discussion about some theological point, or about some passage of Scripture in the OT and then found out that the person or persons I was communicating wth did not even believe the passage could really be real or have any possible application to our "modern" times. Only one God and one Mediator (Jesus)? Ha! I must be very arrogant to believe such a thing! Homosexuality, abortion, lust...dare I call these sins? Well I must be a very judgmental person! Does the Bible teach what I have declared? No, and if it appears to do so then it is either my misinterpretation or the Bible is wrong on the issue! After all, it was written by mere men, right?
How sad, no? Due to this, I have shaken the dust from my sandals and have decided not to engage in discussion with these groups of people. Does this mean I don't want to stand firm for Biblical Truth? Not at all. But allow me to give you an example of what my thinking is. Back when I was teaching Sunday school, one of my great joys was to present the Scripture and then discuss the passages with people. Not because I thought we could see what we "thought" the passage was saying but because my hope was to teach and to correct misunderstandings that people had about the Word. But what if someone came into my Sunday school class and denied the authority of Scripture? Or denied the doctrines of the Trinity, eternal security, Deity of Christ, etc...? I tell you honestly right now that I see no reason why in
Sunday school we need to pause the teaching in order to address these people who would voice such thoughts. I say set the question aside and meet with the person one on one later on. Sunday school is, as shocking as it may sound, for the teaching of the Believer!
If ever again it pleases my Lord to permit me to teach His Word, I will continue to teach with this foremost in my mind: there are Truth's that must be assumed. What I mean by this is that when I come before a Sunday school, I have the right to assume that those sitting with me acknowledge the basic Truth's of Christianity. For someone to say they are a Christian and deny these is for them to expose themselves for what they are: Non Believers. NOT Christians. For them, I need to present the Gospel and explain to them their need for a Savior. And this I am happy to do one on one with them. But as I've said often before, if the person devoid of faith in Jesus Christ comes into our churches and our Sunday school classes, let them listen in silence and let them ask questions of the pastor and teacher later on. And most of them do...remain silent that is. For it is my experience that those who speak up with their doubts in the midst of a class are those who wish to attack God Himself. They don't really want answers...they want to present their own worldview and mock Christianity! Fine. Let them mock it all they want, just not in the assemblage of the saints!
In my own life, many of you know that I have been going through quite a bit in the last couple of months. Well while the worst of that situation appears to be over, it is not completely over nor will it truly be over for the next three years! Unfortunately we live in a wicked society, but this gives me all the more reason to be in the Word and remain faithful to my God! I will not sit down to rest from the battle while the enemy indeed seeks to devour the followers of our Lord!
But aside from that quick update, my purpose in writing tonight is to share a brief thought I've had over the last few weeks. As you know from my blog, I have an account with LibraryThing (you can see the widget that shows my books on the right of my posts). Well I have catalogued all my books on theology and am seriously contemplating doing the same for my books on history and my novels. The only thing that has kept me from doing this so far has been that my widget is on this blog and I don't want my books on WW2 or my novels to show up on my blog! But I may do so anyhow and then remove the widget...we'll see. If I do leave it on the blog just don't be surprised when you start seeing Louis L'Amour novels show up from time to time! lol
Back to my thesis here though...on my LibraryThing account I joined a Christian discussion board and over the last few months I have been reaffirmed in my belief that the vast majority of those who refer to themselves as Christians are not truly saved nor do they even pretend to acknowledge that there is such a thing as the Word of God! They act like members of the Jesus Seminar, deciding for themselves what they will and what they will not believe! So many times I have attempted to engage someone in discussion about some theological point, or about some passage of Scripture in the OT and then found out that the person or persons I was communicating wth did not even believe the passage could really be real or have any possible application to our "modern" times. Only one God and one Mediator (Jesus)? Ha! I must be very arrogant to believe such a thing! Homosexuality, abortion, lust...dare I call these sins? Well I must be a very judgmental person! Does the Bible teach what I have declared? No, and if it appears to do so then it is either my misinterpretation or the Bible is wrong on the issue! After all, it was written by mere men, right?
How sad, no? Due to this, I have shaken the dust from my sandals and have decided not to engage in discussion with these groups of people. Does this mean I don't want to stand firm for Biblical Truth? Not at all. But allow me to give you an example of what my thinking is. Back when I was teaching Sunday school, one of my great joys was to present the Scripture and then discuss the passages with people. Not because I thought we could see what we "thought" the passage was saying but because my hope was to teach and to correct misunderstandings that people had about the Word. But what if someone came into my Sunday school class and denied the authority of Scripture? Or denied the doctrines of the Trinity, eternal security, Deity of Christ, etc...? I tell you honestly right now that I see no reason why in
Sunday school we need to pause the teaching in order to address these people who would voice such thoughts. I say set the question aside and meet with the person one on one later on. Sunday school is, as shocking as it may sound, for the teaching of the Believer!
If ever again it pleases my Lord to permit me to teach His Word, I will continue to teach with this foremost in my mind: there are Truth's that must be assumed. What I mean by this is that when I come before a Sunday school, I have the right to assume that those sitting with me acknowledge the basic Truth's of Christianity. For someone to say they are a Christian and deny these is for them to expose themselves for what they are: Non Believers. NOT Christians. For them, I need to present the Gospel and explain to them their need for a Savior. And this I am happy to do one on one with them. But as I've said often before, if the person devoid of faith in Jesus Christ comes into our churches and our Sunday school classes, let them listen in silence and let them ask questions of the pastor and teacher later on. And most of them do...remain silent that is. For it is my experience that those who speak up with their doubts in the midst of a class are those who wish to attack God Himself. They don't really want answers...they want to present their own worldview and mock Christianity! Fine. Let them mock it all they want, just not in the assemblage of the saints!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
