Friday, November 29, 2013

Christian and Wealth

 

On the subject of economic issues, the Bible is not silent and it is not a matter of private interpretation. We try to believe that Jesus did not address practical economic questions.

 

The biblical injunctions against the exploitation of the poor and the accumulation of wealth are clear and straightforward. The Bible challenges nearly every economic value of contemporary society. For example, the Old Testament takes exception to the popular notion of an absolute right to private property. Leviticus 25:23 "The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me.  The Old Testament legislation of the year of Jubilee stipulated that all land was to revert back to its original owner. In fact, the Bible states that wealth itself belongs to the God, and one purpose of the year of Jubilee was to provide a regular redistribution of wealth. Such a radical view of economics flies in the face of nearly all contemporary belief and practice.  Had Israel faithfully observed the Jubilee it would have eliminated the perennial problem of the rich becoming richer and the poor becoming poorer.

 

The bible deals decisively with the spirit of slavery that an idolatrous attachment to wealth brings. "if riches increase, set not your heart on them." Psalm 62:10. The tenth commandment is against covetousness, the inner lust to have, which leads to stealing and oppression. Solomon wrote, "Whoever trusts in his riches will fall,

but the righteous will flourish like a green leaf." Proverbs 11:28.

 

Jesus spoke against materialism of his day and presumably of our day. The Aramaic term for wealth is "mammon" and Jesus condemns it as a rival God. "No servant can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money." He speaks frequently and unambiguously to economic issues.  He says ""Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God." … "…woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation." Luke 6: 20, 24.

 

 

 

 

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

1700's Puritan?

There is a widespread modern misconception regarding the term Puritan. Today many people believe good Puritans abstained from all sensual pleasures, and certainly before marriage. Actually, the religious denomination now known as Congregationalist acquired the label "Puritan" for reasons that had nothing to do with moral purity in the modern sense. The movement arose in seventeenth-century England with the purpose of purifying the government-sanctioned Church of England of its Catholic vestiges; hence the name "Puritan."


Unlike today every young woman of the provincial middle class knew that her "character"---her reputation for chastity---was all she had. even a sliver of suspicion that she had compromised herself with a man who had not pledged to marry her might doom her chances of ever finding a partner. 

 

In "Puritan" New England one-third of brides were pregnant on the day they married. Marriage for women meant continuous rounds of pregnancies, nursing, infant deaths/child rearing. Death in childbirth was common enough that many colonial women regarded pregnancy with dread. In their letters, women often referred to childbirth as "the Dreaded apparition," "the greatest of earthly miseries," or "that evil hour I look forward to with dread."

 

In addition to her anxieties about pregnancy, an expectant mother was filled with apprehensions about the death of her newborn child. The death of a child in infancy was far more common than it is today. In the healthiest seventeenth century communities, one infant in ten died before the age of five. In less healthy environments, three children in ten died before their fifth birthday. Puritan minister Cotton Mather saw eight of his fifteen children die before reaching the age of two.

 

Today, most women give birth in hospitals under close medical supervision, if they wish, women can take anesthetics. During the seventeen century in colonial America, the typical woman gave birth to her children at home, while female kin and neighbors at her bedside to offer support and encouragement. When the daughter of Samuel Sewall, a Puritan magistrate, gave birth to her first child on the last day of January, 1701, at least eight other women were present at her bedside, including her mother, her mother-in-law, a midwife, a nurse, and at least four other neighbors.

 

During labor, midwives administered no painkillers, except for alcohol. Pain in childbirth was considered God's punishment for Eve's sin of eating the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. Women were merely advised to "arm themselves with patience" and prayer and to try, during labor, to restrain "those dreadful groans and cries which do so much discourage their friends and relations that are near them."

 

After delivery, new mothers were often treated to a banquet. At one such event, visitors feasted on "boiled pork, beef, fowls, very good roast beef, turkey-pie, [and] tarts." Women from well-to-do families were then expected to spend three to four weeks in bed convalescing. Their attendants kept the fire place burning and wrapped them in a heavy blanket in order to help them sweat out "poisons." Women from poorer families were generally back at work in one or two days.

 

In her book When Abortion Was a Crime, Leslie J. Reagan writes that abortion has been a common procedure -- "part of life" -- in America since the eighteenth century, both during the slightly more than half of our history as a nation when it has been legal and during the slightly less than half when it was not.

 

Christians are typically anti-abortion with some exceptions. Exceptions void the argument the fetus is human life therefore abortion is murder. The condition of the fetus or the manner of conception such as rape or incest do not define the fetus. Human life is human life.

 

Moral Purity

The scribes and Pharisees brought to Jesus a woman who had been caught in adultery. Throwing her at his feet, they said to Jesus. "Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. In the law Moses commanded us to stone such a woman. What do you say?"
 
Jesus said to them, "The law is clear. we'll have to kill her."
 
And saying that, he picked up a rock and threw it at her, striking her on the head.
 
The scribes and Pharisees joined in with great enthusiasm, throwing stones at the woman until she was dead.
 
Then Jesus turned to them and said, "Let she who is with sin be stoned."
 
And the scribes and Pharisees marveled at his devotion to purity.
 
This is did not happen. Jesus pointed out the sinfulness of all people and forgave the woman. It was acts such as this that led to his arrest and murder. Grace is a scandal when we're infatuated with moral purity.

Fixed-Earth?

What are we to think of astronomer Nicholas Copernicus's suggestion that the earth moves, when Scripture seems to teach that the earth is immovably fixed in space? This may not seem to be a huge deal today but at the time it was a very hot topic. In the fourth century BC the famous Greek philosopher Aristotle taught that the earth was fixed in the center of the universe and that the sun, stars, and planets revolved around it. Aristotle's fixed-earth view was the official church view for centuries even though, as early as 250 BC, Aristochus of Samos proposed that the earth and planets revolved around the Sun at the center of the solar system. To the ordinary people it looked like the sun appears to go around the earth; and if the earth moves, why aren't we thrown off into space? Why does a stone, thrown straight up into the air, come straight down and if the earth rotating rapidly why don't we feel a strong wind blowing in our faces in the opposite direction to our motion? Surely the idea that the earth moves is absurd?


Aristotle's work was translated into Latin, and in the Middle Ages  it came to influence the Roman Catholic Church.


Aristotle believed that not only that the universe was old, but that it had always existed.


One fellow, Thomas Acquinas (1225-1274) had no difficulty reconciling an eternal universe with the existence of God as Creator in a philosophical sense, but he admitted that there was difficulty reconciling it with the Bible, since the Bible clearly said there had been a beginning. The fixed-earth was different: it seemed to fit in well with what the Bible said. For instance:


1 Chronicles 16:30 tremble before him, all the earth;
    yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved.


Psalm 93:1 The Lord reigns; he is robed in majesty;
    the Lord is robed; he has put on strength as his belt.

Yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved.

Psalm 104:5 He set the earth on its foundations,
    so that it should never be moved.


1Samuel 2:8 He raises up the poor from the dust;
    he lifts the needy from the ash heap
to make them sit with princes
    and inherit a seat of honor.
For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's,
    and on them he has set the world.

The Bible seemed to not only to teach that the earth was fixed; it seemed clearly to say that the sun moved.

Psalm 19:4-6 Their voice goes out through all the earth,

    and their words to the end of the world.
In them he has set a tent for the sun,
     which comes out like a bridegroom leaving his chamber,

    and, like a strong man, runs its course with joy.

 Its rising is from the end of the heavens,
    and its circuit to the end of them,
    and there is nothing hidden from its heat.

 Ecclesiastes 1:5 The sun rises, and the sun goes down,

    and hastens to the place where it rises.

 

 

 

Loving Creator or Clumsy Evolutionary Process?



Those who take the bible seriously do not agree on the creation account. Some believe the literal view of the Genesis days (young-earth) made famous by Archbishop Ussher (1581 – 1656) who gave 4004 BC as the date of the origin of the earth. On the other hand science including scientists who are Christians estimate around four billion years (old-earth).

 

Even before Darwin published The Origin of Species in mid 19th century, many Christians accepted an old-earth which rejects the literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2.  It wasn't until the middle of the 20th century that a large number of evangelicals and fundamentalists began to accept the combination of flood geology and 6-day creation promoted by Seventh-day Adventists. Others supported the idea of Accommodation.  In the Accommodation view, Genesis 1-2 was written in a simple allegorical fashion to make it easy for people of that time to understand.  Augustine (354-430) suggested that the 6 days of Genesis 1 describe a single day of creation.  St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) argued that God did not create things in their final state, but created them to have potential to develop as he intended.  The views of these and other Christian leaders are consistent with God creating life by means of evolution.

 

The discoveries of modern science does not need to be seen as contradictory to Scripture, but as guideposts toward a proper understanding of Scripture's meaning.

 

Augustine offers this advice:

 

 "In matters that are so obscure and far beyond our vision, we find in Holy Scripture passages which can be interpreted in very different ways without prejudice to the faith we have received. In such cases, we should not rush in headlong and so firmly take our stand on one side that, if further progress in the search of truth justly undermines this position, we too fall with it. That would be to battle not for the teaching of Holy Scripture but for our own, wishing its teaching to conform to ours, whereas we ought to wish ours to conform to that of Sacred Scripture."

 

Nature abounds in catastrophes, disasters, imperfections, dysfunctions, suffering and cruelty. Tsunamis destroy and kill; volcanoes erase cities killing all their citizens; floods and droughts bring ruin to farmers. Scientists say the human jaw is poorly designed, parasites kill millions of humans every year and make additional hundreds of millions sick. About 20 percent of all human pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion during the first two months; that is 20 million natural abortions every year.

 

In Northern India there is a population of Hanuman langurs. Their mating system is what biologists call harem polygamy: Dominant males have exclusive sexual access to a group of adult females, as long as they can keep other males away. Sooner or later, a stronger male usurps the harem and the defeated one must join the ranks of celibate outcasts. The new male shows his love for his new wives by trying to kill their unweaned infants. For each successful killing, a mother stops lactating and goes into estrous.... Deprived of her nursing baby, a female soon starts ovulating. She accepts the advances of her baby's murderer, and he becomes the father of her next child.

 

Is that the work of a loving creator or the results of the clumsy evolutionary process?

 

 

 

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Numbers


14% of folks 50+ believe we are not alone in the universe
27% of folks 18-34 agree we have company.

18% of folks 50+ believe there are ghosts
33% of folks 18-34 also believe there are ghosts.

10% of folks 50+ believe astrology is the real deal
19% of folks 18-34 agree.

57% of folks 50+ think angels are real
46% of folks 35-49 agree.

68% of folks 50+ believe in heaven 
56% of those 35-49 believe.

Their general conclusion is as people age and seek answers for many of there life events that tend to increase as you get older, many find comfort in religious explanations.

When you take into account teens and young adults' belief or unbelief in Satan, and what they think of Jesus' sinlessness or the lack of sinlessness somewhere someone is missing something.


Shackled and pregnant: Wis. case challenges 'fetal protection' law

A must read for those folks who want government involved in protecting the unborn.
 
 

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

The Modern Creation Story --- Karl W Giverson & Francis S. Collins


In the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth.

 

The universe begins with a mystery called, for lack of a better term—and there once was a contest to find a better term—the Big Bang. The moment of the Big Bang is beyond the grasp of science. We cannot observe it directly; our theories take us close to that moment but stop short; and our simulations of the early universe in laboratory settings can't get back to that point. What we can do, though, is see the results, and our simulations and theories start working just a fraction of a second after that moment of creation.

 

What appears at the Big Bang is what we might call the rational foundations—or the Logos—of the universe. The deepest and most fundamental laws of physics, with their various properties, emerge. These laws specify the kinds of physical interactions that can take place. Remarkably, as we saw in an earlier chapter, there are only four kinds of interactions that occur in nature: gravitational, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear. Every event, from the thoughts in your head as you read these words, to the laughter of a toddler, to the light being produced by the sun, rests upon these four interactions.

 

Out of the Big Bang comes a specification that there will be only two kinds of physical objects in the world: quarks and leptons, and their mirror-image anti-particles. Protons and neutrons are composed of quarks; the electron is the best-known example of a lepton. Every physical object, from a potato chip, to the Eiffel Tower, to the diamond on an engagement ring is made from quarks and leptons.

 

All the natural phenomena that generate the grand narrative of the universe, no matter how rich or mundane, result from quarks and leptons interacting via four kinds of interactions. Who could possibly guess that a world defined so simply could become so interesting?

 

The four forces and two particles in the universe initially seem like nothing more than chaotic parts of an incomprehensibly messy maelstrom. But then things start to happen—things that no team of scientists or even science fiction writers could ever have even imagined, much less predicted. Out of what looks like chaos comes a most remarkable and transcendent order.

 

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

 

The quarks, with electrical charges of 2/3 and –1/3, combine under the influence of the strong nuclear force, and soon they are all gathered into protons and neutrons, which have electrical charges of 1 and 0.

 

The protons, neutrons, and electrons buzz about as the universe expands and cools. As the temperature declines, the electrons drop into orbits around the protons to make hydrogen atoms—unimaginable numbers of hydrogen atoms spread across the entire universe.

 

All the particles in the universe are now electrically neutral; it turns out the universe has a perfect balance between the positive and negative charges. Once the particles in the universe have become atoms, with no net charge on them, the electrical force becomes far less relevant and the weaker gravitational force takes over. The hydrogen atoms are gathered by gravity into huge clusters, steadily growing until much of the hydrogen in the universe is gathered into gigantic clouds. The clouds get steadily larger in size, surpassing the moon, then the earth, then large planets like Jupiter.

 

And God said, "Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons and for days and years, and let them be lights in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth.

 

At a critical point the gigantic clouds of hydrogen ignite. Across the universe great clouds of hydrogen turn into stars; gravity has made them so dense that the atoms are crushed together until they start to fuse. Here we discover one of the many remarkable balances in nature: the strong force cooperates intimately with this gravitational crushing, and the hydrogen atoms combine to become helium atoms. The process that generates starlight also builds the periodic table—multi-tasking on a cosmic scale—as the simplest atoms -- hydrogen -- fuse to make helium. The fusion process continues to build increasingly heavier atoms: lithium, beryllium, boron, and then the all-important carbon, and on to nitrogen, oxygen, neon, sodium, and beyond.

 

Some of the largest stars become overwhelmed by their own gravity and undergo catastrophic inward collapses so violent that the stars actually "bounce" and explode with the force of a billion atomic bombs. Such explosions populate vast regions of space with the elements created inside the star; the explosions are strangely orderly and eerily silent since there is no sound in space. Gravity gathers the stellar material back into big clouds again. A large cloud at the center of the explosion can become another, second generation, star.

 

The earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

 

The smaller clouds, with their rich roster of elements fused from hydrogen, gradually compress into balls orbiting about the second-generation star. Many of these smaller balls, which will one day be called planets, have a remarkable new kind of structure formed from chemical combinations of atoms. One interesting molecular combination is of hydrogen and oxygen and known as H2O. In most parts of the universe, this molecule is solid, in the form of ice. In other parts the H2O is a gas. But on planets exactly the right distance from a star, the H2O is liquid, a particular liquid called water.

 

Very complex structures, from a mechanical point of view, have been built from simple raw materials; a universe that was once nothing but vast swaths of hydrogen gas now has solar systems where chemically rich planets orbit about stars with remarkably stable outputs of light. Planets at just the right distance from their "suns" have a temperature where water is liquid. This water is surprisingly capable of encouraging the formation of ever more complex molecules like amino acids, carbohydrates, and lipids. By providing a medium where atoms and molecules can jostle around gently, various combinations can form naturally. The result is increasing complexity.

 

And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures of every kind: cattle and creeping things and wild animals of the earth of every kind."

 

These complex materials grow ever more varied until one particular arrangement actually

starts duplicating itself. The ability of this structure to make copies of itself from the surrounding materials enables it to dominate the local environment and soon the waters are filled with this new process. The universe has come to life. In some extraordinary sense we can now speak in meaningful terms about the universe having information—tiny blueprints that direct the formation of ever more interesting and varied forms of simple life.

 

Subtle interactions between these primitive life-forms as they compete for resources make them increasingly more robust, as the stronger ones reproduce themselves more effectively. The copying process, driven by a surprisingly creative set of molecular interactions, steadily and mysteriously pushes the life-forms to greater and greater complexity. The information molecule driving all this will one day be identified as DNA and discovered to have an amazing ability to both reliably makes copies of itself and to explore small variations. These explorations will allow the molecule to locate small improvements to its basic structure and then reproduce that new variation with greater efficiency until it would come to dominate.

 

A major change occurred when single-celled forms of life began to cooperate and form multi-celled organisms. This cooperation empowered entirely new developments that would lead to astonishing increases in complexity and sophistication. Eventually specialized functions would emerge enabling organisms to collect visual information, to hear sounds, to have body temperatures that were constant, to have solid skeletal structures that would provide enormous protection when they were on the outside and great mechanical dexterity when they were on the inside.

 

Then God said "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, And over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."

 

As complexity increased the need to process more and more information from the external world increased also, and a remarkable central processing unit of enormous power and sophistication emerged. These brains, as they would one day be called, endowed their possessors with a growing capacity to function in the world and to understand the world.

 

Mysteriously these brains that evolved in response to challenges having to do with survival and reproduction acquired capacities to think about complex subjects. The capacity to do mathematics emerged and with it came increasingly deep insights into the patterns and underlying order of creation.

 

Eventually the most advanced of the life-forms on the planet, human beings, became deeply religious. Throughout the history of our species belief in God or gods has been close to universal. Abstractions like right and wrong, the meaning of life, and where everything came from have become critically important questions. The religious impulse developed into one of the deepest aspects of our complicated understanding of ourselves.

 

And God saw that it was Good.

 

Problems With a Literal Reading of Genesis

A literal reading of Genesis implies God "specially" created Adam and Eve and that all humans are descended from these original parents. Unfortunately this does not fit the evidence.

 

There are two stories of creation, one in Genesis 1:1-2:3 and one in Genesis 2:4-25. These accounts have different chronological orders, a fact that did not bother Christians who lived in the centuries before the discipline of history emerged, although it makes many Christians uneasy today.

 

A literal reading of Genesis runs into historical trouble when we try to reconcile the chronological details of the different creation accounts in Genesis 1-2. Difficulties arise when we work out the implications of the human race beginning with only two initial people. For example, there is the traditional problem of Cain's wife; where did she come from? The only possibility is that she was Cain's sister, but this conflicts with later biblical commands against incest. Even more problematic are the people Cain fears when he is banished from his homeland for killing his brother Abel.  Genesis 4:13-14 says:

 

Cain said to the Lord, "My punishment is greater than I can bear. 14 Behold, you have driven me today away from the ground, and from your face I shall be hidden. I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me."

 

It is implausible that the people trying to kill Cain are his extended family---siblings, nieces, nephews, and so on---the text does not suggest this. Along the same lines, Genesis mentions the city that Cain build and names after his son. Genesis4:17:

 

Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. When he built a city, he called the name of the city after the name of his son, Enoch. 

 

Who would populate this city or help build it?

 

 

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

A Possible Solution for Discussion

A week or so ago after looking at the folks in the pews, I mentioned to Dan there was an empty Nursing home somewhere. The leaders might want to consider what GSMCOC is going to look like in ten years.

 

In 1 Corinthians 5, was the problem that there was a sinner within the congregation or was it the congregation's attitude toward the sin? I believe it was the latter but am interested in your view.

 

I heard a fellow use the term suburbanized referring to the church in that the church is isolated from issues found in inner cities. A year or two ago Christian Chronicle reported that some of the people in churches in the Denver suburbs were criticized for forgoing services with their congregation to go to downtown Denver and meet with the homeless, prostitutes, drug addicts, homosexuals etc. I wonder how the church can relate to those people when they refuse to come into contact with them. And I wonder how the church can influence them when the church will not associate with them or welcome them into the assembly until those people give up their sinful practices. Are we sinless?

 

You told a story the other day about a time you and Linda thought you had encountered a church with a woman preacher but felt better when you were told it was a man with a high voice. Are you sure he/she was not transgender? Trust me, sometimes you cannot know for sure. I've been told stories by Church of Christers concerning their mistaking a Church with instruments for the real church and left when they saw the instrument. Years ago, when the Boston movement was in the news, Dottie and Shawn and I were in Boston and after searching the telephone book to avoid the Boston Church we found ourselves in an assembly where women made some announcements and prayed for the sick otherwise it was like a real church. We thought it odd but we stayed. I believe it would have been as ridiculous for us to leave as it is for people to leave when they see we have a kitchen.  I believe to its detriment the church suffers from Ideological Amplification. If you don't know what I mean by that I will explain.

 

The reason for the question concerning the problem in the Church at Corinth is how does a homosexual hurt me if they attend the same church I attend? Their attendance does not mean I accept homosexuality. If the subject comes up I can tell them what I believe the Bible says on the subject. We have formalized the assembly to the point that we accept only people who look like us and believe like us.

 

Members of the Church of Christ have an attitude similar to the one Russian President Putin chastised Obama for having we believe ourselves to be exceptional. The Christian religion began on Pentecost and went through a series of mutations. The Church of Christ today is the result of a group of Presbyterians along with a Baptist or two upset with the status quo. We took first-century conveniences, personal preferences, and biases and our conveniences, personal preferences, and biases and made them law. Calling ourselves Church of Christ does not make us the church of Christ nor does saying "In Jesus Name" mean we are speaking with his approval. We are just one of many groups that believe it has an inside track on truth.

 

One solution to promoting evangelism might be for us to remember what Jesus said "let him who is without sin, cast the first stone" and as you have made of point of saying we are not Jesus we are all learning.

 

 


John Jenkins
865-803-8179  cell
Gatlinburg, TN




Email: jrjenki@gmail.com
Blogs: http://littlepigeon.blogspot.com/
         http://alumcave.blogspot.com/


"It is, in the end, cheaper to feed the whole flock for a year than to fight them for a week. 


---1850 Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs


"If the tale of the poor wretches...could be impartially related, it would exhibit  a picture of cruelty, injustice, and horror scarcely surpassed by that of the Peruvians in the time of Pizarro. 


---1852 Gen. E. D. Townsend in his California Diary of the Indians facing pressure from the 1849 gold rush

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

BioLogos

Rich Get Richer

When the church thinks about growing we might want to consider who we want to aim for. In the United States CEOs of large corporations make over 260 times more than the average American worker 

In 2007, the top 1 percent earned 23.5 percent of all income. During the 1970s it was about 8 percent and in the 1990s around 16 percent. The people at the top are getting a bigger and bigger chunk of all income. In 2007 the top one-tenth of 1 percent took in 11 percent of total income.

Time is money. To buy a half gallon of milk a minimum wage earner must work 21 minutes the average wage earner 6.3 minutes and the typical CEO 1.9 seconds.  

To buy a tank of gasoline in 1963 the minimum wage earner had to work 3.4 hours today 8.4 hours.

In 1963 49 ozs of Tide laundry detergent cost .69 cents today $7.54, 1lb of bread in 1963 was .20 cents today $1.41. 1Lb of coffee in 1963 was .69 cents and today $3.53.

The longer one has been a believer the less one thinks like an unbeliever. If one has never worked for minimum wage one has no clue as to how tens of millions of people of the United States and over 1 billion people world wide live. In Sevier County I would not expect much help to pay for a multi million dollar building and the associated utility costs from people who on occasion have to choose between eating and buying gasoline for their car or eating and getting a prescription filled. 


John Jenkins
865-803-8179  cell
Gatlinburg, TN




Email: jrjenki@gmail.com
Blogs: http://littlepigeon.blogspot.com/
         http://alumcave.blogspot.com/


"I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation has a right to intermeddle in the internal concerns of another; that every one has a right to form and adopt whatever government they liked best to live under themselves; and that if this country could, consistently with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace, it was bound to do so by motives of policy, interest, and every other consideration. 


- George Washington, from Letter to James Monroe, August 25,1796.


Which Commandment is the Least?

When Matthew 5:19 is referenced:

 

"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

 

What does break one of these least commandments mean? Don't we teach that all commandments must be obeyed and failure means Hell if not covered by grace? What commandments are least? How about instrumental music which is not referenced at all? How about failing to let your light shine? While Jesus said it, if it is a "lesser commandment" can we be saved after a life of failing to obey Jesus on this point? What are "the important" commandments where failure to obey results in one spending eternity in torment? If we can fail to obey Jesus and live with him in Eternal Reward how about failing to obey the Apostles' instructions?

Kill the Body and the Soul?

When Matthew 10:28 is referenced:

 

And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

 

That Jesus can destroy both soul and body in Hell and that the soul can be killed are glossed over. What does that sentence mean? What does kill the soul mean? What does destroy the soul mean? Destroy usually refers to a specific point in time when something remains no more in the condition it was previously and kill refers to no longer living. How can the body (physical) get into Hell (spiritual realm) to be destroyed?

 

James M Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia

Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination .... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual unseemliness - Lev15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. Your adoring fan, James M Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia (It would be a damn shame if we couldn't own a Canadian)

King James 1

 

James, was King James VI of Scotland and successor to the England's Elizabeth as James I. Elizabeth had ordered the execution of James' mother, Mary, Queen of Scotts, a Catholic who had allegedly plotted to seize the English throne.

 

James had been a king---as he often reminded people---since his infancy. Within a year of his birth, his father had been killed, strangled by assassins after an explosion drove him from his house. Before another year had passed, his mother, Mary, Queen of Scots, had fled Scotland, suspected of having arranged her husband's death. She left her infant son behind, and James was raised by a series of guardians, several of whom also met violent deaths.

 

His precarious childhood and perhaps congenital illnesses as well, took a toll on the boy. James became a strange mixture of brilliance, eccentricity, and fearfulness. Among other habitual precautions, he always wore a thick quilted doublet to ward off dagger thrusts. His appearance inspired neither confidence nor love. Observers noted that his tongue seemed too large for his mouth, causing a speech impediment, and also made him slobber when he drank from a cup. His legs were weak, causing him to lean on other men's shoulders and walk in a circular fashion. When upset, he fiddled nervously with his codpiece, and his large, curious eyes followed strangers who entered his presence, making them uncomfortable.

 

Members of James' court claimed James never washed his hands, only rubbed this finger ends slightly with a wet napkin.

 

Yet James had real achievements. He wrote learned treatises on a number of subjects, from witchcraft (which he believed in) to tobacco (which he was the first to condemn it, calling smoking "loathsome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmful to the brain, dangerous to the lungs)" and as a result he did not like Sir Walter Raleigh. As king of England, he sponsored a new translation of the Bible that remains one of the great literary works in the English language. In 1604, believing the existing English Bibles did not sufficiently emphasize obedience to authority, he ordered a new translation; that became known as the King James Bible satisfied him on that point. In politics, he injected the theory of the divine right of kings into English history and claimed that "the monarch is the law. Rex est lex loquens, the king is the law speaking."

 

James also had definite ideas on what England's foreign policy should be. In the first year of his reign, he secured a peace treaty with Spain, ending fifteen years of warfare. Not all his courtiers were pleased; some attributed the negotiations to cowardice on James' part.

 

James was involved with efforts to colonize the Americas.

 

In 1621 he banned lotteries. He died in 1625 and his son Charles took his place.

 

 

Christian Principles??

I hear public prayers asking that God return our government to Christian principles upon which they believe this country was established I wonder if they know anything about our history. 

In 1492, due to human error, Christopher Columbus got lost at sea, missed the Indies, and made landfall in the Americas. The land was not vacant but was populated by humans who were citizens of hundreds of well established diverse civilizations.


Due to the lack of reliable statistics the number of of people living in North America in 1492 can only be estimated and vary widely from a few million to tens of millions and even a hundred million. The citizens of those nations spoke hundreds of languages and resided in societies from hunter gatherer to sophisticated city dwellers. Farms that fed thousands of citizens of those nations existed, and many cities had large populations. The norms of human interaction such as marriage, divorce, social assistance, etc., were in place. Such disciplines as engineering, astrology, medicine, etc., were available for educational pursuit in many societies. Calendars, suspension bridges, and record keeping, etc., were also part of the fabric of many societies. Trading patterns between most nations were developed and well established.


Politics ranged from democratic to autocratic. Aztecs, Inca and Maya lived under emperors, while most of the North American Nations were democratic. Shortly after the invasion began, the democratic ideals of those nations soon gave rise to the democratic aspirations of long oppressed Europeans. Proof of it lies in the fact that both the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States of America were modeled to a large extent after the democratic ideals and laws of Indigenous American Nations, in particular an Iroquoian law entitled "The Great Law of Peace."


Over ten thousand years ago American Indian horticulturists engineered a plant they named Maize, commonly known today as corn. Native Americans domesticated nine of the most important food crops that feed the modern world.


Over five thousand years ago the Indigenous People of California, utilizing a process they had perfected to take the bitterness out of acorns were milling flour out of them. To assure a reliable supply of acorns they grew large orchards of Oak trees. This was at a time when many Europeans were still hanging out in caves.

 In 1837 President Martin Van Buren said, "No state can achieve proper culture, civilization, and progress as long as Indians are permitted to remain." He put into words the genocidal mentality that native Americans had contended with since Columbus arrived.

In April 1850, the California legislature passed a law that stated "In no case shall a white man be convicted of any offense upon the testimony of an Indian" Crimes against native Americans would go unpunished.


And then there was that pesky problem of slavery.


Time Allocated to Preaching

One of the issues churches address is filling the time allocated to preaching/teaching.

Jonathan Winters and Tim Conway while talented were never successful being the "star" in weekly television series. Trying to come up with new material every week was too much to expect. They made good "guest appearance" people but not main character people. Others such as Sid Caesar folded under the pressure. It is not practical to expect anyone to deliver two, forty-five minute, presentations and teach one or two classes week after week year after year; plus be on call 24/7 to the entire membership and in the case of GSMCOC have a full time job.

Years ago Robert Townsend wrote in "Up the Organization" that a CEO should not remain with a corporation longer than five years. Townsend thought if the CEO remained longer the CEO's personality would override the corporation's personality and ideas would be lost due to people not making a suggestion due to their belief the CEO would never go for it.

Recently I read where a preacher was honored for being with the same congregation for fifty-years. While those folks were proud I thought how sad, that that congregation has been  limited to one man's beliefs, views and opinions for half a century. Preaching/lecture can be used to make people aware but has little value in teaching.

Relying on the preacher to be the sole source of all biblical information distributed to and from the congregation weakens Church leaders and laity..

The pressure congregations put on preachers is not only nonbiblical it injures the spiritual development of the congregation.



Educating Women

Whenever Paul established a Church he insisted that women were to be educated in the faith. "Let a woman learn" was at variance with Jewish and Greek customs. Jewish women were not included in formal education. A man could teach Scripture to boys and girls but a woman could not teach even the youngest children. Women were educated in matters regarding homemaking skills. Compulsory education excluded girls.

Wanting women to be educated in Christianity was radical in thought and difficult in execution. Women were not used to listening to lectures or thinking about theological concepts or studying at all. Bound to their home and limited in social contact to their husband and children Paul wanted women to participate in classroom settings. He instructed women to learn "in silence with all subjection" meaning voluntarily and willingly being responsive to the needs of others to listen, of their own to hear, and of the teachers to communicate without noisy competition.

The difference between being quiet in order to hear someone speak and being quiet in order to listen with studious attention in illustrated in Acts 21:4 through Acts 22:2. At the temple in Jerusalem, Paul was facing a hostile mob that was in such an uproar that the Roman tribune came with soldiers and centurions to establish order. Paul was arrested. When Paul spoke to him in Greek asking for an opportunity to address the crowd, the official gave him permission. Paul motioned to the people with his hand and a great silence fell over the crowd.  When Paul addressed them in the Hebrew language the people became still; as he spoke, they became quietly attentive. Paul was telling the women they must learn and to do so they must be quiet and respectful.

We can only imagine the criticism Paul had to put up with from family members and community leaders outside the Church. Change creates resistance, and educating women risked the moral censure of non-Christians.

At first, teachers had to be men. Jewish custom forbade women from conversing with men other than their husbands. Men teaching women in the Church might be accused by the husbands of trying to break up marriages. Greeks would associate women and religion with the temple of goddess Diana in Ephesus which had hundreds of prostitutes. Men teaching Greek women in the Church might be accused of catering to sacred prostitutes or of attempting to entice women to be a prostitute within the new religion.

Because of the potential scandals that might arise, in response to Paul's attempt to educate women in the Church, Paul urged Christian women to dress modestly and adorn themselves with good deeds. He also prohibited women from teaching men and from exercising authority over men roles that would have infuriated men in that society.

Paul may have had in mind a specific group of women or group in Ephesus but was not willing to lessen his insistence that women were to learn in spite of the "high-handed" attitude of some. Instead, he instructed that women are to learn in quietness, without being rude or domineering. 

 

Christians and Homosexuals


Christians will proudly declare they are "saved sinners" emphasis on "saved." Christians believe homosexuality is wrong because they believe the Bible says it is wrong. Christians want others to believe what they believe without having the same background. Christians will have an affect on the homosexual community only when they associate with homosexuals and accept them as they are, human beings God is ready to forgive and to accept just as he does heterosexuals every day.

Homosexuality is no more of a sin that other sins identified in the bible. A gay man participating in the assembly does not affect anyone but himself. Imagine the possible good that could result if the church accepted homosexuals into their fellowship.   



Science and Religion

Origin of Species is not the first to cause Christians to wonder how they reconcile their faith with other forms of knowledge, like the insights science provides into the natural world.

 

Over the centuries controversies have given rise to wide-ranging and animated discussions of the proper way to relate science and religion.

 

There are no theological problems created by scientific explanations of why the sky is blue or grass is green. Much of science is independent of religion and, other than being grateful to God that the world is orderly there really is very little engagement.

 

But there have always been points of contact, especially when new information about the natural world has forced reconsideration of biblical texts. Augustine and others of his generation were uncomfortable with reports that there were people living below the equator---the "anti-podes," so called because their feet pointed in the opposite direction from the people in the northern hemisphere, where Augustine lived. The problem arose because of the claim in the New Testament that the apostle Paul had preached to "every creature under heaven"  and he couldn't possibly have traveled to the anti-podes.  So as reports of such upside-down people became more and more common, Christians had to think about what those reports of Paul's teaching ministry were really saying.

 

Centuries later, Christians had to rethink what David meant when he wrote that the earth "can never be moved" reprising the same sort of challenge that confronted Augustine. Eighteenth-century Christians had to deal with the problem of extinction and the growing awareness that entire species had lived and died before humans came along. And then nineteenth-century Christians had to wrestle with Darwin and twentieth-century Christians with the big bang, and twenty-first-century Christians with DNA evidence for the relationship between humans and other species.

 

Because our understanding of nature is an ongoing revelation, constantly adding new conclusions and revising existing ones the conversation will not end soon.  

 

Pentecost

Did those baptized on Pentecost signup for teaching the entire world?

Why Do We Believe

Christians claim that the entire Bible, OT and NT are inspired books of God, and revelations from God. But we know the NT was not among the "holy scriptures" which Timothy had known from his youth the first one being written around AD45. 

At the beginning of his letter Luke told his friend:

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Luke wasn't inspired by God nor had he received any revelations from God. He writes for a man named Theophilus, so that he believes in these things. The Gospel of Luke is simply a work of collecting quotes and information from eye-witness accounts and written addressed to one man. Nothing inspired; nothing revealed from God to Luke; Luke is simply making an account of how things happened.

What Luke does is very similar to the folks who collected sayings of the prophet Muhammad from his companions and eye-witnesses, and also showed stories told by eye-witnesses. This is what Luke did; the only difference is that we do not call their work the word of God, like Christians do with the Gospel of Luke.

Why do we say the Gospel of Luke is the result of inspiration or revelation from God. 

Members of the Church of Christ have an attitude similar to the one Russian President Putin chastised Obama for having we believe ourselves to be exceptional. The Christian religion began on Pentecost and as evolution did has gone through a series of mutations. The Church of Christ today is the result of a group of Presbyterians upset with the status quo. We took first-century conveniences, personal preferences, and biases and our conveniences, personal preferences, and biases and made them law. Calling ourselves Church of Christ does not make us the church of Christ nor does calling one Christian make them Christian. We are just one of many groups that believe it has an inside track on truth.



Monday, November 11, 2013

Great Commission

Al says the "Great Commission" was given to everyone (I disagree). Jesus said "Go" but Al says we can "send." Now Al is saying we have to evangelize. Isn't that what we are paying him to do? Aren't we "sending" him but he does not have time to go?

 

 


John Jenkins
865-803-8179  cell
Gatlinburg, TN




Email: jrjenki@gmail.com
Blogs: http://littlepigeon.blogspot.com/
         http://alumcave.blogspot.com/


"It is, in the end, cheaper to feed the whole flock for a year than to fight them for a week. 


---1850 Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs


"If the tale of the poor wretches...could be impartially related, it would exhibit  a picture of cruelty, injustice, and horror scarcely surpassed by that of the Peruvians in the time of Pizarro. 


---1852 Gen. E. D. Townsend in his California Diary of the Indians facing pressure from the 1849 gold rush

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Are Elders Necessary Today?

The church of Christ has long believed itself to be the lone example of the church established on Pentecost. When we look at our history we see a different reality. A group of Presbyterians with a Baptist here or there disgruntled over the practices of their respective churches wanting to use only the bible. The Church of Christ prides itself on following New Testament practices and in some situations it makes first-century conveniences modern day law.

 

We use as an example to require giving to pay the bills of the congregation the collection intended to help the poor saints in Jerusalem. The collection today has little to do with helping anyone other than ourselves. Sure some goes to missions and some goes to benevolence but for the most part it is spent on us. There is no example in the bible for what we do today but we accept it because we want to.

 

Acts 14:19 But Jews came from Antioch and Iconium, and having persuaded the crowds, they stoned Paul and dragged him out of the city, supposing that he was dead. 20 But when the disciples gathered about him, he rose up and entered the city, and on the next day he went on with Barnabas to Derbe. 21 When they had preached the gospel to that city and had made many disciples, they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch,22 strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God. 23 And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they had believed.

These were all young or new converts, and yet among them the apostles appointed persons to watch over and instruct the rest but what purpose do they serve today?

When elders were appointed in the New Testament the congregations did not have preachers, educated in biblical studies. On a practical level what purpose do elders serve today?

 

We have four elders.

 

1 lives and works in a different country;

1 lives in a different county;

1 lives in a different city;

1 spends most of the week at the other side of the state.

The preacher lives in a different city.

 

Whatever you concluded as the purpose of elders can individuals living and working as listed above fulfill such purposes? If so, no problem; if not whom are we kidding when we consider ourselves an example of the New Testament church?

Saturday, November 2, 2013

Adventists Lead the Rebellion Against Evolution Church of Christ Follows.

At the end of the nineteenth century almost nobody was arguing directly in favor of a young earth with an age of less than ten thousand years. Enthusiasm for this view was confined primarily to the Seventh-day Adventists, who followed the writings of their founder Ellen G. White, considered a prophet by the Adventists. In one passage White described a vision she had of the creation of the earth. In another vision God revealed to her that Noah's flood produced the fossil record. Early Adventists could reconcile the geological data found in the early nineteenth century with a literal reading of the flood story of Genesis 6-8, by assuming that Noah's flood did all the work. White's vision grew dramatically in its influence, as it was embraced first by fundamentalists and then by most evangelicals.

 

The early twentieth century movement known as "fundamentalism" did not embrace young earth creationism and was even friendly toward versions of evolution.

 

The widespread creationism of today gained traction as an anti-evolution movement that simply reinvented the "flood geology" of Ellen White's vision. This flood geology was presented in a series of books by George MacCready Price a self taught geologist. By the early 1960s Price's ideas, updated in "The Genesis Flood" were becoming the mainstream belief of anti-evolutionists of many theological stripes. This shift can be attributed mainly to timing.

 

As has been the trend the Church of Christ has taken the ideas of people with whom they would not assemble and treat them as supported by the Bible. 

Had God Forgotten to Create a Mate for Adam?

 

By the end of the nineteenth century, as Charles Darwin's theory became more broadly accepted by scientists, many theologians accepted evolution except for the human species, which they argued possessed properties, like morality, that evolution could not explain.  Some of their hesitancy derived from concerns that evolution could undermine morality and even the larger social order, or that evolution could conflict with Christian claims that human beings were created in the image of God.

 

B. B. Warfield because he had strong views on the complete inerrancy of Scripture is often cited by today's most conservative young earth creationists and other fundamentalists. And yet he wrote:

 

The upshot of the whole matter is that there is no necessary antagonism of Christianity to evolution, provided that we do not hold to too extreme a form of evolution. To adopt any form that does not permit God freely to work apart from law and which does not allow miraculous intervention (in the giving of the soul, in creating Eve, etc.) will entail a great reconstruction of Christian doctrine, and a very great reconstruction of Christian doctrine, and a very great lowering of the detailed authority of the bible.

 

Despite his acknowledgement of difficult issues with evolution---including the creation of Eve---his stance on the interpretation of Scripture was clear. Although committed to the plenary verbal inspiration of the bible, he did not see any need for a wholesale rejection of Darwin's theory of evolution.

 

The Language of Science and Faith

---Karl W. Giberson & Francis S. Collins

The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat] of it you shall surely die." Does the Bible tell us Adam passed this tidbit of information along to Eve who did not exist at this time?

Then the Lord God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him." Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature that was its name. The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him. 

Does anyone believe God had not considered Eve until this point in time?