Its been quite a while since I last posted a blog here. I doubt any will see it, which is perfectly fine with me. But had a little ulceration with a family friend over the issue of judging. She accused me of judging her simply because I did not walk in her shoes. This was after she attempted to commit suicide and wrote my son her suicide note. Supposedly she is a Christian, yet this act was an act of cowardice. After she emailed my son her suicide note, she swallowed a bunch of pills and was discovered by her sister just in time. After a well-deserved rebuke by me for her cowardly act, I became the recipient of her claim that I didn't understand because I didn't walk her life and therefore, basically, had no right to judge her. There really is no way to say this but that the accusation demonstrates total and utter ignorance. I had believed that this young woman was smart but pain and depression will drive us to do things that are just outright stupid. I've heard this argument before, "you don't understand because you've never done what I've done". I can certainly understand the accusation. It may come with some heat or emotion. I can sympathize and even empathize. But Christians really have no room to say something like this when dealing with others who care about them. It is not about identifying. It is about caring. This she admitted. She knew I cared. Yet because I could not identify, I was accused of comparing my life to hers. Which is a very silly accusation. Also, I would reiterate that the act of suicide is a selfish act. But one might claim it is not a selfish act because, as Paul states, "It is far better to be with the Lord than in the body". And David had many opportunities to take the life of Saul yet refrained because he acknowledged that God is the one who brings justice. And I like the story of Abigail who pleaded to David, who was on his way to kill "every male that breathes in Nabel's house", not to take vengeance with his own hands (but leave justice to the Lord). Suicide violates this precept by exacting violence on one's own self instead of allowing the Lord to exact justice. It is still a death whether destroying Nabal or destroying oneself. The reason why it was wrong for David to take this matter into his own hands, though a wrong was done against him, was that Nabal was made in God's image and had done nothing worthy of death at the hand of another. Abigale pointed out that the man was a fool, but a greedy, selfish man is not enough to be put to death, it is not against the law to be a fool. Desiring to see God is not a valid reason to take one's own life. For killing what God has made to be freed of whatever infirmity one is stricken with, only warrants a strong rebuke. For a Christian life does not belong to him or herself to do with it whatever they happen to fancy. The correct retort to this young woman's comment about "What right do I have" for saying these things is simply, "You are not your own". A Christian was bought with a very lofty price by Christ himself. She or he has no business destroying the prize that Jesus has purchased for himself to do with us whatever seems fit of him. These she cannot or refuses to see because of her pain and her depression. Just talked with a man this past Sunday who has been diagnosed with bi-polar and a host of other mental conditions brought about from drug and alcohol abuse. Much to the contrary of this young woman's judgement of me, I know all about mental illness because my father died with it. But she is in pain and is trapped in the culture today that does not want to hear about the truth of their sinful condition. They want everyone to feel bad for them and so they never move from that one spot ahead. Life is always worth living even in our times of pain and suffering. God is preparing for us a house, and would we try to speed this process up on our own? He beckons us to be still and know him. Suicide is always a shortcut and utter selfishness for it teaches us to look at the storm and not at the one who calms the storm in our lives. It was not his will to remove the thorn from Paul yet here we has "Christians" willing to remove their lives from this earth though it be not the will of the Father. This is a contradiction we would be wise to dismiss from our minds. -Joe

Psalms 37: Do Not Fret

Several place here the psalmist calls fretting (or worry) as something we should not do. Right at the outset, in verse one, fret is in the negative, "Fret not" then the positive follows, "For they will fade". Verse 7 the imperative is waiting, "Be still before the Lord" and it is in the positive - it is a good thing to do this. But the negative is fretting, "fret not". Verse eight points out the fretting leads to evil. So with this in mind, I'd like to explore a little more about what fretting actually is. In these three verses someone who frets is contrasted against the proper behavior the psalmist wants us to have. Verse one again connects fretting and envy together which is in turn connected to what evildoers do. We are reminded that the things evildoers do will fade from view. The second reference to fretting is in verse 7 where firstly, we are shown the proper behavior that is being patient and waiting on God's will and instruction. The contrast to this is the man who gets what he wants when he wants it without regard for what God might want for him. This is described by the psalmist as evil. This could be contrasted with the man that James describes in his New Testament book starting at 4:13. It is no coincident that James then launches into a diatribe on the attitude of the rich man and concludes with the value of being patient and waiting on the coming of the Lord. Waiting is a discipline and being established in any endeavor requires time and fortitude no less discipline and perseverance through hardship. Therefore we move into the psalmists last point in the very next verse where he declares that fretting leads directly to evil tendencies. So what is learned here? Jesus in in the book of Matthew starting at 6:25 commands his followers not to worry. He didn't give them merely a suggestion or a request that they ought not worry. But a straight imperative, "do not be anxious about your life". The point we must learn is a matter of trust in a God who is so far greater and good than we are that we should simply say to Him, "Yes, Lord I do trust and will obey you." But the reason these are teachings for us is that this is difficult, though we know we mess up all the time and get things wrong all the time. So why can we not take His word on its face? The reason is control. We do not want to give up control (as if we ever had it anyways!). There is something about the thought of thinking we have the reigns and can steer the car wherever, whenever and how we want and there is some satisfaction in the thought of it. But it is a lie and the car was never meant to be driven by us. Christ still serves us therefore the car is designed to be driven by him and he is able to do it far better than we. As it is we find ourselves being pulled out of car wreck after car wreck when our pride and hunger for power prevent us from allowing Christ have complete control. We say we trust Him, and it is right to trust Him for our very lives but our actions demonstrate we resent Him and do not trust him since we are so reluctant to let go of the steering wheel and move over. The head agrees but the heart will not heed the Word of God. I raised several key issues: control, pride, power and trust. More precisely - the desire or need to be in control; the unwillingness or reluctance to admit I am not in control; the feeling of power and the error of misplaced trust in our own abilities. I want to break these down next time. -Joe

Meditating on Psalms 37: Delighting in the Lord

Meditating on Psalms 37: Delighting in the Lord Meditating on Psalms 37 shows some very interesting things about the life of the believer and things I can apply to my own life. First is at the outset: "Fret not yourself because of evildoers...for they will soon fade like the grass." Why does the psalmist say this? He, as well as we, easily go here when we look around us at the prosperity of those who do not profess a love for God. They go around and life their lives, so it seems, without a care. They are like those in the book of James where he shares a story about the man who says to his comrade "Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit" - yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. Instead you ought to say, "If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that." Elsewhere in the Psalms we read, "Behold, these are the wicked; always at ease, they increase in riches. All in vain have I kept my heart clean and washed my hands in innocence. For all the day long I have been stricken and rebuked every morning. If I had said, "I will speak thus," I would have betrayed the generation of your children. But when I thought how to understand this, it seemed to me a wearisome task, until I went into the sanctuary of God; then I discerned their end. Truly you set them in slippery places; you make them fall to ruin. How they are destroyed in a moment, swept away utterly by terrors!" The Psalmist of Psalms 37 knows the end of the wicked and the goodness of God to those he has set apart as his own and therefore he draws confidence. 37:4 we have an interesting statement given by the psalmist. He says that if I delight myself in the Lord he will give me the desire of my heart. First the desires of my heart must be aligned with the will of God. So therefore if my wish is to do something evil then it is evident that I do not have the mind of God and should not expect anything good from him. This is exactly what James states in the New Testament where he says these words, "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him. But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind. For that person must not suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways." The apostle Paul states, "those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh (and) to set the mind on the flesh is death (and) the mind set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God." Therefore the man attempting to use Psalms 37:4 as a proof text should realize that he must delight himself in God first before anything good might come his way. The unbeliever does not look for good things to come to him from God since he has no faith to believe. But this psalm instructs us that our delight is in the law of God. King David knew this oh so well and his 119th psalm expresses this succinctly. The next verse talks about commitment, progressively becoming an unpopular idea in our culture today to practice. But God requires it of his people. We must be committed to Him and His word. For we know that without Him we are doomed to live a life of despair and utter hopelessness. Life comes through His precious Son who died for us and therefore if we turn our backs to Him, we turn our backs to life itself. We learn this from reading the gospel of John the very first chapter, "In him was life, and the life was the light of men." Also, "The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world." Jesus says of himself, in chapter 8, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life" and in chapter 9 states, "As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world." I will continue in my meditation of this psalm tomorrow Lord willing. -Joe

Futile Thinking

Romans 1:21: They became futile in their thinking... An acceptance of contradiction as a state of normalcy destroys man's ability to discern anything of real value, because there is nothing that is real but what is received through his senses alone. The idea of real implies a value that transcends man's capabilities unless you put man himself in that place. But then that value is worthless and fleeting. A thing is only important for the time that a man places on it. After that, it is thrown away without giving it a further thought. This condition applies to all things. So it is a universal truth after all, that since nothing is valued higher than the value of which man places on it, then once that thing no longer serves his fancy it is disposed of. This applies not only to things but to man himself therefore man values nothing of real, intrinsic worth since all things are viewed as worthless; including himself. There is nothing "real". For if there is any real value, then man cannot have control over it. It is a universal truth and man has rejected any standard but that which he chooses for himself alone without coercion. In theological circles, today's version of Wesleyanism comes closest to this in practice. For there cannot be a sovereign God if God has power of the will of man. There has to be another explanation for man's power to decide while maintaining God as God. The propping up of man's will as ultimate will diminish God's supreme control of the things he has made, and we have exactly the problem we started with. If God is less than God then man reigns supreme. All decisions and choices are determined and decided by man and God cannot interfere one bit. God falls away, in the end, and man's world falls apart as he finds that no longer is anything secure. Once the foundations are shaken down how can man build on it things that last? He cannot. He can only build things that will burn. We must not think we are anything at all. We must have an accurate image of what we are. We are lost and weak. We are sinners and cannot do anything that will go the distance. All our righteous deeds are as filthy rags the scripture declares. Especially if the standard of righteousness that we use is nothing greater than what we define it to be. How pitiful is our measure! How lame indeed!

Weak People

I am thinking about a number of things presently. Last night I had a conversation about how many of our college age young people are being disillusioned in their faith even while at Christian colleges like Gordon College nearby my home. Another thought that is imposing its will on my mind is what I read today on the internet about how a small Christian movie, virtually unknown was nominated for best original music track. The movie was "Alone but not Alone". Check it out. What made me thoughtful and even grave while reading the article was the responses by twitter or facebook followers who stated the culturally and politically relevant, unfounded mindless jargon that we hear everywhere and virtually at all times. Here is a couple examples of this kind of propaganda being spewed out of the mouths of these low information talking heads: "Oh good, the Oscar-nominated song from that homophobic movie was COMPOSED BY THE CHIEF OF THE ACADEMY’S MUSIC BRANCH" "ok i care about the oscars now because ALONE YET NOT ALONE is super racist" ""Alone Yet Not Alone" looks racist as heck. It's the year's most WTF Oscar nominee" "We haven't seen the movie, though it looks like our Joe Reid will have to, but the trailer features—to put it gently—some very (very!) questionable portrayals of Native Americans as savage-like." It is very clear from this last quote that Esther Zuckerman does not know her history. Hello! The Indians were savages and did some very savage things to innocent people. As we are talking about the history of the French and Indian War, I read enough of what was done to the people of Deerfield Mass and outlying communities to know their were atrocities committed. Read the accounts from the parsons themselves. Ignorance rules with most of people who cry "racism!", "homophobia!" and the like. Instead of putting up good, solid, convincing proof, they resort to name calling! Typical liberal! I wonder how anyone can stomach such raving from a bunch of lunatics? But as I don't want to play their game, I shall move on and keep my mouth shut. The first thought above has caused me to wonder about my own children sometimes. Some, as those who made such remarks as I quoted above, would say that it is not our business to steer our children to one way or another. It is only those who need religion, which is a crutch for them (they would say), who feel they must indoctrinate their children to believe in things they would not otherwise believe in. I don't see any such evidence for this type of ignorance. Instead I read Christ himself saying that if anyone would lead these little ones away (children), who believe in me, it would be better that a large millstone be tied around your necks and that you then be cast into the sea. Seems to me that children need guidance and direction. We as adults, ought to know better than merely leaving the innocent, naive and vulnerable alone to whatever desire and whim comes upon them to do. Really?? Also the bible clearly states that left by our own devices we will choose what is evil. So teach them nothing, you will produce misfits of society bent on doing no good. This is really defeating if there is even a remote inkling of brain activity in these people's heads. Society functions because of structure. If there were none, there would be no society. But this is what the anarchists would want isn't it? This is what our postmodern generations think is best. No rules, but their own rules and somehow everyone will get along with each other just fine. That is why we have terrorism causing fear all around the world. But you cannot help but to indoctrinate people in general and children in specific. Children look to adults to show them how to survive in the world and their culture. If you do not show them they will get their information from other sources and will hate you for not informing them. We have unruly children everywhere. They are an epidemic and the burden lies heavy on the shoulders of parents who do not deserve to be called mother and father. They are unfit because they refused to show their children what is right and what is wrong. Why? Sadly because the parents do not believe there is a right and wrong. This idea has been an old tradition that is now out of style. Why be regulated? Why not have total "freedom" to make your own rules? Here is an idea to try on: True freedom is discovered within parameters. I'll say it again, Freedom is only possible when there are rules set up which give structure and sense to society. Without rules and/or parameter, there can be no freedom. The whole idea of people crying "racist!" and "homophobic!" is an effort to get our broken society to agree with one another. The idea that people must be fully accepting of all lifestyles and religions is ridiculous. Getting a bunch of people to agree on every point does not necessarily make them unified. How can we grow as people if everyone must drive a white car? Or live in a particular kind of house in a particular neighborhood and like sushi and salmon? Our ideas must be continually challenged so that we can be better people, because remember we are not infinite in knowledge and understanding. But if we fall prey to governmental forces that desire people to remain stupid in order that they might get away with such crimes as they can get away with and not worry about the citizen's calling our government to account, then there is little hope that we will be able to ever think independently again. Instead we will continue to blow the bugle of "change" and "hope" which really means we must "conform" and get in line. So let's instead of reacting to any and every bit of information that the media blows our way, we stop and think about what is being said and then find out how much truth is in that bit of information? Let us not resort to name calling because it only shows how little we really know. Name calling only strips us naked and makes us look like the fool we really are. Let us engage in intelligent dialogue and debate. Let us discover answers that we can live with instead of relying on media "catch" words that are meant to conjure up an emotional response instead of an educated one. -Joe

Passion; it is an appropriate Christian Response?

When we think of passion we think about people who are driven to succeed don't we? We hear others say, "You need to be passionate about winning souls for Christ". Sometimes people point to evidence of being "called" into ministry is a passionate desire to reach the lost. Passion seems to be important. Some people have passion in their jobs. They seek to bring in more sales than the month before. Some people are so driven to reach the top others might call them passionate in their pursuit of what they want to achieve. We might give a good argument that high achievers are passionate people. But the type of passion I want to explore is as it relates to relationships we have with people. I think it is good to be passionate and have passion. But I think it depends on the object of that passion. I see passion quickly moving into idolatry. Our passion for something can overwhelm our primary desire to glorify Christ. It becomes all that we think of. We have to be careful. Our passion can cloud good judgement because we cannot hear or see anything contrary to our own view. My mother is a passionate person. But she cannot hear any opposing view but her own. It is important to think soberly and consider carefully any decision we make. Paul mentions this continuously to the church in his letter to reason carefully. For instance he says to watch diligently our doctrine so that we might not fall into diverse sin. Keep watch he says. Christ says much of the same as well. He stated to his disciples to keep watch because the spirit is willing but the body is weak. Also we read that the devil goes around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. He is more than happy to pounce on someone who is not looking for him and is lulled asleep by relying on his own wisdom instead of depending on our Father's protective wing around him. So passion is a touchy thing and we must master our desires and not let them run away from us. Now as it pertains to relationships their is an extra guard here. Paul talks about relationships between men and women and says to the man to consider young women as sisters with absolute purity. Why? Because passion a man can have for a woman leads to the opposite of purity. It leads to sin in our minds then in our actions. We must honor the Lord by restraining passionate feelings towards the opposite sex. Colossians 3:5 in the ESV Paul states that passion must be put to death. Passion is not in keeping with God's holiness but is sinful in the eyes of God. I heard it said once that one prerequisite for marriage is that the two people must have passion for one another. I used to agree. I don't any longer. Passion seems to apply to a lack of self-control and the scripture is abundantly clear that this is wrong. Instead Paul states in 1 Corinthians 7 these words, "But whoever is firmly established in his heart, being under no necessity but having his desire under control, and has determined this in his heart, to keep her as his betrothed, he will do well." Against passion Paul says, "But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion." This is a concession that Paul makes. Passion is not a good thing. I have a son who may one day make a decision to marry. It may not be an impulse or a passion that drives him to it but because he has decided that she is good for him. For him it very much may be simply a realization that a friend he likes to spend time with is someone he cannot ever imagine not spending time with. He is a very level headed young man who is not given to any passion. He cool, calm and somewhat separated from things that other people get overly passionate or concerned and worry about. He just is not phased by things. I can imagine that perhaps he might marry to assure that she will remain his companion and friend for the rest of his life. This is no less romantic than two people who have become so madly in love that they need to get married or else they will slip into sin. We smile at this kind of love verses the steady, dedicated companionship attachment determined from a clear head and sober understanding of his or her needs as people. As I write these words my eyes tear up at the first case rather than the second. Our love for our partners should be based on sober reality rather than passionate fantasy. I say this because the passion will die down. What is left better be something built on lasting, firm ground as in a deep friendship else trouble lies ahead. -Joe

Courtship vs. Dating

What is the difference between courting and dating? Before I answer this question there are at least three ways one can look at the issue of man meets woman. The first is simply you are not serious about finding a soulmate but want to enjoy a relationship without any attachments. This is the dating relationship. Here a person doesn't want to grow up. They still want to play. They often times view marriage negatively because it is represented as an ending of the "fun time" to settling down to boredom. Therefore, I believe that dating is never appropriate for a Christian. This mindset is unbiblical and relationally it is inappropriate to view the dating partner in this way. For it cheapens that partner and quite realistically harms them for when they do meet their marriage partner. For biblically we are made for one man and one woman where God's desire is for godly seed to be borne. They are meant for each other exclusively. The dating relationship has no regard for this for it is purely selfish. As there is no commitment the question is always, "what can I get out of her?" I alluded to the second form of relationship. You are not interested in dating, instead you are seeking a person you can commit to. You are looking for a marriageable partner. Your goals are to find the one God has for you. Therefore you seek and you find her. But as you become involved with her physically, a superman complex takes over and you find yourself in compromising situations. But you think you can handle them. These are the things you say to yourself. As a result of this "superman complex" you do not seek counsel and you refuse good advice if it causes you to put parameters around the relationship. Instead you gather around yourself people who will encourage you and approve or otherwise confirm that you are doing right. You trust your own instincts. Now before I get into the third option, which is the courtship approach,I want to show why both of these first two are unbiblical and inappropriate for the Christian. The simple difference, from my experience, is that either of these approaches breed independence in deciding for oneself who is best suited for me. Or, in the case of dating, the dating partner is objectified in totality. But still it is my decision and I have no need to seek approval or advice since this is my business as it pertains to my personal life. This stands completely opposed to courtship and, in particular, Christian courtship. Why? What makes courtship different from these other two options? That is a very good question. As the other two approaches rely on one's own abilities to make life's most important decisions (and that usually at such a young, immature age), the courtship option the young person has a far more mature outlook. He or she is not so naive to think that they can make a mature, right decision. They understand the gravity of their sinfulness and the natural processes that wage a battle with our minds to desire to impatiently act selfishly instead of waiting on God and finding satisfaction in Him until the right time. The courtship option covets parental accountability or if the parent is not there, a godly guardian who receives full trust and honor that their counsel will be adhered to even when it is difficult. Courtship is all about accountability. The relationship is marked by parameters and rules are set up, in love, in order that they will maintain their honor and integrity in case the relationship is broken off. There is no unbounded physical freedom that each have with one another. They do not trust themselves, for they understand that the flesh will desire more until it overrules the mind. This is to be protected against at every point in the courtship. Each one is looking to the good of the other and not trying to satisfy what they want. They view each other as persons and do not look at one another as simply objects to explore and plunder. Now a young man and woman, who find interest in each other, ought to look at their relationship as a final stop to marriage in the first place. Therefore, the second option is good as far as that point goes. But the focus must shift to a healthy fear that they, at any time, could blow it all up. We are human and should not, at any time, think that interaction between one another is "in the bag" and can be handled apart from counsel and relational accountability; for this is not using wisdom. It will become inevitable, for it is natural and of God when the love for one another leads to a desire to wish to be with each other every moment of every day, that compromising situations crop up tempting us and teaching us that we can handle it on our own. But passions will begin to overrule our minds and will lead us into forbidden lands. We must not place ourselves anywhere near that place where we begin to draw conclusions and justifications that speak of being able to handle the intimacy we have allowed ourselves to enjoy; we must not listen to these lies. A young man thinks he needs no one to tell him how to manage his relationship with the woman he loves. It is natural and God's will that he should leave his parents home and cleave to his wife making a home with her. But there is order in this. There are rules to heed. How ironic it is that we can say we will follow our Lord yet refuse counsel of those who know better the rules of relationships. Yet young people want no rules during their courtship (for they refuse to hear good advice) yet they push their relationships physically to the point where they come up against the very walls of disobedience and sin, to God's decrees and laws, and think that they are still on safe ground. But when they, in their passion, loose their minds and climb over the wall and sin against God, how can anyone think that they will heed any rule or parameter of God when they failed to practice obedience in heeding counsel from godly people who warned them before all this trouble started? No, they will continue to resist rules and parameters even though they come from God's prophets (people) who speak the very words of Christ to them. They refuse to listen to them so how do they think that they will hear God's voice in any other way? Do they look for an audible voice? Or is God's voice that which confirms their own wants and desires? These are very real questions that a young man must answer honestly setting his desires aside. But they must not throw reason aside. Love must not be awakened until the proper time as the Song of Solomon reiterates on several occasions. Any godly relationship with one another needs rules and parameters that steer so far clear of that Great Wall that one can still hear God's voice through his prophets and can make right judgements that are not influenced by his passion for the one he loves. I am reading a book presently by Gene Edward Veith,Jr. In it he talks about how four factors play a key part in destroying the aesthetic element of any work of art. They are these: Obscenity, Pornography, Vulgarity, and Profanity. Each of these, in their own way, removes the aesthetic mode out of such things as play and movies. We know what he means. For who cannot agree that just as we begin to get "into" a movie or a book it gets interrupted by some illicit scene that has no bearing whatsoever with the story? In other words, take it or leave it the interruption brings an unnecessary and unwarranted break to the story. So as the reader or moviegoer begins to be caught up in the aesthetic element of the plot (the beauty and creative element), the author or director changes the mood suddenly to arouse the audience in a different way. This serves to distract from the storyline and causes the audience to lose interest. The author or director then switches back to the storyline as if nothing out of the ordinary ever happened. A relationship likewise ought to be on guard against such interruptions. For the aesthetic element in any relationship, between man and woman, is the love and respect, purity, honor and selflessness present in it. But the obscene and profane are those elements that serve as the unnecessary interruptions to the edification and strengthening of it. They are introduced only to get a person to lower their guard and become impatient and intolerant with the holy and pure; the aesthetic creativity. To accept the profane is easier than cultivating beauty in a work of art. For settling for the profane takes no skill but is what is natural to us. But insisting on creating a work of art requires great skill and perseverance. It requires hard work when the temptation is always to settle for the easiest pathway. Please feel free to comment and/or add some other observations to what I have written. -Joe