I was glancing at the sports headlines from yesterday and I was disappointed to see that another elite athlete has admitted to taking performance enhancing drugs. In this case, it was perennial All Star baseball player Alex Rodriguez. It seems like every time we turn around, another athlete is in trouble for this type of offense. Many people probably think it is just a sports issue, but I think it is a commentary on how things have spiraled out of control in society. We live in a culture where winning and cashing in have superceded the honor and integrity of the game. The mindset is to look for shortcuts and find the path of least resistance. The behavior is only wrong when you get caught. Do these people not understand what they are doing to the youth in our country? Kids tend to model what they see. It is very disturbing to consider how these incidents are going to cultivate a new breed of future athletes who have little care or respect for their teammates or the game in which they compete. We have got to start taking a stand against this type of irresponsible behavior. There is no substitute for hard work and the sweat of your brow. Our kids are going to hear so many voices from society that reinforce selfishness and greed and doing things the easy way. Our culture is like a dog chasing its tail when it comes to our pursuit of materialism. A dog chasing its tail doesn't ever get it; it just gets dizzy in the process. We are a land of fast food and 24 hour restaurants, drive-thru wedding chapels, diets that promise success while still eating whatever you want, house flippers , and now athletes that will pop pills like candy to get an edge on their competition. Where does it all end? If you want a hint, just look at our economy and see where corporate greed and quick fixes have gotten us.
Sometimes, the end is even more unpleasant for those who stand in the way of greed. Consider the man who was working his job at a Wal-Mart store in New York the day after Thanksgiving of this past year. There was a big sale and people turned up in droves to score a bargain on this the biggest shopping day of the year. What happened next? The doors were opened early in the morning and the man was trampled to death by shoppers who overwhelmed the staff like a great stampede. Many others were injured including a pregnant woman and people actually refused to leave the store even after it was announced that there had been a terrible tragedy. It was reported that people actually stepped over the man to get where they wanted to go and shoppers became upset when told they would have to leave the store while emergency personnel were called in to deal with the situation. I was saddened to hear about this incident and it really made me think about things. What can we do to change things? Keep taking a stand every day. Be a positive voice in the lives of our future generation. Lights out.
33 comments:
Pretty amazing, reading this brought back the many times I sat in your office and we discussed this issue!
You didn't hit on all the many other things people do for self gratification... like the other things they put in their body/on their face/have surgery for...(yada yada yada)... although I'm sure if you hit on these issues you'd probably break keys from overuse!
Good post... I'm enjoying these Slivo"isms"! But I'm really wanting to read (and maybe respond) to one on Global Warming... so I better see one in the next week or two!
Brandon,
Thanks for the feedback. We sure have discussed many of these things time and time again. Good memories! Also, I'll see what I can do about a global warming blog. hahaha!! Talk to you soon,
Slivo
Coach Slivo, I really am enjoying your writing. : ) You are right about the self gratification. It sorely saddens me to see our next generation not showing any change in the pattern of self centeredness. (I work with jr. high and high school kids)
It's an unbiblical world that brings forth such rotten fruit. Shoving secular humanism and evolution (we're just evolved animals) down kids' throats for 12-16 years of their first 22 years of life is much to blame. It is increasingly hard for the Church to battle for the souls of our youth, our next generation when the majority of the discipling is not done by the Church and the Christian home. :(
p.s.- a global warming blog would be nice. You and I would definitely have much to say on that issue. (We need to have a drive to Oakes like we did in the old days...)
Rex-
Would you agree that the self gratification isn't just present among the "next" generation that you quote, but among our generation, and absolutely into the generations before us? I believe that it is a learned behavior... learned that is from our mentors/parent's. I know I have seen plenty of it from my peers... particularly peers at the college and I see it as much in "Christians" as non-Christians. (Although I did notice your "change in pattern" inclusion)
Also I'm not so sure I understand your ability to tie everything directly to secular humanism and evolution (particularly in the realm of education). If you ask me I would find it to be something that has more to do with personal character than anything "Godly". My point- Evolution didn't trample people to death at Wal-Mart. Social-Humanism didn't make people continue to run over people... people made these decisions!
Further more I wonder how many every-Sunday-church-goers helped run over these people... I would probably gather that it was one or two... that is purely speculation however!
This will start a firestorm- Is it the church's job to "Battle for the souls of our youth?" Or is it the church's job to educate in the way we see the truth?
Let's be honest... church truth hasn't ALWAYS been truth. Sometimes we find out we're wrong... and sometimes we're teaching the wrong message! Perhaps you'll agree with me!
Are we getting to heavy on Slivinozinsky's blog?
By the way Slivo... I continue to wait for a Global Warming blog! Do your research! And if you quote Al Gore, I/they're going to remove your blog!
Brandon - Very interesting. I e-mailed Eric with some of the same thoughts just yesterday.
You said: "Let's be honest... church truth hasn't ALWAYS been truth. Sometimes we find out we're wrong... and sometimes we're teaching the wrong message!"
My questions would be:
1. What is/was the source for those "wrong" messages?
2. If one believes one is doing the will of God then finds out that one's actions are wrong, where does the fault lie? In the individual? In the church? Elsewhere?
3. Given the above acknowledgement that the church has been wrong in the past, how can one have any guarantees that it is not currently wrong?
My ideas about God may certainly be wrong but I try to seek God in my observations of the Universe, for what can be more natural? To quote Whitman: "I hear and behold God in every object, yet I understand God not in the least."
And I, for one, don't think this is discussion too heavy for Eric's blog. Let's be contrarian. :o)
Michael
Michael-
I was hoping you'd jump in...
I "potentially" heard of your email!
I'm sure Rex will post today... I'm interested to hear his take on this!
"My questions would be:
1. What is/was the source for those "wrong" messages?"
If only we all knew. As Christians often liken it to... "The Fall of man" This could very well be true... however I wasn't there so I am unaware of there being a fall (Literal or imaginative)... I guess the only basis is what's found in Moses's recollection of what happened... however he wasn't there either, so I guess we have to hope/have faith that he got it correct... divinely.
I personally believe that the answer is probably a little more simple. Humans are stupid. Regardless of their religion or their beliefs. We often misconstrue truth... for instance how can one truly summarize my feelings/beliefs as I type? Their only perception is their own feelings while they read that which I have typed. The same is true with the Bible, correct?
I truly admire those that truly research the Bible and attempt to truly understand the many details, culturally, geographically, metaphorically, ect. However those people are perhaps in the extreme minority.
With this in mind we're left with dark age words like purgatory and penance... all of which we now view as barbaric... but at the time were considered truth... by the church.
I think you would agree that we/us (the everyday Christian) puts very little thought in personal beliefs (I'll get to this later).
Therefore... like dumb sheep (to put some scriptural ties to this...) we do as we're told. How many pastors need to "fall from grace" before we decide that we need to think for ourselves and find truth for oneself?
So to conclude... I can't believe that any one person is to blame... it's our nature... and often our weakness. Power is a dangerous thing. Is the devil to blame... maybe in some cases... but that's a real easy answer for a complex question. Personally I think human's are the source... remember... we're stupid, we believe some pretty silly things.
"2. If one believes one is doing the will of God then finds out that one's actions are wrong, where does the fault lie? In the individual? In the church? Elsewhere?"
Dependent on the situation. BUT. Being that I am a large proponent of personal responsibility I would say the Individual. Remember it equates back to finding what you believe personally. Have you heard the silly phrase "It's not a religion it's a relationship" (Yeah Christian folks have some dumb slogans).
Perhaps it should say... "It's not a religion it's a relationship that we'll teach you how to have." WOW.
Anyways, I think generally we take very little personal responsibility (Slivo addresses this nicely) and we always attempt to find blame or fault in others. Perhaps you'll enjoy the words of a less than intelligent philosopher (Harry S. Truman) "The buck stops here"
You have to understand I'm a little more black and white... and a person that will forever be trying to find those shades of gray.
When my daughter hit's her brother it's her fault, if I cheat on my wife it's my fault, if I institute a belief system that is inaccurate with scripture or truth then again I believe it's important to take personal responsibility.
"3. Given the above acknowledgement that the church has been wrong in the past, how can one have any guarantees that it is not currently wrong?"
No guarantees... or at least you won't find any from me. But that's why I stress that church is not the answer. Individually we have a choice! For some it's difficult... I just really believe that church doesn't contain the key that unlocks the door, we each do individually.
Church does have it's purpose... hopefully it spurns thought, and personal reflection as to what the individual believes. I think people that show up every Sunday and agree with what Pastor Schmo says are stupid people... again!
Way to much emphasis is placed on church as a vessel for salvation. Although your mainstreamer's will say that's not what they're about... this how everyone outside of church would view it... what do you think?
Brandon (and others)-
Your text will be italicized:
I "potentially" heard of your email!
Uh-oh, I'm becoming notorious!
You seem to be of the mind that just because something survives in the modern-day Bible does not mean it is the true word of God. If this is incorrect, please let me know. Rather, you have faith that it is true. But can't one have the strongest faith imaginable even in a falsity? Beliving in something does not make it true or untrue.
Humans are stupid. Regardless of their religion or their beliefs. We often misconstrue truth... for instance how can one truly summarize my feelings/beliefs as I type? Their only perception is their own feelings while they read that which I have typed. The same is true with the Bible, correct?
I disagree with your assertion that humans are stupid. Certainly a great many are but the fact that the average IQ is 100 and most people get by on that just fine (in other words they don't throw themselves in front of buses and the like) indicates that it is adequate. To be a successful human or even a good human one does not need to be smart. I remember that Eric and I had this conversation once when I was a more cynical person. He said that the one trait he hoped his daughter would have (the others hadn't been born yet) would be compassion. I said I hoped my child, if I ever had one, would possess intelligence. Now my answer has changed. Compassion is truly the greater virtue. I still place great importance on intelligence - I believe, for example, that 90% of intelligence is just in paying attention and is therefore within the reach of most people, barring developmental problems, and that anyone who chooses not to be intelligent has foolishly forsaken a valuable gift indeed - but to be compassionate: to feel the pain of others, to want to reach out and help... this is Godly.
I truly admire those that truly research the Bible and attempt to truly understand the many details, culturally, geographically, metaphorically, ect. However those people are perhaps in the extreme minority.
Indeed.
With this in mind we're left with dark age words like purgatory and penance... all of which we now view as barbaric... but at the time were considered truth... by the church.
I think you would agree that we/us (the everyday Christian) puts very little thought in personal beliefs (I'll get to this later).
Well, most of the Christians who I consider friends, like Eric, do think about these things and do not blindly follow doctrine, but I understand your point.
Therefore... like dumb sheep (to put some scriptural ties to this...) we do as we're told. How many pastors need to "fall from grace" before we decide that we need to think for ourselves and find truth for oneself?
All of them. :o)
"2. If one believes one is doing the will of God then finds out that one's actions are wrong, where does the fault lie? In the individual? In the church? Elsewhere?"
Dependent on the situation. BUT. Being that I am a large proponent of personal responsibility I would say the Individual. Remember it equates back to finding what you believe personally. Have you heard the silly phrase "It's not a religion it's a relationship" (Yeah Christian folks have some dumb slogans).
But can an individual be blamed for believing a false doctrine if his society has enforced that idea from birth... say, a belief in the divinity of the Pope for an Italian Catholic? That person is not stupid for his belief.
You have to understand I'm a little more black and white... and a person that will forever be trying to find those shades of gray.
I do.
When my daughter hit's her brother it's her fault, if I cheat on my wife it's my fault, if I institute a belief system that is inaccurate with scripture or truth then again I believe it's important to take personal responsibility.
But given the passage of enough time how are your followers to know that your institution is at oods with the previous scripture or truth itself?
"3. Given the above acknowledgement that the church has been wrong in the past, how can one have any guarantees that it is not currently wrong?"
No guarantees... or at least you won't find any from me. But that's why I stress that church is not the answer. Individually we have a choice! For some it's difficult... I just really believe that church doesn't contain the key that unlocks the door, we each do individually.
What is the answer, from your perspective? What is true?
Church does have it's purpose... hopefully it spurns thought, and personal reflection as to what the individual believes.
Amen.
I think people that show up every Sunday and agree with what Pastor Schmo says are stupid people... again!
Again, I'll disagree with you concerning the inherent stupidity of people. If Pastor Schmo has been your pastor since birth and your parents tell you he is a man of God, who are you to argue? The fault lies not in an individual's stupidity of gullibility but in an organization's/society's desire to exploit people. In my opinion. :o)
Way to much emphasis is placed on church as a vessel for salvation.
Amen, again, brother.
Although your mainstreamer's will say that's not what they're about... this how everyone outside of church would view it... what do you think?
Too much, it would seem. :o)
Michael
Brandon,
I never used universal words such as "everything".
You are right that instant gratification is a learned behavior. I was merely venting what was on my mind at the time concerning our youth. Generations are becoming incrasingly more corrupt. We need a reformation!
Evolution and secular humanism- being taught as Truth- are the philosophy and religion of today. These negatively shape personal character. Just as God and Scripture shape a Christian's character. My point- why not act like animals? After all, we evolved from them. What morals can one possibly have apart from God and Scripture. No man is innately good. Scripture tells us that we are evil from our youth.
I used Church with a capital "C". This denotes the body of believers. Pastoral staff is not what I saying. The body of believers responsible for training up the next generation starts with the fathers with their wives by their side, then there is the extended family, and finally the fellowship of the body of believers. People need to pick up their Bible and read it! Study it! Learn some basic hermeneutic principles. It really is not rocket science. We must not allow ourselves to be deceived. Yet those churches that do preach their own Scriptures are still going to pay the price before God for their heresy and apostasy.
The current state of the Church (capital C) is not the preaching Truth but being seeker sensitive and filling the pews. The WHOLE Truth is being left out of the message. Pastors neglect expository preaching of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation because the Truth convicts and hurts before it heals. If the pastors all preached the Word like they should then they'd have less butts in the pews and less money in the offering plate. Then they'd have to get a second job! Oh no.
You are right that some who claim to be the Church have not always preached the whole Truth. It worse today.
(The Catholic Church, by the way was not and is not Biblical. That is why the Protestant Reformation began.)
Coach Causey,
I understand that you did not address this post to me so I hope you don't mind if I interject. Your text will be italicized.
Brandon,
I never used universal words such as "everything".
Never? :o)
You are right that instant gratification is a learned behavior. I was merely venting what was on my mind at the time concerning our youth. Generations are becoming incrasingly more corrupt. We need a reformation!
Evolution and secular humanism- being taught as Truth- are the philosophy and religion of today. These negatively shape personal character. Just as God and Scripture shape a Christian's character.
Do you believe that it is possible for a non-Christian to be a moral person? There are both moral and immoral people of both Christian and non-Christian persuasions. No one has a monopoly on ethical behavior and I would be hesitant to assert that my position is the only basis for morality, as would I be to assert that a belief system that differs from my own is inherently negative. Again we return to Brandon's notion of personal responsibility. An individual chooses to act in a certain way; evolution and humanism - or Christianity, for that matter - do not force an individual to act a certain way.
My point- why not act like animals? After all, we evolved from them.
I do not act like a chimpanzee because I am not a chimpanzee - I am a human. For the same reason I do not act like an armadillo. I am not an armadillo. Furthermore, all social animals make concessions in order to live in those social groups, understanding that the benefits - safety in numbers, an ability to share food supplies, etc. - outweigh the limitations. Chimpanzees are more likely to share food with those who have groomed them; therefore, a chimpanzee will make the effort to groom another knowing that there are benefits to such behavior. Female chimps, as another example, will often try to calm males who have been fighting, knowing that dischord within the group is not beneficial. Humans make these same concessions. One knows that by following the rules of his community he will benefit from all the things that community has to offer. If he choose not to follow those rules he will either be
shunned/banished, or imprisoned. This is not to say, mind you, that humans do not have a more developed sense of right and wrong than animals; we do. I am simply pointing out that it is not as simple as you seem to make it out to be.
What morals can one possibly have apart from God and Scripture. No man is innately good. Scripture tells us that we are evil from our youth.
This is where scripture and I would differ and, since you seem to know something about humanism, I do not need to lay out the reasons why. Again I will ask, because I want to know your answer: is it possible for a non-Christian to be moral?
I used Church with a capital "C". This denotes the body of believers. Pastoral staff is not what I saying. The body of believers responsible for training up the next generation starts with the fathers with their wives by their side, then there is the extended family, and finally the fellowship of the body of believers. People need to pick up their Bible and read it! Study it! Learn some basic hermeneutic principles. It really is not rocket science.
Yes, here I will agree with you as I agreed with Brandon. Too many people simply do not know the contents of the Bible, much less how to make sense of those contents.
We must not allow ourselves to be deceived. Yet those churches that do preach their own Scriptures are still going to pay the price before God for their heresy and apostasy.
No comment. :o)
The current state of the Church (capital C) is not the preaching Truth but being seeker sensitive and filling the pews. The WHOLE Truth is being left out of the message. Pastors neglect expository preaching of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation because the Truth convicts and hurts before it heals. If the pastors all preached the Word like they should then they'd have less butts in the pews and less money in the offering plate. Then they'd have to get a second job! Oh no.
Having not been to a church service in years, I cannot comment on this either.
You are right that some who claim to be the Church have not always preached the whole Truth. It worse today.
How would you resolve this? Do you then rely on your own personal interpretation of scripture to determine what is correct? Would this not vary from person to person?
(The Catholic Church, by the way was not and is not Biblical. That is why the Protestant Reformation began.)
Can you elaborate on this?
I found your post most interesting and I really do hope you respond. We may disagree widely but I see no reason why we cannot have a friendly dialogue. Brandon - I hope to hear from you again as well.
Best Regards,
Michael
Michael, I tried to post something but the links I wanted to share with you would not work. Check out my blog. Comment on that. : )
my url is http://rexallencausey.blogspot.com/
By all means, please continue your discussion on my blog. I'm really enjoying the comments, and one of my goals with this blog was to provide an open forum for this type of debate.
Ok, Eric. When I get a chance to read the links Rex directed me towards and gather my thoughts, I'll post here. Brandon - where are you?!? :o)
Michael
Hey... I'm back sorry about that... had a busy few days then it took me two days to reread everything!
Michael before I start, I'm considering taking the wife to Sante Fe/Albuquerque, NM sometime in the next few months... we're talking about swinging over through 'Zona, I'd love to meet up with you again... maybe we can hit Sweet Tomato's!
Ok let me condense as their are a lot of different points... all of which are good, but that would mean each of our blogs would get longer and longer!
Michael said...
"You seem to be of the mind that just because something survives in the modern-day Bible does not mean it is the true word of God."
This is tricky, I do have a great deal of concern for the process in how things were selected for the Bible. But ultimately things were selected, things that I haven't found a great deal of fault in. On the other hand we often misinterpret these things (see Rex's comments). You know that we all have to find truth for ourselves. Ultimately truth for me blends to some degree with faith. There are way to many things that we don't have answers for... to some degree I have to have faith that after three days in a tomb a dead Jesus was resurrected and not stolen (a thought that is gaining momentum). I often wonder what Christ would think of the new testament, and what he would have said regarding the Muratorian Canon. I personally wonder if some things weren't left out based on politics. Please note that I have not done any significant on books left out. I have heard plenty of reason/excuses as to why they were left out. I really struggle with this personally, and I believe that it's something that Christian's have just simply grown to accept.
Michael said...
"I disagree with your assertion that humans are stupid."
Would it help if I said that humans are gullible? My main point is that Christ was right in comparing us to sheep... we often base some of our beliefs off the doctrine of others. I at least know many that are blind in faith. That's why I can respect a guy like Rex, he's not afraid to put himself on the line for something he believes in... that we can all respect even if we don't agree!
Rex said...
"You are right that instant gratification is a learned behavior. I was merely venting what was on my mind at the time concerning our youth. Generations are becoming incrasingly more corrupt. We need a reformation!"
I don't know Rex, and likewise I believe it is difficult for either of us to determine this, lets discuss it again at 80. I mean I read of Orgies in my bible, and murder, and of people having all kinds of crazy ideas and beliefs.
Reformation? Maybe. The thought is nice, the reality is difficult!
Rex said,
"Evolution and secular humanism- being taught as Truth- are the philosophy and religion of today."
Before leaving Trinity I would have agreed with you, now however I don't really think the everyday person believes a whole lot in Evolution... at least it hasn't come up in the office. I won't disagree that it's being taught as truth... however I'm currently taking a "School Law" class for my Master's and I would say that this will actually become a legal hotbed... it actually has already been addressed by the Supreme Court. I encourage you to look up some of these cases.
Next... I'm not sure that I trust a body of believer's especially based on what I have said previously. I will be educating my children to the best of my ability, unfortunately at some point I will be releasing them to make decisions for themselves.
Rex said...
"(The Catholic Church, by the way was not and is not Biblical. That is why the Protestant Reformation began.)"
This is completely misleading Rex. In truth many of the actions done by the catholic church prior to the reformation were given up on later as they recognized many of their own faults (if only some protestant denominations could be this transparent). Now know this... there are a good many things I won't disagree concerning the Catholic Church, however I bet there are even more things that I would agree with. First of all... they're not afraid to say at the top what they believe and go against popular/secular opinion. Now take note... there are many Catholics that have it very wrong, on the flip side many true practicing Catholics actually have it more right than some of us do. Personally... the strongest believer that I have ever met was a Catholic... this lady rocked my world... and led me to shape some personal beliefs and beliefs in my marriage (I know you share some of these beliefs... however you may be unaware of the Catholic origins!)
Michael said...
"Do you believe that it is possible for a non-Christian to be a moral person? There are both moral and immoral people of both Christian and non-Christian persuasions."
Absolutely... and I know many moral "non-Christians"
Sorry again for the delay... I have not read Rex's blog but I will!
Brandon
I like to stay impartial, even as a liberal agnostic in New York City, so I'll stay out of this, and simply ask the more important question: Brandon, if there is a merciful God, how do you explain the Detroit Tigers' 2003 season?
Shawn-
Good to hear from you!
I have several responses on this particular matter...
First... 2003 was a season that should not have happened. Everyone knew about the steroids deal... my theory... NOBODY on the Tigs '03 team did steroids... and everybody else did, therefor unmerciful trouncing's were obvious. In reality, Bud should have canceled the season therefore sparing my tigers of 119 games of humiliation.
Second, it was punishment by God.
This is perhaps a little more plausible. You see what were they doing trading away players like John Smoltz in 1987 for... Doyle Alexander... a "spry" 36 year old. Next the Tigers attempted to build an organization around an individual who weighed close to 400 lbs (that's right... ol' Cecil). Fielder had such lightning quick reflexes that he once even stole a base! (He then proceeded to eat it for dinner).
Next the Tigers decided to try and make the most of the 90's... by doing absolutely nothing of value... except perhaps consuming Domino's Pizza, thanks to their owner at the time.
Fortunately "Pizza Pizza" took over for the Tiger's in time to help them get absolutely plastered while he dumped all kinds of bread stick money into the Wings.
Simply put... it was the wrath of God that brought about such a disaster in 2003.
Lastly, this is my belief of the true events. God broke down this organization in order to build them back up at the hands of Pastor Jim Leyland... a fiery Baptist preacher! This in effort to lead them to the cusp of glory in 2006, and although they went through trials and tribulations in 2007 and 2008, the experts all agree that in 2009 the Detroit Tigers will make it to the promised land!
Brandon
Still a true believer, good to see. And you'll always have 1984. Write me sometime on my yahoo email, give me a life update.
Brandon,
I think my blog I posted to Michael will cover your latest comment. Check out the links and the reading. There is much to read and learn.
My comment concerning Catholics may have been misleading(but only to the unsuspecting person reading that comment that does not have a broader scope of Catholic history and Reformed Church history). I think misleading is a rather strong word to use. Maybe questionable or intriguing might work best; since those descriptions allude to the possibility of the investigation of the history of the Catholic Church and Reformed Church.
Finally, Reformation is needed. Christians must be reformed back to Scripture and not man's ideals and traditions.
Ok, I haven't been online much this past week, so still haven't checked out Rex's links. Still, I thought I should just drop a line so you all know I'm still following the discussion and comment on what has been written here.
Brandon - I'd very much like to see you if you come through AZ. Send me an e-mail: mkr73jd at yahoo dot com.
There are way to many things that we don't have answers for... to some degree I have to have faith that after three days in a tomb a dead Jesus was resurrected and not stolen (a thought that is gaining momentum).
I know I'm playing semantics here, but why do you "have to have faith?" Do you mean because there is no way to prove it either way, or you feel compelled to believe it? Just wondering.
I often wonder what Christ would think of the new testament, and what he would have said regarding the Muratorian Canon. I personally wonder if some things weren't left out based on politics. Please note that I have not done any significant on books left out. I have heard plenty of reason/excuses as to why they were left out. I really struggle with this personally, and I believe that it's something that Christian's have just simply grown to accept.
Can you expand on what you struggle with concerning the apocrypha? Personally, I'm fascinated by the Gnostic texts. They show that in the first centuries after Jesus there were any number of groups trying to understand and explain who he was.
Michael said...
"I disagree with your assertion that humans are stupid."
Would it help if I said that humans are gullible? My main point is that Christ was right in comparing us to sheep... we often base some of our beliefs off the doctrine of others. I at least know many that are blind in faith.
I've always been puzzled by this; how can someone be "blind in faith"? My own beliefs were formulated over many years of reading and listening to the thoughts and ideas of others. Much of my beliefs have foundations in Deism and Transcendentalism. It took a lot of searching and reflection to find out what seemed to be the truest of the words I had read. I guess that since I do not know the feeling of having blind faith, beliving in something without puzzling it over, I cannot understand it. I do, of course, exclude any beliefs I had as a child, before I was able to reason things through for myself.
That's why I can respect a guy like Rex, he's not afraid to put himself on the line for something he believes in... that we can all respect even if we don't agree!
Assuming, of course, that a particular individual - I am not speaking of Rex, here - has beliefs that are not harmful to himself or society. I do not respect the outspoken, unwavering Klansman, for example.
Rex said...
"You are right that instant gratification is a learned behavior. I was merely venting what was on my mind at the time concerning our youth. Generations are becoming incrasingly more corrupt. We need a reformation!"
I don't know Rex, and likewise I believe it is difficult for either of us to determine this, lets discuss it again at 80. I mean I read of Orgies in my bible, and murder, and of people having all kinds of crazy ideas and beliefs.
Reformation? Maybe. The thought is nice, the reality is difficult!
Well, I'm sure my idea of a positive reformation would differ quite a bit from either of yours'. :o)
Rex said,
"Evolution and secular humanism- being taught as Truth- are the philosophy and religion of today."
Before leaving Trinity I would have agreed with you, now however I don't really think the everyday person believes a whole lot in Evolution... at least it hasn't come up in the office. I won't disagree that it's being taught as truth... however I'm currently taking a "School Law" class for my Master's and I would say that this will actually become a legal hotbed... it actually has already been addressed by the Supreme Court. I encourage you to look up some of these cases.
From my point of view, the truths presented to us by nature trump what some members of a nomadic Semetic tribe wrote down thousands of years ago. When we can see the evidence for evolution all around us I find it difficult to deny. Furthermore, denial of evolution is an extension of a belief in the creation; it is not an idea that stands on it own merits and evidence. One can believe in the creation if one likes but that belief does not discredit evolution, nor does evolution directly discredit the creation. One must rather understand that the story in Genesis is not literal and rather is best understood as an explanation of man's relationship to God. I believe in God, I believe that something had to set the Universe in motion but the Universe follows certain laws which cannot be denied. Is it possible that our imperical limitation prevent us from understanding the exact nature of the Universe? This is certainly the case. But for some things, like the history of our planet and the evolution of life upon it, there is little room left for a "Eureka" moment which will completely turn the scientific community on it's head. Rather, every new discovery serves to help complete the puzzle.
Next... I'm not sure that I trust a body of believer's especially based on what I have said previously. I will be educating my children to the best of my ability, unfortunately at some point I will be releasing them to make decisions for themselves.
By this do you mean to say that you do not trust any organized church?
Rex said...
"(The Catholic Church, by the way was not and is not Biblical. That is why the Protestant Reformation began.)"
This is completely misleading Rex. In truth many of the actions done by the catholic church prior to the reformation were given up on later as they recognized many of their own faults (if only some protestant denominations could be this transparent). Now know this... there are a good many things I won't disagree concerning the Catholic Church, however I bet there are even more things that I would agree with. First of all... they're not afraid to say at the top what they believe and go against popular/secular opinion. Now take note... there are many Catholics that have it very wrong, on the flip side many true practicing Catholics actually have it more right than some of us do. Personally... the strongest believer that I have ever met was a Catholic... this lady rocked my world... and led me to shape some personal beliefs and beliefs in my marriage (I know you share some of these beliefs... however you may be unaware of the Catholic origins!)
Well said, Brandon. I was trying to play Devil's Advocate by asking Rex to expand on his comments regarding the Catholic Church. I understand the Catholic/Protestant schism better than may have been apparent - being neither I just didn't want to get into it. :o)
Rex -
My comment concerning Catholics may have been misleading(but only to the unsuspecting person reading that comment that does not have a broader scope of Catholic history and Reformed Church history). I think misleading is a rather strong word to use. Maybe questionable or intriguing might work best; since those descriptions allude to the possibility of the investigation of the history of the Catholic Church and Reformed Church.
See my comment above regarding this. Again, I cannot with good faith defend Catholicism as I am not a Catholic.
Finally, Reformation is needed. Christians must be reformed back to Scripture and not man's ideals and traditions.
May I ask: would your ideal society be a theocracy?
Shawn - Are you the one who wrote Keeping the Faith? If so, I enjoyed it. I found the description of me at the beginning of Chapter Three amusing. :o)
My best wishes to all!
Michael
Here is some edited text from Rex's blog, with some comments from myself. Again, I have not read through the links so my responses will be limited to what he wrote.
Interject to your heart’s satisfaction, Michael. I’m happy to discuss this with you and fully explain my thoughts. I do appreciate you asking me to better explain things when you do not understand where I am coming from. Some people often jump to conclusions rather than slowing down and asking for clarification. Short excerpts of writing can leave a lot to question if one is not of the same mind as the author.
Well, I believe a mutual respect can be a great aid to reaching consensus, even from drastically opposing points of view.
Do I believe it? Of course non Christian people can be moral. They are! Many atheists and agnostics practice some form of morals and ethics. What I meant to say in my comment when I asked “what morals do we have apart from God” is that morals without God and His Word are empty and not absolute, but instead relative to each individual. Then let me say that people who believe in God are not and never will be morally perfect. (Satan and his demons believe in God and tremble. Satan is FAR from being moral or having any desire of being moral despite the fact that he knows God exists and he knows what morals are.) Also, people who deny God are not incapable of morality. (I know many good people who are not Saved.) Now, I never said that evolution and humanism are forcing anyone to do anything. The philosophies we adhere to (i.e.-humanism/evolution and Christianity) do, however, impact how we think and how we think impacts the choices we make. Maybe you have something on your mind and my comment spurred some questions and thought. In that case, AWESOME! Check out this link with several articles to read on morals and morality. There is a lot of great reading and it should answer your questions/cover your statement above. : )
http://www.monergism.com/directory/search.php?action=search_links_simple&search_kind=and&phrase=morality
I have to say, the above comments did trouble me somewhat, particularly "What I meant to say in my comment when I asked “what morals do we have apart from God” is that morals without God and His Word are empty and not absolute, but instead relative to each individual."
I do not believe my morals are empty nor would I declare that yours are simply because they differ from mine. What we understand as morality comes from many sources: biological influence (as I mentioned earlier), societal influence and, I believe though not everyone does, Godly influence. A great deal of my moral fibre comes from God, as I understand God to be. I do not need a list of ten commandments to know when I have done something wrong. The law as laid down by the Jews came from, I believe, this preternatural sense of what was right and what was wrong as well as a great deal of cultural baggage that is clearly not relevant to us, our culture being vastly different from theirs. My morality taps into the same source that inspired the writers of the the Tanakh; naturally we will share some similar moral beliefs. How can my morality be empty if this is the case? Even though my conception of God is differnt from yours, do you still imply that my morality is detached from God's morality?
I said, “My point- why not act like animals? After all, we evolved from them.”
Now, this was a facetious statement. We did not evolve from molecules to man but were created in the image of God. When people are taught that they evolved from animals then it degrades our special creation. When we believe that we came from monkeys and were not special creations of a sovereign God then that leaves us to be simply evolved animals living out nature’s course.
I disagree. Warning: I am about to get very sappy and personal here. I believe that understanding my connection to the planet, the flora and fauna with which I share it, and indeed the entire Universe, deepens my connection to God. I know that through the process of evolution I am God's creation, all living things are God creation, God's children. Did you know that all elements heavier than hydrogen and helium have their origins in supernovae? It takes the energy of an exploding star to produce carbon, the basis of all life on this particular planet. We, esentially, are made of star stuff. I find this to be beautiful. I find this to be a very profuond indication of the glory of God. All that is revealed to us in nature speaks of the glory of God. My beliefs do not degrade my connection to God in the least.
I said, “You are right that some who claim to be the Church have not always preached the whole Truth. It is worse today.” And you asked…
How would you resolve this? Do you then rely on your own personal interpretation of scripture to determine what is correct? Would this not vary from person to person?
Interpretations obviously vary. Hence the different denominations and theological beliefs out there. Here are a couple links to proper interpretation.
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/packer/02interpretation.html
http://www.girs.com/library/theology/syllabus/interp.html
Without having read the links, I will just point out that saying they contain the "proper" interpretation is probably not going to go unchallenged. :o)
I said, “(The Catholic Church, by the way was not and is not Biblical. That is why the Protestant Reformation began.)” And you asked…
Can you elaborate on this?
Catholicism is similar in some ways to Scripture, but the Catholic Church is not following Scripture and does not hold Scripture above or even on the same level as their church traditions and doctrines. Here is some reading on Catholicism and the reasons for the Protestant Reformation. This link should also clarify some of your question about interpretations of Scripture. There is easily a few months worth of reading here. But this should cover your desire for elaboration. : )
http://www.monergism.com/directory/search.php?action=search_links_simple&search_kind=and&phrase=catholicism
Again, I have not visited the link, bout you got some more of my thoughts about this earlier.
Hope this helps. It definitely should be a start to answering your questions. I encourage you to read those articles (you can find more reading by doing a search for the topics at www.monergism.com) and spend some time reflecting on them. You’ll know where I am coming from. : )
Respectfully,
Rex (Coach Causey)
I look forward to your response!
Michael
Michael, We are made of star stuff??? The discussion of origins is something that is a huge side topic. There is too much going on to actually have a meaningful discussion. Let's just keep it narrowed down. When you read the info I gave you then let us talk some more. I must say I am disappointed that you spent that much time replying to me when you didnt even read what I gave you...
Michael, We are made of star stuff??? The discussion of origins is something that is a huge side topic. There is too much going on to actually have a meaningful discussion. Let's just keep it narrowed down.
Actually, it is not a side topic as it is intrinsic to my understanding of God and of the Universe. I thought I had made that clear. Would you like me to elaborate further? Also, the triplicate question marks come off as rather snide. If you want to ridicule my beliefs please do so openly. If that was not your intent then counter my assertions with something other than a seemingly incredulous repetition of what I wrote - this is how discussions are had. If you have evidence refuting that the heavier elements in the Universe are not formed inside of stars, then I am interested to hear of it.
When you read the info I gave you then let us talk some more. I must say I am disappointed that you spent that much time replying to me when you didnt even read what I gave you...
Then let me say I was disappointed you sent me the info in the first place instead of taking the time to express your views. I was not eager to read those web sites because to me it felt like you were copping out of the discussion. I spent a lot of time crafting my post and you chose to respond with "links." I found that to be inconsiderate. Give me your thoughts, Rex. Do you assert that every item I will read on those web pages exactly mirrors your personal beliefs? Am I going to have a discussion with you or with the authors of those pages? If the latter, we are done here. If the former, I look forward to what you have to say. I want to know what is inside your heart and your head. The decision is yours.
Michael
P.S. - I will not delete any of my posts. You seem to do so with regularity. What are you trying to redact?
REX-
DUDE... You have about 800 links... most (99%) are from people I've never heard of. Put it in your own words if you want us to have a good discussion! Don't merely leave it to the words of others! I've actually talked about this quite a bit through this posting... I just really think that if you believe in something be willing to back it up with your own perspective... feel free to use excerpts as part of you argument!
Also... Michael I will attempt a response in the near future! I'm still digesting!
Brandon
Wow, guys. I gave you some reading because I do not want to write an expository article on the topic when there are so many great ones out there already. I did not know that was necessary. The writings are articles I have read thoroughly and do adhere to. The fact that you do not know those authors can be a good thing; it means you are learning new stuff. I was hoping the links would have been read and then we could discuss the information and any questions in detail. The links are to articles that have been crafted by brilliant men. I can discuss the issue with you much better after you have read where I am coming from. I do not have the time to delve into expository writing on the issues in the links I shared. Read it and my comments to understand where I'm coming from and then we’ll move on to discuss your thoughts and questions. I didn't put any pressure on ya'll. I ACTUALLY asked ya'll to read and reflect on it; implying that this is no hurry, take your time. Yet you did not view them??? Not even one??? Then you seem to think that handing information over to someone to read and then discuss is now a sign of copping out of discussion??? That makes no sense. Listen, I have given you truncated synopses of my take on the discussion and issues but you consistently solicit more info from me (hence the links to readings after certain paragraphs) on what I am talking about. You pretend as if you are really trying to understand my comments, but now I see from your lack of reading the info and engaging me in the discussion of it that you don’t care to understand but desire to engage in idle conversation) or act like the info is misleading. I reply with my thoughts and I give you some links to further explain it. And I would not send you those links without some sort of caveat if I were not asserting that every item in those articles exactly mirrors my personal beliefs. You think my posting of some great reading, to compliment what I am saying, shows a lack of time or interest on my part? The blog I constructed was carefully thought out, researched and labored over. I wrote the blog specifically for you, Michael, so your questions on my views could be thoroughly explained. Had you shared some information with me I would have had respect enough to read it and engage further in discussion on the information and issues. Or I would not have read it but I would have at least been honest enough with myself and you by telling you I simply did not care.
So...this is not a discussion between you and the authors. That is a silly thing to say. I shared some authors with you after I made my own comments. Sure I did not write a thesis, but why must I do that when you can just read up on where I am coming from and then discuss it with me?
Anyway, to clarify, triplicate question marks were not intended to mock. Know that I am not one to be discreet; if I was mocking you there would have been some jesting after the question marks. Triplicate questions marks mean I am befuddled, perplexed, confused about your claim that we are essentially made of star dust as if that is fact and as if that supposed fact truly indicates the glory and awesomeness of our Sovereign God. It is not at all scientific fact (operational science) but rather it is your belief in your origins (historical science). Genesis Creation account is not science either but is origins based on presuppositions, just like evolution. Science must be observable and repeatable, and neither BELIEF is observable or repeatable. I also do not see how Christians can say that God is more glorious and awesome now that Darwin’s (an ungodly man to say the least) and man’s unbiblical, misguided evolutionary hypotheses (not scientific theories) of the origins of life and the universe have “helped” us now understand the Genesis account of Creation so much better. There is nothing Scripturally to lead us to believe that the universe and life in it are billions of years old creations started from the inside of star stuff.
p.s.- I delete my posts because I read them over and find spelling errors I did not catch earlier. I didn’t know deletions of a comment were offensive and arousing of suspicion.
Michael, another thing about your most recent comment to me. I did not respond to you with links. I wrote from where I was coming from first. Then I shared some literature with you to let you get a better and more thorough understanding. You really have annoyed me with your latest comment as if you were wronged by my posting of further info to go along with my own words. It truly is absurd to say that I was inconsiderate and copping out of the discussion.
- Rex
And Brandon, 800 links??? Don't be a nerd. :P But I do urge you to browse that site for some excellent learning and encouragement.
Rex,
I see no reason to continue our dialogue. I will continue my conversation with Brandon via e-mail.
Michael
Excellent. haha. The convo was not exactly the highlight of my life.
You can comment on here, Mochael. I will just not take part in it this anymore.
Post a Comment