"The second thing to get clear is that Christianity has not, and does not profess to have, a detailed political programme for applying 'Do as you would be done by' to a particular society at a particular moment. It could not have. It is meant for all men at all times and the particular programme which suited one place or time would not suit another. And, anyhow, that is not how Christianity works. When it tells you to feed the hungry it does not give you lessons in cookery. When it tells you to read the Scriptures it does not give you lessons in Hebrew and Greek, or even in English grammar. It was never intended to replace or supersede the ordinary human arts and science: it is rather a director which will set them all to the right jobs, and a source of energy which will give them all new life, if only they will put themselves at its disposal" (Lewis, Mere Christianity).
I think in the course of this blog it is becoming clear that I am somewhat disgusted by the politicization of Christianity in the current state of affairs in the US. We have a leader, who uses Christianity as a way of garnering votes and favor. That is nothing new or even worse than others have done in the past. His reading of Two Corinthians only showed that he is less comfortable with using the language of Christians to win political favor with them than past politicians. What is worse and a more dangerous situation are the Christian politicization of their faiths. When you try to shoehorn your faith to fit in a box, be it socialism, liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, etc., you are trying to put in a relationship with the infinite into a finite container. It's just not going to work. You're going to have to peel off a bit here, trim off a bit there to make it work. It isn't even like putting a square peg into a round hole - it's like trying to put the thing with the holes into the square peg. It just doesn't work and the results are divisive inside the Church.
The divisiveness in American politics has seeped into the American conscious so ravenously we can't have polite conversations about anything meaningful. That's sad. It's bad for the country as a whole because it's going to stagnate the country and most of its population. Divisiveness in the Church is far worse. It's going directly against Scripture:
1 Corinthians 1:10: "I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought"
Romans 12:16 "Live in harmony with one another"
Galatians 5:26 "Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another"
I'm not saying that there won't be political disagreements between Christians. There will be because each side has elements that mesh with our Christian faith. Each side has things that are not exactly lined up with Christianity. Furthermore, the art of government has things that must be done that have absolutely nothing to do with our faith in God. Agree with one another on the things of God and the other stuff won't matter. The side that wins in an election should not be boastful. Don't challenge one another on everything. That's the way of the world. We're not supposed to be in the world.
Galatians 5:15 "If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other"
We are going to destroy one another in the Church if we get to wrapped up in politics. People living in a modern state are going to have disagreements on what that Modern State should look like. The Modern State is pretty damn complex with thousands upon thousands of issues that could and are debated. But, if we as Christians keep on biting at each other, we're going to destroy ourselves. If we bicker like non-Christians do among ourselves then we are being controlled by the sin nature; we are living just like the people of the world (One Corinthians 3:3). If we can't come to an agreement on everything in the political realm that's ok, so long as we come to live in harmony with one another and agree on the salvation through Christ Jesus. If we can't speak about politics in a peaceful and harmonious way with one another then we ought to just cut political discussions out of the Church. Let's listen to the Proverbs.
Proverbs 17:14 "Starting a quarrel is like opening a floodgate, so stop before a dispute breaks out"
Showing posts with label Proverbs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Proverbs. Show all posts
Sunday, March 5, 2017
Thursday, February 11, 2016
365 Day Bible Catch Up (Proverbs 1-4)
Catching up in Proverbs now...
1:29-33
-Because they did not accept rebuke or advice, because they hated knowledge and chose not to fear the Lord they will eat the fruit of their ways.
1:32 "For the waywardness of the simple will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them" - What a terrifying verse. I know I have been guilty of complacency on more than one occasion. Lord, help me to cease to be complacent.
But, luckily, 32 is counterbalanced with 33: "but whoever listens to me will live in safety and be at ease, without fear of harm".
Proverbs 2
1-5: If you look for it, if you search for it like its valuable (like silver or a hidden treasure) then you will find it. You will find the fear of the Lord and the knowledge of God.
10 - Wisdom will enter your heart
11 - Discretion will protect you
2:19 is somewhat distressing considering my history. "None who go to her return or attain the paths of life". Her being the wayward wife with her seductive words.
Proverbs 3
3:3-4 "Let love and faithfulness never leave you; bind them around your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart. Then you will win favor and a good name in the sight of God and man". I need to really bind these things and write them on the tablet of my heart. Let this soak in Lord.
3:5-6 "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight". Let this soak in as well. I need to really not lean on my own understanding (a thing I am consistently guilty of).
Here in Proverbs 3 we see a little literal? allegorical? metaphorical? account of creation:
3:19-20 "By wisdom the Lord laid the earth's foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place; by his knowledge the deeps were divided, and the clouds let drop the dew". Genesis doesn't use any of this wordage and yet it makes sense on both a literal and allegorical/metaphorical account.
In light of rereading and typing my notes on Rand and her views on altruism, I can say that it is truly opposite to the Biblical approach to ethics. Proverbs 3:27-28 "Do not withhold good from those who deserve it, when it is in your power to act. Do not say to your neighbor, 'Come back later; I'll give it tomorrow' - when you have it with you". Rand talks about altruistic ethics being hypothetical, asking, 'Should I act if a man is hanging on by his fingernails off a ledge' or 'Should I pull the person from a moving car'. If it is in you power, then act. That is the ethics we are to practice.
God mocks proud mockers but gives grace to the humble. Another point against the prideful ethics of Rand. (Proverbs 3:34).
Proverbs 4
How important is wisdom? 4:7 "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding" or "Whatever else you get, get understanding".
Proverbs 4:14-17 warns against walking in the wicked's ways -
"Do not set foot on the path of the wicked or walk in the way of evil men. Avoid it, do not travel on it; turn from it and go on your way. For they cannot sleep till they do evil; they are robbed of slumber till they make someone fall. They eat the bread of wickedness and drink the wine of violence".
It's like wickedness is an addiction. You get hooked and pulled in further and further until you cannot sleep without doing evil. It gets so bad that they get trapped in it. 4:19 "But the way of the wicked is like deep darkness; they do not know what makes them stumble". Why did you do that? I don't know it just happened. Nothing in particular triggered it. It just happened. How many times has that (paraphrase) happened to me? Break my chains Lord.
1:29-33
-Because they did not accept rebuke or advice, because they hated knowledge and chose not to fear the Lord they will eat the fruit of their ways.
1:32 "For the waywardness of the simple will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them" - What a terrifying verse. I know I have been guilty of complacency on more than one occasion. Lord, help me to cease to be complacent.
But, luckily, 32 is counterbalanced with 33: "but whoever listens to me will live in safety and be at ease, without fear of harm".
Proverbs 2
1-5: If you look for it, if you search for it like its valuable (like silver or a hidden treasure) then you will find it. You will find the fear of the Lord and the knowledge of God.
10 - Wisdom will enter your heart
11 - Discretion will protect you
2:19 is somewhat distressing considering my history. "None who go to her return or attain the paths of life". Her being the wayward wife with her seductive words.
Proverbs 3
3:3-4 "Let love and faithfulness never leave you; bind them around your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart. Then you will win favor and a good name in the sight of God and man". I need to really bind these things and write them on the tablet of my heart. Let this soak in Lord.
3:5-6 "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight". Let this soak in as well. I need to really not lean on my own understanding (a thing I am consistently guilty of).
Here in Proverbs 3 we see a little literal? allegorical? metaphorical? account of creation:
3:19-20 "By wisdom the Lord laid the earth's foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place; by his knowledge the deeps were divided, and the clouds let drop the dew". Genesis doesn't use any of this wordage and yet it makes sense on both a literal and allegorical/metaphorical account.
In light of rereading and typing my notes on Rand and her views on altruism, I can say that it is truly opposite to the Biblical approach to ethics. Proverbs 3:27-28 "Do not withhold good from those who deserve it, when it is in your power to act. Do not say to your neighbor, 'Come back later; I'll give it tomorrow' - when you have it with you". Rand talks about altruistic ethics being hypothetical, asking, 'Should I act if a man is hanging on by his fingernails off a ledge' or 'Should I pull the person from a moving car'. If it is in you power, then act. That is the ethics we are to practice.
God mocks proud mockers but gives grace to the humble. Another point against the prideful ethics of Rand. (Proverbs 3:34).
Proverbs 4
How important is wisdom? 4:7 "Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding" or "Whatever else you get, get understanding".
Proverbs 4:14-17 warns against walking in the wicked's ways -
"Do not set foot on the path of the wicked or walk in the way of evil men. Avoid it, do not travel on it; turn from it and go on your way. For they cannot sleep till they do evil; they are robbed of slumber till they make someone fall. They eat the bread of wickedness and drink the wine of violence".
It's like wickedness is an addiction. You get hooked and pulled in further and further until you cannot sleep without doing evil. It gets so bad that they get trapped in it. 4:19 "But the way of the wicked is like deep darkness; they do not know what makes them stumble". Why did you do that? I don't know it just happened. Nothing in particular triggered it. It just happened. How many times has that (paraphrase) happened to me? Break my chains Lord.
Saturday, January 30, 2016
365 Day Bible 5
365 Day Bible Day 5 (25 days late, need to speed up)
Genesis 11 - 13:4
The Tower of Babel has always fascinated me. I wondered why God was so concerned with man making a great tower or city. I guess in reading it it's the men's intentions and purposes for building it - to make a name for themselves that is the great sin. But, God confused their speech and the people spread out.
Again we have a genealogy of people living huge amounts of time. Shem, 500 years; Arphaxad, 403 years; Shelah, 403 years; Eber, 430 years; Peleg, 209 years; Reu, 207 years; Serug, 200 years; Nahor, 119 years. I know that whether or not these are actual dates are of no real consequence to the salvation that comes through Jesus Christ via Abraham, but it baffles me nonetheless. Nahor then was the father of Terah and Terah the father of Abraham.
Abraham (and his nephew Lot) were from Ur of the Chaldeans. Abraham (named Abram at the moment) married Sarai, a barren woman. Terah (who lived to 205 years old) took his sons, including Abram and his nephew Lot on a journey to Canaan, but stopped in Haran. Why?
God then speaks to Abram in chapter 12 and promises him a blessing. Abram heeds the call and took along Lot to go to Canaan when he was 75 years old. Abram kept moving, kept hearing from God and kept listening, building altars to the Lord along the way.
Abram went down to Egypt during a time of famine and had Sarai lie to everyone and say that she was his sister. Through this lie Abram wasn't killed and acquired wealth. But when the Lord inflicted serious diseases on Pharaoh and his household because of Sarai, Abram was told to get up and leave. Abram traveled some more and settled in between Bethel and Ai and called on the name of the Lord.
Matthew 5:1-26 (The Beatitudes)
The first 12 verses read like a list I need to pray daily. Teach me to be poor in spirit, to be meek, to hunger and thirst for righteousness, to be merciful, to be pure in heart, to be a peacemaker.
5:6 "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness for they will be filled". How cool is that? If you take the time to aim yourself towards righteousness God will make sure that you get there.
5:8 "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God." Lord, I need purification in my heart because I don't always see you.
The salt part suddenly scares me. If salt loses its saltiness though it's of no use. It can only be thrown out and trampled by men. That's again seeing Jesus in not a whimsy-flimsy sort of light that often he gets portrayed as.
5:20 "For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven". Again, Jesus is preaching about righteousness. What is this righteousness he is preaching?
What are we to make of Jesus' thoughts on the Law? Nothing will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Does the resurrection accomplish everything?
5:21-26 bears out what Christ says about the blessed. Blessed are the meek, the merciful and the peacemakers. Those who aren't meek, merciful or a peacemaker will suffer the judgment he talks about in these verses.
Psalm 5
Some of Psalm 5 has those difficult verses with David calling for men to be called guilty by God and for them to have a downfall and be banished from God. But as always this is tempered with a call for God to protect those who take refuge in Him.
Verse 3 stands out to me. "In the morning, O Lord, you hear my voice; in the morning I lay my requests before you and wait in expectation". This is my prayer Lord, that I learn to pray like this. Teach me to have faith enough to lay my requests at your feet and wait in expectation.
Proverbs 1:24-28
Wow, here again we have a difficult verse. Lord, teach me not to reject your calls, your discipline so that I am not so far gone that you will not answer when I do call.
Genesis 11 - 13:4
The Tower of Babel has always fascinated me. I wondered why God was so concerned with man making a great tower or city. I guess in reading it it's the men's intentions and purposes for building it - to make a name for themselves that is the great sin. But, God confused their speech and the people spread out.
Again we have a genealogy of people living huge amounts of time. Shem, 500 years; Arphaxad, 403 years; Shelah, 403 years; Eber, 430 years; Peleg, 209 years; Reu, 207 years; Serug, 200 years; Nahor, 119 years. I know that whether or not these are actual dates are of no real consequence to the salvation that comes through Jesus Christ via Abraham, but it baffles me nonetheless. Nahor then was the father of Terah and Terah the father of Abraham.
Abraham (and his nephew Lot) were from Ur of the Chaldeans. Abraham (named Abram at the moment) married Sarai, a barren woman. Terah (who lived to 205 years old) took his sons, including Abram and his nephew Lot on a journey to Canaan, but stopped in Haran. Why?
God then speaks to Abram in chapter 12 and promises him a blessing. Abram heeds the call and took along Lot to go to Canaan when he was 75 years old. Abram kept moving, kept hearing from God and kept listening, building altars to the Lord along the way.
Abram went down to Egypt during a time of famine and had Sarai lie to everyone and say that she was his sister. Through this lie Abram wasn't killed and acquired wealth. But when the Lord inflicted serious diseases on Pharaoh and his household because of Sarai, Abram was told to get up and leave. Abram traveled some more and settled in between Bethel and Ai and called on the name of the Lord.
Matthew 5:1-26 (The Beatitudes)
The first 12 verses read like a list I need to pray daily. Teach me to be poor in spirit, to be meek, to hunger and thirst for righteousness, to be merciful, to be pure in heart, to be a peacemaker.
5:6 "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness for they will be filled". How cool is that? If you take the time to aim yourself towards righteousness God will make sure that you get there.
5:8 "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God." Lord, I need purification in my heart because I don't always see you.
The salt part suddenly scares me. If salt loses its saltiness though it's of no use. It can only be thrown out and trampled by men. That's again seeing Jesus in not a whimsy-flimsy sort of light that often he gets portrayed as.
5:20 "For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven". Again, Jesus is preaching about righteousness. What is this righteousness he is preaching?
What are we to make of Jesus' thoughts on the Law? Nothing will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Does the resurrection accomplish everything?
5:21-26 bears out what Christ says about the blessed. Blessed are the meek, the merciful and the peacemakers. Those who aren't meek, merciful or a peacemaker will suffer the judgment he talks about in these verses.
Psalm 5
Some of Psalm 5 has those difficult verses with David calling for men to be called guilty by God and for them to have a downfall and be banished from God. But as always this is tempered with a call for God to protect those who take refuge in Him.
Verse 3 stands out to me. "In the morning, O Lord, you hear my voice; in the morning I lay my requests before you and wait in expectation". This is my prayer Lord, that I learn to pray like this. Teach me to have faith enough to lay my requests at your feet and wait in expectation.
Proverbs 1:24-28
Wow, here again we have a difficult verse. Lord, teach me not to reject your calls, your discipline so that I am not so far gone that you will not answer when I do call.
Thursday, January 28, 2016
365 Day Bible 3 & 4
Day 3 of the 365 Day Bible (still have some catching up to do).
Genesis 5 - 10
Genesis 5:1-2 reminds us that when God created man He did so in the likeness of God, the Imago Dei. Interestingly here, the NIV says the "likeness of God" and not the "image of God". I wonder what the original text states? I know there are some Christian sects that believe that we were created in the image and likeness of God, but after the Fall we lost the 'likeness' and retained the 'image'.
Adam lived 930 years. Seth lived 912 years. Enosh lived 905 years. Kenan lived 910 years. Mahalalel lived 895 years. Jared lived 962 years.
Enoch lived 365 years and unlike his ancestors, the Bible doesn't say 'and then he died'. It states 5:24 "Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him away". Is this poetic license? Is it just stating the same thing in a more flowery language? Or is it something else? I don't know.
Methuselah lived 969 years. Lamech lived 777 years. Lamech was the father of Noah.
Noah was the father of Shem, Ham and Japheth.
Genesis 6 has some interesting stuff. First, "the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose" (6:2). "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days - and also afterward - when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown" (6:4). What on earth does that mean? Who were the Nephilim?
In spite of the wickedness of man, Noah alone found favor in the eyes of the Lord. Noah was righteous, blameless and walked with God. God decided to wipe out all living things on account of man who had brought violence to the earth. But, God makes a covenant with Noah (this is the first time God makes a covenant in the Old Testament).
Why does God command Noah to take two of every kind of bird in 6:20 and seven of every kind of bird in 7:2?
After the flood the first thing Noah does is to build an altar and sacrifice to God. God then states, "never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood" (8:21). That doesn't exactly paint a very good picture of man - every inclination is evil from childhood. So much for the theory that man is intrinsically good.
God then reminds us of the Imago Dei in a warning not to kill another man - 9:6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man".
God then makes his covenant with Noah never to destroy the earth by a flood and sets the rainbow as a sign to remember that He will remember the everlasting covenant between God and all the living creatures of every kind.
Noah then gets drunk and Ham dishonors him, but Japheth and Shem cover him up. Noah curses Ham (the father of Canaan) to be the slave of his brothers. Noah lived 950 years and died.
What are we to do with the ages in this passage? Are we to take literally that men lived nearly a thousand years? What can be the explanation for such longevity?
Matthew 3-4
John the Baptist bursts onto the scene in Matthew 3, calling for repentance. He prophesies about the coming Messiah who will baptize with fire and the Holy Spirit. He doesn't paint Jesus as a sort of wimpy guy either "His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire" (Matthew 3:12).
John the Baptist then, after mild protestation, baptizes Jesus. A voice from Heaven declares that Jesus is God's son.
After baptism, Jesus goes into the desert to fast 40 days. After this he is tempted by the devil three times. The thing I have always found the most interesting about this passage is that both use Scripture in their back and forth. Of course one would expect Jesus to quote Scripture, but the devil uses it as well. That's an unsettling thought.
Just like John the Baptist, Jesus begins to preach calling for repentance. Jesus then calls his first four disciples Simon-Peter, Andrew, James and John (the sons of Zebedee). Jesus then begins his ministry by preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing the sick. People flocked to him from all over and brought their sick to be healed.
Psalms 3-4
Psalm 3 is one of those Psalms that has a difficult verse in it. "Arise, O Lord! Deliver me, O my God! Strike all my enemies on the jaw; break the teeth of the wicked" (Psalms 3:7). Not exactly one of those verses that makes God seem like the great redeemer He is. It's hard to reconcile the love of God with what David is calling on God to do. But, just as we saw in Matthew 3, Jesus who is healing the sick just one chapter later is being prophesied as standing with the winnowing fork ready to store up his wheat in the barn and burn the chaff forever in an unquenchable fire.
But there are two verses that really stick out to me in Psalm 3. Psalm 3:5 "I lie down and sleep; I wake again, because the Lord sustains me". Even something so simple as waking up is worthy of praising God, because He sustains us. Psalm 3:8 "From the Lord comes deliverance. May your blessing be on your people". David, for all intents and purposes is one of the most renowned warriors in the Bible, but he sees the Lord as his deliverance, not his own strength or might.
Psalm 4 also shows David seeing God as his safety. But, the verse in Psalm 4 that strikes me the most is verse 4. "In your anger do not sin; when you are on your beds, search your hearts and be silent". Hear my prayer God, help me to search my heart so that I do not sin in anger.
Proverbs 1:10-23
Again we see a warning against sin - 1:10 "My son, if sinners entice you, do not give in to them". Again we see repentance and what it does for a man. 1:23 "If you had responded to my rebuke, I would have poured out my heart to you and made my thoughts known to you".
Genesis 5 - 10
Genesis 5:1-2 reminds us that when God created man He did so in the likeness of God, the Imago Dei. Interestingly here, the NIV says the "likeness of God" and not the "image of God". I wonder what the original text states? I know there are some Christian sects that believe that we were created in the image and likeness of God, but after the Fall we lost the 'likeness' and retained the 'image'.
Adam lived 930 years. Seth lived 912 years. Enosh lived 905 years. Kenan lived 910 years. Mahalalel lived 895 years. Jared lived 962 years.
Enoch lived 365 years and unlike his ancestors, the Bible doesn't say 'and then he died'. It states 5:24 "Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him away". Is this poetic license? Is it just stating the same thing in a more flowery language? Or is it something else? I don't know.
Methuselah lived 969 years. Lamech lived 777 years. Lamech was the father of Noah.
Noah was the father of Shem, Ham and Japheth.
Genesis 6 has some interesting stuff. First, "the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose" (6:2). "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days - and also afterward - when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown" (6:4). What on earth does that mean? Who were the Nephilim?
In spite of the wickedness of man, Noah alone found favor in the eyes of the Lord. Noah was righteous, blameless and walked with God. God decided to wipe out all living things on account of man who had brought violence to the earth. But, God makes a covenant with Noah (this is the first time God makes a covenant in the Old Testament).
Why does God command Noah to take two of every kind of bird in 6:20 and seven of every kind of bird in 7:2?
After the flood the first thing Noah does is to build an altar and sacrifice to God. God then states, "never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood" (8:21). That doesn't exactly paint a very good picture of man - every inclination is evil from childhood. So much for the theory that man is intrinsically good.
God then reminds us of the Imago Dei in a warning not to kill another man - 9:6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man".
God then makes his covenant with Noah never to destroy the earth by a flood and sets the rainbow as a sign to remember that He will remember the everlasting covenant between God and all the living creatures of every kind.
Noah then gets drunk and Ham dishonors him, but Japheth and Shem cover him up. Noah curses Ham (the father of Canaan) to be the slave of his brothers. Noah lived 950 years and died.
What are we to do with the ages in this passage? Are we to take literally that men lived nearly a thousand years? What can be the explanation for such longevity?
Matthew 3-4
John the Baptist bursts onto the scene in Matthew 3, calling for repentance. He prophesies about the coming Messiah who will baptize with fire and the Holy Spirit. He doesn't paint Jesus as a sort of wimpy guy either "His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire" (Matthew 3:12).
John the Baptist then, after mild protestation, baptizes Jesus. A voice from Heaven declares that Jesus is God's son.
After baptism, Jesus goes into the desert to fast 40 days. After this he is tempted by the devil three times. The thing I have always found the most interesting about this passage is that both use Scripture in their back and forth. Of course one would expect Jesus to quote Scripture, but the devil uses it as well. That's an unsettling thought.
Just like John the Baptist, Jesus begins to preach calling for repentance. Jesus then calls his first four disciples Simon-Peter, Andrew, James and John (the sons of Zebedee). Jesus then begins his ministry by preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing the sick. People flocked to him from all over and brought their sick to be healed.
Psalms 3-4
Psalm 3 is one of those Psalms that has a difficult verse in it. "Arise, O Lord! Deliver me, O my God! Strike all my enemies on the jaw; break the teeth of the wicked" (Psalms 3:7). Not exactly one of those verses that makes God seem like the great redeemer He is. It's hard to reconcile the love of God with what David is calling on God to do. But, just as we saw in Matthew 3, Jesus who is healing the sick just one chapter later is being prophesied as standing with the winnowing fork ready to store up his wheat in the barn and burn the chaff forever in an unquenchable fire.
But there are two verses that really stick out to me in Psalm 3. Psalm 3:5 "I lie down and sleep; I wake again, because the Lord sustains me". Even something so simple as waking up is worthy of praising God, because He sustains us. Psalm 3:8 "From the Lord comes deliverance. May your blessing be on your people". David, for all intents and purposes is one of the most renowned warriors in the Bible, but he sees the Lord as his deliverance, not his own strength or might.
Psalm 4 also shows David seeing God as his safety. But, the verse in Psalm 4 that strikes me the most is verse 4. "In your anger do not sin; when you are on your beds, search your hearts and be silent". Hear my prayer God, help me to search my heart so that I do not sin in anger.
Proverbs 1:10-23
Again we see a warning against sin - 1:10 "My son, if sinners entice you, do not give in to them". Again we see repentance and what it does for a man. 1:23 "If you had responded to my rebuke, I would have poured out my heart to you and made my thoughts known to you".
Tuesday, January 12, 2016
365 Day Bible Day 2
Day 2 (still playing catch-up)
Genesis 3-4
The Fall of Man in Genesis 3- Why did God make the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil? Why did God make the Tree of Life? Genesis 3 offers us the first look of the Problem of Evil in Scriptures. Why was the serpent crafty? Why did he defy God? Why did Eve mis-remember or lie about the tree in the middle of the garden and embellish what God had said? Eve, even in that innocent state at the least erred, if not fibbed. Who is to blame for the fall of man?
Was it God for setting Adam and Eve up to fail? Was it the serpent for seducing Eve? Was it Eve for eating the apple and seducing Adam? Was it Adam to succumbing to Eve and eating the apple? It just occurred to me, though I've probably thought of it before or so I'm not mis-remembering or fibbing, it's probably more accurate to state that it has been pointed out to me before that the problem of free will and the problem of evil are intricately related.
Why did God create the universe in the way He did? We may posit guesses, theories and plausible scenarios, but our answers will only reach probability standards and internally consistency. The fact of the matter is that the world is as it is because God created it as such (allowing a transcendental argument that presupposes that the Christian God did create the world, that I have no personal qualms with accepting on various levels that I'll not go into at the moment). But, as for the creation of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (whether this is a literal or metaphorical creation, a topic for another discussion) demands that God created the world as such to involve Free Will. Thus, sin, though not inevitable, is at least possible in the world that God created. The Problem of Evil comes about because we ask who is the author of evil. In a world that is created by God where evil is at least possible don't we have to accept that God is the ultimate author of evil? I tend to lean towards St. Augustine's way of dealing with the existence of evil as I sort of had a eureka moment when I learned of his theory. Evil is not something that exists independently and is really only the diminishing of the good. Thus, God who cannot be diminished at all can never be evil. Thus, we can rule God out as the author of evil.
But, we needn't get too deep into this as it really doesn't concern Genesis 3 only that it absolves God from any guilt in the scenario. God shows whose to blame as he doles out punishment. The serpent is cursed. The woman has her pain in childbearing greatly increased and Adam and the ground is cursed because of his role in the event.
Even after punishment though God takes care of Adam & Eve making them garments of skin.
Cain and Abel are then born to Adam and Eve in exile from the Garden. Cain offered "some" of his fruits and Abel offered "fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock". The Lord looked on Abel with favor for his offering, but not on Cain. Cain became angry. Then God says something interesting, combining a comforting and a warning - "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it".
That verse, 4:7 strikes some fear in me. I can vividly picture sin crouching at my door seeking to have me. Lord, help me master it.
Cain kills Abel and is cursed by God, but once again God even punishment doesn't totally destroy Cain, marking him so that nobody kills him.
This is where I start to get intrigued and thinking about the whole Adam & Eve and Cain & Abel and why is Cain scared stating, "I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me". If Adam & Eve are the first people and Cain and Abel their first children, and now that Abel is dead, who is Cain afraid of coming across when he is wandering? Who is his wife that he lay with in the next verse? Now I guess is as good of a place as any for me to posit my working and probably incredibly inaccurate thoughts on Creation, Adam & Eve and who the heck Cain is scared of.
First, with regard to the Genesis account of Creation and its literal/metaphorical interpretation. Actually, let's back up a second before I go into this. Firstly, anything and everything in Scriptures is relevant to our daily walk with God. But, if it doesn't deny the salvation through Jesus Christ or anything heretical about the nature of God, I think a debate can be had on certain things - one of which is Creation. Secondly, as long as there is no disagreement on how one is redeemed, which is through Jesus Christ and acceptance of Him as one's Lord and Savior, and on the Triune God of Christianity being the sole God, one can be called a Christian. I am sure that when I get to Heaven I will be surprised who I see and who I don't see. God's redemptive powers are greater than my conception of them. Lastly, I do not think it to be edifying the faithful or a good look to the un-believing for Christians to come to blows, literal or metaphorical about things related to faith. Where there is disagreement, let there be discussion unless discussion leads to heresy or disharmony. If there are in those rare spots places where Christians can disagree on points of theology that are not related to Christ, his redeeming ways or on the Trinity then let us simply do good works to show our faith. But when it comes to Creation, I am not a literalist. I don't think we can take the Biblical account of Genesis 1-2 and turn it into a scientific treatise because that is not what it was intended to be.
As for my take on Creation, I see no reason why a Darwinian account of evolution is incompatible with a Scriptural worldview. I see this because I don't think the Bible is a scientific textbook. Now, Darwinian evolution has the power to describe the process of how the earth came into being, but not the why or the intent of creation. I believe that when God set into motion the events of creation that would eventually lead to this point and to the final point in history, He did so in the full knowledge of the fall of man and that his creation act included the two seminal points in redeeming man - the crucifixion/resurrection of Jesus Christ and the second coming. They were woven into the fabric of creation because he had foreknowledge that man would fall and in the ultimate act of love and sacrifice he chose to create and redeem nonetheless. Why did God create in such a way that included Free Will? Again, this is one of those questions we can only posit theories to that approximate internal consistency because we cannot know the full mind of God.
Now, we come to Adam and Eve and some of the differences between Genesis 1 and 2. I think at some point in the distant past, when man was emerging out of East Africa, God chose, much in the way he chose Abraham, a certain man and placed him in the Garden to fulfill the purpose which God had set for man at the onset of creation - "to fill the earth and subdue it, to rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground" (Genesis 1:28). Through Adam naming the creatures of the garden, God gave him dominion over those in the garden. While I don't take creation as literal, I take the Garden of Eden and Adam as literal, as well as Eve being formed for Adam by God specifically as literal, historical events.
Now comes the question of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life and the serpent. This I vacillate back and forth on. On the one hand, if God set up a guard at the entrance to the Garden so that Adam & Eve couldn't return to the garden it would suggest that both trees are literal. But, on the other hand, the sin/fall of man could very well have been Adam & Eve exercising their free will in a way that resulted in sin and the story could be metaphorical and just Adam & Eve choosing to live their way instead of God's way. I'm not sure - to be honest, I'm not really sure about any of this; it's just my personal thoughts.
Cain & Abel is most definitely now entering a literal phase. I think that once Adam & Eve have been banished from paradise they are aware of other people throughout their little corner of the world. Cain being banished from his home territory would mean coming across other groups of humans who might not be overly receptive to someone wandering into their territory where they hunt and gather. Why do I think that Adam & Eve and their sons knew of other human beings in the vicinity of them? The wife of Cain, without the Biblical mention of Adam & Eve having a daughter makes me think that Cain (and probably Abel) acquired a wife from another band of humans in the general vicinity to where Adam & Eve were living. But, this could all be wrong. Lord, I pray for two things. First, that I don't get to caught up in intellectualizing your Word and thus, not gleaning the eternal truths from it by drowning out your voice. Second, that I don't lead myself or anyone else astray from you in thinking or writing these things.
To finish up today's reading in Genesis I have two things that puzzle me
1) Lamech. What is Lamech saying when he makes his declaration to his two wives?
2) Adam & Eve's third son Seth has a son called Enosh: "At that time men began to call on the name of the Lord". What does that mean? The Lord spoke to Adam & Eve, and to Cain (presumably to Abel). But had the fall caused enough rift that the Lord was pulling back and so the roles reversed to where man was beginning to call on the name of the Lord instead of the other way around?
Matthew 3
John the Baptist was baptizing and preaching in the desert and drawing crowds. He chastised the Pharisees and the Sadducees who seemed to be relying on their heritage as descendants of Abraham for salvation. "Produce fruit in keeping with repentance" (3:8) he warned them, continuing "The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire" (3:10).
Lord, hear my prayer - Help me to produce fruit in keeping with repentance. I repent of my sins and yet I am bearing no fruit. I continue to go to my sins often, even after repenting. I repent again. Help me to bear fruit.
The first words of Jesus in the New Testament come from Matthew 3:15 "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness". While the formation of the Scriptures as it is now may not be chronological in the order that events happened or were even recorded, I find it interesting to English readers of the Scriptures that Jesus' first words are essentially 'let's do it to fulfill all righteousness'. With that John the Baptist baptizes Jesus and God declares from Heaven who Jesus is - "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased". Righteousness pleases God.
Psalm 2
2:11 - "Serve the Lord with fear and rejoice with trembling"
2:12b - "Blessed are all who take refuge in him"
Lord, may I serve you and rejoice you and take refuge in you.
Proverbs 1:7-9
1:7 "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline."
Lord, let this be yet another beginning of knowledge. Teach me not to despise your discipline. Hear my prayer Lord.
Genesis 3-4
The Fall of Man in Genesis 3- Why did God make the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil? Why did God make the Tree of Life? Genesis 3 offers us the first look of the Problem of Evil in Scriptures. Why was the serpent crafty? Why did he defy God? Why did Eve mis-remember or lie about the tree in the middle of the garden and embellish what God had said? Eve, even in that innocent state at the least erred, if not fibbed. Who is to blame for the fall of man?
Was it God for setting Adam and Eve up to fail? Was it the serpent for seducing Eve? Was it Eve for eating the apple and seducing Adam? Was it Adam to succumbing to Eve and eating the apple? It just occurred to me, though I've probably thought of it before or so I'm not mis-remembering or fibbing, it's probably more accurate to state that it has been pointed out to me before that the problem of free will and the problem of evil are intricately related.
Why did God create the universe in the way He did? We may posit guesses, theories and plausible scenarios, but our answers will only reach probability standards and internally consistency. The fact of the matter is that the world is as it is because God created it as such (allowing a transcendental argument that presupposes that the Christian God did create the world, that I have no personal qualms with accepting on various levels that I'll not go into at the moment). But, as for the creation of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (whether this is a literal or metaphorical creation, a topic for another discussion) demands that God created the world as such to involve Free Will. Thus, sin, though not inevitable, is at least possible in the world that God created. The Problem of Evil comes about because we ask who is the author of evil. In a world that is created by God where evil is at least possible don't we have to accept that God is the ultimate author of evil? I tend to lean towards St. Augustine's way of dealing with the existence of evil as I sort of had a eureka moment when I learned of his theory. Evil is not something that exists independently and is really only the diminishing of the good. Thus, God who cannot be diminished at all can never be evil. Thus, we can rule God out as the author of evil.
But, we needn't get too deep into this as it really doesn't concern Genesis 3 only that it absolves God from any guilt in the scenario. God shows whose to blame as he doles out punishment. The serpent is cursed. The woman has her pain in childbearing greatly increased and Adam and the ground is cursed because of his role in the event.
Even after punishment though God takes care of Adam & Eve making them garments of skin.
Cain and Abel are then born to Adam and Eve in exile from the Garden. Cain offered "some" of his fruits and Abel offered "fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock". The Lord looked on Abel with favor for his offering, but not on Cain. Cain became angry. Then God says something interesting, combining a comforting and a warning - "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it".
That verse, 4:7 strikes some fear in me. I can vividly picture sin crouching at my door seeking to have me. Lord, help me master it.
Cain kills Abel and is cursed by God, but once again God even punishment doesn't totally destroy Cain, marking him so that nobody kills him.
This is where I start to get intrigued and thinking about the whole Adam & Eve and Cain & Abel and why is Cain scared stating, "I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me". If Adam & Eve are the first people and Cain and Abel their first children, and now that Abel is dead, who is Cain afraid of coming across when he is wandering? Who is his wife that he lay with in the next verse? Now I guess is as good of a place as any for me to posit my working and probably incredibly inaccurate thoughts on Creation, Adam & Eve and who the heck Cain is scared of.
First, with regard to the Genesis account of Creation and its literal/metaphorical interpretation. Actually, let's back up a second before I go into this. Firstly, anything and everything in Scriptures is relevant to our daily walk with God. But, if it doesn't deny the salvation through Jesus Christ or anything heretical about the nature of God, I think a debate can be had on certain things - one of which is Creation. Secondly, as long as there is no disagreement on how one is redeemed, which is through Jesus Christ and acceptance of Him as one's Lord and Savior, and on the Triune God of Christianity being the sole God, one can be called a Christian. I am sure that when I get to Heaven I will be surprised who I see and who I don't see. God's redemptive powers are greater than my conception of them. Lastly, I do not think it to be edifying the faithful or a good look to the un-believing for Christians to come to blows, literal or metaphorical about things related to faith. Where there is disagreement, let there be discussion unless discussion leads to heresy or disharmony. If there are in those rare spots places where Christians can disagree on points of theology that are not related to Christ, his redeeming ways or on the Trinity then let us simply do good works to show our faith. But when it comes to Creation, I am not a literalist. I don't think we can take the Biblical account of Genesis 1-2 and turn it into a scientific treatise because that is not what it was intended to be.
As for my take on Creation, I see no reason why a Darwinian account of evolution is incompatible with a Scriptural worldview. I see this because I don't think the Bible is a scientific textbook. Now, Darwinian evolution has the power to describe the process of how the earth came into being, but not the why or the intent of creation. I believe that when God set into motion the events of creation that would eventually lead to this point and to the final point in history, He did so in the full knowledge of the fall of man and that his creation act included the two seminal points in redeeming man - the crucifixion/resurrection of Jesus Christ and the second coming. They were woven into the fabric of creation because he had foreknowledge that man would fall and in the ultimate act of love and sacrifice he chose to create and redeem nonetheless. Why did God create in such a way that included Free Will? Again, this is one of those questions we can only posit theories to that approximate internal consistency because we cannot know the full mind of God.
Now, we come to Adam and Eve and some of the differences between Genesis 1 and 2. I think at some point in the distant past, when man was emerging out of East Africa, God chose, much in the way he chose Abraham, a certain man and placed him in the Garden to fulfill the purpose which God had set for man at the onset of creation - "to fill the earth and subdue it, to rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground" (Genesis 1:28). Through Adam naming the creatures of the garden, God gave him dominion over those in the garden. While I don't take creation as literal, I take the Garden of Eden and Adam as literal, as well as Eve being formed for Adam by God specifically as literal, historical events.
Now comes the question of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life and the serpent. This I vacillate back and forth on. On the one hand, if God set up a guard at the entrance to the Garden so that Adam & Eve couldn't return to the garden it would suggest that both trees are literal. But, on the other hand, the sin/fall of man could very well have been Adam & Eve exercising their free will in a way that resulted in sin and the story could be metaphorical and just Adam & Eve choosing to live their way instead of God's way. I'm not sure - to be honest, I'm not really sure about any of this; it's just my personal thoughts.
Cain & Abel is most definitely now entering a literal phase. I think that once Adam & Eve have been banished from paradise they are aware of other people throughout their little corner of the world. Cain being banished from his home territory would mean coming across other groups of humans who might not be overly receptive to someone wandering into their territory where they hunt and gather. Why do I think that Adam & Eve and their sons knew of other human beings in the vicinity of them? The wife of Cain, without the Biblical mention of Adam & Eve having a daughter makes me think that Cain (and probably Abel) acquired a wife from another band of humans in the general vicinity to where Adam & Eve were living. But, this could all be wrong. Lord, I pray for two things. First, that I don't get to caught up in intellectualizing your Word and thus, not gleaning the eternal truths from it by drowning out your voice. Second, that I don't lead myself or anyone else astray from you in thinking or writing these things.
To finish up today's reading in Genesis I have two things that puzzle me
1) Lamech. What is Lamech saying when he makes his declaration to his two wives?
2) Adam & Eve's third son Seth has a son called Enosh: "At that time men began to call on the name of the Lord". What does that mean? The Lord spoke to Adam & Eve, and to Cain (presumably to Abel). But had the fall caused enough rift that the Lord was pulling back and so the roles reversed to where man was beginning to call on the name of the Lord instead of the other way around?
Matthew 3
John the Baptist was baptizing and preaching in the desert and drawing crowds. He chastised the Pharisees and the Sadducees who seemed to be relying on their heritage as descendants of Abraham for salvation. "Produce fruit in keeping with repentance" (3:8) he warned them, continuing "The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire" (3:10).
Lord, hear my prayer - Help me to produce fruit in keeping with repentance. I repent of my sins and yet I am bearing no fruit. I continue to go to my sins often, even after repenting. I repent again. Help me to bear fruit.
The first words of Jesus in the New Testament come from Matthew 3:15 "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness". While the formation of the Scriptures as it is now may not be chronological in the order that events happened or were even recorded, I find it interesting to English readers of the Scriptures that Jesus' first words are essentially 'let's do it to fulfill all righteousness'. With that John the Baptist baptizes Jesus and God declares from Heaven who Jesus is - "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased". Righteousness pleases God.
Psalm 2
2:11 - "Serve the Lord with fear and rejoice with trembling"
2:12b - "Blessed are all who take refuge in him"
Lord, may I serve you and rejoice you and take refuge in you.
Proverbs 1:7-9
1:7 "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline."
Lord, let this be yet another beginning of knowledge. Teach me not to despise your discipline. Hear my prayer Lord.
365 Day Bible Day 1
Day 1 of the 365 day Bible reading (of course it's Day 12 of the year, but I'm a procrastinator).
Genesis 1-2
When God creates the sea creatures and the birds, he blesses them and says "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth". When God creates the land creatures he says its good. When he creates man "in our image" he does so to "let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground". He gave man a duty and a purpose in the act of creation.
1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them". Why does the author repeat God created man three times in a single phrase? What is the significance of the repetition?
After creating man for a purpose, he blesses them and gives them every seed-bearing plant as food.
God rested on the seventh day and made it holy - he set it apart for rest.
The creation of man coincided with him placing man in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.
God named the "day" and the "night", the "sky", the "land" and the "seas, but Adam named all the animals. Is this significant? I remember vaguely from a college class that naming something in Hebrew culture gave ownership or stewardship, but is that true? I mean, it would make sense as man was created to work and subdue the earth.
Matthew 1-2
Mary was found to be pregnant with Jesus before being married by the Holy Spirit. Is this the first time that the Holy Spirit is mentioned specifically in the Bible?
Joseph became aware of this and was going to break it off with Mary, but an angel came to him and explained the situation. That would be an odd one to experience.
Jesus was born in Bethlehem and the Magi came to see him. They stopped in Jerusalem to find where the one who was to be the king of the Jews was born. They avoided going back through Jerusalem though because of King Herod.
Joseph is again visited by an angel, telling him to take Mary and Jesus to Egypt because King Herod was going to try and kill Jesus. Joseph is once again visited by an angel and told that it was safe to return to Israel now that King Herod was dead.
Psalm 1
1:1-2 "Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers. But his delight is in the law of the Lord and on his law he meditates day and night". This is my prayer Lord, help me to delight in your law and meditate on it day and night.
Proverbs 1:1-6
The purpose of the Proverbs:
-to attain wisdom and discipline
-to understand words of insight
-to acquire a disciplined and prudent life
-to do what is right and just and fair
I need the Proverbs probably more than most things right now. I need to acquire a disciplined and prudent life. Help me Lord to achieve this end.
Genesis 1-2
When God creates the sea creatures and the birds, he blesses them and says "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth". When God creates the land creatures he says its good. When he creates man "in our image" he does so to "let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground". He gave man a duty and a purpose in the act of creation.
1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them". Why does the author repeat God created man three times in a single phrase? What is the significance of the repetition?
After creating man for a purpose, he blesses them and gives them every seed-bearing plant as food.
God rested on the seventh day and made it holy - he set it apart for rest.
The creation of man coincided with him placing man in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.
God named the "day" and the "night", the "sky", the "land" and the "seas, but Adam named all the animals. Is this significant? I remember vaguely from a college class that naming something in Hebrew culture gave ownership or stewardship, but is that true? I mean, it would make sense as man was created to work and subdue the earth.
Matthew 1-2
Mary was found to be pregnant with Jesus before being married by the Holy Spirit. Is this the first time that the Holy Spirit is mentioned specifically in the Bible?
Joseph became aware of this and was going to break it off with Mary, but an angel came to him and explained the situation. That would be an odd one to experience.
Jesus was born in Bethlehem and the Magi came to see him. They stopped in Jerusalem to find where the one who was to be the king of the Jews was born. They avoided going back through Jerusalem though because of King Herod.
Joseph is again visited by an angel, telling him to take Mary and Jesus to Egypt because King Herod was going to try and kill Jesus. Joseph is once again visited by an angel and told that it was safe to return to Israel now that King Herod was dead.
Psalm 1
1:1-2 "Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers. But his delight is in the law of the Lord and on his law he meditates day and night". This is my prayer Lord, help me to delight in your law and meditate on it day and night.
Proverbs 1:1-6
The purpose of the Proverbs:
-to attain wisdom and discipline
-to understand words of insight
-to acquire a disciplined and prudent life
-to do what is right and just and fair
I need the Proverbs probably more than most things right now. I need to acquire a disciplined and prudent life. Help me Lord to achieve this end.
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
Xenophanes, Heraclitus, Parmenides & Proverbs
(Originally Written February 11, 2014 on scrap paper now lost)
History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Book I - Ancient Philosophy
Chapter 4 - Heraclitus
Xenophanes taught that gods were made up through anthropomorphic tendencies. He believed in only one God, but that God was not like man in either thought or form.
He also believed knowledge of God and gods to be impossible, "even if a man should chance to say something utterly right, still himself knows it not. There is nowhere anything but guessing (Russell, 40).
Xenophanes was a rationalist who disliked the mystical elements of Pythagorean thought.
Heraclitus lived around 511 BC in Ephesus. He was a mystic, believing the fundamental substance to be fire. He believed that everything was born by something else's death.
Heraclitus had a very negative view of mankind. He believed it was only force that compelled man to be good.
He believed war was not only a fact of life, but necessary to maintain existence. War brings death. Death brings life to the better things.
He was ascetic and proud of his asceticism.
The soul was made of fire and water. The better the soul, the more fire it had. The "dryer" the soul, the better it was.
He believed the world to be uncreated and eternal.
He believed that everything was in flux.
The constant flux produced strife. Strife produced conflict and that conflict proved to create the balance that exists in life. The flux had the effect of creating the cosmic justice that kept everything in its place and from one thing or one man from attaining too much power.
"The way of man has no wisdom, but that of God has. The wisest man is an ape to God, just as the most beautiful ape is ugly compared to man" (Russell, 44).
Heraclitus' metaphysical notion of the endless flux is the stated by Plato to be: nothing ever is, everything is becoming. Aristotle described it as 'nothing steadfastly is'.
The doctrine of perpetual flux is a horrifying thing to men who seek something permanent. Science and philosophy have been trying to escape Heraclitus for thousands of years.
Chapter V - Parmenides
Parmenides countered Heraclitus' notion that everything is always changing by stating nothing ever changes.
Parmenides lived around 450 BC in southern Italy.
Parmenides taught that both thought and language require objects outside of themselves. You can't think of an object if that object doesn't exist.
Parmenides believed that in order for words to have meaning they must be attached to an object. If that object existed in the past it maintains some existence, otherwise we could not use the word meaningfully.
Chapter VI - Empedocles
Empedocles lived around 440 BC in Sicily. He claimed to be a god.
Empedocles was an old combination of science, religion and philosophy. His science and religion were often times at odds with one another.
Empedocles discovered properties of air and centrifugal force by experiment. He had a scientific belief in an odd version of survival of the fittest type of evolutionary theory.
Empedocles believed not in one primordial substance, but four: earth, fire, wind and water. However, love and strife were on equal footing with the aforementioned substances. Love brought about the combination of the elements. Strife brought about the dissolution of the elements.
Love and strife fought one another. There were periods of time when one mastered the other. Chance and necessity brought about the changes in the universe, not some overarching purpose.
Chapter VII - Athens in relation to culture
The greatness of Athens began when they defeated the Persians at Marathon (490 BC) and defeated Xerxes (480 BC).
Athens grew rich and prosperous after this under the guidance of Pericles until about 430 BC.
During this time Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides flourished.
Proverbs 8
8:9 - "To the discerning all of them are right. They are faultless to those who have knowledge".
The wisdom of the Lord is known to the discerning. It is faultless to those who have knowledge. THen do the unbelieving have no knowledge, no discernment?
Help me to seek you that I may find your wisdom. Help me to seek you God.
Proverbs 9
9:10 - "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding"
Proverbs 10
"The way of the Lord is a refuge for the righteouss"
Lord, may you be my refuge. Put in me a desire to seek you always. Light my heart on fire so that it burns for you. Help me to turn from folly and wickedness. Keep my paths straight. Bless this request my God, my King.
History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Book I - Ancient Philosophy
Chapter 4 - Heraclitus
Xenophanes taught that gods were made up through anthropomorphic tendencies. He believed in only one God, but that God was not like man in either thought or form.
He also believed knowledge of God and gods to be impossible, "even if a man should chance to say something utterly right, still himself knows it not. There is nowhere anything but guessing (Russell, 40).
Xenophanes was a rationalist who disliked the mystical elements of Pythagorean thought.
Heraclitus lived around 511 BC in Ephesus. He was a mystic, believing the fundamental substance to be fire. He believed that everything was born by something else's death.
Heraclitus had a very negative view of mankind. He believed it was only force that compelled man to be good.
He believed war was not only a fact of life, but necessary to maintain existence. War brings death. Death brings life to the better things.
He was ascetic and proud of his asceticism.
The soul was made of fire and water. The better the soul, the more fire it had. The "dryer" the soul, the better it was.
He believed the world to be uncreated and eternal.
He believed that everything was in flux.
The constant flux produced strife. Strife produced conflict and that conflict proved to create the balance that exists in life. The flux had the effect of creating the cosmic justice that kept everything in its place and from one thing or one man from attaining too much power.
"The way of man has no wisdom, but that of God has. The wisest man is an ape to God, just as the most beautiful ape is ugly compared to man" (Russell, 44).
Heraclitus' metaphysical notion of the endless flux is the stated by Plato to be: nothing ever is, everything is becoming. Aristotle described it as 'nothing steadfastly is'.
The doctrine of perpetual flux is a horrifying thing to men who seek something permanent. Science and philosophy have been trying to escape Heraclitus for thousands of years.
Chapter V - Parmenides
Parmenides countered Heraclitus' notion that everything is always changing by stating nothing ever changes.
Parmenides lived around 450 BC in southern Italy.
Parmenides taught that both thought and language require objects outside of themselves. You can't think of an object if that object doesn't exist.
Parmenides believed that in order for words to have meaning they must be attached to an object. If that object existed in the past it maintains some existence, otherwise we could not use the word meaningfully.
Chapter VI - Empedocles
Empedocles lived around 440 BC in Sicily. He claimed to be a god.
Empedocles was an old combination of science, religion and philosophy. His science and religion were often times at odds with one another.
Empedocles discovered properties of air and centrifugal force by experiment. He had a scientific belief in an odd version of survival of the fittest type of evolutionary theory.
Empedocles believed not in one primordial substance, but four: earth, fire, wind and water. However, love and strife were on equal footing with the aforementioned substances. Love brought about the combination of the elements. Strife brought about the dissolution of the elements.
Love and strife fought one another. There were periods of time when one mastered the other. Chance and necessity brought about the changes in the universe, not some overarching purpose.
Chapter VII - Athens in relation to culture
The greatness of Athens began when they defeated the Persians at Marathon (490 BC) and defeated Xerxes (480 BC).
Athens grew rich and prosperous after this under the guidance of Pericles until about 430 BC.
During this time Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides flourished.
Proverbs 8
8:9 - "To the discerning all of them are right. They are faultless to those who have knowledge".
The wisdom of the Lord is known to the discerning. It is faultless to those who have knowledge. THen do the unbelieving have no knowledge, no discernment?
Help me to seek you that I may find your wisdom. Help me to seek you God.
Proverbs 9
9:10 - "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding"
Proverbs 10
"The way of the Lord is a refuge for the righteouss"
Lord, may you be my refuge. Put in me a desire to seek you always. Light my heart on fire so that it burns for you. Help me to turn from folly and wickedness. Keep my paths straight. Bless this request my God, my King.
Thursday, February 6, 2014
Proverbs 4 & 5
(Originally written February 6, 2014 on scrap paper)
I must get better at this journaling thing. Lord, forgive me of my many sins. Cleanse me and accept me as your own. CLear my mind of the useless clutter and help me to stay focused on the important things in life. Grant me the passion to pursue my curiosities and keep me from wasting my life on mindless activities.
Proverbs 4
4:7 - "Wisdom is supreme, therefore, get wisdom. Though it will cost all you have, get understanding".
4:24 - "Put away perversity from your mouth; keep corrupt talk from your lips".
4:23- "Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life."
Lord, let me make the necessary sacrifices to attain wisdom. Cleanse my thoughts so that perversities do not come out of my mouth. Above all else Lord, teach me to guard my heart.
Proverbs 5
Proverbs 5 is a tough chapter to read. Firstly, I understand all too well verses 4, 9 and 14. "But in the end she is bitter as gall, sharp as a double edged sword" (5:4). I feel the scars of that sharpness from time to time. Fear grips me tight in these moments. I sometimes remember and understand the pain of giving my best strengths to others and years to one who is cruel (5:9). Thank you Lord that it was only a few years. But, I still feel ashamed, "I have come to the brink of utter ruin in the midst of the whole assembly"(5:14). Take away any of the pain and shame that is still buried in me under the scars. Thankfully, I do not have to fear this chapter any longer.
I must get better at this journaling thing. Lord, forgive me of my many sins. Cleanse me and accept me as your own. CLear my mind of the useless clutter and help me to stay focused on the important things in life. Grant me the passion to pursue my curiosities and keep me from wasting my life on mindless activities.
Proverbs 4
4:7 - "Wisdom is supreme, therefore, get wisdom. Though it will cost all you have, get understanding".
4:24 - "Put away perversity from your mouth; keep corrupt talk from your lips".
4:23- "Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life."
Lord, let me make the necessary sacrifices to attain wisdom. Cleanse my thoughts so that perversities do not come out of my mouth. Above all else Lord, teach me to guard my heart.
Proverbs 5
Proverbs 5 is a tough chapter to read. Firstly, I understand all too well verses 4, 9 and 14. "But in the end she is bitter as gall, sharp as a double edged sword" (5:4). I feel the scars of that sharpness from time to time. Fear grips me tight in these moments. I sometimes remember and understand the pain of giving my best strengths to others and years to one who is cruel (5:9). Thank you Lord that it was only a few years. But, I still feel ashamed, "I have come to the brink of utter ruin in the midst of the whole assembly"(5:14). Take away any of the pain and shame that is still buried in me under the scars. Thankfully, I do not have to fear this chapter any longer.
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Proverbs 3 & Notes on Bacchus
(Originally written January 26, 2014 on scrap paper)
Proverbs 3
Let me learn 3:5 in less painful terms. Teach me to trust in you and not lean on my own understanding. Give me humility that I may find favor with you. Take me into your confidence and make me righteous. I pray you - "keep my foot from being snared" (Proverbs 3:26).
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Book I - Ancient Philosophy
Chapter I - The Rise of Greek Civilization
Philosophy begins with Thales and his prediction of an eclipse in 585 B.C. "Philosophy and science - which were not originally separate- were therefore born together" (Russell, 3).
Fate - the belief that something beyond us, and even beyond the gods, controlled the destiny of all. It was something that played a large role in the development of Greek thought. "Fate exercised a great influence on all Greek thought, and perhaps was one of the sources from which science derived the belief in natural law" (Russell, 11).
The Greek word 'ate' is a strong, if not irresistible urge towards crime.
It is a wonder that at the 6th century B.C. amazing achievements in thought developed independently. Greek's Homeric poems solidified, philosophy, mathematics and science also were birthed out of Greece while Buddha, Confucius and Zoroaster began to make their marks in the east.
Understanding Dionysus or Bacchus is critical to understanding Greek thought. Bacchus was originally a fertility cult of Thrace. From there he became associated with beer and wine. This association made him all the more popular. The divine madness of wine became a Bacchic rite.
When the religion of Bacchus migrated to Greece it was met with opposition by the orthodoxy. There were many barbaric elements in it, but it proved to be popular with the women of Greece.
The Bacchic religion is a rejection of prudence through a longing for the savage, primitive nature of things.
The Bacchic religion, although savage in nature, was mystified and spiritualized by Orpheus. Orpheus turned these primitive rites into something spiritual, substituting physical intoxication with the mental intoxication through ascetic traditions.
The Orphics taught the transmigration of the souls. There was a belief in an afterlife for the soul, bliss or suffering for eternity based on one's actions in life.
Orphics believed man was partly of earth and partly of heaven. Through purification, ritual or physical (i.e. abstaining from certain food), the heavenly part would increase and the earthly part decrease.
Orpichs taught that one could become one with the Bacchus. The Orphics desired intoxication through enthusiasm (the god entering the man).
To the Orphic, life is pain and wearisome. It is an endless cycle of births with man stuck on earth when he shouldn't be. Through purification he achieves freedom. Purification through asceticism results in a union with God.
Proverbs 3
Let me learn 3:5 in less painful terms. Teach me to trust in you and not lean on my own understanding. Give me humility that I may find favor with you. Take me into your confidence and make me righteous. I pray you - "keep my foot from being snared" (Proverbs 3:26).
The History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
Book I - Ancient Philosophy
Chapter I - The Rise of Greek Civilization
Philosophy begins with Thales and his prediction of an eclipse in 585 B.C. "Philosophy and science - which were not originally separate- were therefore born together" (Russell, 3).
Fate - the belief that something beyond us, and even beyond the gods, controlled the destiny of all. It was something that played a large role in the development of Greek thought. "Fate exercised a great influence on all Greek thought, and perhaps was one of the sources from which science derived the belief in natural law" (Russell, 11).
The Greek word 'ate' is a strong, if not irresistible urge towards crime.
It is a wonder that at the 6th century B.C. amazing achievements in thought developed independently. Greek's Homeric poems solidified, philosophy, mathematics and science also were birthed out of Greece while Buddha, Confucius and Zoroaster began to make their marks in the east.
Understanding Dionysus or Bacchus is critical to understanding Greek thought. Bacchus was originally a fertility cult of Thrace. From there he became associated with beer and wine. This association made him all the more popular. The divine madness of wine became a Bacchic rite.
When the religion of Bacchus migrated to Greece it was met with opposition by the orthodoxy. There were many barbaric elements in it, but it proved to be popular with the women of Greece.
The Bacchic religion is a rejection of prudence through a longing for the savage, primitive nature of things.
The Bacchic religion, although savage in nature, was mystified and spiritualized by Orpheus. Orpheus turned these primitive rites into something spiritual, substituting physical intoxication with the mental intoxication through ascetic traditions.
The Orphics taught the transmigration of the souls. There was a belief in an afterlife for the soul, bliss or suffering for eternity based on one's actions in life.
Orphics believed man was partly of earth and partly of heaven. Through purification, ritual or physical (i.e. abstaining from certain food), the heavenly part would increase and the earthly part decrease.
Orpichs taught that one could become one with the Bacchus. The Orphics desired intoxication through enthusiasm (the god entering the man).
To the Orphic, life is pain and wearisome. It is an endless cycle of births with man stuck on earth when he shouldn't be. Through purification he achieves freedom. Purification through asceticism results in a union with God.
Saturday, January 25, 2014
Prayer on Proverbs 2
(Originally Written January 25, 2014)
Proverbs 2
If you seek wisdom and understanding God will give it to you. If you seek knowledge and understanding like you seek silver or hidden treasure the Lord will grant it to you. If you seek "then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God" (Proverbs 2:5)
Help me to seek you as a hidden treasure. Make the path clear to me. Help me to learn discretion. Be that shield as you promised to be. Keep me from the path of the wicked, help me not slip into their devious ways. Help me to be moral and upright in my ways. Grant me this my Lord.
Proverbs 2
If you seek wisdom and understanding God will give it to you. If you seek knowledge and understanding like you seek silver or hidden treasure the Lord will grant it to you. If you seek "then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God" (Proverbs 2:5)
Help me to seek you as a hidden treasure. Make the path clear to me. Help me to learn discretion. Be that shield as you promised to be. Keep me from the path of the wicked, help me not slip into their devious ways. Help me to be moral and upright in my ways. Grant me this my Lord.
Friday, January 24, 2014
Proverbs 1 & Introduction to History of Western Philosophy
(Originally Written January 24, 2014 on scrap paper)
It seems that every time I find myself to be bored intellectually I try to take up some sort of journaling endeavor. I come back to this or that book that had at one point sparked an endeavor to delve into some short-lived intellectual pursuit. Perhaps today is the beginning of one such short-lived journey. Perhaps not. We shall se in a month whether or not I am purchasing another composition notebook or not.
But, in my most recent returns to intellectual pursuits for the sake of the pursuit, I have come to the table trying to come from the perspective of the tabula rasa. I say, whether on paper or in some unfinished and unread blog things such as "of course one that is 30 cannot fully push beyond one's self all the experience of the past three decades" or "I shall try to come to an idea as if I were in possession of a blank slate as my mind". Firstly, when I think on these statements I laugh at my pretentiousness. Second, I find myself admiring the thought of trying to come from a clean slate without preconceived notions and without a desire to judge an idea.
Isn't it what we as modern human beings need? Openness in intellectual discussions, a willingness to abandon early notions for better ones, and a passion to keep an open mind about everything are the hallmarks of modernity in today's accepting society. But, then after I think critically about this clean slate approach I find myself souring on the entire idea. Besides that, the hallmarks of modernity are illusionary at best. The openness is only open for those that agree with you, the abandonment of early notions for better more progressive ones comes only when it suits a politically expedient solution and today's accepting society is partisan.
Of course some knowledge is gained through experience. Of course as we grow older our experiences change and shape our minds. But, the notion of there ever a mind that truly exists as a blank slate is nonsensical on many fronts. From a purely biological standpoint we, though we know still so little, we comprehend enough genetic knowledge to confidently say the sense play a major role in much of who we are. I won't say much more on this matter because what little collective genetic knowledge there is out there, even less is in my head.
Outside of the biological issues with a tabula rasa that interest me little, there are deeper issues with a clean slate idea. While the man will learn much from experience, the notion that there is not a framework for understanding contained in every human from birth is unpalatable on a couple of levels. First, logical reasoning is not something that can be absolutely empirically derived. Experience will have the logical functions of the mind. Language is another thing that exists intuitively. Of course humans learn language, but a baby reacts and interacts with a mother's voice from even inside the womb. There exists some framework in the mind that is innate.
Of course, then there is the imago dei, the strongest argument against a tabula rasa. While there is argument over exactly what the image of God is in humanity, its existence denies any notion of a clean slate at birth. Also, the inherited sin nature of man excludes a clean slate. Of course this argument is transcendental and falls on deaf ears to an unbelieving reader. But, as one who has experience God in relationship it is impossible for me to see from a viewpoint that has not had that experience. The opposite is true as well. One who has not accepted and experienced God in however little and partial as I have cannot see from my vantage point.
And lastly, the approach that I have taken in the past to achieve what I initially believed to be a noble pursuit was actually little more than a spineless approach to intellectual curiosity. In our open society, those who judge something as true or something as false, something as good or something as evil are quickly becoming labeled as bigoted or as close-minded. But, a pursuit of any intellectual subject must have as its end a desire to gain an understanding of that pursuit's truth. So it is with a desire to understand and attain truth that I set out on this adventure, however short-lived it may turn to be. (As an aside, this short-lived adventure lasted an incredible 19 days).
Now that I have trekked back to an old familiar starting point to begin again anew, let's go over the focus. What I will do in this journal is chronicle my thoughts from three sources. For the grounding I will delve into the Scriptures. For my intellectual curiosity I will start again in Bertrand Russell's The History of Western Philosophy. To stay current I will push into various weekly installments of The Economist. Because of my lack of direction in the Scriptures, I will start in Proverbs because of their instructive nature. I want to learn and that is in fact the goal of Proverbs, to instruct.
Proverbs 1
1:7a "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge".
I do wonder now at 30, am I the young in need of knowledge and discretion? Surely, I am not the wise ready to listen and add to my learning. Guide me then my Lord and teach me discretion. Help me to acquire a disciplined and prudent life.
I am struck by a couple of things. First, as I am setting out to find knowledge I have stumbled upon the perfect passage. "The beginning of knowledge is the fear of the Lord. This is a hard pill for the non-believer, but a grounding for me. Help me to never rely on my own cleverness and to always begin my pursuit of knowledge with the fear of the Lord.
Second, God as personified as wisdom calls out to us. If we do not reject Him, he would pour out His heart and make his thoughts known (1:23). How much do we as Christians struggle with what is the will of God? We toss and turn and say, 'is this your will'? Yet, God says to listen to His rebuke and He will make His mind known to us. But that word rebuke is thought to swallow. As the non-believer finds it unpalatable to admit knowledge begins with the fear of the Lord, the Christian finds it just as unsatisfying to know that we must heed God's correction to know his mind. Break me of my pride so that I hear your rebuke, Lord.
I pray this because God as wisdom personified states that if we reject wisdom we will be turned over to our own sinful desires. God will not intercede on our behalf if we don't call on him. This is the real problem of Free Will, not the mere intellectual one. The part I find most terrifying is 1:32b "The complacency of fools will destroy them". Lord, hear my prayer: let me bend my will to your gentle rebuke and help me not to be complacent. Let me take safety in your wisdom.
A History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
I chose this book because I read it in the summer of 2005 when I was becoming interested in philosophy. It seemed a good starting point then and an appropriate one now. I enjoy the historical aspect of it and it should offer a good launching pad into specific areas of thought.
Introduction:
Philosophy is the product of two factors for Russell, an inherited religious and ethical conception and a sort of scientific investigatory process. "Philosophy is something intermediate between theology and science" (Russell, xiii). Russell states that all definite knowledge belongs to science, while dogma - that which surpasses definite knowledge belongs to theology. Between definite knowledge and dogma is philosophy, a no man's land open to attack from both sides. The studying of questions here in the middle is the business of philosophy.
Russell freely admits that science cannot provide all the answers to life. But he contends that theology has provided answers that are so definitive that they must be met with suspicion by the modern mind. He contends that uncertainty, though painful, must be a part of life if we are to live without "the support of comforting fairy tales" (Russell, xiv). He contends that philosophy is the key to teach one how live in the face of that uncertainty.
Russell seems to state that Christianity's rise was aided by some Stoic traditions. Is this true? He states that Christianity replaced the ideal of antiquity of man's allegiance to the state with man's allegiance to God.
"Dante achieved a synthesis, and gave the only balance exposition of the complete medieval world of ideas" (Russell, xviii). I must read the whole of Dante in the near future.
"The Catholic Church was derived from three sources. Its sacred history was Jewish, its theology was Greek, its government and cannon law...Roman. The Reformation rejected the Roman elements, softened the Greek elements and greatly strengthened the Judaic elements" (Russell, xx).
I do like what Russell says about the Reformation and it explains neatly the current state of Christianity. In the rejection of Catholicism and a central authority determining Truth, the fracturing of Protestantism led to a deepening subjectivism and leading to personal isolation. While the Reformation led to an opening up of a personal avenue between God and man by removing an unnecessary and human constructed constraint between God and man, it fractured a core tenant of Christian belief - the corporate nature of faith. This seems very sad to me.
It seems that every time I find myself to be bored intellectually I try to take up some sort of journaling endeavor. I come back to this or that book that had at one point sparked an endeavor to delve into some short-lived intellectual pursuit. Perhaps today is the beginning of one such short-lived journey. Perhaps not. We shall se in a month whether or not I am purchasing another composition notebook or not.
But, in my most recent returns to intellectual pursuits for the sake of the pursuit, I have come to the table trying to come from the perspective of the tabula rasa. I say, whether on paper or in some unfinished and unread blog things such as "of course one that is 30 cannot fully push beyond one's self all the experience of the past three decades" or "I shall try to come to an idea as if I were in possession of a blank slate as my mind". Firstly, when I think on these statements I laugh at my pretentiousness. Second, I find myself admiring the thought of trying to come from a clean slate without preconceived notions and without a desire to judge an idea.
Isn't it what we as modern human beings need? Openness in intellectual discussions, a willingness to abandon early notions for better ones, and a passion to keep an open mind about everything are the hallmarks of modernity in today's accepting society. But, then after I think critically about this clean slate approach I find myself souring on the entire idea. Besides that, the hallmarks of modernity are illusionary at best. The openness is only open for those that agree with you, the abandonment of early notions for better more progressive ones comes only when it suits a politically expedient solution and today's accepting society is partisan.
Of course some knowledge is gained through experience. Of course as we grow older our experiences change and shape our minds. But, the notion of there ever a mind that truly exists as a blank slate is nonsensical on many fronts. From a purely biological standpoint we, though we know still so little, we comprehend enough genetic knowledge to confidently say the sense play a major role in much of who we are. I won't say much more on this matter because what little collective genetic knowledge there is out there, even less is in my head.
Outside of the biological issues with a tabula rasa that interest me little, there are deeper issues with a clean slate idea. While the man will learn much from experience, the notion that there is not a framework for understanding contained in every human from birth is unpalatable on a couple of levels. First, logical reasoning is not something that can be absolutely empirically derived. Experience will have the logical functions of the mind. Language is another thing that exists intuitively. Of course humans learn language, but a baby reacts and interacts with a mother's voice from even inside the womb. There exists some framework in the mind that is innate.
Of course, then there is the imago dei, the strongest argument against a tabula rasa. While there is argument over exactly what the image of God is in humanity, its existence denies any notion of a clean slate at birth. Also, the inherited sin nature of man excludes a clean slate. Of course this argument is transcendental and falls on deaf ears to an unbelieving reader. But, as one who has experience God in relationship it is impossible for me to see from a viewpoint that has not had that experience. The opposite is true as well. One who has not accepted and experienced God in however little and partial as I have cannot see from my vantage point.
And lastly, the approach that I have taken in the past to achieve what I initially believed to be a noble pursuit was actually little more than a spineless approach to intellectual curiosity. In our open society, those who judge something as true or something as false, something as good or something as evil are quickly becoming labeled as bigoted or as close-minded. But, a pursuit of any intellectual subject must have as its end a desire to gain an understanding of that pursuit's truth. So it is with a desire to understand and attain truth that I set out on this adventure, however short-lived it may turn to be. (As an aside, this short-lived adventure lasted an incredible 19 days).
Now that I have trekked back to an old familiar starting point to begin again anew, let's go over the focus. What I will do in this journal is chronicle my thoughts from three sources. For the grounding I will delve into the Scriptures. For my intellectual curiosity I will start again in Bertrand Russell's The History of Western Philosophy. To stay current I will push into various weekly installments of The Economist. Because of my lack of direction in the Scriptures, I will start in Proverbs because of their instructive nature. I want to learn and that is in fact the goal of Proverbs, to instruct.
Proverbs 1
1:7a "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge".
I do wonder now at 30, am I the young in need of knowledge and discretion? Surely, I am not the wise ready to listen and add to my learning. Guide me then my Lord and teach me discretion. Help me to acquire a disciplined and prudent life.
I am struck by a couple of things. First, as I am setting out to find knowledge I have stumbled upon the perfect passage. "The beginning of knowledge is the fear of the Lord. This is a hard pill for the non-believer, but a grounding for me. Help me to never rely on my own cleverness and to always begin my pursuit of knowledge with the fear of the Lord.
Second, God as personified as wisdom calls out to us. If we do not reject Him, he would pour out His heart and make his thoughts known (1:23). How much do we as Christians struggle with what is the will of God? We toss and turn and say, 'is this your will'? Yet, God says to listen to His rebuke and He will make His mind known to us. But that word rebuke is thought to swallow. As the non-believer finds it unpalatable to admit knowledge begins with the fear of the Lord, the Christian finds it just as unsatisfying to know that we must heed God's correction to know his mind. Break me of my pride so that I hear your rebuke, Lord.
I pray this because God as wisdom personified states that if we reject wisdom we will be turned over to our own sinful desires. God will not intercede on our behalf if we don't call on him. This is the real problem of Free Will, not the mere intellectual one. The part I find most terrifying is 1:32b "The complacency of fools will destroy them". Lord, hear my prayer: let me bend my will to your gentle rebuke and help me not to be complacent. Let me take safety in your wisdom.
A History of Western Philosophy
Bertrand Russell
I chose this book because I read it in the summer of 2005 when I was becoming interested in philosophy. It seemed a good starting point then and an appropriate one now. I enjoy the historical aspect of it and it should offer a good launching pad into specific areas of thought.
Introduction:
Philosophy is the product of two factors for Russell, an inherited religious and ethical conception and a sort of scientific investigatory process. "Philosophy is something intermediate between theology and science" (Russell, xiii). Russell states that all definite knowledge belongs to science, while dogma - that which surpasses definite knowledge belongs to theology. Between definite knowledge and dogma is philosophy, a no man's land open to attack from both sides. The studying of questions here in the middle is the business of philosophy.
Russell freely admits that science cannot provide all the answers to life. But he contends that theology has provided answers that are so definitive that they must be met with suspicion by the modern mind. He contends that uncertainty, though painful, must be a part of life if we are to live without "the support of comforting fairy tales" (Russell, xiv). He contends that philosophy is the key to teach one how live in the face of that uncertainty.
Russell seems to state that Christianity's rise was aided by some Stoic traditions. Is this true? He states that Christianity replaced the ideal of antiquity of man's allegiance to the state with man's allegiance to God.
"Dante achieved a synthesis, and gave the only balance exposition of the complete medieval world of ideas" (Russell, xviii). I must read the whole of Dante in the near future.
"The Catholic Church was derived from three sources. Its sacred history was Jewish, its theology was Greek, its government and cannon law...Roman. The Reformation rejected the Roman elements, softened the Greek elements and greatly strengthened the Judaic elements" (Russell, xx).
I do like what Russell says about the Reformation and it explains neatly the current state of Christianity. In the rejection of Catholicism and a central authority determining Truth, the fracturing of Protestantism led to a deepening subjectivism and leading to personal isolation. While the Reformation led to an opening up of a personal avenue between God and man by removing an unnecessary and human constructed constraint between God and man, it fractured a core tenant of Christian belief - the corporate nature of faith. This seems very sad to me.
Tuesday, May 9, 2006
Biblical backing for animal rights issues
(Originally written May 9, 2006 in 3 Subject Book)
Animal Rights
Rights/Duties
Sentient Rights
Genesis 1:26, 9:1-7 Divine image bearers exercising dominion
Genesis 2:16-17 - Pre-Fall diet, vegetarian??
Deuteronomy 12:15, 20 - Israelites may eat meat
Proverbs 12:10 - ethical treatment of animals
Mark 7:18-19: "Are you so dull? He asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? For it doesn't go into their heart but their stomach, and then out their body" (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean).
Luke 12:24 - humans are more valuable in God's eyes than animals are
1 Timothy 4:1-5 - humans can eat animals
Isaiah 11:6 - the wolf, the lamb & the child
Animal Rights
Rights/Duties
Sentient Rights
Genesis 1:26, 9:1-7 Divine image bearers exercising dominion
Genesis 2:16-17 - Pre-Fall diet, vegetarian??
Deuteronomy 12:15, 20 - Israelites may eat meat
Proverbs 12:10 - ethical treatment of animals
Mark 7:18-19: "Are you so dull? He asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? For it doesn't go into their heart but their stomach, and then out their body" (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean).
Luke 12:24 - humans are more valuable in God's eyes than animals are
1 Timothy 4:1-5 - humans can eat animals
Isaiah 11:6 - the wolf, the lamb & the child
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Proverbs 31 & Suicide
(Originally written April 11, 2006 in 3 Subject)
Let them drink
Contemporary Issues of Philosophy: Suicide
-Suicide
-Assisted Suicide
-Passive euthanasia (termination of life support)
-Active euthanasia
For the Christian, suicide seems to be a simple No-No, but assisted suicide and various forms of euthanasia are complicated by a section of Proverbs.
Proverbs 31:6-7
"Let beer be for those who are perishing, wine for those who are in anguish! Let them drink and forget their poverty and remember their misery no more."
Contemporary Issues of Philosophy: Suicide
-Suicide
-Assisted Suicide
-Passive euthanasia (termination of life support)
-Active euthanasia
For the Christian, suicide seems to be a simple No-No, but assisted suicide and various forms of euthanasia are complicated by a section of Proverbs.
Proverbs 31:6-7
"Let beer be for those who are perishing, wine for those who are in anguish! Let them drink and forget their poverty and remember their misery no more."
Thursday, February 2, 2006
The ethics of the Old and New Testaments
(Originally written February 2, 2006)
Moral Choices: Chapter 2
Christian Ethics
Judeo-Christian ethics has had a big impact on society since ints inception (despite recent departures)
Euthyphro dilemma (Plato raised this first in Euthyphro): is something good because God commanded it or did God command something because it is good?
The Old Testament is not a carefully arranged ethical system; it is a mixture of different types of moral reasoning.
Deontology (appeal to principles) is emphasized in the Old Testament. (The Law)
The Wisdom literature contains some utilitarian reasoning.
Since the Wisdom literature is based on the teaching of the law, so too is the utilitarian reasoning based on the Law's deontology. This utilitarian reasoning serves as a supplement to the Law's deontology.
Egoism and self-interest also supplement the deontology. This egoism and self-interest are found in passages that deal with Israel's obedience corresponding with God's bestowing of blessing on them.
Natural law is also found in the Old Testament. It is stated in Proverbs that right and wrong that right and wrong comes from observation of nature. It is also revealed through general revelation to nations without the Law.
The Law (Pentateuch) has three fundamental principles:
1) The Moral Law (10 Commandments)
2) The Civil Law
3) The Ceremonial Law
The Prophets use the Law to indict Israel
The ancient nation of Israel was a theocracy. There was no distinction between law and morality. All morality was legislated.
Israel made no distinction between personal and social ethics.
Today social and personal ethics are separated to allow for a morally relative and non-judgmental society.
Holiness is what unifies all ethics in the Old Testament.
Israel's treatment of the king, of women, of slaves and of the poor set Israel apart from the rest of the ancient Near East.
Obedience to the law was seen as loyalty to God.
During the sabbatical year a field was rested to follow the ethics of God.
New Testament ethics are not as emphatic on institutional morality and social ethics. The New Testament emphasis is on a morality for the Church.
New Testament ethics is dominated by a deontological system which states that actions, character and intentions are inherently right or wrong.
Jesus did not condemn the ethics of the Old Testament, only the interpretation of them by the Pharisees.
The ethics of the New Testament come shortly after the good news of Jesus Christ.
Love is the key theme of the New Testament ethic.
Moral Choices: Chapter 2
Christian Ethics
Judeo-Christian ethics has had a big impact on society since ints inception (despite recent departures)
Euthyphro dilemma (Plato raised this first in Euthyphro): is something good because God commanded it or did God command something because it is good?
The Old Testament is not a carefully arranged ethical system; it is a mixture of different types of moral reasoning.
Deontology (appeal to principles) is emphasized in the Old Testament. (The Law)
The Wisdom literature contains some utilitarian reasoning.
Since the Wisdom literature is based on the teaching of the law, so too is the utilitarian reasoning based on the Law's deontology. This utilitarian reasoning serves as a supplement to the Law's deontology.
Egoism and self-interest also supplement the deontology. This egoism and self-interest are found in passages that deal with Israel's obedience corresponding with God's bestowing of blessing on them.
Natural law is also found in the Old Testament. It is stated in Proverbs that right and wrong that right and wrong comes from observation of nature. It is also revealed through general revelation to nations without the Law.
The Law (Pentateuch) has three fundamental principles:
1) The Moral Law (10 Commandments)
2) The Civil Law
3) The Ceremonial Law
The Prophets use the Law to indict Israel
The ancient nation of Israel was a theocracy. There was no distinction between law and morality. All morality was legislated.
Israel made no distinction between personal and social ethics.
Today social and personal ethics are separated to allow for a morally relative and non-judgmental society.
Holiness is what unifies all ethics in the Old Testament.
Israel's treatment of the king, of women, of slaves and of the poor set Israel apart from the rest of the ancient Near East.
Obedience to the law was seen as loyalty to God.
During the sabbatical year a field was rested to follow the ethics of God.
New Testament ethics are not as emphatic on institutional morality and social ethics. The New Testament emphasis is on a morality for the Church.
New Testament ethics is dominated by a deontological system which states that actions, character and intentions are inherently right or wrong.
Jesus did not condemn the ethics of the Old Testament, only the interpretation of them by the Pharisees.
The ethics of the New Testament come shortly after the good news of Jesus Christ.
Love is the key theme of the New Testament ethic.
Thursday, December 1, 2005
Notes on Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge - 1
(Originally written December 1, 2005 in Book 1)
Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge
Robert E. Webber
1982
Chapter 1 - Introduction
America changed in the 1960's & 1970's. According to Jerry Falwell, "Secular humanism has become the religion of America".
History used to be divided into two eras, the pre-Christian era and the Christian era. Now we are entering a third era: the post-Christian era. (C.S. Lewis). The post-Christian era has brought about a change in society. Those in favor of this change see it as abandoning religion, which is false, for science, which is true.
Even Christians have changed. They now separate the secular and sacred aspects of life. Prayer and church no longer have a place in the public persona of Christians.
This book is about the recovery of an authentic Christian humanism.
Secularization has driven a wedge between religious faith and our life in the world. Secular humanism is a potent force in American society. The extreme religious right does not have the answers. The extreme religious left does not have the answers. The alternative to the religious right and left is the recovery of authentic Christian humanism.
Chapter 2 - What is Humanism?
"Humanism challenges every principle America was founded on" - Jerry Falwell
Humanism is defined as a reference to man and man's importance. Humanism is interested in what man is capable of creating, especially by using his mind.
Education is important to humanism.
Humanism came from the Greco-Roman world and the Judaic-Christian world.
Protagoras (500 BC) wrote, "man is the measure of all things". He was the first humanist.
Biblical humanism comes from Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs.
The difference between Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian humanism is that the first is naturalistic and the latter is supernatural. Christian humanism asserts that God became human and understands what humanity faces. It also makes God knowable.
Human life is sacred because man is created in the image of God and because God became human.
The Incarnation affirmed that moral absolutes were real. This is contrary to the pagan or secular belief that morals are relative.
Christian humanism has been perverted over the years (the Inquisition, the Crusades and Theodosius' decree of Christianity as the only legal religion are examples of this).
The rediscovery of Greco-Roman humanism in the Renaissance period paved the way for today's secular humanism. That humanism denies anything that is supernatural. That humanism sees religion as an obstacle blocking growth as a species. That humanism sees religion as imposing beliefs upon individuals, denying them the opportunity to live by personal convictions.
Humanism does not wish to negate all morality however. Because their view lacks an ultimate God or an ultimate good. they have no common way of measuring good or evil.
Humanism acquires its values from experience, observation and rationalization only. Humanism seeks to individualize all beliefs and values.
Christian humanism contrasts secular humanism in four ways:
-Confidence in God, in Christ
-A supernatural worldview
-The power of Christ through the Church
-Incarnational humanitarianism
Christ is the model human for Christian humanism. Christ came as a man due to the dehumanizing of men.
Christian humanism seeks to stop the dehumanizing effects of secular humanism and restore the intended nature of man in society. Christian humanism recognizes the battle between good and evil, light and darkness and between God and Satan.
In death, Christ destroyed the power of evil. In resurrection, Christ demonstrated his power to recreate in his new body.
A Christian humanist explains the evils that still exists today in two ways:
-Christ's work will only be completed when He comes again
-The Church is the presence of the future world to come
Christian humanism is rooted in God's love for humanity
Secular Humanism: Threat & Challenge
Robert E. Webber
1982
Chapter 1 - Introduction
America changed in the 1960's & 1970's. According to Jerry Falwell, "Secular humanism has become the religion of America".
History used to be divided into two eras, the pre-Christian era and the Christian era. Now we are entering a third era: the post-Christian era. (C.S. Lewis). The post-Christian era has brought about a change in society. Those in favor of this change see it as abandoning religion, which is false, for science, which is true.
Even Christians have changed. They now separate the secular and sacred aspects of life. Prayer and church no longer have a place in the public persona of Christians.
This book is about the recovery of an authentic Christian humanism.
Secularization has driven a wedge between religious faith and our life in the world. Secular humanism is a potent force in American society. The extreme religious right does not have the answers. The extreme religious left does not have the answers. The alternative to the religious right and left is the recovery of authentic Christian humanism.
Chapter 2 - What is Humanism?
"Humanism challenges every principle America was founded on" - Jerry Falwell
Humanism is defined as a reference to man and man's importance. Humanism is interested in what man is capable of creating, especially by using his mind.
Education is important to humanism.
Humanism came from the Greco-Roman world and the Judaic-Christian world.
Protagoras (500 BC) wrote, "man is the measure of all things". He was the first humanist.
Biblical humanism comes from Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs.
The difference between Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian humanism is that the first is naturalistic and the latter is supernatural. Christian humanism asserts that God became human and understands what humanity faces. It also makes God knowable.
Human life is sacred because man is created in the image of God and because God became human.
The Incarnation affirmed that moral absolutes were real. This is contrary to the pagan or secular belief that morals are relative.
Christian humanism has been perverted over the years (the Inquisition, the Crusades and Theodosius' decree of Christianity as the only legal religion are examples of this).
The rediscovery of Greco-Roman humanism in the Renaissance period paved the way for today's secular humanism. That humanism denies anything that is supernatural. That humanism sees religion as an obstacle blocking growth as a species. That humanism sees religion as imposing beliefs upon individuals, denying them the opportunity to live by personal convictions.
Humanism does not wish to negate all morality however. Because their view lacks an ultimate God or an ultimate good. they have no common way of measuring good or evil.
Humanism acquires its values from experience, observation and rationalization only. Humanism seeks to individualize all beliefs and values.
Christian humanism contrasts secular humanism in four ways:
-Confidence in God, in Christ
-A supernatural worldview
-The power of Christ through the Church
-Incarnational humanitarianism
Christ is the model human for Christian humanism. Christ came as a man due to the dehumanizing of men.
Christian humanism seeks to stop the dehumanizing effects of secular humanism and restore the intended nature of man in society. Christian humanism recognizes the battle between good and evil, light and darkness and between God and Satan.
In death, Christ destroyed the power of evil. In resurrection, Christ demonstrated his power to recreate in his new body.
A Christian humanist explains the evils that still exists today in two ways:
-Christ's work will only be completed when He comes again
-The Church is the presence of the future world to come
Christian humanism is rooted in God's love for humanity
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)